Misinformed, mal-informed displaced hate. Hillary walked a few blocks in this parade. Twitters I read are asking if she agrees. Others fixed the sign for them in Photoshop, but nobody in that crowd is listening.
New York
Would you like Republicans behaving similarly to this observed public behavior, and with no guessing as to motive and with no psychological projection? Would you like a big banner placing blame squarely where it belongs? Would you like that marring your parade? Would you like another banner like this one saying you ruin everything you touch, even to making a gay parade politically unhappy?
Turkey
Yahoo has a slideshow about Turkey police letting loose with rubber bullets on gay pride parade that was banned in Istanbul. They are interesting photographs, a good slideshow, not an ad generator. You see the city and the people and the spent rubber bullets. The city is old and interesting and made colorful and bright and happy and the people themselves are flamboyant. One man has dangling earrings, I thought they would be Muslim symbol of moon, like a charm, but it turned out to be a tiny hammer and sickle earring, and he is shown wearing rainbow knitted hat.
Everything I just wrote about Dems and being unhappy does not apply to Denver's gay parade. LGBT 2016 Colorado Pride Fest video. This was June 19th, last weekend. Denver gays that parade have body types that look like they're from Wisconsin. They're also older than you might imagine. At least 50% of them are heavier, much heavier, and generally older than the music goers photographed yesterday.
45 comments:
How does a 2% - 4% minority gain such a voice of vapidity in a sea of democrat lies? Why point at the perceived enemy the democrats tell you and have told you to and make a parade about it. Win. What's even more ironical is that while they proclaim their intolerance at a lie, at least in this picture that "Republican Hate Kills" they have been created an alternate reality that said that the Orlando shooter was a Democrat.
Now be mindful of this. How is it that you are watching literal cognitive dissonance right before your eyes at this. Christians, whites, republicans, and gun owners killed 49 in Orlando. Not a radical ISIS muslim democrat terrorist. No. That can't be. The truth it hurts. Daddy hold me while I rock back and forth. Hurry we must believe something else quickly in the face of the truth before we lose our minds.
Now, what's even funnier to see, is that some of those people marching in that parade behind those holding that sign know that this isn't the truth, and yet, they are going along with the charade. You see how the radical marxist progressive collectivist hive mind works. None dare speak the truth because the democrat ingsoc machine will eradicate you along with it.
Well, I guess it's easy for me to dismiss, there isn't ever anything like that going on where I live.
Part of a long running effort to pin the blame for the AIDS epidemic on the favored scapegoats... straight men and Republicans.
Denial of responsibility started simultaneously with the epidemic in San Francisco, where I lived at the time.
The mythology of widespread persecution of gays grew out of this scapegoating. Tens of millions of gay men did not die at the hands of homicidal homophobic gangs. No, they died of AIDS as a result of their own actions.
"Brokeback Mountain" is the great propaganda screed in the effort to pin the blame on a scapegoat.
The sexual paranoia and need for a scapegoat at the heart of gay activism is very dangerous.
In fact, this issue is one of the reasons I abandoned TOP.
The fabricated persecution of the gays (and to a lesser extent, women) was just too much to endure.
Fighting back against it only unleashed a torrent of spoiled brat tantrums and abuse. Not something I need.
We're all part good and part bad. Althouse's bad side is really really vicious... her participation in the creation of these vicious stupid myths of the persecution of American gays and women.
Aside from Hillary marching with all the other Bis and coming out as far as she dare, it's just her attempt to show she stands to gun free zones and victimhood, rather than people not being victims and recognizing the folly of gun free zones.
Methadras said...
How does a 2% - 4% minority gain such a voice of vapidity in a sea of democrat lies?
More like 1.3% if you believe the CDC. And less than that if you remember the WaPo knocks a hold in most estimates by noting some people in self-identifying are just trying to be fashionable.
The economy is almost moribund and Democrats are walking down the street behind a banner declaring Republicans the hate filled enemy of gays? At some point the cognitive dissonance between the real state of the nation and Democrat sideshow buffoonery will begin to penetrate the public mind. A Trump win is almost assured as long as he talks jobs jobs jobs and stopping the invasion of untold unskilled millions at a time when there is a dearth of jobs for the actual citizens of this country.
Hello Chip and Lem-
I am about to hijack your thread, but I’ve got too much to say to be brief or concise. I promise it will just be this once. And I’ll put the thread back once I get this off my chest.
The efforts of a minority slice of American trying to look larger is a common technique. Million man march for example.
Pride parades were something else when I first got out of high school, basically it was this underground, counter culture event. The attraction was that it was forbidden and held at night, a bacchanal orgy carnival from one bar to another. Literally: Sex, Drugs, and Rock and Roll!
Now it seems so corporate and staged. Plus the lame attempts to be shocking are like Marylyn Manson videos- just trying too hard. Your photo link was not even Denver Gay Pride, it was the Coors Lite Pride day. In St Louis it was the Wells Fargo Pride day. (how transgressive! Yeah!, that will really blow the minds of the str8ts.)
I think Men in general have a problem with intimacy. How many wives complain about their man not being communicative about his feelings; so if two men are trying to be honest and open about feelings and needs it can be doubly difficult.
I think this is the core to the promiscuity and cheating that are all over the gay culture. And the VD and drug abuse, and alcoholism and suicide rates. I think it reflects a failed vision of masculinity. A vision that is based on being cute or on being gym toned, or on being rich. What that perverted vision does not cover is when one is not cute, or buff, or rich. You gotta love the skin that you were born in. See the current weirdness with the gender benders for an example.
My 4 years in the Army changed me. I was never in the closet even before DADT, and my fellow soldiers’ did not really care. It was about the mission and one’s contribution to winning the mission. I also learned that men can be affectionate, and physical without being sexual. My army buddies gave me an ideal of what man’s love can mean.
So after leaving the service that is what I wanted, and was lucky enough to find it. 23 years later we could not be happier in our life. I got me a good one. And 6 months ago getting legally married just felt right. I very much would have preferred it to be a grant from the voters rather than a dictate from the court, but water over the dam.
I fully recognize the quirkiness of being gay, it does not seem to make much sense from an evolutionary pov.. I pretty much reject the ‘born this way’ crowd, since I came out way back when the theory was ‘do what you want with your lifestyle choice as long as you don’t hurt anyone’. I do think the studies about gay men more likely to have older brothers is interesting. I have 4 older brothers and 2 younger brothers- all straight. So maybe not a solid scientific basis there.
Poppa was not sure what to make of his weird queer son. But I did overhear him talking with his drinking buddies once, he said “ Well you know that Jim’s ole lady is a man right? “ it might not come thru in the written text, but to me, that was a sweet affirmation from Poppa’s way of looking at the world. God bless that crusty old tyrant.
And I’m not sure what the gay role in society is supposed to be. I try to be a good well informed citizen who does right by his neighbors. . I’m not sure how the mainstreaming of gayness is going to turn out for society. I’d pretty much like to keep my bedroom business behind closed doors. So the parades with attention craving female impersonators does not really relate to me. Nor does the political assumptions about my voting preferences. I'm just trying to pursue my happiness.
The lock that progressives have on gays voting and gays political contributions is amazing. I’m not the first person to say it, but I have offended more gays by being conservative than I have offended conservatives by being gay.
Side note: How can any feminist observe a drag queen and not realize that this is a cruel and horrible parody of what womanhood looks like? How come drag queens are not called out for their misogyny and woman hating? It is mocking women, it is hateful and a blackface like slur on women.
I don't think state capitols around the country have a musty coffee stained binder of the republican platform full of anti-gay stances, that must be check off before passing any law. I mean, that is what that sign could mean. I suppose, for the sake of looking for a tail to pin on the donkey. We got to find the secret binders full of anti-gay resolutions and destroy them.
This is your mission, should you choose to accept it. The secretary will notify your relatives should you be caught or killed trying to sneak in some capitol building.
@Jim in St Louis: Thanks for that. Very well said.
Then again they could be blaming republicans for confusion, the lack of consensus with the bathroom signs.
All the alternative signs republicans have come up with have been rejected. No good.
"The lock that progressives have on gays voting...is amazing."
Gays have the same dreams everyone else has. And those dreams are tied to the economy. By voting progressive gays undermine their own dreams. This is of course true of many other voting blocs. It would be so good for the rest of the nation and for gays themselves if they could let go of the illusion that electing statists furthers "the cause." The fact is that on the individual level all you do when you keep statists in power is stifle your own individual dream, whatever it is, because statists are in the business of destroying opportunity as they grow the state.
Thanks Jim.
It reminds me of another type of hypocrisy. Deliciously pointed out by Greg Gutfeld.
Testing
Not a hijack Jim. Thanks. I know lesbians better than the gays. Madison is the SF of lesbians. I may be wrong, but for the most part the gays seem to like women. However, Jim's take on drag queens was something I never thought of before. But, for reasons I don't understand, when we think of gay people, we almost always visualize men. Anyway, back to the lesbo's. They fall into 2 distinct groups. There are the lesbo's that love other women and the ones that hate men. Of all demographic groups, I do best w/ the former and I do the absolute worst w/ the latter. No surprise. Here's a dirty secret. The lesbo's that hate men also hate women and themselves. There is no other demographic on this earth more self loathing. I have worked cases of breakups that are vicious both physically and psychologically.
A while back I had a good exchange w/ a gay[I use "the gays" and "a gay" just as a joke, no group gets a pass on ball busting in my world] @ TOP. Maybe it was the very intelligent and introspective Jim. Although I am good @ micro analysis and investigation, I enjoy more the macro. This is a question I have had for some time. I know there's no one answer, but I have never gotten any good partial answers.
My question is, Why did being gay change from a culture that celebrated being different, become one that demanded rights of conformity, particularly gay marriage. Folks, it was not long ago that in the gay culture marriage was sooo lame. Almost overnight we went from freedom, a brief stop @ the civil union station, then a bullet train to gay marriage. I have no proof, but few know attorneys better than myself. I think a substantial part was $$$$'s. While the divorce rate has grown over the past 5 decades, the marriage rate has declined almost as much. So, there are fewer divorces. Fewer cases to bill. Gay marriage opens up a whole new market for divorce attorneys.
You may be right that gay marriage was pushed by the divorce lawyers who saw a revenue stream. My view was that it was pushed by people who saw what a conniption it was causing on the right. I personally would have been happy with convincing my fellow voters and lobbing my congressmen and getting the statute changed. But the left saw this as a chance to give the finger to the right. And with an evolving constitution anything is open for interpretation.
If you get confused just ask yourself if the person making the argument is talking about gay weddings, or gay marriages. There is a difference. Weddings are about the stupid things like cakes, or the photographer, or the venue. Marriage is about boring stuff like inheritance and life insurance and mortgages.
Great point. But, didn't unions solve the legit points of medical, mortgages, etc. w/o becoming "normal?" From my understanding of civil unions, they were boilerplate, not requiring an attorney for the entering or severing.
Not all lesbians are humorless feminists. Again speaking only in general terms- lesbians seem mostly self deprecating and have excellent senses of humor. Man-hating feminists are so unfunny that they are a punchline in themselves. The two groups do not overlap- but they are bunched together anyway. Much like gay men and lesbian women. No one has explained the B in LGBTQ to me yet.
A sad additional note is that many women who have been abused by men choose to be with a woman as a partner. Can you imagine the horror of being molested as a child by an uncle or grandfather- of course you would choose something totally opposite for your emotional needs.
Jim in St Louis said...
You may be right that gay marriage was pushed by the divorce lawyers who saw a revenue stream. My view was that it was pushed by people who saw what a conniption it was causing on the right. I personally would have been happy with convincing my fellow voters and lobbing my congressmen and getting the statute changed. But the left saw this as a chance to give the finger to the right. And with an evolving constitution anything is open for interpretation.
If you get confused just ask yourself if the person making the argument is talking about gay weddings, or gay marriages. There is a difference. Weddings are about the stupid things like cakes, or the photographer, or the venue. Marriage is about boring stuff like inheritance and life insurance and mortgages.
No, it's about the Left and Demos trying to bind the homosexual vote to them with another "Look what we got for you" with the connivance of shills like Dan Savage, although I think their response to Orlando blew a lot of it. As for "inheritance and life insurance and mortgages", homosexual relationships are exceedingly fragile.
But it's interesting to note, given how many Lefty homosexuals brag about how "accepted" they are, it took SCUS to do.
No one has explained the B in LGBTQ to me yet.
They say Vince Foster was the love of Hillary's life.
Right. We did not have civil unions in MO, but we had gone to a lawyer and had wills, and advance medical directives, and a couple other legal docs that we thought were important. So as legal as legal would allow. I did not see the word ‘marriage’ as being something special to aspire to. However once it was the law of the land, it was nice to actually get married. So I’m a hypocrite or something for taking advantage of it. The only practical difference would be SSI survivor benefits, but that is only if you think there will be any money left.
Jim, I broke lesbo's into 2 distinct groups. As I said, the women loving lesbo's[many athletes and attractive] I do better w/ than any other demographic group. We have a good friend who is a lesbo retired cop. She hangs w/ both lesbo's and heteros w/ equal ease.
Jim, You're a pragmatist, not a hypocrite.
Why did being gay change from a culture that celebrated being different, become one that demanded rights of conformity,
Dunno, In the bad old days marriage was by definition the subjection of one person to another’s dominance. No way could a marriage be a joining of equals, united for common values, and common goals, and mutual support. Boring stay and home gays like us were told that we were aping the establishment, and imitating the patriarchy.
I have noticed that the anarchist type of person often chooses sexual weirdness as a banner in their ultimate goal of smashing the state and by the chaos to give birth to the coming revolution. But of course in those revolutions in history the perverts and nonconformists are the first ones rounded up.
Jim in St Louis said...
Why did being gay change from a culture that celebrated being different, become one that demanded rights of conformity,
I doubt it ever did - really, but I'm sure they told themselves that when they were depressed.
“the Left and Demos trying to bind the homosexual vote to them with another "Look what we got for you" “
If that were true then I guess I would not have an objection. Special interests want their own special rewards and if they band together and get their politicians to deliver then that seems to me what democracy looks like. But that did not really happen in SSM. The society at large did change its attitude, and quickly too. But for some reason that change was expected to be recognized thru the courts. Now the courts are the least qualified to understand and reflect changes in the general society. They are unelected, lifetime serving, unaccountable old people. And that is as it should be- for what judges are supposed to be doing.
It is a puzzlement why this did not come from the legislatures. Every popular vote was against SSM see Prop 8 for example. But it was changing quickly- why not have the vote again? I really don’t understand how 40 years ago people would get upset about something and say “Why there ought to be a law against that!” and today they will say “Why that’s unconstitional!”
The other mystery is how the Left and Demos can claim credit for something they had nothing to do with. Elected democrats were exactly as resistant to SSM as anyone else up until about 5 min ago.
Jim in St Louis said...
The society at large did change its attitude, and quickly too.
Have to disagree. As I say, it took SCUS to do it. If you mean polls, the same skew applied to Hillary (and Pissy, too, no doubt) is undoubtedly applied to other things.
38 states voted against the idea and most of them didn't seem to have any regrets.
The other mystery is how the Left and Demos can claim credit for something they had nothing to do with. Elected democrats were exactly as resistant to SSM as anyone else up until about 5 min ago.
Many of those Democrats came from black districts which were vehemently against same sex marriage.
Which sort of proves my point.
The only thing the left aspires to is dominance and control. Maybe that's why the homosexual demographic is attracted to them for such a long time. Being told over and over and over again that those bible thumping republicans are going to kill you because of who you are, while the reality is, is that isn't really the case, but now we get to see Muslims doing it en masse and there is utter and complete silence. The truth it hurts. Quick set up another reality to replace the one we are in now.
Makes sense in the gay culture of debauched hedonistic sex, drugs, infidelity, and house music. Too much reality isn't good for the soul when you know that you really don't need to escape from your life, but rather aren't equipped to live a good one.
Want a perfect example of how leftists co-opt anything and throw a tantrum when they don't get there way just like the sit-in in the house last week. Go in the way back machine to California's prop 187 in '94. It passed with massive support to stop illegals ineligible for state taxpayer support. The very next day several groups (Mexican-American Legal Defense/Education Fund (MALDEF), the League of Latin American Citizens (LULAC) and the ACLU) filed federal lawsuits to overturn it. A federal judge issued a permanent injunction to stop it's enforcement pending a trial. A trial never came. The state asked for the case to be dismissed and the injunction to be dropped. The federal court denied the dismissal making the injunction literal law. The permanent injunction never has been lifted.
This is how these fuckers play. You literally have a will of the people in limbo with no resolution. For a political ideology that hates religion, they sure love legal purgatories.
A Democrat, a Homosexual and a Muslim walk into a bar.
Punchline,Republican Hate Kills.
Methadras said...
Want a perfect example of how leftists co-opt anything and throw a tantrum when they don't get there way just like the sit-in in the house last week. Go in the way back machine to California's prop 187 in '94. It passed with massive support to stop illegals ineligible for state taxpayer support. The very next day several groups (Mexican-American Legal Defense/Education Fund (MALDEF), the League of Latin American Citizens (LULAC) and the ACLU) filed federal lawsuits to overturn it. A federal judge issued a permanent injunction to stop it's enforcement pending a trial. A trial never came. The state asked for the case to be dismissed and the injunction to be dropped. The federal court denied the dismissal making the injunction literal law. The permanent injunction never has been lifted.
No it's in no way law, all you need a a judge willing to act on the dismissal, but for that to happen, you need an honest Administration and an honest AG.
Jim you see like a stand up guy. I wish you and your partner well. I always wanted to live and let live. Just you live over there and I live over here and we can leave each other alone if that is what we want. I just wish that we can end up there. But sadly that is not where we are. Sad.
Jim,
Thanks for the perspective. I still don't agree with how homosexual culture and sub-culture have sought to seek extra-rights protection from the state, but I prefer clarity to agreement.
edutcher said...
No it's in no way law, all you need a a judge willing to act on the dismissal, but for that to happen, you need an honest Administration and an honest AG
Actually it was voted into law, but it was permanently injunctioned. Even though the state tried to get the case dismissed, the federal court basically said, fuck you. This is how the left works. They infiltrate and put in their own, they then co-opt the legal process and corrupt the entire system under the guise of Constitutionality while the corrosion of our systems follow soon after. We are seeing that now. You can't simply have corruption without corrosion. Corruption begins the process of corrosion like the beginnings of rust. Radical Marxist Progressive Collectivism aka Leftism is corrupting and corrosive ideological rust.
Well we ain't all like Titus, but that seems suspiciously like #notallmuslims.
@ Ampersand
A Democrat, a Homosexual and a Muslim walk into a bar.
Fixed punchline reality:
The Muslim kills the homosexual, the democrat screams "White Male Christian Republican did it!"
Post a Comment