Will the UK or US allow a gay prime minster/president? Watch

Steevee
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#21
Report 7 years ago
#21
I'd have no problem with it. To be honest, to anyone who actually is politically minded it would be a non-issue. You vote for Party and Policy, the actual PM comes a long way down the list.
0
reply
stayd001
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#22
Report 7 years ago
#22
I think the real question is will the UK allow a female lesbian, Muslim, asylum seeker from Poland to become the Prime Minister.
2
reply
Hamesh
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#23
Report 7 years ago
#23
I don't think the majority would care. I wouldn't.
0
reply
channy
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#24
Report 7 years ago
#24
That's about as ridiculous as having a black PM or President, such rubbish! Unheard of...









...problem?
1
reply
TheMeister
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#25
Report 7 years ago
#25
(Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
Well seeing as we don't elect PMs, it's down to the parties whether and whether they're willing to vote in a gay party leader. I would expect Labour to do so within 20 years, and the Tories to follow promptly afterwards, and if they do it at the right time then it's entirely possible yes.
Why would the Tories be second? They had the first female leader and PM, Labour's had neither.
0
reply
AdzD
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#26
Report 7 years ago
#26
Edward Heath was gay and he was a tory, although he wasn't very open about it at the time everyone knew.
0
reply
tieyourmotherdown
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#27
Report 7 years ago
#27
(Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
Well seeing as we don't elect PMs, it's down to the parties whether and whether they're willing to vote in a gay party leader. I would expect Labour to do so within 20 years, and the Tories to follow promptly afterwards, and if they do it at the right time then it's entirely possible yes.
Funnily enough the Tories apparently have the most gay/lesbian MP's in Parliament at the moment (as a percentage), more so than any other party, and to be honest nowadays, I really don't think Labour are any more likely to elect a gay leader than the Tories. 5 years ago I probably would have agreed with you, but not now.
0
reply
channy
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#28
Report 7 years ago
#28
...problem?
0
reply
Aphotic Cosmos
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#29
Report 7 years ago
#29
(Original post by TheMeister)
Why would the Tories be second? They had the first female leader and PM, Labour's had neither.
Mostly the Tory hard right voting against any gay candidate. A lot of the Tory party sits comfortably to the right of the cabinet and even the majority of the backbenches. The kind of people who love outspoken conservative cynics like Peter Hitchens, the kind of people who are in agreement with UKIP on social policies like section 28.
0
reply
f00ddude
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#30
Report 7 years ago
#30
remeber WE have to vote for the party and effectively the PM
the UK is more likely to look past this, as our PMs generally have more substance than style
USA seem to vote on style rather than substance and image of their president is far more important
0
reply
Aphotic Cosmos
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#31
Report 7 years ago
#31
(Original post by tieyourmotherdown)
Funnily enough the Tories apparently have the most gay/lesbian MP's in Parliament at the moment (as a percentage), more so than any other party, and to be honest nowadays, I really don't think Labour are any more likely to elect a gay leader than the Tories. 5 years ago I probably would have agreed with you, but not now.
Gay/lesbian MPs are commonplace these days and Cameron specifically looked for LGBT candidates to fill seats in the Commons to try and shed the image, probably because he himself is towards the more liberal end of the party. However, full members of the Conservative party have the final say on the leadership and a fair share are not particularly tolerant of LGBT issues. I doubt they would welcome a gay leader with open arms.
1
reply
tehsponge
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#32
Report 7 years ago
#32
The idea of someone not being voted in because of their sexual orientation is laughable. It is so depressing how stupid people are sometimes.
0
reply
Tefhel
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#33
Report 7 years ago
#33
Doesn't Iceland (or maybe it was another northern european country) have a lesbian head of state? I remember it being in the news a while go. If they can I don't see why we couldn't.
0
reply
magnum.opus
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#34
Report 7 years ago
#34
(Original post by Lewis :D)
Oh thanks, do you have a link for the new one? I found this survey interesting you see, and it would be nice to see a more updated version
Sure thing. Here is CNN's coverage of the poll:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...-sex-marriage/

I only skimmed the article, but I think it has everything you're looking for.
0
reply
mevidek
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#35
Report 7 years ago
#35
I doubt the Republicans would let a homosexual into their party...
0
reply
ShadowConspiracy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#36
Report 7 years ago
#36
I hope they don't, Imagine that...... A big meeting to discuss war and he comes out with 'ohhh no we can't do that, let's just give them flowers and be friends'
0
reply
kerily
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#37
Report 7 years ago
#37
I'm not sure about the UK.

Firstly, you have to look at boundaries which might stop LGB people getting involved in politics - they'd almost certainly feel alienated by the culture of a party like UKIP or the BNP, for example, especially at grassroots level, where it comes down to individual members and they would possibly feel uncomfortably attending meetings. Even in a party like the Conservatives, I would be surprised if many of their community-level supporters weren't homophobic, or at least 'traditional'. So they'd automatically be limited regarding which party they could join and work their way up the ranks of. Of course, there will be the odd area where the local UKIP branch or whatever is honestly very gay-friendly, but I would imagine that's the exception and not the rule.

It also depends on media attacks. There's a culture of 'let's fight against political correctness!' in a lot of forms of media, which can manifest by people making offensive comments about minorities to show that they're not afraid to be 'controversial'. And if we did have someone openly gay running for a top government spot, there'd be media coverage of their family - if they had kids, or if they didn't have kids, or their partner, or what their partner was like or whatever. Even if that wasn't openly homophobic in tone, it serves to reinforce the idea that an LGB politician was somehow 'different'. And there would be openly homophobic things said under the guise of reasonable criticism, too.

Then it does also depend on whether people would vote for them. I don't think it's anywhere as simple as someone thinking 'oh, they're gay, better not vote for them' - it's how the whole situation is interpreted by many people. A lot of people seem to get a subtle sense of 'otherness' from LGB people - I think it'd be difficult (although not impossible) for a gay man to ingratiate himself as a 'man of the people', in the style of someone like John Prescott, because of the preconceptions people would have. Again, this comes down to the point above about which parties they could join; I don't think an openly LGB candidate would do as well in working-class areas.

And all of this only really applies for a 'normal' LGB person - someone who just happened to be a lesbian but was otherwise a white cisgender woman who wasn't too politically extreme or too masculine, or someone who just happened to be gay but was otherwise a white cisgender man who wasn't very flamboyant or feminine. I don't think there's any danger that an openly transgendered or genderqueer person would be voted in any time soon.
0
reply
visa
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#38
Report 7 years ago
#38
(Original post by ShadowConspiracy)
I hope they don't, Imagine that...... A big meeting to discuss war and he comes out with 'ohhh no we can't do that, let's just give them flowers and be friends'
People thought that of a woman being PM before Margaret Thatcher.
0
reply
Bella Occhi
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#39
Report 7 years ago
#39
(Original post by DVnotDivvy)
We've had female Prime Minister? Oh, do you mean that mannish thing that ruled Britain during the 80s?

But yea, Britain will probably have no problem electing Ed Milliband as PM. As for the US, they will never elect an OPENLY gay President.
Ed Miliband isn't gay
0
reply
OMGWTFBBQ
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#40
Report 7 years ago
#40
I think people are overestimating how accepting the UK would be.

There are still plenty of people who would take exception to it, its just easy to project your own beliefs upon the nation you represent.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (316)
37.44%
No - but I will (66)
7.82%
No - I don't want to (62)
7.35%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (400)
47.39%

Watched Threads

View All