Skip to main content

Simon Hughes is bisexual, apologetically




Simon Hughes, Liberal Democrat leadership contender, has admitted he has had gay relationships in the past.

"I am perfectly willing to say that I have had both homosexual and heterosexual relationships in the past," he said.

Now, that sounds like he's bisexual to me, but once again the media seem determined not to use the word "bisexual." "I'm gay too" the Sun spashes across its front page. How can our interpretaton be so differet from the facts? He's not gay, as he has said on many occasions. I wish he had the bravery to stand up and say 'I am bisexual.'

"I hope that does not disqualify me from doing a good job in public life and I propose to carry on doing that with the usual enthusiasm and determination," Hughes said.

Am I naive to think this goes without saying?

Mr Hughes said: "Nobody has a perfect life. I have never claimed I have. Very few people have simple lives."

All that is true, but why should being bi be more imperfect than being straight or gay? It's just what his sexual orientation is. I wish he could be less reticent and apologetic about himself. He is what he is. He's a single man who has had relationships with men and women. He's done nothing remotely wrong, nothing illegal, not even something like cheating on a partner. He's got nothing to be apologetic about.

I suppose it's naive of me to think a politician would stand up for what they are without worrying about what people will think.

Comments

LaReinaCobre said…
I think that definition is that of a leader, not a politician - and that may be unfortunate.

Popular posts from this blog

The dumbest thing about American Unitarian Univeralism

I'm glad Peacebang started blogging about this cos I was about to, and now it's like I'm joining in with a conversation rather than doing a big rant and having a go at Americans (though that is always fun ;-)). Why the hell do American (or is it just in New England??) UU churches take, like a quarter of the year off? In the summer they close. They CLOSE!! A church, closing. It's so bloody weird and wrong. Where does it come from? Why? Why? Why? Why do people need church less in the summer? Where are people supposed to go? Where is the Divine supposed to go? My church in Boston didn't close exactly, but moved to the smaller upstairs chapel, but the minister still had all that time off. Now I've spent most of my life around teachers and priests, both jobs where people think people don't put many hours in, when in fact they put in loads ('you only work Sunday mornings/9 to 3.25'). Teachers work hard and need their long holidays. Ministers work hard, a...

Is humanism theologically tolerant?

OK, well this might be controversial, but I feel the need to say it. Is humanist tolerant? Please note I'm not asking about humanism within society. Clearly humanism certainly believes in tolerance within society and I'm forever glad they are often the only people in the media calling for a separation of church and state. No, what I'm talking about is descriptions of Unitarianism like this and adverts like this , discussed at Peacebang here , which say that humanism is one option, Christianity is another, God is one option among many. The trouble is, humanism, by definition is theologically opposed to theism. This is very different from the relationship between Christianity and Buddhism. These two traditions may be vastly different, but Buddhism, by definition , is not opposed to Christianity, and Christianity, by definition , is not opposed to Buddhism. But humanism is consciously defined in opposition to Christianity and theism. So to say that humanism and theism can bot...

LOST and theology: who are the good guys?

***Spoiler alert*** I'm continuing some theological/philosophical reflections while re-watching the series LOST. One of the recurring themes in LOST is the idea of the "good guys" and the "bad guys." We start the series assuming the survivors (who are the main characters) are the "good guys" and the mysterious "Others" are definitely bad guys. But at the end of series 2 one of the main characters asks the Others, "Who are  you people?" and they answer, in an extremely disturbing way, "We're the good guys." The series develops with a number of different factions appearing, "the people from the freighter" "the DHARMA initiative" as well as divisions among the original survivors. The question remains among all these complicated happenings "who really are the good guys?" I think one of the most significant lines in the series is an episode when Hurley is having a conversation with ...