>

That's how symbols work. I'm very sorry for your loss, but that's no argument for LGBTQ+ people to stop using rainbows.
Wish football teams didn't use stars. Wish USA didn't use eagles. Wish ancaps didn't use snakes...
But they have the right to do it, so yeah.
Sounds like your issue isn't with Rainbows themselves, but peoples ignorant attitude towards a rainbow. Nothing stopping you enjoying/using rainbows. >

Yes, but the main thing stopping the use of rainbows is the prejudice that comes with it >

What prejudice do you mean? Can you give a direct example of it? >

People assuming that everyone using them is part of the LGBTQ community >

Oh cool so about the least prejudicial prejudice going then.
​
This should only really bother you if you have an issue with gay people. >

No, I don’t have an issue with them, but I have an issue with being identified as them >

Why? >

I don’t like people seeing me in a different way than I am >

So you tell them, "Oh, I'm not [whatever they assumed you were]" and simply move on. Right? >


Lots of people online don’t ask, 2. It would be a lot of people to answer >

I mean, are you afraid of wearing red in case people think you're communist? Certain colours and designs can mean certain things to people in different situations. That's what symbolism is. But it's also not really an issue at all to use stuff outside their perceived symbolism >

I think it's diffrent for single colours, as they have so many things in nature that you can relate them to, rainbows have, well, rainbows and that's it, so it's a lot easier for people to lose the rainbow = rainbow relation, and adopt the rainbow = lgbtq+ mentallity.
If I see red I think of many things, not just one single, if I see a rainbow I do the same, but not everyone does anymore. >

Well frankly, the people who don't are idiots 😅
The light spectrum represents a lot more than LGBTQ+ or rainbows. It represenys visible light, colour palettes, divinity and quite a bit more to many people depending on context. It's about as general a colour scheme you can get without being monotone >


now almost impossible to do anything with a rainbow, without being called part of the LGBTQ.

And?
Why is being mistaken for LGBTQ+ a bad thing? I'm bisexual and get mistaken for Straight or Lesbian all the freaking time. Just use your words and say "oh, I'm blank actually. I just like rainbows" and move on.
It's not like anybody is walking around calling you something that is truly awful - you're not being associated with white supremacy, KKK, Hitler Youth, Al Qaeda, Taliban, ISIS, Lord's Resistance Party, etc.
You're being associated with just everyday people who happen to love a little differently than you. This is such a Not Problem. >

About a year ago I saw an awesome rainbow. I went to tell my fiancé because it was so awesome. At no point, while we were looking at that rainbow, did we think “man this is so gay that we are looking at this rainbow.” I have absolutely zero issues with LGBTQ+. If I see a rainbow flag or pendant I know what it means, and I’m glad those people are able to live their life how they want. The only person who cares about rainbows in your designs and shit is you. >

It is very different if it is somebody very close to you, especially your partner. >

The difference is “hey bro look at this awesome rainbow” instead of “hey babe look at this awesome rainbow.” I literally walked around my apartment complex telling everybody I saw about that awesome rainbow. It’s not like I was walking around asking people to donate to an LGBTQ+ charity. Like I said, the only person who cares is you. >

Also I’m more referring to artwork done by you of things that are to do with rainbows, less the natural real life rainbows >

rainbows aren't always associated with LGBTQ, look at Lucky Charms, My Little Pony, Skittles, NBC. is the rainbow in Noah's ark associated with LGBTQ+? 
you want to use a rainbow you just have to be creative with it; you're a designer, right? creativity comes with the territory.

I want to be able to use rainbows for designs and fun stuff >

They all have more than rainbows in the focus, if rainbows is a vital part of your brand it becomes different for a lot of people >

rainbows are a vital part of those brands - have you ever eaten Skittles? it's all rainbow all the time; google the packaging. do kids think gay when they see it? 
use the rainbow and be creative. it doesn't have to replicate the LGBTQ+ symbol if you don't want it to, but it seems you just covet that specific rainbow. >

Well I've read through the comments and since you are pretty stubborn about this, here's my advice:
Just deal with it. You can't change reality. The Rainbow is a gay symbol and it's here to stay. Either deal with the little amount of prejudice that comes with it or stop using rainbows.
It doesn't matter that "they shouldn't have taken it in the first place" or that you think "they should use a entirely new flag/symbol" because they didn't and they won't.
​
To add my two cents to your actually problem tho: There is no harm done by the LGBTQ+ community using the rainbow. Some might feel a bit weird using it or be scared of being called gay but those a such minor complaints that they don't warrent the enormous expenditure that would be changing such an iconic symbol of such a huge community.
Otherwise everyone could say they didn't like universal symbols like the cross as a symbol of christianity, the moon and star as a symbol of turkey, everysingle chinese zodiac animal as a symbol of its year and the respective communities would have to change it just like that. People that are bothered by symbols have to either deal with the assoaciation or stop using the symbols. >

If people think you're gay because you hug your same-sex friend, you don't stop hugging your friend. Nor do you tell all gay people to stop hugging people of the same sex. You just shrug it off and think that person is a bigot. 
This is an inane post. I really think you, not the people associating your art with lgbtq people, are prejudiced. If someone thinks you are gay because of your art,  then you can just say "Oh, Im not". If it really makes a difference, you can make an artist statement about why you use the rainbow.
You have 0 contextualization skills. Look up the dangers and downside of heteronormativity. In actuality,  people thinking you are gay and being cool about it is a very good thing.  It means we are moving to a place where it isn't a big deal. Any consequence you feel is not due to a symbol of the lgbtq community but rather bigotry and homophobia that society created. Be mad at the fact that the flag was ever needed. >

Nobody has stolen rainbows from you and nobody's stopping you from using them in whatever way you want. There's no reason to think the LGBTQ+ holds a monopoly on rainbow colours. Other companies like MSNBC use them in their logos as well. Do you think they ruined rainbows too? >

No, it’s about the prejudice that has been caused by them using rainbows, less them using them in and off itself >

And how is the prejudice stopping you from using rainbows? Are you afraid that people will assume you're gay? >

I don’t want to be identified diffrently than I am >

I think the real question is, do you think anyone whose opinion you care about would see you differently if you used rainbows? If not, and these are just hypothetical strangers, then you can't prevent them from perceiving you incorrectly even without rainbows, because everyone makes snap assumptions about people they see around them. >

Friendly neighborhood trans guy here, and hopefully a history bit around the flag will explain how the community tried REALLY hard to be associated with only a specific type of colour combination but queerphobia unfortunately ruined nice things.
The original design of the flag contained eight colours, with indigo instrad of "basic" blue, and pink and teal included as well. Gilbert Baker was urged by Harvey Milk to create a design that would create a symbol slightly similar to the silver whistles many folks in the Castro were keeping on them to call for help if a bashing was happening. It would look pretty inconspicuous to anyone outside the community ("you don't usually see all of those colours in a rainbow. What fun") and be quickly identifiable for those in community ("teal and pink? Yes, you're community and you're safe to be myself around.")
Then Harvey Milk was murdered, his killer got manslaughter on the "twinkie defense," and the White Night riots bring such a demand for the flag that the pink stripe is dropped from the design because not enough pink fabric could be found to sew enough flags together. The next year teal would be dropped for similar reasons, and then indigo changed to blue.
The original intention of the flag, to create a symbol community would know but the average individual would sort of pass over, was sort of tossed out the window. But in the coming years there would be a lot of defending the SPECIFIC combo. ROYGBIV is everyone else's rainbow, but ROYGBV with red always on top is our rainbow. In part because of the thing you brought up. People outside community but half attempting to be an ally would claim any ol' combination of colours was the community flag, which led to safety concerns. But those in community again would be looking for a very specific combo of colours.
Even in the last couple of years we are seeing a shift in "branding." After one of the most deadly years for trans women of colour, specifically in the USA, a redesign has the "original" rainbow of six stripes with a triangle cutting into the middle with an additional five stripes. White, pink, and blue to highlight trans members of the community, black and brown to highlight Black and Indigenous members. The "original" ROYGBV is slowly being replaced with this updated version and that becoming the symbol to look for instead of just "rainbow." >

In the UK rainbows have been used to support our national health service in recent times. Nobody batted an eyelid or called anybody gay. Kids love rainbows and nobody questions anything if they have rainbow items.
I think this is a you problem and not a problem with rainbows being used in the lgbtq+ community. 
You can just say no if anybody asks if you're gay. No big deal. >


I just want my rainbows back

Please ask yourself who is stopping you from putting a rainbow on something or what is actually bad about someone assuming you're gay if you put a rainbow on something.
You're perfectly capable of saying "not gay, just like rainbows". >

Did you loved rainbows before knowing they were associated with gay people? If that's the case, you can still use them wherever you want. There's nothing wrong with being gay, unless you live in a religious and conservative community/family. 
I don't think you wear "rainbow colors" on your daily life. Rainbows were more like a hippy thing before gay.
I use rainbow clothes or bags and I love it, and I'm not gay. Plus I love for people to be able to use a rainbow bracelets or bands to say "I'm gay, I'm here". That must be really cool to be gay and know there's another person like you in the room. >

This is such a painfully unimportant non-issue.
You, personally, like a particular arrangement of colors that happens to be associated with a symbol so you think that symbol itself should be completely changed just so you can use those colors without having to deal with some people assuming you're associated with the symbol. It's not like you even liked rainbows first. The rainbow flag was popularized in 1978 so unless you're older than 45 it's been a gay symbol longer than you've been alive, let alone liked it.
Let's take this situation to any other example and see how silly it sounds. I like the colors red, white, and blue, but I am not American. I, as an individual, think that the United States of America should change the color of their flag because I'm tired of having to explain that my red white nd blue stuff does not denote I am American. That seems a little completely ridiculous and impractical, right?
I like the colors red, yellow, and blue but I'm not a Superman fan. I like blue and orange but I'm not a Florida State fan. I think yellow submarines look cool but I don't like the Beatles. I think swastikas look cool but I'm not a Nazi. In every case if someone suggested that society adjust its entire understanding of a symbol to avoid them being mis-associated they'd be laughed out of town.
The real problem with this is that symbols are by nature simplistic and therefore limited. If not the rainbow, what? Say they go with a mountain range, to symbolize the vast range of genders, or something. Now people who like mountains but aren't lgbt are going to have a problem. Do you expect them to try to come up with a simplistic and universally recognizable symbol or selection of colors that's completely unique? What if they do that and then Joe Blow comes along and decides that lime green, magenta, periwinkle, and stygian blue all swirled in a pinwheel is just the coolest thing? One guy doesn't want to have to explain that no, he's not gay, he just likes the pinwheel and now the symbol has to change again? >


I just want my rainbows back, I want to be able to use rainbows for designs and fun stuff, without all the prejudice that comes with it.

So you're complaining about gay people instead of the homophobes causing the prejudice? r/orphancrushingmachine vibes >

LGBT rainbow has concrete colours. If you use different ones or a different number of colours (7 instead of 6) then it shouldn't be associated. Only by people that do not differentiate it a lot and even if - why would that matter.
Also: I don't think that rainbow's shape is associated.
If you want to colour something in rainbow — well, I don't find my little pony's associated with LGBT, but rather with little girls >

I do agree that if it was just the same as the flag, it would be okay, but a lot of people use all rainbows in the same way. >

People will always use various colour schemes and simplify popular symbols (like associate any rainbow) - I think, there's no need to care, it's humane. If someone pointed about LGBT support - you can always say thay it wasn't your point. 
If someone were hateful about it, you can expose their stupidity and if someone would like your art and would want to associate it with lgbt for themselves — would you mind? at the end of the day, every form of expression is convicted to reinterpretation >

The main thing is people would think I’d be part of the community, and it wouldn’t be possible to clarify to everyone that I’m not, and also a lot of hateful people stay anonymous and come back.
It would’ve been better if they had made another colour scheme and made that popular. >

It would be better for YOU, so YOU could wear rainbows and not have people think you MIGHT be queer. 
This is selfish. Are you the main character or something?? >

He is the main character of his own life… and kinda of this thread as well… >

This post makes me so happy. Rainbows were always such a magical part of my childhood.
But I don't see a problem with it being associated with LGBTQ+ That doesn't at all change how I see a rainbow (unless it's like on a flag or a badge or profile pic or something). A rainbow is still a rainbow and anyone can appreciate that. It's like the bald eagle being a symbol of America. That doesn't mean no one is allowed to think about bald eagles without it being linked to America.
I don't think you'd ever be able to stop it from being an LGBTQ+ icon anyways, but I see what you're saying. >

🦅🌈 >

Thats a pretty gay eagle >

Well if rainbows aren't associated with the LGBTQ community then they would be associated with leprechauns and magic pots of gold. So you will still be associated in any way that isn't you. Unless you are a leprechaun. >

Before LGBTQ+ reclaimed the rainbow, rainbows were associated with religion. Noah and the ark. They were God's promise that he would not commit mass genocide by flood again.
This previous meaning is pretty creepy to me. That a "loving" God would kill so many of his children and animals. Just promise he wouldn't do it again by flood. (He will instead burn the earth when he comes again.)
I much prefer the "Love is love" meaning that rainbows represent now. >

So, you don’t mind being associated with a rainbow, just not being accused of being gay? 
Are you sure this isn’t some really deep down issue you’re trying to work through? 
The idea of not wanting to be associated an icon is fine, but the reason is a little hard to connect here. >

So because people have a single minded view of rainbows, you want to stop a community from using rainbows as their symbol? Seems your view is robbing Peter to pay Paul.
If you could wave a wand and change something about the rainbow, would it be that the LGBTQ+ community doesn’t use the rainbow, or that people’s attitudes weren’t so single-minded about the rainbow? >

It’s fair to have small non serious views like this. Maybe the association will end up dying off within the next several years but in the meantime, just draw clouds on your rainbows.
I’m gay and I find the flag kind of cringe so yea, sucks for us but it doesn’t matter. Either that or just use rainbows and add your own meaning to it. “Are you gay?” “Are you dumb? It’s a rainbow not a pride flag” >

It’s funny how you are probably the most understanding while being part of the community, thank you for your answer, I do agree, but it is hard to remind everyone, especially since a lot of people think it without saying it directly. >

Idk how this relates to the topic. Hate crimes are tragic, and nobody is defending them. People can have small issues like the color of the lgbt flag without degrading other issues like the one you just pointed out. >

Exactly, people use that argument to virtue signal.  But if they took that logic to heart, then they should never have a right to complain about ANYTHING AT ALL because there's always someone in the world having a worse experience than they are. >

I'm not even defending OP with my post, I'm just sharing my opinion about people using that argument. >

Oh, ok. 🙄 >

I don't get why you can't just wear rainbow stuff? My dad likes rainbows and has pandemic rainbow maks as well as socks and other items. He is straight and nothing has happened from his wearing these items. Just wear what you want. >

The pride rainbow has 6 stripes, instead of the 7 generally used in western canon >

Are you a leprechaun?  Republicans have hijacked the flag and it really bothers me because they are not patriots.  They’ve also hijacked the cross and the many of them are not following the teaching of Christ so……. A rainbow is a rainbow to me.  People that dwell on “gay” have some serious mental issues. >

Why are they “your” rainbows? Why do you feel like you used to have them and now they have been stolen from you? You’re allowed to use them in designs however often you want, whatever connotation people draw is their own problem. >

Things that are pride related are usually fairly obvious. Things that are not often have clouds or other differentiating features, as well as I think that the colors are slightly different. Is there a reason why you are hung up on possibly being associated with the gay community? Are you in a country where it would be problematic? Maybe I am biased. Out of three kids and four steps, two are gay, one is trans and one is an ace >

Why are you so hung up on "being uncomfortable being identified as something I'm not"?  It's coming off as extremely homophobic.  What's wrong with someone mistakenly thinking you're gay?  Seriously, why does that make you uncomfortable?  
Imagine you just met someone at a party and told them your name, chatted for about 15 seconds, and left.  Two hours later, they flag you down again, and they call you by the wrong name.  Does that make you "uncomfortable"?  
Or imagine you love dogs, and don't really like cats very much.  Someone says "hey, there's a new Cat Café in town, do you want to go check it out?"  Would it make you uncomfortable to be mistaken for being a cat person, or would you just say "I'm not really interested, thanks"?  
You're straight.  No one is prejudiced against you.  So use a rainbow however the heck you want to, it's not going to make anyone prejudiced against you.  If it makes some bigoted asshole think you're gay and then treat you differently, then guess what?  You're better off without them anyway. >

...no?  Try traveling outside of the US sometime.  The symbol appears all over the place, in its original, non-tilted orientation, in other countries.  No one's showing up at temples in Asian countries and screaming about them being Nazis. >


I've always belived rainbows to be amazing and magical, always loved them, but it is now almost impossible to do anything with a rainbow, without being called part of the LGBTQ.

Not really, all sorts of straight LGBTQ allies still use rainbows themselves, to express support of LGBTQ people. >

Doing certain months mostly, but also those who do it do it to constantly vocally support them, and while I do support them and think it’s great they do it, I don’t want to be a spokesperson just for using rainbows >

I have no idea who you are and I don't consider you a spokesperson for anyone. Just do your art and let people think what they want of it. You can't control peoples perception of your art, and once the art has left you it's for the public to decide how it's interpreted, as the artist you renounce say on release. That's how it works.
Check your ego and need for control. If you don't you'll spend all your time fussing and worrying for absolutely nothing in return. If you don't want your art misinterpreted, don't share it. >

Would you be this fearful of being accused of being straight if you were gay? That’s your proof that this is all your internalized fear of feeling like a fag. Deal with that, and you’ll be able to dine out of a rainbow picnic basket while sitting on top of a floral blanket. Have a nice day. >

Chill the fuck out, you seem to be projecting. Nothing this guy has said implies they are afraid of feeling gay. They specifically said they just don't want people to misidentifying their expressed gender because of their rainbow usage.  
Also we have no idea where this guy is from and I'm sure your worldview is far too narrow to have considered the many places on earth you can get beaten or killed if people just think, you're gay, let alone open accusations. What a smooth brained comparison. >


They specifically said they just don't want people to misidentifying their expressed gender

No they didn't. They haven't used the word "gender" a single time in this post. >

Yeah but I'm pretty sure this OP isn't from a western country by what I've seen so it's not exactly fair to expect them to be using perfect gender theory terminology. 
I mean I may have missed something but I feel like they've gone out of their way to express how they don't mean anyone any offence. That they just don't want to be forced to the front of a fight completely unrelated to their love of rainbows. >

It's disingenuous to say somebody has "specifically said" something when they have not done so at all. You're filling in those details with assumptions.
Their main point seems to be not wanting to be identified as part of the LGBT community, not specifically being identified as trans. 

I don’t dislike rainbows, but I don’t want people to say I’m part of a community I’m not

That's the most common way they phrase that argument. >

And the the guy I was responding to conflated this claim with internalised fear of feeling gay, literally trying to turn what seems like a relatively benign if uneducated opinion into evidence for some poxie psychoanalytical condemnation. 
Sorry if you felt mislead by my phrasing I should've included sexuality as well as gender. But as I said it seemed to be pretty clear to me what they were trying to say and I think my response was fairer than what I responded to.
Not sure how me trying to give them the benefit of the doubt is worse than a baseless accusation. >

Is the prejudice you’re referring to just people thinking you’re gay? Because compared to the actual prejudice that queer people experience, it seems a little homophobic of you to be saying that just being compared to a queer person is an act of prejudice. It’d be like a white person saying that they wish they could post stuff about how the idea of race is problematic without everyone thinking they’re black. “I hate being thought to be something different than what I am” they might say. But actually this just translates to “I don’t like it when people think I’m black because I have internalized racism that makes me believe black people are less than”. 
In summary, please check your privilege >

Rainbow symbolizes spectrum. And that’s what it means. That our sexuality and sex are not binary. We all are on this spectrum. I also think that wouldn’t be a problem for you if you personally didn’t experience negative emotions to the 🏳️‍🌈 community. >

Implicitly very homophobic remark >

In what way? >

"I have nothing against LGBTQ people, I just want homophobes to like me" >

I think the LGBTQ+ rainbow is different to the conventional rainbow. It has 8 colors or something >

Yes, I also stated that if it was just the flag it would be ok, but too many people still think of all rainbows that way, and a lot of lgbtq+ people use the conventional rainbow to showcase it. >

I remember being about 10 years old, loving rainbows, and my parents literally pull me to the living room day to have a “talk” and ask if I was gay because all I wanted was rainbow stuff from the store. Truly traumatizing. They were so angry and although they don’t admit it even today you could see it in their face. I was fucking 10 years old. 
Now they have grandchildren who love rainbows and don’t bat an eye about anything lgbtq+. >

Starting your statement with "I'm not homophobic but..." is not a great look and a red flag tbh. >

OP you are absolutely right. >

This is funny, because the only other people I've seen get angry about this are hardcore Christians. In Genesis, God talks about the rainbow being a covenant between him and man, his promise that he will never flood the Earth again. Thus many Christians feel the rainbow belongs to them, and the LGBTQ use is an abomination.
So, Veruca Salt, my point is that you're being ridiculous. Everything in the universe holds multiple simultaneous meanings. You can make things symbolic of anything you want, but you don't get to keep them jealously to yourself. >


I've always belived rainbows to be amazing and magical, always loved them

Gays are amazing, magical and I have always loved them.
But all with all seriousness. What is so wrong liking something "gay"? >

If i had to guess people see the rainbow stuff and think op is a LGBT+ supporter and that bothers them for some reason. >

But why does it bother them? >

Op isn’t arguing that lgbt people don’t struggle lol. They’re just arguing that rainbows are associated with strictly lgbt which is a fair point but it’ll eventually die off >

Yes I agree, I’ve heard the swastika is very similar to an Indian peace symbol, but of course a majority of people outside of the culture will only think of the swastika when seeing it, a shame really. >

Isn’t the logical conclusion of this that LGBTQ+ isn’t allowed to have a symbol? You are upset about the rainbow, but for any conceivable symbol, someone could have a similar problem to yours, that they independently like the symbol, and are upset people now think it means they are LGBTQ+. 
I agree that it can be annoying to have people assume you’re a part of something, but wouldn’t the better problem to solve be that people think negatively of LGBTQ+? If we achieve that, people might still be mistaken if course, but it would matter way less. >

I don't think your argument really works, the symbol for LGBTQ+ doesn't need to be a pre-existing, repurposed symbol. It's not like every logo on the planet already existed before it being used by a company or organisation. >


There’s nothing new under the sun (or rainbow, if you will). Even if someone created a logo made up of completely novel shapes, it would have to be a pre-existing colour, a colour someone could be attached to and have a similar problem as the OP. 

1.5. I would even argue this is the case with LGBTQ+ and the rainbow. The flag isn’t shaped like a rainbow, nor is it even coloured as one. It portrays six or seven evenly sized distinct colours, whereas a rainbow is the complete colour spectrum. LGBTQ+ is using a stylised version of a pre-existing object, and if that’s not allowed, no organisation could have a symbol. 

I said this in a different comment, but all political parties I know of uses a pre-existing symbol. I assume it’s because there are benefits to doing so. Saying LGBTQ+ can’t get those benefits because it inconveniences OP doesn’t seem reasonable to me. >


There's nothing new under the sun, but it's possible to make something unique with what's there.

1.5 The flag is about as unique as a rainbow drawn by a five year old. From childhood we've all learnt to draw rainbows that way.

I fully agree with this, I was just replying to that one argument. >

You are not against LGBTQ+, but you took the time to make a post aboit them using your rainbow??? >

Yes, it is more of a problem with the fact that so many people have prejudice towards people using the rainbow, which can’t and won’t change now that it is the “symbol” of lgbtq+ >

Isn't the issue you have more with the overly prejudiced people then? If you loved the colour pink, you'd have the same issue with the people who think pink is gay, wouldn't you? >

It is with the prejudice yes, I think I worded it wrong, as I am not a native English speaker >

Well frankly you’re English is wonderful 
But the point still stands, your issues seems to be with prejudice people and not LGBTQ+ 
I’m still a tad confused though. Why exactly do you have such an issue with some possibly thinking you are LGBTQ+ ? >

I think it's because 1. a lot of people have negative feelings towards LGBTQ+, which of course is horrible, and I don't want to get a lot of hate comments from them, but also I don't want to mislead people into thinking i'm part of something I'm not.
​
-Also thank you for the compliment to my English :) >

This reminds me a lot of the Pink Floyd thing recently. 
Pink Floyd put out an album in 1973, Dark Side of the Moon.
The album cover had a picture of white light entering a prism and being separated in to rainbow colors, which is an actual physical phenomenon that happens. It has nothing to do with LGBT stuff. 
They released a 30 year anniversary edition of the album and it, sure enough, had a rainbow on it. 
Now a bunch of bigots and homophobes are calling Pink Floyd woke and groomers and making all sorts of horrible accusations against them because of the rainbow. 
That's the kind of thing you're talking about right? You dont want that to happen to you? >

The level of ignorance demonstrated by those reactionaries is pretty alarming. Comfortably Dumb.
(You beat be to it with the Pink Floyd thing. It's the 50-year anniversary by the way). >


I have nothing against anything with LGBTQ 

​

My problem is that so many people now say that rainbows are "gay"

Ejem... that reeks of homophobia :) What is the problem if you have a rainbow and someone thinks that it is gay? It's nothing bad, and unless you wanna sleep with that someone, what they think about your sexuality shouldn't be an issue.
Maybe, if people seeing you with a rainbow and thinking that you are gay is causing problems, you should advocate for protection of the LGBTQ community and less discrimination because you are being affected by that discrimination also.
So, the problem is not with the LGBTQ community using the rainbow, the problem is with prejudiced people. >

So it reeks of homophobia to not want to be identified diffrently than you are?
Advocating won’t change anything if I, with zero influence do it.
But yea the problem is with the prejudice >

You need to read your phrase again. "my problem is that people say that rainbows are gay" is a problem related with homophobia, or your own or your peers.
Now, this doesn't mean that you have bad intentions, but it is common to get stuck with the homophobia or other problems of our environments, and it is important to recognise that to work on it.
But, if we go to the main point, your problem is with people that are being bigoted against the LGBTQ community. Now, why do you care about those people? why do you share time with people like those? They are hateful and harmful people to be close by.
And if you are force to be with them, why do you care about their opinions?
Unless this is a security issue, that this people will attack you if you wear something with a rainbow, that again, you should advocate for that changing, then you shouldn't care about them.

Advocating won’t change anything if I, with zero influence do it.

This is quite wrong, the point is not that you are going to change the world, but it is important to advocate about this things in our personal spaces, so hate can't have a safe house with us. Because if the only people that advocates for having a bit of humanity and empathy are the influencers or people that are seen as detached from the rest of the population, their impact would be reduced, and even attacked more freely. >

LGBTQ people face a lot of discrimination and abuse, including homelessness, violence, and illegal police action. As such, they deserve a strong symbol to rally behind to fight for your rights.
While it sucks for you to not have the rainbow for your personal needs, they need it more than you. So, it should be associated with rainbows for the greater good. >

Personally I believe it would be better if they made their own original collies to use, instead of using something that is already used a lot and loved by many outside of the community >

But that would have less impact as less people know about it. Everyone knows about the rainbow, so it's a stronger symbol to rally LGBTQ people together. Also, they have history with the rainbow. It's a powerful long term symbol.
Why would it be better for them to abandon their history and symbolism for something less notable to help those outside of their community? >

Because they should’ve never taken rainbows to begin with, people would still associate whatever they chose as lgtbq+, and it would have gotten as much marketing as rainbows have gotten for the cause, and it would’ve likely turned a few people who could’ve seen rainbows as them stealing from straight people. (I don’t see it that way of course, but I’m sure some would)
Also them helping people outside the community would also help people inside the community by making more people accept them. >

More recognizable brands mean more marketing, not less. If they chose a less interesting and recognizable brand they'd get less marketing.
If people see LGBTQ people as thieves for using a common aspect of nature, they're probably bigoted enough that it's fine angering them. Angering people who are bigoted tends to help the cause, as they look bad for everyone. 
They don't want to help bigots, that's against their goals. >

Still don’t like being seen as part of lgbtq, yea a rainbow is easier to market, still, they wouldn’t lose much if it was another colour >

Why should they lose anything to please people who already hate them and probably won't change?
They are the victims. Why should they accommodate people for zero gain to them? >

Rainbows include many colors which fits the theme of inclusion and diversity.
They're used to express support, not to signal that you fall under any of the categories the letters stand for.
It's one thing to associate them generally, another to assume that any use of a rainbow by someone is either expressing support or identifying with one of the categories. Having the association doesn't mean someone needs to make that assumption. So I think your problem is with something more specific than association, it's the assumption and the prejudice that are the real issue.
Any sort of logo imagery, or even basic colors like pink for femininity, can become associated with something as well, and there's no good basis for saying fairly basic imagery can or cannot be used in logos without setting a precedent that would cause a problem for the vast majority of logos and more - like "red" as a color for stop or danger generally - so I think there's no particular reason rainbows should deserve special exemption. >

I enjoy rainbows, colors are beautiful in a rainbows.  I still wear, buy things with rainbows on it just for love of rainbows, does not symbolizes I'm part of LGBTQ+.  People who see rainbows on a person should not assume they are LGBTQ+. >

The only real issue I can see with this is if you’re getting harassed because people think you’re queer.
Which is a queer issue. A bigotry issue.
You are well within your right to associate rainbows however you’d like.
I see a rainbow and associate with lgbtq+ because I’m a gay man and I can if I want to.
Every rainbow is gay. That’s how I do it.
So don’t do what I do if you don’t want to.
People face issues for being queer though. Harmful, violent issues and I don’t think it needs to be the end of the world if people think your queer. Just correct them and move on. >

Nothing against them, and I do support that people do what they want, what do you mean by advocate? (Not a native English speaker) >

Oh yes, I do. >

Double rainbow dude finally came out of his acid induced coma >

Did you just call it acid induced coma😂😂 >

Yes, I also want to use rainbows and not get questions like are you gay. Also I don’t wanna be misleading to people who take it as a sign cause I’m straight >

Yes, that is very much my thougts! >

i have to disagree because the rainbow is just symbolic of a spectrum, and since sexuality is a spectrum they used the rainbow as their flag. makes sense to me. plus its the immature kids that have to associate rainbows with anything queer >

this buddy of mine is in a country band and he said he is going to write a song called : give me back my rainbow , it will be tongue and cheek though, because he isn't an asshole >

well there are a lot of rainbows in kindergartens... If people define you by what you wear or things you use then it's their problem. Just ignore them, use as many rainbows that you like! I often received comments on my fashion (lolita) although I just wear them when hanging out with friends. We can't change stereotypes then. >

The rainbow flag was adopted by the LGBT rights movement in the late 70s. I'm going out on a limb and assuming that predates you. If you can't handle someone thinking you might be gay because you are using a rainbow in some way, that's a you problem, not a rainbow problem. >

Everything is "associated" with something in today's world. You just have to live your life the way you want to and not worry about what others think. If you have someone come at you in a way you don't like/want because of something you like, do you even really want that kind of person in your life anyways? 
My 8 year old son LOVES rainbow colors! He also LOVES the typical "boy" stuff. He is obsessed with trucks and heavy equipment and wear rainbow colored glasses I don't see anyone calling him gay because he likes and uses rainbows and bright colors. My middle son (15) is bisexual and hates rainbows and bright colors.
Rainbows themselves are not an LGBTQIA+ representation the pride flags just happens to have rainbow stripes.
Live your life and the people that are worth being in your life will treat you the way you want to be treated. Life is to short to not enjoy the things you like because you're worried about judgment from someone that hold no importance in your life. >

So why can't you wear rainbows? Because you don't want people you assume you're queer? >

Is it supposed to mean that each letter of the alphabet people is a different color? ROY G BIV >

You shouldn't care if someone assumes you're gay. People shouldn't be assuming sexual orientation or gender anyway. 
If you have a problem with strangers assuming you're part of the queer community, then it sounds like you have a problem with the queer community.
Or you could always make a shirt like that Demetri Martin joke
:::Picture of rainbow:::
"Not gay, but supportive" >

You can have the rainbow! The rainbow has all the colours and represents all people, not just the gays. but EVERYONE is incuded, even you. Thats why the rainbow is used. >

Why should we let the prejudices of some, a minority in my country, prevent us from enjoying a rainbow in the manor of our choice? Allowing bigots to decide social policy has always ended poorly, let’s not give them this too. >

You could just wear a button that says “I’m not gay.” Then everyone would know. Maybe a tattoo. On your forehead. >

Rainbows are gay. They're brightly coloured and showy. >

I think the biggest question is why are you so concerned with being associated with the LGBTQ community?  I'm not part of the community, but I have no issue being associated with it.  If I had a rainbow on my bag and someone asked me if I was gay, I'd just say no. 
Why does that association bother you so much? >

A bit of history between 1930s-1940s when the nazi were in control especially with those who associated with Judaism and had them wear the star of David. This same concept was also implemented in concentration camps for people who identified as gay and wore a pink triangle on their clothing. After the ruling of nazi Germany was surpassed, there wasn't really a symbol/flag for quite a long time until the 70s when Gilbert Baker who was an openly gay man who felt the community needed some kind of symbol and felt the rainbow would be well suited for it. >

Put pink into the rainbow. Like literally just replace the red with pink and it will become non-symbolic. >

No u can still use rainbows. What’s so bad about being called gay hmm? >

Sounds like you have a problem with people who are anti-LGBTQ - or, more importantly, treating their complaints as valid. Simply don’t care about people who make such silly excuses to hate others. >

I think I see what you are getting at, op. No one wants people to assume anything of you that isn't true. 
But...fuck what other people think. If you like using rainbows and people assume you're gay, so what? That's their limited mindset. >

Have you maybe tried being gay? It'll solve all your problems. >

Rainbows are still rainbows man. Can be used wherever by whoever. Not everyone sees a rainbow and thinks 'gay' it's just a pretty thing that brightens peoples days >


I've always belived rainbows to be amazing and magical, always loved them, but it is now almost impossible to do anything with a rainbow, without being called part of the LGBTQ.

This is how symbols work. I've always believed that stars and stripes are both cool things to have on a flag, but stick 'em on a flag these days and you're going to call up associations with the USA.

I just want my rainbows back, I want to be able to use rainbows for designs and fun stuff, without all the prejudice that comes with it.

Use them for designs and stuff. If you make a painting with a rainstorm and a rainbow, nobody'll think that's "gay". If you wrap a cartoon unicorn in glittering rainbows, I think people will get the point that it's a sparkly unicorn, not a political statement.
Might help if you gave some context about what symbols you're trying to put a rainbow on? >

Everyone knows rainbows are God's promise to not flood the earth again >

The only group that views any rainbow as relating to LGBT+ identity is conservatives.