Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
p.s. i need to message you back actually sorry about that.
it won't blossom outside in the cold
the whole live blog thing is a self-referrential piss-take, right?
"it's slightly tongue in cheek"
Please give your props to the man.
I thought that other thread (which I didnt open) was about the newsreader Jon Snow buying a pub.
This is the worst argument ever.
(there won't be any other rounds)
and kicked some guys out of it.
but I was incapacitated for a second because I tore the flesh off my face and ate it.
and these guys will HAVE TO stay together forever.
Like, it's their first date, they had one kiss. What if the kiss was the result of a drunken moment of flirtation, but in the harsh light of day they realise that they're better off friends, or they aren't what they expected from their gaydar profiles or whatever?
And now the Guardian has them falling in love. They're gonna feel SO MUCH pressure to stay together while fighting this or else it'll be latched onto as soon as they break up: DIRTY GAYS FIGHT FOR THE RIGHT TO SNOG AND THEN BREAK UP ANYWAY, THE WHORES. Y'know. It's too much, man.
it's about eight, actually
They made me pretty angry
."Bull also revealed further details about the fateful night itself.
"We went to Fire and Stone, near Covent Garden, and both had pizzas," he said, adding that he could not remember what toppings they selected. ".
I'm calling "cover up" on this.
In all seriousness, this is a ridiculous incident and we shouldn't make light of it through humour. Well, at least not too much.
this paper is too hip and self-regarding for it's own good. I'd say twattishly live-blogging, rather than properly reporting this story pretty much precludes The Guardian from legitimately reporting on "proper" gay issues from now on. Smug twats (the Guardian, not the gays).
they don't really need to care if you'd say that
and they did report it properly yesterday
policy based on what an obscure message board inhabitant says.
And reporting it yesterday doesn't mitigate the fact that the live blog trivialises the story.
To me it's not a huge deal, I'd prefer gay people not to be discriminated against, but I'm sure worse discrimination has happened in the time it took me to post this. But for a paper that's so wilfully liberal it surprises me how much the live blog trivialised the issue.
The 'breaking news' that they're going on a second date and where the date was held and what they had is like something out of Heat.
Are they celebrities now, then? Are they going to be on the One Show, snogging each other at dinner time, or getting referenced in South Park?
So the blog seems to be in an appropriate tone.
I over-reacted slightly. The Guardian brings out the Daily Mail reader in me.
The Guardian had a story in the Family section at the weekend whereby a mother was gushing about how please dhe was that her daughter was gay, and how here freinds were jealous because they didn't have a gay kid. Viz's modern Parents had nothing on it. So yeah, the Guardian - pretty shit.
generally (I believe) with the intention of infecting them with HIV.
that's gbh irrc (as is recklessly inflicting it when you know you have it. which I think is weird since other stds and preventble illnesses aren't covered by this rule...)
Also, I know someone who knows someone who did this. He would leave a note the next day with a number they should call.
but hofo *is* a reformed character.
That's pretty good, I guess.
I found that out from a programme Stephen Fry did a few years ago. The most disturbing part was when he spoke to (or learned about?) a guy who was, like, 21 and was deliberately having unprotected sex with guys who were HIV+ so he could get the disease.
I did some internet research and found a forum that was basically full of people saying stuff like 'I'm 20 and I'm still HIV- :(' and 'I want to make someone HIV+'. Probably the most depressing thing of all time.
that's horrible. I mean it's pretty depressing when you hear about certain groups of young men (especially in subsaharn africe) who see it as inevitable and so try to get it out of the way asap. but trying to get it or even wanting it. Do you think its cause certain hiv+ men won't have sex with those who aren't positive for fear of infecting them?
because they don't want to infect anyone, and that's quite conscientious of them.
But those who go to deliberately infect/deliberately get infected seem to operate under the misapprehension that it makes them better somehow and they're part of some exclusive club. It's really malicious and destructive.
Why are they posing for publicity shots? Seems a bit attention seeking.
Just admit you're unemployed