Gay Pride. What image did that short phrase conjure up in your minds? Did it make you think of a long parade of well dressed citizens marching in solidarity for civil rights? If you are an average American the answer is, unfortunately, probably not. More likely you first thought of a bawdy display tramping down the street with large stylized genitalia, and folks dressed in costumes normally worn in private, which leave less to the imagination than a trip to the beach. Sadly, when it comes to pride parades and demonstrations, LGBT groups have opted not to show maturity, restraint, or an understanding of what sorts of behaviors are appropriate in public, and instead have turned these events into something that would earn participants an arrest and permanent status as a registered sex offender if it weren’t for the city permit.
Let’s get down to brass tacks. It is never appropriate to dress up as a giant penis and parade down main street. City streets are public places, and as such need to be kept child friendly. Most parents want to manage the way their children are exposed to sexual content, and groups strutting down city streets in barely enough leather to cover their unmentionables are taking this right away. Take this sort of behavior and try it on a normal day and you’ll be slapped with charges for lewd and lascivious conduct, and with good reason. There is no legitimate excuse for acting this way in a public setting. None whatsoever.
Normal folks see this sort of “pride” on display and form the logical opinion that the people participating in these events don’t have the slightest clue about appropriate behavior, and might be more than a little deranged. Given that this is (hopefully) not the message the LGBT community wants to send, it is time to put a stop to Gay Pride, or at least reform it. I have a few suggestions towards this end:
- Lose the sexual imagery. In Gay Marriage debates the LGBT community is very vocal about how gay relationships are about love, and not lust. If so, why the need for the giant walking penises, and the troops in bondage gear? This sends the message that the LGBT lifestyle actually is just about lust. You can’t have it both ways. Furthermore you don’t see normal people behaving like this in public, we keep our private behavior in the bedroom. Even those of us who support the gay lifestyle would prefer that you keep your sex life to yourself, the rest of us don’t subject you to ours.
- Project a positive image of homosexuals. Most of the folks I know who are gay are normal people, with normal morals, and normal lives. This is the side of gay people you want to introduce America to. Americans who oppose homosexual lifestyles largely do so because they’re afraid gay people are deranged sex offenders out to expose their children to inappropriate content. Gay Pride simply serves to reinforce this belief with solid proof.
- Make use of abstract symbols. From the rainbow flag, to the pink triangle, to the linked gender symbols, homosexuals have a large numbers of easily identifiable symbols to rally around and project as part of their public image. Make floats that focus on these symbols (like Jewish communities focus on the Star of David and Menorah), not explicit sexual imagery and behavior. Abstract symbols are appropriate for public places, giant dildos aren’t.
In the end, I think you’ll find you win more friends with appropriate behavior and conduct than you do by being obscene and offensive.
-Angry Midwesterner
The 12 Angry Men Blog 
November 7, 2008 at 12:40 am
Sounds like someone has some confidence issues? Seriously though, why do people get so flustered at the sight of a giant penis? Penises are part of nature, not disgusting, amoral, or obscene. I have a favorite and simple saying, “People who get offended are dumb.” Lighten up. They are having fun and laughing at their own flamboyancy. Catch the joke and have a laugh.
I had to chuckle at your “think of the children” argument. Just what exactly happens to a child if they see a guy walking down the street in a penis costume? Do their eyeballs implode? Do they find the nearest dog and start humping? You explain a gay pride parade to a child the same way you’d explain a parade in Chinatown or a St. Patrick’s day parade or Mardi Gras. Kids aren’t the brainless sheep they are usually assumed to be.
I’d assert that gay pride parades are partly a chance for homosexuals to brush off some of the oppression they feel they’ve endured (whether real or not) for a large part of their life. This can probably be attributed to people who classify heterosexuals as “normal people” (as you put it) and homosexuals as the freaks of nature.
The bottom line is that homosexuals are just people. You may not believe it, but they are people like you and I. Just people who want to live their life and love the people they fall in love with. They aren’t out to “turn” younglings or rape heterosexuals or whatever other deviance the brimstone crowd would have you believe. They are just human beings trying to be humans.
Finally, if you think that we heteros are above the immorality and immaturity that inhabits the raucous gay pride parades, think again. We heteros have rock concerts, spring break, and mardi gras. Both groups do it and honestly, there is nothing wrong with it. A little immaturity can be fun now and then. I just hope you realize that heteros have similar sexually explicit activities.
ILA
November 7, 2008 at 1:03 pm
And, ILA missed the entire point, didn’t he?
Thank you for pointing out the obvious — people are people. If you have any more tautologies to pass along, feel free.
I think you’ll find the AM generally in favor of phallic projection, but that’s a subject for another day.
Gay pride parades are a celebration of the community — great. Every community should have a celebration. The AM’s point is that they’re sucky PR for the community. Gays aren’t about leather and genital gigantism.
The community isn’t seen to have large, visible community events that don’t involve either 1) public indecency or 2) screaming protests demanding that everyone change to suit them.
While, as you repeat, both of these things may be justified at the appropriate time, the community’s public perception needs a make-over.
Sexuality is important to everyone. Every group has a sub-group who can’t keep it decent in public. It’s just that the gay community (already branded as a primarily sex-oriented group) lacks balance in their high-profile public activities.
-AI
November 7, 2008 at 3:08 pm
The problem is that the marginalization of sexual rights has caused several disparate groups to join together for these “gay pride” type events.
There are quite a few people, gay and straight, who think that it *is* perfectly reasonable to walk down the street in a giant penis suit. These people have a right to their opinions and views, and are to some degree nearly as oppressed socially (if not nearly so much legally) as gays. Think I’m wrong? – try asking one of your friends and coworkers to swing with you sometime and see how it changes your relationship.
The problem with gay pride parades is the direct association of the sexual freedom groups with the gay rights groups, which are really two different movements. While I love you sexual rights people, you’re SEVERELY hurting the progress of the general gay rights movement by associating two sets of behaviors that are trying simultaneously to gain a respectable place in society — and only one of you desperately needs that place from a legal and political perspective.
The people arguing that gay marriage is about love, not lust, are from just the gay rights side of things. People from the sexual freedom would argue that love and lust go hand in hand and should be embraced simultaneously. The problem is that it’s a losing strategy to try to convince “normal” conservative society to accept both of these ideas at the same time. Which is a smaller jump, “all of your family based morals are oudated, you should be able to talk about penises in public and fuck anyone, man or woman, who gives you permission”, or “how about you let Steve and John raise their nice conservative little family the same way as you do, and they won’t ask about your bedroom if you don’t ask about theirs.”
In my opinion, the Gay Rights movement would get a lot more traction if they split things up and ran Gay Pride parades like a normal political parade and scheduled their sexual revolution parades for some other time of the year.
November 7, 2008 at 3:24 pm
That was a truly lucid description of the problem. I think that makes a lot of sense, and I think it would help the cause out a ton.
-AI
November 7, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Yes, I agree that the giant penis suit and “how about you let Steve and John raise their nice conservative little family….” Adam and Steve always has a better ring to it, though. In fact, it’s very similar to the situation with a lot of minority groups and subcultures. Freaking the mundanes is often NOT a good policy, unless you want to make your in-group solidarity stronger with no real attention to out-groups.
Nonetheless I suspect that AM has other issues… he keeps bringing it uphis current great white whale—which in turn is really just a guy in a giant whale suit. Worried that Moby wants to use his^H^H^H? Nah never mind, I don’t think I want to know.
November 8, 2008 at 3:57 am
freaking the mundanes interesting description, especially when you consider that the mundanes are the biggest underminers of the institution of marriage.
How many “mundanes” tie the knot for purely physical reasons? I mean what else could the “no sex before marriage” mantra lead to? Then you need to look at the divorce stats to see the hypocrisy of the majority. Then look at the stats wrt to the bible bashing holier than thou areas.
It ill behooves the cheating preachers and their redneck congregations of cheaters to start casting aspersions at others. As for respecting the views of these disingenuous bottom feeders.. well No.
Give me a person who really means what their vows mean every time over those self righteous ignoramuses even if they spend their free time waving a 5 foot dick on main street. They at least are honest unlike the prudish pricks who cluck and tsk tsk at them.
November 8, 2008 at 9:14 am
Harebell – I agree with you 100% on a personal level – but we all have to live together, and guess which group of us is in the minority right now?
Gaining equal rights as a minority is about convincing enough borderline bigots that maybe you aren’t all that bad, and they can just dislike or distrust you instead of oppressing you. Just look at opinions on blacks in Ohio, for example (btw, I’m from Ohio so I’m not trying to pick on anyone I don’t know). There are a lot of people who aren’t prejudiced – but there are a lot of other people who, while they would never say that a black man shouldn’t have equal rights under the law, will argue that they’re “culture” doesn’t make them as able to be independent or make good moral choices or be hard working or whatever.
They’re still bigoted – but a “Marriage is defined as between a white man and a white woman” amendment would never even make it on the ballot.
Gays need to convince those assholes that gay sex is something you can disagree with, not something that is actively deviant, or gay marriage is never going to get off the ground.
November 9, 2008 at 12:01 am
freaking the mundanes interesting description, especially when you consider that the mundanes are the biggest underminers of the institution of marriage.
Shhh, they don’t want to hear that!
“Freaking the mundanes” is a longstanding tradition of subcultures—hell the mundanes deserve some freaking from time to time—but it’s one such subcultures often need to drop if they want to gain mainstream acceptance. Dudes walking around in giant penis suits and posting your pics from last years IML (http://www.imrl.com/ definitely NSFW) on your MySpace page are not good representatives for a gay couple who wants to adopt.
Q. Why are young black men often so well-dressed?
A. They have to be.
Anyway, there are differing views of the gay marriage issue here because we are, by no stretch of the imagination, monolithic in our views. Some posters object on religious grounds. Angry Midwesterner objects on ground I don’t fundamentally understand (but what else is new? :). Based on a conversation held over pizza and beer a few weeks ago, Angry Military Man and I basically don’t care and thus feel that the right should be allowed on the general principle that if there’s no good reason to deny… though perhaps on a “go slow” basis as outlined by Jonathan Rauch (see, e.g., http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200404u/int2004-04-23). (AMM should correct me if I have misrepresented his views.)
November 13, 2008 at 7:08 am
Can history show that there has ever been a culture that survived longer than four generations (approx 44 years per generation) where gays/lesbians get special rights? Please feel free to provide examples. When gays/lesbians are allowed by our government to diminish marriage it is a road sign that leads to destruction. I say let gays/lesbians live as they are and I don’t judge them but we must not allow government to promote this behavior if we want to survive.
November 13, 2008 at 4:18 pm
T.F… Wow… Really? I’m hoping that was sarcasm?
Just how will providing equal rights to homosexuals lead to the destruction of our society? Please, just explain the next few steps.
I really like the way Mike redefined the issue. It is really a problem of people lumping the general homosexual population together with the homosexual extremists (oh the imagery!). The same can be said about christians and crazy-christians or muslims and muslim extremists. But, the question to be asked, who is making the mistake, the subject or the observer? I think it is the observer.
However, I am failing to see the point of the meta-discussion we seem to be having. I doubt that the gay marriage amendments succeeded in recent elections because the homosexual community has a “bad” public image based on their behavior. I think it really stemmed from an organized fear operation led by close-minded idiots who are looking for any argument to reach their own ends. Case in point, the whole “we will have to teach our kindergarteners about gay sex” argument. What a load of bullshit. Personally I’m pretty disappointed in the people of California, Arizona, and Florida for falling prey to such garbage.
Again, homosexuals are normal, average, loving, responsible people as much as heterosexuals are. I’m very glad Angry Immigrants agrees that this is a tautology. If only the rest of the world did…
November 15, 2008 at 12:35 pm
Thanks for the response ILA and I respect your viewpoints. Our decline as a culture is much larger in scope than any one single issue at this time. God has promised to sustain and prosper our nation if we are just, humble, and moral. In the Bible God has provided general revelation (not specific only to Christ followers) to all men for the common good. He accomplished this with five institutions and they are: personal responsibility, marriage, family, government/military, nationalism. There are many areas of conduct to consider but since the blog is about sexual matters I will get more specific. God is very simple and clear about the area of sexual behavior so that there is no confusion. The institution of marriage was created primarily for creating the next generation through sexual intimacy between man and wife. Honoring the institution of marriage is necessary for the well being of our culture. Since God gave us information so readily shouldn’t we assume that He planned on us finding it useful? Any culture that chooses to support these institutions will be allowed to survive into the 5th generation. If the culture ignores God’s common good principles and continues to slide into more wickedness it will be removed from history. Once one realizes the implications of this then gay/lesbian issues take on a new light. There have always been gays and lesbians in our culture but promoting them to the level of marriage by government degree is appropriate for the common good. There’s my two cents worth…
November 15, 2008 at 12:39 pm
ILA: I made an error on my last post towards the end of the comment. I meant to say that “There have always been gays and lesbians in our culture but promoting them into the level of marriage by government decree is not appropriate for the common good.”
January 14, 2009 at 3:18 pm
I am a lesbian and I agree completely. I lived in San Francisco during the 70s and was a young dyke having fun at the parades and being “in the face of” mainstream America. I fear I may have contributed to our community’s public relations problem. But that was long ago and I have since grown up. Our community seems to suffer from
colossal blindness on this issue. The freaky dykes on bikes do not represent me nor anyone I personally know. We need to clean up our act if we want to be taken seriously.
January 29, 2009 at 10:10 am
[…] Normally, the it’s Angry Midwesterner’s job to rant about how gay marriage will bring about the destruction of western society. Evidently Angry Immigrant’s been studying up on this belief on the sly, especially now that it […]
February 16, 2009 at 4:15 pm
[…] […]
November 11, 2011 at 3:27 am
dr charles heller…
[…]The Problem with Gay Pride « The 12 Angry Men Blog[…]…
January 6, 2012 at 4:33 pm
GAY AND PROUD! LETS STICK TOGETHER!!