San Diego Firefighters and Gay Pride

The first half of the article makes it sound like the complaint is because they were being, you know, sexually harrassed by participants in the parade, which I can completely understand. Then in the second half it goes off on this whole homophobic tangent about how it was against their integrity and religion and whatever to have to see men in tight shorts kissing. There seem to be two entirely separate issues being lumped in together here. That's pretty bad writing.

I can see the sarcastic bumper stickers now: "Homosexuality - Even worse than burning, dismembered kids."

Lovely.

This reminds me of the Scottish fire department that made headlines a few years ago when they refused to hand out flyers at a gay pride parade.

True happiness, we are told, consists in getting out of one's self, but the point is not only to get out, you must stay out; and to stay out you must have some absorbing errand. -Henry James

I am thinking the same thing here! From the article I gather they were forced to attend the parade as participants? If that is the case that is just ridiculous, to force a non gay person to attend a gay pride parade?

However, if they just where there in case of any emergencies then I think they should just do their job!

Interesting though how their sensibilities were offended by men in tight shorts and kissing! I am sure it's totally accidental there is no mention of how they felt seeing women in tight outfits and kissing! LOL!

"call me old fashioned but I prefer feminism that leaves a little something to the imagination!"

I agree too, provided they weren't there on a work-related task (either for educational reasons - like the Scottish firefighter incident - or in case of emergency). I have seen and heard of just about every kind of emergency personnel marching in gay pride parades, including firefighters, police officers, and the military, but as far as I am aware these are GAY people (et al) doing the marching, and they are there by choice (i.e. to show you can be gay and in the military, or whatever).

However, I do think there are some sensationalist elements to this, like the guy who said that this was more uncomfortable and stressful than pulling bodies from burning buildings, and the "forced to look at men in tight shorts" angle. But consider the source (Fox News).

True happiness, we are told, consists in getting out of one's self, but the point is not only to get out, you must stay out; and to stay out you must have some absorbing errand. -Henry James

Which news agency reported this story?  I'm unclear as to why these firemen were required to attend. Why were they "participating" in the parade?  Was a float suspected to go up in flames or was there a drag queen at risk for heart failure? If I assume that these firefighters were working, then as public servants they just need to do their job and go home.  Was this some sort of training exercise?  I think a little more "investigative" reporting needs to be done.  I sure hope these firefighters don't have nightmares from this horrible experience.

they could have been there in case of a fire or emergency breaking out. We don't preposition firemen at every parade as far as has been my experience. Perhaps some supervisor noticed these guys had a gay "hang up", and decided they needed to have some exposure to real gay people, most of whom do not go to Pride to taunt the straight people. We go to celebrate. I would though love to know if it was an openly gay person who did.

I stand with the firefighters. I would not want to be forced to attend a KKK march or a protest by the "God Hates Fags" folks. And I would file suit if forced to do so to keep my job or ever again be promoted. 

"Great minds think alike. They just don't always reach the same conclusion" - stolen from the Little Dutch Girl

It is a foxnews story but they put a link to the official complaint and personally, going by that complaint, I do think these fire fighters have a good point but their "courageous stanse" does seem to stem from fear of gays and fear to be perceived of being gay! ;)

"call me old fashioned but I prefer feminism that leaves a little something to the imagination!"

it wasn't meant critically the remark about foxnews, just as an affirmation of a remark in an earlier comment.

I am sure that kind of thing makes some people uncomfortable but if you read the official complaint they had an issue with the whole thing a day earlier ( before the lewd remarks) and there is a quote of one of the guys mentioning that one of them was teased about "willing to do anything for money" when, as I understoof the story, he did not have a problem with marching! It's because of that part of the complaint that I think homophobia is the underlying cause for the complaint!

"call me old fashioned but I prefer feminism that leaves a little something to the imagination!"

So, can you and I agree to disagree on that particular aspect? But agree on that one should not be forced to participate in events that would make one feel uncomfortable? :)

"call me old fashioned but I prefer feminism that leaves a little something to the imagination!"

Again, no implication intended with "if you read the complaint" that was meant like in general! Not to imply you didn't!

"call me old fashioned but I prefer feminism that leaves a little something to the imagination!"

it was unfair to force them, and I agree with Harpy, they were fair enough to state they objected beforehand.

And I have to wonder if a different group were substituted for 'gay pride parade' some people might hold a different perspective.

I know this has done before, but substitute gay pride with Christian, and I would guess the gays offended by this story might be defending the firefighters, saying they shouldn't have been forced to attend something they objected to.

I think this issue is being treated too sensitively.  It's similar to someone being 'forced' to go to a strip club for lunch (ostensibly while still on the clock)  with clients, the boss, etc., because it might reflect negatively on them if they don't attend.  That's not fair and it's wrong.

NOW, if these firefighters were in the role of first respondents to an emergency situation, they better leave their beliefs and issues behind and focus on the job they were trained and hired to perform. This parade however doesn't seem to meet that standard, it seems they were there in case something should happen.

I applaud the out commander who is looking into the issue.  This, and other public events which might be 'divisive' to some, should probably be staffed on a volunteer basis or contracted out.

Again, let me make the point, in the case of an emergency, shut the fuck up and do your job.  Patrolling a parade doesn't meet that burden in my opinion.

I had a boss once who always scheduled lunch meetings at Hooters.

Little did he know. But that's besides the point. I KNEW his  intentions were to place me in a situation that would be uncomfortable and that was enuff to piss me off. 

"Great minds think alike. They just don't always reach the same conclusion" - stolen from the Little Dutch Girl

asshole!  Did he know you were gay and was trying to get a response out of you?

I must confess the idea of a woman being put in that situation did cross my mind, but my assumption (which I think could be statistically proven) was that it would be men taking men to a strip club.

How did you handle that?

I chatted with all the girls that came to the table as if we were as close as sisters. Interesting enough, it was he who actually became uncomfortable after a few meetings, because the girls would adress me by name and treated him like a wet rag.

He stopped doing it and I know that, although it was never directly expressed, he knew he ended up looking the jerk for this.

And as for those very astute Hooters girls? I still go in for lunch sometimes and chew the fat with them.

"Great minds think alike. They just don't always reach the same conclusion" - stolen from the Little Dutch Girl