Apparently, it’s all right to believe you’re insulting the bus dispatcher by calling him ‘pufta’
This is the infamous Youtube video of the so-called ‘attack on two lesbians’ by an off-duty bus dispatcher who was just using the bus to go home.
The person who uploaded the video thought the main news event here is the bus company’s ‘service with a smile’, but let’s let that constant drone of anti-Arriva whining aside right now and concentrate on the real issues.
I’m going to stick my neck out here and say that the off-duty dispatcher was perfectly within his rights to voice his objections to fondling and smooching on a public bus. PDAs, especially of the grosser variety, are not appreciated by anybody but those directly involved, and most sensible people know better than to smooch on a public bus, even if with a member of the opposite sex.
It is my observation that when couples begin smooching and fondling in a public context where the audience is ‘trapped’ and cannot get away (like on a bus), they do it precisely to attract attention and because they are exhibitionists. Couples who feel they are considered to be unconventional by society – like homosexual couples or black/white couples – sometimes actually do this sort of thing with the express purpose of provoking just this kind of upset emotions in those watching, and even an angry reaction so that they can say ‘See? This is the kind of prejudice we have to put up with.’
Nobody wants to be trapped next to a smooching couple. Most of us remember those awful days when the cinema was Smooch Central and you found yourself trapped in a seat right next to Miss Slobber and Mr Slurp, scanning the dark auditorium for vacant seats as far away as possible, into which you could leap to safety.
Watching this video, it becomes clear that the altercation began with a civilised and very polite request to the young women to stop doing whatever they were doing. ‘Oqoghdu ta’ nies,’ he tells them, making absolutely no mention of homosexuality.
The young women react like total harridans, screeching and shouting about living in a democratic country – you know, because democracy, in the minds of some, means an absence of rules on good behaviour and respect for those around you.
The next thing we know, they are out on the pavement screaming and one young woman has fallen. I don’t know what it looks like to you, but that bus-dispatcher is holding his face there and to me it looks like she has lunged at him and fallen back on the rebound, or was pushed off him.
Homosexual attack or no homosexual attack, there is no way on earth I am going to stand up for two screeching women on a bus who are obviously more than capable of standing up for themselves. It looks to me like others have to be protected from them, and not the other way round.
I’m sick and tired of some people using homosexuality (or anything else that is fashionable) as an excuse for bad behaviour. So what are we saying here – that we can object to gross PDAs between a man and a woman on a bus, but not when the people involved are a man and a man or a woman and a woman?
So let’s get this crazy situation straight. If a man gropes a woman on a bus in front of a trapped audience who can’t get away until their stop comes up (unless they wish to change buses), we are free to tut-tut and tsk-tsk loudly or even (if we are brave) ask them to please ‘oqoghdu ta’ nies’.
But if they are a gay couple, then we have to behave like the Three Monkeys and put up and shut up, because we will end up in a screaming match, possibly slapped and assaulted ourselves, and then accused of perpetrating a homophobic attack.
To crown it all, if you listen to the end of the video, you will hear one woman – it is not clear whether this is one of the women involved or just another passenger – berate the bus-dispatcher by calling him ‘pufta’.
That’s right: to stick up for two women fondling each other on a bus, she calls the bus-dispatcher ‘pufta’.
105 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Well done for this article – I agree perfectly.
There is one flaw in your whole argument – the off duty driver seems to have objected precisely because, as far as we know, it was a same sex couple. Something tells me that he would not have said anything if it was a straight couple, not least because he would not have confronted another man.
As for “pufta”, it’s used so many times to mean anything but gay.
[Daphne – So whatif he was objecting because they are a woman and another woman? He has every right to do so. People have different values and the norms of good behaviour demand that we respect them. It is precisely for this reason that even those who see nothing wrong in topless sunbathing don’t sunbathe topless in an environment where they think it might upset others. You can’t complain that others don’t respect you when you start off by not respecting them.]
Holland, you have no right to assume that he would not have objected if the inappropriate behaviour was done by a heterosexual couple.
That “something tells you” he would not have objected is not enough to put a slanderous allegation in print.
Using your logic, I should not touch my boyfriend in public or be affectionate towards him, lest I upset someone jammed in the 1950s. U hallina! Min ma jridx ma jharisx.
[Daphne – Don’t be ridiculous. That’s not what I said at all. Nobody gives a damn about displays of affection. It’s ‘get a room’ displays that put other people’s backs up, whether the individuals involved are gay or straight. I use the term PDAs for want of a better one. But it’s really all about PDSs, isn’t it.]
“So what if he was objecting because they are a woman and another woman? He has every right to do so. People have different values and the norms of good behaviour demand that we respect them.”
So does that mean that I have the right to beat you if you do not cover up your entire body with a Burka, since the sight of an uncovered woman offends my values?
You employ the exact same reasoning as patriarchal male chauvinists/religious zealots. Your right to not be offended does not trump my right to physical safety.
[Daphne – Who beat who, Zachary? The sound effects on this video make it amply clear that the man was at far greater risk of physical injury than the two women were. Your argument is fallacious. I never said that the woman were wrong to smooch, therefore the transport official was right to beat them up (which he didn’t do, anyway). I said something a lot simpler: when on a bus, mind your manners and don’t do anything that might irritate fellow passengers. I said something even simpler: that people who do this kind of thing are exhibitionists, so it is obvious that they are also going to make an even bigger exhibition when confronted.]
It all depends on what they were doing. I do not agree with your assumption that their sexuality doesn’t matter. In this case, if heterosexuals have a right to smooch in the bus, then they should too.
[Daphne – Nobody has the ‘right’ to smooch on a bus, Patrick. Buses are private property (this might come as a surprise to you) and those who buy a ticket and board the bus are under contract to behave in such a way as not to damage the bus, cause a disturbance or be a nuisance to other passengers. In any case, this is simply a matter of good manners. On public buses, do not raise your voice, play loud music, shout, smooch, fondle or whatever. Just sit there, keep quiet and read. Or stare.]
However, excessive kissing/groping/whatever might seem a little out of place on a bus whatever your sexuality may be. And you should act decently out of respect to the other passengers. However there’s nothing wrong with a little kissing as long is it doesn’t escalate.
If one lives in a tolerant society, then one should have the freedom to act like they do. If someone is offended by homosexuals kissing, that’s their problem.
According to Arriva regulations passangers must not:
“Speak or behave in a manner that is abusive, threatening or likely to cause offence to other passengers or staff. Intending passengers who in the opinion of the driver appear likely to behave in an inappropriate manner or to be under the influence of alcohol, drugs or solvents may not be permitted to travel.”
I doubt that kissing is seen as an action that is “likely to cause offence”. Therefore it is their right as a client (as part of arriva regulations) to do so — within reason, of course.
Also, the line between consumer and public rights becomes quite blurry because arriva is a private company offering a public service.
Those people with barbaric and outdated values and norms should be the ones to change, not those forming part of a social minority.
Daphne – I feel I am nowhere near to a position where I can judge this case, so I won’t. I also see the point you make in the above post. However, I see something amiss in your reply to Holland.
Something tells me that if it was instead the case that in Malta it was still deemed unacceptable for women to, say, wear trousers/pants, you would care less about respecting their values and be more vociferous in complaining about their outdated mentality, if not go ahead and wear pants in public anyway. Correct me if I’m wrong?
To say that it is equally inappropriate for couples of any orientation to smooch and grope in public, well and good. But what you say suggests that if society treats a couple of a different orientation in a different way, then that couple should just bow down and make do with being treated differently. Here is where we part ways.
[Daphne – I have said precisely the opposite: that gay couples should not think of themselves as different or more special than straight couples, especially not when the gay lobby is forever trying to get society to treat them the same way – and then promptly complains loudly when they ARE treated the same way. Displays of sexual passion (as distinct from affection/love) on public transport are completely unacceptable and extremely ill-mannered, whatever the sexuality of those involved. Requests to heterosexual couples to tone it down do not make the news because the individuals involved do not become hysterical and begin screaming about homophobia. So you never get to hear about them.]
Regardless of respect and who was in wrong and what not, his approach was far from appropriate. He could have looked the other way and handled his temper. It’s useless negativity and hate.
Like you said, people have different values. Imagine the chaos if everyone ran around stirring up fights with anyone who was disrespecting their values with such a diversity of values around.
I think Arriva employees should ask to be included in the ‘victims of hate crime’ category.
One of the girls had a problem with the uniform, challenging him to neutral ground outside the bus.
Let’s ask Nicole what she thinks.
Brava! My thoughts exactly. Let’s not forget to mention that this man also lost his job over this incident.
I believe the same happened in the recent incident in Hamrun as well, which was widely touted as a ‘homophobic’ attack. I see it much more simply as a plain old fight that escalated to blows due to silly people not knowing how to act civilised and not knowing when to shut up.
Some seem to believe that living in a ‘democracy’ means you magically become untouchable, get to do whatever you want and insult people anyway you want without any consequences.
And you’re spot on in pointing out that some are exploiting the politically correct climate and the perception of being in a ‘minority group’ to get away with bad behaviour. Then they start whining “See, this happened to us because we are discriminated”. The truth is more like “No, this happened to you because you were behaving like a**holes”.
Being part of a so called ‘minority group’ does not exempt you from the normal rules of civilised behaviour and the laws of the country.
AC/DC, this is in no way comparable to the Hamrun incident.
I hate these fondling couples on buses.
But I always have a book or a newspaper with me, so I can distract myself enough in order to avoid getting into an argument and then a fist fight with them. After all, a bus ride rarely takes longer than an hour at maximum, so it’s not like I am forced to watch these couples without end.
Let’s all relax a bit.
Exactly. So what? I haven’t been on a bus in years, but I’ve been on trains and trams, and you always come across fondling couples, loud teenagers, crying babies, barking dogs, and all kinds of annoying shit. Get over it, or buy a car.
Really? So what? Do you think you are the only one who has been on trains and trams?
I have been on them too, not hundreds, but possibly thousands of times – yes, one expects to come across loud teenagers and crying babies but I do not remember ever seeing couples fondling each other or smooching.
But I guess when one lives among people who are well-mannered and have the decency to show at least some respect to others around them they will never behave that way, will they?
Alla jbierek, kemm sirna progressivi u liberali fuq dawn il-gzejjer dan iz-zmien! Erbat’ijiem ohra nispiccaw gharwenin, naghmlu atti sesswali f’nofs ta’ triq biex nuru lil bqija tad-dinja kemm sirna tal-lajf u mohhna miftuh.
You;re forgetting one important point, Andreas, that a bus employee has the duty to stop behaviour that annoys other passengers.
In this case, the only fault was how he went about it. Then again, considering the arrogance and ignorance displayed by the couple, they would most probably have gotten on my nerves as well.
Does anyone have a link to the video on Youtube? I cannot access it from Daphne’s article.
Malta the backwater!
All this could have been avoided if everyone just minded their own business.
But in Malta, everybody’s business is everybody’s business.
Don’t do it in public and it’s nobody’s business. When you do it in front of my face it’s going to be my business whether you/me like it or not.
Even so, the dispatcher’s boorish and violent behaviour cannot possibly be condoned. I mean, come on, he asked her to “take it outside.” What a pathetic loser. X’imbarazz ta’ nies.
He should not have told them to “take it outside”.
He should have told them to “take it inside” and get a room.
Arriva are obviously not in agreement with your views. They have sacked the driver on basis of violent and antisocial behaviour, and being in breach of their diversity policy, according to their spokesman, who thankfully doesn’t give a toss about the lack of legislation in Malta. But that’s normal policy for companies born in countries with a better LGBT rights track record than ours. Such behaviour is not tolerated, fullstop.
If general reaction to PDAs were equal, I would agree with you on the above. I am all for keeping PDAs private myself too. But the truth is, if it were a boy and a girl, the dispatcher would probably not have told them ‘oqghodu ta’ nies’ and the most the general public would have done is mutter ‘get a room’ in such a way that the couple wouldn’t have heart them. You see a lot of male/female PDA around in Malta, nobody bats an eyelid or turns his/her face the other way.
Playing it down by saying it had nothing to do with their orientation doesn’t do justice to the story.
As for the word ‘pufta’, it has become so ingrained in Maltese language as an insult to someone whatever the occasion (doesn’t have to be homosexuality related), it is pointless trying to make sense of its use in this context.
As usual, Daphne, you have analysed the matter out of the box.
And as usual, Super One News yesterday evening was attempting to take political mileage out of this incident by giving it prominent attention and reporting on a Labour LGBT condemnation.
But that condemnation does not mention the use of the word “puffta” to offend the bus conductor.
I do not know if they have them in Malta, but Arriva UK have the conditions for “Conduct of Passengers” as per link below. Clearly some conditions apply to this incident.
http://www.arrivabus.co.uk/conditions-of-carriage/
Daphne, never have I agreed with you as today.
You are perfectly right. Why do they have to expect preferential treatment?
Are they now pleased because they were the reason why the man was fired?
I think this will only result in the opposite to what the gay movement are campaigning for.
Silvio, I couldn’t agree more with you on this. The last two evenings were a nightmare for me as, on facebook, I publicly declared that I do not agree with the this man being fired, and even more so, the girls shouting ”pufta” at him. Everyone attacked me saying I should be more sensitive towards the girls. You know, because I am gay too.
Well, let me tell you tha as a ”pufta” myself, I feel very offended that these girls used this word within a context of meaning coward, weak and ungutsy. So what does a man have to do to not be a pufta by a woman? Smack the living daylights off her face? And then what? She’d still have called him a pufta.
Question: were the police informed of this case? Are there proceedings? Will the girls be summoned for breaking public peace and using foul language in public, where probably even children were present? I think not!
I am all for equal rights, LGBT rights, an’ all that, but I fear that this incident has nothing valid or of sustenance to go by. The man losing his job has in itself instilled homophobia in him, his immediate family, relatives and friends. Good goin’ girls!! We stood up for two loud mouths and lost the support of say, I don’t know 10 others. At least? They probably did not have an opinion on LGBT issues. Hell, they do now!
On conclusion, I feel that this incident basically discards all the good & hard work that Gabi Calleja and her team at MGRM have been doing all these years. And, if these girls are a representation of the LGBT Community in Malta, then I really do not want to have anything to do with it.
Seems to me that playing the victim is the trend among gays, black people etc…
By way of information:
Subsidiary legislation 499/56, Passenger Transport Services Regulations.
“68I. (1) When a motor route bus is carrying passengers or is waiting to take up passengers, a passenger or an intending passenger shall not, if his condition is such as to be offensive to other passengers, or the condition of his dress or clothing is such that it may reasonably be expected to soil or injure the cushion or cushion covers of the motor route bus or the clothing of other passengers, enter or remain in or on the motor route bus after the driver or the motor route bus inspector shall have warned him either to leave or not to enter the motor route bus. Any person infringing this regulation or causing annoyance or disturbance may be immediately removed from the motor route bus by the Police, independently of any punishment to which the offender may be liable according to law. This provision shall not be used in order to treat a passenger in a discriminatory manner. For the purpose of this regulation, “discriminatory” means affording di fferent treatment to different persons attributable wholly or mainly to their respective descriptions by race, place of origin, political opinions, colour, creed, gender or sexual orientation.”
“68I. (4) No person shall in any way interfere with, obstruct or in any other way molest the driver or other authorized officer of the bus operator in the exercise of their duties nor speak to the driver while the motor route bus is in motion.”
In the video above, the conductor could only be heard asking for proper conduct.
My thoughts exactly when I read the article in The Times. When the dispatcher told them ‘Oqoghdu ta’ nies’, he must have commented as they were not behaving decently.
Otherwise why would he say something like that?
Thousands use the buses every day and nothing extraordinary happens. I have nothing against homosexuals, but I don’t want to see couples kissing and fondling each other, especially if I am on a bus and cannot get out quick enough.
Brilliantly laid out argument. I would object to paying to board a bus with my kid while two persons are snogging and fondling each other. And that’s regardless of their sex or sexuality. Just like I have the right, if not duty, to stop my son from watching content of a sexual nature on the telly, I would expect the right to take him to a public place where he would not be subjected to the same ‘content’.
It’s called having a right not to live in a place where anarchy or the law of the jungle rules. It has nothing to do with democracy, let alone the lack of it.
We’re a country of extremes. Now that all homosexual persons have come out of the closet, there almost seems to be the need for them to scream out to everyone that they’re gay. It all started when The Times printed on front page that picture of Cyrus Engerer snogging his ex boyfriend during the parade some two years ago. It’s like the need to be discreet when expressing love and affection towards someone else does not apply to homosexual couples.
The nice thing – and I’m not being sarcastic here – is that Arriva has fired this person. Whatever his point, he shouldn’t have allowed the incident to escalate to physical violence.
I agree that public-what-have-yous are not a sight to behold, but you can’t physically force someone to stop doing something you’re not enjoying as long as it doesn’t put you in some sort of danger. You, of all people, should appreciate that.
[Daphne – There was no attempt at physically forcing them to stop. It was a polite request, in a polite tone of voice, to remember their manners (oqoghdu ta’ nies). To this, the harridans responded with a great deal of screeching. They were completely in the wrong, because as passengers on public transport they were in duty bound to obey the orders of a public transport official. They are the ones who should have been arrested. But obviously, political correctness dictated that this was not to be.]
It just goes to show that they were exhibitionists. Persons with a decent sense of behaviour don’t go that low. We have to remember that there are some who’d do just about anything to be in the limelight.
If two people choose to kiss one another in public, be they homosexual or heterosexual, I don’t think we should have the right to stop them. If it bothers you, you have every right to ask them to stop but if they refuse and persist, I’m afraid you just have to live with it. Raising your voice and causing unrest on a bus over a triviality like this is certainly not the way forward.
On the other hand, I can see where you’re coming from when you say that some couples choose to engage in PDA in order to provoke some of the more conservative among us. Nonetheless, the dispatcher’s reaction to the situation was uncalled for. After having asked them to respect those around them and stop what they were doing, his options were exhausted in my opinion. He should then have taken his seat and looked the other way.
I think you’ve missed something important here. The bus is a PUBLIC place. In private you can do whatever you like, but in public that’s not the case, otherwise we’d really be in total anarchy. I’m all out for minorities and I assure you it’s not a question of morality. It’s simply a question of coexisting peacefully, without overstepping the limits of decency. You have to understand that something as intimate as a personal relationship is not of public domain. It stops within the personal and should not become an open exhibition to the public.
Great article.
Are gay people above the law nowadays simply for being gay?
The crux of the matter lies in the nature of the girls’ “behaviour”. I haven’t seen any footage justifying this outburst.
As long as public morals are not offended, I cannot justify any reaction by an official.
However, their reaction was also disproportionate and illustrates a general decline in respect towards authority, EVEN if we consider it unjustified and mistaken. We have seen various cases relating to police officers being manhandled in recent weeks.
Next time I get booked by a warden for parking on double yellow lines, I will go bawling to ONE News that I am being targetted simply for being a gay Jehovah’s Witness – and see if I can get away with it.
timesofmalta.com has a very biased article against the dispatcher based on the unreliable and incomplete footage of the cellphone camera perspective.
Having said that the dispatcher’s biggest mistake was when he challenged the two women to fight off the bus. As for footage Arriva had advertised that it would have onboard CCTV cameras on every bus but it seems that it’s not the case.
I agree with your comments, Daph, but think if Arriva did not dismiss the driver (the one who was not on duty) what a halabaloo it would have caused seeing that the anti-Arriva brigade is still at it.
Unfortunately, the driver should have controlled himself and not let the young girls provoke him in such a manner.
Also, I hope that his previous problem had nothing to do with something similar because then he really has a problem and needs help.
I also hope that the girls will not get off scott free as after all they were using foul language so that is tantamount to disturbing public peace. With due respect, Arriva needs to step up their ‘anger management’ courses for their staff to make sure that their employees can manage such situations.
I would have thought that the driver who was driving the bus, would have called the police immediately and the incident may not have degenerated in such a manner. I happened to be on a bus in London some time ago and there were some really unruly teenagers who seemed to be drunk. The bus driver made a quick phone call and on the next bus stop two policemen came on board and got the teenagers off the bus. This is what I call immediate action.
I agree totally with the comments made, but would also suggest that there is probably people out there with an agenda to force the government to bring forward a bill which allows homosexuals to ‘marry’, so that their votes would not go to the opposition.
The two incidents, so close together in time, suggest to me that certain people have been ‘hired’ to provoke such outbursts and the ‘hired’ are not necessarily homosexual: expect more of same in the coming year.
As usual, a very well written article.
There’s a place and time for everything, and behaviour in public places should be decent.
Some things should be left for behind closed doors.
Certain culture has never changed and I’m afraid that it will exist for ever. “dagha, kliem hazin, koppji jqazzuk fuq il-bus, xenati”. Kultura mishuta.
,
We cannot judge as video was mostly black and we could only hear angry voices. Arriva could have easily filmed the incident as cameras are installed on all Arriva buses.
However there are two sides to every argument which would need to be heard before passing judgement.
Oh my my my…here we see the Maltese Arab mentality rear its ugly head. It seems even Daphne is not beyond a fit of violent and angry sex-negative zealotry from time to time.
[Daphne – Maltese Arab, eh, Zachary? Spoken like a true American redneck. Funny how even homosexuals have their own racial prejudices. As for the rest, you clearly don’t seem to understand that it’s not about gay, straight or sex, but about basic good manners. On a bus, do not make a spectacle of yourself, in whatever fashion, because it annoys others. That’s all. Would you fondle your boyfriend in your grandmother’s face? If the answer is no, then it follows that you shouldn’t be doing it where somebody else’s grandmother might be present. And if the answer is yes, you have issues that need to be addressed.]
I’m sure you would blame a woman for getting raped because she was wearing provocative clothing and was therefore “asking for it.” Or maybe you wouldn’t because that is a minority group to which you belong. Absolutely shameless.
[Daphne – Your arguments are so illogical, Zachary, that I am beginning to wonder whether you actually finished high school. How exactly do you segue from the request for good manners on a bus to blaming women for getting raped to accusing me of being absolutely shameless because of an opinion I don’t even have? And just as it did with your racist jibe above, your bigotry pops up again here: women are NOT a minority group. There are far more of us than there of you men, sir. An oppressed group is not necessarily a minority group. In the Roman world, there were more slaves than there were citizens.]
I was under the impression that the Transport Ministry wanted bus drivers rather than mutaween when they hired Arriva. Perhaps the behavior of the two women went beyond decency, but it was certainly not in the driver’s job description to point that out.
[Daphne – On the contrary, Zachary, it is very much in the driver’s job description to point that out. Anything that goes beyond decency on a public bus is for the driver to control or call for help in controlling. I trust you are not suggesting here that the driver should remove drunks but not lesbians who are groping each other and who repond with shrieking hysteria to the simple request to stop – you know, just because they are lesbians and lesbians have special privileges which other people do not.]
Hahaha. Poor Daphne, you have so much to prove. Not least of which is what those two women were actually doing when the driver asked them to “oqoghdu ta’ nies.” The flying assumptions you’ve made all over this page—and your inability to correctly define the word “minority” in a political context—have left no doubt in my mind that you DID graduate from high school…in Malta.
[Daphne – Zachary, women were called a minority in the days when ignorance was rife. Women were never a minority. Women were, and in many places still are, an oppressed group/gender. You are speaking to somebody who likes to use words with accuracy. A minority means just that: a minority, meaning there are far fewer women than there are men, whch is very obviously not the case. I gave you the comparison of slaves in the Roman world: there were more slaves than citizens and they were never a minority. It was the same in colonial situations: you had the oppressed (to a greater or lesser extent) majority in the native population and the minority which did all the oppressing in the form of the colonial masters. When it comes to the accurate use of English, Zachary, I do not look to the United States of America. Yes, in your part of the world minority means ‘oppressed group’ regardless of size or relative proportion, but that’s jargon. Oh, and it’s also offensive to women in a way that might be too complicated for you to understand.]
As it happens, this American redneck has no problem kissing his boyfriend in front of his grandmother, because unlike you she is a civilized lady: she believes that her adult grandchildren should be able to live their own lives and pursue their own happiness with minimal interference from their elders. I wish I could say the same of you and the other defenders of the Maltese patriarchy.
[Daphne – I did not say ‘kissing’, Zachary. I made the express distinction between kissing and smooching. Civilised ladies do not tolerate smooching of any kind in their presence. And more to the point, civilised people smooch in private.]
Really, whatever happened to turning the other cheek? These women were not being violent (if they were, HE would have filed charges and not the other way around), but because he was offended, this driver had to cause a scene. I suppose you and he share that peculiar Maltese habit of swinging first and asking questions later when your delicate (bigoted?) sensibilities are offended.
[Daphne – You have a funny definition of violence and civilised behaviour, Zachary. Those women were asked politely to stop doing what they were doing. They should have complied. Instead, they reacted with violent aggression, screaming hysterically. Is that a normal reaction, or even acceptable? Their aggressive defiance and anger told me that they weren’t raelly targetting the transport official but al the people who had criticised them along the way. That poor sod of a transport official merely became the focus of years of pent-up rage.]
I may be a redneck, but I assure you that with all your victim-blaming talk of “special privileges” for LGBT people, you would be far more welcomed at an American Tea Party rally than I would.
‘I’m sick and tired of some people using homosexuality (or anything else that is fashionable) as an excuse for bad behaviour. So what are we saying here ‘
Ditto Daphne. Gay rights are about respecting people who happen to homosexual and acknowledging they are just like any other ordinary individual.
It is not about labeling them, giving them flags and patronising them while stripping them of the rest of their identity as people (and in many cases their dignity with it). It is certainly not about attention whoring and persecution complexes either.
Alas this is the new face of identity politics and ‘minority mafias’ in Malta and one party seems to be particularly fond of using this. I was right, many of the self proclaimed ‘liberals’ here have mainly switched labels and are just as obnoxious as their religious counterparts.
Straight couples fondle each other and kiss in public all the time. In public parks, playing fields on the streets and in squares.
[Daphne – Public parks, playing fields, squares and streets are not private property which members of the public pay to use, as buses are. There stands the crucial difference.]
You can see it in any Festa pictures When a gay couple does it is suddenly shameful. The Bus driver was a bigot and that is it. The girls should have not gotten aggressive, but they were singled out for something that straight couples all over Malta do all the time.
Now you can write a convoluted response and dig in your heals, but this post really does disappoint me. You should stand up for minority rights, because you are part of a minority of women in privileged and influential positions.
[Daphne – You are a little confused. I am not part of a minority. Nor am I confused as to whose rights were being trampled on here: the right of bus passengers not to be exposed to annoying behaviour, and their right to be protected from such annoying behaviour, by the service provider. ]
Additionally, you said you wouldn’t stand up for “screeching” women, yet you forgot that a lot of people call you a “screeching” woman.
[Daphne – I called them ‘screeching women’ because they were, literally, screeching. Not because they are women and all women are naturally defined as screechers.]
As a member of the gay community, I support your right of freedom of speech and freedom of expression as long as it is harmless. I hope one day you will do the same for me.
[Daphne – You support my right to freedom of speech and expression ‘as long as it is harmless’? You need some lessons in freedom of speech there, buster.]
Paul, I was kicked out of a club along with the girl I happened to be with at that time, after we had one too many and started showing our feelings for each other. I was even told to get a room!!
How dare this bigoted society persecute me for expressing my heterosexuality in front of it? How dare that heterophobic bouncer chuck me out because I was being who I am in front of the rest of the patrons? This is a democratic country and that gives me a right to do anything I want because I have needs.
I demand compensation
Mitrokhin, A Club is a private property not a PUBLIC property. People have the right ask you to leave their private property if they like, especially if you were drunk.
As for your situation, have you considered that perhaps they asked you to leave because you were drunk?
I grew up in Malta, straight couples make out and express their affection all over the place. Claiming you were discriminated is just silly, especially when you compare it to the gay community and the systematic discrimination around the world. If you ever want to hear stories about gay people getting tortured and beaten let me know. Thank goodness It is not a common thing in Malta.
No, I wasn’t that drunk, Paul; we were chucked because it became more than a kiss, will not go into details.
Arriva is a private company and even if it were not a private company, a bus is an area were people are concentrated in a small space and often don’t have the luxury of changing places.
That changes the rules.
In case it was lost on you, I was being sarcastic about discrimination. What applies to me should apply to you as well irrelevant of our preferred point of entry.
As regards gays in other countries, I’m quite aware as I do have friends in countries like Iran and Egypt, some of who happen to be gay. You are not one of them or part of their ‘community’, Paul, and for eff’s sake don’t attempt to compare your situation to theirs.
While things are not ideal you are not going to be lured into false dates by the police or hanged for being who you are.
In the political sense you are a minority. Women are not equally represented in Maltese politics but perhaps you are not aware of this.
[Daphne – POLITICAL SCENE? So I’m a politician now? How did that happen – when I was sleeping?]
As for Freedom, by harmless I mean physical harm. I believe people should have the right to say whatever they want as long as they don’ cause physically harm to anybody. That said, Maltese do not take a challenge gracefully, they rather keep defending there weak and morally wrong argument than admit they were wrong.
PS I never said Public parks, playing fields, squares and streets were private property, I said they were PUBLIC. Please read my first sentence carefully.
[Daphne – Public buses are at the same time private property. This is the distinction I made. A public garden is a public garden. It is not private property. The garden equivalent of a public bus would be a garden to which you are conceded admittance against payment, but which is privately owned.]
PSS: Since the Maltese Government subsidizes the bus system, it is a PUBLIC space!
Thank you for this article, Daphne. You have expressed exactly how I felt about this incident and others. I really couldn’t have said it better myself.
My boss recently hired a transexual. Her contract was not renewed because she called in sick too often and took days off unexpectedly. So she started calling my boss a homophobe. Then she expected me to resign as a declaration of solidarity, because I am gay.
It does not make sense to stand up for two women who were obivously involved in some amplified form of VPDA and then, to defend them, another calls the driver ”pufta”.
Prosit eh!
Sorry but this is total and utter tripe.
The behaviour of the dispatcher is simply inexcusable. He may have been right to ask the passengers (and I deliberately use this word) to refrain from their fondling… but from this to openly challenging a passenger to a fist-fight?
[Daphne – Openly challenging a passenger to a fist-fight? That’s not what I gathered. I heard two women screaming like crazy and a man who, like all men confronted by screaming women and who are not professionally trained to deal with them, panicked.]
How is that excusable? This is total thuggery. Uncivilised, barbaric and primitive, and this has nothing to do with the fact that the passenger was a woman (or a lesbian). It could have been ANY passenger.
[Daphne – On the contrary, the dispatcher’s request and tone of voice were extremely polite. The two women reacted to this polite request by screaming abuse and insults. The thuggery is all theirs. Presumably you are one of those who believes, despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary, that women are the gentler sex.]
The dispatcher’s option was a simple one – call the police to intervene or file a police report.
[Daphne – True. But from what I know of women and of human behaviour in general, these two would have done the same to a police officer.]
I tend to agree with DCG. PDAs (and in particular NPDAs – Noisy PDAs!) should be enjoyed privately, rather than publicly.
However, I would give the whole case the benefit of the doubt, simply because, we have no idea what the girls were doing. For all we know, they were just holding hands, and the bus-dispatcher is a homophobe par excellence. But, these are merely speculations.
[Daphne – At the risk of annoying everyone by repeating myself for the umpteenth time: it is completely normal and standard and socially acceptable for women to hold hands. It does not follow that they are lesbians. So obviously, these two were not just holding hands. Go to any girls’ school and you’ll see scores of best friends walking around holding hands.]
In any case, (and I believe you, DCG, will agree), violence should never be the answer – no matter what – especially when you’re wearing your employer’s uniform.
One final comment/question: picture an identical situation, where the allegedly-attacked couple is heterosexual. Would your article be written in an analogously antagonistic fashion?
[Daphne – Certainly. The difference, though, is that similar requests made to heterosexual couples never make the news for two reasons: 1. the couple do not respond with defensive hysteria about their sexuality, and 2. there is no ‘homophobia’ news peg.]
Was Arriva right in discharging the off-duty driver and not suspended him until the court decides his case?
Arriva found her employee guilty without even giving him a fair hearing.
Perhaps Arriva wanted to please the general public who still veiw her as a failure.
Has this case anything to do with that of Hamrun? Perhaps these lesbians wanted support those involved in Hamrun in bringing about the attention of the authorities about the hate campaign.
@Carlos
Do you refer to Arriva as ”her” because Arriva ends with an ‘a’? Like all companies, institutions etc., Arriva is inanimate so it should be referred to as ‘IT’. Please excuse the upper case, but really.
Great write up Daphne, you are right on the money.
Too bad almost everyone else screamed for this bus driver’s blood and he was fired from his job as a result.
Being called pufta is insulting because of what it implies, and not because of what it actually means but Daphne knows that already.
The LITTER QUEEN would have us believe that the girl fell but that the dispatcher might have been hurt since he was holding his face, reallyyyyyyyyy. I would like to know how many young couples were asked to joqghodu bhan nies when they were smooching on buses. the problem here is that they were a same sex couple and nothing more.
This generation is not prepared to remain in the closet or sit at the back of the bus. It’s curious how both attacks were by men and on young women. I am not suggesting inappropriate behaviour in public but if kissing is inappropriate then surely it can’t be just for gays.
What makes you conclude that he couple were fondling each other or smooching? They might have been holding hands.
[Daphne – Nobody objects to women and girls who hold hands. It’s culturally ‘instinctive’ even for heterosexual women to hold hands. We do it all the time. It starts in childhood.]
Apparently the guy was a driver who was off duty and not a dispatcher (http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=139377) . Out of curiosity, how can you tell that they were fondling? (and that the argument started with the filming? presumably there must have been some build up which motivated whoever was recording to actually start recording).
[Daphne – How can I tell that they were fondling or smooching? Because what else would have provoked an ‘oqoghdu ta’ nies’ reaction from an onlooker, short of actually going the whole hog? You forget that while men who hold hands are ‘gay’, women who hold hands are just women. And young women have even more leeway: it’s perfectly routine for them to snuggle up to each other, play with each other’s hair and so on and nobody thinks ‘lesbian’, because this kind of thing is routine.]
Don’t the buses have security cameras? That would swiftly resolve the situation. However, the fact that Arriva fired the guy pretty instantly indicates that he was at least partially in the wrong.
[Daphne – Not necessarily. In situations like this, individuals might be sacrificed to public opinion.]
Somebody having an “oqoghdu ta’ nies” reaction does not necessarily imply that they were fondling and smooching (later downgraded to fondling or smooching). I am pretty sure that the mechanics of human reaction are not linear enough to allow anybody to make that kind of conclusion without a shred of doubt.
It could be, and camera footage from the bus should help determine this and exonerate the driver, but it seems like a waste of time to write an entire article attacking the couple for over the top PDAs when you are not 100% sure what happened.
[Daphne – I am 100% sure what happened, because it doesn’t take a great deal of imagination. In fact, I actually said smooching. The Times said ‘kissing’, because they apparently can use bad grammar but not slang. Kissing offends nobody and is barely noticed because it is quick. Smooching, on the other hand, makes fellow travellers feel extremely uncomfortable, especially older people who do not like such displays. This whatever the gender of the people involved. I find it difficult to understand how suddenly, almost overnight it seems, we are in a situation in which objections to poor manners are appalling, but the poor manners themselves are justifiable, excusable, acceptable or even not poor manners at all. Next up: why it is OK to take off your pants in a democratic country on a bus, and why it is wrong/homophobic/prissy for others to object. Following instalment: why it is all right to crap on a public bus as long as you have a pooper scooper with you and clean it up afterwards and don’t actually let any part of your bottom show.]
In fact, timesofmalta.com says “they were kissing” and that the driver asked them not to sit near each other. So no fondling going on, or at least none that we know of (http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20120207/local/Bus-driver-sacked-over-assault-on-two-women.405655)
If the two ladies were misbehaving on the bus, they should be brought to justice, because the bus is a public place, and everybody has to behave decently. All sorts of people young and old are on buses, and for sure nobody would like to see this kind of behaviour.
The dispatcher was brave enough to stop them. I have nothing against gays or lesbians, but everybody should behave in public places.
At last, someone’s talking sense! Thank you, Daphne.
Arriva has been too draconian and much too precipitate to dismiss an off-duty employee who had asked politely for decent behaviour by passengers on one of their coaches. Arriva has proved itself to be partial to improper sexual behaviour by antisocial passengers and intolerant of one of their own employees who dared to ask courteously for non-offensive behaviour from an aggressive foul mouthed harridan. Arriva should have taken into consideration that its employee was seriously provoked and he was off-duty.
We seem to move from one extreme to the other. From victims of an unjust discrimination homosexuals are now being treated as untouchables who provokatively flaunt their deviant sexuality and who can do no wrong.
I agree with you. Arriva seems to be too hasty. As for all the talk about couples smooching on buses as being normal. I haven’t seen any such behaviour for a long time.
In my younger days, when youngsters were very much more restricted, any couple who wanted to have some “fun” on the bus used to go to the backseat.
Why this sudden surge of anti lesbians? Makes one wonder.
Deviant sexuality huh? This coming from an M.D….
Precisely because I am an M.D, I know that normal (not deviant) sexual acts take place between persons of opposite sex. Only such heterosexual behaviour could possibly lead to procreation and survival of the species and that is its basic physiological, natural purpose.
Francis Saliba MD – Please don’t use your profession to justify your ignorant opinions. You’re completely wrong; homosexuality was removed from the American psychiatric association list of mental illness in 1973, and even that was too late. We’re now in 2012.
Sexual orientation is not about physiology – if it were, it wouldn’t exist.
Dr. Saliba:
It wouldn’t be a misappropriation of the word to call sex for procreation deviant either. The most common form of sex is for pleasure, not for procreation, hence that’s the “normal” sexual acts. What it’s “purpose” is – whatever that really means in terms of natural acts – is completely irrelevant.
Shame on you for using the term ‘deviant sexuality’. Go tell that to the APA, Dr Saliba…
DEVIANT SEXUALITY this coming from an MD educated and very literate and with impeccable grammar. Nice one DOC
Shame on you Dr Saliba, why not bring back shock treatment while you’re at it.
I’m really considering going back to using the buses; it’s becoming interesting nowadays.
Yes, I agree the despatcher had every right to stop them for playing around in a public place like a bus. Perhaps he could have done it in a calmer way though.
The off-duty driver seems to have tried to go beyond his call of duty to avoid other passengers being placed in an awkward situation.
After watching the video I was surprised at the flak levelled at him – labelled as homophobic, summarily sacked from his job, arraigned in court, accused of having committed a hate crime by the LGBT and generally hanged, drawn and quartered. No wonder the ‘Rajt ma rajtx, smajt ma smajtx’ mentality prevails in this country.
Seems like only the Church is fair game nowadays . . . blacks, gays and Islam are untouchable.
That’s a very warped way of looking at things.
The reason why the topic of social minorities is such a sensitive case is because white people enslaved black people, the Nazis tried to exterminate Jews, homosexuals suffered the same fate as the Jews and those that survived were freed and sent to jail straight away.
Any social minority can easily become the victim of prejudice, abuse and discrimination. If anyone thinks events like the Holocaust is a thing of the past think again. It can happen any time and place. So to make sure it doesn’t, discrimination must be treated with the utmost importance.
The Church was either the source of that abuse, enslavement and discrimination, or didn’t do much to stop it.Plus, the Church is guilty of some horrid acts that they have managed to get away with for a long time. So people are naturally going to dislike the Church.
‘The reason why the topic of social minorities is such a sensitive case is because white people enslaved black people,’
Yes, the chip on the shoulder and the sins of the fathers mentality, especially considering that it was not ‘white people’ but certain European nations and that Africans were enslaved in their hundreds of thousands by Arabs, Berbers and other Black African tribes. Slavery still exists in many countries too. ‘White man’ also freed the ‘Blacks’ if we come to that.
‘If anyone thinks events like the Holocaust is a thing of the past think again.’
Yes the Holocaust must always be remembered but surely it does not give certain individuals the right to try to cash in on it and try to get away with murder by playing the race card and silencing opinions they don’t like by attemptinging character assassination. That would also be immoral and low.
The video doesn’t show them smooching and touching each other inappropriately, so how do we know for certain that that’s what they were doing?
[Daphne – Because the transport official would not have asked them to ‘oqoghdu sura ta’ nies’ otherwise.]
I have been on buses many times when heterosexual couples have been making out like animals and no one told them anything. Why the double standards?
[Daphne – Probably because no transport official was around and none of the passengers wished to stick his or her neck out, no matter the level of discomfort.]
The only time I’ve ever seen a bus driver get angry at passengers, or told them to behave, was in a case when someone was drunk and it looked like they are about to throw up all over the place, which would have meant unpleasant extra cleaning work for the driver.
According to some comments made on youtube, the dispatcher had been telling them to behave for a while, and then he tried to separate them. That’s when one of the girls spoke about living in a democratic country. He had no right to try and separate them.
[Daphne – On the contrary, he had not just the right but the duty to try and separate them. His mistake, if he really did so, was to make the attempt physical rather than verbal. Behaviour that causes discomfort to other passengers is grounds for removal from the bus.]
Anyone confronted by a person in uniform gets defensive so I suppose the girls’ reaction to the dispatcher trying separate them is understandable.
[Daphne – I don’t think it is understandable at all. I think it is shocking.]
Sometimes homophobic people hide their homophobia by using seemingly reasonable and logical arguments that look like they have nothing to do with the person’s sexuality. The same happens with racism.
So there is no guarantee that the dispatcher was not being homophobic. Why didn’t the driver tell the girls anything? Why was it that only one person who had a problem with them?
[Daphne – You can’t arrest a person for being homophobic, Edward. You can’t arrest people for their thoughts and feelings. You can only act on homophobic actions. A request to two people to stop canoodling on a public bus is not a homophobic action. I’m assuming the driver didn’t say anything because he had his back to the action and so couldn’t see it. As for no one else saying anything, no one else would. Only a bus official is able to give an order in that situation. All others can just tut loudly and shift in their seat – or move to another seat where they can’t see.]
If I were to walk along the Sliema front holding my boyfriend’s hand and was told by someone to stop it and to behave decently I would ignore them and carry on as normal because their request would have nothing to do with public decency and all to do with not wanting to “see it”, as they would put it.
[Daphne – This wouldn’t have been about holding hands, Edward. Holding hands is ‘normal’ with women, whether they’re gay or straight. Girls walk around holding hands all the time. Also, a public space is not a public bus. Transport officials have a duty to ensure that there is no behaviour which causes discomfort to other passengers. Let’s say a group of people are shouting on a bus. A transport official can and should ask them to tone it down or get off. ]
That is an oppressive attitude and not one I would want to comply with. And besides, it might do them some good seeing as discrimination towards minorities decreases when people have some sort of contact with that social minority.
And if their children were to ask any uncomfortable questions then it would be a great opportunity for the parents to explain that some people are born different but there is nothing wrong with them.
Daphne, I disagree with you when you call homosexuality “Fashionable”. It is not a fashion, it is a sexuality. Or were you referring to the habit of a few people who fall back on their minority status as a reason to do whatever they want?
[Daphne – The latter. Women used to do the same thing until fairly recently – still do, actually. ‘I didn’t get the job because I’m a woman’. ‘He was rude to me because I’m a woman’. And the worst: ‘I can get away with it because I’m a woman’. You have the perfect illustration of this here. Imagine for one moment that the two screeching, fighting women were two screeching, fighting men – wouldn’t that have changed the slant of the story? Who would have been the ‘thug’ in that case? These two awful women think they can get away with public canoodling (for want of a better word) because they’re gay, and then also get away with screaming and with shouting abuse and fighting on a bus because they’re women.]
Daphne…..well said….no beating around the bush. We are in a situation where it pays to be portrayed a victim, and many groups with a personal agenda are milking this, influencing policy makers and the courts. It seems that only those with a vociferous lobby group succeeds today.
I don’t think the people who are trying to influence policy makers are the same as two girls causing a scene on a bus. Lobbying for the protection of the rights of gay people and same sex marriage are just causes.
The inability of many people to understand an argument is worrying. Daphne, you shouldn’t have had to repeat the same information time and time again.
The mentality shown on the bus is the same seen in many situations on a day to day basis in Malta.
You can be driving behind a car which suddenly stops in the street so that the driver can talk to somebody, when he could have easily pulled over. You react by pressing your horn and the driver goes crazy shouting and swearing. ‘I have a right..’ etc etc. He doesn’t see that it’s me who has to deal with crashing into the back of him.
This ME ME ME mentality in Malta and lack of thinking ahead or having consideration for anybody else is everywhere.
If I was on a bus and the couple in front of me were all over each other and I asked them to stop it, that it not a racist comment if one of the people is black, or a homophobic comment if they are gay. If they then react badly saying ‘just because she is black/ we are gay’ then it is them who have the issue.
Most people understand their surroundings and know how to behave in different social settings. Sat in a restaurant, sat on a park bench, walking down Sliema front and sat on a bus are all very different situations. People have to have consideration for the next person.
I have absolutely no problems with people who are gay. I just don’t understand the mentality of trying to shove sex into people’s faces, parades down Valletta for example. Sure, you have a ‘right’ to do that just as much as I have a ‘right’ to wear a Chelsea shirt walking past Old Trafford on a match day.
If I was to do that I am declaring ‘I am different’ and I would more than likely have the mentality that I would cause some form of confrontation. I could be sat in a bar close to Old Trafford in neutral clothing and tell a Manchester United fan I am a Chelsea fan and the chances are we would have no issues, maybe just some form of banter.
We would see past the team differences and talk about our passion for the game. Had I been sat in the same pub wearing a Chelsea shirt I am being purposely provocative and would of invited a hostile exchange.
What I can gather from the video is that this happened on the bus. The girls were all over each other and then over-reacted to being asked to stop it. They had that attitude because they were conscious of what they were doing.
I understand that gay people feel discriminated in many areas of life especially in Malta and this is wrong. Sadly, I feel that many members of the gay community are doing other gay members a disservice acting in overtly homosexual ways.
Most people don’t CARE you are homosexual. I know gay people who are actually embarrassed at the over-the-top and attention-seeking behaviour of other gay people who give everyone a bad name by creating a bad impression.
I would tell two gay friends kissing and groping each other to stop it at the table as much as I would tell two straight friends. I wouldn’t comment on two gay guys holding hands walking down Sliema front but if they were dry humping in the street I would probably say something. It’s public displays of lust that bother others, not affection, because society still considers lust to be private and personal while it is acceptable for affection to be public.
Everybody has a right to be treated the same as everybody else but that also comes with responsibility. You have a responsibility and a duty to act accordingly in public, whatever your sexual orientation or indeed… football team.
Issa ghax sibna xi hi hadd li jixtieq izomm standard gholi u ta’ nies fuq l-Arriva buses tellfuh il-job? Dik motivazzjoni li qeghdin jaqghtuhom lill-haddiema taghhom l-Arriva.
Mela hekk konna ta nies meta ic-cinema kien qisu burdell u f’certu kazi anke il-buses.
Meta inti tkun lejali lejn il-kumpanija li thaddmek m’hemmx duty u off duty. Sehmek taghtih dejjem. U nahseb li dan id-driver hekk kien avolja off duty, leali u nies bizzejjed li ma jippermettix komportament li mhux ta’ nies, la minn koppji gay u l-anqas minn dawk etero.
I detest some PDAs just as much as anyone else… And the extent of their vulgarity leaves one having little sympathy for the women. But who gets to decide when a couple goes too far? PDAs are difficult to gauge on the gross-scale; what one person thinks is disgusting another might find endearing. So I think that reasonable PDAs are just a potentially unpleasant part of life we have to live with. I do not understand the fuss.
The off-duty driver was not just another passenger – who arguably would have been justified in asking other passengers to desist in activities that were causing him discomfort. He was in uniform and visibly representing his company. I believe he should not have interfered – surely it is not part of an off-duty driver’s job description to monitor passengers’ behaviour in his spare time. And unless the company has a no-snogging-on-the-bus policy his taking initiative was hugely misguided. You differ here. But surely we can agree that he should have shut up and left the bus as soon as it became evident that the situation was likely to deteriorate further? Instead he opted for engaging in a scuffle with clients of the company with which he is employed… tst tst
If you stop the video at 1:22 it looks as though the off-duty driver is pushing one of the women to the ground, with the other driver holding him back – preventing him from attacking further.
You haven’t caught many buses recently, have you?
@ DCG
I think you must have missed the audio part when the dispatcher yells:”Jien bija nnifsi naghmel l-arja. Aw.. trid tohrog barra?” – 0:56-1:00 of the audio.
I think this would change your views on the situation. Challenging passengers to duel?! Sacked on the spot – just for that.
[Daphne – He had the authority and the duty to order them off the bus. It was the method and tone that were wrong. Even if we agree that sexual fondling is not a reason to be asked to leave the bus, screaming abuse at a transport official most definitely is, and this anywhere in the world. It is in fact grounds for arrest, for causing a public disturbance. However much you try to justify the behaviour of those women, and that’s not just the behaviour which promoted the original reaction but their gross behaviour afterwards, you will not have my agreement that the transport official was wrong and they were right. The transport official was right; he had clearly had no training in how to deal with abusive members of the public. Walk into any UK airport and practically the first thing that greets you is a notice telling you that any attempt at verbally abusing staff will be dealt with immediately and severely.]
Here in London, am I’m sure in other civilised countries, it is publicly displayed on the buses that no one is allowed to hassle the staff (driver, etc.)
I fully agree that one should behave themselves ‘bhan-nies’ in any circumstance, including on a bus, and the transport staff (or anyone else, for that matter) has a right to voice, in a polite way, their opinion and ask the offending person to stop the offending action.
In fact, here one is also asked not to play loud music, eat spicy food, hold loud conversations or put their feet up on seats; all which in my opinion are obvious in a decent and civilised community.
However some people need to be reminded and sometimes told. Various times, I have seen drivers tell people off regarding such behaviour and it is totally in their rights to do so.
In fact, other commuters like me, are relieved and expect it from the transport staff, bus driver or otherwise.
In this case, I too thought in the beginning that the girl was victimised for her sexuality, but while not agreeing with the dispatcher’s actions, it is highly objectionable that people feel victimised for the sole reason that they have been told off for something wrong they are doing and that it has been brought to their attention.
In fact they hide their guilt by reversing the action and from perpetrator appear a victim.
@ DCG
I definitely agree that the dispatcher had the authority to ask passengers to refrain from such displays of affection
I also agree that the reaction of the two women was abusive and by no means do I justify their reaction
The fact that are a lesbian couple, is to me, irrelevant
I also agree that in the circumstances, the dispatcher could have either asked the passengers to get off the bus, even if I believe the better option was to file a police report or summon the police.
However, I cannot accept a stance where a dispatcher challenges a passenger (any passenger irrespective of gender or sexual orientation) to a fight to settle a dispute. This is just pure hooliganism. Resorting to violence (not to force to defend oneself) is 100% reason to get the sack.
You are so right about manners, Daphne. We have become a bunch of foul mouthed and uncivilised individuals who dont even believe in a modicum of good behaviour anymore. Self respect, honour and dignity are consigned to the rubbish bin, to be replaced by instant gratification of anything that happens to take our fancy at the moment, be it sexual urges, the latest gadget and so on.
There was a time where certain activities were reserved solely for the privacy of the bedroom, but nowadays, everything is so in your face that you cannot go anywhere without being exposed to inappropriate sexual behavior of some sort or other. Anyone having the temerity to object to this kind of behaviour is immediately labelled a moron and a moralist. What used to be cheap and degrading is now considered to be hip and cool
.
Another thing that I feel really reflects on how bad our manners are as a nation is the complete and utter lack of civic pride. Littering and vandalism are rampant and then we have the gall to blame the authorities for the state of the environment of this island.
Will we ever learn?
Malta as a small country can make small changes that make a huge impact but they don’t. You are sadly spot on when you talk about lack of civic pride. One of the problems is many people think that the government should do everything for them. Somehow voting for one party into government means they void themselves from contributing. They expect 5 years of paybacks.
Sorry to turn this one point political but many of the Labour voters believe they are going to get something back by voting them into office.
I mention the ‘ME ME ME’ mentality in many of my posts because I believe that mentality is to blame for many of the problems here. The job of the government is to provide a steady ship and a basis for business to grow with the least red-tape possible. The people who vote Nationalist see the value of this and contribute in creating business etc. Labour and typical Labour supporters sit back and blame everything and everyone for their problems apart from themselves.
I think many Labour supporters are going to get a rude awakening when their hang overs have ebbed away, not only are they not going to get a cheque in the post, they are also facing a very poor government which is going to have negative effects all over the country, in all aspects of life.
If you looked at many in the African- American community in the US, many of them voted just because Obama was black. Many of us got swept away on the hype and the very obvious ( in the beginning anyway) difference that we thought Obama would make. The economy is now in meltdown and everybody has suffered. Obama himself has seen one of the lowest approval ratings of any president, he might not even see a second term in office. These Americans voted for a change and all they got was the same people behind the new face of Obama. It was a lesson in marketing and branding more than democracy.
The people who vote Nationalist will do so as they see what Gonzi has managed to achieve considering the global economic downturn. They see that he has made the best out of a bad situation. Malta is coping well considering and it is thanks to the government we are in this situation.
Ok so lets look at Labour and their so called ‘change’. Is the Labour party full of bright young minds full to the brim with ideas, proposals and solutions? Sadly the answer is no! They dont even have a charismatic leader we can feel we trust in. If you look at the actual men, Obama, Blair etc love them or hate them they at least had some charisma. What does Malta get? A super one hack.
The Maltese have always punched above their weight, ‘small country big balls’ hang the banners at sporting events. I don’t see why the Maltese don’t fight for a political party they deserve? Come on Malta get that civic pride, take a care in the people or parties you want to govern you NOT to give you hand outs. Start to listen to the arguments and come back with thought out suggestions and ideas. Dont take the easy route and accept change for changes sake when you don’t know what that change is going to be.
Look at the people behind Muscat and tell me what ‘change’ we are going to get.
Yes, well done. I was once trapped on a 45-minute bus ride with a couple sitting behind me who kept kissing and fondling each other throughout. To this day I am still not sure whether they were two women or not, but it doesn’t make a difference at all.
The point is I was made to feel like I was the extra one on the public bus. I just wish I had an iPod with me to block it all out.
As regards this video it sounds to me like the situation escalated because the girls started shouting their heads off. If you’re going to act inappropriately and speak inappropriately as well, then don’t expect roses in return.
On the other hand, losing his cool and coming in contact with girls was a no-no as he lost his case as soon as he did that, and now he looks like the bad guy.
Is it only me or do we simply have too little information to judge one way or the other.
We don’t know what the girls did to cause the man to be so upset.
We don’t know how the man reacted.
We don’t know who started hurling abuse first.
All we know is that some behaviour by two girls upset an off-duty driver, then cut to some audio captured of a shouting match. Of course I don’t understand what was said during the exchange so perhaps I’m missing something, but it feels like neither side of the argument have the facts at hand.
Messrs Scicluna, Patrik, David and ac may care to note that the primary scope for sex in nature is the preservation of the sex through procreation – pleasure is the bait by which nature ensures its more important, indispensable primary aim of ensuring the perpetuation of the human race. It is the same with many other tastes and “appetites” in the philosophical sense. That is why the saying goes, “man eats to live, he does not live to eat” and to become obese:and to suffer from the resulting ailments.
No, it’s not, Francis Saliba MD. Several species like the Bonobo apes use sex for many purposes. Procreation is just the consequence of sexual activity between men and women.
In fact you will intrigued to know that ovulation in women is concealed, the human menstrual cycle is also quite varied when compared to that in other species and therefore even more difficult to predict.
Your reasoning stems from religion and not science, then again you are a physician and not a scientist.
I suggest you stick to what you know Dr Saliba and don’t go calling other people deviants because they don’t fit your definition of normality. There is nothing more perverse than going against one’s own nature, and there’s nothing more unnatural than homophobia.
@ Mitrokhin.
I wrote about Homo sapiens to members of the human race – not about Bonobo apes to Bonobo apes.
@ David II.
When I write a signed comment about medical facts you should understand that I am writing about things that I do know and that I have been practising for decades. What about you? All we know is that someone with the same name (minus digits) killed someone called Goliath.
To me homophobia actually translates into “fear of mankind” – a coloured pejorative term used by homosexuals to suggest incorrectly that heterosexuals fear (or hate) all mankind. I am heterosexual but I do not accept your judgment that I fear or hate anybody and that includes homosexuals.
@ Francis Saliba MD:
You might wish to note that nature has no “scope” for the use of sex (procreation). That would be anthropomorphising nature.
That’s not how “nature” or natural selection works. The advantages gained (in this case, procreation) are almost always a lucky by-product of something else. If we stick to sex and procreation, and we keep in mind that “nature” and “natural selection” are not conscious beings or processes, we will note that procreation (for sexual animals) is only a by-product of sexual attracion.
The reason why sexual attraction spread is because it would only have been animals who procreated who passed the genes for sexual attraction to their offspring. But sexual attraction would necessarily have preceded the will to procreate. That much is obvious.
One gets it all backwards when one says that the purpose of sex is procreation. Procreation is actually only a by-product of sexual attraction, nothing more and nothing less.
Furthermore, one would not sensibly dismiss examples of other species (especially the species that most closely share our common ancestral species) when these examples are given to show that we are not unique in using sex for other reasons than procreation.
Last but not least, one does not sensibly distort science to make it fit with religious texts, that is, if one is to be taken seriously.
@ Kenneth Cassar.
No I do not “wish to note” anything as preposterously unscientific as your comment.
It is an established biological fact that in primates nature ensures procreation by a sexual form of reproduction between male and female and that there is no other way to ensure the survival of the species.
It is you who, by your meaningless bombast, are distorting incontrovertible scientific facts to accommodate your prejudices.
@ Francis Saliba MD:
1. There is nothing unscientific in my comment. But I eagerly await your demonstrating where exactly I was being unscientific.
2. It is unquestionably an established biological fact that in primates “nature ensures” procreation by a sexual form of reproduction between male and female and that there is no other way to ensure the survival of the species. But that’s hardly the point. My point was that “nature”, not being a conscious agent, has no purposes or intentions. Procreation is simply a lucky by-product of sexual intercourse (in the case of sexually reproducing species).
3. Again, I challenge you to demonstrate where I was distorting incontrovertible scientific facts. As far as I know, it is a scientific fact that “nature” or “natural processes” are not conscious agents or processes. Therefore, “nature” or “natural processes” cannot have intentions or purposes. But perhaps we’ve been reading different science books. I would suggest reading proper ones, and not those with plenty of allegories for children to easily understand, as these sometimes have the unfortunate effect of making people mistakenly ascribe purpose and intent to abstract collective concepts such as “nature”.
@ Francis Saliba MD:
And by the way, I don’t see where I was being bombastic. On the contrary, I tried to use simple words that even you would understand. But apparently, I failed in that respect. I would suggest a careful re-reading of my original post, since it cannot be any simpler than that.
@ Francis Saliba:
In your opinion, can anything other than conscious agents have intent, or any purpose other than that which conscious agents ascribe to them?
Very good article, Daphne. It’s this perspective that is so often missed by the media and by people in general.
This unfortunate situation has (if I am not mistaken) cost the transport official his job. I think Arriva should reconsider its decision.
It is breaking news that in the Hamrun incident the two girls are also being charged and hopefully the truth will come out in court.
It is to be hoped that in the Arriva incident the same procedure will be adopted of charging litigants on both sides of the fight.
That was always the procedure adopted by the police. It is still necessary today to quell the suspicion that homosexuals are acquiring a privileged position in the eyes of the law.
So let me get this straight (no pun intended). Are you saying that if someone beats you up, you expect the police to charge you as well, as this would be the “standard procedure”?