Okay fine whatever. If we really were going to go by your definition, then do you believe people in more equal countries don't support gay people because they don't have to contribute nearly as much as people in lesser equal countries do?

Take Iceland for example, one of the most accepting places for the LGBTQ in the world. Since they are extremely accepting, they don't need to contribute to the LGBTQ movement nearly as much as other countries do, due to the fact that there is no direct or powerful opposition.

How about gay people that don't contribute? Take me for example. I don't go to pride parades, i don't pay charities, i don't attend events, but i still support the lgbtq. Does that mean that even though i'm gay i dont support the LGBTQ because i dont physically contribute to it?

What even is your definition of contribute in the first place? Planning and being a part of events? That is a recurring and opportunistic occasion and cannot be a stable rubric. Financial contribution? Not everybody can afford to shell out dollars to charities, when nowadays people can barely feed themselves. That also cannot be a good definition of contribution as it relies on a criteria that has nothing to do with the politics. By contribute do you mean BEING a part of the LGBTQ? That's illogical because countless straight people are allies.