UK vs Philippines Approach to Gay and Trans People

Stimulating conversation - with many good points.

Like many Brits on here I remember the dark days of the 70s / early 80s when homophobic attitudes were very prevelant and ingrained in large swathes of society. We had gay-bashing on Hampstead Heath and elsewhere and most gay guys had encountered hostile and often violent reactions from thuggish bigots.

As we know it's often the religious zealots who fan the flames - citing texts from their works of fiction (always written by controlling males of course!) Some may remember that fine bastion of sanity and ecumenicalism The "Rev" Ian Paisley's "Save Ulster from Sodomy" campaign - whipping up anti-gay prejudice and influencing the political & social agenda.

Then of course we have our Islamic extremists who will happily throw a homosexual from the highest building - apparently doing Allah's work. I could go on...

I was once very active in one of the large public sector trade unions and was very active in the campaign against the nakedly bigoted "Clause / Section 28 introduced by an illiberal Tory government in the 80s.

In my late teens I got really into the punk / new wave scene. Not so much the fashion but the music of The Clash / Damned / Buzzcocks / Ramones etc. I went to see the Tom Robinson Band in a hot, sweaty, club in Edinburgh. Tom was openly gay and an active campaigner against prejudice & bigotry.

One of TRB's songs was "Glad to be gay" and he encouraged the audience - straight and gay alike - to "Sing if your glad to be gay - sing if you're happy that way" Being 100% straight (and in love with Debbie Harry!) I was a bit uncomfortable with this exhortation - but fortified with some awful fizzy beer and with a natural and developing social conscious - I joined in - soon lustily! Maybe I did it partly to appear cool (my friend was having nothing of it - looking at me with mild disgust.)

My own view about the whole LBGT thing is simple - quite frankly I could not care less what consenting adults wish to with one another. The nuclear, heterosexual, family of 2.4 kids is long gone and there are many expressions of love and sexuality.

I have 2 children - early/mid 20s and I'm very proud that the have grown up totally accepting of the wide variety / diversity of modern life. Like me they abhor racism, sexism & homophobia. There is still prejudice of course - but the social & legal landscape they have grown up in is much better than in previous years.

I don't have enough experience of life in the Philippines so I've enjoyed very much reading of perspectives from those who have.

Bit rambling - sorry!

Gerry

i know i'm of that age--and certainly set in my ways....the thing i cant get my head round is--gay marriage.

what i'm about to write is my take on this---and i hope our friend @Brom27 doesnt get upset or offended by this.

to me---marriage is very much a male:female thing. " i now pronounce you man and wife"

marriage was traditionally for a man to take a woman as his wife--she then had a husband. they set up home together--he went to work ( or war )--she had the babies. 2 very different roles.

so to me--husband = male--wife = female.

i have no issues with a same sex couple having a civil partnership ceremony--with all the trimmings---and being legally recognised as a couple---just the same as a het couple getting married.

so why the need for a same sex couple to want to go through a marriage ceremony ? i just dont get it. doesnt make any sense to me.

A couple of good points bigmac, I'm not religious but something doesn't sit well with me when it comes to two chaps marrying in church, same as you I have no issues with a civil ceremony.

Doesn't make any sense to me getting married at all, from a personal point of view I only married because of the visa requirements, I would have been more than happy just to live over the brush.

Our Filipino friends will not know what "living over the brush" means, an English lesson

What about heterosexual couples wanting a civil partnership, how does that sit?

as you may well know--i have now been married 4 times. the first 3 were partly to make life more comfortable for my parents--who were very religious and would have been extremely disapproving of me living in sin. they are both dead now.

but i am happy to be married--i suppose its a feeling of completeness--and security.

She to whom I am married objects very strongly indeed to being introduced as "my wife". She says she doesn't belong to me. The form "This is K, we are married" is acceptable to her. I see her point.

I don't have a problem with same sex marriage.

..and in my eyes a same sex couple should also have that feeling, should they wish.

I personally think they should be allowed to, there was a court case earlier this week I think where the court decided against it.

A civil partnership to me is just a rubber stamping of the relationship, marriage in a church for me is a entirely different.

sure--and a civil partnership would give the same result.

dont think i'm religious--or homophobic. not at all. in fact--my wife is out with a philipino friend who has lived here most of his life--and gay. he will bring her home later--and visit me. nice bloke.

i had a similar online debate about this the other day. i know some gay men refer to their partner as their husband--so what do they call themselves ? cant both be husbands.

whats the legal difference between that and a marriage--?--if any.

There is none and it keeps the people who are religious and find gay marriage offensive happy.

We all have different opinions on homosexuality and its very easy to see why, we just have to all get along with each other, its apparent that us two share similar views on the matter

Would it give the same result though? Maybe they too want the option of Marriage (be it in Church or otherwise). Who am I, not allow someone who doesn't have the same sexual preference as myself the same rights that I have. If same-sex couples want a marriage then let them.

The simple answer to the question of marriage between same sex couples, is that it is not right in the eyes of any God, that's what the religious argument is.

Firstly, marriage predates christianity and in those days it was possible for same sex marriage to happen as well as polygamy. I'm a passive atheist so have no opinions nor interest in what the church says or thinks. The CoE is breaking up because the western countries want to accept the principle but the other countries, mainly African, do not. My local priest is gay and lives in celibacy with his partner... yeah right. I actualy respect those who quote christianity as their reason to be against gay marriage, as long as it is a choice because of their belief, not their prejudice.

The interesting point raised is about civil partnerships and the point would be accurate only that civil partnerships do not convey the same legal rights on each partner as marriage does. Pension rights are reducd, rights when abroad are different as some countries will recognise the marriage but not a civil partnership. It is a dfferent legal state and marriage is a legal process in the UK, not a religious one. You can have a church wedding as many times as you like but the only thing that makes you married is the witnessed wedding certificate which you then have to register. Hindus marry, Bhuddists marry, Sikhs marry, muslims marry, atheists marry. Rastafarians, jews, pick any of some probably 5000 legal religions in the UK. You are only married when you have the certificate. God is just up there with the wedding cake as far as the legal impact. There's a tendancy in my view for people only to look at the world from their corner of the room. I do myself sometimes.

I personally like marriage, a lot and when my first one ends I hope to marry again...... ouch...

There's a whole new industry created in gay divorce though, one interesting anomaly is that adultery in UK law only applies to couples of different sexes.

Very good. I am a serial monogamist myself.

The advice I have been given by divorce lawyers is that one should if possible always avoid "adultery" as grounds for divorce - it's full of pitfalls - and should instead go for "unreasonable behaviour" - sex with someone other than one's partner is unreasonable behaviour - so the issue may be just academic.

one interesting anomaly is that adultery in UK law only applies to couples of different sexes.[

and thats my whole point. adultery can lead to pregnancy--and a new life being born. which is what marriage is all about.
therefore--a marriage must involve a man and a woman. a husband and wife.

a man cant have babies ( in spite of that life of brian sketch) so 2 men--or women--cant get married. but by all means have a legal partnership ceremony and certificate with all the responsibilties and benefits of a marriage---just not the title.

For me, I'm not religious at all but I do not regard myself as a atheist, the reason I do not agree with gay marriage is because I very much respect the views of those people who are religious and I think gay marriage is an unnecessary offence to them.

I would say have a civil partnership and keep the vast majority of people happy, as you say, this issue is causing a lot of upheaval in a lot of religions.

I think the LGBT community should settle for the progress it has made over the years especially now that they are widely accepted.

You argue a good case bigmac, I forgot you used to be religious

What's your take on gay couples adopting children?

no problem with that--at all. or if 2 women in a relationship decide to become mothers.