<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Jon Reed</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 13:57:47 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Why Dannii&#8217;s critics are the ones guilty of homophobia by mike</title>
		<link>http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/television/danniis-critics-are-the-ones-guilty-of-homophobia/comment-page-1/#comment-5891</link>
		<dc:creator>mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 22:56:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/?p=902#comment-5891</guid>
		<description>I think people are reacting too readily to something that is at best a mis-timed comment, rather than some deliberate dig at someone.

As a gay man, i would not have been offended by the comment, i think it was a shrewd comment as to why the song should have to be changed to accomodate a prudish audience.

And one thing i do note is that a lot of people whom i have encounted who are offended by it are themselves straight, which is confusing the situation to say the least, given that i dare say a large proportion of gay/bisexual people would have no problem with that comment.

I know what homophobia is, i had my face rearranged by people who assumed i was gay rather than knowing, so with that in mind lets put this into its proper context and give dannii minogue a break.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think people are reacting too readily to something that is at best a mis-timed comment, rather than some deliberate dig at someone.</p>
<p>As a gay man, i would not have been offended by the comment, i think it was a shrewd comment as to why the song should have to be changed to accomodate a prudish audience.</p>
<p>And one thing i do note is that a lot of people whom i have encounted who are offended by it are themselves straight, which is confusing the situation to say the least, given that i dare say a large proportion of gay/bisexual people would have no problem with that comment.</p>
<p>I know what homophobia is, i had my face rearranged by people who assumed i was gay rather than knowing, so with that in mind lets put this into its proper context and give dannii minogue a break.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why Dannii&#8217;s critics are the ones guilty of homophobia by Jon Reed</title>
		<link>http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/television/danniis-critics-are-the-ones-guilty-of-homophobia/comment-page-1/#comment-5873</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon Reed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:28:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/?p=902#comment-5873</guid>
		<description>It would be a different situation had Danyl wanted to keep his sexuality a secret - but he clearly doesn't: he's quite open about it and has spoken about it in the national press. He and Dannii were both joking about the same thing in rehearsals. The point was really about the song lyrics, and Danyl having the freedom not to change them if he wanted. But that's a complex idea to get across in her 30 seconds of airtime, especially when many of us were unaware of the context - so it was perhaps better left unsaid, as I say. 

It was not homophobic though - Dannii has been a champion of gay rights for many, many years. And certainly not 'shaming' - Danyl's not ashamed - why should he be? The thing that worries me is the widespread idea that she maliciously revealed a 'shameful secret' about him. It's not shameful. It's just a basic demographic fact about him, and not a remarkable one. Move on - there's nothing to see here...

Actually, it's Danyl himself, rather than Dannii, who has moved things on, by "doing a Will Young" at the start of the competition instead of the end. Dannii's only mistake was to think the viewing public would share her and Danyl's view of the world - that it's OK to talk about these things in public.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It would be a different situation had Danyl wanted to keep his sexuality a secret - but he clearly doesn&#8217;t: he&#8217;s quite open about it and has spoken about it in the national press. He and Dannii were both joking about the same thing in rehearsals. The point was really about the song lyrics, and Danyl having the freedom not to change them if he wanted. But that&#8217;s a complex idea to get across in her 30 seconds of airtime, especially when many of us were unaware of the context - so it was perhaps better left unsaid, as I say. </p>
<p>It was not homophobic though - Dannii has been a champion of gay rights for many, many years. And certainly not &#8217;shaming&#8217; - Danyl&#8217;s not ashamed - why should he be? The thing that worries me is the widespread idea that she maliciously revealed a &#8217;shameful secret&#8217; about him. It&#8217;s not shameful. It&#8217;s just a basic demographic fact about him, and not a remarkable one. Move on - there&#8217;s nothing to see here&#8230;</p>
<p>Actually, it&#8217;s Danyl himself, rather than Dannii, who has moved things on, by &#8220;doing a Will Young&#8221; at the start of the competition instead of the end. Dannii&#8217;s only mistake was to think the viewing public would share her and Danyl&#8217;s view of the world - that it&#8217;s OK to talk about these things in public.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why Dannii&#8217;s critics are the ones guilty of homophobia by DC</title>
		<link>http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/television/danniis-critics-are-the-ones-guilty-of-homophobia/comment-page-1/#comment-5870</link>
		<dc:creator>DC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 09:15:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/?p=902#comment-5870</guid>
		<description>I am definately of the opinion that the comment is inappropriate.   As I do not read the news of the world, it did appear more of an outting than a joke.

As you quite rightly state it is perhaps not so much the comment but Danyls immediate reaction to it that made it offensive.  He may well have later twittered and commented all was fine, but his face at the time told a different story.   It is how an individual reacts that determines the offensiveness of any comment.

I do get slightly amused when the terms homophobic get used, since the whole point with equality be this racial or sexual equality is that it does not matter what you are.  In the case of sexuality, it also means the indivdiual has the choice to disclose what they wish at a time of when they want to.  No one has the right to disclose or discuss another sexuality.  It is clear that Danyl did have the News of the World article, but like many I do not read that, and so it is a relatively minor exposure when compared to national TV.  So I think it is the issue of where it was stated that also makes the comment so wrong.

What one person finds funny others can find offensive, it is important to remember that Danni holds responsibility for the way in which this comment was made, and where it was made.  To assume that because one gay or bisexual person finds this acceptable does not mean that is a hard as fast rule that others will.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am definately of the opinion that the comment is inappropriate.   As I do not read the news of the world, it did appear more of an outting than a joke.</p>
<p>As you quite rightly state it is perhaps not so much the comment but Danyls immediate reaction to it that made it offensive.  He may well have later twittered and commented all was fine, but his face at the time told a different story.   It is how an individual reacts that determines the offensiveness of any comment.</p>
<p>I do get slightly amused when the terms homophobic get used, since the whole point with equality be this racial or sexual equality is that it does not matter what you are.  In the case of sexuality, it also means the indivdiual has the choice to disclose what they wish at a time of when they want to.  No one has the right to disclose or discuss another sexuality.  It is clear that Danyl did have the News of the World article, but like many I do not read that, and so it is a relatively minor exposure when compared to national TV.  So I think it is the issue of where it was stated that also makes the comment so wrong.</p>
<p>What one person finds funny others can find offensive, it is important to remember that Danni holds responsibility for the way in which this comment was made, and where it was made.  To assume that because one gay or bisexual person finds this acceptable does not mean that is a hard as fast rule that others will.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why Dannii&#8217;s critics are the ones guilty of homophobia by Col</title>
		<link>http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/television/danniis-critics-are-the-ones-guilty-of-homophobia/comment-page-1/#comment-5868</link>
		<dc:creator>Col</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 01:41:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/?p=902#comment-5868</guid>
		<description>To April (USA), 

At first I was taken aback by Dannii's comments because I did not see what relevance they had to the show and from a judging point of view, however now understand what she was getting at and why she said what she said.  

The thing with X-Factor though, is that unlike Pop/American Idol, the contestants need to have the full package:

Likeability, Vocals, Stage Presence, as this is what the X-Factor stands for.  

Danyl has a great voice, great stage presence, and for me the likeability factor.  The other judges crushed the latter saying he was cocky and arrogant.  Dannii made reference to his sexuality instead which may just have brought his likeability factor right up. 

Danyl to win.  

Col</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To April (USA), </p>
<p>At first I was taken aback by Dannii&#8217;s comments because I did not see what relevance they had to the show and from a judging point of view, however now understand what she was getting at and why she said what she said.  </p>
<p>The thing with X-Factor though, is that unlike Pop/American Idol, the contestants need to have the full package:</p>
<p>Likeability, Vocals, Stage Presence, as this is what the X-Factor stands for.  </p>
<p>Danyl has a great voice, great stage presence, and for me the likeability factor.  The other judges crushed the latter saying he was cocky and arrogant.  Dannii made reference to his sexuality instead which may just have brought his likeability factor right up. </p>
<p>Danyl to win.  </p>
<p>Col</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why Dannii&#8217;s critics are the ones guilty of homophobia by April</title>
		<link>http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/television/danniis-critics-are-the-ones-guilty-of-homophobia/comment-page-1/#comment-5866</link>
		<dc:creator>April</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Oct 2009 23:57:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/?p=902#comment-5866</guid>
		<description>It was inappropriate period regardless of her intentions.  There is time and place for everything and a live show was not the time!

I am very concerned that the two women judges Danni and Cheryl are making moralistic judgments about the girl singer act Ms. Frank and the one women judge Dani inappropriately brought up one of the male singers Danyl Johnson' bi-sexuality after he sang a wonderful song from the Dream Girls score.  Dani was supposed to comment on his Danyl Johnson's  performance no make a big deal out of what she heard in the newspapers about the man's bisexuality.  What is the big deal?  She was shaming him and making him wrong.  It was very hetero-sexist and homophobic and has no place in this competition.  There is a wide axis of different loving beyond the heterosexual format. 

Those moralistic comments were inappropriate and discriminatory - plus it comes off as racist.  Who cares who one has slept with or is loving in their lives (consenting adults of course).  What does that have to do with their singing?  The two women judges are swaying the audience with their moralist and bigoted Puritanical opinions.  This is not cool.  What a sticky wicket they have started here.  They owe them an apology and also they need to stop moralizing to the contestants.  Stick to judging what is important, singer and they stage presence etc. 

Sincerely,
April
USA</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was inappropriate period regardless of her intentions.  There is time and place for everything and a live show was not the time!</p>
<p>I am very concerned that the two women judges Danni and Cheryl are making moralistic judgments about the girl singer act Ms. Frank and the one women judge Dani inappropriately brought up one of the male singers Danyl Johnson&#8217; bi-sexuality after he sang a wonderful song from the Dream Girls score.  Dani was supposed to comment on his Danyl Johnson&#8217;s  performance no make a big deal out of what she heard in the newspapers about the man&#8217;s bisexuality.  What is the big deal?  She was shaming him and making him wrong.  It was very hetero-sexist and homophobic and has no place in this competition.  There is a wide axis of different loving beyond the heterosexual format. </p>
<p>Those moralistic comments were inappropriate and discriminatory - plus it comes off as racist.  Who cares who one has slept with or is loving in their lives (consenting adults of course).  What does that have to do with their singing?  The two women judges are swaying the audience with their moralist and bigoted Puritanical opinions.  This is not cool.  What a sticky wicket they have started here.  They owe them an apology and also they need to stop moralizing to the contestants.  Stick to judging what is important, singer and they stage presence etc. </p>
<p>Sincerely,<br />
April<br />
USA</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why Dannii&#8217;s critics are the ones guilty of homophobia by Fraggle, Edinburgh</title>
		<link>http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/television/danniis-critics-are-the-ones-guilty-of-homophobia/comment-page-1/#comment-5865</link>
		<dc:creator>Fraggle, Edinburgh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Oct 2009 22:24:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/?p=902#comment-5865</guid>
		<description>Probably the most reasonable and well thought out response to recent events, so I thank you. Deeply concerned would be an underestimate about how the knee-jerk reaction on web-based forums made me feel. I believe by applying some intellect and sensible consideration as you have, has gone a long way to redress the balance. So here's hoping others follow suit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Probably the most reasonable and well thought out response to recent events, so I thank you. Deeply concerned would be an underestimate about how the knee-jerk reaction on web-based forums made me feel. I believe by applying some intellect and sensible consideration as you have, has gone a long way to redress the balance. So here&#8217;s hoping others follow suit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Throw away your TV by Groucho</title>
		<link>http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/television/throw-away-your-tv/comment-page-1/#comment-5507</link>
		<dc:creator>Groucho</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 05:58:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/?p=733#comment-5507</guid>
		<description>I've been searching this morning, for views on life without TV. When we started our family, we had no TV, and we were all perfectly happy. The rot set in when someone donated a black and white set, as they 'felt sorry' for us! That was about eighteen years ago, and TV has grown steadily worse. Just HOW can anyone justify £142 per year for what the BBC offers? I will try and get my family (note the 'try') to go for a year without the box. I notice we can still use a Freeview box with speakers, without a licence. Will my daughter 'listen' to the soaps????</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been searching this morning, for views on life without TV. When we started our family, we had no TV, and we were all perfectly happy. The rot set in when someone donated a black and white set, as they &#8216;felt sorry&#8217; for us! That was about eighteen years ago, and TV has grown steadily worse. Just HOW can anyone justify £142 per year for what the BBC offers? I will try and get my family (note the &#8216;try&#8217;) to go for a year without the box. I notice we can still use a Freeview box with speakers, without a licence. Will my daughter &#8216;listen&#8217; to the soaps????</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Criminalising Dissent by mathilde m.reinbold.</title>
		<link>http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/civil-rights/criminalising-dissent/comment-page-1/#comment-5221</link>
		<dc:creator>mathilde m.reinbold.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 14:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/?p=809#comment-5221</guid>
		<description>Wasn't there a case where police dogs attacked a man standing by a group of football fans, or is that me just confusing this case with something else? I'm pretty sure I saw it on the news when I was up in Yorkshire.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wasn&#8217;t there a case where police dogs attacked a man standing by a group of football fans, or is that me just confusing this case with something else? I&#8217;m pretty sure I saw it on the news when I was up in Yorkshire.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Winter in Woking by Jon Reed</title>
		<link>http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/diary/winter-in-woking/comment-page-1/#comment-4513</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon Reed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2009 18:34:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/?p=761#comment-4513</guid>
		<description>Hilarious! Sadly, I don't fancy Derek's chances as the face of Woking Fashion Week... My favourite is &lt;a href="http://www.wokinginformer.co.uk/woking-news/local-woking-news/2009/01/29/barack-obama-s-stepmum-visits-woking-bingo-hall-77646-22809932/" rel="nofollow"&gt;Barack Obama's stepmum visits Woking bingo hall&lt;/a&gt;. Nice to see we're at the centre of world events.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hilarious! Sadly, I don&#8217;t fancy Derek&#8217;s chances as the face of Woking Fashion Week&#8230; My favourite is <a href="http://www.wokinginformer.co.uk/woking-news/local-woking-news/2009/01/29/barack-obama-s-stepmum-visits-woking-bingo-hall-77646-22809932/" rel="nofollow">Barack Obama&#8217;s stepmum visits Woking bingo hall</a>. Nice to see we&#8217;re at the centre of world events.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Winter in Woking by Helen</title>
		<link>http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/diary/winter-in-woking/comment-page-1/#comment-4512</link>
		<dc:creator>Helen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2009 18:18:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jonreed.co.uk/blog/?p=761#comment-4512</guid>
		<description>Ah the Woking Informer. Check out the &lt;a href="http://tinyurl.com/ckyqbe" rel="nofollow"&gt;photostory on local would-be models&lt;/a&gt;. Derek is described as a 'her' -- ha ha</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah the Woking Informer. Check out the <a href="http://tinyurl.com/ckyqbe" rel="nofollow">photostory on local would-be models</a>. Derek is described as a &#8216;her&#8217; &#8212; ha ha</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
