@nev This article associates "straight people" with people who make "all your opinions and hot takes, your updated or antiquated, informed or spit-balled theories, your rants and raves, all your endless, hectoring chatter about the five short hours a year my people get to walk down the street wearing rainbow face paint".

@nev As a straight person who does not do any of these things, I'm simply offended. Sure, it's possible that "we queers have had a tough year." It is not an excuse to lash out at the already quiet or straight up supportive kind of straight people for that tough year.

It's not the supportive straight people who need to shut up now - it's the author.

@nev I understand the frustration and deeply sympathize. Your situation isn't easy nor simple nor painless, queer folks, and you need lots of support to get through the current tough times relatively unscarred and sane.

So kindly don't push that support away with insults like this article.

@phoe Frankly, we don't need the support of deeply insecure people who refuse to take a back seat. My strongest allies have never been afraid of my frustration or anger.

You have my blessing to become a right-wing bigot now!

@nev I'm not insecure. I simply know how many of my queer friends need support, and how many of them are thankful to me that I provide it to them when they need it.

Shutting up when they need support is directly against that friendship as I perceive it.

@nev I don't ever want to become a right-wing bigot, there are already too many of these.

I simply don't want to stop supporting my pals at any time, be it parades, be it events, be it completely average days.

@phoe do you understand that "not all straight people" is #notallmen logic?

CW: rape

https://www.theodysseyonline.com/not-all-men-logic

in other words: not logical, not supportive, not allyship, not helping, thanks no thanks

@nev

@shoutcacophony @nev "Screaming "not all men" is a major cop-out to avoid dealing with a sticky situation. Rather than deciding that a situation doesn't involve you and staying in your own lane or working to change the awful situation in the first place, people who use the "not all men" logic choose to actively ignore problems by still finding a way to make sure that we know it's still all about them. "

@shoutcacophony @nev I actually notice the issue. I already listen to my friends who are queer and face a lot of kicks from their environment because of that - especially in Poland that is quite a fundamentalist country in so many ways.

@shoutcacophony @nev I also don't want to stay in my own lane, either - I already try to be emotional and mental support for the people around me, especially if they are in need for it.

@shoutcacophony @nev It's just very unfun to be classified in the "you're straight, shut up" way.

Not "you're straight, you should not be the main voice when it comes to queer communities" way, which I agree with.

Not "you're straight, you should not write and make the rules and laws for queer people" way, which I consider an obvious and sane right.

@phoe @nev are they asking you for emotional and mental support, though? and if they are, who sets the terms of that, you or them?

@shoutcacophony @nev Yep, I let them know I'm there for them. I end up chatting with them about painful topics - once in a while they need that kindof stuff. I'm there and listen, and share my own thoughts and insight if they ask for that, too.

It's hard to describe that in a single toot. I just try not to screw up the trust they put in me as a friend, and do my best.

@shoutcacophony @nev

It's the "you're straight, shut up *in general* about the paradde" way. Shutting up prevents me from actually expressing happiness about that or talking to my queer friends during that time. It's a logical consequence - I can't talk, I need to be shut up.

@phoe @nev the irony of this situation: you're not being asked to shut up overall, any more than the cops who were told to not show up armed and in uniform are being told "you can't participate"

@shoutcacophony @nev I actually was.

"Please shut up about the Pride Parade. Yes, shut up."

No talking about preparation, no talking about who else comes, no listening to people who faced oppression due to participating previously, no comments thrown at the people who consider all of these parades and all the people who participate in them to be hell spawns and best doused in liters of holy water.

Sure, I can be quiet. I just think it would be much better if I wasn't.

@phoe @nev I'm going to wrap this up, but you're still not getting what the author's intent was in terms of making a generalized point in a specific context. Just like women saying "men are a pita" doesn't mean every single man they've ever known for all existence.

You're not seeing it, and you sound genuine in your convictions here, but that's part of the problem.

Also, this has *no* bearing on you supporting your queer friends, regardless of whether they asked for support or not

@shoutcacophony @nev Sorry to hear you wrapping it up - I'm actually trying to understand the point here and figure out what I'm missing from the picture.

I understand that the author saying "straight people, shut up about X" doesn't mean all straight people whatsoever should shut up about it forever, and I can empathize with the whole stress behind this article, but that intent was conveyed in a way that's not acceptable by me.

That's roughly what I see so far.

@phoe (bumping @nev from thread, feel free to join in if you like)

@phoe the intent as i see it is "i love you all, but friends, you're not helping by your insistence to keep talking about pride, because of reasons that i detail below."

the "shut up" is an affect to reinforce the point, not a literal statement of exclusion of allies

@shoutcacophony Yes, I have read that. The article mentions straight people in one of two contexts only - either people like the ones from Alberta UCP or Ontario premier who are outright hostile to the community, or "straight couples reinforcing the barricades with strollers" who just take photos and then go do other stuff.

Nothing about straight people who actually march along, not because they are queer themselves, but because their dear ones are.

@shoutcacophony Such people exist, but are not mentioned anywhere in the article - that is the part that stung me the most. And now that I look at it, the part that provoked my reaction.

@phoe

it's as if you had a party for friends who like to fish, and their <fishing-friendly> friends kept talking about the price of fish, the ethics of fish, whether fish licenses are good or bad, wether fishes are sentient creatures or not.

when all <fishing> friends wanted was a party where they could talk about fishing without it becoming a larger debate, involving fishing lovers, their friends, fish and wildlife rangers (who insist on showing up armed), the press, fishing-haters and so on

@shoutcacophony Hm. I can understand that analogy. Let me think about it for a moment.

@phoe sure :)

@shoutcacophony The way I see it right now, that's actually a question of: is the Pride Parade essentially a party for friends who like to fish? Even if it is, is it *only* a party for friends who like to fish?

@shoutcacophony I can see the Parade playing very many roles in many people's lives and I do not currently think that an event like a Pride Parade can be simplified this much. It is a party, but it is also a demonstration, a chance for showing support, a chance for showing unity, a chance to show one's inner self, ..., ..., ...

I don't think such a simplification is possible. The way I see it, Parade is actually quite complex when it comes to its reasons and goals.

@shoutcacophony Looking from this point of view that you suggested here, I can see that the author could have tried to say "hey, look, this Fish Parade is now a very damn complex event and everyone wants different things from it - could we perhaps go back to the roots and talk about fishing?" That's a thought that just occurred to me.

@shoutcacophony Except it ended up being titled "Dear people who don't fish: Please shut up about Fish Parade", if we go this far with the metaphor.

@phoe lol!

one of the "lovely" things about signifiers: you unpack them, all the letters and sub-signifiers come spilling out. oops 😂

@phoe *nods* that's one criticism of Pride from within the LGBT community/communities for a while now -- "pride is commerical, cop-friendly and corporate, what happened and how do we go back to its roots"

@shoutcacophony Yep, I understand that criticism and partially agree with it. I just don't think this article did a good way of conveying that thought.

I *seriously* needed to participate in this whole discussion with you now to get the point that you mention now - I think that's an anecdotal, but nonetheless a proof that this article doesn't convey that point well.

@phoe it's definitely not logical, agreed. heh

@phoe useful imo, but definitely not on that register

@shoutcacophony Yep, I understand now. And it seems we came to an agreement.

Thanks for the discussion! It was a good one, and I learned a few new things along the way.

And thanks for not wrapping it up. :P

@phoe You're welcome :)

"Oh, right." (turns off cultural signifier engine) :P "That's quite enough of that."

@shoutcacophony Just in case - are there any other points about the stuff I said that aren't clear yet? It got pretty heated there for a moment, especially at the beginning, so it's possible something is still not properly explained yet.

@phoe *re-reading thread* one minute

@phoe no, all clear. thanks for asking :)

@shoutcacophony Good! Thanks for the discussion again. Mastodon keeps on getting better for me with each passing day with the quality of chats I have over here.

@phoe Not a problem.

I have the occasional road bump (so to speak) now and then, but same here.

@shoutcacophony Road bump? You mean, conversations that are not worth the time?

@phoe sorry, yes. that, and interpersonal dramas and/or politics, basically

@phoe like what happened earlier that started this conversation, but with more people and more layers of conflict

@phoe (venturing a guess) for people such as yourself and myself who look at things this way, yes -- the author though is talking about "Pride" as a signifier though, not literally in terms of its numerous potentials and actualities.

if anything, "Pride" is so varied, that it's at least partially an empty signifier, the same way "gourmet" is. Especially on a global level.

@shoutcacophony no worries I muted the thread

@nev cool. i keep forgetting that this is a thing on here now, lol. helpful things

@nev I love having an Ally™ that doesn't respect the wishes of the group they claim to be an ally for