Must not imply that male homosexuals are not fully male
This is a bit hard to follow but I think my heading above covers it:
"Brian McFadden claims it was his tongue in his cheek, not his foot in his mouth, which saw comments he made about men wearing pink slammed as gay slurs. Fans and lobby groups damned the remarks on New Zealand radio as "homophobic" and the singer a "hypocrite" over the off-the-cuff fashion faux pas.
The Irish crooner got into trouble when he said: "If you are not gay, a man should not be wearing pink. Saying pink is a form of red is the same as saying homosexual is a form of male."
Yesterday McFadden, via a statement from his publicist, said his pink thinking was taken out of context.
While McFadden defended his style statement as a joke, the singer-turned-TV presenter was set upon by gay rights activists on both sides of the Tasman. After hearing McFadden on More FM, local Auckland charity Rainbow Youth slammed the ex-Westlife singer - whose former bandmate Mark Feehily is gay.
Source
5 comments:
Truth hurts, huh?
Once again, we see that gay activists will never miss an opportunity to be seen as victims. That the statement was factual means nothing in the PC'ized world we're forced to live in.
"Must not imply that male homosexuals are not fully male"
But if you imply that they are fully male, they'll be offended!
"Once again, we see that gay activists will never miss an opportunity to be seen as victims"
Good valid point anonymous.
That applies to the Muslims, as well.
However, both "communities" (OH how I hate that term) have realised that the best defense is a strong, unabated vocal offense, in which the word "racist" (Oh how I hate that term) is fired about like an assault rifle on full auto!
All men, straight or gay, are male--that's simple science fact. It's also a fact that homosexuals are not REAL men.
Post a Comment