Headline: The White House is refusing to recognize “LGBT” Pride Month.
Hola a todos. I recently wrote about anti-Queer comments online. From a quick glance, which is all I could stand to do, I noticed that the hateful anti-Queer online comments increased especially the week of el 1 de junio de 2017/1 June 2017 when El Hombre Naranja/The Orange Man did not issue a declaration honouring June as Queer/GLBTQ Pride Month.
Of the few articles I scanned about this, the comments were that of extreme anti-Queer hatred from the (most likely) gay closet cases who were very pleased that their draconian and deranged messiah, The Orange Man, was not honouring Queers and had (according to them) “restored dignity” to la casa blanca/the white house and was not honouring “sexual deviants.” One has to keep in mind that the human trash who continue to support El Hombre Naranja live in their own alternative universe which comes with its own set of alternative facts.
I got the impression that some fake-“progressive”/fake-“liberal” writers were surprised that The Orange Man did not honour the month. Why would that surprise them? Who expects him to honour anything having to do with Queers? Only the most naïve and delusional among us.
And sadly, there’s very little “pride” in the conformist, heteronormative and pro-corporate Queer community of today
As I’ve written many times before, I see very little pride from the “discreet” and “down-low” Queer community today. Those are the two descriptions most commonly found in men-for-men sex ads especially on C****slist. “Discreet” and “down low” (meaning closeted) are the opposite of pride. So what then is the point of continuing to having perfunctory corporate Pride events each year? Well, they are a money maker for a lot of people. Corporate Pride of today is this slick production that comes with their official corporate sponsors, their official automobile, their official corporate hotel (“Are you staying at the official Pride hotel?”), and other official corporate sponsors/commercials. And there’s US military recruiting at some of these events. In recent years, they’ve invited corporate sports teams to be in the parade. I’d like to point out that the Queers of the original Gay and Lesbian Rights’ Movement had no interest at all in the military, or in sports. This is all new in the big scheme of things in order to “assimilate” with the breeders (translation of assimilate: for many Queers this has come to mean go back in the closet and pretend to be straight) and be heteronormative, jock-like and breeder-like.
Unfortunately, the corporatists have thoroughly hijacked, taken over and ruined Pride, just as lesbians have since hijacked the original Gay and Lesbian Rights’ Movement with that top-billing “LGBT” acronym that one sees everywhere (except on pink barrio) and that the sheeple dutifully write as if it’s a Queer corporate logo/brand name. The original Pride lost itself years ago in favour of corporatism, and this seems to be the case regardless of which city one is talking about.
There’s going to be a national — what I’m calling — Queer Pride March on Washington, the District of Columbia, (my former home) this weekend, to coincide with the District’s annual Pride celebrations. DC’s corporate pride event is also sponsored by a major international corporate hotel chain. Lovely. The websites connected with DC’s Pride use the typical corporatist revisionist history acronym: “LGBTA” (notice the Q is missing; the A apparently stands for Ally or Association) rather than GLBTQ which honours our genuine/authentic history.
I have a suggestion: Forget all of these letters altogether and use the word Queer instead. But I know that the corporatist “Brand LGBTTM” won’t do that because the word Queer makes breeders uncomfortable and we can’t have that when Queers are doing their best to emulate and cater to breeders whenever possible as Queers “assimilate” with the breeders.
I sensed from the article I read about the District’s national march this weekend when it was announced that they’re not expecting too many to show up as compared to the national marches on DC during the days of the Gay and Lesbian Rights’ Movement. And because most of the Queer community today is quite conservative, who exactly would show up for Pride — or will they have “pride” for one day during the year? — when most are now “discreet” and “down low?” Closet cases don’t do Pride. How did that happen that Queers have become so conservative? How did the Queer community that I knew go from being very liberal/progressive to now prudish conservatives trying to be like and act like breeders? WTF?
The word “Pride” and the words “discreet, down-low” are a contradiction. When one is “discreet” one is now proud.
As with some political protests of the past, one must consider the strong possibility that the faces of those who attend the national march in DC will be captured by The Orange Man’s fascistic regime using Facial Recognition Technology. (One should put nothing past these septic, fascistic people despite their regime being completely in chaos and out-of-control. Is Jeff Se**ions going to be the next piece of bigoted basura to resign, in part, because “nobody” can get along with El Hombre Naranja?)
From what I’ve read about DC’s Queer community today, they sound as lame, “discreet”, “down low” and closeted as what San Francisco’s Queer community has become. Reading the personal sex ads for the District of Columbia (as well as the Northern Virginia and MD suburbs), they are the same as the ones I read from San Francisco. And if the District’s Pride Parade is as pathetically corporate as what San Francisco’s has morphed into — a mobile thoroughly corporate commercial mainly attended by breeders for celebrating millionaire and billionaire-owned tech companies (such as F***book: “Vladan Joler says that all F***book users are effectively working on behalf of the company,”), wealthy corporate sports team, et al — then I and mis amigos/my friends would have zero interest in going.
Some of us have no interest in corporatist “Brand LGBTTM” so-called Pride month or anything else they come up with. As far as we are concerned, corporatist and conformist “Brand LGBTTM” can fuck off. I and others can’t relate to them at all. I stay away from corporatists and conformist whenever possible. We like people who are proudly radical which are a small minority in the new conservative San Francisco of today, a playground for the super-wealthy.
While writing this article I read the following headline: “How The Stonewall Riot Birthed LGBT Pride.” That’s another lie. Stonewall did not birth “Brand LGBTTM. That is bull shit. That’s more revisionist history that one reads all over the internet these days and I and mis amigos/my friends are sick of it. This new “LGBT” acronym was not used or even thought of at the time of Stonewall. The name “Gay and Lesbian Rights’ Movement” was used at that time. This is another example of what I mean when I’ve written that the corporatist revisionists of “Brand LGBTTM” have literally gone back into historical documents — I don’t know how they accomplished that — and changed the language of that day from “Gay and Lesbian Rights’ Movement” to “LGBT” as if that’s the way it’s always been, which is a lie. It’s a false representation of our G & L Rights’ Movement. The Stonewall riots — along with the previous 1959 riot at Cooper’s Donuts in Los Ángeles and a 1966 riot at Compton’s Cafeteria in San Francisco’s Tenderloin (I’d like to have seen those from what I’ve read about them!) — birthed the Gay and Lesbian Rights Movement, not this “LGBT Pride” nonsense, which again for the thick people who happen to show up here, is revisionist history and a hijacking of our original movement by lesbians.
Now for those who may be wondering about the following and have not read anything else I’ve written on this topic: From my research, I’ve read many reasons why the “L” of “LGBT” was moved to first place. One of the reasons was to give lesbians “top-billing” to show that Queers support women’s rights. Well Duh. Isn’t it a given that Queers support women’s rights? Yes. Then they should have left the L in second place. Queers support transgender rights too — or some of us do — but I never see the T moved to first place, do you? NO. Some of us are surprised that the T is still there at all considering how heteronormative the Queer community has become. Another reason I’ve read for this change was that lesbians were feeling excluded. Oh, the poor dears! It grieves me so to hear that! Therefore, some corporatist idiot (perhaps a lesbian?) proposed “let’s put the L first” even though lesbians did not do most of the work of the movement. In the early days, gay guys and transgender individuals were the most activist and did most of the work with the riots at Cooper’s Donuts and Compton’s Cafeteria. And another reason I’ve read for the change was that the feminist movement — which is now dead in case one hasn’t noticed — occurred at the same time as the Gay and Lesbian Rights’ Movement so because of that in some sort of twisted-thinking way it was decided that the L should be first. To some of us, having the “L” in first place is chauvinistic as in “Ladies go first” something that the corporatists — devoid of any critical thinking skills — who dreamed up “LGBT” never considered apparently. And another reason I read that the “L” was moved to first place is that lesbians are considered more acceptable to breeders than gay guys so the “G” for gay was moved to second place to try to sort of bury the G in there in the acronym giving “top billing” to the L for lesbians. I don’t doubt that that’s the real reason considering how pathetically heteronormative and conformist the Queer community has become. I think it’s always good to cater to breeders and their bigotry/prejudices against gay guys, don’t you? [sarcasm intended]. That’s another example of how I much more related to the original Gay and Lesbian Rights’ Movement because in those days we didn’t fucking cater to breeders and try to be like them like Queers are doing today. Chau.—el barrio rosa