Mr.Jingles 27.04.2007 09:27 |
OK, first let me start by saying that I'm pro gay rights including gay marriage, adoption, and I absolutely encourage laws against sexual orientation discrimination and hate crimes against gays to be punished as much as those hate crimes against any other group of our society. Now, here's what I have a problem with... Gay parades! If gay people want to encourage their right to show their pride, that's fine. However, I absolutely hate how some gay people go on these parades wearing speedos and other accesories of tight or very small clothing while engaging in simulated sexual acts in public. Seriously, if they want to come out and say they're gay, then good for them, but please we don't need a fuckin' public physical demonstration that you're actually gay. Keep your sexuality for your own private space, just like everybody else. I know many gay people come out to parades in a quite decent way, but there are others who do it just for the sake of outraging everybody else. Now, before you call me homophobic, let me just say that I'm not playing by double standards. If it was both men and women engaging on explicit displays of simulated sex acts in public that would be just as wrong. OK, that's my two cents. So feel free to rant now. |
PieterMC 27.04.2007 09:30 |
You know you like it secretly. |
thomasquinn 32989 27.04.2007 09:30 |
You're not homophobic. Just prudish. |
Mr.Jingles 27.04.2007 09:31 |
PieterMC wrote: You know you like it secretly.LOL, maybe I do. |
PieterMC 27.04.2007 09:32 |
Mr.Jingles wrote:It's ok... take a deep breath and step out of the closet.PieterMC wrote: You know you like it secretly.LOL, maybe I do. |
Mr.Jingles 27.04.2007 09:34 |
PieterMC wrote:I'm going to need a little help. Can you give me a push?Mr.Jingles wrote:It's ok... take a deep breath and step out of the closet.PieterMC wrote: You know you like it secretly.LOL, maybe I do. |
PieterMC 27.04.2007 09:36 |
Mr.Jingles wrote: I'm going to need a little help. Can you give me a push?I think you must have me confused with somebody else. |
Mr.Jingles 27.04.2007 09:39 |
PieterMC wrote:I'll ask Erin's "other" husband, then.Mr.Jingles wrote: I'm going to need a little help. Can you give me a push?I think you must have me confused with somebody else. ;-( ( sobs ) |
mahlers.com 27.04.2007 09:43 |
No, I think it makes you diligent by way of stating your opinion. Over in Provincetown, Massachusetts, USA many summers ago... Commercial Street in Provincetown is a place where sometimes the street is opened to foot traffic, people of all ages walk on the pavement and sidewalk. A small art gallery with it's store front window, less than 1 foot from the sidewalk, doorway on the right, my wife and I were inside. There were dozens upon dozens of homosexual artwork, specifically in the nature of sex acts. There was no age notification at the door. This place was small. In the store front window, a life sized pencil drawing of two men having sex, front to back, buttocks connection being the main part of the work, center. Outside on the sidewalk, a child less than 5 years old with his parents. The store owners could have cared less. I along with my wife were outraged. Honestly, I hoped someone took that store front window work out of the window with or without consent of the owners. WK |
PieterMC 27.04.2007 09:45 |
WOW. That's the most normal post you've ever made. |
thomasquinn 32989 27.04.2007 09:46 |
You have absolutely no understanding of art whatseover, do you? Really, it's people like you that have been crying crime and murder ever since impressionism! |
Mr.Jingles 27.04.2007 09:48 |
PieterMC wrote: WOW. That's the most normal post you've ever made.LOL!! |
Mr.Jingles 27.04.2007 09:51 |
<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: You have absolutely no understanding of art whatseover, do you? Really, it's people like you that have been crying crime and murder ever since impressionism!Finally for once I'm going to have to agree with Mahler on something. Artists have the right to display their work, despite of explicit some might find it to be. However, that's why private galleries were made. |
PieterMC 27.04.2007 10:13 |
Don't you know though that you can do anything you want as long it's ART. I know this has nothing to do with the main topic but anyway.... Just out this fruit look for example: link AN artist carried out a bomb hoax in a bizarre bid to gain recognition and to promote an anti-terrorism message, a court has heard. Colin Douglas Barnett, 46, will spend three months behind bars after pleading guilty to one count each of creating a bomb hoax and causing a public nuisance and two counts of making a false report to police. He will also have to pay $6319 to police after the bomb squad was called in to remove his fake bomb. The frustrated artist, of Cranbourne North, placed what he called a peace bomb -- a clay, vase-shaped sculpture -- in Federation Square in October 2005. He returned the next day and moved it to the National Gallery of Victoria when he discovered it had been surrounded by tables and chairs. The following day police were forced to close a section of St Kilda Rd when the package, which had the words "peace bomb" and "fragile: handle with care" written on it, was discovered by gallery security staff. The bomb squad was called in and removed the package. "Bomb attacks killing and maiming people, perhaps scores of people, are a reality in many parts of the world," Judge Leo Hart said. Judge Hart said the peace bomb was an artistic item but only Barnett knew this. The case was unusual and prosecutors had described it as bizarre, he said. Barnett had the dual aims of gaining artistic recognition and promoting an anti-terrorism message: "You misguidedly thought you could achieve both ends by taking the steps that you did," Judge Hart said. Barnett's lawyer Sharon Kermath said Barnett wanted recognition and publicity as an artist, but no major galleries had been interested in his work. |
mahlers.com 27.04.2007 10:30 |
<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: You have absolutely no understanding of art whatseover, do you? Really, it's people like you that have been crying crime and murder ever since impressionism!ThomasQuinn, what are you implying? "Crying" and "crime & murder" although go hand in hand for some, the victim, the deceased, really there is much room for laughter. BTW, The look on the parents face that day, was of disgust and outrage yet, it was only present by their worried eyes. The child did manage to look upon that "buttf**k" drawing, as if by unseen forces commanding him to recieve the message. Me? The store owners did not get a smile, only a cold, cold look directly into their eyes. The two men sat there never saying anything audibly, almost motionless really. WK |
magicalfreddiemercury 27.04.2007 10:40 |
Mr.Jingles wrote: However, I absolutely hate how some gay people go on these parades wearing speedos and other accesories of tight or very small clothing while engaging in simulated sexual acts in public.It doesn't make you homophobic or prudish, IMO. I dislike this, too. I think it reduces gays to little more than horny outrageous characters rather than show them as whole, 'normal' and productive people. A little outlandishness, however, is cool. It's supposed to be about fun and pride. Unfortunately, some people - gay and straight - have a need to take things over the top. |
Deacon Fan 27.04.2007 11:58 |
I feel the same way about all the slutty-looking women in the world, so give us our equal time. :-P |
JoxerTheDeityPirate 27.04.2007 15:06 |
unfunny bunny wrote: I feel the same way about all the slutty-looking women in the world, so give us our equal time. :-Pyou want slutty women? check my profile pic :-] |
***Marial-B*** 27.04.2007 16:24 |
Well... I've seen the carnivals here and I fell in love with drag queens :D!!!!!. They're absoluetly gorgeous xD |
Haystacks Calhoun II 27.04.2007 16:39 |
Whenever people flash their lifestyle, whatever, it is enough to give me pause. I guess you have to ask, if my wife and I did what they do in these "Gay Pride" parades, we'd get arrested. Just another double standard, and normal people are forced to look the other way. |
Sergei. 27.04.2007 16:47 |
joxerthemightypirate wrote:Ugh.unfunny bunny wrote: I feel the same way about all the slutty-looking women in the world, so give us our equal time. :-Pyou want slutty women? check my profile pic :-] If your idea of hotties is that then go to my local wal-mart. :P ON the other hand.... I have never personally seen a gay parade around my area (rednecks 'round here are very traditional, and a lot of the guys are plumbers and the gals are soccer moms, thank god we're not native to my area...) but I live very close to DC so I'm sure there's stuff going on up there... But it's like they're shoving gayness down our throats. They can't be legally married, so they're going to parade around the streets with rainbows (strangely diverted from a religious symbol to a gay symbol..) and make out with each other..? :/ I am also relatively pro-gay rights, I don't honestly care one way or the other because I personally am not gay. But come on. If I wasn't thirteen I'd be organizing straight parades. :P |
user name 27.04.2007 18:00 |
I don't think what these people do is wrong, and I think they have the right to do it. However, I do think it's tasteless and stupid, and would much rather it never be. |
Sweetie 27.04.2007 19:39 |
I like gay pride parades - they're fun :P |
Vincent. 27.04.2007 19:40 |
I don't think I've ever seen a gay pride parade. Am I missing out? :P |
deleted user 27.04.2007 19:57 |
^ It depends on your desire to see grown men in their underwear and angel wings with condom-shaped balloons. I agree that it doesn't send the "best" image - but the thing I take exception to is the fact that these parades cause a lot of litter (glitter, condoms). I think it's a bit rude, and the people in the parade should at least have to pay for the mess they make. ... In other news, I heard there are places in France that sell bread in "special" shapes. |
Vincent. 27.04.2007 19:59 |
^Eeek! No, I don't guess I am missing out! :O |
Sweetie 27.04.2007 20:20 |
^ but you haven't been to the Gay pride parades here (Actually I think it was a one time thing 'cause it was all the year 12ers) but it was fun...and not as scary as those ones |
AspiringPhilosophe 27.04.2007 23:40 |
I saw a gay pride parade once when I was in Paris...and it was interesting, I'll give it that. Now, I love gay men. I mean...really! What could be better companionship for a woman than a gay man? They are like our little spies on the male world...they can interpret men for us when we are frustrated to hell with them, but still give us good sound advice on everything from fashion to relationships. Plus, they are a hell of a lot of fun to be around! That being said...I dislike it when ANYONE pushes their lifestyle and flaunts it like that. Most gay people will tell you that those parades don't represent them, and most view those parades as harming the cause, more than helping it. I hate gay pride parades, just like I hate it when Jehovah's Witnesses come to my door, or Preacher Rick stands in the middle of campus and screams "You are all going to hell!" or a politician tells me that I'm "Throwing away my vote" or "You are helping the terrorists". Be who you are...that's fine...but don't force it on others who may not agree with you. Not only is it annoying, but it's self-centered on your part to think that everyone must agree with you. |
YourValentine 28.04.2007 05:38 |
Gay Pride parades are held because "normal people" (see above) do NOT accept gay life style. There is no necessity to have straight parades because straights are the majority and don't need to fight for acceptance. Gay parades are political, they are not some self-indulgent Fellini excesses. To raise public awareness it's necessary to be provocative. It's easy to say "I accept gay lifestyle as long as I do not see it, as long as they stay in their closets and do not force it on me". Once gays have equal rights and are not discriminated anymore, there won't be any need for gay pride parades. |
john bodega 28.04.2007 05:54 |
"Just another double standard, and normal people are forced to look the other way." Whatever normal is.... you aren't it. |
thomasquinn 32989 28.04.2007 07:55 |
YourValentine wrote: Gay Pride parades are held because "normal people" (see above) do NOT accept gay life style. There is no necessity to have straight parades because straights are the majority and don't need to fight for acceptance. Gay parades are political, they are not some self-indulgent Fellini excesses. To raise public awareness it's necessary to be provocative. It's easy to say "I accept gay lifestyle as long as I do not see it, as long as they stay in their closets and do not force it on me". Once gays have equal rights and are not discriminated anymore, there won't be any need for gay pride parades.Agreed. Oh, and Haystacks...you gave yourself away by calling heterosexuals "normal people". Kinda proves that you are a reactionary bastard. |
.DeaconJohn. 28.04.2007 12:01 |
YourValentine wrote: Gay Pride parades are held because "normal people" (see above) do NOT accept gay life style. There is no necessity to have straight parades because straights are the majority and don't need to fight for acceptance. Gay parades are political, they are not some self-indulgent Fellini excesses. To raise public awareness it's necessary to be provocative. It's easy to say "I accept gay lifestyle as long as I do not see it, as long as they stay in their closets and do not force it on me". Once gays have equal rights and are not discriminated anymore, there won't be any need for gay pride parades.I disagree. Especially with the bit where you deem it necessary to be provocative to raise public awareness; I don't think it does gay people as a whole any good in terms of helping them eliminate discrimination. Whilst I respect your opinion I don't agree with you when you compare it to something like a civil rights march, which you seem to be doing here. |
AspiringPhilosophe 28.04.2007 12:51 |
YourValentine wrote: Gay Pride parades are held because "normal people" (see above) do NOT accept gay life style. There is no necessity to have straight parades because straights are the majority and don't need to fight for acceptance. Gay parades are political, they are not some self-indulgent Fellini excesses. To raise public awareness it's necessary to be provocative. It's easy to say "I accept gay lifestyle as long as I do not see it, as long as they stay in their closets and do not force it on me". Once gays have equal rights and are not discriminated anymore, there won't be any need for gay pride parades.I agree with most of what you said...but I do have some issues with it. There is a difference between being homosexual (by definition being attracted to members of the same sex) and the behavior demonstrated in those gay pride parades. The behavior demonstrated there is about exhibitionism, a need to show off things like sex, which in most people's world is a private thing. I could understand the need for the gay pride parades to act like that if straight people were out having sex on street corners...you don't normally see that, unless you are in a red light district somewhere. Like I said before, most homosexual men and women I have spoken to disapprove of those gay pride parades, because they recognize the difference between being homosexual and being an exhibitionist. They have also realized that those gay pride parades are just shooting yourself in the foot. Acting like that in public, whether you are straight or homosexual or bisexual or a transvestite or whatever is NOT going to win you respect. If respect and an end to discrimination is what they want (and indeed, it is what they deserve!) they need to stop with the parade behavior. It only makes straight people look down on them, even the moderates who could be led to agree with gay rights...If all you know of gay life is what you see on the parades, it's not a surprise people are against gay rights. Respect and toleration is what they need to advance the cause...and those parades don't do it. I also take issue with you comparison of this to civil rights parades. Those were parades of men and women who marched, sang songs, but just marched for the most part. It didn't involve stripper like costumes, public sex and loud gay club music. This is not a comparison you can make with any logical standing. |
YourValentine 28.04.2007 14:11 |
I did not compare Gay Pride parades with any civil right marches. They are political in a sense that they have a tradition of fighting for equal rights - in fact fighting for not being arrested for being gay (Christopher Street Parade.) I have not seen a Gay Pride parade yet where people actually had sex or were nude or violated any laws. Maybe they did offend the taste of people who have an issue with "indecent" clothing, strippers etc. You may be offended by lingerie, make up or suggestive behaviour but the same behaviour can be seen on the Love Parade each year and I never heard that people think "straights" are outrageous because of the Love Parade and "normal people" have to look away. Ask yourself if you make a difference. "If respect and an end to discrimination is what they want (and indeed, it is what they deserve!) they need to stop with the parade behavior. It only makes straight people look down on them, even the moderates who could be led to agree with gay rights...If all you know of gay life is what you see on the parades, it's not a surprise people are against gay rights" I don't agree. I think gays deserve equal rights, period. There cannot be prerequisites like "only if there are no gay pride parades and only if they do not offend the moral majority, they are entitled to equal rights". The right to live an open gay life is not something that is generously granted by the straight majority. In a free society the right to live an open gay life is a given right imo. The whole idea of tolerance means you "bear" the difference even if you do not approve. I am truly convinced that such parades would be obsolete if gays were granted the same rights as straight people. |
user name 28.04.2007 15:05 |
YourValentine wrote: I don't agree. I think gays deserve equal rights, period. There cannot be prerequisites like "only if there are no gay pride parades and only if they do not offend the moral majority, they are entitled to equal rights". The right to live an open gay life is not something that is generously granted by the straight majority. In a free society the right to live an open gay life is a given right imo. The whole idea of tolerance means you "bear" the difference even if you do not approve. I am truly convinced that such parades would be obsolete if gays were granted the same rights as straight people.That is the equivalent of saying, "Well, if you just gave PETA what they wanted, they'd stop blowing up buildings." Just like gay pride parades, blowing up buildings does absolutely nothing to advance one's cause. They are merely outlets for people with a cause. True logic should dictate, "Homosexuals should be granted equal rights AND they shouldn't march in offensive parades." It's not a matter of "Homosexuals should stop marching in parades AFTER they are granted equal rights." The two things have no logical connection to each other. |
JoxerTheDeityPirate 28.04.2007 15:11 |
to your valentine you obviously havent seen the parades ive seen.im all for gay rights but what i dont want to see is hairy arsed beer bellied men in their 50's just wearing chaps flaunting their sexuality in these marches.march by all means but do it with dignity and style.the cause will get more support that way i feel. if its meant to be a party parade thing like a mardi gras then so be it but if its to put their cause across then it needs a bit more decorum. no gay person i know would act like that in public and to be honest nor would any straight person i know. |
deleted user 28.04.2007 17:35 |
I find gayparades horrible, it's a crime towards humanity. But mostly to the gay community herself. There are an awful lot of normal gay persons. Deadly normal. But the extravargant types get all the attention just because their acting strange. This way a wrong image of homosexuality is created. And with gay parades these extravargant homosexuals only help those wrong images, they make them even bigger. It's really horrible and their making it a lot harder for other homosexuals to life! Despite of that it's unappropriate and gross. Keep sex in the bedroom, that's all I say. |
iron eagle 28.04.2007 18:06 |
damn i better lift my feet up the s**t is getting deep |
Erin 28.04.2007 19:29 |
I've never seen one, so I guess I can't add anything constructive. ;-) |
AspiringPhilosophe 28.04.2007 22:33 |
Your Valentine, You are damn right that gays deserve respect...just like everyone else. They should be allowed to marry, adopt, use their partners medical coverage, things like that. I fully agree on this. Period. Other posts here will attest to my stance on this issue, particularly of gay marriage. I do not judge homosexual people. Just like the straight people that I meet, what they do in their bedrooms is their own business, as long as they are consenting adults. I don't judge them for kissing or holding hands in public (actually quite a bit of this goes on at CMU). The issue here is that you are equating homosexual behavior with the behavior seen in those parades. It is NOT the same thing...it's gay times 1000. The participants in said parades do not act like that the next day when they are at work, I can guarantee that. I have NEVER seen a homosexual person behave like that in public, as I've NEVER seen a heterosexual person behave like that in public. The homosexual friends I have hate those parades for casting a false image of what it means to be homosexual, and even the people in those parades will admit that it's not who they are. To be homosexual is not all that you are, just like being heterosexual is not all that you are. It is only a facet of your person. As a matter of fact, it is dangerously close to homophobic to think that homosexuals are defined solely by their sexuality. I'm not saying those who do behave like that don't deserve their rights...we all deserve our rights. I merely point out the fact that they have to use the channels available to them to get those rights, and if they behave in such a way that closes those channels, they will never get those rights. They should be who they are, be proud to be who they are, and work side by side with people to get the government to give them those rights. I detest people who are fake, in any way. The way those people act in parades is not who they are, as you admitted previously. It's fake and meant to be provocative. That's fine, but if you think you need to be fake to make it acceptable to be who you are, then there are deeper issues you need to attend to. Be yourself, be who you are, and work for equal treatment. Being fake will only hurt the cause you proclaim to advance. That may not be fair, I don't agree with it, and it's not pretty. But it's reality, and since homosexuals want their rights in reality, they have to deal with the reality of the situation. The reality is they are discriminated against, and will have to prove to some homophobes that they aren't disgusting, degenerate people who aren't worthy or rights. Again...it's not fair that this is the case, and in an ideal world they would have their rights, just like I want them to and you want them to. But this isn't reality. That world we want can be achieved, but it's not here yet. Let's stop pretending that it is and get down to business....you'll get more done that way. |
YourValentine 29.04.2007 04:18 |
@ Music Man: I did not say: gays should be granted equal rights and then they should stop gay parades - in fact, I don't think they should stop at all. I say: gay parades are held BECAUSE they do not have equal rights. I do think that if gays had the same rights there would not be any gay parades in the future because it would be normal to be gay. About the "hairy asses and beer bellies" - I see these on any public beach but I swear I could not tell if they are straight or gay - the public is not offended, I wonder why. @ CMU History Girl: I know you are a liberal person and if you had a say there would not be any discrimination. If you look back in time you'll see that minorities only ever were accepted when they were loud and when they insisted they were not 2nd rate citizens because they were different. Straight people do not need to defend their sexual orientation - it is considered to be "normal" to be straight. Therefore it does not make sense to compare gay parades to (non-existing) straight parades. It's like men did not have to fight for the right to vote but women had to: Look what was said about the suffragettes who marched for womens rights, in fact up to these days they are laughed at and called "un-female". In those days women who took to the streets were considered just as outrageous, indecent and offensive as gays with a pink plastic penis seem to be today. It was never the members of a minority who "blended in" who made a change: it was always the ones who went to the street and forced their difference on the majority. You say they can have the same rights behind closed doors and I am sure there would not be any gay parades if they actually did have the same rights but you do not GET these rights if you try to blend in and look "normal". The "normal" majority has to swallow the fact that gays are different. Surely, I never saw a gay parade like you did because I live in another country. I saw several gay parades in Cologne which is also a main city of carnival and people are used to colourful parades. I did not see anything illegal or offensive there. I saw a lot of funny people, though. I am proud that it is possible here - 65 years ago gays were still murdered in concentration camps. 50 years ago gays were still considered as mentally ill and 40 years ago it was still illegal to have a gay relationship. It was the gays who went public who brought the change. Today gays can marry, we have openly gay politicians, actors, teachers and writers and most people have swallowed the fact that a considerable minority in this country prefers same sex relationships. |
AspiringPhilosophe 29.04.2007 10:31 |
The gay pride parade I saw in person was in Paris France, when I was there for a study abroad, so that is another country for me. But I have seen snippets of the one in NY on TV, and it seems very similar to the one I saw in France. I believe we are caught up in an issue of perception. The common perception in the US (because a majority of gays remain closeted) is that all gays behave like the ones in the parades...this is why certain conservative nuts won't give them rights; they see it as a blow to morality and family values, not to mention the Bible says no to it (but I have issues with people who base their morality on a work of literature from 2000 years ago...topic for another thread I guess). I'm not arguing that it shouldn't be done, and I personally am not offended by the parade behavior that is exhibited there. But I also know many gays who know that those parades are not helping the gay image. People think that gays are defined by their sexuality, and they are not. Sure, there are some gays who hide it, and remain in the closet for years. But then there are gays who are just like the "normal" majority because that's who they are. They don't want to be defined by their sexuality...that's what they are fighting against, and that's where they see those parades as harmful; those parades perpetuate an image of gays that an ignorant and biased public is only too ready to believe. My gay friends and I agree that if you got the public together, showed them that gays are people first, and that homosexuality does not define who they are, a lot more people would be won over to the cause of championing gay rights. |
.DeaconJohn. 29.04.2007 10:53 |
I'd just like to say to CMU HistoryGirl that your posts are very well written - you're getting the same points accross that I was trying to but wasn't sure how to. |
JoxerTheDeityPirate 29.04.2007 11:02 |
CMU HistoryGirl wrote: The gay pride parade I saw in person was in Paris France, when I was there for a study abroad, so that is another country for me. But I have seen snippets of the one in NY on TV, and it seems very similar to the one I saw in France. I believe we are caught up in an issue of perception. The common perception in the US (because a majority of gays remain closeted) is that all gays behave like the ones in the parades...this is why certain conservative nuts won't give them rights; they see it as a blow to morality and family values, not to mention the Bible says no to it (but I have issues with people who base their morality on a work of literature from 2000 years ago...topic for another thread I guess). I'm not arguing that it shouldn't be done, and I personally am not offended by the parade behavior that is exhibited there. But I also know many gays who know that those parades are not helping the gay image. People think that gays are defined by their sexuality, and they are not. Sure, there are some gays who hide it, and remain in the closet for years. But then there are gays who are just like the "normal" majority because that's who they are. They don't want to be defined by their sexuality...that's what they are fighting against, and that's where they see those parades as harmful; those parades perpetuate an image of gays that an ignorant and biased public is only too ready to believe. My gay friends and I agree that if you got the public together, showed them that gays are people first, and that homosexuality does not define who they are, a lot more people would be won over to the cause of championing gay rights.nice one girl :-] |
Saint Jiub 29.04.2007 12:29 |
I wonder if the gay pride parades would receive any media attention it was not provocative? Of course not. Hence the spectacle. Plus the pressure to be closeted has to have an outlet for some people occasionally (like in the parades). The pressure to maintain social "norms" even extends to the North American Queen convention. There is no hand holding or affectionate contact, and of course men dancing together is still taboo. I might have been oblivious and did not notice, but I think my closet homophobia (yes I have some homophobia bias, but I attempt to control it occasionally) would have detected something "abnormal". LOL So all you homophobes out there - attend the North American Queen convention this summer (Is it going to be held?). I am sure the homophobes won't be offended at the convention, as the "undesirables" will probably be well behaved. "God" forbid if any men hug or anything. |
iron eagle 29.04.2007 12:48 |
feel the same way about mardi gras or carnival? as a gay man i am shocked by the displays at these events-- how dare they! ;-) and they call us bad |
Saint Jiub 29.04.2007 15:57 |
iron eagle wrote: feel the same way about mardi gras or carnival? as a gay man i am shocked by the displays at these events-- how dare they! ;-) and they call us badGot any beads? I love your tits, Mr Eagle. Sexxxxay! |
user name 29.04.2007 16:14 |
I guess I'm caught up in the illusion that intelligent debate, education, and public enlightenment were the mainstays of social change. Apparently I'll have to add riduculous parades to the list. |
deleted user 29.04.2007 16:16 |
Mike Van wrote::/ You know, that's not all what Mardi Gras is.iron eagle wrote: feel the same way about mardi gras or carnival? as a gay man i am shocked by the displays at these events-- how dare they! ;-) and they call us badGot any beads? I love your tits, Mr Eagle. Sexxxxay! |
iron eagle 29.04.2007 16:53 |
neither are the gay pride parades :-)) aw mike you made me blush stud muffin! |
Mr.Jingles 29.04.2007 18:39 |
Barbara Are you implying that outrageous behaviour is justified just because gay people have limited rights? It's just like saying that back in the days of the civil rights movement black people had a right to start riots because they were victims of segragation Gay people have the right to organize parades as long as they keep it decent. Would you want your children to witness a guy rubbing his crotch on someone in public? It doesn't matter whether it's gay or straight people doing it. Indecent behavior in public is just plain wrong. Basically it all comes down to having equal rights for absolutely everyone. If straight people have the right to hold hands and kiss in public, then so should gay people. However, there's certain behavior that is only allowed in private spaces and that goes to absolutely everyone regardless of sexual orientation. Sadly, (as mentioned before) these types of gay people are way too fuckin' ignorant to understand that are making it more difficult for other homosexuals to gain equal rights. |
Saint Jiub 29.04.2007 20:42 |
iron eagle wrote: neither are the gay pride parades :-)) aw mike you made me blush stud muffin!;) LOL, Paul Actually, the parade may be a safer place. I don't recall hetersexuals being arrested in their own homes for what they do in private. Why can't the parade be ignored? I don't remember the Bill of Rights saying everyone has an inaliable right not to be offended. Be careful what you wish for ... One more conservative Supreme Court Justice and then Gay Pride parades may be outlawed. |
user name 29.04.2007 22:14 |
Mike Van wrote: Why can't the parade be ignored? I don't remember the Bill of Rights saying everyone has an inaliable right not to be offended. Be careful what you wish for ... One more conservative Supreme Court Justice and then Gay Pride parades may be outlawed.You make an important point. NOBODY has the right not to be offended. This is very important, especially as to first amendment rights. However, I (and, I believe, everyone else) most certainly do not want such displays to be outlawed. I think we are only suggesting that it is not helping their cause, but rather is hurting it. We are all pro-gay rights here, which is something that's great about our community, but since most of us are straight, we don't necessarily appreciate overt shows of homosexuality, nor even that of heterosexuality (except for some of those lonely Friday nights). |
YourValentine 30.04.2007 05:11 |
Mr. Jingles, I am sure you don't notice that your argumentation is in fact homophobic. Remember - you asked this question to start the topic. The "would you like your children to see.." questions says it all. I would explain to my children what they see, I would never ask to ban something in public because I do not approve - unless it's illegal. We have two topics here - do we approve of gay pride parades - do "they" need gay pride parades to further "their" cause to the first question I think that in my country people are not offended that much by gay pride parades. 20 years ago we had the first gay kiss in a family soap opera which caused a public debate but we are beyond that. Actually, I think sexual suggestive behaviour is not so much an issue here in general. For example, the "Janet Jackson incident" just caused a roar of laughter here in my country. So, maybe it's not so much of an issue for so many people here but I am sure people are offended sometimes. However, it's the undeniable right of gays to go public in demonstrations and parades and it does not matter if people are offended. Mainly it does not matter if I am offended - I am offended by a lot of things I see on the streets. The question if it serves the cause of gay people - I don't know. I see that there is different progress in different countries and the countries where gay parades would be ended by the police are the countries with zero progress. In my previous post I used the example of the suffragettes - if you read the comments from these days you will recognize the arguments of the the "normal" (in those days:male) people. They also said: "women should have more rights but must they wear trousers in public, scream in this indecent manner and act like they are men? Next time they want to decide themselves if they want to work or even want drivers licences" The "normal" people can only be convinced if the minority or discriminated group insists on their "otherness" and forces the majority to accept them being different. Someone asked if the blacks should have had the right to cause a riot to further their cause - my answer is: they did cause riots. It was not the "Uncle Toms" who sat at home discussing equal rights - it was a woman who refused to make room for a white man who started riots in the south. The civil rights activists organized strikes, marches and demonstrations which offended the hell out of the white majority who thought that black people are inferior and should step aside when a white person comes along. The governor of Arkansas even sent the National Guard to keep black students out of an all-white school. Only because of the civil rights activists we can hardly understand today how people could be offended by a black women refusing to make room for a white passenger. Maybe in 30 years people will smile about the gay pride parades in the same manner they smile about carnival and Mardi Gras today. |
Mr.Jingles 30.04.2007 07:23 |
Barbara, you still don't get what I'm getting at. After seeing everybody's response I know that I am for sure not homophobic. My whole point is NOT against gay parades in general. In fact, I do approve gay parades as they keep a good level of decency. My criticism is against the type of behavior that is seen at gay parades where we witness gay people simulating sex acts in public just for the sake of shock value. Once again, and I hope I don't have to mention this again... I'm not holding anything against all gay people because as Maggie (CMUHistoryGirl) mentioned, the majority of gay people don't go out on the street to have public physical demonstrations of their homosexuality. They are more than welcome to publicly admit that they are gay, and I absolutely applaud that. However, some of them forget that certain things should be left in the privacy of their bedrooms. Read this whole thread again and you will realize that is not an anti-gay rant. It's just an anti-indecency rant. Just to show that I am not being biased against gay people, let me just say that at some hispanic parades you have these reggaeton dancers men and women simulating sex in public. If they want to do this at a club or concert, then fine because it's a private area where people know what they will be getting. Maybe I'm just seeing things from the American perspective. It's well known that Europeans are more liberated, and you're probably more outraged than we are at the fact that Richard Gere has received an warrant for arrest in India for kissing a Bollywood actress on the cheek. Here in the western world, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that, but whether it's India, Germany, or the United States we have set the bar at different levels when it comes to defining what's "indecent". You can call me a prude or a homophobic. I for once know that I'm not an ultra conservative nut, and I think most people in this board who know me well enough will agree. |
john bodega 30.04.2007 10:56 |
Would Rosa Parks still be seen as a hero if I told you all that she was actually occupying the DISABLED seat, and simply hadn't seen the signs? |
AspiringPhilosophe 30.04.2007 14:43 |
@ YourValentine...I'm not trying to give you a hard time, really. I just love a good debate :-) The "normal" people can only be convinced if the minority or discriminated group insists on their "otherness" and forces the majority to accept them being different. That is PRECISELY what the gays are fighting against. "Otherness" is a two way street. Yes, people should accept the gays for who they are, just we we should accept everyone for who they are. But by putting your "Otherness" before your "Humanness" is only divsive...on the one hand it could lead to improved treatement, but it can also (and indeed has been) used to deny rights to you. The only way to get people to give gays equal treatment is to get them to see gays as humans first...makes it much harder to deny rights to someone who is human vs. someone who somehow isn't...Hitler did a marvelous job with this and the Jews. De-humanize something, and it makes it a lot easier to deny rights or otherwise treat horribly other people. Someone asked if the blacks should have had the right to cause a riot to further their cause - my answer is: they did cause riots. This didn't answer the question. The question was did they have the RIGHT to cause riots...not did they cause them. It's obvious they did, and in hindsight it was probably the only thing they could have done. But at the time, no they did not have the right to start riots. The KKK didn't have the right to lynch either. Taking the law into your own hands only leads to trouble...that's why laws exist. Now unfair laws can be overturned, and should be, but preferably by lawfull means, and then unlawful only if it is ABSOLUTELY NECCESSARY. I wouldn't say gays are at that point yet...they still have some powerful groups working for them, and I think that in about 10 years, when the old conservative sticks in the mud have finally moved on out of the government, things will change...even conservatives in the US today who are below age 30 recognize that gays should have more rights than they do. |
iron eagle 30.04.2007 14:46 |
actually there is a bit of homophobic stereotyping going on here... surprise surprise some of you are acting like the entire parade is nothing but bumping and grinding and x rated crap you cheapen 98.9% of the parade by doing so-- being a participant as well as an observer in quite a few parades i have seen some of what is being obsessed upon in this thread-- yes there is some of that going on, its the exception not the rule- you see it because thats the media snippet sent out--just to fire up 'normal' people and some of you have bought that hook line and sinker |
Haystacks Calhoun II 30.04.2007 14:50 |
<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote:Bull. Anyone who would dare call the folks in a parade willing to have simulated sex while "marching" is not normal, sorry. Gay, or straight.YourValentine wrote: Gay Pride parades are held because "normal people" (see above) do NOT accept gay life style. There is no necessity to have straight parades because straights are the majority and don't need to fight for acceptance. Gay parades are political, they are not some self-indulgent Fellini excesses. To raise public awareness it's necessary to be provocative. It's easy to say "I accept gay lifestyle as long as I do not see it, as long as they stay in their closets and do not force it on me". Once gays have equal rights and are not discriminated anymore, there won't be any need for gay pride parades.Agreed. Oh, and Haystacks...you gave yourself away by calling heterosexuals "normal people". Kinda proves that you are a reactionary bastard. |
Mr.Jingles 30.04.2007 14:59 |
iron eagle wrote: actually there is a bit of homophobic stereotyping going on here... surprise surprise some of you are acting like the entire parade is nothing but bumping and grinding and x rated crap you cheapen 98.9% of the parade by doing so-- being a participant as well as an observer in quite a few parades i have seen some of what is being obsessed upon in this thread-- yes there is some of that going on, its the exception not the rule- you see it because thats the media snippet sent out--just to fire up 'normal' people and some of you have bought that hook line and sinkerThank you for enlighting us from your own perspective! I agree that people shouldn't buy into the false stereotype of the overly flamboyant, exhibitionist, sexually explicit, and promiscuous gay folk. Most gay people I've met in person are closer to the regular straight person than this infamous gay character. They dress up with class, have decent manners, and look forward to keep a relationship of commitment with a single person. I remember back when 'Queer As Folk' became a popular TV show, how some gay people were outraged at the fact that it constantly portrayed negative stereotypes of gay people. However, I'd expect the average gay person to speak out against those who portray these false stereotypes. |
YourValentine 30.04.2007 15:38 |
@ CMU HistoryGirl - no problem, I don't take it personal at all. About the civil rights activists who caused riots: they did not plan to cause them - they caused them because they dared to come out of the corner that the white majority had put them into. But that's another topic. We won't agree on the gay pride parade but one thing is obvious: I learn a lot discussing such topics with you people - and I don't think Jingles is a reactionary ranting homophobe:) I really think there is a bigger cultural difference in perceiving sex-related issues than I thought. @ Paulie - here in Germany gay pride parades are mostly fun - they are a big party and lots of fun. A lot of sexual toys are in the parade, a lot of costumes, make up and wigs, beautiful drag queens and all kinds of OTT outfits and behaviour. I don't think I am stereotyping when I describe the parade like that. People are aware of the political background and tradition but the parade is an affirmation of life and joy of life. Discrimination and violence against gays does still happen occasionally but it's not as bad as it used to be. In fact, attacks on gays are very rare these days and the acceptance grows by the year. |
iron eagle 30.04.2007 17:55 |
YV- your fine in my book-- no worries know your heart very well my words were not aimed at you at all i am sorry if you thought they were-- |
.DeaconJohn. 01.05.2007 14:19 |
If Chad was still here, there would be some posts in this topic so long that they would crash the server... ;-) |
iron eagle 01.05.2007 15:08 |
dont cha know! i miss me chad...... |