Gay Pride ad a new 'equality gap'?

Those who think that the prejudice case is won do not live in the real world I'm afraid. Ask any minority if they think there is no prejudice.

Smoking affects the self, equal rights for women affected all women ,

It's in the light already in the UK and no need to educate 'future generations' as todays younger generations already see nothing wrong at all with being gay.Many of us older generation have never seen anything legally wrong or sinful either in being gay, a person is as they are.
However, being forced to wear badges/lanyards etc in order to promote any idea by staff is in itself a bad thing.
Imperfect you have explained your view really well, other posts distorting or misunderstanding your posts are sadly what happens on social media.

Well Anniebach, it would appear that lecturing on a whole raft of things has had a very positive effect - take smoking, for instance. As for marches, had women never marched for equal rights, you and i would never have had the choice of an education, a career or a choice regarding whether we wanted to bear children or not.
As I said, I believe that bringing this issue into the light may not change the views of many right now, but hopefully, will help to educate future generations, make them aware.

illtellhim - unwarranted and misjudged, but hey ho. I am not 'having a go' - just raising a discussion point. Your choice of phrase 'public admission' has an implied ring of shame about it. No shame here - the only 'shame' I have encountered is shame attributed by others, not felt by me. Sadness, yes - of course it was sad that a marriage foundered. Bitterness, I hope not, but am aware of being sensitive to overt public expressions of sexuality. So yes, I do think certain aspects of 'Gay Pride' are unnecessary, but can see that they spring from historic and individual experiences of oppression and hurt. I maintain that I don't think that people help their call for acceptance at times. More time and more healing is needed.

We cannot force people to accept homosexuality , marches will not change opinions, neither will lecturing people .

imperfect I think your posts are incredibly informative, insightful and well written.

Most people we come into contact with have no problem with LGBT people except for those who profess a religious faith. My father in law is a lifelong Christian and his negativity towards the LGBT is astonishing. Every time we see him he has something to say about it - yesterday he informed me that a 'gay man had had a baby'. I said that was impossible so he decided to pull out his phone and play the video loudly in the middle of the restaurant! Obviously it wasn't a gay man who'd had the baby, it was a transgender person.

The thing I don't understand is that the couple involved had a lovely baby and looked like a reslly caring couple, yet all he could see was that they were, as he thought, gay!

As whitewave points out, the reason that it is necessary to march and shout from the treetops is that prejudice is still very much an issue for the lbgt comunity. People are beaten, killed, maimed and ostracised for being gay, transexual or bisexual every day. All the time. Today. Now.
I get the distinct impression that many posters feel that it is not necessary as this is the thing of the past. Someone said "the past is another country". Oh how I wish it were true, but in this instance, it is not in the past.
I understand that the idea of discussing one's sexuality may well be distasteful to many, coming from a different generation where it was just not a subject of conversation, but this is not really about gay people being in your face about their orientation, but about awareness and ensuring that the future generations have the opportunity to understand that sexual orientation is neither right nor wrong, it is how you come into this world, not something learned or perverted, regardless of what your orientation is.

I have to agree with sunseeker.

Imperfect27, your last post is what I expect from someone trying to justifie a vey public admission that you are not very happy in your situation, have a go "dear", I'm sure it will get better.

Not sure why being loud and proud should be stopped, or wanting to be defined by your sexual preference. If that is what some members of the gay community want, why not? Their life not anyone else's.

I prefer to be defined by other things, which have changed over the years. But it is my life and providing I am not hurting others in any way I think it is entirely my business.

Do not make the mistake that prejudice has ceased, it hasn't by a long way.

Anniebach - as long as it is between two consenting adults what business is it of anyone else

Some people think the act of buggery revolting,

illtellhim , your post is indicative of the assumption of many, that to be 'quiet' is the same as 'doing nothing.' This is part of the problem.

Far from 'doing nothing' I have actively worked with and challenged others fears and prejudices about homosexuality for a long, long time. I was married to a gay man for 17 years and he served in Anglican ministry. From within a sometimes woefully homophobic climate, we 'quietly' met and opposed others misconceptions and addressed fears and anxieties based on scant biblical evidence and inherited prejudices.

Because of my relatively unusual circumstances, I have dwelt with what it may mean to be' gay ' for decades. I have seen and experienced the pain, anger and turmoil caused by hidden orientation first hand and I am very glad we now live in a society that is more open and accepting. Hopefully, in this generation and beyond, there will be less and less couples who find themselves in a position of 'living a lie' to be socially acceptable.

I still maintain that the 'backlash' of being 'liberated' that gives voice to being 'loud and proud' and places huge emphasis on sexuality as the leading factor in determining identity is off kilter.

To try to illustrate ... I told DH that I am going to have an 'openly heterosexual' day today ... which might mean overt public displays of affection and will include me making sure that I tell all the people we meet today that I am straight. He looked at me as if I am off my trolley...

Your last paragraph says it all imperfect. I know exactly where you're coming from but couldn't have put it as well as you have. The very act of making people west the lanyards is patronising in my mind and is emphasising the difference.

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing

Sadly Imperfect27 you posts reminded me of the above quote.

I wonder what we shal be expected to except next.

"I am also very uncomfortable that Imperfect felt that she had to write such a long exculpatory email to justify saying that she did not like what the NT had done. She presumably felt she needed to do this to protect herself from the thought police who act like the religious police in Saudi Arabia if anyone dares to say anything that they choose to consider as anti LBGT/racist/anti-feminist."

MOnica I did not feel the need to 'protect' myself from the 'thought police.' Neither was I trying to be 'exculpatory' - I was aiming for transparent! I think I may be typical of many of our 'senior' generation: brought up to think homosexuality was wrong / deviant etc. and I have undergone a complete education and change of mind in the past 30 years.

Also, I did not mean to sidetrack with the NT debacle - to me this is just symptomatic of a neurotic 'political correctness' that goes too far / asks too much and actually can alienate people rather than promote understanding and acceptance.

BUT, I don't like sexuality being presented as a leading issue. People to me are - or should be - just people and I find the overt need to declare sexual orientation wearisome. I also find 'loud and proud' declarations of sexuality unnecessary and, at times offensive. But I feel 'Out of step' because it seems un-p.c. to express anything other than 'empathy' or 'acceptance.' I do feel these things quietly and in a very heartfelt way, but would never want to wear a badge, attend a march, wave a flag. That's all.

paddyann yes, there are sadly some people who just don't get it.
When I was in my late teens I had gay male friends who were quite a bit older. I remember them having a party to which they kindly said that I could invite some of my friends.

The reaction of some of my male friends made me and . They seemed to have the vanity and audacity to think that just because the party hosts were gay, then they (the potential guests) might be "approached", to put it politely.

WT heck? Would they have assumed that a female party host was going to make some sort of "move" on them? No, of course not, but just because a man prefers men, why on earth should these people think that their gender alone might make them attractive!

I get similarly incensed when ignorant people think that gay = paedophile

would be very nice if people could just be peoplepheonix sadly its not the case ,I have several gay paople in my family and as friends I have two young friends presently transgendering from female to male .The youngsters have no issues are being well supported and helped by most in their communities .My cousin and neice who are in their fifties not SO supported...in fact a very good friend of mine was horrified to learn these close relatives were "allowed" to take my children out to theatres etc "I wouldn't have that, she told me ,but them WE dont have that in OUR family" this was a woman whose father was a paedophile!! Yet she still thought being gay was worse ...Until we all see that its not an affliction or a choice we need to show support...hopefully the day will come soon when people are all seen just as people

Deedaa You say that your "problem" is to see the person, that is not a problem, it's a virtue, and exactly how it should be!

My problem is that I tend to see the person first rather than the colour, religion or sexual preference. It would seem as odd to go round promoting my gay friends way of life as it would to go round promoting my own. They are just who they are. Admittedly I have been influenced by having fairly arty farty friends. The first gay couple I knew well were a pair of theatrical agents, long before it was legal of course. When I moved out to the home counties a few years ago I did get some shocked reactions from people if they found I had gay friends so it obviously depends where you live and there must be real problems in some places.

I am against "isms" and prejudice in most forms, but am a bit at the need for people to be "labelled", either by themselves or others.

We don't go around saying "Hello, I'm Phoenix, I'm (age) shoe size 6, my religion is (fill in as appropriate) , I vote (party) and I bank with (whoever) and my front door is painted (colour).

Why can't people just be people, regardless of age, colour, sexuality?

I have been on the receiving end of homophobic and racial prejudice. I am not gay or non British but I chose to sit and talk with a woman who was gay when I first started work (when it was illegal to be homosexual) and I married an immigrant. I don't think making someone wear a badge necessarily changes their minds or prejudices, it could in fact exacerbate them.

Sadly the LGBT community is still facing daily prejudice. As do other minority groups. Many people who have neve been marginalised or abused because of their sexuality /race/ faith / ability/ difference sometimes find it hard to appreciate the need to be part of a movement to change attitudes and can become a bit defensive. Even blaming the "victims" for causing the abuse and negative attitudes they face! I understand it can feel uncomfortable to be made to face ones own prejudices. I am not immune to that.

Why should refusing to wear a lanyard imply that the refusers would not treat some people with respect? Why were lanyards designed for this exhibition in the first place? Do all NT exhibitions call for the production of special lanyards? If not, why not? Or is this just virtue-signalling by the NT?

Well said MOnica. I have been a witness for two civil partnerships and one marriage , I would not wear that badge