Blind Prophecy

Yesterday I presented the new logo for Cincinnati Pride without saying anything especially critical in the blog post. I was more interested in getting other people’s reactions.

When I first heard the Pride theme (after returning home from my October visit to NYC which caused me to miss the Pride meeting where it was chosen), my immediate reaction was “Are they kidding?”

I asked my roommates, “Are they really being more progressive than even San Francisco with a sex-positive theme that embraces the sex pig culture?” I thought of this photo (NSFW) I took at the Dore Alley Festival in San Francisco… the most shocking thing I saw that day was this large man in a pink pig mask with a curly-tailed butt-plug wallowing on all fours in the middle of the crowded event.

But maybe I’m being too dirty-minded, right? My roommate pointed me toward the long history of “Porkopolis” Cincinnati and I started noticing the damn pig statues around town. Still, I was unhappy with that theme.

Fair enough, at the time I was a member of the Pride planning committee, so why didn’t I speak up? Well, I missed the November meeting for no good reason and when I attended the December meeting, there was literally not a second allowed for open debate on much of anything (especially not settled matters). In January, looking ahead at my schedule for this spring, I dropped off the Pride planning committee.

Even so, I defended the theme at first, saying “at least it’s not boring” and “it does tie to local flavor.”

Should I have spoken up sooner? Probably. But I’m speaking up now.

No more. When coupled with the logo, it’s a travesty.

From a communications standpoint, it contains far too many negative associations… gay sex=bestiality, pig sex=euphemism for extreme fetishes involving feces and blood, squealin’=southern slang and echoes of Deliverance, etc. All of these things could be overcome with a smart and proactive PR campaign, which Cincy Pride most decidedly does not have in place. For example, when releasing the theme & logo, why not include a statement explaining why it was chosen, what it means, how it was chosen, etc.? Instead, this “here’s the theme, like it or shut up” attitude being taken by some folks in blog comments is not just crappy attitude, it’s crappy PR.

Now, I’ve never been to graphic design school. That said, I’ve earned my paychecks over the last 10 years by working with and for graphic designers. Sometimes, I’ve even earned a paycheck with my own modest skills. I mention this as reference for my opinion that the logo design itself is amateur and compounds the problems in the theme. First off, the color palette is awful – can you imagine what a gross blob this would look like if reproduced in gray (say, on a document coming through a fax)? Putting it on t-shirts or banners requires a 4-color process, which means added cost over a 1 or 2 ink image (this is not a bad thing, but combined with the fine detail needed to make the rainbow-colored pigs crawling along the pig tail look like pigs instead of cancerous tumors, it raises costs in a cost-conscious nonprofit… and I shudder to think what will happen when the LGBT News tries to run this on their press with its notoriously bad color slippage). When I showed this logo to a friend who has also spent her career in advertising, she literally gasped and declared, “Oh, look at that kerning!” (which is a typography nerd’s way of saying “eeewwww!”). Worst of all, perhaps, this theme takes the pig out of the barn and puts it front and center. Another logo might have redirected the word “Squealin’” to reference excited people (like squealin’ girls at a Jonas Brothers concert), but instead, we’re going to make sure that everyone thinks of pigs and queer people in the same moment.

From an event managing perspective, what does this theme contribute to crafting the event? Will there be a petting zoo at Cincy Pride? Will food vendors be offering a variety of pork products (like Bacon Cookies)? Will parade participants be encouraged to build livestock-themed floats? Will the entertainment lead us in a round of “Old MacDonald Had a Farm”? Or will the event planners ignore the theme completely and put on the same generic Pride decor and programming we’ve all become a little bit bored with? If the former, how do they intend to counteract the obvious bestiality and dirty sex criticisms coming our way? If the latter, why have a theme at all?

From a sponsorship point of view, do you really expect me to believe that Macy’s or P&G are anxious to become the target of anti-queer groups eager to smear their sponsorship as an endorsement of man-on-barnyard-animal-sex? Can any of the corporate sponsors really be squealin’ with pride over this theme? Or this logo which reinforces the worst aspects of the theme and has the added bonus of being amateurish?

I won’t go as far as my friend Wolf in advocating a boycott of Cincinnati Pride over this theme and logo (ETA: see comments for important clarification from Wolf), but after initially towing the party line, and then remaining neutral and silent, I can’t stand it any longer. The theme is an embarrassment and it is tone deaf.

Maybe I should just give in and order some toys to hand out to all the kids. Do you think Cincinnati has a big furry scene?

ETA: final food for thought… for those who think “it’s just a theme, sheesh!” If the theme is irrelevant and unimportant, then at the very least it should do no harm in promoting the event. This theme fails to even live up to that simple premise. Instead of talking about the event, people are complaining and threatening to stay home over a stupid theme. Really, you couldn’t do more harm at this point by admitting it’s a bad idea and moving on to something else?

Filed under: Cincinnati, Pride by Jere Keys