Except for the fact that being proud of your heterosexuality doesn't automatically make you a homophobe.
Heterosexual Pride Day? Really?
- Thread starter zeldahuman
- Start date
Rytex
Resident Netizen
- Joined
- May 10, 2010
- Location
- Random house in Texas.
No, but it certainly does make them feel like they've accomplished something. I'm a Christian, and I'm not afraid to admit it. These people may SAY they're Christians, but God is love, and they sure ain't showing it. I just want them to stop their blasphemy, and this only encourages them.
I'm not religious, so I don't understand what you mean when you say "blasphemy". What part of this is particularly blasphemous, and what makes other pride days not blasphemous?
Rytex
Resident Netizen
- Joined
- May 10, 2010
- Location
- Random house in Texas.
You misunderstand. Blasphemy is denying God in any aspect. They deny that God loves everyone, basically denying that God is love, saying that he only loves whites who are heteros and intolerant of homosexuals. After looking at everything they hate, they say that God hates everyone but them. The day itself is not blasphemous. I am a proud hetero, but this kind of thing just encourages these people to tarnish my religion, and I would sooner not do it. You say you aren't religious. That makes it a tad harder to really grasp, but you get the general idea here?
Hanyou
didn't build that
If we are born with a sexual preference one way or the other, then it's a silly thing to be proud of, much like race is a silly thing to be proud of.
Nonetheless, if people would like to express solidarity with one another through "pride," it's understandable. It's especially understandable that minorities would want to assemble in this way if they feel marginalized or discriminated against by the majority.
Understanding why someone wants to do something doesn't justify it, though, or make it any less silly. I am for consistency--if people are just fine with "black pride" in principle, they should be fine with "white pride" (especially now, when white guilt is making something of a comeback and cries of "racism!" are still used to shut down legitimate discourse). The same is true of gay pride and straight pride--I tend to think both would stand for more than simple sexual preference.
We tend to ascribe symbolism to things. I'm not gay, so I certainly can't speak for the movement, but gay pride has always seemed to me to say something like "We have traditionally been discriminated against and denied our rights; we're assembling to let everyone know that regardless of what you think of us, we're not going away and we're not ashamed." Particularly since "coming out of the closet" is such a big deal, since shame has been so closely associated with homosexuality in several periods of history, this is understandable. It's about more than just being gay--perhaps it's about self-expression, about human rights.
Let me tell you what straight pride means to me. Our culture prizes compassion and tolerance; those are good things. However, we've also a tendency to put people into boxes and reward them points for being minorities. There are strong undercurrents of this victim mentality in American culture, and I'm guessing throughout the world. Disagree with affirmative action and you're a bigot or at least ignorant; side with Palestine against Israel and you're an anti-Semite (the inverse carries its own negative implications too); claim you're pro-life and you're anti-woman. Say you think homosexuality is immoral, say you disagree with same-sex marriage, say any of these things, and you are a homophobe.
I am decrying straw men, so it would be hypocritical of me to claim that all advocates for affirmative action, or Israel, or Palestine, or abortion rights, or "gay rights" revert to these arguments. I said "undercurrents." Like you'll hear about undercurrents of homophobia, or racism, or bigotry in general, there are undercurrents of just the opposite--ignorant, mindless hatred for logically sound points that seem subversive to minority groups. There are unspoken gag orders on certain views, enforced through marginalization and humiliation.
Perhaps straight pride can stand as a reaction to that. That certainly seems the most rational symbolism to ascribe to it, and the response to "straight pride"--the kind of reactionary hatred I see to the very concept of it--makes that symbolism all the more relevant (as is the case with "white pride," regardless of who's adopted it, or any other "pride" in its purest form). For those of you who need meaning, who think movements are destructive if they're simply reactionary, I have given you your meaning. And as a straight Christian male, I would like to carve out a place for myself in society as well, regardless of the allegations that all of society somehow favors my views. Regardless of whether you think my values are actually threatened, don't I have the same right to do so as a gay man does? Or do our rights descend from our status as victims, our historical "box," the categorizations assigned to us by politicians and society at large?
As for this particular day, I don't know about or care about their motives. What I'm addressing is the fact that the very idea of straight pride is so repulsive to so many people.
Feel free to disagree all you like, but I respect straight pride on the simple principle that we are all humans, and we are all entitled to not only the same rights, but the same forms of expression, regardless of who may agree or disagree. Indeed, disagreement and revulsion could only ever make such a movement--however hypothetical, however silly, however meaningless--stronger.
Nonetheless, if people would like to express solidarity with one another through "pride," it's understandable. It's especially understandable that minorities would want to assemble in this way if they feel marginalized or discriminated against by the majority.
Understanding why someone wants to do something doesn't justify it, though, or make it any less silly. I am for consistency--if people are just fine with "black pride" in principle, they should be fine with "white pride" (especially now, when white guilt is making something of a comeback and cries of "racism!" are still used to shut down legitimate discourse). The same is true of gay pride and straight pride--I tend to think both would stand for more than simple sexual preference.
We tend to ascribe symbolism to things. I'm not gay, so I certainly can't speak for the movement, but gay pride has always seemed to me to say something like "We have traditionally been discriminated against and denied our rights; we're assembling to let everyone know that regardless of what you think of us, we're not going away and we're not ashamed." Particularly since "coming out of the closet" is such a big deal, since shame has been so closely associated with homosexuality in several periods of history, this is understandable. It's about more than just being gay--perhaps it's about self-expression, about human rights.
Let me tell you what straight pride means to me. Our culture prizes compassion and tolerance; those are good things. However, we've also a tendency to put people into boxes and reward them points for being minorities. There are strong undercurrents of this victim mentality in American culture, and I'm guessing throughout the world. Disagree with affirmative action and you're a bigot or at least ignorant; side with Palestine against Israel and you're an anti-Semite (the inverse carries its own negative implications too); claim you're pro-life and you're anti-woman. Say you think homosexuality is immoral, say you disagree with same-sex marriage, say any of these things, and you are a homophobe.
I am decrying straw men, so it would be hypocritical of me to claim that all advocates for affirmative action, or Israel, or Palestine, or abortion rights, or "gay rights" revert to these arguments. I said "undercurrents." Like you'll hear about undercurrents of homophobia, or racism, or bigotry in general, there are undercurrents of just the opposite--ignorant, mindless hatred for logically sound points that seem subversive to minority groups. There are unspoken gag orders on certain views, enforced through marginalization and humiliation.
Perhaps straight pride can stand as a reaction to that. That certainly seems the most rational symbolism to ascribe to it, and the response to "straight pride"--the kind of reactionary hatred I see to the very concept of it--makes that symbolism all the more relevant (as is the case with "white pride," regardless of who's adopted it, or any other "pride" in its purest form). For those of you who need meaning, who think movements are destructive if they're simply reactionary, I have given you your meaning. And as a straight Christian male, I would like to carve out a place for myself in society as well, regardless of the allegations that all of society somehow favors my views. Regardless of whether you think my values are actually threatened, don't I have the same right to do so as a gay man does? Or do our rights descend from our status as victims, our historical "box," the categorizations assigned to us by politicians and society at large?
As for this particular day, I don't know about or care about their motives. What I'm addressing is the fact that the very idea of straight pride is so repulsive to so many people.
Feel free to disagree all you like, but I respect straight pride on the simple principle that we are all humans, and we are all entitled to not only the same rights, but the same forms of expression, regardless of who may agree or disagree. Indeed, disagreement and revulsion could only ever make such a movement--however hypothetical, however silly, however meaningless--stronger.
Last edited: