Quote (majorblood @ Jun 14 2017 07:39am)
the reason for a parade can evolve over time as a society does, there's little reason for homosexuals to be afraid of the police any more than heterosexuals and it doesn't seem logical to not want police supporting the parade. I also don't see why homosexuals should have something against support from companies, is this just some Marxism?
BLM is actively attempting to stop police and gays from bridging gaps by forcing this separation, especially stopping gay police officers from celebrating. What is BLM trying to achieve with this? Isn't a sense of community and making connections more important than issues of the past?
Many people within the community would disagree with you, especially transgender women of color. Additionally, there's the notion that if people/groups want to be truly supportive, then that support transcends a Pride parade that only happens once a year, and that they can and should be supportive without feeling like they need either recognition or publicity.
The same can be said for corporations, and that rather than attempting to profit off of pandering to the community, people would far rather corporations address their own forms of oppression. To give an example, Wells Fargo is typically at every single Pride event, but it is a major funder/contributor to the Dakota Access Pipeline, and as such, is met with criticism and protest. What significance, truly, does a major bank have to do with Pride? If they want to be supportive, then that's an every-day practice, not just at Pride where they get to advertise and engage in virtue signaling.
And BLM isn't trying to stop police and the community from "bridging gaps" at all. Rather, they're taking the approach that the police need active training and real-world reform to be truly supportive, and that merely having a contingent in the parade one day a year doesn't negate that other 364 days of the year in which LGBTQ+ people experience disproportionately negative experiences with law enforcement and the criminal justice system as a whole.
Quote (Skinned @ Jun 14 2017 10:21pm)
I like that the Ethical Experience itself now is a commodity on all its own. If you buy this product we give this small percentage of profit to a remote place that was ravaged by colonialism and capitalism to begin with. Lets use more capitalism to correct the problems created by capitalism...which is all about conquering territory, installing leaders, and opening markets.
But if I spend an extra two bucks a day I can buy a cup of coffee by a farmer in Latin America who is not quite as exploited as the rest of the producers of commodities....
Nonetheless I buy all organic, free range, fair trade, etc, because its "better". Purchasing this ethical experience is probably hundreds of dollars a month in the case of my family.
Social entrepreneurship is certainly the wave of the future, it seems. And while although certainly better than apathetic capitalism, there's still certainly a plethora of issues that social entrepreneurship provides. Like you said, it doesn't redress the wrongs of the original colonialism and capitalism, and it can actually have very unintended (or intended if you're cynical) effects, like how Tom's Shoes stole the design from Latin American culture their "get a shoe, give a shoe" program actually ended up putting shoe makers in other countries out of business and creating a dependency in those regions.
This post was edited by Handcuffs on Jun 14 2017 08:04pm