I don't need PRIDE to show I’m comfortable in my own skin.
If you were out one night, let’s say you were at the dancing, and a drunken heterosexual came up to you, staggering around, slurring his words and, in amongst this drunken kerfuffle, proceeded to conjure up some ‘witty’ remark inquiring as to where your rainbow flag was. Straight away you’d consider his comment homophobic; he’s making a remark that’s based purely on a gay stereotype – something you whole heartedly think is wrong. Yet, if you twirl your fluttering eyelids towards any Pride march, what will you find? Float after float drenched in rainbows of the stereotype you so boldly claim to oppose – I smell hypocrisy, don’t you?
So, why do homosexuals wrap this stereotypical rainbow flag around them, then flail and flounder around like Tinkerbell with her arse on fire whenever someone uses it as a weapon of homophobia? If you want the stereotype to be weeded out, then stop embracing it. I’m not condoning homophobia, not in any way, shape or form, but you can’t claim the torches of hate are being lit when you’re the one that’s providing wood for the fire.
And that’s what Pride does; it fuels the flames of hate. Today, Pride is little more than a giant excuse for cooperate marketing and a bit of drunken fun. The marches claim to ‘celebrate’ its participant’s sexuality, but it’s to its communities own detriment.
Gay Pride was originally initiated with the aim of taking a bold, positive stance against the discrimination and violence towards the LGBT community; hoping to help build community and celebrate sexual diversity and promote equal rights. They were carried out to help eliminate the belief that being gay was a mental illness, that these ‘people’ were inflicted. They challenged state authority and faced hatred - they stood for something. Now half the participants are so drunk, or wearing such outrageous heels, they can barely stand.
Who cares? I do. You’re not being bold, you’re not making a stance and you’re certainly not making a statement – at least not one that’s helping us gain the respect and equality we deserve. Perhaps you think I’m being too serious, that Pride is just ‘fun’. Well, you know what. Equality is reached through hard work and dedication, not staggering around the streets in a drunken haze whilst dressed in drag. And Pride does a lot more damage to the LGBT community than people care to realise.
When children are mocked and bullied at school for their sexuality, what hateful remarks are they subjected to? When I was at school, it was remarks like “bums against the wall, boys” or moronic digs and questions from my adolescent piers about “If I liked to wear dresses or make-up” or they’d flick the wrist at me; I even got pushed around. What’s my point? These remarks, these calls that teenage homosexuals are bombarded and plagued with, are heavily incorporated into every Pride march and then plastered all over websites, magazines and the TV for the world to see. It’s a parade full of six-foot tall queens, cross-dressing middle-aged men – and guess what, I’m not stereotyping here. Of course people will use that against us, that’s what a lot of the members of the procession dress like. It’s little more than a counterproductive, drag-queen pageant these days than it is a political statement. Yet, people still say its harmless fun. Around 40% of homosexual teenagers suffer from depression and 30% of all teen suicides are due to issues related to their sexuality, most notably being subjected to bullying because of it - tell me now Prides just harmless fun?
Right now, all over the world, the LGBT community is battling for the right to get married and the reason so many people are still opposed to it is because of the lingering stereotypes that haunts the LGBT community. It’s sad, but a lot of folk do still cling to the idea that homosexuals are hedonistic, sex-crazed deviants and it’s this myth that’s holding us back; a myth that isn't made any less fictitious by today’s Pride marches. Why don’t you just get a marker pen and scribble ‘AIDS’ on your index finger and chase folk around like a feral animal, whilst manically trying to prod them with it. Both are just as ridiculous as each other.
You want equality? You want to be treated with respect and given the same human rights as everyone else? Then fight for it. You don’t need one yearly march to let the world know you’re proud of who you are. You also don’t need to let yourself be defined by sexual orientation. If you want some fun, an excuse to get drunk or dress in drag? Then do it, who am I to stop you – just don’t wave it in people’s faces. The world is already waging a hateful war; don’t give it any more ammunition.
Wednesday, 27 June 2012
Saturday, 2 June 2012
From one Queen to another - attack of the homophobic corgis.
Once upon a time there was a Queen. She was a Queen of great beauty and passion; she was adored by millions all across the globe; drawing in people worldwide to her island, winning them over with not much more than the royal gesture of a regal wave. Oh, what might and power she wields, what fabulous hats she dares to sport, what praises are sung in her name, what…
Hold it, your gin-guzzling Highness. This queens got a question.
This weekend will see us celebrate 60 years under the Queen’s reign, an event hosted only once before in 1897 by Queen Victoria for her Diamond Jubilee. It is with this in mind, I felt I should do a blog in Lizzie’s honour.
Over the last 60 years, dear Elizabeth has reigned well. Giving to various charities and organizations, visiting sites of disastrous events (both natural and terrorist related) and always seeming to be fairly socially progressive. Except when it comes to the LGBT community - Apparently this Queen won’t acknowledge her fellow queens.
Ever since the tragedy of Diana’s death, and the ungainly public relations disaster that swiftly followed after, the Queen has gone to great lengths to reach out to her nation; to acquire an idea of their mood and feelings. She changed the monarchy and has presented it as passionate, multicultural, modern and seemingly socially progressive. Yet, not once in her entire reign has she acknowledged the existence of the LGBT community.
Now, I’m not proclaiming that our Queen partakes in some disgustingly royal acts of homophobic behaviour, but when she refuses to publicly acknowledge the existence of gay members of her own family, you’ve got to presume she isn’t gay-friendly.
*side note* Disgustingly Royal Acts of Homophobic Behaviour - Can you imagine that?
The Queen in all her aristocratic glory, sitting regally on her throne, and a beaten homosexual man is brutally thrown at her feet. “Think you’re a queen, do you?” she mockingly spits, “We shall see.” Just then she signals to one of her well-groomed servants, who with robot-like obedience brings her a hunting rifle. The Queen takes aim and, without the slightest flicker of remorse in her eyes, shoots a bullet directly into the mans upper-left thigh. Juddering from left-to-right, like a drag queen attempting to stand in his first set of heels, the partially wounded homosexual man pulls himself to his feet, “I’m feeling rather sporty today, so I shall give you a five minute head start.” The man limps away as fast as he can, before the Queen signals another servant to unleash her blood-thirsty, gay-hating corgis - bred purely with the intention of eliminating the gay community.
Anyway, a bit off topic. As I was saying. She isn’t gay-friendly. Whilst having always spoken approvingly of the other faiths and races that currently reside in Great Britain, she’s ignored all contact with the LGBT community, to the point she’s never even whispered the words ‘gay’ or ‘lesbian’ in public, for the past six decades. Are these omissions due to advice from her royal advisors and courtiers, or perhaps they’re just born out of her own personal view? It’s irrelevant. As monarch she has an undeniable responsibility to treat all her subjects equally. If she were to dismiss or refuse to acknowledge other faiths or cultures in Britain, Asians Britons for example, she’d be immediately classed as a racist; so I don’t see how ignoring the gays is any different. Even though she has never blatantly publicly spoken out against us, her silence sends a message that can only be interrupted as disrespectful and somewhat homophobic. Are we excluded because we’re beneath the monarch?
For all she is giving, having attended functions hosted by many welfare organisations and charities, never once has she given time to any deserving gay charities; Stone Wall Housing, which helps provide shelter for LGBT youths, for example.
In 1999 a gay pub in Soho was bombed by neo-Nazi, David Copeland, yet the Queen didn’t visit any of the 70 wounded that were hospitalized - and that was one of the biggest terror attacks the UK had seen in quite some time.
An argument against this could be made, as the Queen undoubtedly has homosexual people on her staff. But that doesn’t make her ‘gay-friendly.’ They’re employed to be her servants - it’s hardly a term of endearment.
As head of state, the Queen has an obligation to recognise all British citizens, regardless of their sexual orientation, faith group and/or race. It is her duty to embrace ALL of us. So, Lizzie, how much longer will we have to wait to be recognised and acknowledged?
Hold it, your gin-guzzling Highness. This queens got a question.
This weekend will see us celebrate 60 years under the Queen’s reign, an event hosted only once before in 1897 by Queen Victoria for her Diamond Jubilee. It is with this in mind, I felt I should do a blog in Lizzie’s honour.
Over the last 60 years, dear Elizabeth has reigned well. Giving to various charities and organizations, visiting sites of disastrous events (both natural and terrorist related) and always seeming to be fairly socially progressive. Except when it comes to the LGBT community - Apparently this Queen won’t acknowledge her fellow queens.
Ever since the tragedy of Diana’s death, and the ungainly public relations disaster that swiftly followed after, the Queen has gone to great lengths to reach out to her nation; to acquire an idea of their mood and feelings. She changed the monarchy and has presented it as passionate, multicultural, modern and seemingly socially progressive. Yet, not once in her entire reign has she acknowledged the existence of the LGBT community.
Now, I’m not proclaiming that our Queen partakes in some disgustingly royal acts of homophobic behaviour, but when she refuses to publicly acknowledge the existence of gay members of her own family, you’ve got to presume she isn’t gay-friendly.
*side note* Disgustingly Royal Acts of Homophobic Behaviour - Can you imagine that?
The Queen in all her aristocratic glory, sitting regally on her throne, and a beaten homosexual man is brutally thrown at her feet. “Think you’re a queen, do you?” she mockingly spits, “We shall see.” Just then she signals to one of her well-groomed servants, who with robot-like obedience brings her a hunting rifle. The Queen takes aim and, without the slightest flicker of remorse in her eyes, shoots a bullet directly into the mans upper-left thigh. Juddering from left-to-right, like a drag queen attempting to stand in his first set of heels, the partially wounded homosexual man pulls himself to his feet, “I’m feeling rather sporty today, so I shall give you a five minute head start.” The man limps away as fast as he can, before the Queen signals another servant to unleash her blood-thirsty, gay-hating corgis - bred purely with the intention of eliminating the gay community.
Anyway, a bit off topic. As I was saying. She isn’t gay-friendly. Whilst having always spoken approvingly of the other faiths and races that currently reside in Great Britain, she’s ignored all contact with the LGBT community, to the point she’s never even whispered the words ‘gay’ or ‘lesbian’ in public, for the past six decades. Are these omissions due to advice from her royal advisors and courtiers, or perhaps they’re just born out of her own personal view? It’s irrelevant. As monarch she has an undeniable responsibility to treat all her subjects equally. If she were to dismiss or refuse to acknowledge other faiths or cultures in Britain, Asians Britons for example, she’d be immediately classed as a racist; so I don’t see how ignoring the gays is any different. Even though she has never blatantly publicly spoken out against us, her silence sends a message that can only be interrupted as disrespectful and somewhat homophobic. Are we excluded because we’re beneath the monarch?
For all she is giving, having attended functions hosted by many welfare organisations and charities, never once has she given time to any deserving gay charities; Stone Wall Housing, which helps provide shelter for LGBT youths, for example.
In 1999 a gay pub in Soho was bombed by neo-Nazi, David Copeland, yet the Queen didn’t visit any of the 70 wounded that were hospitalized - and that was one of the biggest terror attacks the UK had seen in quite some time.
An argument against this could be made, as the Queen undoubtedly has homosexual people on her staff. But that doesn’t make her ‘gay-friendly.’ They’re employed to be her servants - it’s hardly a term of endearment.
As head of state, the Queen has an obligation to recognise all British citizens, regardless of their sexual orientation, faith group and/or race. It is her duty to embrace ALL of us. So, Lizzie, how much longer will we have to wait to be recognised and acknowledged?