The Pointer Sisters are headlining this year's annual events to be conducted June 24-26 with the parade on the 26th. Be there or be square. http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2011/05/on-being-excited-about-okcs-lgbt.html

The Pointer Sisters are headlining this year's annual events to be conducted June 24-26 with the parade on the 26th. Be there or be square. http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2011/05/on-being-excited-about-okcs-lgbt.html

Doug, your blog post is outstanding. This seems like a real big-city gay pride event. Should be fun.

Yet another music act from way back when to see before they get too old and die or retire.

Yet another music act from way back when to see before they get too old and die or retire.
I get to see Stevie Wonder at ACL Fest this year....that was a bit of a surprise act but Van Morrison was there are couple of years ago so maybe it shouldn't have been. The Eagles were the closing headliner last year.

Did Van Morrison play more than 45 minutes? He only gave us 50 in Denver a couple of years ago

I have never been to these events.

I have never been to these events.

ಠ_ಠ

sounds like fun.

Enjoy your cultural diversity OKC. And who said OKC was not cosmopolitan. ....

It's been a good year, lots to celebrate.

Doug, in your blog you say we had a gay mayor who never admitted it. If you are meaning who I THINK you are I will maintain that we had TWO, NEITHER of whom admitted it. Like you, however, I will keep it hush hush.

In Chicago, this is the social event of the year. My daughters, neither of whom is gay, spend days thinking up their costumes and friends travel there for the event. Every apartment is full of visitors. It would be cool to see ours become at least a "must see" event for the locals.

Doug, in your blog you say we had a gay mayor who never admitted it. If you are meaning who I THINK you are I will maintain that we had TWO, NEITHER of whom admitted it. Like you, however, I will keep it hush hush.
Sounds like we need to compare notes privately!

ಠ_ಠ

What's wrong?

Unless things have changed...a lot....some gay pride parades don't do much good to help how some people understand gay people. Sometimes image is everything...

Unless things have changed...a lot....some gay pride parades don't do much good to help how some people understand gay people. Sometimes image is everything...

Meaning what exactly? Sounds like you are stereotyping...careful.

Its true. A lot of them are out there nude, near nude, wearing extreme kinky sexual outfit, having sex on floats, etc. Just common knowledge that I've learned over the years.

Sounds like we need to compare notes privately!

Why is this any of your business or the business of anyone else?

Meaning what exactly? Sounds like you are stereotyping...careful.
Oh please....don't be a freak. Read again. Look for words like "some" and "sometimes". Its freaky how quickly 'some' people jump to conclusions without actually and completely reading a statement.

Why is this any of your business or the business of anyone else?
I understand your legitimate concern for privacy issues, king183, but gay issues are on the public agenda and history is everyone's business. Gay Pride is the topic of this thread, and for those who are public figures, like mayors, that is particularly true. Not at all intending to make an appropriate analogy because it isn't, but to flip the coin to its dark side, I'd be equally interested in knowing what mayors may have been secret members of the KKK. I'd be surprised if there wasn't at least one, if not more, but that's a topic for another day.

As to this topic, do you think that it is OK to mention that Al McAffrey, my state house representative, is gay, and that former county commissioner Roth is, too?

Where do you draw your line as to appropriate public interest in your own view of what is OK and what is not?

As if straight people don't push the envelope of what society thinks is acceptable?? Ever seen what goes on at Mardi Gras or Sturgis? Makes the boyz in San Fran look tame.

Put it this way, if 3% of metro OKC is gay, then that's 36,000...odds are pretty high that you interacted with several gay people in the last week and didn't know it. That's cuz the majority do not look or act the stereotype. The sterotypical gay image represents an extreme subset of the gay population.

As if straight people don't push the envelope of what society thinks is acceptable?? Ever seen what goes on at Mardi Gras or Sturgis? Makes the boyz in San Fran look tame.

Put it this way, if 3% of metro OKC is gay, then that's 36,000...odds are pretty high that you interacted with several gay people in the last week and didn't know it. That's cuz the majority do not look or act the stereotype. The sterotypical gay image represents an extreme subset of the gay population.

You can ask USG. He's living witness on here that people interacting around me would never know. lol

You know, I'm just guessing, but maybe there's some concern about "outing" someone without their consent. A dead former mayor (if that's the case here), obviously can't give consent. Also, "outing" is seen by some as showing that there's an insinuation that there's something wrong with being gay. Even using terminology such as, "admitted", etc. I don't know - I'm a straight guy who's married and has always loved ladies - but I also understand both sides on this issue of "outing."

Mike, no one has been outed here. I would imagine that all of the oldies around here knew who Doug was referring to but none of us used names.

And, yes, Thunder, I will attest that you certainly are not obvious about it.......... at ALL.

some gay pride parades don't do much good to help how some people understand gay people.

Ummm, what's there to understand?? They're just people like anyone else except they happen to be interested in the same sex. It's pretty simple really.

Mike, no one has been outed here. I would imagine that all of the oldies around here knew who Doug was referring to but none of us used names.

And, yes, Thunder, I will attest that you certainly are not obvious about it.......... at ALL.

I understand that. But the blog post is talking about "hints" and such and in trying to be fair to the lesbian and gay community, that part of it might be very offensive to some. Then again - maybe not. The other side, I suppose, is that if it's no big deal, why not just talk names since there's nothing wrong with being gay? See what I mean by seeing both sides?

And, yes, Thunder, I will attest that you certainly are not obvious about it.......... at ALL.

Awww, you're so kind.

Awww, you're so kind.

Well, except for the doilies and other decorative items you make, hee hee. Gotcha there, big guy.:Smiley122 ........................................:sofa:

:-(

And before anyone gets their shorts in a wad, I have been highly involved with gays all my life and when I am with them we use words for them you can't say in polite society. When they are real friends PC goes out the window.

I understand your legitimate concern for privacy issues, king183, but gay issues are on the public agenda and history is everyone's business. Gay Pride is the topic of this thread, and for those who are public figures, like mayors, that is particularly true. Not at all intending to make an appropriate analogy because it isn't, but to flip the coin to its dark side, I'd be equally interested in knowing what mayors may have been secret members of the KKK. I'd be surprised if there wasn't at least one, if not more, but that's a topic for another day.

As to this topic, do you think that it is OK to mention that Al McAffrey, my state house representative, is gay, and that former county commissioner Roth is, too?

Where do you draw your line as to appropriate public interest in your own view of what is OK and what is not?

Come on, Doug. That's ridiculous. Someone's sexuality is none of your business as long as it does't impact you (and it doesn't). You and USG getting together to "compare notes" on what public figure is gay seems a bit pathetic and high schoolish.

You can talk about gay public policy issues all you want, but you have absolutely no business discussing someone else's sexual orientation if that person has chosen not to have that type of information public. The idea of getting together with someone else to gossip about it is outrageous. For many, such actions are a source of unnecessary hurt.

Al McAffrey and Jim Roth are two public figures who discuss it openly and publicly often. That's their choice. Good for them. You have no business making the choice for someone else, even if it is "just to compare notes."

:-(

Just pickin' on ya coz you're little, buddy.

Come on, Doug. That's ridiculous. Someone's sexuality is none of your business as long as it does't impact you (and it doesn't). You and USG getting together to "compare notes" on what public figure is gay seems a bit pathetic and high schoolish.

You can talk about gay public policy issues all you want, but you have absolutely no business discussing someone else's sexual orientation if that person has chosen not to have that type of information public. The idea of getting together with someone else to gossip about it is outrageous. For many, such actions are a source of unnecessary hurt.

Al McAffrey and Jim Roth are two public figures who discuss it openly and publicly often. That's their choice. Good for them. You have no business making the choice for someone else, even if it is "just to compare notes."

Don't miss my post above this one since we posted at the same time.

Meaning what exactly? Sounds like you are stereotyping...careful.

I have a lot of friends and family who are gay. That doesn't mean I want to see them acting ridiculous in public - any more than I would want heterosexual people acting that way. When people see a celebration of "gayness" and it amounts to public "lewdness," it supports a stereotype that is unfair to the vast majority of gay people. Last I checked, there isn't a celebration of heterosexuality that involves getting out on floats and behaving in a manner that would make ANYONE who was sober uncomfortable.

You can't equate it to what happens at Mardi Gras. Mardi Gras in intended to push the boundaries beyond what is acceptable. That is the whole point. It is people doing things they wouldn't normally do just before lent. When you see gay folks celebrating their sexuality in the same manner as heterosexuals do when they are deliberately pushing the limit (as in Mardi Gras), it leads to a belief by many that this sort of depravity is what defines gay people. If you know gays, you know that isn't true. But if you don't, this suggests that to be gay is to act like a pervert in public. You may not like what I am saying, but think about it. It is one thing for gay folks to walk hand in hand, wave, give each other kisses and hugs, hold signs, etc. It is another to behave in such a hedonistic manner that even gay parents don't want to bring their kids to the parade. If they want to celebrate their gayness by acting like out of control heteros at Mardi Gras, that is one thing. And they are free to do that. But pretending it doesn't support an inaccurate stereotype is unrealistic.

Just pickin' on ya coz you're little, buddy.

I'm little? :-O

Certainly, compared to all the other Thunders in town. Six five ain't squat. :sofa:

Edit: oops, I mean IS squat.

I think it's exciting!

Certainly, compared to all the other Thunders in town. Six five ain't squat. :sofa:

Edit: oops, I mean IS squat.

I'm sure some of them are shorter.

Just makin' sure here, Thunder, but you do realize that my calling you "little" in the first place was a joke, right. You could squash me like a bug. :whiteflag

Just makin' sure here, Thunder, but you do realize that my calling you "little" in the first place was a joke, right. You could squash me like a bug. :whiteflag

I'm a harmless boy. :-O

Last I checked, there isn't a celebration of heterosexuality that involves getting out on floats and behaving in a manner that would make ANYONE who was sober uncomfortable.
I guess that you haven't been to some of the larger biker rallies...."adult spring break" is what comes to mind. In fact a year or two ago the fairgrounds where the Republic of Texas (ROT) Rally is held became 18 and over during the rally after some furor by one of the county commissioners. This was after the event had pretty much had the same atmosphere for the previous 12 or so years.

It's hard to know where to begin, and I'm ignoring Thunder's comments in that regard. Sorry, Thunder, you can easily ignore me, too.

King183, you said

Come on, Doug. That's ridiculous. Someone's sexuality is none of your business as long as it does't impact you (and it doesn't). You and USG getting together to "compare notes" on what public figure is gay seems a bit pathetic and high schoolish.

You can talk about gay public policy issues all you want, but you have absolutely no business discussing someone else's sexual orientation if that person has chosen not to have that type of information public. The idea of getting together with someone else to gossip about it is outrageous. For many, such actions are a source of unnecessary hurt.

Al McAffrey and Jim Roth are two public figures who discuss it openly and publicly often. That's their choice. Good for them. You have no business making the choice for someone else, even if it is "just to compare notes."
King, I already said what I said about public figures, and any mayor is such a thing, and any information about them has historic value. As a historic piece of information, it is fair and is not out of line to explore whatever there is to explore, and I say that as one who is sympathetic with OKC Pride. As far me privately comparing notes with USG60, well, that's none of your business either, is it.

King183, why are you trying to control what other people have to say (me, at least), or even communicate privately by PM, in this thread? I don't get it. What I have to say is my right and business, and I would add my legitimate business, and what you have to say is yours, and neither you nor I have the legitimate business of trying to gag the other.

To make my position clear, I'm 100% aligned with the LGTB activities and agenda. At the same time, I'm also interested in discovering any historical information that is available which might be relevant to OKC historical political or business or other prominent figures as part of the city's history.

If that's not good with you, deal with it. If you think that you can do more than I have done to support the LGBT agenda, that's all good. Go for it and do it and quit talking smack.

PennyQuilts, I'm not sure from your comment where you're at on this. Are you saying that OKC Pride has done or allowed to be done anything along the lines that you mentioned? I'm a bit surprised by your comment, and, based upon what I already know of you first hand, I'm confused. Care to clarify?

MikeOkc, you said, "You know, I'm just guessing, but maybe there's some concern about "outing" someone without their consent." In the main, I'd agree. But when public figures are involved, I disagree.

What do you mean, Doug, about my comments?

Thunder, I really don't want to be rude to you, and I apologize for being exactly that. I saw nothing in your comments that I felt a need to reply to. I'll just leave that as a shortcoming of mine.

Okay. Have you been to those parade before? I dunno if I should go or not. Who on here is planning to go?

It's hard to know where to begin, and I'm ignoring Thunder's comments in that regard. Sorry, Thunder, you can easily ignore me, too.

King183, you said

King, I already said what I said about public figures, and any mayor is such a thing, and any information about them has historic value. As a historic piece of information, it is fair and is not out of line to explore whatever there is to explore, and I say that as one who is sympathetic with OKC Pride. As far me privately comparing notes with USG60, well, that's none of your business either, is it.

King183, why are you trying to control what other people have to say (me, at least), or even communicate privately by PM, in this thread? I don't get it. What I have to say is my right and business, and I would add my legitimate business, and what you have to say is yours, and neither you nor I have the legitimate business of trying to gag the other.

To make my position clear, I'm 100% aligned with the LGTB activities and agenda. At the same time, I'm also interested in discovering any historical information that is available which might be relevant to OKC historical political or business or other prominent figures as part of the city's history.

If that's not good with you, deal with it. If you think that you can do more than I have done to support the LGBT agenda, that's all good. Go for it and do it and quit talking smack.


Doug, I'm not trying to control what you discuss--I have no means or rights to control it. I will, however, express my disagreement and ridicule of those who gossip about people's sexual orientation without their consent. It's none of your business--and your attempt to say it's for historical purposes is quite lame.

That doesn't mean I'm going to try to stop you from doing it. Go ahead. It's your right to do so. Whether you're an ally of LGBT's or not, is irrelevant. That logic reminds me of people who say racist things, but say, "Don't worry--I'm friends with a lot of black people, so it's okay."

I guess that you haven't been to some of the larger biker rallies...."adult spring break" is what comes to mind. In fact a year or two ago the fairgrounds where the Republic of Texas (ROT) Rally is held became 18 and over during the rally after some furor by one of the county commissioners. This was after the event had pretty much had the same atmosphere for the previous 12 or so years.

My feeling is that if they want to just break out, go to Mardi Gras with the heteros. I don't know about you, but hedonism is not the way I define/see being gay. Gay is just a same sex lifestyle - they have families, children, they love each other, they work, pay the rent, etc. I guess it comes down to how people want to celebrate their gayness, I guess. I just think the sexual part of it is not the biggest thing and it doesan't help to highlight that, particularly in a hedonistic way unless that is the way they want to be defined, I suppose.

To defend on Doug on one point: in doing research for one of my books, I encountered very credible archival material that does give very strong evidence that yes, one very beloved Oklahoma City mayor was almost certainly gay. I agree with Doug - there is historical significance to this matter. But I'll leave my contribution to this discussion limited to this one point and say no more.

Penny - I do see Pride Parades in the same lights as Mardi Gras: they are pushing the envelope with entertainment while also spreading the message that OKC (and other cities with pride parades) has a significant glbt population that people otherwise wouldn't realize. Sure I disagree with some of the acts that some people do during the events, but I think it is really all in honest fun and perhaps they are making fun of the stereotypes (counter-culture) or the fact that they have to hide because of the 'fear' of the sexuality itself. But people DONT have to hide during the pride festivities.

If I can recommend, take it all as entertainment. There is always something to learn and hopefully OKC's glbt community will do a better job with their festivities given the 'somewhat conservative' nature that exists in OKC. I think OKC's pride parade should be more on the lines of educational and community building than a counter-culture show.

GLBT does add a positive contribution to OKC and is a part of OKC's diversity. Sure, it would be nice if business owners in the 39th district spruced up the neighbourhood and it became upscale similar to other gayhoods around the world. But most would be surprised that there are many gay run businesses all around the city, they just chose not to posterize their sexuality with business.

I dont see the pride festivities as the catalyst of developing 39th street, I see it as an opportunity for the glbt community of OKC to openly celebrate and have a day of Mardi Gras celebration their own way. Nothing wrong with that IMO and I am happy that OKC has a Pride event and even more happy to see OKC residents embracing it (even if there are still some 'questions' about what the event really is).

I have a lot of friends and family who are gay. That doesn't mean I want to see them acting ridiculous in public - any more than I would want heterosexual people acting that way. When people see a celebration of "gayness" and it amounts to public "lewdness," it supports a stereotype that is unfair to the vast majority of gay people. Last I checked, there isn't a celebration of heterosexuality that involves getting out on floats and behaving in a manner that would make ANYONE who was sober uncomfortable.

You can't equate it to what happens at Mardi Gras. Mardi Gras in intended to push the boundaries beyond what is acceptable. That is the whole point. It is people doing things they wouldn't normally do just before lent. When you see gay folks celebrating their sexuality in the same manner as heterosexuals do when they are deliberately pushing the limit (as in Mardi Gras), it leads to a belief by many that this sort of depravity is what defines gay people. If you know gays, you know that isn't true. But if you don't, this suggests that to be gay is to act like a pervert in public. You may not like what I am saying, but think about it. It is one thing for gay folks to walk hand in hand, wave, give each other kisses and hugs, hold signs, etc. It is another to behave in such a hedonistic manner that even gay parents don't want to bring their kids to the parade. If they want to celebrate their gayness by acting like out of control heteros at Mardi Gras, that is one thing. And they are free to do that. But pretending it doesn't support an inaccurate stereotype is unrealistic.

I disagree. While I agree with your central premise -- that publicly outrageous and sexually suggestive behavior is not necessarily synonymous with being gay -- it is a part of gay culture, and a part that straight people shouldn't be so uptight about, frankly. Why? Because it's fun and entertaining and celebratory. I often hear this argument: "Why do they have to wear their sexuality on their sleeve?" This question belies an understanding of the point of a gay pride parade.

Make no mistake: being gay in Oklahoma is still a challenge for many people, particularly in this repressive political and religious climate.

The Mardi-Gras-esque celebration is at once a celebration of the uniqueness and humor of gay culture and a repudiation of this repressive cultural undertone permeating so much of our public discourse.

We aren't talking about Sturgis, Mardi Gras, or San Francisco. We are talking about OKC.

I guess my question would be: if similar activities/attire were engaged by others in an otherwise "straight" parade, would that be acceptable? For instance, if the folks from the various adult "gentleman clubs" in the metro area had a float or floats, wearing their "work" attire and the like, do you that would be ok to have on a public street, where access is not controlled or limited by age etc? In recent years there have been children's activities at the Pride parade. Is that ok?

When an "adult" event is held, it needs to be limited to those of legal age on private property with controlled access. No matter the sexual orientation of the participants.

^^ my oh my

We aren't talking about Sturgis, Mardi Gras, or San Francisco. We are talking about OKC.

I guess my question would be: if similar activities/attire were engaged by others in an otherwise "straight" parade, would that be acceptable? For instance, if the folks from the various adult "gentleman clubs" in the metro area had a float or floats, wearing their "work" attire and the like, do you that would be ok to have on a public street, where access is not controlled or limited by age etc? In recent years there have been children's activities at the Pride parade. Is that ok?

When an "adult" event is held, it needs to be limited to those of legal age on private property with controlled access. No matter the sexual orientation of the participants.

Then go to the OKC gay pride parade and judge for yourself if it's appropriate for children. It's probably tame and subdued compared to the San Francisco parade.

"Free your mind and the rest will follow; be colorblind don't be so shallow."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaoSSVQz37A&feature=related

We aren't talking about Sturgis, Mardi Gras, or San Francisco. We are talking about OKC.

I guess my question would be: if similar activities/attire were engaged by others in an otherwise "straight" parade, would that be acceptable? For instance, if the folks from the various adult "gentleman clubs" in the metro area had a float or floats, wearing their "work" attire and the like, do you that would be ok to have on a public street, where access is not controlled or limited by age etc? In recent years there have been children's activities at the Pride parade. Is that ok?

When an "adult" event is held, it needs to be limited to those of legal age on private property with controlled access. No matter the sexual orientation of the participants.

I don't know about anybody else but I would go to that :kicking:

Larry, one can never tell what each successive parade may bring, but this slideshow by taos3 of the 2006 parade seems to reflect standards that I think (but don't know) would be OK with you. This is Oklahoma City, not San Francisco.

I've embedded the slideshow in my blog post and I'd do it here but that can't be done in this forum's software (to the best of my knowledge), but you can click on this link (http://good-times.webshots.com/slideshow/551736369UYaYIE) to see the 2006 slideshow, 39 photos.

Having done that, what do you think, my friend. Still scary?

Well, this one IS scary ... and I understand that it can be seen from either side of the window, depending on perspective ... the question, I suppose, is WHO ARE the would-be body snatchers, people who think like Sally Kern, or you next door neighbor who, in the main, probably pretty much thinks the way that you do and is an otherwise decent and fair-minded person but who happens to be one of the following: LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) ...

v/L-jzblCbsuA?version=3"

Fear is always a bad and false motivator, though ... compassion is better ...

v/-MJYurkvUp0?version=3"

PennyQuilts, I'm not sure from your comment where you're at on this. Are you saying that OKC Pride has done or allowed to be done anything along the lines that you mentioned? I'm a bit surprised by your comment, and, based upon what I already know of you first hand, I'm confused. Care to clarify?
My response was strictly limited to the previous comment made that they need to be careful how they behave so as to not encourage bad stereotypes. That's all. I am not saying that is what they have done but if they did, I personally think it would be a bad idea because it would encourage ignorant people to think that was what gayness was all about. It isn't, of course.

Penny - I do see Pride Parades in the same lights as Mardi Gras: they are pushing the envelope with entertainment while also spreading the message that OKC (and other cities with pride parades) has a significant glbt population that people otherwise wouldn't realize. Sure I disagree with some of the acts that some people do during the events, but I think it is really all in honest fun and perhaps they are making fun of the stereotypes (counter-culture) or the fact that they have to hide because of the 'fear' of the sexuality itself. But people DONT have to hide during the pride festivities.

If I can recommend, take it all as entertainment. There is always something to learn and hopefully OKC's glbt community will do a better job with their festivities given the 'somewhat conservative' nature that exists in OKC. I think OKC's pride parade should be more on the lines of educational and community building than a counter-culture show.

GLBT does add a positive contribution to OKC and is a part of OKC's diversity. Sure, it would be nice if business owners in the 39th district spruced up the neighbourhood and it became upscale similar to other gayhoods around the world. But most would be surprised that there are many gay run businesses all around the city, they just chose not to posterize their sexuality with business.

I dont see the pride festivities as the catalyst of developing 39th street, I see it as an opportunity for the glbt community of OKC to openly celebrate and have a day of Mardi Gras celebration their own way. Nothing wrong with that IMO and I am happy that OKC has a Pride event and even more happy to see OKC residents embracing it (even if there are still some 'questions' about what the event really is).

Gay folks can certainly want to have a madi gras type parade if they want. I have no problem with that. I just think that if they do, they need to make it clear that it is all in good fun (like mardi gras) and that they aren't trying to suggest that being gay amounts to being a hedonist. Make sense? It won't change the minds of people who are anti gay - they'll be looking for evidence that gays are out of control perverts - but it would be a fairer statement about what the purpose of the parade would be. I'd say the same thing about a parade celebrating women. If it amounted to a bunch of debauchery, I personally would be unhappy with that. Being a woman doesn't make me a slut. But if it was a parade that was touted as "girls gone wild" or something like that, I might not attend but at least I wouldn't worry that they were trying to portray women, in general, as being like that.

All this talk about Mardi Gras makes me think of boobs and beads. Wonder what would be shown at the OKC gay parade if they where throwing pearls? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tx-y8CeE6kM&feature=related

OK, how about a show of hands...who here has actually seen a pride parade in person??

I've seen two...here and Atlanta. Both were attended by people of all ages including families with children. Both were a lot of fun, very positive energy. There were no hedonistic displays b/c well, that's quite against the law and there are cops all over the place as well, mostly to protect the paradegoers from lunatics.

So, if you've never actually seen one, maybe you are guilty of ill-informed assumptions.

Penny, I think they have made it clear that Pride events are educational yet celebratory, with the pride parades being the "mardi gras" type of event. And as has been said, OKC's event is nowhere near as 'offensive' or touching the borders of society as SF's. I think you would be surprised if you went to the very tame and educational OKC parade by comparison.