The Mail, ‘Nazis’, adoption, ‘retards’ and homophobia
Posted by antonvowl
May 14th, 2009
This is an expanded post from my other blog. Honestly, I’d been having such a lovely morning and then I happened across the Mail’s website. I don’t know what it was that made me do it, but there I was, and suddenly, well, you can’t look away, can you? It’s like when you drive past a dead badger with its guts hanging out by the side of the road. You don’t want to see the awfulness of it all, but something makes you look. Do you know what I mean? Anyway, this is what I saw: 
It seems simple enough, in Mail land. If you complain about people’s attitudes towards homosexuality, then you are a ‘Nazi’. A ‘Nazi’ in the Littlejohn/Gaunt mould, that is, ie someone who has views that you don’t can be called a Nazi. As the man who led to the end of Gaunt’s career in radio pointed out, though, you need to put something in front of ‘Nazi’ to be able to get away with it – the Mail has chosen ‘adoption’ this time. Because the Nazis were so fond of homosexual people, weren’t they? So fond of them they gave them nice pink triangles to wear in the concentration camps. It’s a really good analogy, Mr Mail.
(Interestingly enough, Littlejohn, as an example, has been given credence in recent years by pretending claiming that it is in fact the Left, rather than the Right, who are the real anti-Semites. I don’t know how much good he really does that particular cause by then going and slapping the label Nazi onto anyone he doesn’t like, as Angry Mob noted in the 2008 Littlejohn audit. Isn’t that, you know, a teensy-weensy bit disrespectful to those who really suffered at the hands of the real Nazis, to imagine that some bloke who’s made up a rule you don’t like can be called one?) Anyway, what have people done to deserve being called ‘Nazis’ in this instance? Well, here is the story behind the emotive headline, and here’s the quote that the Mail have cherry-picked out of an adoption pamphlet aimed at single-sex couples:
‘Children need good parents much more than retarded homophobes need an excuse to whinge, so don’t let your worries about society’s reaction hinder your desire and ability to give a child a loving caring home.’
I think it is indeed a bit harsh to call people ‘retarded’ when you don’t agree with their point of view – but the overreaction from Mail Towers is ridiculously out of proportion. Incidentally, talking about the offensiveness of the term ‘retard’, guess who it was who called Gordon Brown ‘an accident-prone retard’ and got away with it long before Jeremy Clarkson got in hot water for calling him a ‘one-eyed Scottish idiot’? Go on, guess. Go on. Who do you think it was? You guessed Littlejohn, didn’t you? Of course it was! And it was in the Daily Mail as well. Call a homophobe a retard – find yourself attacked by the Mail. Call a politician a retard – find yourself paid hundreds of thousands of pounds by the Mail.
But Gaunt, during the ‘Nazi’ exchange that got him booted out by TalkSport, was making a point against adoption services too, calling them Nazis for not allowing smokers to adopt. Anyone who’s been watching the recent series of documentaries on Channel 4 about adoption (and I’m guessing that excludes the entirety of the Mail workforce) will have seen just how hard it is to adopt a child, even if you *do* pass all the criteria and tests, and even if you’ve done all the training – and yes, especially if you happen to be a same-sex couple.
People like the Mail and Gaunt ignore all the evidence. In their minds, adoption agencies hand over children like sweets to gay couples and ignore nice middle-class folk. There’s no evidence for this, but this is what they think, so this is what they describe as being the truth.
And there’s another point worth making. The Mail described people who complain about homophobia as ‘Nazis’ in one story, but guess what? When the ‘homophobia’ in question comes from their nemesis, then it’s perfectly acceptable to be offended on behalf of the gay community:
Those folk who complained about Ross aren’t ‘Nazis’ at all, of course. They’re perfectly acceptable individuals. And look at the irony:
Ross was involved in a light-hearted discussion about prizes in a competition themed around the fictional teen pop star when he joked: ‘If your son asks for a Hannah Montana MP3 player, you might want to already think about putting him down for adoption before he brings his…erm…partner home.
Up for adoption, Wossy? But as we already know, adoption agencies are infiltrated by evil forces designed to make children gay and favour gay couples over nice straight ones. And the people who enforce this are NAZIS.
Categories: Politics, Sex & Sexuality | Tags: agendas, homophobia, Littlejohn
Excellent work in capturing all the sentiments of this rotten headline in one outing.
I’d have to look at it from this point of view – Nazism is no longer a set political standpoint to Mail readership. Many do not understand the depth of their ideology or the rationale (if you can call it that) behind the genocide. They’re simply them lot what we fought back in the 1940s, and the term simply represents an idea of a collective nemesis rather than a specific entity.
This coming from a paper which was a supporter of British Fascists in the 1930’s. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail#Inter-war_period
Nice post. The Mail has proven time and again that they attack things in different ways depending often on who holds the opinion. Ross says something, evil, Littlejohn says similar, wonderful.
I hate their hypocrisy more than anything else. If you have an agenda then at least be honest about it. Instead they act like they’re not homophobic, xenophobic and mysogynistic and that it is their enemies that are these things when it suits them.
Uponnothing – I’m of two minds about the Mail’s agenda. While you could look at their self-contradicting approach as them trying to decide which is the greater of two evils, you could also see it as representing the inherent illogic required to hold the views of (I assume) many Mail readers.
Personally I’m of the opinion that the Mail has no agenda except ’sell more newspapers’. Sometimes this manifests itself as ‘ban the licence fee’ (to reduce the competition), but in general they just write stories which reinforce the views of the people who read them. Whether or not the readership would hold those views without papers like the Mail around is arguable, and whether they ultimately sell more papers this way than if they printed actual news is debatable, but I’m fairly sure the ‘journalists’ who work at the Mail couldn’t give two shits about the content of the paper. A lot of them are probably normal, intelligent people – even Littlejohn – but writing this wank makes them money.
I know the purpose of this website isn’t to rag on Mail readers, but I’m afraid I’m of the opinion that theyre actually the source of the problem. If you didn’t have hundreds of thousands of people WANTING to hate immigrants, the Mail wouldn’t exist. I don’t think they care whether gay couples adopt, I dont think they care how many immigrants there are in the country, and I dont think they care what expenses MPs claim. They just care that their readers care, and that their readers want to be told they’re right.
Oh, the irony!
“Incidentally, talking about the offensiveness of the term ‘retard’, guess who it was who called Gordon Brown ‘an accident-prone retard’ and got away with it long before Jeremy Clarkson got in hot water for calling him a ‘one-eyed Scottish idiot’? Go on, guess. Go on. Who do you think it was? You guessed Littlejohn, didn’t you? Of course it was! ”
From today’s bile emission http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1181835/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-Im-proud-announce-Britain-leads-world-moat-dredging.html:
..the accusation of mental handicap is relatively recent. It [using the word 'retard'] marks a new low in the nastiness of what was once a perfectly respectable cause.
So now the liberal left can’t call homophobes retards? It’s political correctness gone mad! Et cetera.
[...] The Mail, ‘Nazis’, adoption, ‘retards’ and homophobia | Daily Mail Watch It seems simple enough, in Mail land. If you complain about people’s attitudes towards homosexuality, then you are a ‘Nazi’. A ‘Nazi’ in the Littlejohn/Gaunt mould, that is, ie someone who has views that you don’t can be called a Nazi. As the man who led to the end of Gaunt’s career in radio pointed out, though, you need to put something in front of ‘Nazi’ to be able to get away with it – the Mail has chosen ‘adoption’ this time. Because the Nazis were so fond of homosexual people, weren’t they? So fond of them they gave them nice pink triangles to wear in the concentration camps. (tags: lgbt adoption dailymail) Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Hotel Rwandavignette, cont…Growing number of Brits say “peace” to the U.K.Celebrate a mom’s life, help in her recovery [...]
On the subject of Nazis, see today’s (Saturday’s) Mail. There is a suitably outraged story about the BNP. No doubt the author of the piece is sincerely appalled by the BNP on a personal level (quite a few Mail journalists, as in reporters rather than columnists, do not share the Mail’s politics in real life, but need the work: as one of them once said to me, “everybody wants to write for the Guardian, mate”), but this story sits rather uneasily in a paper that continually peddles to ill-informed readers the kind of prejudiced race-baiting half-truths or utter falsehoods that the BNP exploit. Furthermore, there is quite a lengthy preamble in the article about Mosley and the British Union of Fascists, with nary a mention of the Mail’s association with them. Needless to say, I didn’t get anywhere with posting “Hurrah for the Blackshirts!” in the comments.
When I don my anorak I sometimes visit a site for bus enthusiasts, where one contributor insists on calling the management of a particular bus company nazi.
They divert a bus route – “ubergruppenfuhrer —– has decreed that the 61A must no longer serve Much Wittering”
They withdraw an old bus that he likes – “the hitlers at HQ have decided that 2215 must go”
I have – politely – suggested that using such terminology is just a teensy bit OTT, and offensive both to the managers concerned AND to those who know what nazism really means, like death and degradation, rather than a new bus or a different bus stop. He just doesn’t get it.
Having worked in the fostering and adoption industry and seen how many children are sent from foster home to foster home (or residential home) because there are not enough people adopting, it’s so good to see the Mail doing looked after children such a service. I mean we don’t want children in the clutches of evil gay couples (who have the space, time and commitment) when they can be in the hands of twisted Mail readers. Imagine how nicely balanced those children will end up.
I wonder how many Daily Mail journo’s have put themselves forward to adopt children in care to counter the gay plague upon decent ordinary right thinking peoples that they decry time and time again?
To Luton Diesel……
you wrote
‘ this story sits rather uneasily in a paper that continually peddles to ill-informed readers the kind of prejudiced race-baiting half-truths or utter falsehoods that the BNP exploit.’
for a moment there I thought you were referring to the BBC
Even by Littlejohn’s standards, that was a pathetically ill-written little froth piece from him the day after this story broke. Standout gems;
‘Google the phrase ‘retarded homophobes’ and it turns up regularly in gay rights propaganda.’
No it doesn’t – try it.
‘Time and again we read of children being taken away from their families and handed over to gay couples.’
On what planet?
‘The accusation of mental handicap… marks a new low’
You said it Mr [Gordon Brown is acting] like ‘a schoolboy with special needs’.!
‘If any outfit put out an official document referring to homosexuals in such an offensive manner, the gay rights lobby would demand that they were prosecuted for ‘hate crime’.’
What, like the (now defunct?) Christian Voice and their endless press releases insinuating that homosexuals are ill in the head and need to be cured, disgusting, perverted, etc? Demanding prosecution? If anything, Stephen Green was seen as an irresistible comedy figure.
You Couldn’t Make It Up…
Littlejohn is a lying fool, probably laughing all the way to the (US) bank as he does his predictable, dreary and hate-fulled right-wing routine.
There are a few of them around, usually laughable hypocrites too – look at ‘pills’ Limbaugh or that ludicrous ignoramous Anne Coulter.
Shame they can’t be tried for the misery they deliberately spread and damage they do to untold numbers of people’s psyche.
Great site this. So many idiots. I just ove it.
I hate the Mail so much: you’ve probably seen this already but if you haven’t please check it out for hypocrisy:
http://www.layscience.net/node/507
It beggars belief.
Just discovered your blog- will be back. Keep up the good work.
There is no such thing as homophobia, retards.
Only way to deal with fascists is to round them up and contain them, anyone with fascistic opinions has to be stepped on hard.
For most straight people the idea of leaving a little boy in the care of two gay men is not a easy one. No I do not think all gay men are pederasts. It is just that we come from a line of evolution where for millions of years (long before any false religion, and they are all false came along to complicate things) one man and one woman was the normal parenting unit. Nobody has a right to have a child.
Neville Squamous-Has just about got it right. Honestly folks its just about selling papers. I expect the Mail is “toying” with the idea of being Anti-Semitic again.It could be coming populist. We will have to watch how much longer Melanie Philipps , Martin Samuells and Alex Brummer are employed.Its nothing personel with the Mail, just business.