David Cameron goes after the Gay Vote

Right this is going to be a tricky article to write and I am sure to take some stick as a result of it - so remember this before you start to read it.  This article and its contents are my opinions and mine alone and nothing to do with the British National Party.  Some of it will be BNP policy, as I am in broad agreement with their official policy but other parts of it will not.  So here goes, if you are that way inclined, take hold of my hand and off we go.

This article was inspired by the news over on Pinknews.co.uk who have posted the results of a poll saying that 31% of young gay voters will vote for the conservative party, 27% for Labour and in the poll an encouraging 7% said they would vote for the British National Party.

First let us get the BNP policy out of the way first.  Theirs is a very wise "Don't care what you are" policy that I also support.  Someone's sexuality and peccadilloes are their own private business and of no concern to anyone else.  Heterosexuals feel no need to proclaim to the world that they are straight and likewise there should be no need for homosexuals to wear their pink hearts on their sleeves with Flags above police stations and Gay parades.  The parades I kind of understand, as I am always up for a parade and a party afterwards and I suspect that the "Gay Community" enjoy parties and dressing up more than most.

Now before I give my opinions and thoughts on the matter of homosexuality, I must make my own sexuality clear.  I am most definitely heterosexual although sometimes, some people, not knowing me, may have thought that my sensitivity and understanding put me in both camps.   A mistake on their part but a mistake that has never disturbed me.  I know who and what I am.

Now, I discovered at an early age that a "popular" person is not the one who dominates a conversation around a table but one who listens and makes "appropriate" noises in the right places.  And thankfully I have always enjoyed listening to people speak.  With every word and sentence the speaker utters, the listener learns more about the speaker and the subject of the conversation.  More people should try listening for a change - they might be surprised to learn that people other than themselves have interesting stories to tell also.

And like the circle in a Venn diagram that intersects all other circles, my life, has I have travelled the world and our country, intersected with all kinds of people and causes.  Drug dealers, travellers, the police, the medical profession, Queen's Counsellors, celebrities, dog hunters, hunt saboteurs, anti-fascists, fascists, badger baiters, bankers, stock traders, paupers, millionaires, workers and bosses.  The list is endless but by now you should have got the point.  And on all occasions, I have sat and listened and asked questions and raised points without ever condemning or supporting the cause or the person.  And my curiosity 0to "learn" and my travels have led me to have more than my fair share of contact with homosexuals and their "community". I believe I have learned a lot so I will now give you my opinions and my thoughts.

Now I will not go into my views on homosexuals serving in the armed forces - they are not relevant for this article. I am going to leave that for a follow up story if there is any interest in this one.

Quentin Crisp - "If you like"

So let us go to a party.  Just under a year ago, I and my lady friend were one of only two heterosexual couples invited to a party to celebrate the birthday of one of the gay brigade.  The guy whose birthday it was had come down from London where he and his partner  worked in the city.  They were both successful and well off and as different as chalk n cheese.  One was openly gay, in an over the top Quentin Crisp way and the other (very good looking according to my lady friend) seemed to be as straight as myself and excellent company.

In fact I spend several hours speaking solely to him, which caused my lady friend to raise an eyebrow, fortunately she is used to me seeking out "interesting" people.  Besides she was lapping up the attention by the "over the top" gays who were really "camping it up" for her and some of whom she had been to school with.

The gay community in the valleys of Wales must actually be quite small, as those present(about 30) had come from miles around to be there so perhaps there really is only one gay in the village.  But what an opportunity to talk to lots of the gay crowd about a subject that had been beyond my comprehension for decades.  Now I could actually ask all the questions I wanted to ask and hopefully receive truthful answers after a few drinks had loosened lips. 

My main question, that none could give me an answer to that I could understand, was how or why did they find other men to be more attractive than women?  They just did.  And that was that.  They were attracted to men the way I was attracted to women.  The image of a hunk appealed to them as much the image of a beautiful woman would appeal to me.  It really was as simple as that.  No mystery. At least not with these men.   

So if there are different answers I would be pleased to hear about them. I will be sorry I wrote that - the UAF,  a few years ago signed me up to a host of gay sites and forums that took me awhile to unsubscribe from but otherwise did not bother me.  Best be on stand-by Kazzy for incoming abuse.

Later, when all sat together, well oiled and talkative, the debates really started and they were really "explicit", frank and detailed.  And like in all groups of people gathered together, there were huge differences in opinion that sometimes got quite heated but never out of hand. 

One of the biggest dividers it seemed, was the differences in opinion towards "celebrity" homosexuals who "flaunted" (their word) their homosexuality on T.V. to raise a laugh and those who thought the "celebrities" were too camp and crude for the homosexuals who felt that they did not have to highlight their sexuality in an equal world. 

My private thoughts on watching and listening to the lads having a go was that the more reserved and thoughtful homosexuals thought that their sexuality was private, whilst the more extroverted, tended to lean towards exhibitionism and a desire to be the centre of attention.

Peter Tatchell

I must confess that occasionally I did stir the pot whilst passing the port but only because I wanted to learn what these people thought and so I asked about their attitude towards organisations like Stonewall and individuals like Peter Tatchell. with their in "your face" messages promoting homosexuality and the "outing" of homosexuals by naming them, when perhaps those individuals would much preferred to have kept their sexuality private and to slowly emerge from the closet when ready.

Too in your face for me

I must confess I was taken aback by the hostility of those who supported the nastier actions of Stonewall and Tatchell and their complete disregard for the wishes  of those outed or just how the  heterosexual public would perceive their actions and billboards like the one above. 

In fact they were very confrontational in a way that again, the more thoughtful, thinking homosexuals were not.  I do not believe these militant homosexuals do their cause any good and said so.  I was promptly told by one angry over the topper, that this debate was not my concern.  I pointed out to him and the others present , that my views were probably shared  by a lot of others and should be considered and most present nodded in agreement.  My attacker literally "flounced" off to the kitchen for a refill which raised a laugh and the mood lightened.  Seriously, these people do have a great sense of humour and can be very self depreciating or at least these guys did.

When the talk turned to the promotion of homosexuality in schools, again there was an almost 50 50 split.  With one half saying that homosexuality should be promoted as it would help young children "realise" they were homosexual or encourage some to experiment to discover if they were or not.  I was not sure about that last bit but remained silent and the others saying young people should be allowed to discover their own sexuality in their own time.   And round and round they went with arguments for and against until they moved onto age of consent and round and round they went again until I was feeling quite dizzy and learnt really nothing other than they disagreed with each other on almost every subject under the sun.

Then we had all the "first time" experiences which - and I must be honest - was sometimes a bit sloppy and sometimes too much information but it did lead on to another ritual of homosexuality that I was curious about.  Why do people like the dead traitor Ted Heath, the singer George Michael and the Welsh Politician Ron Davies find appealing about meeting other men in public toilets, which they refer to as "cottaging"?  I suppose that Cottage is a much nicer name for a place that smells of stale urine then lavatory.  Now this really divided them yet again.

Now most of them said they did not do it themselves, as there were more than enough clubs and organisations they could go to to meet like minded people and one said he would be embarrassed to be found seeking sex in a public toilet.  Those who said they were against "cottaging" and looking for badgers on the common were also against having sex in places that might be viewed by members of the general public, especially children. 

The minority side said that meeting people in public toilets and having sex in public was a basic human right as sex was a natural function and nothing to be ashamed of and that those who disagreed were homophobic which I thought a silly statement as some of their friends and partners were also against cottaging but did not get a chance to query those who supported that claim.

Somehow I managed to drag the conversation back to the age of consent and the promotion of homosexuality in schools.  I was pleased to listen again, that most of those present thought that children should discover their sexuality for themselves and that whilst homosexuality and other variations should be mentioned, neither should it be promoted as being "cool".  What is "cool"?

At this point some said that if they had sons (I did not ask how) they would prefer them to be heterosexual although they would "understand" if they were homosexual but it would be nice to have grandchildren one day.  At the time I thought, well at least homosexuals still retain the genetic imprint in all humans for their species to continue but by now I was mainly listening.  I had hoped to talk about "gay adoption" but by now thinks were slipping beyond the control of my amateur skills as a conversation manipulator as music was now playing a song  and the campers were doing what they do best.  Camping it up and laughing like fools at how funny they were.

Finally as the drink took over, behavioural inhibitions were slipping and I and my partner bid our good byes and left but not before speaking to my companion from early in the evening who said at the door that most people like myself would not really "understand" the "Nitty Gritty" side of homosexuality and that perhaps it was best that way.  I understood exactly what he meant.  In fact I have written about just how "Nitty Gritty" being a practising homosexual can be and that is not for me no way.

So I guess my conclusions were these.  Homosexuals are made up of nice guys, bad guys, intelligent guys, stupid guys, witty guys, boring guys, pricks, posers and nasty militant type guys.  Just like in the heterosexual community I guess.  But I suppose my main concern was that the thoughtful intelligent homosexuals are far too quiet and have allowed the more vocal militants amongst them to become their spokesmen and self proclaimed representatives.

My general feeling is that most of the homosexuals I met would be assets to the British National Party as they seemed to share that same philosophy of the BNP, that is was not a persons colour or sexuality that counts but more what sort of person they are.

So there you go.  If any of you gays want to talk to BNP people about what we really think then you will find us in our Paltalk room.  There, you can discover for yourselves  whether we are the homophobic monsters portrayed in the press or not.   Tell them the Green Arrow sent you.