Here’s the obligatory part: I generally don’t post up an entire post from elsewhere but I really can’t figure out how to better comment on it than what has already done. I will, however, section it a bit. So….
SHOT:
A perfect example of how the SJWs have taken over at Google:
Dozens of Google employees have sent an open letter to the organizers of San Francisco’s annual Pride parade urging them to kick Google’s company float out of the parade.
In a letter posted to Medium, the employees wrote of a work atmosphere where concerns from LGBTQ employees are regularly brushed aside.
“We have spent countless hours advocating for our company to improve policies and practices regarding the treatment of LGBTQ+ persons, the depiction of LGBTQ+ persons, and harassment and hate speech directed at LGBTQ+ persons, on YouTube and other Google products,” the letter read.
CHASER:
“The gist of the letter isn’t that Google’s LGBTQ+ employees are being treated badly at work, but that the company isn’t stringent enough about cracking down on WRONG SPEECH on YouTube.”
HANGOVER:
In other words, Google hires gay people who then seek to damage the company they work for, in order to pressure the company to engage in totalitarian censorship of anyone they don’t like.
Now do you understand what the firing of James Damore was really about? The LGBT community has become toxic in its politics, abandoning any pretense of seeking “tolerance” and instead demanding that the rest of us obey their diktats or else be banished into outer darkness.
CONTEMPORARY HISTORY:
Just the other day, a survey found “that young Americans — generally regarded as the most socially tolerant generation — are less comfortable with LGBTQ people than in previous years. The survey . . . found that Americans aged 18 to 34 who say they are comfortable interacting with queer people fell from 53% in 2017 to 45% in 2018 — even among those whom the report considers ‘allies’ to the LGBTQ community.” This is very much like the little-mentioned backlash that followed the triumph of the civil rights movement in the 1960s. Prior to the mid-1960s, sympathy for the plight of black people in the South under Jim Crow was widespread in the North. But after passage of the landmark civil-rights legislation in 1964 and 1965, there occurred a wave of urban riots across the North, and rather suddenly the Yankees realized that maybe “integration” wasn’t going to be a risk-free process for them. These were the years (1966-69) when radicals like Eldridge Cleaver abandoned non-violence and intergrationist rhetoric, instead demanding “Black Power,” and threatening violence in pursuit of that goal.
So now, after their triumph in the Obergefell case, LGBT activists have taken a similar radical path, and even young people who consider themselves “allies” are becoming uncomfortable with them.
From oppression to achieving tolerance to now demanding acceptance and further, affirmation of their lifestyle (re: think of the pushbacks against those that think some of the Pride Parades are too over the top?). For instance, I remember when I worked in Boston in Copley Square a few decades ago now; I felt bad for the tourist families with small children that happened to be in the area at the time. Parents rapidly rushing their children away in trying to protect the innocence of their children from the antics that were on the floats, the words that were said, and the leering looks.
How times have changed when the same City of Boston tried to shut down a “Straight Pride Day” until Mayor Marty Walsh was hit with a threat of a lawsuit after first denying them a permit. After all, if one identity group can be proud of itself, why not another? Why should one be “valued” over another? Shouldn’t both be uplifted if one is? Yet, that’s not how it has been working out:
Efforts to hold a “Straight Pride Parade” in Boston are one step closer to becoming reality.
City officials said the organizers’ public event application was approved Thursday, the first step toward receiving a permit for the parade. Next, organizers need the approval of police district captains and the licensing board to receive a parade permit and an entertainment license. Critics panned the idea as homophobic when the group Super Happy Fun America announced its intention to hold the parade. But the group’s president, John Hugo, told CNN the event is “not anti-gay but pro-straight,” adding that a groundswell of support is building around it.
Homophobic? That’s the typical rhetorical response – I’m not surprised – the Progressive Identity Group Narrative must never be impinged upon. I do think their name was rather slyly done; hey, if the homosexual community decided to redefine “gay”, it was clever of the hetrosexual group to adopt “Super Happy Fun”!
More than 350 volunteers have joined the effort and Milo Yiannopoulos is slated as the grand marshal, he said. The permit says 2,000 attendees are expected. “The city has assured me that if we follow the steps, it will go through,” said Hugo, whose name is on the event application as the primary organizer.
And of course, the Democrat Mayor has a reaction – I think this is called “choosing sides / picking winners and losers”.
If it goes forward, Mayor Marty Walsh will not attend, city officials said.
Well, that’s making it rather plain spoken as to which group he prefers. Wonder if the other one will return the favor come election day? And we also see which value is set is preferred, given an explict and dog whistle denouncement against a group that is challenging The Narrative:
The parade would be held on August 31 from noon to 3 p.m., according to the application. It would start on Boylston and Clarendon Streets and proceed along Boylston to Tremont. The mayor’s office emphasized that event applications are granted “based on operational feasibility” and not “values or endorsements of beliefs.”
Yet Walsh happily made it clear that he was going to participate in the Boston Gay Pride Parade. Leftover from that lawsuit threat? And that was emphasized with this:
The group originally requested to hold the event on City Hall Plaza and raise the “Straight Pride Flag” on city hall flag poles, the office said in a statement. According to the organizers’ website, the straight pride flag features the male and female sex symbols linked against a purple and blue background.
The request to raise the flag was “respectfully denied” since use of the poles “is at the city’s sole and complete discretion,” the statement said.
“The city maintains that its flag poles are a forum for government speech. As such, the city maintains selectivity and control over the messages conveyed by the flags flown on our flag poles, and has chosen not to display the ‘Straight Pride’ flag.”
We can tell what the “Government Speech” is, yes?
(H/T: TheOtherMcCain via Instapundit)
