Hi, y’all.

An article on right-wing criticism of LGBTQ Pride events in Sweden, Tolerance with conditions is bigotry in disguise on Digital McGyver caught my attention:

This leads to something that I can only describe as a rant about how “these things” stigmatize LGBT people and makes “politics of private issues”. It boils down to a variation of “why do gays have to flaunt their sexuality in public” and paints the organization for Stockholm Pride as a “cultural leftist organization”. Then it goes on stating that it’s “the modern society’s lack of norms and fix points that has created mental ill health and social problems”.

…

What Skyttedal actually says here is that she can accept LGBT persons who aren’t “deviant with radical opinions”. I have to assume that “radical opinions” means having the same opinions as her.

It’s the usual bigotry disguised as moral panic and demands that gay people fall in line and act just like everyone else. That’s why this article caught my attention — not because the problems described are unique but because they are so familiar. The article could have easily been written about a conservative from the United States.

Recently, Occupy Austin had an activist visit from Barcelona, who was part of the revolutionary movements in Spain. The problems they face, and the issues they target were strikingly similar to our own, and his list of their top issues they’d compiled was similar to ours except perhaps in different order. Austerity, access to education, the corruption of the economy by the big banks …

Not only has the modern age of social media and citizen journalism connected movements worldwide, it also reflects the universality of our problems. Local issues matter, but they frequently boil down to the same root causes — and doesn’t it all come back to money and unequal distribution of wealth?

This is the latest myFDL open thread. What’s on your mind?

By Daniel Edward Massoglia (@jujueyeball). Originally published on the Occupied Chicago Tribune. For more MyFDL coverage of Occupied Pride events, see Why Occupy Pride and the watercooler posts Pride and Pride Revisited.

OccuPride Banner in Chicago (Photo: Philip DeVon, used with permission)

If you had, at the time, asked a participant in the Stonewall Riots—whose occurrence annual LGBTQ Pride parades commemorate—whether they envisioned a future where their cause was vocally supported by JP Morgan, Doritos, and the President of the United States, chances are your answer would have been a swift and sure “No.” But, in 21^st century America, this is the case, and, sadly, Pride has let itself be changed by this, with little thought given to the consequences and ramifications.

Let this be said: Chicago Pride was awesome. Hundreds of thousands (850,000 by the city of Chicago’s estimation) joined together in Chicago’s Lakeview and Wrigleyville neighborhoods in an exuberant celebration of humanity. People of all races, ages, sexual orientations and gender identities celebrated the wonder of life in all its forms. Gay cowboys line-danced. Dykes occupied their bikes. Even the handful of bigots ended up looking silly, flanked on either side by a sign directed at the preacher (“Secretly Gay”) and an honest to goodness “Gay Jesus” impersonator, fabulous from beard to sandals. It really was beautiful. In one interfaith segment, Mormons, Catholics, Buddhists, and other groups marched, carrying signs saying, “Gays are God’s People.” Even with all the upbeat, sun-driven joy, however, there were a number of troubling elements to the parade.

Underwritten by the 1%

Pride initially represented the cry, “We exist!” shouted from an ignored and stigmatized community to the larger population of the country. It was a celebration of the margins. While this is still the case in some ways, the LGBTQ community has now found itself underwritten by the most oppressive elements of American society—banks, politicians, and corporations, the ultimate ostracizers—and it has largely accepted this. It is a shift almost as dizzying in scope as the shift in mainstream consciousness towards LGBTQ rights. Decades ago, from the margins came a movement, one which has now, years later, unfortunately and almost unblinkingly accepted the subsidy of organizations and individuals that actively enable the perpetual, repressive “othering” of the powerless.

Read the rest of this entry →