#HetrosexualPrideDay

[FalloutJack]

If hetrosexuality is feeling THAT threatened by homosexuality, then they're gonna need alot more than pride to see their way through.

 

[Jamcie Kerbizz]

If hetrosexuality is feeling THAT threatened by homosexuality, then they're gonna need alot more than pride to see their way through.

and alternatively if homosexuality is feeling THAT threatened by hetrosexuality, then they're gonna need alot more than pride to see their way through... ooooh wait.

#BreathingAirPrideDay please rage about this next, cause if having sexual orientation is THAT important then ability to fill your lungs with oxygen is even more...

PS.
Fishpeople will rise and kill us all!
#fishpeopleawarnessday

 

[Jamcie Kerbizz]

Pffffffft more like Heterosexual Shame Day.

Seriously what's wrong with some people? It's like the White Pride thing. "I know these people were oppressed for hundreds of years, BUT I WANT A HASHTAG TOO".

It's childish, really.

I disagree. It's "Someone Else is getting attention day".

OT: I saw it summed up pretty accurately somewhere else. This is like the kid who needs a birthday present on his/her sibling's birthday or she/he'll cry. I'm straight. I don't feel I have faced challenges over my sexuality worthy of any kind of celebration.

Except it's not a 'Yay Us!' type of thing, it's coming of a place of competitiveness towards the GSM community, with the intention of lessening the importance of LGBT pride events. It's basically a means of being dismissive towards the whole concept outside of gay pride. As a 'Yay Us!' type thing it's meaningless, useless, and pointless, because cisgender heterosexual people haven't been told to be ashamed of their sexual orientation or gender identity for their entirelives. GSM folk have and being told to be ashamed of ourselves for arbitrary things we can't help is still a pervasive part of culture today.

More or less what I wanted to say, but in better words.

Oh well, I'm off to celebrate the lack of discrimination I have felt and the challenges I haven't faced that comes from being straight.

You do realise that best way to respond to this for homosexuals would be to attend and do 'yay You!' day out of it - we're happy that you are heterosexual. Pushing for confrontation and acting like a bunch of chauvinist over it just makes both groups in eyes of bystanders look equally dumb.

 

[Emanuele Ciriachi]

Well, ya realise gay people adopt, right? And some straight people never/can't have kids? It's not black-and-white like you're makin' it. Straighties aren't just pumpin' out babies non-stop, thank god.

And also, the being proud of it bit generally comes from people trying to erase and kill them for hundreds of years. It's not like they decided to have Pride for no reason. It's a celebration of being able to be visibly themselves after years and years of not being able to.

Well, even without my objection to same-sex adoption, any combination of gender and number of people can potentially raise a child - while only a man and a woman can give birth to a new one. A heterosexual union has a potential that is both superior and unique among all forms of unions, which makes it necessary to society.

I understand that people are upset for being unfairly targeted for their sexual tendencies, but I still don't see the pride in it.

Well, overpopulation is a major issue in the world today. Also we have the technology to non sexually create children. So even if everyone in the world was gay, life would go on, since I'm guessing the same % of gay people as straight people want to raise families, even if it means adopting or working with others to create them. Hell, even without the tech, I'm sure plenty of Gay men and women would put up with the act merely for the ability to have and raise children.

I would ask your opinion on condoms/safe sex as well with such a view.

I get your point; but most people that bring this subject - yourself included - usually don't state what would be an acceptable level of population versus technological level, and why it is that. I think we are very well capable of supporting more population right now, which in turn - if handled properly - will lead to a bigger worldwide market and even quicker technological advancement.
But regardless, even if overpopulation was a problem, that doesn't mean we should stop making children - just that we should make less of them.

If by "working with others to create them" you mean renting an uterus, I am definitely against the legality of such practice.
As for your question, I don't use condoms for religious reasons (I'm a Catholic) but I do use other forms of birth control - having children is great, but as I said before one also needs to have the capabilities and resources to raise them.

 

[Phasmal]

Well, even without my objection to same-sex adoption, any combination of gender and number of people can potentially raise a child - while only a man and a woman can give birth to a new one. A heterosexual union has a potential that is both superior and unique among all forms of unions, which makes it necessary to society.

I understand that people are upset for being unfairly targeted for their sexual tendencies, but I still don't see the pride in it.

Well that just sounds fuckin' squicky to me. You know what, dude, you just do you. I'd bring up that there are trans people and people who identify outside the gender binary who are able to have kids, but I don't see that conversation going down a productive road.
If you go around thinking your relationships are 'superior' to others, that's probably not gonna do anybody any good in the long run. But hey, what do I know.
I'm out.

 

[Saelune]

Well, ya realise gay people adopt, right? And some straight people never/can't have kids? It's not black-and-white like you're makin' it. Straighties aren't just pumpin' out babies non-stop, thank god.

And also, the being proud of it bit generally comes from people trying to erase and kill them for hundreds of years. It's not like they decided to have Pride for no reason. It's a celebration of being able to be visibly themselves after years and years of not being able to.

Well, even without my objection to same-sex adoption, any combination of gender and number of people can potentially raise a child - while only a man and a woman can give birth to a new one. A heterosexual union has a potential that is both superior and unique among all forms of unions, which makes it necessary to society.

I understand that people are upset for being unfairly targeted for their sexual tendencies, but I still don't see the pride in it.

Well, overpopulation is a major issue in the world today. Also we have the technology to non sexually create children. So even if everyone in the world was gay, life would go on, since I'm guessing the same % of gay people as straight people want to raise families, even if it means adopting or working with others to create them. Hell, even without the tech, I'm sure plenty of Gay men and women would put up with the act merely for the ability to have and raise children.

I would ask your opinion on condoms/safe sex as well with such a view.

I get your point; but most people that bring this subject - yourself included - usually don't state what would be an acceptable level of population versus technological level, and why it is that. I think we are very well capable of supporting more population right now, which in turn - if handled properly - will lead to a bigger worldwide market and even quicker technological advancement.
But regardless, even if overpopulation was a problem, that doesn't mean we should stop making children - just that we should make less of them.

If by "working with others to create them" you mean renting an uterus, I am definitely against the legality of such practice.
As for your question, I don't use condoms for religious reasons (I'm a Catholic) but I do use other forms of birth control - having children is great, but as I said before one also needs to have the capabilities and resources to raise them.

I'm not saying we have to put some sort of regulation on breeding, but the "maintaining humanity" argument is a weak one. We have the technology to artificially impregnate a woman. So sex is no longer required for that. "Working with others to create them" could be as simple as either a lesbian asking a male friend to donate sperm, or a gay man asking a female friend *who wants to do it" to be a surrogate mother. There are women who may not want to raise children, but still have some desire to mother a child.

I also think being against gays adopting is silly. Why deny a child a loving home? We have no shortage of orphaned children. You seem to believe in parents having pride in what they do, but plenty don't.

As for pride for one's sexuality, I will restate this...again. Its not mere pride for being gay, but for achieving better treating and place in society, despite all the challenges society put. Sure, you seem very polite and not the raging homophobe, but you clearly are very religious, and bound to many biases because of that. But 40 years ago, even you would likely have been one if not for the actions of people fighting for equality for LGBT people.

We have pride for no longer being considered a mental illness. We have pride for no longer letting people and police shame and bully us. We have pride for fighting for our love when others hate. We have pride for being able to finally have our love legally protected in union, even if we are not protected in schools or businesses fully yet. But when we do finally achieve that, we will be proud of that too.

 

[wulf3n]

... I don't even know what to say to that. I'm serious, if you think "indignation" and "bitterness" are strong emotions, then I actually don't know how to continue having a conversation here.

EDIT: For clarity, I believe they can certainly fester into strong emotions, but don't imply strong emotions by themselves.

Not by themselves, probably medium intensity, though again it depends on how it is said. Together though, that seems to imply some intensity. They're not just indignant, they're bitterly indignant.

Again, have you literally never seen someone bottle up their emotions? Generally speaking, people can be pretty good at that, especially since around here letting your anger out will frequently result in punishment.

Sure, in face to face conversations, where the visual and audible aspects of the language offer greater insight, such that I can actually see their emotion regardless of what they're saying. Without those things I can't, with any certainty, tell if a person is bottling something up, or just doesn't care that much.

Also, people posting in these sociopolitical threads get emotional all the time. If you haven't been seeing it, then once again, I don't know what to say.

I see it, just not as much as other places.

I'm glad someone is firing back. It is annoying being told i'm evil due to my sexuality and having that demonization be cuturally acceptable.

Not really sure what exactly is being lost in that expression, there, but okay.

Well, the first part "annoying" is quite a subjective term that covers a broad spectrum. Are we talking fly buzzing around your head, or dog shitting in your bed level of annoyance?

The second part is quite colourful, but with just the words themselves a lot of the context is lost. Are they being facetious? Sarcastic? Is it just hyperbole or are they literally suggesting they are being called evil?

It's like a petulant child saying, "Hold on now, my brother gets an inhaler? I want one too. I don't have asthma but I better get one!"

I would say it's more like getting an inhaler that looks like a lightsaber and plays music. Sure it's primary purpose is to save lives, but it looks like a hell of a lot of fun regardless. Can you really blame the brother for wanting their own?

 

[Amaror]

Even today effeminate homosexuals are still often discriminated against by "straight-acting" gays who feel they again, hurt their image to mainstream society.

Why "straight-acting"? Not trying to start a fight, but do you really think just because a homosexual person is not dancing on rainbows, they are just "acting" and "pretending" to be straight to fit in. Or am I just massively misunderstanding what you meant with "straight-acting" here?

 

[Saelune]

Even today effeminate homosexuals are still often discriminated against by "straight-acting" gays who feel they again, hurt their image to mainstream society.

Why "straight-acting"? Not trying to start a fight, but do you really think just because a homosexual person is not dancing on rainbows, they are just "acting" and "pretending" to be straight to fit in. Or am I just massively misunderstanding what you meant with "straight-acting" here?

I didn't coin the term. It is just one used to describe gay men who aren't into interior design, fashion, or sound lispy, and prefer sports and beer and burping.

I put it in quotes for a reason. Its not a term I actually go using to describe such people. Most people agree it is a negative term.

 

[Amaror]

I didn't coin the term. It is just one used to describe gay men who aren't into interior design, fashion, or sound lispy, and prefer sports and beer and burping.

I put it in quotes for a reason. Its not a term I actually go using to describe such people. Most people agree it is a negative term.

Ah, ok. Seems weird that homosexuals of all people would discriminate against other homosexuals for not acting in a stereotypical fashion.

 

[Saelune]

I didn't coin the term. It is just one used to describe gay men who aren't into interior design, fashion, or sound lispy, and prefer sports and beer and burping.

I put it in quotes for a reason. Its not a term I actually go using to describe such people. Most people agree it is a negative term.

Ah, ok. Seems weird that homosexuals of all people would discriminate against other homosexuals for not acting in a stereotypical fashion.

Inter-discrimination does happen. Its really unfortunate though. Not that it only happens in gay communities. Plenty of people of different groups think that either acting too stereotypical, or even not stereotypical enough are major negatives.

 

[Yopaz]

You do realise that best way to respond to this for homosexuals would be to attend and do 'yay You!' day out of it - we're happy that you are heterosexual. Pushing for confrontation and acting like a bunch of chauvinist over it just makes both groups in eyes of bystanders look equally dumb.

I think this site offers a better solution to be honest http://psychcentral.com/lib/what-to-do-about-attention-seeking-kids/

 

[Thaluikhain]

I didn't coin the term. It is just one used to describe gay men who aren't into interior design, fashion, or sound lispy, and prefer sports and beer and burping.

I put it in quotes for a reason. Its not a term I actually go using to describe such people. Most people agree it is a negative term.

Ah, ok. Seems weird that homosexuals of all people would discriminate against other homosexuals for not acting in a stereotypical fashion.

Inter-discrimination does happen. Its really unfortunate though. Not that it only happens in gay communities. Plenty of people of different groups think that either acting too stereotypical, or even not stereotypical enough are major negatives.

That can't be repeated enough. People will fight amongst themselves over any and every stupid thing. There's a few scenes in Life of Brian that have become simultaneously much funnier and much less funny for me as I've gotten older.

 

[Phasmal]

It's like a petulant child saying, "Hold on now, my brother gets an inhaler? I want one too. I don't have asthma but I better get one!"

I would say it's more like getting an inhaler that looks like a lightsaber and plays music. Sure it's primary purpose is to save lives, but it looks like a hell of a lot of fun regardless. Can you really blame the brother for wanting their own?

Your example isn't really much better. It's still childish. No, maybe you couldn't blame a literal child for being jealous that someone who suffers something also gets something cool. But adults should know better.

Hell, the hospital I had an operation on my ear in as a child had an N64 in it, which my sisters thought were cool, but neither of them were like "Damn, I wish I had a head-wound so I could play N64!".

People should learn not to act like children. Maybe sometimes they need to be reminded, but still.

 

[Gengisgame]

Here many of you are whining about heterosexuality and going on about systematic oppression unable to understand how life or people as individuals operate.

You as an individual whine about straights, I as a straight have a problem with you, at this point in time I don't care for your "muh systematic oppression" to justify your childish
attitude towards me.

If you have a problem with someone celebrating straight pride day as some sort of mockery against gay pride fine but when you start going on about "oh those white men had it so tough" or any of that crap then we have a problem.

As an individual you could have had a golden life or suffered horrible abuse regardless of whether you think one makes it harder or easier so I would prefer you hypocrites understand the mentality of an individual, you give me shit, I give you shit back whether you think I'm privileged, probably am better off than most but some people seem to think I should suddenly be a doormat. Nice to celebrate being better.

 

[wulf3n]

Hell, the hospital I had an operation on my ear in as a child had an N64 in it, which my sisters thought were cool, but neither of them were like "Damn, I wish I had a head-wound so I could play N64!".

Were they like "Damn, I wish I could play N64!"? as that's the point I was making.

In the example provided it wasn't the kid saying "I want asthma" it was the kid saying "I want the inhaler" they may not need it for life saving purposes, but it's not the life saving purposes they want it for.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

I would say it's more like getting an inhaler that looks like a lightsaber and plays music. Sure it's primary purpose is to save lives, but it looks like a hell of a lot of fun regardless. Can you really blame the brother for wanting their own?

You can always join in on the festivities. How exactly would a heterosexual pride party look like, to begin with? IF you're going to celebrate all diversity spectrums of sexuality roughly attributeable, or is it going to be only straight cis people dancing at your average rave? I mean, if you take away the kink aspects that could still be considered heterosexual relationships, it just starts looking like your average dance party.

That's kind of boring, tbh.

If you liven it up with hardcore BDSM play. Mistresses spanking sissies. Straight crossdressers doing Abba and heterosexual transgender couples latin dancing with glorious sequins outfits on floats decorated like clouds ... then it might be a party worth going to. I mean, if the primary purpose is because you want to have fun, then it's just going to look like a LGBTQ pride party/parade.

One of which you were never barred from participating in in the first place.

 

[Phasmal]

Hell, the hospital I had an operation on my ear in as a child had an N64 in it, which my sisters thought were cool, but neither of them were like "Damn, I wish I had a head-wound so I could play N64!".

Were they like "Damn, I wish I could play N64!"? as that's the point I was making.

In the example provided it wasn't the kid saying "I want asthma" it was the kid saying "I want the inhaler" they may not need it for life saving purposes, but it's not the life saving purposes they want it for.

Yes, for a moment, and then my mother reminded them that I only got to spend so much time on it because I was in hospital and had my head cut open and stitched up again.
That's what I mean. People should be reminded of these things, instead of acting like grabby little children.

Also, stepping away from the analogy for a second, there is literally nothing stopping straight people from going and celebrating at Pride. Go, have fun, wave rainbow flags, nobody's stopping you.

 

[happyninja42]

Hell, the hospital I had an operation on my ear in as a child had an N64 in it, which my sisters thought were cool, but neither of them were like "Damn, I wish I had a head-wound so I could play N64!".

Were they like "Damn, I wish I could play N64!"? as that's the point I was making.

In the example provided it wasn't the kid saying "I want asthma" it was the kid saying "I want the inhaler" they may not need it for life saving purposes, but it's not the life saving purposes they want it for.

Yes, for a moment, and then my mother reminded them that I only got to spend so much time on it because I was in hospital and had my head cut open and stitched up again.
That's what I mean. People should be reminded of these things, instead of acting like grabby little children.

Also, stepping away from the analogy for a second, there is literally nothing stopping straight people from going and celebrating at Pride. Go, have fun, wave rainbow flags, nobody's stopping you.

Many of us already do.

 

[wulf3n]

Yes, for a moment, and then my mother reminded them that I only got to spend so much time on it because I was in hospital and had my head cut open and stitched up again.
That's what I mean. People should be reminded of these things, instead of acting like grabby little children.

Sure, but that's not going to stop people wanting the fun aspects. It's human nature.

Also, stepping away from the analogy for a second, there is literally nothing stopping straight people from going and celebrating at Pride. Go, have fun, wave rainbow flags, nobody's stopping you.

Too true.

You can always join in on the festivities.

Indeed.

How exactly would a heterosexual pride party look like, to begin with? IF you're going to celebrate all diversity spectrums of sexuality roughly attributeable, or is it going to be only straight cis people dancing at your average rave? I mean, if you take away the kink aspects that could still be considered heterosexual relationships, it just starts looking like your average dance party.

That's kind of boring, tbh.

I honestly have no idea.

If you liven it up with hardcore BDSM play. Mistresses spanking sissies. Straight crossdressers doing Abba and heterosexual transgender couples latin dancing with glorious sequins outfits on floats decorated like clouds ... then it might be a party worth going to. I mean, if the primary purpose is because you want to have fun, then it's just going to look like a LGBTQ pride party/parade.

That seems more like just a general sexuality pride parade... which sounds quite fun.

One of which you were never barred from participating in in the first place.

I never really felt like I was.