No Looking Like a Cop at the Pride Parade

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by ToewsFan

There have been dozens of members of the LGBT community that have come out on social media and in the news stating that they are boycotting the Pride parade, since they feel the Police have made tremendous progress interacting with the LGBT community over the last decade. It sounds like this decision by the Pride Festival organizers is doing far more damage, in terms of internal strife, than it is for relations with the Police Service.

Originally Posted by Minnie

Thing is, "they" (Pride exec) don't speak for everyone. In conversations, my daughter has yet to meet a single person in her community who feels this is a good thing - they are all pissed about it. But, short of replacing the entire exec...

We live in strange times. I don't know what the cause is, maybe social media, but we've lost all sense of proportionality. Very small numbers of people can get events changed or cancelled, even if their objections are not shared by more than a fraction of the people they claim to represent. We've come to believe in the fiction that consensus is always achievable. That if any number of people - 5 per cent, 2 per cent - are strongly opposed to something, we need to change it or shut it down. It's proving tremendously damaging to pluralistic, civil society, and our notions of the common good.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by WhiteTiger

This is the crux of everything, isn't it? . But according to your statement, I should hate every cop I see from now until I die, no.

No but I think that is the attitude that essentially makes it ok for police to do worse and then much worse things. In this thread there's this attitude well our cops aren't TOO bad. Sure they're not perfect. But all in all they're pretty good. I don't buy that because when they're bad it destroys lives. For a lot of people it's not just a $500 ticket. It's serious physical and emotional damage. It's not incumbent upon minorities to mend those fences.

[ToewsFan]

edit double post....

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

No but I think that is the attitude that essentially makes it ok for police to do worse and then much worse things. In this thread there's this attitude well our cops aren't TOO bad. Sure they're not perfect. But all in all they're pretty good. I don't buy that because when they're bad it destroys lives. For a lot of people it's not just a $500 ticket. It's serious physical and emotional damage. It's not incumbent upon minorities to mend those fences.

What exactly CPS can do to "mend those fences"? As has been mentioned, CPS has outreach offices. It has liasons that work with minority groups, both LGBTQ and POC. It has been a longstanding supporter of Pride. CPS has been trying to mend those fences. But it appears that you and the bigots behind VOICES aren't actually interested in being neighbours. So what, really, is the purpose of your virtue signalling here?

[PepsiFree]

I feel like this needs repeating, but this isn't an LGBTQ issue that is being addressed, but an issue relating to persons of colour. Signalling that members of the gay community think it's bad so it must be bad is heartwarming in the sense that some people think gay people have the righteous power of strong moral ethics, but we're all just people who are more or less the exact same. That means that racism, for example, is found plenty in the gay community just like any other community.

It's important because that's what problem this is addressing. Not the relationship between the white LGBTQ community and the police, but the relationship between minorities and the police. The point is bigger than an LGBTQ issue, so boiling it down to that and excusing it because some members of the community don't think it's an issue either kind of misses the point completely.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Locke

Can you read?
Evidently not.

I can read, Locke.

There are two things to remember:
1. Sometimes people miss posts, or skip them suspecting not everything by every poster is worth reading.
2. Upon reflection of the post you pointed out, I'm not overly comforted by your flippant "there must be a problem" concession, when you repeatedly affirm that you aren't aware of it, that it must be minor, that it is essentially undeserving of the attention they're bringing to it, and that your version of it matters.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

What exactly CPS can do to "mend those fences"? As has been mentioned, CPS has outreach offices. It has liasons that work with minority groups, both LGBTQ and POC. It has been a longstanding supporter of Pride. CPS has been trying to mend those fences. But it appears that you and the bigots behind VOICES aren't actually interested in being neighbours. So what, really, is the purpose of your virtue signalling here?

I'm not sure if they've done this yet, they hadn't last I heard, but they should release the results of the internal audit they did in 2013. They should fire immediately anyone proven to be a bully or worse. Diversity training for the higher ups is a bit of a no brainer. I'm sure I've missed it but it would be nice to see zero tolerance for any bullies or old boys' club types. I mean at least one person needs to be canned. As far as mending the relationship with minorities and the public in general, that's a lot tougher. I think 100% body cam coverage would be a fantastic start. And constant on going training regarding rights would be great. It's kind of amazing what police don't know sometimes. Even the lines they push need to be a bit more firmly established.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

I'm not sure if they've done this yet, they hadn't last I heard, but they should release the results of the internal audit they did in 2013. They should fire immediately anyone proven to be a bully or worse. Diversity training for the higher ups is a bit of a no brainer. I'm sure I've missed it but it would be nice to see zero tolerance for any bullies or old boys' club types. I mean at least one person needs to be canned. As far as mending the relationship with minorities and the public in general, that's a lot tougher. I think 100% body cam coverage would be a fantastic start. And constant on going training regarding rights would be great. It's kind of amazing what police don't know sometimes. Even the lines they push need to be a bit more firmly established.

How about we start with firing the people who banned the police from the parade?

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

How about we start with firing the people who banned the police from the parade?

They're not banned.

[PsYcNeT]

Maybe some light can be shed on CPS' historical interactions with the LGBTQ community here.

https://calgaryqueerhistory.ca/2017/...th-the-police/

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

They're not banned.

Of course they aren't...unless they show pride in their occupation, then they are.

[V]

Since when is the Pride Parade about inclusivity? I never got that impression from them.

[CampbellsTransgressions]

Pride is a massive indignity to gaybros. I can understand that it is still very important for LGBTQ folks that live in small hick towns, but the big city versions come across as nothing but stereotype reinforcement and a tool for non-LGBTQ folks and plain old SJWs to convince everyone of how progressive they are. This action is just an extension of their facade.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

This is probably a really stupid question, but:

Why is it a big deal the police not wear their uniforms? Why is dressing as a civilian, or better yet, a hilarious pride costume, not the default dress code?

[...]

What's CPS reaction to this, are they insisting on uniforms? I don't get it.

It's a big deal because in uniform, with symbols, they'd be saying "I am a police officer, and I support human rights". Out of uniform, as the organizers intend, they will be saying "I am a person, and I support human rights". And this makes it easier for certain activists to portray law enforcement as a faceless enemy, rather than the cop marching with them at pride.

But it's also a big deal because of the history of the pride movement. Pride started as a commemoration of the anniversary of the Stonewall Riots, a violent protest by gays against a police raid. Having the police, as police says "the enemy who caused this whole thing is now an ally". If true, that's a fantastic statement to make. But if you don't believe it, it would be a massive betrayal of the cause.

Furthermore, it's a big deal because of the doctrine of intersectionality. For many social activitists, to deal with oppression for one group is only possible if you deal with it for all groups, because groups intersect. (This may not be a technically correct interpretation of intersectionality, but it's one that they believe to be correct.) So in order to be a good gay activist, one must be a good ally to the likes of Black Lives Matter (not my logic, theirs).

But the notion that law enforcement is inherently oppressive and therefore shouldn't be there? I don't see how that's true for anyone but an anarchist. A well-designed law places restrictions on some to enable others - you have a lot more freedom when the law protects you from assault, rape, murder etc. Security enables liberty, and law enforcement provides security. Sometimes, the laws they enforce are bad, but that's the problem with law and society, and does not make law enforcement inherently oppressive.

I believe we are at a place where the police should be there. Conservative politicians though, maybe not so much.

Save

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Again, this is not strictly about the treatment of the gay community, but about treatment of others minorities of which members of the gay community are a part.

Either way, the "I haven't seen it, so it must not exist" line of reasoning is as weak as they come. You're letting your personal experience decide the legitimacy of the experiences of others, and that's no way to understanding. Go have a conversation with people who have different experiences than your own, or take the easy route and just listen to the actual statements made by groups representing some of these people to get a clue that their experience might not match yours.

Based on the statements by Pride, the CPS, and Voice, combined with the clear road to institutional representation occurring again as early as next year,, comments revolving around officers being "alienated" and "demonised" seems like grandstanding and not representative of the feelings of CPS, or the situation in general.

Oh the irony. Between you and OMG!WTF!, sometimes I just think you guys just paint yourself into a corner and don't bother to really think about what you post.

We all have opinions coloured by our experiences. I don't think anyone is saying others experiences are illegitimate. People are simply trying to point out that judging an entire group based on a small number of negative interactions does everyone a disservice. Man, it seems so simple.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

What if I wear a sexy cop Halloween costume? Will that be allowed?

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

Oh the irony. Between you and OMG!WTF!, sometimes I just think you guys just paint yourself into a corner and don't bother to really think about what you post.

We all have opinions coloured by our experiences. I don't think anyone is saying others experiences are illegitimate. People are simply trying to point out that judging an entire group based on a small number of negative interactions does everyone a disservice. Man, it seems so simple.

But it's not a small group....at all. 36% of women in the force have experienced sexual harassment. From two days ago....

http://www.660news.com/2017/07/26/ca...al-harassment/

That's horrific. It's stunning. And there's still not much changing because "changes aren't always as rapid as people want".

So now you've got an inordinate amount of good ole boys heading out to deal with the public and you actually believe things are going to go totally differently for the public?

I don't think complaints are a good way to measure police performance but they are up 45% in 2016 with contacts up only 8%. It's not getting better.

I'm not forgetting the hundreds of thousands of good police encounters every year. But I'm also not giving a pass on the "small number" you think is so insignificant especially when not much is changing. And your "small number" is not so small when they involve the same minority groups over and over.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

What if I wear a sexy cop Halloween costume? Will that be allowed?

You have to simulate sex with a nun with a beard otherwise you're breaking the rules.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

Oh the irony. Between you and OMG!WTF!, sometimes I just think you guys just paint yourself into a corner and don't bother to really think about what you post.

We all have opinions coloured by our experiences. I don't think anyone is saying others experiences are illegitimate. People are simply trying to point out that judging an entire group based on a small number of negative interactions does everyone a disservice. Man, it seems so simple.

Where we disagree is that I do believe Locke was attempting to discredit the experiences of others with his own experiences, or at least to pretend his opinion was equally valuable to the situation. In many scenarios, two competing opinions can both be valid

It's nice that everyone has an opinion, but say you're a straight white person who is not a cop, perhaps you'd better serve the conversation by realising your opinion is irrelevant when it comes to interactions between CPS and visible minorities who also count themselves as members of the LGBTQ community. I would say if minorities are saying it's an issue, and if CPS is saying they'll work to be better, then that's probably sufficient. Opinion of person who could never possibly have had that unique interaction about it's legitimacy? Not adding value.

There's no participation medals in life. Not everyone who shares an opinion is going to end up sharing one that matters, and it's better when we can try to recognise when our own don't.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I feel like this needs repeating, but this isn't an LGBTQ issue that is being addressed, but an issue relating to persons of colour. Signalling that members of the gay community think it's bad so it must be bad is heartwarming in the sense that some people think gay people have the righteous power of strong moral ethics, but we're all just people who are more or less the exact same. That means that racism, for example, is found plenty in the gay community just like any other community.

It's important because that's what problem this is addressing. Not the relationship between the white LGBTQ community and the police, but the relationship between minorities and the police. The point is bigger than an LGBTQ issue, so boiling it down to that and excusing it because some members of the community don't think it's an issue either kind of misses the point completely.

As Jammies pointed out, then why aren't we seeing protests against other events that indigenous people and police both take part in, like the Stampede parade? A cynic might suggest that the Stampede Board and First Nations have papered over any antipathy with wads and wads of cash.