« Death of a Moonbat | Main | LA Hosts Tinfoil Hat Festival »

June 26, 2006

Gay Pride Weekend Wrapup

I knew al-Reuters had to be good for something. Below are some scenes from the weekend's gala gay pride festivities.

New York:









The kids were adopted into this lifestyle.

New Yorkers didn't have all the fun. Here's San Francisco:














Sao Paulo:


Welcome to the future our cultural elite has planned for Western Civilization.

Posted by Van Helsing at June 26, 2006 6:28 AM


Why are you so scared of a bunch of people in strange costumes? Not quite sure that parade costumes provide significant evidence of a cultural direction. Lots of parades have rather loud costumes. Check out the Macy's parade sometime, scary stuff there.

Posted by: Nick at June 26, 2006 11:35 AM

The costumes are much les disturbing than the people who turn out their kids as stage props to shock the normals.

The costumes are not really that scary at all. Just something to point and laugh at when people wonder why we don't respect the gay left.

Posted by: V the K at June 26, 2006 11:40 AM

What / who / how do you class 'Normal'?

This is just people in a parade having fun, many people who are not gay go and enjoy gay pride festivals and parades around the world..

And if you dont want to go, then don't - job done, everyone's a winner

Posted by: Normals at June 26, 2006 11:57 AM

Big goddamn deal. I would be far more impressed if they marched in Riyadh and Tehran.

Posted by: chsw10605 at June 26, 2006 1:25 PM

What / who / how do you class 'Normal'?

People who don't prance around in public dressed like freaks, for one.

Posted by: V the K at June 26, 2006 2:57 PM

I don't give a fat damn what your sexual orientation may be; if you dress like that in public you are an exhibitionist nutcase with no taste, poor impulse control, and an adolescent degree of self obsession.

I don't care if the occasion is a Gay Pride parade, or mardi gras, or the Superbowl; if you behave like this I think you should expect your neighbors to consider you a fool, and possibly a dangerous fool. You should have trouble getting a drivers' license, obtaining permission to adopt, or getting any job connected with teaching children until such time as you show that you can dress yourself like a human being, instead of an ape let loose in Rock Star hand-me-downs.

So long as Gays allow the words "Gat Pride" to be associated with motley fools who dress like circus clowns and act like spoiled children, Gay Liberation is going to have trouble gaining acceptance.

Wise up, people, looking like an escaped Peter Max character out of Yellow Submarine isn't going to convince ANYBODY that you are respectable folk who deserve to be treated like adults.

Face it; the Irish gained social standing by becoming associated in people's minds with sober Cops and populist politicians. THEN they instituted their St. Paddy's Day parade of fools.

Dial it back a bit (ok, a lot) until your fellow citizens accept Gay Marriage and so forth. THEN you can start behaving like the '70's Elton John on a three week bender again.

Posted by: C. S. P. Schofield at June 26, 2006 3:03 PM

At least 95% of humanity is heterosexual. That is a pretty good definition of NORMAL.

Gays may have some kind of chemical/genetic defect that they are not responsible for, but they are nonetheless ABNORMAL.

This doesnt mean people should go around beating them up or treating them as subhuman. They are still human beings. What ticks off most people is the gay lobby that tries to force everyone to embrace them as NORMAL and accept their in-your-face antics.

I know these view are not politically correct but I couldnt care less.

Posted by: General Jack D. Ripper at June 26, 2006 3:29 PM

The thing is, a same-sex attraction is no excuse to act like a freak. And there is no reason people who have a same-sex attraction should have to embrace, support, and celebrate people who act like freaks.

And if you do, you have absolutely no right to bitch about stereotypes.

Posted by: V the K at June 26, 2006 4:02 PM

You are obviously afraid of something. People usually label others as freaks when they are afraid of a specific lifestyle. Why do you fear homosexuals, or at least why do you fear those that believe that homosexuality (or any specific biochemically-based state) is not specifically abnormal since all biochemical states (including sexual attraction) cannot objectively be defined as "abnormal" without a specific justification of what is normal to begin with? Even as a heterosexual politically independant male, I can't seem to find any rational justification to label homosexuality as a freakish behavior. Could you provide rational justificiation for your statement?

Posted by: Nick at June 26, 2006 4:14 PM

I think it's very close-minded and intolerant of you to presume that everyone who disapproves of the freakish behavior of over-the-top homosexuals is straight.

Posted by: V the K at June 26, 2006 5:51 PM

I wouldn't take my children to such a festival anymore than I would take them to a Vegas strip club.

Nick: For the record, no one here "fears" homosexuals. That's a patently absurd question and I hear it all too often. If someone disagrees with a certain lifestyle, fear is the least of their motives.

Posted by: Oyster at June 26, 2006 6:09 PM

Nick, you're a dingbat.

I don't fear homosexuals - if I did I wouldn't live half an hour away from New Hope PA - I fear the kind of narcissistic twit that will make that kind of spectacle of himself. The eternally adolescent "look at me! look at me!" that is capable of doing absolutely ANYTHING for attention. Their 'sexual preference' is a flag of convenience, since at base they love only themselves, and don't care WHICH sex they enthrall and suck dry.

They are sexual predators. Not perhaps as evil as the killers, but they spread misery and self-loathing in their wake. My wife was abused by one as a child. Several of my Gay friends have had nervous breakdowns brought on by taking one as a lover. They moved into the Gay subculture as the '70's grew to a close and the Heterosexuals started making fun of them (ridicule is their kryptonite).

I despise them.

At a time when the Gay community absolutely depends on the goodwill of the 'straight' community these fools are still out playing 'shock the squares' - because they can drop the Gay facade and go batten on some other insecure subculture when they push things too far.

The only satisfaction I have is that they are SO sure that they are GOLDEN that they seldom take ordinary precautions. The first man I knew to die of AIDS was my wife's abuser. God has a NASTY sense of humor.

Posted by: C. S. P. Schofield at June 26, 2006 6:53 PM

You are obviously afraid of something. People usually label others as freaks when they are afraid of a specific lifestyle.

Thanks for your comment. I love parlor psychology. "Afraid of something"...gee, whatever could this coy riposte be referring to?

If you think Muslim fanatics are freaks, is it because you're worried about turning into one? How about cannibals? Or the scrotum-inflating guy in SF? (Or liberals not otherwise included above?) It's perfectly possible to find a group or a behavior distasteful without secretly wanting to join it or indulge in it, pace subscribers to Psychology Today.

BTW, "normal" means constituting or conforming to the norm, i.e., a pattern or trait taken to be typical of the behavior of a social group, as in the expression, "Homosexuals are not normal," where implicitly the reference group is society as a whole.

OTOH, one could assert, if one thought so, that those depicted in the photographs are "normal for homosexuals," where the reference group is made explicit. One could rebut that assertion by showing that those individuals are not typical of homosexuals, i.e., that they're abnormal for homosexuals.

Got it?

Posted by: Occam's Beard at June 26, 2006 8:44 PM

C. S. P. Schofield, definitely gay. You know who else hated fags? Roy Cohn. Your hatred reminds me of Cohn. Methinks you doth protest too much.

Posted by: Back from Iraq at June 27, 2006 2:31 AM

Re; Back from Iraq's comment:

I've been happily married for more than twenty years. That said, I will admit that some of what annoys me about the people I teed off on is that I fear that I may be like them. If I didn't watch myself I could easily be a self centered user.

That's what REALLY annoys me about the exhibitionist twits depicted in the original post - that and the damage they do to far more decent Gay people (some of whom I call friends) both by screwing up their lives on a one to one basis, and by holding themselves up as some kind of Gay 'norm'. It isn't just by turning any Gay Pride event into a circus of the taste impaired; these are the damn fools who embrace the idea of 'transgressive sex' being 'a revolutionary act'. Their more articulate numbers write this tripe, encouraging the image of the Gay Male as a sexual deviant addicted to latex and chains. They are the idiots who opposed closing the Gay sex clubs and bath houses at the start of the AIDS epidemic - heaven forbid a little thing like a deadly Sexually Transmitted Disease epidemic be allowed to interfere with their fun. They are the reason that so many ordinary people reflexively believe that Gays are sexually incontinent by nature.

I could be like them: we all could. All it takes is to be too self absorbed to think that other people matter .... and that's all too easy. They revolt me because hey show a side of me I wrestle with and don't like at all. But that isn't their sexual orientation - it's their spiritual one. They are users. A pox on them.

Posted by: C. S. P. Schofield at June 27, 2006 3:54 AM

Married for 20 years... suppressing something??

Come on CSP, come on out the closet - people here will call you abnormal and a freak, but to hell with them - read what they write - most are fools anyway...

Posted by: Gay as a window at June 27, 2006 4:08 AM

I'll attempt to answer each individual separately to ensure fairness in my response:

V the K:

One cannot be intolerant of an intolerant opinion. Such a statement would make one tolerant of tolerance, hence making one accepting of things that are not intolerant. I find it slightly amusing that you have attempted to use such a boring and old judo pass, you don't get a cookie for that response. Such an argument is best saved for random other extreme right issues like "activist judges" and other bullshit things that the right likes to pretend exist.


You can speak for yourself, but I'm not so sure about other people here.

Occam's Beard:

Nice attempt, but your comparisons are rather childlike. The inherent nature of political opinion is very different than a sexual attraction. If I were talking to you, I would attempt to speak very slowly to you so that you wouldn't miss this basic statement. It probably wouldn't matter, since upon the sight of the first shiny object you would most likely lose all focus in our discussion and go off running after it.

Repressed sexual tendencies (see Klein's entire body of work) can often manifest themselves through outward fear and aggression towards those that openly partake in the said sexual lifestyle. It is of course possible that this is not the case, but it is amazing how defensive some bigots will be when this topic is raised. Why so defensive?


Hmm... not quite sure what to say to you. You obviously need some kind of help. It might be best not to say anything to you, since it might cause you to escalate. I would only recommend that you get some kind of help.

To All Posters:

Well I can now see why this website bitches so much about the "liberal elite". I have no kind words for liberals, but at least they read big books (the one's with no pictures) and watch intelligent movies (not just the one's with girls in bikinis shooting automatic rifles). They, at least, make for intelligent (although not always effective) opinions.

Nice try though, thinking is tough, just keep trying and you'll eventually get the hang of it.



Posted by: Nick at June 27, 2006 9:05 AM

Ever notice how people who are losing an argument quickly revert to insults and ad hominem attacks on the people who are winning?

Posted by: V the K at June 27, 2006 9:50 AM

Ever notice how people who are losing an argument quickly revert to insults and ad hominem attacks on the people who are winning?

Actually, let me amend that. Ever notice how people who bring nothing to an argument but half-baked cliches quickly revert to insults and ad hominem attacks against people who have actual ideas and opinions?

Posted by: V the K at June 27, 2006 9:52 AM

hmm... let's see which side started the insults: "The costumes are not really that scary at all. Just something to point and laugh at when people wonder why we don't respect the gay left", "The thing is, a same-sex attraction is no excuse to act like a freak", "Nick, you're a dingbat.".

Don't fight your own ignorance. Take the neoconservative route, embrace it.

Posted by: Nick at June 27, 2006 10:02 AM

Go on V the K - get out your old shiny G-String, dance out in the streets as if no-one was watching you'll find it liberating - and at least give your neighbours a laugh. What's more, happiness and laughter help you live longer, so its good for them too..

Posted by: Xpres It at June 27, 2006 10:05 AM

Thanks for proving my point, Nick.

Posted by: V the K at June 27, 2006 11:25 AM

Nick, you've astutely divined my secret wishes. I'm now trying to figure out how to type a lisp and a sashay.

Posted by: Occam's Beard at June 27, 2006 1:24 PM

"Of all the sexual perversions, chastity is probably the most unnatural."

Aldous Huxley

Posted by: phil at June 28, 2006 11:12 AM

Nick blabbed:

I have no kind words for liberals...

We actually have something in common! I'm talking about having no kind words for liberals, not about wearing women's undergarments. That's not my cup of tea, but different strokes for different folks!

but at least they read big books (the one's with no pictures)

Since WHEN do liberals read the Bible? LOL!

and watch intelligent movies

Like Fahrenheit 9/11, or Bowling for Columbine, or Bareback/Humpback/Brokedick Mountain (or whatever the hell it is)? Yeah, "intelligent"...

They, at least, make for intelligent (although not always effective) opinions.

Of all the nutty (don't get excited with that word, Nick) leftist talking points that you've tossed about like a "salad" and we've had to "bear", that one takes the "top" prize. Congrats, pal, for that chuckle! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Posted by: Jonathan L. at June 28, 2006 12:10 PM

for you bible readers:
How many times did Jesus mention homosexuality, versus "love other people as yourself??

There is a fine line between Jesus using you and you using Jesus. Not many know the difference, but some day he will explain it to you.

Father, forgive them for they know not what they are saying!

Posted by: david at July 2, 2006 12:07 PM