Skip to content

Yes, we do need Straight Pride

December 19, 2010

We really do need Straight Pride…not necessarily PC-baiting shirts advocating death via biblical passage, but real Straight Pride. Why? Because there are those who think Straight Pride is anything that gays feel unable to take part in, like talking about their relationships in public. Of course, I doubt they’d want to argue that Gay Pride is anything that straights are offended by, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it were so.

We need Straight Pride because there are those who would rather have straight men feel unnecessary shame about the least thing that someone else feels bad over, using the red herring that goes something like “XX percent of YY is made up of straight men anyway, so what are you whining about?”, to which I’ll answer “For one thing, that XX percent doesn’t necessarily give a damn about me the person so much as me the construct”. Oscar Grant was a black heterosexual male, yet some punkass white cop gets away with killing him and receives a lesser sentence than Michael Vick did for animal cruelty. Nice gift that “hetero male privilege” was for him, huh?  By the way, all those “offensive” depictions of sexualized women we see everyday come from the elites within the media, not every damn straight man out there.  They might actually be less sexualized if the media actually cared about the opinions of the men they advertise to instead of making assumptions guaranteed to conveniently piss off feminists.

We need Straight Pride because there are those who insult all heterosexuals (like certain anti-gay conservatives) by acting as though straight men must be so weak and disdainful of their attraction to women that something, anything could turn them gay, and that they’ll enjoy being gay much more than being straight. Is there any self-respecting straight woman out there that actually likes the implication that a man would only want her as a “beard” and not as a lover in a mutually attractive relationship?

Because the concept of “questioning one’s sexuality” is almost always a euphemism for either coercing a man into acceptably overt heterosexuality or marking him as an acceptable “gay” target for insecure straight men to take out their lack of pride toward their sexuality on, likely with violence. Suppose someone wanted to “question” me, for example:

  • “So, you claim to be just another heterosexual guy, right”
  • “Yeah”
  • “Then what was this “I’d Hit That and I’d Wear That” thing I heard about?”
  • “It’s in my “Rated ‘F’ for Feminine” post.”
  • “I know, but how do you see an attractive woman and not only fantasize about sex with her, but want to wear what she’s wearing (and not take the easy way out by claiming to be a transexual or transgender with lesbian leanings)? Aren’t you just in the closet?”
  • “It’s not all that complicated. You just remember that I’m a man, she’s a woman, and thus…heterosexuality! The rest is just accessories, equipped skills, technique proficiency levels, encounter rates, etc.
  • Note that this hypothetical conversation is edited for language, and would not be nearly as effective against a woman (because questioning her sexuality is the stuff of lucrative book deals and fanfare these days) or a gay man (because few are crazy enough to suggest that a gay man would be closeted and really want to sleep with women). The whole point of these types of attacks is to take advantage of a lack of Straight Pride and make a straight man dance to the tune of “I’m not gay, really”.

  • Because a lack of Straight Pride is all but inherently anti-straight male in practice if not also in theory.
  • Because apparently Gay is a strongly-marketed brand that people treat as a default for any man in “question” regardless of what that man feels. Remember, when in doubt, he must be gay unless we need him to be straight for political purposes.
  • Because there can be no equality or justice with a ludicrous double standard that allows for Gay Pride and considers it automatically harmless yet denies Straight Pride and considers it automatically harmful.
  • Because as long as the majority of rational heterosexuals are blamed for the crimes of the minority within and live under that shadow, and this is supposed to be okay, it will actually subtly encourage more anti-gay violence.
  • Because just maybe then all these straight women that claim to actually like men in a sexual manner (and only want an opportunity to show it) would take more time to better articulate it to men and women in the media will follow suit, instead of constantly griping about all the things men do wrong.
  • Because if Gay Pride really isn’t a way of attacking heterosexuals, they should have no problem allowing Straight Pride if it doesn’t attack homosexuals, and no, merely being offended by benign Straight Pride does not count as an attack.
  • Advertisements

    Leave a Reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

    You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

    Google+ photo

    You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


    Connecting to %s

    %d bloggers like this: