The Globe reports on a deal brokered by Mayor Walsh that would let MassEquality march - as long as they don't wear shirts or carry signs that have the word "gay" on them. No word if they'll be allowed to carry rainbow flags as long as all the stripes but the green one are taped over.
Only problem: Nobody told MassEquality, which says it learned of the "deal" by reading the Globe:
The fact that Parade organizers are willing to have a conversation with MassEquality is an important part of ongoing public dialogue about LGBT people and the Parade. But at this point, it’s still just a conversation. MassEquality has not accepted any invitation to march, and will only consider accepting an invitation that allows LGBT people to march openly.
We have heard from LGBT people who are Irish, who are veterans, and many others who would like to march in the Parade and to be able to express all of who they are. LGBT people should not have to silence who they are to celebrate other parts of their identities.
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
you apparently haven't seen Wacko on the news lately,
By aging cynic
Sat, 03/01/2014 - 4:32pm
Wacko is dead plus a breath. Get ready for the inappropriate celebration.
You don't see them fighting
By Man Ray
Sat, 03/01/2014 - 3:52pm
To march in the Caribbean parade or the Columbus parade. How about marching in the Ancient and Honorable Artillery parade?
Bunch of attention grabbers.
The Gay Lobby got together
By RHookup
Sat, 03/01/2014 - 6:07pm
The Gay Lobby got together and decided they didn't have a big enough budget to attack every target. They will be having a bake sale next week to help get into the other parades next.
What a great excuse to be
By anon
Sat, 03/01/2014 - 6:07pm
What a great excuse to be bigoted.
Bay Windows: Time for Gillette, Sam Adams and Westin to act
By adamg
Sat, 03/01/2014 - 3:55pm
The paper urges readers to contact the three companies, all official parade sponsors, and ask them to act like the NFL in Arizona and put pressure on parade organizers to let MassEquality march without the restriction.
Sam Adams wouldn't dare...
By O-FISH-L
Sat, 03/01/2014 - 4:19pm
Sam Adams founder Jim Koch's last act of anti-Catholicism didn't go so well. He wouldn't dare try it again. I doubt Gillette or the Westin would either, especially when the upside is gaining a fraction of 3% while risking a loss of far more potential customers.
Social justice and good business aren't always
By MC Slim JB
Sat, 03/01/2014 - 4:24pm
mutually exclusive. Some corporations act in good conscience, and will not associate their brand with bigotry, even when it costs them profits. For instance, one of the ways apartheid in South Africa was brought to an end was pressure from the divestiture movement.
More recently, the NFL's implicit threat to pull next year's Super Bowl from Arizona almost certainly influenced Brewer's decision to veto that disgusting "Jim Crow for gays" bill. People are starting to figure out that hatred is bad for business.
Also, pulling sponsorship based on the parade organizers' homophobia isn't anti-Catholic; it's anti-bigotry. Stop conflating the two.
As always, gays are still allowed to march without gay banner.
By O-FISH-L
Sat, 03/01/2014 - 4:30pm
Bigotry? The moral equivalence of apartheid? Surely you jest. As always, gays are still allowed to march in the parade. Organizers have merely maintained the appropriate stance of banning any reference to sexuality (homo, hetero or otherwise) at a family event attended by thousands of children. TMI as the kids say.
I'm not equating the Southie parade to apartheid
By MC Slim JB
Sat, 03/01/2014 - 4:50pm
My point is that individuals and businesses putting pressure on businesses and governments to eschew bigotry can be effective, even on a much larger scale. It has led to a change of a large country's entire political system, and gotten a governor in a state that is notoriously bigoted to make a difficult decision that pissed off a good chunk of her Republican supporters.
It will be interesting to see if any significant pressure can be put on these parade sponsors. The fact that gays might represent a smaller fraction of their business than homophobes is not the only calculus at work here; there are a lot of straight people like me who also find homophobia repugnant, and don't give people a pass on it because they claim it's part of their religious values. (And despite what bloat-bags like Doyle say, I think the Pope and Jesus are both anti-homophobia.)
The potential for long-term damage to the brand is also a concern, and that might have a greater economic impact than a few people deciding to switch razor brands.
This parade is a privately
By anon
Sat, 03/01/2014 - 8:24pm
This parade is a privately sponsored event to celebrate something defined by the sponsor. And for private parades the sponsors can set the rules around whether participation promotes their purpose in having the parade. Every year, the circus comes to town and the elephants parade to the Garden. PETA hasn't got a right join in that parade. Atheist organizations would not be allowed in the North End religious processions although the procession take place on public streets. Time was when NAMBLA marched in the gay pride parade, however the sponsors of that parade no longer allow them to march.
Orientation isn't merely SEXUAL...
By David in Chelsea, MA
Thu, 03/13/2014 - 6:24am
Sexual orientation doesn't just refer to the sex act. It refers to WHO YOU ARE ATTRACTED TO AND CAPABLE OF FALLING IN LOVE WITH. And minority groups NEED RECOGNITION that the majority DO NOT, since they are , you know, THE MAJORITY.
Talk about your
By aging cynic
Sat, 03/01/2014 - 4:48pm
strawman arguments. Nothing is being conflated anywhere but your vivid imagination. Now we get to endure a couple of weeks of post hoc ergo propter hoc bullshit from both sides. Take Marty's compromise as an opportunity to show the good faith we keep hearing so much about. He's a whole lot more sincere than Menino ever was. There. Problem solved.
In this and the other parade thread, the usual suspects
By MC Slim JB
Sat, 03/01/2014 - 5:05pm
have been doing exactly that: saying, in effect, "If you object to homophobia, you are Catholic-bashing." And I keep repeating, "It's not your entire religion, but your bigoted behavior."
This is what just got asserted in Arizona: the fact that you think your religion allows you to be a bigot doesn't mean you get a law protecting that behavior. Most of the people wailing about that veto are doing the same thing: "They're repressing our religious freedom!" Um, no: you are free to practice your religion, up to the point where your religious values violate the law, including laws against discrimination. In this particular case, it's not a law that's involved, but a very public "private" event. With the legal options exhausted, a logical next step to express disapproval is activism to pressure the sponsors.
Sam Adams
By plt3012
Sat, 03/01/2014 - 9:14pm
Samuel Adams was virulent anti-Catholic bigot. Check out references to Pope's Day (I think it's November 4th). He incited mobs to attack Catholics in Boston. Where's the outrage?
you see?
By deselby
Sat, 03/01/2014 - 9:32pm
they can't compromise. pressure pressure pressure. they want their victory parade. It's not going to happen. Hurley does not care about the money.
Why don't they do it for Columbus Day parade? They'll find their Shih-tzu's head in the bed.
Statement from the mayor's office
By adamg
Sat, 03/01/2014 - 5:36pm
So, in other words, this isn't settled yet.
Why are you butting in with relevant information?
By nm
Sat, 03/01/2014 - 9:16pm
We are just here to yell!
reason
By stump
Sat, 03/01/2014 - 8:38pm
What are they marching for? The parade is supposed to be to celebrate the heritage of Irish people in south boston. Yeah it's got a little crazy with Michael Jackson look a likes and star wars characters (they shouldn't be in it either). But this is not a protest parade for gay rights. Last time I checked MA was pretty liberal and you have more rights than on other states.
I know this is crazy but some
By anon
Sun, 03/02/2014 - 3:34am
I know this is crazy but some people are both gay AND Irish.
all day event
By massprince
Sun, 03/02/2014 - 7:55am
I suggest having a gay St. Patrick parade in the afternoon, the gays dont have to join where theyre not wanted.
Separate but equal
By davem
Sun, 03/02/2014 - 11:16am
has worked SO well in the past. Great idea…
Once Upon a Time
By JP Gal
Sun, 03/02/2014 - 10:53am
Parade organizers did the right thing: http://www.bostonglobe.com/2013/03/13/patrick-day-...
And right there in the caption, it notes that some
By MC Slim JB
Sun, 03/02/2014 - 12:34pm
Southie folks threw eggs, bottles and cans at the NAACP float. When GLIB marched in the '92 and '93 parades, they were escorted by riot police. It makes me wonder: if MassEquality does eventually get to march on its own terms, how well will spectators behave?
Seems like homophobia is increasingly a function of age; younger people are much likelier to consider sexual preference a non-issue. Maybe a few years from now, enough of the old bigots will have moved out or aged out of Southie's population to make people wonder: why was letting gay Irish-Americans participate in the parade such a big deal back in the day? When even the Pope is on the right side of the issue, the hateful and fearful sure look like dinosaurs.
Out of Place
By anon
Sun, 03/02/2014 - 8:55pm
Am I the only one who things that gay people with rainbow flags is just as out of place at the St. Paddy's parade as a bunch of drunk people wearing green would be at a gay pride parade? I'm pretty sure that's what this all about.
Two words:
By MC Slim JB
Sun, 03/02/2014 - 9:51pm
Imperial Stormtroopers. Maybe I'm missing something about Star Wars trivia, but their connection with Irish-American heritage seems a bit more tenuous than a bunch of proudly Irish-American gay people who want to participate.
Guess you got me there.
By anon
Mon, 03/03/2014 - 12:20am
Guess you got me there.
I would venture that the
By anon
Mon, 03/03/2014 - 10:39am
I would venture that the Imperial Stormtroopers are there for the kids. Kids and adults alike love them. They're a fun part of the parade. If you've ever been to the parade, believe it or not, there are little kids with parents who line the front of the crowds along the parade route to watch the parade. It's not all puking college students with green plastic hats.
To the main point, I think it's absurd that if you're gay you're not allowed to march openly. Hopefully this year will be a turning point and things will improve with each parade with regards to this issue so it will soon become a non-issue. Furthermore, I do think it's only right that ALL parades allow people who are gay to march openly. Which other parades don't allow gay people to march openly?
Pages
Add comment