(November 11, 2010 at 7:04 am)Tiberius Wrote:

(November 11, 2010 at 6:55 am)Cerrone Wrote:

(November 11, 2010 at 6:35 am)joshgold17 Wrote: well why would straight people need to have a straight pride anyway

So only perceived minorites are allowed to be proud of themselves?

White power! I mean...pride

In all seriousness, I agree with you completely. Apparently when the majority feel the need to express pride, it makes them a bunch of bigots. This fact about society has always confused me.

(November 11, 2010 at 7:04 am)joshgold17 Wrote: oh so should we be allowed white pride and white history month then or would you call that racist

We could do that (and it wouldn't be racist), or we could forget about the whole "pride" thing and just celebrate humanity, and all of history.

As Morgan Freeman said, "I don't want a Black History Month. Black History is American History".

so if a group of str8s had a str8 pride march and a group of gays had a gay pride march would you say the str8 group or the gay group is more likely having a march to be hateful or threatining than actually doing it to celebrate their sexuality.

(November 11, 2010 at 7:16 am)joshgold17 Wrote: so if a group of str8s had a str8 pride march and a group of gays had a gay pride march would you say one of those groups is more likely having a march to be hateful or threatining than actually doing it to celebrate their sexuality.

No, I'm saying that without any further information, it is impossible to make any deductions about why a group of straights (there is no '8' in that by the way) is marching in a straight pride march.

If a group of gays can march in a gay pride parade, I see no logical reason why a group of straights can't march in a straight parade. If the gays are simply celebrating their sexuality, why can't straight people do the same? Unless you are inferring that having a gay sexuality is somehow 'better' than having a straight one, because I would disagree with you; all sexualities are equal.

(November 11, 2010 at 7:22 am)Tiberius Wrote:

(November 11, 2010 at 7:16 am)joshgold17 Wrote: so if a group of str8s had a str8 pride march and a group of gays had a gay pride march would you say one of those groups is more likely having a march to be hateful or threatining than actually doing it to celebrate their sexuality.

No, I'm saying that without any further information, it is impossible to make any deductions about why a group of straights (there is no '8' in that by the way) is marching in a straight pride march.

If a group of gays can march in a gay pride parade, I see no logical reason why a group of straights can't march in a straight parade. If the gays are simply celebrating their sexuality, why can't straight people do the same? Unless you are inferring that having a gay sexuality is somehow 'better' than having a straight one, because I would disagree with you; all sexualities are equal.

so in 1960s america when white people got treated alot better had more rights and black people got treated worse and had less rights,would you say it would be ok if white people have a white pride march even though they were the majority and had more rights.

i am not saying it is like 1960s for gays today but in america gays in most states can not get married,can not serve openly in the military(althouh i am not sure if its changed) can get fired for being gay in most states,gay teens are 4 times more likley to commit suicide,and gays are much more likley to be victim of hate crimes of straight people than staright people being the victim of hate crimes of gay people.

Is that you Existentialist?

(November 11, 2010 at 7:33 am)joshgold17 Wrote: i am not saying it is like 1960s for gays today but in america gays in most states can not get married,can not serve openly in the military(althouh i am not sure if its changed) can get fired for being gay in most states,gay teens are 4 times more likley to commit suicide,and gays are much more likley to be victim of hate crimes of straight people than staright people being the victim of hate crimes of gay people.

Moral of the story;

Don't be gay!

(November 11, 2010 at 7:33 am)joshgold17 Wrote:

(November 11, 2010 at 7:22 am)Tiberius Wrote:

(November 11, 2010 at 7:16 am)joshgold17 Wrote: so if a group of str8s had a str8 pride march and a group of gays had a gay pride march would you say one of those groups is more likely having a march to be hateful or threatining than actually doing it to celebrate their sexuality.

No, I'm saying that without any further information, it is impossible to make any deductions about why a group of straights (there is no '8' in that by the way) is marching in a straight pride march.

If a group of gays can march in a gay pride parade, I see no logical reason why a group of straights can't march in a straight parade. If the gays are simply celebrating their sexuality, why can't straight people do the same? Unless you are inferring that having a gay sexuality is somehow 'better' than having a straight one, because I would disagree with you; all sexualities are equal.

so in 1960s america when white people got treated alot better had more rights and black people got treated worse and had less rights,would you say it would be ok if white people have a white pride march even though they were the majority and had more rights.

i am not saying it is like 1960s for gays today but in america gays in most states can not get married,can not serve openly in the military(althouh i am not sure if its changed) can get fired for being gay in most states,gay teens are 4 times more likley to commit suicide,and gays are much more likley to be victim of hate crimes of straight people than staright people being the victim of hate crimes of gay people.

Unless the straight pride march in some way was spreading hate or giving itself a sense of superiority I see no reason why in theory one would be unacceptable?

I also support the principles behind gay pride marches and attend one of the biggest in the country every year in Brighton, where I'm from.

I can understand why a straight pride march may attract negative connotations, however that's just due to a peculiar sense of guilt society has created for its majorities (particularly, as mentioned, under Nu Labour. Possibly as a direct result of it's policies on equality and multiculturalism that created division and resentment where there was none to begin with) . In theory a straight pride march need be nothing but a celebration.

(November 11, 2010 at 7:33 am)joshgold17 Wrote: so in 1960s america when white people got treated alot better had more rights and black people got treated worse and had less rights,would you say it would be ok if white people have a white pride march even though they were the majority and had more rights.

I don't see how that is relevant. We don't live in 1960s America. It's not ok if some people have rights and other don't if that's what you mean.

Quote:i am not saying it is like 1960s for gays today but in america gays in most states can not get married,can not serve openly in the military(althouh i am not sure if its changed) can get fired for being gay in most states,gay teens are 4 times more likley to commit suicide,and gays are much more likley to be victim of hate crimes of straight people than staright people being the victim of hate crimes of gay people.

All of which is completely irrelevant when talking about the issue at hand...which is whether straight people should be able to have "straight pride" marches. I say they should if they want to (whether they'd want to is a separate issue), because I believe that everyone should have equal rights. If we allow gay people to celebrate their sexuality, and not allow straight people to celebrate theirs, we are not fulfilling a commitment to equal rights.

(November 11, 2010 at 8:33 am)Tiberius Wrote:

(November 11, 2010 at 7:33 am)joshgold17 Wrote: so in 1960s america when white people got treated alot better had more rights and black people got treated worse and had less rights,would you say it would be ok if white people have a white pride march even though they were the majority and had more rights.

I don't see how that is relevant. We don't live in 1960s America. It's not ok if some people have rights and other don't if that's what you mean.

Quote:i am not saying it is like 1960s for gays today but in america gays in most states can not get married,can not serve openly in the military(althouh i am not sure if its changed) can get fired for being gay in most states,gay teens are 4 times more likley to commit suicide,and gays are much more likley to be victim of hate crimes of straight people than staright people being the victim of hate crimes of gay people.

All of which is completely irrelevant when talking about the issue at hand...which is whether straight people should be able to have "straight pride" marches. I say they should if they want to (whether they'd want to is a separate issue), because I believe that everyone should have equal rights. If we allow gay people to celebrate their sexuality, and not allow straight people to celebrate theirs, we are not fulfilling a commitment to equal rights.

so why do you think there were and still are gay pride marches other than to celebrate sexuality.

---

Skipper Wrote:Unless the straight pride march in some way was spreading hate or giving itself a sense of superiority I see no reason why in theory one would be unacceptable?

I also support the principles behind gay pride marches and attend one of the biggest in the country every year in Brighton, where I'm from.

I can understand why a straight pride march may attract negative connotations, however that's just due to a peculiar sense of guilt society has created for its majorities (particularly, as mentioned, under Nu Labour. Possibly as a direct result of it's policies on equality and multiculturalism that created division and resentment where there was none to begin with) . In theory a straight pride march need be nothing but a celebration.

right yes because we should go back to the 1970s when the majority whites could say racist things,not hire blacks and asians for jobs,where the NF got quite a few votes,where interacial dating was taboo.

And what do you mean majorities feel guilty. since when do straight people feel guilty about being straight or white people feel guilty about being white?

(November 11, 2010 at 8:54 am)joshgold17 Wrote: And what do you mean majorities feel guilty. since when do straight people feel guilty about being straight or white people feel guilty about being white?

Easy there, sugar.

Historically, straights have been prejudiced against gays, whites against other races, Christians against other religions, etc.

The point that most of us would like to make is that it was our fathers, or grandfathers, or great grandfathers, or even further back who committed these crimes. And yet, no matter what the religion, people seem to think the idea of "sins of the father" applies.

My father is a racist. I'm not. I don't deserve to be made to feel guilty for the things HE does - we're two separate adults. But you have to agree that because we share a last name, people are going to associate me with him and some of those people will look down on me.

It's not that anyone who is straight feels guilty about being that way, it's that (at least in America) there seems to be a prevailing attitude of demeaning ourselves in small ways to "make up" for any real or perceived wrongs done to homosexuals.

There are plenty of "guilty liberals" who go around with this false humility, this sickening attitude of "I know, I was born white, I'm sorry, you're better than me, you're right, because your ancestors suffered more than mine." It doesn't help anyone.

Gay or Straight parade, doesn't matter, as long as you're celebrating what you are, and not demeaning what the other is.

(November 11, 2010 at 8:54 am)joshgold17 Wrote:

Skipper Wrote:Unless the straight pride march in some way was spreading hate or giving itself a sense of superiority I see no reason why in theory one would be unacceptable?

I also support the principles behind gay pride marches and attend one of the biggest in the country every year in Brighton, where I'm from.

I can understand why a straight pride march may attract negative connotations, however that's just due to a peculiar sense of guilt society has created for its majorities (particularly, as mentioned, under Nu Labour. Possibly as a direct result of it's policies on equality and multiculturalism that created division and resentment where there was none to begin with) . In theory a straight pride march need be nothing but a celebration.

right yes because we should go back to the 1970s when the majority whites could say racist things,not hire blacks and asians for jobs,where the NF got quite a few votes,where interacial dating was taboo.

And what do you mean majorities feel guilty. since when do straight people feel guilty about being straight or white people feel guilty about being white?

I'm clearly not saying lets go back to the 70's, read what I said and think about it. I'm saying society moved on from then itself, nu labour however, I feel pushed that progress back with pushing the issues of equality and integration way to hard and quickly and it stirred up resentment and tensions where there needed be none.

Majorities ARE made to feel guilty for the sins committed by them in the past. Groups of white British people push this bullshit guilt on other white British people for past wrongs to some how seem tollerent and liberal, but it causes even more issues. We should be moving on from a time when skin colour or sexual preference mattered not switching it around the other way. If a member of a majority criticises a minority group or someone of a minority the issue of racism or homophobia is bought up way to quickly when the minority element is a non issue. It completely removes the meanings from the words and undermines real issues people face.

I feel I've defended against homophobia on these boards fairly strongly, and to be honest, probably a bit to over aggressively at times, but you coming here on a big gay crusade and creating issues where there is none is a perfect example of what I'm talking about and just as non progressive and annoying as the anti-gay bigots themselves.