[i]“Sadly, it seems to be further confirmation that the Big Lottery has long since ceased to impartially distribute lottery cash to worthwhile and respected causes”[/i]

How on earth is tackling homophobia not a “worthwhile and respected cause”? The implications of what Eddy says here are huge.

Why not give it to an organisation that tackles all forms of bullying?

Joel:

Indeed, yet more vile homophobia in local government, prejudice is a hard thing to shake for this idiots.

Richard:

Schools you mean? The thing is Richard, people like you find it hard to accept that in this case LGBT young people have a harder time of it, as reflected in the level of homophobia we see around us. Also, you miss the point, as always, which is that homophobic bullying is a serious problem and a unique one; next time I’m doing some work for Stonewall you should come along and listen to the stories of the young people and their first hand experience of homophobia.

Ah, the Campaign Against Political Correctness: one man, his wife, and the world’s worst website. Google it and see!

That any newspaper ever goes to him for a quote or describes him as a ‘pressure group’ is patently absurd. I’m thinking of setting up a site called ‘Campaign For Political Correctness’ so I can call myself a think tank and get in the papers too.

I agree with D H-G. Homophobia is a unique problem that needs to be tackled uniquely. Throwing it in with bullying doesn’t do justice to the sufferers (of either).

There’s a much harder time had in education, there’s a high suicide rate. Homophobia needs to be tackled specifically, and if groups want to do so, they should receive this support.

I’ve become even more disgusted with Eddy than last time.

As an aside, I’d like to add my support to the campaign for a posthumous knighthood for Alan Turing.

If you want to beat homophobia then it’s important to recognise the contribution to society homosexuals have made.

Turing lay the foundations of the information revolution and he played a pivotal part of the code breaking section at Bletchley Park during WW2; but being gay lead to him being persecuted by the State until he eventually took his own life.

Turing was one of the most important thinkers of the 20th Century. He’s rightly celebrated in Manchester but he deserves more recognition nationally.

I agree very much Shatterface but isn’t it a shame that we have to find LGBT icons to act as flagships for sexuality, as if we have to provide evidence that LGBT people are ‘okay’.

My god, I agree completely. The necessity for icons is depressing. I remember reading Stephen Fry’s letter to his 16-year-old self ( http://bit.ly/115E5H ), and thinking what a fantastic thing people like him were doing in getting people to accept themselves.

I find the idea that, on non-homosexual issues, the fund doesn’t award to specific and narrow schemes quite a funny one.

Homophobia is nonsense and to spend taxpayers cash on it is farcical and pointless. It’s discrimination by label, meddling in people’s lives to hit some arterial gibberish dreamt up by people with few manners and even less compassion. It’s like Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle made flesh in its pervasive reach into preceptions of discrimination rather than actual discrimination. There are already sufficient measures of authority within preofessional services to react where people feel slighted and this is even more so for kiddies. The argument for funding is base, vulgar and anachronistic.

“Homophobia is nonsense”.

You couldn’t be more wrong. You’re unaware of the high suicide rate due to homophobia, the homophobic assaults and murders, the systematic hatred. It’s an extremely serious problem, and it’s also a serious problem that some people don’t take it seriously.

I’m sure I could be more wrong if I put some effort into it. I established 18 hate reporting centres a couple of jobs ago and I was left with the overall impression that homophobia need not be separate, specific, isolated or categorized in its own right. I am in no way diminishing its severity – what I am stating though is that it should be mainstreamed into the job descriptions of anyone who deals with people – be that housing officers, coppers, benefit advisors, teachers, docs etc. I think it should just be supplemental to the standard duties that people perform. There is sufficient scope & significant legislation to start dropping specific funding.

Someone always will lose out, Arnold, when it comes to funding…there’s not enough cash. Able to be mainstreamed or not, the idea that homophobia can’t be tackled with funding specifically for it’s own cause is clearly not one that holds water.

It’s like Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle made flesh

You mean we can’t measure the velocity of homosexual particles and simultaneously record their location? That’s news to me.

At least we *do* know that the gay elements are Potassium, Zinc, Hydrogen, Copper and Argon.

I think the question is more what the money will, in fact, be spent on. Cos it sounds like bollox to me. Compare and contrast with a more obvious solution: spend some money on locking up some violent criminals for a couple more years than they otherwise would be. You know the sort of people that actually pose a threat to law abiding homosexuals (and by coincidence, everyone else too). Protecting individuals from violence and crime is, after all, meant to be the state’s raison d’etre.

Since it is a lottery grant, perhaps it would be best to privatise it (make it an independent charity without the government being able to appoint its officials), then leave it alone to make its own funding decisions. If they want to fund gay pressure groups at the points, thats fine.

I love how Nick entirely undermines the first half of his own comment with his second paragraph.

And it still doesn’t make sense. The lottery grant *is* going to a private, independent group, and the Government *isn’t* appointing officials.

So I guess that means you agree with the grant, and the Reach organisation? That’s nice – I do too!

So prisons run by Government good? Anti-homophobic bullying campaigns allegedly run by Government (but not really) bad? Huh?!

17. Nope, the Big Lottery Fund is a non-departmental public body: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Lottery_Fund

And the secretary of state (for culture?) has a hefty tranche of powers to control it: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/ukpga_20060023_en_2

And the charity that set up Reach appears to deal almost exclusively with government agenices: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_Action_Challenging_Homophobia

That makes it a political issue. Turn them both into genuinely independent charities, and you won’t see me kicking up a fuss about it, no matter what they decides to fund. I don’t know whether I would support it personally, it would depend on whether it was effective at achieving its aims, which knowing how effective charities with political connection tend to be, I have some doubts.

Arnold Hinkley Smythe Botham=trolling cunt who is a homophobe

Now we’ve got that cleared up…

Jamie:

This is perhaps one of the funniest things I’ve read in a while: “It’s like Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle made flesh…You mean we can’t measure the velocity of homosexual particles and simultaneously record their location? That’s news to me.”

And then Nick the horse fucker comes here too, what is it with threads that mention homosexuality zoophile?

Your comment at 16 is marvellous nonsense, it may sound like bollox to you pal but considering your experience of working with young LGBT people is no doubt zero and mine is quite extensive thanks, I can tell you such projects, as Joel points out well, are needed and are very effective.

I’ve had the honour of working with Stonewall on numerous occasions on various projects to empower LBGT young people and the horror stories as well as those of real courage in the face of the kind of ignorance seen in this thread alone was enlightening and moving.

But the idea that if you lock up criminals, this will somehow stop homophobia (and now we’re back to the idea that prisons even work, silly chap, we’ve already dispatched that old chestnut) is perhaps one of your very worst, along with the one about fucking animals being okay as long as the animal consents…

As for your blather about the lottery grant, I am wondering why this particular project has your heckles up, considering your previous efforts at not being homophobic looking very homophobicindeed; I’d avoid threads in which your prejudice can leak out.

Smearing me again, old bean? Very unfortunate.

I’ve probably made enough comments on here for people to be fairly confident I am not a bigot or a homophobe, whatever other unpopular vews I hold. My experience of politically connected LGBT groups are that they are quite ineffectual. There are exceptions: DELGA seem fairly good for example. Perhaps your experience is different, and I acknowledge my experience is limited. But the advantage of private charity is that the price of disagreement is fairly low. I contribute to my preferred groups, you contribute to yours.

I wouldn’t be so sure, Daniel Hoffman-Gill.

Not only does Arnold Hinkley Smythe Botham have a long, impressive name, he also talks about Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, which proves that he must be clever tho.

Fuck me, I’m so overwhelmed by all this name-dropping. Also the use of words like “arterial” leaves me feeling abashed at my own stupidity (not to mention vulgarity, mustn’t forget vulgarity).

Anyone who has such a command of big words must be right about everything, even if the words are wholly irrelevant in the context and are only paraded in the hope that they will make their author seem clever (ene though he can’t spell).

For all the zoophiles in the house:

http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com/2009/08/heavy-petting-layer-drop-shadow-really.html

Jamie:

I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again, I love you.

Zoophile:

“My experience of politically connected LGBT groups are that they are quite ineffectual.”

Great but your experience is limited and as I have worked for and with many groups in a child focused context and seen first hand the success your point is quite redundant.

Ok, I’ve worked with them in a legal context. A lot of them seemed surprisingly uninterested in the criminilisation of fisting videos, which obviously has a disproportionate impact on homosexuals. That made me wonder where their priorities lie.

And I notice you have taken to calling me names, which indicates that you might not have taken on your own anti-bullying message very successfully. Which, in turn, makes me wonder what sort of organisation would use you in a child focussed context.

It’s not name calling Zoophile, it’s a term of endearment!

And I’m not talking about from a legal perspective, just as this piece isn’t that we are commenting on. I’m talking from a coal face perspective, the only perspective that matters, empowering young LGBT people in the face of adversity.

Powerful stuff.

I’d just like to thank Chris for getting this story out to a wider audience.

The issue is not that the award could have been spent on other things- there are a million and one things the award could be spent on.

It’s that Cllr. Eddy described as an “outrageous” waste of money an award to a charity who’s purpose is to help combat homophobia that is targeted against teenagers.

We think its a good cause and that the indifference to homophobic bullying of a leading politicians in a modern British city is unacceptable.

Eddy is notorious for controversial “hit and run” attacks on minority groups (see the “gollywog doll” story. His actions are designed to gain publicity without having to actually make any policy announcements.

D

Binky:

No it wouldn’t you racist.

RSP:

Clever observation? Nah.