Friday, January 18, 2008

Forbidden fruits?

What is it with some straight people in England?

It seems they cannot leave gay people alone and want to jump into bed with them.

In just two days I see these two cases of sexual harassment.

First, yesterday, a gay guy was being sexually harassed by a straight woman.

And today, the papers reveal a lesbian in the army is set for a big payout after sexual harassment from a male sergeant?

Is it that gay people present a bigger challenge?

There's an urge to somehow 'convert' them?

Or is it the prospective taste of forbidden fruits?

12 comments:

Andrei said...

You really a sucker for the gay grievance industry Fairfax.

These are people who are unhappy in their work and want a payout.

Who hasn't been hit on by a colleague or had their life made miserable by a co-worker at some point?

Most of us get on with it or not as the case may be.

Play the gay grievance card and get a payout why not? Hmmmm

dad4justice said...

The Trany Granny is at it again!!! The Human Rights Commission wants the sick criminal government to pass another law so schools allow children to change gender .What the f##k !!!

I hate this country as it is run by queer social engineers hell bent on making everybody a deranged misfit .Scum of the earth Helen Klark maggot !!!!

What a cess -pit full of faggot poofter nutbars !!!

Go Pink Blacks you stupid turd tossers !!!

What a f##king disgrace !!!!

FAIRFACTS MEDIA said...

It's hardly a case of being taken in Andrei.
It just seems to be a theme of this week's papers.
And I'd thought I'd give Islam a rest for a second.
I would happily let anyone hit one me- gay or straight- if I got a huge payout too. £400,000 seems a fair price.
I guess the novelty is that 'straight' sexual harassment cases have been around a decade or two.
The gay angle represents the latest thing, a novel twist that has whetted the appetites of the UK media, especially the tabloids.
I wonder what will come next?

Maybe I should have linked to a warning the other week about 'pirahnas'.
Women who target successful men, they 'accidentally' fall pregnant and then they have a meal ticket for life, along with half of the poor fellow's assets.

Craig Ranapia said...

D4J:

Ever considered laying off caffeinated beverages and sugar on days that end with a 'Y"? Seriously.

Andrei:

Call me old fashioned, but I work to earn a living not score a root and I have a reasonable expectation that my co-workers do the same.

I've got a three-step proactive process to deal with sexual harassment - regardless of the gender or sexual orientation of the perpetrator. (I've been in a committed and perfectly happy relationship for thirteen years, so I'm not on the hunt outside work either.)

First offense: A polite but firm warning to sod off.

Second offense: A sharp tap to the genitals, and a not-so-polite warning to fuck off before the next one lands in their face.

Third offense: I make it my mission in life to make sure you are shamed for being a moronic sleazebag, and kept as far away from me as humanly possible. Not angling for a 'big payout' from the 'grievance industry', Andre. Just want to be left alone to do what I was hired for - and do damn well, if I say so myself.

Life is only as complicated as you choose to make it, folks. And I don't choose to complicate my life with bureaucrats or sleazebags.

dad4justice said...

Craig R, your concern about my caffeine intake is bizarre to say the least. I think you should contain your comments, as you show a callous disregard for someone who has been involved with both the Human Rights Commission and Law Commission since 2002.
As a disgruntled falsely accused father looking at incarceration in the foreseeable future after 200 odd court and tribunal appearances I am rather frustrated the Law wishes to address the rights of a minority group. As Tim Barnett (Chairman of Care of Children Bill Select Committee) said; “Labour will not help fathers” it is not difficult for a decent bloke to find himself in the precarious position of being vulnerable to a vindictive and vengeful gender bias judicial system.

I suppose the pain, hopelessness and frustration of a major depressive episode should be expected in the environment where fatherhood is valued as meaningless. My caffeine intake and my Internet activity are trivial when one compares it to the orchestrated destruction of a once decent father.

Unlawful gender discrimination has run a muck within government agencies that dishonestly say they act in the “child’s best interests” .What else would I expect from a radical feminist regime that detests middle age heterosexual men.

Feel free to thrust another knife in as the Internet is a great place to participate in such activities. Maybe I should say that I a homosexual denied his right to love his children and who knows I might just get listened to? Stranger things have happened and any credibility is better than no credibility .

Anonymous said...

Gosh when I think back to my first few jobs in the 1970s the compo I could have got. As a single early 20s working with mainly single and married late 20s thru 30s females.The things they used to say and do to make me blush. The days of miniskirts and hot pants.Me too young and innocent just wanting to hide away.All that was on offer. Oh dear too late now.

Craig Ranapia said...

D4J:

Please take this in the spirit in which it's offered: I know you've been through some pretty awful shit, but don't you think going off like that was a wee bit OTT?

Call me a PC whatever, but if I wanted to go to work and see arsehats pestering people who find their sexual overtures eminently resistable, I'd become a bartender. I can handle a bit of well-judged banter in the office - and clearly assert myself when I want folks to back off -, but it's not a fantasy of the PC dykeocracy that there are people who cross the line and don't respond well to reason.

Andrei said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Andrei said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Andrei said...

Call me old fashioned, but I work to earn a living not score a root and I have a reasonable expectation that my co-workers do the same.

All well and good, the trouble is what constitutes "sexual harassment" is in the eye of the beholder.

One might be flattered, another offended etc.

Actually it is a dance we all dance until we form a permanent monogamous relationship, if we ever do.

In times past and other places the courting ritual was more tightly circumscribed perhaps and where so it is more obvious which courting activities are approved and which not.

However with free love etc it becomes more complex.

So an individual who hits on a workmate might find a lifetime partner, a quick grope in the stationary cupboard or a sexual harassment suit. Depending on what the agenda of each party is to some extent I suppose.

dad4justice said...

Craig R ;Cool bananas bro, ya right on, the “PC dykeocracy” – is simple poetry and yes sometimes a strong character shines in adversity. “Well –judged”? Well um - Internet banter is something I am slowly learning, because I am thick as a brick. In fact, I struggle at times, as I find it can be hard to handle on more than one occasion .I am adapting to the net. I do cannot understand why the pc dykeocracy would want to spend huge amounts of money destroying a once stable and happy family unit? Talk about crossing the bloody line mate these pricks have crossed my line. Steady front rank, hold positions as justice is coming, just look to the sky, as the Bat will fly. Sorry just was being plain silly, but God loves a tough-minded optimist.

Anyway, oh that’s right the radical ideas of 2008, the year of perpetual anxiety! Silly me - get with the flow girl -oops I mean boy. Call me old fashioned 60’s, 70’s child, oh to bring back those happy times for kiwi families and kids, yeah right – it’ll never happen .I’m from the school of hard knocks and Helen Klark is a disgrace to the good name of New Zealand. She is a highly skilled nanny state social engineer who seizes any notable event to put her in the public gaze, while the behind the scene gals get into to the real business of dehumanisation. The very root of her political system is secrecy and the total implementation of her feminist policy is her main priority , stuff everybody else .

Cheers dude.

FAIRFACTS MEDIA said...

I think we have two seperate arguments here that have become intertwined.
First of all, my view is that we have had sexual harassment cases for a couple of decades now.
Some maybe genuine, some maybe frivolouos.
It is only inevitable that such cases would start to involve gay people.
I see no problem in that.
There is no gay grievance industry I am aware of , just gay people wanting the same rights as others, no special favours.
We can all argue how we might respond to unwarranted advances of a sexual nature ourselves.
D4J comes up with a separate argument about how he had been treated in the justice system.
And he is probably justified in his belief based on his experience.
But I doubt Tim Garnett being gay is to blame. More likely Tim Barnett said what he said because he is a PC lefty prick.
It's like I have no issue if Helen Clark is lesbian, if she is. My opposition to her stems from her being a tax and spend dictaorial socialist.
As for gay 'agendas' , I am not aware of any, other than wanting to be treated like anyone else, being part of society, the mainstream.
And I see nothing wrong with that.
And to those on the right who see fault in this, what will its impact be?
It won't make gays straight, it will encourage them to run into the arms of the Liarbour Party.