Black Lives Matter Toronto briefly halts Pride parade

There have been ongoing consultations for years. 

I think it's fine that Pride is going to hold an open forum on this before the next Pride, personally, but it's important to note that these are not new issues, none of them, and that they have been under discussion for years around Pride, within the LGBT+ communities. The demands from BLMTO did not spring from nowhere, and no one on the Pride executive would have been surprised by them, since they come from years of consulations within marginalized people within the LGBT+ communities. 

I don't care what anyone signed. Did you not hear me? Human rights are not negotiable. Or subject to referendum votes. As for more black ASL interpreters, are you suggesting that Pride is reneging on that? First I heard of it. Therefore, big straw person.

Mr. Magoo wrote:

I don't have authoritative info on what they have or have not bent the knee for.  If there will be more black ASL interpreters then huzzah for whoever could not abide an Asian one.

Oh, sorry, got it - All Interpreters Matter. Thanks for the clarification.

Quote:

But you're usually a bit of a stickler for the details.  Can you tell me me more about someone's Human right to not have a police booth at a parade, and perhaps how the law frames that?

No. It's just one of those things that if you don't get, you won't get.

Quote:

Here is a very partial list of police actions against queer communities after 1981:

• 1987-1992/3: Police lay obscenity charges against queer publications, from the The Joy of Gay Sex to the lesbian magazine Bad Attitude, and the bookstores that sell the material, from Toronto's Glad Day to Little Sister's in Vancouver.
• 1990: Montreal police bust the Sex Garage, a popular queer party, and arrest 48 people in the subsequent protest.
• 1994/1995: Julian Fantino's fabricated kiddie-porn panic in London, Ontario results in over 500 charges.
• 1996: Police raid Remington's, a Toronto gay strip club, and lay charges against 19 staff, dancers, and customers
• 1999: Police raid the Bijoux, a gay porn bar in Toronto, and 19 patrons are arrested for committing "indecent acts."
• April 2000: Police visit the Barn and lay charges against members of Totally Naked Toronto, a men's nudist group.
• Sept 2000: Police raid the Pussy Palace, a women's night at the Club Baths.
• November 2000: Police visit the Toolbox, an S/M bar, and lay charges related to liquor license infractions during a naked-night party.
• Dec 2002: Police raid Goliath's, a bathhouse in Calgary, arresting 15 men.
• Aug 2004: Police raid the Warehouse, Hamilton's bathhouse, and arrest two men for committing "indecent acts."

[url=http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/views-expressed/2016/07/think-canadas-po... Canada's police now have enlightened views toward Pride? Think again.[/url]

swallow wrote:

Quote:

Here is a very partial list of police actions against queer communities after 1981:

• 1987-1992/3: Police lay obscenity charges against queer publications, from the The Joy of Gay Sex to the lesbian magazine Bad Attitude, and the bookstores that sell the material, from Toronto's Glad Day to Little Sister's in Vancouver.
• 1990: Montreal police bust the Sex Garage, a popular queer party, and arrest 48 people in the subsequent protest.
• 1994/1995: Julian Fantino's fabricated kiddie-porn panic in London, Ontario results in over 500 charges.
• 1996: Police raid Remington's, a Toronto gay strip club, and lay charges against 19 staff, dancers, and customers
• 1999: Police raid the Bijoux, a gay porn bar in Toronto, and 19 patrons are arrested for committing "indecent acts."
• April 2000: Police visit the Barn and lay charges against members of Totally Naked Toronto, a men's nudist group.
• Sept 2000: Police raid the Pussy Palace, a women's night at the Club Baths.
• November 2000: Police visit the Toolbox, an S/M bar, and lay charges related to liquor license infractions during a naked-night party.
• Dec 2002: Police raid Goliath's, a bathhouse in Calgary, arresting 15 men.
• Aug 2004: Police raid the Warehouse, Hamilton's bathhouse, and arrest two men for committing "indecent acts."

[url=http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/views-expressed/2016/07/think-canadas-po... Canada's police now have enlightened views toward Pride? Think again.[/url]

12 years?

bekayne wrote:

swallow wrote:

Quote:

Here is a very partial list of police actions against queer communities after 1981:

• 1987-1992/3: Police lay obscenity charges against queer publications, from the The Joy of Gay Sex to the lesbian magazine Bad Attitude, and the bookstores that sell the material, from Toronto's Glad Day to Little Sister's in Vancouver.
• 1990: Montreal police bust the Sex Garage, a popular queer party, and arrest 48 people in the subsequent protest.
• 1994/1995: Julian Fantino's fabricated kiddie-porn panic in London, Ontario results in over 500 charges.
• 1996: Police raid Remington's, a Toronto gay strip club, and lay charges against 19 staff, dancers, and customers
• 1999: Police raid the Bijoux, a gay porn bar in Toronto, and 19 patrons are arrested for committing "indecent acts."
• April 2000: Police visit the Barn and lay charges against members of Totally Naked Toronto, a men's nudist group.
• Sept 2000: Police raid the Pussy Palace, a women's night at the Club Baths.
• November 2000: Police visit the Toolbox, an S/M bar, and lay charges related to liquor license infractions during a naked-night party.
• Dec 2002: Police raid Goliath's, a bathhouse in Calgary, arresting 15 men.
• Aug 2004: Police raid the Warehouse, Hamilton's bathhouse, and arrest two men for committing "indecent acts."

[url=http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/views-expressed/2016/07/think-canadas-po... Canada's police now have enlightened views toward Pride? Think again.[/url]

12 years?

And you have to go back 16 years to find an example from Toronto, the police force being criticized here.

I'm also curious about how much blame people think should be alloted to the politicians who oversee these police forces. There seemed to be general enthusiasm that Justin Trudeau was participating in Toronto Pride. Well, he runs the RCMP. What is THEIR record currently like in regards to racism, homophobia, etc?

And if we find that record to be less than pristine, do we hold JT accountable, and maybe question whether he's a suitable invitee for Pride? Or does he get a pass in return for at least articulating sentiments and values congruent with Pride?

Nothing, other than we'll see how Pride deals with that demand.

Unionist wrote:

I don't care what anyone signed. Did you not hear me? Human rights are not negotiable. Or subject to referendum votes. As for more black ASL interpreters, are you suggesting that Pride is reneging on that? First I heard of it. Therefore, big straw person.

Actually they are.

Human rights aren't a set of rules carved into stone. They are sets of beliefs like humans should be protected against unlawful imprisonment, torture, and execution.  It's quite open to inturputation.

They're also subject to specific governments. Do you think in Saudia Arabia you have the right to be protected against torture?

Human rights are beliefs and suggestions which means they are essentially negotiable.

Again, it would sure be handy next time I got a ticket if there was a human right to not have to deal with cops, but there is no such right.

There are arguments for and against this.None of them are showstoppers, sorry.

Actually, I think #BLM has no problem sharing the spotlight. The problem is police floats at the parade. I agree with #BLM.

So nice to have butter-wouldn't-melt provocateurs involved in a conversation about Black folks being profiled and murdered by police.

Open Letter to the Vancouver Pride Society and the Vancouver Police Department from Black Lives Matter Vancouver

Very good letter.

Thanks for taking the time to flush that out for me Misfit. Wise words for sure. I plan to go over your example a few times. 

Maybe my problem is that I'm too quick to try and forget the past, especially easy when it didn't effect me.  Not exactly the same but in Bosnia villages would absolutely hate each other (up to and including planting land minds at the graves stones of the other villages cemetaries) because of something their ancestors did to each other 500 years ago.  I think to myself at what point, if ever, does the past become a crutch?

I wonder if BLM had a bigger picture in mind with blocking the parade. Should police be banned from having parades for 5 years? 10? Forever?

I'm not sure if you skipped it on purpose or by accident (in the former case then no worries please disregard) but what did you think about my question as to whether police presence should be absent from the parade all together?

Unionist wrote:

So nice to have butter-wouldn't-melt provocateurs involved in a conversation about Black folks being profiled and murdered by police.

 

I know right? Have you considered trying to extort the admins and threaten to quit unless the provocateurs are banned?

In post # 77 I expressed some doubt about the rationale behind the no uniformed police floats/booths as part of Pride demand. I still have the same thoughts, but I'm more open to the perspective of BLM-TO at present.  Regardless, it's an issue between them and Pride Toronto.

From an earlier (less recent post):

Really, if we want to speak plainly, it was a ransom.  If Pride didn't want an entire parade to roast in the sun for six hours, they pretty much had to sign.  If you think anyone should be bound by such an agreement, please say why.

I actually see non-violent peaceful protest such as a sit-down (which this was) in a different light.  The protesters were putting themselves in a precarious position, rather than putting the parade organizers in such a position.  The parade organizers could easily have had the police move and/or arrest them*.  This is a risk that the protesters put themselves under.  The parade organizers were under no such risk.  They willingly signed the agreement when they had the other clear option, I feel.

 

what did you think about my question as to whether police presence should be absent from the parade all together

That's just stupid.  There was an article on Rabble that proposed all of society should be police free, by the very nice Michael Stewart -- regardless, silly, IMO.

____

* unless the police refused to acknowledge such a request from the parade organizers, which would have been delicious irony.

ETA:  ..but then Pride could simply use its own security team and/or volunteers to move them out of the way.  Moving protesters engaged in a sit-down blockade of something happens all the time.  Again, there was no need for Pride to sign the document if they didn't agree to its content.

I don't see the point in dancing around that.

If I can't dance I want no part of your revolution.

6079_Smith_W wrote:

It was a ransom (a contract forced under duress, actually) and deceit and implied lack of trust, since they took this step rather than going to pride without a forced ultimatum.

So charming, to talk like this about activists organizing against police profiling and murders. Why not just call them terrorists and get it over with?

Then maybe you can pontificate about Indigenous folks who blockade roads and rail tracks and bridges, thus burning all the good will of the good Canadians who are inconvenienced.

What a sickening thread this has become.

mark_alfred wrote:

 

I actually see non-violent peaceful protest such as a sit-down (which this was) in a different light.  The protesters were putting themselves in a precarious position, rather than putting the parade organizers in such a position.  The parade organizers could easily have had the police move and/or arrest them*.

In theory perhaps. In practice can you imagine the shit super-storm that would explode if the parade organizers had BLM protestors physically removed by police?

Also I agree about it being silly (no police presence) but I've seen it argued a lot.

Paladin, I think it is up to the Black Lives Matter Toronto committee to define what their needs are and for how long they want their needs met and that it is up to us to listen and respect their wishes. It is not up to me to make those hypothetical decisions and to set up time frames for them. This is all a part of what listening and respecting is all about. You also place a huge burden of forgiveness on the Black Lives Matter community, especially since the police seem to show no remorse or concern for the senseless harassment and brutality they continue to inflict on the lives of black people. How long? Well how long are the police going to continue carding, harassing, assaulting, and murdering visible minorities and showing no concern for murdered and missing First Nations women? How long, Paladin? How long do we have to wait for the police to fully account for their actions? That is the real how long that you seem to be conspicuously silent about.

It was a forced ultimatum, unionist. And it was deception and a betrayal of trust. It was also a brilliant move. My question was if it id indeed an issue as serious as wholesale murder, who cares about dressing it up and pretending it was not exactly what it was. As for your perennial shame game, not sure if you are ever going to figure out that some of us could care less what you think about us, as the issue at hand is a little bit more important.

In theory perhaps. In practice can you imagine the shit super-storm that would explode if the parade organizers had BLM protestors physically removed by police?

Yes.  Also, police may not have moved them, feeling it was an internal affair of Pride (since BLM-TO were actual invited participants rather than outside protesters).  IE, they may have seen it as a civil affair between the two parties rather than a criminal affair.  Mind you, it would be like an employee who has suddenly decided to protest a company action and stage a sit down strike rather than do her/his job.  Generally in such a case dismissal and removal occurs -- insubordination being frowned upon by most employers (unless it's a refusal to do unsafe work, of course).  Work now, grieve later, as they say (in fairness to BLM-TO, we really don't know what discussions have occurred behind closed doors over the years regarding the issues of concern to BLM-TO -- so the oft-mentioned idea of them springing this outta nowhere is not known, I'd say).  Anyway, as I mentioned earlier, even if police wouldn't enforce such a request, I believe Pride has its own security and volunteers that could have removed them if the conditions BLM-TO demanded were seen as too disagreeable to Pride Toronto to agree to.  I don't see any honour in the more powerful party of the two signing an agreement and then reneging on it.  Pride Toronto is the more powerful party.

Also, my point is that they were under no obligation to sign the agreement.  So it's wrong to say "forced agreement".  Non-violent protesters staging stuff like sit-ins are frequently moved and could have been here too.  Again, Pride Toronto is the more powerful entity who had other options than signing something they didn't agree to.  And again, are you saying that all acts of non-violent peaceful protest can never be resolved with an agreement on the spot?  Because you seem to be suggesting that the act of non-violent peaceful protest negates the possibility of agreement.

I did not say there is no possibility of agreement. I said one person's signature does not compel a board to do anything. And that is their stated position on this.

A year or so ago there were some good articles on rogue police in the Toronto Star.  Certainly still issues there.

[digression]

Mind you, the following question puzzles me a bit:  "crime keeps going down year after year so why do we keep increasing police budgets?"  I mean, seems to me that it could be argued that the increased expenditure has shown successful results (crime keeps going down).  "I keep spending more on education even though the jobs I've been getting over the years have had a consistently higher salary each time.  Why do I keep spending money on education then?"  Odd, seems the answer is right within the question.  If one says, "I keep spending more on education year after year and yet I end up with low salary jobs regardless.  Why do I keep spending money on education then?"  Or, "crime keeps going up year after year despite increased spending on police so why do we keep pursuing this failed policy?  Perhaps increasing social spending on affordable housing would be a better way to reduce crime." --> yet this isn't what we're hearing.  Instead, it's "we spend money, get good results, so why are we spending money?"  This as a question makes no sense to me.  To argue "we keep increasing money on police budgets and crime goes down, but there is no correlation -- crime has gone down due to a lower proportion of younger people and a higher proportion of the elderly in the population today, rather than as a result of increase spending on police, meaning increasing spending on police is not necessary and a waste of money." --> note, I dunno if that's true, but at least as an argument it would make sense.

[/digression]