As much as I'm usually the left winger socialist, who is quick to jump to the defence of gays and other minorities, I'm gonna have to agree with Clarky on this one.
I think gays should be proud of who they are, but these parades portray gays as sleezy and sluty which is not a positive image for any group to have. They come off as being overtly sexual without any regard for safety or dignity. It only furthers a devide between relatively normal gay people and a population of straight people who believe all gays are freaks because they've seen these parades.
I think people would be alot more excepting of gays, if these parades showcased the positive things that gay people have done. Instead of a guy in leather, why not show a succesful University professor who happens to be gay, or a CEO, or a doctor.
Quote:
Originally posted by RougeUnderoos
Straight people parade around doing pretty outlandish things but you never hear something like "the Red Mile is a disgusting display and has put heterosexuals back a long way".
|
I usually agree with your points, but can't see this comparison.
The difference is that the red mile was not an event aimed at bringing attention to the heterosexual community. It was not representative of heterosexuals, homosexuals or anything in between. The gay pride on the other hand is designed and intended to bring positive attention to the gay community.
I think a more fair comparison would be, to have a straight pride parade full of strippers, hookers and pimps. And then we could say it is a bad representation of heterosexuals.
Quote:
|
Can't you just ignore the gay pride parade?
|
If people ignore it, it had failed in its mission. The event is organized to draw attention and awareness of the gay community. People ignoring it, is almost as bad as people turned off by it. The goal should be to get people to accept it, enjoy it, and maybe open up some close minds.