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
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]iron eagle wrote: [/QUOTENAME]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
[/QUOTE]
Got any beads? I love your tits, Mr Eagle. Sexxxxay!
as a gay man i am shocked by the displays at these events-- how dare they! ;-)
and they call us bad
[/QUOTE]
Got any beads? I love your tits, Mr Eagle. Sexxxxay!
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.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mike Van wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]iron eagle wrote: [/QUOTENAME]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
[/QUOTE]
Got any beads? I love your tits, Mr Eagle. Sexxxxay![/QUOTE]
:/ You know, that's not all what Mardi Gras is.
as a gay man i am shocked by the displays at these events-- how dare they! ;-)
and they call us bad
[/QUOTE]
Got any beads? I love your tits, Mr Eagle. Sexxxxay![/QUOTE]
:/ You know, that's not all what Mardi Gras is.
neither are the gay pride parades
:-))
aw mike you made me blush stud muffin!
:-))
aw mike you made me blush stud muffin!
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.
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.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]iron eagle wrote: [/QUOTENAME]neither are the gay pride parades
:-))
aw mike you made me blush stud muffin![/QUOTE]
;) 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.
:-))
aw mike you made me blush stud muffin![/QUOTE]
;) 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.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mike Van wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
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.
[/QUOTE]
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).
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.
[/QUOTE]
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
@ 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.
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.
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
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
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]YourValentine wrote: [/QUOTENAME]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.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed.
Oh, and Haystacks...you gave yourself away by calling heterosexuals "normal people". Kinda proves that you are a reactionary bastard.[/QUOTE]
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.
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.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed.
Oh, and Haystacks...you gave yourself away by calling heterosexuals "normal people". Kinda proves that you are a reactionary bastard.[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]iron eagle wrote: [/QUOTENAME]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
[/QUOTE]
Thank 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.
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
[/QUOTE]
Thank 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.