Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 120
Thanks Tree58Thanks

Thread: Why "Straight Pride" and "White History Month" is Offensive

  1. #1
    Council Member Djinn's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    45,958
    Thanks
    30343

    From
    Pennsylvania, USA

    Why "Straight Pride" and "White History Month" is Offensive

    There's an awful lot of people here who figure that there's nothing wrong with "Straight Pride" and "White History Month" because - "You know ... equality!"

    Wrong. And I found a blog post that does a stunning job of explaining why. It isn't terribly long, but I boldfaced the critical bit, which explains that "gay/black pride" isn't really "pride in being gay/black." It's pride in the advances such groups have made towards equality.

    That's why pride in being straight/white is (as the blog correctly states) "asinine."


    Any reasonable person cognizant of civil rights history should find the above photo offensive. It is no surprise it was being shared by a page on Facebook called “Right Wing News”. That should tell you enough right there. The photo is a symptom of the reactionary movement against civil rights. This dynamic is typical in history—there is always a counter-revolution, or a reactionary movement, to any movement that opposes the establishment. This photo is nothing more than some ignorant person pretending to stand up for the “oppressed majority”. He or she is making fun of the struggles of the minority, in this case, LGBT citizens.

    Any minority that has overcome oppression warrants pride in themselves and a celebration for each historical benchmark achieved. Any straight person that wants to pretend he or she is being oppressed because gays are making progress toward equality, and they are proud of it, is nothing less than a bigot.


    This photo is equivalent to what the disingenuous conservative pundits are doing in the media by accusing homosexuality of being shoved in their face simply because Michael Sam kissed his boyfriend on ESPN. Homosexuality is not being shoved in their face. It is being treated equally. Yes, Michael Sam kissing his boyfriend on ESPN was a big deal because it was symbolic of a historical benchmark, and we gays have every reason to be proud, but it wasn’t homosexuality being shoved in anyone’s face anymore than hetereosexuality gets shoved into the faces of gay citizens, which is exactly what the above photo is doing.


    This photo is a mockery of LGBT citizens and our struggle. It is disingenuous because it assumes that heterosexual citizens have had to go through—and are going through—what we have had to go through to achieve equality. Hell, it assumes the majority had to achieve equality at all. The photo should elicit strange looks for the same reason that anyone proposing a “White History Month” should elicit strange looks—it’s asinine. It is asinine because it blatantly ignores history.


    When any person says they feel as if homosexuality is being shoved in their face by the advocacy for civil rights, what they are really telling you is they are disgusted by gays and that said person is bothered by seeing or hearing anything having to do with being gay. The above photo is nothing more than some bigoted individual trying to be cute.
    Source

  2. #2
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    3,568
    Thanks
    416

    From
    Australia
    That doesn’t work because neither homosexuality nor black skin are new. Both have existed for eons, as have people who were proud of their sexual orientation and color, whatever it was. Go back to ancient Greece and you’ll find a black gay guy, giggling and drinking wine, announcing to one and all how proud he was to be black and gay. Others would stand up and say, “Oh yeah? Well I’m proud to be white and straight.”

    This is nothing new.

  3. #3
    Veteran Member Kropotkin's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    7,536
    Thanks
    739

    From
    New York
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob Larrikin View Post
    That doesn’t work because neither homosexuality nor black skin are new. Both have existed for eons, as have people who were proud of their sexual orientation and color, whatever it was. Go back to ancient Greece and you’ll find a black gay guy, giggling and drinking wine, announcing to one and all how proud he was to be black and gay. Others would stand up and say, “Oh yeah? Well I’m proud to be white and straight.”

    This is nothing new.
    Um, yea, might want to hit the history books Robby. That's one of the dumbest attempts at an historical allusion that I've ever seen- and I've seen some really stupid attempts before, primarily by right-wingers.

  4. #4
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    3,568
    Thanks
    416

    From
    Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by Kropotkin View Post
    Um, yea, might want to hit the history books Robby. That's one of the dumbest attempts at an historical allusion that I've ever seen- and I've seen some really stupid attempts before, primarily by right-wingers.
    Hah - now the Lefties are saying that homosexuality and skin color are things they just invented recently. You guys crack me up.

  5. #5
    Council Member Djinn's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    45,958
    Thanks
    30343

    From
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by Rob Larrikin View Post
    That doesn’t work because neither homosexuality nor black skin are new ...
    They're not new. But the fact that black people have the same rights as you is new. The fact that a gay person cannot be fired from their job (or worse, thrown in prison) for being gay is new. And that is what they celebrate.

    It's not their sexual orientation or their skin color. It's their achievements in the face of a majority that has strictly opposed them for centuries.
    Last edited by Djinn; 7th June 2014 at 06:33 PM.
    Thanks from Friday13, Babba, Cicero and 2 others

  6. #6
    Established Member soupnazi's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    6,708
    Thanks
    1285

    From
    Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    There's an awful lot of people here who figure that there's nothing wrong with "Straight Pride" and "White History Month" because - "You know ... equality!"

    Wrong. And I found a blog post that does a stunning job of explaining why. It isn't terribly long, but I boldfaced the critical bit, which explains that "gay/black pride" isn't really "pride in being gay/black." It's pride in the advances such groups have made towards equality.

    That's why pride in being straight/white is (as the blog correctly states) "asinine."


    Source
    Several problems here.

    One is that the author of that piece is claiming to speak for others as is the OP. Most people I know who observe Black history month or black pride or LBGT pride are not taking pride in advancements or achievements but of what they are. You may have a point if more people claimed they are celebrating a triumph over oppression but I just do not see them making that claim.
    Thanks from Rob Larrikin

  7. #7
    Established Member soupnazi's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    6,708
    Thanks
    1285

    From
    Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    They're not new. But the fact that black people have the same rights as you is new. The fact that a gay person cannot be fired from their job (or worse, thrown in prison) for being gay is new. And that is what they celebrate.

    It's not their sexual orientation or their skin color. It's they're achievements in the face of a majority that has strictly opposed them for centuries.
    Why do they always say the opposite? You are the first I have heard make this claim and it is about many other people you do not know.

  8. #8
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    3,568
    Thanks
    416

    From
    Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    The fact that a gay person cannot be fired from their job (or worse, thrown in prison) for being gay is new.
    Three points here:

    1) When you say “cannot be fired” you mean “cannot be fired legally”. They can still be fired for being gay or black, and probably will be, but that would be illegal. On the other hand it would be up to the gay person to prove he or she was fired for that reason, and that is very difficult. All an employer has to do is pretend it was for another reason.

    2) What you are saying does not apply to the majority of people in the world. In many countries a gay people can be whipped, jailed or put to death for being gay.

    3) I agree with Soupnazi – this is not what the gays and blacks are saying. They are saying that they are proud because they are gay and or black – without the “because it’s new” tag.

  9. #9
    Senior Member vikingbeast's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2013
    Posts
    11,649
    Thanks
    6388

    From
    Banned Camp Segregation Unit
    Why should there be "pride" events over what's supposed to be "normal?"
    Thanks from soupnazi and Rob Larrikin

  10. #10
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    3,568
    Thanks
    416

    From
    Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by vikingbeast View Post
    Why should there be "pride" events over what's supposed to be "normal?"
    Precisely.

    In fact I believe it is a form of reverse racism. If everyone is perfectly equal, and color was of no consequence, then nobody would be "proud" to be black (or white). In such a society that would be as silly as it would for us to have "big toes" pride. In our society nobody really cares whether toes are big or small, and as such there are no "Small toe pride" groups.

    The pride groups are just another form of baiting. They're trying to stir other groups up to react, and that is precisely what is happening. This only creates more race and sexual barriers and tensions.

Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 88
    Last Post: 25th September 2013, 04:42 PM
  2. Replies: 65
    Last Post: 20th September 2013, 01:03 PM
  3. Replies: 261
    Last Post: 14th July 2013, 01:47 AM
  4. Is the term "faggot" or "fag" generally offensive?
    By The Voice of Reason in forum Opinion Polls
    Replies: 739
    Last Post: 29th August 2012, 11:27 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed