>


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.
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).