Graham Young admits gay activists brought him to his knees

Apr 16, 2019

Who would have thought that gay activists could have sucked dry Graham Young’s rivers of advertising gold:

While On Line Opinion may have contributed to some small softening of political debate, that would be impossible to detect compared to what social media has licenced.

In 2010 we were the subject of an advertising boycott, organised by gay activists, which destroyed the business model of the site. (Read the full details here.) Our sin was that we published this article by Bill Muehlenberg as part of a feature containing 25 articles on gay marriage, 75% of which were in favour of it.

But to activists 75% is not enough. It has to be 100%, so in a technique, since used by organisations like the Australian Conservation Foundation, and Sleeping Giants, our advertisers were targeted to pressure us to stop publishing anyone who disagreed with the activists. $17,000 income from advertising in the month of November 2010 went to virtually nothing in January 2011.

The same thing is being done to Rugby Australia over Folau, but instead of protecting his human rights, RA is caving in.

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=20260&page=0

He gives a lot of credit to these gay activists for their actions. But stop for a minute and think about what he’s saying.

These activists approached his advertisers with a simple request not to advertise on his site, and they made an informed decision not to place their brand amongst the content he chose to publish.

Short of taking credit for the distasteful content his advertisers chose to avoid, be blames homosexual people for daring to take exception to homophobic content he published.

If there ever were the monthly thousands pouring into the On Line Opinion coffers that Graham Young claims, the fault lies at his feet for not having done the necessary risk analysis to cater for the day he might not have the loyalty of his most profitable advertisers. After all, they’re only trying to protect their brand from being tarnished by the toxic content he was publishing.

And that’s exactly what Qantas is doing by not wanting to have their brand tarnished by the homophobia emanating from Rugby Australia’s midst.

Hark Graham: Don’t be surprised when your pro-gay advertisers object to your homophobic opinion.


POSTSCRIPT

After I published this article Chrys Stevenson contacted me and brought to my attention the following extract from her 12-Feb-2011 blog MY FREE SPEECH FIASCO, which paints a different reality to that which Grahan Young believes occurred:

So, when I heard that Graham was being persecuted for publishing an anti-gay marriage article by Catholic conservative, Bill Muehlenberg, I was outraged.  I disagree with everything Muehlenberg said in the article, but, in the cause of free speech, I supported his right to put his point of view, and Graham’s right to publish it.  Muehlenberg’s article is highly selective, makes some ridiculously broad assumptions and is clearly biased.  On the other hand, it is reasonably well written and, while being critical of what he sees as homosexuals’ proclivity for infidelity, he doesn’t (in my view) directly vilify GLBTI people, either as individuals or as a group.


The story I heard, initially, was that someone had taken offence at the article, complained to some of the advertisers on the site (specifically IBM and ANZ) and that these companies had removed their ads – at significant financial cost to Online Opinion.


Impulsively, I contacted Graham and offered my support.  I also did a quick survey of articles about same-sex marriage on Online Opinion and found that pro-gay articles far outnumbered anti-gay articles.  There was no question of anti-gay bias.


Graham then made me aware of an article about the incident on the gay online journal, SX.  The story suggested the problem was not so much Muehlenberg’s article, as Graham’s failure to remove an offensive comment, by ‘Shintaro’ on another article which suggested that gays should either stay in the closet or be murdered.  Graham protested that he hadn’t removed the comment because it had been taken out of context.  He provided me with the link and I satisfied myself that the person who posted it was not advocating violence at all; he was pro-gay and anti-violence and the comment was intended to show where the anti-gay rhetoric in the discussion could lead.


Now, in high dudgeon at the injustice of it all, I posted a comment on SX defending Graham and Online Opinion and I wrote an email to a number of influential bloggers and columnists suggesting that they join me by writing in Graham’s defence.


Graham emailed back saying, in effect, “Nice email, but the facts are wrong.”


It seems that in my rush to play the part of Crusader Rabbit,  I hadn’t done my homework on the issue thoroughly enough, and Graham had (quite rightly) assumed that I had.  The advertising, it seems,  wasn’t lost because of the comment mentioned on SX, it was withdrawn because of another comment altogether.  This comment read:


“It’s interesting that so many people are offended by the truth. The fact is that homosexual activity is anything but healthy and natural. Certain lgbt’s want their perversion to be called “normal” and “healthy” and they’ve decided the best way to do this is have their “marriages” formally recognised. But even if the law is changed, these “marriages” are anything but healthy and natural. It is, in fact, impossible for these people to be married, despite what any state or federal law may say.”

Posted by MrAnderson, Thursday, 25 November 2010 10:09:39 AM


A gay reader brought the comment to Graham’s attention and asked for the reference to the ‘perversion’ of LGBT people to be removed.  Although Graham did not agree with the remark, he felt that it was a view which was commonly expressed among a minority of Australians, which did not incite violence, and which would have been acceptable (if widely condemned) in a parliamentary debate.  Given his commitment to free speech, Graham refused to delete it.


Having been rebuffed by Graham, the reader then decided to complain to the site’s advertisers.  Someone within IBM (it is not clear whether it was the same person) also complained to their management.  As a result, IBM and the ANZ decided to withdraw their advertising from Online Opinion and a number of other advertisers followed.  Sadly, as Online Opinion is part of an advertising co-operative, this meant that other bloggers also lost a substantial amount of their income, despite having nothing to do with Graham’s editorial decisions.


Now I was in a quandary.  In fact, I felt like I’d been hit with a ton of bricks.  All day I’d been sending supportive emails to Graham and shouting loudly from my ‘freedom of speech’ soap-box.  He thought I was an ally.  I thought I was an ally!  Now I realized I’d gone off half-cocked and, with this new information to hand, I felt I couldn’t defend Graham’s actions.  I felt sick, conflicted and embarrassed.  OK, I felt stupid.  I’d emailed all these people and said ‘stand up for freedom of speech!’  Now, if I was to be true to my own moral compass, I was going to have to write back to them and say, “Given new information to hand, I’m no longer standing up for free speech.”  I wished that a large black hole would just open up and consume me right then and there.


When I told Graham that I could no longer speak out publicly in his defence, he said I didn’t understand what free speech means.  Perhaps he was right.  I support free speech within limits, but not untrammeled free speech.  Perhaps that’s a terrible cop-out.  Perhaps it is ideologically unsound.  All I know is that every ethical atom of my being was screaming at me that I couldn’t defend the right of anyone to call a gay person perverted.  Nor could I support the decision not to delete a comment which was not only highly offensive, but, given the weight of expert medical and sociological opinion, patently untrue.


https://thatsmyphilosophy.wordpress.com/2011/02/12/my-free-speech-fiasco

What do Cardinal George Pell and Rabbi Ronald Lubofsky have in common?

Feb 26, 2019

What do Rabbi Emeritus Ronald Lubofsky AM and His Eminence Cardinal George Pell AC have in common?

Both appointed to the Order of Australia.
Both revered in their religious circles.
Both vehemently opposed to homosexuality and sexual immorality.
Both sexually abused / predated on young boys.

Pell pulled out his penis and approached the other boy, grabbing his head.
The complainant asked Pell, “Can you let us go? We didn’t do anything.”
“I could see his [the boy’s] head being lowered towards his [Pell’s] genitalia,” the complainant recalled. “Then he sort of started squirming, he was struggling. His head was being controlled and it was down near archbishop Pell’s genitals. I was no more than a couple of metres away.”
This took place for about a minute or two. Pell stopped and turned to the complainant.
“And then he put his penis into my mouth. Archbishop Pell was standing, he was erect, and he pushed it into my mouth. He instructed me to undo my pants and take off my pants, and I did that. And then he started touching my genitalia. Archbishop Pell was touching himself on his penis with his other hand.”
When it was over the complainant, in shock, pulled up his pants. The boys left the room and tried to rejoin the procession before returning their robes.
About a month later, again after Sunday solemn mass, Pell passed the complainant in a corridor of the church and attacked. He pushed the boy against a wall and forcefully squeezed his genitals through his choir robes.
“Nothing was said,” the complainant said. “It was all within a matter of seconds.”

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/feb/26/five-times-guilty-how-george-pells-child-abusing-past-caught-up-with-him-in-courtroom-43

The world can now know that a little over 20 years ago, in Pell’s first months as archbishop of Melbourne, this scourge of sex was forcing choirboys to suck his penis.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/feb/26/brutal-and-dogmatic-george-pell-waged-war-on-sex-even-as-he-abused-children

It was alleged by two men in 2012 that the late Rabbi Emeritus Ronald Lubofsky AM of St Kilda Synagogue masturbated in front of them during their bar mitzvah lessons in the 1970s and 1980s.  These men would have been 12 or 13 years old boys at the time.  So far neither of these men have gone public with the details of this sexual abuse.
Members of the board of St Kilda Synagogue were made aware of these allegations at the time they arose.

https://mikeybear.com.au/2018/01/08/rabbi-emeritus-ronald-lubofsky-am-child-sexual-predator

Australian Christian Lobby launches new logo

Feb 13, 2019

I love the new Australian Christian Lobby logo.  For once they’ve been totally honest.

ACL logo


Clarification of photo with Jack Chapman and me used in noodlesandbeefleftovers tumblr post

Nov 7, 2018

This photo of Jack Chapman (red top) and me (green top) was taken at Bearaoke at The Laird Hotel on June 14 2012.  It was posted to the VicBears Facebook page the following day:

The photo has since been re-used in a November 3 2108 noodlesandbeefleftovers tumblr post:

20181103 Noodles and Beef Leftovers Tumblr.png

It’s unclear what the purpose of the photo appearing in the tumblr post is but it may be connected to the sentence:

Jack had been subservient before getting the muscles and way before silicone was in the picture.

Under the VicBears post on Facebook I explained what Jack was doing to me:

20120615 VicBears Jack Michael photo

I was buying raffle tickets that were supporting the Anti Violence Project. I elected for the “$5 for as many as can fit the length of my inside-leg measurement” option and Jack was measuring me up.

Jack was kneeling in front of me so he could put a tape measure around my leg.  It was a beautiful moment of hilarity between Jack and me, but it was nothing more than that.

I would be very disappointed if this photo of us was being used to prove some point about Jack different to what actually happened.


VicBears: Celebrating the life of Jack Chapman

Oct 28, 2018

Jack Chapman

Celebrating the life of Jack Chapman
Hosted by VicBears Inc.

Saturday, 10 November 2018 from 12:00-17:00
The Laird
149 Gipps Street, Abbotsford, Abbotsford, Victoria, Australia 3067

VicBears would like to invite you to celebrate the life of Jack Chapman, one of our nearest and dearest. He touched so many lives not only here in Melbourne but around the world. To know him, was to feel loved.

At his strictest orders, this is not to be a sad or solemn occasion, but one to celebrate the ways he lived his life – limitless enthusiasm, boundless hilarity and unconquerable courage.

The ever amazing boys at The Laird have graciously given us the venue for a few hours and allowed us to extend the invite to ALL of Jacks family and friends. Anyone that knew him or knew someone touched by him is most welcome to attend and make a contribution (not just the men)!

VicBears will also be unveiling a few special surprises on the day to ensure this beloved ranga is never forgotten and continues to make a lasting positive impact on our community for years to come.

Please ensure you RSVP on this Facebook event as light snacks will be provided and drinks will be available for purchase from the bar.

——————————————————————-

Even if you can’t be there on the day YOU CAN STILL CONTRIBUTE! No matter where you are in the world…

Prior to the day we are calling for any and all farewell messages, photos, stories or memories of your best moments with Jack. These will be displayed around the venue on the day and made available to his family (so keep them mostly family friendly please) so that they can see how much he was loved and how many lives he touched.

Send your contributions to kevin@vicbears.org.au as soon as possible to make sure they’re included.


Gladys Liu: anti-transgender, anti-marriage equality, and an unrepresentative Liberal candidate for Chisholm

Oct 26, 2018

The Age (October 26 2018) reported the Victorian Liberals have announced Gladys Liu as their candidate for Chisholm:

The Victorian Liberals have chosen a party activist and business consultant to contest the Chisholm electorate, presently held by Julia Banks, who controversially announced plans to quit parliament after going public with bullying allegations.

Gladys Liu was preselected late on Thursday evening for the federal seat in Melbourne’s east, which includes the suburbs of Box Hill, Chadstone and Mount Waverley.

Gladys Liu

Gladys Liu

The Guardian (July 12 2016) reported of Gladys Liu:

“A Liberal campaigner in Chisholm has been credited as masterminding an anti-Labor smear campaign focused on the anti-bulling Safe Schools Coalition and marriage equality.”

Guardian Australia has reported messages on Chinese social media site WeChat orchestrated by the Liberal Gladys Liu that included strong opposition of Safe Schools and same-sex marriage.

Liu said many Chinese people didn’t want the next generation “destroyed” by “rubbish” like transgender identity and believe same-sex marriage is “against normal practice”.

The 2017 ABS Marriage Equality Postal Survey returned a 62% YES vote in Chisholm:

 

ABS Marriage Equality Postal Survey Chisholm

Neos Kosmos (Oct 27 2017) reported of Chisholm MP Julia Banks:

Federal Member for Chisholm Julia Banks declared her unequivocal support for same-sex marriage this week, saying that the most disturbing aspect of the ‘no’ campaign was the view that “only a marriage between a man and a woman will ensure the protection of children”.

Ms Banks said the fact that two loving people are not able to have the equal rights at law that millions of Australians enjoy in loving marriages, was “about standing for equality for all, regardless of gender, race, sexuality or ethnicity.”

The Liberal MP, who holds one of Australia’s most marginal federal seats, and one with a diverse multicultural electorate, added that marriage equality was about “equality before the law” and that respectful debate on the issue was vital and a “cornerstone” of Australian values.

If Gladys Liu is the best the Liberal Party can come up with to represent the views of the voters in Chisholm, one of Australia’s most marginal federal seats, then they have failed badly in their choice of candidate.


Memorial for Jack Chapman

Oct 25, 2018

MEMORIAL FOR JACK CHAPMAN
February 13, 1990-October 15, 2018

The family of Jack Chapman cordially invites you to join them in celebrating the extraordinary life of their beloved son and brother.

15 McCrae Drive, Doreen
Victoria, Australia
Saturday, October 27, 1pm

The family requests you bring your thoughts, prayers and fondest memories of Jack. Reception to follow. Bring a plate.

Jack Chapman and family


%d bloggers like this: