Rob Ford, when asked if he would be attending this year’s pride parade in Toronto, said “I’m not going to go to the pride parade. I’ve never been to a pride parade. So I’m not going to change the way I am.”
Uh-oh:
The mayor’s remarks prompted criticism from the public and at least one fellow city councillor — Shelley Carroll — who accused him of “thinly veiled homophobia.”
Helen Kennedy, the executive director of Egale Canada, strongly disagreed with this assessment:
“There’s nothing ‘thinly veiled’ about it. It’s overt homophobia.”
Sure. And refusing to watch Jersey Shore reruns is overt heterophobia.
*Yawn*.
There are two rising social trends: Homoism and Islam.
The clash between the two will be interesting.
Personally, I’m thinking the side with the machetes will prevail.
Har har har… that’s a cracker!
Um, can I say that? Cracker? I’ve such white privilege. Sighhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh…
Not going to a circus show of homos conducting lewd acts in public is now homophobia to these people. Sorry, I find it gross. Do whatever you like in private you freaks but don’t expect me to watch it.
It’s not really an “ism”, though, is it? There are heterosexuals – like the cast of Jersey Shore – who are similarly profligate exhibitionists, but we don’t generally blame their behaviour on heterosexuality – or their “heteroism”.
The whole stupid – and annual – story is really about a person’s right not to attend a particular event featuring (often) half-naked people acting silly. Those who in effect demand mandatory attendance on the part of public officials, under threat of social proscription and name-calling, betrays a quasi-fascist tendency.
Like a lot of people, Rob and Doug Ford have homosexual friends; they’re just not partial to the “pride” parade. Would either of them attend an annual parade featuring a bunch of half-dressed heterosexuals? Probably not.
Is it okay to hate them on political grounds? Just curious, it’s not like I care what liberals or stupid people think.
Because the turd being pushed and polished here is this: if you don’t agree with the liberal/gay agenda, that is seen as intolerance – and intolerance won’t be tolerated.
I wouldn’t go to a parade that celebrates those moral and intellectual cripples either.
Standard playbook by the gays. Their one and only objective is to *force* everyone accept their lifestyle. That’s why they usurped the word “gay”. That’s why they insisted on marriage. That’s why they have parades. That’s why they want to adopt kids. That’s why they want teachers to tell kindergarten children that Johnny has two Daddies.
Every single last thing they do is to try and force everyone to accept their lifestyle. So when Rob Ford says no, they cry like babies.
You obviously haven’t heard of Man Love Thursday.
Yet another reason to vote for Rob Ford, no matter how many drunken shenanigans he gets up to.
I mean, consider the alternative: Olivia “Pinko” Chow.
Say, can we still call people “pinkos” without being accused of racism? Or is being a frickin’ pinko commie a race now?
Not that I care really, just intellectual curiosity. ~:D
You’re making a serious logical error: you’re selecting a subset of highly politicized gays and extrapolating their politicized behaviour on everyone who has that orientation. I’ve had four or five gay friends in my lifetime, and not one of them had even the slightest interest in forcing other people to think one way or another. To say “(Gays’) one and only objective is to force everyone to accept their lifestyle” is simply false.
The behaviour of the blathering idiots who are hounding Rob Ford every year to try to get him to attend the pride parade is ultimately political in nature. So, to answer Glenfilthie’s (rhetorical) question, yes, it’s okay to hate them on political grounds. Because they’re behaving like fascists.
Homosexuals have nothing to be proud of. You could not pay me to watch their parades.
I’m proud of Mayor Ford standing up for his principles.
I really don’t care about his motives. As long as he continues to drive the howling commie moonbats insane he has my vote.
It’s just a fact of life, Kroket, that a certain percentage of people are born gay, and, I guess, that a considerably larger percentage will hate them for it.
The Fords don’t hate gay people, though; the article notes that both Rob and Doug have gay friends, so if they’re “standing up for (their) principles”, as you put it, they’re standing up for the right to not be forced to watch a parade of exhibitionists.
That’s the ticket!
I hope Ford’s refusal to attend this vile circus starts a cascade of people unwilling to ingratiate themselves to the professional gays’ wing of the Perpetually-Aggrieved.
It seems that epithet labeling of some sort of anyone who disagrees with any level of leftist/gay agenda, no matter how extreme, is quite in vogue now. The public and media tolerates this and it is becoming more shrill and intimidating with time. I think we all remember the Liberals a couple of elections ago claiming anyone who did not agree with them was a bad Canadian.
In this case, it seems that that this bunch of political radicals, who happen to be gay, is demanding that all public figures, especially high profile ones, support their vile public display. Trouble is, all gays, political or quiet, are tainted by this and a quiet hate among the general public may well to be building. Never in the past have I heard what some people actually think as I have heard the last number of years. In the past everyone knew they were there, maybe knew a few, even me, but mostly no one gave them much thought.
Good for the Fords to have the courage to not cave in to them.
“The professional gays’ wing of the Perpetually-Aggrieved.”
That’s an apt description, and the noisiest spokespeople for same are the ones who are quoted – annually – in tiresome newspaper stories about the “homophobics” who’d rather drink a beer and play with their kids than attend a parade they don’t want to watch.
I don’t hate homosexuals nor heterosexuals. I just detest their in your face attitude. I am not proud of being heterosexual, it’s just normal and no need to discuss it. I have homosexual friends but we do not discuss the issue at all. No need for it.
Just think- had this been the Stalinist era, Ford would have been shipped off to Siberia for refusing to clap.
You’ve hit on a very, very important point: No one, gay or straight, likes to be *forced* to do something they don’t want to do — whether it be attending a silly parade or mouthing the prescribed words of support for a particular cause — and when people are forced to do these things, resentment and anger is pretty much inevitable.
I was about to say that I’m surprised that more of these activists don’t realize this, but I think they actually do understand this, and that they actually feed on the resentment, which they can then portray in each instance as a prima facie case of “homophobia.”
I think you’re right that these loudmouth, quasi-fascist, self-appointed “spokespeople” for the orientation (which makes about a much sense as being a spokesperson for the right-handed) are actually doing a huge disservice to the quieter homosexuals (as you put it) whose orientation has about as much political significance to them as their right-handedness.
I agree with every word of your 10:45 comment, Kroket. I feel the same way.
Don’t you Canucks know how to spell “Eagle”?
😉
EBD, first off your point is of little practical significance if it is the “highly politicized gays” who are setting the agenda.
Second, why don’t the other gays speak up? Not a peep from any of them. Which tells me they are in a very small minority, and the majority are radicals with an agenda. Or, it tells me they quietly agree with the agenda.
Either way, as I said, your point is moot because the radical gay agenda is alive and well and increasingly it intrudes everywhere it can, including into the lives of innocent children who are used as pawns.
I have no respect for the gay community at all. They are thugs. Bullies. Cowards. Spoiled, whining, selfish brats who only care about themselves and no-one else.
A phobia is an irrational fear of something….not a choice not to condone or participate in something. The president of eagle (sic) needs to read a dictionary like so many of the other activists in the gay movement. They are indeed pushing everyone’s buttons to the point of backlash.
If these parades were just that – a parade, like the Santa Claus parade or a St. Patrick’s Day parade then there wouldn’t be an issue. But, if after 20 years (or whatever) you still have to do the same over the top crap you did back then, you haven’t matured enough to be part of an intelligent conversation about the entire issue. It’s time for the gay community to truly grow up and say ‘No more of the gross stuff.’
Thinly veiled homophobia? More like acute, widespread homonausea.
I’ve had queer (their word) friends and queer renters and their orientation was never an issue, never a concern. But as has been said, we’ve gone from the “love that dare not speak it’s name, to a movement that just won’t shut up”. These ‘activists’ primary motivation is not sexuality, but ideology. It’s leftism using orientation as a cudgel.
The comment by the activist about there being more “families” in attendance than naked men is beside the point. One naked man (or woman) in a parade is just inappropriate. Acceptance of public nudity, be it in a ‘parade’ or otherwise, inevitably leads to pushing the envelope and ending up with San Francisco north. And if you wonder what that’s like, check out Zombie’s blog for just one horrid example: http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=1861
It’s not about acceptance, it’s about complete surrender of one’s principles.
I forgot to mention that the new mayor of NYC Bill DeBlasio has refused to participate in the upcoming St. Patrick’s Day Parade because the organizers refused ‘gay pride’ proponents to enter a float
What the hell does your orientation have to do with St. Paddy’s Day? Or whether you sail 150 meters through the air on skis? Everything is political to the activists, which is why I said the orientation is secondary to the ideology – a means to a fascistic end. It’s indoctrination and if you don’t toe the line as an individual or a corporation, you’ll be publically shamed and condemned.
Phobia implies one is scared of something… scared, right.
As for ‘being born that way’ or ‘well, it occurs in nature’, some people are born with an incredible urge to kill or steal as well. Doesn’t mean we should encourage their behavior and I have seen mothers eat their young in ‘nature’. I still would be hard pressed to recommend that act to newborn mothers.
Well, it’s not like the self-appointed ones who are setting the agenda asked for the non-noisy gays’ permission. The activists get to set the agenda because a) they’re the ones who have an agenda, and define themselves as the activists/spokespeople; b) they’re often government funded, at some level; c) they’re the most famous, and “in your face”, because they’re inevitably the “go-to” source for quotes in newspapers and such, and d) they have the support of a much larger number of “progressives” who act as de facto enforcers for those who aren’t “down” with the larger “program.”
As for why the other gay people don’t “speak up”, why should they speak up on behalf of gays if they don’t consider themselves part of the politicized agenda? All the gay people I’ve known have avoided the politicized activist-types like the plague because they see their own orientation as incidental to the more important things in their life, and because they just don’t want to be a part of all that noise. They just want to have a normal, quiet life like anyone else. The majority of heterosexuals don’t constantly bang on about their heterosexuality, and a lot of gay people feel the same way. They have that right, just as Rob Ford has a right to not attend the pride parade.
I don’t feel compelled to speak out against Snooki and JWoww on behalf of heterosexuals, or to appoint myself as spokesman for same (“you guys are making us heterosexuals look bad!”) so I can’t really expect quiet, non-activist gay people to step into the fray on behalf of homosexuals.
You’re absolutely right that there is a radical – and I would add “noisy” — gay agenda, one that’s run out of bounds with the ball, IMO, but it’s really a subset of a much larger radical/progressive agenda that includes “green” issues (think “Ontario windfarms”), totally inappropriate “s*x-ed” in schools (including heterosexual s*x-ed), “social justice” of every description, and funding for all, blah-blah-blah.
Again, it’s just a subset – a very, very noisy, and often ill-behaved subset. Anyone who would condemn and denounce a politician for not attending a stupid parade is bound to be really and truly annoying.
What homosexuals don’t realize is that they’re virtually nonexistent outside of large cities. Where I currently live, those that reside here are as reserved as heterosexuals in publicizing their carnal lives. People really don’t care what consenting adults do in private even though we’re all rednecks.
When I practiced in Vancouver I had considerable exposure to homosexuals as the west end of Vancouver is one of the world homosexual mecca’s. Initially it was interesting to see what HIV could do to the bodies immune system and the numerous infections which are controlled by cell mediated immunity. Then antiretroviral therapy came along and AIDS vanished (except for the IV drug using population of E. Hastings who can barely organize their next fix let alone seeing a doctor about their profound weight loss and not feeling good) and HIV got boring. I got tired of having to drag in high functioning HIV+ individuals every 3 months so I could berate them to do their regular blood tests and give them another 3 month prescription for antiretrovirals. The were healthy, they were working and they were annoyed at having to see a doctor every 3 months. I was also annoyed at having no interesting lab results to review and the only exciting problem to pop up was the decline of mitochondrial numbers in cells as a result of antiretroviral therapy. That temporarily made HIV interesting again.
The generation of homosexuals that was around Vancouver when HIV entered the population is far more conservative than the current population that assumes that HIV is just another chronic disease. It probably is a life changing event when 95% of ones friends die and one wonders if they’re going to be the next statistic. I’d regularly hear from such survivors (who probably have an innate caucasian immunity to HIV) about how their words of warning to the younger generation seem to fall on deaf ears. Aside from their homosexuality, most of these individuals wouldn’t stand out and they had no intention of standing out. Unfortunately, they don’t speak out against the mentally deranged homosexuals who are likely to bring back homophobia with a vengeance.
There are a lot of homosexuals with personality disorders and I made sure I slowly eliminated them from my practice. Usually the suggestion that they were fit to work and that I would not fill out any forms so they could be “sick” for welfare purposes while they engaged in the full time exploration of uranism with many partners was sufficient for them to never come back again. This was the population that was most obsessed with such events such as “gay pride” parades and demanding that the “breeders” in the population accept their perversions.
Whenever one of the homosexual “pride” parades occurred in Vancouver, I’d make a point of leaving the city for the interior. The seeming insatiable desire of Vancouver residents to clog downtown streets on the slightest pretext making it difficult for anyone who actually lived there to go about their business was one of the significant factors that lead to my moving out of Vancouver. I don’t think that makes me homophobic any more than my leaving Vancouver during the “festival of light” indicates I have a fear of fireworks — I don’t like crowds and fireworks get boring after a few years.
The ridiculously high prevalence of homosexuality numbers all come from individuals who live in large cities. Homosexuality is rare and, still having the ability acquired in Vancouver to guess with high probability whether an individual is homosexual, revealed very few homosexuals coming into BC interior walkin clinics that I worked in. In every case, I was the one who brought up a question about their carnal preferences and was right every time. As a physician from a small town near where I live noted “the queers have all had the shit pounded out of them enough times here that they’ve all moved to Vancouver”. A bit of an overstatement as people tend to be fairly tolerant, but exhibitionist homosexuality doesn’t get much approval in the interior of BC.
By accusing any public official who doesn’t put in an obligatory appearance at the annual festivals of uranism of “homophobia”, the blatant queers are generating more and more hatred for their lifestyle among the general public. It seems that homosexuals aren’t satisfied with the population being accepting of what they do in private, they are demanding special status for their often perverse practices. If someone suggested holding a “white pride” or “gunowners pride” parade, there would be howls of outrage over the non-inclusivity or antisocial nature of such an event. Curiously, homosexual “pride” parades represent less than 1% of the population and are considered as symbols of “tolerance” despite the fact that the individuals involved in organizing such events are some of the most intolerant people one could find.
The only advice I have for the non-exibitionistic homosexuals who are living quiet normal lives is to be a lot more vocal in outing the clearly mentally ill individuals who are getting away with activities that heterosexuals would be arrested for. The notion that a common bond of homosexuality trumps any defects an individual might have needs to be re-examined as, when the backlash comes, it will be indiscriminate. I’ve known homosexual couples who I’d have no problem living next to whereas I’m glad that the borderline personality disordered homosexuals I’ve met live in Vancouver. A healthy homosexual population would reject such individuals as they’re giving homosexuality a bad name.
I have been watching the Olympics on NBC on Shaw Direct channel 325 for the last hour and during a 15 minute break the host and two guests, one being Vladimir Pozner, for a few minutes discussed Putin’s tremendous popularity among Russians and why, and then proceeded to discuss the Russian anti-Gay advertising law for the rest of the time. Good grief, is this really the most important thing to discuss on the first day of the Olympics?
I agree.
David Thompson wrote a superbly wry post (titled “You’ll Notice They All Wear Shoes”) about the inappropriate and not-family-friendly exhibitionistic excesses on the streets of the Castro District in San Francisco.
Well worth reading. As always, much of the hilarity is in David’s (and other people’s) comments under the post.
Referencing Loki’s thoughts regarding personality disorder, I happened to tune in the Bill Good program on CKNW for a few minutes. He was discussing abuse towards transit drivers and a caller, saying he was himself a transit driver, claimed to suffer from PTSD due to being spat upon and attacked while on the job.
He said he would react to sounds or situations and end up at home, curled up and crying. He carried a bottle of Adavan with him to help control his emotions. Then he referred to how difficult it was on his “partner” of fifteen years. One might assume it was a woman, but based on the conversation, I guessed otherwise and my guess of course was correct, as he subsequently referred to his partner as “he”.
Sure, driving a bus can be tough and sometimes unpleasant. But c’mon, it is really enough to induce post traumatic stress disorder in a well ordered personality?
But EBD, why isn’t there at least one, just *one* gay person that is willing to stand up and say that it’s perfectly fine if Rob Ford does not want to attend the parade? The fact that there’s not even *one* is very telling in my view.
Look at this blog. When the Cons do something we don’t like dozens of us speak up and complain. So do the folks on Sun News. So do writers in the National Post.
But when the radical gays do radical things, the rest of them are as silent as mice.
Like I said, I have no time for the gay community. They persistently try to shove it our faces (and worse, our children’s faces) at every possible turn. They lie. They see nothing wrong with using children as pawns in their agenda. They are a typical “me me me, give give give” special interest group. In short, a thoroughly rotten bunch all around.
I see the Google doodle for the Olympic Games has the pride flag colours. I rest my earlier case – everwhere you look the gays are trying to force their agenda.
Waiting for the Google doodle that celebrates heterosexual families…..waiting…..waiting……waiting…..waiting….
EBD, yours is a thoughtful, even-handed comment. Given the circumstances, don’t you think that’s inappropriate?
That is so gay!
Rob Ford has been relieved of most of his duties as Mayor so it’s up to his deputy to ride the rainbow wagon. He sure knows how to GET to the Leftards who will be well represented at the parade including Ontario Premier Windmill Winnie who refuses to meet with Ford.
@ BC 11:10 Agreed, they are the most affluent “discriminated against” group ever. Their agenda or whatever “it” is is always front and centre because they make up a large percentage of people working in the media and entertainment industry.
They want to be normalized yet at the same time be viewed as special. What the activists at Gladd and Eagle fear is the realization that most people just don’t care. Just shut up, go away and leave the kids alone.
A little late to the parade but I would be as apt to attend a pride parade as much as I would a St Jean Baptiste day thing. Does that make me a hater of all things frenchy-homo?
If so, I’m OK with that.
Can you imagine the outcry by the lefties if the majority of us staged a straight pride parade>
Wally 10:48 I see your “Straight Pride Parade” and raise you with “Hetro-Normal Pride Parade” also could try
“Crackers who won’t Wave their Peckers in Public Pride Parade”
Does not the Pride Parade get 500,000 tax dollars from TO to display their pride?
Can us Crackers get 500,000 to build a shooting range?
Out here on the left coast we have a “Family day” it is oriented towards the community as a whole, kids activities, everyone is welcome.
Now how quaint is that?
If Mayor Ford does not want to go to their event, so what?
Everyone already supports their event with tax dollars.
Would they welcome a hetro-normal segment of their parade?
Just askin’
For this observer, homosexuality remains fundamentally wrong and a gay pride parade is an automatic invitation for a public display of immoral behaviour. How could it be anything else?
How could normal or spiritually aware people attend such a travesty or see anything good in it?
When you can only find sound moral guidance from former officers of the KGB, you know that you are living in very disturbed times. Canadian conservatives have completely lost their way in this moral jungle and can expect to be devoured by unseen beasts for their mistakes.
Rob Ford, drunken idiot though he may be, has a vague glimpse of moral certainty on this issue.
We might as well give up and start again, this country has broken down and become almost a laughing stock, surely in heaven if not on earth.
What kind of logic is;”You must respect me because I am Gay?”
Certainly does nothing for me.
Show mw your work.
What have you built?.
Seems to be a very progressive mentality, obsessing over ones sexuality.
Could it be, that this is the only distinction these sad folk have?
What if your only accomplishment was, your sexuality?
Sad.
Further proof that liberalism is a mental disorder.
Rather than develop a socially useful skill, they insist we must respect them when they choose to be nonproductive.
Political Science?
Even-handed would be a line of reasoning that accounts for viewpoints not sharing “being born gay” as axiomatic.
EBD: What’s ‘quasi-fascist’ about it? It’s purely fascist – “You vill belief vat ve vant you to belief!”
We’ve gone from official condemnation of homosexuality, through tolerance, all the way to outright promotion and celebration. If Kathleen Loser had her way when she was Education Minister, we’d have been teaching kids in Grade 2 how to perform acts I can’t name lest the f*lter bans me.
I really don’t care what they do in their bedrooms; it’s none of my business. But to be told that I must celebrate and exalt their perversions? Feh.
All shall attend, on the threat of re-education camp.
That percentage is incredibly exaggerated, for political purposes. Mostly, the gay brigade is just another example of modern urban tribalism; like Goths, Hippies, Skinheads, wearing gangster hats sideways or backwards, etc.
Politically incorrect warning:
Yes, this is a lie expanded from rare cases where chromosomes are mixed up through those who have emotional issues to those who have joined an urban club.
You may well be right that the percentage is exaggerated for political purposes – I have no idea – but it doesn’t really matter what the percentage is. If it’s 0.000005 percent or 3.1 percent, it’s still a fact of life that some people are born gay, in the exact same way that other people are born heterosexual.
I hate to keep banging on the same drum, but it’s germane to the discussion: The atrocious, sexual exhibitionism of certain heterosexuals – like certain members of the cast of Jersey Shore – is *never* ascribed to their heterosexuality, or posited as a behavioural symptom of it, and no one points to their behaviour in an attempt to denigrate all heterosexuals. There’s a very good and logical reason for that.
The list of historic figures who were homosexual — Michelangelo, Arthur Rimbaud, Alexander the Great, Hadrian, Walt Whitman, Alan Turing (the man who helped break the Enigma code in WWII), Vladimir Horowitz, Leonardo da Vinci – is practically endless, but it’s not an issue in retrospect because none of them were loud, in-your-face exhibitionists parading around half-naked in public and demanding that public officials participate in the “fun”.
As with the cast of Jersey Shore, the attitude of the pride parade activist-types is a personal/behavioural issue more than a sexual orientation issue. I do admit that there’s probably a larger degree of overlap between the two in the gay community – especially the gay male community, within which the behaviours tend to be a sort of an extreme condensate of the natural male tendency to (*) and run – but let’s not overdo it here.
There are a lot of gay/lesbian people who are ten times as quiet and modest as a lot of the more profligate members of the heterosexual community. If some people don’t understand this – probably because they haven’t met them – then so be it.
…it’s still a fact of life that some people are born gay…
He says, without an ounce of proof.