The BBC have disgusted me today

The BBC are really scraping the barrel today, which their repulsive Have Your Say 'discussion' entitled 'Should homosexuals face execution?'

Even the question is abhorrent, and I don't know how they can justify posting it. Would it be right to have a discussion, under the banner of freedom of speech, on 'Should black people be killed for being black?', or 'Should goats be executed for having four legs?'. NO. Of course not. Because the question in itself is ridiculous and stupid. All they've done is invite lots of horrible little bigots to submit their putrid little brain farts, typed out with their misshapen club hands, while they furrow their monobrows under the strain of trying to spell a word as long as homosexuality. It's the kind of thing I'd expect from the Daily Mail, not from the BBC.

The 'Most recommended' tab of the debate (sic) is particularly horrifying, both for the stupidity and the bile that it contains. And these are posts that have been RECOMMENDED as good by other readers. It's truly terrifying.

Chris the vile little toad from Guildford treats us to this awesome piece of widsom:

"I suggest all gays are put on a remote island somewhere and left for a generation - afterwhich, theoretically there shoild be none left !"

First of all, WOO HOO gay party island! We'll take Mustique, thanks very much, and YOU'RE not invited because only people who can tie their own shoelaces and don't clasp their pencils with their whole fist are allowed.

Second of all, SHUT UP. Where do you think gay people come from? Not from breeding with each other obviously, you seem to have grasped that much. So what, you think we just swish past people in our fabulous outfits and somehow they get turned gay? You worthless little moron. I've known I was gay since I was in infant school. INFANT SCHOOL. Do you think I should have been put to death for it then? Or was it only when I started tonguing boys that I crossed the line? If the world ever has the misfortune of you breeding, I hope all your children ARE gay and I hope they hate you. Also, learn to spell 'should', you vacuous pustule.

Rob D from Northampton is no better:

"Homosexuality is not natural. It makes me very uncomfortable when you consider what it involves."

Homosexuality does not equal anal sex. Lots of straight people have anal sex. For FUCK'S sake. Do you think that's all we do all day? Even if your problem is with anal sex, that's completely different to homosexuality. That's an act, not a gender. And you've got no reason to feel uncomfortable, who do you think is going to want to fuck you, you lard arse? Gay people have GOOD taste, haven't you heard?

It goes on and on. Anglobert from Surrey makes an attempt at being understanding, but can't get past the 'I'm a complete and utter DICKWAD with no right to be alive' stage:

"Let's face it. Homosexuals are not wilful criminals but unfortunate disabled people who cannot enjoy Nature's gift of attraction to and union with the opposite sex, and unable to treasure the family memories most of us take to the grave.

Feel sympathy but do not regard their relationships as normal alternatives to marriage and procreation. Hopefully, medical science will find a remedy to normalise their disability. Meanwhile, they should not be regarded as criminals. They are born that way."

I'll wait for my blue badge in the post shall I? It'll make it much easier when I nip up to Tescos. You better be careful though, those bays are right next to the Mother And Baby ones, I might try to fiddle with some kiddies while I'm there.

In case you hadn't noticed, Anglobert, most gay people think gay sex is HOT. I for one do not feel a huge void in my life simply because I am unable to fancy Anglobettina, or whatever your snub-nosed dwarf of a wife is called. And lots of us also have FAMILIES. I know! Shocking isn't it?

So forgive me if I don't rush myself down to the electroshock clinic in order to get my disability rectified. I'm far too busy spending my disposal income, wearing great shoes, and holidaying three times a year.

The BBC should be ashamed of itself.

I don't like the Blood Service

I don't like the Blood Service because it is discriminatory and unfair. I've read through all their arguments, and I've read why the Terrence Higgins Trust supports their view (albeit accepting that it is discriminatory), but I still don't like it because it makes me feel like I am inferior because of who I am.

For those of you who don't know, the Blood Service doesn't allow gay men to give blood. Ever. We're banned for life. They don't phrase it specifically like that, in fact they deliberately make it not about being gay but about sexual behaviour. Otherwise I suspect it would be illegal under equalities legislation. The question they ask you is:

'Are you a man who has had oral or anal sex with another man (even if you used a condom)?'

And if the answer is yes, then you're out.

You can, however, be a woman who has had oral sex with a man without using a condom, and that's fine. You can also be a man who has had sex with 300 women in the last year. Even if it was in a back alley after 14 shots of vodka. Not if she gave you a tenner in payment for it though, that makes a whole world of difference.

Their argument, based on their scientific advice, is that by allowing any men who have any kind of sex with men to donate blood, they would greatly increase (by 60% they say) the chance of blood-borne viruses entering the supply. They can't take that risk, nor can they jeopardise public confidence in the Blood Service.

I can understand why they have to keep patient safety rather than my feelings as an overriding concern. But as a gay man it feels HORRIBLE. They'd rather take blood from a tramp on the street than from me.

Even worse, without wanting to bore you (or enthrall you) with too much detail, the kind of sexual activities I have enjoyed during my life to date could not be classed, in my opinion, as being in any way risky. In fact I'd go as far to say that I'm at less risk than the average person of having contracted HIV. On top of that, I actually know my HIV status, which is more than lots of people can say. I doubt many of my straight friends have ever had an HIV test. But none of that matters. They don't have the "resources", they say, to obtain detailed sexual histories from every potential donor, so the kind of sex you've had or how recent it was doesn't matter.

But what of that feeling you have, and that is implied in the adverts, that they always need to people to give blood, they're crying out for it, and that people would die if you didn't? Well they don't care about that either. In fact if pressed, they say "there has been a safe and sufficient blood supply in this country for many years". Oh, so I don't need to feel guilt-tripped into giving blood by your adverts after all? Well I wish you'd said, there was me hoping to be a good citizen and "do something amazing today".

I'm not arguing particularly for a change in policy, although I do note that other European countries take a different view. If I were to argue for it, I suppose it would be that they should consider each person's individual history, and not impose a fairly arbitrary and harshly-phrased lifetime ban. But I would like them to acknowledge that their policy sucks ass (which would presumably preclude you from giving blood if it's a man's ass), and for them to show a bit more sensitivity as they trample over my feelings.

Aren't weddings supposed to be fun?

Sigh, OK so here is the latest on my brother's wedding, that I couldn't be bothered to write about yesterday because it was too depressing.

Mum now has a borrowed dress and a hat to wear, which is good because she was freaking out about finding an outfit. So is she feeling any happier and maybe looking forward to her son getting married? No. She's now able to turn her attention instead to freaking out about how she's going to manage the day, and how long she'll be able to stay for, and how she'll get home afterwards. I think the root cause is most probably that she went to a dress shop at the weekend for an hour and then it took her two days to recover, so she's obviously now thinking how is she going to manage a whole wedding.

Dave isn't being particularly helpful, but I do understand why. He's feeling a bit pissed off I think that not only is Mum not doing anything to help for the wedding (because, admittedly, she can't), she is actually being a hindrance and creating more stress for him, by asking for constant reassurance and checking of things like where she can go for a rest during the day, where she can eat her meal, etc etc. She is quite good at making things about her, even when you think it is something that most certainly is not about her.

She's like that though. Take when she found out I was gay - one of the earliest things she said to me was "I don't think you've thought about how this affects me", and then she bought this stupid book called Stranger In The Family - How to cope when your son is gay. It was all about grief, and the mourning that a parent feels for the life they thought their child was going to have and now won't.

Fuck. Off. Mourning?? I wasn't bloody dead! Just because she chose to make lots of assumptions about my life, it's not my fault. I never promised to marry a nice girl and have lots of babies. And a parent's assumptions actually make their gay child's life rather more difficult, as you then feel like you're doing something wrong by not conforming to them.

Anyway, I'm getting off the point. Mum is getting stressy and demanding attention, and Dave is getting pissy and refusing to give it, so I end up getting my ear bent by both of them. I don't recall signing up to be family conciliator and I'm getting a bit fucked off with it lately. I want to go to my brother's wedding and enjoy it! But I won't really, I won't be able to relax until the evening probably, once Mum and Dad leave, which sounds AWFUL but it's true.

So there you are. And we've got about five and a half weeks to go. I'm sure someone will go into meltdown at some point before that. I'm slightly concerned that Dave will be short with Mum on the phone, she'll take offence (partly on purpose, as part of her attention-seeking tactics), and then Mum will say she won't go at all then if she's such a trouble and we'll have a whole family drama.

But whatever, fuck it, I can't fix everything for them. I'm getting exasperated, can you tell?

Not feeling ill? Start the clock!

I'm back at work now, and am no longer ill, hooray! Of course, it is only a matter of time before I get some other virus, so I had better enjoy it while it lasts. Maybe I should start a counter, and keep a running total of how many days I succeed in staying healthy. It'll be like Bridget Jones's "Cigarettes: 4; Alcohol units: 8" at the start of each entry.

So here we go:
Days Healthy - 1

On the downside, Chris has caught what I had now, so is at home with a raging sore throat during his half term, and probably feeling a bit hard done-by. He normally fends off my illnesses with his superior immune system, but not this time. I hope he gets better soon, I quite want to go dancing at the weekend.

I've just been reading a recent blog post by Jay Brannan where he talks about not liking being labelled as a gay artist. I do agree with him, particularly where he talks about gay people who live in a ghetto-ised environment where being gay seems to be the most important part of their personality. They only read gay books, the only have gay friends, it's all so insular. I met quite a few people like that at university, and I don't think it's healthy.

And how do you manage only to have gay friends anyway? Most people are straight, surely your group of friends would have to comprise a few?? And lots of gay men are really quite unpleasant...

Some people have commented in full agreement with him, and have voiced the sentiment I share that if all we focus on is our differences, how will we ever get passed them? Celebrating your differences is fine, but making everything in your life be about them seems wrong to me.

Other people however have really laid into him about it, which I think is mean. If he doesn't want to be pigeonholed and have his music shoved into the gay section of a shop, I think that's up to him.

Anyway, enough semi-ranting now, I'm off to have my lunch and hopefully not contract any diseases.

It's a little bit funny

Sometimes I think it's a bit odd that I live with another boy. I sleep in a bed with another boy, I kiss another boy, but he’s a BOY.

Obviously, I quite like it, and I wouldn't change it. But when you grow up being told that one day you’ll get married to a girl and you’ll have children and live in a house with an apple tree next to it and a yellow sun in the sky and smoke coming out of the chimney, it feels weird when you don't end up doing it.

Torchwood is just the gayest thing

I haven't really watched Torchwood before, but we were channel-hopping last night and found that Spike from Buffy was in it. I've always found him rather hot, so we carried on watching, and within five minutes John Barrowman was snogging the face off him! Where did that come from?? I know John Barrowman is gay, but when did they make whatever his character is called (Captain Jack Hackett or something) a homo too?

Apparently he and Spike had spent five years together in a time loop where they basically just knobbed each other senseless.

And then a short while later in the programme, Captain Jack was making a pass at this office type man.

I'm going to take a wild guess here and assume Russell T Davies writes Torchwood. All he seems to do is write scenes he'd love to toss himself off to and then make actors act them out! Shocking, but I'm not complaining as it was nice to see Spike in some man-on-man action.