Does your friend feel like he owes any kind debt to the ‘loud’ rights activists?

My friends (a married gay couple) also don’t like the “marching pride” events and the general idea of a Pride Month as a whole. They are both of an age that generally accepted that being gay is something that you hid*, certainly never any PDA,  and both are somewhat reserved generally. Their view is that just living their lives as a married gay couple in plain view of the world is enough of a testament to equality, they don’t want or expect anything over and above that.

* I’m not for a moment suggesting that this view is normal, or should be acceptable, but the just reality of being a gay man in the recent past.

That would show you that the only group in society that is actually marginalised is straight white men.

As a straight white man I’ve never had to hide my sexulatilty for fear of being being attacked in a pub. I’ve never had to hide my sexuality for fear of being ostracised at work or not getting a job in the first place. I’ve never been stopped by the Police for having white skin. I’ve never been rejected for a job for having white skin.

Life has been incredibly easy if I’m honest, if only it was so for everyone in society.

@footflaps have a large plus one for both of your recent posts.

Edit. I have a daughter in her early 30’s (yes I was a child bride) and she regularly suggests we smash the patriarchy as it is a constant source of toxic masculinity to her. I have hope for the future that her generation will get the necessary changes through.

OK, OK, I’ve learned my lesson. No more attempts at parodying right wing views.

I promise.

Their view is that just living their lives as a married gay couple in plain view of the world is enough of a testament to equality, they don’t want or expect anything over and above that.

Again, it would be interesting to hear if they felt their current level of acceptance in society would have been possible without Pride events and the vocal activism over the last thirty years.

The wife and I were in the Lake district last year walking in the middle of nowhere (quiet route on the back of the Dodds). Coming off the fell we could see two men sat by the path with their arms around each other, just sat there. As we approached they separated and then once we passed I assume they went back to putting an arm around each other’s backs.

The fact they felt uncomfortable just doing that in the middle of nowhere tells you how far we stil have to go.

The fact they felt uncomfortable just doing that in the middle of nowhere tells you how far we stil have to go.

The UK has always been (AFAIK) more socially comfortable with men fighting than hugging when it comes to touch.

I recently lived and worked amongst some Spanish men for a month or so and I was amazed at how physically comfortable they were with (non-sexual) touching each other. They would casually touch, stroke, hug and lay their head on each other’s legs when chilling out.

At first it set off my ‘AHEM, We’re British Here!’ alarm bells ringing. It still feels distinctly weird to hug any male in my family, and most of my male (Brit) friends.

I know that’s a different issue to OP but I’m sure it all plays into the aggressive attitudes towards ‘girly’ men that we still see from time to time. It’s one of the reasons I think we as a country have more in common with the US than with much of Western Europe.

Some similar observations:

https://goodmenproject.com/uncategorized/the-ways-the-spanish-men-won-my-heart-that-you-can-use-too-rbsk/

I have hope for the future that her generation will get the necessary changes through.

I’m not sure. It’s not specifically about patriarchy but an illustration we have a long way to go, and the thought that the younger generation will be the change may me misplaced.

My daughter had to make a short film/music video as part of her media studies A level. She got my son (15) and his girlfriend (16) to act in it. The behaviour of a group of boys (early to mid teens at a guess) reduced her to tears, wolf whistling and lewd comments. My daughter told them to **** off and grow up. But this was yesterday, Guildford town centre, early evening, lots of people about and not one single (adult) said or did a thing.

I don’t know whether it was the fact that it was kids doing the commenting (next generation I assume has learnt it from somewhere, and more than that are being told at school and on media how wrong it is and did it anyway), or the fact that everyone else ignored it.

I went along to a few Pride marches/events in the early 90s, and they were definitely fun, mad, happy times. Then it seemed to get increasingly corporate, and the huge free parties turned into expensive fenced off affairs, thus excluding many people. As with so many things that start out as a celebration of inclusivity, it seems the Pride ‘brand’ has been hijacked by parasitic concerns, wanting to enhance their own corporate image. I thought this just the other day, when I saw you can now get an Apple Watch band in the ‘Pride’ rainbow colours. I think a lot of people have lost sight of what Pride is really meant to be about. I wonder what the likes of messrs. Baker, Milk and Ginsberg would have to say about it all now?

The Apple connection is because key people in the organisation want to do more than sell things… raising awareness using one of the biggest brands in the world, who have a presence in countries where oppression is not only still ripe, but increasing, isn’t about selling out, it’s about many individuals in a huge company wanting that company to act, speak out, and not just keep quiet in the name of sales.

Again, it would be interesting to hear if they felt their current level of acceptance in society would have been possible without Pride events and the vocal activism over the last thirty years

Yes, it’s something I’ll have a chat with them about, I genuinely don’t know their thoughts on it

The Apple connection is because key people in the organisation want to do more than sell things… raising awareness using one of the biggest brands in the world, who have a presence in countries where oppression is not only still ripe, but increasing, isn’t about selling out, it’s about many individuals in a huge company wanting that company to act, speak out, and not just keep quiet in the name of sales.

I think you misunderstood. There’s nothing wrong with Apple Computer inc, or any other company, caring about society. In fact, that’s what they should be doing, as a default. But I digress. Apple had rainbow colours in its logo for many years (coincidental, nothing to do with Pride). It’s not the use of the rainbow flag in itself that is the issue, it’s how the Pride ‘brand’ has been hijacked as a commercial enhancer. I know people who were involved in organising some of the first Pride rallies in London, decades ago, and they aren’t happy how things have evolved. They are happy that Pride is now such a huge global entity, just not with the increasingly corporate side. Many companies that co-opt the Pride brand have dubious records when it comes to the actual issues, and may still be dealing with regimes where being different is illegal, even punishable by death. Pride is a political movement, despite what some might argue. And it seems politics are fine when it comes to making profits. So, it’s very highly complex. This isn’t to diminish the Pride movement in any way, just to make the point about that very complexity. People shouldn’t lose sight of what it really means; if people are associating Pride with materialism, then some of the original message has become lost.

and they aren’t happy how things have evolved.

Pretty much applies to any movement / campaign. They grow / shrink and adapt over time. Doesn’t matter if it’s saving Hedgehogs* or BLM. People fall out / get upset / think its lost its way etc.

My local HH rescue centre had a scism and split over the way it was evolving….

I recently lived and worked amongst some Spanish men for a month or so and I was amazed at how physically comfortable they were with (non-sexual) touching each other. They would casually touch, stroke, hug and lay their head on each other’s legs when chilling out.

At first it set off my ‘AHEM, We’re British Here!’ alarm bells ringing. It still feels distinctly weird to hug any male in my family, and most of my male (Brit) friends.

Reminds me of motor bike touring around Turkey many years ago. We stopped somewhere completely random in the middle of nowhere which turned out to be where the Tourist Guide University was for all Turkish guides to be. Speaking English was a major part of the course, only being in the arse end of nowhere, no one spoke any English. So two young english lads on motorbikes who randomly arrived one afternoon were hot property and everyone wanted to know us. Obviously showing you were best buddies with the English Guys meant putting your arm around them etc (pretty normal for Turkish men). I remember that was a very awkward evening (for me anyway).

Not really pride related but this video on white priviledge was pretty good (although slightly controversial – see https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/as-a-video-about-white-privilege-goes-viral-again-experts-caution-it-could-actually-cause-more-damage-170528763.html)

Certainly made me realise how much opportunity has been handed to me on a plate throughout my life.

I thought this just the other day, when I saw you can now get an Apple Watch band in the ‘Pride’ rainbow colours.

They aren’t a compulsory purchase. There is also a watch face that you can use for the month in the Pride colours that comes with the update just before Pride Month. A “low cost” way of showing your support (if you have the watch that is, a bit pricey if you go and buy the watch beforehand).

Their view is that just living their lives as a married gay couple in plain view of the world is enough of a testament to equality, they don’t want or expect anything over and above that.

That’s one of my best friends’ view too. The fact that he has a husband is one of the least interesting aspects of his life. I like that viewpoint.

As a straight white man..

I was assaulted on the tube and have been searched by the police as a student walking down the street (carrying a big heavy bag full of stereo kit!)

Most people are around average height and no-one feels the need to comment on it. If someone is particularly tall or short, you may comment on it initially but it is not something you are going to bring into every conversation. If the conversation is specifically about height then you may mention your height or their height but neither is considered right or wrong. People don’t choose what height they want to be, they are just born and grow to a certain height. During their teenage years especially they might be particularly sensitive about their height especially if they are at either extreme but we should accept and understand that, not condemn them for wearing heels or stooping. You would not shout out insults across the street about a strangers height or beat someone up for being 5’10” although if you had a good friend or family member you might make joking references in a loving, not hating, manner.

This might all seem stupidly obvious.

Now switch from height to gender identity. You know what, it should all still remain stupidly obvious.

While I agree with the point of your post I am going to mention that while everybody has a height not everybody has a gender identity.

I’m 52.
My aunt Martha and her partner aunt Helen were my role models growing up.
I loved them so much and I miss them every day.

Love to all.

Well, OK, a story.

My mum was the youngest of five, born in Collyhurst in 1932.
Her mother died in childbirth a year or so later and father died soon after.
The two oldest brothers joined the army, aunt Rita brought up the kids. She was a child herself.

My aunt Martha met my lovely aunt Helen when they were both kids. They spent the next 70 years together.

In 1968 Martha and Helen were ready to buy a house. They couldn’t do so without the blessings and signatures of a husband or a male guarantor. My dad offered to sign, because he loved them. They refused to compromise.

The Catholic Church stepped forward and lent them the money. Interest free.
Everyone knew. Martha was headmistress of the local infant school.
No one cared.

Most people have a similar story.

In real life, NO ONE CARES.

Love, light and peace to all.
Pete.

In real life, NO ONE CARES.

Sadly, many do/did. And so do/did institutions. It’s only very recently that widows/widowers started to be treated the same in terms of pensions if their other half was the same sex, for example. Equality is still a battle many are facing now, and many more were facing 70 years ago.

Yep, my Ma’s cousin May came alive in WW2 since she could don an donkey jacket, wear a boiler suit and drive lorries and ambulances. She also had a life-long partner. One of my uncles always had a male lodger/assistant living in his E End pub. Nobody batted an eyelid and couldn’t care less.

This might all seem stupidly obvious.

Now switch from height to gender identity. You know what, it should all still remain stupidly obvious.

Switch from height to anything but white straight man is the reality.

In real life, NO ONE CARES.

So you are saying nobody has a problem? I think you are fortunate not to have spoken to them or seen any comment from them on the internet.

One of my uncles always had a male lodger/assistant living in his E End pub. Nobody batted an eyelid and couldn’t care less.

Then why the clandestine nature of their relationship?

There is a big gap between “people couldn’t care less” and “they lived in a society where they could openly be themselves with the support of the rest of the community around them”.

I had a wonderful great aunt who lived with her “friend” since they met when working as midwives at the end of the war.

I always assumed they were a couple but it’s one of those things that was never discussed or hinted at – not sure if that suggests acceptance or avoidance by the rest of the family.

My familial aunt died first (at a good age I should add) and her partner remained an accepted part of the family till she died a few years later. Only after she died did we discover that she’d been sectioned in the early 50s with what sounded like PTSD from being a nurse in London during the Blitz. Truly remarkable woman.

Well, Pride Month is off to a flying start.
Lead by Jolyon Maughan of the Good Law Project (a privileged, straight, white man), a number of
well-funded LGBT+ organisations (including Mermaids) have come together to launch a court appeal against the LGB Alliance’s charity status.

This action was initially supported by Stonewall, who then immediately pulled out.

The LGB Alliance is run by volunteers and funded by donations (from an increasing number of supporters).

Do you think that Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual people have the right to organise for their own interests? If not, why not?

I always assumed they were a couple but it’s one of those things that was never discussed or hinted at

Some couples don’t feel the need to publicly declare or celebrate their love for each other for their own reasons. Some for other ‘reasons’

Do you think that Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual people have the right to organise for their own interests? If not, why not?

Don’t know the detail behind LGB Alliance charity status but can’t imagine many people would say no to the question in the way you have chosen to word it.

a court appeal against the LGB Alliance’s charity status

Could that be because the LGB Alliance seems to only exist to campaign against Trans people, and their rights, perhaps?

Anyway… reporting of the launch of that case here, for those that haven’t heard about it:

https://www.thirdsector.co.uk/crowdfunder-appealing-lgb-alliance-charity-registration-raises-thousands-pounds-first-day/governance/article/1717913

Do you think that Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual people have the right to organise for their own interests? If not, why not?

Because they’ve set up the ‘No Homers Club’.

If they want to maintain that ‘Biological sex’ is the most important factor then they have to precisely define what they mean by it. People are misusing scientific terms like binary to further their narrow minded agenda.

Can’t be bothered re-writing everything so here is what I said in the Non-binary thread:

Transphobes like to use scientific sounding language. It allows them to sound dispassionate while doing what they really want to which is dehumanise a section of society. Bigots of every strip use dehumanising language to describe the target of their ire. Sometimes it’s obvious (tranny, was man, etc) sometimes they camouflage it with scientific sounding terms (anomoly, abnormal, etc). The key thing to look for is are they describing a person, or group of people, or a single identified aspect of a person.

Another point, the binary sex thing is also an attempt to manipulate scientific sounding terms to dehumanise.

They treat Male and Female as if it were the same thing as Cat and Dog. With cats and dogs there is a single defining characteristic to definitively say one is a cat and one is a dog which is the genus. This single defining characteristic means cat or dog is a binary thing.

What is the single defining characteristic of Male and Female?

I can tell you now there isn’t one. There are various Male and Female characteristics and when enough of these characteristics are met we put the person in the male or female category. In some cases a person has an unusually mixed bag of characteristics compared to the general population and classifying these people becomes less obvious. In these cases the medical community has stepped in to say that, when a particular person has this combination of characteristics, they are male and with this combination they are female. It’s people making classifications. It is not indisputable.

So while it is correct to say that there are male and female characteristics it is not correct to say there is only the Male sex and the Female sex. In order to say that you have to have a single defining characteristic.

Excluding a marginalised community is wrong, full stop. And if they feel they absolutely have to do it the LGB Alliance has to discover the single defining characteristic of biological sex. Good luck with that.

For those new to the LGB Alliance name, PinkNews has a bit of a summary of their story so far here:

https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2021/04/20/lgb-alliance-charity-commission-register-england-wales/

Kelvin and Bruce Wee, Wow, just **** wow, I knew you’d react like this, and I doubt no-one (or maybe two people) here will call this this out as the homophobic bullying it it.

As I said before, I am a lesbian, I am attracted to people of the same sex. Until what seems like 5 minutes ago everyone understood what this meant. The LGB Alliance is the only organisation supporting same sex (rather than same gender) attraction.

For everyone else, Lesbians being forced underground again, into private Facebook groups etc, where memberships has to be strictly checked, and language moderated to avoid being flagged by FB algorithms. On other social media platforms such as reddit, groups have been completely shut down.
Attempts to organise real-live events are thwarted by venues demanding ‘inclusivity’.

Doesn’t this sound like a marginalised group to you?

For those new to the LGB Alliance name, PinkNews has a bit of a summary of their story so far here:

Pink **** News? Are you going to quoting the Sunday Sport next?

Kelvin and Bruce Wee, Wow, just **** wow, I knew you’d react like this, and I doubt no-one (or maybe two people) here will call this this out as the homophobic bullying it it.

I would respond to this but until you quote the homophobic part I can’t.

If you feel that there is nothing you can point to specifically and it’s the general tone then can you explain how that tone is homophobic?

Well I never thought people could have anything against Pride. I know one thing, if there was a whining middle aged man day we’d definitely all qualify.

Well I never thought people could have anything against Pride.

There will be millions of people, in the UK alone, who have something against Pride. Go out and talk to some people who you don’t usually mix with…

On a FB group local to me there is male who is now presenting a female. I am not sure what their ‘pronouns’ are as their fb user name is a mixture of both (traditionally) male and female names. I’ll use they/them to avoid accusations of misgendering.

Their profile picture (created with some kind of filter) is best described as looking like an child-like sex doll. Recent photographs of this person show them (they are 40 years old) having grown out (and dyed blond) what limited hair they have, dressed as what can best be described as jail-bait. i.e. not how (most) 40 year old women would dress.
This person joined a Facebook lesbian dating group, posting pictures and asking ‘do you think I’m hot?’. One of my friends, as respectfully as she could, said ‘but you aren’t a lesbian’ and was booted from the group.

Again, a question for everyone, do you think I’m being transphobic for not considering this person to be part of my dating pool. Bruce Wee seems to be implying (with the sex is complication thing) that I (and others like me) am.

Edit: I am in no way ‘denying’ this person right to exist, but they are NOT a lesbian, and I would like to have spaces where it’s okay to say this, and to mix freely with other women.

you think I’m being transphobic for not considering this person to be part of my dating pool

No.

mix freely with other women

You want the group to be an exclusive group of women. A dating group absolutely doesn’t have to be inclusive. It can be selective, rather than open to all comers. Others in that dating group might have a different idea about who should and shouldn’t be allowed to be part of it, and that’s where the disagreements begin to be magnified.

Again, a question for everyone, do you think I’m being transphobic for not considering this person to be part of my dating pool. Bruce Wee seems to be implying (with the sex is complication thing) that I (and others like me) am.

OK, so you feel like I’m implying you have to date transgender people and that is the homophobic part of what I said?

If I did that wasn’t my intention. I don’t feel like I’ve touched on what relationships people should or shouldn’t have at all. Just to clarify, anyone should be able to date anyone they want.

My main point has been that transphobes regularly misuse scientific sounding language to appear dispassionate while using that language to dehumanise a section of society.

I’m not trying to ‘complicate’ the issue of biological sex. It is already complicated. Transphobes want to push the idea it is simple because it supports their agenda.