# This Morning.   Phillip comes out  as gay.



## xsunnysuex (Feb 7, 2020)

Wasn't expecting that.   Very emotional.  Love that man!


----------



## existentialist (Feb 7, 2020)

xsunnysuex said:


> Wasn't expecting that.   Very emotional.  Love that man!


It somehow doesn't feel like a huge surprise, but bless him for having the courage, and the compassion for his family. Tough times for them all, I imagine, but the signs are promising, going by that statement from him.


----------



## Reno (Feb 7, 2020)

I was more surprised to learn that he is married to a woman. I always assume that male presenters of light entertainment programmes on the BBC are gay.


----------



## maomao (Feb 7, 2020)

I have assumed he was gay for 35 years. More shocked he was married. Not that I've given it a lot of thought.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Feb 7, 2020)

I just hope the timing of the statement was of his own choosing, and not a response to newspaper muck-raking.


----------



## killer b (Feb 7, 2020)

why did you assume he was gay?


----------



## Reno (Feb 7, 2020)

killer b said:


> why did you assume he was gay?


Been there with a couple of them before they were out (in one case he was out all along just nobody asked). 

Generally there are a lot more gay men working at the BBC, more than many places I can think of. Is there anything wrong with me assuming he was gay, considering most people default to assuming the other person is straight ?


----------



## dessiato (Feb 7, 2020)

Sorry, but Philip who? Perhaps being outside the UK I’m insufficiently aware of UK entertainment.


----------



## purenarcotic (Feb 7, 2020)

Reno said:


> Been there with a couple of them before they were out.
> 
> Generally there are a lot more gay men working at the BBC, more than many places I can think of. Is there anything wrong with me assuming he was gay, considering most people default to assuming the other person is straight ?



Sorry to be pedantic but he works for ITV.


----------



## killer b (Feb 7, 2020)

Reno said:


> Been there with a couple of them before they were out (in one ase he was out all along just nobody cared to asked).
> 
> Generally there are a lot more gay men working at the BBC, more than many places I can think of. Is there anything wrong with me assuming he was gay, considering most people default to assuming the other person is straight ?


I was replying to maomao tbh.


----------



## MrSki (Feb 7, 2020)

dessiato said:


> Sorry, but Philip who? Perhaps being outside the UK I’m insufficiently aware of UK entertainment.


Gordon the gopher was his mate.


----------



## Reno (Feb 7, 2020)

purenarcotic said:


> Sorry to be pedantic but he works for ITV.


OK, I have no such experience with ITV. I'll now revise that to "all British male light entertainment presenters"

He started on the BBC though, right ?


----------



## dessiato (Feb 7, 2020)

MrSki said:


> Gordon the gopher was his mate.


Who?


----------



## MrSki (Feb 7, 2020)

purenarcotic said:


> Sorry to be pedantic but he works for ITV.


Last appearance with Gordon on the BBC.


----------



## maomao (Feb 7, 2020)

killer b said:


> I was replying to maomao tbh.


I don't know tbh. But I work on the furthest flung edge of bbc culture and got a call from an excited colleague (he works in a BBC studio and is easily excited) telling me this about an hour ago and I didn't realise it was news. I honestly have t paid him much attention since broom cupboard days.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 7, 2020)

dessiato said:


> Sorry, but Philip who? Perhaps being outside the UK I’m insufficiently aware of UK entertainment.


Schofield.
I don't watch TV but I assumed he'd come out decades ago.


----------



## killer b (Feb 7, 2020)

I think the assumption that all mildly camp men who work in the media are gay is perhaps one that we should be trying to challenge.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 7, 2020)

killer b said:


> I think the assumption that all mildly camp men who work in the media are gay is perhaps one that we should be trying to challenge.



Philip Schofield is letting the side down very badly in this regard.

Must admit, I never knew (or cared, as in it never occurred to me) one way or the other.  Seems to have a good rep both in his industry and generally, so good luck to him, and agree with comment above in hoping that this wasn’t in response to shit media shits.


----------



## maomao (Feb 7, 2020)

killer b said:


> I think the assumption that all mildly camp men who work in the media are gay is perhaps one that we should be trying to challenge.


A lot of people enjoy gossiping about celebrities personal lives.


----------



## Reno (Feb 7, 2020)

killer b said:


> I think the assumption that all mildly camp men who work in the media are gay is perhaps one that we should be trying to challenge.


.
You are the first one mentioning anything about anybody being camp. I don't find him particularly camp.


----------



## purenarcotic (Feb 7, 2020)

Reno said:


> OK, I have no such experience with ITV. I'll now revise that to "all British male light entertainment presenters"
> 
> He started on the BBC though, right ?



Yes, that’s true, he did.


----------



## dessiato (Feb 7, 2020)

OK. Why should his sexuality matter to any other person than himself and his partner? I really don’t care that much.

Now if it had been Prince Philip...


----------



## killer b (Feb 7, 2020)

Reno said:


> You are the first one mentioning anything about anybody being camp.


Sure, but that's why no-one is surprised isn't it? He's a bit camp, therefore _it's been obvious_ for ever.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 7, 2020)

Reno said:


> .
> You are the first one mentioning anything about anybody being camp. I don't find him particularly camp.



I’m rubbish at spotting these things so just assume others are right on this count.

If asked before today, I’d have given a 95% certainty that Schofe is either straight or gay.


----------



## moomoo (Feb 7, 2020)

killer b said:


> Sure, but that's why no-one is surprised isn't it? He's a bit camp, therefore _it's been obvious_ for ever.



It wasn’t to me. I think it’s just a shame he felt like he had to tell everyone. It’s no ones business except for him and his family. I read his statement though and it’s really lovely.


----------



## killer b (Feb 7, 2020)

moomoo said:


> It wasn’t to me. I think it’s just a shame he felt like he had to tell everyone. It’s no ones business except for him and his family. I read his statement though and it’s really lovely.


It wasn't to me either, cause I don't assume camp men in the media are gay. But lots of people do, and they're all tapping their noses today going _aha! I knew all along!_


----------



## D'wards (Feb 7, 2020)

Reno said:


> .
> You are the first one mentioning anything about anybody being camp. I don't find him particularly camp.


He's more camp on social media I think


----------



## 8ball (Feb 7, 2020)

moomoo said:


> I think it’s just a shame he felt like he had to tell everyone. It’s no ones business except for him and his family. I read his statement though and it’s really lovely.



Agree totally.  With all of it (I also took a look at the statement, prompted by your post).


----------



## Reno (Feb 7, 2020)

D'wards said:


> He's more camp on social media I think



I'm not on social media and I certainly wouldn't follow him if I was. On TV he falls right in the centre of the butch/camp spectrum, like most straight and gay men. Much British light entertainment is a bit camp though and it is an industry which has long been more welcoming to gay men behind and in front of the camera than many others industries. In any case, I seem to have a large ex-boyfriend pool who have worked at the BBC at one point, but then I long worked in the British media myself.


----------



## D'wards (Feb 7, 2020)

Reno said:


> I'm not on social media and I certainly wouldn't follow him if I was. On TV he falls right in the centre of the butch/camp spectrum, like most straight and gay men. Most British light entertainment is a bit camp though and it is an industry which has long been welcoming more to gay men behind and in front of the camera than many others. In any case, I seem to have a large ex-boyfriend pool who have worked at the BBC at one point, but then I long worked in the British media.


This meme I've seen a couple of times put me on to it


----------



## hash tag (Feb 7, 2020)

I sorry that he has felt the need to hide it all these years. Why is it even a thing and who cares? There's a story on a news website this morning about someone who has come out as a lesbian!
This is 2020 Britain, not the 1920's.


----------



## hash tag (Feb 7, 2020)

I suppose this helps to explain his relationship with Gordon


----------



## dessiato (Feb 7, 2020)

hash tag said:


> I sorry that he has felt the need to hide it all these years. Why is it even a thing and who cares? There's a story on a news website this morning about someone who has come out as a lesbian!
> This is 2020 Britain, not the 1920's.


Who? (Just idly curious)


----------



## existentialist (Feb 7, 2020)

killer b said:


> I think the assumption that all mildly camp men who work in the media are gay is perhaps one that we should be trying to challenge.


I had him down as "mildly camp", but never really took my thinking much past that. I quite like the idea that it can be utterly irrelevant, as least as far as the job he's doing is concerned.


----------



## killer b (Feb 7, 2020)

hash tag said:


> I sorry that he has felt the need to hide it all these years. Why is it even a thing and who cares? There's a story on a news website this morning about someone who has come out as a lesbian!
> This is 2020 Britain, not the 1920's.


he didn't hide it all these years, he's apparently only recently realised it.


----------



## existentialist (Feb 7, 2020)

It says a lot for Urban that threads like this are possible without having to fend off idiots going on about "lifestyle choices" and "it ain't natural", etc.


----------



## hash tag (Feb 7, 2020)

Who cares. What does it change?


----------



## killer b (Feb 7, 2020)

hash tag said:


> Who cares. What does it change?


It's obviously a big change to his personal circumstances and living arrangements which would make for a substantial tabloid expose had he not made a statement about it. He gets to control the narrative this way round.


----------



## D'wards (Feb 7, 2020)

killer b said:


> It's obviously a big change to his personal circumstances and living arrangements which would make for a substantial tabloid expose had he not made a statement about it. He gets to control the narrative this way round.


Depends if his wife knew and they had already come to terms with it I spose


----------



## existentialist (Feb 7, 2020)

D'wards said:


> Depends if his wife knew and they had already come to terms with it I spose


Judging by his statement, she knew not long after he did, but the knowledge seems new to them both.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Feb 7, 2020)

I really wish this sort of thing wasn't news. The fact it gets pushed to my phone as "breaking news" just exemplifies how a celeb gay coming out story is leaped on as an opportunity to push a sensationalist fluff piece thinly veiled as  something in the public interest - no wonder so many gay people decide against going public.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 7, 2020)

killer b said:


> I think the assumption that all mildly camp men who work in the media are gay is perhaps one that we should be trying to challenge.


Why? I don't care if he's gay or straight, it doesn't interest me in the slightest. I just assumed he was gay, and no, I don't think that all mildly camp men who work in the media are gay, but even if I did, my assumption wouldn't be harming anyone, just as assuming he was straight wouldn't be harming anyone. I see it no differently to having a guess at the make of car he drives.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 7, 2020)

skyscraper101 said:


> I really wish this sort of thing wasn't news. The fact it gets pushed to my phone as "breaking news" just exemplifies how a celeb gay coming out story is leaped on as an opportunity to push a sensationalist fluff piece thinly veiled as  something in the public interest - no wonder so many gay people decide against going public.



I couldn't guess how many gay people are keeping it quiet at this time, but it also popped up on my phone. 
Media - shower of shite.


----------



## MrCurry (Feb 7, 2020)

MrSki said:


> Gordon the gopher was his mate.



I thought this....



killer b said:


> why did you assume he was gay?



Was a reply to this....

Must pay more attention when reading threads!


----------



## killer b (Feb 7, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> Why? I don't care if he's gay or straight, it doesn't interest me in the slightest. I just assumed he was gay, and no, I don't think that all mildly camp men who work in the media are gay, but even if I did, my assumption wouldn't be harming anyone, just as assuming he was straight wouldn't be harming anyone. I see it no differently to having a guess at the make of car he drives.


I guess if he'd sold his Ford and bought an Audi he wouldn't feel the need to get a statement out ahead of the inevitable red-top expose, and wouldn't have half the country going 'Ha! I always knew he was into German cars!'


----------



## 8ball (Feb 7, 2020)

killer b said:


> I guess if he'd sold his Ford and bought an Audi he wouldn't feel the need to get a statement out ahead of the inevitable red-top expose, and wouldn't have half the country going 'Ha! I always knew he was into German cars!'



I think you have coined a new phrase there with "bought an Audi".


----------



## MrCurry (Feb 7, 2020)

I bought an Audi years ago, and although I haven’t been keen to admit it publicly, I now feel the time is right to be honest with myself and all of you. My wife is fully supportive of my decision, for which I’m very grateful.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 7, 2020)

"Telly bloke is gay"

Woo hoo!


----------



## maomao (Feb 7, 2020)

existentialist said:


> It says a lot for Urban that threads like this are possible without having to fend off idiots going on about "lifestyle choices" and "it ain't natural", etc.


Tbh I work in one of the most annoyingly right wing small minded offices in the Greater London area and noone says or has said this kind of thing. I'm not claiming homophobia has been solved I'm just saying a celebrity being gay is not really a scandal anymore.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 7, 2020)

killer b said:


> I guess if he'd sold his Ford and bought an Audi he wouldn't feel the need to get a statement out ahead of the inevitable red-top expose, and wouldn't have half the country going 'Ha! I always knew he was into German cars!'


What bothers me most is that people actually give a shit whether he's gay or straight. I'd honestly be more interested in what car he drove, if I had any interest in him at all. I guess it's all part of the celebrity worship culture, with relationships and sexuality being top of gossip list. It's all a bit sad, really.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Feb 7, 2020)

maomao said:


> I have assumed he was gay for 35 years. More shocked he was married. Not that I've given it a lot of thought.


I must confess I´d assumed the same. I´m sure there were rumours about him and one of the Neighbours stars back in the day. I'm not sure I particularly care...I remember him as the continuity announcer on childrens' TV.
Anyway, good luck to him.


----------



## existentialist (Feb 7, 2020)

maomao said:


> Tbh I work in one of the most annoyingly right wing small minded offices in the Greater London area and noone says or has said this kind of thing. I'm not claiming homophobia has been solved I'm just saying a celebrity being gay is not really a scandal anymore.


That's good to know, although in these far-flung rural corners, I think the old attitudes do hold out for longer. I've had a few conversations that have taken a surprising turn as it turned out the person I was talking to was a bigot...


----------



## 8ball (Feb 7, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> What bothers me most is that people actually give a shit whether he's gay or straight. I'd honestly be more interested in what car he drove, if I had any interest in him at all. I guess it's all part of the celebrity worship culture, with relationships and sexuality being top of gossip list. It's all a bit sad, really.



Part of me thinks sections of the media had a hit lined up, he has pre-empted it, so they are getting what mileage they can from it.


----------



## Jay Park (Feb 7, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> Why? I don't care if he's gay or straight, it doesn't interest me in the slightest. I just assumed he was gay, and no, I don't think that all mildly camp men who work in the media are gay, but even if I did, my assumption wouldn't be harming anyone, just as assuming he was straight wouldn't be harming anyone. I see it no differently to having a guess at the make of car he drives.



He’s a cyclist


----------



## 8ball (Feb 7, 2020)

Jay Park said:


> He’s a cyclist


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 7, 2020)

Jay Park said:


> He’s a cyclist


That changes things significantly.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 7, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> That changes things significantly.



No statement has been released, and aside from one picture of him smiling on a bicycle, there is a dearth of documented evidence.
He _is_ on record as having disagreed with a vegan.


----------



## BCBlues (Feb 7, 2020)

I'm more interested in whether he dyes his hair. I reckon he dyes the silvery grey look in.


----------



## Reno (Feb 7, 2020)

BCBlues said:


> I'm more interested in whether he dyes his hair. I reckon he dyes the silvery grey look in.


At last we have the most unlikely assumption about Phillip Schofield !


----------



## 8ball (Feb 7, 2020)

BCBlues said:


> I'm more interested in whether he dyes his hair. I reckon he dyes the silvery grey look in.



I reckon he has private sessions at one of the places that do the blue rinses.


----------



## BCBlues (Feb 7, 2020)

Reno said:


> At last we have the most unlikely assumption about Phillip Schofield !



Try telling that to Mrs BCB. Shes adamant is natural and that I'm jealous cos I'm just grey, not silver grey.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 7, 2020)

Jay Park said:


> He’s a cyclist


That might explain why he didn't indicate before coming out.


----------



## porp (Feb 7, 2020)

The show he hosts is a clearing house for shit right wing talking points and culture war bullshit. The show he hosts is helping to further poison the political environment in the UK. 

I hope that the process he is going through personally will help him realise that people and situations are complex and contradictory, so he is less ready to be a cheerleader for simplistic tabloid views and judgements. But I won't hold my breath.


----------



## killer b (Feb 7, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> That might explain why he didn't indicate before coming out.


bravo.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 7, 2020)

porp said:


> The show he hosts is a clearing house for shit right wing talking points and culture war bullshit.


AND he's a cyclist.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 7, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> AND he's a cyclist.



[citation needed]


----------



## Argonia (Feb 7, 2020)

I thought for a while that Schofield was going to get caught up in the Yewtree investigations.

I still remember when Fruitbat of Carter USM attacked him.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 7, 2020)

Actually, I think we might be slagging him off unjustly. I can't find any pictures of him clcling This doesn't count:


----------



## existentialist (Feb 7, 2020)

porp said:


> The show he hosts is a clearing house for shit right wing talking points and culture war bullshit. The show he hosts is helping to further poison the political environment in the UK.
> 
> I hope that the process he is going through personally will help him realise that people and situations are complex and contradictory, so he is less ready to be a cheerleader for simplistic tabloid views and judgements. But I won't hold my breath.


I don't follow his career at all closely, but I have always had the impression that he was one of the more thoughtful fluffy-TV presenters, and not afraid to go to the heart of some tricky issues, especially in comparison to others (Piers Morgan, anybody?). So I'm not sure that your view really makes his sexuality any more relevant to his career.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 7, 2020)

Jay Park said:


> He’s a cyclist


I'd edit this out if I were you, Jay.

If he sees it, it could open the site to a libel action.


----------



## hash tag (Feb 7, 2020)

They have just shown the full statement on the lunchtime news


----------



## skyscraper101 (Feb 7, 2020)

Fucking ridiculous. There's a major global health scare, and scumbag politicians ruining the country, and the news gives prominent airtime to telly presenter comes out.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Feb 7, 2020)

.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 7, 2020)

There's a major global health scare, and scumbag politicians ruining the country, and the news gives prominent airtime to telly presenter comes out.


----------



## Argonia (Feb 7, 2020)

There's a major global health scare, and scumbag politicians ruining the country, and the news gives prominent airtime to telly presenter comes out.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Feb 7, 2020)

Board wobble causing double posts should be more newsworthy.


----------



## marty21 (Feb 7, 2020)

BCBlues said:


> I'm more interested in whether he dyes his hair. I reckon he dyes the silvery grey look in.


Being a silver haired chap myself,  I fully support him outing as a silver haired man.


----------



## Edie (Feb 7, 2020)

Oh I proper love Phillip Schofield and Holly Willoughby. They are GREAT together, and they make me laugh like mad when the two of them get the giggles about shit.

I’d also assumed he was gay and was a bit surprised he was married. He just _seems_ gay I guess, whatever that means, not sure I could put a finger on it.


----------



## moomoo (Feb 7, 2020)

Jay Park said:


> He’s a cyclist



Are you thinking of Jeremy Vine? I always got them muddled up.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 7, 2020)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> I just hope the timing of the statement was of his own choosing, and not a response to newspaper muck-raking.



He says it was.


----------



## ginger_syn (Feb 7, 2020)

killer b said:


> he didn't hide it all these years, he's apparently only recently realised it.


This happened to a friend of mine recently he's 42.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 7, 2020)

I’m currently in the hairdressers and they’re talking about this at the chair next to mine. Saying how they feel sorry for his family but it won’t change how they look at him. 

I think that’s good. 

And, whether we like it or not, the news media do make something out of people being gay when they are household names who appear to be straight. So it’s a story that could have been sold if someone had found out. So, it’s good that he outed himself. 

I’m thinking that it would also be news if someone we all believed to be gay came out as straight. 

Remember when Tom Robinson stunned everyone and married a woman?


----------



## tim (Feb 7, 2020)

moomoo said:


> Are you thinking of Jeremy Vine? I always got them muddled up.



They all look the same these ageing male presenters








Good job they're not MPs


----------



## campanula (Feb 7, 2020)

ginger_syn said:


> This happened to a friend of mine recently he's 42.





ginger_syn said:


> This happened to a friend of mine recently he's 42.


Yep, I think this happens loads...and if/when someone does come to some clarity regarding what a lot of people (me included) find to be an opaque and shifting category of existence, I can't blame anyone for wanting a bit of exuberant shoutiness (although I am generally inclined to massive repression). The idea that hidden gayness is newsworthy or even threatening  and must be disclosed in order to 'control the narrative' is much less palatable.

I can't say as I have much idea who Philip Schofield is apart from some annoying TV ads for insurance or summat) so have no prior thoughts regarding his sexuality. Ot people on TV generally. Or anyone tbh.

Is this double posting summat to do with the boards? Or is it just me being thick? Plus a whole other quote vanished too.  Stepping away from the ketboards


----------



## Poot (Feb 7, 2020)

Teenage me might never get over this. Middle aged me, however, just really hopes that he wasn't forced out.

Still, explains why he never called.


----------



## Edie (Feb 7, 2020)

Poot said:


> Teenage me might never get over this. Middle aged me, however, just really hopes that he wasn't forced out.
> 
> Still, explains why he never called.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 7, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> Actually, I think we might be slagging him off unjustly. I can't find any pictures of him clcling This doesn't count:
> 
> View attachment 197802



Note that I said "smiling on a bicycle".  Though I understand the misinterpretation.


----------



## bimble (Feb 7, 2020)

Poot said:


> Teenage me might never get over this. Middle aged me, however, just really hopes that he wasn't forced out.
> 
> Still, explains why he never called.


Much the same but my crush off the telly was derren brown. When he came out about a decade ago I felt a bit better about him not having you know married me.


----------



## IC3D (Feb 7, 2020)

Someone I met related a pretty salubrious story about him back the 90s which I'm not sharing here. I reckon his wife knew and this is damage limitation of some kind to come out now unfortunately.


----------



## Cid (Feb 7, 2020)

IC3D said:


> Someone I met related a pretty salubrious story about him back the 90s which I'm not sharing here. I reckon his wife knew and this is damage limitation of some kind to come out now unfortunately.



Why now and not at some other point in the intervening twenty-something years?  

Also... doesn't salubrious just mean 'good, clean stuff'? It's insalubrious you want. Or maybe salacious.


----------



## weltweit (Feb 7, 2020)

It doesn't matter to me one way or the other and I don't watch his show, I do know that he is is a public figure, but I don't really understand why I need to know his sexuality. I suppose what I'm wondering is why he felt the need to tell his story publicly?


----------



## existentialist (Feb 7, 2020)

weltweit said:


> It doesn't matter to me one way or the other and I don't watch his show, I do know that he is is a public figure, but I don't really understand why I need to know his sexuality. I suppose what I'm wondering is why he felt the need to tell his story publicly?


4 pages in, and it takes a man of weltweit's calibre to ask the question on the tips of all our our tongues, and yet which no-one was brave enough to ask.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Feb 7, 2020)

Good luck to him whatever he chooses to do.  None of anyone's business.


----------



## weltweit (Feb 7, 2020)

existentialist said:


> 4 pages in, and it takes a man of weltweit's calibre to ask the question on the tips of all our our tongues, and yet which no-one was brave enough to ask.


Is that a genuine point or are you being cynical?


----------



## existentialist (Feb 7, 2020)

weltweit said:


> Is that a genuine point or are you being cynical?


It's a genuine point. 

Albeit a cynical one


----------



## Reno (Feb 7, 2020)

weltweit said:


> It doesn't matter to me one way or the other and I don't watch his show, I do know that he is is a public figure, but I don't really understand why I need to know his sexuality. I suppose what I'm wondering is why he felt the need to tell his story publicly?



Assuming he wasn't pressured into it, if he cops off with, or dates a bloke, then he would be outed by the media. There'd be gossip and speculation and it wouldn't be on his terms.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 7, 2020)

Coming out at 57, what a twat. As someone posted above, I don't care and don't see why we need to know his sexuality.


----------



## existentialist (Feb 7, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> Coming out at 57, what a twat. As someone posted above, I don't care and don't see why we need to know his sexuality.


You <——————————————————> the point


----------



## weltweit (Feb 7, 2020)

Reno said:


> Assuming he wasn't pressured into it, if he cops off with, or dates a bloke, then he would be outed by the media. There'd be gossip and speculation and it wouldn't be on his terms.


Yes Reno you make a good point, I hadn't thought of that angle. And on your first point I do hope he wasn't pressured into it. That would be really scummy.


----------



## D'wards (Feb 7, 2020)

Can we change the title of the thread to "This Morning. Phillip comes out of the broom closet"


----------



## cyril_smear (Feb 7, 2020)

weltweit said:


> It doesn't matter to me one way or the other and I don't watch his show, I do know that he is is a public figure, but I don't really understand why I need to know his sexuality. I suppose what I'm wondering is why he felt the need to tell his story publicly?



do it on his own terms maybe? Rather than the papers putting a sordid ''he lied about hi sexuality'' twist on it.


----------



## Reno (Feb 7, 2020)

I always wondered who here has me on ignore.


----------



## Idris2002 (Feb 7, 2020)

tim said:


> They all look the same these ageing male presenters
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, that doesn't say mid-life crisis at all.


----------



## scifisam (Feb 7, 2020)

I remember back in his broom cupboard days there was lots of chat at school about whether or not he was gay. I think it probably started when he got hugely into Dusty Springfield and sang Downtown virtually every day until it finally got re-released and got in the charts. Obvs I'm well aware that sexuality and campness are only partially connected, but it was literally a man singing Dusty Springfield songs in a closet. 😁




dessiato said:


> OK. Why should his sexuality matter to any other person than himself and his partner? I really don’t care that much.
> 
> Now if it had been Prince Philip...



You like much older men??


----------



## PursuedByBears (Feb 7, 2020)

I think that was Andy Crane and Petula Clarke. Otherwise, good point.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Feb 7, 2020)

ignored member said:
			
		

> I always wondered who here has me on ignore.


Who's that?


----------



## Reno (Feb 7, 2020)

farmerbarleymow said:


> Who's that?


cyril_smear gave almost exactly the same answer as me a few posts later. They can’t have seen mine.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 7, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> Coming out at 57, what a twat. As someone posted above, I don't care and don't see why we need to know his sexuality.



so you'd rather he stayed closeted?


----------



## scifisam (Feb 7, 2020)

PursuedByBears said:


> I think that was Andy Crane and Petula Clarke. Otherwise, good point.



I got the singer wrong, but it was Schofield who had a thing for Downtown. So there. CBBC’s Broom Cupboard: 10 brilliant childhood memories


----------



## Celyn (Feb 7, 2020)

Yes,  I'm often a bit flummoxed by people deciding that they're gay or bi after lots of years of heterosexual marriage and offspring. Still,  quite a lot of people do,  including one of my brothers.  Luckily,  any slight befuddlement I might have is not their problem,  really.  I should imagine television is not the most challenging industry in which to come out,  but good luck to him anyway.  We have only one life to live,  after all.


----------



## Celyn (Feb 7, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> Coming out at 57, what a twat. As someone posted above, I don't care and don't see why we need to know his sexuality.


That strikes me as quite a nasty attitude. I mean your first statement,  just in case you need it explained.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 7, 2020)

For a split second ai thought this was about Prince Philip.


----------



## D'wards (Feb 7, 2020)

There are loads of gay television presenters. Dating back as long as I can remember. I don't think it would have effected (affected?) his career that much but I'm sure dear Pippy had his reasons.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 7, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> Coming out at 57, what a twat. As someone posted above, I don't care and don't see why we need to know his sexuality.



Why call him a twat if you don't care?


----------



## D'wards (Feb 7, 2020)




----------



## Celyn (Feb 7, 2020)

porp said:


> The show he hosts is a clearing house for shit right wing talking points and culture war bullshit. The show he hosts is helping to further poison the political environment in the UK.
> 
> I hope that the process he is going through personally will help him realise that people and situations are complex and contradictory, so he is less ready to be a cheerleader for simplistic tabloid views and judgements. But I won't hold my breath.


Your points might be valid.  I don't know his programme,  but if it's some kind of daytime chatter thing,  high chance it is as you describe. On your second point,  we can hope,  but if he is well paid for promoting tabloid views...


----------



## MrSki (Feb 7, 2020)

He tries to get people to sell their cars at very low prices & is a tory cunt. Could not give one about his sexuality. Only hope his wife has known for the duration & hasn't fucked her own life.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 7, 2020)

Celyn said:


> Yes, I'm often a bit flummoxed by people deciding that they're gay or bi after lots of years of heterosexual marriage and offspring.



to quote someone who came up on my tweeter feed - 

"People who are LGBT+ are made to feel wrong & unwelcome from a young age. 

If they go on to make certain life choices, IT’S BECAUSE THE WORLD TELLS THEM THEY HAVE TO.

They don’t try to deceive anyone"

worth remembering it's not much more than 50 years ago that gay male same sex activity was decriminalised in England and Wales (less than 30 years ago in Scotland and N Ireland) and the general environment is still not universally gay friendly.

From my perspective, I think a heck of a lot more people are (to some extent) bi than will generally admit it - there is also some negativity towards people who are (or appear to be) bi within the 'gay community'


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Feb 7, 2020)

D'wards said:


> There are loads of gay television presenters. Dating back as long as I can remember. I don't think it would have effected (affected?) his career that much but I'm sure dear Pippy had his reasons.



An out children's TV presenter in the 1980s? That would not have been easy.


----------



## scifisam (Feb 7, 2020)

D'wards said:


> There are loads of gay television presenters. Dating back as long as I can remember. I don't think it would have effected (affected?) his career that much but I'm sure dear Pippy had his reasons.



It's might not be an issue for TV presenters in general, but it would have been harder for a kids' TV presenter in the 80s, with section 28 and all. Course, there are other reasons that people don't come out even if they realise early on, not just job reasons.


----------



## Celyn (Feb 7, 2020)

skyscraper101 said:


> I really wish this sort of thing wasn't news. The fact it gets pushed to my phone as "breaking news" just exemplifies how a celeb gay coming out story is leaped on as an opportunity to push a sensationalist fluff piece thinly veiled as  something in the public interest - no wonder so many gay people decide against going public.


Liked,  but is all that get pushed to your phone as "breaking news" proper news,  without stuff about,  say football or rugby competitions or film or telly awards,  shoved in too? Genuine question.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 7, 2020)

Celyn said:


> Your points might be valid.  I don't know his programme,  but if it's some kind of daytime chatter thing,  high chance it is as you describe. On your second point,  we can hope,  but if he is well paid for promoting tabloid views...



Do you not remember Gordon The Falangist Gopher?


----------



## D'wards (Feb 7, 2020)

scifisam said:


> It's might not be an issue for TV presenters in general, but it would have been harder for a kids' TV presenter in the 80s, with section 28 and all. Course, there are other reasons that people don't come out even if they realise early on, not just job reasons.


Appens as maybe. I was more thinking of ya Russell Harty type. And Larry Grayson if course but his gayhood was his usp I spose.

Tony Hart was gay but I never realised as a kid.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 7, 2020)

scifisam said:


> It's might not be an issue for TV presenters in general, but it would have been harder for a kids' TV presenter in the 80s, with section 28 and all.



there were some tory MPs who were calling for the BBC to sack Gorden Kaye from 'Allo Allo' when he came out in the mid 80s  (in his case, the scum was about to out him so he went public to the mirror instead)


----------



## skyscraper101 (Feb 7, 2020)

Celyn said:


> Liked,  but is all that get pushed to your phone as "breaking news" proper news,  without stuff about,  say football or rugby competitions or film or telly awards,  shoved in too? Genuine question.



The difference is their presenting a veneer of being a public interest piece (and an urgently important one at that) when in fact they’re just perpetuating sensationalism about sexual choices.


----------



## Celyn (Feb 7, 2020)

8ball said:


> I reckon he has private sessions at one of the places that do the blue rinses.


I was a teenager in the mid-late 1970s and I wondered a lot about the "shock horror" of punks dyeing their hair crazy colours when old ladies were already doing it.  Blue hair! Pink hair!  Oddly,  the latter seemed to stop it round about then.


----------



## scifisam (Feb 7, 2020)

D'wards said:


> Appens as maybe. I was more thinking of ya Russell Harty type. And Larry Grayson if course but his gayhood was his usp I spose.
> 
> Tony Hart was gay but I never realised as a kid.



Tony Hart was married for 50 years and never came out - think you must have got him mixed up with someone.


----------



## Ax^ (Feb 7, 2020)

hmm as much as i think this as a non story as i did not know he even had a wife

some  of the stuff said in this thread is a little odd

agree with Puddy_Tats post on the last page

being gay when he was a kid was something completely different to what it is now

Fair play to the fella


----------



## D'wards (Feb 7, 2020)

scifisam said:


> Tony Hart was married for 50 years and never came out - think you must have got him mixed up with someone.


Was he not? Well I'll go to foot of our stairs!

I was told Tony was once in a relationship with Andi Peters, but I now see this was a scurrilous rumour, although it seemed feasible at the time


----------



## IC3D (Feb 7, 2020)

Id really like to know how Andy Peters has forged a career based on being on a permanent holiday  more than this really.


----------



## Reno (Feb 7, 2020)

It


skyscraper101 said:


> The difference is their presenting a veneer of being a public interest piece (and an urgently important one at that) when in fact they’re just perpetuating sensationalism about sexual choices.


Sexual choices ?


----------



## cyril_smear (Feb 7, 2020)

Reno said:


> cyril_smear gave almost exactly the same answer as me a few posts later. They can’t have seen mine.


 not on ignore, why would you be


----------



## skyscraper101 (Feb 7, 2020)

Reno said:


> It
> 
> Sexual choices ?



sexuality


----------



## cyril_smear (Feb 7, 2020)

Reno said:


> I always wondered who here has me on ignore.



also, i dont think you can see the posts of a person who has you on ignore i.e you wouldnt be able to see my post


----------



## trashpony (Feb 7, 2020)

I couldn’t give a toss what his sexuality is. I do think this is shit for his wife though and suspect the only reason he’s come out now is a newspaper expose.

He could have just quietly announced his divorce.


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 7, 2020)

IC3D said:


> Id really like to know how Andy Peters has forged a career based on being on a permanent holiday  more than this really.


not sure what you mean by this - he moved into production and worked on T4 for most of its existence. Not sure what he's up to now.


----------



## Ax^ (Feb 7, 2020)

more than likely why he never came out before was he not barrymores itv replacement


----------



## Mumbles274 (Feb 7, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> not sure what you mean by this - he moved into production and worked on T4 for most of its existence. Not sure what he's up to now.


He created T4 didn't he?


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 7, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> Coming out at 57, what a twat. As someone posted above, I don't care and don't see why we need to know his sexuality.


and you're a dickhead


----------



## Orang Utan (Feb 7, 2020)

Mumbles274 said:


> He created T4 didn't he?


not sure, but I used to work in the C4 videotape libraey and they filmed T4 in C4 HQ (the only programmed that C4 made themselves, in the in-house studio, so used to see him all the time when he'd come and ask for tv clips. It's weird seeing children's tv presenters you grew up watching, looking unshaven and without makeup


----------



## IC3D (Feb 7, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> not sure what you mean by this - he moved into production and worked on T4 for most of its existence. Not sure what he's up to now.


Ive only seen him promoting Holiday competitions on daytime tv in the last 10 years


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 7, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> and you're a dickhead


Cockcheese


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 7, 2020)

Orang Utan said:


> not sure, but I used to work in the C4 videotape libraey and they filmed T4 in C4 HQ (the only programmed that C4 made themselves, in the in-house studio, so used to see him all the time when he'd come and ask for tv clips. It's weird seeing children's tv presenters you grew up watching, looking unshaven and without makeup


You're supposed to close brackets once you've opened them yer bellend.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 7, 2020)

Lupa said:


> Why call him a twat if you don't care?


I don't care about him being gay, but I think it's a twattish thing to do to come out so late in life and I fail to see why we all need to know about it.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 7, 2020)

Celyn said:


> That strikes me as quite a nasty attitude. I mean your first statement,  just in case you need it explained.


You strike me as being particularly thin-skinned.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 7, 2020)

Puddy_Tat said:


> so you'd rather he stayed closeted?


I didn't say that now did I?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 7, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> I don't care about him being gay, but I think it's a twattish thing to do to come out so late in life.



Surely it's his choice to come out when he wants?

As a matter of interest...do you care how people die?


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 7, 2020)

Lupa said:


> Surely it's his choice to come out when he wants?


And it's my choice to regard him as a twat for leaving it so late. It's just one of the numerous reasons he is a twat.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 7, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> I didn't say that now did I?



it was hard to tell...


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 7, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> And it's my choice to regard him as a twat for leaving it so late. It's just one of the numerous reasons he is a twat.




Yes..but your opinion is rubbish. And its our choice to tell you.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 7, 2020)

Puddy_Tat said:


> it was hard to tell...


No, it wasn't.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 7, 2020)

Lupa said:


> Yes..but your opinion is rubbish.


That is your own incorrect opinion


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 7, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> That is your own incorrect opinion



You didnt answer my question. 
Do you care how people die?


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 7, 2020)

Lupa said:


> You didnt answer my question.


Yeah I did, I said that he is entitled to come out when he wants, but that I'm entitled to regard him as a twat for the age he decided to come out at.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 7, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> Yeah I did, I said that he is entitled to come out when he wants, but that I'm entitled to regard him as a twat for the age he decided to come out at.




So do you care how people die?


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 7, 2020)

I don't particularly care how people I don't care about die, no. Why do you ask?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 7, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> I don't particularly care how people I don't care about die, no.



Oh..
Welcome back naohpop


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 7, 2020)

Lupa said:


> Oh..
> Welcome back naohpop


Lol, whatever mate.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 7, 2020)




----------



## Cerv (Feb 7, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> Yeah I did, I said that he is entitled to come out when he wants, but that I'm entitled to regard him as a twat for the age he decided to come out at.


it’s not like he can go back in time and do it earlier


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 7, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> Lol, whatever mate.



Yep it's funny how you popped up.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 7, 2020)

Lupa said:


> Yep it's funny how you popped up.


You come across as paranoid mate. Chill.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 7, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> I don't particularly care how people I don't care about die, no. Why do you ask?



If you dont care how people you don't  know, die... then why do you care how people you don't know, live?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 7, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> You come across as paranoid mate. Chill.



You're not my mate. 
And I'm not paranoid. 
Your posts remind me of someone who caused a shitload of hassle.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 7, 2020)

Lupa said:


> You're not my mate.
> And I'm not paranoid.
> Your posts remind me of someone who caused a shitload of hassle.


You're getting all over exited. Calm down.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 7, 2020)




----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 7, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> You're getting all over exited. Calm down.



"Exited"? 
And you giving out the pay to Orang Utan for brackets.

I'm very calm.


----------



## existentialist (Feb 7, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> And it's my choice to regard him as a twat for leaving it so late. It's just one of the numerous reasons he is a twat.


Of course it's your choice. Just like it's the choice of others to disagree.


----------



## hash tag (Feb 7, 2020)

Spoiler: reveal



I'm a White  heterosexual male with many camp tendencies. So what


----------



## Reno (Feb 7, 2020)

cyril_smear said:


> also, i dont think you can see the posts of a person who has you on ignore i.e you wouldnt be able to see my post


I wasn't really being serious.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 8, 2020)

I just think it's cowardly and stupid to come out so late in life. He says he's proud to be gay but he can't be that proud if he hasn't had the balls to come out in all these years, decades infact.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 8, 2020)

How would you know?


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Feb 8, 2020)

purenarcotic said:


> Sorry to be pedantic but he works for ITV.


Basically there is a much higher than normal ratio of gays in TV production in general.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Feb 8, 2020)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> Basically there is a much higher than normal ratio of gays in TV production in general.


How do you know? Those of us in engineering are just more wary of coming out.

At the start of my career I’d never have passed positive (security) vetting if I was a suspected homosexualist. 

we live in very different times, but for those of us of a certain age, old habits die hard.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Feb 8, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> I just think it's cowardly and stupid to come out so late in life. He says he's proud to be gay but he can't be that proud if he hasn't had the balls to come out in all these years, decades infact.



My brother didn't until he was about 35. I witnessed the huge inner struggle he was going through that took its toll mentally and physically before he came out (I had no idea). It was obviously not easy, and I certainly don't think he was being cowardly for 35 years. Happy to say that it completely turned his life around.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Feb 8, 2020)

pseudonarcissus said:


> How do you know? Those of us in engineering are just more wary of coming out.
> 
> At the start of my career I’d never have passed positive (security) vetting if I was a suspected homosexualist.
> 
> we live in very different times, but for those of us of a certain age, old habits die hard.


having said that, Armistead Maupin’s tweet amused me...”welcome to the family, we were expecting you”.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Feb 8, 2020)

pseudonarcissus said:


> How do you know? Those of us in engineering are just more wary of coming out.
> 
> At the start of my career I’d never have passed positive (security) vetting if I was a suspected homosexualist.
> 
> we live in very different times, but for those of us of a certain age, old habits die hard.


Well yes I was going to add that maybe they are just more open, but I do think it's more than that. Last production I worked on was around  50% gay and that's just the ones that mentioned it in some way at some point.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 8, 2020)

He could have come out when it mattered, when the gay community needed him, but he was too much of a fucking coward.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 8, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> He could have come out when it mattered, when the gay community needed him, but he was too much of a fucking coward.



Then judgemental twats like you would have complained that he was just attention seeking. It's nothing to do with you what he decides, or when.

Again: how would you know?


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Feb 8, 2020)

...


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Feb 8, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> He could have come out when it mattered, when the gay community needed him, but he was too much of a fucking coward.


Don't be such an ignorant twat.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 8, 2020)

Always wonder why some people are surprised/annoyed/confused when people come out later in life. It's not like they suddenly "decide" they're gay or bi etc. It's something that some of us struggle with for years. The amount of times I had to keep calm and quiet when I'd hear "jokes" and gossip about who's gay or bisexual. Listening to some people come out with ill-informed statements like "they're on heat all the time", "how can they be bi and married, surely they must be at it all the time" etc. 

You get grief from some because you remain in the closet, you get grief for coming out and "shoving your sexuality in my face", you get disbelief because you "never mentioned it before, I don't believe you" and so on and so on.

Ideally, it shouldn't matter. But with bigotry ever present, maybe it's a good thing to remind some people that sexuality isn't as straightforward or easily labelled as they think.

I'm not a huge fan of PS, but it's clearly something that he felt strongly about. And it's not a "shit thing to do".  If his relationship with his wife and family is a loving one (which I imagine it is), don't worry. They will be fine.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 8, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> I just think it's cowardly and stupid to come out so late in life. He says he's proud to be gay but he can't be that proud if he hasn't had the balls to come out in all these years, decades infact.



And then some wonder why more people don't come out?

There's nothing cowardly or stupid about it. It can lead to mental health issues, suicidal feelings and a huge adjustment that some of us just aren't up to, at a particular point in life.


----------



## Reno (Feb 8, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> He could have come out when it mattered, when the gay community needed him, but he was too much of a fucking coward.


Are you speaking on behalf of the gay community?


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Feb 8, 2020)

Reno said:


> Are you speaking on behalf of the gay community?


We’re a mafia, not a community


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Feb 8, 2020)

pseudonarcissus said:


> We’re a mafia, not a community


And we recruit


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 8, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> He could have come out when it mattered, when the gay community needed him, but he was too much of a fucking coward.


You fucking weirdo


----------



## editor (Feb 8, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> Yeah I did, I said that he is entitled to come out when he wants, but that I'm entitled to regard him as a twat for the age he decided to come out at.


Why, exactly?


----------



## Jennastan (Feb 8, 2020)

Celyn said:


> Yes,  I'm often a bit flummoxed by people deciding that they're gay or bi after lots of years of heterosexual marriage and offspring. Still,  quite a lot of people do,  including one of my brothers.  Luckily,  any slight befuddlement I might have is not their problem,  really.  I should imagine television is not the most challenging industry in which to come out,  but good luck to him anyway.  We have only one life to live,  after all.


I only worked out i'm bisexual at the age of 47 - not sure why that should flummox anyone. For me it says more about attitudes to LGBT in the UK, where we constantly default to straight (& if not straight, then gay) and many of us who aren't straight (or gay) really struggle to know ourselves. If the information about bisexuality had been available to me as a teenager I'd have probably worked it out then.
(previous to that I assumed i was gay  btw, not straight)



pseudonarcissus said:


> How do you know? Those of us in engineering are just more wary of coming out.



Agree. I've worked in engineering most of my career, in London too, and homophobic bullying is a big issue. I used to hear of many cases, and I was never out at work until a few years ago. Hope that doesn't make me a coward. I just didn't see the point in wrecking my career when i didn't have to. If I still worked in engineering on the front line I would still not be out. It's only because I work in the nice safe head office now that I feel able to be out and open.


----------



## Jennastan (Feb 8, 2020)

Celyn said:


> I was a teenager in the mid-late 1970s and I wondered a lot about the "shock horror" of punks dyeing their hair crazy colours when old ladies were already doing it.  Blue hair! Pink hair!  Oddly,  the latter seemed to stop it round about then.


and those punks are old ladies now and still doing it. The cycle is complete!


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 8, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> I just think it's cowardly and stupid to come out so late in life. He says he's proud to be gay but he can't be that proud if he hasn't had the balls to come out in all these years, decades infact.



This says more about you than Philip Schofield.

He stayed the course of his marriage and reared his kids. Probably because he didnt want to hurt the people he loves. That's far from cowardly. That's pretty selfless if you ask me. 
Now he has come out. His children are adults and his family supports him in this. 

I think your view is narrow and particularly unkind.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Feb 8, 2020)

Reno said:


> cyril_smear gave almost exactly the same answer as me a few posts later. They can’t have seen mine.


I was only joking - I don't have you on ignore.


Count Cuckula said:


> He could have come out when it mattered, when the gay community needed him, but he was too much of a fucking coward.


Fuck off.  It's an entirely personal thing as to whether or when an individual 'comes out' - and no other individual has the right to expect them to (or when).


krtek a houby said:


> You get grief from some because you remain in the closet, you get grief for coming out and "shoving your sexuality in my face", you get disbelief because you "never mentioned it before, I don't believe you" and so on and so on.


My all-time favourite homophobic whinge is 'stop shoving it down my throat'


----------



## dessiato (Feb 8, 2020)

Why don't we all put count cuckula on ignore and improve our quality of life?


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 8, 2020)

Jennastan said:


> and those punks are old ladies now and still doing it. The cycle is complete!



Blue rinse cycle!


----------



## maomao (Feb 8, 2020)

My mum didn't come out till late in life because, like Schofield, she had a family and kids. Marriages aren't all about sex and parenthood definitely isn't. I'm heterosexual but outside of my bedroom (and occasionally living room if the kids are out) my sexuality is completely irrelevant because I'm monogamous. If it is the case that he commited to a marriage and children for nearly thirty years before deciding to come out I don't think he can be condemmed for coming out late in life. No more than any other divorcee anyway and his wife's support suggests that it's not based on infidelity.


----------



## dessiato (Feb 8, 2020)

His coming out even managed to make Spanish news I'm told.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 8, 2020)

maomao said:


> My mum didn't come out till late in life because, like Schofield, she had a family and kids. Marriages aren't all about sex and parenthood definitely isn't. I'm heterosexual but outside of my bedroom (and occasionally living room if the kids are out) my sexuality is completely irrelevant because I'm monogamous. If it is the case that he commited to a marriage and children for nearly thirty years before deciding to come out I don't think he can be condemmed for coming out late in life. No more than any other divorcee anyway and his wife's support suggests that it's not based on infidelity.


Whilst I agree with this, I am conflicted because I think the same reasoning also leads to the opposite conclusion.  What does it actually _mean_ for him to say he is gay?  Is he leaving his wife?  Is he going to stay with her but start having sex with men?  If neither of those things then he is gay in the same way that I’m an out of work actor — I might have a theoretical preference to be paid to be on stage but there’s no action that can evidence it.  If your and my sexuality is relevant because we are monogamous, so is his.  There are a hell of a lot of people out there that love each other deeply and stay together because their relationship gives them support and love but no longer have sex.  It may be a little sad for one or both of them that this is true, but it doesn’t define them.  They don’t need to tell the world about their lack of sex and come out as asexual.  In short, sexuality literally doesn’t define anything about you other than who you want to have sex with, and if you’re in a sex-free relationship, at that point any status of heterosexual or homosexual is purely moot.

On the other hand, if he is leaving his wife then I’m actually even more confused.  It would seem that he loves her dearly.  It seems surprising to me that the pull to sex — especially with an as yet unknown person — is so overwhelmingly important to anybody above the age of about 25 that it’s worth throwing away your entire nurtured, loving family existence in order to achieve it.  I mean, if somebody wants to do that then I’m not going to condemn them for it, that’s up to them.  But neither am I going to congratulate them any more than if it were any 57 year old man who was bored of sex with his wife and seeking a bit of adventure with another woman.  Prioritising sexual desire over everything else strikes me as a thing you have every right to do, but not particularly _praiseworthy_ as such.

So the thing I am conflicted on — to the extent that it is anything to do with me at all, which it isn’t, and the extent that I therefore need to have an opinion, which I don’t — is what he really wants from his life as he moves forward into his 60s and beyond, and why this is best achieved by announcing his sexuality.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 8, 2020)

Did he need to come out and say it? Possibly he said it because it makes it more real, more concrete for him. By telling everyone, it's out there, it confirms who he is. Of course it doesn't define him, but maybe there was a (long) period of denial? I guess he's being not only honest with the world, but more importantly, honest with himself.

Christ only knows, everyone approaches it a different way and everyone's circumstances aren't going to be exactly the same. At the end of the day, whilst it's hardly earth-shattering news, _I'm guessing_ it's life-changing or life-affirming for him.


----------



## maomao (Feb 8, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Whilst I agree with this, I am conflicted because I think the same reasoning also leads to the opposite conclusion.  What does it actually _mean_ for him to say he is gay?  Is he leaving his wife?  Is he going to stay with her but start having sex with men?  If neither of those things then he is gay in the same way that I’m an out of work actor — I might have a theoretical preference to be paid to be on stage but there’s no action that can evidence it.  If your and my sexuality is relevant because we are monogamous, so is his.  There are a hell of a lot of people out there that love each other deeply and stay together because their relationship gives them support and love but no longer have sex.  It may be a little sad for one or both of them that this is true, but it doesn’t define them.  They don’t need to tell the world about their lack of sex and come out as asexual.  In short, sexuality literally doesn’t define anything about you other than who you want to have sex with, and if you’re in a sex-free relationship, at that point any status of heterosexual or homosexual is purely moot.
> 
> On the other hand, if he is leaving his wife then I’m actually even more confused.  It would seem that he loves her dearly.  It seems surprising to me that the pull to sex — especially with an as yet unknown person — is so overwhelmingly important to anybody above the age of about 25 that it’s worth throwing away your entire nurtured, loving family existence in order to achieve it.  I mean, if somebody wants to do that then I’m not going to condemn them for it, that’s up to them.  But neither am I going to congratulate them any more than if it were any 57 year old man who was bored of sex with his wife and seeking a bit of adventure with another woman.  Prioritising sexual desire over everything else strikes me as a thing you have every right to do, but not particularly _praiseworthy_ as such.
> 
> So the thing I am conflicted on — to the extent that it is anything to do with me at all, which it isn’t, and the extent that I therefore need to have an opinion, which I don’t — is what he really wants from his life as he moves forward into his 60s and beyond, and why this is best achieved by announcing his sexuality.



Being gay is a social identity as much as it's a sexuality. There are large numbers of men who have sex with other men who don't identify as gay or bisexual and there are also large numbers of openly gay men who are not having sex with men on a regular basis. Loads of people are bisexual to some extent but commit to one or the other. It's not just a case of us being interested in his sex life because being gay clearly isn't just about sex.


----------



## strung out (Feb 8, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> He could have come out when it mattered, when the gay community needed him, but he was too much of a fucking coward.


Fucking hell you're a charmless prick.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 8, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Whilst I agree with this, I am conflicted because I think the same reasoning also leads to the opposite conclusion.  What does it actually _mean_ for him to say he is gay?  Is he leaving his wife?  Is he going to stay with her but start having sex with men?  If neither of those things then he is gay in the same way that I’m an out of work actor — I might have a theoretical preference to be paid to be on stage but there’s no action that can evidence it.  If your and my sexuality is relevant because we are monogamous, so is his.  There are a hell of a lot of people out there that love each other deeply and stay together because their relationship gives them support and love but no longer have sex.  It may be a little sad for one or both of them that this is true, but it doesn’t define them.  They don’t need to tell the world about their lack of sex and come out as asexual.  In short, sexuality literally doesn’t define anything about you other than who you want to have sex with, and if you’re in a sex-free relationship, at that point any status of heterosexual or homosexual is purely moot.
> 
> On the other hand, if he is leaving his wife then I’m actually even more confused.  It would seem that he loves her dearly.  It seems surprising to me that the pull to sex — especially with an as yet unknown person — is so overwhelmingly important to anybody above the age of about 25 that it’s worth throwing away your entire nurtured, loving family existence in order to achieve it.  I mean, if somebody wants to do that then I’m not going to condemn them for it, that’s up to them.  But neither am I going to congratulate them any more than if it were any 57 year old man who was bored of sex with his wife and seeking a bit of adventure with another woman.  Prioritising sexual desire over everything else strikes me as a thing you have every right to do, but not particularly _praiseworthy_ as such.
> 
> So the thing I am conflicted on — to the extent that it is anything to do with me at all, which it isn’t, and the extent that I therefore need to have an opinion, which I don’t — is what he really wants from his life as he moves forward into his 60s and beyond, and why this is best achieved by announcing his sexuality.


This all seems to assume that sexuality is solely about who you want to fuck. Gay people live in sexless relationships too. I could quite see Schofield staying with his wife for all the things that form a long term loving relationship other than the shagging. Sex isn't the sole factor in relationships. Maybe not even the primary one.


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Feb 8, 2020)

I'm afraid my first unworthy Maily thought was '57, wife and two kids: not all that gay then'. But when that rather hasty, if not plain nasty, reaction was given very little time I more or less thought 'Poor bloke has perhaps been unhappily struggling with this for decades; he may have got married before his sexuality settled down, or he may have resisted his sexuality at the time. Any number of possibilities  He seems relieved any how. I wish him well'

The other thing is that presumably somebody can be one sexuality (to the extent that anybody is completely one anything, that is)  and then realise that they aren't any more, either relatively suddenly or dawningly. 

 'I didn't know I was gay until recently': perhaps you really  weren't to any great extent. 

My cousin Jo decided they were gay after a marriage and children; they didn't realise that they had been gay all along. It was 'So I'm gay now'.  I got no sense they felt  that they had been 'living a lie' until that point.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 8, 2020)

maomao said:


> Being gay is a social identity as much as it's a sexuality. There are large numbers of men who have sex with other men who don't identify as gay or bisexual and there are also large numbers of openly gay men who are not having sex with men on a regular basis. Loads of people are bisexual to some extent but commit to one or the other. It's not just a case of us being interested in his sex life because being gay clearly isn't just about sex.


If it’s a social identity (which it is, although this raises questions about whether it’s a healthy thing for the future for society to continue to place sexuality at the core of identity, but that’s another issue), it is an identity that he _doesn’t have_.  He’s not in a gay relationship, after all.  Identity is performative and relational, not just something you feel. This is what I mean when I say I don’t really understand what an announcement like this really means.


----------



## Chilli.s (Feb 8, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> He could have come out when it mattered, when the gay community needed him, but he was too much of a fucking coward.


This opinion shows a lack of empathy and understanding of the human condition, hopefully your stay on U75 can help you with this.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 8, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> This all seems to assume that sexuality is solely about who you want to fuck. Gay people live in sexless relationships too. I could quite see Schofield staying with his wife for all the things that form a long term loving relationship other than the shagging. Sex isn't the sole factor in relationships. Maybe not even the primary one.


Then in what way is he gay?


----------



## Reno (Feb 8, 2020)

kabbes said:


> If it’s a social identity (which it is, although this raises questions about whether it’s a healthy thing for the future for society to continue to place sexuality at the core of identity, but that’s another issue), it is an identity that he _doesn’t have_.  He’s not in a gay relationship, after all.  Identity is performative and relational, not just something you feel. This is what I mean when I say I don’t really understand what an announcement like this really means.


You can't know what he feels and how he has dealt with his sexuality up to now. I'm pretty sure there are things he isn't making public and that's his right.


----------



## Marty1 (Feb 8, 2020)

I haven’t read much of this past the headline so - is he leaving his wife?


----------



## Reno (Feb 8, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> I haven’t read much of this past the headline so - is he leaving his wife?


He hasn't said he is. Why ?


----------



## kabbes (Feb 8, 2020)

Reno said:


> You can't know what he feels and how he has dealt with his sexuality up to now. I'm pretty sure there are things he isn't making public and that's his right.


Yes, it is his right.  I think I’ve made it pretty clear that the reality of his life is not my business.  Doesn’t mean we can’t talk about the concepts involved, though.


----------



## maomao (Feb 8, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Identity is performative and relational, not just something you feel.


So a virgin can't be gay?


----------



## Marty1 (Feb 8, 2020)

Reno said:


> He hasn't said he is. Why ?



Just wondering how this new dynamic will work.

Im assuming that publicly announcing you’re gay is something that would lead him to peruse a gay relationship?  Where would his wife fit in with that?


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 8, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Then in what way is he gay?


What I mean is that he could feel attracted to men but not feel the need to do anything other than be open about it. Still love his wife and stay in the relationship with her for all the other reasons (I’m not saying he will so this, but it’s possible).


----------



## Reno (Feb 8, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Just wondering how this new dynamic will work.
> 
> Im assuming that publicly announcing you’re gay is something that would lead him to peruse a gay relationship?  Where would his wife fit in with that?


Could be but how he and his wife deal with this is their business.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Feb 8, 2020)

The Boris Jonson/Jeremy Corbyn interviews solidified him as a nasty assed Tory boy and for that and that only he can fuck right off in to the sea


----------



## B.I.G (Feb 8, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Just wondering how this new dynamic will work.
> 
> Im assuming that publicly announcing you’re gay is something that would lead him to peruse a gay relationship?  Where would his wife fit in with that?



In any number of ways. You really are thick.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 8, 2020)

strung out said:


> Fucking hell you're a charmless prick.


And you're a sad knobhead who, presumably, actually cares about Philip Schofield.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 8, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> Sex isn't the sole factor in relationships. Maybe not even the primary one.


No shit. Fucking hell, state the fucking obvious why don't you.


----------



## existentialist (Feb 8, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> He could have come out when it mattered, when the gay community needed him, but he was too much of a fucking coward.


Stop being a stupid cunt.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 8, 2020)

Spymaster said:


> You fucking weirdo


Knobcheese


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 8, 2020)

existentialist said:


> Stop being a stupid cunt.


Twat


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 8, 2020)

Fucking hell, you people are so fucking sad giving so much of a massive shit about all this, including what I post about it. You all need to get a life and get a fucking grip. Schofield is a bellend anyway, always has been.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Feb 8, 2020)

I'd be more interested if he suddenly said he was a massive Krautrock fan and closest electronica musician about to release an album.


----------



## existentialist (Feb 8, 2020)

Chilli.s said:


> This opinion shows a lack of empathy and understanding of the human condition, hopefully your stay on U75 can help you with this.


Not if it's as brief as I suspect it will be...


----------



## existentialist (Feb 8, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Just wondering how this new dynamic will work.
> 
> Im assuming that publicly announcing you’re gay is something that would lead him to peruse a gay relationship?  Where would his wife fit in with that?


I guess that's something only he needs to figure out.


----------



## existentialist (Feb 8, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> Fucking hell, you people are so fucking sad giving so much of a massive shit about all this, including what I post about it. You all need to get a life and get a fucking grip. Schofield is a bellend anyway, always has been.


You're the one who started off on the ranty bullshit - most of the heat and light on this thread is people calling you out for being a cunt.


----------



## ignatious (Feb 8, 2020)

I’ve never liked his adopted persona but sympathise with his wife and kids. It spoke volumes of the man that he chose to be babied in a TV studio by his fake chums when the news broke rather than stay at home and support his wife during what must be the most humiliating time of her life.


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Feb 8, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> peruse



Dodgy autocorrect or malopropism?


----------



## existentialist (Feb 8, 2020)

JuanTwoThree said:


> Dodgy autocorrect or malopropism?


----------



## Reno (Feb 8, 2020)

ignatious said:


> I’ve never liked his adopted persona but sympathise with his wife and kids. It spoke volumes of the man that he chose to be babied in a TV studio by his fake chums when the news broke rather than stay at home and support his wife during what must be the most humiliating time of her life.


I'm not sure how he can come out on TV while simultaneously comforting his crying wife at home ? Are you suggesting this was the first she'd heard of it ?


----------



## Poot (Feb 8, 2020)

Ah. I've just realised who Count Cuckula is. Thought he'd be back.


----------



## existentialist (Feb 8, 2020)

Poot said:


> Ah. I've just realised who Count Cuckula is. Thought he'd be back.


I'd assumed he must be some kind of returner, but I can never be arsed to figure out who's who in the ranks of those who get their kicks from trying to annoy people.


----------



## maomao (Feb 8, 2020)

Poot said:


> Ah. I've just realised who Count Cuckula is. Thought he'd be back.


Who? Don't think it's AW.


----------



## Spymaster (Feb 8, 2020)

I think I know who it is


----------



## Poot (Feb 8, 2020)

maomao said:


> Who? Don't think it's AW.


Really? Oh. I was going by the hair trigger which is usually the giveaway.


----------



## Sweet FA (Feb 8, 2020)

Is it Frannie?


----------



## Poot (Feb 8, 2020)

Don't know. Questioning myself now. But then I seem to be in a tiny minority of people who didn't know that PS was gay either so what do I know!


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Feb 8, 2020)

Poot said:


> Ah. I've just realised who Count Cuckula is. Thought he'd be back.


I'm really shit at this and have no idea but clearly they are just trying to cause trouble. On this thread at least.


----------



## maomao (Feb 8, 2020)

Poot said:


> Really? Oh. I was going by the hair trigger which is usually the giveaway.


Could be wrong but usually starts reasonably on benefits threads, maybe some prog rock and TV stuff then goes mad with MRA or keto stuff and explodes about three months later. He's due though and the name is the right style so maybe he just didn't calm down since last time yet.


----------



## existentialist (Feb 8, 2020)

Mrs Miggins said:


> I'm really shit at this and have no idea but clearly they are just trying to cause trouble. On this thread at least.


I've reported a sample post and hinted that a thread ban might be in order. A thread like this doesn't need cuntitude like that.


----------



## andysays (Feb 8, 2020)

killer b said:


> he didn't hide it all these years, he's apparently only recently realised it.


Where do you get this from? I haven't seen any suggestion of it in the admittedly little I've read.


----------



## killer b (Feb 8, 2020)

andysays said:


> Where do you get this from? I haven't seen any suggestion of it in the admittedly little I've read.


His statement?


----------



## andysays (Feb 8, 2020)

killer b said:


> His statement?


OK, I obviously didn't read it as carefully as I might have


----------



## Reno (Feb 8, 2020)

Andysays is right. I'm currently watching his coming out on youtube because curiosity got the better of me. It's all a little cringey in the way these things are. Holly on his behalf reads out the statement that it has been "a conflict he's been living with for a really, really long time" and he claims that he's been open with his wife along the way.



In my experience it is very rare in a Western, reasonably liberal society that a man would not have been aware of his sexuality at his age. The truth usually is that they've been aware of being gay for a long time, but struggled with it due a variety of reasons. In his case it may well be that he loves his family and that was more important to him.


----------



## xenon (Feb 8, 2020)

Mrs Miggins said:


> I'm really shit at this and have no idea but clearly they are just trying to cause trouble. On this thread at least.



I think they're quite young, strident, everyone's not quite left or politically sound enough for them, - in that annoying way some politically aware people can be, esp when young. They've made a twat of themselves and rather than own it, they're just lashing out.


----------



## andysays (Feb 8, 2020)

Reno said:


> Andysays is right. I'm currently watching his coming out on youtube because curiosity got the better of me. It's all a little cringey in the way these things are. Holly on his behalf reads out the statement that it has been "a conflict he's been living with for a really, really long time" and he claims that he's been open with his wife along the way.


In the end, it doesn't matter that much whether he has known for many years or whether it was more of a gradual realisation he's finally come to.

I was just surprised to see KillerB state it in that definite way, because it didn't seem his statement was that definite


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 8, 2020)

existentialist said:


> I've reported a sample post and hinted that a thread ban might be in order. A thread like this doesn't need cuntitude like that.


Sad twat. What I posted is a perfectly normal and common viewpoint. Anyway, I'm not wasting anymore time on this bullshit, I've got better things to do than bicker about Philip fucking Schofield all fucking day long, obviously you guys haven't.


----------



## killer b (Feb 8, 2020)

Oh ok. Whatever you like, I dont care enough to go back over whatever I was reading yesterday


----------



## maomao (Feb 8, 2020)

Not acknowledging or engaging with posts about him being a banned returner is classic AW though. I'm in two minds now.


----------



## Reno (Feb 8, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> Sad twat. What I posted is a perfectly normal and common viewpoint. Anyway, I'm not wasting anymore time on this bullshit, I've got better things to do than bicker about Philip fucking Schofield all fucking day long, obviously you guys haven't.


Thank you for keeping us informed.


----------



## keybored (Feb 8, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> Sad twat. What I posted is a perfectly normal and common viewpoint. Anyway, I'm not wasting anymore time on this bullshit, I've got better things to do than bicker about Philip fucking Schofield all fucking day long, obviously you guys haven't.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Feb 8, 2020)

maomao said:


> Not acknowledging or engaging with posts about him being a banned returner is classic AW though. I'm in two minds now.


I'm not a banned returner and it's pure paranoia to assume that I am. I know about this site through a friend of mine. Anyway, like I say, I've got other things to do now so bye bye. I'll let you all continue obsessing over Philip Schofeild's sexuality since it's such a vital topic.


----------



## maomao (Feb 8, 2020)

Count Cuckula said:


> I'm not a banned returner and it's pure paranoia to assume that I am. I know about this site through a friend of mine.


He's not some keto nut from the west country is he? And I'm not assuming, I'm idly speculating. On work time as well so there.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Feb 8, 2020)

Was wondering why this was nine pages. I've put a thread ban and a warning point on.


----------



## Riklet (Feb 8, 2020)

I cant believe anyone cares about this absolute non-news.


----------



## JimW (Feb 8, 2020)

I feel like my whole life up until now has been a meaningless shell, carrying on in blithe ignorance when all the time _Philip Schofield_ was _gay_.


----------



## Reno (Feb 8, 2020)

For many straight people this may be totally irrelevant, but the more people who are in the public eye come out of the closet, the more being LGBT+ becomes normalised. It’s not like we are living in a society free of homophobia and prejudice, there still is a lot of homophobia about. This may be a joke to anybody who has never suffered homophobia, to someone struggling with their sexuality right now, it may be a lifeline.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Feb 8, 2020)

Poot said:


> Don't know. Questioning myself now. But then I seem to be in a tiny minority of people who didn't know that PS was gay either so what do I know!


Same here - I've obviously seen him on telly over the years, but never paid a great deal of attention to him - never been interested in breakfast or daytime telly.  I don't think I've ever given consideration of his sexuality.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 8, 2020)

maomao said:


> I'm heterosexual but outside of my bedroom (and occasionally living room if the kids are out) my sexuality is completely irrelevant because I'm monogamous.



sorry, and i don't want to make this sound like a personal attack, but no it's not.

being heterosexual is the 'normal' / default assumption from early childhood onwards.

straight people don't 'come out' because there's no need to, society in general just assumes people are straight.

straight people don't often get discriminated against / get turfed out of their parents' home / lose jobs / get duffed up for being straight or being perceived as straight.

doing 'normal every day' things for a straight person (like mentioning or being seen with your partner) are things that are an act of 'coming out' for a gay person - and things that gay people have generally tended to avoid or at least think twice about doing.  just one personal angle - i was in my 40s before i held hands with someone in the street.  when i was in my late teens / 20s, there would have been a high chance of getting duffed up or nicked for it.

yes, all of the above is better in the UK than it was in the 80s, and i've no personal knowledge of what it was like in the 50s when gay male activity was still a criminal offence.  or of countries where you can still get locked up or worse...


----------



## Clair De Lune (Feb 8, 2020)

Aww good for him. It sounds like it's been a very painful secret and I hope he feels better now he's spoken of it. 

He's clearly a very loving and loved person. It must have been so hard for him to tell his wife and family. 

It must have been so difficult to live without the possibility of ever sharing chemistry, attraction, passion, sensuality, lust or indeed romantic love with someone.


----------



## maomao (Feb 8, 2020)

Puddy_Tat said:


> sorry, and i don't want to make this sound like a personal attack, but no it's not.


I was, perhaps clumsily, trying to separate sexual behaviour and sexual identity. A celibate but openly gay person is in more danger of being physically attacked than a married man with children who discreetly frequents cruising spots or watches gay porn.


----------



## bimble (Feb 8, 2020)

Reno said:


> For many straight people this may be totally irrelevant, but the more people who are in the public eye come out of the closet, the more being LGBT+ becomes normalised. It’s not like we are living in a society free of homophobia and prejudice, there still is a lot of homophobia about. This may be a joke to anybody who has never suffered homophobia, to someone struggling with their sexuality right now, it may be a lifeline.


Basically this. And if a 50-something yr old daytime tv presenter coming out has any meaningful impact on the universe its probably only going to be for other people of his sort of age who have lived through decades of totally unchecked homophobia and not felt able to say anything for decades. To anyone else whats the relevance really so good, him doing this might be of some help to people who have been through real shit.


----------



## Celyn (Feb 8, 2020)

Clair De Lune said:


> Aww good for him. It sounds like it's been a very painful secret and I hope he feels better now he's spoken of it.
> 
> He's clearly a very loving and loved person. It must have been so hard for him to tell his wife and family.
> 
> It must have been so difficult to live without the possibility of ever sharing chemistry, attraction, passion, sensuality, lust or indeed romantic love with someone.


Well,  surely he did with his wife,  for a time. A long time. Still,  life happens. Changes happen.


----------



## IC3D (Feb 8, 2020)

It's wierd all the sympathy and celeb fawning. People seem to be assuming he sat with legs crossed celebate for 30 years, for all the love he appears to have he probably has been shagging away all this time. This could be his wife saying Im divorcing you we raised the kids but I'm done. It feels like a load of BS you get from a celeb who's on a damage limitation mission. Fuck all to praise


----------



## ignatious (Feb 8, 2020)

Reno said:


> I'm not sure how he can come out on TV while simultaneously comforting his crying wife at home ? Are you suggesting this was the first she'd heard of it ?


He didnt come out on TV. He came out on Instagram, then went on TV almost immediately afterwards.

He could have made the announcement and then done the mawkish interview a few days later once the public had digested the news. That would have enabled his wife to weather the inevitable media storm with him rather than watch his very public catharsis from afar.


----------



## rekil (Feb 8, 2020)

Still a scab. I remember him getting irate about a british airways staff strike 'people's holidays _ruined_' etc, while comrade Willoughby said she supported them.


----------



## Clair De Lune (Feb 8, 2020)

Celyn said:


> Well,  surely he did with his wife,  for a time. A long time. Still,  life happens. Changes happen.


Surely he did What?


----------



## Cerv (Feb 8, 2020)

ignatious said:


> He didnt come out on TV. He came out on Instagram, then went on TV almost immediately afterwards.
> 
> He could have made the announcement and then done the mawkish interview a few days later once the public had digested the news. That would have enabled his wife to weather the inevitable media storm with him rather than watch his very public catharsis from afar.



you’re seem to be assuming that the two of them didn’t discuss this at all and agree together how they’d handle it before he made the public announcement 
maybe I’m naively looking for the best in people, but that seems more likely to me than he just sprung this on his family yesterday


----------



## ignatious (Feb 8, 2020)

Cerv said:


> you’re seem to be assuming that the two of them didn’t discuss this at all and agree together how they’d handle it before he made the public announcement
> maybe I’m naively looking for the best in people, but that seems more likely to me than he just sprung this on his family yesterday


Maybe the whole process was all agreed, but it doesn’t alter the fact that this chronology has done her no favours. His bit is done; the story now becomes more about her and how she is coping.

By positioning himself ahead of the story he’s, inadvertently or not, forced his wife into the position of victim.

Why not let her announce they’re separating and then taking ownership of the fallout himself?


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Feb 8, 2020)

I've been thinking...the more people who come out as gay or queer or wherever they are on what is becoming clear is a whole spectrum of gender and sexuality, the more the old fashioned men vs. women gender stuff becomes irrelevant. The future will be gender neutral and sex discrimination will become a nonsesne. Not in the way I thought it would but in a better way because we will all become...just humans who can express ourselves however we like. And that is a world I really want to live in.


----------



## Chilli.s (Feb 8, 2020)

Yeah, labels are not so helpful sometimes.


----------



## Jennastan (Feb 8, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Whilst I agree with this, I am conflicted because I think the same reasoning also leads to the opposite conclusion.  What does it actually _mean_ for him to say he is gay?  Is he leaving his wife?  Is he going to stay with her but start having sex with men?  If neither of those things then he is gay in the same way that I’m an out of work actor — I might have a theoretical preference to be paid to be on stage but there’s no action that can evidence it.  If your and my sexuality is relevant because we are monogamous, so is his.  There are a hell of a lot of people out there that love each other deeply and stay together because their relationship gives them support and love but no longer have sex.  It may be a little sad for one or both of them that this is true, but it doesn’t define them.  They don’t need to tell the world about their lack of sex and come out as asexual.  In short, sexuality literally doesn’t define anything about you other than who you want to have sex with, and if you’re in a sex-free relationship, at that point any status of heterosexual or homosexual is purely moot.
> 
> On the other hand, if he is leaving his wife then I’m actually even more confused.  It would seem that he loves her dearly.  It seems surprising to me that the pull to sex — especially with an as yet unknown person — is so overwhelmingly important to anybody above the age of about 25 that it’s worth throwing away your entire nurtured, loving family existence in order to achieve it.  I mean, if somebody wants to do that then I’m not going to condemn them for it, that’s up to them.  But neither am I going to congratulate them any more than if it were any 57 year old man who was bored of sex with his wife and seeking a bit of adventure with another woman.  Prioritising sexual desire over everything else strikes me as a thing you have every right to do, but not particularly _praiseworthy_ as such.
> 
> So the thing I am conflicted on — to the extent that it is anything to do with me at all, which it isn’t, and the extent that I therefore need to have an opinion, which I don’t — is what he really wants from his life as he moves forward into his 60s and beyond, and why this is best achieved by announcing his sexuality.


Doesn't it just mean he fancies men and not women? Definitely think you're over-thinking this.


----------



## Jennastan (Feb 8, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Then in what way is he gay?


his desire to have sex with men however that manifests itself.


----------



## hash tag (Feb 8, 2020)

It's even made the front page of today's paper


----------



## kabbes (Feb 8, 2020)

Jennastan said:


> his desire to have sex with men however that manifests itself.


But Spy said it wasn’t that.


----------



## trashpony (Feb 8, 2020)

He’s been having an affair with a teenager. What a surprise


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Feb 8, 2020)

We don't get this shit on BBC4


----------



## purenarcotic (Feb 8, 2020)

trashpony said:


> He’s been having an affair with a teenager. What a surprise



Where did you see that?


----------



## planetgeli (Feb 8, 2020)

trashpony said:


> He’s been having an affair with a teenager. What a surprise



A gofer (runner) no less. You couldn't make this shit up.


----------



## trashpony (Feb 9, 2020)

purenarcotic said:


> Where did you see that?


Twitter

This was always a PR crisis management exercise. Creep


----------



## kabbes (Feb 9, 2020)

Now it all makes sense.  

Why now?  Because he has been doing the cliched power-imbalance exploitation of a teenaged co-worker (who on this occasion happens to be male).  

What does it mean to be gay in this context?  It means you’ve been fucking a teenager behind your wife’s back.

Etc.  And lo, the complex questions about identity and society resolve themselves into simple ones about what powerful men can get away with.


----------



## weltweit (Feb 9, 2020)

I would just be a little wary of something that comes from Twitter, do you know it's a fact?


----------



## MrSki (Feb 9, 2020)

Well here is the tweet. I don't care enough to follow the link or check the source but feel free & report back.

Edited for legal sensitivities.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 9, 2020)

weltweit said:


> I would just be a little wary of something that comes from Twitter, do you know it's a fact?


----------



## scifisam (Feb 9, 2020)

I really hope it's not true about the teenager. For one, that would be creepy as fuck, and for another, some bigots would use it as ammo, but that's the norm, unfortunately. Added to that, some people who've been saying Schofield's brave would decide not to back down despite the creepiness.

And it could be purely made-up rumours. Stranger things have happened. Even if does remind me a bit of Kevin Spacey.


----------



## Reno (Feb 9, 2020)

MrSki said:


> Well here is the tweet. I don't care enough to follow the link or check the source but feel free & report back.



Politicalite UK is an ultra rightwing website.


----------



## MrSki (Feb 9, 2020)

MrSki said:


> I don't care enough to follow the link




Edited to be on the safe side.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Feb 9, 2020)

trashpony said:


> Twitter
> 
> This was always a PR crisis management exercise. Creep


There are no details yet as far as I am aware, just speculation, but even so it doesn't mean he didn't have a difficult time coming out as gay. Might mean he's a bit of a dick. His wife and family did already know (supposedly).
No different from a hetro presenter cheating on his wife with an teenage  intern, for which he wouldn't have had to make a televised public statement to confirm his  heterosexuality, bravely or not.
By all accounts, I hear through my TV grapevine that he can be a horrible shit, but I don't have any first hand accounts of that.


----------



## Jennastan (Feb 9, 2020)

kabbes said:


> But Spy said it wasn’t that.


oh well, can't be then.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Feb 9, 2020)

D'wards said:


> Tony Hart was gay but I never realised as a kid.



Tony Hart was not gay, just a very nice man indeed. You are confusing him with Hartley Hare, who definitely was.


----------



## MrSki (Feb 9, 2020)

UrbaneFox said:


> Tony Hart was not gay, just a very nice man indeed. You are confusing him with Hartley Hare, who definitely was.


Watch what you say about Hartley Hare.    I don't care about his sexualality but I don't want to hear a bad word about him.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 9, 2020)

MrSki said:


> Watch what you say about Hartley Hare.    I don't care about his sexualality but I don't want to hear a bad word about him.



And Tony Hart was not a very nice man he was a very naughty boy


----------



## MrSki (Feb 9, 2020)

Reno said:


> Politicalite UK is an ultra rightwing website.


I thought they might be so reporting on PS is right up their street.


----------



## UrbaneFox (Feb 9, 2020)

trashpony said:


> He’s been having an affair with a teenager. What a surprise


What, after 10 pages of support we learn that he's a love cheat?

How cheated I feel.

I'm taking him off my "following" list.  He knows that is a serious matter. Where's that screenshot?


----------



## MrSki (Feb 9, 2020)

UrbaneFox said:


> Tony Hart was not gay, just a very nice man indeed. You are confusing him with Hartley Hare, who definitely was.


Maybe you are right & Hartley was a wrongun. My childhood is shattered.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 9, 2020)

UrbaneFox said:


> Tony Hart was not gay, just a very nice man indeed.


But Morph was a cunt!


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 9, 2020)

two sheds said:


> And Tony Hart was not a very nice man he was a very naughty boy
> 
> View attachment 197969


Fuck off, farmerbarleymow ...


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Feb 9, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> Fuck off, farmerbarleymow ...


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Feb 9, 2020)

MrSki said:


> Maybe you are right & Hartley was a wrongun. My childhood is shattered.



That's the first time I've ever heard of that.  Not exactly very convincing rabbit/hare/whatever - they clearly found the puppet costumes in a skip.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Feb 9, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> But Morph was a cunt!


How dare you.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 9, 2020)

farmerbarleymow said:


>


Something about animals... Possibly seagulls.


----------



## Epona (Feb 9, 2020)

killer b said:


> I think the assumption that all mildly camp men who work in the media are gay is perhaps one that we should be trying to challenge.



We should also challenge the assumption that men who aren't mildly camp are straight - there are too many assumptions in this world!


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Feb 9, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> Something about animals...


What on earth are you wittering on about.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 9, 2020)

Someone mentioned animals. I assumed it was something to do with you ;-)


----------



## scifisam (Feb 9, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> But Morph was a cunt!



Morph was lovely! His friend Chas was the bastard.

(Still not going to discuss the Schofield runner thing unless it's shown to be true).


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 9, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Then in what way is he gay?



In what way are you straight?


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 9, 2020)

scifisam said:


> I really hope it's not true about the teenager. For one, that would be creepy as fuck, and for another, some bigots would use it as ammo, but that's the norm, unfortunately. Added to that, some people who've been saying Schofield's brave would decide not to back down despite the creepiness.
> 
> And it could be purely made-up rumours. Stranger things have happened. Even if does remind me a bit of Kevin Spacey.



Yep, it's the perfect ammunition for those who equate homosexuality with paedophilia. And the source material is extremely suspect, (_and yet, those who don't understand the concept of being gay and might feel uncomfortable that it can't be defined according to their own standards_) are happy to believe it.

No doubt we'll have someone along comparing us to animals, next


----------



## kabbes (Feb 9, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> In what way are you straight?


As I said.  Performatively and relationally.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 9, 2020)

kabbes said:


> As I said.  Performatively and relationally.



To be straight, one must engage in sexual acts or be in an opposite sex relationship?

How about single people, then?


----------



## kabbes (Feb 9, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> To be straight, one must engage in sexual acts or be in an opposite sex relationship?
> 
> How about single people, then?


There are other ways that performance and relations work than being in a relationship.  But those ways don’t include performatively and relationally acting out a completely different identity.  You don’t have some special secret self that you keep hidden.  You are what you do, the relationships you maintain, the things you say.

That’s why it’s so painful to live in a way incongruent with how you feel, of course.  Because you don’t get to be one thing in your heart and another thing in reality.  Your reality defines you regardless of whether you want it or not.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 9, 2020)

kabbes said:


> There are other ways that performance and relations work than being in a relationship.  But those ways don’t include performatively and relationally acting out a completely different identity.  You don’t have some special secret self that you keep hidden.  You are what you do, the relationships you maintain, the things you say.



Pretty sure there's plenty of people out there who keep their sexuality hidden or repressed. Sexuality is a many faceted thing, it's impossible to neatly label it.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 9, 2020)

Then don’t label it.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 9, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Then don’t label it.



Are you talking to me or Schofield? It seems like you want him to jump through hoops to prove his sexuality.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 9, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Are you talking to me or Schofield? It seems like you want him to jump through hoops to prove his sexuality.


I didn’t want anything for Schofield.  I only asked the question what does his announcement actually mean?  But now it would seem I have my answer — it means he yet another powerful middle-aged media arsehole who wants to fuck teenagers that are beholden to him.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 9, 2020)

kabbes said:


> I didn’t want anything for Schofield.  I only asked the question what does his announcement actually mean?  But now it would seem I have my answer — it means he yet another powerful middle-aged media arsehole who wants to fuck teenagers that are beholden to him.



It's quite an age gap, no doubt about it. But it seems they were in a consensual relationship which soured. Maybe his bf threatened to go public so Schofied got in there first. Does this make PS a monster, a predator, though?


----------



## trashpony (Feb 9, 2020)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> There are no details yet as far as I am aware, just speculation, but even so it doesn't mean he didn't have a difficult time coming out as gay. Might mean he's a bit of a dick. His wife and family did already know (supposedly).
> No different from a hetro presenter cheating on his wife with an teenage  intern, for which he wouldn't have had to make a televised public statement to confirm his  heterosexuality, bravely or not.
> By all accounts, I hear through my TV grapevine that he can be a horrible shit, but I don't have any first hand accounts of that.


I’m not saying he didn’t/doesn’t have a difficult time coming out as gay.
That doesn’t stop him from being a middle aged letch though. Nor does it mean that he doesn’t come across an very unpleasant on screen and, by all accounts, off screen.


----------



## dessiato (Feb 9, 2020)

Shouldn't we wait until it's proven that he had a relationship with the boy before we start suggesting Schofield is a "monster, a predator?" At the moment the evidence that he is, or might be, seems very thin on the ground.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 9, 2020)

If the rumour is true about him having an affair that started 7 years ago with a then 18yr old runner (now 25) on the GM show...and that it was all going to come out because the runner had decided to talk...then this has been a damage limitation / garner support and sympathy exercise and an effort to avoid looking like a lying cheating shit and his sexual orientation outing will take second place....eventually. 

Whatever the truth is...I feel extremely sorry for his wife who seems to have been a rock in his life and is still doing her best to be supportive of him.


----------



## Tankus (Feb 9, 2020)

Meh


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 9, 2020)

Tankus said:


> Meh



Fair point


----------



## scifisam (Feb 9, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> In what way are you straight?





krtek a houby said:


> It's quite an age gap, no doubt about it. But it seems they were in a consensual relationship which soured. Maybe his bf threatened to go public so Schofied got in there first. Does this make PS a monster, a predator, though?



Honestly? If it's true, and still if, then yeah, it'd be creepy as fuck. Schofield is 57 now. And the bloke is supposed to be a runner on the This Morning set so that's a bit Harvey Weinstein, smacking of shag you way up. 

Like I said, I really hope the rumours aren't true, but if they are then them being the same sex doesn't excuse anything. A 49 year old man shagging an 18-year-old woman that he's in a position of authority over is not something anyone on here would say was just fine and dandy. And coming out and getting lots of sympathy for it as a way to deflect from a report about him shagging an 18-year-old runner would be really shitty. 

So thumbs crossed that it's not true and actually he shagged a bloke he met in a pub or something.

Kabbes I do get what you're saying, FWIW, but I can't find a way of expressing how without potentially offending people who are bisexual and living in hetero relationships, which I don't want to do.


----------



## purenarcotic (Feb 9, 2020)

The rumour seems to have come from an article published by The S*n, so I think I’ll hold out on jumping to conclusions until a more reputable source comes through. Not as if the scum is known for its honesty and fact finding, is it.


----------



## MrSki (Feb 9, 2020)

farmerbarleymow said:


> That's the first time I've ever heard of that.  Not exactly very convincing rabbit/hare/whatever - they clearly found the puppet costumes in a skip.


What you never heard of Pipkins? Amazing what they could get onto kids TV.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Feb 9, 2020)

trashpony said:


> I’m not saying he didn’t/doesn’t have a difficult time coming out as gay.
> That doesn’t stop him from being a middle aged letch though. Nor does it mean that he doesn’t come across an very unpleasant on screen and, by all accounts, off screen.


You framed his coming out as nothing more than a cold calculated PR exercise.


----------



## trashpony (Feb 9, 2020)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> You framed his coming out as nothing more than a cold calculated PR exercise.


Because I think the timing of it is. But that doesn’t mean I think that having to hide your sexuality for the sake of your career isn’t shit.


----------



## Marty1 (Feb 9, 2020)

Lupa said:


> If the rumour is true about him having an affair that started 7 years ago with a then 18yr old runner (now 25) on the GM show...and that it was all going to come out because the runner had decided to talk...then this has been a damage limitation / garner support and sympathy exercise and an effort to avoid looking like a lying cheating shit and his sexual orientation outing will take second place....eventually.
> 
> Whatever the truth is...I feel extremely sorry for his wife who seems to have been a rock in his life and is still doing her best to be supportive of him.



This story suggests Schofields sexuality was known for 2 years before his public coming out.









						Phillip Schofield's sexuality was 'open secret' at This Morning for two years
					

EXCLUSIVE: A source has revealed Philip's sexuality has been an open secret at this Morning for two years and that the presenter felt safe to be himself around his colleague because he knew they would stay quiet




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## Poot (Feb 9, 2020)

Please. Don't.


----------



## Reno (Feb 9, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> This story suggests Schofields sexuality was known for 2 years before his public coming out.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Coming-out in gradual process shocker !


----------



## scifisam (Feb 9, 2020)

Epona said:


> We should also challenge the assumption that men who aren't mildly camp are straight - there are too many assumptions in this world!



That's true. I had a friend who was SO, SO straight seeming that he found it really hard to pull blokes despite being good looking - everyone assumed he was a straight bloke experimenting whereas he was actually a gold star gay man in his thirties and wanted a long-term relationship with a man.


----------



## Reno (Feb 9, 2020)

scifisam said:


> That's true. I had a friend who was SO, SO straight seeming that he found it really hard to pull blokes despite being good looking - everyone assumed he was a straight bloke experimenting whereas he was actually a gold star gay man in his thirties and wanted a long-term relationship with a man.


Sound like bullshit to me. No gay man can't find dates because they appear "too straight".


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

Reno said:


> Sound like bullshit to me. No gay man can't find dates because they appear "too straight".



One of my best friends was asked to leave a gay bar because they thought he was straight! Ended up in a row about the need to be straight friendly anyway and not assume that everyone who looks straight is an enemy. This was in the 80s.


----------



## scifisam (Feb 9, 2020)

Reno said:


> Sound like bullshit to me. No gay man can't find dates because they appear "too straight" for so many reasons, I can't even be bothered...



No, he could get dates very easily, and did, but he wanted something more serious and long-term, to rent a flat together and that, and guys assumed he was just experimenting. He was just very laddish, but not in a bear way or anything like that - he just came across as a straight bloke, somehow. Pretty sure he had no reason to bullshit to me, and I have no reason to bullshit you either.


----------



## Reno (Feb 9, 2020)

Guineveretoo said:


> One of my best friends was asked to leave a gay bar because they thought he was straight! Ended up in a row about the need to be straight friendly anyway and not assume that everyone who looks straight is an enemy. This was in the 80s.


That could happen, especially in the 80s, but its an entirely different issue. Homophobia still was much worse then it is now and LGBT+ venues had to be vigilant and would have been getting it wrong occasionally . It happened to me that I was at least questioned, trying to get into a gay venue where I wasn't a regular.

The idea that a gay man can't get dates because they appear "so, so straight" is ludicrous on an number of levels.

It is in fact a quality highly desirable with a lot of gay men. You'll find the description "straight acting" on a lot of gay dating profiles and it is controversial. It assumes that there is such a thing as gay- or straight acting and it is supposed to exclude more effeminate/camp men. There is some internalised homophobia at play.

I'm usually assumed to be straight by other straight people and so are most of my gay friends. Some gay men present as very masculine, which I suppose would be "so, so" straight, its as much a spectrum as straight men and women.

We usually don't find dates randomly by walking down the street. We are a small minority so the chances for that are small. We go on gay dating websites and apps or gay venues to meet mates, possible shags and partners. Once in such an environment, you will be assumed to be gay, no matter how you present.


----------



## scifisam (Feb 9, 2020)

Guineveretoo said:


> One of my best friends was asked to leave a gay bar because they thought he was straight! Ended up in a row about the need to be straight friendly anyway and not assume that everyone who looks straight is an enemy. This was in the 80s.



One of my best nights our started with us being asked to prove we were lesbians to enter GAY at the Astoria, and being asked whether we read specific magazines. One of my friends said no, but I can tell you what fanny smells like. 

(I was always secretly offended that I never got asked those questions despite being really fucking femme in my 20s).


----------



## Reno (Feb 9, 2020)

scifisam said:


> No, he could get dates very easily, and did, but he wanted something more serious and long-term, to rent a flat together and that, and guys assumed he was just experimenting. He was just very laddish, but not in a bear way or anything like that - he just came across as a straight bloke, somehow. Pretty sure he had no reason to bullshit to me, and I have no reason to bullshit you either.


There are all sorts of reasons why many gay men are bad at long term relationships, but being "laddish" or seeming too straight isn't one of them. That is perpetuating harmful stereotypes. Most gay men are clued up enough that they wouldn't simply assume someone is just experimenting if they aren't other indicators for that. We are able to communicate these things like anybody else. Fact is, many of us aren't great at long time relationships and maybe that's how he rationalised that to himself. Just because you have "a story" doesn't make it a universal fact for gay men in general.


----------



## Reno (Feb 9, 2020)

I shall now put this thread on ignore as I'm not _that_ invested in Phillip Schofield and being told by straight people how to come out and how to be gay isn't great for my blood pressure.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 9, 2020)

From my own experiences, which are not those of every gay or bi person, I've had people question whether I was gay or straight. These people were either gay or straight themselves. My "gaydar" doesn't always work, either. I've met people who I was sure were straight but turns out they weren't. What I'm saying is, there's no one way to "be" gay or bi, and there's no one way to determine whether another person is or isn't. I was told that I couldn't be with a woman, once, because her gay friends insisted that I was gay. Been told by gay and straight people that there's no such thing as bisexual. You either are, or aren't. It seems to me that there are always others who want to explain to you what you are and just won't accept who you are.

Being told how to behave/act/think is a situation that many LGBT folks have encountered, at least once or twice in their lives.


----------



## scifisam (Feb 9, 2020)

Reno said:


> There are all sorts of reasons why many gay men are bad at long term relationships, but being "laddish" or seeming too straight isn't one of them. That is perpetuating harmful stereotypes. Most gay men are clued up enough that they wouldn't simply assume someone is just experimenting if they aren't other indicators for that. Fact is, many of us aren't great at long time relationships and maybe that's how he rationalised that to himself. Just because you have "a story" doesn't make it a universal fact for gay men.



I didn't say it was a universal fact for gay men, and I was responding to a gay man who was saying that being seen as straight when you're actually gay can be annoying with an anecdote about a friend of mine. I think it's fairly well known on here that I'm as gay as you are, so I didn't feel the need to add that.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Feb 9, 2020)

Coming to this thread late because I didn't know it was here, but I have a very similar story that happened to a the mother of a childhood friend of mine and she only found out 3 months ago. Her husband has left her.

It wouldn't surprise me if Phil had been getting his rocks off for a while because the story just seems *so*similar to that of my Mum's friend. Let's call her K, the husband S, and the person on the other side A.

My friend has a younger sister. Let's call her N. N was 15 at the time when K found a phone lying around. K had presumed that the phone belonged to a friend of N and so gave her the phone in order to find the rightful owner. Said phone had, shall we say, a lot of dodgy messages from someone called A and when N confronted her dad S about it, he basically admitted that he was gay, and made N promise not to tell her mother.

This poor child had to keep her Dad's closeted secret for 15 years while the affair continued.

Fast forward 15 years. N is now 30+, none of the children live at home. They are both retired. K is now 65+ and S "suddenly" comes out and leaves home shacking up with the other guy. K says that so much stuffed clicked into place. Things that had made no sense to her, regarding sex life, "work" time away from family, endless sporting trips, etc, suddenly made sense.

Everyone including mine, has the attitude that if the dude's gay, then he's gay, and there's really not a lot anyone can do about it. Better to come out than not at all and the kids haven't been particularly effected, they have left home after all and have their own families now.... but

I do not think any of this is particularly brave. It has been devastating for K who at 50 years old when N found his phone could have still moved on (had S done the decent thing then), but instead she continued being his housewife and gave up her career to raise his kids, she was totally dependant on him (he is very successful in his field), and basically feels like she was used as a prop in his life. They were together for over 40 years, and she is coming to terms that that 40 years was a sham. She's also pissed off, rightly IMO that any hope that she might have had a semblance of a chance at finding a fulfilling relationship at 65, with a man who loved her in the way she wanted to be, is basically nil, and that she had no choice in the matter because that choice was taken from her.

She now faces the last years of her life in a big empty house. Alone. While S pops around to check occasionally that she is OK and then goes back to A.

S says that everything they worked towards in the marriage, all the material success they build together is still theirs and A won't have a dime of any of it.

A saving grace I suppose.

Either way, I can't help thinking the dude is a massive arsehole. Gay or not hiding your affairs for 15 years? Expecting other people to cover for your secret while you take full advantage of the woman in domestic servitude at home, who raises your kids and cooks your meals while you swan about, completely out of the closet in one area of your life but keeping it a secret from the person who is raising your kids, lying to her, and then expecting adulation while you leave her to the last 10 years of her life alone with no one?

Get to fuck mate.

At least Phil didn't leave it 40 years, but still, his poor, poor wife.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 9, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> From my own experiences, which are not those of every gay or bi person, I've had people question whether I was gay or straight. These people were either gay or straight themselves. My "gaydar" doesn't always work, either. I've met people who I was sure were straight but turns out they weren't. What I'm saying is, there's no one way to "be" gay or bi, and there's no one way to determine whether another person is or isn't. I was told that I couldn't be with a woman, once, because her gay friends insisted that I was gay. Been told by gay and straight people that there's no such thing as bisexual. You either are, or aren't. It seems to me that there are always others who want to explain to you what you are and just won't accept who you are.
> 
> Being told how to behave/act/think is a situation that many LGBT folks have encountered, at least once or twice in their lives.



ETA changed "her gay friends insisted that I _wasn't_ gay" to "insisted that I _was_ gay." Duh!


----------



## Red Cat (Feb 9, 2020)

kabbes said:


> There are other ways that performance and relations work than being in a relationship.  But those ways don’t include performatively and relationally acting out a completely different identity.  You don’t have some special secret self that you keep hidden.  You are what you do, the relationships you maintain, the things you say.
> 
> That’s why it’s so painful to live in a way incongruent with how you feel, of course.  Because you don’t get to be one thing in your heart and another thing in reality.  Your reality defines you regardless of whether you want it or not.



Reality includes the thoughts and feelings that we keep to ourselves, in our minds, our physical arousal, bodily experience, unobserved by others.

This psychological theory, does it only accept that which is observable by others to be real?


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 9, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> This story suggests Schofields sexuality was known for 2 years before his public coming out.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well thank goodness for The Star to put us straight.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 9, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> This story suggests Schofields sexuality was known for 2 years before his public coming out.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I dont really care about that. 
And my post was not about this.


----------



## likesfish (Feb 9, 2020)

bloke comes out as he was shagging an 18 yr old who threatened to out him that's not remotely "heroic" that's an entitled prick covering his own arse.
 If he was a teacher he'd be facing jail.
 The serious power imbalance in that relationship and dodgy as fuck straight or gay if a 57-year-old bloke was shagging my teenage kids he'd be looking at a broken Jaw 
half your age plus 7.
  Schofield is a dirty old man.


----------



## Marty1 (Feb 9, 2020)

Lupa said:


> I dont really care about that.
> And my post was not about this.



I should have stayed the obvious that if that article is accurate then it’s likely that his wife knew her hubby was gay for some time now.

But yeah, it’s her I feel sorry for.


----------



## strung out (Feb 9, 2020)

likesfish said:


> bloke comes out as he was shagging an 18 yr old who threatened to out him that's not remotely "heroic" that's an entitled prick covering his own arse.
> If he was a teacher he'd be facing jail.
> The serious power imbalance in that relationship and dodgy as fuck straight or gay if a 57-year-old bloke was shagging my teenage kids he'd be looking at a broken Jaw
> half your age plus 7.
> Schofield is a dirty old man.


If he was a teacher shagging an 18 year old he worked with, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be facing jail, no matter how grubby the age difference might seem.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Feb 9, 2020)

MrSki said:


> What you never heard of Pipkins? Amazing what they could get onto kids TV.


Nope, never heard of that until it was posted.  Maybe before my time I suppose - it looks 1960s ish for some reason.


----------



## MrSki (Feb 9, 2020)

farmerbarleymow said:


> Nope, never heard of that until it was posted.  Maybe before my time I suppose - it looks 1960s ish for some reason.


73 to 81 ATV pre school programme where the characters had regional accents.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 9, 2020)

Red Cat said:


> Reality includes the thoughts and feelings that we keep to ourselves, in our minds, our physical arousal, bodily experience, unobserved by others.
> 
> This psychological theory, does it only accept that which is observable by others to be real?


No it doesn't and of course you are right.  But bear in mind the context in which I was raising this in the first place.  I was questioning what the announcement actually meant in the context of somebody in a monogamous relationship with a woman who intended to stay in that monogamous relationship with that woman.  The fact that you might be aroused by a woman other than your wife in those circumstances is not something that I think is generally worth remarking on, advisable to broadcast or respectful of anybody involved.  I can't see that any of that changes just because it is a man you find arousing instead.


----------



## spanglechick (Feb 9, 2020)

strung out said:


> If he was a teacher shagging an 18 year old he worked with, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be facing jail, no matter how grubby the age difference might seem.


He or she would be sacked, however.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Feb 9, 2020)

MrSki said:


> 73 to 81 ATV pre school programme where the characters had regional accents.


Maybe it was only broadcast in some parts of the country.  Definitely don't remember seeing it as a bairn.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

spanglechick said:


> He or she would be sacked, however.



They would win an employment tribunal on grounds of unfair dismissal, then!


----------



## purenarcotic (Feb 9, 2020)

Guineveretoo said:


> They would win an employment tribunal on grounds of unfair dismissal, then!



Would they? They hold a position of trust and power, shagging a school student is surely a huge breach of that. I would have thought it would say in their contract they can’t; it’s very clear in mine that a sexual relationship with a service user is a gross misconduct issue.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 9, 2020)

Guineveretoo said:


> They would win an employment tribunal on grounds of unfair dismissal, then!



not sure they would

if i understand right, while in most cases the age of consent is 16, it's 18 if the older person is in a position of authority (e.g. teacher)

don't think it's a criminal law matter if both parties are over 18 and consenting

but fairly sure that most schools / colleges would have something in contracts of employment about getting in to sexual relationships with students whatever their age.  it would probably depend on the specific contract.

some places have contracts about sexual relationships in the workplace - mcdonalds recently turfed out their CEO for a (we are told consensual) relationship with an employee


----------



## strung out (Feb 9, 2020)

spanglechick said:


> He or she would be sacked, however.


What for? Having an affair with an adult co-worker?


----------



## scifisam (Feb 9, 2020)

Guineveretoo said:


> They would win an employment tribunal on grounds of unfair dismissal, then!



Unlikely. Like other people have said, it would probably be written into their contract in some way because it would be a breach of trust.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 9, 2020)

Whatever about Phillip Schofield's actions and the fallout for his wife which is pretty dramatic and devastating for her ......the age of consent in the UK is 16 and the young man allegedly involved with Schofield was 18 when the alleged affair began. 18 is an adult whether we like it or not. Also, 18 year olds today are more informed on their sexual rights than any previous generation.

Having said all of that....the young man was obviously not in a position of power and schofield by virtue of his experience, seniority, status had significant power. 
They were not in any way shape or form on a level footing. So...Schofield was a fucking fool at very least and could be viewed as manipulative and potentially predatory at most, to pursue anything with the young man.


----------



## kebabking (Feb 9, 2020)

Guineveretoo said:


> They would win an employment tribunal on grounds of unfair dismissal, then!



No, they wouldn't.

Not only are such things prohibited within a teacher's contract of employment - in my wife's LA it also precludes having a relationship with any former pupil of whatever age and however long after they stopped being a pupil - the age of consent is 18 when it's a relationship with a person in a 'position of trust', which consent bit relating not just to sex, but the beginning of the relationship/the grooming.

It not something I've looked at, but I wouldn't actually be surprised if the age of consent thing (I'm pretty sure it's teachers and social workers) taste until they leave the care of that individual, so just because a sixth form pupil turned 18 in say, the October of the academic year, it would still be a criminal offence for a teacher to start a relationship (not just sex) with them until that teacher ceased being in a position of trust.

If the story alleged is true, then Schofield is as grubby and predatory as any other 57yo who fucks an 18yo who works for him - the gay/straightness of the situation is no more relevant than whether they are a redhead or brunette.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

purenarcotic said:


> Would they? They hold a position of trust and power, shagging a school student is surely a huge breach of that. I would have thought it would say in their contract they can’t; it’s very clear in mine that a sexual relationship with a service user is a gross misconduct issue.



Completely different scenario. The scenario under discussion is work colleagues!


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

kebabking said:


> No, they wouldn't.
> 
> Not only are such things prohibited within a teacher's contract of employment - in my wife's LA it also precludes having a relationship with any former pupil of whatever age and however long after they stopped being a pupil - the age of consent is 18 when it's a relationship with a person in a 'position of trust', which consent bit relating not just to sex, but the beginning of the relationship/the grooming.
> 
> ...


As I say - the scenario is not of a teacher and pupil but of a teacher and a work colleague who is a teenager. 

you are right about teacher and students or other service users, but that is not what is under discussion.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

scifisam said:


> Unlikely. Like other people have said, it would probably be written into their contract in some way because it would be a breach of trust.


Again. 

The scenario is work colleagues!


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

Puddy_Tat said:


> not sure they would
> 
> if i understand right, while in most cases the age of consent is 16, it's 18 if the older person is in a position of authority (e.g. teacher)
> 
> ...


As above....

Plus, it is employment law, not criminal law.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

For clarity and because it has moved up the thread, the post which established the scenario was this one:



> If he was a teacher shagging an 18 year old he worked with, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be facing jail, no matter how grubby the age difference might seem.


----------



## scifisam (Feb 9, 2020)

Guineveretoo said:


> Again.
> 
> The scenario is work colleagues!



I know, but Spangles was quoting someone talking about a teacher and a student. 

It is somewhat relevant if the bloke was actually a runner and Schofield was the host, because legally obvs he wouldn't be in a position to be prosecuted, but there are similarities in the power differentials.

And it is still IF so I'm not going to assume the story is true. I do think it's very, very likely that Schofield had an affair with someone and then came out because he was going to be outed but that doesn't necessarily mean it was this particular bloke. If a late forties married bloke had a fling with an 18 year old woman who relied on her job for him I'd also think it was creepy as fuck.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

scifisam said:


> I know, but Spangles was quoting someone talking about a teacher and a student.
> 
> It is somewhat relevant if the bloke was actually a runner and Schofield was the host, because legally obvs he wouldn't be in a position to be prosecuted, but there are similarities in the power differentials.
> 
> And it is still IF so I'm not going to assume the story is true. I do think it's very, very likely that Schofield had an affair with someone and then came out because he was going to be outed but that doesn't necessarily mean it was this particular bloke. If a late forties married bloke had a fling with an 18 year old woman who relied on her job for him I'd also think it was creepy as fuck.


No - she quoted the post I quoted above!


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Feb 9, 2020)

Puddy_Tat said:


> some places have contracts about sexual relationships in the workplace


There is a long-standing policy about workplace relationships at mine - it doesn't ban them of course, but forbids people in a relationship being in the same line-management chain - i.e.. one partner managing the other.  Primarily to reduce the risk of internal fraud, and other things like unfair treatment, etc.  It also applies to family members working there.


----------



## scifisam (Feb 9, 2020)

Guineveretoo said:


> No - she quoted the post I quoted above!



Spangles quoted a post saying:

If he was a teacher shagging an 18 year old he worked with, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be facing jail, no matter how grubby the age difference might seem. 

And said that he would still be sacked.

Unless I'm somehow misreading? It's been known.


----------



## purenarcotic (Feb 9, 2020)

Guineveretoo said:


> For clarity and because it has moved up the thread, the post which established the scenario was this one:



We are interpreting it differently. I interpret ‘work with’ as teaches them, you are evidently interpreting it as work together as colleagues.


----------



## kebabking (Feb 9, 2020)

purenarcotic said:


> We are interpreting it differently. I interpret ‘work with’ as teaches them, you are evidently interpreting it as work together as colleagues.



Indeed. An 18yo runner on minimum wage is no more a _colleague _of the several million pound a year National Treasure than an 18yo Private Soldier is a _colleague _of the Chief of the Defence Staff.

Unpaid, 18yo intern and President of the United States.

This stuff isn't difficult.


----------



## strung out (Feb 9, 2020)

scifisam said:


> Spangles quoted a post saying:
> 
> If he was a teacher shagging an 18 year old he worked with, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be facing jail, no matter how grubby the age difference might seem.
> 
> ...


You misread. A teacher sleeping with someone they worked with, not someone they taught.


----------



## strung out (Feb 9, 2020)

purenarcotic said:


> We are interpreting it differently. I interpret ‘work with’ as teaches them, you are evidently interpreting it as work together as colleagues.


Nah, you read it wrong.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 9, 2020)

if somebody says a teacher is “working with” an 18 year old, this ambiguous phrase seems much more likely to mean “teaching” than “is a colleague of”.  Because how many teachers have 18 year old colleagues?  What would they be doing?


----------



## purenarcotic (Feb 9, 2020)

strung out said:


> Nah, you read it wrong.



Yes I’ve just said I interpreted differently, that’s the nature of written stuff innit, sometimes we read it differently. I’m not entirely sure what the purpose of your post is given I have already noted the difference in interpretation?


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

scifisam said:


> Spangles quoted a post saying:
> 
> If he was a teacher shagging an 18 year old he worked with, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be facing jail, no matter how grubby the age difference might seem.
> 
> ...


We are reading the original quote differently. "worked with" means colleagues in my mind.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

purenarcotic said:


> We are interpreting it differently. I interpret ‘work with’ as teaches them, you are evidently interpreting it as work together as colleagues.


Indeed. Not least because that is what mirrors the (alleged) relationship which is being discussed.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 9, 2020)

Guineveretoo said:


> We are reading the original quote differently. "worked with" means colleagues in my mind.


Like I said, how many teachers do you know with 18 year old colleagues?  How many with 18 year old pupils?  On that basis, which is the more natural interpretation of the ambiguous phrase?


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

kabbes said:


> if somebody says a teacher is “working with” an 18 year old, this ambiguous phrase seems much more likely to mean “teaching” than “is a colleague of”.  Because how many teachers have 18 year old colleagues?  What would they be doing?


Except that the person who wrote it has explained what they meant. 

And the rumour we are discussing is about a young member of staff and an older member of staff.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Like I said, how many teachers do you know with 18 year old colleagues?  How many with 18 year old pupils?  On that basis, which is the more natural interpretation of the ambiguous phrase?


When the discussion is about a rumour about an older guy having a relationship with a younger guy he works with, it is natural for me to have assumed that the "works with" meant work colleagues, not teacher/pupil.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Like I said, how many teachers do you know with 18 year old colleagues?  How many with 18 year old pupils?  On that basis, which is the more natural interpretation of the ambiguous phrase?


Treating that as a real question, none of the school teachers I know well have 18 year old pupils.  Some of them have young colleagues, although I have no idea of the age of their young colleagues because it is not a discussion we ever had, but I do know that they have had school and college leavers coming to work with them, if that helps.

Not sure why you want to know that, though....


----------



## scifisam (Feb 9, 2020)

strung out said:


> You misread. A teacher sleeping with someone they worked with, not someone they taught.



OK. That really was not clear at all from what you wrote. I didn't misread, you miswrote.

Plus a teacher sleeping with an 18 year old they "worked with" but didn't teach could be in line for disciplinary procedures, if they were in their line of management. Especially if the difference in age was 30 years and the difference in line management was several £million.

Fuck's sake. If this all turns out to be a complete lie it will have done its work.


----------



## andysays (Feb 9, 2020)

strung out said:


> Nah, you read it wrong.



Actually, it appears to be *you* who has misread or misunderstood the original post mentioning teachers and going to jail, which was this one from likesfish which you then responded to as if he was talking about a co-worker rather than a pupil



> bloke comes out as he was shagging an 18 yr old who threatened to out him that's not remotely "heroic" that's an entitled prick covering his own arse.
> If he was a teacher he'd be facing jail.
> The serious power imbalance in that relationship and dodgy as fuck straight or gay if a 57-year-old bloke was shagging my teenage kids he'd be looking at a broken Jaw
> half your age plus 7.
> Schofield is a dirty old man.



The implication in that post is quite clearly that of a teacher shagging a pupil, but the whole turn the thread has taken since is pretty much irrelevant to the situation under discussion because, even assuming the story as reported is broadly true, Schofield isn't abusing a position of formal trust in the way a teacher/pupil, social worker/client or even line manager/worker relationship would be.

While we might find it unwise, inappropriate or unsavoury (and I would, *if* it turns out to be as reported), the various comparisons made since are really not applicable to this situation.


----------



## scifisam (Feb 9, 2020)

Guineveretoo said:


> Treating that as a real question, none of the school teachers I know well have 18 year old pupils.  Some of them have young colleagues, although I have no idea of the age of their young colleagues because it is not a discussion we ever had, but I do know that they have had school and college leavers coming to work with them, if that helps.
> 
> Not sure why you want to know that, though....



Not many schools employ 18 year olds (hardly any, I'd say, apart from on work experience). Lots of secondary schools have 18 year olds in their final year. When talking about teachers and 18 year olds in their school it's much more likely that the 18 year old is a pupil than a teacher.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

andysays said:


> Actually, it appears to be *you* who has misread or misunderstood the original post mentioning teachers and going to jail, which was this one from likesfish which you then responded to as if he was talking about a co-worker rather than a pupil
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Actually, I thought the later comment clarified it by emphasising that it is not a teacher/pupil thing but people working together. That is what I thought was happening....


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

scifisam said:


> Not many schools employ 18 year olds (hardly any, I'd say, apart from on work experience). Lots of secondary schools have 18 year olds in their final year. When talking about teachers and 18 year olds in their school it's much more likely that the 18 year old is a pupil than a teacher.


I understand that. I was answering a specific question. 

And, as I say, I thought what we were doing here was talking about a rumour of an older guy having a sexual relationship with a much younger person he worked with - i.e. as colleagues - and that is what I was referring to when I said that the hypothetical teacher would win a hypothetical employment tribunal for unfair dismissal if they were sacked for having a relationship with a hypothetical adult colleague, regardless of the age difference.


----------



## scifisam (Feb 9, 2020)

Guineveretoo said:


> Actually, I thought the later comment clarified it by emphasising that it is not a teacher/pupil thing but people working together. That is what I thought was happening....



Strung out was the one who changed it from teacher and pupil to teacher and co-worker. But it really is really unlikely for there to be a teacher and co-worker where there's a 30 year age gap and not a huge imbalance of power and a mentoring relationship.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

scifisam said:


> Strung out was the one who changed it from teacher and pupil to teacher and co-worker. But it really is really unlikely for there to be a teacher and co-worker where there's a 30 year age gap and not a huge imbalance of power and a mentoring relationship.


Because we were not talking about someone who abused that position of trust/power.

It is kind of sad that this thread has taken this odd turn, as if adults cannot have consensual sexual relationships with older people.


----------



## andysays (Feb 9, 2020)

Guineveretoo said:


> Actually, I thought the later comment clarified it by emphasising that it is not a teacher/pupil thing but people working together. That is what I thought was happening....


Possibly; the thread's become so confused that I'm not sure who is talking about what anymore  

Anyway, I'm not going to pursue any of this any further unless there's some certainty what actually happened or didn't happen (and possibly not even then)


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 9, 2020)

andysays said:


> even assuming the story as reported is broadly true, Schofield isn't abusing a position of formal trust in the way a teacher/pupil, social worker/client or even line manager/worker relationship would be.
> 
> While we might find it unwise, inappropriate or unsavoury (and I would, *if* it turns out to be as reported), the various comparisons made since are really not applicable to this situation.


If the story does turn out to be true, I fail to see how it's any different to a teacher having an affair with a pupil. The power imbalance is the same, if not worse. Schofield was not only this lad's mentor, he also, potentially, had the power to positively or negatively affect the lad's future in the industry. That's a serious power imbalance, and, if true, is every bit as bad as a teacher having an affair with a pupil, IMO.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> If the story does turn out to be true, I fail to see how it's any different to a teacher having an affair with a pupil. The power imbalance is the same, if not worse. Schofield was not only this lad's mentor, he also, potentially, had the power to positively or negatively affect the lad's future in the industry. That's a serious power imbalance, and, if true, is every bit as bad as a teacher having an affair with a pupil, IMO.


It is a very different impact from a teacher and a pupil! And, it is not illegal, which it would have been if it had been a teacher and a pupil.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 9, 2020)

Guineveretoo said:


> It is a very different impact from a teacher and a pupil! And, it is not illegal, which it would have been if it had been a teacher and a pupil.


The only difference, in my mind, is the legality.


----------



## strung out (Feb 9, 2020)

kabbes said:


> if somebody says a teacher is “working with” an 18 year old, this ambiguous phrase seems much more likely to mean “teaching” than “is a colleague of”.  Because how many teachers have 18 year old colleagues?  What would they be doing?


But in this context it would be utterly meaningless because the relationship between a TV presenter and stagehand is not the same as a teacher and pupil.


----------



## Guineveretoo (Feb 9, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> The only difference, in my mind, is the legality.


I don’t agree, but I think I’ll park it there, as it’s all irrelevant and hypothetical anyway.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 9, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> If the story does turn out to be true, I fail to see how it's any different to a teacher having an affair with a pupil. The power imbalance is the same, if not worse. Schofield was not only this lad's mentor, he also, potentially, had the power to positively or negatively affect the lad's future in the industry. That's a serious power imbalance, and, if true, is every bit as bad as a teacher having an affair with a pupil, IMO.



Power dynamics absolutely impact on this. 
And 7 years on it would seem if the stories are true, that the power dynamic shifted and the now 25 year old runner took charge of his relationship and it would also appear, although this is only from online shite, that he was about to disclose the full nature of their relationship. 
He has also moved from the GM show to work on Loose Women...so he is no longer under Schofield's wing or thumb.

I'm still sorrier for Schofield's wife than anyone in this scenario.


----------



## xenon (Feb 9, 2020)

farmerbarleymow said:


> There is a long-standing policy about workplace relationships at mine - it doesn't ban them of course, but forbids people in a relationship being in the same line-management chain - i.e.. one partner managing the other.  Primarily to reduce the risk of internal fraud, and other things like unfair treatment, etc.  It also applies to family members working there.



This happened at a place I worked at. No real age gap IIRC but manager shagging a junior colleague. The jammy git got moved down from his management position but kept the salary.


----------



## xenon (Feb 9, 2020)

likesfish 

Sort this confusion out. You meant teacher and student yeah?


----------



## strung out (Feb 9, 2020)

xenon said:


> likesfish
> 
> Sort this confusion out. You meant teacher and student yeah?


He probably did, I was trying to point out why it's a ridiculous comparison. This isn't a teacher/pupil relationship.


----------



## xenon (Feb 9, 2020)

strung out said:


> He probably did, I was trying to point out why it's a ridiculous comparison. This isn't a teacher/pupil relationship.



Well for argument sake, if this is true, the affair with the runner. Whilst lacking the mentoring aspect and pastaral care the teacher / student role ecompases, it's still pretty grubby for the reasons already mentioned. Power difference, industry career breaks / connections implied etc.


----------



## trashpony (Feb 9, 2020)

You cannot call a relationship between a highly paid TV star with a minimum wage runner as 'between colleagues'. I can't remember who made the analogy of a relationship between chief of staff and a soldier but that's not far off. Actually, I'd argue it's even more of a power imbalance. There are no rules and regulations - if the star wants something, the star gets it. And that's the runner's job. I can't think of a much more imbalanced relationship.


----------



## MrSki (Feb 9, 2020)

trashpony said:


> There are no rules and regulations - if the star wants something, the star gets it. And that's the runner's job


Hence why they are aka gophers.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 9, 2020)

strung out said:


> But in this context it would be utterly meaningless because the relationship between a TV presenter and stagehand is not the same as a teacher and pupil.


As per Saul, it’s not exactly a million miles off.  It’s certainly closer than that of everyday work colleagues.


----------



## spanglechick (Feb 9, 2020)

For the avoidance of doubt, I did indeed assume that strung out was continuing the earlier point about teachers and 18 year old students.  

I’d commonly talk about my sixth formers as people I work with, especially since (as head of lower sixth) I would be incorrect in saying I _teach_ most of them.


----------



## likesfish (Feb 9, 2020)

Well it's not illegal it's dodgy as fuck he's not remotely "brave"

He's a sleazy randy old goat


----------



## brogdale (Feb 9, 2020)

likesfish said:


> Well it's not illegal it's dodgy as fuck he's not remotely "brave"
> 
> He's a sleazy randy old goat


Is the story of the relationship with the co-worker now accepted as true, then?
Not really following this very closely tbh.


----------



## kebabking (Feb 9, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Is the story of the relationship with the co-worker now accepted as true, then?
> Not really following this very closely tbh.



I don't follow it either, but given how damaging it is to the narrative of _Brave Philip..._ I would have assumed that m'learned friends would have got involved if it was all a load of old bollocks.

I don't doubt that there's been a bit of embellishment and artistic license, there always is when people's love lives go horribly wrong, but it's not been denied, and the bulk of the story has the ring of unpleasant truth about it.

Schofield is lucky that the story has a gay/coming out element - if it were just middle-aged, very rich man getting caught balls deep in a woman 35 years his junior and who worked at a very junior level in his company, he'd be getting roasted as a predatory sleeze-bag.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 10, 2020)

kebabking said:


> Schofield is lucky that the story has a gay/coming out element - if it were just middle-aged, very rich man getting caught balls deep in a woman 35 years his junior and who worked at a very junior level in his company, he'd be getting roasted as a predatory sleeze-bag.



How so? Where is the luck? Seems he's being roasted, to me.


----------



## Rokky (Feb 10, 2020)

I do not believe he should receive any type of praise whatsoever for treating his wife and family  in this disgusting, disrespectful manner.
I believe he knew the Gopher was going yo lift the lid on things so jumped before he was pushed.

I do not know any other way to say this but here goes, he had anal sex with a bloke, then goes home to his wife, has sexual intercitourse in a normal man using his private parts which has penetrated a male anus.

If any of you wanna praise him for this I feel you are warped.I feel very strongly about this activity, god never put us upon this earth  to commit such filth.

I got a feeling I may not have written this to suit some, this is me, my views.

Not very good on computers anyway.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 10, 2020)

Rokky said:


> Not very good at trolling anyway.


.


----------



## maomao (Feb 10, 2020)

Rokky said:


> I do not believe he should receive any type of praise whatsoever for treating his wife and family  in this disgusting, disrespectful manner.
> I believe he knew the Gopher was going yo lift the lid on things so jumped before he was pushed.
> 
> I do not know any other way to say this but here goes, he had anal sex with a bloke, then goes home to his wife, has sexual intercitourse in a normal man using his private parts which has penetrated a male anus.
> ...


Lots of heterosexual couples practice anal sex and lots of homosexual ones don't. And you're an ignorant piece of shit.


----------



## editor (Feb 10, 2020)

Rokky said:


> If any of you wanna praise him for this I feel you are warped.I feel very strongly about this activity, god never put us upon this earth  to commit such filth.


Who the fuck are you to tell us what God wants you arrogant piece of shit? Why should anyone care about your bigoted, small minded views?


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 10, 2020)

Rokky said:


> I do not believe he should receive any type of praise whatsoever for treating his wife and family  in this disgusting, disrespectful manner.
> I believe he knew the Gopher was going yo lift the lid on things so jumped before he was pushed.
> 
> I do not know any other way to say this but here goes, he had anal sex with a bloke, then goes home to his wife, has sexual intercitourse in a normal man using his private parts which has penetrated a male anus.
> ...



Not very good at all.

And fuck your god, btw.


----------



## D'wards (Feb 10, 2020)

To quote the internet "don't feed the troll"

I have no idea why you all engage with it


----------



## Mumbles274 (Feb 10, 2020)

Reno said:


> Politicalite UK is an ultra rightwing website.


That spreads fake news. And the only one running the schofield runner affair story.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 10, 2020)

D'wards said:


> To quote the internet "don't feed the troll"
> 
> I have no idea why you all engage with it



Sometimes it's rewarding, like letting off steam after a hard day. It won't be here very long, at any rate


----------



## D'wards (Feb 10, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Sometimes it's rewarding, like letting off steam after a hard day. It won't be here very long, at any rate


If you use it as an opportunity to get your fair share of abuse, then crack on


----------



## editor (Feb 10, 2020)

Rokky said:


> I got a feeling I may not have written this to suit some, this is me, my views.


My view is that I'm kicking your tiny little homophobic mind off this site, so shake your shit tambourine to that.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 10, 2020)

D'wards said:


> If you use it as an opportunity to get your fair share of abuse, then crack on



It's more to challenge such chumps, by getting them to showcase their unique, tedious brand of fuckwittery. Anyway, it's gone now, so back to the main thrust of the matter....


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Feb 10, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> How so? Where is the luck? Seems he's being roasted, to me.



No, he's being treated by the media as a brave hero.


----------



## Mumbles274 (Feb 10, 2020)

ElizabethofYork said:


> No, he's being treated by the media as a brave hero.


The only place running the affair story is a right wing fake news website

(that I have seen from googling "schofield affair runner" type terms)


----------



## editor (Feb 10, 2020)

D'wards said:


> To quote the internet "don't feed the troll"
> 
> I have no idea why you all engage with it


'It' was only here for under an hour. Long enough to tell him what a twat he was, but not long enough for him to get past one post. Perfect result, I'd say.


----------



## MrSki (Feb 10, 2020)

Mumbles274 said:


> The only place running the affair story is a right wing fake news website
> 
> (that I have seen from googling "schofield affair runner" type terms)


Super injunction.


----------



## Mumbles274 (Feb 10, 2020)

MrSki said:


> Super injunction.


If that's the case then does that mean all the Schofield is a creepy perv talk is based purely on speculation? Also might be tricky for editor if it were the case?


----------



## MrSki (Feb 10, 2020)

Mumbles274 said:


> If that's the case then does that mean all the Schofield is a creepy perv talk is based purely on speculation? Also might be tricky for editor if it were the case?


I have edited the post to be on the safe side. If Reno wants to edit the quote?


----------



## 1927 (Feb 11, 2020)

If half the stuff thats out there is true his career should be finished and he should probably be in jail.


----------



## Mumbles274 (Feb 11, 2020)

1927 said:


> If half the stuff thats out there is true his career should be finished and he should probably be in jail.


What stuff?


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 11, 2020)

1927 said:


> If half the stuff thats out there is true his career should be finished and he should probably be in jail.



Well, let's wait and see if it's true, shall we?


----------



## 1927 (Feb 11, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Well, let's wait and see if it's true, shall we?


If theres a super injunction you'll never find out tho!


----------



## 1927 (Feb 11, 2020)

Mumbles274 said:


> What stuff?


Clever googling will find everything.


----------



## killer b (Feb 11, 2020)

Why would you bother tho


----------



## MrSki (Feb 11, 2020)

Cos ITV are covering it up. 

Edited


----------



## 1927 (Feb 11, 2020)

MrSki said:


> Cos ITV are covering it up. Shades of Jimmy Savile & the BBC.


----------



## killer b (Feb 11, 2020)

Are you not concerned you might be being played by some homophobes?


----------



## 1927 (Feb 11, 2020)

killer b said:


> Are you not concerned you might be being played by some homophobes?


No.
Just look at what is factual and provable and it shows that the stunt staged on friday was a complete sham.


----------



## killer b (Feb 11, 2020)

You seem to be mistaking me for someone who's actually going to Google for info about who some tv presenter may or may not have been fucking. You have fun with that though.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Feb 11, 2020)

Can't believe people are conflating Savile fucking corpses and Schofield allegedly consentually having sex with the office junior


----------



## 1927 (Feb 11, 2020)

S☼I said:


> Can't believe people are conflating Savile fucking corpses and Schofield allegedly consentually having sex with the office junior


Because you haven't seen everything that is on the internet! and it snot about PS shagging corpses.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 12, 2020)

1927 said:


> Because you haven't seen everything that is on the internet! and it snot about PS shagging corpses.


I'm fairness, it seems that most of the stuff online is coming from one single source, and has propagated from there. No major sources have gone with the story, although there has been talk of a super injunction, but, given the nature of a super injunction, it's something that can't be proved to be factual or infactual, so, in the interest of fairness, we have to assume that it isn't, in fact, a fact.
I do believe in innocent until proven guilty, and we don't yet know, for a fact, that Schofield had an affair with the lad, and if he did, whether there was anything illegal about it.
We really shouldn't be buying into internet gossip, and stringing someone up based on its content. Let's see what transpires before turning him into a paedo.


----------



## MrSki (Feb 12, 2020)

I am not accusing him of anything but according to Joan Collins it was common knowledge that he was gay & she questions what made him make a sudden disclosure on Friday?


----------



## 1927 (Feb 12, 2020)

MrSki said:


> I am not accusing him of anything but according to Joan Collins it was common knowledge that he was gay & she questions what made him make a sudden disclosure on Friday?



And Pereze Hilton has tweeted a video where he says that at the Oscars he was told that the other person who may or may not have had a relationship with PS was paid off last week before the announcement.


----------



## scifisam (Feb 12, 2020)

killer b said:


> Are you not concerned you might be being played by some homophobes?



I certainly am. But a man coming out for no reason and still staying with his wife and never having any other reason to come out than wanting to be true to his own identity, which is how it was presented. Huh. Yeah, right. 

There's no need to say it's like Savile fucking corpses. If something like what's accused did happen, it would be really shitty behaviour, while using the cover of coming out to excuse it. Like I've said umpteen times, I hope it didn't happen, but so many people are excusing it even if it did, and that's fucked up.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 12, 2020)

scifisam said:


> I certainly am. But a man coming out for no reason and still staying with his wife and never having any other reason to come out than wanting to be true to his own identity, which is how it was presented. Huh. Yeah, right.
> 
> There's no need to say it's like Savile fucking corpses. If something like what's accused did happen, it would be really shitty behaviour, while using the cover of coming out to excuse it. Like I've said umpteen times, I hope it didn't happen, but so many people are excusing it even if it did, and that's fucked up.


If it did happen, I'm definitely not excusing it. But let's see what transpires.


----------



## MrSki (Feb 12, 2020)

The 2 faced theatre company has deleted its site which PS was a patron. Maybe it didn't want pictures like this to become public? Matthew McGreevy aged ten.

<ed: no posting up pics of 10 years old please>


----------



## Saul Goodman (Feb 12, 2020)

MrSki said:


> The 2 faced theatre company has deleted its site which PS was a patron.


I'm not trying to justify anything but their site would have been getting millions of hits a day after this 'news' broke, and if the traffic didn't bring it down, their lawyers would have certainly advised them to take it down.

If he did anything noncey, I'll be the first to weigh in on him, but we don't know for certain, yet.


----------



## MrSki (Feb 12, 2020)

At the 4 mins onward mark.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 12, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> I'm not trying to justify anything but their site would have been getting millions of hits a day after this 'news' broke, and if the traffic didn't bring it down, their lawyers would have certainly advised them to take it down.
> 
> If he did anything noncey, I'll be the first to weigh in on him, but we don't know for certain, yet.



you may want to delete the photo (see MrSki's original post).


----------



## MrSki (Feb 12, 2020)

Saul Goodman said:


> I'm not trying to justify anything but their site would have been getting millions of hits a day after this 'news' broke, and if the traffic didn't bring it down, their lawyers would have certainly advised them to take it down.
> 
> If he did anything noncey, I'll be the first to weigh in on him, but we don't know for certain, yet.


.


----------



## MrSki (Feb 12, 2020)

two sheds said:


> you may want to delete the photo (see MrSki's original post).


That photo is out on the web. I deleted a tweet from a supposedly (as in I have not researched) far right source that was making accusations.


----------



## killer b (Feb 12, 2020)

MrSki said:


> That photo is out on the web. I deleted a tweet from a supposedly (as in I have not researched) far right source that was making accusations.


If you're going to 'research' Schofield's sexual history, the first thing you have to do is check out the sources you're using in your research isn't it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 12, 2020)

killer b said:


> If you're going to 'research' Schofield's sexual history, the first thing you have to do is check out the sources you're using in your research isn't it?


No, the first thing you're going to do is determine your search terms. Then look for sources. And then evaluate them. So the third thing.


----------



## killer b (Feb 12, 2020)

I cant believe you bothered typing that. Well, I can. I dont want to though.


----------



## Lurdan (Feb 12, 2020)

What is this fucking shit ?

MrSki you are making VERY obvious insinuations about a living individual. When you say 





> Is grooming noncey?


 you make it quite clear that of the multiple rumours that have been started about Schofield since he came out you are referring to those implying he may have committed a very serious criminal offence. That's about as clear a breach of Urban's rules about this sort of thing as could be.

But not content with that you go to the next level. Such is your "massive concern" about child sexual abuse that you publicly identify someone you are insinuating may be a victim of it. The individual had already been named on this thread in a different context. Rumours that they MAY have had a sexual relationship with Schofield, and that there MAY have been something inappropriate about it. None of which is substantiated so far as I can see, but rumours which will already have had an affect on the person named. 

You repeat the name, post a photograph (now deleted by ed) of him aged ten in a group of children and Schofield, with his face helpfully circled. And a tweet including a video of him - which has just been deleted by the person who posted it. If your insinuations about Schofield had any basis at all then you are naming an alleged victim of CSA which along with being *an entirely cuntish thing to do*, would in some circumstances be a criminal offence.

"Please sir, they said it first" doesn't fucking cut it.


----------



## MrSki (Feb 12, 2020)

I have edited anything which might be seen as going against the rules & leave it at that. I doubt this story will go any further anyway not with things being as they are. If there is anything else I have posted on this thread that Lurdan or anyone else wants me to remove then I am happy to do so.


----------



## existentialist (Feb 12, 2020)

The problem with all this "everybody knows" prognostication is that, when it turns out to be right, the prognosticators get to look back over the history gleefully and say "I was right!". Which probably reinforces the desire to do it whenever the opportunity arises.

But if it's *not* right, even if it turns out to be a million-to-one chance, and even if the prognosticators don't agree with the outcome, the fact is that nobody should be traduced in this way on the basis of flimsy evidence. I'm very uncomfortable reading these revelations, whether they are true, or untrue. Given that they seem to be based on the shakiest of foundations, making it unlikely that they are true, or at least credible, reposting them seems cruel and selfish, not to mention libellous.


----------

