The sign on their guest-house rules board read:
“Here at Chymorvah we have few rules, but please note that as Christians we have a deep regard for marriage (being the union of one man to one woman for life to the exclusion of all others). Therefore, although we extend to all a warm welcome to our home, our double-bedded accommodation is not available to unmarried couples. Thank you.”
Alan Craig, the author of the article in question, says:
"Just 90 miles away in Torquay, Devon, is “the UK’s first and only” gay men’s resort which, amongst other things, has been happy to promote its sauna with photos of male genitalia on its website. In March this year I challenged the EHRC about the resort on the basis that what is sauce for the straight goose should be sauce for the gay gander too, but they declined to take action. To the equalities watchdog it seems some are more equal than others."
I think I see what the problem is.
Alan Craig is very happy at being able to go to a guest-house in Cornwall where the owners break the law... but what he really wants to be able to do is party with the homosexual crowd. He simply feels he cannot do so because this gay sauna seems to be "more equal that others".
Clearly gay people must become more straight, and then this gay resort will be open to be people like Alan Craig to visit?
But then it wouldn't be a gay resort. Just, ah, um, a resort.
One wonders how far Alan Craig will truly go in the search for male genitalia to support his arguments in the future? Because in his article he doesn't seem to use it for a single argument as to why the mild mannered and self effacing couple should not have been punished by the law for an oppressive and 14th century policy of refusing to allow same sex couples to share a bed.
He seems to only conclude that because there is a gay resort, there needs to be a place for straight people to stay too. Well guess what, straight people can stay at a "gay resort". That's because gay people don't give a shiny turd whether you are straight or not.
Granted, the gay resort in Devon restricts persons who are not gay or bisexual. But why oh why would a straight person want to go to a gay resort, with all of that open homosexuality on offer and male genitalia hanging out? And if you were "straight" but wanted to go to a gay resort you could clearly register as a bisexual and be covered. There you go Alan Craig... that's an idea for ya!
But equally the UK's population is overwhelming heterosexual and it's a percentage close to 0.00000000001% that you are going to be turned away from an establishment based on your heterosexual tendencies. So perhaps it's fine to allow homosexuals a refuge to engage in their anti-god practices and safe from the prejudices of the pious communities who have helped spread homophobia throughout the ages?
Perhaps I am forgetting that case where a straight person was beaten to death by a gang of homosexuals because of their creepy "straightness"? Or perhaps there is a prominent campaigner for heterosexual issues that was butchered for speaking out against ignorance?
Oh... looks like those should be the other way around doesn't it?
They should have stayed at the gay resort that Alan Craig has highlighted. Maybe they can take Alan Craig along with them such is the curiosity on display?
Still, staying at home to look at male genitalia is far more fun. And no doubt Alan Craig can probably find some more faith based stories to use the argumentum ad mal genitalia in the future...
...so the research continues
1 comment:
Why is that the religious right, and the anti-LGBT crowd in general, are MORE obsessed with gay sex than we are?
They're all supposed to be straight ... I'm bisexual, which makes me 50% gayer than they are, and they *still* seem to think about the things some men do to each other's bottoms (and other naughty bits) more than I have hours in the day for. Even if I went full-on, I still couldn't be as fixated on it as they are. I've seen guys in gimp outfits being ridden around fetish clubs who have less of a thing about sexual perversion than these weirdos!
As for the resort, well they probably don't specific bar heterosexuals on the grounds that they wouldn't have to. Unless you're a fan of man action, why would you *want* to go? And even if they DID restrict to gay/bi only, they probably do so legally by making themselves not "open to the public" - ie. one can only book, no passing trade (as it were), unlike a B&B (which *is* open to the public).
If the B&B were, in fact, a private residence in which rooms were available, but they could only be booked in advance, no passing trade accepted, one could probably discriminate on the grounds that they're offering private lodgings. I'm not sure of the law, but I think the "public" part of it is what means you can't discriminate.
I think we should try to coin the phrase, "argumentum ad phallum" (argument from cocks) and get it into common usage :)
Post a Comment