web analytics

Big Gay Nowt

Written By: - Date published: 10:26 am, February 4th, 2011 - 75 comments
Categories: gay rights, john key, spin - Tags:

It’s almost Big Gay Out time again which also means it’s time for some new images of John Key dancing (if you can call it that) with drag queens and cuddling up to lines of shirtless hunks.

I know I’m supposed to admire the fact that a National party PM would take time out of his busy schedule to be seen with us homos (what a tolerant guy that nice Mr Key is!) but there’s something utterly dishonest about him appearing at the Big Gay Out.

History has a lot to do with this. Key leads a party that has rarely been our supporter and very often our oppressor. I still vividly remember the mid-1980s when the National Party and their supporters tried to kill homosexual law reform. Norm Jones, National MP for Invercargill, famously told us to ‘Go back into the sewers where you come from’.

And more recently in 2004 the Nats overwhelmingly voted against the civil union legislation. Some like Judith Collins conveniently claimed she would have voted yes if it had been gay marriage, the same logic that would see you denying bread to a starving person because it isn’t as good as caviar.

To be fair to our PM, his voting record does contain some gay positive ticks. He voted for both the Property (Relationships) Amendment Act and the obliteration of the provocation defence. But did the public register these as gay-related legislation? Or did Key’s polling tell him he could get away with these votes without drawing any fundamentalist fire?

Polling was certainly in his mind with the civil union legislation on which he voted no. He explained that it was a conscience issue and that’s how the people of his electorate would have wanted him to vote. “Personally I have no problems with Civil Unions” he said but explained “I had done some polling, I wouldn’t say it was extensive, but I did some polling in my electorate and on the basis of that polling I voted against civil unions.”

I interpret Key’s remarks as an insinuation that he wanted to vote yes but had to vote no because his electorate demanded it. And right there we have some classic Key – not quite sitting on the fence (though he’s good at that also) but more a case of jumping down on one side of the fence while eloquently explaining that he’d dearly like to step down on the other but simply can’t for the following excellent reasons. Oh I’d dearly love to give you some rights but those nasty people over there won’t let me, but you still love me right?

Can you blame him for wanting to play this game? For politicians, pursuing legislative advances for gay men and lesbians is a relatively thankless task.

Key has made much of his pro-gay stance. He’s claimed he has gay friends (though I’m not sure your hairdresser and Chris Finlayson count as ‘friends’, John) and supports gay couples bringing up children. He even joked that he’d ‘go gay’ for Brad Pitt (coupled with his recent remark about wanting to bang Angelina Jolie I’m foreseeing a steamy threesome in our PM’s future!). And, of course, there’s that yearly date with the Big Gay Out.

But if he truly supports our rights then why didn’t he vote with his conscience on civil unions? I don’t want to get into a debate over whether a conscience vote should be guided by anything other than, well, one’s own conscience because it’s a complex issue. But if you’re going to vote against your own personal beliefs to follow the wishes of your electorate I would think you’d want more evidence than could be gleaned from some ‘not extensive’ polling.

Why, when asked about gay adoption in 2009 did Key say we have bigger problems, like the economy, and we shouldn’t rush into changing the law? Are human rights only something we deserve in times of financial boom? And I don’t remember this economic test, or the ‘big enough’ test for that matter, being applied to other pieces of legislation. He certainly found time to strip voting rights from prisoners.

We know why Key has talked the pretty talk but won’t walk the walk on gay issues. Because Key isn’t really gay friendly, not in a political sense. He’s saying all the right words but his actions in Parliament are no better than those of Norm Jones. It’s just the same old National in rainbow drag.

But will you respect me tomorrow?

This is why Key soaking up adulation at the Big Gay Out leaves me crying hypocrisy. Key has done nothing to deserve being greeted like some conquering conservative warrior. Even worse, we’re actually welcoming a man who voted against our interests, who continues to sideline advances in gay equality.

But surely, some will argue, cosying up to him will convert into gay-friendly legislation? Eventually we can win him over! That’s as ludicrous as the other conversion myth. Key’s got us right where he needs us. We’re just a freak show photo op to show the world how ‘everyman’ he is. Key might be good for some gaiety but forget about him delivering us any rights.


75 comments on “Big Gay Nowt ”

  1. kriswgtn 1

    Totally agree
    I remember not long ago re Blinglishes Son and his anti gay blog and Blinglish defending his sons right to do so

    Nact hates gay people and basically are a disgrace to the human race

  2. Lanthanide 2

    I think Key is just exploiting the gay vote, as gay households will tend to have much more discretionary money to spend, and generally higher incomes, than heterosexual ones. So much like the vaunted gay advertising market that has ramped up in the last decade, Key’s spotted a small section of the population to which his right-wing economic policies might appeal and is marketing to them. It doesn’t matter that his might ultimately not be in their best interests in terms of social policy.

    But having said that, there really doesn’t seem like there is much discrimination left on the law books. Whether or not Key voted for civil unions is water under the bridge at this point, so he might as well exploit the social platform that Labour has set up to further his right-wing ambitions: all he has to do is stay the line on current social policy, not promising any changes but also not repealing any previous changes.

    • Xanadu 2.1

      “as gay households will tend to have much more discretionary money to spend, and generally higher incomes, than heterosexual ones.”

      M’kay. Proof of this?

      Are you taking into account the school drop out rate of gay kids, family/sometimes financial rejection, the “finding ourselves” much later on in life, expensive fertility treatments, legal fees making sure we’re covered, I could go on.. = lots of “fun” stuff comes with being gay.

      I hear this comment often, and I wonder who or what it’s based upon? .. a handful of gay/lesbian celebrities or politicians? The (false) core belief many straight people have, that LGBT live this “carefree”, single, childless, with apparently no birth family responsibilities, winebar lifestyle? … or is this the opinion of a minority of gay or straight people, who live in an ivory tower & don’t mix with all the gays who have “everyman” jobs?

      I can’t speak for gay men and their situation/s, but (politicians aside) every lesbian I know is broke. BROKE.. Even the most highly educated, qualified, artistic, practical & ambitious Dykes are living pay-day to pay-day. This is not due to living the high life or beyond our means (bar spoiling the cat/s). The reasons are complicated, maddening and require their own blog post.

  3. Bill 3

    Both Labour and National exploit the gay vote. Labour goes one better and exploits the union vote too. Meaning that important facets of the left have been neutered. The union movement and the gay movement have been co-opted, reduced to the status of parliamentary pressure groups that are courted for votes they can deliver, but given as little as possible in return.

    • Bii, where do I start?

      For decades Labour was the supporter of gay rights and National bitterly opposed any advancement. Do you remember homosexual law reform in the 1980s. All the major improvements for gays and lesbians happened under Labour.

      As part of its strategy for the last election National decided to be “all inclusive”. They stuffed up in 2005 when Brash announced that National stood for “normal New Zealand” which excluded gays, maori, immigrants, most women …

      They learned in 2008 and chose Smile and Wave because he would do things like go to the big gay out and do a bit of a dance. They also put ethnic candidates in winnable positions. They did this to look as much like Labour as they could and it worked. Much of the electorate is still confused and think that Key is a benign leader.

      And don’t get me started on the unions.

      History goes like this, Labour is elected and continuously takes steps to strengthen protection of workers rights and to improve wages and conditions. National is elected and continuously takes steps to weaken protection of workers rights and to lower wages and conditions.

      There is no exploitation. Exploitation suggests that nothing gets better or worse and history shows that this is definately incorrect.

      • Bill 3.1.1

        I think you’re missing my point. It’s not argued that advances haven’t been made. My point is simply that advances have occurred…and will increasingly occur…. as a result of lobbying rather than as the result of meaningful and inclusive political action.

        What chance then for the formation of a left movement if gains are brokered by a select few in dialogue with government? Can you not see that this disempowers the left even as some (perfectly ‘managed’ and ‘safe’) gains are made?

        What happens when government reverses concessions previously ‘gifted’ by government? Where is the resistance from within the general populace going to come from? Know what I mean? eg. Reversing Annual Leave entitlements that had been fought for, or that workers had been mobilised around, would be a far more difficult proposition for a government,than is the case when the entitlements have resulted from lobbying.

        It’s fairly easy to keep a lid on demands emanating from a lobby group. Tacit understandings of what is and what is not going to be within the parameters of acceptability, should the lobby group (or the individuals constituting the bargaining component of the lobby group) wish to preserve its/their preferred status, soon mark out permissable parameters of contestability.

        There’s an old cartoon that offers a nice example of the reality of co-opted organisations. It pictures a group of workers standing outside two doors. One door is marked ‘union’ and the other ‘boss’. And the workers are wondering who they should negotiate with first.

        So union and gay lobby groups etc can wrest more concessions from a Labour led government than a National led government. But the whole process relegates the people who make up those constituences to the role of spectator, and so ultimately weakens the left.

    • kriswgtn 3.2

      Both Labour and National exploit the gay vote.

      Actually No they dont
      If it wasnt for Labour and Fran Wilde,we would still be classed as criminals for who we choose to have sex with

      As a young gay teenager in the 80’s I remember the homophobic National party and their horrible crusade against us

      Guess you had to be there and experience the hatred

      Labour also have Rainbow Labour who work endlessly on behalf of Gay people in NZ
      Where is Nationals?

      • Bill 3.2.1

        Wasn’t there a highly politicised gay movement during the 80’s here in NZ? Which is where exactly, these days?

        Your appeal that Labour also have Rainbow Labour who work endlessly on behalf of Gay people in NZ. merely reinforces the point that lobby groups have replaced or supplanted political activism; that large elements of the left have been co-opted and the political activism of the left correspondingly weakened.

  4. rjs131 4

    If John key voted against the civil unions he may have also been voting to represent the wishes of his electorate, you know the group of people that elected him into Parliament or are you suggesting he should ignore them. Of course you dont refer to those Labour MPs that also opposed that bill.

    [lprent: Use OpenMike if you want to raise a different topic. ]

    • Lanthanide 4.1

      “Of course you dont refer to those Labour MPs that also opposed that bill.”
      Because the post is about Jonkey gaying it up at the Big Gay Out, not about Labour MPs that voted against the bill doing so.

      • Tigger 4.1.1

        Read it again rjs, or at least read the whole thing this time – I don’t think he should ignore them at all but I’m saying if you’re going to vote against what is apparently some deeply held belief in order to reprsent your voters you’d better know what your voters think. Key admitted he only had a cursory idea of what the Helensville electorate though.

        Might be a good time for someone to post on conscience voting though…it’s an interesting issue.

        • Rosy

          Saying he voted the way his electorate thought about civil unions is just an excuse IMO. If he really thought it was an important principle to do what the electorate thought he wouldn’t have got national on board on the repeal of S59.

      • grumpy 4.1.2

        However, he seems pretty gender and orientation neutral to me when you look at his Front Bench.

        • Carol

          key and dominant front bench positions to men. Women get the more controversial ones related to social welfare, education, police etc and will probably mostly be replaced next term. And how come Wilkinson didn’t go to the Hobbit meetting with Warners’ execs, when it turned out to be related to employment law?

          I remember Key voting against civil unions and supporting an unrepentant partner-basher. Fair-weather friend. He is NOT welcome at my Big Gay Out!

          • Lanthanide

            Giving the key roles to men probably has a large part with the women being featherweights (except Paula – I am making a pun, but she is the most competent and intelligent woman they’ve got in cabinet).

          • higherstandard

            When’s the big straight out ?

            • Tigger

              No one’s stopping you hs…

            • QoT

              Every other day of the year, when hetero couples get to walk down the street hand-in-hand and not have “f#ggot!” screamed out the windows of passing cars.

    • Draco T Bastard 4.2

      Actually, on issues such as this he should be voting on what’s right and not on what his electorate wants. Voting to ensure that everyone has the same rights would be the correct thing for him to do, anything else is BS. If his electorate didn’t want it then he should have got out there and told them why it was right for him to vote in favour.

      • TightyRighty 4.2.1

        yes, your right for once DTB. bugger the will of the people he represents. what do they matter. he should just do what is “right”. your orwellian language and overbearing arrogance are symptomatic of why the opposition can’t even come close to challenging the most inclusive leader we have ever had.

        • Draco T Bastard

          So, you think the government should do everything that the people want even if it’s wrong and can be proven wrong rather than educate the people?

          • TightyRighty

            Rather fallacious argument there. What government has ever done everything the people want? and is it education if there is no consultation and it’s force fed to you?

          • Rex Widerstrom

            Sheesh I hate these debates because the progressive part of me says “do what’s right” and the democratic part of me says “follow the wishes of the people who elected you” (albeit with more foundation than “not extensive” polling) and I reckon both parts are right.

            I think DTB has arrived at the right answer to the dichotomy though – educate the people, then vote. Hopefully you’ll sway the majority, or at least take the heat out of the issue so there’s a large “don’t care either way” component, and you can vote knowing you’re not telling the majority of people who elected you to stick their opinions.

            If those efforts fail, and the majority still oppose what it is you want to do, then our system allows you to stick your neck out and vote against that majority. But if an MP has truly polled their electorate and votes according to their wishes, then I find it very hard to condemn them.

            • Draco T Bastard

              But if an MP has truly polled their electorate and votes according to their wishes, then I find it very hard to condemn them.

              So do I which is why I said to educate them. Hell, that’s why we have government ministries – so that decisions can be based upon fact and what is morally right rather than opinion. Opinion is not a viable base upon which to base decisions.

              And, yes, I’m going to get flamed for putting morals in there as well but I’ll just point you to Plato.

              The first horn of the dilemma (i.e. that which is right is commanded by God because it is right)

        • The Baron

          “Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.”

          Though Draco, you are an arrogant and overly simplistic jerk – and your attitude shows exactly why noone will ever vote you and your frankly bizarre ideas anywhere near any sort of representative position.

          • Rex Widerstrom

            Baron, what do you hope to “prove” with a quote from the 1700’s, when those elected to Parliament were likely to be the only people who had any sort of education and the peasants they represented wouldn’t have known much beyond pig husbandry. And if they wanted to know more, they’d have to wait till someone rode through town who’d been to London months earlier.

            A time when women, amongst others, couldn’t vote so the views of 51% of the populace were held to be worthless before they were even uttered. A time when the people had no effective means to communicate their wishes to their representatives and had to rely on their judgment.

            In those days it was true in a practical sense if not a philosophical one; today education and technology make it a quaint look at an outdated view of Parliamentary democracy; nothing more.

            • The Baron

              I disagree, Rex, but I think we are talking about different philosophies about what representative government means. And I wasn’t trying to “prove” anything, apart from that it is quite an elegant quote that was wholly relevant to the debate above – and illustrates that these philosophical differences are as old as representative democracy itself.

              Have these factors changed. Education and technology arguably enable a more informed role to representation, but not one that is perfect. In other words, judgement is still required, with the ballot box as punishment for when you get it wrong.

              alternatively, those factors enable a wholly different style of democracy, yes. But that is a different debate.

        • Tigger

          So TR, here Key voted against what he thought was ‘right’…he voted how he imagined he should – how was that inclusive? Or decent? Or sensible?

          And he’s not inclusive about gay rights – he just says he likes the gays then votes to exclude us. His ‘everyman’/inclusive stance is utter crap.

          • TightyRighty

            Its not the same as voting in favour of what is wrong.

            How is having an openly gay minister being anti gay? Its more likely he doesn’t care what your sexual preference is, as long as you contribute to society.

            This is just another desperate smear. Basically calling the prime minister a homophobe beecause you don’t like his political creed. Weaker and weaker with every week. By November someone on this site will have another conspiracy about john key being under the whip of evil Aussies Crosby textor from birth as he prefers Vegemite to marmite.

            • Draco T Bastard

              Its not the same as voting in favour of what is wrong.

              Considering that he voted to exclude a minority of the population access to the same rights that the majority already enjoyed he, effectively, voted for what was wrong.

              • Tigger

                Who has called Key a homophobe (nice try at spin there TR)? Just called him a fraud – pretending to be gay friendly when his actions have been the opposite. I’m of the opinion that it doesn’t matter what Key does so long as his actions match his rhetoric. I’d prefer someone who would honestly and openly say ‘no gay rights’ rather than Key who trades on being inclusive but votes against gay rights.

            • Colonial Viper

              How is having an openly gay minister being anti gay? Its more likely he doesn’t care what your sexual preference is, as long as you contribute to society.


              Are you talking about Finlayson? Frak tonnes of his caucus colleagues only realised he was gay very late on.

              And are you saying that being gay is only OK with Key as long as you ‘contribute’ to society? And if you don’t, what then mate? Coz you seem to suggest that if you’re not contributing to society, then Key will consider your sexual preferences a problem.

              • QoT

                Nah, CV, TR’s saying Key can’t be homophobic, some of his best friends are etc etc.

              • Weizguy

                Finlayson’s only OK because he’s a “non-practising gay.” Y’know, because sexuality is a thing you do.

                • Lanthanide

                  Frankly I’d count that as a mark against him – he’s either a saint, or really screwed up in the head, or deeply ashamed of himself.

  5. I look forward to someone asking John Key which male rugby players he’d include on his list of hotties.

    • grumpy 5.1

      That question may well have been better put to his predecessor as PM.

      • mcflock 5.1.1

        Damn, so yet again the MSM failed to do their job and we had a prime minister go by without discussing their turn-ons rather than, oh, actual policy?

    • Lanthanide 5.2

      Richie McCaw and Dan Carter, obviously.

      He went for the obvious and well-known Jessica Alba/Liz Hurley/Angelina Jolie triumvirate, so surely his taste in men wouldn’t be any more nuanced or eclectic.

      As Tigger posted above, he said he’d “go gay for Brad Pitt”.

      Actually someone should ask him at the Big Gay Out if this means he does want a threesome. I’d like to see him squirm his way out of that question as being ‘inappropriate’ given that he’s the one who effectively brought the subject up.

      • Blondie 5.2.1

        “He even joked that he’d ‘go gay’ for Brad Pitt (coupled with his recent remark about wanting to bang Angelina Jolie I’m foreseeing a steamy threesome in our PM’s future!)”

        I foresee nothing of the sort; if Brad and Angelina felt inclined towards menage a trois they’d probably find someone far hotter than John Key. Fairly certain it’d be a female too (Angie likes the ladies, doesn’t she?). Actually I’d volunteer for that spot…..

  6. the sprout 6

    nice work Tigger, well put

  7. gingercrush 7

    The Civil Union legislation was a disgusting piece of legislation. For it maintains the status and ideal that two people in a relationship must make that relationship formal. Instead of providing legislation that gave more legal rights to de facto couples. It instead prescribes a 20th Century mentality to relationships.

    Also as a gay person I am quite comfortable with any politician that decided to vote against the Civil Union Bill whatever their reasoning was. Also I’d be quite interested to see stats that show who gay people vote for. Because I think while the left would enjoy the majority of those votes I’m not convinced it’ll be an overriding majority.

    • Lanthanide 7.1

      There really is very little difference between De Facto couples and Married/Civil Union couples, so I’m not sure what you’re specifically objecting to here.

      I also think that while they would tend to vote left, it’s probably only a slim majority, and I’d expect it would be eroding with time – the new young gay set take all of their freedoms for granted and so vote for whoever promises them the most (with National supporting higher net-worth individuals as gay couples tend to be, that helps National), while the older generation remember the struggle and know who it was they should thank for the freedoms they now enjoy.

      • Blondie 7.1.1

        Um, I think the difference is the formality involved in becoming a married/civil union couple, as opposed to the fluidity or flexibility of a de facto relationship.

        Love, trust, respect, and compatibility should be what keeps a couple together – not a piece of paper. Paper burns.

        • Lanthanide

          From a legal perspective, there is little difference, is what I was saying.

          captcha: misunderstand

  8. Carol 8

    I have always thought that JK has foregrounded his heterosexual married/fatehrhood status, reinforcing the kind of “communist, barren, lesbian” helengrad discourse that the right used to undermine Clark’s government. As soon as he was made leader of the Nats, JK appeared on CloseUp with his wife in a way that foregrounded his heterosexuality. He hardly ever has included her since,a s she’s mostly kept in the background. Also indicative of the way he uses his wife as a support when it suits. JJ’s het, married, father status was also foregrounded in TV political broadcast vids during the las election.

    I don’t like the way Goff joined in the preferred hotties gossip. But at least he put his wife top of the list, and tends to talk about her as an equal partner.

    • The Baron 8.1

      I’m sure she has her own objectives in life, Carol – rather than being paraded around like our first lady. Being in the background probably suits her quite nicely.

      Doesn’t suit your fresh consipracy theory though huh.

      • Tigger 8.1.1

        Key is well known as being very ‘American right wing’ in his family values. He decries misbehaviour amongst his group, especially sexual antics (want a reason why Worth was dumped – there it is). So I have no doubt that the father/husband image projected is real. The ‘I want to pork Angie’ line however is bull. And the ‘going gay’ (could write a piece about that stupid line) for Brad line was equally crap. They’re just spin to sex up his image.

  9. BLiP 9

    Polling was certainly in his mind with the civil union legislation on which he voted no. He explained that it was a conscience issue and that’s how the people of his electorate would have wanted him to vote. “Personally I have no problems with Civil Unions” he said but explained “I had done some polling, I wouldn’t say it was extensive, but I did some polling in my electorate and on the basis of that polling I voted against civil unions.”

    This angle really annoys me, and I’ve seen it from Labour as well as National Ltd™ in terms of the civil union and other legislation. Not everything my MP has voted for/against has been to my approval yet when I put my tick against their name on the ballot paper, I was extending my trust in their judgement. Quite often when I express my disapproval I’m told of other factors I wasn’t aware of, or behind-the-scenes machinations and concessions, which, sorta, kinda temper my annoyance. In this instance, and in relation to some of prostitution by-laws, I’m still furious. I understand all about representing the wishes of the people and being a voice for the many – but when it comes to social justice issues if that concern had been prevalent at the time, we’d still be employing a hangman. Further, John Key, inter alia, are not just MPs, they are supposedly our leaders laying down the pathway for a better society – as such, the owe their allegiance to the future all of New Zealanders. I can understand some marginal back-bench CV-groomer pandering to the religious bigotry of his Local Electorate Committee, but those who should be leading us still using that excuse are, in my mind, cowards.

  10. johnm 10

    I like John Key!!! It’d be great to be playboying in Gay Paris with him enjoying the can can at the Moulin Rouge! Come on John give up that miserable PM Chore and let’s visit Paris together! Oh and break out the Champagne!

  11. NX 11

    As the Attorney-General, Chris Finlayson probably holds the highest office ever attained by an openly gay man.

    New Zealand is fortunate the leader of the main conservative party is socially liberal. It’s former leader was a social liberal too – Don Brash expressed regret in his valedictory speech that he voted against the civil union bill. I also believe Rodney Hide is socially liberal.

    Winston Peters is a known social Conservative & I suspect so is Peter Dunne. It’s ironic they were Labour’s collation partners in the last government.

    Gay people, like all New Zealanders, who believe in small government, lower tax & more personal freedom don’t have to vote left-wing.

    And that is the real vicTory.

    • QoT 11.1

      Of course queer people don’t have to vote left-wing. They just have to be aware that John Key will simply use them like he uses every other demographic: nice to them when he wants their votes, dumped as soon as a bigger subgroup doesn’t like it.

      (And of course the mainstream left’s position on this is pretty fucked anyway what with selling the “identity politics” groups down the river because We Need To Reconnect With Real People.)

      • Tigger 11.1.1

        Exactly QoT. Log Cabin Republicans anyone?

      • NX 11.1.2

        Sub-group? Oh, you mean New Zealanders.

        • QoT

          Jesus, NX, next time just say “I hate gay people” up front and don’t waste everyone’s time pretending to be constructive.

          • NX

            Your comment says more about you than it does me.

            • QoT

              It’s been a while since I played this game, is my line “I know you are but what am I?”?

              • NX

                QoT – Your comment above was so unbelievably unfair & a personal attack of the highest order.

                lprent – I suggest you remove the comment, I don’t think it’s helpful to anyone.

                [lprent: Outside my guidelines – see the policy about robust discussion. I terminate comments that are judged to be pointless abuse. I usually don’t intervene when people are just feeling insulted because I’d be here all day*.

                Her point had a point whether you agree or not. Up to you or others to refute it.

                * and anyway I would have to moderate myself because I’m not above putting the boot in when I’m not moderating for instance this morning. ]

                • QoT

                  Oh, I’m sorry, NX. Was I meant to give you the benefit of the doubt after you literally said “Sub-group? Oh, you mean New Zealanders.” and thus explicitly ruled “gay people” out of the category “New Zealander”?

                  ‘Cause that seems pretty darn homophobic to me.

                  • Tigger

                    NX – bottom line is your comments are nothing than a scattershot selection that totally miss the point. No good in voting for small government if that government continues to deny you basic human rights. Personally I wouldn’t call you a homophobe but it’s clear you’ve drunk the Kool Aid.

                  • NX

                    and thus explicitly ruled “gay people” out of the category “New Zealander”?

                    ^ you are right, that would be pretty darn homophobic.

                    At first I couldn’t work out how you extracted that from my comment.

                    You thought I was referring to ‘New Zealanders’ as the “bigger subgroup” that J Key would favour over Gay people.

                    Your interpretation is way off the mark. I was confused by your use of the term ‘subgroup’ to begin with. By saying “a bigger subgroup”, you implied that gay people were also a subgroup.

                    So to reword my comment:

                    Subgroup WTF is that??? We are all New Zealanders.

                    We all eat, sleep, and pay taxes. Pigeonholing people into subgroups is bad practice in my opinion & results in bad policy.

                    And also, even if you were to use the term, New Zealanders aren’t a ‘subgroup’. We are the group!!

                    lprent – grudgingly I agree. Sorry for dragging you in.

                    • QoT

                      Pigeonholing people into subgroups is bad practice in my opinion & results in bad policy.

                      That’s all well and good but on a post discussing specifically how John Key targets specific demographics when it’s convenient for his image it’s pretty irrelevant.

                    • QoT

                      Also, in terms of my mention of “another subgroup”, have you never witnessed the hypocrisy of a politician going to the Big Gay Out or similar event one year and then decrying the breakdown of “traditional family values” as soon as a fundamentalist Christian group throw a conference? Because that shit happens a lot

                    • NX

                      I think it’s good Key is willing to go to the Big Gay Out. Brash went as well. I don’t think English has been – not really his cup of tea I suspect.

                      With regards to your second comment – that’s politicians for you.
                      I’m interested to see what line Goff takes on family values. The Pacific community tends to vote Labour & ‘family values’ is their thing.

                      I don’t even know what ‘family values’ actually means.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      ‘Family values’ is what US politicians harp on about as a distraction from anything meaningful when the economic and social conditions faced by the working poor continue to deteriorate.

                • Tigger

                  NX, ‘willing’ to go to the BGO? See comment in main post about how grateful I\’m expected to be that he would lower himself to be seen with me.

                  ‘Cup of tea\? It\’s not a damn sex orgy – it’s a family picnic! Full of couples, parents, kids – so Blinglish isn\’t into that kind of stuff?

                  I know I’m just firing off side shots during this little squirmish you’re having with QoT but hell mate, you clearly know nothing about gay politics.

                  • NX

                    Is gay politics different from regular politics?

                    And yes, Blinglish should go.

                    I don’t think John Key thinks he is lowering himself by attending the BGO – not what he’s about. That’s your interpretation.

Links to post

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Tokelau Language Week reminds us to stay united and strong
    Staying strong in the face of challenges and being true to our heritage and languages are key to preserving our cultural identity and wellbeing, is the focus of the 2020 Tokelau Language Week. Minister for Pacific Peoples, Aupito William Sio, says this year’s theme, ‘Apoapo tau foe, i nā tāfea ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • NZ announces a third P-3 deployment in support of UN sanctions
    The Government has deployed a Royal New Zealand Air Force P-3K2 Orion (P-3) maritime patrol aircraft to support the implementation of United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions imposing sanctions against North Korea, announced Minister of Foreign Affairs Winston Peters and Minister of Defence Ron Mark. “New Zealand has long supported ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Pacific trade and development agreement a reality
    Pacific regional trade and development agreement PACER Plus will enter into force in 60 days now that the required eight countries have ratified it. Trade and Export Growth Minister David Parker welcomed the announcement that the Cook Islands is the eighth nation to ratify this landmark agreement. “The agreement represents ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Securing a pipeline of teachers
    The Government is changing its approach to teacher recruitment as COVID-19 travel restrictions continue, by boosting a range of initiatives to get more Kiwis into teaching. “When we came into Government, we were faced with a teacher supply crisis,” Education Minister Chris Hipkins said. “Over the past three years, we ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Border exceptions for a small number of international students with visas
    The Government has established a new category that will allow 250 international PhD and postgraduate students to enter New Zealand and continue their studies, in the latest set of border exceptions. “The health, safety and wellbeing of people in New Zealand remains the Government’s top priority. Tight border restrictions remain ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • First COVID-19 vaccine purchase agreement signed
    The Government has signed an agreement to purchase 1.5 million COVID-19 vaccines – enough for 750,000 people – from Pfizer and BioNTech, subject to the vaccine successfully completing all clinical trials and passing regulatory approvals in New Zealand, say Research, Science and Innovation Minister Megan Woods and Health Minister Chris Hipkins. ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • International statement – End-to-end encryption and public safety
    We, the undersigned, support strong encryption, which plays a crucial role in protecting personal data, privacy, intellectual property, trade secrets and cyber security.  It also serves a vital purpose in repressive states to protect journalists, human rights defenders and other vulnerable people, as stated in the 2017 resolution of the ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Ministry of Defence Biodefence Assessment released
    The Ministry of Defence has today released a Defence Assessment examining Defence’s role across the spectrum of biological hazards and threats facing New Zealand. Biodefence: Preparing for a New Era of Biological Hazards and Threats looks at how the NZDF supports other agencies’ biodefence activities, and considers the context of ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • New Approaches to Economic Challenges: Confronting Planetary Emergencies: OECD 9 October 2020
    New Approaches to Economic Challenges: Confronting Planetary Emergencies: OECD 9 October 2020 Hon David Parker’s response following Thomas Piketty and Esther Duflo. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, wherever in the world you might be. I first acknowledge the excellent thought provoking speeches of Thomas Piketty and Esther ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Kaipara Moana restoration takes next step
    A Memorandum of Understanding has been signed today at Waihāua Marae between the Crown, local iwi and councils to protect, restore and enhance the mauri of Kaipara Moana in Northland. Environment Minister David Parker signed the document on behalf of the Crown along with representatives from Ngā Maunga Whakahī, Ngāti ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • New Zealand and Uruguay unite on reducing livestock production emissions
    Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor and Uruguayan Minister of Livestock, Agriculture and Fisheries Carlos María Uriarte have welcomed the launch of a three-year project that will underpin sustainable livestock production in Uruguay, Argentina, and Costa Rica.  The project called ‘Innovation for pasture management’ is led by Uruguay’s National Institute of Agricultural ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • 3100 jobs created through marae upgrades
    Hundreds of marae throughout the country will be upgraded through investments from the Provincial Growth Fund’s refocused post COVID-19 funding to create jobs and put money into the pockets of local tradespeople and businesses, Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones and Māori Development Minister Nanaia Mahuta have announced. “A total ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Health volunteers recognised in annual awards
    Health Minister Chris Hipkins has announced 9 teams and 14 individuals are the recipients of this year’s Minister of Health Volunteer Awards.  “The health volunteer awards celebrate and recognise the thousands of dedicated health sector volunteers who give many hours of their time to help other New Zealanders,” Mr Hipkins ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Community COVID-19 Fund supports Pacific recovery
    The Minister for Pacific Peoples, Aupito William Sio says a total of 264 groups and individuals have successfully applied for the Pacific Aotearoa Community COVID-19 Recovery Fund, that will support Pacific communities drive their own COVID-19 recovery strategies, initiatives, and actions. “I am keen to see this Fund support Pacific ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Community benefits from Māori apprenticeships
    Up to 50 Māori apprentices in Wellington will receive paid training to build houses for their local communities, thanks to a $2.75 million investment from the Māori Trades and Training Fund, announced Employment Minister Willie Jackson today. “This funding will enable Ngāti Toa Rangatira Incorporated to provide its Ngā Kaimahi ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 weeks ago
  • Training fund supports Māori jobseekers
    Rapidly growing sectors will benefit from a $990,000 Māori Trades and Training Fund investment which will see Wellington jobseekers supported into work, announced Employment Minister Willie Jackson today. “This funding will enable Sapphire Consultants Ltd. to help up to 45 Māori jobseekers into paid training initiatives over two years through ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 weeks ago
  • Ruakura Inland Port development vital infrastructure for Waikato
    The Government is investing $40 million to develop an inland port at Ruakura which will become a freight super-hub and a future business, research and residential development for the Waikato, Urban Development and Transport Minister Phil Twyford, and Māori Development Minister Nanaia Mahuta announced today. The funding has been has ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 weeks ago
  • Appointments made to Defence Expert Review Group
    Defence Minister Ron Mark announced today the establishment of an Expert Review Group to review a number of aspects of the New Zealand Defence Force’s (NZDF) structure, information management and record-keeping processes.  The Expert Review Group’s work arises out of the first recommendation from the Report of the Government’s Inquiry ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 weeks ago
  • No active community cases of COVID-19
    There are no active community cases of COVID-19 remaining in the country after the last people from the recent outbreak have recovered from the virus, Health Minister Chris Hipkins said today. “This is a big milestone. New Zealanders have once again through their collective actions squashed the virus. The systems ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 weeks ago