comes in colours ev'rywhere

Last night's baseball game was also a fundraiser for Savannah PRIDE.
The parade won't occur until October, but, because this is the second decade mark, an all-out (pun intended!) celebration is in store.
Accordingly, fundraisers began in May to make this year's the biggest yet to come.
(Yes, that little joke was intended, too. You're welcome! LOL!)
(smile)
Ordinarily, for a Bark In The Park night, the First Banana would be hoisted by someone associated with a local shelter.
However, this time, that honor was granted to a female veteran of the Navy.
She is lesbian and associated with Savannah PRIDE.

A little later, the Eagle Scout started a dialogue about that.
Specifically, he said he didn't have a problem with lesbians and gays, but he couldn't support "all those other types".
My reply had been, "Oh, so you don't like all the colors of the rainbow, you just like a couple of them."
He had brightened and said, "Exactly! That is exactly right! I want to get a rainbow flag that's missing some of the colors!"
I had tried to explain that it wouldn't be a "rainbow" flag then, but couldn't get any traction with that concept.

This morning, I was musing on the idea while the coffee was percolating.
That's when I realized that there had been a misconception, not just with him, but with the entire gender argument.
Most people, on both sides, regard the rainbow flag as only pertaining to those who are homosexual.
I argue that the rainbow does not exclude heterosexuals.
Let me explain what it does represent, shall I?
Every rainbow ever consists of seven colors, though the identity may vary.
A Newtonian might list them as red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet.
However, one like Isaac Asimov would describe them as red, orange, yellow, green cyan, blue, violet.
I prefer to consider the seven as four unique shades and three blended ones.
That actually works rather well in describing the seven basic sexual types.
Let's start with the blended colors: green, orange, and purple.
Those correspond with three blended, or blurred, regions of the sexuality continuum.
"Questioning" are those who don't know what gender attracts them.
"Bisexual" are those who are attracted to both male and female genders.
"Transgender" describes those with gender conflicts between the sexual pieces of their physical body and their mental image of their identity.
That makes "Q", "B", and "T" applicable to either homosexual or heterosexual persons, even though they are regarded as part of LGBTQ culture.
That takes care of three of the seven colors in the rainbow.
"Lesbian" is limited to women who only want other women for sex, making it exclusively homosexual. That would be represented by a primary color, whether it be red, yellow, or blue.
"Gay" refers to men who only are sexually attracted to other men, at leat since the 1960's. That means this term is also exclusively referencing homosexuals and can be represented by a primary color.
"Heterosexual" is the term applied to males attracted exclusively to women or to women attracted exclusively to men. This category would also be represented in the rainbow by a primary color.
So, red, yellow, blue, orange, green, and violet are assigned to comparable sexual archetypes, whether discrete or blended.
That just leaves one color out of the mix: cyan/indigo.
Not a primary color.
Not a blend of two primary colors.
Something unique, not attributable to any classification already noted on the continuum.
I suggest that seventh color be applied to those who are "asexual", those finding no attraction to anyone else.

We are all part of the same rainbow, folks.
It doesn't matter what the label is, we are all on the same sexual continuum.
Heterosexual, homosexual, or asexual, what does it matter?
Seriously.
There is plenty of Earth for all of us.
I think the Rolling Stones would agree with me.
After all, their song is all about a woman having sex... but doesn't specify with whom.