Canadian Trustee who wants no nudity at Gay Pride is targeted

LOL- earlier in this thread I got tired of the parroting of that claim and did just that.

Found no example of it- not on the website of the man who wanted to stop the nudity, not in any news report.

I would just like to see where this claim came from that you are so willing to repeat?

I am not saying you made it up.......I am just saying that it would look like that if you can't provide a source.

 

Wow- looking back- not only did I challenge Javis about the 'death threat' issue- he even responded to my post- ignoring of course my challenge to show us the death threats.

 

Ya, know, its a gay pride parade, right?

Kinda like something gays are proud of?

I dont care if youre gay or not, but are you proud of this?

 

proud of what,

this?

View attachment 27184

or maybe this?



or maybe even this?



that has been my question all along, must there be naked homosexuals in order for it to be a "gay pride" parade? Since the activists targeted the man who wants no nudity, it appears that yes, there must be naked homosexuals as it appears to be an integral part of being "proud"

 

I dont know if you noticed but the source article from the op is now changed. The initial article was about the trustee receiving death threats for suggesting parade members should wear clothes....

Thats exactly how deep the rabbit hole goes....

 

I might as well post this for the fourth time.....

To recap

Toronto has a Gay Pride Parade.
Some people get nude during the parade
A trustee suggested that police enforce Toronto's anti-nudity ordinances
Some people criticized him for his stance.

That is the situation in Toronto.

And here is my position:
a) I don't have an objection to Pride Parades
b) I think that local municipalities can and should decide on how to enforce their own nudity laws
c) I don't think that anyone has the 'right' to be nude in public- but I also don't think that nudity in and of itself is offensive.
d) I support the right of this trustee to his opinion
e) I also support the right of those who disagree with him to their opinion.
f) Nudity in a parade is not an exclusively 'gay' thing- hence the comparison of Mardi Gras to Pride Parades- both Mardi Gras and Pride parades are celebrations that can include nudity and sexualization, and are completely over the top blow outs.

- - - Updated - - -

Still waiting for someone to show me where anyone was making death threats- I have asked three times now....still crickets.....still people making that claim.

Smelling more and more like BS

 

I have not been to NOLA in over a decade, since before Katrina, but unless things have drastically changed, the public nudity (cries of "Show your tits!!!" shouted by dozens if not hundreds of men and women) are a year round affair on Bourbon Street. I'm a dood and have flashed plenty and received many beads in return.

 

not at 9am they don't....

 

And that makes the situation ENTIRELY different........lol...

 

absolutely, because at 9, more kids can be exposed to the decadent behavior.


But, if you run a gay pride parade at 9pm.... when kids are (supposed to be) in bed.... and a trustee says "keep the nudity down".... you have a point.


but I understand the point of having gay parades at 9am is to expose kids.... so you are in a bit of a conundrum....

 

Oh yeah lol we are trying to make your kids gay.

[video]Man Bear Pig: http://youtu.be/xf69EEL3WBk[/video]

 

Nobody is awake at 9am.

 

I believe that is just one more stunning example of your understanding........

But to recap JavisBeason's understanding:
Nudity by gays at 9 a.m. is perverse
Nudity by non-gays at 9 p.m. is not perverse

What about noon? Is 3 p.m. perverse or not perverse? 6 p.m. if it is dark already?

Or is it just okay if it is girls showing their boobies?

 

After I thought about this- I thought- what the hell are you talking about?

http://www.worldpridetoronto.com/festival/parade--marches/annual-pride-parade
Start time 1 p.m.- moved up from 2 p.m. because of the huge registration.

 

WRONG. Actually, the laws there do in fact allow nudity.

Sam Sotiropoulos, the guy who is all up in arms on twitter, voted to ban nudity at the pride parade. The Toronto District School Board vetoed his motion by a 16 to 6 margin.

It also appears that Toronto parents are not against nudity either. Quote:

Worried about your kids seeing nudity? Don't take them to the parade. Furthermore, criticism of trustee Sam began because of his preaching about "homosexism" which is the idea that society discriminates against straight people. His homosexist idea was hammered as idiotic, as was his proposal to ban nudity, and he went on twitter to moan about his failure to get what he wants.

So this thread is complete nonsense, pulled from a "news" source that is complete nonsense, and completely ignores why people had criticized trustee Sam in the first place, which, again, is complete nonsense.

Move along folks, nothing to see here.

 

Any opinions or objections to the following

http://www.pbase.com/slater/fremont_summer_solstice_parade__2012&page=all (Starts at 3pm by the way with a full nude parade of cyclists)

or is it ok because they are not homosexual?

 

I don't support that either.... go make a thread about it and we will be in agreement

 

ahh

so it brings us back full circle. Can it be a homosexual pride parade without naked homosexuals? If the answer is yes, then why target this guy for not wanting nudity? Why not be respectful to people who don't want to see assless chaps and penises wagging around and groping?

If the answer is that there MUST be naked homosexuals in order for it to be representative and qualify as homosexual pride, then I understand the pushback

 

And the answer that has been given to you many times is "Of course yes".

You just refuse to acknowledge the rest of the answer- which is that some participants want to be naked in this parade. It isn't required- it is an option some people would like.

And some people object to that.

And once again- 'freedom of speech does not mean freedom from criticism'- this gentleman expressed his opinion- and other people disagreed with him. Hardly a unique situation for any city official.

What is respectful? To me, it seems your statement is not respectful to people who just want to walk nude.

As another poster pointed out- its not as if anyone is forced to go to this parade. Parents can choose to bring- or not bring their children to the parade. From my own experience at other parades, in order for a kid to get within viewing distance of the parade takes a concerted effort, because the crowds of people enjoying the high energy, incredibly fun parades are dense- people arrive sometimes hours in advance to get prime spots for the parades, and getting through the crowds later can be very difficult.

 

Sec has asked over and over if nudity is a 'requirement' for Pride Parades, and essentially ignored the responses to his question.

But it got me thinking.

One of the other big parades here in San Francisco is the Chinese New Years Parade. For those who have never been to one, it is quite enjoyable(when it isn't raining)- as dragon dancers dance their way down the street, kung fu classes parade, school children in chinese dress parade- it is quite the celebration of everything Chinese/American, and one our most popular parades.

Often during the parade, firecrackers are set off- this is traditionally Chinese for the New Years- but completely illegal.

Illegal but tolerated. Slightly dangerous and tolerated.

There are kids in the parade, and kids lining the parade route- and these little explosives are going off regularly.

To parallel Sec's question: Are firecrackers necessary for a Chinese New Years Parade?- and the answer is no.....not necessary, but they are part of the tradition of the parade- everyone coming to the parade expects the firecrackers, and police ignore the violations.

So- if some city official called for the banning of firecrackers from the Chinese New Years Parade- should he be free from criticism for the request?

I realize it is a poor comparison- since firecrackers are actually dangerous, and can cause both physical harm, and damage hearing, while public nudity can only offend someones sensibilities, but I do see the parallels in illegal, but tolerated behavior........

 

you are all about justifying exposing little kids to gay penises, aren't you....


so what is your true goal.... to celebrate gayness, or expose children to gay porn.....


seems pretty obvious.


SEC hasn't said ban gay pride parades... he said, don't shake your penis or simulate gay sex in the open where kids can see.... Why must that be tolerated (like your fireworks analogy is tolerated)

- - - Updated - - -

freedom of speech does not mean freedom to simulate gay sex in front of as many children as possible to help normalize a deviant behavior at an impressionable age.



or unless you are progay, and when you get fired for wearing a pro-gay shirt to work, you are a "victim"

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friend...enue-fires-employee-for-pro-gay-rights-shirt/

 

Reported for the personal attack that it is.

- - - Updated - - -

Repeated because I don't want Javis's comment to derail this.

 

you can avoid... I'm not attacking, I'm asking.


why is it so important that gay paraders be allowed to shake their penis and simulate gay sex at times that they can get a larger child audience? At least Madi gra parades that are "adult themed" are advertised that way, and run at night starting around 9pm-ish.... not 8am, 3pm, or 6pm, which is prime time child exposure time.

I ask because you seem to be all about protecting the gays ability to parade around nude.... what's your reason? is it because you want to expose children to it?

 

First of lets review what my post was-

Sec has asked over and over if nudity is a 'requirement' for Pride Parades, and essentially ignored the responses to his question.

But it got me thinking.

One of the other big parades here in San Francisco is the Chinese New Years Parade. For those who have never been to one, it is quite enjoyable(when it isn't raining)- as dragon dancers dance their way down the street, kung fu classes parade, school children in chinese dress parade- it is quite the celebration of everything Chinese/American, and one our most popular parades.

Often during the parade, firecrackers are set off- this is traditionally Chinese for the New Years- but completely illegal.

Illegal but tolerated. Slightly dangerous and tolerated.

There are kids in the parade, and kids lining the parade route- and these little explosives are going off regularly.

To parallel Sec's question: Are firecrackers necessary for a Chinese New Years Parade?- and the answer is no.....not necessary, but they are part of the tradition of the parade- everyone coming to the parade expects the firecrackers, and police ignore the violations.

So- if some city official called for the banning of firecrackers from the Chinese New Years Parade- should he be free from criticism for the request?

I realize it is a poor comparison- since firecrackers are actually dangerous, and can cause both physical harm, and damage hearing, while public nudity can only offend someones sensibilities, but I do see the parallels in illegal, but tolerated behavior.

You focused on another 'meat' entirely- rather than the content of my post.

I am not surprised, but it is worth pointing out.

- - - Updated - - -

I will limit my remarks to pointing out that you are the one focused on gay penises.

And pointing out once again that your post was a personal attack.

 

Why is it so important for you to characterize nudity in a parade as 'shaking penis'?

Why do you keep claiming that this has anything to do with a 'child audience'?

Why are you more concerned about the possibility that a parent may bring a child to a parade and that child might be exposed to the horrors of a nude man- than you are concerned about the possibility that a parent could bring a child to a parade with dangerous firecrackers that could damage their hearing?