Posts Tagged ‘GLBT’

I Don’t Want To Vote On Marriage Law

January 15, 2012

I have a problem with the majority voting on the universal human rights and fundamental freedoms of the minority. It doesn’t matter which groups we are discussing when we say the “majority” and “minority”; what we have are two sets of people – human beings – that are different in some way.

Legislation can be introduced to help define and clarify, to put in black and white, what we hold to be universal human rights, but even without these laws in place, they are called universal human rights because we know that these are so basic, so beyond reproach or question that laws are almost superfluous. Almost. The majority can become blind to the minority. This can lead to a belief that the differences that define the the minority are somehow a threat to that which defines the majority, or that the differences of the minority are undesirable because they’re not shared by most people. And so laws can act as a safeguard for the rights of the minority for cases in which their voices cannot be heard over the crowd.

I think it is horrific that we allow any human being to have their rights curtailed by the whimsy of popular opinion. That is one of the reasons I am angry about this November’s ballot initiative in Minnesota, which leaves it up to us, the voters, to amend the Minnesota Constitution to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman. Other reasons that I’m angry about the proposal include the traditional objections to polluting our constitution with language that would bar citizens from their rights, because I support human happiness and this amendment would hurt gay human beings, and because I detest the political drama and fear-mongering that is caused by this American Idol-esque “let the people have a say” and “down with activist judges” posturing.

So why are we voting on whether Bob and Steve should be allowed to get married? Well, because bigoted, sex-obsessed, fearful, religious zealot nutjobs…oh, we’ll skip that for now. Let’s just go with this:

Some people (see past sentence) want to amend the constitution to “protect” heterosexual marriage from gay people, and they think the best way to do this is to amend the constitution. Per Article IX of the MN Constitution we, the voters, must approve any changes to the constitution. That’s why we’re voting on Bob and Steve’s rights this November.

But why do the bigoted, sex-obsessed, oops some people want to amend the constitution? Why is the law in the Minnesota Statutes not enough? Judges refer to the Constitution to make decisions and rulings. Right now, judges in Minnesota can point to the constitution and say that nowhere in our Constitution does it explicitly ban the marriage of gay people. This amendment would put language in place that would explicitly ban the marriage of gay people. Several states have already used the lack of this language in their constitutions to overturn statutes that ban gay marriage, thus making gay marriage legal in those states. Some people in Minnesota are trying to prevent that from happening in this state.

This is marriage law that we’re discussing, not theology. Churches can be as restrictive as they want about marriage within the confines of their religion, but every resident of Minnesota should have the right to be treated as equal to every other resident of Minnesota under Minnesota law.

So no, I don’t want to vote on the proposed amendment that would make it very difficult for gay residents to marry in Minnesota. And I don’t want you to be able to either.

But if it is there when I step into the voting booth in Novemeber, I will be voting NO, the Minnesota Constitution SHALL NOT be amended to provide that only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota.

….

And in light all of that, this is a heartening development from Friday:

From The Colu.mn:

Legislators Propose Repeal of Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment

DFL legislators in the Minnesota House introduced a bill during the legislative recess on Friday to repeal a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage from the 2012 ballot. The bill faces high hurdles as the Republicans still control the House.

Here’s text of the bill:

H.F. No. 1885, as introduced – 87th Legislative Session (2011-2012) Posted on Jan 13, 2012

A bill for an act relating to marriage; repealing a proposed amendment to the Minnesota Constitution recognizing marriage as only a union between one man and one woman;repealing Laws 2011, chapter 88.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:

Section 1. REPEALER.

Laws 2011, chapter 88, is repealed.

Sec. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.
Section 1 is effective the day following final enactment.

The bill was submitted by Karen Clark of Minneapolis, Leon Lillie of North St. Paul, Kate Knuth of New Brighton, Rena Moran of St. Paul ; Marion Greene of Minneapolis, John Lesch of St. Paul, Mindy Greiling of Roseville, Carolyn Laine of Columbia Heights, Ryan Winkler of Golden Valley, Alice Hausman of St. Paul, Linda Slocum of Minneapolis, Joe Mullery of Minneapolis, Phyllis Kahn of Minneapolis, Dianne Loeffler of Minneapolis, Frank Hornstein of Minneapolis, Bill Hilty of Finlayson and Kathy Brynaert of Mankato

Props for the effort, but as the article points out, this is likely not going to get anywhere since the Republicans control the House, and the seated Republicans are fairly united in their support of the amendment:

Those in red boxes are Republican legislators. Source

 

Gay is the new black…or isn’t it?

January 11, 2012

One of my friends posted a YouTube video on his Facebook wall, and I thought it was interesting enough to listen to the entire 11:34 piece (woah, attention span…where did you come from? You usually take off once I sit down at the interwebs).

The author of the video is speaking in response to the rallying cry “Gay is the new black”, and specifically to this article published in the Huffington Post at the end of December.

Image source: Fox News

Monique Ruffin’s Huffpo article is an interesting piece on how the “Black Church” is supporting oppression of gays. She calls out black Christians who would deny civil rights to gay people. She is also wondering how some black people in general would bemoan the phrase “Gay is the new black”, and asks them to see the similarities between the black struggle and the gay struggle, not just the differences between the two.

For me, the sufferings of a person or a group of people at the hands of other humans are frightening and heartbreaking. Instinctually, I feel that if any group can be oppressed, then I can be oppressed. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. made this very point when he said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” This is why I’m always flabbergasted when I see some black Christians fighting against the civil rights of gays. We know firsthand the impact and dehumanization of discrimination.

Melvin too calls for blacks and gays to see the similarities of their struggles, but he lists 5 reasons why gay is not the new black.

1.You can’t compare oppressions. If I understand Melvin’s point, he’s calling out those who oversimplify the fight for civil rights undertaken by blacks and by gays and lumping them together in the phrase “Gay is the new black.” Like Ruffin, he asks us to avoid trying to say that one is more of a struggle than the other, but urges us to recognize that each had and has its unique challenges and battles; they are not the same. I liked this section:

Who the hell cares? Who the hell cares? Inequality and oppression are evil, regardless of the form they take. By comparing your oppression to someone else’s, you’re trivializing that person’s struggle and creating a hierarchy, which prevents you from seeing how the two struggles are related and building alliances.

2. Black is still black. “We can’t just hone in on homophobia and ignore other systems of inequality.” Here he describes how the struggle for black equality is not over, and those who lobby for gay rights under the banner of “black rights were then, gay rights are now” are blind to the the ongoing battles still being waged for black rights.

3.  _____ is the new black. I found this argument to be very similar to number two. Again, Melvin is pointing out that discrimination comes from all corners, and chastises people who are so proud to support gay or black rights and forget the Latina, the person with a disability, the woman, the muslim. The take away from this is we can’t just focus on homophobia and forget the other injustices being fought.

When I hear someone say that gay is the new black, and that gay rights are the new civil rights issue of our time, it makes me think they’re pretty ignorant. It makes me think, you know, that person just doesn’t really give a damn about people of color, women, people with disabilities, transgender people, or any other group facing discrimination these days.

4. Gay is not the new anything. Here Melvin gives props to the gay community. Gay is not new, gay oppression is not new, the gay struggle is not new. Gay people have been fighting their fight for over a century. He’s saying gays don’t need to tie onto the black struggle to get their message across because the gay community has been holding its own.

5. So, transgender is the new gay – not. This is a different presentation of 2 and 3: There are other marginalized groups out there, not just the gay community. He is specifically speaking about the transgender community here. Melvin makes an argument that the GLB community has for the most part largely ignored issues facing transgendered people.

In closing, Melvin tells us that we can’t compare gay oppression and the black oppression, but we can learn from the movements of both groups and the ways they have each organized.

So, is gay the new black?

In Ruffin’s Huffpo article she is using the phrase “Gay is the new black” to hit black Christians who discriminate against gays over the head. She is not breaking down the phrase to ask if it is a perfect metaphor, she is using it to remind black Christians that gays are being discriminated against, as they were once were (not in the same way, but nevertheless, they both have been are being oppressed). Melvin is more concerned with the actual metaphor and is asking us to stop using it.

Every activist group needs a battle cry, but is this the right one for the GLBT community? Does it simplify and trivialize other types of discrimination?

It is a frustrating situation; when it comes to civil rights, why is there any other distinction that “human”?

Why Homosexuality Should Be Banned

December 3, 2011

This is going around teh Facebooks today. Here are seven ridiculous arguments for banning homosexuality (as if that were possible!) and seven snarky tongue-in-cheek responses.

I think this is a good follow-up to the American Family Association’s Buster Wilson explaining to us why people like him are fighting for traditional marriage (hint: it’s not because they’re homophobic or that they just hates homosexuals.)

This is the best response I could find for Buster:

Mr. Wilson, this bull thinks you’re full of bull.

High School GLBT WIN!

January 31, 2011

High school sucks for a LOT of people. The tiniest, silliest differences can be called out and used as an excuse to ostracize kids and egg on bullies. Being gay or transgender is a seen as a pretty big difference and many GLBT students suffer isolation and harrassment in school.

Most of you are aware of the rash of suicides by GLBT youth that occurred across the country last year; Anoka-Hennepin school district in Minnesota suffered THREE suicides by gay students in 2010. And here’s a heaping of extra salt in the wound: An anti-gay group consisting of anonymous members and calling themselves the Parents Action League sprouted up last July to insist that sexual orientation not be taught as part of sexual education in Anoka-Hennepin High Schools. Although their website currently appears tame, claiming only to support a “focus on core academics” and leaving the teaching of sexual orientation to “individual family homes, churches or community organizations”, the Minnesota Independent reported last August that the website promoted distinctly anti-gay messages:

It wants the district to “respect traditional family values” and to “provide valid resources for students (and their families) struggling with sexual identity and/or same-sex attraction.” It seeks to “ensure that all health curriculum teach healthy sexuality and promote abstinence until marriage.” The group also wants the district to “promote the Day of Truth” each year.

The Day of Truth is an event organized by Exodus International, a group that says it can turn gay people straight through Christian prayer.

Blech. So being gay in the Anoka-Hennepin school district probably sucked extra hard last year.

But 2011 is starting out differently, with a big, gay, FABULOUS win!

Champlin Park High School Snow Days is an annual celebration and it has a royal court – 24 students chosen by the student body become the Snow Days court.  This year both women of a lesbian couple were chosen to represent the senior class, and were excited to walk together during the coronation ceremony.  The school administration was less excited for them and enacted a decision to separate the court members so that they would file in individually with an adult chaperone.  Speedy movement by civil and GLBT rights groups and a lawsuit filed on behalf of the couple led to a change of heart by the school, and this year the tradition of students walking in as couples will continue at the Champlin Park Snow Days celebration.

Congratulations to Desiree Shelton and Sarah Lindstrom on their victory, and thanks to them for standing up for their rights. Kudos also to the students who were interviewed by the Star Tribune who stood up for their classmates.  Students everywhere, take note – Champlin Park High, you’re doin’ it right.

Congrats, Dan Choi!

October 20, 2010

Dan Choi is a former infantry officer in the United States Army.  He’s a West Point graduate, he served in combat in Iraq (2006-2007), he’s fluent in Arabic and has a degree in environmental engineering.

Oh yeah, and he’s gay.  He was discharged from the Army in 2009 for violating Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT).

DADT is very, very close to being repealed and we as a nation are very, very, very close to allowing openly gay men and women to enlist and serve in the United States military.

From Adam Levine, CNN
October 19, 2010 4:05 p.m. EDT

Washington (CNN) — The Pentagon has advised recruiting commands that they can accept openly gay and lesbian recruit candidates, given the recent federal court decision that bars the military from expelling openly gay service members, according to a Pentagon spokeswoman.

The guidance from the Personnel and Readiness office was sent to recruiting commands on Friday, according to spokeswoman Cynthia Smith.

The recruiters were told that if a candidate admits he or she is openly gay, and qualify under normal recruiting guidelines, their application can be processed. Recruiters are not allowed to ask candidates if they are gay as part of the application process.

The notice also reminded recruiters that they have to “manage expectations” of applicants by informing them that a reversal of the court decision might occur, whereby the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy could be reinstated, Smith said.

Later Tuesday, U.S. District Court Judge Virginia Phillips in California denied the government’s request for an emergency stay of her order barring the military from enforcing its ban on gay men and lesbians serving openly. The government is now expected to go to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

Groups representing gays and lesbians have warned against coming out to the military because the policy is still being appealed in courts.

Today, Dan Choi re-enlisted in the Army.

This is a well-editted video of Dan Choi’s experience down at the recruiting office in NY Times Square (it’s only 4:10 vs. the 8:44 that is going around). It’s over at the Maddow Blog – clicking on the image below will take you to the original blog post and video.

Congratulations, Dan Choi!  I’m glad to have you back, and grateful for your activism that has helped bring us to this point.

Is everyone on FB right now, or what?

October 16, 2010

Seriously, stop with all the awesome, I’m trying to work!

I love that the people shown here didn’t get mad and seemed to genuinely think about the question and the implications of the answer.

And this one is just good fun.

You go, Mister President, Sir.  You smoke that cigarette!

 

Flash Mob: Homophobia Kills Die-In

October 11, 2010

Act on Principles is a group promoting “Full LGBT civil rights now. No delay. No excuses.” The group is currently attempting to get the American Equality Bill (AEB) filed in the Senate.  The AEB would amend the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” as federally protected statuses. 

Queer SOS is an activist project of the Act on Principles group that is focusing their attention on Senator Gillibrand of New York.  Queer SOS wants Sen. Gillibrand to file the proposed American Equality Bill.  Last Friday Queer SOS hosted “Flash Mob: Homophobia Kills Die-In” in Grand Central Station:

Aside from hosting energizing flash mob art-performances-with-a-message, Queer SOS is demonstrating daily outside of Sen. Gillibrand’s offices.  This is part of the the communication that the AEB Project sent to Sen. Gillibrand on 9/17/10 (bolding is original):

Dear Senator Gillibrand,

I’m writing to request again that you commit to and file a Civil Rights bill for our community immediately.

As you know, it is the prime duty of Government to protect its citizens from discrimination and Congress has failed over 30 million LGBTQ people in this regard.

We can not wait any longer for action to redress this.

To press this issue, activists will be launching a daily, friendly vigil outside your campaign offices starting Sept. 27th until the American Equality Bill (AEB) is filed.   If no bill is filed as of October 11th we plan to go 24/7, and then on Nov. 2nd to begin group fasting. 

This is a very serious matter as people will be risking their health standing outside and fasting for basic human justice.  We should not have to take these steps, but talking about this has failed and there is no other option.

We will broadcast our work daily, seek as much media attention as possible, and try to join you at other public campaign appearances.

Please know that this is not an opposition action in any way and that we are very happy your campaign is doing so well! But we NEED YOUR HELP now! We need this bill to organize around and there is no excuse for not filing it immediately.

rest of letter omitted

I support public demonstrations that do not harm or unduly inconvenience the audience to the point where they are coerced into taking action.  Get out there, make your message known, go first amendment-protected speech! 

But group fasting?

It appears to me that threatening a fast is a coercive action – Hey Senator, I’m going to hurt myself unless you do what I want you to do.  I support the goals of this group and I want to support the group itself, but I have reservations about fasting as a political statement.  I know that hunger strikes aren’t new, but why are they okay?  Why is holding one’s health hostage an acceptable means of political pressure?  Can anyone tell me why hunger strikes are appropriate, or give me arguments about why they are not?

DADT Fails in Senate

September 21, 2010

Damn it.

From Ed O’Keefe at the Washington Post:

Efforts to repeal the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” suffered a near-fatal blow on Tuesday as senators fell short of earning the 60 votes necessary to start debate on the annual defense policy bill by a vote of 56 to 43.

Tuesday’s vote does not end efforts to lift the military’s 17-year ban on gays serving openly in uniform, but makes it almost impossible to ensure a repeal is included in the final House-Senate compromise version of the defense bill that lawmakers may vote on during a lame-duck session after November’s midterm elections.

The vote’s fate was sealed early Tuesday, when Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who supports repealing “don’t ask,” said she disagreed with Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid’s decision to restrict the number of amendments to the bill.

This is an except from a larger article.  Read the full article here.

If you’re not familiar with DADT, or if you only know that Lady Gaga seems really interested with it, I encourage you to visit the ServiceMembers Legal Defense Network.  They explain what DADT is, the controversy around DADT, and they lay out why repealing DADT is a crucial matter of national security as well as a civil rights issue.

~~~~~

UPDATE: Check out Joe.My.God for a very good collection of reporting and video about the defeat of the Senate DADT vote.

Snippets and Sunday Pride

July 1, 2010

Snippet #1: I took this picture of some awesome mailbox “street art” in Uptown at Girard and 31st:

Snippet #2: I needed a bigger flower pot to contain my monster cherry tomato tree.  My friend, Courtney, thought that she had one that would work, so she came over with a replacement.  When she got to my apartment complex, she got out of the car, pulled out her cell phone and announced to me, my caretaker and a couple of neighbors, “Hey, I’m outside and I have your pot.”  Greeeeat.  Thanks, Court.  I made a big show of displaying the brown flower pot – “Wow, this is a great pot!  Thanks!” – to the neighborhood as we got it out of her trunk.

Snippet #3: WordPress lets me know what phrases people are using when they stumble across my blog via google.  Yesterday I had an above-average weird Google Search Term hit: “genital anatomy dog”  WTF, google.com?

Snippet #4: Today is the start of CONvergence!!!  I’m using the CONvergence Scheduler, which is pretty sweet – especially for an event of this size, with 10+ panels, activities, events and parties happening every hour.  There was a write-up about CONvergence in 365 Things to Do – Twin Cities, and an even better photo of some con attendees in the article!

Sunday Minneapolis Pride Report

Sunday was very, very different from Saturday.  For one thing, I went to the Pride festivities with the Hubby instead of a 13 year-old and a six year-old.  Sooooo different.  I don’t think I really experienced the Pride events on Saturday because of my preoccupation with keeping everybody smiley and safe.  On Sunday I was with the man I love and I was relatively carefree.  The parade was awesome, as always!  I didn’t manage to get any photos of the parade, but I did manage to scrounge up some decent video of this year’s parade.

The first one is interesting because he’s sped up the film.  This first video is different from the second (below) because he has a lot of zoomed-in images, so you don’t get a feel for how large and crowded the parade is:

I like this second one BUT I would recommend skipping the beginning and watching only between 0:54-5:51.  Outside of this window is just film of the videographer and her friend chatting and being silly.  But the meat of the video (again – 0:54-5:51!) is fun because she mixes still shots and video, and she’s filming from the street without zoom so you feel more like a spectator watching this video than you do with the first video.

And more of my own pictures in the park, this time on Sunday with me and the Hubby:

2010 Twin Cities Pride: Saturday

June 29, 2010

June 2010 marks the 38th Annual Pride festival.  The Twin Cities Pride Celebration is one of the largest free GLBTA pride events in the country!  Thank you, Twin Cities Pride for your free awesomeness!

So on Saturday I went to Pride In the Park, which is two days of nearly 400 hundred GLBT-friendly vendors, exhibits, food and concerts in Loring Park, a neighborhood of Minneapolis.  The vendors were selling homemade crafts, artworks, tools, home improvement packages, sex toys, clothing, jewelry, food and beverages, and much more.  Businesses were out pledging their support of diversity and GLBT rights for their employees.  Non-profit organizations were fundraising and plugging their missions.  There were advertisements for banks, churches, housing and neighborhood associations, restaurants, bars, social clubs of every stripe, a commitment ceremony tent, canoe rides and at least three concert stages.

Some things at Pride are a little racy – there are a couple of sex toy booths, and the Naked Minnesota guys in their barrels are awesome, but they really are naked under those barrels.  I’ve checked – in the interest of science, of course.  Accept nothing without verifiable evidence, right?  But for the most part, the park is very family-friendly.  I took Ashley to Pride in the Park last year, and aside from running across a drag king performing a very explicit dance to some very explicit pop song, everything was cool.  She had a blast picking up every sticker, temporary tattoo, lollipop, pen, bag, notepad, ruler, and other miscellaneous swag she could get her hands on.

This year Ashley and I went to Pride in the Park again, with one little difference: She asked if she could bring a friend along.  Like a sucka I said “Sure, why not?”  Well, it turns out her “friend” is Marjie (not her real name) the six year-old daughter of a family friend who her Mom is babysitting.  I should have said no when Ashley came out of the house holding Marjie’s hand, but

1) I hadn’t had any coffee yet, and didn’t fully comprehend the situation.
2) I was struck by the adorableness of Marjie, and was excited to take this cute little girl to the exciting party in the park with the balloons and the puppies and other stimuli.
3)  I had never experienced how quickly six year-olds can change their minds and their emotions back and forth and back again.
4) I didn’t know at the time that a six year-old has an attention span of about 10 minutes and one city block.
5) I have never witnessed the awesome fury of a six year-old who is ready to leave NOW.

So, not knowing any of these things, I got both kids in the car, and off we went! We arrived at the park at about early (~8:30am) so we could snag a parking spot, and then we walked down to Hell’s Kitchen, which was probably a good seven blocks each way.  Marjie was pretty good.  She walked the entire distance on her own feet, but she walked it slowly (geez, no stride to speak of on a 4ft tall kid – who designed these things?).

Cool alley in the Loring Park area that we went through on our way to breakfast, and two shots of the Hell’s Kitchen street sign

At the restaurant, Marjie wanted pancakes and then decided she doesn’t like pancakes, and she hated eggs, but according to Ashley she loves scrambled eggs, and she wanted potatoes, and was not happy when we got hash browns instead of “real” potatoes (your guess is as good as mine), but at least she liked the fruit garnish and her apple juice.  Ashley, for her part, ordered a $10 BLT and proceeded to eat the fries and took maybe two bites out of one half of the sandwich.  I hope the cooks got to eat the other half.

Back to the Park.

Along the way to the park we had to stop at Target so I could get more cash from the ATM, and there was a minor slushie incident, but moving right along…  On our walk I helped Marjie get over her fear of the sidewalk grates, and together we had fun hopping on all of the grates and manhole covers along Nicollet Avenue while “I’m 13 and way too cool for you bozos” walked ahead and pretended not to know us.  We took the Greenway path between the apartments that leads to Loring Park, and both kids had fun dipping their hands and feet in the fountains.

At the park we first walked  through the dog rescue/pet products section, and I nearly had a heart attack every time Marjie tried to hug a strange dog (No doggie faces near your face, Marjie!).  We walked quickly by the sex shop booths (Nope, not those pamphlets, honey!  No, we don’t need any penis-shaped candies.  Thank you though, you’re too fabulous!), and on through the child-tempting vendor’s guantlet.  We made it through that section without any casualties, but the girls had to stop and spin every contest wheel, and Ashley kept trying to sign up for mailing lists so she could get t-shirts, CDs, etc.  They collected stickers on their shirts from every political party and non-profit organization that was giving them away.  They managed to get temporary tattoos from Target, Cub and one university.  They collected reusable grocery bags, dry-erase boards, and a safer sex kit even made it into Marjie’s bag (whoops, Brianne will take that one, honey!).

The girls trying on sunglasses, posing in front of the exhibits, Ashley in the Pfund cutout.

At one point we stopped at a concert stage to watch the drag queens and kings from St. Cloud University.  Ashley was stoked because one of the kings was lip synching to Usher’s O.M.G, and that’s when Marjie freaked out.  She started crying and pulling away from the stage and she kept saying “I don’t want to dance” – she wasn’t acting scared or covering her ears from the volume, she was just seemed pissed and wanted to leave.  And this tantrum made Ashley mad (Y’all can do whatever you want, I’m staying here and watching the concert.)  I finally convinced Marjie to sit on my lap and watch the show, and when we finally got up to leave she started crying again because she didn’t want to leave.

D’oh!  Why you…!

The concert crowd and one of the St. Cloud University Drag Queens

After that we went to the food court and everyone was happy again.

We went to a few more booths and collected some more paraphernalia.  On the way through we were treated to this guy reading from his bible and imploring the audience to let him save them.   (Well girls, that man thinks that it’s bad if two men want to be boyfriends or two girls want to be girlfriends.  What?  Umm… because he just does, probably lots of reasons.  But don’t say anything mean when we go by – he has a right to be here and to express his ideas, even if we don’t agree with him.)

Inside-the-head voice sez “You jerk, try not to get beat up by some drunk gay person while you’re here, okay?”

Finally, it was time to go.  Everyone was exhausted, but relatively satisfied when I dropped the girls back home.  Here’s Marjie’s final good-bye: “Hey, I got gum on your seat.  Thanks.  Bye.”

Seriously, she was standing outside of the car and her butt was still connected to the back seat by a two-foot long strand of chewing gum.

All-in-all, it was a very unique Pride experience.

~~~~~

Happy Pride!

Stop back tomorrow for more photos and stories from Sunday’s Parade and Festival.

This photo was taken at Toronto’s Pride Parade – isn’t it fun?