back to article Apple adds gay and lesbian icons to iOS 6 messaging

Apple's next-generation mobile operating system, iOS 6, will include oh-so-cute 'n' cuddly gay and lesbian emoji couples for your texting and emailing enjoyment. Not that there's anything wrong with that. The two hand-holding couples are nestled among their heterosexual brothers and sisters – although, for reasons we at The …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

  1. Richard Cartledge
    Facepalm

    Discrimination

    What about bestiality zoophiles? Where are their icons?

    1. toadwarrior
      Trollface

      Re: Discrimination

      You need to complain to the people who make the unicode standard if you want to represent your own lifestyle choices.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      That's it now

      Bible belt America will start the backlash, Apple will be proclaimed the evil empire by all those Bible bashing preachers.

      Even carrying an iPad, iPhone, iPod will mark you out as one of the Devils Disciples.

      Hell and Damnation.

      Could this be the end?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: That's it now

        Apple creepy and Californian! Awful! Almost as bad as that nasty rock music stuff!

        Best publicity stunt ever.

      2. feliksch

        Re: That's it now Could this be the end?

        You'll have to ask those how-many-millions who died from deadly diseases, liberally transmitted by the oh-so-"gay".

      3. Figgus
        Happy

        Re: That's it now

        Even carrying an iPad, iPhone, iPod will mark you out as one of the Devils Disciples.

        Amusingly, the running joke around the office between the Android and iThingie cults has been that owning an iThingie makes you gay. This is just more fodder for the war, I think.

        That said, I have never understood the aversion. 2 guys being gay = 2 more women on the market for the rest of us!!! WE NEED MOAR GAYS!!!!

    3. Tigra 07 Silver badge
      FAIL

      Re: Discrimination

      I never see the comparison between a loving relationship between consenting adults and shagging animals...but then i'm not a mentalist

      1. Old Handle
        Headmaster

        Re: Re: Discrimination

        Bestiality is shagging animals, zoophilia is loving animals. So "bestiality zoophiles", though strangely constructed and partly redundant, would presumably refer to people who shag animals withing the context of a loving relationship. The animals would also be adults, and consenting (at least in the non-legally-loaded sense of the word), so there you go.

        But given the large number of possible human/animal combinations, I think it's probably simpler if they just plop two icons side-by-side and call that good enough.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Joke

      Re: Discrimination

      Oh I agree - they also fail to cater for hemaphrodite's. Let alone those who are 50% hemaphrodite.

      I'm outraged.

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Discrimination

      What about bestiality zoophiles? Where are their icons?

      Don't know about them, but coprophiliacs are sorted: http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/1f4a9/index.htm

  2. Darryl
    Trollface

    Not much in the way of non-caucasians either, regardless of sexual orientation, orally challenged or otherwise

    1. Ian Moffatt 1

      Could that be because...

      ... emoji originate from Japan? At least that would account for the Japanese(?) characters and stereotypical westerners with their big round eyes.

      And who says they are gay anyway? They might me friends.

      Nothing wrong with it though - no doubt the religious wankers er, zealots of all description, not to mention the Daily Mail will be on the case. Ironically emailing from their Apple devices.

  3. Jeebus

    Won't somebody think of the children.

    They should be taught how to wield weapons and how to perform exorcisms, and how to come up with thousands of different ways to not explicitly state they hate the president because of the colour of his skin.

    Not sure if Richard Cartledge is taking the piss or not, if you are then kudos. If not then, well hazard a guess.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Good, good

    For once Anna Leach will be pleased.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    This is part of the Unicode standard

    http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U1F300.pdf

    Apple may pick their graphical representation, but what's available is set in the standard.

    1. Ian Moffatt 1

      Re: This is part of the Unicode standard

      1F3E9 - Love Hotel - how very polite!

      What's that thing (on the Apple emoji layout) between the barber's pole and the chequered flag?

    2. Michael H.F. Wilkinson Silver badge
      Happy

      Re: This is part of the Unicode standard

      1F52F seems to stand for a Kosher atom ;)

      1. Swarthy Silver badge
        Paris Hilton

        Re: This is part of the Unicode standard

        1F49E - Polyamory?

        Paris, because, do you need to ask?

  6. MrEntropy
    Trollface

    So...

    They have the lady doing the "Macarena," where's the guy doing "YMCA?"

  7. ratfox Silver badge
    Happy

    Not Apple's fault!

    They are just implementing the Unicode standard, which contains U+1F46C ('two men holding hands') and U+1F46D ('two women holding hands')…

    The standard also contains U+1F46F ('woman with bunny ears'). I would write it here, but El Reg's forum seems woefully unable to accept it: "The post contains some characters we can’t support".

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: The post contains some characters we can’t support

      el Reg draws the line at supporting women with bunny ears?

      - just send them over here

  8. DN4

    Scary

    People without mouths are not so scary as the pile of shit symbol that *has* eyes and mouth (see the linked TechCrunch article).

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Scary

      It's known as the Lucky Poo in Japan, you culturally insensitive clod.

      Here's an anime about a whole city of poo characters

      Also see South Park's Mr Hankey

      You're welcome.

      1. DN4

        Re: Scary

        I prefer being culturally insensitive clod to my poop sprouting eyes and mouths, thank you very much. In fact your links made it even more scary.

  9. LinkOfHyrule
    Flame

    As a gay man who is MILF curious....

    I demand a MILF icon! I Demand it now Apple! Stop discriminating!

    1. LinkOfHyrule
      Joke

      Re: As a gay man who is MILF curious....

      Who's the MILFophobe who downvoted me!

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: As a gay man who is MILF curious....

        A gay man who's into MILFs and Zelda... will you be my new best friend? :)

        1. LinkOfHyrule

          Re: As a gay man who is MILF curious....

          I cant tell if this would be the start of a beautiful friendship or the start of an ordeal ending in court cases and therapy.....

  10. mhoulden
    WTF?

    Strange story

    A couple get together, then have a kid. It doesn't work out so they try the love that dare not speak its name. That doesn't work either so they get back together minus the child. A couple of Swedish devil women start dancing around, possess the woman and make her wave her arms around. Then someone tries to pull her head off, and then chop it off with a massive pair of scissors. She also gets her nails ripped out, becomes an angel, looks shocked and then finally seriously dismayed. The kid reappears a few years down the line, suffering from serious depression, and then has a play with the dressing up box.

    Have to say I can't wait until part 2.

    1. Tigra 07 Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      Re: Strange story

      Best read of the day!

    2. Nanki Poo
      Go

      Re: Strange story

      rofpmsl

      Can I have a quart of what you're on please... ;)

      nK

    3. Rik Myslewski
      Thumb Up

      Re: Strange story

      Damn... That may have been the finest response-post I've seen in Comments since I joined this merry band in 2008. Well-played, well-played indeed.

    4. Jedit
      Angel

      "Have to say I can't wait until part 2."

      Yes, perhaps part 2 will explain how Apple got all of that into one icon.

    5. NightFox
      Thumb Up

      Re: Strange story

      I call for the Reg Playmobil reconstruction of this

    6. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: Strange story

      That's going to take quite a complex icon to represent though !

  11. jake Silver badge

    My only question for the idiots against gay marriage is ...

    ... how in the hell could the fact[1] that the two guys living in the house on the other side of my Wife's rose garden are married possibly have any affect on my Wife & I's heterosexual marriage? Are the idiots really so unsure of their own marriage? Perhaps they should look within, instead of removing the rights of other tax-paying Californians.

    [1] They had had their wedding planned for several years, and managed to hold it before Prop 8 ::spit:: was passed. They are legally married.

    [2] It probably only passed because most of the ignorant voting public thought that "Yes" was in favo(u)r of gay marriage ... I can't tell you how many times I've had to tell someone that "Yes" was anti-gay, a "No" vote would have continued gay marriage. They usually look furtive & scurry away.

    1. Tigra 07 Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      Re: My only question for the idiots against gay marriage is ...

      Reminds me of an email i got back when proposition 8 was on the cards in California:

      Why Gay marriage is wrong:

      1) Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning. Also apparently those homosexual animals have picked up some unnatural behavier

      2) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.

      3) Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.

      4) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.

      5) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Brittany Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.

      6) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.

      7) Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.

      8) Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.

      9) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.

      10) Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

      1. frank ly Silver badge

        @Tigra 07: Re: My only question.... Point 2)

        "...hanging around tall people will make you tall."

        I tried that for a long time and it doesn't work. I know this is only anecdotal evidence but I thought I should share my observations on this one.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: hanging around tall people

          but hanging around gay people can be a lot of fun (if you're at all bi-curious)

        2. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

          Re: @Tigra 07: My only question.... Point 2)

          "...hanging around tall people will make you tall."

          And being married to a woman hasn't made me always right

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: My only question for the idiots against gay marriage is ...

      > how in the hell could the fact[1] that the two guys living in the house on the other side of my Wife's rose garden are married possibly have any affect on my Wife & I's heterosexual marriage?

      It doesn't. The question is, "why do the two guys living in the house on the other side of your wife's rose garden want to apply a word denoting hetrosexual unions to themselves?"

      Although spoken in jest, the point has been made above. I have deep affection for my dogs, they live with me and have done for longer than most marriages last, there is mutual affection and support. Why can this not be a marriage? It isn't a marriage because it doesn't fall under the definition of the word "marriage". I have two dogs - I'm not polygamous.

      I suspect that the reason christians get upset is that the language is pretty well defined and has established usage. To include homosexual unions in the term when it is specifically understood to exclude homosexual, non-permanent hetrosexual, non-sexual and non-human relationships was always going to be seen as agressively anti-christian and I suspect was deliberate. To go through the legislative process and force a redefinition of the word by law seems like political activism overriding the will of the majority (at least in the US) which doesn't go down well. It isn't an anti-gay thing. Just because hetrosexual people are living togther in a committed relationship does not make them married. You often see the phrase "long-term partner" which is an apt description.

      Why not pick a different word or term and dispense with all the hostility? "Civil partnership" (I'm not aware of any mainstream religions which bless homosexual relationships, so it would be civil) seems as good as any and "partner" is already in common usage.

      1. jake Silver badge

        AC writes: "It isn't an anti-gay thing."

        One word: Horseshit.

        Have you never actually listened to the anti-gay sheeple minor sub-set of humanity incapable of thinking for themselves being "guided" by their shamans ... uh ... genetically human, but hard-of-thinking people, here in the US? I mean, seriously?

        A marriage is a (hopefully) permanent union between two adults who love each other and plan to spend the rest of their lives together. Period.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: AC writes: "It isn't an anti-gay thing."

          "A marriage is a (hopefully) permanent union between two adults who love each other and plan to spend the rest of their lives together. Period."

          And Horseshit back to you

          Up until now a marriage has been defined as a union between a man and a woman. It previously been a union between a man and a woman with the intention of bearing children (something which in parts of Europe was tested out before the wedding).

          Marriages had been meant to be for life, but again that changed over time.

          I am not against two men or two women getting married. But lets be absolutely clear, the definition of marriage is being changed again to accommodate this change in accepted perception of what a marriage should entail.

          1. jake Silver badge

            Oh, hi, AC 09:02 (was: Re: AC writes: "It isn't an anti-gay thing.")

            I agree that the definition of marriage is changing. For the better, IMO.

            The rest of yours? Where was I disagreeing with you?

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: AC writes: "It isn't an anti-gay thing."

            And apparently 'gay' used to mean something else, too.

            Times change. So do words.

        2. DN4

          Re: AC writes: "It isn't an anti-gay thing."

          "A marriage is a (hopefully) permanent union between two adults who love each other and plan to spend the rest of their lives together. Period."

          One word: Horseshit.

          Lots of adults who love each other and plan to spend the rest of their lives together are *not* married and do not plan to get married. Whatever their sex is. Period.

          1. jake Silver badge

            @DN4 (was: Re: AC writes: "It isn't an anti-gay thing.")

            In the Venn diagram, marriage is a subset of a (hopefully) permanent union between two adults who love each other and plan to spend the rest of their lives together.

            The fact that marriage is a subset of how humans decide to live their lives doesn't alter my premise.

            Grok where I'm coming from?

      2. Fibbles

        Re: My only question for the idiots against gay marriage is ...

        If you look back through human history you'll see that different cultures have had different ideas of what marriage is. The only description I can come up with that covers all of them is 'a social contract between two or more people'.

        One man, one woman might be the Christian definition but it's by no means the only one.

      3. LINCARD1000
        Devil

        Re: My only question for the idiots against gay marriage is ...

        "...is that the language is pretty well defined and has established usage."

        Your rather inflexible viewpoint and the fact that I am annoyed I have to accept a 'second-rate' legal agreement instead of a proper marriage to my male partner aside, I downvoted you because of that one statement. Languages are a naturally evolving thing and the usage, definition, pronounciation etc. of words does change over time.

        Unlike, it seems, your point of view.

        1. GitMeMyShootinIrons

          @Lincard1000

          Your point about language evolving is quite true. Consider the original (and still true) meaning of 'gay' as being jolly or happy, it could be said that all successful marriages are gay. Therefore, my wife and I enjoy a gay marriage.

          Throw that at them there religious fundamentalists!

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019