Hayley Louise Brookes wrote...

I wish you'd just shut up an take what you've got there are more important issues at stake and you want a gay village do one!!!!! Ha ha only jokeing darling brother I totally agree

Posted by: Hayley Louise Brookes  | April 3, 2007 2:24 PM

James White wrote...

I can't believe you said that Hayley.. " DIRTY ST8"

Posted by: James White  | April 3, 2007 2:31 PM

Hayley Louise Brookes wrote...

David has just emailed me your comment and I can assure you I am not homophobic, I sent that as a joke to my brother not expecting him to post it, it was just sibling banter and I am sorry if I offended you. I most definatley do not think that it is acceptable for people to be beaten up due to there sexuality, race, religon any reason I am against viloence. Seriously I agree with everything David has said I think that Liverpool should take a look at its whole night life scene not just the gay one to make it a safer place and stop letting silly under age children and yobs spoil it for the rest of us!

Posted by: Hayley Louise Brookes  | April 3, 2007 2:50 PM

James White wrote...

Sorry Love, I am a bitch at times. I thought you was having a go. I am not Hetroaphobic I was joking calling you a " Dirty St8" I Love St8 girls they make gr8 fag hags. MWAH X

Posted by: James White  | April 3, 2007 3:01 PM

Hayley Louise Brookes wrote...

Don't worry about you've got nothing to be sorry about you got caught in the cross fire I think David owes us both an apology he he xxx

Posted by: Hayley Louise Brookes  | April 3, 2007 3:10 PM

Phil Lennon wrote...

I understand the views for, but it should be allowed to be developed naturally rather than manufactured.

Manchester's has evolved over 30 odd years and as much as it would be great to have cafes, restaurants and shops to go to during the day, spending a day out and night there, it must have the correct infrastucture in place as its current location would be an easy target for mindless morons and scallies to attack us. Manchester's in on the edge of the city centre were the people can enjoy themselves in peace and quiet away from such idiots.

A prime location would be near the City Loft development near the new Mal Mason on the water front but prime location means prime costs and I think any development would have to be privately funded.

Posted by: Phil Lennon  | April 4, 2007 12:22 PM

Tracey wrote...

I was on Canal Street in Manchester last week and had a wonderful day out. Everyone was relaxed there was a much better atmosphere than when I go out in town. I think a gay village in Liverpool would be fantastic.

Posted by: Tracey  | April 19, 2007 9:19 AM

Joe wrote...

No windows? Big deal. I know plenty of bars in general that have no windows.

And perhaps you don't really go to nightclubs.... but erm... nightclubs have never tended to have windows.

Posted by: Joe  | June 18, 2007 3:12 PM

David wrote...

Joe the above comments are about bars not clubs... perhaps you never went to school and learnt how to read.

Posted by: David  | June 18, 2007 3:20 PM

Joe wrote...

Tracey: "I think a gay village in Liverpool would be fantastic."

Tracey, I'm a tad apprehensive about a gay village. By all means the L.A should give the area a much needed cash investment, but I'd rather not see the label "gay village". As soon as that happens, it'll attract 'tourists' and undesirables. I'd much rather see a cash injection done on the fly than in a blaze of "gay village" publicity.

Besides, isn't the idea to be integrated? Having a designated gay village discourages that. I find it odd that on one hand we're bleating on about equality whilst on the other, separating ourselves with gay villages. From what I'm seeing - and I've lived in a few places - we, as a gay community, seem to expect, demand even, that the rest of society treat us equally and without discrimination, but at the same time, we don't seem to offer anything back. I'm not saying we should have a "hug a hetro" day or anything like that, but in the main, they are not our enemy, and the idea of segregating ourselves with labels of 'gay village' just doesn't sit well with me.

Posted by: Joe  | June 18, 2007 3:31 PM

Joe wrote...

my apologies for mistaking Garlands - which sits at number 8 in the no windows chart - for being a club.

Posted by: Joe  | June 18, 2007 3:34 PM

David wrote...

Very true Garlands is a club, I must have went to the same school as you..

Posted by: David  | June 18, 2007 3:37 PM

tracey wrote...

Joe....

I didn't mean to imply that it should be segregated just that it should aim for an atmosphere similar to manchester.

I used the wording gay village more as a universal terminology to indicate the relaxed atmosphere of Canal Street.

Posted by: tracey  | June 18, 2007 3:41 PM

Joe wrote...

it's ok - I know you weren't implying anything by it. I've always just thought it's got an "and this is where the gays go" feel about it. Actually I think Liverpool's is "gay quarter" rather than village. Same difference I suppose. Not sure if that's an official thing or whether the meeja conjured that up. That's how the post reported it when it the idea first appeared yonks ago.

I think if anything Liverpool should look closely at mancs. It's because of that 'gay village' label that it gets so much grief. If I'm through there it tends to be a Saturday night, but apparently Fri's are a nightmare for hen nights and stuff. That's what'll happen to Liverpool if the area around Stanley St gets branded "Gay Quarter".

Mind you... i don't usually go out on a Fri, so maybe it is like that already. lol!

Posted by: Joe  | June 18, 2007 4:39 PM