Culture Pride Months and Commercialism

[Abhorsen]

Gay pride is evil too then right?

Noooo!!!! Anything but that, how will I survive!

LGTBEQGAGA%-pride is not actually pride, it's a pumped up display sold by multi billion dollar companies to dipshits that think they're rebelling against an oppressive system.

Yeah, because we won. Now we have moved onto the next level, commercializing. That's what all oppressed minorities should aim for: equal rights, followed by aggressive capitalism.

Alternatively, there is a fair argument to be made that commercial exploitation of LGBTs fast-forwarded acceptance, because we bought a lot of stuff, so we got targeted marketing, which affected the culture. Either way, I'm happy there's little to no systemic oppression in the US to rebel against anymore (LGBs are fine, there is some from Ts, and there's some ugly internal oppression by LGBTs against LGBTs, but total oppression is way down).

 

[Senor Hortler]

Yeah, because we won. Now we have moved onto the next level, commercializing. That's what all oppressed minorities should aim for: equal rights, followed by aggressive capitalism.

Alternatively, there is a fair argument to be made that commercial exploitation of LGBTs fast-forwarded acceptance, because we bought a lot of stuff, so we got targeted marketing, which affected the culture. Either way, I'm happy there's little to no systemic oppression in the US to rebel against anymore (LGBs are fine, there is some from Ts, and there's some ugly internal oppression by LGBTs against LGBTs, but total oppression is way down).

No, you got bought and sold by people who don't give a fuck about you at best; and at worst still despise you, but like the fact that they can use you as leverage. There was no 'fast forwarding of acceptance' no one fucking wanted to accept you lot. They were forced to in the end by relentless waves of pigs tossing cash around. You're some business's bitch boy and pet topic used so they can sell the idea of virtue.

Hopefully that gets reversed.

EDIT: The 'future' for you guys is the same as the future for us if the elites keep on as they have been. Generations of mindless, vapid consumerists deracinated, detached from anything beyond the immediate physical and slaves to multi national business whims. The only difference I suppose would be that since you can't actually have families the impact would be lessened somewhat.

 

[Abhorsen]

No, you got bought and sold by people who don't give a fuck about you at best; and at worst still despise you, but like the fact that they can use you as leverage. There was no 'fast forwarding of acceptance' no one fucking wanted to accept you lot. They were forced to in the end by relentless waves of pigs tossing cash around.

Oh, there really was a fast forwarding. The rate of change on gay acceptance and gay marriage was truly astonishing. So I think it's fair to say (and I can back this up with plenty of evidence) that in exchange for the almighty pink dollar, businesses targeted gays to sell us stuff, which pushed gay existence into mainstream conciousness. And gays being open and out was and is the most important part of LGBT equality. Everything flows from that.

So as much as they used us, we used them, and we both benefited. Capitalism played a huge role in Gay Liberation, and I'm damn proud of it.

You're some business's bitch boy and pet

A whole business dedicated to bossing me around and treating me like a pet... Hortler, have you been reading my fantasies?

 

[Senor Hortler]

Oh, there really was a fast forwarding. The rate of change on gay acceptance and gay marriage was truly astonishing. So I think it's fair to say (and I can back this up with plenty of evidence) that in exchange for the almighty pink dollar, businesses targeted gays to sell us stuff, which pushed gay existence into mainstream conciousness. And gays being open and out was and is the most important part of LGBT equality. Everything flows from that.

So as much as they used us, we used them, and we both benefited. Capitalism played a huge role in Gay Liberation, and I'm damn proud of it.

No, you did not 'use them as well'; the end result of this 'partnership' is going to be a spiritually dead collection of rootless, historless husks. You are a product that they are selling, and a weapon that they are happy to wield; and as a result your entire subculture has been reduced to being a pink haired lisping tosser with dildo's suction cupped to his chest mincing around in public with assless chaps.

The 'pro gay' movement has done a fantastic job of convincing me that instead of being normal people who were into some gross shit that I had assumed you guys were; you are apparently instead a collection of child molesting lunatics that actively spread HIV and love banging unending lines of strangers.

When anyone tells me they are gay now; my mind doesn't go to my coworker who I learned was gay when his boyfriend turned up to a BBQ after a year of knowing the man, but to the morbidly obese bugchaser who adored telling me about all the taxi drivers he's shagged to get a free ride off of.

Gay 'culture' as it is, is a cancer.

A whole business dedicated to bossing me around and treating me like a pet... Hortler, have you been reading my fantasies?

I try to avoid pornography. Though I suppose written erotica is probably the least objectionable porn there is.

 

[Abhorsen]

I try to avoid pornography.

You say this, but then you also say things like this:

Pink haired lisping tosser with dildo's suction cupped to his chest mincing around in public with assless chaps.

A little more, and I think you might have a career here! It's a good thing, too, as you certainly don't have a career in history with your weak grasp on it.

Quite simply, the biggest block in the way of gay rights was being ignored by the straights. So yes, being featured in mainstream media (which includes ads) was part of the strategy to defeat this. And it clearly worked.
Instead of being

a product that they are selling

(Though yet again, you hit on my kinks. Really, are you sure you didn't read any of them?), it was much more like a business relationship where both sides won. We might have won a little too fast, and now we have some crazies, but every group has their loud crazies, and letting the activist crazies set your expectations for LGBT is like letting white nationalists like you set expectations for white guys.

 

[Senor Hortler]

You say this, but then you also say things like this:

A little more, and I think you might have a career here! It's a good thing, too, as you certainly don't have a career in history with your weak grasp on it.

Sadly the gay pride parade regularly does its thing in my nearest city; and it has some the highest rates of same sex couples (the male version of which in the UK is rather hilariously referred to as Men-who-have-sex-with-men, to account for all the...straight men who are fucking each other I guess?). It's a pain in the arse shopping for Klan hoods when it's on.

Quite simply, the biggest block in the way of gay rights was being ignored by the straights. So yes, being featured in mainstream media (which includes ads) was part of the strategy to defeat this. And it clearly worked.
Instead of being

The biggest block in gay rights was getting the guys with money to give a fuck about you. Once that happened the 'winning' was inevitable. If it can be packaged and sold then it will be pushed.

(Though yet again, you hit on my kinks. Really, are you sure you didn't read any of them?), it was much more like a business relationship where both sides won. We might have won a little too fast, and now we have some, but every group has their loud crazies, and letting the activist crazies set your expectations for LGBT is like letting white nationalists like you set expectations for white guys.

I have met one normal gay; the rest have been degenerates, the pattern is evidently holding. I suppose I should use studies? But since all they say is you guys A) Are essentially non monogamous and B) Are absolutely riddled it'd go about the same.

EDIT: To clarify; I have met one "Normal" Gay, in that he was still not normal for being gay, but he didn't go around being a fucking tramp.

 

[Lanmandragon]

You say this, but then you also say things like this:

A little more, and I think you might have a career here! It's a good thing, too, as you certainly don't have a career in history with your weak grasp on it.

Quite simply, the biggest block in the way of gay rights was being ignored by the straights. So yes, being featured in mainstream media (which includes ads) was part of the strategy to defeat this. And it clearly worked.
Instead of being

(Though yet again, you hit on my kinks. Really, are you sure you didn't read any of them?), it was much more like a business relationship where both sides won. We might have won a little too fast, and now we have some, but every group has their loud crazies, and letting the activist crazies set your expectations for LGBT is like letting white nationalists like you set expectations for white guys.

Gay or "LGBT"? Because one is a sexual orentation while the other is a Marxism advocacy group.

 

[Senor Hortler]

Gay or "LGBT"? Because one is a sexual orentation while the other is a Marxism advocacy group.

Is it though? The whole LGBT thing doesn't seem particularly organised beyond being a twitter hashtag wielded by people as a bludgeon, or as some tosser favourite pet cause to bring up. I'm sure the LGBT thing has certainly been used a figurehead by such advocacy groups; but in of itself seems just like a rights advocacy group.

Except the 'T'. Not sure why they're in there.
EDIT: The whole Marxism advocacy group seems to be a boogey man. Like I'm sure there are a load of them floating around, but it is possible for a people to organise against conservative society without it being one.

 

[Abhorsen]

The biggest block in gay rights was getting the guys with money to give a fuck about you. Once that happened the 'winning' was inevitable. If it can be packaged and sold then it will be pushed.

I disagree. There are a lot of things people with money want others to believe that don't get nearly as much cultural acceptance (look at abortion, for example. Thankfully, it hasn't had nearly as much success as LGBT rights.). The challenges that LGBT equality had to meet are a) being noticed, as it was common to deny that gays even exist, and b) normalization, so that once gays are noticed, they aren't beaten back down, but instead fade into normality (rights would follow from a and b). There is an inherent tension between these two goals, and being noticed must happen before getting normalized. Part a is one of the reasons gays were so flambouyant. But mass media could do (a) and (b) at the same time by depicting gay characters like they were normal.

Regardless, I think you admitted my base point: Capitalism is amazing and it lead to Gay rights. So of course Pride should include an orgy of capitalism.

I have met one normal gay; the rest have been degenerates, the pattern is evidently holding. I suppose I should use studies? But since all they say is you guys A) Are essentially non monogamous and B) Are absolutely riddled it'd go about the same.

This says more about you than it does about them. You probably come across as homophobic; given your opinions on the board, people coming to this conclusion wouldn't be wrong. If I knew I was in front of a homophobe in person, I'd do one of two things: a) not come out to them if they had any sort of power over me, or b) gay it up to annoy them, and talk about the most degenerate things I can think of.

Gay or "LGBT"? Because one is a sexual orentation while the other is a Marxism advocacy group.

I actually split it between LGBTs and LGBT radicals. Gay kinda excludes lesbian, bisexuals (like me!), and definitely excludes trans, and I wanted to refer to them all as a group of sexual orientations along with transgender people. Its a convenient group that includes a group that has worked together politically for a long while. Sometimes the particular LGBT group is a bunch of Marxists. Usually, the regular members of every LGBT group just want equal rights, and members don't care what the other things the group leader believes in are, which can lead to problems.

Except the 'T'. Not sure why they're in there.

T's are there because of history, similar political goals (gay marriage was a loophole for straight trans people who couldn't legally change gender, for example), and an initial lack of firm separation between trans people, drag people, and crossdressers, so they all got lumped in together.

 

[FriedCFour]

I'm happy there's little to no systemic oppression in the US to rebel against anymore

Why isn’t white history month a thing then? Shouldn’t that also be commercialized and shouldn’t we have big “it’s okay to be white” banners plastered on McDonalds?

 

[Senor Hortler]

I disagree. There are a lot of things people with money want others to believe that don't get nearly as much cultural acceptance (look at abortion, for example. Thankfully, it hasn't had nearly as much success as LGBT rights.). The challenges that LGBT equality had to meet are a) being noticed, as it was common to deny that gays even exist, and b) normalization, so that once gays are noticed, they aren't beaten back down, but instead fade into normality (rights would follow from a and b). There is an inherent tension between these two goals, and being noticed must happen before getting normalized. Part a is one of the reasons gays were so flambouyant. But mass media could do (a) and (b) at the same time by depicting gay characters like they were normal.

Regardless, I think you admitted my base point: Capitalism is amazing and it lead to Gay rights. So of course Pride should include an orgy of capitalism.

Yes? Capitalism leads to gay rights is something I agree with. Was it coming off that I didn't? Apologies if that was the case. I think gays are gross and degenerate; so it's not something I would call amazing, even if your rights are owed to you anyway. But I do agree it certainly helped you.

This says more about you than it does about them. You probably come across as homophobic; given your opinions on the board, people coming to this conclusion wouldn't be wrong. If I knew I was in front of a homophobe in person, I'd do one of two things: a) not come out to them if they had any sort of power over me, or b) gay it up to annoy them, and talk about the most degenerate things I can think of.

No, I'm never homophobic at work; we're coworkers, I'm not going to be unfriendly to the man because of the disgusting things he gets up to. It breeds a hostile work environment and makes doing your job harder. Plus it's a dick move, it's not his fault he was born the way he is. The man was just fucking gross and liked talking about wildly innapropriate things at work. But I wouldn't complain to anyone about it anymore than I would for someone else telling a graphic story of normal sex. I'd just rather not hear about your sex life while I'm selling insurance.

But yes I am anti gay. I think you're a collection of gross degenerates; but I don't really care all that much. Like, it's weird, and bizarre and makes me feel kind of ill. But so does so does foot fetish stuff. I don't want anyones rights taken away, or for them to be abused or made to feel uncomfortable in the workplace. The guy I worked with came out with nonstop filth, but he also did his job. I'm sure I had characteristics that he disliked about me as well. I have met six gays that I know are gay because they've told me. Of that six five were vile sexual deviants; while one was a normal guy who happened to be gay, It's probably coloured my opinion; but hohum. I don't have to deal with gays in a non work setting enough to have an opinion beyond 'ew' and then going about my day. Not a dedicated homophobia, more of a reflexive one you know? Like It's not going to sway my decision on anything if you shag men.

T's are there because of history, similar political goals (gay marriage was a loophole for straight trans people who couldn't legally change gender, for example), and an initial lack of firm separation between trans people, drag people, and crossdressers, so they all got lumped in together.

Didn't realise the gay marriage loophole. Huh, themoreyouknow.jpeg.

 

[Abhorsen]

Yes? Capitalism leads to gay rights is something I agree with. Was it coming off that I didn't? Apologies if that was the case. I think gays are gross and degenerate; so it's not something I would call amazing, even if your rights are owed to you anyway. But I do agree it certainly helped you.

I had taken this as a disagreement with my statement:

No, you did not 'use them as well';

Guess I understood wrong! Glad to have cleared that up.

Not a dedicated homophobia, more of a reflexive one you know? Like It's not going to sway my decision on anything if you shag men.

Regardless of how you think you express it, people can kinda sense it regardless of how you feel you act, sorta like a reverse gaydar (which is definitely a thing). Like, I've picked up on it before, purposefully not come out to certain people, and latter turned out I was right about that (generally a lot more misses than hits on this, but this is one of those times it's better to be safe than sorry). Like gaydar, it's based off of stereotypes, but it's less reliable (gays play into gaydar, which is why it works so well)

You might just be dropping clues you don't notice (the likelyhood of this is especially high if the gays you've met all know each other, which is very likely as gays tend to congregate). The reason I think this is that you've somehow only met 6, which seems like a small number to me, especially if you live near a very gay part of the UK (on the other hand, I might have some bias here, because as a gay, I tend to be part of the congregating gays). Maybe you just don't interact with a lot of people, but it seems small. This is also enhanced by the one person who came out to you in a way not to make you feel disgusted also came out to a bunch of other people as well, so it seems like no one has come out to you on purpose in a non-combative way.

Regardless, it sucks people are talking about their sex lives at work with you. In the US, this would be sexual harassment, but IDK in the UK. I hope it stops. But this seems off topic for this thread, so I'll leave it here.

 

[FriedCFour]

For example, poor white rednecks and poor rural black people have a lot more in common than do poor white rednecks and the white liberal elite.

So whites have no culture, every other race does, commercialized culture is good for all races except for whites? I don’t know, that seems kind of like systemic discrimination to me.

 

[Bear Ribs]

Why isn’t white history month a thing then? Shouldn’t that also be commercialized and shouldn’t we have big “it’s okay to be white” banners plastered on McDonalds?

Why would McDonald's want the banner? They already sell billions of hamburgers to white people, unless it will somehow bring in even more white people it's an expense that has no financial benefit.

 

[Bacle]

So whites have no culture, every other race does, commercialized culture is good for all races except for whites? I don’t know, that seems kind of like systemic discrimination to me.

'White' is not a culture.

Irish is a culture, French is a culture, Polish is a culture, Italian is a culture, etc.

'White' is just a lack of melanin in the skin, not a nation, people, or culture.

 

[Abhorsen]

So whites have no culture, every other race does, commercialized culture is good for all races except for whites? I don’t know, that seems kind of like systemic discrimination to me.

I mean, do you have facts to argue with instead of just saying 'systemic discrimination'?

A part of any definition of culture should probably include: If C is a culture then, for every combination of subcultures X, Y, and Z, where X, Y are in C and Z is not in C, X is culturally closer to Y than it is to Z.

So because I found a mostly white culture that was culturally closer to a mostly black culture than to another white culture, a overall white culture does not exist in America. There are (mostly) white cultures, but no (mostly) white culture.

We have to put mostly before nearly any race based culture in America because there is a ton of mixing in America.

'White' is not a culture.

Irish is a culture, French is a culture, Polish is a culture, Italian is a culture, etc.

'White' is just a lack of melanin in the skin, not a nation, people, or culture.

Not actually a good argument when it comes to America, as the melting pot means people lose a lot of their national origin culture, so all that's left is the lack of melanin. There definitely is a mostly white redneck culture in the south and Appalachians. This is also true for black people, as their ancestors in Africa don't really identify as 'African' but by what tribe they are from. This history was taken from the African American through slavery's repression of culture. There is no real Nambian Culture in America, for example, despite probably having enough people of Nambian descent to create such a culture. Similarly, I'd say there's very little Irish culture in America either, though there is Irish American culture, but it's very different.

 

[Bacle]

Not actually a good argument when it comes to America, as the melting pot means people lose a lot of their national origin culture, so all that's left is the lack of melanin. There definitely is a mostly white redneck culture in the south and Appalachians. This is also true for black people, as their ancestors in Africa don't really identify as 'African' but by what tribe they are from. This history was taken from the African American through slavery's repression of culture. There is no real Nambian Culture in America, for example, despite having enough people of Nambian descent to create such a culture. Similarly, I'd say there's very little Irish culture in America either (there is Irish American culture, but it's very different).

The basis of American culture is a melting pot ideal that is colorblind or colorless.

The 'pride month' stuff is unhelpful in all it's iterations, particularly when done on the basis of skin color.

But none of that detracts from my point, that culture is not skin color.

 

[Abhorsen]

The basis of American culture is a melting pot ideal that is colorblind or colorless.

The 'pride month' stuff is unhelpful in all it's iterations, particularly when done on the basis of skin color.

But none of that detracts from my point, that culture is not skin color.

The melting pot for African Americans has not been colorblind until the latest generation. They were places they purposefully excluded from it based on their race until the 70s/80s, with Loving v Virginia and the end of redlining finally bringing them in. But it hasn't melted in yet.

For the record, the only pride month that really exists is LGBT pride, which was helpful to LGBT people. The others are history months.

As for you point about culture, this is somewhat true. Your skin color doesn't necessarily define your culture, but it can have a big role in it, and many cultures in America have a default race.

 

[Bacle]

The melting pot for African Americans has not been colorblind until the latest generation. They were places they purposefully excluded from it based on their race until the 70s/80s, with Loving v Virginia and the end of redlining finally bringing them in. But it hasn't melted in yet.

For the record, the only pride month that really exists is LGBT pride, which was helpful to LGBT people. The others are history months.

As for you point about culture, this is somewhat true. Your skin color doesn't necessarily define your culture, but it can have a big role in it, and many cultures in America have a default race.

Ok, yes, the ideal of colorblindness in the US is something that has a mixed history and couldn't really take hold at all till the Civil Rights Act passed, even if the 13th Amendment started the process.

Though I would argue that part of the reason racial issues are not healing as fast as some would like in the US is because too many people do conflate skin color with culture.

Fighting against that mentality is part of what is needed to continue healing racial divides in America.

 

[Abhorsen]

Fighting against that mentality is part of what is needed to continue healing racial divides in America.

Sure, but saying that skin color isn't heavily linked to culture now is just wrong.