Originally Posted By peeaanuut what is a gay or lesbian band? I dont understand that. There is rock, country, rap, dance, soul, Jazz, Classical and Folk, but is Gay/Lesbian? is it a genre or do all the people in the band have to be gay? I am really confused about this. Someone please explain what gay music is and how its different from other music.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 "I dunno ... maybe when you can talk about him without jumping up and down and screaming." That's a pretty insulting thing to say. You're talking about a group of people who have had to live with intolerance, hatred and fear directed at them most of their lives. Most of us had to keep our sexuality hidden for years because we were frightened that we would lose our friends and families if we said anything, or in the worst case, face violence. Now, finally, over the last twenty years, attitudes are starting to change - but we still have a long, long way to go -- and it can be very frustrating. So you'll forgive us if we become angry and sometimes "jump up and down screaming". Inequality is not an easy thing to live with quietly.
Originally Posted By alexbook I think we're overlooking the most important element of the Inauguration: The “World Famous” Lawn Rangers of “Amazing” Arcola, IL, will be marching in the Inaugural parade. <a href="http://lh3.ggpht.com/_iGjwO4OUWGM/SGryc5A5viI/AAAAAAAACZY/jHw9DunT6v4/IMG_3068.JPG" target="_blank">http://lh3.ggpht.com/_iGjwO4OU...3068.JPG</a> <a href="http://www.davebarry.com/misccol/LawnRangers2.htm" target="_blank">http://www.davebarry.com/miscc...ers2.htm</a>
Originally Posted By Inspector 57 <<///It's very cool that he's inviting an OUT gay marching band to participate/// ---only if they march well. If they were chosen because they are attracted to their own kind then that's not cool in the slightest.>> Presumably, all of the eighty-plus bands that were extended invitations (and have accepted them) have demonstrated the rudimentary ability to play music while marching in time to it. My point stands. It's cool that Obama specifically chose a (qualified) marching band that is explicitly gay. His choice sends a message. barboy, you're intelligent enough to understand this point. <<///If the band is lucky, they'll be sandwiched between the Boy Scouts and the Firefighters/// ---so harassment can go down again like in San Diego? Did you know that some of those fire personnel in SD felt embarrassed and belittled?>> Yes, I did. So I purposely chose in my post to reference both the Boy Scouts and the Firefighters to send a (too subtle, apparently) reminder that there are groups [Boy Scouts] that actively discriminate against gays and individuals[some SD Firefighters] who are so strongly homophobic that they feel justified in demanding their employer exempt them from contact with their gay constituents. <<It's positions like yours I-57 that hurt your own cause.>> That's classic opressive verbiage, identical in meaning to that which we've read from other posters on this thread: "If you complain too loudly about being relegated to second-class status, you're just going to make it worse for yourself. So for your own good, just shut up and be obedient and show some gratitude for the token progress we decide to allow you."
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Presumably, all of the eighty-plus bands that were extended invitations (and have accepted them) have demonstrated the rudimentary ability to play music while marching in time to it.*** You presume wrong, my friend. The Cadets will be impressive though. If you're checking out the parade on TV, watch for them specifically and note the ACTUAL rudimentary ability to march and play (trust me, it doesn't exist with any of the others and you WILL see the incredible difference). BUT, you probably didn't want to read that and probably don't care.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>"If you complain too loudly about being relegated to second-class status, you're just going to make it worse for yourself. So for your own good, just shut up and be obedient and show some gratitude for the token progress we decide to allow you."<< And you're proving my point. Anyone thinking and acting rationally would be able to discern that that's not what we're saying at all.
Originally Posted By Inspector 57 <<And you're proving my point. Anyone thinking and acting rationally would be able to discern that that's not what we're saying at all.>> mawnck, perhaps I've misunderstood your position. So let me ask for clarification. What, specifically, does this mean?: "I would've gladly marched beside No on 8 supporters before the election, and immediately after it. Not anymore. Not until they calm down and start thinking with their heads again." What happened post-election to cause gays to lose your formerly staunch support?
Originally Posted By mawnck >>What happened post-election to cause gays to lose your formerly staunch support?<< You have NOT lost my support. However, I see both the people on this board and the movement in general having a pity party instead of strategizing and organizing, doing the things that will actually FIX the problem. Here's a comparison. It's odd, but it's something I know about, so I'm going with it: You know the DTV transition, right? In February all the full-power TV stations are turning off their analog transmitters. Since this is something I am interested in and know a lot about, I've been on a couple boards giving advice and info to understandably confused TV viewers. About 60% of them take the advice, or ask more questions, or come up with their own solution. They take the facts *as they stand* and do what they need to to achieve their goal (IE uninterrupted TV reception.) The other 40% come on the board to rail against the government wasting their money, destroying their reception, forcing them to subscribe to cable, and why should they do all these stupid things because the TV was fine the way it was. Both reasonable reactions given the circumstances. But only one of those two groups is going to be watching TV on February 18th. When I said march, I was not speaking figuratively, and it might have sounded like I was. I was talking about shoes on pavement. And what I was getting at was that a march in which a lot of angry people are getting into fistfights, pointing accusatory fingers at African Americans, and engaging in other activities that are going to hurt THE CAUSE rather than help it, is not going to get Prop 8 repealed. It's just going to solidify the opposition, and turn off people who were on the fence. So I don't want to participate in it. I think what's going on here is the MLK strategy vs. the Malcolm X strategy. African Americans had just as much justification for anger as you do. But justification does not equal results. You have to WIN your public support, not beat it out of 'em. Where's the ad campaign telling the general public about this business of rescinding of California marriages that have already been reformed? (It hasn't gotten the press it deserves because of the financial mess, and I'm sure there are an awful lot of Californians who don't know this is happening.) Where are the well-known spokespeople going on the talk shows (not just newscasts) to state their case? Where in the Sam Hill is the petition for a Prop that's going to repeal Prop 8? Think with your heads instead of your feets. Gather more flies with honey than with vinegar. Think about how you look to the soccer mom who might or might not support your cause depending on whether she thinks you are nice enough people to be worth supporting. There's an AWFUL lot of people like that out there, and you NEED them on your side. Be realistic. Would you rather we know how angry you are, or would you rather have, as it were, a TV that works after February? It's your choice. And now you know which path I recommend.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>that have already been reformed<< performed I start substituting words when I get on a roll. This one got by me.
Originally Posted By Mr X I think you make an excellent point, Maw, but I would add that there is room for the Malcolm X's of the world too... I know that for me, strongly inspired by Dr. King though I of course was, the real DEPTH of the anger and struggle of black people during those times hit me most when I read about X and others who were more, for lack of a better term, militant. Granted, that's just my view, AND it's looking at things from a historical perspective since I wasn't around during those times. I guess my main point is, I can understand why some are at this point getting hot under the collar over this stuff. But your point about being smart and getting organized is well taken!
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom What does Proposition 8 have anything to do with the fact that the only official "gay" organization involved in the Inauguration will be a band? I thought the whole point of this thread was that gays and lesbians were over looked AGAIN by a Democratic elect Presidential candidate.
