[quote=@Buddha] [@Dynamo Frokane] Historically infertile women were given a lot of shit actually, and so were men that were considered infertile (because it wasn't possible to prove it back then). So you are wrong in that department. It has nothing to do with 'considering it normal' because infertility for straight couples historically resulted in shit too. In fact for a woman it was considered dangerous too. Because women didn't work = women didn't earn income = women relied on husbands to earn = husbands wanted a child to further their family line. No child = no food on the table = death. [quote=http://www.bustle.com/articles/76161-how-infertility-was-talked-about-throughout-history-because-to-fight-a-taboo-you-need-to]The overall impression, though, is that infertility has often been a frightening and societally damaging experience — and that women usually suffered for it. In a pre-IVF, pre-feminist world, where motherhood and the ability to carry sons often proved a woman's worth, childlessness was challenging and dangerous — for everybody involved. So nowadays, if you're struggling to get pregnant, give a thought to the women in the past who've shared your fight. You're all part of the same surreal, difficult club.[/quote] Read a history book my man. Generationally (that word comes up a lot when discussing social issues) we have gotten past that just like we will get past homophobia. But applying pressure like the LGBT community does now by forcing people to get over it is counteractive and makes it take longer to get over it. It makes people feel forced to do something and if anything, people don't like to be forced to do things. I am unsure how protesting social acceptance would do any good. 'WE DEMAND YOU ACCEPT US' that's great, but.. who is going to listen to that? Do you expect to sway the hillbilly Christian who totes guns at homosexuals that steps too close to his property? How? He's not gonna have an epiphany, come on. Race relations also don't improve with government bills but they're a start. Equal opportunity does not equal equal outcome. But it can lead to equal outcome. For example, lets say blacks were now getting educated (which they are more and more) meaning they're legally and socially on more equal footing with other races (let's say whites, because that's the prime target group I guess). Not only that but it brings them into areas that were previously predominantly white, and perhaps Asian and Euro-Hispanic. That makes them mix with white people and other races, and it begins the fostering of the understanding of different cultures and the feeling that perhaps they are not so different after all. The in-group is no longer defined by skin color alone, but also by just sharing the same space, talking, etc. Now imagine the same for homosexuals. They have the same rights and equal access to the same agencies and possibilities. Instead of mingling with the majority and fostering the growth of the in-group relations, they choose to out themselves at gay prides to show 'look how different we are!' Do you think that straight people will go 'well damn, they're kinda like us after all!!!' Fuck no. Most people will no care, and those hard-liners that were already against homosexuals will see the.. half naked men.. and go 'GOD DAMN WE WERE RIGHT ALL ALONG' and continue toting guns. Like I said before, acceptance is already at a very high level in city areas, and as mentioned by Jigg, the areas that do not have a lot of acceptance are full of hard-liners that are not going to chance their mind with gay prides. [/quote] Right first of all the inferitlity thing still isnt comparable, no one ever got thrown in prison for being infertile and straight whatever 'shit' they got isnt comparable to what the gays have went through. Also, you cant 'see' infertility, if an infertile couple walks down the street they arent going to be harassed on an assumption and DEFINATELY not in the modern world. Yes government bills are a start and yes there are many different ways to intergrate, sadly, social intergration isnt a hard science, there is a lot trial and error, and gays arent nessecarily going to all be experts on how to market themselves to be accepted by a majoriy yes HETERONORMATIVE society. Gay prides are all very different, some are very sexual, some are obnoxius, some are profuoud, some are loud, some are very quiet, some are musical and some are artsy, it all depends on who is organising it and what the public choose to react to indivudiually. But we can agree that most people arent in gay pride parades on most days. Pretty much for the majority of the year, gay people are going to work, going to the store to pick up groceries and paying bills just like everyone esle. This characterisation of them being Go-Go dancing psychopaths trying to slap society in the face with a pink dildo is just unhelpful and stupid. If they want to celebrate their difference as part of their movement to acceptance then they should have at it, is it going to convince EVERY christian hillbilly to leave his NASCAR and go hug a twink? NO But there are people in the middle of the extreme fringes who are maybe sitting on the fence about how they feel, and a tried and true method with western society is that the more we see something the less we care it gets BORING but improtantly it gets NORMAL. Do you see people getting outraged at south park anymore for having naughty language? The concerned parents from the late 90s and early 2000s? NO because its been around for 19 years and we are all used to it. Its a slow process but more and more of the world will get used to gays, its already started happening, and its not a smooth or perfect process but it will work on some level and if you are against general homophobia you shouldnt want to get in the way of that.