Where will they do that?

I guess the zoo would make sense. I know they closes that years ago, but maybe they can use the same area.

 

At least in Nana and Cowboy I know which bars I have to avoid. 

Fortunately I'll be out of Bangkok for the long weekend so I won't have to suffer these attention seeking exhibitionists making complete fools of themselves.

 

Look at MEEEEEEEEEEEE. 

 

Ummm, no thanks... 

8 minutes ago, proton said:

 

Absolutely, they want to be treated the same as everyone else, and apart from a few legal areas are. No need for this imported pride nonsense in Thailand

 

I get your point, really, but at the same time I don't see the need for people on the forum to be so hostile to Pride, ladyboys and gender-fluidity generally, and a lot of it really is just pure nastiness of the sort I have never witnessed among Thais.

 

And some might say Walking St and Patong etc are Straight Pride Night every night of the year anyway!

12 minutes ago, oldscool said:

 

I get your point, really, but at the same time I don't see the need for people on the forum to be so hostile to Pride, ladyboys and gender-fluidity generally, and a lot of it really is just pure nastiness of the sort I have never witnessed among Thais.

 

I don't see it as hostile. I just don't see the need for it. We don't see white pride, straight pride, ginger pride, bald pride, tall pride etc.

 

I don't see gay people being harrassed in Thailand. There are gay people in senior positions in the company I work for, nobody bats an eyelid. If you raised it as an issue you would be treated as a Pariah and rightly so. Just get on with their lives. No need to shout about it, it's almost like inviting hostility where there is none. Like racism, the demand for homophobia seems to be outstripping the supply so some people are trying to manufacture some to fill the gap. It's like "let's be deliberately provocative and see if we can bait someone into objecting so we can scream Homophobe and Bigot at them". 

 

12 minutes ago, oldscool said:

 

And some might say Walking St and Patong etc are Straight Pride Night every night of the year anyway!

 

Equally, you could say places like Soi Paradise in Phuket or Silom Soi 4 in Bangkok are like gay pride every night. The gay scene has their areas just as the straight scene does. 

 

Just another example of equality already achieved. 

42 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

 Carry on with your gay bashing party.

I'm outta here.

 

Being critical of gay pride parades is not gay bashing at all, you just want to think it is.

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

Oh you mean Trump rallies.

 

 😇 no comment

I know they Legalized it but it's not Compulsory, 

5 hours ago, Jingthing said:

I think gay traveller's are attracted to gay friendly countries in general all year just as any tourism promotion board would.

There is a reason that Taiwan and Spain are much more popular among gay travellers than Iran or Jamaica or Russia. 

 

Erm...  Iran, Jamaica and Russia are your basis of comparison for popular tourist destinations ????

 

You can't even see how ridiculously flawed your examples are...    Perhaps you should have added Iraq and Afghanistan !!!

Removed some personal attacks and poorly disguised profanity.

7 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

I don't see it as hostile. I just don't see the need for it. We don't see white pride, straight pride, ginger pride, bald pride, tall pride etc.

 

Dumb comparison. You don't see people being beaten up, imprisoned and executed for being bald, ginger, tall etc. Besides that, Pride is about other things too. 

 

Some people's obsession with it on here is rather sad, and when you get the same people criticizing every article of LGBT+ news it leaves one to think it's something a bit more sinister. I don't see why Pride should exist, it's all equal now isn't a valid criticism unless backed up with sound reasons.

33 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

Dumb comparison. You don't see people being beaten up, imprisoned and executed for being bald, ginger, tall etc. Besides that, Pride is about other things too. 

 

Some people's obsession with it on here is rather sad, and when you get the same people criticizing every article of LGBT+ news it leaves one to think it's something a bit more sinister. I don't see why Pride should exist, it's all equal now isn't a valid criticism unless backed up with sound reasons.

 

You make a strong and valid point...

 

However, having a 'special' day, a 'special' 5 days or a 'special' month etc also seems to contradict the ideology of equality..... 

 

If anyone genuinely wants to be treated equally, why celebrate the difference in such a manner ?

18 hours ago, JonnyF said:

I don't see it as hostile. I just don't see the need for it. We don't see white pride, straight pride, ginger pride, bald pride, tall pride etc.

 

About the need for it, well one of the main reasons for Pride was to put the agenda for equal rights under the law centre-stage, and that has succeeded in many parts of the world, though not yet Thailand.

 

And there have been plenty of white pride marches and groups, some more infamous than others, and a regular ginger convention.

10 hours ago, Baht Simpson said:

Dumb comparison. You don't see people being beaten up, imprisoned and executed for being bald, ginger, tall etc. Besides that, Pride is about other things too. 

 

Some people's obsession with it on here is rather sad, and when you get the same people criticizing every article of LGBT+ news it leaves one to think it's something a bit more sinister. I don't see why Pride should exist, it's all equal now isn't a valid criticism unless backed up with sound reasons.

 

I don't see why being gay is something to be proud of. Any more than being straight. It's just what you are. It's like being proud of having blue eyes. 

 

As for my opinion being sinister, I presume that is a euphemism for homophobic but you don't have the stones to come out and say it. A weak argument, especially when we consider that many gay people agree with me, Douglas Murray for example.

 

2 minutes ago, oldscool said:

And there have been plenty of white pride marches and groups, some more infamous than others, and a regular ginger convention.

 

And I would apply the same logic to those marches. Pointless, and a cry for attention. 

As I've pointed out Johnny, Pride was not a cry for attention, it was about many things, not least about helping to achieve equal rights under the law, and it succeeded. 

9 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

If anyone genuinely wants to be treated equally, why celebrate the difference in such a manner ?

 

One might conclude that they (and I don't mean all gay people, I mean the ones who attend these rallys) do not want to be considered equal, they want to be considered "special".

 

Hence all the exhibitionism, the crys for attention, the exaggerated flamboyance, and even indecent exposure that we see at such marches. It all just screams "look at ME". Personally I have a lot more respect for people who just accept their sexuality, whatever that might be and get on with their lives, like the majority of gay people I work with on a daily basis. 

2 minutes ago, oldscool said:

As I've pointed out Johnny, Pride was not a cry for attention, it was about many things, not least about helping to achieve equal rights under the law, and it succeeded. 

 

Yes, nothing about pride marches inidicates a need for attention.😃

 

Obviously one needs to get attention to get anything changed. Dressing up is one way to do it.

8 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

I don't see why being gay is something to be proud of. Any more than being straight. It's just what you are. It's like being proud of having blue eyes. 

 

As for my opinion being sinister, I presume that is a euphemism for homophobic but you don't have the stones to come out and say it. A weak argument, especially when we consider that many gay people agree with me, Douglas Murray for example.

 

You seem to misunderstand Pride in the LGBT context. It wasn't that long ago that homosexuality was deemed illegal and was seen as something to hide, suppress and feel ashamed of. In 1967 in the U.K.  the law was repealed but gay people suffered continued discrimination and were still vilified for their sexual orientation. In 1972 was the first march under the Gay Liberation banner which then became Gay Pride. It is not the biblical definition of the sin of pride but an affirmation of pride not shame. 

It's not peoples opinions I find sinister, although some are clearly misguided. It's just that anytime there is any discussion about LGBT+ issues you get a swathe of replies, usually the same names, up in arms about some perceived nonsense which seems to be just baiting and with no intention of intelligent questioning or polite discussion, just disgust. I wonder why?

As I've explained before on here I do not use the h word as I find it can be misleading, preferring the term anti-LGBT. So I was not using any euphemisms. I'm sure you realise though that "stones" is a euphemism for balls. They're fine actually but thank you for your concern.

 

I wish you and others would stop using the "many gays agree with me" line. It's irrelevant and we just have your word for it.

 

As for Douglas Murray, I agree with him on some issues but not this. He should know better about Pride, for the reasons I've mentioned above. There are a number of right-leaning or religious gays who are unhappy with their lot but that's their tragedy not ours.

4 hours ago, Baht Simpson said:

You seem to misunderstand Pride in the LGBT context. It wasn't that long ago that homosexuality was deemed illegal and was seen as something to hide, suppress and feel ashamed of. In 1967 in the U.K.  the law was repealed but gay people suffered continued discrimination and were still vilified for their sexual orientation. In 1972 was the first march under the Gay Liberation banner which then became Gay Pride. It is not the biblical definition of the sin of pride but an affirmation of pride not shame. 

It's not peoples opinions I find sinister, although some are clearly misguided. It's just that anytime there is any discussion about LGBT+ issues you get a swathe of replies, usually the same names, up in arms about some perceived nonsense which seems to be just baiting and with no intention of intelligent questioning or polite discussion, just disgust. I wonder why?

As I've explained before on here I do not use the h word as I find it can be misleading, preferring the term anti-LGBT. So I was not using any euphemisms. I'm sure you realise though that "stones" is a euphemism for balls. They're fine actually but thank you for your concern.

 

I wish you and others would stop using the "many gays agree with me" line. It's irrelevant and we just have your word for it.

 

As for Douglas Murray, I agree with him on some issues but not this. He should know better about Pride, for the reasons I've mentioned above. There are a number of right-leaning or religious gays who are unhappy with their lot but that's their tragedy not ours.

 

It's like 80 year old women furiously marching for the vote, forgetting they already have it. 

 

Being gay isn't special or shocking any more. Just accept nobody cares any more. You're just an average Joe now. No need to dress like a flamingo and dance flamboyantly down the road to drum up a reaction.

 

If anything its an advantage. Of all the DEI boxes to be ticked when applying for jobs, being gay is a pretty good one. To keep playing the oppressed victim makes you appear not so much as Baht, but Mai Dem Baht.

 

 

16 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

It's like 80 year old women furiously marching for the vote, forgetting they already have it. 

 

Being gay isn't special or shocking any more. Just accept nobody cares any more. You're just an average Joe now. No need to dress like a flamingo and dance flamboyantly down the road to drum up a reaction.

 

If anything its an advantage. Of all the DEI boxes to be ticked when applying for jobs, being gay is a pretty good one. To keep playing the oppressed victim makes you appear not so much as Baht, but Mai Dem Baht.

 

 

80 year old women, flamingos, DEI boxes (?), Mai Dem baht (?). Nice response to my detailed post addressing your concerns. I was expecting something a bit more sensible.

6 hours ago, Baht Simpson said:

You seem to misunderstand Pride in the LGBT context. It wasn't that long ago that homosexuality was deemed illegal and was seen as something to hide, suppress and feel ashamed of. In 1967 in the U.K.  the law was repealed but gay people suffered continued discrimination and were still vilified for their sexual orientation. In 1972 was the first march under the Gay Liberation banner which then became Gay Pride. It is not the biblical definition of the sin of pride but an affirmation of pride not shame. 

It's not peoples opinions I find sinister, although some are clearly misguided. It's just that anytime there is any discussion about LGBT+ issues you get a swathe of replies, usually the same names, up in arms about some perceived nonsense which seems to be just baiting and with no intention of intelligent questioning or polite discussion, just disgust. I wonder why?

As I've explained before on here I do not use the h word as I find it can be misleading, preferring the term anti-LGBT. So I was not using any euphemisms. I'm sure you realise though that "stones" is a euphemism for balls. They're fine actually but thank you for your concern.

 

I wish you and others would stop using the "many gays agree with me" line. It's irrelevant and we just have your word for it.

 

As for Douglas Murray, I agree with him on some issues but not this. He should know better about Pride, for the reasons I've mentioned above. There are a number of right-leaning or religious gays who are unhappy with their lot but that's their tragedy not ours.

 

There is nothing to be proud of in any sexual orientation, nothing special or novel about being gay. This whole gay pride farce and silly flag waving is an anachronism by people desperately trying to pretend they are still victims and special.

Deleted

Edited May 23, 20242 yr by Jingthing

57 minutes ago, proton said:

 

There is nothing to be proud of in any sexual orientation, nothing special or novel about being gay. This whole gay pride farce and silly flag waving is an anachronism by people desperately trying to pretend they are still victims and special.

If you think that's all that Pride represents then I feel sorry for you.

On 5/21/2024 at 10:06 PM, richard_smith237 said:

In another thread, some were outspoke about LBGQT+ being pushed everywhere...   

 

Y-A-W-N-N-N-N.... For the convenience of all concerned -and non concerned- parties, let me cut+paste my reply (from one such thread) to the homophobic brigade, here there and elsewhere:

 

"....What makes it "difficult to participate in this discussion" is the amount of garbage thrown in by the anti-gay pundits left and right in order to to distort and/or obfuscate the topic - as you can see on full display on this thread, and as inevitably on any other gay-related issues. You can try to pin them down, and when getting caught, these cowards simply deny what they previously said to wiggle their way out. Often a kick in the right place would see them scoot, tail between their legs.

 

The well meaning folks both straight and gay from the general public/forum simply stay away from such contentious thread as one would from a soi with too many feral looking dogs. I used to disregard the haters but that simply inflamed them further and the thread went down quickly. But at least by confronting them one by one, people who care would have the opportunity to see the hatred and the insanity from these bigots who though vocal and bordering on rabid, are just a small minority and probably would go to their grave still full of bile." NEXT!

 

There you have it folks, just a taste...For the whole enchilada, click on the link below:

 

https://aseannow.com/topic/1324413-fears-of-discrimination-in-thailand-despite-looming-same-sex-marriage-bill/page/4/

 

On 5/21/2024 at 2:02 PM, Jingthing said:

I stopped adding at LGBT. People know what you mean regardless.

 

In the UK, LGB have formed a splinter group & allied with the TERFs, leaving the 2S...TQQI+ out in the cold 🙂

Edited May 23, 20242 yr by GanDoonToonPet

5 days seems like a reasonable amount of time to celebrate 'your thing' but a month is too long IMO.

 

Also the scale. Keep it reasonably low key. There's 'pride' and then there's wallpapering the universe with it; when everyone feels like they're in the Yellow Submarine music video or having an acid flashback 🤔

Regarding 'Pride Month', 'Black History Month' and the proposed 'Islamophobia Awareness Month' in the UK; seems like an arms race to me; grab those months when you can, there's not many left.

 

I remember when we had a 'minute's silence' for important events. A few years ago, I think the anniversary of Princess Diana's death, it got extended to 2 minutes, the 3, then 4...then everyone came to their senses.

 

Let's hope the same thing happens with everything else. Next will be (for example) 'Pride Season' then 'Pride Year' then 'Pride Life of the Universe'; an endless arms race where everyone is trying to outdo each other to jostle their position to be the most 'oppressed'

Edited May 23, 20242 yr by GanDoonToonPet

15 hours ago, Baht Simpson said:

If you think that's all that Pride represents then I feel sorry for you.

It’s starting to mean the end of civil society.

22 minutes ago, mogandave said:

It’s starting to mean the end of civil society.

In what way?