Hey, there! Log in / Register

No Pride parade in Boston this year

WBZ reports it's still dead due to last year's angsty dissolution of the group that had run it over board members declining to come to grips with trans and Black inclusion issues.

Free tagging: 

Ad:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

Cutting off your nose to spite your face.

up
Voting closed 32

This is happening to a number of civic organizations where younger members are pushing to be more inclusive and representative of the world we have now.

Charles River Wheelers had a similar board shitshow showdown over having the organization represent the entire population of the region, rather than just the affluent white male boomer population giving out head pats here and there from their carbon fiber bikes, while wearing their Effective Cycling zealotry next to their hearts. Not quite sure how that all settled out as I have long avoided them in favor of the much more inclusive Boston Cyclists Union.

up
Voting closed 33

...if the New Guard is willing to do something besides tear down the old.

up
Voting closed 104

The New Guard views as "building up and reaching out".

Most of it's perspective and the inability/unwillingness to change after a certain point in life.

up
Voting closed 13

Think before you write, please.

up
Voting closed 13

... or of the old guard doesn't burn down the castle

up
Voting closed 6

Oh you mean like this? I've been to the previous two and they were both great: no alcohol, no commercial sponsors, no banks or cops but lots of fun. https://www.transresistancema.com/trans-resistance-2022

up
Voting closed 13

I mean, given that the "old guard" took their ball and went home, I'm not sure we can point fingers at the "New Guard" for not having a full-scale event organized yet.

(and tbh I wouldn't be surprised if we still see Pride parades on a smaller, less corporate scale, and likely not advertised on WBZ)

up
Voting closed 34

The new guard took a flamethrower to Pride. They seemed more interested in carnage than having a functional organization.

up
Voting closed 10

They seemed more interested in carnage than having a functional organization

So what's "a functional organization"? One optimized to run an event just the same way it's been run for the past decade or two?

I'm firmly of the belief that no one is entitled to sit on the sidelines and demand that other people create an event to their specifications. But if people are willing to do the work to create an event with some changes, how is that "taking a flamethrower to Pride"?

up
Voting closed 8

They demanded every board member of Pride resign and give the organization to them. That’s a power grab, not a collaboration. They’ve now had a year to set up the stripped down, grass roots parade they claim to desire, and have accomplished nothing.

up
Voting closed 17

That is the goal. The world isn't as white and activities aren't as cis-gendered and male as they once were.

The problem is often that the "old guard" has to be removed en bloc because they don't fucking listen to the new reality of inclusion in a changed world ... or they think that "listening" followed by condescension/braying about 20 years ago is enough.

Whinging about "tearing things down" happens when they make that necessary with their maladaptive responses to the need for organizations to diversify or die.

up
Voting closed 30

...than our Gay Pride parades. Maybe the organizers weren't as inclusive as some would like. They may not have moved as quickly or been as responsive as some would like. And some may have objections to various corporate sponsors, or resist the idea of any kind of corporate participation at all. But the fact remains that for many years our community had a very fun, positive, and inclusive parade that meant a whole lot for a whole lot of people over the years, and now we don't.

up
Voting closed 77

organizations is laudable, but you might still have have room to become more inclusive yourself, and it looks to me like you failed to address that.

up
Voting closed 25

Not having a parade at all.

Doesn't include anybody.

up
Voting closed 44

maybe even empty? Having a parade that purports to celebrate inclusivity and tolerance while not fully embodying those values.

up
Voting closed 19

...cancel them all! Perfect or nothing, that'll show 'em!

up
Voting closed 30

If Pride doesn't embody values of inclusion, what's the value of Pride?

This is only my opinion, but if it's all about mimosa brunches and photo ops, it's really not a big deal if Pride doesn't happen. In fact, I'd say that if people get seriously upset about not having Pride, they're telling on themselves. It's not as if it's the only day of the year that we can have fun, create community, be visible, show our strength.

up
Voting closed 11

got "cancelled"; it was the original organizers that took their ball and went home in a snit. If anything, they cancelled themselves.

The old guard vs. new blood sparring is an old story in non-profit ventures. The surprise twist in this one is that rather than make some kind of accommodation, the old-timers decided to torpedo the whole thing.

I don't have a horse in this race. That's just what it looks like to one outsider.

up
Voting closed 21

You can’t talk about condescension in one post and use the term “boomer” in another. The ageism is getting old and isn’t fair to the people that started the work. All sides should have both an ear and a voice at the table here.

up
Voting closed 23

Everyone gets eaten by the new guard.

up
Voting closed 34

Identity politics have been a phenomenon ever since one sentient person decided they were not a duplicate of another.

Identity politics was very much a part of the writing of the Constitution. Look at the 3/5ths clause. Slave owners who considered slaves to be lessor and so needing to be slaves (for their sake) wanted these folks to be fully counted in Congressional apportionment.* These people were recognized as having a group identity. Slaves. Yet the politics of the slaveowners pushed for the members of this group to be counted fully in political representation.

Complaints about identity politics is just another cliche for whining.

*It still amazes me that southern slaveowners wanted representation based on the number of "individuals" including slaves even though the slaves were property, chattel and therefore could not vote. All the grand words of taxation without representation fell on deaf ears with slave holders. And given the extremes that southern states have gone to disenfranchise undesirable voting that seems to continue to be the case. Some sins never get washed away.

up
Voting closed 16

Their “reasoning” was based on identity politics and it did not hold up. It always fails in the end. If people are continually separated and put into checkboxes, there will always be a “new guard” that tries to tear down what previous generations have built.

up
Voting closed 3

It's that it certainly never involved anything people would refer to as "identity politics".

up
Voting closed 13

That could well be true for CRW, and I agree wholeheartedly that BCU does a very good job at seeking inclusive representation. But sometimes the problem isn't really there, just because somebody says that it is. If a bomb is thrown and all it does is blow up the target without replacement, then it's probably a net loss to the community. Regarding the specific example of Pride, are people really better off with no organization at all? No event? Was that the best result that could be achieved? It's just a shame that nothing has risen from the ashes.

up
Voting closed 34

If they decided to quit instead of becoming more inclusive, that's on the old guard. They choose to close the entire organization.

Every time a smaller group asks the larger group to make space for them, there is push-back from the larger group. That doesn't make it right to not make progress just because the larger group enjoys the status quo.

up
Voting closed 26

I get their weekly emails announcing rides. I have in the past found their rides to be too fast for my taste, so I don't generally go on them. But that's no reflection on them, just on the kind of riding I prefer (slow, sightseeing pace).

up
Voting closed 20

Let's think about who rides that fast - it isn't you, it isn't me, it isn't most people with modest bank accounts and no time to pile on the miles or buy the fast toys.

If their rides and activities are entirely organized, run, and paced for a very narrow group of people, that is a recipe for future implosion - and a lot of more urban, younger, female, and minority cyclists are struggling to get that through some very arrogant heads.

Yes, they are still around but there is an ongoing drama about a board that ignores the fundamental demographic realities that cycling will not survive if it continues to cater solely to primarily white suburban men who ride for recreation.

EDIT: I am seeing some more reasonably paced rides, women's rides, and more rides on their calendar originating from the more urban reaches of the Charles River/T stations at times that working people can participate. The board was not entirely overturned, but changed in positive ways. But there is still room for improvement.

up
Voting closed 15

for hijacking a story about LGBTQ+ inclusivity and making exclusively about you. This kind of ally we don’t need.

up
Voting closed 71

But Swirrly's comment wasn't a hijacking, nor was it an attempt to make it exclusively about her. It simply notd that a similar generational conflict occurred in a different group.

Also, you're wrong about what you need: If her comment made you angry, then someone who makes a thoughtful observation probably _is_ an ally that you need.

up
Voting closed 10

for hijacking a story about LGBTQ+ inclusivity and making exclusively about you. This kind of ally we don’t need.

What did YOU add to the conversation?

up
Voting closed 22

my reply was a response to the comment made by someone named swirlygrrl, whom I presumed was female. I didn’t realize she was a dude. My bad.

up
Voting closed 16

At least, she's never indicated otherwise.

I've operated on that premise the entire decade and a half I've been on UH.

up
Voting closed 8

makes one way or another in this discussion.

up
Voting closed 8

Pride is not the only organization that is struggling with these issues. They simply have more complex layers and intersections of diversity to contend with.

This is happening to many organizations with an entrenched leadership that doesn't respond to shifting demographic realities and an expansion of identities, and that is more responsive to satisfying deep pockets instead of a broad base.

up
Voting closed 28

As a member of the LGBTQIA+ community I think this may be for the best. The event got so bloated and so boringly corporate (yes, I know everything needs money) that it effectively consumed itself. And in recent years the whole thing seemed to be for the amusement of heterosexual families who turned out in droves (making sure to put special rainbow colors in the hair of their children) to watch the sideshow and display how progressive they are. LGBTQIA+ youth long ago broke off from this decaying behemoth to stage their own parade, which takes place in May. Perhaps something new, something less circus-y, something more soulful, if you will, will arise from the ashes. And here's hoping it's not called "Pride". What is there to be proud of? That we have same sex attraction? Isn't this a little like being proud that we have a right arm or a left foot?

up
Voting closed 78

As I drove to work this morning.

To that moon, I attribute the quality of this post, for it is a rare contribution from an anon that is thoughtful and terrific.

up
Voting closed 21

Is not a good way to go forward. (What is Pride supposed to mean?? Aren’t I clever?) it just leads to needless division between once solid groups. “You get nothing. Good day (insert inoffensive pronoun here).”

up
Voting closed 11

...on EARTH are you talking about?

it just leads to needless division between once solid groups

Horsefeathers. If it can't stand the mildest scrutiny, that's a sure sign that it's hollowed out.

up
Voting closed 11

As a gay man myself, I concur with your entire statement.

For me pride went from... a group of people who are proud of who they are & their supporters celebrating together. It was grass roots, local artists, local bars, big floats.. real local stuff.

Maybe that lone politician who supported gay rights (when no one else did), or that company that supports us or that lone UUE church in the parade. But most of it was men in jock straps, women without tops on, fetishwear and on and on.

Pride now? Big corporate sponsorship. parades that are endless churches, companies, and politicians. And overloaded with 'straight supporters'.

And while in the 30 years I've been out and going to pride, I'm happy that we're much more support of it, but its lost its appeal because of it. Its not that you're welcome, but the event started out by us for us. And now everyone else wants to play.

--

As far as Boston Pride Committee, I had no love for this group at all. Looking at their board, it was pretty clear this was no longer a grassroots thing, and essentially a corporation. A pride country club is the best way I can put it. Explains why they got mad, not willing to change, so they took toys and corporate sponsorships with them.

As I said, no love for this group. But no love for the new one either. I get why the new group pushed for this. Pride was very white and that needed to change. But feel like the new group of people were unprepared for the amount of effort that goes into planning such a thing, which is why I don't think we're having Pride this year. I think they couldn't get together.

Others above have chimed in and said "well may need more time". Perhaps. but also perhaps that they should understood the work it takes to put this one. And not just time energy to make it happen.. you need money. It takes time to build all of that back up.

I somehow think this new group thought it was 'just gonna happen' because they were the face of Boston Pride. But they failed to realize that sure, Boston Pride had money that could have gone to the new group, but those big corporate sponsorships that pay for a good portion of pride.. did not. Remember Boston Pride is basically a business, and since the new group was not 'taking over' the old group (i.e. same name, same structure, just diff people at the helm) vs start up their own group.. all of those big sponsorships stayed with the former pride committee. The corporations do not have honor their donations to the new group of folks because.. its not the same group.

My point is... As much as I dislike the corporatism at Pride, it was one of the reasons why we had pride for many years. They paid. And now this new group needs to go back out & re-ask for donations and funding. And I don't think they realized that. I don't they realized how connected people were to getting that stuff pretty easy. Especially when you've run the event for years.. you just go back year, after year.

Everyone is all talk until you realize all the effort that is required to do so. I think that is what happened here. It will be a surprise next year if we have one or not. We'll see if my hunch is right.. but I don't think the new group has the backers or the people to run Boston Pride.

But what do I know.. I sat on Atlanta Pride for 2 years, did it here in Boston for 2 years. And I also run an event (currently) in the cape that attracts 25k or more people. So I might just be talking out my ass (/snark)

up
Voting closed 57

This kind of authenticity is what I come here for.

up
Voting closed 9

And while in the 30 years I've been out and going to pride, I'm happy that we're much more support of it, but its lost its appeal because of it. Its not that you're welcome, but the event started out by us for us. And now everyone else wants to play.

Hard agree. But...

feel like the new group of people were unprepared for the amount of effort that goes into planning such a thing, which is why I don't think we're having Pride this year. I think they couldn't get together....Others above have chimed in and said "well may need more time". Perhaps. but also perhaps that they should understood the work it takes to put this one. And not just time energy to make it happen.. you need money. It takes time to build all of that back up. I somehow think this new group thought it was 'just gonna happen' because they were the face of Boston Pride. But they failed to realize that sure, Boston Pride had money that could have gone to the new group, but those big corporate sponsorships that pay for a good portion of pride.. did not

I can't speak to what the new group's thinking was, or what they wanted Pride to be. But, question the premise that putting on "Boston Pride" means putting on the same event as we've had in recent years, just with new people at the helm. You said it yourself: it became the TD Bank(tm) Boston Pride Parade, the suburban straight "mama bears" Pride Parade, the Massachusetts politician's Pride Parade, the parade where actual LGBTQ people seemed almost incidental except as window dressing for all these other people. And yeah, it takes a lot of funding to throw that event. But is that the event you want to have?

up
Voting closed 8

And in recent years the whole thing seemed to be for the amusement of heterosexual families who turned out in droves (making sure to put special rainbow colors in the hair of their children) to watch the sideshow and display how progressive they are.

I'm lost on that remark. For someone who is all about inclusiveness, that's not very inclusive. Maybe I'm missing the point of the parade, but aren't you looking for acceptance and rights from everybody? Those hetero families are supporting you - isn't that a good thing? Or, maybe you just want a parade with just LGBTQIA participants and spectators. I'm not sure.

In the interest of full disclosure, I'm a hetero man who has never gone to the parade, so I don't have first-hand knowledge of its history and what it has become. Maybe it has become off the mark lately. It definitely sounds like it ain't what it used to be which is very common (even unavoidable) when an event wants to grow, but gets entwined in all the negative aspects of growth. There is a delicate balance that is difficult (impossible??) to achieve.

I hope the parade comes back, probably best as a grass roots affair again. Screw the corporate sponsorship.

up
Voting closed 10

I'm lost on that remark. For someone who is all about inclusiveness, that's not very inclusive. Maybe I'm missing the point of the parade, but aren't you looking for acceptance and rights from everybody?

In the context of an LGBTQ event, inclusiveness means inclusive of all LGBTQ people.

Those hetero families are supporting you - isn't that a good thing?

I'm going to get a lot of hate for this, but I think it's important to question what this "support" is, and who gets to define it. Every marginalized group needs support -- but when majority culture gets to define what that means, and how and under what conditions this support shall be doled out (or withheld, as in, if you're the wrong kind of gay "you've just cost yourself my support", which is the bullythreat that marginalized people hear ALL THE TIME from majority culture), then it isn't really support. It's straight people doing what they want to do, when and how and under what conditions they want to do it. It's for them, not for us.

I'm a huge fan of straight people being allies, and supporting their LGBTQ friends and family members. But I've also seen some of them take it a bit too far, to the point where they want to be the ones driving the bus. I've seen some of them wanting to dictate what can and can't happen at Pride (never mind LGBTQ rights, politics, and presence in society). That isn't support.

up
Voting closed 10

So, is it alright if heteros show up or not? They're not driving the bus, they're just showing up at the parade. At first you showed disapproval, but then said (I think) it's ok to show up, just don't tell us how to run our organization (agree).

up
Voting closed 7

So, is it alright if heteros show up or not? They're not driving the bus, they're just showing up at the parade.

Look, I'm not the boss of this parade that isn't being held (yes, this conversation has become that absurd), but if you want my advice, maybe read the room? And that doesn't mean that I think you're being dense, and it doesn't mean "the room says don't go", it means READ THE ROOM. It means respond to the situation at the time, whatever that happens to be in that moment, with awareness and sensitivity, recognizing that you're not the focus of the event, and if you choose to go, think of ways that your presence can be a net benefit rather than a detriment. And that's general advice, not just for straight people going to pride, but for anyone in a similar situation. I think in situations like that, your best advice will come from listening, applying informed common sense, and asking yourself whether you should go or not, rather than asking someone to give you a thumbs up or thumbs down.

up
Voting closed 6

People want to go and show support, but now you want them to way overthink it and figure out whether they should go or not because they may hurt someone's feelings in this inclusive event that is really only inclusive to LGetc people.

Now I know why this event was cancelled.

up
Voting closed 5

This is just ignorant. Youth Pride started in the 90s as a state-sponsored event, as part of the Governor’s Commission to Stop Gay Teens From Killing Themselves (not its real name).

As a 90s teen myself, I for one appreciated corporate donations at youth pride: there were free Ben & Jerry’s mini cups, mm tasty

More seriously, I was able to attend this event with our high school group, which was called a Gay-Straight Alliance, but also used the initials LGBTQQIIA (try to guess what all of that stands for), with several teachers in attendance as chaperones— and you better damn well believe that if it were NOT an official school-sanctioned event most of us kids would have been forbidden from going.

The past is another country but do try to imagine a time when pride parades were not considered “fun for the whole family”

up
Voting closed 9

It's good to see a measured reporting.

There was so much bad stuff that happened over the course of 5 or 6 years, it isn't easy to pick a side in the fight. The worst of it on both sides is plausible but not well proven, so who knows.

I lean toward lamenting that the Boston Pride board just "took their ball and went home" instead of figuring out a way to, say, double their board and allow greater and broader representation. But perhaps the sniping had gotten too loud that wasn't really an option. I don't know. I agree with some comments that the march/parade became boring, being overrun by company affinity groups, mostly banks, and politicians. But with most of the gay bars gone, what other organized groups are there?

I haven't heard mention of Pride Lights. I presume the block party will happen, since there's still a bar on that block (and they rake in the cash), but haven't seen any definitive news about that.

As I read elsewhere recently, perhaps the issue is that the events suffer in some way under the success and gains made, so the drive by intersectional groups to take up the "march" aspect is more important than the affluent whites keeping it a party "parade." Dunno. Just sad that it's such a mess.

up
Voting closed 7

if there are people willing and able to take it over.

up
Voting closed 12

Were there? Or were there just bomb throwers telling others what they should be doing?

up
Voting closed 46

enjoys tremendous success

up
Voting closed 47

That the one parade that welcomes gay cops and firefighters is the Saint Patrick's day parade.

up
Voting closed 25

Well, for one thing, we rid ourselves of the old regime and took a stand that all are welcome. But we have a unique set of characteristics that make both our organization and parade unique which others don’t benefit from.

As much as I would like to see the Pride Parade return, nobody seems to be that interested or the timing isn’t right. It’s hard work organizing an event of that size and not everyone has the community support that the St. Patrick’s Day parade enjoys.

Hopefully someone will step forward and at least put something together, even if it’s just a static event in a public place. It may be square one but a necessary step in generating interest and support.

up
Voting closed 7

There will be a Dyke March this year, as noted in the WGBH article linked in another comment.

Last summer there was a low-key non-marching event on the Common organized by the people who usually organize the Boston Dyke March.

up
Voting closed 24

Parades are a dying tradition. What people enjoy today are protests and counterprotests.

up
Voting closed 14

Your post may have been somewhat facetious, but allow me point out that the original "Pride" parades here back in the 70s were indeed protests. They were, in fact, referred to as "marches" and the gathering on the Common afterwards as a "rally". Talk about politically charged language. Older LGBT man that I am, I sometimes still slip into the old terminology and call them that, the way my grandmother used to refer to the T as "the streetcar". I recall one march here in the 70s when a contingent of people marched with paper bags on their heads with eyeholes cut out so they could see, carrying signs that stated their occupations. One of the signs I recall was "teacher". This was still when one could be fired from a teaching job for being gay. Honestly, when you've seen something as heavy as that, today's family-friendly, fluffy, self-congratulatory "parades" seem rather empty.

up
Voting closed 21

I wonder why??

up
Voting closed 8

As an ally, I’m going to the Providence event. Same train, different direction and way less drama.
Peace/out

up
Voting closed 9

As a queer person, I question terms like "ally" that are thrown around worn like badges. It's such an outdated blanket phrase that needs to be deconstructed here in 2022. Ally of what, exactly? The entire LGBTQIA+ community? Specific friends in the community? A crusader for all truth and justice? And the fact that one seeks to go to an event with less drama smacks of fairweatherness. Is one only an ally when the going is smooth?

up
Voting closed 8

As an ally, I’m going to the Providence event. Same train, different direction and way less drama.

Why are you going? What do you think Pride is all about?

up
Voting closed 7

I'm not Chinese, but I go to the Lion Dance parade in Chinatown on (or around) Lunar New Year.

up
Voting closed 6

...it might be, yes. Liberation isn't the only thing Pride is about, but it also isn't a spectator sport.

up
Voting closed 8

And age will be the divide.

up
Voting closed 10

What is now NYC Pride was the Christopher Street Day Parade. It was very much an in your face, "we're here, we're queer, get used to it." The word pride comes in as a response to the SHAME that has always been part of suppression and oppression of gays, lesbians, etc.

In some places that shame has been largely diluted. At least in Boston. Far from gone, but at least diluted enough that even large corporations would get in on the parade.

I am not saddened that there is no parade this year. It has become an apolitical event that has no teeth. All sugar but no fiber. To me it's also mostly playtime. I've enjoyed my years of playtime of loud music, plenty of alcohol and general revelry. Heck, in my youth I was very much part of that aspect.

But I also remember that fundamentally what we call Gay Pride today was the annual demand that we will not be forgotten, ignored or treated as though we don't exist.

It's been about 2 generations since the Compton's Cafeteria riot and the Christopher Street rebellion. Yet there are plenty of people who want anyone who is refuses to wear the right clothes, call themselves by the right names, birth the right number of babies, etc. to just disappear. As long as they wage culture war there will be no shortage of community fighting back.

Maybe the best thing is for the Boston Pride Parade to die so that something may be reborn.

Appropriate given the confluence of major religious high holidays.

up
Voting closed 13

It's been about 2 generations since the Compton's Cafeteria riot and the Christopher Street rebellion. Yet there are plenty of people who want anyone who is refuses to wear the right clothes, call themselves by the right names, birth the right number of babies, etc. to just disappear.

Anyone who's paying attention will have noticed the recent sharp rise in anti-LGBTQ legislation.. It is merely the latest round scapegoating of LGBTQ people and making us the target of a politically useful moral panic. From Phyllis Schlafley and Anita Bryant, through the election of George W. Bush, to today's "Don't say gay" laws, all happening in a country that wants us to believe that the Equality Act is unnecessary...we exist on the sufferance of the straight world and the second they decide to withdraw their tolerance, there we go.

The irony is that it's the older members of the community who have no excuse not to understand this. But some of them have achieved a measure of personal security through privilege that does not extend to the community at large. They are comfortable and they don't want to struggle any more and so they unilaterally declare the war won, or at least over. They want a party. They feel they've earned a party. And so Pride went from a radical protest to a more polite protest to a celebration of tenuous accomplishments (Look! Lesbian couples with babies in strollers! Look! Cops wearing rainbow buttons! Look! Major corporations want our money!) to a party where the guests of honor have become an afterthought.

This year in particular, I'm inclined to think that we would do better to not have any big Pride marches, or perhaps even small ones. We need to be sending a different message, showing ourselves as something other than those colorful people who put on a good show. This year, we would do better to focus the month of June on some hard truths and reality checks. And if it means that corporations and politicians and police departments don't get to rainbow-wash themselves and are instead required to actually do something to earn their "ally" tag, I am all in favor.

up
Voting closed 9

Gotta weed out the TERFS

up
Voting closed 6

The implosion of Boston Pride can also be explained in part by this acronym: QTBIPOC. Here's the statement by Boston Pride announcing its dissolution.

https://www.bostonpride.org

It is clear to us that our community needs and wants change without the involvement of Boston Pride. We have heard the concerns of the QTBIPOC [Queer, Trans, Black, Indigenous, and People of Color] community and others. We care too much to stand in the way. Therefore, Boston Pride is dissolving. There will be no further events or programming planned, and the board is taking steps to close down the organization.

Silly old pride was too gay, too lesbian. Not enough other letters and other issues. With gay rights largely won, the youth wanted the gay rights movement to pivot to a sort of all-purpose social justice movement. And they wanted the gays and lesbians who created and ran pride to keep working, while taking an ideological beating from their new overlords. If you're same sex attracted, you're not only no longer central, but you're suspect.

This Quillette article has greater detail.

https://quillette.com/2021/10/13/the-implosion-of-bostons-pride-parade-i...

The protesters against Pride, who repeatedly interrupted the march with demonstrations, demanded more BLM, less police (and for goodness sake, no police as parade marshalls), no Israel, and definitely no Log Cabin Republicans. And white people, such as those gays and lesbians who founded and ran the organization, should just sit down and shut up.

But activists weren’t satisfied, and the board was pressured to make more concessions—including the shelving of nearly all virtual Pride events in favor of “Events that Support the Black and Brown Community.” But by this time, it seemed no gesture of apology or appeasement would suffice. And some former volunteers set up a rival group called Pride 4 The People as a vehicle to organize boycotts. A group of transgender activists also started a separate group called Trans Resistance MA to “advocat[e] for the safety, joy, and liberation of TQBIPOC” (this term being identical to “QTBIPOC,” except with the Q and T pointedly reversed). Together, these groups put on a “Trans Resistance March and Vigil for Black Trans Lives” as an alternative to the cancelled Pride parade. But in contrast to the celebratory, upbeat mood that generally characterizes Pride, the March and Vigil were somber and somewhat morbid.

The organizers even issued a set of special instructions for any “white person planning to attend the event.” One commenter advised that “white queers [should] pretend that you are attending a funeral for a friend of a friend of a friend. You want to support the friends there, but you didn’t really know the person who passed. Would you shove yourself to the front of the room and sob and make everyone else uncomfortable? I sure hope not. That funeral isn’t for you, it’s for the people who are seriously hurting and you’re there to show support.” Sounds fun, no?

See up there, how easily gay is demoted to "queer?" If a gay man is offended by that, he clearly doesn't matter to these folks. But why should people who created an organization to support same-sex attracted people put up with being forced to work as servants to people whose ideas they don't agree with, and lose even the right to define who they are?

Since Obergefell, Pride organizations in many parts of North America have been flush with cash and political influence, but not quite sure what to do with it. In Boston, as in other cities, Pride has fractured into several camps. One is made up of those who are happy to see Pride become a blander, more corporate, mass participation institution within America’s ever-expanding civic calendar. The second major bloc is made up of those who seek radicalism for its own sake, and who are desperate to rekindle what they see as the revolutionary origins of Pride. And so if gay rights is no longer radical, they insist, the LGBT movement must pour its energy and resources into causes that offer the possibility of militant politics—such as radical gender movements, the erasure of biological sex, anti-capitalism, demonization of Israel, extreme forms of “anti-racism,” pacifism, and police abolition. Even gays and lesbians, now seen as the “privileged” elite of the LGBT population, are the subject of suspicion, and even animosity.

Under those conditions, with insults piled on demands, and the insistence that everybody toe a narrow ideological line, who can blame the Pride organizers for finding something better to do with their time?

up
Voting closed 28

Very eye-opening overview of the whole absurd situation.

up
Voting closed 9

With gay rights largely won

lol

up
Voting closed 7

Bless your heart. You're new to all this, aren't you? Is there anything you need better explained?

See, when us boring old people were coming up (in the _last_century!_), it was illegal for gay people to get married, or even to have sex, and it was legal to fire gay people from jobs just for being gay. It's probably difficult for kids these days to imagine what things were like back then.

Have a read of the Quillette article (unless your little band of blue-fringers will shun you for it). Boston Pride started to fall apart just as Obergefell v Hodges (which legalized gay marriage in the entire country) was decided in 2015. In the words of the protesters, "YOU’VE GOT MARRIAGE—WHAT DO WE HAVE??"

(They already had marriage, unless it was same-sex marriage)

up
Voting closed 9

You're new to all this, aren't you?

Bwaaahahaha. I was organizing Pride marches in the '80s. Take a seat.

up
Voting closed 6

As a member of the LGBTQIA+ community...

I'm behind the times. What does the "IA" stand for?

up
Voting closed 5

(I think?)

up
Voting closed 7