Jan Moir tries to apologise but still misses the point

Jan Moir's recent homophobic column in the Daily Mail about the death of Stephen Gately was awful and I have previously blogged about it, you can read it here.

Well, it does appear that Jan Moir is trying to apologise in her latest column, titled "The truth about my views on the tragic death of Stephen Gately."

Initially as you read it you feel there may actually be a genuine change of heart, although there are some lines it that make me feel otherwise. I have spent a lot of time since Jan Moir's first column reading some of her past columns and I have come to the conclusion that she isn't homophobic, but uses people's sexuality a little bit too liberally in the columns when it really doesn't add anything to the content.

"What had been reported about that night is that Stephen and his civil partner Andrew Cowles went to a nightclub and brought back a Bulgarian man to their apartment."

This line from the apology proves a point, the Bulgarian man, is a close friend, yet still Jan is trying to imply something sinister.

"There have been complaints about my use of the word 'sleazy' to describe this incident, but I still maintain that to die on a sofa while your partner is sleeping with someone else in the next room is, indeed, sleazy, no matter who you are or what your sexual orientation might be."

There is no proof at all that this is the event that took place, just nothing more than gossip and since then it has come out that it is in fact untrue, that Andrew Cowles and the friend in question were in fact in different bedrooms.

"The point of my observation that there was a 'happy ever after myth' surrounding such unions was that they can be just as problematic as heterosexual marriages. "

But Jan, that isn't what you said, so surely if that is what you meant then perhaps you should have said it and it might have avoided a lot of uncertainty?

The original column also talked about other gay stars, dead and alive, again with absolutely no justification, perhaps as stars accept complete hogwash is written about them the public should too, but I don't think it is acceptable for "journalists" and I say that in the loosest term with some people to just say what they want without facts being part of their research.

Jan Moir may not be homophobic, but in my opinion the original column was and some of the content is sheer hogwash. As for the apology, nice try but way off the mark and not genuine as there are too many caveats and justifications that undo the original part.

The one part of the apology I felt was real was that about the timing of the original column - it was very bad timing indeed.