Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2016 7:48:11 GMT
If a future monarch or president of the UK was gay or transgender, would that matter?
|
|
|
|
Post by theolo on Nov 3, 2016 9:50:24 GMT
No
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Nov 3, 2016 9:58:13 GMT
Didn't matter when past ones were gay.
|
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on Nov 3, 2016 10:04:06 GMT
I'm sure there would be lots of chitter chatter, but a gay, trans (or even disabled or black PM/Monarch) could have the huge positive benefits in terms of tackling stigma and discrimination.
I accept that black Monarch is the most unlikely of those scenarios
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2016 13:28:25 GMT
Didn't matter when past ones were gay. Of course King William III was alleged to gave been gay; I bet that is something the Orange Order doesn't spend a lot of time discussing at its meetings. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2016 13:34:43 GMT
Didn't matter when past ones were gay. Of course King William III was alleged to gave been gay; I bet that is something the Orange Order doesn't spend a lot of time discussing at its meetings. Best evidence is in relation to James I & VI: with all the others (including William III & II), the evidence is very circumstantial. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 3, 2016 13:37:20 GMT
They already have been frequently.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2016 13:47:48 GMT
They already have been frequently. So that's what their spokesmen mean when they celebrate every year and encourage all to have a "gay time"? So much for "save Ulster from sodomy" campaigns |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2016 13:49:20 GMT
Of course King William III was alleged to gave been gay; I bet that is something the Orange Order doesn't spend a lot of time discussing at its meetings. Best evidence is in relation to James I & VI: with all the others (including William III & II), the evidence is very circumstantial. Nothing circumstantial about Edward II. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2016 14:05:35 GMT
Best evidence is in relation to James I & VI: with all the others (including William III & II), the evidence is very circumstantial. Nothing circumstantial about Edward II. It is quite likely that Edward's relationship with Piers Gaveston, and possibly others, was sexual in nature, but the evidence falls far short of proof. |
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,029
|
Post by Sibboleth on Nov 3, 2016 14:21:10 GMT
Sexuality was understood rather differently in the Middle Ages to today (ironically in a way that comes across as very... er... tumblr...) so it doesn't even make sense to look at it in that way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Penddu on Nov 3, 2016 15:01:06 GMT
You mean if Britain had a queen instead of a Queen?
|
|
middyman
Conservative
"The problem with socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of other people's money."
Posts: 8,050 
|
Post by middyman on Nov 3, 2016 15:05:57 GMT
I am troubled by this. Shouldn't it be "were gay or transgender", as it were.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2016 21:42:59 GMT
Sexuality was understood rather differently in the Middle Ages to today (ironically in a way that comes across as very... er... tumblr...) so it doesn't even make sense to look at it in that way. Really I thought the bible told them that "man should not lie with man nor beast"? How different is that from some of attitudes held by some of our brethren today? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2016 21:44:04 GMT
I am troubled by this. Shouldn't it be "were gay or transgender", as it were. Pedantic... |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Nov 3, 2016 22:36:25 GMT
Sexuality was understood rather differently in the Middle Ages to today (ironically in a way that comes across as very... er... tumblr...) so it doesn't even make sense to look at it in that way. Really I thought the bible told them that "man should not lie with man nor beast"? How different is that from some of attitudes held by some of our brethren today? There is a massive difference between 21st Century Western understanding of sexuality and that of almost every other culture throughout history. The concept of sexual orientation is very much a post-Enlightenment Western way of understanding sexuality (it does describe an underlying reality - though there are definitely people who do not fit the categorisation, but nobody in the middle ages would have understood their sexual desires and sexual activity in such a way). People basing their identity on their sexual orientation is another very modern and Western thing, and it probably can't be traced back any further than the 19th Century. |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,135
|
Post by Foggy on Nov 3, 2016 23:02:38 GMT
I am troubled by this. Shouldn't it be "were gay or transgender", as it were. Pedantic... Some of us take that as a compliment.  |
|
middyman
Conservative
"The problem with socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of other people's money."
Posts: 8,050
|
Post by middyman on Nov 3, 2016 23:05:39 GMT
I am troubled by this. Shouldn't it be "were gay or transgender", as it were. Pedantic... ....... but correct |
|
johnloony
Conservative
Posts: 24,563
Member is Online
|
Post by johnloony on Nov 4, 2016 5:57:37 GMT
If a future monarch or president of the UK was gay or transgender, would that matter? It would very much matter if a future president of the UK were gay or transgender, because it would mean that the UK would no longer be the UK, but would be a Republic. That, were it ever to happen, would be the ultimate catastrophe. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 4, 2016 10:00:39 GMT
If a future monarch or president of the UK was gay or transgender, would that matter? It would very much matter if a future president of the UK were gay or transgender, because it would mean that the UK would no longer be the UK, but would be a Republic. That, were it ever to happen, would be the ultimate catastrophe. Why? Why? and Why? |
|
