Let's have some extremely outrageous and offensive behavior during Pridefest. We want to frighten as many middle-of-the-roaders as we can. Too much progress has been made in making people think that gays and lesbians are normal people who should be permitted to get married, raise children, be within 10 miles of children, and even continue breathing.

The Homophobic Protection Act might not pass without some good ammo for the PR wars. Ricky Santorum could use some photos for his campaign fliers, too. The scarier to the straights, the better.

As long as I'm whining and pissing everyone off, can I mention that I find your use of the term "breeders" to be highly offensive. on par with the "c," "n," or "k" words?

Sure, you can mention being offended by something I write. I get offended by things you write, too --- one of the joys of the blogosphere.

I suspect you unintentionally hit on a key issue -- the gay and lesbian community passes for normal. The rest of the queer community are still estranged. So the groundshifts to those who pass/cover and want everyone to tone it down for fear of being linked with the outrageous freaks. And don't even bring up the bisexuals ...

If you want outrageous behavior, you can find it at any community festival. If you want to be offended, that's possible too. You just have to be looking for it.

After all, it is PrideFest. Not PassFest.

It's not about passing. It's about strategy.

Look at what the people who dress up as Klingons do to Trekkers. Greasy malnourished D&Ders have given a fun little game a bad name. The problem is, there aren't people out there suggesting the sole exemption to a ban on abortion would be a prenatal diagnosis of possible D&D tendencies. They aren't trying to take the children away from the Trekkers.

Once we've ended the threat from homophobes, then let's have this discussion. Until then, it's giving comfort to the enemy.

Your arguement presumes that the homophobe is external and that simply is not the case. Homophobia within our community and among our allies is just as deadly. I have multiple friends and acquaintances (gay and straight) who would argue that the gay umbrella does not include transexuals, transvestites, bisexuals, intersexed individuals, etc. We cannot force them to the back of the bus to make room for the rest of us.

Not everyone in the gay community is going to pass for a white, middle class, Christian, heterosexual. Nor should we.

But rest assured Rob there are plenty of folks in the community who agree with you and I'm sure you'll hear their tongues a clicking in disapproval all day Saturday. If there's one thing we do well in the community, its cast judgement (I should know). Then flee back to the suburbs.

I'm not sure I believe this is a gay issue. I'm not sure I believe it's even indicative of internalized homophobia. I think it's more of an issue of extremes-- every community has them.

The environmentalist community has the people who pound stakes into living trees: often it kills the tree and it can also kill a human as well. These people are extremists and mainstream environmentalists try to distance themselves from the extremists.

The Christian community has the likes of Fred Phelps and mainstream Christians trip overthemselves trying to distance themselves from Phelps' gang.

The white community has the KKK and again, whites tend to distance themselves from these extremists.

The Muslim community has the radical Muslims who feel justified in blowing up innocent people. And the Muslim community distances itself from these extremists.

Like it or not, the flamboyant "flaming queers" and many of the non-performing drag queens that come to Pride dressed to the nines are extremists. (*PLEASE, I realize that many drag queens are "merely" entertainers and look "normal" during the day (although I hate that word "normal", I think it conveys what I mean. Or at least I hope it does.)) And extremists often do whatever they can to call attention to their "cause" and get media attention.

Now, that's not to say that drag queens and the "flaming queers" are hurting anyone in the same sense that the extremists mentioned above are hurting anyone. And yet, because of the apparent desire by the American public to focus on the extremists, they often DO hurt the struggle for gay equality because they reinforce the negative stereotypes of gays that many straights have. I remember marching in the parade one year and hearing the chant "We're here, we're queer, get used to it" and thinking "What good is this doing?" As the saying goes, you attract more flies with honey than vinegar (or something like that.)

Some would say that I'm advocating "selling out". I respect their right to do so but I'd respectfully disagree as well. We are ambassadors of the gay community. Not much different than an abassador to a foreign country. How well do you think someone would be received in a foreign country if they went into that country and said essentially "I know that everything I'm going to do is going to offend your moral sensibilities, but I don't give a damn." How open do you think that foreign country would be to the next ambassador?

It's our responsibility as ambassadors to educate the "foreign country" we live in (ie, a heterosexual culture) to what it means to be gay. And you're not going to get anyone to listen to what you have to say if you're poking them and antagonizing them. That makes them only put up their defenses and tune you out.

You can't tell someone they're wrong if their faith says being gay is wrong. You can't argue with faith: faith is beyond reason, it's beyond logic and it's highly personal and subjective. What you CAN do is say "Look, you have your faith and I respect it and I'm not asking you to live by my faith. All I'm asking is that you give me the same right that you have taken for yourself: the right to live your life according to what you believe. That's a right that is guaranteed by the US Constitution and yet I don't have that right. How would you feel if the government forbid heterosexuals from marrying or told you you coudln't marry the person you love?"

Right or wrong, fair or unfair, just or unjust, our society judges by appearances. We can bitch and moan about it all we want, but it's not going to change what IS. Only through education and experience will attitudes change and we can begin to move away from judging a book by its cover.

Like it or not, schools have dress codes, even the school of life. In order to teach in the school, you have to follow the dress code. You don't have to like it. You don't have to agree with it. But if you want the opportunity to educate an entire generation or two about gay equality, you have to follow it. You can still be flaming within the community, you can still dress to the nines when it's "appropriate", you can even be outrageous when you're among straights who "get it": who understand that your desire to dress to the nines is not much different than the guy who likes to go extreme skiing or the artists that likes to paint in the nude. But when you're acting as an ambassador, you have taken on a responsibility to the larger community and you have, by default, agreed to "lay aside" your personal interests in service to the greater community.

Most of us never asked to be ambassadors. But we are. We can either help the cause and thereby eliminate the need for ambassadors or we can hurt the cause which not only prolongs the need for ambassadors (ie, delays the day we get equal rights) but may even require trying to reestablish diplomatic ties with a country that has kicked us out.

Which strategy do you think is the most effective?

Love and Light,
Rev. Shelly

For a good many years I was a loud, proud unmistakable dyke. My hair was short, spikey and so was my attitude. I wore my queer identity like armor, radiating don't-mess-with-me toughness. I organized dyke marches, I worked in a liberal political organization, my life was ruled by my passion and my rage. They were my fighting years.

But now? I'm an undercover lesbian. I'm in a different phase of my life, over time my perspective changed, as did my wardrobe. I still have lots of passion and anger but I've learned to direct it in different ways and-- this took a while-- I've also learned to be happy despite how screwed up things can be. I'm married to a wonderful woman who, 7 years ago, was as butch as they come, but now she too is quite "undercover." This was something that evolved, not something that was an active choice. We just settled into a different part of ourselves over the years.

So, speaking as a now invisible queer, I don't think one way of expressing onesself is more valid than the other. I think any discussion about shunning people for openly representing the more controversial parts of our community that do exist is pretty sad. The GLBT community isn't just about the prejudice we face as a group and fighting for legal rights, our movement shouldn't lose sight of the bigger picture about who we are-- and we need to stand up for everyone, for those who don't conform, who express themselves differently, and for those who are "straight acting" in every area of their lives except in bed. Otherwise what are we fighting for exactly?

The fact is that there are plenty of us who can't be caged and can't be closeted, even if they wanted to be. The day we start demanding that queeny men, butch women or transfolks work harder to be "normal" because it is somehow hurting our image among people who aren't predisposed to like us anyways is the day we've truly lost what makes us wonderful-- our innate creativity and our diversity.

I know it's a cringe-worthy cliche, but I personally want to fight for all of us to have the right to be who we are, to express ourselves freely, to marry or not to marry, to be parents or be childless, to work on Wall Street or in a drag king review.

We really do have far more in common than we realize much of the time, we do have a common struggle, so let's not do the anti-gay movement's work for them by tearing ourselves apart and tearing each other down. Those drag queens are, essentially, still our sisters, and we wouldn't be where we are today without them. (Hello, Stonewall!) There is more to changing people's minds about us than fleeting images of a few leather daddies.

Shalom,
zoe

I think we're talking about two different things. You're talking about expressing oneself. I'm talking about acting as an ambassador/teacher to the straight community. Some are going to be better teachers than others: that's life. We all had good teachers in school and we all had teachers who sucked. This is no different.

Expressing oneself is one thing; teaching is another. Some can teach while expressing themselves; others cannot because their self-expression alienates their "students". That's not homophobia: it's a fact of life.

I'm not advocating for suppression of self-expression. I'm advocating that those who wish to accept the ambassador job and actively teach/educate the straight community have to accept the dress code that school requires.

I'm also not suggesting that we "shun" anyone. Just that we accept the fact: they are on the "fringes" and they're not as effective a teacher as someone who is NOT on the fringes.

I don't know about what you're fighting for, but I'm fighting for the right of every individual to live their life as they see fit as long as exercising that right does not interfere with another's right to do the same. A lofty ideal, but so be it. I am also a practicalist: that's not going to happen overnight and we may never reach that ideal, but we sure can get closer than we are now. Should people be judged by their appearance? Hell no! But they are! Being outraged about it isn't going to stop it from happening. Teaching people that's what they're doing (because you'd be surprised how many people simply don't realize that IS what they're doing) isn't going to happen if we're "in your face" about it.

Social progress is slow: it was less than 70 years ago that women in 12 states couldn't legally own property or sign contracts if they were married. It was less than 40 years ago that blacks were not allowed to marry whites in fourteen states. And it was less than 20 years ago that routine genital mutilation of babies with ambiguous genitalia stopped being common practice in virtually every hospital in the country. The gay equality movement has come a long way since Stonewall: it still has a long way to go, but I think we tend to forget just how far we've come.

The two greatest civil rights victories in the last 100 years were those led by Martin Luther King, Jr. and that led by Ghandi. Neither of them advocated "in the face" attitudes. They advocated determination and standing up for one's self and maintaining one's dignity. But they advocated a peaceful and non-violent revolution.

If the fringes of the gay community want to come to pride dressed to the nines, more power to them. But when the press asks "Can we take your picture?" and they say "Sure!", then they've taken on the role of ambassador and should behave accordingly. If they don't want to do that, then they should turn down the media's request for a photo. They could even do so with a pointed question like "Why is it that the media seems to want to reinforce the straight communities negative stereotypes of gays?"

Love and Light,
Rev. Shelly

O/T and personal-- I love this blog, not only is the writing great but it gives me a lot of hope that the 'bugh GLBT community is active, thriving and growing. Since I grew up in the 'burgh it's nice to know for things are good it's own sake, but even more so now because my wife and I are house hunting this weekend! We'll be staying in the Mexican War Streets so hopefully we'll have time to swing by Pride to check out the scene.

If anyone who lives in Pittsburgh wants to share their thoughts about living in the 'burgh, recommend any neighborhoods, etc., please do so, I'd really appreciate it.

Rev Shelly-- my comments weren't directed at you explicitly, more the dialogue overall. Although the idea that some drag queens or leather men would tell anyone, let alone a media person, that they themselves are "negative stereotypes" in the gay community is pretty far-fetched and pretty condescending. I understand where it is coming from, I really do, as I too find it frustrating and perplexing that people are still fascinated by drag queens and leather daddies. But that's not their fault, in many ways they are what made us much more visible in the first place, for better and for worse.

I totally understand your perspective that we're ambassadors, I personally use that phrase a lot IRL. My wife and I consider ourselves to be ambassadors, in our jobs, in our neighborhood, pretty much in our daily lives. The tricky part is that many of the conformist, not-in-your-face gays are invisible to straight people, they often mistake us for one of them. Which gives us good opportunities as well as puts us in a position where someone says something nasty about glbt people and we are in the position to raise and eyebrow and impress upon them that they don't always know who we are.

Naturally some people are better ambassadors than others, but we're a movement of people, not an orchestrated campaign, so we don't have that much control over the messengers or how the message is delivered. All we can do, collectively and as individuals, is live our lives, stand up for ourselves.

There is one other angle that no one has brought up-- we are often up against something much bigger than just the way we dress or act. There are people who wouldn't care if a gay couple was Christian, Republican, pro-life, pro-gun, pro-war, etc.-- gay is and will always be wrong to them, no matter what. Some people will never come around to viewing us or our families as equal because of what their religion has taught them. Sadly, their minds can't be changed no matter how "normal" we are.

That being said, our most revolutionary act is to simply be "out." I have a lot of family that was very homophobic until I came out. Then suddenly they cared about someone who was gay, it wasn't just an issue of "those people" anymore. Fortunately, after nearly 10 years, they came around and are back to not approving of me because I'm a liberal, not because I'm a lesbian. ;)

Great dialogue, keep it up!

Zoe:

By "negative stereotype", I wasn't intending to comment on the individuals or how they live their life, but on the impact it has on the straight and gay communities. Or perhaps more accurate, the impression it leaves on those who oppose gay equality. People point to these individuals and say "THIS is why I don't approve of gays." It certainly is condescending and arrogant of those who hold to these stereotypes and use them to judge others, but it happens nonetheless.

Yes, the "conformist" gays are often invisible. Sadly, many of them are not out either and therefore don't raise their eyebrows when comments about gays are made. I've even heard a few in-the-closet gays make some of the nastiest comments about gays.

I may not have addressed the radical religious right here on this site, but I've addressed them elsewhere, on both my ministry site and a site I have created called "Exposed! Unmasking the Agenda of the Radical Religious Right". On my ministry page, for example, I counter virtually every argument I've ever heard against gay marriage.

I'm one who finds it arrogant and condescending to attempt to convince someone that their faith is wrong. We are, in this country, free to believe what we will and if we expect someone else to beleive as we do, we are in principle doing exactly what we rail against the radical religious right for doing. I support someone's right to believe that being gay is and always will be immoral. I do not support their attempts to make their personal beliefs the law of the land and that is what many of these people have a hard time understanding. Their faith tells them that God created one set of morals and it applies to everyone. They don't believe that morality is subjective and are unable to acknowledge that they, since they chose which "version" of God to believe in, the morality their "version" declares applies to all is equally subjective. Such an acknowledgement would be in violation of their faith. Since I don't want anyone else asking me to violate MY faith, I won't ask anyone else to violate theirs.

I'm thinking we must be related because your family sounds a lot like mine. ;-)

Love and Light,
Rev. Shelly

You missed my point about right-wing Christians-- that being overly preoccupied with our "image" won't necessarily make a difference to certain segments of the population. Whether we're wearing leather chaps or button-down polo shirts many of them will never accept us and believe it is "moral" to oppose our equality and the equality of our families. But I said nothing at all about telling them their faith is wrong, as for whether or not their particular religious views should be enshrined into law, that is a different story. I agree with you about the offensiveness of telling someone else their faith is wrong, although I might point out that not all people who share their faith share their views, that there are different interpretations. :)

Shalom,
Zoe

There currently is more to the pridefest. Go see the Pittsburgh Pride Theatre Festival currently running. I have seen them and they are enjoyable and show a variety of representations on queer identities. Below is information for attending (taken from the Trib)

June 15-25. Pittsburgh Playwrights Theater. 542 Penn Ave, Downtown. There are 8 plays with GLBT themes on alternating Programs. Program A: "Getting Better/Couldn't Get Much Worse" by Michael Schwartz, "The Burning Half" by Bridget Harris, "Manly Men Doing Manly Things" by Scott Sickles and "Postcards from a Dead Dog" by F. J. Hartland plays at 8 p.m. tonight, this Saturday and June 23, 3 p.m. this Sunday, 4 p.m. June 24 and 7 p.m. June 25.

Program B: "In Common" by Gayle Pazerski, "Rain" by John Reoli, "Reunion" by Allison J and "Is That a Gun in Your Pocket?" by Carol Mullen plays at 8 p.m. Friday, June 22 and 24; 4 p.m. Saturday and 3 p.m. June 25.

Admission: $10 in advance and $15 at the door. Details: 412-288-0358.