White Pride

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Robert Greene said:

1) I encourage all real conservatives to show up, and wear a shirt that says "Heterosexual Pride Day", and walk right beside all those wearing the rainbow flag.  

2) There is no law preventing you from leaving the sidewalk and marching right infront of their transvestites floats.

1) Pride has always welcomed straights and if you show up and smile you will be welcomed.  These folks are called "Allies".
2) Just smile and wave and you will be welcomed.

We are past equal rights for LGBTQ people.  Extremists want them to deny who they are and force them to be quiet.

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

1) Pride has always welcomed straights and if you show up and smile you will be welcomed.  

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/heteros-get-their-day-of-pride/article1374297/

Here is some background from several years back.

[Robert Greene]

33 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/heteros-get-their-day-of-pride/article1374297/

Here is some background from several years back.

Of course, they need support by association to amplify their agenda. Make no mistake, that would never accept someone coming in with "Straight Pride" or "Heterosexual Pride" Shirt

If it was about equality, there wouldn't allow half naked transvestites prancing around in front of Children. They would ban flamboyancy, and just stick to education against discrimination, instead of putting on a sexualized spectator show.

If I went around the streets grouping my crotch for attention, I would be arrested for public indecency.

It seems perfectly ok, if they do it in front of the children watching.

This is why many people take the LGBT thing as a joke.

Edited June 12, 2018 by Robert Greene

[Michael Hardner]

7 minutes ago, Robert Greene said:

1) Make no mistake, that would never accept someone coming in with "Straight Pride" or "Heterosexual Pride" Shirt

2) They would ban flamboyancy, and just stick to education against discrimination, instead of putting on a sexualized spectator show.

3) If I went around the streets grouping my crotch for attention, I would be arrested for public indecency.

1) If you are coming as an ally I'm sure it would be fine.

2) 'Banning flamboyancy' is ambiguous.

3) Sexual acts in public are not allowed.

Extremists want to roll back rights.  Even if you are an extremist you are welcome to post your opinion but you can't be shocked when people don't accept it.

[taxme]

6 hours ago, Robert Greene said:

Of course, they need support by association to amplify their agenda. Make no mistake, that would never accept someone coming in with "Straight Pride" or "Heterosexual Pride" Shirt

If it was about equality, there wouldn't allow half naked transvestites prancing around in front of Children. They would ban flamboyancy, and just stick to education against discrimination, instead of putting on a sexualized spectator show.

If I went around the streets grouping my crotch for attention, I would be arrested for public indecency.

It seems perfectly ok, if they do it in front of the children watching.

This is why many people take the LGBT thing as a joke.

If one wore a T-shirt with the words straight or heterosexual pride written on them it would be taken as an insult and maybe even an attack against gay people. Knowing the liberal MSM mindset, if they can make an anti-gay story out of it they would do it just to stir up more useless who cares shit. All this promotion of the gay lifestyle is just another attack on our Western Christian morals and decent values. Like you said if they want to promote their lifestyle do it in a more proper manner thru proper education and not be out there trying to promote their lifestyle by being in a parade half naked or even naked and seeing so called men prancing around like a bunch of fairies grabbing their crotches or women all dressed up in hunting gear and wearing army boots and all this being done in front of innocent children. But I cannot blame the children for this. I blame their parents for bringing them to such an indecent spectacle. What are they trying to teach their children here anyway? How to go about making a fool of yourself? 

Dam right you would be arrested and charged for public indecency. But you see only the sickos in our society now can get away with garbage like this. There is one set of rules and arrests and charges for gays and another set of rules for straight or heterosexual people. 

All this LGBTQHSTY and probably a K to be thrown in there somewhere soon is all so bloody ridiculous and truly is a farce. When society says that a man can be a woman one day and a woman the next day should tell us all that we are truly living in a sick perverted society. Our dear comrade leaders have become so politically correct that to them doing things with and in a common sense and logic approach makes no common sense and logic at all to them anymore. Canada has no real and true politically incorrect leaders anymore just whimpy ones who are in total fear of saying anything politically incorrect that may get them in trouble with the politically correct police and may not get them elected this time or the next time. Canada does not have any real men and women in government anymore.

At least in America they have a real and true conservative man named Trump who does not run and hide from his convictions and says it like it is and that is what got him elected as President of the USA. Trump was no politically correct buffoon and that was what the we the American people wanted as their leader. No more bull chit liberal emotional and foolish talk wanted in America anymore. I just wish that Scheer would be more like Trump and tell the people what they want to hear. They want to hear someone who is willing to speak for them and not just for politically correct special interest groups and a small minority of losers who have pretty much been allowed to run and rule this country. They want to hear that we will be paying less taxes and have less government and be given back their right to express their opinions and point of view without the threat from big communist government of going after them just because their freedom of speech has hurt or offended someones feelings. let them go cry in the corner and then let them get over it. 

Like this backup? Works for me. 

 

[AngusThermopyle]

When I was a kid back in the seventies I loved White Power. Sadly they went out of business. The White brothers made some of the very best after market performance parts available in Motocross.

[Argus]

12 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) Pride has always welcomed straights and if you show up and smile you will be welcomed.  These folks are called "Allies"..

Unless you're a cop, or in the military, or conservative. Then you're not welcome.

Because 'gay pride' organizations are now far left political activist groups run by BLM.

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/im-gay-and-i-wouldnt-blame-doug-ford-for-avoiding-torontos-pride-parade

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/jason-kenney-police-military-ban-at-pride-parade-insulting-1.3968721

Edited June 13, 2018 by Argus

[GostHacked]

12 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

3) Sexual acts in public are not allowed.

Except at Gay Pride events.

[dialamah]

54 minutes ago, Argus said:

Unless you're a cop, or in the military, or conservative. Then you're not welcome.

How would they know you were a conservative, unless you wore a tshirt?  If you are wearing a tshirt proclaiming your conservatism, perhaps avoid ones like this or this . 

Even cops and military people could show up, if they wore tshirts like this one or maybe even this one.

Why are so many conservatives so eager to grab the mantle of victimhood? 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, dialamah said:

How would they know you were a conservative, unless you wore a tshirt? 

Don't ask, don't tell.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

1) Unless you're a cop, or in the military, or conservative. Then you're not welcome.

2) Because 'gay pride' organizations are now far left political activist groups run by BLM.

1) Not true

2) No - the Pride Committee runs Pride.

[Michael Hardner]

20 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

Except at Gay Pride events.

I don't think so.  You can get arrested for lewd behaviour.  If someone has evidence to the contrary I would (and would not) like to hear it.

[dialamah]

59 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Don't ask, don't tell.

Was wondering where you were just the other day.

[Argus]

12 hours ago, dialamah said:

How would they know you were a conservative, unless you wore a tshirt?  If you are wearing a tshirt proclaiming your conservatism, perhaps avoid ones like this or this . 

Even cops and military people could show up, if they wore tshirts like this one or maybe even this one.

Why are so many conservatives so eager to grab the mantle of victimhood? 

I see, so you can go if you stay in the closet and hide who you are? Got it. How very welcoming. 

[Argus]

12 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) Not true

Were the cites I posted too hard for you to read?

12 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

2) No - the Pride Committee runs Pride.

The pride committee are BLM's bitches. BLM stops their parades with a half dozen people, makes demands, and the pride committee bursts into tears and agrees.

[Michael Hardner]

6 minutes ago, Argus said:

1) Were the cites I posted too hard for you to read?

2) The pride committee are BLM's bitches. BLM stops their parades with a half dozen people, makes demands, and the pride committee bursts into tears and agrees.

1) You can't cite a fact you are stating with an opinion piece.  I don't know the details of the Edmonton Pride but Toronto Pride certainly welcomes police officers.  The article says 'Marching' so I suspect that means participating in an official capacity which is entirely different.

2) You are at least stepping back from saying BLM 'runs' pride.  Your second guessing as to what happened the day of that particular process isn't very endearing.  If BLMs tactics had failed on that day I suspect you would find some other reason to not like pride.  In the end, they made a certain decision on the spot and had to live up to it.  The politics of the day and recent events have resulted in that ban to continue but the participants to the event are divided over that and very divided.

[Argus]

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) You can't cite a fact you are stating with an opinion piece.  I don't know the details of the Edmonton Pride but Toronto Pride certainly welcomes police officers.  The article says 'Marching' so I suspect that means participating in an official capacity which is entirely different.

Pride has no ability to welcome or not welcome people standing on a sidewalk. It has no power to remove them and any attempt to make them feel 'not welcome' would be grounds for harassment charges. It has clearly stated that military people and police make its members (meaning its masters) uncomfortable, and that the conservatives have not kowtowed to their political agenda sufficiently. Gee, I wonder what would happen to an organization that said Black people or gay people made its members uncomfortable and so they weren't allowed?

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

2) You are at least stepping back from saying BLM 'runs' pride.  Your second guessing as to what happened the day of that particular process isn't very endearing.  If BLMs tactics had failed on that day I suspect you would find some other reason to not like pride.  In the end, they made a certain decision on the spot and had to live up to it.  The politics of the day and recent events have resulted in that ban to continue but the participants to the event are divided over that and very divided.

They've done this in three cities that I know of. So it's not simply once. Nor is it a matter of second guessing. If someone tries to stop me from doing what I'm legally entitled to do I call the cops and have them arrested. 

[Michael Hardner]

35 minutes ago, Argus said:

1) Pride has no ability to welcome or not welcome people standing on a sidewalk.

2) It has no power to remove them and any attempt to make them feel 'not welcome' would be grounds for harassment charges. It has clearly stated that military people and police make its members (meaning its masters) uncomfortable, and that the conservatives have not kowtowed to their political agenda sufficiently.  

3) If someone tries to stop me from doing what I'm legally entitled to do I call the cops and have them arrested. 

1) Ok, well let's abandon this line of discussion then, since you brought it up: "Unless you're a cop, or in the military, or conservative. Then you're not welcome."

2) Actually they had the decision whether to allow police to march or at least were stakeholders with approval power.  Do you have a cite about the Pride Committee's statement on making people uncomfortable, conservatives not kowtowing... anything ?

3) Uh... sure ?

You seem to be splashing around trying to make a hurricane in a bathtub.  I pointed out that Pride welcome straights, and although I concur that they don't allow police to march officially that's a political sticking point reflecting the long and troubled relationship between police and LGBT people.  It's not endorsed across the board by Pride attendants and 2/3 of Torontonians oppose it so I suspect it will pass soon.  http://poll.forumresearch.com/post/2745/toronto-pride-may-2017/

Will you be ok with Pride at that point or is this your only beef with them ?

[Argus]

6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

You seem to be splashing around trying to make a hurricane in a bathtub.  I pointed out that Pride welcome straights, and although I concur that they don't allow police to march officially that's a political sticking point reflecting the long and troubled relationship between police and LGBT people.  It's not endorsed across the board by Pride attendants and 2/3 of Torontonians oppose it so I suspect it will pass soon.  http://poll.forumresearch.com/post/2745/toronto-pride-may-2017/

The police AND military and conservative party are banned in Edmonton. The police are also banned in Ottawa, London, Calgary Winnipeg, Halifax and Vancouver in addition to Toronto. So hostility to policing is endorsed by pride organizations from coast to coast.

Edited June 13, 2018 by Argus

[dialamah]

59 minutes ago, Argus said:

The police AND military and conservative party are banned in Edmonton. The police are also banned in Ottawa, London, Calgary Winnipeg, Halifax and Vancouver in addition to Toronto. So hostility to policing is endorsed by pride organizations from coast to coast.

"Police to march officially" is likely the salient point you are happy to ignore in your eagerness to claim victimization by the progressive/left/SJW.  Police doing crowd control in their official capacity, out-of-uniform police as gay participants and as gay-friendly attendees are not unwelcome.  As I pointed out previously, how would anyone know unless the individual advertised his/her religious/political stance or their occupation?  

http://lfpress.com/news/local-news/pride-to-london-police-you-can-march-with-us-but-no-uniforms

Edited June 13, 2018 by dialamah

[Guest]

On 6/12/2018 at 9:29 PM, dialamah said:

Was wondering where you were just the other day.

Yeah, been busy.  The occasional drive by post is all I can manage these days.

[Scott Mayers]

On 6/12/2018 at 8:21 PM, dialamah said:

How would they know you were a conservative, unless you wore a tshirt?  If you are wearing a tshirt proclaiming your conservatism, perhaps avoid ones like this or this . 

Even cops and military people could show up, if they wore tshirts like this one or maybe even this one.

Why are so many conservatives so eager to grab the mantle of victimhood? 

"I'm not homophobic, I just think its wrong." 

Compare this to what these people are correctly interpreting by contrasts:

"I'm not homophobic, I am just NOT gay and so being gay is 'wrong' for my preference." Being gay is also one who logically may hold (not necessarily though) that: "I'm not heterophobic, I just think it its wrong" and similarly mean, "I'm not heterophobic, but I AM gay and so being straight is 'wrong' for my preference."

I agree with the  potential persons arguing this as being sincere without hate because while those who hate WILL use this also as a rational counter to the pride parades, the same can be said of subsets of those people within the gay community. That is there ARE gay people who would say, "I'm not heterosexual, I just think its wrong." who are also hateful of the heterosexual in a 'conservative' way. This hate, if it is presumed to be endemic in one saying this by default, then the same MUST hold to those who might say something within the gay community as well UNLESS you intrinsically believe that the gay people themselves are somehow MORE superior or innocent by default! So the logic of the teeshirt holds. You are hypocritical if you think some set of people holding open 'pride' for any X is more valid than another because you'd be implying that X is preferred over not-X. 

The sincerity of organizations claiming to stop some abuse of others by advocating in numbers to some unique victimhood based upon discrimination has to NOT discriminate. If 'discrimination' were the cause, you don't use discrimination to counter. But when you do, don't complain that the counter to the accused class discriminating originally as at fault for countering in a reflexive way again. You only give them the very reason they may have discriminated against you in their original discriminating way too!! Duh!

Examples I see like this:

We see a court case where some woman is being charged for abusing her child. The court finds her not guilty because the woman's own abuse was deemed to come from an abusing father. So the father transitively becomes the fault for the abused child implicitly.

Hypocritically, this proves bias to the father and father-kind if no one bothered to ask whether the father was abused by his own mother and so on. Instead of resolving the issue, the buck is passed on when advocating special treatment to the identity of the person that has no link to the direct action. The woman abused her child. Logically, this means, "a (person) abused a child" and so the solution is to treat the person as at fault. Instead, the con transfers the issue to be about the identity irrelevant to the problem: 'abuse'!

 

Hitler's anti-Jewish stance was countered successfully by showing the extreme crimes against them. But are the particular abuses the crimes of the Holocaust?... or was it the fact that these were "Jewish" people? The campaign to defeat this coming from Jewish interests tended to lash back in an advocacy similar to the pride parade thinking. They tackled the nature of those who abused them as based distinctly on being Anti-Jewish (Antisemitic) and implicitly non-Jewish, as though Jews could not be possibly at fault for such potential atrocities. Was the hate crime itself the fault or the hate against the Jews as a crime the fault? If hate in all cases is the fault, you don't start a group advocating support FOR that specific group because it only  suggests a potential unknown problem about that specific group that DOES exist. Maybe the Nazis DID sincerely feel attacked with hate by the Jews they aimed to destroy? 

Of course, if you treat the issue as a lesson against the both the crime and the hate that seemed to compel it, you can question whether the criminal was themselves victims of a prior act of hate that goes on ad infinite to the past. Either way, if one's identity is NOT a justification for an act, don't use the identity as a justification to counteract! You risk, with reason, one counter reacting because the action IS a fault but you falsely look at the identity of the actor as intrinsically the fault rather than some underlying logical reason. 

Edited June 15, 2018 by Scott Mayers
rephrased the last sentence to better clarity of the previous version

[taxme]

On 6/12/2018 at 2:48 PM, AngusThermopyle said:

When I was a kid back in the seventies I loved White Power. Sadly they went out of business. The White brothers made some of the very best after market performance parts available in Motocross.

Try calling your business today "White Power" and watch the chit hit the fan? One complaint to the HRC and the The Human Rights(wrongs)politically correct attack dogs Commission will be on your butt faster than vultures on a dead carcass. Just saying. 

[Jimwd]

On 5/9/2018 at 8:18 AM, Argus said:

A few items and articles have provoked thought of late about the deliberate division of people into separate identity groups that politicians and social activists are busily engaged in. For politicians it's a way to win votes by tailoring legislation and policies to specific identity groups and sub-identity group members. For the social justice activists, who are inspired by Marxist anti-Capitalist ideology its the division of the world into oppressor and oppressed so they can harangue the former while exploiting the latter.

If we're all divided into separate 'tribes' now, then tribal behaviour will follow. We are, as a species, hard wired into tribalism after all. If the politicians and media and academics keep separating us into our separate groups, then those groups become tribes. The white tribe, the black tribe, the native tribe, the muslim tribe and the christian tribe, the asian tribe and the the gay tribe among others.

The problem is that these tribes are not treated equally. In fact, one is constantly singled out for abuse and attack. That being the white one. And that produces an obvious sense of resentment we can see rising in the form of populism and far right political parties, particularly in Europe where such tribalist separation is more advanced than here (though Trudeau is fighting desperately to catch up). Political tribalism and identity group tribalism are dividing America in the same way.

At its core, the problem is simple but fundamental. While black Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, Jewish Americans, and many others are allowed – indeed, encouraged – to feel solidarity and take pride in their racial or ethnic identity, white Americans have for the last several decades been told they must never, ever do so.
People want to see their own tribe as exceptional, as something to be deeply proud of; that’s what the tribal instinct is all about. For decades now, nonwhites in the United States have been encouraged to indulge their tribal instincts in just this way, but, at least publicly, American whites have not.

On the contrary, if anything, they have been told that their white identity is something no one should take pride in. “I get it,” says Christian Lander, creator of the popular satirical blog Stuff White People Like, “as a straight white male, I’m the worst thing on Earth.”

...

Or consider this blog post in the American Conservative, worth quoting at length because of the light it sheds:

I’m a white guy. I’m a well-educated intellectual who enjoys small arthouse movies, coffeehouses and classic blues. If you didn’t know any better, you’d probably mistake me for a lefty urban hipster.

And yet. I find some of the alt-right stuff exerts a pull even on me. Even though I’m smart and informed enough to see through it. It’s seductive because I am not a person with any power or privilege, and yet I am constantly bombarded with messages telling me that I’m a cancer, I’m a problem, everything is my fault.

I am very lower middle class. I’ve never owned a new car, and do my own home repairs as much as I can to save money. I cut my own grass, wash my own dishes, buy my clothes from Walmart. I have no clue how I will ever be able to retire. But oh, brother, to hear the media tell it, I am just drowning in unearned power and privilege, and America will be a much brighter, more loving, more peaceful nation when I finally just keel over and die.

Trust me: After all that, some of the alt-right stuff feels like a warm, soothing bath. A “safe space,” if you will. I recoil from the uglier stuff, but some of it— the “hey, white guys are actually okay, you know! Be proud of yourself, white man!” stuff is really VERY seductive, and it is only with some intellectual effort that I can resist the pull … If it’s a struggle for someone like me to resist the pull, I imagine it’s probably impossible for someone with less education or cultural exposure.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/mar/01/how-americas-identity-politics-went-from-inclusion-to-division

Interesting comment. I am an average middle class white guy who has no idea what you are talking about. Have had numerous opportunities my whole life but know many who haven’t especially non white individuals,.

[turningrite]

On 6/13/2018 at 11:19 AM, Argus said:

The pride committee are BLM's bitches. BLM stops their parades with a half dozen people, makes demands, and the pride committee bursts into tears and agrees.

I believe the BLM-Pride controversy reflects the fact that Pride no longer plays a vital role in promoting gay rights, which are now largely codified in law even if acceptance isn't universal in the general population. The Pride festival I most recently attended, about 6 or 7 years ago, seemed like a 'fin de siecle' event. It appeared to me a rather boring corporate-driven and cliche-soaked enterprise. When I'd previously attended the event in the mid 1990s, there was an edge to it as the gay community was at the time fighting for basic civil and social rights as well as AIDS treatments. I suspect the whole thing was ripe for a takeover and that seems to be what's happened. I read a fascinating piece in the National Post a week ago where the author, who identifies himself as being gay, notes the irrelevancy of the parade in today's context. A good friend of mine, who is gay, believes it time the Pride festival be reconsidered. If it's no longer relevant to much of the LGBT community, why should it be relevant to anybody else? It's served its purpose.

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/im-gay-and-i-wouldnt-blame-doug-ford-for-avoiding-torontos-pride-parade

Edited June 20, 2018 by turningrite