No Looking Like a Cop at the Pride Parade

[PepsiFree]

#bluelivesmatter

[Locke]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

#bluelivesmatter

No they dont. Their existence is pain.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Locke

What about Gay Police? Can we discriminate against them? No?

We're running out of people to discriminate against and fools and lepers are shouldering more than their fair share of the burden!

Thank #### for the fat, the short and the stupid.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by GGG

It really is an opportunity for Jean and Kenny to invite the LagNT community to help them craft equality initiatives. If they cam out and said we look forward to engaging the LGBT community on crafting equality policy and will attend as spectators they could get their political win at the expense of hurting their leadership chances.

Jean's response of I'm disappointed and always have supported equality rings of not getting the message.

Can you give an example of "Equality Initiatives"?

[Erick Estrada]

We are hypocrites by nature. I simply think a lot of people have far to high of expectations of our species. Deep down like all other animals self-preservation is our key instinct and with that comes inherent selfishness.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Can you give an example of "Equality Initiatives"?

How about add the following to the official policy of the UCP

“defend the equality of all persons regardless of race, religion, gender or sexual orientation.”

The last time this was tried by the WR we ended up with an NDP government.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by GGG

How about add the following to the official policy of the UCP

“defend the equality of all persons regardless of race, religion, gender or sexual orientation.”

The last time this was tried by the WR we ended up with an NDP government.

How do you know they won't when they actually make their official policies? (I could be wrong but a quick look shows they are doing it after selecting a leader).

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Weitz

How do you know they won't when they actually make their official policies? (I could be wrong but a quick look shows they are doing it after selecting a leader).

We have no idea, which I believe is the point of the Pride people. Show us that you respect US and then you can wrap yourself in the Pride flag to show you aren't bigots.

Why would pride assume based on the previous behaviour of half of the UCP that this would get in the platform.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by GGG

We have no idea, which I believe is the point of the Pride people. Show us that you respect our beliefs and then you can wrap yourself in the Pride flag to show you aren't bigots.

Why would pride assume based on the previous behaviour of half of the UCP that this would get in the platform.

I just find it silly that they would openly welcome people in years past from the Wildrose and PC party, but they suddenly won't accept them from the UCP? That along with the police restriction just seems there is more to it then what is being said. I am a cynic at heart though.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Weitz

I just find it silly that they would openly welcome people in years past from the Wildrose and PC party, but they suddenly won't accept them from the UCP? That along with the police restriction just seems there is more to it then what is being said. I am a cynic at heart though.

Because pride is undergoing a shift where it is actively being more aware and purposeful with it's mission and role in the community.

Just because they were doing something wrong before doesn't mean they should be noted as suspicious for correcting their behaviour. I think we can all agree that being better role models is a good thing.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

I think it is a pretty reasonable that Pride take the position that a group should show it's bona fides when it comes to the issues important to Pride. I have some sympathy for the CPS, as I don't think they asked to participate to score political points (as I am not sure with whom would they score?), but it is fair comment with respect to UCP.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Weitz

I just find it silly that they would openly welcome people in years past from the Wildrose and PC party, but they suddenly won't accept them from the UCP? That along with the police restriction just seems there is more to it then what is being said. I am a cynic at heart though.

http://globalnews.ca/news/3518050/wi...d-pride-event/

This was 2 months ago. I have no problem with Pride taking an active stance on asking what the UCP stands for before allowing them to participate given the fact that the Wildrose seemed to not know what it stood for either. The simple fact is the Wildrose did an atrocious job of promoting equality, because it did not promote equality. It had MLA talk about Lake of Fire. The leader came out and said she faced mutiny for participating in the parade and was punished for it. Another MLA was caught thanking transphobic posts. You have a staffer being harassed by members because he was out. It was a joke of a party, and it now makes up 1/2 of the UCP.

The very least Pride should be doing here is making sure the UCP gets its #### together when it comes to its stance on LGBT rights before allowing it to participate.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Because pride is undergoing a shift where it is actively being more aware and purposeful with it's mission and role in the community.

There was a time when pride sought the validation of other groups to give themselves legitimacy. To show they were accepted by wider society. Now it's pride who has the power, and other groups seek out their validation in order to give themselves legitimacy. It's an interesting reversal of power dynamics.

[wingmaker]

Pride has never been about inclusion. It didn't start that way and it never has been that way. Pride always was a protest where people who were gay demonstrated their sexuality in a group setting that gave them strength in numbers. Over the years, many people have marched with pride as a show of solidarity. But at no point was it a parade to celebrate inclusivity in general terms. More recently, pride has been elevated to the status of "cultural festival" by mostly sys and white pockets of the society who see it as a fun, family event. Many have misinterpreted Pride as a parade for everyone and should include everyone. But it never was. It has always been of and for LGBTQ individuals and their supporters. Specifically. And now Pride organizers are making a stand to make this clear. If you march in Pride, you are specifically supporting sexual equality for all, not some general inclusive, love thy neighbour feeling.

Additionally, several Pride organizations have championed the causes of other marginalized groups who are also LGBTQ—such as racial minorities. It is fully within their rights as a protest group to invite or not invite certain government and social organizations on behalf of these marginalized members of their group. After all, these are groups who carry a history of being segregated, discriminated against, and worse

That being said, the ongoing tiff with cops amongst Pride groups in Canada does have some problems. I understand the logic by Pride organizers but it is one that will receive lots of opposition. Perhaps this is their intent. I totally understand why many people would be angry with that and it is totally fair to critique Pride organizers on this issue.

But people who say Pride is about inclusivity and that to exclude certain groups is hypocritical do not understand that Pride is not about general inclusivity. It is very specifically about LGBTQ rights and that they organize as a protest. Still.

[GGG]

I think a lot of it comes down to this concept of once part of the out group is accepted by society it becomes okay to be prejudiced against them. People have the moral license not to truly accept them because of the bone they have been thrown.

We just had a black president so why are Blacks complaining
Black sports stars make a ton of money just #### up and play

In this case the LGBT has be "given" (actually fought for and suffered for) equality rights so people have this anger at them for not being satisfied and continuing to use their political power to advance their agenda.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GGG

I think a lot of it comes down to this concept of once part of the out group is accepted by society it becomes okay to be prejudiced against them.

I don't see that. It was perfectly acceptable to be prejudiced against LGBTs 30 years ago, and only mildly impolite 20 years ago. In that era, you didn't see companies and political parties asking to be part of Pride. Why would they want to be associated with something so weird and fringe?

Today, it's a serious black mark for a company or a party not to be seen as LGBT friendly. Pride has the moral and popular high ground now, and others want their validation. It's a sign of how power has shifted dramatically.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Weitz

I just find it silly that they would openly welcome people in years past from the Wildrose and PC party, but they suddenly won't accept them from the UCP? That along with the police restriction just seems there is more to it then what is being said. I am a cynic at heart though.

The face of bigotry has changed as well.

In the past anti-LGBTQ bigots were much more open about their beliefs. Now the line among many anti-LGBTQ groups is to state they only condemn the behaviour and not the people, and that makes them "inclusive". Obviously, that's total garbage. If you believe that a homosexual deserve to spend an eternity in hell, simply for acting on their feelings with consenting adults, then you are a bigot.

A lot of organizations are also using pride parades to "pink wash" their anti-homosexual and other bigoted agendas.

I can definitely see why pride parade organizers are wary of these people. Particularly groups like the UCP, who always refer to softening or changing their stance without outright coming out and stating they unequivocally support full equality, which means supporting gay marriage, adoption, etc..

The organizers of pride, which is indeed a political event, need to adapt their event to the changing faces of politics. I don't see a problem with that.

[PepsiFree]

It's all pretty simple. If you're marching in the parade just to show others you're supportive of the LGBTQ community in the day to day, don't march. If you're supportive of the LGBTQ community and want to march because you believe in the true spirit, history, and goals of Pride, march!

The fact that it became an empty political point-scoring event for some people is disgusting, the fact that Pride recognised this and took action is admirable. Pride is not to show your support despite your other day-to-day actions, it's to show your support in addition to them. The CPS as an organisation are a hell of a lot closer than the Wildrose have ever been, and I think their path to being back in the parade will be much faster and easier than the UCP's.

And showing support doesn't mean showing more support. It means showing the same amount of support you would to any other human being. It's about not treating people different because of their sexuality or gender. Seems simple enough, so it's no wonder the "power structure" has changed to a place where people who can't even do that end up blackmarked.

[longsuffering]

I can't say that I'm surprised.

Kenney turns down opportunity to discuss LGBTQ issues with KD Lang

For a man who aspires to be Alberta’s premier, turning down the chance to learn from a home-grown LGBTQ icon is sad but not surprising for an Alberta gay rights advocate.
On Tuesday, Alberta-born crooner k.d. lang, in Calgary for two shows at the Jubilee Auditorium, offered United Conservative Party leadership hopeful Jason Kenney free tickets to one of her performances — along with the proviso that he meets with the singer for a conversation about LGBTQ rights.

“I’ll give @jkenney free tickets if he’ll sit down and talk #lgbtqia rights with me!” lang tweeted to Kenney in response to an earlier pitch from Calgary blogger Mike Morrison, who had invited the former Conservative MP to the show.

For Kristopher Wells, a University of Alberta professor and LGBTQ advocate, the apparent snub will do little to improve Kenney’s standing in a community that has deep reservations about him.

“It’s incredibly short-sighted and a missed opportunity to learn from the LGBTQ community,” he said. “And who better to learn from — k.d. lang is one of the original pioneers of LGBTQ.”

And before anyone pipes in with "But he was busy and had no room in his schedule", the truth is that if this was important to Kenney he'd have made time or scheduled another opportunity to meet with her.

These guys - Kenney in particular - could NOT care less about LGBTQ folks or their issues.

[GGG]

That's some gotcha journalism. Jason Kenny shouldn't care what KD Lang thinks of LGBT issues. Meeting with community leaders as part of his leadership campaign should be on his schedule. And researching if he is or isn't doing that would be far more pursuasive then the last minute tweet from a D list celeb.

It's like meetin with Dicaprio or Cameron to discuss global warming.