"Man refuses to drive bus because it 'promotes homosexuality'"

Roilshead · 17 Aug 2019

He was wrong and the company was right to sack

yorkie said:
Perhaps the driver should have concentrated on transporting people from A to B?

The reason the passengers were delayed was due to the driver not concentrating on this; surely you can see that?

The company should have had the sense not to put themselves or their employees in this position, by promoting (which is what they did) what is still to many people a contentious subject. I accept that this argument then opens up a whole debate about drivers refusing to drive buses with all sorts of adverts contrary to their beliefs . . . but perhaps some arguments should carry more weight than others?

RailUK Forums

Alexbus12 · 17 Aug 2019

Roilshead said:
The company should have had the sense not to put themselves or their employees in this position,

It was a coloured destination supporting a community....

bramling · 17 Aug 2019

Alexbus12 said:
What are peoples views on this? I've just been having an argument over twitter with someone who thinks the driver should have had a choice whether or not he drove a bus promoting pride. I personally think the driver ought to reconsider the career he's entered, but that's my opinion

https://news.sky.com/story/bus-driv...pride-themed-bus-11785459?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter

I can sort of see two sides to this one.

Personally, I don't see why any sexuality should need to be "promoted", or to look at it another way singled out. In fact, I find it quite belittling that such a sensitive subject is reduced to rainbow colours, something which many of us will more associate with nursery school. So in that sense, personally I find the bus company's actions in doing this misguided. Having said that, I do agree with the comments elsewhere on this thread that there does need to be an effort to normalise sexuality, which is something which has rightly been going on for many years, but I think there's more sensible ways of achieving that objective than multicoloured colours on the front of a bus.

Having said that, the driver doesn't really have a leg to stand on as he's employed to drive the bus which is allocated to him, and this isn't really a good reason not to.

Tetchytyke · 17 Aug 2019

Roilshead said:
The company should have had the sense not to put themselves or their employees in this position, by promoting (which is what they did) what is still to many people a contentious subject.

I think this statement is very telling...you're not in agreement with his political views are you?

Roilshead said:
I'd love to see Translink Foyle/Metro/Ulsterbus promote Pride.

Your wish is my command

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.be...st-pride-2019-translink-offering-16593791.amp

With thousands of people preparing to take part in the LGBT+ calendar’s main event, this is the second year Translink is providing a bus for people with accessibility issues to take part in the parade.

Anyone who may find it difficult to walk such as those with mobility, mental health or sensory issues as well as families with young children are invited to join Translink and be part of the celebrations.

Tetchytyke · 17 Aug 2019

bramling said:
Personally, I don't see why any sexuality should need to be "promoted", or to look at it another way singled out.

I marched in the Newcastle Pride parade a couple of years ago as an ally, and plenty of homophobic remarks were shouted at the parade. The parade isn't "promoting" anything, either. It started as a request for equal treatement...we're a long way from that.

This bus wasn't "promoting" being gay either, which seems to have been overlooked somewhat.

Remember that until very recently it was ILLEGAL to discuss being gay in school. And look at the protests in Birmingham (publicly supported by senior Tory MPs) trying to get us back there. We're not as liberal as we like to make out. Look at some of the comments on this thread. "Be softly softly" (i.e. don't hold hands with your girlfriend on a London bus).

Bletchleyite · 17 Aug 2019

Pluto said:
Refusing to stock Jeffrey Archer books is really nothing short of censorship, I think customers can judge for themselves when they are "crap" or not. You seem to loathe quite a few people with a passion, I'm no great fan of George Galloway but the word loathe isn't in my vocabulary.

Getting back to the bus issue, if a driver can refuse to drive a bus because they don't like an advert on it where would it end?

That of course is different. A bus company owner can decline to take a specific advert as it is his bus. A bus driver is paid to drive the bus of the company's choice, not his choice.

Stan Drews · 17 Aug 2019

ChrisPJ said:
To be fair times have changed since Brian Souter was donating large sums to campaigns supporting the continued prevention of the promotion of homosexuality in schools. He doesn’t own Stagecoach outright now, and didn’t back then so I thought it a little unfair that some pink paint was poured over their buses, however if pressed on the matter now I’m sure he would be a bit more guarded.

He appointed many gay people to very senior posts, so he was quite happy to judge people on merit, rather than their sexual orientation. However, the urban myth is much more sensational than the reality of the facts!

LOL The Irony · 17 Aug 2019

GusB said:
Why would heterosexuality need promotion? It's already seen as the "normal" way.

What's normal? Also something like only 30% of Gen Z's indetify as heterosexual (although the survey was done by the Gay Times (it may not be the Gay Times but another similar publication) so the results could be skewed) so it soon won't be "normal".

LOL The Irony · 17 Aug 2019

I've managed to find it (And it was the Gay Times)

Jordan Adam · 17 Aug 2019

LOL The Irony said:
I've managed to find it (And it was the Gay Times)
View attachment 67353

I wonder if that poll was done at a Pride event or Gay nightclub....

LOL The Irony said:
What's normal? Also something like only 30% of Gen Z's indetify as heterosexual (although the survey was done by the Gay Times (it may not be the Gay Times but another similar publication) so the results could be skewed) so it soon won't be "normal".

I don't personally believe there's been a "increase" in LGBTQ+ people or there will be an "increase". They've always been there, it's just these days they (thankfully) can be more open about it, hence it appears there's a higher number of LGBTQ+ people when in reality there isn't.

ChrisPJ said:
To be fair times have changed since Brian Souter was donating large sums to campaigns supporting the continued prevention of the promotion of homosexuality in schools. He doesn’t own Stagecoach outright now, and didn’t back then so I thought it a little unfair that some pink paint was poured over their buses, however if pressed on the matter now I’m sure he would be a bit more guarded.

You might want to get someone to update his website which still "promotes" the fact he donated money to block the repeal of section 28... Additionally it wasn't that long ago that he was sitting on the BBC Question Time table trying to block equal marriage among other things. Everyone i know who've met or spoken to Souter have said he's a fantastic guy, and i'm in no doubt that he is. But his views on these issues are rather worrying given the power/influence he has.

Ethano92 · 17 Aug 2019

LOL The Irony said:
I've managed to find it (And it was the Gay Times)
View attachment 67353

The word 'completely' probably changed that result a bit, in that more younger people growing up in a more accepting society from earlier on are willing to accept that they don't have to be 'completely straight, live up to masculine expectations etc' and from that I would like to say no, I don't think masculinity and homosexuality are the same thing, and don't believe the gay = feminine stereotype before any misunderstandings.

As for where it was done, that obviously also changed those results, if it was done online I suspect that just reflects the demographic of the gay times.

takno · 17 Aug 2019

Ethano92 said:
The word 'completely' probably changed that result a bit, in that more younger people growing up in a more accepting society from earlier on are willing to accept that they don't have to be 'completely straight, live up to masculine expectations etc' and from that I would like to say no, I don't think masculinity and homosexuality are the same thing, and don't believe the gay = feminine stereotype before any misunderstandings.

As for where it was done, that obviously also changed those results, if it was done online I suspect that just reflects the demographic of the gay times.

I agree that the word completely does change the results. IIRC from the research the number in the age group describing themselves as gay or bi-sexual as opposed to faintly curious was more like 20%, which is higher but not wildly higher than in other age groups.

As to the quality of the survey, it was done online, as almost all surveys are now, since it's pretty much impossible to do them effectively by phone anymore. It was done by YouGov though using one of their standard panels, so it isn't at all related to the readers of The Gay Times.

bramling · 17 Aug 2019

Arctic Troll said:
I marched in the Newcastle Pride parade a couple of years ago as an ally, and plenty of homophobic remarks were shouted at the parade. The parade isn't "promoting" anything, either. It started as a request for equal treatement...we're a long way from that.

This bus wasn't "promoting" being gay either, which seems to have been overlooked somewhat.

Remember that until very recently it was ILLEGAL to discuss being gay in school. And look at the protests in Birmingham (publicly supported by senior Tory MPs) trying to get us back there. We're not as liberal as we like to make out. Look at some of the comments on this thread. "Be softly softly" (i.e. don't hold hands with your girlfriend on a London bus).

I find it very hard to reconcile something where on the one hand the objective (absolutely 100% rightly) is for it to be completely normal to the extent where eyelids aren’t batted, yet on the other hand it needs to be very visibly singled out - in this case on a bus.

I get the point that this remains a work in progress, however with there seeming to be some outwardly concerning evidence that the steady progress of changing attitudes has possibly shown signs of grinding to a halt recently, maybe there does need to be a rethink that things have gone as far as they’re going to go with pride marches and rainbows, and perhaps it’s time for a more sophisticated approach.

In all honesty I really find representing people’s sexuality with a rainbow extremely belittling, be it on a bus or elsewhere. How can something be regarded as totally normal when it has it’s own specific symbol which by definition singles it out?

davp · 17 Aug 2019

Understanding that people should be able to live without fear of discrimination should be really straightforward. The problem is not the Pride movement. Problems include hate crime increasing, people experiencing stigma, discrimination, continuing and significant inequalities etc.

My first Pride was 32 years ago. It has taken a long time to get where we are and there’s still some way to go. The solution is just treating others with respect and kindness at which point Pride will start to move into history. I like the rainbow flag. I love the Pride bus in Edinburgh. A few more of those would be fab.

https://www.lothianbuses.com/news/2019/06/were-proud-to-support-pride/

takno · 17 Aug 2019

bramling said:
I find it very hard to reconcile something where on the one hand the objective (absolutely 100% rightly) is for it to be completely normal to the extent where eyelids aren’t batted, yet on the other hand it needs to be very visibly singled out - in this case on a bus.

I get the point that this remains a work in progress, however with there seeming to be some outwardly concerning evidence that the steady progress of changing attitudes has possibly shown signs of grinding to a halt recently, maybe there does need to be a rethink that things have gone as far as they’re going to go with pride marches and rainbows, and perhaps it’s time for a more sophisticated approach.

In all honesty I really find representing people’s sexuality with a rainbow extremely belittling, be it on a bus or elsewhere. How can something be regarded as totally normal when it has it’s own specific symbol which by definition singles it out?

The aim of it being a rainbow is to celebrate everybody's sexuality, and a culture of acceptance. By seeing it as a private party for previously-opressed minorities you are essentially missing out on the decade's biggest party. It's fine not to be interested if parties aren't your thing (they aren't really mine either), but society as a whole quite likes them, and if you're going to have one it might as well celebrate something.

I don't disagree that there may have been a small rise in hate crimes and various intolerance recently (there were some big headlines, but the underlying data was an attitudes survey which didn't show anything significant outside the margin of error, and reports of crime which aren't wildly outside the increase in crime generally). I think that's mostly down to 9 years of generally weaselly government increasing poverty and setting everybody against each other, combined with cuts to police, education and social services budgets. Certainly whatever it is down to, it is unlikely to be because violent bigots are specifically angry about a few rainbow flags.

davp · 17 Aug 2019

LGBT folk do experience significant issues that non LGBT folk do not. LGB*T* is not just about sexuality. Hate crime is real and rose 5% in Scotland last year. Sadly we do still have some way to go. Respect and kindness is all that’s being asked here.

I think it would have been better for the driver to have been supported to improve his awareness and work through some of his views. However once someone had filmed the incident and put it in the public domain the outcome was inevitable.

507021 · 18 Aug 2019

When I go into work, my employer expects me to drive the bus I am given regardless of what I think about what livery it's in or what adverts are on it. As they pay my wages, which helps me to support my family, I am more than happy to do so.

Ultimately, I'm not bothered whether the bus I'm driving advertises cars made by Ford when I prefer Renaults or Skodas, or if it's in a livery to promote Everton when I support Liverpool. However, I'm fairly sure if I objected to driving a bus based on either of those, then I'd be told to either drive the bus or go and work somewhere else.

I also have to wonder why he thinks the rainbow coloured numbers on the destination apparatus is apparently "promoting" homosexuality as if it were a product or brand.

Personally, I'm proud to work for a company which has chosen to celebrate and support Pride in the region I live in.

Jim Jehosofat · 20 Aug 2019

Perhaps this driver should be confined to driving Konect's route 8 from Toftwood to Norwich which is marketed as "Straight 8"!

riceuten · 20 Aug 2019

6Gman said:
Are you really suggesting that telling a lie is the appropriate course of action?

And they do. The woman who makes my bacon roll in the morning wears a headscarf - I asked whether she minded and she said ‘it’s not me eating it, is it?’ And ‘If I objected that much I wouldn’t work here’

Deerfold · 20 Aug 2019

riceuten said:
And they do. The woman who makes my bacon roll in the morning wears a headscarf - I asked whether she minded and she said ‘it’s not me eating it, is it?’ And ‘If I objected that much I wouldn’t work here’

How is that telling a lie?

chubs · 21 Aug 2019

Some of the comments on the Konectbus FB page are sick.

I cant report them as I deleted my account years ago, not that FB would take action anyway.

bb21 · 21 Aug 2019

chubs said:
Some of the comments on the Konectbus FB page are sick.

Just goes to show the world (or even just supposedly first world countries) have a long way to go yet for equality.

Tetchytyke · 21 Aug 2019

Stan Drews said:
He appointed many gay people to very senior posts, so he was quite happy to judge people on merit, rather than their sexual orientation. However, the urban myth is much more sensational than the reality of the facts!

What urban myth? He spent millions of his own money campaigning for schools to be banned from discussing homosexuality. It makes him a homophobe.

"My mate's gay" doesn't change that in any way, shape or form.

hst43102 · 21 Aug 2019

Has anyone noticed that nearly ALL Stagecoach buses/trains carry rainbow livery?

alex397 · 21 Aug 2019

bb21 said:
Just goes to show the world (or even just supposedly first world countries) have a long way to go yet for equality.

And social media sites like Facebook are perhaps helping to reverse so many decades of progress. Hate crimes are increasing after all.

alex397 · 21 Aug 2019

chubs said:
Some of the comments on the Konectbus FB page are sick.

I cant report them as I deleted my account years ago, not that FB would take action anyway.

Useless FB might not do anything, but Konectbus should be able to remove the homophobic messages (some of which were made over a week ago) as its their page. This has the potential to be a PR disaster for them really.

bb21 said:
Just goes to show the world (or even just supposedly first world countries) have a long way to go yet for equality.

And social media sites like Facebook are perhaps helping to reverse so many decades of progress. Hate crimes are increasing, and its obvious that social media is one of the reasons for this.

cnjb8 · 21 Aug 2019

alex397 said:
Useless FB might not do anything, but Konectbus should be able to remove the homophobic messages (some of which were made over a week ago) as its their page. This has the potential to be a PR disaster for them really.
.

Do you mean 0eople commenting about this on their FB page?

alex397 · 27 Aug 2019

cnjb8 said:
Do you mean 0eople commenting about this on their FB page?

Yes, I did.

LOL The Irony · 28 Aug 2019

alex397 said:
Useless FB might not do anything, but Konectbus should be able to remove the homophobic messages (some of which were made over a week ago) as its their page. This has the potential to be a PR disaster for them really.

Tech companies are quite happy to sell your data to the highest bidder but when it comes to the police needing it for investigation, they suddenly won't hand it out. So maybe that's why the messages are still up.

Tetchytyke · 28 Aug 2019

LOL The Irony said:
So maybe that's why the messages are still up

Businesses can moderate their own pages. It's easy enough to do- I used to do it for one of the students' unions I was a manager at- but it takes time. And is also soul-destroying; some of the stuff posted towards us was horrific.

"Man refuses to drive bus because it 'promotes homosexuality'"

Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

On Moderation

On Moderation

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Emeritus Moderator

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

On Moderation

Veteran Member