Prelude: Un Prost Gramada
If you’ve managed to receive at least a ninth grade education in most any part of the world, you may have — at some point — already been introduced the concept that homosexuality is not a bacterial infection.
For example, if you happened to stand really close to a gay person, you might notice their sexual preference is not contagious. Or, if you were forced to talk to one, you just won’t get coodies.
In the course of scientific observation, many lucid people have famously recorded that gay men generally trend toward non-violent social habits. They’re not particularly dangerous and do not customarily attack small children unprovoked.
A great majority tend to be capable of rational thought when engaged in human dialogue with heterosexuals. And quite a few of them demonstrate a proclivity toward fashionable attire, in a deliberate effort to not offend the sensibilities of their straight counterparts.
Other than that, the learned mind reaches the inescapable and bluntly obvious conclusion that gay people are pretty much the same as the rest of the population. They laugh, they cry, they work, and, yeah, they try to bust the occasional nut.
Unfortunately, there still remains a small percentage of uneducated cretins on this planet who cling to the irrational fear that gay men represent a conspiratorial threat against the ability of straight men to get laid because queers fiendishly commiserate in a plot to steal all the hot chicks away from breeders.
Not only that, my brothers, but keep in mind the Uninea Poponari is bent on seducing, corrupting, and raping our wives and daughters. Or was it our fathers and sons? You never know because gays are mysterious and shifty!
When a noble gentlemen and intellectual giant of the stature and wisdom of Gigi Becali proclaims homosexuals are immoral, then we should harken unto his warning. Afterall, everyone knows Becali has read the Bible and repairs his own car.
Any good Christian who has even vague familiarity with the very book they claim to believe in knows the Scriptures are unequivocal about Jesus’ sermons on homosexuality. Christ himself is famously very specific on the subject of gay orientation.
Actually, if you claim to be a Romanian Orthodox Christian but are not explicitly familiar with what your Lord and Saviour has expounded upon with respect to men who have sex with other men, then improve your chances for eternal life: go read the exact Biblical passages that reveal what Jesus Christ had to say about homosexuality.
Your very soul hangs in the balance by a thread in the eye of a needle…
Of course, if you don’t take your religion seriously or couldn’t care less what the Son of God said, then by all means continue in your complacency.
Leave issues of moral turpitude to your betters such as the flamingly effeminate Patriarhia Teoctist and his ensemble of unmarried, co-habitating men who wear dresses and pretty little hats. Trust in theologians who accessorize.
As for myself, I am sadly burdened by time wasted in university on a predilection for intellectualism which is to say I’m fairly imbued with a halcyon outlook on homosexuality. In fact, I even go so far as to view gays as equal.
Shocking, I know.
As a big fan of sodomy myself, I couldn’t resist the opportunity to join up with the recent gay pride civil rights march in Romania in hopes of seeing a nice ass or two. In my continuing service to you, dear reader, I’m thrilled to report I was wildly successful in doing precisely that.
Stay tuned. Details to follow shortly…
June 12th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
By the way, do you know what is the nickname of Ms Teoctist among church leaders?
Iapa. The Mare, for your readers who don’t speak Romanian.
It is not a rumour, it is true fact.
Also: looking forward to details re: nice asses discovered by mistor Romerican! O_o
June 12th, 2007 at 4:47 pm
well don’t stop now! We need to know the rest of the story!
And “Amen” on your logic!
June 12th, 2007 at 4:58 pm
Jesus talked about love, forgiveness about being tolerant, not judging others and all that kind of boring stuff. That’s why they have to use the Old Testament and hand pick the fun verses. Forbidding eating of pork and shellfish is not fun at all and that’s why they’re almost never enforced by Christian extremists. But bashing gays and throwing rocks toward them sure is fun. I wonder why they discard the verses about raping the women of your enemy during war…
June 12th, 2007 at 5:58 pm
So, what’s this antibiotic I’ve been on for?
June 12th, 2007 at 8:23 pm
Loved your gimmick with Christ’s teachings on homosexuality.
However, I’m sure He had lots of things to say about gays, considering he was one himself:
http://www.salon.com/feature/1998/04/cov_10feature.html
If only the members of his fan-club would let us bask in the light of His truth…
June 12th, 2007 at 8:30 pm
“The youth, looking upon him, loved him and beseeched that he might remain with him … they went into the house of the youth …
And after six days, Jesus instructed him and, in the evening, the youth came to him wearing a linen cloth over his naked body.
And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God.” (The Secret Gospel of Mark, Gnostic Scriptures and Fragments)
Hallelujah, praise the Lord, for I was looking for His kingdom and Jesus hath shown me the way!!!
June 12th, 2007 at 8:30 pm
All this laughter when reading your post puts me in doubt: so now I should trust clergy that accessories? That’s an interesting reflection. (I am still laughing)
June 13th, 2007 at 12:46 am
Meanwhile, back in the “dark ages”, at this very moment in the U.S. when the nominee for Surgeon General is a leading member of a church organization who believes that there is a “cure”….just “pray the gay away”…
We have this little story & questionaire from Anderson Cooper of CNN
http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/blog/2007/02/can-people-change-from-gay-to-straight.html
June 13th, 2007 at 3:18 am
Mate, your sexual orientation is yours to keep. As well, heterosexuality and homosexuality have to do with sex, one of the most private things of an individual.
I don’t care WHAT your sexual orientation is so why do you force me to see you running around the street? Why do you insist to display your sexual orientation? I mean, homosexuality is not illegal in Romania anymore, why do you have a parade? It’s obvious that you won’t win over the local population with it so why insist? Yes, the homosexual community(according to our press, many of the people that marched are “professionals” at these kinds of things) of Romania is so brave, marching on for their rights(although it’s legal) trying to win hearts and minds while being guarded by 700 policemen in riot gear.
You want a “civil contract”? Well fine, but why don’t you lobby the government? Why not make a decent parade, not a bloody circus with people wearing weird shit and some even obscene gestures? It’s obvious you won’t win the public’s heart this way, why not find something else?
June 13th, 2007 at 5:04 am
v-twin - I want to thank you for responding and I’ll follow up on this topic.
June 13th, 2007 at 9:28 am
@v-twin- what’s your gripe? What do you care who has a parade? Hetero couples kissing in public, screwing on TV, etc. is OK? I am impressed (if true) that Romania had 700 police protecting it’s citizen’s rights during a parade. Romania has definitely come a long way if this is the case. I do like when you say, “Why not make a decent parade, not a bloody circus with people wearing weird shit and some even obscene gestures?”. A decent parade like the mandatory parades for Ceausescu? You need to see a real freak parade in San Francisco sometime! *and* you shold be proud to live (I assume you live in Romania) somewhere that has parades like that.
romerican, I look forward to hearing from you on this topic. I have been reading your postings for almost an hour and am enjoying what I read.
BTW, I am heading to Bucharest Friday. Any bar or restaurant recommendations for someone with a taste for California wines and good food (and service)?
June 13th, 2007 at 9:47 am
Oh, and I wanted to share with you all something that has happened a long time ago, when I was still in the 11th grade, almost 18 but not really. It was the summer vacation and our kids gang was headed for the seaside. Navodari camp, does this ring a bell? Anyways, my best friend’s mom gathered her daughter and daughter’s friends for final instructions. And that sounded like this, I kid you not: “Be careful at the disco, and don’t wander out late. You know it is full of homosexuals out there.” It’s the same camp where the local policeman, at that time called a “militian”, came to hush us off when the disco was nearly over: “What? Are we here to have a good time?” (Duh, of course not, it was just a prison like summer vacation)
v-twin: when I am going to be able to make a bank loan together with my (same-sex) partner, share property and all that crap you take for granted, I am just going to go to the parade to wear shit, make obscene gestures and generally have a good time because I can. Until then I am just waiting for Romerican’s follow-up.
June 13th, 2007 at 11:11 am
The ocean is deep and large. I would appreciate the offer of a soft round bum to kiss, coming from a young blond boy. But being courted by a second-hand car salesman with moustache would be out of question. Married kings and warriors had boys and warriors under their tents at night. Homosex had never been considered a sin for thousand of years. The fall of Sodoma was just possibly a warning against having too much sex every day: enemies may knock at your gate while you are resting. At sudden come the Dark Middle Ages: good christians keep burning homosexuals (blond boys, priests, nuns, damsels and ladies not included).
Renaissance sees Messer Leonardo da Vinci, the scientist and painter, pinching his pupils’ bum, with the pope’s benign neglect or approval.
A nice Arabian chap would offer an eleven old boy or girl to his lovesick male friend, throwing all fatwas into the bin. Commies and Fascists were against homosex. In modern era lesbians have been much more tolerated then gays. What’s new nowdays ? THEY want to marry and adopt babies: this is completly new and maybe not a good idea after all. I forgot to mention that burning the gays is a mean the Leader and the Pope may use to reaffirm their power, instead of gays they may use the blacks, the muslims, the neighbours, the scientists, the capitalists and the beggar. And well, I am a boring idiot, wifey betrays me, my boss is a fat lady who calls me ‘That asshole’, but thanks god I am not a disgusting fennel I am a true man. Is that all? not at all.
June 13th, 2007 at 3:43 pm
v-twin - I’d agree with the notion that for most people most of the time physical acts involving nudity and genitalia is private affair, whether that’s one person alone, two, three, or seventeen. There are exhibitionists, of course, but there is general truthiness to the broad concept of privacy of sex acts.
But that’s not what you’re talking about.
If I understand you correctly, intimacy seems to offend you. And I find that to be rather anachronistic. Sure, in some social circles, 100 years ago, it would have been verboten for unmarried boys and girls to hold hands in public.
50 years ago, it might been okay for a fellow to put his arms around the shoulders of a gal in public, but not if they had different colors of skin. Or perhaps parents of a different religion. Or any number of other now seemingly-arbitrary barriers.
Ought we turn back the clock? It’s okay for a latino boy to kiss a black girl, but not in public? It’s okay for a Japanese gal to be hot for an American, but she just can’t show it? Romanians and Hungarians in Transylvania shouldn’t let their neighbors find out about their lust?
Poppycock!
I’d put it to you that this is precisely the line of logic you’re advancing here. The banning of expressions of sexuality. The outlawing of obvious flirtation at a coffee shop sounds like the sadistic anti-humanity you’d find right out of Ceausescu’s wet dreams. I don’t think it’s a position you really want to hold, because it’s an untenable one.
The reason why I’m glad you posted that opinion is because it’s one I’ve heard a number of times before, in different places in the world but most often in the United States. What’s become obvious is that most people proposing ideas of this sort are generally opposed to some activity (pre-marital sex, black and whites together, or jews dating muslims, etc) and seek to quash it by promoting a public ban on unapproved relationships. The argumentative tactic is one of “it’s fine, but keep it to yourself” which sounds eminently reasonable at first blush because everyone feels they shouldn’t be forced to encounter offensive and lewd acts everywhere they go.
But it’s bullshit, v-twin. Utter bullshit.
I hope you reconsider your thinking on the topic. I happily assume you don’t really hate gays but are merely willing to tolerate their right to be human so long as they keep it in the closet and away from the world like a caged songbird. I assume you’re generally opposed to allowing teenagers to kiss or married couples to hold hands because that might reveal their sexual preference which you find repulsive to behold the private details that a male might be attracted to a woman.
That’s where the bullshit comes in. You see, the bottomline is there’s nothing to be offended about if a German loves a Roma and you happen to catch a glimpse because they kissed briefly in the park. It’s two people expressing intimacy, love, lust, and/or sexuality. There is nothing to be offended about. Black and white. Two women. A Christian and a Buddhist. Me and whomever I excited about tonight.
For purposes of this discussion, no one is talking a naked person wearing a leather mask menacingly waving a 3-prong spikey vibrator and whipping another naked person who is bound and gagged in broad daylight just outside the Sunday school after mass. We’re not talking about sex itself. We’re talking about a kiss. We’re talking about flirting. It’s not offensive. It’s not lewd.
Once you acknowledge there’s nothing offensive about two people holding hands, then pretty quick you have to realize it doesn’t matter which two humans are involved unless you’re a bigot who wants to make exceptions to the rule based on hatred.
Let people be.
From there, we’re just a hop, skip, and a jump away from understanding that if you don’t care to see a hot Romanian girl shoving her tongue down the throat of a Turkish tourist, then stop staring. There’s other things to look at besides the retired pensioners holding hands as they walk in the park. You don’t have to pay attention. And then, in a Zen moment, it immediately stops existing without your need to impose on others. As you see, this is far easier and more successful.
Some people hate sex. We shouldn’t tolerate public displays of affection. Teens shouldn’t be allowed to fuck. People in their 20s need to stop kissing on the subways and in the theaters. Romanian women shouldn’t wear sexy outfits. It’s all evil, rotten, and sinful for reasons that impossible to articulate. Except what? Except married people of the opposite gender who are conservatively dressed should be allowed to make eyes at each other if they’ve been pre-approved by a certain kind of holy shaman and maintain a strict no contact, no excitement rule? See, it’s bullshit.
So, let’s get to your hyperbole, shall we?
I don’t see homosexuals “running around the street” like some pack of wild dogs. What I saw was an orderly procession of people who want to make their voices heard in a legally sanctioned march on a topic of sexual freedom and equality. That’s hardly running around the street and it’s a disservice for you employ heightened language to evoke images of chaos when there was none.
I think the parade is an affirmation of their legality. It’s pretty much that simple, v-twin. If it was illegal for me to have the kind of sex I like to have, then I’d be out celebrating when such acts were decriminalized. I might even be proud of it. People tend to commemorate such fundamental changes.
“Free at last, free at last, thank God Almighty we’re free at last.”
I’m not sure why you seem to object to the government doing it’s job. The parade was legal. The police are supposed to keep order. It is generally known that a number of stupid kids (notice that Becali, Tudor, Arapasu, and other supposed leaders never have the balls to actually participate themselves but instead they harvest the impressionable youth to do their dirty work) apparently find satisfaction in injuring their fellow humans. So, the cops protect the constitutional rights of Romanian citizens. Where’s the problem? If you don’t have one, then stop complaining about law enforcement.
As far as I understand, homosexuals actually want to be able to get married like everyone else. However, the majority of the gay community is very happy to compromise on the name of the arrangement. The name. A civil union is a marriage, v-twin. Make no mistake that’s what it is. However, probably 20% of the population feels strongly enough about the magic word “marriage” that they’d go to any insane length to prevent homosexuals from using it, but the gays actually outsmart bigots by simply changing the word from “marriage” to the phrase “civil union” and suddenly the rioting stops.
You don’t really think civil unions are materially different from marriages, do you?
So, they want marriage. Just like straight people, when the right person comes along then gay people want to make that strong commitment and bond we call marriage. Amazing how similar people are. But, given that the angry villagers might attack the castle with pitchforks and torches, the victims of discrimination are exhausted enough to agree on linguistic slight of hand to get the job done.
To get their equal rights and be able to marry, they do lobby the government as you wisely suggest. It’ll take some time to grease the slow creaking wheels of politicians who are afraid to rock the boat. In turn, that means gays need to be sure they are seen in public, heard in public, and open in public so the little world of Romania can get used to the idea that these human beings aren’t cyborg devils from outer space. A parade seems to get that done nicely. It’s on TV; people hear about it.
“Oh, we have gays in Romania? Oh, there’s a lot more of them than last year? Oh, they want something called a civil union? Yeah, sure, okay, ma rog, just give it to them and let me get on with my own life.”
As the number of rational beings increasingly adopt this attitude, the legislation on gay marriage becomes more likely because the politicians hoist their sails in the winds of public discourse. Thus, you can surmise the parade has an effect and a purpose.
I didn’t see a bloody circus. I would remind you that this characterization of events could be misinterpreted by some people as a revelation you hate gays. I don’t share that opinion, but thought you might consider the perception of others. There was no mayhem or anarchy.
Nah. There were some people walking down the street. They held some political signs. They had some music. There was a little dancing. In fact, in most respects the entire affair was just like all the other political events in Romania, such as PSD’s party on May 1 or the pro-Basescu rallies. Or do you view every public demonstration to be a bloody circus? I think not.
There were a few guys in drag. Some looked fabulous, but others were a disaster. Meh. What can you do? In Vienna, they have a little event called Carnival, where people get dressed up in costumes, too. Interestingly, there are similar parades of costumed celebrants in places like Rio de Janeiro and New Orleans. Fasching in Germany. Of course, there’s also Halloween where it seems like everyone is out on the street dressed in costume. On many college campuses, it’s been a time honored tradition for straight guys to dress in drag just for the shock effect. We won’t even get into all the other historical instances of men in dresses.
But unless you’ve grown up on a farm, none of these things are anything to get excited about. It’s just people having fun. Big deal.
At the end of it all, v-twin, you’re the only one who can decide whether it’s okay for Irish and British to kiss in a public sidewalk of Londonderry, whether it’s okay for Jews to get married by someone other than the Romanian Orthodox Church but still receive the legal distinction necessary for spousal coverage on their American health insurance plan, and whether it’s okay for a couple of lesbians to rent a hotel room with a single bed on a weekend in 2 Mai. If any of these make you uncomfortable, then you can probably ignore such events without having to feel offended by acts which are not lewd. Let the gay people do what they want and focus your energies into some other issues which impact your own life.
It’s easy; turn off your TV so you don’t have to see that some Romanians still have to fight for the right to love.
June 13th, 2007 at 4:26 pm
Wow, that is about as good as it gets! Thanks! But let’s not forget that these developments take time to be more widely accepted. Even in more “advanced” countries (take the Scandinavian ones) people still stare if they see black and white together etc. But I am not so sure about your views on intimacy. But that is of course more a question of where you put the line. Kissing = yes, holding hands = yes, but try and do that in Saudi-Arabia! Where do you stop or should you stop anywhere? It is a really confusing issue because it makes you think about yourself, about fundamental beliefs you have and how to put them into context in the world you are living in. And is there a global! true way?
But really, you should not on the other hand dismiss v-twin saying that he should turn off his TV. That is rather simplistic. There is no real gain if you have the right to be as you are, if this is only accepted by the majority because they are looking away.
I did like the part with the leather mask and waving a 3-prong spiky vibrator
June 13th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
Romerican:
“no one is talking a naked person wearing a leather mask menacingly waving a 3-prong spikey vibrator and whipping another naked person who is bound and gagged in broad daylight just outside the Sunday school after mass.”
WD:
Oh, you mean the Folsom St. Fair in SF, right?
Anyway, let me share a brief moment that really touched me regarding this topic. It was one of my last few nights in Tashkent, Uzbekistan and I was in the park (what an opening) with two friends having a beer. In Uzbekistan, a former-Soviet state, the relationship between most native Uzbeks and the Russians is a bit tense. The latter tend to congregate in the large cities and look down upon the former. Anyway, it was getting dark, and we were all having a good time reminiscing over strong Baltika beers.
A few tables away, in the most secluded corner of the park I caught a glimpse of a couple sharing a drink. The young man was Uzbek and the young girl was Russian. I could tell by their body language that this was an encounter between boyfriend and girlfriend. For a minute I had to ponder the beauty and sadness of the situation. Although I was to leave that troubled country just the next day, this couple was probably not so lucky; their future was uncertain not only because of political turmoil but also because of the nature of their love. Of course I have no idea what happened to that couple, but your post and comment reminded me of them.
As I prepare to leave Romania, I wonder if this next step on the ladder of social development can be made, fara excuse or delay.
June 13th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
Best comment on GayFest so far.
It’s reassuring to see someone with a clear focus and with no obvious bias who can put things in perspective.
However, it’s not so reassuring to acknowledge that the best comment on some Romanians’ struggle for their rights comes from a foreigner.
June 13th, 2007 at 7:06 pm
“Sure, in some social circles, 100 years ago, it would have been verboten for unmarried boys and girls to hold hands in public.”
Well, 150 years ago, in Bucharest, it was okay for people to bathe naked in our beloved river, Dâmboviţa. :-)
Sorry, no photos, but there’s an 1868 watercolor painting which testifies this, by showing a few women, including a gypsy girl (in foreground) bathing.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Preziosi_-_D%C3%A2mbovi%C5%A3a_la_Bucure%C5%9Fti%2C_1868.jpg
June 14th, 2007 at 4:43 am
(I would like to apologize in advance if some of my ideas lack logic; I have to go up and down a lot to Romer!can’s reply)
Nice reply, mate. I enjoy debating a topic as long as it’s civilized and although we are on different ends of the issue, I’m glad we can discuss. Sorry it took so long to reply, I live in Canada and the whole time zone difference + school got in the way.
First off, I have nothing against sex, nothing against holding hands or kissing. Date whoever you want, but allow me the right to an opinion. I am not going to act on my opinion but I reserve the right to one(good or bad, informed or no). I agree with you that there should be some article in the law regarding civil unions between people of the same sex because of all the legal implications. Your exageration however regarding holding hands is miss-placed. Although if I were to ever marry, I would go for a white, prefferably Romanian girl. It’s just the way I was socialized and certain things I got used to.
I want what makes sense. Everything you’ve mentioned there (kissing, holding hands, flirting) is legal. We realize there are gay people around us. Thusly, we don’t need a yearly reminder. I never quite understood the purpose of the parade. Is it about giving more rights to gay people? Is it about raising awareness that gay people exist? Is it a celebration of “freedom of expression”(sexuality being one of them)? When I called the parade a “bloody circus” I was confused by the message(we’re were, we want to be treated equally) and what I was seeing (people dressed up, fancy hairs and make up). For me, it doesn’t add up. This year was the exact opposite of last year’s parade. Last year was truly a circus, more people got beat up, there were less cops and more gays marching.
If last year’s parade was met with so much resistance, this year’s resistance increasead, why not try something else? Why not march down without drag? Why not march with some signs, get a petition, do something to get the public on your side?
I am more than happy to accept people’s right to march for something they need and rightfully so. But I will never agree to a “Gay Pride Parade” like the ones in the West. We are different people in Eastern Europe, why do you insist in this if we don’t really want it? You have wide popular support in Germany, whereas here you have wide popular hatred. I sincerely belive that the EU is the only reason gay parades are allowed in Romania and that the Police is there to protect the gay people so that we don’t get into shit. Cuz if some gay dude/chick dies, we’re fucked.
You know, there was a really good editorial in Monday’s “Gândul” called “De ce zâmbesc homosexualii?”. The idea was that this parade keeps going just because these NGOs get funding from outside the country and this is a good way to get more money. All they have to do is report a number of incidents and that will increase their funding for their campaigns. Money that will never actually get to their intended use. Maybe it’s our Eastern-European paranoya that people just want money for themselves, but knowing my country and my countrymen, it’s plausible.
On my blog, I got this comment from a gay dude, Alex on the matter of the march. I will quote him here and if you need a translation, please tell me:
“Hai sa fim seriosi. Eu sunt gay, dar sunt contra acestor manifestari total idioate. Am un job normal, nimeni nu ma intreaba de orientarea mea si stau de ani de zile impreuna cu prietenul meu. Problema care e cei de la Accept - cica oamenii care ma reprezinta - pe draq - sunt cu fite in cap si cu aere de vedete. Sunt niste personalitati de-a dreptul ciudate, asta o spun eu in ca un gay. M-am ferit de “minunatele cluburi” si am considerat ca viata mea e viata mea si nu are sa se bage nimeni in ea. Sunt in totalitate impotriva Gay Fest.”
I thoroughly enjoy this exchange of ideas. I really could not care less if any of your readers or yourself consider me an ape with age-old ideals. Closing the tab with this page would’ve been much easier but I prefer to discuss things rather than ignore them as you have suggested.
Good day mate! :)
June 14th, 2007 at 10:22 am
Take “sexual orientation” out of most of your original post, V-twin, and replace it with “religion” and it pretty much reads the same way - except that those religious types insist on parading their faith every week rather than once a year, wearing stupid clothes and pushing their belief system in everybody else face. We could ban that too, if you like.
I think you’re right in the Eastern Europe has a fair way to go before catching up with the West in granting true equality to the gay and lesbian community (and merely being legal isn’t enough). (A recent article from the Guardian on this very topic (post the violence in Russia at which gay rights protestors were attacked viciously by the far right/religious conservatives - and then the police arrested the victims).
It would be nice to imagine that gay/lesbian/bisexual etc people could sit at home minding their own business, being with their lovers and making no protests; and that things would somehow change organically and they would gain acceptance, and equal rights. But really, when has that ever worked? Would you criticise Martin Luther King for going on marches for civil rights in the 60s?
June 14th, 2007 at 10:27 am
By the way, I wouldn’t like it to be read into my post that I believe the west has actually got to true equality yet, just that it is further along the road.
And also, think the “Gândul” suggestion that those who marched were doing so in the pay of NGOs purely to keep getting funding is pretty damn insulting. Coming out is damned hard anywhere in the world, coming out in Eastern Europe particularly so, and then standing up and walking through the streets of a hostile in a statement of your own identity is harder still. It takes a lot of guts to march in Gay Pride, and the suggestion that it’s some kind of professional scam is pretty low (I realise that you were quoting “Gândul” not necessarily relating your own opinion)
June 14th, 2007 at 3:01 pm
Only a handful of marchers were in drag. The “great overwhelming majority” of gay and lesbians in the parade were not in drag. There’s a lot gay men who aren’t too thrilled about drag queens, either. Some of them might even agree with you that the gay pride march could facilitate the gaining of acceptance much faster if some aspects were toned down. But, in the end, the parade is open to anyone and everyone who supports equal rights for gays and lesbians… including straight people, drag queens, and people wearing those silly rainbow punk wigs, even if most of the marchers were actually “normal” in the conventional sense.
June 14th, 2007 at 6:30 pm
I must agree with Csiki Andy’s comment “It would be nice to imagine that gay/lesbian/bisexual etc people could sit at home minding their own business, being with their lovers and making no protests; and that things would somehow change organically and they would gain acceptance, and equal rights.”
This is exactly WHY there are gay pride parades. There are also (in certain other countries) public displays of parades for other groups, nationalities, athletic teams, etc. Would v-twin suggest that for instance if one does not like a particular group of people we should condone or ban St. Patrick’s Day parades? Juneteenth parades? Athletic team parades? It’s all about being proud to be who you are without having to hide or be ashamed.
And as for the comment “We are different people in Eastern Europe, why do you insist in this if we don’t really want it?”, who is “we”? Excuse me, v-twin, but who is “we”?? Do you think that you really speak for all Eastern Europeans? Or just who *you perceive* to be the “moral” majority? (hmmm)
By the way, (v-twin) perhaps you live in an area or grew up in a culture that allows the public holding hands, but this is not universal. Segregation in the Middle East (Iran, for example) is so extreme in public that the women have to ride in separate subway cars. Sure, v-twin, you have the right to your opinion. Your expressions are certainly giving us all food for thought.
Romania is definitely at the forefront of liberating some of the ways of the stifling past. Hopefully, this healthy outlook for human rights will continue. In America, having the present administration look to the “good book” for inspiration in dictating law and debating rights, thank goodness there prevails the right to freedom of speech. It’s really good to see Romania joining in the struggle to do the same.
June 14th, 2007 at 7:08 pm
you are a notoriuos cheater, Mr. Bogdan. The bathing beauties are ex French models. Fired by the painter Edouard Manet because they were getting fat, the unlucky models had to flee Paris and start a new life in Bucharest, where they were paid poorly and catched a lot of colds.
June 18th, 2007 at 4:09 pm
“Leave issues of moral turpitude to your betters such as the flamingly effeminate Patriarhia Teoctist and his ensemble of unmarried, co-habitating men who wear dresses and pretty little hats. Trust in theologians who accessorize.”
ROTFLMAO!!!
Nice, and cuts to the quick right where the BOR needs it. :)