• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is it time for gay pride parades to take it down a notch in general?

CLAX1911 said:
Sorry, I dint understand what this has to do with my post.
Click to expand...
Your were responding to someone who said "If you want to have a separate discussion about inappropriate crap that heteroes do".
I thought you guys were talking about public displays.
 
sangha said:
And I understand why you think it was a bad move. It's because you don't understand what ACT UP accomplished.
All those die-in, quilters, etc - they knew about AIDS because of ACT UP brought attention to the issue when no one else was doing anything about AIDS.
Click to expand...
It's possible to bring an issue to the fore without offending, hurting or horrifying people. You absolutely hurt your cause when you do that.
But you are completely black and white and fear any criticism of things you support, even from yourself.

I was there when ACT UP threw condoms at churchgoers and nuns. Believe me, they lost a lot of public support at that moment.
And any children that were in St. Patrick's Cathedral that day are today's homophobes.
 
tererun said:
First off, I love the GLBT community and I want gays to be out in public. Yes, I want an adult alternative for people to participate in. So hear me out before freaking out. In the past the gay pride parade needed to be in your face. It needed a brash we are here and queer and it is not going away attitude. Also, it was one of very few outlets which means all types were there and there was no good alternative for an adult thing. I guess this also would overlap on adult entertainment in straight society also. Some people want there to be more adult venues and it seems there is becoming a demand for kids free locations that are not just clubs or bars. That probably plays in here also.

Is it time to maybe make pride parades a bit more PG while expanding new venues for the adult exploration of adult gay life? In this aspect gays seem to be making the second half of that happen a lot more than straight people. I know of a few Adult gay celebrations on private lands and where kids are restricted that go on. There are a number of adult conventions that I know about many of which are heavily gay and alternate sexuality. This seems to be a great way to do things so you can tone down the pride events while promoting the adult events at something that draws a larger crowd. I have noticed a few of my gay friends who have now started to shy away from adult celebrations because they have children. There should be pride events that children of both gay and straight people can go to without getting a dick in their kid's face. perhaps the public nudity displays should not be holding up traffic for everyone. I don't want to see neked women or men lovin it up in the middle of the street while I have to get to work. I can understand that view.

Should the gay community be moving towards a more family oriented pride now that they are breaking through?
Click to expand...
I think Pride has always been about more than just sexual orientation at its most basic. It's about for one day essentially being allowed to express who you are -- whether that means simply marching under a sign that says "Gay and proud" or putting on a dress and a wig or wearing a thong. The whole point of the thing is to celebrate sexual and gender non-conformance. I don't think you can say that the parades should "tone it down," because that defeats the entire point.

That said, I do have some issues with what some people do during Pride. After this year's pride, I went with my boyfriend to a fairly nice bar (not a gay bar) to get some food. We were going to dinner with some friends later, so I went to the restroom to change from my T-shirt and shorts into a button-up and slacks. As I was changing this guy came in and literally stood outside the stall and just watched me change my clothes over the door, making comments. Eventually I told him to get lost, so he went over to some other guy in the restroom who was open to the solicitation and they started going at it.

I find that sort of thing offensive and horribly embarrassing as a gay man. Pride is about celebrating being who you are. It is not a license to sexually harass other people or commit public lewdness and other sex offenses. There is a line in there somewhere that should not be crossed.
 
Brooks said:
It's possible to bring an issue to the fore without offending, hurting or horrifying people. You absolutely hurt your cause when you do that.
But you are completely black and white and fear any criticism of things you support, even from yourself.

I was there when ACT UP threw condoms at churchgoers and nuns. Believe me, they lost a lot of public support at that moment.
And any children that were in St. Patrick's Cathedral that day are today's homophobes.
Click to expand...

For one thing, I don't think ACT UP threw condoms at St Patricks. What "they" did to cause an uproar was to throw a communion wafer on the floor, and it wasn't ACT UP that did that. It was one protestor, so I doubt your honesty when you claim that you were there

And as far as losing support, their successes prove you wrong.
 
Krhazy said:
I think Pride has always been about more than just sexual orientation at its most basic. It's about for one day essentially being allowed to express who you are -- whether that means simply marching under a sign that says "Gay and proud" or putting on a dress and a wig or wearing a thong. The whole point of the thing is to celebrate sexual and gender non-conformance. I don't think you can say that the parades should "tone it down," because that defeats the entire point.

That said, I do have some issues with what some people do during Pride. After this year's pride, I went with my boyfriend to a fairly nice bar (not a gay bar) to get some food. We were going to dinner with some friends later, so I went to the restroom to change from my T-shirt and shorts into a button-up and slacks. As I was changing this guy came in and literally stood outside the stall and just watched me change my clothes over the door, making comments. Eventually I told him to get lost, so he went over to some other guy in the restroom who was open to the solicitation and they started going at it.

I find that sort of thing offensive and horribly embarrassing as a gay man. Pride is about celebrating being who you are. It is not a license to sexually harass other people or commit public lewdness and other sex offenses. There is a line in there somewhere that should not be crossed.
Click to expand...

Pride should be more than just a sex party. I also agree that some gay bars need to step up the class so that we get places which are a little more reserved.
 
sangha said:
For one thing, I don't think ACT UP threw condoms at St Patricks. What "they" did to cause an uproar was to throw a communion wafer on the floor, and it wasn't ACT UP that did that. It was one protestor, so I doubt your honesty when you claim that you were there
Click to expand...
What you care to believe moves me not at all..

sangha said:
And as far as losing support, their successes prove you wrong.
Click to expand...
Their "success" is not provable since there's no control group for this experiment.

Breakthroughs for AIDS research occurred in many countries around the world, the earliest ones being in France, I believe so their antics in the NYC gay pride parade most likely accomplished nothing positive in the long run.
It was a bunch of angry and frustrated militants spewing hatred against those not responsible. In fact the sick irony is that during the mid 80's, Catholic organizations provided more beds to AIDS patients than any other organization in the country. But militants rarely think that far outside the box.

It wasn't an intentional, success driven strategy, it was an impetuous, angry outburst.

Keep defending it.
 
wolfie said:
It is not a personal vendetta..you accused me of saying something that I didn't...simple as...
Click to expand...
Let it go. This is a personal vendetta.
What you said I interpreted to mean something. You didn't clear it up despite ample opportunity. When you are misunderstood it is your duty to make yourself understood.

If you want to continue this BS maybe we should do it in private. So you don't get another violation for being off topic.
Apparently I am not the only one who thinks that a gay mafia exists!!

Now meet the real gay mafia..
Click to expand...
multiple people share your delusion that doesn't mean anything.
And once again...No..I didn't say that gay people are out to get me in Manchester....I said hets were not made to feel very welcome there!!
Click to expand...
yeah likely because you talk trash like you do here.
 
Last edited:
Brooks said:
Your were responding to someone who said "If you want to have a separate discussion about inappropriate crap that heteroes do".
I thought you guys were talking about public displays.
Click to expand...

No, he was talking about it being inappropriate for guys to be wearing shorts and such in public like they do in pride parades, I remarked that I have seen 13 year old girls wear the exact same thing to the super market.

I destroyed his point so he thought bringing sexuality into it was a clever defense.
 
CLAX1911 said:
Let it go. This is a personal vendetta.
What you said I interpreted to mean something. You didn't clear it up despite ample opportunity. When you are misunderstood it is your duty to make yourself understood.
Click to expand...

Seems weird for you to say that, since you've been taking this quite personally for a while. I tend to get sick of the whole "if you don't support gays in everything, you hate gays" hyperbole.
 
sangha said:
I believe in facts. I am not surprised that you care not for the facts

The successes of ACT UP are indisputable
Click to expand...
In regards to hastening AIDS treatments - unprovable.
In terms of creating hordes of homophobes - most definitely.
 
Gipper said:
Seems weird for you to say that, since you've been taking this quite personally for a while. I tend to get sick of the whole "if you don't support gays in everything, you hate gays" hyperbole.
Click to expand...

I don't know why you are addressing this to me. I never come off from that perspective. I never said you have to support anything. Perhaps you are being overly sensitive.
 
CLAX1911 said:
I don't know why you are addressing this to me. I never come off from that perspective. I never said you have to support anything. Perhaps you are being overly sensitive.
Click to expand...

Do I really need to look back to last Friday when you appeared to be suffering from a painful case of butthurt over my posts? Even Bodhi couldn't talk you off your ledge.
 
sangha said:
Because before ACT UP, nobody hated gays :lamo
Click to expand...

I've never once heard of ACT UP being a cause of homophobia until this thread. As if "acting up" when the president ordered the surgeon general to not even acknowledge the AIDS crisis for years was entirely unwarranted.
 
Gipper said:
Do I really need to look back to last Friday when you appeared to be suffering from a painful case of butthurt over my posts? Even Bodhi couldn't talk you off your ledge.
Click to expand...

I wasn't butt hurt, you are a homophobe. You would hit a gay guy fir saying words to you? that is homophobia, that is all i was saying.

I simply expressed that you are homophobic. Bodhi attempted to save face for you but I see through that lie. But my feelings weren't involved.
 
CLAX1911 said:
I wasn't butt hurt, you are a homophobe. You would hit a gay guy fir saying words to you? that is homophobia, that is all i was saying.

I simply expressed that you are homophobic. Bodhi attempted to save face for you but I see through that lie. But my feelings weren't involved.
Click to expand...

So instead of seeing the obvious joke, you assume we colluded together. Gotcha.

Keep thinking I'm homophobic.
 
CLAX1911 said:
There is no obvious joke. I don't think you colluded together either. Man everybody is out to get you. Standard paranoia. You are homophobic.

If it was a joke explain the humor.
Click to expand...

I'm a magician. If I explain it, the wonder disappears.

Actually, the paranoia is on your end. You made it sound like Bodhi and I were tag-teaming you - which I'm sure, in some way, you get enjoyment from.
 
Gipper said:
I'm a magician. If I explain it, the wonder disappears.
Click to expand...
pulling that childish "i am only joking" thing once you say something foolish isn't wonder its transparent.
Actually, the paranoia is on your end. You made it sound like Bodhi and I were tag-teaming you - which I'm sure, in some way, you get enjoyment from.
Click to expand...
Actually i wouldn't say I would punch somebody for saying words to me. Then when my words are scrutinized come up with this silliness and actually think its a defense.

I don't think you and embody else tag teamed me, i would have to see pictures first.
 
CLAX1911 said:
pulling that childish "i am only joking" thing once you say something foolish isn't wonder its transparent.

Actually i wouldn't say I would punch somebody for saying words to me. Then when my words are scrutinized come up with this silliness and actually think its a defense.

I don't think you and embody else tag teamed me, i would have to see pictures first.
Click to expand...

Okay, I reeeeeeeeeeally wouldn't punch anyone. If you want, you can talk to Schweddy about introducing a sarcasm font.
 
Gipper said:
Okay, I reeeeeeeeeeally wouldn't punch anyone. If you want, you can talk to Schweddy about introducing a sarcasm font.
Click to expand...

It is your job to make sure you are properly understood.

I hope you learned a lesson here.

I don't need a sarcasm font. What you said want sarcasm.

It was just wasn't funny if it was humor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom