I lazily got the bus this morning even though I had walked half of the twenty-five minute walk already. Lazy doesn’t begin to describe the journalism behind the headline I saw on a story being read by someone in The Metro. I bet most people who read today’s edition of the free rag wanked on to buses by The Daily Mail Group didn’t even think twice about it. This is how shit gets in people’s heads, the general population anyway. Yes, some people react to blatant homophobia by taking it on board. This is a small minority of people, still sneering at dirty f****ts, fucking p***s, inclement n***ies or some other such nonsense.
A lot more people just let stories/headlines like this slowly taint their opinion of people/groups. And it’s dangerous. Whether or not you want to believe it – and you probably aren’t the kind of person this happens to if you are reading this¹ – there would have been a lot of people reading that story and drawing some connection with homosexuality and murdering a baby on some subconscious level. I am almost 100% certain (94.6% certain) that there is some ideological intention in the writing of the headline that was not subconscious. If that sounds like I am accusing this headline and by extension The Metro of being homophobic it’s because that is what I am suggesting.
Why mention it in this way? And what is a gay text? Can I send a gay text even though I am not gay? What happens if a straight woman receives a gay text off a gay man?
This is how The Daily Mail Group and all it’s publications work. Passively putting bullshit about people in your brain by osmosis. Remember that next time you are reading the showbiz gossip on The Daily Mail website: It’s not a picture of an actress in an ill-fitting bikini, it’s a message that women should just look good because that’s what they are mainly for: (white) (straight) men run the world. That is what they are saying.
If they just stuck to the facts that the bloke was texting his boyfriend then they would have still managed to communicate the horror of his homosexuality to the poor readers. No need to implicate sexuality whatsoever in the headline. Because sexuality is not relevant whatsoever. The fact that this guy is clearly mentally unhinged is the issue which is definitely nothing to do homosexuality. I am not totally certain on the figures but I would imagine if you researched it over the history of time one would find mental instability, the ability to murder, poor temperament and, sadly, the ability to commit murder are traits of human beings. Not all humans. Because all homosexuals are humans this means they too are prone to these traits. Like they are prone to liking the films of Steven Spielberg, being confused by the music of Bjork, or wondering why people interpret a higher meaning to some works of literature that don’t are not allegorical.
BECAUSE THE ONLY TRAITS ONE CAN ATTACH TO A HOMOSEXUAL ,THAT ONE CAN’T ATTACH TO NON-HOMOSEXUALS, IS BEING ATTRACTED TO PEOPLE OF THEIR OWN GENDER².
Because that’s the only difference. Well, it should be. Of course society is somehow still able to make out being heterosexual as some condition befitting superiority. Whether it be allowing people to get married or NOT linking sexuality to why you would kill a baby can’t everyone just be equal? Or at least pretend by treating everyone equally and in time that will seep into everyone’s subconscious and people will just start to think like that. Maybe. Or you could just start thinking like that y’know.
¹That’s not me being big-headed thinking this reader attracts the world’s great and good, this is me knowing that this is read by people who know me and are probably my friend and most of my friends are more intelligent than me (that’s called flattery, apparently it will get you everywhere).
²I’m trying not to over-complicate this right now, let’s not vilify me.