Put the GAY back in PRIDE?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 07, 2014 3:37 AM GMT
    Pride week. Do you know how it started?

    The first picture in this video is from what is said to be the first 'Gay Rights' protest on April 17th 1965. The pioneer souls in this picture were told to 'not dress gay' so here they are in hetero-normative drag.

    The next images are from the Stonewall riots on June 29th 1969. So what were the Stonewall Riots? This event is considered the single most important event of the gay rights movement. It took place at the Stonewall Inn in NYC.

    From wikipedia...
    "Very few establishments welcomed openly gay people in the 1950s and 1960s. Those that did were often bars, although bar owners and managers were rarely gay. At the time, the Stonewall Inn was owned by the Mafia.[5][6] It catered to an assortment of patrons and was known to be popular among the poorest and most marginalized people in the gay community: drag queens, representatives of a newly self-aware transgender community, effeminate young men, male prostitutes, and homeless youth. Police raids on gay bars were routine in the 1960s, but officers quickly lost control of the situation at the Stonewall Inn. They attracted a crowd that was incited to riot. Tensions between New York City police and gay residents of Greenwich Village erupted into more protests the next evening, and again several nights later. Within weeks, Village residents quickly organized into activist groups to concentrate efforts on establishing places for gays and lesbians to be open about their sexual orientation without fear of being arrested."

    On the 1st anniversary of the Stonewall Riots, the first Gay Rights marches were held in NYC and several other large cities. What we think of now as the gay rights movement was borne out of this event.

    Over the decades, the movement grew in scope and support, but always on the anniversary of the Stonewall Riots.

    Now even the word 'gay' has been removed from 'Pride' events. They are spaced out in June to maximize revenue for businesses hungry to make money off 'gay tourism'.

    You can debate in your own mind if the word 'gay' should be restored to these 'Pride' events, but you can not deny the history.

    [url][/url]
  • Rene_Aensland

    Posts: 2495

    Jun 07, 2014 3:48 AM GMT
    Interesting.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 07, 2014 12:55 PM GMT
    back to the top
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 07, 2014 1:20 PM GMT
    I find it interesting that in the video you chose there seems to be a bias towards only gay men.

    Pride has always been about both gays and lesbians, as you can see in one brief shot of a sign that actually said "Lesbian and Gay Pride".

    It has since grown to be inclusive of all people who celebrate their differences and diversity. This to me has been the real message of our struggle.

    The world has evolved since this movement began, it would seem our organizations and traditions should also evolve to recognize this. If we do not we are no better than others who choose to use tradition as a means of stopping progress in our society.

    I think Pride is an appropriately open and inclusive moniker for what we are truly celebrating. We are here to celebrate all those who fought with us in defense of the idea that no one should be publicly shamed or legally discriminated against for openly expressing their true gender or sexuality.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 07, 2014 2:05 PM GMT
    moscowmikey said
    Now even the word 'gay' has been removed from 'Pride' events. They are spaced out in June to maximize revenue for businesses hungry to make money off 'gay tourism'.

    You can debate in your own mind if the word 'gay' should be restored to these 'Pride' events, but you can not deny the history.

    Some adjustments to your "undeniable" history. The word gay has not been removed from the Pride events I attend. It's just been expanded to the more inclusive LGBT in most cases (remember, the "G" stands for gay), though I'll still see the word gay as a stand-alone, and it's what people commonly say when describing these events, and how the media reports them.

    The real reason for the spacing is to prevent scheduling conflicts with the multiple Pride events now held, mostly in June. And in the case of South Florida we have them as early as March (this year) because of the high heat and strong sun in summer, and with June as our rainy season. Although we'll still have a second Stonewall Parade on the traditional weekend, for which we get thunderstorms about half the time. We've even held parades at night to avoid the sun.

    Yes, merchants make money on Pride. But that's good. We WANT people to respect our buying power, to support our events, not oppose them. And funny, around here even the police will tell you they like getting Pride patrol duty, because it's easy. Friendly and fairly well-behaved crowds, few disturbances that need police attention. Church picnics are barely quieter. That makes for good PR between us and the police, the very problem that caused the Stonewall Riots in the first place.

    Plus many of the event vendors are gay themselves. Along with gay service organizations and charities (including a booth my husband & I operate). Having multiple regional gay events spread out over the calendar gives them the opportunity for more exposure, as they travel from one to another every weekend. I don't see what's wrong with that.

    "At the time, the Stonewall Inn was owned by the Mafia..."

    That was common on the East Coast. Gay clubs were considered a dirty and often illegal business that decent investors wouldn't touch, not unlike brothels, natural the Mafia would be involved. Raids were common, but not as many as there would have been if the Mafia hadn't been paying off (and threatening) the police. And usually the clubs got to stay open.

    My husband tells amazing stories about the Mafia-owned gay clubs in Boston of the 1950s & 60s. All the strategies the gay patrons used to avoid or at least survive police raids. The secret methods used to signal a pending raid, or the presence of an undercover vice cop in the bar, not unlike tactics in the Prohibition speakeasies of the 1920s. All the police harassment gays suffered on the public sidewalks and streets outside those bars. Those stories alone could make an interesting thread here.
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Jun 07, 2014 2:11 PM GMT
    creyente saidI find it interesting that in the video you chose there seems to be a bias towards only gay men.

    Pride has always been about both gays and lesbians, as you can see in one brief shot of a sign that actually said "Lesbian and Gay Pride".

    It has since grown to be inclusive of all people who celebrate their differences and diversity. This to me has been the real message of our struggle.





    Very well said! Absolutely agree.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 07, 2014 4:30 PM GMT
    I am guilty of choosing couples pics of men. Definitely a bias of mine. It is definitely male-centric. It would be fascinating to create a retrospective of the contributions of gay women to the equal rights movement.

    However, I do wish to push forward a couple of ideas.

    Is 'gay' an inclusive term? When did it come to mean only men?

    If these Pride events are based on the Stonewall Riots, isn't it entirely appropriate to call them Gay Pride?

    Please don't take that to mean that I don't think of wholeheartedly agree that it has become and even that the cause is better served via inclusion. Of course I do.

    But by removing the word 'gay' doesn't that do a disservice to the origin of the event?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 07, 2014 5:29 PM GMT
    moscowmikey saidI am guilty of choosing couples pics of men. Definitely a bias of mine. It is definitely male-centric. It would be fascinating to create a retrospective of the contributions of gay women to the equal rights movement.

    However, I do wish to push forward a couple of ideas.

    Is 'gay' an inclusive term? When did it come to mean only men?

    If these Pride events are based on the Stonewall Riots, isn't it entirely appropriate to call them Gay Pride?

    Please don't take that to mean that I don't think of wholeheartedly agree that it has become and even that the cause is better served via inclusion. Of course I do.

    But by removing the word 'gay' doesn't that do a disservice to the origin of the event?




    When I was younger I had always considered the word gay to be inclusive of both men and women, but there are definitely those that are not comfortable with that. This is one of the reasons we have the "LGBT" acronym.

    The current definition of the word does say it is used to refer to both men and women. It doesn't bother me either way.

    While I understand wanting to preserve the origins of the event, does that really need to be done by creating segregation in the name? There are certainly many books, videos and media accountings to help anyone who cares enough to learn the history of the event.

    While the stonewall riot was the impetus for the parade, there is a larger meaning to the parade then just celebrating gay men and women fighting back.

    Gay pride - Wikipedia
    On November 2, 1969, Craig Rodwell, his partner Fred Sargeant, Ellen Broidy, and Linda Rhodes proposed the first pride march to be held in New York City by way of a resolution at the Eastern Regional Conference of Homophile Organizations (ERCHO) meeting in Philadelphia.[3]

    "That the Annual Reminder, in order to be more relevant, reach a greater number of people, and encompass the ideas and ideals of the larger struggle in which we are engaged-that of our fundamental human rights-be moved both in time and location.

    We propose that a demonstration be held annually on the last Saturday in June in New York City to commemorate the 1969 spontaneous demonstrations on Christopher Street and this demonstration be called CHRISTOPHER STREET LIBERATION DAY. No dress or age regulations shall be made for this demonstration.



    Additionally, I think of this in the same way i think of the marriage argument to call gay marriage a "domestic partnership". Why do we need to segregate people based on a tradition or on the (perceived) origins of a ceremony? It only serves to create boundaries.

    I would rather show that the LGBT community is about progress, flexibility and evolution. While we cherish our history, we don't need to create boundaries as a result of them.

    We open the celebration to anyone gay, lesbian, straight, asexual, bisexual, or transgendered (or any mix thereof) who wish to celebrate the progress we've made in removing the shame and discrimination associated with being different into today's society. In truth they have all had a hand in this progress.

    That's just my opinion and I'm sure others will disagree.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 07, 2014 6:42 PM GMT
    creyente said...I think of this in the same way i think of the marriage argument to call gay marriage a "domestic partnership". Why do we need to segregate people based on a tradition or on the (perceived) origins of a ceremony? It only serves to create boundaries....


    And yet doesn't "gay marriage", instead of "marriage for gay people", segregate our marriages from str8 ones. (I know, I know, there he is again.)

    Words are funny and how we use them. Depending on usage, gay means gay men but also gay means the same sex community. In the latter sense it is inclusive of at least two genders and maybe even (but perhaps debatable) trans just as bi encompasses both males and females.

    Dropping the word gay from pride is an interesting observation. I'm not sure that's entirely bad. The rainbow flags still hint at our involvement. Pride standing alone, maybe that engenders (haha) pride towards all (hate to have to qualify "all" but I will) adult, consenting sexuality. Because if you think of it, homophobia is all about str8s not accepting themselves. When str8s accept themselves, outside of their religious horseshit--which is likely used to justify their sexual inhibitions anyway--they accept us. So they get to be proud too. And then Pride presents opportunity for an even bigger party.

    "On the field of battle, the spoken word does not carry far enough; hence the institution of gongs and drums. Nor can ordinary objects be seen clearly enough; hence the institution of banners and flags." ~~ Sun Tzu, circa 500 BCE
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 07, 2014 6:48 PM GMT
    theantijock said
    creyente said...I think of this in the same way i think of the marriage argument to call gay marriage a "domestic partnership". Why do we need to segregate people based on a tradition or on the (perceived) origins of a ceremony? It only serves to create boundaries....


    And yet doesn't "gay marriage", instead of "marriage for gay people", segregate our marriages from str8 ones. (I know, I know, there he is again.)


    Doh!!!

    or better yet.. marriage equality instead of "marriage for gay people"

    Checkmate... Newman!

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 07, 2014 7:02 PM GMT
    creyente saidDoh!!!

    or better yet.. marriage equality instead of "marriage for gay people"

    Checkmate... Newman!


    Only when the wedding party's dressed naked.

    You only thought I wasn't looking because I'd turned my head, but I saw you rearrange the board. I caught my niece do the same when she was four and I still don't trust her.

    So proper reference would be marriage equality generally, but we still refer to orientation so guests know whether to gift a tacky fondue set or a proper dildo.

    My point of that being sometimes phrasing gets shortened. Sometimes just to fit the space available. And then there's how that plays on meaning. For me, having lived through this, Pride standing alone doesn't diminish Gay. But I don't know how that will play into the future and so as I said the OP has an interesting point.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 07, 2014 7:14 PM GMT
    theantijock said

    You only thought I wasn't looking because I'd turned my head, but I saw you rearrange the board. I caught my niece do the same when she was four and I still don't trust her.


    hellonewman.jpg

    I bumped into it and fixed the pieces. emoticon_angel.png
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 07, 2014 7:20 PM GMT
    creyente said
    I bumped into it and fixed the pieces.


    square-bike.png

    Thanx for straightening that up.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 07, 2014 8:25 PM GMT
    My best friend wears a wristband that reads "Irish Pride." When we first started hanging out, I asked him if he was gay. He said "no, but I get that a lot, I associate pride with self-esteem rather than gay."

    So in my opinion, yes, the word "gay" should be added to Pride in order to distinguish what the pride is about.