It was gay day...🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈

Actually 99% of it isn't homophobia but more of a delightfully gentle way of redressing the balance. Sticking something they don't like in people's faces invites a reaction so the fault isn't on one side only, at all.

@optimissed

That's one way of viewing it, I guess.

However:

a) Pride is no more sticking something in someone's face than Christmas, or the cisheteronormativity which occurs all day every day. Heterosexuals just don't notice how much heterosexuality is on display all the time because they're desensitised to it, and bigots are hypersensitised to homosexuality. Thus to think of it as 'sticking it in people's faces' is at best an ignorant, at worst a homophobic, attitude.

b) Outright condemnation of other sexualities, especially through the use of slurs, mockery, insults, or misinformation, cannot be fairly considered 'delightfully gentle', as can be shown through a commutation test in terms of race. To say it is belies a homophobic attitude. Additionally, creating a toxic atmosphere of casual and 'acceptable' homophobia and weaponised misinformation (which occurs frequently on these boards) emboldens the more extreme forms of bigotry which can result in violence or legal discrimination against lgbtq+ folk.

c) Saying there is a balance, implies the false idea that lgbtq+ rights and experience currently are, and have always been, on a par with straight rights and experience, which is obviously untrue. The balance comes from the activist and protest movements like Pride, not despite them. This phrasing is, then, homophobic.

d) Not liking homosexuality is homophobic, since modern usage of the term boils down to anything less than a celebratory endorsement of lgbtq+ on a totally equal footing with cishet being bigoted.

Pride Month nowadays is just gay people dressing up weird while marching on the streets a way for companies to change colours and appeal to LGBT customers

Whilst it has become massively more commercialised and more celebratory in the West (which is still fine in itself), it also still has a real political and social function.

I'm not sure you can fairly say those companies are 'ruined', nor can you blame Pride.

The companies may, arguably, have made misjudgments about their customers, true, but pretty much all the financial damage suffered by those companies came from boycott action by anti-lgbtq+ folk.

What? Conservatives are annoyed at Chick Fil A? Sounds interesting, let me google that real quick...

... oh, they have a diversity, equity and inclusion program... so... they're like any major company...

"It's offensive to be reminded you exist" is pretty hateful in any other context. I wonder why you think it's an acceptable attitude in this case.

l is ok. g is ok. I mean, not particularly with some people but live and let live. So b is ok but what does t even have to do with it? Nothing. q? Well, I think I was once muted for using the q word. Weird, since it was a normal descriptive word in use in the 70s. I had lots of friends who described themselves that way around 73 so why do we have to be g or l before we can use it? Something not quite right. And then +? It's like some people want to take over the world. It means more. So maybe all people with one leg longer than the other need a voice. It isn't getting ridiculous, it became ridiculous years ago. Ordinary people don't have a voice.

As usual, you can only see something from your point of view.

lol, I forgot who I was talking to... never mind, I'm not going to argue with you here.

Good. You've shown what you are over the last few days. Not someone who very easily accepts the opinions of others as legitimate opinions yet you want others to accept all your opinions as not only legitimate but also as correct.

For context oppy recently went on (yet another) tirade in a completely different topic I was in... disagreeing with him even once risks dozens of insults, mostly regarding your intelligence...

... you're holding yourself back pretty well so far.

Trans look more like women but it’s actually doubly gay at least

From where I stand, dazzled by the company you keep and the sunlight on your golden armour, all I can say is that you're playing to the gallery.

Again.

Try responding to points? Not something you do?

So your specific issue is with T (trans), Q (queer) and + (various, including asexual).

I really don't see why any of those minorities are problematic.

As for a voice for those with one leg longer than the other, disability rights organisations exist and do good work. If you'd like to join them please do so.

My first post to you in this topic was addressing a point (I didn't notice it was you since you rarely post outside of the usually 2 or so topics). Your response was to attack me.