Foreign / Overseas LGBT News - Gay News Outside Singapore (Compiled)

[Steve5380]

1 hour ago, LeanMature said:

 

It is morè than just religion.  

 

Yes.  But is is much more than a bunch of homophobic old shrews like the Thio Li-Ann and some crooked pastors like Kong Hee and his brain-washed sheep at City Harvest Church?   And who keep a large segment of the population equally brain-washed?

Can you compare these with a Shariah Law that dictates that homosexuals deserve to be stoned?

 

 

1 hour ago, Guest guest said:

 

Yep, its more than just religion,  as usual , ang moh speaking as though he has lived in Singapore from pre independence till now, not showing any knowledge about local conditions.

 

Its easy to make anti  establishment comments from outside singapore without having to face the conzequences .

 

 

Ang moh has more guts than a coward "Guest guest" who is too chicken to post as an accountable member.

And who is not so abysmally ignorant to spell consequences like "conzequences"

[LeanMature]

14 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

 

Yes.  But is is much more than a bunch of homophobic old shrews like the Thio Li-Ann and some crooked pastors like Kong Hee and his brain-washed sheep at City Harvest Church?   And who keep a large segment of the population equally brain-washed?

Can you compare these with a Shariah Law that dictates that homosexuals deserve to be stoned?

 

 

 

Ang moh has more guts than a coward "Guest guest" who is too chicken to post as an accountable member.

And who is not so abysmally ignorant to spell consequences like "conzequences"

 

My sense is that majority here is still a bunch atheist conservatives.  

[fab]

8 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

How can religion-neutral Singapore be among the last when there are some Islamic countries like Malaysia and Indonesia too? 

 

Surrounding. Neighbouring. Islamic.Countries.  Nuff said.

 

Actually most overseas Chinese I know r more traditional than greater China Chinese, though not necessarily conservative. 

 

One British Chinese guy told me guys must always comb their hair up, can't ve fringe.  He also make it to have breakfast and dinner with his parents. 

 

One American chinese  gay told me must have descendants. And he's married eventually.  

Edited May 31, 2019 by fab

[Rice60640]

Can’t even repel 377A so why even bother to discuss same sex marriage?

[Guest Desperate measures]

On 5/31/2019 at 11:32 AM, LeanMature said:

 

My sense is that majority here is still a bunch atheist conservatives.  

Not just conservative but homophobic conservative from state media brainwashing. MDA still censors homosexual content like satanism, communism, terrorism and anti-semetism here in a way that no positive and balanced portrayal is allowed, except some tokenistic annual converage of pinkdot.

 

India is even more conservative but they live and let live. They do not have the need to routinely criticise and badmouth gays like many of our fellow country people do. There are even deeply religious catholic countries like Ireland that passed gay marriage laws and have an openly gay head of state.

 

Singapore is not even that conservative - we do not retain our cultural roots and are so westernised that western culture, habits and practises are more prevalent than indigenous Asian culture here.

 

State media blanket censoring of positive gay portrayals has created this toxic environment that allowed religious fundamentalism to take root, spread and thrive.

 

Islamism is not as vocal as the christians here in denouncing gays. When Islamic countries are still religious and conservative while western countries where christian missionaries came from have moved on to accept LGBT people and their rights as humans as equal and inalienable, we have a situation where christians here are more zealous than the muslims in their struggles to put up a last fight against gay equal rights.

 

That's why you have true.love.is, wear white, coos, fotf, aware saga and choices ministry constantly rearing their ugly heads here.

 

The muslims? They are way less affected, way less desperate, way less nosey and way less obsessed but more focused on themselves than the LGBT community and their issues than the christians are here.

 

[fab]

Our leaders r not conservative but extremely politically correct.

 

Most mature guys r neutral as long as u leave me alone. Prolly they have been exposed to 302 during ns.

 

The mature women on the other hand are more homophobic and ignorant. 

[Guest Nimby Syndrome]

6 hours ago, fab said:

Our leaders r not conservative but extremely politically correct.

 

Most mature guys r neutral as long as u leave me alone. Prolly they have been exposed to 302 during ns.

 

The mature women on the other hand are more homophobic and ignorant. 

If they are politically correct they will be protecting gays. They couldn't care less and are sticking to the "ignorant" status quo and old narrative to toe their party line for self-preservation. Nimby syndrome much.

[Guest Cleanly Teacher]

One of Trump's favourite child molesters, George Nader, has been arrested on child pornography charges. Back in December 2016, Nader helped arrange a secret meeting in the Seychelles Islands between Erik Prince (founder of infamous Iraq war crimes company Blackwater and brother of Trump's anti-education Secretary of Education Betsy De Vos), Kirill Dmitriev (close associate and some critics would say henchman of Putin), and other power brokers from Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Israel, allegedly over foreign interference in the US Election, and creating behind the scenes global policy plans for the incoming Administration.

 

 

It must be pointed out that Nader got away with child porn charges involving boys in 1985 and again in 1991, due to his Middle East expertise for the US government, and actually served time in jail in 2003 over molesting 10 boys in the Czech Republic. After taking office, the Secret Service told Nader he wasn't allowed near Trump, who overrode them to take the photo in the article and supposedly said "George is a great guy." I'm sure his next comment will be that he barely knew George who was begging him for a job or something. But keeping company with molesters like Nader, Roy Moore, and Jeffrey Epstein tells everything.

[Steve5380]

38 minutes ago, Nightingale said:

https://www.todayonline.com/world/vatican-condemns-gender-theory-bid-destroy-nature

 

Interesting article!  

 

"VATICAN CITY — The Vatican condemned gender theory on Monday (June 10) as part of a "confused concept of freedom", saying in a new document that the idea of gender being determined by personal feeling rather than biology was an attempt to "annihilate nature".

 

So the LGTBQ movement attempts to annihilate nature?  Are we really so powerful?  

Doesn't it, at most, reduce procreation...  at a time when overpopulation is a real threat to the life sustainability of the planet?

 

It says gender theories are "often founded on nothing more than a confused concept of freedom in the realm of feelings and "Iwants, or momentary desires provoked by emotional impulses and the will of the individual, as opposed to anything based on the truths of existence".

 

It is ridiculous that organized religion criticizes something as opposed to anything based on the truths of existence!  How much is the Catholic doctrine based on "the truths of existence",  and why does it conflict so much with the "truths of existence" of other religions? 

 

It is hard to imagine that the well educated people who created this Vatican's document don't realize that sexual orientation is much more than emotional impulses of wants and momentary desires.  It seems that they chose these words carefully to degrade the relevance of sexual orientation, and this reveals that they are misleading and written with sinister intentions.

.

 

Edited June 11, 2019 by Steve5380

[Guest Loquacious Larry Laminator]

Dance Teacher Charged With 8 Counts Of Committing Unnatural Sex Against His 15-Year-Old Student

 

PUTRAJAYA: A dance teacher was charged today with eight counts of committing unnatural sex against his 15-year-old student. Lee Men Chun, 42, had allegedly forced the boy to have oral sex and performed physical sexual assault on the boy between last April and June. The case was heard at the Special Court for Child Sexual Crimes here.

 

 

The accused was charged under Section 377 C of the Penal Code for carnal intercourse against the order of nature without consent and Section 14(a) of the Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017 for physical sexual assault on a child by touching any part of the body of a child.

[Steve5380]

New York will not accept much longer the defense that a criminal act was committed against LGBTQs out of panic.

Apparently LGBTQs are not scary anymore,  except for our Lord in Heaven who gets bent out of shape by them. 

 

New York State Moves To Ban ‘Gay and Trans Panic’ Defense for Homicides

It’s set to join five other states banning the homophobic and transphobic argument that a victim’s sexual identity was a source of distress to the perpetrator.

 

The “gay and trans panic” defense for homicide would no longer be allowed in New York’s courts under a bill approved Wednesday by the state Assembly. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) suggested he would sign the measure, which was one of his top priorities for the legislative session.

The bill, sponsored by Assemblyman Daniel O’Donnell (D), establishes that perpetrators can no longer justify their crimes as a response of “extreme emotional distress” to a victim’s sexual orientation, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression or sex assigned at birth.

 

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/new-york-state-legislature-gay-and-trans-panic_n_5d0939dce4b0f7b7442823ce

.

 

Edited June 19, 2019 by Steve5380

[GachiMuchi]

Michael Gove wants to hold ‘online giants’ to account for internet homophobia

VIC PARSONS JULY 4, 2019

 

Michael Gove at the PinkNews Westminster summer reception 2019. (Paul Grace)

Environment secretary Michael Gove has said that he wants the Conservative party to hold social-media companies to account for online homophobia, and bring in hate crime laws for sexuality-related offences.

At the PinkNews summer reception at Westminster today (July 4), Gove said that “online giants” should be held to account for online bullying.

 

Equalities minister Baroness Susan Williams also spoke about the need for progress when it comes to LGBT+ equality.

Williams called for progress on banning gay conversion therapy and Gove also said he wanted to see hate-crime legislation specific to attacks on someone’s sexuality brought in.

 

Gove’s ’embarrassing confession’

Gove began his speech by joking that he had an “embarrassing confession” – that it was the second time in two months that he’d been on the same stage as shadow foreign secretary Emily Thornberry, and the second time in two months that he had agreed with every word she said.

 

Thornberry shouted from the crowd, “That’s embarrassing for me.”

Gove said that “homophobic, biphobic and transphobic bullying online needs to be policed with as much rigor as other areas.”

“Online giants should be held to account. They need to clean up their act and protect our young people.”

 

Gove also called out the “homophobic and misogynistic attack on two young women” on a London bus.

“We need hate crime legislation that makes attacking someone because of gender or sexuality an aggravated offence,” he said.

Fifty years since Stonewall

Williams began her speech by paying tribute to Marsha P. Johnson, and said that the world today would be “unrecognisable” to those at the Stonewall Inn 50 years ago.

 

“Fifty years ago the world changed forever in a bar in New York. In that moment we made progress,” Williams said.

But, Williams said, “Progress is hard fought and it’s easily lost and that feels especially true today, when LGBT+ people and the issues that affect them are squarely in the public eye – you don’t have to look far to find seeds of discontent being sown.”

“We will bring forward a consultation on ending the practice of so-called conversion therapy,” Williams said.

“I will not pretend this work will be easy, there are likely to be difficult conversations to come but we must have them.

“Having open, respectful and constructive discussion about these issues is the only way we can bring everyone with us on LGBT+ inclusion, it is the only way we can make progress,” Williams said.

Thornberry announced nominees for two PinkNews awards during her speech at the PinkNews reception: the Business Equality Award and the Role Model Award.

The PinkNews event took place at Church House in Westminster, London.

The Westminster reception was supported by Gilead and Octopus Group. Pride in London was the charity partner.

 

 

 

 

[GachiMuchi]

Emily Thornberry calls for UK to expel Commonwealth countries with anti-LGBT laws

EMMA POWYS MAURICE JULY 4, 2019

 

Emily Thornberry speaking at the PinkNews event in Westminster

The Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry is calling on the UK to demand Commonwealth countries abolish anti-LGBT+ laws or be expelled.

The Labour MP gave an impassioned speech for LGBT+ rights at the PinkNews summer reception at Church House in Westminster, London, on Thursday (July 4).

 

She said: “If the Commonwealth of Nations mean anything, then we must use our time as chair of the Equal Rights Coalition not just to persuade more Commonwealth countries to join it, but to demand that Commonwealth countries abolish draconian laws or be expelled — and let’s start with Brunei.”

Thornberry said the time had come for Britain to take a “global lead” in tackling LGBT+ persecution, as dozens of countries around the world “are going backwards not forwards.”

 

The leadership has to come from somewhere, and I believe that it should come from Britain.

 

In a clear reference to the diminishing rights of LGBT+ people in the US, she said: “At a time when the so-called leader of the free world and his homophobic vice president are legitimising the rollback of LGBT+ rights, the leadership has to come from somewhere, and I believe that it should come from Britain.”

 

Her words were met with a resounding applause from the audience of politicians and business leaders, including Health Secretary Matt Hancock, the Liberal Democrats’ Chuka Umanna and Michael Gove, who later said: “I agree with every word.”

Thornberry made a pointed comment towards Gove’s work in leading the removal of plastic pollution from oceans, saying: “We proudly talk about the lead we provide on other issues, and when we don’t show global leadership [on LGBT+ rights] we should be ashamed.”

The event was held at Church House in Westminster, London, on Thursday (July 4) to celebrate Pride season and recent legislative successes in the LGBT+ community.

The Westminster reception was supported by lead partner Gilead, supporting partner Octopus Group, and charity partners Pride in London.

The Labour MP also announced nominations for the Business Equality Awardand the Role Model Award at this year’s PinkNews Awards in October.

Earlier this year, Thornberry took part in demonstrations outside the Brunei-owned Dorchester hotel in protest at strict Islamic laws which punished gay sex with stoning.

She also wrote to the foreign secretary to call for the prime minister to “take a leading role in condemning these laws and calling for strong action to be taken.”

The bigots and the homophobes have not given up on this fight, so we cannot afford to do so either.

 

She warned the PinkNews audience that the time for fighting for LGBT+ rights is far from over. She said: “Whenever we’ve had to fight so hard to win rights, we’ve had to fight just as hard to protect them.

“Because whenever you have such entrenched, such violent, such bitter opposition against freedom and rights of any community, the war is never truly, finally won.

“The rights that we win are the rights that we must constantly defend. Because the bigots and the homophobes have not given up on this fight so we cannot afford to do so either.”

 

 

 

[Nwest]

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/beauty/face-body/nivea-is-being-binned-after-allegations-of-homophobia-by-employees/news-story/82baa53e03afa384f94f94eb9177121e

 

During the conference call, an FCB representative reportedly pitched a commercial in which two men would be filmed touching hands.

The pitch was flatly rejected, with an executive from the beauty brand allegedly saying: “We don’t do gay at Nivea.”

[fab]

Not surprising. 

 

I once worked with an international fashioned related brand, the people were homophobic too. Not to mention nivea is a female products n most women are homophobic.

 

 

[Guest Guest]

Is it homophobic? Pls dont be so sensitive lah. 

[Steve5380]

3 minutes ago, Guest Guest said:

Is it homophobic? Pls dont be so sensitive lah. 

 

It should not be a matter of sensitivity.

Expressing outrage and phobia against homophobia helps us all !

[Dan 28]

Cathay Pacific Airways did an outstanding gay billboard advert displayed at various locations in HK , including the HK international airport but was asked to be  taken down at the HK MTR station though ....

[FattChoy]

The advertising executive who proposed that was obviously a lanjiaolang (a dick).  How does his proposed ad address the Nivea market segment?  Why have such a divisive 'pin in the eye' message which would put Nivea in the eye of a storm from an increasingly PC hungry and noisy liberals?

 

The CEO should just ask the ad company to provide risk assessment on adopting gay themed ads as well as the additional returns it could bring in.  And after 2 weeks the CEO should just bin it politely 'after careful consideration', cos obviously it's plain as day that it is an outrageously idiotic idea.

 

The client is ready to pay a hefty sum for a good ad to increase its sales and standing, not to be a financier for the ad executive's personal propaganda promoting same sex relationships.

 

A real duh!

Edited July 5, 2019 by FattChoy

[doncoin]

Well, s

49 minutes ago, FattChoy said:

How does his proposed ad address the Nivea market segment?  Why have such a divisive 'pin in the eye' message which would put Nivea in the eye of a storm from an increasingly PC hungry and noisy liberals?

 

Nivea lotion as lube. Duh! Imagine the market growth opportunity. You soften the skin on your dick at the same time while getting pleasured. It is more than just 2 guys touching hands. The growth won't just be limited to gay men, but straight men as well. 

Edited July 5, 2019 by doncoin

[Guest can't win with anti gay]

Jun 27, 2019, 07:43am

Advertising Agency FCB 'Resigns Nivea Account After Turmoil Over Alleged Anti-Gay Remarks'

 

Advertising agency FCB is reportedly resigning its Nivea account after rising tensions, including allegations that Nivea rejected an image of men’s hands touching, saying “We don't do gay at Nivea.” No comments have surfaced so far from representatives of both parties.

 

According to trade publication Ad Age, which first reported about the alleged homophobic remarks, FCB CEO Carter Murray sent an internal memo to employees, saying that the agency will resign its global Nivea account when contracts expire at the end of the year. The memo reportedly fails to address the alleged remark.

According to Murray’s memo, Nivea represents 1% of the agency's global revenue, and the company is confident it will be able to make this up in 2020. Nivea is owned by Beiersdorf, a personal-care products giant based in Hamburg, Germany.

 

 

Nivea is just one of Beiersdorf's brands, which also include Elastoplast, Eucerin, Labello, La Prairie and others. According to Murray’s memo, other Beiersdorf brands, including Eucerin and Hansaplast, will remain under FCB.

“There comes a point in every long-term relationship when you reflect on what you've accomplished together and set your sails for where your journey will take you next. Sometimes that journey ahead demands tough choices that lead down different paths,” Murray stated in the memo, quoted in Ad Age.

Nivea has had its share of controversies in the past as well, with one of the recent ones being the release of an ad that seemed to be embraced by white supremacists because of the “White is purity” phrase in it. The company stopped the ad saying that they “are deeply sorry to anyone who may take offense to this specific post. Diversity and equal opportunity are crucial values of Nivea.”

The news comes in the same week that both FCB owner, Interpublic Group, and Publicis Groupe, two of the biggest advertising holding companies in the world, declined to pitch for the controversial but powerful U.S. National Rifle Association (NRA), which split from its longtime agency Ackerman McQueen because of financial disputes. It will be interesting to see if any holding-company-owned agency picks up this lucrative but controversial account.

Both Nivea and FCB have been contacted for a comment and the post will be updated after an eventual feedback.

 

 

Ugly FCB-Nivea breakup follows 100-year relationship, recent controversies

Beiersdorf says it began 'agency model' review early this year and that it values diversity

 

By Jack Neff and Lindsay Rittenhouse. Published on June 27, 2019.

 

Nivea’s ugly parting with FCB isn’t your ordinary agency breakup: It ends a relationship more than a century old, dating to when the agency went by the name Lord & Thomas. But it follows a rocky few years that have included three incidents where the brand was criticized for ads seen as racially insensitive.

 

Beyond the history, the account is no small loss for FCB. While Nivea only had $21.8 million in U.S. measured media spending last year, per Kantar, the brand, owned by Germany’s Beiersdorf, is much bigger outside the U.S., with $4.9 billion in global annual sales, according to estimates by Evercore. It represented 1 percent of agency revenue globally, according to an FCB internal memo. 

The end of the relationship follows tensions dating to 2017, according to people familiar with the matter, the same year FCB and Beiersdorf reorganized agency and client teams globally. It comes just before the end of Pride Month, and in the wake of a client meeting in which, according to people familiar with the matter, a marketer rejected a photo of two men’s hands touching by saying “Nivea doesn’t do gay.” 

FCB declined to comment.

In a statement, Beiersdorf said: “Nivea and FCB have had a long-standing partnership that goes back more than 100 years. However, in light of the profound transformation of our industry and the advertising landscape, a decision was made at the start of the year to review Nivea’s current agency model. As a result, Beiersdorf will initiate a pitch process for our biggest global brand. Following the launch of our new corporate strategy C.A.R.E.+, this is now the right time also for a new beginning in Nivea’s brand management and creative work.”

While Beirsdorf didn’t comment on the specific statement attributed to one of its marketers, the company said: “We are an international company with more than 20,000 employees with very different genders, ethnicities, orientations, backgrounds and personalities worldwide. Through our products, we touch millions of consumers around the globe every day. We know and cherish that individuality and diversity in all regards brings inspiration and creativity to our society and to us as a company. No form of discrimination, direct and indirect, is tolerated.”

 

C.A.R.E.+ is corporate investment program Beiersdorf announced in February that includes spending of more than $80 million annually in an effort to increase the organic sales growth of its consumer business to 4 to 6 percent and earnings before interest and taxes margin to 16 to 7 percent.

The breakup is hardly the first controversy Nivea and FCB have faced in recent years, amid three waves of backlash over ads critics saw as racially insensitive. It is unclear if FCB was behind the following ads.

 

First came a 2011 Nivea for Men ad showing a clean-cut black man carrying a decapitated, bearded head with an afro, presumably representing his former self prior to using Nivea products, and the tagline “Re-civilize yourself.” Amid an uproar, Nivea quickly pulled the ad and apologized on Facebook, saying: “Diversity and equal opportunity are crucial values of our company.”

After this 2011 Nivea for Men ad, the company quickly pulled the it and apologized on Facebook, saying: “Diversity and equal opportunity are crucial values of our company.”

 

Credit:

Nivea

Then in early 2017 came a Facebook post for Nivea deodorant in the Middle East showing a white woman in a white bathrobe and the headline “White Is Purity.” U.S. alt-right supporters embraced the ad on Twitter, 4chan and elsewhere. “Nivea has chosen our side,” said one since-removed Twitter post as reported by The Washington Post. Nivea apologized and took down the post, saying it wasn’t meant to offend.

Six months later, Nivea faced backlash again over ads in West Africa for Natural Fairness Body Lotion promising “visibly fairer skin,” after Ghanian musician Fuse ODG criticized the ads on Instagram. This time, Nivea stuck with the ads, issuing a statement that they weren’t meant to “demean or glorify any person’s needs or preferences in skin care.” Neither the product, nor the implication that lighter skin can improve career or romantic prospects, is unusual in personal-care marketing throughout much of Asia and Africa.

Asked about these ads, Beiersdorf said in a statement, “Unfortunately, there have been isolated, controversial Nivea communications over the years. We always valued the respective feedback of our consumers and consider it as a motivation to continuously learn, adapt and further improve our brand communications.”

As for whether Nivea has been the center of any homophobic controversies or avoided LGBTQ+ marketing efforts in the past, Mike Wilke, an LGBTQ+ advertising historian and founder of adrespect.org, argued the opposite. He said he began noticing Nivea targeting the LGBTQ+ community with ads in 2004 and most recently the brand aired a spot in 2018 featuring Olympic skater Adam Rippon, an openly gay athlete, and Miami Dolphins’ Danny Amendola running into each other in a locker room and chatting about Nivea Men’s new body shaving stick.

“They have been gay at least a couple of times that I’ve tracked,” Wilke said, suggesting either the company has recently flipped its stance on LGBTQ+ advertising, which he added would be ill advised, or “it was an uninformed comment.”

He argued the recent ad with Rippon took a thoughtful creative approach by featuring “someone who’s well known in the gay community and featuring him prominently.”

So the alleged comment by the Nivea employee "seems out of line with what we’ve seen for the brand,” Wilke said.
 

Full Beiersdorf statement

Nivea and FCB have had a long-standing partnership that goes back more than 100 years.

However, in light of the profound transformation of our industry and the advertising landscape, a decision was made at the start of the year to review Nivea's current agency model. As a result, Beiersdorf will initiate a pitch process for our biggest global brand. Following the launch of our new corporate strategy C.A.R.E.+, this is now the right time also for a new beginning in Nivea’s brand management and creative work.

Unfortunately, there have been isolated, controversial Nivea communications over the years. We always valued the respective feedback of our consumers and consider it as a motivation to continuously learn, adapt and further improve our brand communications.

What is highly important to emphasize is our strong commitment to diversity, mutual respect, equal opportunity and tolerance – this stance and belief is shared and lived throughout all levels of the Beiersdorf and Nivea brand organizations.  

We are an international company with more than 20.000 employees with very different genders, ethnicities, orientations, backgrounds and personalities worldwide. Through our products, we touch millions of consumers around the globe every day. We know and cherish that individuality and diversity in all regards brings inspiration and creativity to our society and to us as a company. No form of discrimination, direct and indirect, is tolerated.

 

 

[Guest CXX]

14 hours ago, Dan 28 said:

Cathay Pacific Airways did an outstanding gay billboard advert displayed at various locations in HK , including the HK international airport but was asked to be  taken down at the HK MTR station though ....

 

[auri]

In this day and age, there is no way that a statement like " we don't do gay" will go unpunished.

[Steve5380]

3 hours ago, auri said:

In this day and age, there is no way that a statement like " we don't do gay" will go unpunished.

 

And this came because we contemporary gays don't resign ourselves to put down our heads in shame.

 

 

 

[FattChoy]

On 7/6/2019 at 8:59 PM, Steve5380 said:

 

And this came because we contemporary gays don't resign ourselves to put down our heads in shame.

 

 

 

You have seen many here who said they won't do married men.  Same difference? 

[Steve5380]

4 hours ago, FattChoy said:

You have seen many here who said they won't do married men.  Same difference? 

 

I find that "don't do married man" is an individual moral position. It means decency to not interfere with and break up a traditional marriage which could victimize its other members.

[Guest hype]

I find the whole story is hyped up. And as someone said before, it seems to be launched by a competitor or competing PR agency.

Why do I conclude like this?

 

Because the ad was only prepared and discussed but never published anywhere.

I find it very strange that nowadays people jump on such news which has not even been published and they still would go out and ask people to boycott products from this brand.

Isn't it that Nivea has not published any anti gay advertisement. And what if people on some Marketing committees at a company talk bullshit.

There are Prime Ministers, Royals, CEO's who talk a lot of bullshit day in day out too.

There was no marketing campaign pro gay or anti gay, just a discussion in a board room, we don't even know it is true.

 

At least we should accept that there are people with differing opinions on homosexuality. We can ask for everyone to accept us.

 

This whole things seems very blown up to me. People nowadays jump to easily on conclusions without anything real on hand.

[Guest InBangkok]

Don't do gay? This is fun - although it's not an official Nivea commercial. It was shot in Bangkok.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRfGg8Nbdzs&list=PLbl40j33S4g86vy99Yq-6xuJUcLlGrcJ5&index=27

[Guest InBangkok]

On 4/9/2019 at 11:22 AM, Steve5380 said:

 

What you mean?  The US is not a Middle East Muslim country that finances its adventures and misdeeds with the profit from oil.  None of the US military actions around the world, beneficial or damaging, have turned out any profit,  and they are financed by us, the fools who have to pay taxes! 

 

Apologies in advance for coming back to this subject after a long time. I did not notice it earlier.

 

Steve5380 is being incredibly naive. "None of its military actions around the world ... have turned any profit." Where on earth do you get that information from? Remember Iran in the early 1950s? Remember the CIA in its new role as the USA's enforcer-in-chief along with its ally the United Kingdom masterminding the ouster of the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran? I repeat "democratically elected." And what was the reason for this action? To protect the USA's vast oil interests in that country. Now if that is not a military action to turn a profit, I fail to understand what is! Yes, I know. You can call it whatever you like - a non-military action, perhaps. Not turning a profit, perhaps. But it was the USA using its might and muscle to ensure that its vast profits from the import of cheap oil continued unhindered. 

 

So what if the USA did not touch a drop of Iraq's oil! The fact is that it spent vast sums on a full-scale invasion of Iraq with two objectives: to remove weapons of mass destruction and to introduce democracy to the Middle East. Well, we know what a disastrous mess that has created not only in that part of the world but for the world asa whole. The US National Security Advisor appearing on television warning the world that mushroom clouds would soon appear if Saddam was not brought down was just one lying chess move by an administration determined to oust Saddam Hussein by fair means or foul.

 

As for introducing democracy, hark back to the ousting of a democratically elected Prime Minster of Iran! Iran had democracy until the USA decided for its own profitable reasons - cash and influence - to prop up the Shah, have democracy devalued and to keep propping up him and his hated torturing Savak Secret Police Force until the Iranians finally turned against him in 1978. That led to the return of Khomeini and a far more strict Islamic regime that had more tolerant Islamic nations fearful that they might suffer a similar fate - and those countries included Indonesia and Malaysia. 

 

Remember, too, that the USA sided with Iraq in the horrific 8-year Iran/Iraq was which Saddam started in 1980. That was partly because it had lost its influence after the ousting of the Shah and more importantly because of its hatred of Iran resulting from the detention of hundreds in their Embassy in Teheran after the Khomeini regime took over. 

 

And what happened after all this intervention in the Middle East to protect the USA's interests and cash? A US administration installed in Iraq that had no one clue what it was doing and why it was doing it. Remember that the disbandment of Iraq's Republican Guard led directly to the establishment of Al Qaeda. And we know the utter disaster that resulted in with millions killed and many, many millions refugees in Jordan, Germany and other countries. The arrival of Iranian and Russian forces into the resultant Syrian War. And so on. It was all a disaster on a devastating scale - all to satisfy the bloodlust of a few neo-cons in Washington.

 

I spent two weeks in Iran less than two years ago. The people are lovely - warm, friendly to this foreigner and extremely proud of their long and distinguished history which happens to be millennia older than the USA.  Most Iranians thoroughly dislike the regime running their country. But need I ask yet again who is responsible for the installation of that regime? The USA.  And it was all due to the desire for money and influence. Now Trump and his cohorts hate Iran and are doing their best to choke it to death hoping that beforehand it will come back to the negotiating table. Naturally, the regime does not get hurt. It is always the ordinary people in the street. 

 

Throughout the 20th century, the USA was a force for extraordinary good - as long as it served their interests. The Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe after World War 2 was an amazingly generous exercise. But would it have taken place if the Soviet Union was not threatening to march over the rubble to the Atlantic shores and spread communism to the entire continent? Highly unlikely? Was the rebuilding of Japan a similarly generous exercise, bearing in mind that the Soviet Union was breathing down Japan's northern shores? Yet again, highly unlikely.  

 

The USA is like any other great power before it. It manipulates the world for its own purposes. That is tantamount to saying it profits from its deeds both in cash and in kind.

[Guest InBangkok]

Apologies. In the above post, it should read ISIS and not Al Qaeda.

[Guest Iran]

I m surprised Guest Bangkok knows all this about Iran...

 

The problem started with another American President who was maybe a nice guy but didn't understand the world.

The US supported the Shah regime for years but stopped the support in 1978 which led to the situation that the Shah had to run off his country.

 

Wikipedia: When President Carter enacted a human-rights policy which said countries guilty of human-rights violations would be deprived of American arms or aid...

 

It would have been smarter to convince the Shah in opening his politics or forcing him to change, but Carter just dropped him like a hot potato, not foreseeing the Islamic movement.

 

Unfortunately, there are too many examples of failed American Foreign policy...

[Steve5380]

13 hours ago, Guest InBangkok said:

 

Apologies in advance for coming back to this subject after a long time. I did not notice it earlier.

 

Steve5380 is being incredibly naive. "None of its military actions around the world ... have turned any profit." Where on earth do you get that information from? 

 

No need to apologize.  But I don't need either.  I stand by my post you answered,  except that I should have written  "None of its RECENT military actions...".

 

My post was in response of a cynical remark,  after my wish that America had a reason to topple the homophobic regime in Brunei,  saying that the reason America has is that Brunei has oil.

 

OF COURSE America acts in the interest of those Americans in power!  Like any other country.  But oil is in no short supply in the US.  Our country does not invade and plunder other countries. Our form of government is stable and smart,  we are not a racist or religiously fanatic country.  In a list of countries by their evil we should be in the lower half. So with this out of the way.....

 

I agree with you about the bloodlust neo-cons in Washington.  When I was young I was a conservative republican,  and for many decades now I have turned around 180 deg. and I am now a progressive democrat.  I have seen too much stupid damage done by republicans, by their petty interests, their false morality, their attitude of superiority.   I have not recovered from my disappointment seeing that this country I so admired has a significant fraction of the population that is able to have voted for Donald Trump and is STILL supporting him.

.

 

Edited July 20, 2019 by Steve5380

[Guest InBangkok]

13 hours ago, Guest Iran said:

I m surprised Guest Bangkok knows all this about Iran...

 

The problem started with another American President who was maybe a nice guy but didn't understand the world.

The US supported the Shah regime for years but stopped the support in 1978 which led to the situation that the Shah had to run off his country.

 

Having a near lifelong interest in history, especially of the various Silk Road routes, and in Islamic Art, Iran was one country I knew a little about. Then spending time there, even as little as two weeks, I could not only wallow in some of the most famous historical and Islamic sites anywhere, I had a chance to talk with ordinary people. As I mentioned,  I found almost all I spoke to warm, helpful and friendly. 

 

It was largely the British and French colonists and their governments that first screwed up the Middle East at the start of the 20th century. Only after oil was discovered, first  in Iran in 1908 and only later in what is now Saudi Arabia, did the West pay a great deal more interest in that part of the world. The West, including the USA, depended to a large extent on cheap Iranian oil. The USA and British organised a coup when the democratically elected Prime Minister Mossadegh proposed nationalising the oil industry. This overthrew Mossadegh in 1953 and the Shah returned to Iran after a short period in exile.

 

So the problem actually started in the early 1950s. The US backed Iran and soon Iran was working closely with Israel on the torture and execution of many thousands of Iranian dissidents and political prisoners. As the Shah became more and more unpopular in his country, he continued to be backed by the USA, much the same as the USA propped up the murdering kleptomaniac dictator Ferdinand Marcos in The Philippines. The USA failed to understand that the massive resentment growing within Iran was a direct result of the Shah's actions and policies. But the USA needed an ally and needed the oil. The lack of Middle East experts in the State Department misread the tea-leaves, just as a similar situation had occurred when the same Department misread the whole Vietnam situation when Ho Chi Minh wrote to both Presidents Roosevelt and Truman seeking help to ensure the French colonists did not return after World War 2.

 

The USA never withdrew support for the Shah. In fact, President Carter continued to support the Shah even after he had been exiled after the return of Khomeini. Carter even agreed to his being given sanctuary in the USA. This further angered the Khomeini regime when barely nine months after the start of his exile Carter allowed him to have medical treatment and to stay for a short time in the USA. This so inflamed the militants and students in Iran that it led directly to the storming of the American Embassy in November that year. Had Carter prohibited the Shah from entering the USA, it is highly likely that the Embassy storming and occupation would never have happened!

 

For 25 or more years, Iran was the US base for protecting its power throughout the Middle East. It turned a blind eye to all the Shah's corruption, conspicuous consumption, stashing vast wealth in offshore accounts - all the trappings of the worst dictators. And all this time the many tens of millions of ordinary people of that blighted country lived in virtual abject poverty.

 

With the advent of the Khomeini regime and the Embassy storming, the USA did a total about face. From that point on, Iran became a hated enemy for the USA policy makers. And that has directly led to the present heightened tension in Middle East. The USA caused it - and now the USA wants to get rid of its former ally. But then that's what the USA does. After its Iran policy collapsed, it turned to Iran's long time enemy Iraq. For a time it loved Saddam Hussein. When he invaded Kuwait for its oil, the USA did a similar 180-degree about face. Hussein was then the enemy and he had to go. If only policy makers in Washington would listen to their allies, if only the State Department employed true experts and could see through the lies of the puppets and dissidents who for decades have been regularly dragged before Congress to praise the USA and request it do everything to bring down their former countries, if only the majority of US Senators had at least a modicum of knowledge and interest in parts of the world they probably can not spell, the world might perhaps be a more peaceful place!

[Guest Iran]

18 hours ago, Guest InBangkok said:

 

Having a near lifelong interest in history, especially of the various Silk Road routes, and in Islamic Art, Iran was one country I knew a little about. Then spending time there, even as little as two weeks, I could not only wallow in some of the most famous historical and Islamic sites anywhere, I had a chance to talk with ordinary people. As I mentioned,  I found almost all I spoke to warm, helpful and friendly. 

 

The USA never withdrew support for the Shah. In fact, President Carter continued to support the Shah even after he had been exiled after the return of Khomeini. Carter even agreed to his being given sanctuary in the USA. This further angered the Khomeini regime when barely nine months after the start of his exile Carter allowed him to have medical treatment and to stay for a short time in the USA. This so inflamed the militants and students in Iran that it led directly to the storming of the American Embassy in November that year. Had Carter prohibited the Shah from entering the USA, it is highly likely that the Embassy storming and occupation would never have happened!

 

For 25 or more years, Iran was the US base for protecting its power throughout the Middle East. It turned a blind eye to all the Shah's corruption, conspicuous consumption, stashing vast wealth in offshore accounts - all the trappings of the worst dictators. And all this time the many tens of millions of ordinary people of that blighted country lived in virtual abject poverty.

 

 if only the majority of US Senators had at least a modicum of knowledge and interest in parts of the world they probably can not spell, the world might perhaps be a more peaceful place!

 

You forgot the vast amount of Dictators from Panama to South America that were supported by the US.

 

What you left out after the 1950s was that bitter "Cold War" fight between US and Russia. With supporting Iran, US was fending off the Russians from the area. Hussein in Irak had better links to Russia... other countries in the Middle East were favouring Russia, so it was always a fight between East and West in the early times.

 

For your information, I lived during the Iranian Revolution in that country as a Foreigner.

The anger from the people was on the Shah, but it was not only on him. The wealthy Iranians caused by their behaviour increased the anger of the poor people. The gap between rich and poor was wide and the rich Iranians taking on Western lifestyle, women not wearing the headscarf but walking around the city in "skimpy" but exuberant Dior, Chanel and Ives Saint Laurent haute couture, driving in luxury cars, showing off their richness made the people very angry as much as unfairness towards the poorer people. These things mixed with the usual ills of poor but rich countries like a hugely growing population, bad public services and infrastructure created the arena for the uprising. Even the educated and intellectuals were opposing the Shah due to unemployment.

 

Yes, there were human rights violations and people who objected to the Shah were detained. There was a secret service which was even trained by the Americans. We are not sure whether all what happened was told to the Shah, whether he had full knowledge of what was going or whether some "militia men" exploited the situation on their own.

When the Shah realised the wrongs, it was probably too late, in particular as he had defended his reign and shot his own people in many demonstrations.

 

But I would like to object  on one point:

The Shah was expecting military support from the US to fend off the demonstrations and assist him in remaining in power.

His own military support from his military officers was waning. He was left alone to handle the people's unrest with any real assistance withdrawn by the US.

(I am not judging here on his brutal way to fend off the demonstrations and the security police's actions).

By this the US withdrew the support to the Shah. The US upheld his regime for many years but at the last point it stopped to continue support on the Shah.

I m not sure whether the Carter government wanted him to resign or what was the point of discussion. But looking that the Shah in fact appointed one former enemy as the incoming Prime Minister, I sense that there was some sort of "recommendation" on the politics from the US government.

But, even these final actions did not bring any military support for the Shah.

Carter had this different approach on world politics and his advisors for sure underestimated the very religious Khomeini.

It might have been better if they had somehow prevented Khomeini from traveling to Iran. This is one of the plenty miscalculations in US politics.

But we know how it continued.

 

Another point to note is, despite being from the former opposition, the last Prime Minister under Shah, Bachtiar was never supported by the US. For sure he disliked the Shah and started democratic reforms but crucial was that the Carter government left him without any support and he Bachtiar was later outpowered by Khomeini. 

 

Some of your statements on the exile of the Shah are not correct:

Carter actually objected for the Shah to be going to the US in 1979 (for hospital treatment). The Shah exiled first from Iran to Egypt on , then later went to Morocco, but left again for Mexico. Due to his cancer illness he needed critical surgery and treatment, while he was in Mexico. Carter initially objected to letting him fly to US. It was proposed that he received treatment in Switzerland but the Shah did not intend to fly to Europe. Carter was very reluctant to permit the Shah to the US. Former secretary of state had to "intervene".

There are theories that the decision was influenced by some bankers or Rockefeller to freeze Iranian monies from Chase Manhattan, but I m not sure whether this is correct, because nobody was able at that time to predict the reaction in Iran of allowing the Shah into the US. But notably Rockefeller paid doctors to the Shah's assistance in Mexico.

Probably, the Shah was in fear that with a huge Iranian contingent of people in Europe his security could not be properly ascertained, there were a lot of exiled Iranians in France and Germany and he thought only the US could protect him properly.

 

The problem was for sure that nobody wanted to take in the Shah as we had been a persona non grata due to his past.

 

 

 

[Guest InBangkok]

I agree with most of what Guest Iran has written. There was certainly deep-rooted resentment within Iran at the Shah rather than with the Americans for propping up his regime. Like all dictators the Shah let power go to his head and believed he was unassailable. The ridiculous spectacle and monstrous cost of the great archeological site at Persepolis being turned into the location for a massive party over several days for 50 kings, queens and Prime Ministers to celebrate the 2,500th anniversary of Cyrus the Great's founding of Persia in 1971 was the beginning of a very long ending. Creating a tented city of luxury with suites with marble bathrooms and all the 18 tons of the finest foods flown in from Maxim's of Paris when all but a small percentage of the population was living in dire poverty was idiocy to any rational person. 

 

The Shah's appointment of Prime Minsters with whom he might not have agreed came far too late to save him. Guest Iran suggests that "when the Shah realised the wrongs, it was probably too late." I wonder: does he seriously believe, given all the Shah's history right up to 1977 and 1978, that he ever - even once - realised he was wrong? I have seen no evidence to suggest this was even a remote possibility. Dictators just don't think that way. 

 

As for his being admitted to the USA for hospital treatment, you are correct. Carter did not want him but was persuaded by people like Henry Kissinger and others. But that absolutely does not negate the fact that this very act by President Carter led directly to the Iranian students rising against and seizing the US Embassy. Nor that the present American action against Iran stems as much from this huge diplomatic embarrassment as it does to the coup against Prime Minister Mosaddegh in the early 1950s and American support for Iraq in the Iran/Iraq War. 

 

With respect I left out out the US propping up various other dictators around the world only because this topic is about Iran. I felt this was not relevant, other than to cite one instance of Marcos in The Philippines.

[Guest BollyGay]

Gay couple and their stunning Indian wedding go viral

 

 

Lily Wakefield

1 day ago

  © Provided by PinkNews Media Group

 

Two grooms celebrated their marriage in a traditional Hindu wedding in the US last week (July 20), and the amazing photos have gone viral on social media.

Amit Shah and Aditya Madiraju were already officially married at New York city hall earlier this year, but wanted to hold a special ceremony with their family and friends.

Madiraju told PinkNews that when the couple met in 2016 they “hit it off” immediately and have been together ever since.

He added: “Both our families have been supportive from day one.”

 

He said: “The fact that the ceremony took place at a temple under religious observation is a huge thing for our community.

 

“I guess it is unheard of, and we didn’t realise the impact it would have. The response had been so overwhelming and we are honoured to share our story with the world.

“It seems like people need to hear our story to feel empowered and we are excited to provide people with some inspiration.”

 

After seeing the response on social media, he wrote on Instagram: “We didn’t realise the impact a simple wedding at a temple would have on people around the world looking for hope.

“There is no secret to acceptance, tolerance, or happiness. You just have to find the right partner to take the step with. Let the truth of your love speak for itself.”

Hinduism has historically been accepting of trans people, and earlier this year a Hindu trans woman in India was legally recognised as a “bride” in her marriage.

[Guest uniform fetish]

Venezuelan actors arrested over gay cops satirical play set free

AFP News 6 August 2019

 

 

Authorities had accused the actors of ridiculing and distorting the true functions of the police for their satirical performance

Four actors taking part in a satirical play about two gay police officers were freed Monday night, nearly 24 hours after they were arrested and accused of ridiculing and usurping the functions of Venezuela's authorities.

Actors Pedro Wise and Isaias Ovalle had been arrested on Sunday following a performance of "Two Cops in Trouble," which has been running at a Caracas theater since July 19.

Director Leonam Torres and producer Johana Villafranca were also arrested, and all four were accused of "the crime of usurping public function when pretending to present a theatrical piece while wearing the regulatory uniform" of police, according to an official dispatch leaked to Venezuelan media outlets.

The report said the actors had tried to "ridicule and distort the true functions of police," and that their outfits were confiscated as evidence.

A photograph of the detainees alongside their wives, together with police in camouflage uniforms was shared by online media.

A lawyer representing the detainees said performances of the play would resume Tuesday, but the actors would use "facsimiles of uniforms" and not the original costumes.

Ovalle had predicted his arrest in an Instagram story published on Sunday.

"If I wake up chopped up, incinerated, kidnapped or dead, you'll know why. It's not a game, it's serious, so come and see the show before it gets closed down," Ovalle wrote.

Carlos Correa, director of the Espacio Publico (Public Space) NGO, described the arrests as a "barbarity."

"It's an open violation of the human right of freedom of expression. The theater is a place for criticism," he told AFP.

[Guest Eric]

This should be fine for gays

[Guest WHO?]

Med docs out there, esp proctologists, tell us, can you really prove anything by this?

[StockBottom]

This Tunisian lawyer is hoping to be the country's first openly gay president

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/08/09/world/mounir-baatour-tunisia-president-candidate-trnd/index.html

 

[Guest Ah Song]

On 9/6/2019 at 10:27 PM, Guest Eric said:

This should be fine for gays

If no imprisonment, they can finger until I song song.  

[Guest guest]

Quote

The man who founded Hope for Wholeness, one of the most prominent conversion therapy groups in the United States, has come out as gay.

McKrae Game, the founder of the South Carolina-based conversion therapy ministry Hope for Wholeness, came out as gay this summer, nearly two years after being fired from the organization he founded.

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/09/04/mckrae-game-founder-conversion-therapy-group-comes-out-gay/2210789001/

[Creevie]

We r all ultra lucky to be living in Singapore. Look at the crappy cultures of some countries. Absolutely inhumane treatment in Tunisia, my goodness!

[Kimochi]

16 minutes ago, Guest guest said:

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/09/04/mckrae-game-founder-conversion-therapy-group-comes-out-gay/2210789001/

Wa ~ 😮

[Guest no(n)sense]

I wouldn't wonder if the guys are then fucked in police detention by the police officers in Tunisia...

[Guest disclosed yourself]

1 minute ago, Guest no(n)sense said:

I wouldn't wonder if the guys are then fucked in police detention by the police officers in Tunisia...

 

[Guest latin lovers]

CNN

Censorship row makes superheroes' gay kiss front page news in Brazil

By Emily Dixon, Joshua Berlinger and Duarte Mendonca, CNN

 

Updated 0152 GMT (0952 HKT) September 10, 2019

 

 

By Emily Dixon, Joshua Berlinger and Duarte Mendonca, CNN

 

 

The front page of the Folha De S.Paulo on Saturday shows a frame from an Avengers comic in which two men are seen kissing.

(CNN)After Rio de Janeiro's evangelical mayor tried to ban an illustration of two male superheroes kissing from a book fair, one of Brazil's biggest newspapers decided to put it on their front page.

The controversy kicked off last week after Rio Mayor Marcelo Crivella demanded that the Marvel comic book "Vingadores: A Cruzada Das Crianças" ("Avengers: The Children's Crusade") be withdrawn from sale at Rio's biennial book fair because it shows male superheroes Wiccan and Hulkling kissing. The book was completely sold out at the book fair by Friday, organizers told Agence France-Presse.

The Folha De Sao Paulo newspaper said it used its Saturday front page and Sunday editorials to discuss the issue.

"The mission of professional journalism and a newspaper like Folha is to be uncompromising with obscurantist attempts and to shed light on threats of censorship," said Sérgio Dávila, the paper's editorial director.

The book was initially published in 2010. Its illustrator, Jim Cheung, said in a lengthy post on Instagram that the debacle "is now being drawn into the spotlight by the mayor perhaps only highlights how out of touch he might be with the current times."

"The LGBTQ community is here to stay, and I have nothing but love and support for those who continue to struggle for validity and a voice to be heard," Cheung said.

Crivella is a conservative evangelical who called homosexuality a "terrible evil" in his 1999 book "Evangelizing Africa."

He wrote on Twitter "we need to protect our children," and said that the fair was collecting books with "content that is unsuitable for minors."

"It is not right for them to have early access to subjects that are not appropriate for their ages," he said.

After his demand sparked backlash, he said in a subsequent tweet: "The decision to collect comic books at the Biennial had only one goal: to comply with the law and protect families."

The organizers of the book fair responded by filing a preventive injunction with Rio de Janeiro's Court of Justice Friday. In a statement posted on Instagram, the organizers said the injunction was intended to "ensure the full operation of the event and the right of exhibitors to market literary works on the most diverse themes -- as foreseen by the Brazilian legislation."

The book fair hosted events on topics including "happiness, science, motherhood, theater, trans literature, LGBTQA+ and more," according to the Instagram post.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest latin lovers]

The Guardian:

Brazil paper publishes gay kiss illustration in censorship row

Folha de S.Paulo aims dig at evangelical Rio mayor after he tried to ban a Marvel comic

Dom Phillips in Rio de Janeiro

Sun 8 Sep 2019 18.16 BST Last modified on Sun 8 Sep 2019 20.10 BST

 

 

The front page of Folha De S.Paulo on Saturday

 

Brazil’s biggest newspaper has printed an illustration from a Marvel comic of two men kissing on its front page to attack an attempt at censorship by the evangelical mayor of Rio de Janeiro.

Marcelo Crivella attempted to ban copies of the graphic novel Avengers: The Children’s Crusade from appearing at a book fair on the grounds that it included content unsuitable for children.

Critics said his move was reminiscent of the censorship imposed during Brazil’s 21-year military dictatorship, which ended in 1985 and is often praised by the country’s far-right president, Jair Bolsonaro. On Sunday the president of Brazil’s supreme court overruled a court decision that had endorsed Crivella’s move.

 

Folha de S.Paulo’s mission was to “throw light on censorship threats”, its editor, Sérgio Dávila, told the Guardian.

“It is an attack on freedom of expression,” said Mariana Zahar, the vice-president of the National Union of Book Publishers, which organised the book fair. “We will fight this to the end.”

The controversy began on Thursday when Crivella ordered the biennial to wrap copies of the graphic novel in black plastic. “What we did was defend the family,” Crivella said in a video he tweeted on Friday after ordering city hall inspectors to seize copies of the book – which had apparently sold out by that point anyway.

“It is a backwards decision … it is ignorant censorship,” said Marcelo Chalréo, the president of the commission of social rights at Rio’s bar association, which has also attacked the legality of Crivella’s move.

 

Felipe Neto, a YouTube celebrity with 34 million followers, bought 14,000 copies of books with LGBT themes at the book fair and gave them out for free, wrapped in black plastic with the warning: “Book inappropriate for backward … and prejudiced people.” Demonstrators marched through the event, wrapped in rainbow colours and waving placards and books, while gay couples kissed in protest.

Neto linked Crivella’s move to the government of Bolsonaro, who has repeatedly made homophobic comments. Bolsonaro watched an independence day military parade on Saturday with Crivella’s uncle, the evangelical bishop Edir Macedo, the founder of the powerful Universal Church of the Kingdom of God.

“Although we [are] going through the most frightening government in terms of repression since the dictatorship, this time we have a united and engaged people who will not permit that censorship, the imposition of others’ moral values,” Neto told the Guardian.

[Guest Loquacious Larry Laminator]

So in the American state of Kentucky, a school principal famous (infamous) for banning books with even remotely gay content has been arrested for child pornography.

 

A high school principal who once banned books with LGBTQ content and other factors parents and administrators found objectionable has now been arrested on child pornography charges. // Police say he possessed 15 child porn images and had shared them with others. He is charged with 15 counts of possession of matter portraying sexual performance by a minor, and 15 counts of distribution of such material. He appeared in court Wednesday and pleaded not guilty. //

 

Yet another hypocrite using an anti-gay agenda to hurt people who have done nothing wrong while he was engaging in criminal activity himself all along. Just shameful.

[Guest ManlyBtm]

On 9/9/2019 at 6:24 PM, Since u r here said:

that will only result in pure bottoms  or flex getting convicted

 

Not true, the anus recovers quickly after sex. Even btm can be tight