No Pride parade in Boston this year

I mean, given that the "old guard" took their ball and went home, I'm not sure we can point fingers at the "New Guard" for not having a full-scale event organized yet.

(and tbh I wouldn't be surprised if we still see Pride parades on a smaller, less corporate scale, and likely not advertised on WBZ)

That is the goal. The world isn't as white and activities aren't as cis-gendered and male as they once were.

The problem is often that the "old guard" has to be removed en bloc because they don't fucking listen to the new reality of inclusion in a changed world ... or they think that "listening" followed by condescension/braying about 20 years ago is enough.

Whinging about "tearing things down" happens when they make that necessary with their maladaptive responses to the need for organizations to diversify or die.

Everyone gets eaten by the new guard.

If they decided to quit instead of becoming more inclusive, that's on the old guard. They choose to close the entire organization.

Every time a smaller group asks the larger group to make space for them, there is push-back from the larger group. That doesn't make it right to not make progress just because the larger group enjoys the status quo.

Let's think about who rides that fast - it isn't you, it isn't me, it isn't most people with modest bank accounts and no time to pile on the miles or buy the fast toys.

If their rides and activities are entirely organized, run, and paced for a very narrow group of people, that is a recipe for future implosion - and a lot of more urban, younger, female, and minority cyclists are struggling to get that through some very arrogant heads.

Yes, they are still around but there is an ongoing drama about a board that ignores the fundamental demographic realities that cycling will not survive if it continues to cater solely to primarily white suburban men who ride for recreation.

EDIT: I am seeing some more reasonably paced rides, women's rides, and more rides on their calendar originating from the more urban reaches of the Charles River/T stations at times that working people can participate. The board was not entirely overturned, but changed in positive ways. But there is still room for improvement.

for hijacking a story about LGBTQ+ inclusivity and making exclusively about you. This kind of ally we don’t need.

What did YOU add to the conversation?

Pride is not the only organization that is struggling with these issues. They simply have more complex layers and intersections of diversity to contend with.

This is happening to many organizations with an entrenched leadership that doesn't respond to shifting demographic realities and an expansion of identities, and that is more responsive to satisfying deep pockets instead of a broad base.

...on EARTH are you talking about?

it just leads to needless division between once solid groups

Horsefeathers. If it can't stand the mildest scrutiny, that's a sure sign that it's hollowed out.

This kind of authenticity is what I come here for.

And while in the 30 years I've been out and going to pride, I'm happy that we're much more support of it, but its lost its appeal because of it. Its not that you're welcome, but the event started out by us for us. And now everyone else wants to play.

Hard agree. But...

feel like the new group of people were unprepared for the amount of effort that goes into planning such a thing, which is why I don't think we're having Pride this year. I think they couldn't get together....Others above have chimed in and said "well may need more time". Perhaps. but also perhaps that they should understood the work it takes to put this one. And not just time energy to make it happen.. you need money. It takes time to build all of that back up. I somehow think this new group thought it was 'just gonna happen' because they were the face of Boston Pride. But they failed to realize that sure, Boston Pride had money that could have gone to the new group, but those big corporate sponsorships that pay for a good portion of pride.. did not

I can't speak to what the new group's thinking was, or what they wanted Pride to be. But, question the premise that putting on "Boston Pride" means putting on the same event as we've had in recent years, just with new people at the helm. You said it yourself: it became the TD Bank(tm) Boston Pride Parade, the suburban straight "mama bears" Pride Parade, the Massachusetts politician's Pride Parade, the parade where actual LGBTQ people seemed almost incidental except as window dressing for all these other people. And yeah, it takes a lot of funding to throw that event. But is that the event you want to have?

I'm lost on that remark. For someone who is all about inclusiveness, that's not very inclusive. Maybe I'm missing the point of the parade, but aren't you looking for acceptance and rights from everybody?

In the context of an LGBTQ event, inclusiveness means inclusive of all LGBTQ people.

Those hetero families are supporting you - isn't that a good thing?

I'm going to get a lot of hate for this, but I think it's important to question what this "support" is, and who gets to define it. Every marginalized group needs support -- but when majority culture gets to define what that means, and how and under what conditions this support shall be doled out (or withheld, as in, if you're the wrong kind of gay "you've just cost yourself my support", which is the bullythreat that marginalized people hear ALL THE TIME from majority culture), then it isn't really support. It's straight people doing what they want to do, when and how and under what conditions they want to do it. It's for them, not for us.

I'm a huge fan of straight people being allies, and supporting their LGBTQ friends and family members. But I've also seen some of them take it a bit too far, to the point where they want to be the ones driving the bus. I've seen some of them wanting to dictate what can and can't happen at Pride (never mind LGBTQ rights, politics, and presence in society). That isn't support.