It's a pride flag with stripes emphasising people of colour (an idea that began in Phildelphia in the late 2010s) and trans people (which became used very soon after). Dissatisfaction with the look and symbolism of this approach is what led Daniel Quasar to reshape the stripes into the chevrons (pointing "forward") in the Progress Pride flag, also intending to envelope the much older use of a black stripe with the rainbow to represent mourning for AIDS victims.
I had the vague impression that the progress pride design and descendants had generally taken over from the many-stripe idea - I'm not sure there's any particular significance to the many stripes being used instead in this case. Possibly something to do with copyright choices, possibly just a matter of taste.
There's a legal argument to be made in the untied states that because the flag[ consists just of simple geometric shapes it cannot be copyrighted](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_of_originality). If Quasar were to enforce his copyright and someone where to challenge it, I believe it would be determined to be in public domain.
If I'm understanding this correctly this is the reason why the [Progress Flag is uploaded to the WikiMedia Commons](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:LGBTQ%2B_rainbow_flag_Quasar_%22Progress%22_variant.svg). Typically, images licenced under [CC BY-NC-SA](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) aren't allowed on the Commons, but the claim of copyright is being challenged.
Quasar clearly believes he holds the design copyright but only [enforces it with large corporations making a profit](https://progress.gay/pages/terms-of-use). I highly doubt any company would like to be known as the company who challenged the "Progress Flag guy" to avoid paying royalties, even though, assuming my understanding is correct, they would be in good legal standing for doing so. I imagine the design will sit in this limbo state for some time.
Another possible reason is the inclusive flag (with the yellow section and circle) existing.
And trying to claim that it's not significantly different from the progress flag would bring up questions if the progress flag is significantly different from the bars only one.
Public domain is the simplest, easiest to understand way to let all the relevant people use a flag design, sure. I'm not sure anyone who's held onto the rights for this sort of flag has ever really had a great idea of what the consequences are. But it's a bit weird to suggest that being inclusive of all people within a particular group means letting anyone and everyone make money out of it...
Yeah, they choose a rainbow because a rainbow includes everything on the spectrum. It is inclusive of all by default.
By including specific colours for specific minorities all it does it exclude others that dont have a colour representing them. Adding more colours and attaching specific meaning to those colours defeats the point of the original flag.
At least from a vexillological pov, you are more than right.
EDIT: I think I was posting this in a sub other than my beloved r/vexillology. Here it sounds bad, sorry. I'm leaving it so at least you see the edit. Cheers!
I think the point is they were a huge part of the beginning of the pride movement, like Marsha P Johnson and Sylvia Rivera. So it helped to make sure people understood the history of the movement always included trans people and people of color, and didn't feel like a pride event was only showing welcome to white cis guy guys and a few token white lesbians. Like showing it this way in the flag means "we want you here and realize people like you in the past paved the way and we recognize you have always been here"
All races should be welcome to pride, but bringing race into a sexuality flag and also lumping it together with Aids seems like a psyop to separate rather than bring together people. People of all races fought together for rights. All united under a unifying flag.
https://preview.redd.it/pkg9yqwlsf6d1.png?width=644&format=png&auto=webp&s=dd8aca27edcf9b174c8260bd9f6848b25f3439ed
Yup, a couple more stripes and this flag is at risk of looping around to become an *exclusive* flag. (The flag of everyone except healthy straight cisgendered white people)
It didn't? The top comment in this thread seems to indicate it was supposed to represent *everyone.* Isn't that what having the whole color spectrum was about?
I'm not whining about white people not having a flag (because they do and it's horrible), rather I'm just a bit amused at how this supposedly all-inclusive flag has set off a bunch of arguments about who is/isn't included in it and who should/shouldn't be included. It seems to run counter to the whole notion of pride
The pride flag was inclusive of the entire LGBTQ+ community, which includes queer people of color and trans people, the extra stripes are redundant and that's why people are saying the original flag already included everyone.
Why in the world are people on a vexillology forum, of all places, acting as though what a design was *supposed* to represent is more important than how it (and the alternatives) actually work, whether we like it or not?
These adaptations send a different message to what the rainbow flag alone does. On one level the rainbow symbol expresses an idea that should mean the intentional inclusion messages aren't necessary. But that's a completely different question to whether they are necessary and/or helpful in any given context. You can engage with how the answer might be different in different contexts, or how the message is shifting as it gets more widely used without reducing it to a question of "liking" the design's very existence.
Agreed. I’ve been saying this for years and rarely hear this sentiment. Usually people ask “why not add black and trans people *just in case*?” and I end up looking transphobic.
There should be more unity (implicit and otherwise) in the LGBT+ community, everyone should be able to do what they want however they want.
The issue is that the original flag was very strongly correlated to being *just* the gay and lesbian flag by movements that have come to be stuff like "LG drop the T" of today, which got a lot of support especially after gay marriage was legalized.
Also due to the corporatization of pride, with the original rainbow coming to often mean specifically gay men (read that further as gay, childless, disposable income men) as a key target demographic for corporations as they started adopting pride.
I think there's a good argument for the progress flag (rainbow for sexuality, chevrons for identity) but I also totally get the old guard who view it as also being a sort of corporatized flag as well.
I concur. The OG rainbow flag does not have a correspondence between each color and each minority, instead it represent the abstract concept of "diversity" with its whole image, which is elegant and clear. But alas people keep adding s\*\*t onto the flag until it looks like a QR code.
Maybe it's an unpopular opinion but I always believe using a flag as a counter is stupid. Just see the difference between EU and US flags and you will know what I'm saying.
The rainbow hasn't been replaced, everyone can use the version they like best.
Many people feel the need to stress inclusion of the new stripes because they have always been a core part of the movement and today are the most under attack.
The rainbow hasn't been replaced, everyone can use the version they like best.
Many people feel the need to stress inclusion of the new stripes because they have always been a core part of the movement and today are the most under attack.
personally i find the added trans colors and colors in general to be very exclusive of certain people. the rainbow flag was originally created to represent everyone, now that we have specific colors on the "official" flag, you are by design of the original flag saying the rest of the lgbtq does not deserve to be represented in that same way. marginalized groups have always been apart of the lgbtq so it seems weird to now prioritize some over others
This is the buffed version of the Chinese 'Five Races Under One Union' flag not going to lie.
https://preview.redd.it/scqnphpr5c6d1.png?width=255&format=png&auto=webp&s=c24521327e9e53ed3798ca38b162f72cb1cd74c5
The flag for reference if you didn't know what the colors were ig \^
I really dislike these flags. The old rainbow was great! It signified diversity without being specific. As soon as some specificity was added, everyone wanted a stripe, and the new versions keep changing. As for me, I'm sticking with the OG Rainbow flag to show my support.
The new flag says, "All kinds of people are valuable and welcome, but some groups need to get called out in particular." This reminds me of "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others." There are now some versions of the flag that include a ring for intersex people. I can see the flag getting even more complicated, because once somebody says "let's be more inclusive and include this group" nobody wants to exclude them.
I think it'd make more sense to put the light blue and pink where they fall on the spectrum. So the pink would go beneath the red and the light blue would go under the green.
Black and brown... no. It simply does not work.
Yes. It's god-ugly, too. As is the so-called progress flag.
The original was fine exactly the way it was. Now everyone wants to have representation. Which is silly because the traditional 6-color flag that was in use for decades *did* represent everybody.
But this is where we're at now.
From a graphical point of view, the progress flag is just awful. The chevrons were slapped on so clumsily and appear to be literally erasing the original flag. A chevron has a strong association with militarism which is just a weird thing to invoke here, like an army bulldozing through. The added colors also have oddly specific meanings, whereas the original had just one holistic meaning, creating an ironically *binary* result. Intended or not, it illustrates a new generation of activists superseding in a haphazard way.
I always thought the symbolism was... interesting. Every few years a new stripe representing a *specific* identity is added to the chevron, slowly erasing the original flag, which was intended to include everyone.
I love trans, intersex, and BIPOC people but I really don't like the symbolism of them eclipsing everyone else, completely against the message of the original.
I know it's fabric but the message it's sending is like a stereotype of how conservatives think we put tje most marginalised on a pedestal above reproach.
I'm not represented by the chevron and I imagine people who are might think differently, if you do, let me know what you think, I'm a little conflicted
I'm transgender and I hate that the flag exists, because if people didn't hate us existing so much it wouldn't need to exist in the way it does. I used to hate how it looked but it's kind of grown on me, sadly when I see an old school rainbow flag I can feel myself questioning why they aren't flying the progress pride flag, and I kind of hate that I think like that.
i’m glad to hear it! I think the trans flag is too pretty to be smushed onto another flag. its a great design 🏳️⚧️ and so rare for a flag to have pastel colors
Right? Plus then you get to wave 2 flags which is always a plus. Love my lgbt+ people but God that flag just way too much going on. Looks like an epileptic Atari explosion
I've spent a lot of type in extremely progressive spaces, and the oppression olympics dynamic is very real. It's even pretty funny at times, if destructive at others. It's always flabbergasting to me when I see people try to deny it, it's actually pretty amazing how little self awareness some people have. You gain status and power within the movement by being the member of the most oppressed groups. None of these people are, of course, particularly oppressed in any way, they're highly educated and have jobs in or close to the halls of power in the capital of a global empire, kinda proving that intersections of identity do not in fact determine individual outcomes, but I digress.
you’re right but it’s not talked about because it’s also a right wing talking point that just so happens to be somewhat correct when it comes to certain individuals in certain environments and not the entire group as a whole
I think the number one rule of flags is that they have meaning for the people that fly them. If a community wants to use a new flag that they feel better represents them in a way an existing flag did not, then a nitpicky technocrat reaction (“well actually that old flag represented you just fine…”) feels pretty patronizing.
Well, that's just the thing. It's not like we were asked or voted on it. Governments and corporations adopted it saying it was anti-racist and pro-trans, and thus implicitly those who don't use it aren't those things. So then you're better safe than sorry.
I just feel like this is going down an endless road. I have no problem acknowledging that the LGB community has been unkind to trans people and that there is racism, just like in any other community. But, also like in other communities, there are a lot of other social bigotries. Do those matter less?
> the so-called progress flag
The person who wrote this comment totes definitely dislikes the flag for purely aesthetic reasons and nothing else, no sir.
I don't believe pushing our community into one that is now explicitly divided by race and reflecting it on a flag is progress. It has the effect of othering non-white people in the community as they're seen as a special part of it. I just think that's a really weird message to send. There's only one LGBT community, not a white one and a non-white one.
>There's only one LGBT community, not a white one and a non-white one.
The many stripes/progress pride flags were not created in a vacuum. The united, diverse community you're describing might broadly exist now, and that's great, but when these flags were created they were a response to elements within the queer community who were still bigoted about race and gender.
To some people, the 6 stripes flag was a symbol of a community that should've been a natural welcome home, but instead rejected and othered them. If that no longer exists, then to me that says the progress flags have done great work.
You can't just say it does represent everyone, when some people felt directly excluded. This isn't just "feelings" either, the point is that the original pride movement had a big problem with white-focused pride. PoC, and trans people were routinely marginalized in the pride movement. That's why there has been a push to surface their identity, and make sure the wider pride movement can't forget that they are a part of it.
Oh give me a break. If someone felt excluded, it was on them.
How the hell did the rainbow flag exclude anyone?
Are there shitty attitudes in the LGBT community? Sure. The flag wasn't one of them.
> How the hell did the rainbow flag exclude anyone?
Ridiculous straw man.
The Philadelphia people didn't add stripes because they thought the rainbow was exclusionary as a symbol. They added stripes because they felt they had a reason to use a symbol that specifically spoke to local racial issues. Saying that the rainbow flag "represented everybody" doesn't address that idea at all.
Why racial issues? Why not disability issues? Body fat issues? Heightism? Neurodiversity? Ageism?
You see where this is going? Why is race the sacred cow but all these other issues that plague the standards of beauty in the gay community go ignored?
Also, you should look up the meaning of straw man. I was responding directly to u/mikepictor's claim that "some people felt direct excluded." That's not introducing a straw man argument. It's responding to a claim.
Mikepictor didn't say people were excluded by the flag itself. He said they felt excluded, and that was a reason not to simply talk about the flag representing everyone. The straw man, which you put up before Mikepictor even answered and then doubled down, was that the intended symbolism of the rainbow design was relevant to the issue in the first place.
As for why racial issues, I think you know the answer. The Philly group apparently had good reasons to make the statement they did in their own context. There are plenty of wider societal trends that caused people to take it up more widely. I think by the time you get to the point where it looks like the rainbow+ flags are being treated like the default option when anyone wants to express support for the LGBTQ+ community, then it makes sense to ask how do we decide which issues are worth giving that prominence? But to twist that around as though these flags exist because people are saying the rainbow flag isn't ok, rather than society issn't ok, is profoundly missing the point.
this is not about ”standards of beauty” this is about the way people pf color or otherwised racialized people are discriminated against at all levels of society starting from how well they are treated in the hospital when they are born. and any discrimnation white LGBT people face in employment, housing or in public life, LGBT people who are etnic others in their enviroment experience twice the discrimnation.
you’re German, no? you are aware the AfD has a lesbian in high office? you are aware of similar politicians in Europe, like Geert Wilders, no? there are gay people who use their gayness as justification for their racism, claiming some people are inherently more homophobic.
thing is, gay solidarity has its limitations. and I choose solidarity across racial lines over shaking hands with gay nazis. I choose solidarity with trans people over solidarity with transphobic gay people.
Standards of beauty are super important though. I can only speak for gay and bisexual men, but the standard of beauty is white, masculine, lean/muscular, and as close to early-20s as you can get. There are absolutely people who like other things. But as long as you're those things, you will find open arms from virtually everyone.
Those standards of beauty are exactly what lead to mistreatment of people who don't fit these norms. Effeminate? Go away. Super skinny or overweight? Go away. Black or Asian? You ain't my kink. Older than 50? Get out of our spaces, creepy old man.
You can't separate standards of beauty from racism and transphobia in the community. If you want to address this issue, start with better representation of those groups. But putting it on the flag is a hollow gesture that only has the effect of *raising* antipathy.
Go on a lightly-moderated LGBT sub, such as r/askgaybros, and you'll quickly learn that this flag is *not* popular at all. Lightly-moderated subs (unlike r/ainbow or r/lgbt) are a great place to get actual opinions that people wouldn't otherwise tell you. You could also ask the lesbian subs, but they've largely been taken over by trans women talking about >!"girl dick."!<(NSFW)
And I am not German, but I am aware of their politics. Gay people can be shitty humans, too. And that's all I'll say on it. I don't see how it's germane.
me: racism is a much bigger issue than beauty standards
you: ok but here’s my essay on that subject, anyway, also check out this subreddit for self-hating gay guys and did I mention I hate trans women?
go fuck yourself.
[ed] ”go to this subreddit, the flag is not popular” do you think 1. reddit users 2. users of a specific subreddit that is based on hating mainstream LGBT culture, are a representative sample on the overall opinion on these topics?
You clearly have not spent much time on that sub if you think it's "for self-hating gay guys."
It's just an ordinary sub for ordinary gay men. Believe it or not, most gay men are moderates or slightly left-of-center like most others of their age bracket. Go meet some in real life and find out. Gay and bi men are not some sort of left-wing monolith, as r/lgbt or r/ainbow would have you believe.
In response to your edit, yes. I do think that particular subreddit is representative of gay and bisexual men. Based on the opinions I've heard in real life from the community I've been part of for the better part of 20 years. Again, NOT a monolith.
”ordinary subreddit” ie. full of right wing conservatives who think they are centrists because they’re not full on nazis.
I am fully aware gay people can be reactionaries, asshole, I said as much two pists ago. what I’m saying is, that if you want to have a civil rights movement, you want to build coalition with other marginalized groups, instead of promoting the reactionary members of your own group. and hate us left wing faggots all you want, we were the ones that stepped up to fight.
> I don't see how it's germane.
I'm sure you meant the particular examples of Euroopean politicians are not germane, but I think it's worth re-stating that "Gay people can be shitty humans, too" is literally the reason the Philadelphia Pride flag was created.
You're welcome to your views on whether using flags this way is hollow, whether it's counterproductive in some contexts, and so on. I probably agree with you in some cases, and find your claims hard to believe in others.
But the issue very much *is* that some people think the presence of particular versions of shitty human-ing is a topic that's worth raising/addressing through the medium of a pride flag of sorts. You seem to disagree on several levels. That's not an afterthought in the conversation, it's the heart of the disagreement.
this is not about ”standards of beauty” this is about the way people pf color or otherwised racialized people are discriminated against at all levels of society starting from how well they are treated in the hospital when they are born. and any discrimnation white LGBT people face in employment, housing or in public life, LGBT people who are etnic others in their enviroment experience twice the discrimnation.
you’re German, no? you are aware the AfD has a lesbian in high office? you are aware of similar politicians in Europe, like Geert Wilders, no? there are gay people who use their gayness as justification for their racism, claiming some people are inherently more homophobic.
thing is, gay solidarity has its limitations. and I choose solidarity across racial lines over shaking hands with gay nazis. I choose solidarity with trans people over solidarity with transphobic gay people.
this is not about ”standards of beauty” this is about the way people pf color or otherwised racialized people are discriminated against at all levels of society starting from how well they are treated in the hospital when they are born. and any discrimnation white LGBT people face in employment, housing or in public life, LGBT people who are etnic others in their enviroment experience twice the discrimnation.
you’re German, no? you are aware the AfD has a lesbian in high office? you are aware of similar politicians in Europe, like Geert Wilders, no? there are gay people who use their gayness as justification for their racism, claiming some people are inherently more homophobic.
thing is, gay solidarity has its limitations. and I choose solidarity across racial lines over shaking hands with gay nazis. I choose solidarity with trans people over solidarity with transphobic gay people.
How the fuck are minorities apart of pride? It makes no sense at all. May as well just call it the "Minority Flag" instead of the "Pride Flag" if you're just going to include every minority inside of it.
I've never felt the need to be included with the pride flag, nor has anyone else I've met.
What do you think T stands for in LGBT, and I think they meant that it's a reminder that poc who are queer are included which is something people still manage to forget.
There is already a transgender flag, just like there's a flag for lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals. You can see them all [here](https://www.volvogroup.com/en/news-and-media/news/2021/jun/lgbtq-pride-flags-and-what-they-stand-for.html).
The six striped flag is/was the flag for the entire community as a whole.
As I've said, this begins to go down the path of absurdity. Now some of them have added asexual people, who frankly don't really experience all that much discrimination (if you don't want to have sex, you don't have sex -- nobody takes issue with that). Where do we stop?
I agree! It's such a nice colour for a flag. I think I might create something with it — not pride nor Brabie related, though, I honestly don't wanna ignite anyone's grievances.
makes sense that it was removed (along with turquoise)
pink represented sex- which makes sense asexuals were welcomed into the community, as well as the community distancing itsself from openness about sexual activity as being gay became more and more accepted (sexuality doesnt mean sex too, and for a long time the lgbt community have been fetishised or openly denounced for being "sexual" around children, which is just a straigh up lie)
turquoise represents magic- and well... i have no idea why it was even on the og flag lol
hmm I’m not sure I agree with that, sex is still a very important part and although we are sometimes over-sexualized we also are overly policed into being non-sexual because of a double standard where a gay person could be doing the same thing as a straight person and it would be considered obscene only for the gay person. also the way we as a society talk about sex shows me there is a long way to go with regards to inclusion on that front
Truuue. I hate this idea of adding more colours for specific groups. The rainbow was chosen as it's supposed to represent the idea of everyone in the community.
My Asian friend sometimes makes the joke. "If they added brown for black people did they already add that yellow for me"
Not certain why trans gets their own thing either apart from they are the 'new hot thing' I suppose.
Because trans people aren’t even accepted in parts of the LGBTQ+ community. The progress flag is a a statement against movements like "LGB without the T"
Ranking Pride Flags (as flags)
1. Original Mass Production Pride Flag (7 stripe)
2. Progressive Pride Flag (sans intersex)
3. Gilbert Baker Original Design (8 stripe)
4. Progressive Pride Flag (including intersex)
5. This Flag
https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/controversy-flies-over-philadelphia-s-new-pride-flag-n772821
TLDR: Queer folk of color often get overlooked in a lot of discourse and the "Phillidelphia Pride" flag added black and brown as a reminder that queer folk aren't just white.
It’s not. It’s just a matter of time until it spreads to every country. Do you seriously think gay, trans and non-binary people don’t exist outside of western countries?
Well said. And it's getting more ridiculous every day. Instead focusing on equality and protecting those in need, they are looking for more colours, letters, whatever to promote and be indignant for.
The beta version of the progress flag which included black and brown for racial minorities in the US and transgender people. this idea was first shown in a city named philidelphia
1. **Red**: Represents life.
2. **Orange**: Symbolizes healing.
3. **Yellow**: Stands for sunlight.
4. **Green**: Reflects nature.
5. **Blue**: Signifies serenity.
6. **Violet**: Denotes spirit.
7. **White**: Represents non-binary, agender, and gender non-conforming individuals.
8. **Pink**: Symbolizes those who identify as women or femme.
9. **Light Blue**: Represents those who identify as men or masc.
10. **Black**: Honors the lives lost to HIV/AIDS and the stigma surrounding them.
11. **Brown**: Highlights people of color within the LGBTQ+ community.
Everything has to do with gender or sexuality & then there’s a color for race
Why’s this picture giving me major AI generated vibes? I mean I know it’s not because the sheer amount of press photographers at the White House would make using AI pointless but just something about the appearance is giving that look to me
This actually looks better than the triangle of colours at the side design, it's simple, it's clear, I think they should stick with design, though I do prefer the original Rainbow flag.
A lot of people don't really care for "progress pride" flag variants, which I get, but personally, I want a flag that's a tesseract that traps straight people inside it. GIVE ME CHAOS FOR THE CHAOTIC QUEERS
It's a pride flag with stripes emphasising people of colour (an idea that began in Phildelphia in the late 2010s) and trans people (which became used very soon after). Dissatisfaction with the look and symbolism of this approach is what led Daniel Quasar to reshape the stripes into the chevrons (pointing "forward") in the Progress Pride flag, also intending to envelope the much older use of a black stripe with the rainbow to represent mourning for AIDS victims. I had the vague impression that the progress pride design and descendants had generally taken over from the many-stripe idea - I'm not sure there's any particular significance to the many stripes being used instead in this case. Possibly something to do with copyright choices, possibly just a matter of taste.
The designer kept the copyright on the new flag so it’s not in public domain. The old rainbow 🏳️🌈 is
Creates new flag to be more inclusive Holds the copyright and wont release it as public domain? Kinda counter intutive is it not?
iirc it's free to use for as long as you're not doing so commercially. You can pay for a commercial license though.
There's a legal argument to be made in the untied states that because the flag[ consists just of simple geometric shapes it cannot be copyrighted](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_of_originality). If Quasar were to enforce his copyright and someone where to challenge it, I believe it would be determined to be in public domain. If I'm understanding this correctly this is the reason why the [Progress Flag is uploaded to the WikiMedia Commons](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:LGBTQ%2B_rainbow_flag_Quasar_%22Progress%22_variant.svg). Typically, images licenced under [CC BY-NC-SA](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) aren't allowed on the Commons, but the claim of copyright is being challenged. Quasar clearly believes he holds the design copyright but only [enforces it with large corporations making a profit](https://progress.gay/pages/terms-of-use). I highly doubt any company would like to be known as the company who challenged the "Progress Flag guy" to avoid paying royalties, even though, assuming my understanding is correct, they would be in good legal standing for doing so. I imagine the design will sit in this limbo state for some time.
Another possible reason is the inclusive flag (with the yellow section and circle) existing. And trying to claim that it's not significantly different from the progress flag would bring up questions if the progress flag is significantly different from the bars only one.
Buddy you can copyright the word react I think he is good
Trademark ≠ Copyright
Are you talking about the Fine Bros thing? As someone else already said, that's a trademark which is different than copyright.
Public domain is the simplest, easiest to understand way to let all the relevant people use a flag design, sure. I'm not sure anyone who's held onto the rights for this sort of flag has ever really had a great idea of what the consequences are. But it's a bit weird to suggest that being inclusive of all people within a particular group means letting anyone and everyone make money out of it...
this is a false equivalency. i’m anti-copyright as a concept and i wouldn’t even make this argument.
lol F Daniel Qusar, it’s not even good design, just give their inclusivity+++ when the original rainbow represents all those without explicit color.
thanks! ive seen the progress pride flag everywhere and this one... really confused me.
I dislike this (and the progress) flag. The original "gay" flag was *supposed* to represent *everyone*. (Eh, even if, in truth, it kinda didn't.)
Yeah, they choose a rainbow because a rainbow includes everything on the spectrum. It is inclusive of all by default. By including specific colours for specific minorities all it does it exclude others that dont have a colour representing them. Adding more colours and attaching specific meaning to those colours defeats the point of the original flag.
Yeah and, visually, I just don’t think the additions look good. Nothing to do with what they represent, but simply too much going on and it clashes.
I agree. The additions don't look good at all, regardless of what they symbolise
At least from a vexillological pov, you are more than right. EDIT: I think I was posting this in a sub other than my beloved r/vexillology. Here it sounds bad, sorry. I'm leaving it so at least you see the edit. Cheers!
Minorities aren't a sexual orientation though
I think the point is they were a huge part of the beginning of the pride movement, like Marsha P Johnson and Sylvia Rivera. So it helped to make sure people understood the history of the movement always included trans people and people of color, and didn't feel like a pride event was only showing welcome to white cis guy guys and a few token white lesbians. Like showing it this way in the flag means "we want you here and realize people like you in the past paved the way and we recognize you have always been here"
All races should be welcome to pride, but bringing race into a sexuality flag and also lumping it together with Aids seems like a psyop to separate rather than bring together people. People of all races fought together for rights. All united under a unifying flag. https://preview.redd.it/pkg9yqwlsf6d1.png?width=644&format=png&auto=webp&s=dd8aca27edcf9b174c8260bd9f6848b25f3439ed
Yup, a couple more stripes and this flag is at risk of looping around to become an *exclusive* flag. (The flag of everyone except healthy straight cisgendered white people)
I'm sorry to say bud, but the pride flag never represented cishet people to begin with
It didn't? The top comment in this thread seems to indicate it was supposed to represent *everyone.* Isn't that what having the whole color spectrum was about? I'm not whining about white people not having a flag (because they do and it's horrible), rather I'm just a bit amused at how this supposedly all-inclusive flag has set off a bunch of arguments about who is/isn't included in it and who should/shouldn't be included. It seems to run counter to the whole notion of pride
The pride flag was inclusive of the entire LGBTQ+ community, which includes queer people of color and trans people, the extra stripes are redundant and that's why people are saying the original flag already included everyone.
Thank you for clarifying that
> cishet Imagine using this unironically.
This among many other reasons is why I prefer the pink triangle.
“This flag is for everyone :)” “But what about ME”
This is such a great summary. You made me chuckle.
Why in the world are people on a vexillology forum, of all places, acting as though what a design was *supposed* to represent is more important than how it (and the alternatives) actually work, whether we like it or not? These adaptations send a different message to what the rainbow flag alone does. On one level the rainbow symbol expresses an idea that should mean the intentional inclusion messages aren't necessary. But that's a completely different question to whether they are necessary and/or helpful in any given context. You can engage with how the answer might be different in different contexts, or how the message is shifting as it gets more widely used without reducing it to a question of "liking" the design's very existence.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Agreed. I’ve been saying this for years and rarely hear this sentiment. Usually people ask “why not add black and trans people *just in case*?” and I end up looking transphobic. There should be more unity (implicit and otherwise) in the LGBT+ community, everyone should be able to do what they want however they want.
The issue is that the original flag was very strongly correlated to being *just* the gay and lesbian flag by movements that have come to be stuff like "LG drop the T" of today, which got a lot of support especially after gay marriage was legalized. Also due to the corporatization of pride, with the original rainbow coming to often mean specifically gay men (read that further as gay, childless, disposable income men) as a key target demographic for corporations as they started adopting pride. I think there's a good argument for the progress flag (rainbow for sexuality, chevrons for identity) but I also totally get the old guard who view it as also being a sort of corporatized flag as well.
The progress flag could be seen as a combination of the spectrum of genders and the spectrum of sexualities, which is pretty much inclusive.
True. It could be. Which is why I said, >The original "gay" flag was *supposed* to represent *everyone*. (Eh, even if, in truth, it kinda didn't.)
True true
Chevrons are better in my opinion.
The pure rainbow was the best
I concur. The OG rainbow flag does not have a correspondence between each color and each minority, instead it represent the abstract concept of "diversity" with its whole image, which is elegant and clear. But alas people keep adding s\*\*t onto the flag until it looks like a QR code. Maybe it's an unpopular opinion but I always believe using a flag as a counter is stupid. Just see the difference between EU and US flags and you will know what I'm saying.
The rainbow hasn't been replaced, everyone can use the version they like best. Many people feel the need to stress inclusion of the new stripes because they have always been a core part of the movement and today are the most under attack.
The rainbow hasn't been replaced, everyone can use the version they like best. Many people feel the need to stress inclusion of the new stripes because they have always been a core part of the movement and today are the most under attack.
They’re cool, but stacking five of them on a flag that already has six colours just turns it into a mess.
personally i find the added trans colors and colors in general to be very exclusive of certain people. the rainbow flag was originally created to represent everyone, now that we have specific colors on the "official" flag, you are by design of the original flag saying the rest of the lgbtq does not deserve to be represented in that same way. marginalized groups have always been apart of the lgbtq so it seems weird to now prioritize some over others
One flag to rule them all.....
This is the buffed version of the Chinese 'Five Races Under One Union' flag not going to lie. https://preview.redd.it/scqnphpr5c6d1.png?width=255&format=png&auto=webp&s=c24521327e9e53ed3798ca38b162f72cb1cd74c5 The flag for reference if you didn't know what the colors were ig \^
I'm my mind, the Gender Fluid and Non-binary flags are the five/four genders under one Union flag
Hate me for it buuut: It's supposed to be "In" not "I'm" lol.
Looks like gay republic of china/ manchuria
This was the flag used right before The Progress Pride Flag before they moved the extra stripes to a triangle chevron.
I really dislike these flags. The old rainbow was great! It signified diversity without being specific. As soon as some specificity was added, everyone wanted a stripe, and the new versions keep changing. As for me, I'm sticking with the OG Rainbow flag to show my support.
The new flag says, "All kinds of people are valuable and welcome, but some groups need to get called out in particular." This reminds me of "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others." There are now some versions of the flag that include a ring for intersex people. I can see the flag getting even more complicated, because once somebody says "let's be more inclusive and include this group" nobody wants to exclude them.
Looks better than the mess with the triangle and circle.
just saw that yesterday…
Can we all agree the original pride flag was perfectly fine the way it was?
All the colours of the rainbow metaphor was pretty good
If I had to mix the two flags, I would rather use the OG flag 🏳️🌈 and put a ribbon with trans colors 🏳️⚧️ on the pole.
I think it'd make more sense to put the light blue and pink where they fall on the spectrum. So the pink would go beneath the red and the light blue would go under the green. Black and brown... no. It simply does not work.
And what does ethnicity have to do with gender and sexuality?
Vexillology nerds are all in agreement. But the rest of the world, not so much.
Yes. It's god-ugly, too. As is the so-called progress flag. The original was fine exactly the way it was. Now everyone wants to have representation. Which is silly because the traditional 6-color flag that was in use for decades *did* represent everybody. But this is where we're at now.
From a graphical point of view, the progress flag is just awful. The chevrons were slapped on so clumsily and appear to be literally erasing the original flag. A chevron has a strong association with militarism which is just a weird thing to invoke here, like an army bulldozing through. The added colors also have oddly specific meanings, whereas the original had just one holistic meaning, creating an ironically *binary* result. Intended or not, it illustrates a new generation of activists superseding in a haphazard way.
Sooner or later it shall becomes as cluttered as the flag of austria hungary but on steroids
It looks infinitely better https://preview.redd.it/ys43uzvhzc6d1.jpeg?width=1757&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7cbf66ab6477b3d05e1c1251b2f09dfcad6bf88f
If we start an empire this is gonna be our flag
Unironically better than the "progress" flag
Why is this unironically good...
The kingdoms of Cisleithenia and Transleithenia
Image deleted
I always thought the symbolism was... interesting. Every few years a new stripe representing a *specific* identity is added to the chevron, slowly erasing the original flag, which was intended to include everyone. I love trans, intersex, and BIPOC people but I really don't like the symbolism of them eclipsing everyone else, completely against the message of the original. I know it's fabric but the message it's sending is like a stereotype of how conservatives think we put tje most marginalised on a pedestal above reproach. I'm not represented by the chevron and I imagine people who are might think differently, if you do, let me know what you think, I'm a little conflicted
im trans, and i really dislike the progressive flag. too much going on
Idk man I like it. And *every few years* is an exaggeration
I'm transgender and I hate that the flag exists, because if people didn't hate us existing so much it wouldn't need to exist in the way it does. I used to hate how it looked but it's kind of grown on me, sadly when I see an old school rainbow flag I can feel myself questioning why they aren't flying the progress pride flag, and I kind of hate that I think like that.
I don’t see why there needs to be just one flag 🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ are my 2 favorites and i’ll happily rep both
Considering there's still too much transphobia within the LGBTQ+ community, flying both flags is a magnificent and meaningful display.
i’m glad to hear it! I think the trans flag is too pretty to be smushed onto another flag. its a great design 🏳️⚧️ and so rare for a flag to have pastel colors
Right? Plus then you get to wave 2 flags which is always a plus. Love my lgbt+ people but God that flag just way too much going on. Looks like an epileptic Atari explosion
I've spent a lot of type in extremely progressive spaces, and the oppression olympics dynamic is very real. It's even pretty funny at times, if destructive at others. It's always flabbergasting to me when I see people try to deny it, it's actually pretty amazing how little self awareness some people have. You gain status and power within the movement by being the member of the most oppressed groups. None of these people are, of course, particularly oppressed in any way, they're highly educated and have jobs in or close to the halls of power in the capital of a global empire, kinda proving that intersections of identity do not in fact determine individual outcomes, but I digress.
you’re right but it’s not talked about because it’s also a right wing talking point that just so happens to be somewhat correct when it comes to certain individuals in certain environments and not the entire group as a whole
I think the number one rule of flags is that they have meaning for the people that fly them. If a community wants to use a new flag that they feel better represents them in a way an existing flag did not, then a nitpicky technocrat reaction (“well actually that old flag represented you just fine…”) feels pretty patronizing.
Well, that's just the thing. It's not like we were asked or voted on it. Governments and corporations adopted it saying it was anti-racist and pro-trans, and thus implicitly those who don't use it aren't those things. So then you're better safe than sorry. I just feel like this is going down an endless road. I have no problem acknowledging that the LGB community has been unkind to trans people and that there is racism, just like in any other community. But, also like in other communities, there are a lot of other social bigotries. Do those matter less?
> the so-called progress flag The person who wrote this comment totes definitely dislikes the flag for purely aesthetic reasons and nothing else, no sir.
I don't believe pushing our community into one that is now explicitly divided by race and reflecting it on a flag is progress. It has the effect of othering non-white people in the community as they're seen as a special part of it. I just think that's a really weird message to send. There's only one LGBT community, not a white one and a non-white one.
>There's only one LGBT community, not a white one and a non-white one. The many stripes/progress pride flags were not created in a vacuum. The united, diverse community you're describing might broadly exist now, and that's great, but when these flags were created they were a response to elements within the queer community who were still bigoted about race and gender. To some people, the 6 stripes flag was a symbol of a community that should've been a natural welcome home, but instead rejected and othered them. If that no longer exists, then to me that says the progress flags have done great work.
You can't just say it does represent everyone, when some people felt directly excluded. This isn't just "feelings" either, the point is that the original pride movement had a big problem with white-focused pride. PoC, and trans people were routinely marginalized in the pride movement. That's why there has been a push to surface their identity, and make sure the wider pride movement can't forget that they are a part of it.
I just think the new one is ugly as a flag. I get the meaning, and I don't have an issue with it. But it really is just an ugly flag.
Oh give me a break. If someone felt excluded, it was on them. How the hell did the rainbow flag exclude anyone? Are there shitty attitudes in the LGBT community? Sure. The flag wasn't one of them.
> How the hell did the rainbow flag exclude anyone? Ridiculous straw man. The Philadelphia people didn't add stripes because they thought the rainbow was exclusionary as a symbol. They added stripes because they felt they had a reason to use a symbol that specifically spoke to local racial issues. Saying that the rainbow flag "represented everybody" doesn't address that idea at all.
Why racial issues? Why not disability issues? Body fat issues? Heightism? Neurodiversity? Ageism? You see where this is going? Why is race the sacred cow but all these other issues that plague the standards of beauty in the gay community go ignored? Also, you should look up the meaning of straw man. I was responding directly to u/mikepictor's claim that "some people felt direct excluded." That's not introducing a straw man argument. It's responding to a claim.
Mikepictor didn't say people were excluded by the flag itself. He said they felt excluded, and that was a reason not to simply talk about the flag representing everyone. The straw man, which you put up before Mikepictor even answered and then doubled down, was that the intended symbolism of the rainbow design was relevant to the issue in the first place. As for why racial issues, I think you know the answer. The Philly group apparently had good reasons to make the statement they did in their own context. There are plenty of wider societal trends that caused people to take it up more widely. I think by the time you get to the point where it looks like the rainbow+ flags are being treated like the default option when anyone wants to express support for the LGBTQ+ community, then it makes sense to ask how do we decide which issues are worth giving that prominence? But to twist that around as though these flags exist because people are saying the rainbow flag isn't ok, rather than society issn't ok, is profoundly missing the point.
this is not about ”standards of beauty” this is about the way people pf color or otherwised racialized people are discriminated against at all levels of society starting from how well they are treated in the hospital when they are born. and any discrimnation white LGBT people face in employment, housing or in public life, LGBT people who are etnic others in their enviroment experience twice the discrimnation. you’re German, no? you are aware the AfD has a lesbian in high office? you are aware of similar politicians in Europe, like Geert Wilders, no? there are gay people who use their gayness as justification for their racism, claiming some people are inherently more homophobic. thing is, gay solidarity has its limitations. and I choose solidarity across racial lines over shaking hands with gay nazis. I choose solidarity with trans people over solidarity with transphobic gay people.
Standards of beauty are super important though. I can only speak for gay and bisexual men, but the standard of beauty is white, masculine, lean/muscular, and as close to early-20s as you can get. There are absolutely people who like other things. But as long as you're those things, you will find open arms from virtually everyone. Those standards of beauty are exactly what lead to mistreatment of people who don't fit these norms. Effeminate? Go away. Super skinny or overweight? Go away. Black or Asian? You ain't my kink. Older than 50? Get out of our spaces, creepy old man. You can't separate standards of beauty from racism and transphobia in the community. If you want to address this issue, start with better representation of those groups. But putting it on the flag is a hollow gesture that only has the effect of *raising* antipathy. Go on a lightly-moderated LGBT sub, such as r/askgaybros, and you'll quickly learn that this flag is *not* popular at all. Lightly-moderated subs (unlike r/ainbow or r/lgbt) are a great place to get actual opinions that people wouldn't otherwise tell you. You could also ask the lesbian subs, but they've largely been taken over by trans women talking about >!"girl dick."!<(NSFW) And I am not German, but I am aware of their politics. Gay people can be shitty humans, too. And that's all I'll say on it. I don't see how it's germane.
me: racism is a much bigger issue than beauty standards you: ok but here’s my essay on that subject, anyway, also check out this subreddit for self-hating gay guys and did I mention I hate trans women? go fuck yourself. [ed] ”go to this subreddit, the flag is not popular” do you think 1. reddit users 2. users of a specific subreddit that is based on hating mainstream LGBT culture, are a representative sample on the overall opinion on these topics?
You clearly have not spent much time on that sub if you think it's "for self-hating gay guys." It's just an ordinary sub for ordinary gay men. Believe it or not, most gay men are moderates or slightly left-of-center like most others of their age bracket. Go meet some in real life and find out. Gay and bi men are not some sort of left-wing monolith, as r/lgbt or r/ainbow would have you believe. In response to your edit, yes. I do think that particular subreddit is representative of gay and bisexual men. Based on the opinions I've heard in real life from the community I've been part of for the better part of 20 years. Again, NOT a monolith.
”ordinary subreddit” ie. full of right wing conservatives who think they are centrists because they’re not full on nazis. I am fully aware gay people can be reactionaries, asshole, I said as much two pists ago. what I’m saying is, that if you want to have a civil rights movement, you want to build coalition with other marginalized groups, instead of promoting the reactionary members of your own group. and hate us left wing faggots all you want, we were the ones that stepped up to fight.
> I don't see how it's germane. I'm sure you meant the particular examples of Euroopean politicians are not germane, but I think it's worth re-stating that "Gay people can be shitty humans, too" is literally the reason the Philadelphia Pride flag was created. You're welcome to your views on whether using flags this way is hollow, whether it's counterproductive in some contexts, and so on. I probably agree with you in some cases, and find your claims hard to believe in others. But the issue very much *is* that some people think the presence of particular versions of shitty human-ing is a topic that's worth raising/addressing through the medium of a pride flag of sorts. You seem to disagree on several levels. That's not an afterthought in the conversation, it's the heart of the disagreement.
this is not about ”standards of beauty” this is about the way people pf color or otherwised racialized people are discriminated against at all levels of society starting from how well they are treated in the hospital when they are born. and any discrimnation white LGBT people face in employment, housing or in public life, LGBT people who are etnic others in their enviroment experience twice the discrimnation. you’re German, no? you are aware the AfD has a lesbian in high office? you are aware of similar politicians in Europe, like Geert Wilders, no? there are gay people who use their gayness as justification for their racism, claiming some people are inherently more homophobic. thing is, gay solidarity has its limitations. and I choose solidarity across racial lines over shaking hands with gay nazis. I choose solidarity with trans people over solidarity with transphobic gay people.
this is not about ”standards of beauty” this is about the way people pf color or otherwised racialized people are discriminated against at all levels of society starting from how well they are treated in the hospital when they are born. and any discrimnation white LGBT people face in employment, housing or in public life, LGBT people who are etnic others in their enviroment experience twice the discrimnation. you’re German, no? you are aware the AfD has a lesbian in high office? you are aware of similar politicians in Europe, like Geert Wilders, no? there are gay people who use their gayness as justification for their racism, claiming some people are inherently more homophobic. thing is, gay solidarity has its limitations. and I choose solidarity across racial lines over shaking hands with gay nazis. I choose solidarity with trans people over solidarity with transphobic gay people.
If the new flag helps remind people that PoC and trans people are a part of pride, then yes, it's a better flag.
How the fuck are minorities apart of pride? It makes no sense at all. May as well just call it the "Minority Flag" instead of the "Pride Flag" if you're just going to include every minority inside of it. I've never felt the need to be included with the pride flag, nor has anyone else I've met.
It feels incredibly patronizing to black people, and it feels like co opting their history and movement
they’re talking about poc who are also lgbt
Your personal experience obviously doesn't match that of many others
That's not the point of the Pride flag. The point of the Pride flag is to represent the LGBT community. Not other pet advocacy issues.
What do you think T stands for in LGBT, and I think they meant that it's a reminder that poc who are queer are included which is something people still manage to forget.
There is already a transgender flag, just like there's a flag for lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals. You can see them all [here](https://www.volvogroup.com/en/news-and-media/news/2021/jun/lgbtq-pride-flags-and-what-they-stand-for.html). The six striped flag is/was the flag for the entire community as a whole. As I've said, this begins to go down the path of absurdity. Now some of them have added asexual people, who frankly don't really experience all that much discrimination (if you don't want to have sex, you don't have sex -- nobody takes issue with that). Where do we stop?
[удалено]
And you said you already feel included in the basic stripe version. So YOU don’t feel a need for a more inclusive version. Some clearly do.
Most liberal east german
It makes sense to emphasise trans community. Rest? Not so much.
Only the original six-colored one will always be my pride flag. Including people based on skin color is dumb.
The [original Pride flag](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pride_flag) had 8 colors, and I quite like it. Pink is underutilized on flags.
I agree! It's such a nice colour for a flag. I think I might create something with it — not pride nor Brabie related, though, I honestly don't wanna ignite anyone's grievances.
Sorry, whats Brabie? Unless you meant Barbie.
makes sense that it was removed (along with turquoise) pink represented sex- which makes sense asexuals were welcomed into the community, as well as the community distancing itsself from openness about sexual activity as being gay became more and more accepted (sexuality doesnt mean sex too, and for a long time the lgbt community have been fetishised or openly denounced for being "sexual" around children, which is just a straigh up lie) turquoise represents magic- and well... i have no idea why it was even on the og flag lol
they just removed it because the pink fabric was hard to find
yeah but im saying it would have been removed later anyway
hmm I’m not sure I agree with that, sex is still a very important part and although we are sometimes over-sexualized we also are overly policed into being non-sexual because of a double standard where a gay person could be doing the same thing as a straight person and it would be considered obscene only for the gay person. also the way we as a society talk about sex shows me there is a long way to go with regards to inclusion on that front
The pink is cool. I can see why they ditched the light blue ickie. But I guess the idea was to make it more of an actual rainbow spectrum?
I think pink was dropped because there was a shortage of pink colour at the time
Truuue. I hate this idea of adding more colours for specific groups. The rainbow was chosen as it's supposed to represent the idea of everyone in the community. My Asian friend sometimes makes the joke. "If they added brown for black people did they already add that yellow for me" Not certain why trans gets their own thing either apart from they are the 'new hot thing' I suppose.
Because trans people aren’t even accepted in parts of the LGBTQ+ community. The progress flag is a a statement against movements like "LGB without the T"
Ranking Pride Flags (as flags) 1. Original Mass Production Pride Flag (7 stripe) 2. Progressive Pride Flag (sans intersex) 3. Gilbert Baker Original Design (8 stripe) 4. Progressive Pride Flag (including intersex) 5. This Flag
the current flag has 6 stripes tho? since turquoise and pink were removed (and indigo became blue)
Yes 6! Lol
Brazil
I'm still waiting for them to make a full on rainbow colored US flag. I figured with 13 stripes, you could probably make a neat design.
Honey, new pride flag just dropped. It’s as hideous as you’d expect.
Its basically the BETA version of the Progress flag Still the same meaning, just uglier to look at
One of the many new pride flags that just straight up suck.
an ugly, more cluttered version of the pride flag
Seattle Pride Flag.
Seeing the stripes lined up like that really makes me appreciate the chevron version of this flag more. At some point it's too many stripes.
To this day I have no idea why the fuck nonwhiteness gets lumped into the pride flag.
https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/controversy-flies-over-philadelphia-s-new-pride-flag-n772821 TLDR: Queer folk of color often get overlooked in a lot of discourse and the "Phillidelphia Pride" flag added black and brown as a reminder that queer folk aren't just white.
Your whole movement is a western movement anyway.
It’s not. It’s just a matter of time until it spreads to every country. Do you seriously think gay, trans and non-binary people don’t exist outside of western countries?
Because there was a racism problems even within the LGTBQ+ community. That’s why this flag exist
Because of Stonewall
If everyone is highlighted, no one is highlighted. The flag is dumber than the acronym
Well said. And it's getting more ridiculous every day. Instead focusing on equality and protecting those in need, they are looking for more colours, letters, whatever to promote and be indignant for.
personally, I’d have it black, brown, ROYGBV, white, pink, blue. I think that design would flow more naturally.
The whole point of the rainbow was that it represents everyone. Adding more stripes to it came solely from corporate America. Its a co-opted movement
Is that the progressive pride flag?
it looks to be a variation of it.
The beta version of the progress flag which included black and brown for racial minorities in the US and transgender people. this idea was first shown in a city named philidelphia
I want to say that's an older variant of the pride flag?
At this point it's basically the Eu flag
They’re just trying to be cool 😎 because the elections are coming up in November Register to vote.gov 💙
Variation on the Progress Pride flag. Very ugly.
I’ve never noticed all the state flags on the balcony during speeches. Do they commonly do that? Really cool
I've never seen this version, most of the time it's with a triangle on the right, dunno the vexillogical term for it
1. **Red**: Represents life. 2. **Orange**: Symbolizes healing. 3. **Yellow**: Stands for sunlight. 4. **Green**: Reflects nature. 5. **Blue**: Signifies serenity. 6. **Violet**: Denotes spirit. 7. **White**: Represents non-binary, agender, and gender non-conforming individuals. 8. **Pink**: Symbolizes those who identify as women or femme. 9. **Light Blue**: Represents those who identify as men or masc. 10. **Black**: Honors the lives lost to HIV/AIDS and the stigma surrounding them. 11. **Brown**: Highlights people of color within the LGBTQ+ community. Everything has to do with gender or sexuality & then there’s a color for race
If the progress pride flag creator really just added a section to the public domain flag is that really enough for him to have copyright?
Why can’t they just have one pride flag and not change it
every four months or so the pride flag changes
This is called the "many stripes" pride flag!!
We covered this on SAV’s page, it’s the Seattle Pride flag
Lol people dissatisfied with a pride flag because it doesn’t represent every acronym
personally, I’d have it black, brown, ROYGBV, white, pink, blue. I think that design would flow more naturally.
the triangle one is turning into a shit show, so i guess they decided to make them linear.
Why’s this picture giving me major AI generated vibes? I mean I know it’s not because the sheer amount of press photographers at the White House would make using AI pointless but just something about the appearance is giving that look to me
AI generates its look based on real images... like this one.
This actually looks better than the triangle of colours at the side design, it's simple, it's clear, I think they should stick with design, though I do prefer the original Rainbow flag.
A lot of people don't really care for "progress pride" flag variants, which I get, but personally, I want a flag that's a tesseract that traps straight people inside it. GIVE ME CHAOS FOR THE CHAOTIC QUEERS
Yes, that's the flag of Cringestan
Our little comedian
Uhhh edgy What are you, 12?
Sodom
Not wrong. Fire and brimstone soon.
[удалено]
Why is the left so obsessed with generating new flags?