Phillip Schofield leaves This Morning

[sealion]

Judgements about why someone isn't coming out sound homophobic to me?

Wondering what the reasons for not coming and how it effects the actual person are not judgements.

 

[Mumbles274]

Wondering what the reasons for not coming and how it effects the actual person are not judgements.

Are you speaking from experience?

 

[sealion]

Are you speaking from experience?

Do i have to be gay to wonder/ ask why he never came out earlier?

 

[Epona]

Do i have to be gay to wonder/ ask why he never came out earlier?

How much time do you spend talking about your shagging preferences?

And do you feel there is a moral obligation on you to publicly do so?

 

[Kevbad the Bad]

This was on BBC news tonight, the first fucking item. Went on about it for yonks. Ham acting on Scofield's part. He still gets full sympathetic access to mainstream media. He's ever so sorry and heartbroken about his conduct, now that he's been found out. Complete and utter pillock, but full of himself. I think he should just shut his mouth for a good wee while.

 

[sealion]

How much time do you spend talking about your shagging preferences?

That's a strange question.

And do you feel there is a moral obligation on you to publicly do so?

Nope. I just wonder why he didn't do it earlier. If you can read anything other than my curiosity in to it, then i can't help you. What has hisd shagging preferences and moral obligation got to do with me being curious and probably nosey?

*I'm not playing this game all night.

 

[Epona]

That's a strange question.


Nope. I just wonder why he didn't do it earlier. If you can read anything other than my curiosity in to it, then i can't help you. What has hisd shagging preferences and moral obligation got to do with me being curious and probably nosey?

*I'm not playing this game all night.

Well I just wondered why you thought someone who was gay should publicly make an announcement about it is all. Straight celebs don't make a media announcement that they are straight.

 

[bellaozzydog]

I feel really sad for him, yeah, he's broken some work rule about not having relationships with colleagues. That's the only thing he has done wrong in terms of rules/laws... As far as anyone is aware at this point.

So the remaining factor is the age gap, and that's just a question of values and moral standard isnt it and they are all different for everyone so context is so crucial isn't it?

I can't help but imagine a situation with a very confused closeted gay man in the public eye having a lot of very flattering attention from a younger man being a very hard path to navigate and always make the right choices. He's talking about having depression. I've never met a depressed person that didn't make bad choices at some point.

This looks like bullying to me, I feel for Phil at this point, no matter how bad his mistakes

Nope

 

[planetgeli]

He's a shitrag in my book. Every adulterer is imo.

Me too?

I had a perfect 28 year relationship born from, on both sides, what is normally termed adultery (although marriage never came into it, but both in other relationships at the time).

Were we both cunts or did we just find the right person while life was already leading it's merry way?

Life is not black and white. Fuck your morality judgements.

 

[scifisam]

Wondering what the reasons for not coming and how it effects the actual person are not judgements.

When he started out, section 28 was in force and he worked in kids' TV. I can't judge him for not coming out then TBH (except possibly for him marrying a woman - maybe she knew; that's their business, nobody else's). And since then, who knows - keeping a secret that long probably makes it hard to backtrack.

I'm younger than him and I have a kid largely because I was trying hard not to be gay, and know several others in the same position. I even know a few older people who were in straight marriages for years before coming out, so he's not exactly the only one, and I don't judge them harshly because I don't know the details and have no right to.

Using it to deflect from the more sordid stuff, coming out as a cover-up is... ugh, that's just giving homophobes what they want.

But I think it's gone a bit too far now and I wouldn't be at all surprised if he actually feels as bad as he's claiming. Can understand why people think he's faking, given what he's done before, but it's better to err on the side of caution and just not be a cunt about it. Man's lost his job and reputation already, it's time to call off the hounds.

Don't think I'll post again about it myself unless someone specifically wants to ask me something about what I've said, but I expect everyone can cope without that.

 

[sleaterkinney]

I hate everyone in light entertainment anyway, so I'm enjoying this. The vape is the piece de resistance.

 

[Wilf]

I feel really sad for him, yeah, he's broken some work rule about not having relationships with colleagues. That's the only thing he has done wrong in terms of rules/laws... As far as anyone is aware at this point.

So the remaining factor is the age gap, and that's just a question of values and moral standard isnt it and they are all different for everyone so context is so crucial isn't it?

I can't help but imagine a situation with a very confused closeted gay man in the public eye having a lot of very flattering attention from a younger man being a very hard path to navigate and always make the right choices. He's talking about having depression. I've never met a depressed person that didn't make bad choices at some point.

This looks like bullying to me, I feel for Phil at this point, no matter how bad his mistakes

A lot of that would be true with regard to any old workplace relationship where there was a significant age gap. What needs factoring in is that Schofield got him the job and was not so much his 'boss' but was something much more powerful than that. He was the 'talent' (and, presumably, one of the best paid people in showbiz). It's about power.

 

[pbsmooth]

And? "But everyone else is doing it" isn't an excuse you can use after infant school.

I'm not excusing it I'm explaining it.

Some people seem to have impossibly high standards, of which the vast majority of people would fail and apparently they then deserve the end of their career, vilification, ridicule etc. Really quite ridiculous to me and surprised it's the attitude of some people on a forum like this.

 

[sealion]

Well I just wondered why you thought someone who was gay should publicly make an announcement about it is all.

It wasn't known whether he was gay until he came out.

Using it to deflect from the more sordid stuff, coming out as a cover-up is... ugh, that's just giving homophobes what they want.

I agree.

 

[krtek a houby]

To me it depends on why he never came out of the closet earlier. Because people can be nasty about then okay but if was just to keep his career at the top going i can't feel sad for him. The industry has lots of openly gay presenters/ stars who are open about it. Not saying it's all like that but we're not stuck in the 70's with regards to attitudes either.

I just find him a smarmy weasel type i never bought into the clean image and housewives favourite bollox, He's shown signs of being devious and sly plus he's media savvy. I'm probably not the best person to give him any benefit of the doubt. He's a shitrag in my book. Every adulterer is imo.

It's not always easy to come out. Some people don't react very well.

Haven't heard the word "adulterer" in a while. It's very biblical and judgemental sounding, don't you think?

People have affairs. Some fleeting, some ruinous and some for many other reasons. Life and relationships aren't always perfect. Sometimes people have sex with others.

 

[sealion]

It's not always easy to come out. Some people don't react very well.

Yes i know and understand that.

Haven't heard the word "adulterer" in a while.

More chance when someone is comitting adultry. Is it offensive to you or not the correct wording for a bloke that's comitting adultery? What shall we call it instead? Muppettery? Shagawayfromhomery?

It's very biblical and judgemental sounding,

Is it? If someone is comitting adultry then they;re an adulterer. What am i supposed to call them? Mechanics, budgies. jacket potatoes? It may be judgemental to you because you're very judgemental and seem to be able to find offence at the smallest thging even when there is none intended.

People have affairs. Some fleeting, some ruinous and some for many other reasons. Life and relationships aren't always perfect. Sometimes people have sex with others.

Thanks for clearing that up because i never knew that and there isn't a mention of it in this 28 page thread about a bloke comitting adultery.


Any further questions M'Lord?




What we do without eh!

 

[krtek a houby]

Yes i know and understand that.

More chance when someone is comitting adultry. Is it offensive to you or not the correct wording for a bloke that's comitting adultery? What shall we call it instead? Muppettery? Shagawayfromhomery?


Is it? If someone is comitting adultry then they;re an adulterer. What am i supposed to call them? Mechanics, budgies. jacket potatoes? It may be judgemental to you because you're very judgemental and seem to be able to find offence at the smallest thging even when there is none intended.


Thanks for clearing that up because i never knew that and there isn't a mention of it in this 28 page thread about a bloke comitting adultery.


Any further questions M'Lord?




What we do without eh!

Dunno who you are but checking recent interactions, it does appear you seem to have some beef in your plate.

If you wish to be of a pious nature, that's grand but no need to be judgemental towards others.

Am sorry someone broke your heart. We've all been there.

 

[sealion]

Dunno who you are but checking recent interactions, it does appear you seem to have some beef in your plate.

I'm annoyed by you questioning me and other here on a regular basis. You don't seem to have a lot of trust in you i suppose hence the grilling. You did it to me on another thread, digging and implying things.

but no need to be judgemental towards others.

Hahahahahahahahaha. That's hilarious coming from you. It's pou that's digging away and making judgements

If you wish to be of a pious nature

Am sorry someone broke your heart.

Isn't that being a tad judgemental of me?








Over to you M'Lord.

 

[krtek a houby]

Nah, you seem a bit obsessed.

If you don't understand why posters who make dubious statements get called out, there's not much to say.

 

[sealion]

wh

What dubious statement have i made? which post are you refering to as being dubious

 

[Thora]

I'm not excusing it I'm explaining it.

Some people seem to have impossibly high standards, of which the vast majority of people would fail and apparently they then deserve the end of their career, vilification, ridicule etc. Really quite ridiculous to me and surprised it's the attitude of some people on a forum like this.

Not shagging teenage interns is now an impossibly high standard?

 

[krtek a houby]

What dubious statement have i made? which post are you refering to as being dubious

Not your posts, specifically. Other posters made comments, and then you chimed in complaining about my asking them to explain themselves.

Now, let's get back to convicting Schofield.

 

[A380]

Iranian Morality Police. What a good job this coukd never happen in the UK, or on Urban…

 

[kabbes]

Iranian Morality Police. What a good job this coukd never happen in the UK, or on Urban…

View attachment 377488

Remember this?

Reading the parts of this thread through that actually have relevance to the subject matter, a pattern became apparent to me. It’s something to do with secondary meta-reactions, not so much to Schofield’s actions directly but what to do with the meaning we ascribe to them. There is a confusion between the right of society to set rules of law, the right of communities to enforce norms of behaviour and the right of individuals to construct personal ethical and moral codes.

Right, so that’s very vague. I’ll try to make it more concrete. Here are three valid statements. The first relates to legal status, the second to social norms and the third to ethics.

1. Schofield, so far as we know, didn’t break any laws. He is not guilty of a crime.

2. Schofield has spent most of his lifetime as a gay man trying to conceal that reality because it historically transgressed (and, for some, still transgresses) social norms of acceptability. Part of these norms have included the trope of “predatory gay man”, which is a character position still alive and well in the heads of many.

3. Schofield engaged in a sexual relationship with a very young individual that he had known since that individual was a child. When the relationship started, Schofield was in a position of immense power over him. Furthermore, Schofield was still married at the time.

The conflict between individuals on this thread seem mostly to relate to a mismatch regarding which of these statements is being given prominence and what the consequences should be from this. Personally, I see it like this:

1 simply means that no legal action should be taken against Schofield. No more, no less.

2 suggests a context within which a certain benefit of the doubt should be extended to Schofield. That is, those of us who have not had a lifetime of feeling like a transgressor should be very careful about extrapolating our own experience to his. Furthermore, we should be suspicious of our impulses. We have also become subjects to and of the society we live in, and society’s norms are part of our own unexamined assumptions.

However,

3 means that we do get to ultimately form a personal judgement of Schofield the man, that is used not to determine guilt but just to determine if we like him. We do not ultimately have to justify our personal code to others, and if you feel that Schofield has done something wrong then you should feel free to want nothing more to do with him. This is notwithstanding the care that is needed as a result of point 2. And, of course, it’s got nothing to do with legal consequences as discussed in point 1.

You’re conflating point 1 with point 3 again

 

[A380]

Remember this?


You’re conflating point 1 with point 3 again

TBH I hadn’t even read your posts. Mine was more in response to Sealion’s…

 

[andysays]

TBH I hadn’t even read your posts. Mine was more in response to Sealion’s…

1. kabbes's post are generally worth reading, even if I don't always agree with them
2. whether or not I agree with everything sealion has posted on this issue, to compare their posts to the Iranian Morality Police is a bit ridiculous

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

Otherwise known as "lessons will be learnt".

Otherwise known as 'like fuck they will'. Nothing to see here, carry on.

 

[Pickman's model]

To me it depends on why he never came out of the closet earlier. Because people can be nasty about then okay but if was just to keep his career at the top going i can't feel sad for him. The industry has lots of openly gay presenters/ stars who are open about it. Not saying it's all like that but we're not stuck in the 70's with regards to attitudes either.

I just find him a smarmy weasel type i never bought into the clean image and housewives favourite bollox, He's shown signs of being devious and sly plus he's media savvy. I'm probably not the best person to give him any benefit of the doubt. He's a shitrag in my book. Every adulterer is imo.

i think that's a bit harsh. many, certainly, most - perhaps - but all?

 

[pbsmooth]

Not shagging teenage interns is now an impossibly high standard?

Reportedly they first had sex when the younger guy was 20 and he was then an employee not an intern. But why let the facts get in the way...

 

[A380]

1. kabbes's post are generally worth reading, even if I don't always agree with them
2. whether or not I agree with everything sealion has posted on this issue, to compare their posts to the Iranian Morality Police is a bit ridiculous

I agree re Kabe’s posts generally.my reason for not reading these ones is below.

I haven’t read most of this thread, because I, probably through a mix of my arrogance and ignorance, have no interest in what I’ve taken to be a hypocritical story about celebs blown out of all proportion by the homophobic right wing ‘popular press’ .

Since when were arguments on here not allowed to be ridiculous or hyperbolic?