CHAPEL END CHARLIE

Your *witty repost* took a hour to arrive I notice ... and what a long and lonely journey that must have been for any idea to take.

If it exploded in your brain then I suspect that little real damage would have been done. Why don't you tell everyone on here yet again of just how very innocence you are of libelling Gatwick air crew

I was asked for examples of the homophobia that I had personally encountered in my working life. I duly obliged with this request, although obviously contributions of this type are bound to be anecdotal in nature. No I did not record on tape what was said. Now you have the unmitigated gall to come on here I tell me that these conversations and attitudes that I have very good cause to remember vividly did in fact not happen and that I am therefore lying to this forum. Strangely I don't remember you being there when a ex copper of my acquaintance informed me of how he, and some of his colleagues, behaved towards black people back in the 1970's? Neither do I recall your attendance on another occasion when I was told of a common assault being committed on someone suspected of being gay. You weren't even there when all this happened, but nevertheless somehow you just 'know' that these incidents did not happen! Now you can get away with this crap over the anonymity of a broadband connection you snivelling little coward. You can rest assured however that you certainly wouldn't be speaking to me in this manner were this conversation taking place anywhere in the real world. It is perhaps one of the great administrative mysteries of this forum exactly why the moderators on here have tolerated your appalling behaviour for so long now when far better contributors than you have been banned for lesser offences than you seem to get way with every bloody day. Do you imagine that there is some shortage of malice in the world that only you can remedy? Are you labouring under the impression that sarcasm has been promoted and is not the 'lowest form of wit' anylonger. I'm past caring frankly, but some on here might wonder what has made you the hateful piece of work that you are. Perhaps you were just born that way. On the other hand it may be that something in your past has made you turn out like this - it might even be related to the subject we are discussing here for I know. Whatever the underlying reasons behind your obvious character flaws you are undoutably the most miserable excuse for a Human Being it has ever been my misfortune to encounter on here.

I really don't think you have anything worthwhile, or even remotely interesting, to say on this subject at all. But if I'm wrong in that then stun me with your acumen. Then you can answer the question and explain why anyone should take your opinion on the scale of prejudice LGBT people experience ahead of what they themselves report.

If there ever is a time when you decide to change your routine and address some issue properly on here then you MIGHT just come within spitting distance of 'doing the right thing' for once. Needless to say no one will be holding their breath waiting for that to happen ... But if you some have/any reason why I should take what the likes of you think about prejudice ahead of those who are in a position to actually know what they are talking about then lets see it.

But I have carefully read all contributions posted on this thread. For some reason the member in question is seeking to downplay the reality of homophobia in our society today - apparent on the grounds that he has not witnessed any incidents of this nature himself. In reply I (and others) have pointed out to him that there is actually good statistical evidence that many members of our 'LGBT' population do indeed still suffer significantly from various forms of abuse. You may think differently of course, but it seems to me that the people who are best placed to judge the reality of the situation are not those on here with some (unknown) agenda they seem determined to promote, but rather those with direct personal experience of homophobia in action - i.e. its victims. Ultimately, who the hell am I to question the truth of what they report .. some might well wonder who are you and Hypo to do so for that matter?

Gatwick doesn't matter anyway because any foul homophobic abuse hurled at Brighton and Hove Albion fans is of course merely *banter* and therefore all good fun apparently ...

My apologies, I'm clearly not 'tuned in' to you. What point were you attempting to make?

Eh?

You have already been provided with a perfectly serviceable definition of homophobia and I see no good reason to repeat myself. You appear to be suffering from what is sometimes defined in Parliament as being 'wedded to your position'; i.e. you are so committed to your line of argument that you're just not listening to the evidence anymore or indeed much interested in debating the issue in a reasonable manner. This ailment can infect any of us of course, but when the position you 'wed' yourself to is fundamentally wrong-headed then it becomes a bit of a problem.

Yes, the car is always key and it's also true that the young Lewis started his F1 career in the seat of a very competitive McLaren indeed. Obviously few other drivers are ever fortunate enough to be gifted such a wonderful initial opportunity. You can rest assured however that Lewis would not have been in that car in the first place had Ron Dennis doubted his raw speed and level of ability. His first F1 title soon confirmed that this show of faith invested in him was not at all misplaced. After a couple of seasons McLaren F1 lost its competitive edge and LH wasted years in utterly hopeless cars that didn't offer him much of a chance at the title. He also faced a series of personal problems he needed to address and overcome before he became the driver he is today. That (oh-so-human) maturing process he underwent is one of the reasons I admire him so. As for F1 being ''dull'' ... well I can only presume that people who say this just don't bother to watch every race anymore because - at its best - this sport is still quite the most trilling sporting spectacle you'll ever see IMO.

I see not a shred of actual evidence provided to support the first contention. Therefore, when there is no so-called 'false positive' statistical evidence provided then taking the above theory into ''account'' becomes more than a little problematic. As for the latter point, again a significant proportion of people in the 'LGBT' group report that they have personally experienced a homophobic incident within the last 12 months - a significant 1 in 10 people from this societal group report they were the victim of some form of physical assault. Impartial official estimates also show that there are in fact some 39,000 - not 6000 - reported and unreported homophobic crimes committed in this country per year. Furthermore, many Police Constabularies have reported that this problem is in fact increasing, rather than declining, in their force areas: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/nov/26/rise-violent-homophobic-crimes-reported-police I dare say few would seriously question that Britain today is a far less prejudiced place that it certainly was in decades past. However, this picture some on here are seeking to paint of our society being a supremely tolerant and utterly safe place for minority groups to express themselves in would appear to be a debatable one at best.

To attempt to argue that hate crimes, such as homophobia, can't exist in our society anymore, or are at most a marginal problem, because you don't happen to have witnessed any such incidents yourself is of course the stuff of nonsense. I don't happen to have personally witnessed any murder, rape or serious fraud offences in the last 12 months as it happens. Were I to be so foolish as to try and claim that none of these crimes can therefore exist as these offences were all outside of my personal experience then I would lay myself open to utter ridicule on here - and quite rightly so I think. If you are really so very interested in my various encounters with homophobia, and other hate crimes, over the years then I'm more that happy to oblige you. I work daily with a number of (perfectly ordinary in my experience) working men of all age groups. I must inform you that in conversation with my fellow workers many of them quite frequently stray into casual derision of, and expressed revulsion towards, members of the so-called 'LGBT' community. You do know I hope that is the dictionary definition of homophobia - i.e. the dislike of, or prejudice against, homosexual people. You don't have to go out and give some poor bloke a bloody good kicking to be considered homophobic. I must also inform you that some of your fellow citizens express what are indeed sexist and overtly racist viewpoints too - indeed I once worked with a ex Nottinghamshire miner and a former Dorset Constabulary policeman who, had their private conversations with me been recorded, would probably both be serving a 5 year stretch at HMP Parkhurst now. I left school back in 1979 and I've worked in many places over all those years and encountered much the same attitudes, to one degree or another, at almost every job I've ever held on a weekly (if not daily) basis. Back in my 'drinking days' the very same attitudes could be indeed be heard in almost any pub or club throughout the land. What genuinely surprises me here is that you (and a few others) are so surprised that many common people are really like this. Perhaps you have experienced a atypically sheltered upbringing. Perhaps you are just a little naive about the world. For all I know you may even spend your time surrounded by far more enlightened and liberal attitudes up in a office somewhere than I have so very often experienced down on the 'shopfloor' of working life. But you can rest assured that not all British people, in their private conversations, always express the enlighten modern approach towards minority groups that some would hope they would. Now if you are really 'seeking after the truth' here and want to gain a better understanding of this issue then read the following report and consider carefully what it says - you never know you might even learn something about life. http://www.report-it.org.uk/files/stonewall_gay_british_crime_survey_2013.pdf

Well wriggle as you do, the fact is that homophobia is alive and well in our society. The people I ''hang around with'' are perfectly ordinary examples of the species that anyone might encounter in their everyday lives. Again you attempt to justify your argument by selecting a (oddly narrow) definition of what constitutes homophobia that many fair minded people would not agree with.

Of course you disagree - in the immortal words of Mandy-Rice Davis ''you would wouldn't you'' ... The official 'LGBT' hate crime rate is quoted simply because that is how the statistics are gathered by government - there is no separate UK Homophobia only crime stat that I am aware of. Frankly, all victims who fall within this broad societal group seem to suffer comparable hate crime experiences. I might also add here that it ill-becomes those who make a point of requesting evidence be provided to support a given supposition to then reject said evidence on grounds that seem entirely bogus to this commentator.

I can only say that I just don't recognise this depiction of a homophobia-free British society you seem to live in. Perhaps some on here lead relatively sheltered lives - lucky you - but whenever I'm out and about in society I personally encounter some degree of homophobic comment or attitude at least once a week on average I guess. I dare say that those who are unfortunate enough to be the targets of this form of prejudice probably experience this far more often than I do. Again the UK Crime Survey shows that this is provable statistically and if that doesn't appal you then it probably should.

I expect that lynchings in the old American South were very much an 'exception to the rule' when measured against the everyday experience of routine prejudice black people suffered from at the time. Surely the fact that an experience may be exceptional does not therefore mean that it is also insignificant and not in need of addressing.

It would seem then that your definition of what constitutes homophobia is not quite the same one as most reasonable people I think would agree with. Like many other offences homophobia takes on many forms and exhibits differing degrees of malice. This can range from mild somewhat ''jokey'' jibes in the workplace, to the (offensive) lyrics of certain rap songs, or even serious physical assault on occasion. These are all different spots of a spectrum of prejudice. But if you still seek to question this reality (for some reason that I can only guess at) then you can look up the stats yourself if you like. However, the fact is that the most recent UK Crime Survey [for England and Wales only] showed some 39,000 recorded homophobic 'hate crime' incidents over the 2012-2013 period. The survey also reveals that eight in ten LGBT people have been verbally abused or harassed, with a statistically significant one in ten suffering actual physical assault. In reality of course these statistics may well under-report the full extent of the problem due to the fact that some LGBT people are reluctant to register incidents with the police for obvious reasons. Therefore the 'homophobia does not really exist' line you have been pursuing on here for two days now really doesn't hold a lot of water does it?

You are seriously telling this forum that you have not heard a single homophobic remark in the last ten years? Perhaps you should get out more ...

Well you are free to speak for yourself of course, but you certainly don't speak for me. I make no apology whatsoever for restating that I neither share in, or even understand frankly, this sense of hatred directed towards Adam Lallana. My first and last reaction when he left us was more one of regret rather than bitterness because I had much enjoyed the experience of watching him develop into the fine player he now is and that privilege was over. Some on here however went so far as to express that they wanted one of our players (Victor Wanyama ironically) to ''break his legs'' when he next came back to St Marys - a truly appallingly thing for anyone who calls themself a Saints fan to post and perhaps the lowest point in this forums history. Yes of course he was well paid for his efforts and furthering his own career too, but from the stands I saw that lad 'sweat blood' for this club for season after season in the lower leagues. I dare say that few would dispute that Adam played a significant part in getting this club of ours out of the mire we were in and back into the PL. Is it not also true that, man and boy, he spent a long time at this club - more than half his career probably. The record shows that when he finally departed for Liverpool he left the club with a huge transfer profit on the deal - money I will point out the club spent on replacing him quite effectively. Why doesn't any of that still count for something on here? Few of us fans I suspect really 'know' the young players we discus on here personally. I suppose Adam Lallana could be some inordinately scheming and villainous Human Being who you wouldn't want your daughter to meet, let alone marry. But I ask you to use your judgement and experience of people and tell me if 'deep down' you really believe any of that because I don't.

As has replies of the above type frankly. What does matter more in the final analysis - what people do, or how they choose to do it? It seems to me that if you were to murder someone then the significance of doing so with an immaculately clean gun and impeccable manners is of little importance when put against that fact that the victim is still dead! It doesn't really matter anymore if Adam said something stupid when put on the spot at an awards dinner years ago - perhaps if he had been half as duplicitous a player as you think him to be then he could have found a better way of avoiding the question in the first place. No, the key issue here is that our club struggles so to retain ambitious players who want to 'better' themselves elsewhere. If some on here put half the energy they spent trying to think up reasons to hate this (decent enough) young man on that more important question then they might gain a better understanding of the big issues our club faces.

It seems to me that Gaston is one of those players who can indeed be useful on his day, clearly lad has some real talent. However, you'd have to structure the squad in such a way so that he would have little or no real defensive responsibility because that really is not his 'thing' methinks. Those PL managers who are fully signed up to the 'defend as a unit' ethic might well think that too high a price to pay for what he offers going forward.

Good.

Yes F1 is undoutably a very 'political' sport - there is far too much money involved in it for it to be otherwise. However, any team will seek to protect its star driver - it is afterall in both their commercial and competitive interests to do so. That does no mean that the evidence shows that Mercedes have somehow significantly favoured Hamilton over Rosberg. From my perspective Mercedes appear to have been scrupulously even-handed in the main. On his day Nico Rosberg has the sheer pace to match Hamilton I think, his qualifying performances do tend to show that. What he lacks perhaps is the mental strength to match the world champion over the course of a long season or indeed a race on occasion. I might speculate that because Hamilton over the course of his career has had to overcome some very public personal problems, and terrible McLaren cars too at times, this 'school of hard knocks' experience has gifted the British driver more robust and mature personality than his German team mate. Be that as it may, having (for once) watched both the live Sky TV coverage from Austin and the BBC's later recorded broadcast programme, I have to say that the BBC coverage was notably superior I thought in terms of both its analysis and commentary. Suzy Perry is both likeable and knowledgeable while her male Sky counterpart is a total nonentity in comparison. David Coulthard and Eddie Jordan (when present) also form a admirable 'double act' that Hill and Herbert struggle to match despite all Sky's substantial financial and technical resources. I have always liked Martin Brundle, but the fact that David Coulthard also has much more recent experience of actually racing a F1 car may be a distinct advance for the BBC team too.

Nonsense. Like him or loath him - the later I'm guessing in your case - to be fair Adam Lallana left everything he had 'out on the field' for this football club while we had him. Indeed, I've seldom seen a player put in a better effort in that regard.