My supporters group for my small local football team already flies pride, anti-fascist, and pro-union flags at away games (we've covered a stand at our home ground already & actually had a bit of a scrap defending them tonight).
A couple of people want to add a straight-ally flag. It's a nice enough flag and nice concept, but as far as I'm aware it doesn't have much actual history and feels a little bit like hedging your bets (like saying "I'm supportive but definitely not queer in any way") but maybe I'm just being overly concerned as a not particularly binary-embracing but mostly boringly cis-het guy.
Thoughts from any queer or otherwise identifying comrades?
UPDATE: as I felt, consensus seems to be that it's cringe at best. I feel like it creates a needless dividing line and reinforces some problematic dynamics. I've also talked to the two openly queer people in our supporters group and while they didn't have strong opinions. One didn't care either way and the other felt a little odd about it although didn't feel strongly. So I'm gonna suggest to our group that we don't fly it and stick with just the more traditional pride flags.
Cis-het guy also and nah. If I'm going to show my support I'd stick with the rainbow flag. This just feels like straight people inserting themselves so as to stand out. If you're showing support for the LGBTQ+ community it should only be about them, not the fact that you are from outside the community.
that looks really cringe ngl
i dont like any variations of the pride flag, either. if you want to make other flags depicting other specific identities thats cool and all, but adding shit to the pride flag to make it, like, inclusive of trans people or poc or anything like that is missing the point. the pride flag is already inclusive of those groups. it's a rainbow. it includes everyone already. thats the whole thing.
there's a flag that explicitly includes trans people because there's a very vocal segment of the population that's trying to exclude us from the trans flag - look up the LGB Alliance. and the POC thing is about decentering white people. these flags are revisions that address present political realities. even if the original flag technically includes everyone, the active movements to exclude are enough reason for these flags to exist.
none of these things are true of cishet people as a group. this flag is at best an attempt to redirect back to cishets and away from queer people and at worst its another go at straight pride.
there’s a flag that explicitly includes trans people because there’s a very vocal segment of the population that’s trying to exclude us from the trans flag
doesn't making a new flag then complete the process by also implicitly excluding yourself? just use the pride flag. and the trans pride flag too, like thats cool. but mashing them together just looks bad and misses the point
both sides of of the conflict claim that the flag includes everyone AND use the flag. the disagreement is over the existenceof trans people. the point of the new flag is to signal to trans people that you're safe and not exterminationist.
Straight ally flag is "I support the gays, Im just not gay" which is kinda suspicious in a perpetuating stigma kind of way
I have a fundamental issue with allyship from the getgo and believe that allies should have no voice on internal queer dialogue. This stems from so many instances where people demand you couch your language and make it appealing to allies lest the allies abandon your group, but at that point, did you even want them? Having non-queer people march and stand in solidarity and advocate for queer rights is an integral part of pushing for equality, but do they actually need to be recognized as this special group? I remember in college a few people said that the A in LGBTQIA was for ally and it bugged me even before I had a decade of time to digest other people's opinions on allyship. It centers the feelings of the ally before the community they're supporting, acting as if their simple action of being not a terrible person gives them an identity that includes them. The straight-ally flag feels like an extension of all of this, where it's centering the ally over the community they're supposedly allying with. The ally can drop their flag at any point and walk away with next to zero consequence while queer people aren't able to drop their identities, the flags are a way to represent a group that has been oppressed for generations under a white cis-het power structure that has destroyed queer culture the world over and even if someone drops the flag, they're left with consequences from this power structure.
This is a great response and thanks for sharing. I asked specifically because I feel similarly.
cringe but also fine. they're way better than the pointless limpdick "in this house we believe bla bla bla" signs i see all around here.
aesthetically, very ugly, return to pure rainbow flag
In practice I would find it weird to see someone use it, but conceptually I like it since it leaves the regular pride flag for our own use. I don't mind the differentiation, the whole point is that we're different and that it is okay to be different.
I still feel strange about it still, but your point is exactly why I asked too.
