h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Incidentally:

"while being as gay as a box of frogs in private, to no great detriment to their careers."

That wasn't really true. There were gay men who managed public careers without detriment in previous decades but only because they managed to keep it from officially getting out. Those gay men who were "found out" were frequently the subject of blackmail and often had their lives ruined if the truth got out. The 1962 British film "Victim", one of the first to openly argue for the repealing of the anti-homosexual laws in the UK, used this fact as the basis for it's position.

Yes, the rare prosecutions such as that of Oscar Wilde were usually
a direct result of 'flaunting' it. The old policy of 'out of sight out of mind'
was sort of like 'common law'; it allowed almost everything between
consenting adults as long as it was private and co-consentual. But the
laws would be enforced when 'radicals' like Wilde started with their
'in your face' politicking and self promotion.

It seems all legalising has accomplished is the freedom to flaunt;
Gay Pride parades being the main area of mass flauntings.

Happy flaunting folks!


~jwf~

flaunt, vb intr, for a gay person to behave the same as a straight person.

TRiG.

Oh, did I mean 'flout', or maybe 'floose', a verb based on the noun floosy.

>>
—Usage note from Dictdotcom
4. The use of flaunt to mean “to ignore or treat with disdain”
(He flaunts community standards with his behavior)is strongly
objected to by many usage guides, which insist that only flout
can properly express this meaning. From its earliest appearance
in English in the 16th century, flaunt has had the meanings “to
display oneself conspicuously, defiantly, or boldly” in public and
“to parade or display ostentatiously.” These senses approach those
of flout, which dates from about the same period: “to treat with
disdain, scorn, or contempt; scoff at; mock.” A sentence like 'Once
secure in his new social position, he was able to flaunt his lower-class
origins' can thus be ambiguous in current English.

Considering the similarity in pronunciation of the two words, it is
not surprising that flaunt has assumed the meanings of flout and
that this use has appeared in the speech and edited writing of even
well-educated, literate persons. Nevertheless, many regard the senses
of flaunt and flout as entirely unrelated and concerned speakers
and writers still continue to keep them separate.
<<

Never one to flaunt, flout or floose I confess the distinction eludes me.


~jwf~

Sorry, jwf, I just get fed up with religious people going on about how much they don't hate gay people, they just wish we'd pretend we didn't exist. They don't actually say that in so many words: they use the word /flaunt/ instead.

TRiG.

There is a peculiar fascination with having things rammed down their throats.

Straight people flaunt too, plenty of male t-shirts around saying at the moment "This would look great on your bedroom floor" or "While you are reading this I'm admiring your s." We don't seem to have progressed to this though.

http://www2.b3ta.com/host/creative/66433/1219377848/tshirt.jpg

It really isn't about flaunting at all, for the vast majority of us... I really can't imagine going to a gay pride event... In the same way I really can't imagine going to a football match... But waht it is about is fredom to just be yourself, not having to hide and lie each time your asked a question that could potentially 'out' you to workmates, bosses, or a friend down the pub, personally I can't imagine how horrible it must have been before the law was changed, and before a lot* of society became a lot more tollerant... tollerant isn't the right word... a lot less violent, agressive and prejduiced against someone for some aspect of their life, which, really, doesn't impinge in the slightest on anyone elses life...
I mean... like when I was talking to my manager in my last job, I wasn't constantly thinking thoughts at the back of my head about what he and his misses were getting up to in their bedroom... Similarly I don't expect him to be thinkign the same thoughts about me and my partner, whatever sex my partner may be...

>It seems all legalising has accomplished is the freedom to flaunt;
Gay Pride parades being the main area of mass flauntings.<

How many gay pride parades have you attended jwf? When younger I went to a few, not the actual parade but the fun bit at the end in the park, for the funfair rides, the excellent live music and the sitting around drinking beer and having picnics, and for once not having to worry if I accidently forgot myself in public and gave my girlfriend a discreet kiss and held her hand. You can't believe how horrible it is feeling you can never comfortably do that..or at least I've never felt able to do it..I'm not talking anything OTT, but just stuff like you might ocassionally see at ordinary open air events between two people who clearly love one another. Even if you go off for a picnic in the countryside you're forever looking around in case someone suddenly appears, and you had the temerity to put your arm around your lover.

I'm generally not a great fan of 'monoculture' events but heck once a year doesn't seem extreme, because that's all they are here in London. But haven't been in yonks. But then I haven't been in a relationship for yonks.

And if you don't like seeing any sort of flaunting whatsoever, even interspersed amongst the vast majority who are not flaunting, the events are easily avoided. But I don't know how it is in Canada. Maybe it's generally just a much more public flaunty sort of place? The actual floats on the parade itself are bound to be a bit OTT though, and people may get a bit carried away in the march with a kind of joy. It's a carnival for sakes, a celebration. Carnivals tend to be like that.

Speaking personally, purely selfishly, the most important accomplishment of legalisation for me, is the freedom from worry that gay male friends of mine, won't suddenly be carted off to prison.

Some people used to cripple themselves emotionally and never find happiness their whole lives, involving something as fundemental as sex. You should read E. M. Forster's, 'Maurice'. It's pretty tragic in parts, but ultimately optimistic for at least one of the characters..no flaunting, but lots of hiding away and forced pretense; attempts at turning straight because of the fear and self loathing. You might enjoy it.

I'm assuming ~jwf~ is being ironic, Effers and Taff.

Regarding Pride, I get the impression (from the Savage Love podcast, if you must know) that Pride in North America is a political event while in the UK it's a cultural event.

B

I dunno... sometimes I don't really get the whole 'pride' thing at all myself... I'm not* 'proud' to be gay.... in the same way I'm not* proud to be 'male', or pproud to be a guitarist... they're just things I am... I don't like labels that much anyhow as they're often so useless... but I guess sometimes useful

I've been to *counts on fingers* four pride parades, and one political march for marriage equality. Fun, yes. And we've come a long way in a short space of time.

TRiG.

yes... I know from talking to gay friends that the whole perspective on that kind of thing can be very differnt depending on your background; I guess I have been lucky as who I am wasn't ever actually illegal during any part of my life... well cept for the few years until I turned 21 (but I think they've moved age of consent down now so its the same for hetrosexual and homosexual individuals...)

oi zen what have i done now????

>> Pride in North America is a political event while in the UK it's a cultural event. <<

An astute and accurate observation.
Everything is the USA is political.
They have very little culture.


~jwf~

PS:
2 other points.

1.
Mother Effers asked how many GP parades I have attended.
The answer is of course none. Not my cuppa. Wouldn't know
anyone there. Any gay friends I have are, like 2legs, a little
less concerned with making a 'political' statement.

But I wanted to add that what we see of these events on TV news
is usually edited highlights selected for their visual impact and shock
value. We see only examples of the most flagrant, in-yer-face and
near naked behaviours (such as pelvic thrusting, nipple rubbing and
KISS-like tongue gesturing) which have been played to the cameras
by enthusiastic participants and which get chosen by news editors to
'excite' the story.

2.
Which prompts the real issue and reason for me to be here on this thread.
IE: The misuse of the word 'flaunt' when people really mean 'flout' began
in the tasteless 70s and hedonistic 80s. Those who had money were apt
to express their conspicuous consumption of cars, jewelery, etc, with the
mantra "If you got it; flaunt it." In this context flaunt took on an unsavoury,
anti-social, selfishly careless, in-yer-face subtext which sends the wrong
message when talking about Gay Pride (unless you are TV news editor).


~jwf~

Hmmm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10720924

"Young people rarely see positive portrayals of lesbian and gay people on television, according to Stonewall. A survey for the gay equality charity monitored more than 120 hours of programmes watched by the young. It said gay people were mainly portrayed as promiscuous, predatory, or figures of fun."

Funny, for people that represent a group that has historically been repressed and silenced, they seem quite happy to see other's freedoms attacked -

"Stonewall chief executive Ben Summerskill said: "Of course it's welcome that some of the most obnoxious unpleasantness of people such as Jeremy Clarkson is now being edited out before transmission."

I fnd the evolution of the word "gay" is quite interesting in what it reveals about attitudes.

Twenty or thirty years ago, mainly older and more socially conservative people would protest loudly at what they saw as the missappropriation of the Englsh word "gay" by people they viewed as unspeakable. "When can we have our word back?" was a sentiment echoed in conservative and right-wing populist papers like the Daily Express and Daily Mail. And OK, it did, once upon a time, only ever mean "happy", "sweet", "attractive", "pleasant." There's a very long-established tropical fish/aquarium store near me in Manchester that must have adopted its name long before the word changed its socially accepted meaning: it has adamantly refused to change it but must have suffered from people wilfully or otherwise geting it wrong. But the Gay-Lyfe Store - "all you need for your aquarium" on Stockport Road still goes strong today, forty or fifty years on.

In return to this sniping, the gay lobby always used to reply, in a lofty and somewhat patronising way, "These people must realise that the meanings of words are not fixed forever and do change over time, and no group in society can claim to own a word." In other words, shut up and put up.

But in the last few years, especially after "South Park", a new meaning of the word "gay" is emerging - an ironic one meaning "sad" and"lame" and "sorry". The first lobby group to express its outrage was, ironically enough, the gay lobby.

Has nobody yet said to them "sorry guys, no group in society can claim to own a word, and you must realise that the meanings of words are not fixed forever and do change over time..."

And it occurs to me that to balance the case slightly, there have been very many societies and nations where being gay was not justmerely tolerated or socially acceptible, but in some extreme circumstances compulsory... I'm thinking of the way Ancient Greeks, such as the Spartans, created social bonding and cohesiveness in their armies, where men who depended on each other not to break and run from the press of spears in the phalanx were expected to "buddy up". An older soldier would be expected to take a new, green, teenage recruit under his wing, so to speak, in every way possible, and this was viewed almost as "uncle and nephew". Spartan women weren't exactly shy of consoling each other while the men were away at war.

And the external enemy of the Greeks was of course Persia, another long-established Empire ith similar bonding rituals whose forefathers have ben depicted on bas-reliefs as ritually buggering their prisoners of war. Possibly for fun and possibly to emphasise who won - "who's the Daddy?" The Persians are he people whose national poet once wrote

"A woman for duty, a melon for fun, and a boy for ecstacy". (Omar Khayyim - who when you think about it left the gender of his preferred
"thou" unassigned, in "a loaf of bread, a jug of wine, and Thou."

There is such a long tradition of male homosexuality in Iran and it goes back do long that prescriptive Islam really doesn't stand a chance - it runs too deep.