THEGAYUK

Category: Topics

  • OPINION | Celebrity Big Brother: I feel I’ve been watching a long-running pro-Tory commercial

    Big Brainwashing. Why does Big Brother want us to love dangerous Ann Widdecombe?

    Yes, I admit it: I’ve been watching Celebrity Big Brother for the first time in years. Hearing it was the Year of the Women I was intrigued. Hearing that there were, to be frank, political discussions hooked me. Little did I know what was in store.

    Well, about that whole Year of the Women debacle I can be short: they never meant it did they? If they did the selection would have been better. (Almost) all of the women selected were lovely and admirable in their own way, but were they the perfect choice to represent the whole of womanhood?

    Not according to the audience who voted three out in the first week and another three in last Tuesday’s eviction. But even ignoring that: the year of the women basically ended when the men entered the house … or even before that: the moment Ann Widdecombe entered and opened her mouth.

    The reason why she was ever asked to represent in “The Year of the Women” is questionable, as she has always made it blatantly clear she is no supporter of the female sex.

    She even admittedly left the Anglican Church to become a Catholic because she did not like their decision to accept women vicars.

    On her first night in she revealed she was basically against fighting for female rights or equal payment and victim blamed rape victims.

    She then upset trans contestant India by misgendering her, even though she was corrected several times by both India and other housemates.
 She later also branded Prince Harry’s fiancee Meghan Markle “trouble”, saying the actress’s background and attitude made her “uneasy”.

    Which for other contestants should have been enough to be voted out first, if you think about it. But not this time. No-one seemed to even bat an eyelid, and the media reported it as if the comments came from a funny old aunty, not a former Tory politician and media personality who still has quite a lot of influence: she still writes books and columns and is often wheeled out to defend unpopular Tory policies.

 Then Courtney Act (or Shane Jenek) entered the house, and things got even worse: the Ru Paul’s Drag Race contestant was met with eye roles and disapproving looks from the start. Every conversation about gay rights or feminism was met with contrary statements tuts or more eye roles. Even when the other girls talked about things that had upset them or made them uneasy she refused to show any empathy.

    Things got even worse once Courtney struck up a firm flirty friendship with Andrew Brady. This friendship with Brady was labelled “disgusting” by Ann, and their funny play fights were what made her choose the pair as the ones to be up for eviction. She thought their actions were sexual claimed they had “brought the whole house into disrepute” and then upset Brady by suggesting his mother and grandmother would be upset by it.

    Strangely it was not Ann who was edited as the bad guy in this, but according to the media, it was Andrew for being so upset he called her the c-word. Sure, not the nicest thing to call someone, but when pushed past the breaking point in a place like that tempers run high. The fact that a lot of housemates had admitted to feeling restricted by Ann’s constant judging, her eye-rolls and facepalming seems forgotten or ignored – even by most housemates themselves.

    This was not the first time Big Brother and the media twisted events to let Ann get off scot-free. Year of the ‘bad editing’ and year of the ‘feeble excuses’ would have been a better label. Or … year of protecting the sexism and homophobia apologist … Because frankly, that is what I feel I have been watching.
 Actually, I don’t know WHAT I’ve been watching beyond a long-running pro-Tory commercial. 

Several housemates have claimed that Ann seems to get a favourable treatment where edits are concerned. (The edit CBB chose to make of a conversation Andrew and Shane had during a very late night ‘Live from the house’ broadcast compared to what was shown on the official CBB show seems to support this.)

    Also, the way the show went out of their way to create another non-existent homophobic row to deflect from Ann was a clear indication of how protective they are of their ‘star’; John Barnes was edited to look homophobic in a conversation with Courtney.

    Even though the poor man, who had very intellectual LGBT rights conversations on the show, was obviously talking about what older straight men usually think about gay men. The media did pick up on this in a big way, even though Courtney expressed on camera what a great conversation she had with John.

    Meanwhile, more and more people in and around the house became “protective of Ann”; she was so entertaining and funny. She was harmless; it was pantomime, she was close with bisexual Amanda Barrie; it was all a joke.

 A strange long-running joke then. A joke who wrote a column to support conversion therapy.
 A joke who voted against: Gay adoption, Equalising the age of consent, Repealing Section 28, Civil partnerships, Equality Act, Making it easier for lesbian couples to access IVF.

    She is also against abortion and once agreed with the view that even in case of women who get pregnant because of rape, a life is still a life.

    She calls herself “a defender of the unborn”.

    In the recent past, she even supported capital punishment and a move to shackle pregnant prisoners in hospital.

 Looking up the housemates online before going in Courtney might well be surprised by the views of Ann and had every right to ask her about it.

    When she was a member of the House of Commons, she was a representative of us, the people so she should be willing to debate and admit what she did and why. There is no need to protect her from this; she chooses to appear on reality TV time and time again.

    She chose to go in this house, knowing that there would be debate and made herself a target by goading people like Courtney and Andrew by constantly eye rolling everything they did. She clearly revels in upsetting and placing small ticking bombs that she keeps kicking until they explode, but when they do she blames the injured party for being ‘too sensitive’ and then shuts down, expecting her protectors to finish the job. A neat political trick.

    It is remarkable that a person like this is hailed as a “loveable granny” in edits. For most of the time, this series was the “Ann” show, where housemates seemed to always chat about how “funny” and “adorable” she was. Sometimes this continued on into the Bit On The Side studio, where after a while people even forgot to add the, “I don’t agree with her views”, disclaimer that they’d added at the start.
 There is the strange feeling of it being ‘the year of the conservative’ where the housemates and audience alike are sucked into her views and being to repeat them.

    Quietly, Ann trained everyone in the house to look at her for approval… once she achieved that, she made the correlation that she was like Mum or Grandmum. She gave rewards and punishments. Then gradually escalated the levels of what they weren’t allowed to do, thus shutting out everyone who had anything bad to say about her. To disrespect/disagree with Ann would be like doing that to your own loved ones and made the person questioning the rules seem wrong and vindictive. And if you do a Twitter search it seems as if it’s working. Ann is hailed for her views and convictions by a good many people.

    The main excuse Ann apologists seem to use is ‘she’s old, and people were like that back then.’

    Excuse me? Were they really?

    Pardon me, but Ann Widdecombe is 70, not 101, She is not from the pre-war or Victorian age. She is my mum’s age; a woman who fought for equality for women, race and LGBT. If she heard someone like Ann back then, she’d clipped her around the head.
 Ann Widdecombe grew up in the ‘Swinging 60s’, she is younger than Mick Jagger and most of the Rolling Stones, younger than the remaining Beatles. She is as old as Marianne Faithfull – who was raised a convent girl but became a poster girl for bisexual liberation.

    These were the decades of protesting, feminism and sexual liberation – she might not have been part of it, but she can’t pretend she never heard of it. She certainly can’t brainwash people into believing that her attitude was the norm back then amongst her peers.

    The worst thing is seeing other LGBT members make those excuses for her, sucked in by the “funny old lady” act. No Amanda, Wayne, Rylan, Biggins, Russell Grant – this was not the norm back then. Shame especially those who are her age: why shame your whole generation?
 People like Elizabeth Taylor, Joanna Lumley, Barbra Streisand and most of the cast of Grace and Frankie are her peers as is Barbra Windsor.

    All these people believed and still believe in gay rights and general equality, even the nuns in the original Call the Midwife books were more open-minded than she is.

    What the heck Amanda especially; how difficult is it to understand that gay people did not have the right to marry in the very recent past and that this was because of people like Ann who voted against that. Be friends with her if you must, but don’t say that she and her opinions had nothing to do with your rights! Even on the show Widdecombe still insisted: “Marriage is between a man and a woman.”

    She uses her status to create her own little pantomime in which she is the star, knowing that this will continue to give her a stage to present her dangerous opinions… It’s a trick card Donald Trump played as well during the elections.

    It has nothing to do with how ‘things were back then’, as this was clearly not the case amongst her age group; it has to do with a narrow-minded woman who enjoys being the villain when it suits her, knowing it keeps her in the media. She uses her status to create her own little pantomime in which she is the star, knowing that this will continue to give her a stage to present her dangerous opinions. It even seems to make her popular with every generation. It’s a trick card Donald Trump played as well during the elections.

    Like Trump, Ann too showed she is still vindictive, placing Maggie Oliver up for eviction because of past political clashes. Maggie – who everyone expected to go far was barely seen during her time on the show. “I was talking about police, zero hour contracts, poverty and homelessness and those conversations haven’t been showed,”

    She came out of the house saying Ann had ‘no compassion for the homeless or poor’ and is a ‘misogynist’.

    “I don’t hate Ann,” she said. “She’s a powerful woman, and I believe that she is a misogynist.
 She’s playing a very clever game. She is very intelligent, but emotionally she is not. 
My views on politicians are widely reported, and Ann has proved every comment and stereotype that I have made about people in positions of authority. 
I don’t believe [her lack of empathy] is her fault, she has lived a privileged life.

    Emotionally she has never evolved. Politically she is very smart, but she has lived in a world of men. She has shown that in the fact she is quite vocal on her views about women.”

    In a way, this is bigger than Big Brother as this is a small window into the state of the world right now. It reveals how easily people give up their own opinions and freedom and how much intolerance towards those that fight for equality there still is.

    The catchphrase of this year’s Big Brother is “respect your elders”. Of course, you have to have respect for those that came before you; so many people fought for your right to exist and a lot of the freedoms we have now. But when someone is disrespectful or hurtful to you – judging you before they have even met you. You are allowed to voice your opinion. No-one is allowed to belittle or hurt anyone, no matter who they are and what their age is.

     

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, its management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • OPINION | Is it time to revisit Gay Labels?

    Gay labels are ubiquitous, and some would argue that we don’t need them and even that they’re harmful. I’m talking about labels such as Daddy, bear, jock, twink etc. I think we do need gay labels, but we need them to mean something other than what they currently mean.

    At the moment, gay labels refer to a whole package. For example, ‘twink’ seems to refer to a particular male build and appearance as well as a personality and implied sexuality (bottom boy). ‘Daddy’, by contrast, seems to denote a well-built mature man who is probably a total top and is into twinks.

    I think we are right to be sceptical about gay labels when they are used in this way, and gay apps like Grindr don’t encourage us to think differently about them. But we can’t seem to come up with any alternatives at the moment.

    Naming is important because it helps us to make sense of the world around us and to integrate that meaning into and through language.

    One way of recalibrating these labels is to think about naming in terms of bodies, sexualities, and characters.

    Bodies

    It’s useful to have labels which describe particular body shapes, but such labels mustn’t over-reach themselves and try and encompass sexuality and character as well. They denote structural features only.

    Example labels to describe body shapes and physical appearance include:

    • Bear
      • Hairy, average-to-large build, any age
    • Twink
      • Slim-to-skinny build, youthful, little body hair
    • Jock
      • Athletic-to-muscular build, any age
    • Daddy
      • Any build, mature appearance

    Note that where possible, labels to describe physical appearance are age-blind and ignorant of these people’s sexual dynamics and personalities. Such labels, moreover, can refer to any male, gay, straight, bisexual, whatever.

    Sexualities

    Additionally, it can be creative to name different modes of sexuality and those who embody those modes. Labels to denote gay males of varying sexualities are concerned with direction – the direction bears, jocks, twinks etc. take their sexuality.

    Example labels to describe (polar opposite) embodiments of sexualities include:

    • Dom
      • Dominant top, protective (‘Sir’, ‘Man’)
    • Pussyboy
      • Submissive bottom, boyish (‘bumboy’, ‘bitch boy’, ‘boi’)

    It follows, therefore, that there can be Dom twinks, pussyboy bears, and Dom Daddies etc. This considerably revises the way we usually think of such labels.

    What I’m trying to steer away from is the widespread tendency to equate physical build and appearance with a particular sexuality.

    Don’t get me wrong, though. Sometimes we are attracted to particular physical builds because of distinct sexual arousal connected with how they look. A Dom Daddy might be attracted to a slim twink because of the implied power dynamics. But such dynamics are built up through encounter and relationship; they are not inherent in particular body types. They are also connected to personality, of course.

    Characters

    Adjectives to describe character concern the ways personality traits enliven our physical presence and sexuality.

    Example labels to describe character traits include:

    • Artsy
      • Cultured, creative, intellectual
    • Manly
      • Virile, noble, strapping
    • Effeminate
      • Graceful, expressive, dainty

    These adjectives are not automatically associated with any body type, but they are associated with particular sexualities: manly Dom, artsy pussyboy, etc.

    The key is to play around with different combinations and to begin using this language in more specific ways.

    Example combinations include:

    • Manly Dom twink
    • Artsy pussyboy jock
    • Manly Dom Daddy
    • Effeminate pussyboy twink

    Some combinations will seem strange because we are so used to associating physical shapes with sexualities and personalities. I’m not saying that our physical build and appearance are irrelevant; far from it. But when we do associate skinny twinks with being effeminate submissive bottoms and big muscular Daddies with being dominant tops, this is because these dynamics occur through encounter and desire and the stories we tell about each other. As long as we recognise that, then we’re OK.

     

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, its management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • COMMENT | India Willoughby: Attention seeking or something more?

    So we have yet another ‘celebrity’ making noises about the world of LGBT. Except for this time, in a slight change of pace, it’s from one of our own. India Willoughby is one of the contestants (now ex) of the Celebrity Big Brother house and has caused somewhat of a stir with her comments about drag queens.

    Let me start by saying that I don’t watch Celebrity Big Brother (or Big Brother) as, for me, it has lost its way. It started off being genuine and now it’s so convoluted that I would rather watch paint dry. At least you know it is paint on a wall and not some self-interested soul out to get fame and fortune. But I digress.

    This ‘fear’ of drag queens peaked my interest however for two reasons. 1) having spent a lot of time lately learning about the experiences of the Trans community I wanted to know where this came from and 2) what possible reason could acting like a child about it possibly serve? Oh yes, fame and celebrity… silly me!

    There are people in the gay community that are ‘afraid’ of drag queens. But most of them from what I can see aren’t actually afraid of drag queens themselves, but more what they represent. The same applies for those that say they find them in bad taste (each to their own). For me, drag queens represent confidence, attention, fun and ambition. Where they go, especially the ones that perform, trouble always follows (I say trouble, what I mean is fun!) and for some people that can be too much and come across as overbearing. We all have our demons and for some, the thought of being a stage drag queens ‘victim’ is just too much.

    But what happens when that inner demon actually becomes or is something else?

    I’m not a transexual nor have I had any urges to change gender so I can’t put myself in India’s position. But what I can do, is see how her community reacts to her and how her actions make me feel as a member of her wider community.

    In a recent interview on Celebrity Big Brother‘s bit on the side, Paris Lees outlined how some of where India was coming from resonated with her own previous experiences.

    “We went to see the Thai ladyboys, and it was essentially these transgender women dancing about on-stage, and I felt so uncomfortable. It was like, guys, we were on the beach yesterday if you wanted to see a transgender woman dancing around in a bikini.”

    In the various points, Paris raised the two that stood out where that Drag Queens are often seen by most people as Transexual when they are not (namely because there is still a lack of education out there) and India’s transition is still fairly recent therefore such fears may well be bringing up issues yet unresolved.

    I’ve not watched India in precise detail but surely regardless of cause this outburst (and then going to stand by her actions) just makes her another Caitlyn Jenner?

    Is this also a good time to also mention the recent images of her that have appeared with her tweeting about having fun with at least two drag queens (with pictures)? So while I’m willing to believe there are some deep rooted issues there, the fuss and nonsense coming from her to turn everything into an attack on her is nothing short of over the top and will only do more harm to her and the trans community than good.

    As an openly gay man, in order for me to appreciate what it means to be a gay man in today’s world, I have to understand my heritage. Understand what it must have been like to live in fear of going to jail, being killed or getting HIV. The same applies to any members of the LGBT+ community, including India and her trans heritage and family.

    While friends to LGBT+ people are slowing growing they still aren’t huge in number and many of us still face violence, death and isolation. So if we can’t learn to get along with each other then how on earth can we expect non LGBT+ people to?

     

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, its management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • COMMENT | India Willoughby is “undoing the good” of those that have gone before her

    So India Willoughby really has been making tidal waves on social media of late hasn’t she?

    I for one will never understand her. She is out there, in full view and as the woman she wishes to be. So what I don’t get is that she berates anyone who doesn’t quite understand her journey. People still don’t quite understand the concept. She refuses to accept Amanda Barrie’s apology for a start.

    You see the problem I have is that India, like Caitlyn Jenner, can help the trans community achieve so much more in terms of acceptance. They could become if you wish, martyrs to the cause. They could go down in history in changing perceptions. She has this visual presence on TV that can make people sit up and go “oh, it’s just a person FFS. What’s all the fuss about?”

    Instead, they have chosen to publicly ridicule others within the LGBT+ community. For India, she has taken a swipe at drag saying that it “cheapens” the whole trans thing. Trouble is drag and trans are two very different areas. One is where a man uses dick tape to hide his cock and the other has it removed if they go down the gender reassignment route.

    You sit there screaming at the TV wanting her to “grow the f*** up”. If she can’t handle it and use her presence to educate then she needs to step out of the fire. In my mind, she was a beacon of light for the trans community but I fear she will set it back decades with her pissy behaviour and spite.

    I work in a very male-dominated industry and I’ve come across the odd homophobic slur. To be fair I don’t usually raise an eyebrow and waste a breath on them. I am out and proud and should someone have a problem, I will do my best to show that gay men are just men who happen to love men. We don’t actually do anything different in our day to day working lives than our straight counterparts.

    Now as a gay man with an open upbringing I am of the “live and let live” view. If it doesn’t affect me (and when you think about it there isn’t much that affects any of us really) then I’m not going to lose what valuable time I have being alive wasting it on something I don’t really mind.

    India is turning into a self-righteous idiot who is actually undoing any good that those who have gone before her have fought for. So just what is India’s problem?

    Come to think of it, WHAT is her problem?

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, its management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • Body shaming: Do you even know what it is?

    Recently you may have seen me talking more and more about the culture of body shaming in the media and the wider gay community.

    Are a hairless body and a six pack the route to happiness?

    I started talking about it because I have suffered from body confidence issues and these have started to affect my personality. We all get our confidence (large or small amounts) from somewhere and mine have definitely been harder to muster since I started comparing my own body shape to that of the ‘picture perfect’ man. Some of the engagement I have had with people has been quite useful and has led me to some conclusions.

    Firstly, there is a lot of confusion out there as to what exactly ‘body shaming’ is and what harm it can bring. And secondly a surprisingly high number people I’ve seen will state one moment they are against it, but the next moment share content they have just said they were against. Both seem to stem from that lack of understanding as to what exactly body shaming is and how it can fuel negative thoughts in people, like those associated with body dysmorphia. I, therefore, wanted to share some of my own personal thoughts and experiences on this and encourage you to find out exactly what body shaming is and how it could be negatively influencing you without you even realising it.

    I’ll start by saying that if you are perfectly happy in your body shape, regardless of what this might be, then most of this will pass you by. And this is by no means saying what you are doing and how you live your life is wrong, far from it. If you have found body confidence regardless of your body shape then treasure it. I for one will never try to take that from you as I know how precious that can be.

    However, put simply, body shaming is the promotion (usually in the media but not always) of one particular body shape over another by saying that you can only really be happy, content and ‘a good gay’ if you are toned, slim, hairless and what is otherwise referred to as ‘body perfect’. If you speak to most experienced health professionals they will tell you there is no ‘perfect’ body shape but there are ideals based on your health, exact body makeup and metabolism. Everyone is different, with different capabilities, biologies, restrictions and environments to say a six pack is the best thing for every living soul is ludicrous.

    Can we ever be truly comfortable in our own skin?

    Therefore, if you are someone (a young teenager for example) that often gets their ‘injection’ of gay life from the media and all you are told is how wonderful the body beautiful people are you are going to naturally compare yourself to them and automatically feel bad that you are not one of them. That is basic human psychology that we all do in one form or another. If someone has something that I believe I want, I will compare it to what I have and judge the gap.

    Many of us spot this and have taught ourselves to either not accept that this is what we want or we have come to believe that a six pack is not the ideal body shape. Therefore, when we see these articles we just dismiss them. But if you are someone with strong body confidence issues to the point of body dysmorphia, these messages just add fuel to the fire.

    One gay magazine which I can’t really name, did a survey this year on body confidence and of those who responded 84% said that they felt under intense pressure to have a ‘perfect body’. There was a really good article by Nick Arnold from BBC3 on “How being a gay man can make your body issues worse”. I recommend reading!

    But is the ‘gay media’ solely to blame for it, or are we as a community also responsible? We’ve all done it, I will be one of the first people to go and buy a magazine if it has a half-naked Harry Judd on it. But that is just me adding fuel to the flame as that purchase adds to the value of what is traditionally called “sex sells”. Fact is we, currently, just don’t rush out to buy magazines that have articles on things that remind us of ourselves. Instead, we buy and promote these ‘dream boys’ and dribble over them.

    I’m not saying we need fewer images of Harry Judd (good heavens no) but what I am saying is that in order for people to find their body confidence we do need to expose ourselves to a wider range of body shapes and change our language from ‘happiness = six pack’ to ‘happiness = comfortable in your own skin’. I recently put a picture of my own body out on my twitter (against the wishes of my body confidence inner voice) in order to educate myself and others about this issue. I am not an ‘ideal body shape’ as mentioned above, I carry extra weight, things wobble that probably shouldn’t and the chest hair is currently in need of local council attention. But I did it, and I received some amazing feedback both positive, and indeed some negative.

    My advice to you if you are suffering from any form of body dysmorphia or lack of body confidence is to speak to someone about it and remember that the voice in your head is not the leading authority on everything. You can be wrong, so maybe the voice is wrong about this too.

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, its management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • Should the word “faggot” be removed from Fairytale of New York?

    Should the word “faggot” be removed from Fairytale of New York?

    And the bells are ringing out…

    Every year it becomes a talking point amongst some in the gay community, but are the lyrics to “Fairytale of New York” offensive? We asked our readers… It sparked a lively debate, to say the least.

    Most people who commented on our question, said no – and that they weren’t offended by the song. Here are some of our favourite comments to the question: “Should the lyric “faggot” be removed from Fairytale of New York?”

    No. People need to chill out before we have to remove half of the English dictionary as one person or another finds something offensive – Ben

    No, it’s attitudes that need to change not great Christmas songs, when did the idiots start running the asylum??? – Paul

    I’m sick of people getting offended over ridiculous things. If you offended by the lyrics to this song you need to have a serious word with yourself – Gary

    It should be changed. I also opt that the sky should be permanently replaced with a pink viscous gunge because that makes sense too – Dillion

    Anyone with a decent understanding of the English language knows that the word has two meanings: 1 A savoury dish made from pork and 2 A bundle of sticks or twigs, no I didn’t look it up! – Graham

    It was a phrase from the age. If we erase every offending word from songs, the world would be a very sanitised place. Somewhere I personally wouldn’t want to live. – Derek

    No, it shouldn’t. People need to stop being so touchy. If anything ita a reminder of how far equal rights have brought us. I love that line. – Angela

    I’m gay and not offended. As much as I’m glad attitudes towards a lot of things are changing it’s going to get to the stage where you can’t say anything in case of offending someone. – Robbie

    Why remove a word calling someone a spicy meatball?
    In seriousness though, a word is only as powerful as the meaning you give it. If you motion to get it removed, you’re part of the problem, because you are the one giving it negative connotations. We need to take words back, you’ll never change attitudes by doing things like this – it just alienates people and makes the words even more negative. Like telling a toddler not to say “fuck”. – Evelyn

    I think it should be removed. Just as every song or rap that uses the n-word should be removed. Also fuck, arsehole and every other swear word or slur.  Oh, we can’t do that because songs everywhere would lose meaning and expression? – Sam

    I don’t think so I don’t like the word but it’s re-writing history which is more offensive. It’s a song and reflects reality just as with any creative medium. People saying it’s past tense to be insulted by the word live in a different world. I live opposite a school and I don’t know which is worse the homophobia coming from the kids or the parents hanging about the gates. – Jamie

    I’m gay, and a dj…. and when I play it in a gay bar… I turn the sound off for that line and the WHOLE room sings it with glee at the top of their voices… point proved lol… so it’s not us moaning! – Matt

    Leave it alone! If you had to start erasing things that upset people half the 20th Century would have to go! It was a sign of the times and something for people to look back and learn from. – Andrew

    No. I still giggle hysterically when I hear the song played uncensored in shops at Christmas. It was a song of its time, we cannot rewrite or delete history. – Jamie

    • some comments were edited for clarity or grammar.

     

  • How similar are you to other gay guys?

    Check out these 12 questions to find out how similar you are to other gay guys!

    Poll may take a moment to load… please wait a mo!

    [socialpoll id=”2163118″ type=”set”]

  • Your Comments: What did you think about James Corden and Harry Styles’ kiss?

    It’s taken the internet by storm, but what do you think about the kiss between Harry Styles and James Corden?

    Use the comments below to have your say

  • Your Comments: Is the term ‘Fag Hag’ offensive?

    The term “fag hag” dates back decades and originated from the US, but in 2017 is it now offensive to use?

    The term “Fag Hag” is a slang phrase that refers to a woman who hangs around and socialises with mostly gay or bisexual men. These women could be characterised as out-going, camp and very accepting of the gay community – but not always.

    Most notable examples of a “fag hag” could be Linda La Hughes in the British sitcom, Gimme Giveme Giveme. US Comedian Margaret Cho has talked in her standup show about being a “fag hag” (but now prefers the term “dick widow” and the legendary performer, Pam Ann has also been described as a “fag hag” by many gay publications.

    Some people find the term offensive, whilst others embrace it… Some consider the phrase a term of endearment, but in 2017 does this phrase need to be used?

    Over to you – use the comments below to let us know your thoughts. Do you find the term offensive? What other terms could be used instead?

  • What’s it like to have a doctor check your balls for lumps?

    Oh no; not a third bollock! I had found a lump!

    Nothing significant but it was a lump on my right testicle. I had woken one morning stretching, raking, scratching, checking and there it was. I did nothing, well not precisely nothing I kept checking every day to see if it would just go. It didn’t. After about a week I knew I should see a doctor just to be safe.

    Having recently moved into a new area I had yet to register with a surgery. I lived in an apartment in a large converted Victorian house, halfway up a hill. At the foot of the hill was the nearest clinic. Registering as a new patient seemed to be a good idea, so I filled in the form when I went to ask to see a doctor. There were no appointments, but I could sit and wait to see the duty doctor. I was told the duty doctor for today was the GP I had just registered for and I would be his first patient on his first day.

    It was the summer of 1992, a hot August day. I sat in the waiting room, worried about sweating in the heat and wondering if this was the best time to be here. How long would I have to wait? Long enough to be considered of dubious personal hygiene? I hoped not. I wanted to be cool and calm, but I just felt hot and sweaty.

    Surrounded by seniors, some with quiet dignity, an old lady with her head to one side. “Earache,” the old man accompanying her said sharply as he looked across at me. Oops had I been staring? Small children, some running around, others looking very sorry for themselves and clinging to their parents.

    “Tom Driver to Doctor F……..”, the loudspeaker announced. I followed the instructions the receptionist had given me and went up the stairs to the door on the left. I knocked and almost immediately heard back “Come in.”

    Deep breath and in through the door and shocked, absolutely stunned! Sitting in the chair, formally attired, smiling back at me was a young man who was the spitting image of England Rugby Union Captain Will Carling. “Tom isn’t it? Do take a seat.”

    Take a seat? I wanted to run out of the door. This man was wank fantasy material incarnate, and I was going to tell him I had a lump on my right bollock!

    Pleasantries over and I had made my disclosure, while mumbling, looking away and staring at the floor. “Well, we better have a look then. Stand up and drop your trousers and underwear.”

    Mentally I was in agony dreading what would happen if my cock reacted during the examination. In my head, I was watching the Salvation Army marching band and old ladies knitting while reciting “Bromide in the NAAFI tea keeps the cock at half-mast or lower.”

    In the time I had been having these thoughts and thinking of what excuse to offer should he excite me, the doctor had got on his knees in front of me. Oh My God, focus on the matter in hand, IN HAND, he has my balls in his hand fondling squeezing and checking. He reached to his desk and took from it with his right hand the instrument they use to look into mouths and ears (Otoscope). With his torch in his right hand and the lump exposed by his positioning of my testis with his left, he shone the light. I thought; ‘he really wants a good look’. Then he got up, and I heard him say “All done, pull them up.”

    I had to ask, “What were you doing?” He explained to me that he shone the light because cellular tissue is denser than fatty tissue. Having this knowledge and the fact the light shone into and through the lump indicated it was not cellular (potentially cancerous) and was most likely a polyp, a lump of fatty tissue the body would probably reabsorb over time. I was told to keep an eye on it and if it changed, itched or grew to come back. I thanked him and left.

    On the stairs, on the way down I stood back to let an elderly couple pass on their up. It was the old lady with the earache who was his next patient. I smiled, knowing where the instrument he would use to examine her had just been.

     

    If you are concerned about lumps on your testicles, you should make an appointment with your GP as soon as possible.

    THEGAYUK.com has teamed up with The Naked Rugby Players to help raise money and awareness for testicular cancer with the Balls To Cancer charity, through their Naked Rugby Calendar 2018. To buy a copy click here.

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, its management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • What’s it like to go to BDSM dinner party?

    It comes around every year, announced by the crashing onto the doormat in the hallway, abound (well it would be) invitation to the Mid Devon BDSM Dinner and dance.

    I only too well remember last year’s meal… I was sat at a table facing the door. The man from the table next to me was on the floor in the foetal position. He was already at his dessert; I made a mental note not to order anything with crushed nuts.

    A couple entered and were being shown to their table when I heard a resounding thud and splat. The sort of noise only heavy-duty surgical rubber makes when over lubed. Sure enough, the sub of the couple had lost his butt plug. Forced out by the 30-second long rasping fart that followed, accompanied by musical lows and highs. I could only imagine the look of embarrassment and relief on his face, as his full cover gimp mask rendered him quite expressionless.

    My date for this event was Clive. A massive 22 stone of a man clad from head to foot in Biker’s leather, boots, gloves with studs and a helmet with a skeleton in relief on the back. Rather like a secret Santa event, the seating was chosen at random. I inquired of Clive as to where he had parked his bike? In the most effete of voices and with a Birmingham accent he replied, “Oh no bab, I haven’t got a bike. I came on the bus!” (pronounced buzz by Brummies). At this juncture, he extended a hand, as limp as a left out lettuce and requiring a bone in the wrist to prevent it from dangling perpendicular to the forearm. I returned the greeting taking and shaking just his index and middle finger.

    Clive had long dishevelled hair, a matching beard and wore corrective glasses that almost worked. His head was facing me, one eye looking at me, the other looking for me. Our drinks arrived. I took my pint of real ale with my cuffed hands and Clive his Babycham. There we sat making small talk, a pseudo biker and me in my PVC maids outfit, crotchless panties, thigh length rubber waders and cast iron ankle shackles. I glanced around the dining room and given the assembled company I felt we blended in and were perhaps even a little conservative in our garb.

    Our order for dinner was taken by an orange-hued spray tanned muscle Mary, shrink-wrapped into the tightest of trunks. I would have aged him to be in his 40s. The badge announcing that his name was Doris was worn through his pierced right nipple. From the way he twitched when it jiggled I think the piercing was new for the event. He seemed to be enjoying the pain. Though he was less than steady on his 6-inch heels, part of the reason we had steered clear of the soup.

    Neither Clive nor I had any food or gunge fetishes and we wanted to eat and not wear our food. Though the same could not be said for all the diners, one of whom was having his rectally inserted, the decision having been made by his master. I think they were vegetarians and the choice of the Raw root platter must have been a veritable delight, given the moans of pleasure coming from the recipient who was bent over the table.

    But I have reminisced too long. Time to look in the wardrobe, I want to stand out this year and was thinking of wearing something a little risque. I do hope they have “pigs in slings” on the menu again. I avoided them last year, being as they were, past their best by date. I will, of course, report back