Hmmmm........going back to the first post here and the quote that upset me so for a moment, the reason why it upset me so much, I think, was its completely "offhand" nature. The ease with which it was spoken, - the speaker obviously feeling certain that everyone in their right mind would get his point and share his views. He wasn't trying to be controversial, he wasn't aware of being controversial; - he was just trying to give an clear and honest description. Quite evidently he was voicing something he must have been thinking back in 1945, and he hadn't changed his mindset one bit since then.
It was a cold blast from the past, and no mistake. A past that was less than 10 years before BBM lets the murder of Earl occur. As such it sure sent chills down my spine.
I don't put that much weight on this one man not having changed his views over the long years - but having thought it over I disagree with this:
If the sequence was cut, there'd be no issue; I think it may be better to put forth information as unpleasant as anyone may take it in order to know what is going on. I personally find the comment disagreeable, but in the context of things, it falls way down my list of concerns. but, if it was cut from the final edit, no one would know how some people use 'weakling and sissy' as something related to homosexuality ..
I think the sequence should have been cut. The program was not at all about people's views on homosexuality (nor did it see to it that a counter-opinion was voiced.) It let someone show contempt for a truly contemptible person by means of embracing and broadcasting prejudice against a whole group of people, seeming to assume this prejudice would be commonly shared and understood by the viewers. That was an error of judgement on BBC's part.
That present-day error also served to make the whole thing hit me hard. Because I don't think you see very often, if at all, opinions like that without the speaker to some extent being
aware that he is controversial. And provocative. That's what almost anyone'd be especially
aiming for, saying something like that today. Certainly all these talk show hosts are very aware of the controvercy - that's what they're building on, that's why they keeop harping on the same stale jokes. And people such as conservative Christian anti-gay preachers may completely believe their own prejudiced statements with a fervour for all I know, but they also know that there are many that oppose them. That's why they bother to spend so much time and loud voice on the issue. And so forth. In general, I think that most anti-gay sentiments in RL, including some instances mentioned in this thread, originate with people who were and are entirely aware that their attitude isn't a commonly held view. They build bellingerence on knowing that their views are being contested, may be becoming rare, and that there's controvercy and disagreement about.
So, in my long and meandering way getting to the point at last.
This is what I am not used to encountering in this day and age: People with prejudices against homosexuality who are completely
oblivious to the fact that theirs is by no means a commonly shared and "the only possible" view. In that sense, I think the world has moved ahead quite a bit. And so.... yes, any completely offhand expression of contempt in a contemporary TV program hits all the harder. But from the discussion in this thread I get the impression that such offhand remarks and oblivious attitudes may still be more common than I thought.... I'd like to hear some more opinions on that, if possible.