Halifax gay-friendly destination

[Will]

Halifax gay-friendly destination

Nearly three years after Rosie O’Donnell inadvertently promoted metro as a potential destination for homosexual and lesbian travellers, Destination Halifax continues to push the city as a gay-friendly place for such visitors.

To that end, staff with the municipality’s tourism marketing board spent much of Saturday showing off several sites of the municipality and its environs to a small group of gay journalists.

They saw such popular spots as the Spring Garden Road shopping district, the Public Gardens, Citadel Hill and Peggys Cove outside Halifax, and then had dinner at a downtown restaurant.

Hugo Dann, chairman of Halifax Pride, the city’s annual gay-pride festival, said the visitors were about a half-dozen American journalists whose reports reach gay and lesbian communities in the United States. They’ve been in Nova Scotia since Wednesday, he said, and plan to leave today.

Mr. Dann said the group drove around in a minivan and he provided "a gay historical take on the city." He said he pointed out previous gay-pride parade routes in Halifax, local bars and other gay-friendly sites.

Same-sex visitors are seen as upwardly mobile tourists looking to spend their money in places that are fun to visit and where they’re made to feel welcome. Other Canadian cities considered gay-friendly are Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver, Mr. Dann said.

Ms. O’Donnell stopped in Halifax in 2005 while on a cruise that had set sail from New York City. Many of the passengers were part of gay or lesbian families, and Ms. O’Donnell told reporters that they were eager to come to Canada, where gays and lesbians are more welcome than in some areas of the United States.

Ms. O’Donnell is planning to return to Halifax this summer on another cruise, according to a spokeswoman for Destination Halifax.

And a woman wrote on the gay.com website a couple of years ago: "My partner and I felt comfortable holding hands everywhere (in Halifax), and I think the weird stares were mostly due to our tourist attire." (They were holding five maps and a camera and wearing large-brimmed hats).

Destination Halifax has its own lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender travel website. It’s called rainbowhalifax.com and it markets the city to travellers from those communities.

In 2007, then-tourism minister Len Goucher said the gay and lesbian travel market was one the province wanted to tap into. He said the same-sex community "is a very strong market" and one that will grow in Nova Scotia. Potential customers come from near and far, and are often affiliated with gay travel groups, he said.

Mr. Goucher said last August that homosexuals and lesbians who travel tend to spend more than other tourists — perhaps twice as much — and attracting that segment of the market was something the government recognized in a tourism plan launched earlier in 2007.

Gay Halifax

[unrepentantgael]

I hear house music playing.......

Bloody queers.

[BlueCharm]

Do you feel threatened in in some way, Gael?

[Gravitas]

I hear house music playing.......

Bloody queers.

I once read a theory that those people who are most 'opposed' to homosexuality are that way because deep down, there's something in their own sexuality that relates to it, and it scares them. I tend to agree with this theory.

[oogie]

I hear house music playing.......

Bloody queers.

I once read a theory that those people who are most 'opposed' to homosexuality are that way because deep down, there's something in their own sexuality that relates to it, and it scares them. I tend to agree with this theory.

I'd be interested in the clinical studies supporting that theory.

[GreyEyes]

I hear house music playing.......

Bloody queers.

Care to expand on that 'gael? I'll assume that you are gay....?

Also, Grav is right - the more someone (usually men) decries homosexuality, the more likely that they have latent homosexual tendencies.

[Fred8]

I hear house music playing.......

Bloody queers.

Care to expand on that 'gael? I'll assume that you are gay....?

Also, Grav is right - the more someone (usually men) decries homosexuality, the more likely that they have latent homosexual tendencies.

I hear that statement from time to time but have never seens anything to back it up. It seems like an awfully convenient way to redirect a discussion into a personal jibe. Is there some research behind it?

[kp]

Also, Grav is right - the more someone (usually men) decries homosexuality, the more likely that they have latent homosexual tendencies.

I hear that statement from time to time but have never seens anything to back it up. It seems like an awfully convenient way to redirect a discussion into a personal jibe. Is there some research behind it?

No, but those touting the gay agenda have learned that such a statement will quickly shut down criticism of their efforts.

[unrepentantgael]

Do you feel threatened in in some way, Gael?

Threatened personally? Not in the least. That doesn't mean I'm not in opposition to their agenda though.

I once read a theory that those people who are most 'opposed' to homosexuality are that way because deep down, there's something in their own sexuality that relates to it, and it scares them. I tend to agree with this theory.

It's a convenient and cheap insult. It's not based in any kind of clinical study. It's the typical mantra of liberalism, seek to discredit anyone who disagrees with your agenda.

I hear that statement from time to time but have never seens anything to back it up. It seems like an awfully convenient way to redirect a discussion into a personal jibe. Is there some research behind it?

Basically they are saying, "the only reason you aren't on the front of gay pride float simulating sodomy with another leather clad man is because YOU ARE SECRETLY DESIRING IT. Laughable.

No, but those touting the gay agenda have learned that such a statement will quickly shut down criticism of their efforts.

Exactly. In fact the comfort a straight man or woman would have in his or her own sexuality would enable them to more effectively identify and intellectually criticize the homosexual agenda and it's impact on society. If anything, liberals who support said agenda are more likely then anyone to be harbouring homosexual tendencies, while unable to reconcile those feelings themselves - they lend tacit support to the "out" community as an outlet of their desires.

Imagine if I said I was against "fascism" and then GreyEyes said "probably because you ARE a fascist in secret. YOU have latent fascist tendencies" - that would seem pretty ridiculous eh? This is the same.

Never compromise with liberals.

[oogie]

This theory maybe onto something - if we draw from it, I guess that means those that are most critical of the right wingers have, deep down inside, right wing tendencies.

Rather interesting...

[Gravitas]

Exactly. In fact the comfort a straight man or woman would have in his or her own sexuality would enable them to more effectively identify and intellectually criticize the homosexual agenda and it's impact on society. If anything, liberals who support said agenda are more likely then anyone to be harbouring homosexual tendencies, while unable to reconcile those feelings themselves - they lend tacit support to the "out" community as an outlet of their desires.

You know, my original post was almost facetious (although I do believe there is a kernel of truth there). But your response to it is just laughable.

I'm sorry, I know you were trying to be serious but every time I read 'the homosexual agenda' I just about fell off my chair.    What, exactly, is the 'homosexual agenda'?? To make everyone fly a rainbow flag, wear leather chaps and listen to Donna Summer? Most homosexuals I've ever known pretty much just want to live their lives (rather like all the heterosexuals I know, strangely enough). I have yet to meet one with a hidden 'agenda' ...

But I suppose if you're a raving homophobe, you probably believe they're all out to convert you, don't you? LOL ...

[Fireblade]

Do you feel threatened in in some way, Gael?

Threatened personally? Not in the least. That doesn't mean I'm not in opposition to their agenda though.

I'm just wondering what their 'agenda' might be?  Being accepted?  Or perhaps feeling safe from harm while walking down the street?

I tend to have less problem with homosexuals than intolerant people.  'Course if your both, well... that's another story.

[hfx_chris]

Ah yes, the homosexual agenda. How dare those bastards want to live their lives in peace without being persecuted by homophobes.

What an awful, awful agenda.

[fisherman]

Ah yes, the homosexual agenda. How dare those bastards want to live their lives in peace without being persecuted by homophobes.

What an awful, awful agenda.

Some people are raised to hate by sad ignorant parents. In my experiance all the bigots I have met were taught to hate by parental figures.

 Its not about blame or intelectualism its about finding a minority and attacking them because some view them as weak and thus as easy victims.

I have little time for bigots be them anti-black, anti-gay or even flat out Nazi scum. They are all the same and if you ask them why they hate (Insert minority here) they will have all kinds of great reasons why they hate what ever minority Dad or Mom taught them to hate.

[unrepentantgael]

What, exactly, is the 'homosexual agenda'??

The Political Agenda of homosexuals (which I freely admit would not be inclusive of all gays, just seemingly the more vocal ones at this point in time) It's assumed you're referring to the agenda on the political axis when you're on a politics forum. No need to mince words.

I would argue, the political agenda of homosexuals is more sweeping and aggressive then the simple right to live in peace and conduct their private affairs as they please (which is a completely reasonable right).

Homosexuality - as everyone knows has been taking place forever. It's not going to stop and it's not going to go away. Accetping that, and also accepting the philosophical values of Western society in regards to freedom of action still does not shackle someone who feels for a variety of reasons that homosexuality is not a constructive human relationship from voicing such opposition.

It's no different a position then opposition to plural marriage, well admittedly only different in the sense that the homosexual lobby will seek to blacklist and discredit those due to superior organization and patronage to a degree that the plural marriage lobby (for example) could only ever dream of.

But I suppose if you're a raving homophobe, you probably believe they're all out to convert you, don't you? LOL ...

This tactic of ideological truncheon swinging is getting old fast. Call me as I am, but make it accurate - raving? Hardly. Homophobic? I haven't expressed any open or thinly veiled fears of homosexuals in any of these posts.

Unless of course, you equate any opposition at all to homosexuality as homophobic? I think even you're reasonable enough to agree that a person can be in opposition to a human activity without necessarily being afraid of it, or as you earlier mentioned - in opposition as an over-compsenation for desire to engage in it. In the vast market of ideas that is Western pluralism, your ideas are going to have to carry more weight to then that to stand the test of even a simple probing argument.

It's as if you all take a page from the manual on manufacturing consent and just chuck non-sensical phrases around with hopes of silencing opposition instead of actually out-arguing them. Very telling, shows to the weakness of the argument - and those making it.

Some people are raised to hate by sad ignorant parents

Since you said, "some people" - I'll assume you don't mean me. And if you do - you can freely say so. In regards to my position, like I've stated before - I don't hate gays, but not hating them does not, and does not have to equate agreement with the lifestyle or agreement that it's beneficial to society.

Its not about blame or intelectualism its about finding a minority and attacking them because some view them as weak and thus as easy victims.

I completely disagree. At least as far as I am personally concerned. There is, in all arguments legitimate opposition. I'm not entirely certain why the only tactic I encounter here is assaults on the legitimacy of opposition at all when I disagree with your opinions. Part of the pluralism you so willingly defend in this little back and forth over homosexuality is the philosophical acceptance that constructive opposition is legitimate.

So either you're just lazy when it comes to argumentation (and that I understand because I'm guilty of it often) OR you just don't grasp the means to actually debate the issue - I'm not certain.