Castanet

The Green Barbarian wrote:

LANDM wrote:Really?
Photographed with their genitals fully exposed? Sure they were.....

man that jt is a creep

I don't know why during gay parade it seems so necessary to be close to being naked. A "normal" parade is not naked. Just people that enjoy the fun of a parade. Should be the same for the gay pride parade. To show that they are gay and have pride in that is fine. To show their "stuff" is imho out of line. What's the point.

Anyone else confused as to the point of the original post?

casey60 wrote:I don't know why during gay parade it seems so necessary to be close to being naked. A "normal" parade is not naked. Just people that enjoy the fun of a parade. Should be the same for the gay pride parade. To show that they are gay and have pride in that is fine. To show their "stuff" is imho out of line. What's the point.

Have you ever been to a pride parade? If not, don’t assume it is like some of the people say here. If you have been to one lately, you would know that your question isn’t accurate.
Have you ever seen a "normal" parade float with bikini babes on it? I certainly have. And they are showing a lot more than anything I have seen at a pride parade.

Treblehook wrote:The photo that I saw, taken at the Toronto parade, had several male participants [front and center] with their genitals fully exposed. As I said, it is a huge question why these folks feel so compelled to expose themselves at these events Why? And that picture that shows Trudeau with the bare breasted woman is embarrassing for many Canadians. He looks like the village idiot, grinning like a horse eating thistles. Ridiculous.

Pride parades have always been about pushing the envelope.

Yes LandM Even been at the Parade in Amsterdam that goes thru the canals. Got really bad and city hall stepped in as to dress. There is no point imho to show your "stuff". And city hall there made the right decision. So don't assume. I only deal with facts.

casey60 wrote:Yes LandM Even been at the Parade in Amsterdam that goes thru the canals. Got really bad and city hall stepped in as to dress. There is no point imho to show your "stuff". And city hall there made the right decision. So don't assume. I only deal with facts.

Omg, so now you are relying on Amsterdam as your justification?
Well, you got me there! I must admit I have never been to an Amsterdam Pride Parade.

How about local, provincial, or even Canada-wide.....and current? Since you are "only dealing with facts"?

And how are the "normal" parades different from the (presumably) abnormal ones? I don’t see much difference.......give some examples of the "facts" you deal with since you are a worldwide pride parade follower.

If they do not want uniforms then the police should not attend at all.

Robert7461 wrote:Proof? Post the photo with some blur. Some penis-shaped pasta was served at Toronto Pride, are you sure you're not mistaking pasta penises for real ones?

I'm still waiting. I've googled quite a few of the 2019 parades and haven't found anything but I'm probably not spending as much time as others to find penis pictures.

Since this is in the BC section, did anyone here attend any of the parades in BC? I was at the Vancouver one and sort of at the Kelowna one but mainly hung out at the lake to meet some people. In Vancouver I saw some people in bikinis and that was pretty much it.

The Green Barbarian wrote:

LANDM wrote:Really?
Photographed with their genitals fully exposed? Sure they were.....

Where is his hand?

As a taxpayer, I wouldn’t like to see defacing of the uniforms, as they represent a profession that has no place in sexual events. On their private time, they can do whatever they please, but not in uniforms. That’s shameful.

Mike Br. wrote:As a taxpayer, I wouldn’t like to see defacing of the uniforms, as they represent a profession that has no place in a sexual event. On their private time, they can do whatever they please, but not in uniform. That’s shameful.

It’s a "sexual event"?

You seem to have an odd idea of sex?!?!
A bunch of families enjoying a parade with loads of corporate support......very sexual!

How would uniforms be "defaced"? Do you know the rationale behind not having the uniforms?

LANDM wrote:It’s a "sexual event"?

Of course it is. That’s what they are parading - their sexual preference. Let’s call spade, a spade.

Mike Br. wrote:As a taxpayer, I wouldn’t like to see defacing of the uniforms, as they represent a profession that has no place in sexual events. On their private time, they can do whatever they please, but not in uniforms. That’s shameful.

As I recall, these events were an opportunity for mainstream groups to help de-stigmatize a marginalized group of people who were too often subjected to viciousness and violence for what they chose to do among consenting adults.

At the time, it was very PC to shame and deride anyone who did not conform to the heterosexual expectations of society.

People in uniform helped support their efforts by showing their willingness to stand with the stigmatized, very publicly, in an era when it was PC to shame and deride them instead.

Now the people in uniform representing mainstream groups that helped campaign for sensible, fair treatment of a marginalized and stigmatized group are being told, by that same group, their presence is no longer welcome.

That's what's shameful, IMO.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/arti ... vists.html

The Get The L Out group states on its website that 'new ‘queer’ LGBT politics coerces lesbians to accept the penis as a female organ, and promotes heterosexual intercourse between male and female as a form of lesbian sex.'

It is alleged that the women refused to put placards with controversial slogans out of sight, with messages such as 'Lesbian visibility', 'Children need therapy not puberty blockers hormones and therapy' and 'Transing children is abuse.'

'The upshot was that the police were called to remove a bunch of sober, peaceful women, mostly lesbians for no reason other than responding to a question from a member of staff with an answer that did not align with her political beliefs, or indeed with facts, such as the fact that women don't have penises.'