Why do we still need Pride?

hotmail.com · 30-06-2015 2:07pm

irish_dave_83 wrote:

Yes but one is discreet and one is not. Lets be honest, you have a different mind-set if you are just going to whip it out on Georges street full of people compared to a near empty park behind a bush.

They are both public places. The public can stumble across a pair having sex in a park! It's the same thing and the same principle. So it's really rich to condemn one and to say the other one is ok. You're now talking about someone's mind set. Smell of judgement off some posters. Gays will do your head in.

irish_dave_83 · 30-06-2015 2:23pm

hotmail.com wrote: »

They are both public places. The public can stumble across a pair having sex in a park! It's the same thing and the same principle. So it's really rich to condemn one and to say the other one is ok. You're now talking about someone's mind set. Smell of judgement off some posters. Gays will do your head in.

Firstly I'm not gay, and "gays will do you head in" is a rather judgmental comment to make.

That aside, its obvious both are public places no one is arguing this, but behind a bush in a park at night and 2am on Georges St on a Saturday night/Sunday morning are very different things. If you can't grasp that, well I don't think I can explain it much more clearly.

At least in the park you are trying not to get caught, maybe you should look up the phrase "stumble across" before trying to argue your point.

So it's perfectly fine for me to condemn this blatant disregard for other people.

Ash885 · 30-06-2015 2:32pm

And when the parks are littered with condoms and lube wrappers like they are now, we'll know it was all done to save us the sights of the actual sexual deed. Cheers! People are defending dogging, I love it haha.

And I think the gays will do your head in malarky is how some people choose to be offended by what would obviously happen at any public gathering of this scale. I've seen many a times two straight people riding the hell out of each other in the alleyway outside Coppers. I didn't judge the entire hetereosexual populace on this action, nor women, men etc. Just two bafoons who had a little too much to drink and not enough decency. Sure I knew what to expect going to Coppers; did I let it affect my night? No, because focusing on an incident like that (whether intended to be public or not) is not something that I want to focus on.

I think this very topic is exactly why we need Pride, as the thread asked. Because people will continually try to sexualise the gay community into these acts when in all fairness, all I wanted to do (and many others I assume) on the day was walk down O'Connell street holding our partners hand...

hotmail.com · 30-06-2015 9:56pm

irish_dave_83 wrote: »

Firstly I'm not gay, and "gays will do you head in" is a rather judgmental comment to make.

That aside, its obvious both are public places no one is arguing this, but behind a bush in a park at night and 2am on Georges St on a Saturday night/Sunday morning are very different things. If you can't grasp that, well I don't think I can explain it much more clearly.

At least in the park you are trying not to get caught, maybe you should look up the phrase "stumble across" before trying to argue your point.

So it's perfectly fine for me to condemn this blatant disregard for other people.

Nonsense. A public place is a public place.

Anyway, what harm is it causing if people are doing it?

hotmail.com · 30-06-2015 9:58pm

Ash885 wrote: »

And when the parks are littered with condoms and lube wrappers like they are now, we'll know it was all done to save us the sights of the actual sexual deed. Cheers! People are defending dogging, I love it haha.

And I think the gays will do your head in malarky is how some people choose to be offended by what would obviously happen at any public gathering of this scale. I've seen many a times two straight people riding the hell out of each other in the alleyway outside Coppers. I didn't judge the entire hetereosexual populace on this action, nor women, men etc. Just two bafoons who had a little too much to drink and not enough decency. Sure I knew what to expect going to Coppers; did I let it affect my night? No, because focusing on an incident like that (whether intended to be public or not) is not something that I want to focus on.

I think this very topic is exactly why we need Pride, as the thread asked. Because people will continually try to sexualise the gay community into these acts when in all fairness, all I wanted to do (and many others I assume) on the day was walk down O'Connell street holding our partners hand...

Well said.

There are gays that frequently go to saunas and have done outdoor stuff and they are sometimes very quick to judge others.

We're supposed to be getting away from judging people. It has to start with gays not judging other gays.

sasta le · 30-06-2015 10:14pm

Be great to get the gay vote on other things that effect the country

Annasopra · 30-06-2015 11:42pm

hotmail.com wrote: »

Well said.

There are gays that frequently go to saunas and have done outdoor stuff and they are sometimes very quick to judge others.

We're supposed to be getting away from judging people. It has to start with gays not judging other gays.

Why is this about gays judging other gays? Personally I find the idea of having sex in the middle of the street wrong no matter who does it. I'm not judging someone cause they are gay. I'm judging someone for having sex in the middle of the street. I think you are wrong to actually suggest this is about gay people judging gay people at all.

Annasopra · 30-06-2015 11:44pm

sasta le wrote: »

Be great to get the gay vote on other things that effect the country

Eh. Its not a homogenous vote. Some of us are like Paddy Manning, Keith Mills and Richard Waghorne. Some of us are the opposite.

sasta le · 01-07-2015 12:30am

Mean in terms of numbers support and awareness

wakka12 · 01-07-2015 9:19am

One of my american friends recently visited from Florida and said he didnt enjoy his trip to ireland at all, he said it was beautiful and had so many interesting sites but the people were terrible, especially in Dublin. God nasty looks when holding hands with his boyfriend and even had homophobic abuse shouted at him on a number of occasions.
Said he didnt suffer any abuse outside of Dublin, funny isn't it. So much for Dublin being the liberal accepting place I thought it was, Im so angry and sad and just disappointed this happened to him.

Daith · 01-07-2015 10:05am

wakka12 wrote: »

So much for Dublin being the liberal accepting place I thought it was, Im so angry and sad and just disappointed this happened to him.

Well no. Dublin isn't a homogeneous liberal place where nobody is ever insulted. It's made up of a huge number of people. The majority are fine (how many people didn't give your friend a nasty look or shout abuse) but some people are ***** and we tend to remember negative experiences.

I'm not saying any abuse is acceptable but it's a reality.

jobbridge4life · 01-07-2015 4:28pm

hotmail.com wrote: »

Nonsense. A public place is a public place.

You keep saying that and keeps on being as ridiculous. You can't possibly try and equate having a drunken public mutual **** on a street in daylight on Pride with a sex act at in the dark of night in some disused lay-by or in some woods.

Neither of which I have done let me add.

jobbridge4life · 01-07-2015 4:35pm

wakka12 wrote: »

One of my american friends recently visited from Florida and said he didnt enjoy his trip to ireland at all, he said it was beautiful and had so many interesting sites but the people were terrible, especially in Dublin. God nasty looks when holding hands with his boyfriend and even had homophobic abuse shouted at him on a number of occasions.
Said he didnt suffer any abuse outside of Dublin, funny isn't it. So much for Dublin being the liberal accepting place I thought it was, Im so angry and sad and just disappointed this happened to him.

Wakka I don't think anyone, certainly noone here except for yourself ever tried to portray Dublin as a homogeneous liberal wonderland. I am sorry for your friend, I am a little shocked to be honest I see gay people holding hands without issue on most of the main streets (also the most touristy ones) in Dublin everyday at this stage. I guess the lesson is not to allow ourselves mistake anecdotes with evidence and not to let one horror story overly colour our impressions.

wakka12 · 01-07-2015 5:33pm

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Wakka I don't think anyone, certainly noone here except for yourself ever tried to portray Dublin as a homogeneous liberal wonderland. I am sorry for your friend, I am a little shocked to be honest I see gay people holding hands without issue on most of the main streets (also the most touristy ones) in Dublin everyday at this stage. I guess the lesson is not to allow ourselves mistake anecdotes with evidence and not to let one horror story overly colour our impressions.

Yeah I suppose, maybe I did overestimate it a little...I just had this (obviously skewed) image of Dublin as a very liberal place...maybe thats because all my social circles are very accepting of gay people..

Ticking and Bashing · 01-07-2015 9:18pm

Was passing O'Connell st after work, saw two women holding hands (they might've been 'lesbians'

) - man shouts ''lesbian b*****ds''. I was a little surprised at this. It was something I wasn't expecting in Dublin! I must be completely naive!

Kalman · 02-07-2015 3:28pm

irish_dave_83 wrote: »

Yes but one is discreet and one is not. Lets be honest, you have a different mind-set if you are just going to whip it out on Georges street full of people compared to a near empty park behind a bush.

Behind a bush? Huh, how disgusting !

hotmail.com · 02-07-2015 10:18pm

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Why is this about gays judging other gays? Personally I find the idea of having sex in the middle of the street wrong no matter who does it. I'm not judging someone cause they are gay. I'm judging someone for having sex in the middle of the street. I think you are wrong to actually suggest this is about gay people judging gay people at all.

16 or 17 year olds who were probably drunk..and you seem to want to condemn them for being "wrong". It sounds judgmental to me. And it was a hand job, not sex.

Anyway, I don't think we're going to agree on the lack of significance of the event, that's even if it happened.

wakka12 · 02-07-2015 11:21pm

hotmail.com wrote: »

16 or 17 year olds who were probably drunk..and you seem to want to condemn them for being "wrong". It sounds judgmental to me. And it was a hand job, not sex.

Anyway, I don't think we're going to agree on the lack of significance of the event, that's even if it happened.

Its a sex act

jobbridge4life · 03-07-2015 10:29am

hotmail.com wrote: »

16 or 17 year olds who were probably drunk..and you seem to want to condemn them for being "wrong". It sounds judgmental to me. And it was a hand job, not sex.

Anyway, I don't think we're going to agree on the lack of significance of the event, that's even if it happened.

You do realise that judgement when reasonable and equitably applied has a very worthwhile place in our society?

jobbridge4life · 03-07-2015 10:38am

Meanwhile I reiterate my call for Pride to be utilized to;

1. Help raise awareness of the rise in unsafe sex practices;

2. Promote safe sex;

3. Remind people that although HIV is now a treatable disease it is still a disease;

4. Fight the stigma for those living with HIV.

The situation is rapidly reaching a crisis point in London, 1 in 8 gay men in London are HIV positive according to the following article,
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/london-chemsex-parties-face-gay-club-scene-with-hiv-fears-1.2271564

Think about that. 1 in 8, thats worse than many parts of sub-Saharan Africa. If we don't make an effort now it won't be long until the statistics for Dublin mirror that of London.

SpaceTime · 03-07-2015 12:44pm

hotmail.com wrote: »

. And it was a hand job, not sex.

Anyway, I don't think we're going to agree on the lack of significance of the event, that's even if it happened.

Isn't that what a former U.S. president said?

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Meanwhile I reiterate my call for Pride to be utilized to;

1. Help raise awareness of the rise in unsafe sex practices;

2. Promote safe sex;

3. Remind people that although HIV is now a treatable disease it is still a disease;

4. Fight the stigma for those living with HIV.

The situation is rapidly reaching a crisis point in London, 1 in 8 gay men in London are HIV positive according to the following article,
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/london-chemsex-parties-face-gay-club-scene-with-hiv-fears-1.2271564

Think about that. 1 in 8, thats worse than many parts of sub-Saharan Africa. If we don't make an effort now it won't be long until the statistics for Dublin mirror that of London.

I agree though people need to have a lot more cop on about HIV risks and just because it's treatable doesn't mean it's a particularly pleasant way to spend your life.

I honestly think gay marriage and being open has a lot of important impacts on this though too.

If you keep pushing people underground, you're going to get risky behaviour because being open about being gay itself was risky! Pulling gay couples into the mainstream helps a lot by bringing a lot of boring stability and good role models, and totally different aspirations.

I mean when you think about it it's ridiculous that a lot of gay people could only ever have aspired to a hushed up relationship, hidden away ... Always sneaking around.

There's been a bit of a culture of drug taking, heavy drinking and zero inhibitions developing in the straight community too in recent years though.

How many sexual assaults seem to involve being very, very, very drunk for example?

I'm not excusing the assaults (tanking advantage of someone who is totally incapacitated is pretty vile behaviour) but people need to play things safely to minimise risk of disease, assaults and also just addiction and physical damage from substance abuse.

On a side issue how does anyone get % for the gay community though? There has to be a bit of self selection bias in clinics where people who are coming for testing are probably a percentage the people who are most aware of being at risk.
There may well be a large number of boring hay couples who simply aren't at risk because they're monogamous and don't actually appear in that stats at all.

It would just seem to me to be hard to get accurate pictures on the size and shape of the gay community (particularly when you might extend it to anyone who's ever had sexual contact with anyone of the same sex rather than just those who identify as gay) and various reports have various biases.

Regardless though, the HIV figures are way too high to be complacent though.

We do need to change two aspects of culture here:

1) An aspect of gay culture, which I do think has developed because of long-term historical oppression rather than from something being in anyway different about how gay people behave.

Without being moralising or preachy, I don't think saunas etc should be part of a "general gay culture". They're a sleazy and pretty high risk aspect sexual entertainment, in the same way that straight equivalents would be and I actually object to the way they're kind of thrown into "culture" as if every gay person agrees with the concept or partakes in their use.

There's a big issue due to legacies of oppression and I think it's one that actually is going to have to eventually be addressed. It's not 1955 or even 1995 and you can actually have a same-sex relationship without resorting to picking someone up in dodgy circumstances in exactly the same way as a straight person can do the same.

Gay people being visible and mainstream is absolutely vital to reducing that risk of pushing people into underground stuff and I'm sure I'll probably offend a few people by saying this too.

I'm not saying we should all turn into boring 1950s model households, but there's definitely a need to see more people being more relaxed about doing normal 'coupley' things and it is happening and it's really good to see!

High risk sexual behaviour will only go away when it's a non-issue taking a bloke to your grads when you're a bloke or taking your first girlfriend home when you're a woman or when you can hold hands across a restaurant table, lean on your partner's shoulder in the cinema and nobody gives a damn. Until it's *that* normal, there's always a risk of sexual behaviour being associated with sleaze and pushed underground.

2) General drug / drink culture. Looking at stats for Ireland and Britain over the last few years, we've had a generation gone out of control entirely with substance abuse, especially alcohol.
Whatever about HIV, we're going to need a hell of a lot of spare livers for transplants in the next 30-50 years.

03-07-2015 10:03pm

I have mixed feelings toward Pride in its current manifestation but seeing this on the Humans of New York page really hit me today and reminded me of why a movement for LGBT visibility is so important.

I normally don't get affected by these kinds of things but that picture really moved me. And this is in New York, quite a liberal city for the most part; if a boy is so scared there, how must it be for young LGBT people his age in Russia, Uganda or the Middle East?

I didn't got to Pride this year (I didn't want to go by myself, and was feeling pretty crappy that day anyway) but I'm not too surprised to read some of the comments about it here. There definitely needs to be a fun element to it but it can't be just another piss-up when there are such serious messages to get across.

Annasopra · 04-07-2015 10:46am

That picture bothers me a lot.

He's about 10 or 11.

He now has no control over who does or doesn't have information about his sexuality. And who has given the control of this information? The boy is upset about how others might treat him because he is gay. So he might be fine with a stranger knowing, but maybe not with his whole class in three years time. His privacy has been stripped by this.

I accept it's awful and homophobia should be challenged. And I'm fine with what is essentially a form of art having a political stance. But I don't think I'm fine with making a child a martyr to the cause. I don't think that should have been a decision that any parent made for their child. Because it won't be one he can undo.

SpaceTime · 04-07-2015 11:17am

I agree with the putting a kid that age on a publicity campaign is risky to say the least.

Maybe a young adult could have provided a perspective of how he felt a few years previously? Would have had the same effect without the lack of ability to consent to participate in the publication.

(Incidentally my previous thank was a touch interface error, not an endorsement)

I do think though that we need to be very, very much more active about places like Russia and parts of Eastern Europe where people are being attacked by their own governments for being gay.

Uganda and parts of the Middle East are simply off the scale and I think if this were any other group being treated this badly there'd be military actions but clearly LGBT people don't matter as much to the international community as other minorities - all I see is some hand wringing.

Likewise, I see similar hand wringing over women's rights.

I'd be taking trade and diolomatic sanctions at the very least!

As it stands states are free to murder, torture and imprison us without any international consequences other than a bit of tutting and finger wagging. How's that acceptable?!

Also at EU level there needs to be LGBT human rights law. It's long overdue. It only covers employment law at present.

04-07-2015 8:43pm

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

That picture bothers me a lot.

He's about 10 or 11.

He now has no control over who does or doesn't have information about his sexuality. And who has given the control of this information? The boy is upset about how others might treat him because he is gay. So he might be fine with a stranger knowing, but maybe not with his whole class in three years time. His privacy has been stripped by this.

I accept it's awful and homophobia should be challenged. And I'm fine with what is essentially a form of art having a political stance. But I don't think I'm fine with making a child a martyr to the cause. I don't think that should have been a decision that any parent made for their child. Because it won't be one he can undo.

I do see where you're coming from but on the other hand I think the outpouring of support for this young man is something that will empower him and help him deal with the future better.

HONY is very popular and, from what I can see, is a socially responsible page. I can't imagine they'd have published this without a thorough conversation with the boy and his parents/guardians first. If it was the case that a website was maliciously outing him then that would very much be a different matter.

(Also I've seen a few reports on this refer to the boy as a "teen", they don't actually state his age but perhaps he's a little older than he looks)

SpaceTime wrote: »

(Incidentally my previous thank was a touch interface error, not an endorsement)

Awwww but I like being thanked.

</3

SpaceTime · 04-07-2015 9:57pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Awwww but I like being thanked.
</3

I'll thank the other half of your post

This is a personal thanks... Comes with a virtual box of chocolates and everything.

4friggA · 06-07-2015 2:15pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I have mixed feelings toward Pride in its current manifestation but seeing - link - really hit me today and reminded me of why a movement for LGBT visibility is so important.

I normally don't get affected by these kinds of things but that picture really moved me. And this is in New York, quite a liberal city for the most part; if a boy is so scared there, how must it be for young LGBT people his age in Russia, Uganda or the Middle East?

I didn't got to Pride this year (I didn't want to go by myself, and was feeling pretty crappy that day anyway) but I'm not too surprised to read some of the comments about it here. There definitely needs to be a fun element to it but it can't be just another piss-up when there are such serious messages to get across.

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

That picture bothers me a lot.

He's about 10 or 11.

He now has no control over who does or doesn't have information about his sexuality. And who has given the control of this information? The boy is upset about how others might treat him because he is gay. So he might be fine with a stranger knowing, but maybe not with his whole class in three years time. His privacy has been stripped by this.

I accept it's awful and homophobia should be challenged. And I'm fine with what is essentially a form of art having a political stance. But I don't think I'm fine with making a child a martyr to the cause. I don't think that should have been a decision that any parent made for their child. Because it won't be one he can undo.

Before I clicked on the link I knew it was going to be that post. It has been everywhere lately and to be honest, I don't know if that's right. He's very young, Joey says 10 or 11, I agree with that, possibly even younger, and now he's all over facebook, all over the internet and the world feel like they own his sexuality.

I wonder how HONY operates when it comes to kids, do they get a parent's permission, do they even need to? I would be very worried about that boy if he was my child.

Nokia6230i · 25-07-2015 10:40pm

Newsflash or perhaps not.

Story in Sunday Times tomorrow that Dublin Pride is moving to a new venue next year.

To be fair it's a victim of its own success if you will and Merrion Square has become too small a venue.

Phoenix Pk. according to the paper is the favourite currently.

hotmail.com · 26-07-2015 4:47pm

Nokia6230i wrote: »

Newsflash or perhaps not.

Story in Sunday Times tomorrow that Dublin Pride is moving to a new venue next year.

To be fair it's a victim of its own success if you will and Merrion Square has become too small a venue.

Phoenix Pk. according to the paper is the favourite currently.

This was rumoured to happen for the last couple of years due to the growing numbers but they appeared to shelve the idea because of the distance to the Park.

jobbridge4life · 26-07-2015 5:54pm

Initial reaction; the Phoenix Park would be a shirra venue. 1. How is the parade supposed to march along any decent route towards it? 2. It is way too far from any of the gay venues. 3. What part of the park? 4. Its a nonsense to suggest that Merrion Square is too small. Between the park, the adjoining streets and side streets you could fit more than twice the crowd that attended Pride, it just requires adequate planning and innovative thinking. 4. Is Pride really just going to be a Northside event?

Why do we still need Pride?

Comments