Categories
Actors Ad arms art celebrities Celebrity Court Dead Death Divorce fat Fight fit Gay gay marriage H&M hips Homes ice t image Intervention interview IRS Jeremy Irons Marriage Married natural Owe Party photos quote red Relationships size son stage thin

Jeremy Irons: ‘Abortion harms a woman – it’s a tremendous mental attack’

wenn23348890

I went into Jeremy Irons’ Guardian interview only having read one quote, the quote about abortion. I thought I would just read the piece and pull the abortion-quote-block for context. But I can’t. Because this interview is BONKERS. While I definitely think Jeremy Irons is eccentric in a vastly terrible way – think of his comments on incest and gay marriage several years ago, or his thoughts on sexual harassment – I also sort of have to give him credit for putting it all out there. Most celebrities/actors would have some sense of self-awareness that their thoughts are terrible and should never be spoken out loud, especially to the Guardian. Irons does not have that sense of self-awareness, so at least we can openly discuss his on-the-record comments. You can read his full Guardian interview here. Some highlights:

On his six homes & a castle: “I have developed a life which seems to need a relatively high income.”

Marriage & Christianity: “Our society is based on a Christian structure. If you take those religious tenets away, then anything goes and it will become terrible – and you usually get into trouble. Adultery might be very nice, but finally it f–ks us up. And it f–ks up the structure of society. We don’t steal – well, some people do – because it makes life intolerable for everybody. Yes, you can be in love and raise a family wonderfully by not being married, but actually marriage does give us a strength, because it’s quite hard to get out of, and so it makes us fight more to keep it together. If divorce becomes dead easy – which it sort of has – then we don’t have that backup. Because, for everybody, relationships are hard.”

Abortion harms women: “Take abortion. I believe women should be allowed to make the decision, but I also think the church is right to say it’s a sin. Because sin is actions that harm us. Lying harms us. Abortion harms a woman – it’s a tremendous mental attack, and physical, sometimes. But we seem to get that muddled. In a way, thank God the Catholic church does say we won’t allow it, because otherwise nobody’s saying that it’s a sin.”

On Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn: “I think he might be the death knell. I love his idealism, but he’s not what I would call a politician. I think the Labour party is no longer fit for purpose. What we very, very, very strongly need is a not a party that represents the labour movement, but everyone who doesn’t like that we are governed, in effect, by global economics. We have to find an intelligent alternative to the Conservative ethos.”

He doesn’t believe in interventionism. “It’s like genetic engineering. Everything is held in balance, whether good or not, by diverse internal forces. Syria deals with the opposition with great cruelty, but there are cruel people, as one sees from Isis, and you’re not going to remove that part of nature from those fanatics at that stage of their civilising development. Yet everybody – especially the Americans – seems to think the only way of life is theirs. Democracy? What the f–k does that mean? Freedom? What the f–k does that mean?”

The US election: “[It signals] maybe the end of democracy. If democracy has become a gameshow where you vote for the one who makes you laugh most, or whatever, then we’re not worthy to have the vote”.

[From The Guardian]

There’s a lot to unpack and I’m not going to go beat by beat with Jeremy Irons. Let me just say that while I appreciate that he identifies as pro-choice, I do not appreciate that he uses the language of anti-choice advocates. If a woman feels psychological or even physical pain because of her abortion, the decision is still HER CHOICE. If a woman wants to say abortion is a sin, that is her choice too. But no man or woman gets to decide for all women what is and is not a “sin.” And let me tell you, the psychological and physical pain would be even more profound if the state forced women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term.

wenn23345271

Photos courtesy of WENN.

wenn23345271
wenn23348890
wenn23439403

More at Cele Bitchy

Categories
2013 Ad Books celebrities Crazy fat Gay Gross gues guess H&M interview Jeremy Irons Law live Marriage OMG photos Pregnant quote red Relationships son Sued thin WTF

Jeremy Irons still insisting that it’s only incest if someone gets pregnant

Last week, we and every other site ran the story about Jeremy Irons absolutely insane comments during a HuffPo interview. Irons was asked about gay marriage, I think specifically in reference to the two cases before the Supreme Court this session. Go here to read what Irons said – he basically went off on this tangent about gay marriage opening the door to fathers marrying their sons for tax purposes, and when confronted with the idea of incest laws, Irons insisted that it’s only incest if you’re breeding, which… is gross. That’s a really worrisome and gross distinction to make, regardless of its (lack of) context in the gay marriage discussion.

So, everyone was like “WTF?” and now Jeremy has issued a written statement to try to explain what he really meant, and honest to God, I think he’s making it worse:

I am deeply concerned that from my on line discussion with the Huffington Post, it has been understood that I hold a position that is anti gay. This is as far from the truth of me as to say that I believe the earth is flat.

I was taking part in a short discussion around the practical meaning of Marriage, and how that institution might be altered by it becoming available to same-sex partners. Perhaps rather too flippantly I flew the kite of an example of the legal quagmire that might occur if same sex marriage entered the statute books, by raising the possibility of future marriage between same sex family members for tax reasons, (incest being illegal primarily in order to prevent inbreeding, and therefore an irrelevance in non reproductive relationships). Clearly this was a mischievous argument, but nonetheless valid.

I am clearly aware that many gay relationships are more long term, responsible and even healthier in their role of raising children, than their hetero equivalents, and that love often creates the desire to mark itself in a formal way, as Marriage would do. Clearly society should find a way of doing this.

I had hoped that even on such a subject as this, where passions run high, the internet was a forum where ideas could be freely discussed without descending into name-calling.

I believe that is what it could be, but it depends on all of us behaving, even behind our aliases, in a humane, intelligent and open way.

[From Jeremy Irons’ site]

“Clearly this was a mischievous argument, but nonetheless valid.” NO IT WASN’T. Jeremy was even confronted – in real time, by the interviewer – with the legal and criminal contradiction to his “kite-flying” incest scenario and he rejected the contradiction by making the argument about “it’s only incest if someone gets pregnant” basically. And he is STILL making the same incest argument – “incest being illegal primarily in order to prevent inbreeding, and therefore an irrelevance in non reproductive relationships”. Dude… STOP. Incest is incest, whether or not there are children born of incestuous relationships. This is like the “legitimate rape” debate. There is NO threshold component for rape. Rape is rape. Incest is incest.

Anyway… I guess I believe that Jeremy Irons is truly “pro” gay marriage, but who can even remember because OMG his views on incest are so g—damn creepy. As for his complaint about internet snarking… dude, YOU are the one “flying a kite” for a scenario in which you would marry your son to pass on your fortune, and if you had sex with him it would be fine too because two dudes can’t get pregnant. You said it. Own it and deal with the consequences.

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

FFN_TRIC_Awards_FLYNETUK_031213_51035573
FFN_GTRES_Irons_Jeremy_092212_50893906
FFN_GTRES_Irons_Jeremy_092212_50893913

Thanks to Cele Bitchy

Categories
2013 Ad Beating celebrities Celebrity Dog eating Frank Ocean Friends Gay gay rappers H&M interview Jeremy Irons jeremy irons homophobic Jerks Miley Cyrus Music quote Rapper Snoop Dogg snoop dogg frank ocean snoop dogg homophobe snoop dogg homophobic Snoop Lion snoop lion anti-gay snoop lion frank ocean snoop lion homophobe snoop lion homophobic snoop lion masculine son style thin

Snoop Lion Makes A Stupid Offensive Comment About Gay Rappers

snoop lion cosby sweater

Snoop Lion AKA Snoop Dogg can join Jeremy Irons in the despicable Anti-Gay Club For Jerks. When The Guardian asked Mr. Lion-Dogg what he thought of Frank Oceans’ coming out as a sign of progress in accepting homosexuality in the rap world, Mr. Lion said,

Frank Ocean ain’t no rapper. He’s a singer. It’s acceptable in the singing world, but in the rap world I don’t know if it will ever be acceptable because rap is so masculine.

It’s like a football team. You can’t be in a locker room full of motherfucking tough-ass dudes, then all of a sudden say, ‘Hey, man, I like you.’ You know, that’s going to be tough.

Oh my God. These are the exact stereotypes that keep gay rappers/football players/anyone in the closet and halt any kind of progress. What is so insane about the idea that someone can be both gay and masculine? Snoop, come on! You’ve probably met lots of masculine men who were gay and you didn’t even know it.

And the second part, the locker room analogy — I don’t even know where to begin. Again, it perpetuates the fear some straight men have that all gay men just want to hit on all straight men. Just because you have a group of men changing in a locker room and one or some of them are gay, does not mean that they are going to suddenly develop huge crushes on all of the straight men and make everyone uncomfortable. Changing in a locker room isn’t even a sexual thing! You’re the one who’s sexualizing it, Mr. Snoop Lion. You’re the one who’s bringing that into the equation.

Of course then he uses the classic, “I don’t hate gay people, I have gay friends” tactic:

I don’t have a problem with gay people. I got some gay homies. Yeah, for real. People who were gay used to get beat up. It was cool to beat up on gay people back then. But in the 90s and 2000s, gay is a way of life. Just regular people with jobs. Now they are accepted, not classified. They just went through the same things we went through as black.

You’re still beating up on gay people; now you’re just doing it with your words and your attitude. If you think they’re “accepted” then why the hell can’t they be rappers?

You can listen to Snoop Lion’s new song he did with Miley Cyrus here. It’s pretty masculine.

Special thanks to Evill Beet Gossip

Categories
2013 Ad Books celebrities Celebrity Gay H&M interview Jeremy Irons jeremy irons anti-gay jeremy irons antigay jeremy irons apology jeremy irons homophobe jeremy irons homophobic jeremy irons idiot jeremy irons incest Jeremy Irons interview live LOL Marriage quote red Relationships son style thin

Jeremy Irons Sort Of Apologies For Anti-Gay Statements

scar lion king jeremy irons

Jeremy Irons compared homosexuality to incest in an interview with Huff Post Live. Now he’s backpedaling just a bit. From Queerty via JeremyIrons.Net:

I am deeply concerned that from my on line discussion with the Huffington Post, it has been understood that I hold a position that is antigay. This is as far from the truth of me as to say that I believe the earth is flat.

I was taking part in a short discussion around the practical meaning of marriage, and how that institution might be altered by it becoming available to same-sex partners. Perhaps rather too flippantly I flew the kite of an example of the legal quagmire that might occur if same sex marriage entered the statute books, by raising the possibility of future marriage between same sex family members for tax reasons (incest being illegal primarily in order to prevent inbreeding, and therefore an irrelevance in non reproductive relationships).

Clearly this was a mischievous argument, but nonetheless valid.

I am clearly aware that many gay relationships are more long term, responsible and even healthier in their role of raising children, than their hetero equivalents, and that love often creates the desire to mark itself in a formal way, as Marriage would do. Clearly society should find a way of doing this.

Gotta interrupt here, this is my favorite part:

I had hoped that even on such a subject as this, where passions run high, the internet was a forum where ideas could be freely discussed without descending into name-calling.

Lollllllllll. Okay, lastly:

I believe that is what it could be, but it depends on all of us behaving, even behind our aliases, in a humane, intelligent and open way.

This is probably the most traffic JeremyIrons.Net has ever seen, so good one there, Mr. Irons.

In conclusion, whatever, dude, you’re just a talking lion.

What do you think of his backtracking statements?

Source: Evilbeetgossip.com