But why should rejecting shame automatically turn into pride? I’m not “proud” of every part of me that I’m not ashamed of.
Plus, it’s weird how the things are seen differently. “Queer pride” is usually seen as “sticking it to the homo/transphobes”, while someone saying they’re “proud of being cishet” sounds like they just hate LGBT people (and I mean, that’s probably correct). Why isn’t “proud of being gay” seen with the same acception?
They are proud in order to fight the shame that conservatives constantly tell them they should feel for existing. It's a tool for empowerment and fighting back against oppression.
So in your opinion, if we reached a level of society where no one is oppressed for their identity/sexuality, would it just cease to “be an idiom”?
Let's get there first and then we decide. For now, I'm proud to be gay.
“Let’s get there and then decide” is usually not a good way to tackle issues… but I guess it’s not up to us anyway to decide, unfortunately it looks like it’s going to take a long time before that becomes reality.
This is not an issue and it's not one that needs tackling. It's literally bored Lemmings taking an argument to the extreme for the sake of being argumentative.
It’s currently not an issue, and it’s not going to be one for a long, long time. But it’s still a sort of double standard that will eventually need to be addressed if society progresses enough. Talking about it now is pointless, sure, but so is most stuff people do on the internet.
will eventually need to be addressed if society progresses enough
That's the funniest "hypothetical" shit I've ever heard.
So let be get this right... we're gonna make it an issue because you're bored and need something to grind your axe? I'm glad it's not something that affects you personally to the point that people like you are murdered all over the world for being different.
Because if you think this shit is trivial and annoying, you're drowning in a world filled with privilege.
I mean, you’re just putting words in my mouth at this point.
Point to the part where that happened and explain how.
You said:
-I want to “make it an issue”
-I want to “grind my axe”
-I think “this shit is trivial and annoying” (whatever “shit” you’re talking about, since I never belittled any argument, except maybe my own ones).
All I said was that I find weird that people take pride in stuff they didn’t choose to be, and that having a different approach to “pride” based on your sexuality is a logical fallacy that will eventually need to be addressed, once all the other, more important, issues are resolved.
You’re making it sound like I did a call to arms for people to stop being proud of being gay because they annoy me or something.
like I did a call to arms for people to stop being proud
See, the irony is that I did no such thing and that you're the one misconstruing my points. When what I did was criticize you--as in judgement. Here's what actually happened:
I want to “make it an issue”
You literally are trying to make it an issue. Here are your words: "It’s currently not an issue [...] But it’s still a sort of double standard" blah blah. That is literally you trying to find fault in something that is not problematic in any way. Your whole premise hinges on "if society progresses enough" like you're trying to prevent a social disaster from happening in your mind. That is the pettiest battle to take on the strangest vanguard that I've ever heard. You're pulling an issue out of thin air.
I want to “grind my axe”
That's exactly what you're doing, though, and I'm calling you out. You're being argumentative over something that does not need to be argued about and ultimately fuels disdain because of this strange need to want to have a straight pride. Instead, be thankful that you don't need it to exist. If gay people could forego pride entirely in order to live in peace, we would in a heartbeat. I'm still getting homophobic shit in a supposedly gay-friendly city.
I think “this shit is trivial and annoying”
My exact words were "if you think this shit is trivial and annoying". You omitted the most important word of this hypothetical condition. At no point does it make it fact that it's what you think.
I find weird that people take pride in stuff they didn’t choose to be
And I find it weird that people try to shame me regularly for something that I didn't choose to be. What am I supposed to be if not prideful and without shame of who I am? Pride is literally a valid antonym of shame. But let me know what your effective and concise alternative is to express that. Anything constructive that doesn't sound ridiculous?
You may think you're smart by slapping destructive and inaccurate labels like "logical fallacy" on a device that my community has used to fight back to get us to where we are. But you're saying this all the while using other idioms incorrectly and failing to identify intention. Get your basics right, man.
eventually
So let's get there first, then.
Okay, I’ll admit I did not know the “grind your axe” idiom and assumed it meant something along the lines of “sharpen your knives”, in the sense that I wanted an excuse to be angry (and metaphorically violent) at someone. I honestly still didn’t completely get what you meant because the first three definitions I found are all different from each other, but none is what I thought you meant so my bad.
You literally are trying to make it an issue. Here are your words: “It’s currently not an issue […] But it’s still a sort of double standard” blah blah. That is literally you trying to find fault in something that is not problematic in any way. Your whole premise hinges on “if society progresses enough” like you’re trying to prevent a social disaster from happening in your mind. That is the pettiest battle to take on the strangest vanguard that I’ve ever heard. You’re pulling an issue out of thin air.
You think it’s not problematic in any way. Tell me how it isn’t a double standard (by default a fallacy if we want both parties to be equal) then. And again, I’m not trying to prevent anything, at one point I even said it’s currently not important and it’s not for our generation to care, but you wanted to keep discussing because even suggesting it might be a slight problem in the far future is unacceptable.
You’re being argumentative over something that does not need to be argued about and ultimately fuels disdain because of this strange need to want to have a straight pride.
It’s the opposite, actually. I said it’s weird to have pride for something like that, be it gay or straight. They’re both weird in my view and I don’t see why would I ever be proud about my sexual preferences.
What am I supposed to be if not prideful and without shame of who I am? Pride is literally a valid antonym of shame. But let me know what your effective and concise alternative is to express that. Anything constructive that doesn’t sound ridiculous?
Why is it so important to express it? And even if it was, why can’t you just be “not ashamed”? It’s not a dichotomy. There are plenty of things about myself I’m not prideful nor shameful about, and my sexuality is one of them. You say “straight pride” doesn’t need to exist, but you don’t think that as a consequence they have to be ashamed about it, do you?
You may think you’re smart by slapping destructive and inaccurate labels like “logical fallacy” on a device that my community has used to fight back to get us to where we are.
The logical fallacy is in “proud of being gay” and “proud of being straight” meaning exactly the same thing but being viewed with diametrically opposite acceptations. I don’t think the entire LGBT rights movement is founded on that.
So let’s get there first, then.
Ok. I’m waiting and doing my part in voting for progressive parties in my country. Am I not allowed to make conjectures on the internet that in no way harm the progress your community is trying to achieve, in the meantime?
That is a hypothetical so far removed from any semblance of reality that it doesn't even merit discussion.
Might as well ask "well if we were all made of purple goo would we have anything to fight about?" It's fucking nonsense. Human nature dictates that a majority will always oppress a minority, even when it's not intentional. It's selective pressure, pure and simple. If you have a population that's ⅔ one kind and ⅓ another, the society will naturally trend to cater to the ⅔ more than the ⅓, and it doesn't take much thinking to understand why. And even if the smaller group grows to reach numerical equity, their historical disadvantage will stay with them for many, many generations, putting everyone born into that historical minority at a disadvantage from birth.
That's called systemic inequality, and it is real and pervasive in human societies. It's built into the system and will never go away, so we will ALWAYS have to also create ways to alleviate it.
Entertaining hypotheticals is kind of a fundamental part of argumentation.
Human nature dictates that a majority will always oppress a minority, even when it’s not intentional. It’s selective pressure, pure and simple.
That’s not true at all. Left-handed people are a minority. Blond people are a minority. People over 2 meters are a minority. But none of those minorities are currently “oppressed” because of that.
Society catering more to the majority doesn’t mean the minority has to be oppressed. Very tall people have a lot of issues because architecture, clothing and everything else is tailored mainly to people with an average height, but try saying tall people are “oppressed” and see how many agree.
The oppression we see now is because people feel the moral superiority in “being normal”, and everything else is different, weird and therefore wrong. But just like left-handed people stopped being considered spawns of Satan in all of civilized society, we can get to that point for homosexuality too.
Saying a world where LGBT people aren’t oppressed is as likely as a world where “we’re all made of purple goo” honestly feels offensive to the effort activists have been making for all these decades.
Pride as a reaction to shame is pretty unhealthy, from a mental health perspective. There are people trying to shame everyone for everything. Don't be fat, don't be thin, don't be pretty, don't be ugly. If everyone was distractingly screaming about their pride for everything they feel ashamed of the world would be obnoxious.
I think pride as a movement made sense when everything queer was a hidden subculture.
I feel like that's past us. There are LGBT pro-hamas groups now. I think we've hit peak queer when there are queer activists for groups that would hang them.
You're also being kind of obnoxious trying to knock something down that does not need to be knocked down, ngl.
OBNOXIOUS AND PROUD, BABY! 🌈
Good for you but now you're just obnoxiously taking the piss.
Anyone that claims to be proud of being white or straight is doing it in opposition of black pride, or queer pride, etc. It might as well be the same as the all lives matter outrage.
Because that’s a logical flaw. “If black people and white people deserve the same rights, and black people can be proud of being black, why can’t white people be proud of being white?”
The difference between normal people and racists is that normal people might think of it as weird, but don’t talk about it because they don’t really care about “white pride”, while racists openly declare it and use the “fallacy” to stir the pot.
I can't believe I'm being downvoted on Lemmy of all places for thinking "white pride" is bad and and the alternatives aren't. I don't even have a rebuttal, I'm just flabbergasted.
Edit: I was 0/5 when I typed this.
I'm being charitable and chalking it up to people with 0 social awareness or life experience who don't realize how much they are enabling the real bigots.
Maybe some healthy open discussion would do us some good then, instead of barricading oneself behind semantic barbed wire in fear of having ones beliefs challenged.
Short answer - because the original events were called "Pride" and other events that followed that model and style can literally trace the name to two organizers of the original event, Brenda Howard and Robert A. Martin.
Long answer...
What is important to remember about Pride is it is specific. Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual liberation marches pre-date Prides but they were more like a conventional protest and they were poorly attended because you had to expect police violence. They were dour, focused primarily on the pain and hardship of oppression. It was mostly people dressed to look respectable marching with signs to appeal to the cis/hetro masses in a "hey look we're actually just like you!" kind of way.
"Pride" was different. They organized the first event around the concept of Independence day style activities. It was supposed to have the feel of an emancipation celebration and was originally intended to become a National day of observance of the five days of Riots at Stonewall, something that a lot of queer people decided to rally around as essentially the literal fight for independence of queer culture in the US. Shortly thereafter a lot of cultural aspects of Queer community done for fun that actually create a culture like Ballroom culture, Drag performance, dance, theater, caberet, burlesque, various bizzare kink related specialities were spotlighted. Pride took all that stuff that was happening in the shadows and turned it into a public festival. In part it was intended as a "fuck you we are not afraid and there is more of us than you think" but it also gave the public a look at the spectacle of open queer joy. That it was fun and weird meant it became a proper festival. It spread and other events that followed that format also became "Prides". Over time other communities and sub groups within the growing coalition came to define their own means to celebrate together and also came to call then things like "Trans Pride".
So at least in part the "Pride" portion is a historical naming convention for a very specific style of event and festival with a tracable history. It is helpful to understand that "Pride" has a secondary and silent implication of Pride Event "Woo Happy Pride! " is at some point like wishing someone Happy Christmas. "Proud" is in part an event theme that euphemizes that original "fuck you, our culture is valid and we won't be shamed out of the public eye."
Someone going on about "cis pride" is at some point basically just trying to carbon copy a format of protest made for a specific purpose while entirely misunderstanding the original usage. Some argue they don't really need a specific public culture festival or a protest because they are the dominant culture. They get their culture fest from national and religious tinted celebrations and they are accepted as a norm so the protest element is unnecessary. It more comes across more as someone who just doesn't like how queer people have claimed a slice of public space and want to have yet another party to celebrate themselves. It's like throwing an Independence day style celebration but when there is no commemorative event at it's core and no independence that needed to be fought for at all.
Yeah, I guess there’s a huge distinction between pride as an emotion and Pride as an event at this point. Maybe that’s also why it’s seen with a very different meaning, I don’t think “””cis pride””” ever had an event, and if it did it was probably just a gathering of transphobes chanting slurs.
Straight prides... Have existed... and you are correct that the theme of straight prides were more about creating a narrative about how cis hegemony is unfairly under attack by the LGBTQIA making them in effect anti queer bigotry parades driven more by spite than anything. The organizers of such events have had traditionally firm links to the alt right.
The end effect of the Boston straight pride event was like an empty parody of a Pride event that just looks like an American Independance day celebration with a bunch of people wearing jeans and t-shirts waving American flags with a bunch of signs saying stuff like "Remember who gave birth to you" and a bunch of Trump related signage making it kind of vaguely indistinguishable from any other conservative rally.
The fact that when given a chance to organize a straight pride parade it just tends to take on the nationalist symbols of the country it is performed in kind of demonstrates that maybe there isn't a whole lot of point to the event celebrating straight culture as the participants can't really identify what is unique about being straight themselves because you are just supposed to assume it as a default...
Oh. I looked up “cis pride” and found nothing so I assumed that was it.
Then yeah, that just reinforces your last comment. I still think the difference in treatment feels unfair, but I can’t really blame it when LGBT people take these occasions to show off their best side and straight ones show their worst instead. I guess it’s a conversation for a different century (when hopefully we all learned not to ridicule people different from us).
I mean Prides are still open to cis and hetero folk in the same way like a Italian culture festival is open to non-Italians. The key component is that queerness has a culture with it's own traditions, history, art, coded language and etticate in much the same way an ethnicity does the only difference is that it is not passed along by virtue of birth. The nature of Prides as being in opposition to generational suppression and genocide just makes them a bit louder and in your face.
I know a debate has derailed when social splintering turns it into a semantic game of RISK.
Because it's the same thing as gloating when you win. It makes you look like an asshole rubbing it in the face of the less fortunate.
But why should rejecting shame automatically turn into pride? I’m not “proud” of every part of me that I’m not ashamed of.
Plus, it’s weird how the things are seen differently. “Queer pride” is usually seen as “sticking it to the homo/transphobes”, while someone saying they’re “proud of being cishet” sounds like they just hate LGBT people (and I mean, that’s probably correct). Why isn’t “proud of being gay” seen with the same acception?
They are proud in order to fight the shame that conservatives constantly tell them they should feel for existing. It's a tool for empowerment and fighting back against oppression.
So in your opinion, if we reached a level of society where no one is oppressed for their identity/sexuality, would it just cease to “be an idiom”?
Let's get there first and then we decide. For now, I'm proud to be gay.
“Let’s get there and then decide” is usually not a good way to tackle issues… but I guess it’s not up to us anyway to decide, unfortunately it looks like it’s going to take a long time before that becomes reality.
This is not an issue and it's not one that needs tackling. It's literally bored Lemmings taking an argument to the extreme for the sake of being argumentative.
It’s currently not an issue, and it’s not going to be one for a long, long time. But it’s still a sort of double standard that will eventually need to be addressed if society progresses enough. Talking about it now is pointless, sure, but so is most stuff people do on the internet.
That's the funniest "hypothetical" shit I've ever heard.
So let be get this right... we're gonna make it an issue because you're bored and need something to grind your axe? I'm glad it's not something that affects you personally to the point that people like you are murdered all over the world for being different.
Because if you think this shit is trivial and annoying, you're drowning in a world filled with privilege.
I mean, you’re just putting words in my mouth at this point.
Point to the part where that happened and explain how.
You said:
-I want to “make it an issue”
-I want to “grind my axe”
-I think “this shit is trivial and annoying” (whatever “shit” you’re talking about, since I never belittled any argument, except maybe my own ones).
All I said was that I find weird that people take pride in stuff they didn’t choose to be, and that having a different approach to “pride” based on your sexuality is a logical fallacy that will eventually need to be addressed, once all the other, more important, issues are resolved.
You’re making it sound like I did a call to arms for people to stop being proud of being gay because they annoy me or something.
See, the irony is that I did no such thing and that you're the one misconstruing my points. When what I did was criticize you--as in judgement. Here's what actually happened:
You literally are trying to make it an issue. Here are your words: "It’s currently not an issue [...] But it’s still a sort of double standard" blah blah. That is literally you trying to find fault in something that is not problematic in any way. Your whole premise hinges on "if society progresses enough" like you're trying to prevent a social disaster from happening in your mind. That is the pettiest battle to take on the strangest vanguard that I've ever heard. You're pulling an issue out of thin air.
That's exactly what you're doing, though, and I'm calling you out. You're being argumentative over something that does not need to be argued about and ultimately fuels disdain because of this strange need to want to have a straight pride. Instead, be thankful that you don't need it to exist. If gay people could forego pride entirely in order to live in peace, we would in a heartbeat. I'm still getting homophobic shit in a supposedly gay-friendly city.
My exact words were "if you think this shit is trivial and annoying". You omitted the most important word of this hypothetical condition. At no point does it make it fact that it's what you think.
And I find it weird that people try to shame me regularly for something that I didn't choose to be. What am I supposed to be if not prideful and without shame of who I am? Pride is literally a valid antonym of shame. But let me know what your effective and concise alternative is to express that. Anything constructive that doesn't sound ridiculous?
You may think you're smart by slapping destructive and inaccurate labels like "logical fallacy" on a device that my community has used to fight back to get us to where we are. But you're saying this all the while using other idioms incorrectly and failing to identify intention. Get your basics right, man.
So let's get there first, then.
Okay, I’ll admit I did not know the “grind your axe” idiom and assumed it meant something along the lines of “sharpen your knives”, in the sense that I wanted an excuse to be angry (and metaphorically violent) at someone. I honestly still didn’t completely get what you meant because the first three definitions I found are all different from each other, but none is what I thought you meant so my bad.
You think it’s not problematic in any way. Tell me how it isn’t a double standard (by default a fallacy if we want both parties to be equal) then. And again, I’m not trying to prevent anything, at one point I even said it’s currently not important and it’s not for our generation to care, but you wanted to keep discussing because even suggesting it might be a slight problem in the far future is unacceptable.
It’s the opposite, actually. I said it’s weird to have pride for something like that, be it gay or straight. They’re both weird in my view and I don’t see why would I ever be proud about my sexual preferences.
Why is it so important to express it? And even if it was, why can’t you just be “not ashamed”? It’s not a dichotomy. There are plenty of things about myself I’m not prideful nor shameful about, and my sexuality is one of them. You say “straight pride” doesn’t need to exist, but you don’t think that as a consequence they have to be ashamed about it, do you?
The logical fallacy is in “proud of being gay” and “proud of being straight” meaning exactly the same thing but being viewed with diametrically opposite acceptations. I don’t think the entire LGBT rights movement is founded on that.
Ok. I’m waiting and doing my part in voting for progressive parties in my country. Am I not allowed to make conjectures on the internet that in no way harm the progress your community is trying to achieve, in the meantime?
That is a hypothetical so far removed from any semblance of reality that it doesn't even merit discussion.
Might as well ask "well if we were all made of purple goo would we have anything to fight about?" It's fucking nonsense. Human nature dictates that a majority will always oppress a minority, even when it's not intentional. It's selective pressure, pure and simple. If you have a population that's ⅔ one kind and ⅓ another, the society will naturally trend to cater to the ⅔ more than the ⅓, and it doesn't take much thinking to understand why. And even if the smaller group grows to reach numerical equity, their historical disadvantage will stay with them for many, many generations, putting everyone born into that historical minority at a disadvantage from birth.
That's called systemic inequality, and it is real and pervasive in human societies. It's built into the system and will never go away, so we will ALWAYS have to also create ways to alleviate it.
Entertaining hypotheticals is kind of a fundamental part of argumentation.
That’s not true at all. Left-handed people are a minority. Blond people are a minority. People over 2 meters are a minority. But none of those minorities are currently “oppressed” because of that.
Society catering more to the majority doesn’t mean the minority has to be oppressed. Very tall people have a lot of issues because architecture, clothing and everything else is tailored mainly to people with an average height, but try saying tall people are “oppressed” and see how many agree.
The oppression we see now is because people feel the moral superiority in “being normal”, and everything else is different, weird and therefore wrong. But just like left-handed people stopped being considered spawns of Satan in all of civilized society, we can get to that point for homosexuality too.
Saying a world where LGBT people aren’t oppressed is as likely as a world where “we’re all made of purple goo” honestly feels offensive to the effort activists have been making for all these decades.
Pride as a reaction to shame is pretty unhealthy, from a mental health perspective. There are people trying to shame everyone for everything. Don't be fat, don't be thin, don't be pretty, don't be ugly. If everyone was distractingly screaming about their pride for everything they feel ashamed of the world would be obnoxious.
I think pride as a movement made sense when everything queer was a hidden subculture.
I feel like that's past us. There are LGBT pro-hamas groups now. I think we've hit peak queer when there are queer activists for groups that would hang them.
You're also being kind of obnoxious trying to knock something down that does not need to be knocked down, ngl.
OBNOXIOUS AND PROUD, BABY! 🌈
Good for you but now you're just obnoxiously taking the piss.
Anyone that claims to be proud of being white or straight is doing it in opposition of black pride, or queer pride, etc. It might as well be the same as the all lives matter outrage.
Because that’s a logical flaw. “If black people and white people deserve the same rights, and black people can be proud of being black, why can’t white people be proud of being white?”
The difference between normal people and racists is that normal people might think of it as weird, but don’t talk about it because they don’t really care about “white pride”, while racists openly declare it and use the “fallacy” to stir the pot.
I can't believe I'm being downvoted on Lemmy of all places for thinking "white pride" is bad and and the alternatives aren't. I don't even have a rebuttal, I'm just flabbergasted.
Edit: I was 0/5 when I typed this.
I'm being charitable and chalking it up to people with 0 social awareness or life experience who don't realize how much they are enabling the real bigots.
Maybe some healthy open discussion would do us some good then, instead of barricading oneself behind semantic barbed wire in fear of having ones beliefs challenged.
Short answer - because the original events were called "Pride" and other events that followed that model and style can literally trace the name to two organizers of the original event, Brenda Howard and Robert A. Martin.
Long answer...
What is important to remember about Pride is it is specific. Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual liberation marches pre-date Prides but they were more like a conventional protest and they were poorly attended because you had to expect police violence. They were dour, focused primarily on the pain and hardship of oppression. It was mostly people dressed to look respectable marching with signs to appeal to the cis/hetro masses in a "hey look we're actually just like you!" kind of way.
"Pride" was different. They organized the first event around the concept of Independence day style activities. It was supposed to have the feel of an emancipation celebration and was originally intended to become a National day of observance of the five days of Riots at Stonewall, something that a lot of queer people decided to rally around as essentially the literal fight for independence of queer culture in the US. Shortly thereafter a lot of cultural aspects of Queer community done for fun that actually create a culture like Ballroom culture, Drag performance, dance, theater, caberet, burlesque, various bizzare kink related specialities were spotlighted. Pride took all that stuff that was happening in the shadows and turned it into a public festival. In part it was intended as a "fuck you we are not afraid and there is more of us than you think" but it also gave the public a look at the spectacle of open queer joy. That it was fun and weird meant it became a proper festival. It spread and other events that followed that format also became "Prides". Over time other communities and sub groups within the growing coalition came to define their own means to celebrate together and also came to call then things like "Trans Pride".
So at least in part the "Pride" portion is a historical naming convention for a very specific style of event and festival with a tracable history. It is helpful to understand that "Pride" has a secondary and silent implication of Pride Event "Woo Happy Pride! " is at some point like wishing someone Happy Christmas. "Proud" is in part an event theme that euphemizes that original "fuck you, our culture is valid and we won't be shamed out of the public eye."
Someone going on about "cis pride" is at some point basically just trying to carbon copy a format of protest made for a specific purpose while entirely misunderstanding the original usage. Some argue they don't really need a specific public culture festival or a protest because they are the dominant culture. They get their culture fest from national and religious tinted celebrations and they are accepted as a norm so the protest element is unnecessary. It more comes across more as someone who just doesn't like how queer people have claimed a slice of public space and want to have yet another party to celebrate themselves. It's like throwing an Independence day style celebration but when there is no commemorative event at it's core and no independence that needed to be fought for at all.
Yeah, I guess there’s a huge distinction between pride as an emotion and Pride as an event at this point. Maybe that’s also why it’s seen with a very different meaning, I don’t think “””cis pride””” ever had an event, and if it did it was probably just a gathering of transphobes chanting slurs.
Straight prides... Have existed... and you are correct that the theme of straight prides were more about creating a narrative about how cis hegemony is unfairly under attack by the LGBTQIA making them in effect anti queer bigotry parades driven more by spite than anything. The organizers of such events have had traditionally firm links to the alt right.
The end effect of the Boston straight pride event was like an empty parody of a Pride event that just looks like an American Independance day celebration with a bunch of people wearing jeans and t-shirts waving American flags with a bunch of signs saying stuff like "Remember who gave birth to you" and a bunch of Trump related signage making it kind of vaguely indistinguishable from any other conservative rally.
The fact that when given a chance to organize a straight pride parade it just tends to take on the nationalist symbols of the country it is performed in kind of demonstrates that maybe there isn't a whole lot of point to the event celebrating straight culture as the participants can't really identify what is unique about being straight themselves because you are just supposed to assume it as a default...
Oh. I looked up “cis pride” and found nothing so I assumed that was it.
Then yeah, that just reinforces your last comment. I still think the difference in treatment feels unfair, but I can’t really blame it when LGBT people take these occasions to show off their best side and straight ones show their worst instead. I guess it’s a conversation for a different century (when hopefully we all learned not to ridicule people different from us).
I mean Prides are still open to cis and hetero folk in the same way like a Italian culture festival is open to non-Italians. The key component is that queerness has a culture with it's own traditions, history, art, coded language and etticate in much the same way an ethnicity does the only difference is that it is not passed along by virtue of birth. The nature of Prides as being in opposition to generational suppression and genocide just makes them a bit louder and in your face.
I know a debate has derailed when social splintering turns it into a semantic game of RISK.
Because it's the same thing as gloating when you win. It makes you look like an asshole rubbing it in the face of the less fortunate.