I am from San Francisco, and have attended a number of LGBT Pride Parades. In addition to a celebratory display of homosexuality, and this does entail flamboyant costumes, dancing, etc., that seems to offend you, there are a number of people that represent themselves as what you would call normal. For example, LGBT police officers march in uniform and families with same-sex parents march with their children in strollers. Clearly you have never been to a pride parade. Perhaps you should take your issues up with the media outlets that choose to show only the provocative aspects of the parade. Better yet, as a reporter, attend one for yourself and report on the many diverse aspects of the parade. That said, pride parades aren’t a meant to be an intellectual debate about what it means to be human. They are meant to be a celebration of a very diverse community in which many members are proud of their sexuality and want to display this very aspect of their identity that they have been marginalized for.

Gay culture back in 60s, 70s, and 80s used to be about freedom and exploration. But as gay culture became more and more incorporated into the mainstream, it was forced to adopt the rules of the mainstream. Homosexual relationships must be monogamous, partners must be of the same race, both partners must be successful, contributing members of society, etc.

I advocate more outlandish behavior at gay pride parades. Keep it about freedom, not about acceptance.

Jamie: All gay pride parades are registered as fundraisers, and historically, raising money for AIDS awareness and treatment/prevention have been strongly linked to gay pride parades. Maybe it’s not the only purpose, but it’s definitely one of them (as I mention in the article, along with promoting awareness and acceptance of the community), and very, very few parades (if any) don’t have a fundraiser associated with AIDS.

Please read my reply to David again. It’s not that I personally care about what they do, but that I can’t take them seriously on an intellectual level because their message (a valid one: that society should accept differences in sexual orientation) comes packaged with things that undermine the point they’re trying to convey. Perhaps my word choice of saying “offensive sexuality” was amiss (I was trying to get at the notion that it offends my intellectual sensibilities), but regardless I think the tone and thrust of my article is clear enough that nitpicking at one word in the entire article is pretty trivial (along with the fact that I mention multiple times in the article that I am not anti-gay, nor am I offended by homosexuality).

I did write that it’s a terrible idea to shock and offend those very same people you wish to persuade and support you. That doesn’t mean me – they don’t need to persuade me, I’m already on their face – it means a large part of the general public at large that are offended by the behavior at gay pride parades. I’m not offended because I know and have worked with gay people and understand that there’s more to them than what goes on in the parades. A lot of people, on the other hand, have never done so (either because of ignorance or homophobia), and only see what’s on TV, leading them to conclude that what’s on TV is the whole picture. Frankly, I don’t see how anybody can think that it is.

I’m not really offended by what goes on in gay pride parades (I’ve seen far worse; 2 minutes on 2girls1cup took care of that), but you ask me “then why not watch the parade?” The answer to that question is the whole point of my article, which you missed in your attempt to pigeonhole me into being anti-gay. The reason I don’t watch the parades is because I think they’re counterproductive – I’d rather see a gay pride parade where they showed the sexual side, but not only the sexual side. I’d like to see informed, intellectual debate that takes into account all aspects of what it means to be a human being – straight or gay, white or black, man or woman. One thing that is worth mentioning is that it’s not just me saying this – people within the gay community espouse similar views to mine (something I found out after writing the article, and something I was glad to find).

If you would like to continue this discussion, please e-mail me at asundar@wustl.edu. Thanks for the comment.

obviously aids is a super important and pressing issue, but as an lgbt activist, i’m pretty uncomfortable with people always putting aids and gay together. we’re trying to fix that.

I’m writing a response, but to be frank, I don’t think it will make a difference. You clearly missed the point of the article – I am not anti-gay, I am not offended by homosexuality in the least, and I think that mainstream understanding and acceptance of homosexuality is a good thing. Just because I’m criticizing a specific practice of the gay community doesn’t mean that I’m criticizing gay people or the gay movement as a whole. I’ll just point out specific things in your comment:
- When I say “homosexual activity,” I’m not using activity to refer to sex, but rather intentional actions to bring about progressive values and change in society. Perhaps activism would’ve been a better choice, but I wanted to avoid negative connotations associated with the word.
- The whole point of my article was to bring an outsider’s perspective (read the last sentence of the article proper), so calling me unqualified is not helpful (then again, what name-calling is helpful?). Sometimes the boy on the street has more important things to say than the emperor and all of his assistants.
- I don’t find any shock and offense in homosexuals nor in the parades, even if you erroneously claim that I do. I just can’t take the parades seriously on an intellectual level when the message is literally contradicted by the way that the participants act (they want to foster acceptance of the community and yet act in a way that actively prevents acceptance of the community)
- My message is not to “make LGBT normal,” but rather to show what’s already there. I strongly disagree with you when you say that sexuality constitutes the identity of a person in the community. Sure it plays a part, but there’s much more to being a human being. What about their career, interests, hobbies, passions?

Your sentiments mirror those embodied by the spirit of the parades, but this sentiment is horribly misplaced, because it reduces a human being to mere sexuality.

A homosexual is no more defined by their orientation than I am by my heterosexuality – and just as two heterosexuals can be completely different (compare me to a white football player at Ohio State), so it is with homosexuals. The point that needs to be emphasized (and one that you seem unwilling to consider) is that gay people are just as complex, deep, and multifaceted as any other human being, and emphasizing that is the key.