I guess I would like to schedule a meting with the project manager and/or customer to discuss the flag specification…
Kolanaki@pawb.social 2 days ago
I think it’s basically just “feature creep.” Too many ideas trying to be crammed into one symbol. And what’s annoying, to me, is that the rainbow by itself was already supposed to represent everyone. That’s why it is a rainbow.
hddsx@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
nomy@lemmy.zip 21 hours ago
Make sure someone takes minutes so we can maximize our synergies and deliverables.
sixty@sh.itjust.works 23 hours ago
KOLANAKI
mienshao@lemm.ee 2 days ago
Why is this upvoted so much? Do you know anything about the Pride flag? Each color represented a particular concept (e.g., sex, sunlight, nature). The colors mean something and weren’t just a catch-all concept to “represent everyone.” Like you’re just saying shit lol. The fact that I see this dumbass discourse EVERY YEAR tells me that maybe it’s not just aesthetics that folks are complaining about, I think some people are bitches and don’t wanna make room. The Progress Pride flag is great and makes clear that it really is for everyone, not just gay men. Get over yourself fr.
Acamon@lemmy.world 1 day ago
The original Pride flag was designed with eight colours, but quickly moved to six and seven stripes because of issues with sourcing dyes and mass production. As others have said, each colour did have a specific meaning like Sex, Life, Harmony, Art, Sunlight. These were aspects of the queer community, but they did not mean specific or narrow identities, and did not only describe ‘gay’ or ‘lesbian’ people.
In the words of Gilbert Baker (who designed the initial flag) “We needed something beautiful – something from us, and the rainbow is so perfect because it really fits our diversity in the sense of our race, our gender, all of those things.” Since then people have added specific colours and extra features to draw attention to identities that they felt were undervalued or overlooked, which is laudable goal, but not because the original did not include everyone.
You’re throwing around a lot of strong negative claims about the discussion here, if you really want to make a case that the meaning of original flag did not include queer people who were black or whatever, please bring some sources. And just to note, personally I actually like the chevrons of the Progress flag, but that doesn’t invalidate people claiming that the original flag included everyone.
tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 2 days ago
Hot pink - Sex
Red - Life
Orange - Healing
Yellow - Sunlight
Green - Nature
Turquoise - Magic/Art
Indigo - Serenity
Violet - SpiritAo I’m seeing on Wikipedia that the original colors represented stuff like sunlight and life. Who was excluded by these categories?
starlinguk@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Nobody. That’s the point of the “idiot”.
scarabic@lemmy.world 1 day ago
It’s the same phenomenon as “LGBTQI+”
It was literally LGB at one point. I understand the concept of inclusion but I think pursuing it by appending and appending and appending is a lousy way to go. I believe the “Q” was finally added in part because it was hoped to be some kind of catch-all, but that didn’t work.
Feathercrown@lemmy.world 1 day ago
We could always use the GRSM acronym (Gender, Romantic, and Sexual Minorities)
ApollosArrow@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
I just learned about GSM two days ago here on Lemmy. Now I am learning about GRSM, and while I like both, learning that there is now an additional letter leads me to believe it may go down the same rabbit hole.
Feathercrown@lemmy.world 20 minutes ago
Really? I’ve never heard just GSM.
nomy@lemmy.zip 21 hours ago
Oh shit I unironically like this.
Feathercrown@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
I’m a fan of it but it doesn’t seem widely known. Maybe we should spread the word.
match@pawb.social 1 day ago
I propose reducing it down to QT
BuboScandiacus@mander.xyz 1 day ago
You have reached enlightenment. The universe has no more secrets to you, young one.
CATCH THEM, BOYS !
Image
Venator@lemmy.nz 1 day ago
Maybe we should shorten it to Q++ 😅 (j/k)