The effort to produce this report required the assistance and support of persons in addition to the Panel members. The following is a list of persons and groups whose volunteer efforts assisted with this final report:
We first want to thank the members of the LGBTTIQQ2SA communities who so fully and passionately engaged in our process. Some attended public sessions, and targeted and individual consultations. Others provided input via the community survey, written submissions, emails, and through other means. Their input was invaluable in assisting with the identification of issues and the development of the recommendations contained within this report.
The Panel would also like to thank the members of the Pride Toronto Board for respecting the independence of the Panel, and responding to our requests for information. Further appreciation is extended for the Board’s assistance with some of the expenses incurred throughout the consultative process.
The Panel was supported by several people who volunteered their time in the following ways:
Maura Lawless, executive director of The 519 Church Street Community Centre, for her assistance in developing the Panel’s mandate, which was eventually approved by the Pride Toronto Board. This mandate directed the Panel’s efforts throughout the consultative process.
Todd Kaufman who acted as an assistant to Brent Hawkes for the purpose of this consultative process. Mr. Kaufman’s dedication and organizational skills helped to keep Panel members on track and enabled them to meet the tight timelines associated this community review.
Michel Savoie who developed the CAP website and made himself available to assist with technical issues encountered by Panel members.
Ginny Marshall who worked tirelessly entering the data contained within the questionnaires distributed at the public consultations. Her work was critical in helping to identify major themes and issues raised by the community. Her assistance with meeting minutes is also greatly appreciated.
Ian Kennedy, Michael da Silva, Robert Hares and Chava Schwebel, University of Toronto law students, who assisted with the identification of major themes stemming from the questionnaires distributed at the public consultations.
Barbara McLean who provided invaluable support in writing this report with the Panel. Her efforts helped the Panel to communicate its final recommendations along with the supporting information provided by the LGBT community.
The Panel would also like to thank members of the media, especially the staff at XTRA, Fab, Now, and Proud FM. Their coverage of the consultative process helped to encourage LGBT community members to attend and provide input. This coverage also kept members of the community informed throughout the consultative process. The Panel would also like to thank Andrea Houston of XTRA for the use her photographs taken during the consultation sessions.
Further appreciation is extended to the locations where public consultations were held. These locations helped with the accessibility and transparency of the consultations, and contributed to the quality of input that was provided to the Panel. Specifically, the Panel is grateful to The 519 Church Street Community Centre, the Gladstone Hotel, and the University of Toronto’s Flavelle House.
We also thank our colleagues, family and friends, who have patiently supported us throughout this demanding process.
Pride Toronto and the Toronto Pride Week are at an historic turning point in their existence. The Toronto Pride Week has experienced noteworthy growth in recent years. Pride Week has become one of the largest events of its type in the world, and a major cultural event and tourist attraction for Toronto. However, this outward success has masked significant growing pains. The rapid growth and a commitment to “bigger is better” have stretched Pride Toronto’s resources, its attention, and its energy, revealing financial vulnerabilities, operational and management inadequacies and structural weaknesses. Pride Toronto’s primary focus on entertainment and its seemingly unqualified embrace of commercial support had caused it to lose sight of its original mission, and to neglect one of the communities it was established to serve: the trans community. Consultations have exposed community disappointment with, and a serious erosion of trust, in Pride Toronto. The deterioration of this relationship of trust is further evidence of its troubled operations.
The “perfect storm” arrived in 2009 and 2010 when this outwardly successful, but internally frail and vulnerable organization was beset by two simultaneous challenges. Like its sister organization in Sydney, after a successful 2009 financial year, Pride had unexpectedly experienced costs of growth that were exceeding the growth in revenues. The organization was headed for a record operating loss in 2010, in no small part owing to a drastic drop in federal government financial support. At a time when close attention was needed to these financial management challenges and the organization needed to boost support, Pride Toronto found itself embroiled in a controversy over its most popular event that diverted management’s attention and energy, and further compromised its finances.
Pride organizations around the world have struggled with resolving deeply political disputes over Parade participation. For example, in Sydney, Australia, the dispute was over the participation of a group called “Animal Liberation.” In Toronto, the conflict that erupted was over the participation of a group called Queers Against Israeli Apartheid (QuAIA). After they first appeared in the 2008 Parade, a group of gay supporters of Israel began lobbying for their exclusion. They were not satisfied with the response of Pride Toronto, and escalated their efforts through 2009 and 2010, producing a documentary condemning the group’s participation. Some protagonists framed the argument in binary terms, and pressured persons inside and outside the community to choose sides and bring pressure to bear on Pride Toronto to yield to their point of view. Our survey has revealed that our community is deeply polarized and divided on this issue.
The effect of this controversy on a weakened Pride Toronto was traumatic. Some withdrew their financial support from Pride Toronto, or threatened to do so at a time when the organization could ill afford lost revenue. In the absence of any guiding principles or conflict resolution process, the issues consumed the Board of Directors. The Board looked in vain for community consensus, and hoped for a compromise between two uncompromising foes. They vacillated and changed positions, with the protagonists portraying each response as either a victory for truth over a misguided leadership or an abandonment of principle by Pride Toronto’s allegedly morally compromised management. Pride Toronto had little community support. The Board could never win.
One effect of this debate was to erode outside support for Pride Toronto. At the political level, the City of Toronto after reluctantly leaving 2010 funding in place made it clear at the political level that funding for 2011 will depend on the organization’s successful resolution of this issue. Funding from other sources is also in some doubt, not only because of this controversy, but also because of the recent revelation of poor operating results in 2010 and controversy over conflict of interest allegations involving the former executive director. Pride Toronto’s banker is also its lead sponsor. Fortunately for the organization and the community at large, TD Bank Financial Group has faithfully stood by the organization during this time of trouble.
In June of 2010, some community leaders became concerned that the situation at the organization was deteriorating to the point that it imperiled the future of Pride Week, a much loved community institution. They were convinced that Pride Toronto did not just require a principled solution to the issue of Parade participation; it also required a deeper review of its mission, its community relations and its operations. Pride Toronto accepted two motions from community leaders. These motions were comprised of both a short-term immediate solution to the participation issue, and a proposal for a long-term examination of community perspectives on the broader issues surrounding the controversy.
To undertake this examination, Pride Toronto appointed an all-volunteer Community Advisory Panel (Panel) comprised of community leaders and allies, and in so doing, attempted to reflect the diversity within the community. The Panel acted as an independent volunteer advisory body and reported the results of its consultations to Pride Toronto. The Panel’s mandate required it to provide high-level strategic recommendations designed to protect and advance the overall objectives of Pride Toronto. These recommendations were to consider the results of community consultations and stakeholder feedback.
To obtain community perspectives, the Panel hosted six large-scale public meetings. Three meetings were open to the broader LGBT community, and three were open to members and allies of the Trans, racialized, and LGBT Women’s communities. Meetings were held in different locations to facilitate attendance and accessibility. Members of the media were also invited as a way of keeping the public informed of the Panel’s progress. The presence of American Sign Language interpreters at some meetings, as well as live streaming of the meetings by XTRA, helped to make the sessions accessible.
In addition to these public sessions, the Panel engaged in targeted community outreach to individuals and groups, the list of which was compiled from multiple sources, including XTRA, Pride Toronto, and others. A number of interested individuals and stakeholders contacted the Panel, advising of their desire to provide input. The Panel arranged over forty targeted sessions during the consultation process. The Panel also launched an online survey, using SurveyMonkey.com, recognizing that not all community members would be able to attend a public consultation. Over 1,600 responses were received. As well, community members were permitted to submit their input in writing for consideration by the Panel. The Panel’s website, www.CommunityAdvisoryPanel.ca, and its Facebook page also provided interactive platforms to obtain information and inform the community. In summary, it is estimated that the Panel received input from over 2,000 community members.
The Panel also researched the experiences of other Pride festival organizers. Specifically, the Panel consulted with the following organizations: Montreal, Quebec; Vancouver, British Columbia; New York, New York; San Francisco, California; Sydney, Australia; and Tel Aviv, Israel.
After completing its consultations, the Panel concluded that Pride Toronto could be saved and should continue as an organization dedicated to serving the LGBT community, despite the current uncertainty and challenges. The Panel found that Pride Toronto had veered from the core principles and goals listed in its articles of incorporation and that there was a strong community desire for Pride Toronto to return to these principles and goals (celebration, information, education, and culture). Pride Toronto must abandon the “bigger is better” philosophy. If Pride Toronto is to rebuild the trust of the communities it serves, it needs to understand that it must earn that trust. A good beginning would be an apology for past failures and a public commitment to a new approach. The community in turn must do its part in bringing back Pride. The recommendations contained within this report are designed to refocus Pride Toronto and provide an opportunity for talented community members to assist in this process of renewal.
The recommendations contained within this report have both short term and long term implications. The Panel recognizes that it will be impossible for Pride Toronto to implement all of them before the 2011 Pride Festival. However, several are designed to address the urgent remedial action that is required. Specifically, the Panel recommends an immediate search for a qualified interim Executive Director, as well as an increase in the number of directors serving on the Board. The Panel also recommends the formation of the following committees comprised of community volunteers with the requisite experience to assist the Board in improving its governance structure: a Board Development Committee, a Board Advisory Committee on Governance, a Financial and Audit Committee, a World Pride 2014 Committee, a Community Advisory Panel Implementation / Policy Advisory Committee, and a Community Consultations Committee. Pride Toronto must take immediate steps to begin to engage the trans community in the governance of the organization, and to allocate adequate resources to support their participation. As Pride recalibrates and looks for areas to reduce costs, our Report has clearly identified the activities which the community wishes to see preserved and those it is prepared to sacrifice. Other recommendations include a more diversified revenue stream and the adoption of a mechanism by which Pride Toronto can evaluate the contribution of its corporate sponsors to LGBT community issues.
With regards to improving Pride Toronto’s relationship with the community, the Panel recommends the adoption of a community engagement strategy that would enable Pride Toronto to benefit from existing community expertise and enthusiasm. This strategy would form the basis for the assessment and reporting of its engagement activities. Further recommendations address the specific grievances of persons with disabilities and the trans, First Nations, Métis, Inuit, and racialized communities. Recommendations designed to facilitate language access are also included in this report.
With regards to entertainment, arts and culture, the Panel made recommendations designed to improve and diversify Pride Week programming. Specifically, the community expressed a desire to have the Community Fair returned to being centered on community organizations. As well, recommendations aimed at better support of LGBT artists are described in this section of the report.
As Pride Toronto enters a period of financial restraint, the community was clear during the consultations that the most important Pride Week events to be preserved include the Parade, the Dyke March, and the Trans March. The community was also clear in communicating its frustration over the inconsistency of Pride Toronto decision-making. Suggestions to develop transparent rules outlining Parade participation, as well as the consistent application of these rules, are outlined in this report. These recommendations involve an undertaking by Parade participants to abide by Pride Toronto’s Anti-Discrimination policy for which a suggested wording is outlined in this report. For complaints regarding Parade participation, or violations of the Anti-Discrimination Policy a dispute-resolution process is also recommended, the form for which is outlined in this report. The development of a conflict of interest policy is further recommended to assist with transparency and consistency within Pride Toronto operations and decision-making.
To help focus Parade participation on LGBT issues, the Panel recommends that the Parade require an emphasis on LGBT messages during the Parade to be organized under the following suggested sections: “Celebrating our Communities,” “Diverse Voices United,” and “We Are Family.” The Panel recommends that the messaging in “Celebrating Our Communities” be confined to issues directly related to sexual orientation and gender identity, and that other messages be permitted in “Diverse Voices United” so long as they are not commercial in nature and provided that the predominate message is directly related to sexual orientation or gender identity. “We Are Family” will be a new section for individuals not affiliated with groups. All Parade participants will be required to sign an enforceable undertaking not to portray messages or images that condone or promote violence, hatred or negative stereotypes against any group. The Panel recommends severe and enforceable restrictions on commercial messages throughout the Parade. Commercial messages will be severely limited during the Parade. The Panel also recommends a return to highlighting the recognition of the Stonewall riots that marked the beginning of the modern LGBT rights movement around the world through an opening event.
In closing, this report is the product of over nine months of planning and consultations with key stakeholders and members of the LGBT community. As such, the recommendations contained within this report are not those of the Community Advisory Panel, but rather, they belong to the community. They honour the many diverse voices of those who came forward to provide input and assistance. In developing solutions, no one method of consultation was emphasized over another. Instead, Panel members considered the totality of the information acquired throughout the entire consultative process, and balanced this information against the social, financial, and political realities facing Pride Toronto to make recommendations that were in the best interests of the community as a whole.
The recommendations contained within this report are intended to kick start a necessary restructuring that is possible, despite the challenges that lie ahead. The framework contained within this report is based upon an existing foundation within the LGBT community. That foundation is comprised of skilled and enthusiastic people who generously volunteer their time and talents to Pride Toronto, and on the tremendous goodwill of donors, both public and private, community allies, and the general public, whose support is deeply appreciated. This report is a call to those are committed to Pride, and all that it represents, to come forward to assist Pride Toronto in bringing about the re-emergence of a Pride Week that is a meaningful and authentic reflection of the community’s distinctive history, culture, diversity, and talents, its passion for protest and desire for celebration.
Pride Toronto can be saved. It will only be saved if the community helps to save it.
The recommendations contained within this report are organized into the following categories:
Overall Recommendations
Purpose Of Pride
Governance
Trans Lens
Community Relations
First Nations, Métis, Inuit Communities
Language Access and Pride Toronto
Racialized Communities and Pride Toronto
Accessibility and People with Disabilities
Age (Youth, Family, Older)
Business Community
Relationships with Other Pride Organizations
Corporate And Government Funding
Entertainment (Culture)
Marches And Parade
Dispute Resolution
Advocacy regarding Alcohol rules
Thanks and Support to Volunteers
R1. Pride Toronto should be saved and its programming considerably downsized.
R2. Pride Toronto should continue as a single organization dedicated to serving communities of diverse sexual orientation and gender identity.
R3. Pride Toronto should acknowledge wrong and apologize to the community for the pain it has caused.
R4. Pride Toronto shall consider that the date of the Festival incorporate the date of the Stonewall riots.
R5. Pride Toronto integrate the core priorities as defined in the objects of incorporation – Celebration, Information, Education and Culture – into its mission and values.
R6. Pride Toronto build its programming activities aligned with its core priorities
R7. Pride Toronto engages in a process to define its core constituencies and address the evolution of the current LGBTTQQ2SA communities towards defining the focused communities to whom it is accountable.
R8. The recommended CAP Implementation Advisory revisit and use Pride Toronto’s 2005-6 five years strategic plan “Rebuilding Our Pride” to support revitalizing, defining and articulating the purpose of Pride Toronto
R9. Pride Toronto make explicit that it is a not for profit organization accountable to its membership, owned by its communities and vested with representing the interests, diversity and diverse sexual and perspectives of the Pride communities.
R10. Pride Toronto hire an interim executive director.
At the time of this report, Pride Toronto finds itself without an executive director. As such, an interim executive director should be hired as soon as possible to enable Pride Toronto to manage the 2011 Pride Festival on a fiscally responsible basis. The interim executive director should not be responsible for implementing any of the longer term recommendations contained within this report and approved by the Board. The work of the interim executive director should be supported and guided by a Management Support Group consisting of experienced current and past executive directors or respected community organizations such as the 519 Church Street Community Center or Black CAP.
R11. Pride Toronto establish a Board Development Committee consisting of one or two current Board representatives and a majority of community leaders to fill the current vacancies on the Pride Toronto Board.
In addition to the vacant Executive Director position, two members recently resigned from the Pride Toronto Board. A committee comprised of a current Board member(s) and community representatives will ensure that effective and trusted new leadership is identified to fill these vacancies. It is recommended that no steps be taken to fill these vacancies until the committee has identified strong candidates to present for consideration by the membership.
R12. The Pride Toronto Board of Directors be expanded to include cross-directors, i.e., persons holding office in other organizations that have cognate interests, such as the 519 Church Street Community Centre, and who are directly interested in and affected by Pride Toronto’s programs and activities, such as the local business association. These expanded positions might be nonvoting members of the Board.
R13. Pride Toronto make arrangements to include, as ex-officio members, representatives from important internal constituencies whose concerns have not historically been adequately addressed within the organization including at least: volunteers, trans community, racialized communities, dykes, persons over 40, people with a disability, and seniors.
R14. Pride Toronto establish a Board Advisory Committee on governance and that membership on this committee consist of at least one Board representative, but consist mainly of people from the community who have the skills and experience necessary to carry out the responsibilities specifically allocated to this committee and to ensure that Pride Toronto’s governance structure, its bylaws, and its operations reflect the best practices of not-for-profit corporations.
The Board Advisory Committee will assist the Board and its membership in overseeing Pride Toronto’s compliance with the applicable municipal, provincial and federal laws; its obligations imposed by its Letters Patent and Bylaws; and with obligations under funding agreements including the reporting obligations imposed by those agreements, e.g., City of Toronto Equity Guide.
Furthermore, this committee will ensure that Pride Toronto creates the policies and practices imposed by the City Of Toronto on funding recipients, including as priorities robust equity policies, conflict of interest policies, and a dispute-resolution process.
R15. Pride Toronto, in cooperation with the Financial and Audit Committee, create and provide systems for the application of standardized checklists and auditing processes at every decision-making level to ensure compliance with its core mandate, as well as with City of Toronto Equity Guide.
This recommendation is designed to ensure a balanced representation of cultural activities; a balanced representation of constituents, e.g., trans and racialized communities, persons with disabilities, etc.; and a balanced allocation of funds to advance the Pride Toronto mandate.
R16. The Board Advisory Committee on Governance oversee the development of the job description for the hiring of the new executive director and the competition and hiring for that position. It will also formalize arrangements so that that all staff members have appropriate skills and experience, ongoing training, supervision, and regular performance review.
R17. The Board Advisory Committee seeks outside expert assistance as needed and is advised to consider the services of the not-for-profit sector, such as Management Advisory Service (www.masadvise.ca), Volunteer Lawyers Service (www.volunteerlawyers.org) and Boardmatch Leaders (www.altruvest.org).
R18. Pride Toronto must conduct itself in a financially responsible manner.
R19. A Financial and Audit Committee be formed consisting of the Treasurer of Pride Toronto and a group of leaders from the community who must have the skills and experience necessary to carry out the responsibilities allocated to the committee. The Financial and Audit Committee will be tasked, as its highest priority, with oversight of the day to day financial operations of Pride Toronto to ensure the financial survival of the organization. The committee must ensure prudent, knowledgeable, and accountable financial management. Examples of this prudence include the tracking of cultural expenditures based on Pride Toronto’s core mandate; ensuring compliance with conflict of interest stipulations after reviewing that these stipulations are adequate in their application to all purchasing, procurement and sponsorship agreements: see Pride Toronto Purchasing and Procurement Policy, February 8, 2010; and ensuring that the expenditures for fundraising events do not exceed the amount of revenue that they generate.
R20. The Financial and Audit Committee oversee the broader multi-year financial horizon as soon as the immediate financial situation is brought under control. More particularly, it will be the Committee’s responsibility to ensure that Pride Toronto returns to in-year excess of revenues over expenses in 2011, and that the financial deficit is eradicated by 2013. The financial restructuring of Pride must take account of the activities deemed most meaningful to the members of the community, as revealed throughout the Panel’s consultation process.
R21. The Financial and Audit Committee engage in proactive disclosure to ensure that the process by which the Pride Toronto budget is developed is transparent and that the budget documents are made available on Pride Toronto’s website expeditiously for public reference.
R22. The budgeting process be flexible enough to respond to changes of circumstance, e.g., changes in funding, sponsorships, and other support.
R23. The budgeting process be informed by reference to the budgets of other Pride organizations and of other organizations with similar purposes.
R24. The Financial and Audit Committee oversee the preparation of audited statements for general meetings.
R25. A World Pride 2014 Committee be formed and tasked with overseeing the preparations for World Pride. Membership of the World Pride 2014 Committee should be public and should include various community stakeholders.
R26. A Community Advisory Panel Implementation / Policy Advisory Committee be formed comprised of at least one Board representative, but consist mainly of a majority of community leaders, especially those with experience in policy development and strategic planning. It is further recommended that the Board of Pride Toronto work in partnership with this panel. This recommendation proposes the establishment of a committee that would be responsible for oversight of the implementation of the Panel’s report and updating the Board and the membership on its progress. This committee would also assist the Board by addressing new policy concerns that arise, which are not contained within this report. This committee would also be responsible for advising the Board and the membership on the format for a review that would take place after the first two years of experience with the Panel’s report. This advice would ensure that this review is properly conducted in a timely fashion.
R27. Pride Toronto create and provide budget support as necessary to committees representing marginalized groups within Pride Toronto, e.g., racialized groups, the Trans community.
The recognition of these committees will formalize the consultation obligations of the Board to the members of Pride who have expressed marginalization in the past. To further this objective, these committees will meet regularly as necessary and produce reports to the Board, to which the Board must respond in a timely fashion.
R28. The Community Consultation Committee consist of the Chairs of the community committees and advise the Board and membership on effective community consultation measures.
R29. The Chair of the Community Consultation Committee be an ex-officio member of the Pride Toronto Board of Directors.
R30. Pride Toronto revise its membership rules to be simple, reasonable, transparent, and beyond manipulation.
R31. Pride Toronto abandons its application for charitable status. For activities that are compatible with charitable status, the Panel recommends creating an arrangement with Community One Foundation to raise charitable donations.
R32. Pride Toronto partner with Community One Foundation to organize a long term fundraising strategy to provide reliable stable funding for Pride Toronto so that its ability to deliver on its core mandate is never again threatened by inadequate financing.
R33. Pride Toronto diversify its revenue stream to align its operations with its mandate and core commitments. This recommendation involves decreasing dependence upon government funding and corporate funding, generally while developing stronger and more diversified relationships with reasonable and supportive corporate sponsors.
R34. Pride Toronto increase donations though the development of giving campaigns that engage the LGBT community members and that these campaigns also empower those communities to have influence over Pride Toronto’s policy development.
R35. Pride Toronto develop a template for measuring principle-based decision-making in regard to sponsorship consistent with its core mandate. The Panel recommends a score-card such as the one set out below that serves as an audit and tracking tool. This scorecard enables all participants at every level (corporations, Pride Toronto management, and community members) to evaluate sponsorship decisions and ongoing relationships.
R36. Cease trans tokenism
R37. Provide trans peoples equitable access to resources and funds
R38. Engage in the trans political process
R39. Cease employment discrimination against trans peoples
R40. Provide trans peoples access to services
R41. Include trans peoples in governance
R42. Use respectful language with trans peoples
R43. Use respectful portrayals and imagery of trans peoples
R44. Include trans peoples in environmental mapping and priority setting
R45. Include trans peoples in outreach and development access
R46. Pride Toronto develop a community engagement strategy involving specific proactive outreach and consultation efforts with all members of the community, and in particular, communities that consistently reported poor relations with Pride Toronto.
R47. Pride Toronto effectively communicate its community engagement strategy along with the results of its engagement efforts.
R48. The Pride Toronto Board be restructured to establish positions for members of specific community representatives and specific community organizations to better reflect the views of such communities in the planning and administration of Pride Toronto operations.
R49. The governance of Pride Toronto be restructured to provide consultation forums or “caucuses” of communities of shared identity.
R50. Pride Toronto provide increased opportunities for community groups, organizations, and individuals to manage their own programming at the Pride festival.
R51. Subcommittees are established with defined terms of reference and a scope of authority that does not require further board decisions. The formations of the following subcommittees, at minimum, are recommended: Parade, Dyke March, Trans March, Community Fair, Human Rights – International, Human Rights – Domestic, Blockorama*, and Entertainment. Subcommittee membership should be open to the public.
R52. Pride Toronto post a map of locations in the Community Fair allowing community organizations to self-select their preferred locations.
R53. Pride Toronto utilize a system of themed areas for the Community Fair to allow for like interests to be located in close proximity.
R54. Pride Toronto establish strong relationship agreements with existing community resources to assist with developing programming content for the Pride festival.
R55. Pride Toronto develop performance measures that enable it to evaluate the deployment of its resources and the effectiveness of its activities against stated goals and objectives.
R56. Pride Toronto partner with the Canadian Lesbian and Gay Archives to provide recognition of the LGBT movement in Toronto and Canada. Such recognition should explicitly include the role of diverse people on the basis of race and ethnicity, gender, gender identity, age, and sexual orientation.
R57. Pride Toronto select an issue each year and encourage all contingents to have some way of reflecting it. This suggestion is distinct from a theme in that it is more advocacy-oriented.
R58. Pride Toronto develop a community service charter or code of conduct that would outline the expected behaviours and practices of Pride Toronto staff and volunteers vis a vis the community. This code would include clear guidelines for the treatment of community members by Pride Toronto staff and volunteers.
R59. Pride Toronto have clearly identifiable First Nations Two-Spirited LGBT representation during Pride programming in collaboration with First Nations communities.
R60. Pride Toronto have at least one entertainment or cultural program with a French component, in partnership with a local French gay organization.
R61. Pride Toronto build a strategy for increasing opportunities for multilingual engagement with its communities.
R62. It is recommended that as Pride Toronto continues to engage in international human rights advocacy, that it do so in partnership with individuals and organizations from other countries and here in the city, and that outreach be done inclusive of the languages of those countries or communities.
R63. Pride Toronto develop a community engagement strategy that brings Pride Toronto face to face with racialized communities and all members of the LGBT community.
R64. Pride Toronto develop a strategy and partnerships with targeted equity and inclusion initiatives.
R65. Pride Toronto change the governance and operational committee structures to ensure representation and reflection of the City’s racialized LGBT demographics and diverse LGBT sexual politics.
R66. Pride Toronto develop an internal review of the organization structure and operations.
R67. Pride Toronto diversify the volunteer pool through targeted community outreach.
R68. Pride Toronto conduct targeted outreach to ensure diversity within the pool of coordinators recruited annually.
R69. Pride Toronto implement a fulsome orientation process for all staff and volunteers, with content inclusive of the role and contributions of racialized communities and individuals in the LGBT movement.
R70. Pride Toronto provide increased investment of resources in Blockorama and work with the community to identify a long-term location for the stage.
R71. Pride Toronto expand its community programming to reach LGBT communities that have been neglected or rendered invisible, specifically Two-Spirited, Trans, Deaf, youth, and to community members with disabilities.
R72. Pride Toronto implement a vendor and sponsorship policy that ensures vendors and sponsors are aligned with the mission, vision, and values of Pride Toronto.
R73. Pride Toronto develop community-informed and transparent criteria for choosing the International Grand Marshall.
R74. Pride Toronto create an advisory World Pride International Human Rights committee comprised of activists, groups, and organizations across the country to develop the human rights program for 2014.
R75. Pride Toronto provide tangible support, including funds, to LGBT organizations in the country or area of focus of Pride Toronto’s annual human rights program.
R76. Pride Toronto develop sponsorship and fund development strategies that are linked to supporting community involvement. This could enable partnerships with corporate sponsors and community organizations serving LGBT communities, thus eliminating the displacement of the community by corporate sponsors.
R77. Pride Toronto integrate inclusion and equity agenda and initiatives in all committee and programming activities.
R78. Pride Toronto address issues of accessibility, further to the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act by providing additional space and support for people with disabilities to both participate in and view the Sunday Parade.
R79. Pride Toronto include additional exits among the barriers to allow more opportunities for participants with mobility challenges to exit the Parade pathway.
R80. Pride Toronto address issues of accessibility inside and outside its office space to ensure compliance with the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act.
R81. Pride Toronto review its policies regarding escorts to allow more escorts to be in accessibility viewing areas.
R82. Pride Toronto establish a working group with members of the Ontario Rainbow Alliance for the Deaf to implement various recommendations addressing ASL interpretation issues and other access issues.
R83. Pride Toronto security staff be trained in customer service and cultural competence to ensure respectful engagement with all Pride participants.
R84. Pride Toronto reorient some of its programming and gear it toward audiences of a more diverse age range.
R85. Pride Toronto establish or showcase a Queer parenting community fair and marketplace, featuring Queer resources, books, family entertainers, toys, and information about drop-in centres, support groups, etc., as well as increase the promotion of the availability of these services.
R86. Pride Toronto offer additional water and cooling stations and work to remove the requirement that attendees dispose of water bottles when entering a licensed area.
R87. Pride Toronto consider “outsourcing” beer gardens to the community and/or organizations such as the Business Improvement Association.
R88. Pride Toronto work with the Church-Wellesley Business Improvement Association (BIA) and local businesses to review the site plan to ensure that business and Pride Toronto interests can be better realized.
R89. Pride Toronto document and publicize its relationships with other Pride organizations.
R90. Pride Toronto diversify its revenue stream to decrease its reliance upon corporate funding, and reinstate control to Pride Toronto and the communities it serves.
R91. Pride Toronto consider introducing fees for participation in or attendance at certain events and activities.
R92. Pride Toronto ensure that its corporate sponsors are reasonable and supportive of the LGBT community overall. This recommendation proposes the development of criteria or a mechanism by 2012, which would assess the quality of its corporate sponsors. This mechanism would assist Pride Toronto in evaluating the effectiveness of its sponsors in advancing their LGBT diversity to greater levels. Sample questions asked of sponsor companies may include the following:
Does your organization have an LGBT employee affinity/resource group?
What is the membership base?
What is the composition of LGBT versus allies?
Does your organization offer LGBT/same sex benefits?
Do you measure the participation of LGBT individuals in your benefits program?
Does your organization proactively hire LGBT individuals?
Does your organization do LGBT on-boarding as part of the new-hire process?
Does your organization use inclusive language?
Does your organization have “out” executives and/or senior management?
Does your organization offer LGBT mentoring opportunities?
R93. Pride Toronto develop a sponsorship template by 2012, that explicitly states the benefits afforded to corporate sponsors, and clearly articulates what benefits are included and excluded in return for sponsorship. For example, corporations cannot, and will not influence programming of the festival.
R94. Pride Toronto post the reasons for supporting the corporate sponsors they choose.
R95. Pride Toronto end the “toonie drive” and implement a more assertive on-site, street fair, and entertainment stage fundraising strategy at the entrances of the street closure area.
R96. Pride Toronto implement a simplified tiered pricing strategy and/or rewards for small businesses and/or community organizations to participate in the community fair.
R97. Pride Toronto expand from its current focus on spectator and audience entertainment to include participatory, cultural development, including a broader definition of the arts, and forums for LGBT community expression.
R98. Pride Toronto establish an Information and/or Education committee to develop initiatives regarding information and education about LGBT culture in Toronto. Pride Toronto establish training opportunities for staff and volunteers to learn about LGBT culture in Toronto.
R99. Pride Toronto reorganize the Community Fair such that community groups providing information and education are closer to the main area of Church and Wellesley Streets, and in other higher-visibility areas.
R100. Pride Toronto provide a prominent venue and the publication of opportunities for local Queer artists to participate in Pride festival events.
R101. Pride Toronto establish a forum where more established Queer artists can have an opportunity to meet emerging artists.
R102. Pride Toronto establish a partnership with arts organizations, such as Buddies In Bad Times Theatre and the Inside Out Film and Video Festival to identify opportunities for Pride Toronto to participate in development and/or promotion of local artists.
R103. Pride Toronto integrate diverse local LGBT artists on all stages and that Pride Toronto establish an exclusive stage for local Queer artists.
R104. Pride Toronto establish a goal of facilitating capacity building opportunities for emerging local artists.
R105. Pride Toronto pay local artists in addition to paying more established artists.
R106. Pride Toronto undertake financial disclosure to better illustrate the financial relationship between entertainment costs and revenues.
R107. Pride Toronto document sponsorship relationships, if any, which require certain types of entertainment and/or certain levels of beverage sales.
R108. Pride Toronto undertake surveys (of all constituents not just attendees) of culture and entertainment preferences to help ensure that entertainment is more inclusive of community preferences.
R109. Pride Toronto track and publish the sexual orientation or gender identity of performers.
R110. Pride Toronto undertake specific consultations with members of the trans and racialized communities regarding cultural programming.
R111. Pride Toronto should have clear and transparent rules of universal application governing participation in its Parade and marches. The rules should be consistent with and designed to advance the purposes of Pride Toronto. The rules must be consistently and fairly enforced for all participants through a new Pride Toronto dispute-resolution process that ensures due process for all.
R112. Once Pride Toronto adopts these rules, it is important that the rules remain consistent and in force for a set period without change in order to stabilize Pride Toronto. Frequent and dramatic changes of rules in response to political pressures from inside or outside the queer community must be resisted. Equally importantly, Pride Toronto should commit to a formal process of review of its parade and march participation rules and dispute-resolution process after the initial trial process has been completed.
R113. Pride Toronto must provide adequate training about the new rules to its volunteers, especially Parade Marshalls, and to proposed participants in the Parade or the marches.
R114. All participants in the Pride Parade and marches must agree in writing to abide by the rules of Pride Toronto governing the Parade or the march in question, and to submit any dispute about the application of those rules for binding resolution through the Pride Toronto dispute-resolution process. Any group that refuses to provide these undertakings must be officially barred from participating in the Parade or the march in question.
R115. All groups applying to participate in the Parade or a march must complete an undertaking to abide by Pride Toronto’s anti-discrimination policy. Included in this undertaking will be the following phrase “The applicant will not present images or messages that promote or condone, or may promote or condone, violence, hatred, degradation or negative stereotypes of any person(s) or group(s).” Allegations that this undertaking has been or will be violated by any group, like other allegations of rule violations, will be resolved through the Pride Toronto dispute-resolution process. Groups violating this undertaking or other Pride Toronto rules may be subject to sanctions, including being denied the right to participate in the current or future Parades or marches. (Appendix A)
R116. Each year the Parade should feature an “Honoured Community” from among the sexual and gender minorities served by Pride Toronto.
R117. Commercial participation in the Parade and marches will be governed by the following criteria:
All commercial entries in the Parade and marches must meet Pride Toronto’s general rules regarding minimum equity (queer community support) standards;
An “Honoured Business” should be selected by a committee or subcommittee established for this purpose each year with representatives from business organizations. The object of this honour would be to recognize those corporations or other commercial entities that have a record of excellence in their support of their queer employees or their commitment to the queer community at large. The business selected would have a right to an entry in the first section of the Parade identified as the winner of the “Honoured Business Award”;
Businesses with queer employee affinity groups, or umbrella organizations such as Pride at Work that promote queer employee affinity groups, should be encouraged to participate in the first section of the Parade with the name and logo of their employer, provided that they are clearly identified as the employer’s affinity group and there are no additional commercial messages;
Businesses will be entitled to sponsor non-commercial entries in the parade, and to indicate their sponsorship with the business name and logo provided that the sponsor’s identifying information must be less prominent than the sponsored group’s information;
Other purely commercial messages will be banned from the Parade and marches;
Any restrictions on commercial messages in the marches other than (a) and (e) will be determined by the committees of Pride Toronto responsible for those marches.
R118. The Parade will be divided into three sections as follows:
The first section (tentatively named “Celebrating Our Communities”) will be open only to those groups who commit to limiting their entry’s message to issues expressly and directly about sexual orientation and/or gender identity;
The second section (tentatively entitled “Diverse Voices United”) will be open to groups who do not wish to have messages that are limited to messages directly and expressly about sexual orientation and/or gender identity. Such additional messages will be permitted provided that (i) the group also delivers a message expressly and directly about sexual orientation and/or gender identity that is more1 prominent than theadditional message or messages, (ii) the additional message is not a purely commercial message, and (iii) the additional message does not violate the Parade’s anti-discrimination rule, including the undertaking to abide by Pride Toronto’s anti-discrimination policy;
The third section (tentatively entitled “We Are Family”) will be for individuals who wish to march as individuals and not as members of groups. Individuals will be expected to abide by Pride Toronto rules banning purely commercial messages, and images or messages that promote or condone, or may promote or condone, violence, hatred, degradation or negative stereotypes of any person(s) or group(s).
R119. In the Parade, an escalating fee structure should be imposed for groups in excess of 50 individuals. A firm ceiling of 200 individuals should be imposed on all groups. The purpose of this rule is to ensure that newer or more marginalized groups are not swamped by a larger or more established group, the size of the Parade is kept manageable, the diversity of the Parade is encouraged and additional sources of independent revenue are created for Pride Toronto.
R120. The Parade should remain an inclusive and diverse event including celebration and protest, as one of the highlights of the Sunday that ends Pride Week.
R121. The weekend that commences Pride Week should be designated as Stonewall Day(s), to remember our past and accent our communities’ tradition of protest and dissent. Stonewall Day would be organized by Pride Toronto’s Human Rights Committee or a special Stonewall Day Committee working with Pride Toronto’s Human Rights Committee. Education activities must be integrated throughout Pride Week, including the closing Parade and the two marches. Stonewall Day should be developed as a day to especially showcase a broad range of human rights issues, including sexual orientation and gender identity issues. In order to recognize intersectional human rights issues, Pride Toronto should select one such issue each year as a special intersectional human rights theme. The precise format and content of events on Stonewall Day could be based on the New York City approach and could be a rally in a prominent public space such as Nathan Phillips Square or Queen’s Park. However, the Panel does not wish to insist on any particular activity being either included or excluded. This must be allowed to evolve, and decisions must be made by the organizers in part based on logistical issues such as resources, available spaces, permits, availability of speakers and the support of community partners. The Panel recognizes that it may be too late to develop this concept fully for this year’s Pride Week.
R122. Other than the undertaking to abide by Pride Toronto’s anti-discrimination policy and the general rules regarding commercial participation, the dyke community through Pride Toronto’s Dyke March Committee must determine the rules for participating in the Dyke March.
R123. Pride Toronto should encourage its Dyke March Committee to reach out to the organizers of the Take Back the Dyke March to attempt to restore unity, if possible.
R124. Other than the undertaking to abide by Pride Toronto’s anti-discrimination policy and the general rules regarding commercial participation, the Trans community through Pride Toronto’s Trans March Committee must determine the rules for participating in the Trans March.
R125. Pride Toronto should continue to seek and obtain government support for its important cultural and educational activities. However, in order to reduce Pride Toronto’s vulnerability to political pressures or ideologically motivated funding decisions, Pride Toronto should move to a budgetary model that ensures that the Parade, the Dyke March, the Trans March, and Stonewall Day activities do not receive any government funding.
R126. Pride Toronto should continue to seek and obtain meaningful commercial support from corporate sponsors who meet Pride Toronto’s equity criteria for its activities, including the Parades and marches. However, Pride Toronto must ensure that it has both diverse sources of revenue and diverse sources of commercial funding, so that it does not become unduly vulnerable to funding cuts by commercial sponsors who become unable or unwilling to support Pride Toronto.
R127. In reordering its finances this year, Pride Toronto must demonstrably recognize that the community has clearly identified the community’s top preservation events as the Parade, the Dyke March and the Trans March. Pride Toronto must operate in a financially prudent manner so that these and other activities are not imperiled.
R128. Despite the clear need for additional financial restraint and prudence by Pride Toronto this year, adequate support must be given to the Dyke March and the Trans March as central priorities of our community. In determining what is adequate, Pride Toronto must have particular regard to the marginalized nature of the Trans community and the special challenges faced by that community, including high levels of unemployment and poverty. Previous and current support levels to the Trans March have been, and are, woefully inadequate. This lack of tangible support has contributed to the poor relationship between the Trans community and Pride Toronto.
R129. Pride Toronto establishes a robust, fair, and independent dispute-resolution process to be known as the Pride Toronto Dispute-Resolution Process (Pride Toronto DRP). The Pride Toronto DRP must be binding on Pride Toronto and groups or persons who wish to participate in Pride festival activities. Details are included in the next section under Complaints and Appeals – Human Rights and Anti-Harassment Policy. It is up to the Board and the members of Pride to decide on the principles that will guide Pride Toronto, and to establish the rules that will carry out those principles. However, neither the Board nor management should be called upon to make final decisions on whether the rules have been broken.
R130. That as a condition of becoming a member of Pride Toronto or participating in the Parade or marches that groups or individuals agree to be bound by the Pride Toronto DRP.
With regards to participation in the 2011 Pride Parade, Pride Toronto shall forthwith post lists of all groups who participated in the 2010 Pride Parade. All such groups will be deemed to have applied on the date this policy is approved by the Pride Toronto Board. For new applicants and future parades and marches, Pride Toronto shall post on its website the names of any applicants, the nature of their application (sponsor, Pride Parade, Dyke March, etc.) and their proposed message(s). Anyone wishing to object to an applicant will have 15 days to object to the Pride Toronto DRP.
R131. Pride Toronto adopts the process recommended in this report for the DRP.
R132. Pride Toronto participate in initiatives with other outdoor festivals to advocate for provincial reform of Alcohol and Gaming Commission regulations or stipulations with respect to serving alcohol in enclosed areas.
R133. Pride Toronto ensure adequate guidance and support to its volunteers to prevent burnout and turnover among those whose skills and enthusiasm are required to ensure its success going forward.
At the time of this report, the Pride Toronto finds itself at a crossroads. The recent financial problems reveal serious management and operational deficiencies, and it is clear that urgent remedial action is required. In many ways, the rapid growth of Toronto’s Pride Festival can be considered one indication of recent successes. At the same time, this growth and the challenges around Parade participation have stretched Pride Toronto’s resources, its attention, and its energy, revealing financial and operational inadequacies within the Board’s management practices. In many ways, Pride Toronto is experiencing growing pains faced by other Pride boards and not-for-profit organizations that have also been challenged by rapid growth in the context of diverse community demands.
As if the challenges of unmanaged growth were not enough, community consultations revealed that Pride Toronto has disappointed many of its members. The deterioration of its relationship with the community is also indicative of inadequacies within the Board’s operational and management practices. Furthermore, this disappointment is reflective of the community’s loss of something very meaningful and important: an authentic Pride Week reflective of its culture and values. While this disappointment is troublesome, it is not surprising given the passion the community has for Pride Week, the diversity within the community, its strong commitment to pluralism, and the high standards by which the community evaluates Pride Toronto and its operations.
In reading this report, it will be important to consider the dangers of binary thinking. The rigid insistence that all things fall into one category or another (e.g., male or female) narrows thinking, limits available courses of action, and easily marginalizes people or groups, an oppressive tool with which the LGBT community is all too familiar. It was with these perils in mind that the Community Advisory Panel developed recommendations, and attempted to mirror the ideals inherent within community – that of coming together and of collaboration. As such, these recommendations are not those of the Community Advisory Panel, but rather, they belong to the community. They honor the voices of those who came forward to provide input and assistance. In developing solutions, no one method of consultation was emphasized over another. Instead, Panel members considered the totality of the information acquired throughout the entire consultative process, and balanced this information against the social, financial, and political realities facing Pride Toronto.
The recommendations contained within this report are intended to kick start a necessary restructuring that is possible, despite the challenges that lie ahead. The framework contained within this report is based upon an existing foundation within the LGBT community, a foundation comprised of skilled and enthusiastic people who generously volunteer their time and talents to Pride Toronto, and on the tremendous goodwill of donors, both public and private, community allies, and the general public, whose support is deeply appreciated. As such, this report is a call to those who are committed to Pride Week, and all that it represents, to come forward to assist Pride Toronto in bringing about the re-emergence of a Pride Week that is a meaningful and authentic reflection of the community’s distinctive history, culture, diversity, talents, and desire for celebration.
Pride Week is entrenched in the historic struggle of a diverse community bravely challenging the oppression and systemic discrimination of sexual minorities. Pride Toronto’s genesis is rooted in political activism for equality and human rights. In North America, this activism began on June 28, 1969, in Greenwich Village, New York City with the Stonewall riots against government-sponsored police repression of sexual minorities. This event became the defining moment that marked the start of the modern gay rights movement in the United States and around the world.
In 1981, the Toronto Pride march grew out of community resistance to the massive bath house raids of that year.
Today, Pride events are organized by Pride Toronto, a non-profit organization that exists to celebrate the history, courage, diversity and future of Toronto’s LGBT community. Pride Toronto works within a festival budget that is made possible through funding from government, corporate, and in-kind sponsorships. This funding has increased over the past few years, and this increase represents a dilemma for Pride Toronto. While greater and more predictable funding has changed the way Pride Toronto can bring events and awareness to the community in the form of more diverse and interesting programming, it also poses a challenge and surfaces contentions around the purpose of Pride. These questions revolve around Pride being a political movement promoting equality within all the communities Pride Toronto serves (e.g. trans, racialized, women, etc.) or a mainstream cultural festival, or both, with disagreements on where the emphasis should be placed.
As was evident during the 2009 and 2010 Pride Weeks, members of the LGBT community are not homogeneous in their agreement about methods, public policies, social and political positions, or even the value or purpose of Toronto’s Pride Week. Even the relatively common description of the event as a “festival” now provokes controversy among those who view that word as coded language for a Pride Week devoid of politics and devoted solely to amusement. During these most recent Pride Weeks, conflicting opinions emerged about the participation of Queers Against Israeli Apartheid (QuAIA) in the annual Pride Parade; the relocation of the Blockorama stage and the organizing of the Trans March. QuAIA participation in the Parade resulted in pressure from various stakeholders, including threats to withdraw funding, all of which threatened the survival of Pride Week. Recognizing the threat to Pride Week, the Board initially banned the phrase Israeli Apartheid from the parade, forcing the group to abandon its name or face exclusion from participating in the parade. This decision did little to quell the conflict and tensions continued.
As the Pride Parade approached, and with no end in sight to the mounting animosity, the Board realized that this conflict could not be solved without an examination of all issues within their larger contexts. As such, in June 2010, the Board accepted two motions suggested by LGBT community leaders. These motions were comprised of both a short-term immediate solution to the participation issue, and a proposal for a long-term examination of the communities’ perspectives on the broader issues surrounding the controversy. The short-term, temporary solution required all Pride participants to sign the City’s Declaration of Non-Discrimination Policy, thereby placing responsibility on the City to adjudicate complaints about policy violation. In adopting the motions, the 2010 Pride Week went ahead with relatively little disruption. However, Pride Toronto effectively reversed its earlier decision, resulting in further criticism of its actions.
This short-term solution should have provided the much-needed relief for this very difficult situation. However, the City has declined to interpret its own policy, leaving Pride Toronto without a clear direction to guide future Pride Weeks. Furthermore, the City’s vagueness has fanned the flames of the public dispute, permitted community division to flourish, and has done nothing to alleviate the threats to Pride Week. At the time of this report, the City has still not clarified its policy. Pride Toronto still faces the possibility of funding withdrawal for the 2011 Pride Week, which marks the 30th anniversary of Pride.
This report is the product of over nine months of planning and consultations with key stakeholders and members of the LGBT community. While these consultations revealed opinions as diverse as the members who make up the LGBT community, this process was designed to allow the community’s voices to describe what Pride means to the community, how to resolve Parade participation issues, and how to improve Pride Toronto’s management and operations going forward.
Despite the ongoing uncertainty around 2011 funding, Pride Toronto has supported and pursued the second motion put forth by LGBT leaders. Specifically, this resolution adopted in June 2010 states the following:
Be it resolved that Pride Toronto appoint a panel of LGBTTIQQ2SA leaders and friends to recommend a policy to protect and advance the qualities of Pride and ensure it is true to its core values and principles.
The mandate of the group would be to consult with the community to develop recommendations to ensure a Pride that values and promotes freedom of speech and individual expression, inclusiveness and respect, pluralism and diversity, equity and fairness, celebration, humour and fun, and to make recommendations regarding Pride Toronto’s ongoing working relationship with the broader LGBTTIQQ2SA communities.
In the interest of time, three community leaders met and devised a mandate for what has become known as the Community Advisory Panel (the Panel) and its consultative process. These community leaders included Brent Hawkes, Douglas Elliott, and Maura Lawless. A draft of the Panel’s mandate was forwarded to Pride Toronto, whose members provided helpful clarifications that did not result in substantial changes to the initial submission.
In undertaking its community outreach, the Panel was provided with the following scope for the consultative process:
Undertake a consultation process to seek input from the LGBT communities and other relevant informants, funders, and corporations to examine the relevance of Pride Toronto in relation to these stakeholders, and the mandate within which they would like to see the organization operate.
Based on the findings of the consultation process, develop a broad strategic policy framework that will assist the Board of Pride Toronto in defining its mission, vision, and values and operating consistently within its mandate.
Provide recommendations to the Board of Directors to structure the Board’s strategic planning process and, as appropriate, organizational/governance elements to ensure the viability and sustainability of the organization and a positive relationship with the broader LGBT communities.
The scope of this consultative process assumed that the Pride festival would continue to exist, and did not examine internal human resources matters, or other day-to-day functioning of Pride or its festival. Matters of importance to the festival identified through the consultative process were referred to the Co-Chairs of the Board by the Panel chair.
In adopting this resolution, a Panel comprised of community volunteers and leaders was appointed by Pride Toronto. In selecting members for this Panel, Pride Toronto attempted to reflect the diversity within the LGBT communities. Pride Toronto also appointed a Chair to provide leadership for this initiative. See Appendix 1 for a description of the Panel members. Pride Toronto further provided expectations for Panel members.
The Panel acted as an independent volunteer advisory body and reported directly to the Co-Chairs of the Pride Toronto Board. To facilitate the consultative process, one Pride Toronto Board member was designated to assist Panel members by providing the context and background information about the Pride Toronto organization and the issues from which this public consultation stem. This Board member did not act as a Panellist, nor did the Board member have voting rights within the Panel. The Board retained final approval for the final approval and implementation of any recommendations.
The Panel’s mandate required it to provide high-level strategic recommendations designed to protect and advance the overall objectives of Pride. These recommendations were based on consultations with community members and stakeholder feedback. The Panel was concerned about reaching as broad a cross section of the community as was possible under the tight timelines associated with this consultative process. The following paragraphs describe the community outreach undertaken by the Panel.
Six (6) large-scale public meetings were organized to enable the Panel to hear from the LGBT community. These venues allowed participants to provide input and to share perspectives about how effectively Pride Toronto had fulfilled its mission, as well as to make suggestions about its future direction.
General Meetings. Three (3) public meetings were open to the broader LGBT communities. These meetings were held in three (3) different locations to ensure geographic representation and to increase accessibility across the City (The 519 Church Street Community Centre; The Gladstone Hotel; and Flavelle House, University of Toronto).
Community-Specific Meetings. To create a safe and comfortable space for participants, three (3) separate sessions were held with members and allies of the Trans community, the racialized community, and the LGBT Women’s community. These sessions were held at the 519 Church Street Community Centre.
These consultation sessions were hosted and facilitated by Panel members who explained session context, purpose, format, ground rules, and participation expectations (example: respectful discussion, no discrimination, etc.). See Appendix 3 for details about the Community Consultation Context Statement. These introductions were delivered by Panel members at the beginning of each session. These meetings consisted of round table small group discussion facilitated by a trained volunteer or member of the Panel.
To facilitate discussions, participants were asked to respond to questions about the following general issues: (1) the purpose of Pride Toronto, (2) parade participation, (3) corporate involvement, (4) entertainment and cultural programming, (5) community relations, and (6) governance structure. Notes containing the main themes of each group’s discussions were collected after each meeting. In addition, a questionnaire (the ‘Consultation Questionnaire’) was distributed at all consultations and participants were encouraged to provide responses to the following questions contained within this questionnaire:
Why is Pride important to you?
What values would you like to see guide Pride?
What issues raised in the context statement are important to you?
What are your suggestions/creative ideas for moving Pride forward in a healthy way?
The schedules and locations of the public sessions were posted on Facebook, and over 2,700 email alerts sent out to those who had contacted the Panel advising of their interest in the consultations. Notices were also published in XTRA, FAB, and Now. The meetings were also advertised on Proud FM, listed on Pride Toronto’s website, and community groups were encouraged to send the meeting notices to their members. Furthermore, a poster advertising the Trans community consultation was also published.
Accessibility. Participants were able to request financial assistance for TTC transport if they were unable to afford to attend the public consultations. As well, American Sign Language interpretation was provided when these resources were available.
Targeted Consultations. As well, the Panel attempted to target consultation through community outreach to various groups. The list of these groups was compiled from multiple sources, including XTRA, Pride Toronto, and other sources. A letter/email was sent to these groups asking if they would be interested in hosting a consultation session for their members and friends. This letter was also posted on the Panel’s website and open invitations extended through the aforementioned media. Furthermore, an open invitation was published through Facebook asking groups interested in hosting a session to contact the Panel through its website email address.
Individual Consultations. The Panel also contacted a number of interested individuals and stakeholders, while others had contacted the Panel requesting the opportunity to provide input. Panel members attempted to fulfil these requests given time and human resource limitations it faced. However, by December 2010, it became evident that the response to the Panel’s invitation for targeted group and individual consultations was overwhelming. Requests to meet with the Panel were still being forwarded after the initial deadline of November 26, 2010, which had been extended to December 10, 2010. It was also evident that a number of common themes were emerging from the meetings that had been completed. The Panel did not want to miss the opportunity to hear potential new information or fresh perspectives. However, its members did not have the time to devote to hearing these common themes from everyone who requested a meeting, given tight timelines and human resource limitations.
To facilitate analysis of the large body of information that had been collected, as well as the drafting of recommendations from this analysis, the Panel decided upon a cut-off date of January 15, 2011. This date would enable the drafting of recommendations and a timely presentation of them to Pride Toronto. As such, in an effort to be fair and transparent, the Panel developed the following protocol against which new requests for consultations were assessed.
The Panel would meet with established groups, not private individuals;
Groups requesting meetings had to indicate how their contribution was distinctive or filled a gap, i.e. provided a fresh perspective, new information, and/or new ideas;
Groups with similar perspectives were consolidated into one meeting;
Meetings were structured to avoid repeated presentations;
Meetings were structured to enable Panel members to ask questions of the groups; and
When meetings could not be scheduled, groups were invited to provide a written submission of reasonable length to the Panel.
See Appendix 4 for a list of groups and individuals who provided input through consultations or written submissions to the Panel.
Recognizing that not all community members would be able to attend a public consultation sessions in person, the Panel developed an online survey as another medium by which community members could provide their input. This survey contained both closed and open-ended questions and was available for completion until January 15, 2011. See Appendices 6 through 23 for a summary of responses, including a listing of organizational affiliations of survey respondents .
In addition to the advertising discussed earlier in this report, the Panel launched the website www.CommunityAdvisoryPanel.ca. This website provided a forum for interested persons to contact the Panel, as well as for the Panel to update the community about its activities and progress throughout the consultative process.
In an effort to ascertain best practices and to learn from the experiences of other Pride festival organizers, the Panel researched the following organizations: Montreal, Quebec; Vancouver, British Columbia; New York City, New York; San Francisco, California; Sydney, Australia; and Tel Aviv, Israel. These organizations were researched for their policies and practices pertaining to structure, governance, and community relations; the range of events within their festivals; parade entry policies; entertainment; and sponsorship. This research was used by Panel members to assess the current situation, determine possible options for Pride Toronto, and frame the eventual recommendations contained within this report.
In addition to the input solicited from the community, the Panel members reviewed numerous documents relevant to the consultation process and the issues that it identified. These documents are listed in Appendix 24.
Members of the media were invited to the public meetings. However, the Panel recognized that photographing or filming some community members during the sessions could jeopardize their community standing, personal safety, or workplace security. The Panel also recognized that people with these concerns should not be penalized or discouraged from attending public forums. As such, guidelines supporting the broadest base of community inclusion without compromising the need for transparency of process were developed and distributed during the public sessions. These guidelines attempted to mitigate the risk and potential for damage that extended beyond expressing unpopular opinions. Appendix Eight describes the guidelines used to respect the privacy of attendees.
A key element within the privacy guidelines emphasized that consent for photographing was NOT assumed and efforts were made to identify a “media free zone” designed to provide a safe space for participants who did not want their photos published by the media. That said, it was understood that Panel members and volunteer/coordinators had provided their consent to be photographed and/or filmed at these forums. Their comments formed part of the public record, as did the comments of the spokespeople reporting for each discussion group at the public sessions.
As an invited guest, XTRA hosted a live stream of the public sessions that could be viewed remotely. In addition to allowing this public component to be fully visible, this streaming supported active contribution from participants at a virtual discussion table, as well as aggregating tweets from community members who were both in attendance and following the proceedings online. This live streaming helped to increase accessibility to the consultative process by allowing people who could not otherwise participate for reasons of geography or physical ability. The live streaming also provided a secondary channel of communication for those with speech and/or hearing difficulties who attended or viewed the sessions.
In addition to the information gathered through the consultation process, a number of articles and videos were submitted for the Panel’s consideration.
The analysis and recommendations contained within this report are organized into the following categories:
General Recommendations
Purpose Of Pride
Governance
Community Relations
Corporate And Government Funding
Entertainment (Culture)
Marches And Parade
Dispute Resolution
Other Recommendations
General
Homophobia still exists. Murders and harassment in Canada and around the world motivated by the hate of diverse sexual orientations and/or gender identities still occur. This fact was most recently evidenced by bashings on Church Street, challenges to the establishment of gay-straight alliances, and bullying in schools. People continue being afraid of coming out in their schools, workplaces, religious institutions, families, and/or social networks. Pride Toronto can serve as a venue to help address homophobia issues.
Transphobia still exists. This phobia exists not only within the broader community, but also within the lesbian, gay, and bisexual communities. The absence of gender identity as a prohibited ground for discrimination continues within human rights codes. Suicide rates among trans people are astronomical. Trans people continue to experience massive barriers to employment, income, housing, and social security, as well as discrimination in access to facilities such as gay bars and women’s spaces, and numerous other barriers. Pride Toronto can serve as a venue to help address transphobia issues.
Financially, Pride Toronto continues to enjoy the support of governments, corporations, and individuals. If Pride Toronto were to fail, this failure could send a chilling signal to potential funders that Pride events are a bad investment. The negative implications for Pride events, not only in Toronto, but across Canada are significant. Pride Toronto should be considered “too big to fail.”
The Community Advisory Panel considered recommending that Pride Toronto wind up operations, due to its significant financial and community relations’ challenges. Pride Toronto has lost the trust of significant segments within the LGBT community it is supposed to serve. The Panel believes, however, that these challenges can be overcome, with a significant overhaul of the organization. It is easier to fix an existing organization than to start from scratch, and the failure of Pride Toronto would be demoralizing to the community. Furthermore, strong supporters of the community would be unfairly burdened with significant financial losses.
As a community, we are stronger together. The existence of Pride Toronto as a single umbrella organization for multiple identities provides the potential for a platform for shared understandings of our diversity. For example, gay and lesbian people can learn about transgender issues and help advocate to address significant legislative barriers and social concerns. As well, financial transfers are more easily facilitated from wealthier communities to poorer communities, all of which helps all communities enjoy a better Pride festival.
The Panel examined various other models of Pride festivals that are based on divided organizations, such as Montreal, San Francisco, and New York City. Some of these cities have separate events for different political views. Some of these cities have separate organizations run their Trans March or Dyke March. The Panel rejected this notion of division, in the hope that together Pride Toronto could be a stronger organization. The community places a high value on sustaining an inclusive event.
An apology would not mean that any one individual or group is to blame for these problems. It would recognize that as an organization, overall, Pride Toronto has had a hand in past hurt for which it needs to account. This is the philosophy behind Ontario’s Apologies Act, an Act that allows organizations to make apologies without incurring legal liability. This apology would be an important step in healing community wounds, thereby enabling community members to move beyond their hurt and into a rebuilding phase.
Such an apology should recognize the following:
The financial predicament of the organization that, but for the good grace of a supportive financial institution, could have resulted and could still result in the complete closure of Pride Toronto as an organization.
The lack of Transgender representation at all levels of the organization from governance, programming, execution of the Trans march, and financial distribution.
The absence of Pride Toronto’s support for and assistance with current legislative battles calling for inclusion of gender identity in federal and provincial human rights legislation.
The lack of consideration of the trans community as a core constituency of the organization, and one of the original founding four identities (including lesbian, gay, and bisexual).
The hurt felt by the community for the handling of the Parade participation issue, including the absence of a complaints process, dismissal of concerns, and the changing decisions with minimal consultation.
The treatment of volunteer organizers of Blockorama, particularly the angst caused by potential relocation, and the low financial and logistical support provided.
The adopting of a defensive “us versus them” posture with the community in the face of criticism.
R1. Pride Toronto should be saved and its programming considerably downsized.
R2. Pride Toronto should continue as a single organization dedicated to serving communities of diverse sexual orientation and gender identity.
R3. Pride Toronto should acknowledge wrong and apologize to the community for the pain it has caused.
R4. Pride Toronto shall consider that the date of the Festival incorporate the date of the Stonewall riots.
Pride Toronto’s genesis is rooted in political activism for equality, human rights, and just change. In North America this began on June 28, 1969, in Greenwich Village, New York City with the Stonewall riots against government-sponsored police repression of “sexual minorities.” This resistance movement began with the community and the voices of the poorest and most marginalized people in the gay community: drag queens, black and Latino queers, members of the transgender community, sex trade workers, and homeless youth. This became the defining event that marked the start of the modern gay rights movement in the United States and around the world. The “Lesbian and Gay Pride Day” in Toronto was organized at the end of June to commemorate the anniversary of the Stonewall riots.
In 1981, the Toronto Pride march grew out of our community resistance to the massive bath raids of that year. Two of the initiating groups for Pride in 1981 – Gays and Lesbians Against the Right Everywhere (GLARE) and Lesbians Against the Right (LAR) – were left-wing gay liberation groups dedicated to fighting the anti-gay, anti-feminist, and racist right-wing politics of the day.
The Pride event then would not have taken place without the political and social context created by the massive resistance that took place against the bath raids that year. Thousands of queer men, lesbians and supporters took to the streets on a number of occasions, including taking over Yonge Street when it was against the law to march on Yonge Street. Many people of colour facing racist police repression came out in support of the struggles organised by the Right To Privacy Committee (RTPC) and many in the gay and lesbian community returned the solidarity. Many feminists came out in support of those arrested and in return the largest ever gay men’s contingent in the International Women’s Day march that was organized that year by GLARE and the RTPC. Gay postal workers got the Metro Toronto and District Labour Council to come out against the bath raids. City councillors also joined the voices denouncing the police action. As a result the city was turned on its ear and the police raids backfired creating more queer visibility and mobilization in the city (Toronto Pride by Gary Kinsman, 2006). Pride only became officially recognized by the City in 1991, when Toronto City Council proclaimed Pride an official City event.
Pride Day (now Pride Week), and the then Pride Committee, now Pride Toronto, came from a history of political protest against oppression of LGBT peoples and was created out of a spirit of resistance; giving birth to a place to affirm our value, celebrate our lives and our struggles. Politics, celebration, and community are therefore inextricably linked to Pride.
Pride Toronto’s corporation documents identifies the legal name of the organization as “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transsexual and “Transgender”2 Pride Toronto” and defines its objects of incorporation as “staging... an annual celebration and informational, educational and cultural festival by and for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual and “transgender”3 people of their sexual and gender orientations and identities, and their histories, cultures, communities, organizations, relationships, achievements and lives...”
The current mission and values of Pride Toronto states:
Mission Statement
Pride exists to celebrate the history, courage, diversity and future of Toronto’s LGBTTIQQ2SA* communities.
*Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transsexual, Transgender, Intersex, Queer/Questioning, 2 Spirited, Allies
Our Vision
Pride Toronto will:
Run a not-for-profit organization, committed to volunteers and staff.
Create a safe space to engage communities in the celebration of their sexuality.
Coordinate a series of pre-eminent arts and cultural events, including the annual Pride celebration, that empower and support our communities.
Connect with and help develop our communities, fostering essential partnerships.
Capture and build upon our organization’s and our communities’ history.
Provide a platform for education through a significant public presence.
Our Values
Pride Toronto will
Honour – our past by remembering our history.
Protect – our future by reaching out, educating and defending our right to celebrate.
Value Diversity – by accepting and respecting differences and working to understand the diverse cultural complexities that influence identity, assumptions, behaviours, expectations, and beliefs.
Celebrate – with provocative, racy, and outrageous events
Engage – the diversity of our communities to participate in events and facilitate community development.
Recognize – and acknowledge, the involvement and contributions of volunteers, staff and stakeholders.
Respect – volunteers, staff and stakeholders by creating and sustaining an environment where we treat each other with respect and dignity.
Sustain – the organization by ensuring transparency in our actions and accountability with, and to, our communities.
Manage – with fiscal responsibility and foresight, ensuring the viability of the organization and the fulfillment of its mission.
CAP’s assessment is that Pride Toronto’s core activities in the mandate (as outlined in the objects of incorporation) are sound and reflective of an organization with a stated commitment to inclusion. There was some concern that the mission, as compared to the objects of incorporation, does not directly include reference to education and information.
Regrettably, numerous segments of its communities expressed dissatisfaction with Pride Toronto not living its mandate, mission, vision and values. This has left many individuals and communities feeling alienated, disrespected, undervalued, marginalized, hurt and angry with Pride Toronto. For many communities, such as the trans, racialized, dyke, and people with disabilities communities, the challenges are long-standing; however in 2010 the tensions surfaced around Pride Toronto’s decisions regarding QuAIA, Blockorama and the Trans March.
The specific concerns and perspectives of the communities’ about Pride’s responsive ness to its mission, values and purpose can be reflected as follows:
Community Relations. Lack of responsibility and accountability of Pride organizers to the community was a significant concern. This was expressed by the majority of participants in the public meetings, online survey, and consultation questionnaire. The themes of the concerns were numerous:
In the consultation process the community expressed personal feelings of responsibility for the community’s image, and that Pride organizers have not been sensitive to the overall message the event conveyed as well as its inclusiveness of the many voices in the LGBT communities. One questionnaire respondent wrote,
“Pride claims to speak for the queer and trans community as a whole, including me. Since pride claims to speak for me, it has a responsibility to understand my voice and the voices of my community.”
Pride Toronto was not consultative with its communities resulting in mistrust and dissatisfaction with the governance and leadership to represent the communities’ interests.
Pride’s actions were seemingly limited due to corporate/government involvement.
Still others wrote, “Pride reflects my community’s expression of its concerns and issues” and saw no reason for complaint and continued to see it as a positive event where they felt welcome and included.
The overall feedback however was that the “by and for” LGBT interests in Pride Toronto’s leadership and programming has been steadily eroding and its relationship with the community was now broken.
Politics. Respondents to the questionnaire were divided over whether Pride should be a place of political expression at all. From the public consultation questionnaire approximately 10% of survey respondents expressed concerns about Pride’s organization this year. Broadly speaking, these concerns were that the event has become too political, too corporate or too overtly sexual, that funding is precarious, and that organizers lack accountability and should be more responsible for the ‘image’ or ‘message’ of the event.
However, the overwhelming majority refused to dissociate Pride from political issues. Accordingly, Pride was framed as:
An important vehicle for political recognition of the rights of the queer community.
A political organization or that political activism was at least one key component that could never be separated from Pride’s mission.
An occasion to speak out against oppression in a wider or more global sense, i.e., racial issues, poverty, immigration, or human rights violations worldwide.
Pride as a place of protest and resistance was a common theme
The controversy between Israel and Palestine was alluded to by a small subset of respondents. It is worthwhile to compare statements from respondents such as the following:
“Israel is using gay rights to support their oppression,” and asked, “is it a gay issue?” Another wrote that “having QUAIA [Queers for Anti-Semitism]” would “lead to violence.” Meanwhile, others wrote that “defending our rights is connected with defending others’ rights” and that Pride was a “place of intersection,” where “Pride = recognition and articulation of the connection between queer rights and human rights.”
Commercialization. More participants made statements in the public meetings concerning commercialization of Pride and concerns that corporate presence is overshadowing the LGBT community and its allies. Specific examples cited to illustrate the concerns were:
The growing presence of large corporate floats in the Parade at the same time as the experience of marginalization of LGBT organizations and community allies.
The central placement of corporate and commercial vendors in the Community Fair at the expense of community participation and presence. . It was reflected by 5% of respondents to the questionnaire who commented on what they perceived as the increasingly commercial and corporate atmosphere of the event. For example, one wrote about “problems with commercial booths,” commenting that the event “doesn’t feel inclusive anymore” but had become “[f]ragmented.” The same respondent added, “we need to go back to core values of why we’re here... What should the parade be? What do companies have to do with pride?”
The programming of the main stages with artists that have “commercial appeal” has marginalized the promoting and integration of local artists from the communities
Respondents felt that there was no accountability for corporate sponsors. Many stated that corporate sponsors had too much influence and control on Pride activities.
Funding. A small number of respondents addressed the “precarious” state of Pride funding, commenting that the City’s decisions felt “arbitrary.” Another individual noted “that the funding allows the LGBT to be really visible this one time during the year” and was important in keeping the event alive.
The consistent critique leveled against Pride Toronto is that it has not delivered on its mission, mandate and purpose. For many it has strayed from its relationship with its members and communities; that it has lost focus on representing the interest of its diverse communities; that it has become overly invested in corporate growth subscribing to the notion that “Bigger is Better” and that its purpose and mission has become susceptible to being shaped by corporations and government funders. The question that was asked in 2010 by many in the LGBT community was “Whose Pride?”
Pride means and represents many things to the communities that call it theirs. For most it is a place of Celebration, Community, Visibility/Expression, Politics, and Sexuality. The word chart below provides a pictorial representation of the words frequently used when respondents articulated the purpose of Pride.
Through the consultations and survey the CAP heard echoes of this Pride’s history. That there is great importance in remembering the history of protest and resistance in Pride communities, and that this history and the contributions of the diverse members of the LGBT communities must be honoured and continually echoed in the celebrations. In all of the public meetings and from a few respondents to the questionnaire, mention was made that consideration should be given to moving the date of the parade back to the original date linked to the Stonewall riots of June 28, 1969.
The celebratory aspect of Pride was by far the most important factor to survey respondents. Almost 60% stated that the event was a time of “fun” and “celebration” for them. Many commenting that Pride is important because it is a celebration; of the community, of political and/or social inclusion, and often for marking personal milestones, such as coming out or celebrating friendships, families, and relationships. Some simply said, “it is fun,” or a great way to “celebrate LGBT culture and pride.”
Political expression was the second largest factor – approximately 35% identified the event as political, although a minority of respondents referred to politics as an unwelcome feature of the parade. Within this group, nearly 90% argued that Pride is political and that this is a positive feature of the event. A minority responded that political issues, such as the Israeli/Palestinian controversy, should not be given voice at the event. Here, a significant tension emerged between political solidarity, i.e., the defense of human rights, globally, and concerns that Pride remain solely about the rights of the queer community locally and internationally.
Around 10% of respondents noted that Pride has changed for the worse, citing problems such as the inclusion of the Israeli/Palestinian political controversy, the precariousness of public funding, and the increasing presence of corporate sponsors and a perceived commercialization of the parade itself. This group was also concerned with accountability, commenting that Pride organizers had a responsibility to represent the community in an authentic and coherent way. Overall, participants viewed the event positively as an occasion of great social, political and personal significance.
Nearly 50% of respondents noted that Pride is important because it affirms their sense of community. Ideas of membership, social inclusion, solidarity and acceptance of diversity were emphasized. One wrote that Pride is an occasion where “[t]he community comes together to celebrate.” It is a time to “be who we are,” to “send messages of love and acceptance,” and to “bring light to issues where we need to be moved in terms of full participation of gays.” In this context, some commented on the event’s history and noted its important educational purpose: both for the LGBT community and the community at large.
Safety was also a common theme. Around 20% of respondents stated that Pride made them feel comfortable and secure in their identities. For example, one participant noted that Pride “provides me and my people a safe place to be themselves, an outlet where being Queer is normal.”
Roughly a third of respondents associated Pride with visibility and public expression: whether political, social, or personal. In this vein, the visibility of the event was significant, as was the notion of public space and a safe venue to assert and celebrate one’s sexual identity. As one respondent noted:
Pride is important to me to have a space and time to feel comfortable to be myself and express my sexuality and to celebrate. It is also important to educate and offer the straight world a window onto our culture. It is also important to express solidarity with queer people all over the world in terms of human rights, social justice and equity.
In this context some commented, however, that Pride has become an event where they no longer feel comfortable. One expressed the concern that Pride is “being taken over by corporate sponsorship”; another asked that “corporate, political sponsors” not “overtake” the event. Another felt strongly that Pride had “targeted” him “as a Jew,” writing that the event “has made itself important to me by telling me how much me and my community are hated by the [P]ride organization.”
A number of respondents commented that Pride was an important occasion for sexual expression. The results were divided between those emphasizing sexual freedom, i.e., kinkiness, fun, flamboyancy, and those who referred to sexuality as an issue of identity and social recognition. Others did not make this distinction; one wrote simply that “Pride is important to me as a public celebration of my sexuality.”
A small number of respondents expressed the concern that Pride had become too overtly sexual and that “nakedness” was unnecessary. Others tied sexual flamboyancy to political resistance and the free expression of sexual identity. One wrote that Pride made them feel safe and respected – fundamentally, it was about “Safety (f)or Trans, Leathermen, Lesbians, Bisexuals, straights, the Kinky, Youth, Gay Parents, Gay families.”
Other significant factors and themes include: importance of a public space/recognition, equality, protest, diversity, solidarity, safety, education and history. Overall, respondents to the importance of Pride cited the celebratory nature of Pride as the main reason for its significance. Community was a close second, and political, social, and individual expression was also an important factor in the event’s significance. Concerns were few, but significant: certain respondents felt alienated by the QuAIA controversy, the increased presence of corporate and political sponsors, and generally commented that the event lacked the authenticity and social cohesion of the past.
These sentiments were also affirmed in the online survey response to “What Pride means to you?” and were reflected as:
Celebrates Identity
Celebrates Survival
Is Political
Affirms LGBTTIQQ2SA existence
Reaffirms “Normalcy” Informs and provides resources,
Celebrates a Safe Haven, Locally and Nationally
Is celebrated as a LGBT / Chosen Family / Family Holiday / High Holiday / Party / Festival
Celebrates the ability for one da yto walk through the streets and be safely open and out and expressive
Informs and provides resources, especially for those who come from outside Toronto
Honours the legacy of those who fought for rights before us
Honours progress in human rights for LGBTTIQQ2SA
The word chart below provides a pictorial representation of the words frequently used by respondents to the questionnaire in articulating the values that should guide Pride.
Most consultation participants either expressed support or did not comment on the current list of communities served, as identified in the LGBTTIQQ2SA acronym. There were several comments raised that illustrated concerns with the absence of a community, or with the presence of a community. Sometimes during the consultation, the acronym was referred to as the “alphabet soup,” “LGBTQ” or “LGBT etc,” suggesting that the full acronym may not be commonly understood or used as a communication tool.
Representatives of two communities / identities requested to be explicitly recognized as communities for Pride Toronto: asexual, pansexual and genderqueer. The Asexual Visibility and Education Network submitted a written submission, stating that “its important for asexual people to be included explicitly under Pride’s umbrella for our asexuality” and “that Toronto Pride consider adding asexuality to the list of people represented by the mandate.”
Several respondents to the online survey indicated that they wished for pansexuals to be identified and recognized. Example statements include: “Pride includes many groups; however I rarely see anything regarding "pansexuals". Would be nice to see an inclusion of this group as well :-)” “I’m part of the pansexual community. I would like there to be some gender minority presence at the fair and preferably at least one pansexual flag (we do have a flag. It is unofficial but recognized within the community.)”
Genderqueer (GQ) and intergender are catch-all terms for gender identities other than man and woman. Several respondents to the online survey indicated that they wished for genderqueer to be identified and recognized. These requests were less formal than the requests for either asexual or pansexual, as follows: “An additional G in its identification statement (genderqueer); “One word that Pride means to you – gender queer.”
Notwithstanding the requests for additional communities to be served by Pride Toronto, there were some who had concerns with the communities currently listed. Allies was most frequently questioned. While all respondents thanked, recognized, valued and supported the role that allies have played towards the LGBT community; some questioned whether allies should be directly represented in the mission statement.
“Please leave out the "A" Allies, they are welcome to stand with us and I am proud to have friends from the hetero/sis gender community but this is our celebration. They are welcome to come and watch the March and parade but it should be a chance for our community to get greater exposure throughout the world.
“I resent the inclusion of "allies" in Pride Toronto’s mandate. Ally shouldn’t be an identity category, it’s an action.”
Some comments illustrated disagreement with other terms used in the LBTTIQQ2SA acronym. For example:
I like the purpose as described other than the alphabet soup ending to it.... Questioning is very ambivalent and lacks meaning. Queer is a "catch all" word that is defined by the person using it at the time, and in the context that they are using it. I do not accept that the eleven letters are in fact one community – and I do not believe that one organization can successfully try to represent or bring together all of those communities as one.
Comments about communities, however, sometimes reflected a view of Pride’s performance towards these various communities – that perhaps Pride only stated that they worked with these communities but didn’t actually mean it.
“If Pride is going to include any other letter besides G and possibly L in its acronym, then it’s going to have to do a much better job of addressing the needs and concerns of those communities in order to properly celebrate them. The Bs, Ts, Is, Q/Qs and 2Ss need a lot more integration and inclusion into the festival before we even begin to think about anyone else down the list.... How about: Pride Toronto is a non-profit volunteer organization that exists to celebrate the history, courage, diversity, achievements and the ongoing struggles of Toronto’s LGBT+ community and LGBT+ communities everywhere.
There is a dynamic tension between the goal of inclusion achieved by adding additional groups, and the danger that such groups (such as, Allies) are not well defined and can cause Pride to lose focus of its original focus on communities of sexual orientation and gender identity.
R5. Pride Toronto integrate the core priorities as defined in the objects of incorporation – Celebration, Information, Education and Culture – into its mission and values.
R6. Pride Toronto build its programming activities aligned with its core priorities
R7. Pride Toronto engages in a process to define its core constituencies and address the evolution of the current LGBTTQQ2SA communities towards defining the focused communities to whom it is accountable.
R8. The recommended CAP Implementation Advisory revisit and use Pride Toronto’s 2005-6 five years strategic plan “Rebuilding Our Pride” to support revitalizing, defining and articulating the purpose of Pride Toronto
R9. Pride Toronto make explicit that it is a not for profit organization accountable to its membership, owned by its communities and vested with representing the interests, diversity and diverse sexual and perspectives of the Pride communities.
The Community Advisory Panel has been asked to examine Pride Toronto’s governance. Governance issues are complex and our time frame has been tight. A full examination would consider all the applicable legal rules, the obligations undertaken to public and private donors, and commitments to the community. It would also carefully examine the work of the board of directors, the Executive Director, other staff, and volunteers. Our recommendations must be seen as a first step to better governance, with the process of reform being carried on by Pride Toronto’s Board, members and its new Governance Committee.
Pride Toronto finds itself at a crossroads today. The recently revealed financial problems are very serious. The challenges relating to participation in the annual parade have demanded a lot of attention. The revelation of serious management and operational deficiencies require urgent remedial action. Longstanding festering problems have languished. The parade’s very rapid growth marks its success in some ways but bigger is not necessarily better in the eyes of many in the community: our extensive consultations have revealed that Pride Toronto has disappointed many of its members in a variety of ways. This is not surprising given that the LGBT community is very diverse, has a strong commitment to pluralism and has set very high standards for Pride to satisfy.
CAP was not established to function as an investigative body like a Commission of Inquiry. The committee has engaged in extensive consultation with members of the community in meetings and through questionnaires. We have listened carefully. We set out an account of some of what we have learned through our consultation process below. This account is not complete; it provides a basis for suggesting a better framework for management and operation. It is important to note that we have learned that other Pride organizations have failed or split into different undertakings when they encountered the range of problems that Pride Toronto now faces. More generally, some of these problems are rooted in the kind of poor governance that other not for profit corporations experience in periods of rapid growth and in the context of diverse community demands.
It is clear that changes are urgently necessary to the operations of Pride Toronto. These changes will require hard work and stern determination. Further study may indicate be that changes are also necessary to the governing instruments and management structure.
We also stress at the outset our belief that the necessary restructuring is possible. There is a wonderful foundation in place. Pride enjoys a membership of skilled and enthusiastic people who volunteer their time and talents generously. The concerns relating to Pride’s operation in recent years, which we describe below, were often expressed with strong emotion, reflecting disappointment at the loss of something very meaningful and important. There is tremendous good will on the part of donors, public and private, allies of the community and the general public, whose support is deeply appreciated.
Also expressed in clear terms was the desire to return to an earlier model for Pride, which embodied a less ambitious Pride Week. That older model is widely considered to have been a more meaningful and authentic reflection of the community’s distinctive history, culture, diversity, talents and desire for celebration. Happily, this more authentic model requires a smaller budget.
The most urgent changes are basic to good corporate governance, financial prudence, and renewed sensitivity to Pride’s basic aspirations.
Pride Toronto’s publicly articulated purposes and values have not been adequately served by the governance arrangements and management in recent years. The basic commitments of Pride as stated in their mission, vision and values outlined in the “Purpose of Pride” section of this report serves as a background to our assessment of the community’s concerns and our recommendations in this section.
Pride Toronto’s presentation of itself in application for World Pride 2014 characterizes an organization with:
Strong emphasis on pluralism, multiculturalism, diversity of Toronto and by extension the Pride festival experience
This characterization has been widely disputed by the community. In fact, the community overwhelmingly argued that Pride Toronto has not lived up to its mission, vision and values.
Concerns for more accountability, transparency, consultation
Need to restructure relationship between board of directors, staff, volunteers
Need for sounder financial planning, including comparison of expenditures of similar organizations and contingency planning
Desire for clearer rules for contracting and procurement, including conflict of interest: value for money and selection of Parade orientation too commercial, at the expense of community participation
Need for strategic plan supporting community’s priorities
Need for complaints process
Desire for better administration of membership and voting at public meetings.
Staffing/volunteer:
Need to ensure volunteer jobs have reasonable expectations in terms of time and responsibility. Desire for more training, organization and skills development.
Desire for more attention to disadvantaged members of community
Desire for better communication systems for volunteers, staff and board of directors
Need for senior staff to serve community’s interests and pay special attention to the marginalized and disadvantaged
Need to address alienation of many devoted members with strong skills and wide experience due to dissatisfaction with recent management priorities and policy directions.
More attention to diversity and human rights interests in committee work, programming, festival
Less commercial activity at center of festival. More attention to local artists and crafters in terms of funding and location in the limited area available to the festival. Allocation of space at festival to enable community members to make new contacts, find new outlets for their talents and interests, discover what is new in the community and beyond
End complacency in regard to challenges still confronted by LGBT in Canada, e.g., support for proposed legislative amendments to ban discrimination based on sexual minority status at provincial and federal level
Need for more attention and resources for people with a disability – sign language, accessibility of premises
We have determined that a significant segment of the community is dissatisfied with Pride Toronto’s governance performance. There is need to create an interim solution to ensure the continuation of the Parade and marches on a sound financial basis. There is also need to set up arrangements for more long-term oversight and rebuilding.
These immediate steps necessitate the active participation of skilled and experienced members of the community, many of whom are formerly active members who became alienated in recent years due to dissatisfaction in the operation of the organization.
Pride Toronto must undertake extensive reorganization and reconsideration of priorities to fulfill its objectives and aspirations. There are numerous very talented and experienced former volunteers and staff members, but it is not clear that they would be able to take on the new governance project. In any event, Pride must hire a new executive director and create a new strategic plan. To this end, we suggest that Pride Toronto consider enlisting the help of the expertise available at Management Advisory Services, which provides volunteer consultants in support of the following areas: Governance and Board Development, Facilitation, Strategic and Tactical Planning, Mentoring and Coaching, Human Resources and Organizational Analysis, Finance and Accounting, Marketing and Communications, Information Management, and Fundraising. (There are other agencies that provide volunteer legal services for eligible nonprofit organizations including board governance and human resources as well as training and facilitation in finding highly skilled and experienced board members, should these services be required.)
Pride Toronto should revisit the documentation created in earlier efforts to revitalize the organization. We have obtained copies of a draft 5-year strategic plan for 2005-6 and a document entitled “Rebuilding Our Pride,” dated 2010. These documents contain excellent analysis and recommendations, many of which might have averted the current failings and dissatisfaction. (We do not consider the recommendation for a Constitution for Pride to be a high priority at this time. Such an undertaking would be very difficult and likely unsuccessful given the other issues that must be addressed on an urgent basis.)
The first priority must be financial sustainability. We recommend that Pride Toronto prioritize the activities deemed the most meaningful by the members of the community who participated in our consultations: the Parade and the Trans and Dyke marches. We also recommend that Pride study the publications of other Pride festivals to gain insight into good management structures and best practices, determine priorities and compare expenditures. Other suggestions include finding ways to boost revenues, curb expenses and seeking an arrangement with Community One Foundation to raise charitable donations for those parts of the Pride Toronto’s activities that can be so supported. We consider Pride’s application for charitable status to be unnecessary. We give financial sustainability the highest priority because all of Pride’s activities are dependent upon it and, further, we understand that the current financial problems may undermine established funding relationships and jeopardize World Pride 2014 in Toronto.
To support the financial restructuring, we recommend the creation of a financial committee that will have strong oversight, review and reporting authority. This committee should draw on the expertise and experience within the community and also bring in other respected professionals who can bring a critical eye and fresh ideas to the deliberations.
We heard from many sources that the current governance arrangements have disrupted communication between the membership and the board of directors, opening the door to decision-making that has proved to be unsound. Many people have expressed the view that earlier arrangements created a better relationship between the membership and the board of governors. We recommend revisiting abandoned arrangements, including better channels of communication, transparency, and accountability. We also suggest the creation of ex officio positions on the board of directors for members of the community. This would support sustained commitments to Pride’s mission statement.
We recommend the creation of a governance committee to advise Pride on immediate changes and to create a long-term plan for changes and operation. This committee should have authority to oversee the transition to a new governance structure and to oversee its performance through periodic review and reporting. This committee, like many of the other committees we recommend, should consist of at least one member of the Board of Directors but include a majority of outside professionals. There are a number of organizations that Pride Toronto can turn to, such as Pride at Work, to reach out for talented volunteers. This will not only provide the Board with much needed assistance, it will help rebuild the community’s feeling of engagement with the organization and create opportunities for recruiting future directors for the Board. The Panels’ experience in recruiting the initial roster of adjudicators for the Dispute-Resolution Process reveals that there are untapped reservoirs of professional talent willing to lend a hand to a revitalized Pride.
Much criticism was levied against the former Executive Director during our deliberations, however, for the record we note that she resigned before our Report was delivered. It would be a mistake to blame all the problems of Pride Toronto on her management style. Her departure will not address the many underlying problems at Pride Toronto. While it may be that closer oversight of the Executive Director will be required in future, an organization of Pride Toronto’s size and complexity cannot be run on an all-volunteer model. An Executive Director is needed. An Interim Executive Director should be engaged to manage this year’s event, with the support of a committee of experienced Executive Directors and managers. Given the immediate challenges, the interim Executive Director should not play any significant role in implementing the longer-term strategies in this Report. A permanent Executive Director will need to be recruited.
The Executive Director’s position should be reconfigured in order to improve accountability, communication and sound decision-making in support of the mission statement of Pride. Special care must be taken to ensure adequate training and performance review of all senior staff. In addition, review of the employment profiles and contracts as well as procurement policy is strongly recommended to sustain the financial health of Pride Toronto. New rules are necessary to safeguard against conflict of interest as the existing safeguards have proved to be inadequate to ensure that any and all nonarm’s length contract are above criticism.
We recommend the creation of a complaints process and the introduction of other methods of dispute resolution as determined to be advisable. We recommend a system connected to the Anti-Discrimination and Harassment Policy and the enforcement of the Parade and march rules below. There is considerable disappointment and frustration within the community that needs an outlet for resolution, other than at infrequent members’ meetings. It would also be advisable to consider having facilitators at general and annual public meetings to ensure that debate is constructive and productive during the volatile transition period.
Pride Toronto has lost a considerable amount of money on unsuccessful fundraisers in 2010. We recommend that Pride reconsider these events to ensure that they achieve their purposes without losing money.
We suggest that Pride can improve its programming at reasonable cost by partnering with other organizations to produce events that bolster education, culture and community. The Canadian Lesbian and Gay Archives is a logical education partner, to give only one example. Engagement with non-LGBT organizations in developing programming on intersectional issues is also logical as a low cost means of enriching Pride Week’s educational and informational offerings.
In addition to the general unhappiness and alienation of many in the LGBT community in recent years, there are disadvantaged members of the community who feel that their needs and preferences have been neglected. Examples include the failure to prioritize health issues, inadequate attention to those with disabilities, and weak support for the most marginalized members of the community. We suggest that some changes to governance would facilitate improved relations with and service to these members of the community. The development of these changes should be the product of consultation and include support for training, service and employment opportunities, as well as political and social support. As for other changes, there is need for goals, review and reporting mechanisms.
R10. Pride Toronto hire an interim executive director.
At the time of this report, Pride Toronto finds itself without an executive director. As such, an interim executive director should be hired as soon as possible to enable Pride Toronto to manage the 2011 Pride Festival on a fiscally responsible basis. The interim executive director should not be responsible for implementing any of the longer term recommendations contained within this report and approved by the Board. The work of the interim executive director should be supported and guided by a Management Support Group consisting of experienced current and past executive directors or respected community organizations such as the 519 Church Street Community Center or Black CAP.
R11. Pride Toronto establish a Board Development Committee consisting of one or two current Board representatives and a majority of community leaders to fill the current vacancies on the Pride Toronto Board.
In addition to the vacant Executive Director position, two members recently resigned from the Pride Toronto Board. A committee comprised of a current Board member(s) and community representatives will ensure that effective and trusted new leadership is identified to fill these vacancies. It is recommended that no steps be taken to fill these vacancies until the committee has identified strong candidates to present for consideration by the membership.
R12. The Pride Toronto Board of Directors be expanded to include cross-directors, i.e., persons holding office in other organizations that have cognate interests, such as the 519 Church Street Community Centre, and who are directly interested in and affected by Pride Toronto’s programs and activities, such as the local business association. These expanded positions might be nonvoting members of the Board.
R13. Pride Toronto make arrangements to include, as ex-officio members, representatives from important internal constituencies whose concerns have not historically been adequately addressed within the organization including at least: volunteers, trans community, racialized communities, dykes, persons over 40, people with a disability, and seniors.
R14. Pride Toronto establish a Board Advisory Committee on governance and that membership on this committee consist of at least one Board representative, but consist mainly of people from the community who have the skills and experience necessary to carry out the responsibilities specifically allocated to this committee and to ensure that Pride Toronto’s governance structure, its bylaws, and its operations reflect the best practices of not-for-profit corporations.
The Board Advisory Committee will assist the Board and its membership in overseeing Pride Toronto’s compliance with the applicable municipal, provincial and federal laws; its obligations imposed by its Letters Patent and Bylaws; and with obligations under funding agreements including the reporting obligations imposed by those agreements, e.g., City of Toronto Equity Guide.
Furthermore, this committee will ensure that Pride Toronto creates the policies and practices imposed by the City Of Toronto on funding recipients, including as priorities robust equity policies, conflict of interest policies, and a dispute-resolution process.
R15. Pride Toronto, in cooperation with the Financial and Audit Committee, create and provide systems for the application of standardized checklists and auditing processes at every decision-making level to ensure compliance with its core mandate, as well as with City of Toronto Equity Guide.
This recommendation is designed to ensure a balanced representation of cultural activities; a balanced representation of constituents, e.g., trans and racialized communities, persons with disabilities, etc.; and a balanced allocation of funds to advance the Pride Toronto mandate.
R16. The Board Advisory Committee on Governance oversee the development of the job description for the hiring of the new executive director and the competition and hiring for that position. It will also formalize arrangements so that that all staff members have appropriate skills and experience, ongoing training, supervision, and regular performance review.
R17. The Board Advisory Committee seeks outside expert assistance as needed and is advised to consider the services of the not-for-profit sector, such as Management Advisory Service (www.masadvise.ca), Volunteer Lawyers Service (www.volunteerlawyers.org) and Boardmatch Leaders (www.altruvest.org).
R18. Pride Toronto must conduct itself in a financially responsible manner.
R19. A Financial and Audit Committee be formed consisting of the Treasurer of Pride Toronto and a group of leaders from the community who must have the skills and experience necessary to carry out the responsibilities allocated to the committee. The Financial and Audit Committee will be tasked, as its highest priority, with oversight of the day to day financial operations of Pride Toronto to ensure the financial survival of the organization. The committee must ensure prudent, knowledgeable, and accountable financial management. Examples of this prudence include the tracking of cultural expenditures based on Pride Toronto’s core mandate; ensuring compliance with conflict of interest stipulations after reviewing that these stipulations are adequate in their application to all purchasing, procurement and sponsorship agreements: see Pride Toronto Purchasing and Procurement Policy, February 8, 2010; and ensuring that the expenditures for fundraising events do not exceed the amount of revenue that they generate.
R20. The Financial and Audit Committee oversee the broader multi-year financial horizon as soon as the immediate financial situation is brought under control. More particularly, it will be the Committee’s responsibility to ensure that Pride Toronto returns to in-year excess of revenues over expenses in 2011, and that the financial deficit is eradicated by 2013. The financial restructuring of Pride must take account of the activities deemed most meaningful to the members of the community, as revealed throughout the Panel’s consultation process.
R21. The Financial and Audit Committee engage in proactive disclosure to ensure that the process by which the Pride Toronto budget is developed is transparent and that the budget documents are made available on Pride Toronto’s website expeditiously for public reference.
R22. The budgeting process be flexible enough to respond to changes of circumstance, e.g., changes in funding, sponsorships, and other support.
R23. The budgeting process be informed by reference to the budgets of other Pride organizations and of other organizations with similar purposes.
R24. The Financial and Audit Committee oversee the preparation of audited statements for general meetings.
R25. A World Pride 2014 Committee be formed and tasked with overseeing the preparations for World Pride. Membership of the World Pride 2014 Committee should be public and should include various community stakeholders.
R26. A Community Advisory Panel Implementation / Policy Advisory Committee be formed comprised of at least one Board representative, but consist mainly of a majority of community leaders, especially those with experience in policy development and strategic planning. It is further recommended that the Board of Pride Toronto work in partnership with this panel. This recommendation proposes the establishment of a committee that would be responsible for oversight of the implementation of the Panel’s report and updating the Board and the membership on its progress. This committee would also assist the Board by addressing new policy concerns that arise, which are not contained within this report. This committee would also be responsible for advising the Board and the membership on the format for a review that would take place after the first two years of experience with the Panel’s report. This advice would ensure that this review is properly conducted in a timely fashion.
R27. Pride Toronto create and provide budget support as necessary to committees representing marginalized groups within Pride Toronto, e.g., racialized groups, the Trans community.
The recognition of these committees will formalize the consultation obligations of the Board to the members of Pride who have expressed marginalization in the past. To further this objective, these committees will meet regularly as necessary and produce reports to the Board, to which the Board must respond in a timely fashion.
R28. The Community Consultation Committee consist of the Chairs of the community committees and advise the Board and membership on effective community consultation measures.
R29. The Chair of the Community Consultation Committee be an ex-officio member of the Pride Toronto Board of Directors.
R30. Pride Toronto revise its membership rules to be simple, reasonable, transparent, and beyond manipulation.
R31. Pride Toronto abandons its application for charitable status. For activities that are compatible with charitable status, the Panel recommends creating an arrangement with Community One Foundation to raise charitable donations.
R32. Pride Toronto partner with Community One Foundation to organize a long term fundraising strategy to provide reliable stable funding for Pride Toronto so that its ability to deliver on its core mandate is never again threatened by inadequate financing.
R33. Pride Toronto diversify its revenue stream to align its operations with its mandate and core commitments. This recommendation involves decreasing dependence upon government funding and corporate funding, generally while developing stronger and more diversified relationships with reasonable and supportive corporate sponsors.
R34. Pride Toronto increase donations though the development of giving campaigns that engage the LGBT community members and that these campaigns also empower those communities to have influence over Pride Toronto’s policy development.
R35. Pride Toronto develop a template for measuring principle-based decision-making in regard to sponsorship consistent with its core mandate. The Panel recommends a score-card such as the one set out below that serves as an audit and tracking tool. This scorecard enables all participants at every level (corporations, Pride Toronto management, and community members) to evaluate sponsorship decisions and ongoing relationships. This framework is based on the following checkpoints:
Constituency: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans (as set out in articles of incorporation)
Activity: Celebration, Information, Education, Culture
Priority: Identities, Histories, Cultures, Communities, Organizations, Relationships, Achievements, Lives
This scorecard is graded on binary, 1, 0, with maximum score of 24.
This word map is based on grievances stated by a broad cross-section of the Trans community at the CAP Trans forum Toronto, December 9th 2010. See Appendix 25 for complete list of grievances. These grievances were transcribed, opened to the public for scrutiny and ratified Jan 10th 2011. The graphic was generated by using computer software which automatically assigns size and prominence based on word frequency.
This wisdom, in conjunction with the online survey were used to identify core “causes and conditions” – Namely, the systemic governance issues behind trans exclusion.
None of what follows precludes the general responsibility for community relations, nor general inclusion, nor any other reform put forward by the panel.
However, the bottom line is this.
Until and unless these governance issues are addressed and reformed, there can be no forward movement in the relationship between the Trans Communities and Pride Toronto Inc.
Because of their visibility, trans people have always been at the forefront of the fight for queer rights...but not the receipt of those rights. Early on, the gay liberation movement made a conscious decision to sanitize its image. Gay men were straight-acting; lesbians wore dresses and make-up and trans people were seen as an “optical liability” – and thus rendered invisible.
Pride Toronto has carried on this tradition. In 1995 it paid lip-service to including trans people by officially renaming itself “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgenderal [sic] Pride.”
In 1997, the official name was corrected. However, in 2011, the content of the letters patent still features this unacceptable term elsewhere in the document.
One could not choose a better metaphor to illustrate Pride Toronto’s lack of substance with respect to meeting its obligations to the trans community. The image was changed, but the content stayed the same.
Trans people are nothing if not optimists and over the decades, many have tried to create “change from within.” And year over year, each successive “strategic report” has suggested “reaching out to the trans community.” The fact is that the trans community has been reaching out to Pride Toronto for years – It is Pride Toronto who has consistently turned their back on the trans community.
Any criticism of Pride Toronto has been deflected as “disloyalty” to the LGBT community
– After all, “Who could question Pride Toronto’s commitment to Trans peoples.”
We are reminded of the old activist mantra: “If not me...who? – If not now...when? “
Thus, the central question that the trans community is now asking itself is whether it endorses or opposes Pride Toronto 2011.
Trans people have been:
Tokenized to attract funding and to deflect criticism
Denied access to equitable allocation of funds
Side-lined from the political process
Discriminated from employment
Denied access to services
Excluded from governance
Insulted by degrading use of language
Degraded by insulting portrayals and imagery
Excluded from environmental mapping and priority setting
Excluded from outreach and development access
Since its incorporation in 1995, Pride Toronto has claimed to be collecting funds intended for the use of the LGBT communities. That is to say the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Trans communities. Those funds received amount to millions of dollars.
Trans people may not be equally present when it comes to services. But they are highly prominent when it comes to attracting corporate funding. As “poster kids” they are trotted out as token examples of great need. (See #7 degrading imagery)
With government funding, there is a requirement that trans people be treated with equity and respect. But this is “technical” requirement that is rarely checked after the fact. Pride Toronto in the past regards has not investigated or verified its compliance with its obligation to serve the trans community.
Pride Toronto’s statements about trans equity have never been independently verified. (Source Toronto Guide to Access)
The trans community represents at least 10.2% of the LGBT spectrum (source CAP online survey 2010/11)
Based on the equitable allocation of funds, this means that, significantfunds should have been used to benefit the trans community.
This has not happened.
Recent figures illustrate this inequity even more clearly.
In 2010, Pride Toronto Inc. generated gross revenue of $3,411,982 (Source 2010 Pride Toronto Budget) At 10.2% the budget to benefit the trans community should be at least $348,022 In 2010 the budget assigned to the Trans March committee was $0.00
(source Pride Toronto detailed Profit and Loss statement August 2010)
$348,022 > $0.00
This is not “equitable” allocation of funds.
Bill C-389 is an example of fundamental human rights legislation that aims to give trans people equal protection under the law. It includes things like classifying “tranny bashing” as a hate crime, making sure that trans women don’t get thrown into men’s prisons, making it illegal to decline medical treatment because someone is trans, and so on.
The trans community has literally begged for help – Pride Toronto has declined.
Pride has used excuses such as” there is no committee to deal with domestic human rights,” that it is “too busy with “important issues” to “waste time” on this. That is when it has bothered to say anything at all. For the most part Pride Toronto has simply ignored the issue. Pride Toronto has no money or political will to help the trans community in its struggle to gain full rights of citizenship for trans people in Canada.
Despite direct invitations to engage with the community – even as late as February 9, 2011 while Bill C389 limps through Parliament to a cool reception at the Senate level Pride Toronto continues to ignore this battle.
This is not a frivolous cause –To reiterate for absolute clarity
This is a battle to add “Gender Identity” to existing anti-discrimination laws
Gender Identity is not covered by existing anti-discrimination laws
Pride Toronto has provided no support for this cause
Without Bill C-389, it is possible to fire someone simply for being trans. This, combined with systemic transphobia, means that unemployment in the trans community is desperately high. (Source transpulse report August 2010)
50% of trans people live on less than $15,000 a year
This is so far below the poverty line that getting the most basic of needs, such as medicine, housing, clothing and food , is not possible without some charitable help such as shelters, donations, food banks, etc.
2010, Pride Toronto Employment Expenses:
2010, Pride Toronto TRANS Employment Expenses:
(Source Annual Report and detailed Profit and Loss Statements August 2010)
Pride Toronto spent $872,196 on employment – Pride Toronto did not employ a single trans person.
This is not an equitable employment standard.
Three examples of denials of service by Pride Toronto that are highly illustrative.
(Sources photographic/video evidence and eyewitness testimony – Further testimony as to police presence can be obtained from LGBT liaison officer Thomas Decker. Officer Decker is to be applauded for his quick intervention, which prevented a potentially violent confrontation between the Trans March and Police Officers staffing the barricade)
In the summer of 2009 Pride Toronto attempted to ban the trans march.
Pride Toronto then attempted to confine the march to the sidewalk only.
Pride Toronto then attempted to stop the Trans March from entering the heart of our gay village by:
Failing to provide safety marshals
Failing to stop traffic crossing East to West on Wellesley
Placing a barricade staffed by police to stop access to Church St.
This is not equitable access to service
Up until December 2010, Pride Toronto by-laws used transphobic language, which excluded trans people from becoming co-chairs of the organization. These by-laws have since been changed, however no trans person could be elected to the board until the next Annual General Meeting in late 2011 (after Pride 2011 is over)
Further practices with respect to board seniority mean that no trans person would be eligible for acting as a co-chair until 2012.
Eligibility for general directorship is at the discretion of the standing board. There has never been a trans board member.
There has never been a trans Executive Director, nor any trans person in a position of authority at Pride Toronto.
This is not equitable access to decision-making
An illustrative example: Pride Toronto (without consultation with the trans community) chose a theme for the Trans Human Rights March. This theme, used in all marketing communications was “When Harry became Sally.”
This demeaning language for a march to help stop murder, suicide, and violence against trans people – was seen as painful betrayal of trust that the trans community still feels deeply – Pride Toronto has not apologized for this.
As an example of systemic erasure, if one views the “gallery” on the Pride Toronto website, there is a “flickr” slide show of several hundred official pictures from Pride 2010.
What you will not see in any of these official pictures is a trans person.
An example of degrading imagery is to the right. This was used (without the permission of the band who are posing here and who do not identify as trans) to represent the “typical” trans person.
This is ageist, racist, and it is diminutive as used, because trans people do not cluster around looking upwards at superior forces. Many trans people (correctly) felt that these did not appear to be trans people.
This is not “respectful” representation of the trans communities
Other than the work of this Panel, no surveys have been conducted to evaluate the needs of the trans communities, no committees to guide trans programming, and no committees to guide trans cultural contribution.
It was claimed by Pride Toronto that in 2010 there was an attempt to contact trans community leaders but that they failed to respond in a timely fashion. This was found to be untrue.
Pride Toronto has produced many strategic plans stating the need for Pride Toronto to attract trans involvement. This has not happened.
The claim that “The trans community is fragmented and impossible to get a hold of” is demonstrably not true.
A short walk (100 yards) from Pride Toronto’s office is a community centre, which has daily activities for the trans community. This centre has a Trans Access Program, which provides training in cultural competence, and assistance with policy development. This centre also liaises with the Sherbourne Health Centre, a centre of excellence and trust for the trans community. There is no excuse for lack of outreach.
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
It has been clearly illustrated that the trans community has received almost no net value from its past ties to Pride Toronto.
The present situation also provides no substantial value to the trans community.
Sadly, in the absence of radical reform, there is also no obvious reason to trust that the future will be any different.
This is particularly sad because (although Pride Toronto Inc. has demonstrated that it is neither an ally nor a friend of the trans community)... We are forever the allies and friends of our Gay and Lesbian brothers and sisters.
It is possible, in the current climate of change, that Pride Toronto is capable of the kind of radical reform needed to re-engage. But, it must first be understood that the former administration has no credibility with the trans community. It has betrayed all trust and has no moral currency.
Any new administration would have to very quickly and convincingly present its case that it can be trusted and that its guarantees have substance. i.e. follow the lawful mandate laid out in its letters patent; follow the law with respect to allocations of funds; follow the law with respect to human rights.
Cease tokenism
Provide equitable access to resources and funds
Engage in the trans political process
Cease employment discrimination
Provide trans access to services
Include trans people in governance
Use respectful language
Use respectful portrayals and imagery
Include trans in environmental mapping and priority setting
Include trans in outreach and development access
If these actions cannot be satisfactorily guaranteed, then the trans community has nothing to lose and everything to gain by divorcing itself from Pride Toronto Inc. By forming a separate trans organization, “Trans Pride” could then use funds, intended for the trans community... to benefit the trans community.
Everyone would prefer unity – But the responsibility for earning trust and achieving unity rests solely in the hands of Pride Toronto.
The following question was posed to the trans community:
A follow up question was then asked: “Why do you feel this way?”
The following trans voices answered.
They are complete and unedited.
They are placed in the order in which they were received.
They speak very clearly.
I am a trans person who lives in the queer/trans community. I LOVE pride, but I feel that PT (the official organization) has lost its connection with my community, and I have consequently lost faith in the organization’s respect for us. The decision to censor QUAIA was made in order to guarantee funding that is used to pay for a large commercialized festival that now caters to the mainstream (gay, lesbian, straight allies) at the expense of all voices, and is more about growing the size of the festival than inclusion. The addition of the trans march as an official event was a positive development, but it only occurred after we started one on our own in 2009. In addition to the censorship debacle, moving Blockorama to Alexander Parkette (later reversed), the consequent loss of Alterna-Queer’s liquor license, and the relocation of Dyke Day to Queen’s Park all contributed to an overall impression that PT is not truly interested in including us. PT has become overly focused on the mainstream majority at the expense of my community.
seriously, trans people are treated as the butt of a joke in mainstream media, and in this year’s pride guide, it was very apparent that we are marginalized still within the queer community. If there were any sort of respect for the people we are at Pride, I found it amongst other trans folks at the trans march, and just on the street. I also feel like pride doesn’t have trans peoples best interest in mind, and has done little to promote a spirit of activism and politicism that pride once stood for, especially with the recent banning (then re-admitting) QAIA, and with charging fees for groups to be in the march. Shame.
Besides Buck Angel doing his presentation and the Trans march I found no other Trans events. I also feel our own community needs to step up as they have been as well inbeing heard...hence me filling out this survey. I am from London and I put a Trans float in the parade..we didnt have our own march we joined the exisiting one...in solidarity:).
Although Pride Toronto portrays themselves as inclusive and responsive to the trans community, I have never seen any sort of outreach or consultation with our community to find out what our needs or concerns are. Likewise, I’m still angry with the way that Pride Toronto tried to block and bully members of the trans community who wanted to start a trans march in 2009 by claiming that Pride Toronto had the right to refuse our march down the Church Street corridor for what they euphemistically called "safety reasons". Faced with an aggressive, bullying organization that was determined to shut down our parade, the organizers made the "decision" to become an official Pride event so that the march could occur. I put " "’s around decision because there was no real choice available to us other than to become an official event and continue to view Pride Toronto unfavourably because they then went and trumpeted the fact that they were being trans inclusive by authorizing our parade and claiming legitimacy. This was patently false.
Pride Toronto acted like they did not care about trans* people and in some cases ignored them.
Pride, regardless of its intentions, has in recent years become a corporate spectacle that seems more concerned with assimilation than community. Its corporate sponsors do not acknowledge the presence of my community in their non-discrimination policies, so I’m not sure what entitles them to profess concern for my interests, or for those of my community.
I don’t know who Pride consults with or if it is responsive, sensitive or respectful. I do feel comfortable at the end resulting festival.
I was not directly involved with Pride Toronto but I do know that my local pride celebrations were some what lacking in a transgendered representation
Pride Toronto appropriated a grassroots event (trans march) ignored the people who put the 1st one together, and did a terrible job organizing it. Pride Toronto does not invest resources in participants who speak languages beside English. Pride Toronto does an appalling job rendering even just a few things *actually* accessible. Pride Toronto generally applies the divide to conquer approach when pitting marginalized portions of our LGBT communities against one another while ensuring those of us who live at intersections of multiple identities are rendered completely invisible.
I am a member of the Transgender community – obviously well represented at Pride. I live outside Toronto and only attend events/shows where I am being paid, or perhaps if a VERY good friend is appearing. Otherwise, I dislike the parking issues and crowds – I find it very challenging to get around with some medical issues which impact my mobility to a degree.
Pride Toronto did not do well this year at including of celebrating trans people and our communities. From the lack of trans involvement in planning trans events, to the poor funding for performers on the trans stage, to the insulting "joke" in the Pride Guide, to the consumation by Pride of the transmarch, to the appointing of a crossdressers group to operate a "trans space" during the weekend, again and again Pride Toronto demonstrated that they don’t get it, they don’t care and optics matter more than substance. And that was before the QAIA debacle, or lack of community consultation or funding for the block-o-rama stage, or attending family Pride to discover that they focus on very young children with nothing really available for families with children 12 or older. It felt like increasingly Pride is trying to be a circuit party or a community music festival without queer and trans ties. All of that is disappointing.
Simply that trans people I( am a MTF transwoman) are NOT welcome at any event other than trans pride. The pride parade is clearly for gay folk only and you should start saying so. I was spat on and threatened while I walked in gay pride.
The events that reflect my varying identities/communities feel marginalized (under funded, supported) by Pride Toronto. In addition, changes are made with little to no sufficient consultation.
To be honest, I often feel like an outsider at Pride. I do not know where I fit in. I am a member of the gay community and the trans community. At Pride, I spend most of my time either attending events for work, or spending time with friends – going where they are.
I’m part of the transgender community, but as I have only ever been a spectator and attended Toronto Pride once, I am unsure of how sensitive/responsive Pride Toronto is to transgender issues.
I feel that the concerns of the trans community are not addressed by Pride Toronto and that the Trans community is being largely tokenized. Also, last year at Pride, there were offensive anti-polyamorous messages. There were signs and merchandise being sold by vendors which contained slogans promoting monogamy and accusing polyamorous people of spreading HIV. The massive de-politicization of Pride Toronto has meant that those people still facing high levels of discrimination and those struggling with poverty are not being represented and our concerns are not being addressed.
I would like to see more trans-oriented events especially in the ftm community. (this does not mean drag shows)
I agree that pride does represent the Trans community, but I would like to see it bolstered a little bit. Trans march is good!
Pride Toronto, Caters to Corporate Interests!!, Pride is not In Touch with Community and has Lost Its Roots!!.....
Pride Toronto doesn’t take care of the needs of the queer Black community and the trans(black) community. Pride is a fun event but it seems to cater to white gay men with money. it’s seems that in the last 10 years pride has moved away from a grass root approach and focused more on sponsorship and money. the only event i attend is blocorama which in the past 3years has had the worst space! and the least amount of funding. Pride t.o needs to work closer with marginalized communities listed above even if they don’t bring in the type of money or sponsorship as the circuit party community. As you list above "Communities can be defined on the basis of gender and gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, religion, age, race, culture, and many other characteristics" but these aren’t reflected in very many pride events except for blocorama.
Pride Toronto has almost no trans programming and space. The trans pride march is given very little visibility or space, and little support. The trans area during pride was shameful.
I feel that they hold out on some stuff for trans people
Trans inclusion at Pride is generally pitiful, if at all existent. The Trans Space this year was insulting, catering to a small subsection of trans people, (i.e. white, middle-class, late-transitioning trans women). The Trans March was an afterthought, and not even listed in most Pride Toronto literature. Bisexual visibility was low to non-existent as well. My general feeling is that Pride Toronto caters primarily to white, cisgender, vanilla, middle-class, gay (and sometimes lesbian) people. Perhaps this is PT’s greatest source of income, but that hardly seems like an excuse.
I feel as though Pride Toronto tries to include the trans community, but haphazardly. Trans people need to be hired and paid to coordinate community consultations, stage and performer organising, and be publicly vocal on trans issues more. Just because LGB people have won explicit humans rights protection in the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Ontario Human Rights Code, doesn’t mean trans people have protection, not to the recognition of hate crimes, or the compiling of hate crime statistics for evaluation and policy recommendation to protect trans people from acts of violence. Try being a trans person trying to adopt a child. See how far you get.
I selected agree as again there is no somewhat I can select and their is still a need for improvement as again its like we were just thrown out there on our own with no guidance for functions
I have been attending Toronto Pride since 1998 and I’ve always felt that there was quite a disconnect between my experiences as a queer trans person and what was available during that week. However, in the last few years this has gotten much worse. Pride has moved further and further from the community it represents and into the arms of corporations and politicians. The history of pride is political and even if it grows and changes it must remember to be accountable to both the community from which it sprung and the a politics of struggle and rights. Instead, pride has tokenized various communities in ways that don’t feel genuine or inclusive (e.g. black LGBT communities, trans communities, etc.). Moreover, the issue with queers against israeli apartheid is yet another indication of how far pride has moved from both the community and politics. Free speech is key to pride and pride has let us down.
I am transgendered therefore I feel that the issues that affect and pertain to me are just starting to be addressed.
Black and African Diasporic people, people of colour, trans people are not central to the decision making of the pride organization. The organization does not reflect the diversity of toronto, nor the diversity of the LGBTTI2QQ communities in toronto. Consultation is an arms length alternative to having diversity built into the fabric of the organization. It is a good stop-gap but is not the be all and end all of creating a sense of ownership in the organization by queer and trans people of colour. that said, consultation has not been done adequately with trans and with people of colour communities in toronto!
I live North of Toronto. Pride is centered downtown with no advertising or initiatives outside of Toronto.
We are a minority (trans people) and need Pride to let the community know more about us, Pride envisages to do this and is a good forum to do so.
If there was a time frame for these statements, this would be easier to answer. Over the past few years, Pride Toronto has increasingly distanced itself from community interests that are challenged by corporate partners/donors. Since the terrible handling of the initial Trans march to the banning of particular groups (i.e., the Liberal and New Democrat parties are relevant to queers, but QuAIA is not) to the debacle of Blockorama, along with the non-democratic voting at the AGM and restrictions on free participation generally, I have not felt that PT represents any of my communities at all any longer. I feel very alienated from PT.
Trans communities continues to be treated poorly by Pride Toronto. The funding for the trans stage is poor, the guide this year made inappropriate comments and the selection of a crossdressers only group to run the trans space was just stupid.
As a Trans person, I feel our community is often misunderstood and marginalized, even within the larger LGBT community. I realize Pride Toronto is making more of an effort to include the Trans community, and I applaud that effort, however at the 2010 Pride Week festivities (I attended the final weekend, Saturday and Sunday), I had a hard time seeing any Trans presence at all.
Need more trans space that isn’t small and in a tent.
as a queer trans person of colour there is not one identity i have that pride toronto treats well.
Pride Toronto has displayed absolutely no regard for my community. Apparently their concept of ’the West" does not extend past Hamilton.
As a trans woman, I found all of Pride’s ’inclusion’ of transgender issues related to drag, sex, and existing for gay men’s pleasure or scorn. There were no representatives of the transsexual communities, genderqueers, or many other trans-identified groups visible.
meaningful participation/visibility of trans sorely lacking.
As someone who considers global human rights, including Palestinian rights, a queer issue, I feel that PT treats my community as a threat, rather than as part of the larger LGBT community.
Pride was a disgrace to freedom of speech, with the banning of QuAIA. I was deeply disappointed to witness trans and queer people being banned from our own community center (519) with the Pride reception. Especially considering the forced segregation, sexual assault and homophobic/transphobic slurs and bullying by police that happened to queer and trans people during the G20. This was a chance for community members to have a ’safe’ response to the violence inflicted upon our community. Once again we were banned from our freedom of speech.
TP is now beginning to recognize the Trans community and for this I am grateful. I know the Trans community is very diverse but the effort through trans space was good to see.
Trans issues seem to be an afterthought in order to seem politically correct. We are not a part of the decision making process.
As a trans woman, I feel that Pride Toronto has continually failed to make my community feel welcome.
The Trans march is wonderful and deeply moving but the Pride committee continues to leave organising it till the last moment and to select organisers who are disconnected from local trans activists The attempts to squash free speech were truly appalling. Pride is and has always been a POLITICAL event. There has never been a real problem between QUAIA and Kulanu, just this manufactured nonsense by problematic and powerful individuals manipulating evidence. The commercialization of Pride over the years is deeply distasteful. I’ve attended all but one Pride since 1988 and it breaks my heart. The year the barriers went up for the parade down Yonge st was such a painful marker of the shift from community play to tourist attraction. More community, more politics, less commercial crap, please!
I was offended and hurt by the transphobic "jokes" in the pride guide, the general lack of consultation with the trans community, and the subsequent appointment of a person who holds openly transphobic views to the board.
I would be happier with a much less corporate Pride celebration which is respectful of the core communities within Toronto’s gay community, including its activist, Palestinian, and trans communities.
I am black and trans and pride Toronto has treated us like crap for long enough--if it wasn’t for blocko I wouldn’t even bother and now that’s going too. Trans march is great but where are trans people in other events? Where are they on board and staff? Useless
Backtracking on the decision to allow the misplaced hate speech of "queers against israeli apartheid" to participate was insulting and misguided. There are many more important battles to fight for gay rights. That fight has absolutely nothing to do with gay rights and our fight. I am hoping to see if the Santa Claus parade allows them in. Oh wait, they wouldn’t apply to be in the Santa Claus parade would they?
I’m both queer and transsexual and I’m delighted with the inclusion of a trans march in the Pride events and I’m excited about the consultation with the trans community coming on Dec. 9 at the 519 to prepare for next years march. Thank you for your work to further embrace the trans community. I feel this goes a long way in bringing all of us together as allies for freedom of gender and sexual expression.
Fist time out with Xpressions group. Throughly enjoyed it.
Pride screws trans people
Don’t know why I’m filling all this out, oh well.
I’m part of the Trans community and Pride Toronto has never been very trans inclusive. Two years ago trans people themselves had to organize a trans march and only last year did Pride Toronto finally decide it wanted to play a role. Just feels like too little too late. On top of that, they seemed to "take over" the trans march, rather than help facilitate it by assisting the community.
I think that Pride Toronto is still very G and L oriented, despite the ridiculously expanding acronym LGBTTIQQ2SA. It seems to me that the rest of us have had to step up and do the work to make sure that we are included and represented.
The Trans March was at first shunned and attempted to be suppressed by Pride, with even the Police being told to not let us march (2009). Pride then picked up the Trans March, and advertised it as "When Harry Becomes Sally," demeaning, stereotyping and erasing the real meaning of the Trans March: i.e: that we have no civil rights, that we are oppressed, that we are survivors. No effort was made to find a grand marshall to lead the chants down the street, so our message was lost even in the march itself. I felt more accepted and had more visibility in Take Back The Dyke than in the Trans March, as a transsexual person. There’s something seriously wrong with that.
Long history of PT sidelining trans and nonwhite voices, and going for money and expansion at the expense of community involvement (insufficient showcasing of local performers, marketplace booths prohibitively expensive in the past).
Was pleased that Pride Toronto sponsored Trans Space
My exposure to Pride Toronto has been through long-distance friends and OutTV, as I am a resident of BC. What I have observed is that gay males are markedly prioritized above lesbians, and transgendered persons are somewhat of an afterthought.
was a bad year for Pride Toronto.
Pride Toronto: lacks the proper stakeholder outreach activities, seems susceptible to advancing the opinions of outsiders with divergent interest from those of the Queer community, and does not fully represent the struggles that have framed the history of the community in Toronto. Shame on you.
Queer women don’t organize an alternative dyke march when Pride Toronto is responsive to the concerns of queer women. Trans communities were tokenized and condescended to. Arab queers and their supporters were similarly treated with disdain. Consultation was a fiasco.
Pride Toronto does not address my interests well in part because I feel that it is an autocratic organization with little accountability to the community it claims to represent. The poor manner in which it deals with its finances reflects poorly on the queer and trans community because it makes the organization appear inept or even corrupt. For the last four questions, I would say that Pride Toronto has very recently made some rudimentary attempts to reach out to the trans community. However, these have been largely superficial and I for one don’t take these attempts very seriously. Trans people are in a unique situation and face certain challenges that the rest of the queer community is largely free from. Understanding these issues takes a strong organic connection to the trans community, this would take years to develop under the best of circumstances and I don’t think Pride Toronto has even seriously begun.
i feel pride toronto (the organization) has increasingly over the years moved to a corporate-style pride, with big fundraising, big events, and a bigger and bigger budget, as if this is a good thing. i think pride toronto desperately needs less money and more authenticity.
Larger pride parades are very corporate – does not reflect our community.
As a trans person I feel we should be mentioned more
R36. Cease trans tokenism
R37. Provide trans peoples equitable access to resources and funds
R38. Engage in the trans political process
R39. Cease employment discrimination against trans peoples
R40. Provide trans peoples access to services
R41. Include trans peoples in governance
R42. Use respectful language with trans peoples
R43. Use respectful portrayals and imagery of trans peoples
R44. Include trans peoples in environmental mapping and priority setting
R45. Include trans peoples in outreach and development access
The consultations and online survey were unmistakable that, despite deep attachment to Pride Week, Pride Toronto’s relationship with the LGBT community is not strong. The online survey illustrated these views of Pride Toronto’s community relations. Responses were as follows:
Pride Toronto addresses my interests well (10% strongly agree, 42% agree)
The activities of Pride Week are generally inclusive of my specific community (11% strongly agree, 38% agree)
Generally speaking, Pride Toronto is responsive to my specific community (10% strongly agree, 35% agree)
Pride Toronto treats my specific community with sensitivity and respect (12% strongly agree, 34% agree)
The lack of community consultation emerged as a significant problem and a consistent theme. Survey results’ ratings of consultation were particularly weak. For the question of whether Pride Toronto sufficiently consults with my specific community, 8% strongly agreed and 24% agreed. Lack of consultation, generally and with specific communities, is the most significant community relations problem. Members of the Trans and racialized communities were particularly negative about their perceived treatment by Pride Toronto. Respondents pointed to their dissatisfaction over the lack transparency around the movement of the 2011 Pride Week to the July long weekend, decisions involving the 2010 Parade participation, the location and planning of the Trans March, the location of Blockorama stage, and the general lack of dialogue at public meetings such as the Annual General Meeting.
Respondents also felt that Pride Toronto’s consultation processes were limited to intra-organizational discussions and immediate personal/social networks. Pride Toronto is perceived as insular, focusing more on the interests of corporate and government sponsors than on those of the community. Furthermore, there is a perception that Pride Toronto is not designed to solicit or respond to community input or involvement. The Pride Toronto website does not have a place to welcome suggestions or input of any kind. The “Contact Us” page has extensive discussion of the office’s inaccessibility, with a contact form for “enquiries” (as distinct from ideas). Year-round volunteer roles are only described as those of the “co-ordinators.” The website lists no other year-round volunteer opportunities.
These problems are further exacerbated for specific communities. Transgender, transsexual and intersex survey respondents report poorer community relations than the general population. First Nations, Métis and Inuit survey respondents report poorer community relations than the general population. Racialized / people of colour respondents report poorer community relations than the general population. On the basis of religion/faith/creed, Jewish, Muslim and Sikh respondents report poorer community relations than respondents of other religions. On the basis of sexual orientation, queer respondents report poorer community relations than the people of other sexual orientations (gay, lesbian, bisexual or straight).
Following are representative quotes from the consultations that illustrate the problems:
“I do not know who Pride Toronto are from one year to the next. I believe the group may be insular, non consultative as I have had no communication with Pride Toronto via organizations I belong to.”
“There isn’t really any community consultation, and the communities Pride represents aren’t allowed to vote on anything.”
“I have found when I have had the opportunity to interact with Pride Toronto board members and staff they have been responsive and helpful.”
“I do not believe that Pride makes any significant or meaningful efforts to reach its stakeholders and communities; instead focuses on ensuring it is representing its corporate interests above its community interests.”
“The various controversies around Pride 2010 clearly demonstrate an inability by members of the board to understand what community consultation means, or how the very fact that Pride is possible is due to work of many hundreds, if not thousands, of activists who have fought and continue to fight for the rights and dignity of sexual minorities.”
“There is a complete lack of feedback loop from event to event, with organisers (committee coordinators) making decisions almost entirely based on their own impressions of the festival, rather than driven by the desires of the festival-going public.”
“I don’t know who Pride consults with or if it is responsive, sensitive or respectful.”
“Pride Toronto doesn’t consult with any communities except through a third party this consultation panel. They need to build a better, more collaborative, and trusting relationship with their members and the larger community. Having said that, because they haven’t consulted directly with members/community, they haven’t sufficiently addressed my interests/concerns or treated us with respect.”
Pride Toronto can be better. Following are representative quotes that illustrate recommendations to improve consultation:
“A community that learns from its elders, will not constantly repeat its past mistakes. A community that listens to its youth will be renewed. Together...we will build a better and more radiant and vibrant future again.”
“Pride Toronto, because of its challenges in balancing the interests of many diverse communities, must become an organization that above all has and demonstrates and teaches a FACILITATIVE style of leadership.”
“On-going dialogue and policies that not only celebrates diversity but incorporates it into daily operations. This is usually accessed through a permanent Community Advisory Panel, suggestion/feedback summaries, community satisfaction surveys and transparent processes that should be compulsory for any not-for-profit.”
“have a dialogue instead of criticize”
“Pride more open to public opinion.”
“The only (way to) repair relations is through open debate and discussion.”
“Need more consultation, more sense of inclusion and involvement in decision-making. More community power. I need to feel like I truly belong, and can have a real voice.”
Pride Toronto needs to have “better connections to community (ask first and listen vs. impose policy then react in a surprised and defensive manner)”;
Improved community relations require ongoing meaningful dialogue. To achieve this objective, the community needs to be engaged both inside and outside of Pride Toronto. These recommendations will require that Pride Toronto establish a system of consultation that permits the opportunity for ongoing public contributions, not just in times of crisis. It is suggested that Pride Toronto use multiple forms of consultation around important decisions such as the date of Pride Week, the location of stages, new initiatives, and the selection of Grand Marshals and honorees, to name a few.
Furthermore, these recommendations will require that Pride Toronto establish a systematic approach to community engagement, in other words, a consultation charter. This charter would outline opportunities for involvement, as well as Pride Toronto’s consultative processes. At a minimum, these processes would include planning, oversight, assessment, and most importantly reporting. To this effect, a section of Pride Toronto’s Annual Report could be dedicated to describing its engagement strategy and results of its engagement efforts. Additionally, monthly updates from the Pride Board could create a social connection with community members via Facebook, Twitter, etc.
Some of the recommendations specifically address the diversity within the LGBT community. Pride Toronto is tasked with the responsibility of balancing the interests of this diverse community. Ongoing dialogue and internal structures are required to remove barriers to participation and incorporate this diversity into daily operations. Specific board positions and caucuses of interest allow for ongoing dialogue about issues affecting those who have traditionally been marginalized and ignored. These recommendations will position Pride Toronto as a leader and a champion of issues affecting trans and racialized communities, as well as persons with disabilities, to name a few.
Increasing community partnerships will allow diverse communities to self-determine how they can be most effectively included in Pride celebrations.
One theme of community relations is that Pride Toronto can work in partnership with other organizations to help achieve its mission. As expressed by two survey respondents:
“Pride just needs to ensure that there are opportunities for as many communities as possible and that there are as few barriers to participation as possible. It doesn’t mean that Pride has to do all the work or pay for everything themselves – engage groups and individuals from various communities and get them to help.”
“I think Pride Toronto should collaborate more with other groups in the community to organize the festival. Some of the best parts of Pride have happened through partnerships with others in the community – whether it’s partnering with SOY to do Fruitloops or Blackness Yes! to do Blocko – these are good models of community engagement. Perhaps through such partnerships with other groups it can address some of the challenges it seems to face in recent years. Pride is never going to be able to be everything to everyone. But it can partner with groups that are more in touch with and reflective of the various parts of the community. Maybe Pride shouldn’t try and run all of the entertainment spaces but instead collaborate with event promoters or other nonprofit community organizations and allow them to run spaces – especially space for diverse communities.”
The Blockorama model of partnership, in spite of under resourcing and relationship concerns, is an effective model that can be used to increase community support and buy-in, as well as reflect diverse community interests. “Blackness Yes! is a community-based committee that works year-round to celebrate Black Queer and Trans history, creativity, and resistance. The Blackness Yes! mandate has been to create a space for LGBT folks of African descent and their friends and allies, specifically at Toronto’s Pride festivities and more recently, year-round in Toronto. Blackness Yes! created and developed the Blockorama event, which has taken place over the past eleven years at Pride. Replicating this model for other communities, whereby community members make specific decisions around programming within a funding envelope and relationship structure would help to address the disengagement of community members.
An international example of this community model is San Francisco Pride, which hosts over twenty (20) community-run stages and venues. “They are a unique feature of San Francisco Pride and a great way to experience first-hand the amazing diversity of the LGBT community.” San Francisco also partners with community organizations for beverage sales, donations, and accessibility.
Broadly speaking, the opportunities for partnering with Pride fall into three categories: Beverage Partners, Donations Partners, and Accessibility Partners. Organizations that work with the Beverage Program will provide volunteers to operate beverage booths (beer, liquor, wine, water, and soda) at the event. Those working with the Donations Program will provide volunteers to collect donations at the front gates as people enter the celebration site. Finally, Accessibility Partners work with Pride to ensure the proper management of Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing spaces, our wheelchair-accessible Grandstands as well as other areas of the event with added accessibility features.” (www.sfpride.org)
There are existing community groups with the potential to provide expertise on relevant event programming. Examples include Supporting Our Youth or the Youthline for youth issues, the Toronto Rape Crisis Centre for issues of sexual violence, Sherbourne Health Centre for health matters, etc., all of which engage in year round programming. The Canadian Lesbian and Gay Archives are a natural potential partner for information about LGBT history and education These are groups have the capacity to assist with developing relevant programming content for the Pride Festival.
The recommendations will require clear partnership agreements that define roles, responsibilities, expectations, and accountabilities that are based on financial fairness. As a necessary condition, and to support a genuine consultative process, Pride Toronto will require transparent, participatory budgeting and financial reporting practices at a level of detail that will enable informed community input.
There were several concerns about the community fair locations and cost of entry. In the words of one survey respondent:
Currently, they (community organizations) have to pay to be able to have an inaccessible small booth on an untravelled street at Pride. This is totally backwards to what should be happening! They should be front and centre and PART of the planning-central to/at the core of the festival. They are the heart of our communities, and they should be at the heart of Pride.
The recommendations include proposals enable community organizations to have priority in the community fair over corporate booths and vendors. As one of the mandates of Pride Toronto is to inform and educate, the community fair would be organized physically to emphasis this mandate. It is recognized that discussion and conflict resolution may be required in the event that more than one organization prefers the same location.
It should be easier for community fair attendees to find the information and education that they may be seeking. Pride Toronto needs to be physically organized to facilitate community relationship building between organizations of similar theme. Community organizations could discuss among themselves the themes that they wish to express.
“What gets measured gets done.” The development of metrics will assist Pride Toronto in assessing and articulating its performance. Equally important, these metrics will enable the Board to ensure that precious resources are being directed in the most appropriate manner. In particular, these metrics will focus Pride Toronto, facilitate decision making, and enable the Board to articulate the impact of its activities, as well as take corrective action when required.
One of CAP’s specific mandates was to look at Pride Toronto’s community relations with the LGBT communities, and to seek out responses from two communities who had raised challenges in this area namely racialized and transgender communities. CAP acknowledges that while we were focusing on transgender and racialized perspectives, it was important to acknowledge that there are other significant voices such as those from the First Nations, francophone, and disability communities that must also be heard. Hence, in the online survey and in the consultation meetings the community was invited to bring forward the perspectives and experiences of those communities.
On every dimension of community relations, as reported in the online survey, Francophone, First Nations, Métis, Inuit, racialized and trans communities report lower community relations with Pride Toronto.
The feedback results from these communities about relationships with Pride Toronto are the worst dimension reported. In fact, more was said by the invisibility and silence with regards to the inclusion of First Nations, Métis, Inuit, Two-Spirited and LGBT community members in Pride Toronto. This cannot be divorced from the historical impacts of colonization and its contemporary effects on First Nations Métis, Inuit Two-Spirit and LGBT peoples in this city. The impact of structural oppression including homophobia, heterosexism and racism are all likely to play a role in the exclusion of First Nations Two-Spirited and LGBT peoples from Pride Toronto.
This reality of invisibility, alienation and exclusion is not an isolated experience for this community and for mainstream LGBT organizations like Pride Toronto. Its grimness however does underscore the need for Pride Toronto to proactively engage organizations, like Two-Spirited Peoples of the First Nations to build relationships towards increasing visibility and ownership by Two-Spirited and LGBT peoples in Pride.
The fact that Trans and Two-Spirit people are consistently reported at high risk of social and health concerns including suicide, depression, isolation, experiences of discrimination and violence, STI and HIV infection, access to appropriate care as well as issues in employment, housing, education and job training, demands that inclusion and collaboration be the priority for Pride Toronto in its community relations with First Nations, Métis, and Inuit Two-Spirited and LGBT peoples.
Survey respondents who identified as First Nations, Métis, Inuit, have varied reasons for attending Pride Toronto activities. Community and celebration are the most prominent, however, there appears to be a greater tendency towards use of political / advocacy language, with words such as solidarity, rights, political, struggle and fighting appearing more prominently than in other communities.
There were some positive comments about Pride Toronto’s acceptance. For example:
As an aboriginal bisexual female living an alternative (open) lifestyle I feel welcomed and comfortable at any and all Pride Toronto events, even when I bring my straight boyfriends or gay girlfriends with me.
Many of the written comments regarding community relations highlighted concepts of solidarity with other oppressed peoples. Following are some of the stronger comments in relation to the presence of First Nations at Pride Toronto:
“As a queer identified cis-gender white/Métis woman who is involved with anti-racist, anti-colonialist movements and organizing, I do NOT feel that Pride Toronto has shown my friends, allies and community members much respect.... Where is the respect for Canadian First Nations activists who are allies with QuAIA. In dismissing them, you were dismissing us also. There has been absolutely NO discussion about or reaching out to two spirited and First Nations queer people. No acknowledgment about the colonized lands that Pride Toronto sits on. No acknowledgment about Queer First Nations histories.”
“I am Two-Spirited and feel the Indigenous communities in Toronto lack representation at Pride. Include Two-Spirited performing artists in the programming! I have heard similar complaints from members of the African diaspora, and the treatment of QuAIA is appalling.”
The CAP heard proposals for clearly identifiable First Nations Two-Spirited LGBT representation in Pride programming in collaboration with First Nation communities.
The following suggestions from the online survey illustrate possible examples:
“I would most certainly like to see more First Nation representation and honoring of our people and acknowledgement of our pre-existence in Kanata, in the future. I think some great cultural and dances and drumming and beautiful costumes....could be reintroduced...and perhaps even sweats during Pride month...for those who have been prepared.”
“Pride Toronto needs to acknowledge that it sits on occupied land and reach out to the First Nations communities whose land that is. Pride Toronto needs to do a better job of fighting racism, transphobia, ableism and classism in the community.”
“In general, Pride Toronto should not "manage" communities’ participation, but create space for them to self-organize and represent themselves. If representation is notably absent – e.g. the underrepresentation of 2-spirit/queer Indigenous voices Pride Toronto needs to figure out why, in cooperation with leadership from the underrepresented communities, and make that space happen.”
Through additional programming, consultation and outreach to First Nations, Métis, Inuit communities, Pride Toronto should be able to improve relations with these communities.
Francophone community members and LGBT community members whose first language is not English noted that Pride Toronto does not integrate language specific programming into their events to attract, welcome and affirm the presence of non-English speaking community members. It is important to note that diversity can also be measured by the extent to which people speak another language other than English or French in the home. Thirty-one percent (31%) of Toronto’s residents had a home language other than English or French, and in 2006, forty-seven percent (47%) of the City’s population had a mother tongue in a language other than English or French. Members from those communities reflected to the CAP that as Pride Toronto engages in human rights advocacy with countries where English is not the national language, that outreach should be done with members from those countries here in the city, in the languages of those countries. This would increase the participation of LGBT members in advancing human rights interests in their home countries and would build new and stronger relationships between Pride Toronto and it diverse language communities.
Similarly, Francophone LGBT community members responded via the online survey recommending that Pride Toronto integrate some language specific events, designed and implemented in partnership with francophone community organizations such as FrancoQueer. Additionally, some community members noted that the marketing and promotions strategy of Pride Toronto should look at targeted translation and multi-lingual advertisements in the city’s diverse community specific newspapers towards furthering the building of relationship with diverse communities. To further emphasize the language access needs the CAP itself was critiques for hosting all its consultations and survey materials in English, and this was noted as a barrier for the participation of LGBT members whose first language is not English.
Following are comments from the francophone respondents in the online survey about concerns:
«Le contenu francophone de Pride Toronto est trop limité. La publicité de Pride Toronto en français est nulle.»
“To my knowledge Pride Toronto never had any official contact or representation with the Francophone community and offer specific programming in the French Language. It is surprising that Pride Toronto do not event offer one web page in French for its numerous French speaking participants from Ontario and Quebec or abroad. While Pride Toronto make great effort to attract tourist from around the world, no specific effort have been made to attract the French Speaking tourist from Ontario, Quebec and the French speaking world.”
“Apart from a couple community fair participants, there is no francophone activities or programming at pride. This is surprising seeing we are in a bilingual city in a bilingual province in a bilingual country!”
It is recommended to have at least one entertainment or cultural program with a French component, in partnership with a local French gay organization such as FrancoQueer. For example:
I would very much like a French component. The year before last, there was some French programming (such as singer Nathalie Nadon) and I was delighted (as was the small audience that gathered). I’m sure local groups would be quite happy to collaborate in helping see this happen.
Further, the CAP would recommend to the Board of Pride Toronto it proactively build a strategy for increasing opportunities for multi-lingual consultations with its communities.
Through the CAP consultation processes, racialized communities expressed tremendous dissatisfaction and feelings of alienation by Pride Toronto’s lack of engagement, inclusion and responsiveness to the interest of racialized LGBT communities. This experience of disconnects and marginalization was also seen as reflective of the experience of many racialized LGBT communities from other “mainstream” LGBT organizing in Toronto. The communities noted that Pride is owned by a range of communities and therefore Pride Toronto must include and be accountable, equitably, to all its constituencies.
Racialized communities affirmed the value of Pride for their communities. Among racialized people, as reported in the online survey, there is a wide diversity of reasons for participating in Pride Toronto’s activities. Some of the more common words include community, celebrate, visibility, human rights, political activity and fun. The following “word cloud” illustrates some of the reasons for racialized people participating in Pride Toronto’s activities.
Following are three of the more poignant reasons reported:
“I celebrate when my parents kicked me out at the age of 18 – June 22, 2006. It was political, and I celebrate my political queer, racialized identity every year by marching for my rights and those who cannot. This is important to me, important for me.”
“solidarity amongst queer people who continue to fight for better lives for all queer people”
“a chance to come together with the queer community and celebrate that we are organized, informed and diverse”
The frustrations and anger of racialized communities can be divided into two diverging opinions; on the one hand, some racialized members who continue to experience exclusion from decision making, full participation and acknowledgement have given up on Pride Toronto and see the festival and parade as another mainstream vehicle that does not showcase the diverse voices of the our communities.
On the other hand, outraged racialized members surfaced in 2010 when Pride Toronto threatened yet another move of the Blockorama stage. In response, Blockorama’s organizing committee Blackness Yes! convened a community meeting on April 13th, 2010 to bring the voices and concerns of its communities to Pride Toronto. This meeting, attended by over 200 community members from racialized LGBT communities and allies, became a community coalition building gathering of diverse voices, including representatives from the transgender communities, community agencies, youth organizing, disability networks, human rights organizing, women’s groups, past Pride Toronto volunteers and a range of longtime activists in the LGBT communities. The meeting spotlighted the convergence of concerns and grievances that many groups and communities, in addition to racialized communities, have with Pride Toronto.
A summary of the concerns named by racialized communities and echoed by allies in the CAP consultation and survey process include:
Duplicitousness on the part of Pride Toronto when it promoted itself on the world stage as “diverse” and “in solidarity” with marginalized communities within the LGBT community in the bid for World Pride 2014 and with funders, as well as when it used the presence of ethnic and racial diversity in Pride events to promote Pride Toronto internationally as a tourist destination while failing to address the issues, needs and concerns of those “diverse” community members in its own city.
Constant need to justify annually the need for Pride Toronto to support racialized events in the programming, i.e. Blockorama, and the pitting of events for minoritized groups against each other for Pride Toronto resources.
Pride Toronto’s lack of knowledge about the history, activism, accomplishments and presence of racialized LGBT communities in Toronto and in Pride Toronto organizing, and therefore seemingly lack of interest in engaging the community as a valuable partner.
Racialized communities feeling undervalued and disrespected by Pride Toronto, particularly in the response or lack thereof to the challenges brought forward in 2010. The constant relocation of Blockorama to inadequate and inappropriate spaces was echoed consistently as an example of this.
Lack of integration of racialized artists on the main stages and the ghettoization of racialized artists to racialized stages.
Inequitable sharing of resources to support racialized stages and events in Pride.
Racialized communities have organized their communities and have brought programmed events to Pride Toronto which demonstrated increased visibility and affirmation of Pride in their communities, and those events have been tremendously successful, i.e. Blockorama, Pelau, FunkAsia. Nevertheless, there
appears to be an unwillingness on Pride Toronto’s part to be a supportive partner for those efforts seemingly because they are not the “owners” of the events.
Inconsistent inclusion of racialized community event planners in Pride Toronto organizing committees and a lack of transparency in Pride Toronto’s decision-making which fuels mistrust.
Lack of effective consultation with racialized communities and when consulted it is indirectly through third party.
Placement of non-profit groups and organizations on the margins of Church and Wellesley in the Community Fair which limits new communities and marginalized LGBT Pride goers’ access to information about supportive community resources, while corporate/for-profit entities are given prime placement in the core.
Lack of anti-oppression training for staff and volunteers to enable successful working relationships with diverse communities seeking to work with Pride Toronto.
A workforce at Pride Toronto that is not reflective of Toronto’s diverse LGBT communities.
Presence of poor leadership and governance that has exacerbated and escalated tensions.
Systemic structural problems with the organization, hence the problems experienced by racialized communities and others repeat overtime even when the individual leadership changes.
Strong perception that Pride Toronto is no longer owned by and accountable to the community but is instead driven by a corporatized agenda and model, resulting in increasing marginalization of grassroots communities with which many racialized communities are linked.
The communities were not without hope about the possibilities for a Pride Toronto that could deliver on its original values, vision and purpose, and a number of suggestions for improvements were presented to the CAP in the consultation process. They include:
Develop a community engagement strategy that brings Pride Toronto face to face with racialized communities and all members of the LGBT community.
Develop a strategy and partnerships with targeted equity and inclusion initiatives.
Change the governance and operational committee structures to ensure representation and reflection of the City’s diverse and racialized LGBT demographics and diverse LGBT sexual politics.
Develop an internal review of the organization structure and operations.
Diversify the volunteer pool through targeted community outreach.
Conduct targeted outreach to ensure diversity in the pool of coordinators hired annually.
Implement a fulsome orientation process for all staff and volunteers, with content inclusive of the role and contributions of racialized communities and individuals in the LGBT movement.
Provide increased investment of resources in Blockorama and work with the community to identify a long-term location for the stage.
Integrate diverse local LGBT artists on all stages.
Expand Pride Toronto’s community programming to reach LGBT communities that have been neglected or rendered invisible, specifically Two-Spirited, Trans, Deaf, youth and community members with disabilities.
Implement a vendor and sponsorship policy that ensures vendors and sponsors are aligned with the mission, vision and values of Pride Toronto.
Develop community-informed and transparent criteria for choosing the International Grand Marshall.
Create an advisory World Pride International Human Rights committee comprised of activists, groups and organizations across the country to develop the human rights program for 2014.
Provide tangible supports, including funds, to LGBT organizations in the country or area of focus of Pride Toronto’s annual human rights program.
Develop sponsorship and fund development strategies that are linked to supporting community involvement. This could enable partnerships with corporate sponsors and community organizations serving LGBT communities, thus eliminating the displacement of the community by corporate sponsors
Integrate inclusion and equity agenda and initiatives in all committee and programming activities.
The Community Advisory Panel did not specifically solicit feedback on accessibility matters. The Community Advisory Panel apologizes for the oversight of not asking survey respondents about matters of accessibility and persons with disabilities. Given the extensive size of the survey, omission of accessibility matters is a missed opportunity.
Nonetheless, some accessibility matters were raised throughout the consultation. The Ontario Rainbow Alliance for the Deaf was particularly helpful not only in pointing out concerns of their own cultural community, but also in bearing witness for those with mobility challenges. It is recognized that Pride Toronto will be required to work on issues of accessibility, further to the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act. For Pride Toronto, as an organization based on inclusion, to have offices that are could not be made accessible to a portion of the community without incurring prohibitive costs is inexcusable. Given Pride Toronto’s current financial situation, the office is an excessive expense, and alternate arrangements should be explored.
For events, concerns were raised about security staff treatment of attendees. This is illustrated in representative quote:
I have Severe Traumatic Brain Injury... Security needs to ASK if a person has a medical condition or condition BEFORE they use physical contact period. IE pat down or touch shoulder allowing entrance into a function.
This recommendation is designed to increase the comfort and attendance of deaf persons at Pride events, as well as ensure that Pride Toronto benefits from an existing community partner in its efforts to make Pride events more accessible. Examples of how Pride Toronto can benefit by using the Ontario Rainbow Alliance for the Deaf include assistance in increasing the number of qualified and LGBT positive ASL interpreters and reserving those interpreters; as a partner in publication of events requiring ASL interpretation; as a partner in surveying interpreters, including their cancellation policies; and through access to software to translate English into ASL. Pride Toronto should also give consideration to selecting community members who are deaf as Grand Marshals.
Concerns were expressed that Pride Toronto activities are aimed largely toward younger populations (19-35) with a heavy focus on dancing and the consumption of alcohol. Consultations with people aged 40 and over resulted in the suggestions that included organizing a “tea” event (alcohol-free) with drag queens honoring all older Queers and celebrating LGBT pioneers. It is interesting to note that requests for spaces without alcohol were also received from teenagers.
There was a call to make it easier for queer families to find the resources they need.
There was also a call to recognize older people in long-term care, those who are often ignored and rejected. Furthermore, this group favored more free space, more family space, and more senior space with less emphasis on beer gardens. This group also expressed a desire to make better use of parks, as they are shaded. Allan Gardens was recommended as a possible venue that would address concerns related to the heat and other ailments that create discomfort for this group.
The businesses of Church St. and Wellesley St. are affected in different ways due to the Pride Toronto festival. Some businesses benefit from increased customer traffic. Others experience losses as they are not tourist or visitor-dependent enterprises. There are further challenges due to the location of community fair booths that sometimes block views or even physical access to businesses. The Church-Wellesley BIA overall supports Pride Toronto, and wants to ensure that Pride Toronto activities stay rooted in the Church-Wellesley area. Better cooperation is essential.
Several consultation participants expressed the desire to have Pride Toronto help with their local Ontario pride festivals. One survey respondent stated the following: “My community is Niagara... get involved with other Pride organizations. lots of smaller communities look to Toronto for their Pride. Help them develop their own.”
It is recognized that Pride Toronto is a member of Interpride, and that its staff and volunteers may have formal and informal relationships with Pride organizations located in other cities. Communicating the fact that the lessons learned here in Toronto are being shared elsewhere (and vice versa) would help to garner support for Pride Toronto in places outside of the GTA.
The following recommendations are designed to address the clear and consistent message from community members indicating a desire for increased community consultation and information sharing:
R46. Pride Toronto develop a community engagement strategy involving specific proactive outreach and consultation efforts with all members of the community, and in particular, communities that consistently reported poor relations with Pride Toronto.
R47. Pride Toronto effectively communicate its community engagement strategy along with the results of its engagement efforts.
R48. The Pride Toronto Board be restructured to establish positions for members of specific community representatives and specific community organizations to better reflect the views of such communities in the planning and administration of Pride Toronto operations.
R49. The governance of Pride Toronto be restructured to provide consultation forums or “caucuses” of communities of shared identity.
R50. Pride Toronto provide increased opportunities for community groups, organizations, and individuals to manage their own programming at the Pride festival.
R51. Subcommittees are established with defined terms of reference and a scope of authority that does not require further board decisions. The formations of the following subcommittees, at minimum, are recommended: Parade, Dyke March, Trans March, Community Fair, Human Rights – International, Human Rights – Domestic, Blockorama*, and Entertainment. Subcommittee membership should be open to the public.
R52. Pride Toronto post a map of locations in the Community Fair allowing community organizations to self-select their preferred locations.
R53. Pride Toronto utilize a system of themed areas for the Community Fair to allow for like interests to be located in close proximity.
R54. Pride Toronto establish strong relationship agreements with existing community resources to assist with developing programming content for the Pride festival.
R55. Pride Toronto develop performance measures that enable it to evaluate the deployment of its resources and the effectiveness of its activities against stated goals and objectives.
R56. Pride Toronto partner with the Canadian Lesbian and Gay Archives to provide recognition of the LGBT movement in Toronto and Canada. Such recognition should explicitly include the role of diverse people on the basis of race and ethnicity, gender, gender identity, age, and sexual orientation.
R57. Pride Toronto select an issue each year and encourage all contingents to have some way of reflecting it. This suggestion is distinct from a theme in that it is more advocacy-oriented.
R58. Pride Toronto develop a community service charter or code of conduct that would outline the expected behaviours and practices of Pride Toronto staff and volunteers vis a vis the community. This code would include clear guidelines for the treatment of community members by Pride Toronto staff and volunteers.
R59. Pride Toronto have clearly identifiable First Nations Two-Spirited LGBT representation during Pride programming in collaboration with First Nations communities.
R60. Pride Toronto have at least one entertainment or cultural program with a French component, in partnership with a local French gay organization.
R61. Pride Toronto build a strategy for increasing opportunities for multilingual engagement with its communities.
R62. It is recommended that as Pride Toronto continues to engage in international human rights advocacy, that it do so in partnership with individuals and organizations from other countries and here in the city, and that outreach be done inclusive of the languages of those countries or communities.
R63. Pride Toronto develop a community engagement strategy that brings Pride Toronto face to face with racialized communities and all members of the LGBT community.
R64. Pride Toronto develop a strategy and partnerships with targeted equity and inclusion initiatives.
R65. Pride Toronto change the governance and operational committee structures to ensure representation and reflection of the City’s racialized LGBT demographics and diverse LGBT sexual politics.
R66. Pride Toronto develop an internal review of the organization structure and operations.
R67. Pride Toronto diversify the volunteer pool through targeted community outreach.
R68. Pride Toronto conduct targeted outreach to ensure diversity within the pool of coordinators recruited annually.
R69. Pride Toronto implement a fulsome orientation process for all staff and volunteers, with content inclusive of the role and contributions of racialized communities and individuals in the LGBT movement.
R70. Pride Toronto provide increased investment of resources in Blockorama and work with the community to identify a long-term location for the stage.
R71. Pride Toronto expand its community programming to reach LGBT communities that have been neglected or rendered invisible, specifically Two-Spirited, Trans, Deaf, youth, and to community members with disabilities.
R72. Pride Toronto implement a vendor and sponsorship policy that ensures vendors and sponsors are aligned with the mission, vision, and values of Pride Toronto.
R73. Pride Toronto develop community-informed and transparent criteria for choosing the International Grand Marshall.
R74. Pride Toronto create an advisory World Pride International Human Rights committee comprised of activists, groups, and organizations across the country to develop the human rights program for 2014.
R75. Pride Toronto provide tangible support, including funds, to LGBT organizations in the country or area of focus of Pride Toronto’s annual human rights program.
R76. Pride Toronto develop sponsorship and fund development strategies that are linked to supporting community involvement. This could enable partnerships with corporate sponsors and community organizations serving LGBT communities, thus eliminating the displacement of the community by corporate sponsors.
R77. Pride Toronto integrate inclusion and equity agenda and initiatives in all committee and programming activities.
R78. Pride Toronto address issues of accessibility, further to the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act by providing additional space and support for people with disabilities to both participate in and view the Sunday Parade.
R79. Pride Toronto include additional exits among the barriers to allow more opportunities for participants with mobility challenges to exit the Parade pathway.
R80. Pride Toronto address issues of accessibility inside and outside its office space to ensure compliance with the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act.
R81. Pride Toronto review its policies regarding escorts to allow more escorts to be in accessibility viewing areas.
R82. Pride Toronto establish a working group with members of the Ontario Rainbow Alliance for the Deaf to implement various recommendations addressing ASL interpretation issues and other access issues.
R83. Pride Toronto security staff be trained in customer service and cultural competence to ensure respectful engagement with all Pride participants.
R84. Pride Toronto reorient some of its programming and gear it toward audiences of a more diverse age range.
R85. Pride Toronto establish or showcase a Queer parenting community fair and marketplace, featuring Queer resources, books, family entertainers, toys, and information about drop-in centres, support groups, etc., as well as increase the promotion of the availability of these services.
R86. Pride Toronto offer additional water and cooling stations and work to remove the requirement that attendees dispose of water bottles when entering a licensed area.
R87. Pride Toronto consider “outsourcing” beer gardens to the community and/or organizations such as the Business Improvement Association.
R88. Pride Toronto work with the Church-Wellesley Business Improvement Association (BIA) and local businesses to review the site plan to ensure that business and Pride Toronto interests can be better realized.
R89. Pride Toronto document and publicize its relationships with other Pride organizations.
All Corporate involvement recommendations are aligned with recommendations pertaining to the Parade and Governance sections. The corporatization recommendations address the overall direction of Pride and corporate participation in Pride and incorporate general outcomes of primary research conducted by the Panel.
Corporatization is defined as the following: to subject to corporate ownership or control. The impacts of corporatization on the LGBT communities, based on data received from the public and targeted consultations, surveys completed, and questionnaires completed at the multiple forums, have indicated the following:
Community disengagement and isolation from Pride.
Community anger that Pride Toronto no longer serves, cares, or values community members as individuals or their respective communities.
Erasure.
Perceptions that Pride Toronto has become “diluted” due to corporate funding and increased presence of these corporations; too many corporate floats in the Pride parade, and an increase in the visibility of corporate logos during Pride Week.
Feelings of a loss of control over Pride (specifically the Pride Festival, marches and the Parade).
Rapid growth that was unmanaged due to increased reliance on corporate funding and a decrease in private donations and alternate sources of funding.
Non-LGBT vendors with non-LGBT messages, along with Parade participants who are non-LGBT with non-LGBT messages, and an increase in non-LGBT volunteers for Pride, thereby diluting LGBT spirit and politics.
Increased vulnerability within the current revenue stream.
Increased awareness around LGBT positive organizations and supporters of the community.
The affording of a free footprint and increased diversity in event offerings, due to increased funding.
There were nine (9) survey questions that assessed the community’s sentiment towards reliance on corporate and government funding. A significant portion of respondents (40.6%) believes it is reasonable for corporations to have expectations based on funding. Respondents also communicated that they value the privilege of a free “footprint” that this funding affords (50.4%).
Also, most respondents do not believe that Pride Toronto needs to be independent of corporate funding, and understand that Pride events bring a significant economic contribution to Toronto (54.5%). The majority of respondents either strongly agrees or agrees, (17.2% and 40.6%, respectively), that corporations should have expectations based on funding. The adjacent word cloud presents a visual representation of the frequency of the words used by respondents when answering questions about corporate and government funding.
Balancing survey results with input Panel members received from community consultations, a large majority of LGBT community members perceive that the pendulum has swung too far in favour of corporations. Hence, the issue is one of balance and representation of the LGBT community versus too much of a focus on corporate sponsors and control allocated to corporate sponsors.
Increasing transparency within Pride Toronto operations was a consistent theme heard throughout the consultations. This recommendation speaks directly to this important goal. This public recognition will benefit all parties because it will acknowledge Pride Toronto’s due diligence and focus on LGBT issues when selecting sponsors, it highlights demonstrated corporate leadership promoting LGBT issues (e.g., LGBT positive policies, sustained LGBT support, etc.), and it informs the public about progress in the areas of equity and social justice.
A significant amount of community members stated that there was a need for Pride Toronto to give a voice back to the community and reinstate balance, trust, measured growth, and transparency around key decision making. As such, Pride must, as per its mandate, and over the course of the next three years leading to World Pride, tangibly and transparently show proof of fulfilling its mission statement and mandate.
The vast majority of survey respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that “it is important that Pride Toronto activities are free (with a request for donation).” At the same time, it is recognized that Pride Toronto needs to raise funds to offer the programs and services that the community wishes. Several recommendations therefore are designed to help Pride Toronto raise additional revenues.
To address the recent threats to withdraw funding, Pride Toronto can achieve diversification through an increased focus on donations and fundraising. To achieve this objective, Pride Toronto should oversee the development of giving campaigns to engage members of the LGBT communities and empower these members influence the direction taken by Pride Toronto. This recommendation will require staffing a full time position with a well experienced and established fundraiser.
R90. Pride Toronto diversify its revenue stream to decrease its reliance upon corporate funding, and reinstate control to Pride Toronto and the communities it serves.
R91. Pride Toronto consider introducing fees for participation in or attendance at certain events and activities.
R92. Pride Toronto ensure that its corporate sponsors are reasonable and supportive of the LGBT community overall. This recommendation proposes the development of criteria or a mechanism by 2012, which would assess the quality of its corporate sponsors. This mechanism would assist Pride Toronto in evaluating the effectiveness of its sponsors in advancing their LGBT diversity to greater levels. Sample questions asked of sponsor companies may include the following:
Does your organization have an LGBT employee affinity/resource group?
What is the membership base?
What is the composition of LGBT versus allies?
Does your organization offer LGBT/same sex benefits?
Do you measure the participation of LGBT individuals in your benefits program?
Does your organization proactively hire LGBT individuals?
Does your organization do LGBT on-boarding as part of the new-hire process?
Does your organization use inclusive language?
Does your organization have “out” executives and/or senior management?
Does your organization offer LGBT mentoring opportunities?
R93. Pride Toronto develop a sponsorship template by 2012, that explicitly states the benefits afforded to corporate sponsors, and clearly articulates what benefits are included and excluded in return for sponsorship. For example, corporations cannot, and will not influence programming of the festival.
R94. Pride Toronto post the reasons for supporting the corporate sponsors they choose.
R95. Pride Toronto end the “toonie drive” and implement a more assertive on-site, street fair, and entertainment stage fundraising strategy at the entrances of the street closure area.
R96. Pride Toronto implement a simplified tiered pricing strategy and/or rewards for small businesses and/or community organizations to participate in the community fair.
Pride Toronto is seeking advice on high level strategies for different forms of entertainment, and the appropriate role for Pride Toronto in providing such entertainment. This section of the report addresses: What is the vision for entertainment at Pride Toronto?
Pride Toronto’s core activities are articulated in its official purpose, the objects for which the corporation was incorporated. These activities are as follows:
staging in the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto an annual celebration and informational, educational and cultural festival by and for lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans people of their sexual and gender orientations and identities and their histories, cultures, communities, organizations, relationships, achievements and lives [and such other complementary purposes in furtherance of and not inconsistent with the foregoing objects].
Entertainment means “something that amuses, pleases, or diverts, especially a performance or show” (Source: The Free Dictionary). Culture implies something more than just entertainment. Definitions of culture include the totality of socially transmitted behavioral patterns, arts, beliefs, institutions, and all other products of human work and thought. That said, there are no information or education committees within Pride Toronto’s organizational structure, nor is budget consistently assigned to these areas. The main burden for meeting the obligation to inform and educate falls on third parties (alternative entertainment, community marketplace, and alternative stages).
It is desirable that there be an Information and Education Committee within Pride Toronto’s organizational structure, with a budget consistently assigned to these areas. Such a committee could assist with broader understanding of LGBT culture. For example – what is a drag queen or drag king performer, and why is this method of arts so common in LGBT community?
It is possible therefore that even the staff or volunteers of Pride Toronto may not be aware of LGBT cultural facts. Although volunteers are required to engage in a certain amount of cultural competence training, senior staff are not. Some Pride Toronto board members have engaged in limited education initiatives (one board member attended 2 hours of trans training in 2009). Current employment advertisements have been placed in mainly mainstream media and state “some experience of LGBT issues would be an asset.” Thus, neither senior staff nor board members are required to have cultural competence. There is no year-round training commitment to engender excellence or expertise.
The main burden for meeting the obligation to inform and educate falls to third parties under
Alternative Entertainment
Community Marketplace
Alternative Stages
A common complaint that emerged among all respondents (online and in person) was the physical marginalization of initiatives designed to educate and inform people about LGBT culture. Put plainly, the stages and information centres were displaced by commercial messaging or other commercial interests and segregated at the outer geographical extremes of the festival. This seemed to mirror the overall commitment (or lack of commitment) to health and cultural education. Almost no budget was assigned to these initiatives and little or no promotional effort was placed behind these core activities. The establishment of such an Information and Education Committee could assist with promoting a broader understanding of LGBT culture and managing the logistics behind this core activity.
Given the recent financial shortcomings of Pride Toronto and the challenges experienced with the Pride Festival’s unmanaged growth, the responsible use of funding and human resources demands that Pride Toronto focus on its core activities which include information, education and the promotion of LGBT culture.
In a financial respect, Pride Toronto’s past performance, as illustrated by a breakdown of 2010 committee budgets demonstrates a focus on entertainment of a particular kind – DJ’s and bands. 2010 expenditures on “beverage” entertainment (DJ’s and Bands) were over $190,000. (This figure excludes costs of stages). “Alternative” arts expenditure, including queer, local artists, literature, visual arts and video was about $8,500. (Source: Pride Toronto Unaudited detailed profit and loss statement dated August 2010)
It is distressing to note that Pride Toronto’s internal use of the word “alternative” means simply: “Everything except DJ’s and Bands.”
In fact, the “alternative” arts falling under this budget are extremely mainstream. This includes; literature, visual arts, theatre, videography, contemporary dance, film, spoken word performers, novelists, playwrights and any musician that doesn’t use a beatbox.
To add insult to (financial) injury, PT has a second, coded use of the term “alternative.” It is used as a euphemism for “not very good.” This is not just incorrect, it’s offensive and runs contrary to the mission objective of “Celebrating our achievements”
In Toronto, we have local access to some of the world’s pre-eminent artists in their fields. In addition to being queer role-models and icons, they are Internationally recognized as leaders. In the field of literature and performance alone this might include Jacob Shier (Governor General Award), Daniel MacIvor (Governor General Award), D’bi Young, etc., etc. Additionally, these artists (and hundreds more) have a demonstrated commitment to sharing their experience and strength with emerging queer artists who are “young in craft.”
Respondents to the online survey generally agreed that all artists need not be from Toronto area, and that all artists need not be queer. At the same time, there was split opinion as to whether or not to include famous artists. The Community Advisory Panel therefore acknowledges that for some people, it is important to showcase local and/or queer artists, but that others are also welcome. Disclosure and promotion of local and/or queer artists would likely address the concerns.
That said, community support for Queer artists was evident in the qualitative responses provided for open ended survey questions. A visual depiction of the most frequently used words to answer the following question is illustrated below: “What would be your vision for entertainment at Pride Toronto?” Very detailed answers were provided by 369 respondents, whose responses amounted to 10,447 words. This word cloud indicates that support of local Queer artists is important to the community.
In response to other questions about culture and entertainment, the words Queer and artist also emerged as the most frequently used. The following word cloud was generated from the free-form explanation for values around culture and entertainment (19,264 words).
Disclosure and promotion of local and/or Queer artists would likely address the community’s concerns and more appropriately reflect their values around culture and entertainment. The following recommendations reflect the community’s concern for support of Queer artists and are intended to assist Pride Toronto in demonstrating this support.
It is recognized that the amounts of payment would be subject to budgetary constraints. However, the word “alternative” is also used by Pride Toronto when budgeting for “emerging artists.” These terms (along with “local”) have been used by Pride Toronto as coded ways of saying “sub standard” and therefore, not worthy of funding. The following quote from Pride Toronto staff illustrates this appalling attitude quite clearly:
[I]t is not PT’s mandate to pay “emerging artists” out of a sense of entitlement without regard for artistic quality. [We] will determine the merits of entertainment value by applying community artists. Emerging artists are encouraged to perform at [unlicensed stage] to an audience of their community for the benefits of mass exposure and not financial compensation.
Government grants speak to the issue of capacity building. In addition, virtually all artistic and cultural grants demand that artists be paid fairly. Moreover it is a requirement that they be paid based on artistic contribution and not “entertainment value.
There is currently a distinction between licensed and unlicensed stages. This distinction creates an environment for the following, circular argument:
Pride revenue comes from beer sales, therefore, “good” entertainment sells more beer. “Good” entertainment costs more money... which can be funded by more revenue from beer sales. This false argument is based on the mistaken premise that beer sales are a net-positive contribution to Pride Toronto’s financial bottom line. However, an examination of the Board’s current Profit and Loss statements reveals that beverage sales over hard costs of delivery are, at best, “revenue neutral.” In fact, a deeper review strongly suggests that beverage sales are “revenue negative.”
If one attributes a reasonable portion of “beverage entertainment costs” to the licensed stages as a cost of beverage sales, then the “beer argument” disappears, as does the financial argument for avoiding local and queer artists. This circular argument combined with unusual compensation and accounting practices creates a potential for conflicts of interest within decision-making processes. For example, beverage entertainment costs are not attributed to beverage sales and therefore do not impact performance evaluations. An event could be run at a huge loss and yet the organizer would not be held accountable. Another example might be sponsorship packages tied to entertainment (without regard to the costs associated).
In keeping with the theme of a lack of transparency around Pride Toronto operations, the consultations revealed concerns around entertainment decisions being made or influenced by people whose compensation is directly or indirectly linked to sponsorship. There was further concern that these decisions may be made without bottom line accountability, all of which amounts to a conflict. Better reporting and accounting practices will help to surface the exact costs associated with entertainment events, thereby ensuring more effective assessments of the real costs and benefits associated with beverage sales and better decision making surrounding such sales.
Community consultations revealed that members of LGBT community do not feel included in Pride Week events, and the needs of their members are not being met by Pride Toronto. This sentiment was particularly strong among trans and racialized members who provided the Panel with input. As an example, the trans population provided 10.2% of survey respondents. The budget for the trans committee is zero dollars and there is no evidence that any of the performers on Pride Toronto stages were transgender. This was described in the consultations as blatant and systemic transphobia in the budget allocation. Furthermore, Pride Toronto’s entertainment spending is not tracked on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation.
A similar degree of insensitivity is evident when looking at the age breakdown of the engaged constituencies of Pride. There is blatant and systemic ageism in the budget allocation. Similarly, an examination of the age breakdown of the engaged constituencies of Pride Toronto reveals that the vast majority of those who participated in community consultations were over the age of 30. The median age is about 40. The budget for the 40 plus committee is zero dollars, which suggests another area where Pride Toronto may be out of sync with the make-up of its constituents
The financial statements show that spending on culture, information and education is a fraction of expenditures. As such, the assigned budget to be divided among constituencies is very small.
Levels of satisfaction with all activities of Pride Week (Parades, Galas, Entertainment, etc.) by all respondents were very low. Bear in mind that this question could be considered as a very “soft lob” This means that one only had to “somewhat agree” that these activities were “generally inclusive.” Even so, only 11% of respondents could “strongly agree” that Pride Toronto was “generally inclusive.” 38% of respondents could somewhat agree – The remaining 51% were even less enthusiastic.
When cross-tabulating the report to show entertainment and culture as it pertains to specific communities, the picture is even more clear.
Overwhelmingly, trans people do not feel that they are adequately reflected in the entertainment and cultural activities that Pride Toronto organizes.
Once again the phrasing of this question is something of a “soft lob.” The question is not phrased “... Is PT excellent at reflecting the community?” The survey only asks “Is Pride Toronto ‘adequate’ ?”
More than 94% of trans respondents did not strongly agree that Pride Toronto activities were adequate.
While one would hope for equity across all constituencies, it is almost beyond comprehension that a constituency named in the corporation’s charter (i.e. trans) could be so obviously disenfranchised.
It would also seem to indicate the urgent need for analysis (and remedy) as to how financial and staffing resources are assigned to constituencies. It seriously calls into question the processes for the allocation of funds – It further casts a shadow over the measures for evaluating how effectively these funds are being used. ( appendix c )
Clearly there is a mismatch between any internal reports which suggest “The Trans Community feels well-served by Pride Toronto”... and the truth.
The pattern of disengagement and disenfranchisement is repeated when one cross tabulates using other equity-based criteria.
Again, there are low reports among people of racialized communities that the entertainment and cultural activities that Pride Toronto organizes “reflect my specific community.”
The consultations’ results indicate the urgent need for analysis (and remedy) as to how financial and staffing resources are assigned to constituencies. Processes for the allocation of funds are called into question, as are the measures for evaluating how effectively these funds are being used.
The following recommendations will assist Pride Toronto in reconnecting with community members who disclosed their disengagement from Pride Toronto and the Pride Festival.
R97. Pride Toronto expand from its current focus on spectator and audience entertainment to include participatory, cultural development, including a broader definition of the arts, and forums for LGBT community expression.
R98. Pride Toronto establish an Information and/or Education committee to develop initiatives regarding information and education about LGBT culture in Toronto. Pride Toronto establish training opportunities for staff and volunteers to learn about LGBT culture in Toronto.
R99. Pride Toronto reorganize the Community Fair such that community groups providing information and education are closer to the main area of Church and Wellesley Streets, and in other higher-visibility areas.
R100. Pride Toronto provide a prominent venue and the publication of opportunities for local Queer artists to participate in Pride festival events.
R101. Pride Toronto establish a forum where more established Queer artists can have an opportunity to meet emerging artists.
R102. Pride Toronto establish a partnership with arts organizations, such as Buddies In Bad Times Theatre and the Inside Out Film and Video Festival to identify opportunities for Pride Toronto to participate in development and/or promotion of local artists.
R103. Pride Toronto integrate diverse local LGBT artists on all stages and that Pride Toronto establish an exclusive stage for local Queer artists.
R104. Pride Toronto establish a goal of facilitating capacity building opportunities for emerging local artists.
R105. Pride Toronto pay local artists in addition to paying more established artists.
R106. Pride Toronto undertake financial disclosure to better illustrate the financial relationship between entertainment costs and revenues.
R107. Pride Toronto document sponsorship relationships, if any, which require certain types of entertainment and/or certain levels of beverage sales.
R108. Pride Toronto undertake surveys (of all constituents not just attendees) of culture and entertainment preferences to help ensure that entertainment is more inclusive of community preferences.
R109. Pride Toronto track and publish the sexual orientation or gender identity of performers.
R110. Pride Toronto undertake specific consultations with members of the trans and racialized communities regarding cultural programming.
Some of the most difficult of the many issues reviewed by CAP have been the issues connected with the Pride Parade.
The Pride Parade has been a central and dominant feature of Pride celebrations around the world. In many countries, such as Russia, one of the key battles of the LGBT community against the state is simply the right to hold a Pride Parade. The Pride Parade commemorates the Stonewall riots that marked the symbolic birth of the modern “Gay Liberation” movement. It is clear from our consultations that the Pride Parade remains the most important event of Pride for many in our community. The Pride Parade has deep psychological significance for many in the LGBT community. For a lot of people, especially those outside the LGBT community, the Pride Parade is Pride.
The Toronto Pride Parade has grown over the last 30 years from small protest march to one of the most significant annual events in Toronto, a major tourist attraction, and one of the largest Pride Parades of its type in the world. In our consultations, it is apparent that many in the LGBT community have a deep emotional attachment to the Pride Parade as an institution. It tops the list of Pride Week activities that members of the LGBT community want to preserve.
The creation of CAP was triggered by a crisis arising out of dispute over participation in the Pride Parade. A group called Queers Against Israeli Apartheid (QuAIA) marched in the Pride Parade in 2008 and 2009. It wanted to continue to do so in 2010. The problems that arose in connection with the participation of (and opposition to) that group, however, have underscored underlying questions which must be resolved if the Pride Parade and the other activities associated with Pride Week are going to continue to flourish in future.
CAP has heard a number of complaints from a wide range of sources about the Pride Parade. Despite those complaints, and the conflicting visions about the Pride Parade, it was apparent that many people care deeply about the Pride Parade. Many were very passionate, and some even moved to tears, as they shared with us their concerns for the future of the Pride Parade.
There can be no doubt that this controversy has caused Pride Toronto, affiliated organizations and the LGBT community a great deal of harm. It is apparent from the consultations and the survey results that the LGBT community has become deeply divided over this issue, with strong sentiments on both sides of the issue. Last year a significant group set up a separate march that was expressly subject to rules different from those applying to the Pride Parade. For example, despite the fact that the proponents of this alternate Parade claimed to be advocates of free speech, they appear to have imposed a ban on the display of corporate logos in this alternate Parade. This makes it apparent that the debate is not so much about censorship, but rather about what types of messages should be allowed to appear in the Parade.
In our view, there is nothing inherently wrong with a Pride Parade that, for example, limits, or alternatively permits, the display of corporate logos, consistent with the aims of the organizers of the Parade. The organizers are entitled to set the rules consistent with the messages they wish to express during their Parade. For example, the organizers of the Labour Day Parade limited official participation in their parade to politicians who had been expressly endorsed by the Labour movement.
Despite the anguish, there has been a positive side to this dispute. It has generated a thorough and thoughtful review of some issues that were long overdue for deeper consideration. Last year’s alternate parade may grow this year, and we may see a situation develop as exists currently in Montreal and Vancouver where there are at least 2 different types of LGBT Pride events. Up until now, Toronto Pride has been a “big tent” that has tried to unify the diverse elements in the community. The question before us is whether a solution can be found which might allow for the continuation of that “big tent,” or whether as a community we will choose to divide Pride into two or more competing events. We recognize that whatever solutions we recommend, those who dislike our solutions will be entitled to establish their own alternate Parade and festival.
We are also aware that in the past Pride has collapsed, and been on the brink of collapsing, both here and in other cities. There is no guarantee that Pride will continue to thrive in future as it has over the past 30 years.
The roots of the Pride Parade, and this controversy, reach back to the early homophile movement in the USA that preceded the Stonewall riots of 1969.
There were two early organizations thought for lesbian and gay rights in the USA, the Mattachine Society and the Daughters of Bilitis. These types of pre-Stonewall organizations are often called “homophile” organizations,” a term coined to put the emphasis on love rather than sex. The only contemporary organized group in Canada was the Association for Social Knowledge (ASK) in Vancouver.
One of the major activities of the American homophile organizations was the protest march. Members of the group would appear before prominent American landmarks such as Independence Hall in Philadelphia with picket signs, demanding an end to persecution of lesbians and gays. The aim was to end the invisibility of gays and lesbians, what the LGBT community calls “living in the closet.” It was bold and even shocking at the time that anyone would appear in public demanding rights for lesbians and gays, with the implication that they were themselves lesbian or gay. Although Dr. Kinsey had established years earlier that Americans were engaging in homosexual behaviour more frequently than had been believed, very few people were willing to publicly acknowledge that they were not heterosexuals. This is hardly surprising; not only was homosexuality subject to social stigma, it was a criminal offence.
The homophile organizations used the tactic of high visibility, but they had very strict rules about their picketing. The picketing was quiet and orderly. The protesters were dressed very conservatively, the men in suits and the women in dresses or skirts. Transexuals were invisible. The aim was to confront the public with the reality that homosexuals existed, while reassuring them that homosexuals were nice normal people.
On June 25, 1969, the Stonewall Riots began, marking the birth of the modern gay liberation movement that quickly supplanted the earlier homophile movement.
As they were in the habit of doing periodically, the New York police raided the Stonewall Tavern in Greenwich Village. The patrons were among the most marginalized in the LGBT community, drag queens, transsexuals, people of colour and street youth. For the first time in the long history of official repression of the LGBT community, the patrons fought back. Not only did the patrons refuse to submit meekly as they had in the past, they attacked the police and their vehicles, forcing them to take cover in the Stonewall Tavern and call for reinforcements. Other members of the community joined in the resistance, mocking the authorities. This reaction was in keeping with the restless spirit of the late 1960’s. The time was rife with political protests, peaceful and otherwise. These protests denounced racism, America’ participation in the Viet Nam War, and other problems, and were an important tool of marginalized persons and the political left used against the political and social establishment.
The Stonewall Riots sparked the creation of the Gay Liberation Front and a new breed of gay rights activists. Although these activists also aimed to advance lesbian and gay rights and to end the tyranny of being forced into the closet, these activists rejected the polite protests and social conformity of the homophile movement. They espoused the politics of confrontation that became associated with slogans such as “Out of the Closets and into the Streets!” and later “We’re Here, We’re Queer, Get Used to It!”
In 1970, in New York, San Francisco and many cities around the world, Pride Parades were organized to commemorate the Stonewall Riots. The concept of “gay pride” emerged as the opposite of the shame of living in the closet. Being visible and unashamed of our sexual identity were, and still are, key aims of this social movement. The Pride Parade offered strength in numbers and a feeling that you were not alone as a gay or lesbian person, made it clear that gays and lesbians existed in significant numbers and demanded an end to second-class status. It was hoped that this would also encourage others who were hiding in the closet to “come out.”
In Canada, we had our first gay rights protest on a rainy day on Parliament Hill in 1969. In Toronto, the commemoration of Stonewall was a more low key celebration initially, taking the form of the “Gay Day” picnics at Hanlan’s Point on the Toronto Island. Although groups such as the Community Homophile Association of Toronto promoted this event, eventually these celebrations died out.
Pride celebrations revived in Toronto in direct reaction to state sponsored repression of the LGBT community in the early 1980’s.
At that time, the far fight was gaining ground in Western democracies. This coincided with a sharp new attack against the LGBT community under the leaderships of homophobes like Anita Bryant, who accused the LGBT community of “recruiting” children. The murder of shoeshine boy Emmanuel Jacques in 1977 prompted a tremendous backlash against the LGBT community in Toronto. Legal attacks were made against community institutions such as Glad Day Bookstore and The Body Politic newspaper. This attack culminated with a series of violent raids on Toronto bathhouses, and mass arrests, the worst of which occurred almost exactly 30 years ago. The LGBT community became mobilized and created new organizations to fight back, such as the Right to Privacy Committee. Spontaneous protest marches were held in the streets.
It was in this atmosphere that Pride was reborn in Toronto in 1980. Groups such as Gays and Lesbian Against the Right Everywhere (GLARE) organized the one-day event. It began quite humbly, with a small community fair and a protest march. There were no government sponsors and no commercial sponsors. Many of the marchers were straight allies from far left organizations such as the International Socialists. The LGBT community also reached out to other minorities who were feeling challenged by the police, such as the black community. However, white activists, especially gay white men, dominated the Pride march.
Over time, the commercial and residential centre of the LGBT community had been coalescing around Church and Wellesley in Toronto. The Pride Day activities moved to Cawthra Square Park on Church Street, adjacent to the 519 Community Centre. This has remained the hub of Pride activities to the present day.
During the eighties, Pride continued to grow. The outbreak of the AIDS epidemic cast its ominous shadow over the parade. In the midst of our sorrow, the joy of Pride sustained the LGBT community in those years. A temporary, and later permanent, AIDS memorial was established in Cawthra Square. For many of us, a moment remembering lost friends became part of the ritual of Pride Day. Eventually, a candlelight vigil where the names of those who had died were read aloud became a permanent part of the activities associated with Pride. In addition, a Pride and Remembrance Run affiliated with Pride has become a permanent feature of Pride activities since the mid nineties.
Pride Day was much like a family reunion, where you would see members of the community that you had not seen before. For many young people who were just coming out, it was a chance to connect time with their community and find acceptance, and even love. The gender and racial diversity of Pride began to increase. There were more diverse groups, and the atmosphere of the Pride Parade became more consistently LGBT, less political and more festive. The Parade was becoming more of a real LGBT centered parade, and less a generic political protest of the left. However, during the eighties, even the most obvious consumer sponsors such as condom manufacturers continued to give the Pride Parade a wide berth. Pride was a volunteer run organization with a small budget, and no government support.
During the nineties, Pride began to grow rapidly. In 1991, Pride incorporated as a nonprofit organization. We began to speak of Pride Week instead of Pride Day. The Parade grew in size and was finally recognized as an official event by the city, and given a parade permit so we could march lawfully down Yonge Street. There was increasing diversity in the Parade, and a wider range of activities. As we enjoyed increasing success in the Courts, our human rights challenges and victories would feature prominently in the parade, Jim Egan and his partner Jack Nesbitt serving as Grand Marshalls one year. We also celebrated our progress in the treatment of AIDS, as death rates began to fall, finally. Some brave politicians began to march in the parade. There was still an air of informality and family reunion to the event. There were still no barriers between the sidewalks and the street, so people would jump in and out of the parade as they saw friends.
The movement for LGBT rights coalesced around the battle for equal marriage in the early part of this century. Like the threats of police repression and AIDS, this struggle served to unify our community. We had emerged victorious in the Courts in 2003, and the Conservatives finally abandoned their fight to reverse that victory in Parliament in December 2006.
Pride Toronto was experiencing rapid growth during this time. The cost and complexity of running the parade and associated activities were climbing, but so were revenues from sources that included governments, commercial enterprises and beverage sales. Pride’s staff grew from only one employee occupying a single office to a staff of eight occupying small building.
Pride Week had grown into a full week of activities that is now kicked off with the Mayor raising the rainbow flag at City Hall, followed by an outdoor barbeque in Nathan Philips Square. A human rights program also became part of the official activities, although this program collapsed last year as a result of the controversies.
In addition, to the activities officially organized by Pride Toronto, many organizations have decided to take the opportunity to recognize LGBT people and issues. LGBT employee affinity groups have held events at some of the major chartered banks, and the Law Society of Upper Canada has hosted an education event and a popular annual reception at Osgoode Hall for many years. It is becoming increasingly common to speak of “Pride Month.”
The Pride Parade had grown to be the largest in North America, and one of the largest in the world. It is a major tourist attraction for the city, attracting over a million people. Many of the people who come to watch the Pride Parade, and some who march in it, are not members of the LGBT community. The Parade now lasts 3 or 4 hours or more, and goes down the full width of Yonge Street from Bloor to Gould. In addition to the many groups who march, the Parade also has a variety of floats. There are now barricades set up down the length of the Parade route to separate spectators from the Parade.
In addition to the Pride Parade on Sunday, Pride Toronto hosts the “Dyke March” on Saturday. This event for women is a smaller event focussed on women, and as the name suggests, more like the historic marches than the current Pride Parade. It has also become a cherished feature of Pride Week for many.
In 2009, members of the trans community decided to hold an unofficial trans march. This became a part of the official Pride activities in 2010. Some of the issues related to that march are discussed in connection with the trans community section of our report.
In 2010, an unofficial march was organized by persons concerned with Pride’s earlier decision to ban the term “Israeli Apartheid” (which had been altered by the time of Pride), but also in reaction to concerns about the perceived commercialization and depoliticising of Pride. Called the “Take Back the Dyke March,” it attracted over 1,000 participants. This march was billed as being one without barricades and without corporate logos.
Historically, Pride has encouraged the broadest possible participation in the Parade. In the past, the problem was not keeping anyone out of the Parade, but rather encouraging as many as possible to join in our Parade. Many were reluctant to do so because of the stigma associated with the LGBT community.
In general, all that has been required to participate has been to complete a form in a timely fashion and pay a fee. Until 2010, Pride Toronto does not seem to have had any firm or consistent official policy that tried to limit anyone from participating or that limited anything said by anyone during the Parade. This loose approach appears to have rested primarily on the assumption that anyone participating in the Parade was there to show their support for the LGBT community, and that alone was enough.
CAP has been advised that in 2009, and perhaps in earlier years, parade applicants were required to sign an undertaking that they would not propagate hatred during the Parade. This requirement was not continued in 2010, for reasons that are not completely apparent. However, all parade participants were required to sign an undertaking to abide by the City’s anti-discrimination policy in 2010.
Apart from QuAIA, which will be discussed below, CAP has become aware of three prior controversies with Parade participation. In one incident reported to us, a Parade participant was asked to stop displaying a Confederate flag because of its connection with racism. The party in question apparently complied. On another occasion, a group known as the Raëlians were asked by volunteer Parade marshals to not display signs that were thought to be offensively anti-Catholic. The group complied and marched with tape over their mouths in protest. Complaints were also made about the nudity of a group of gay naturists known as Totally Naked Toronto Men. Although there have been arrests in the past for nudity at Pride, there have been none recently. TNT still marches and Pride Toronto seems to have successfully resisted the pressure to remove this group, although some still complained about nudity during our consultations.
The issues related to the participation of QuAIA in the Parade are the most challenging because the community is most sharply divided on that question. However, that was far from the only issue regarding the Parade were raised with us. In general, the consensus was that people liked the Parade and wanted it to continue. However, there were aspects of the Parade that people did not like and it is clear that some members of the LGBT community no longer participate in or even watch the Parade because of these problems. Concern was expressed that rather than being an LGBT community reunion and celebration, the Parade could become a spectacle relevant only to an audience of straight gawkers. Some suggestions were raised with us that we have decided to reject, and others we have accepted and recommend for implementation. Some of the ideas reflect our Panel’s own creative process rather than the adoption of suggestions made or models used elsewhere. Indeed, we hope our ideas may be of benefit to other Pride organizations.
We heard from a number of persons who complained about the size of the Parade. There was a frequently expressed sentiment that Pride Toronto had been pursuing a bigger parade on the theory that bigger is always better.
Several issues were raised with respect to the Parade’s size or length. The size of the Parade caused the introduction of barricades with a loss of intimacy. Smaller groups sometimes feel swamped by the many larger groups. This is exacerbated as people give up on marching because they have been waiting for hours in the hot sun in the marshalling area before the Parade gets under way. The size of the Parade contributes to a lack of focus on celebrating the LGBT community, and instead the parade becomes a giant billboard to promote the marketing of condominiums or other products, politicians, or political ideas. Instead of emphasis on promoting the LGBT community, there is emphasis on promoting to the LGBT community. LGBT messages are lost.
There were many complaints about the lack of focus of the Parade. Most people feel the Parade should be an opportunity to showcase the LGBT community, to celebrate our success and to highlight LGBT issues. Many complained that they felt the Parade was too often being used as a marketing opportunity for persons who had products, services or ideas to sell to the LGBT community. In short, the parade was no longer about the LGBT community and its issues, but a platform for reaching the LGBT community.
A parade about everything becomes a parade about nothing. The parade is not a universal fair like the CNE or a universal protest march like a G20 demonstration. It is also not an open air commercial or billboard. Many people stressed to us that this is the one time of year that the focus is on the LGBT community and LGBT issues. We should not permit that focus to be diluted.
There was also a concern voiced on a number of occasions that that the parade remains too dominated by gay men, and is still too white, and that here must be more effort put into showcasing other aspects of the LGBT community.
Some people wanted to keep the tone of the Parade celebratory, and to ensure that any “messages” were positive. Many people answering our questionnaire emphasized celebration and community as the most important values of Pride, although many also chose “protest” or “politics.” Some people in the community felt that the high visibility of the Parade meant that we had to find a way to effectively incorporate human rights issues into the Parade, rather than having them separated and ignored. Many people complained that the debate about QuAIA and the Middle East had drowned out other more core LGBT messages last year, especially trans issues. However, there was strong support for an inclusive Parade.
Although QuAIA’s participation dominated the discussion in the media and the political world, it was the issue of commercialization that animated most of the people we consulted. Many people complained that the Parade was becoming too commercial, and being turned into a billboard aimed at the LGBT community. One person noted that flyers were being handed out during the Pride Parade promoting the sale of condominiums, and questioned what that had to do with LGBT issues.
There was also recognition by many that corporations and commercial interests could have a positive role to play in the Parade, but it had to be meaningful. To the extent that Parade participation meant that the business in question was supportive of LGBT issues and their LGBT employees, it was a good thing to see them in the Parade. Some also recognized that to some extent commercial interests were adding entertainment value to the Parade, such as music, attractive floats or sexy dancers. While many people recognized that we need money to organize the Parade, there was widespread consensus that the community wanted to see the commercial elements and logos downplayed.
Interestingly, those who spoke to us from the commercial sector did not disagree with some aspects of these concerns. There was consensus that a company marching in the Parade or featuring its logo should be required to meet some LGBT criteria in order to participate. They did not anticipate that this would substantially reduce support for Pride, and might enhance awareness about LGBT issues among businesses. However, they pointed out that it is unrealistic to expect commercial support, and then censor those commercial supporters by forcing them to be invisible during the Parade. They also expressed concern about non-LGBT issues being featured in the Parade. Commercial entities are displaying their logos to show their support for the LGBT community, and would be concerned about a photograph of that logo next to a political slogan they did not support. While commercial sponsors are not dictating content to Pride Toronto, the simple fact is that they are far less likely to support a Parade where a wide range of political activist messages are permitted, especially if there is a risk that they will be perceived to endorse some other message. The concern about being associated with or being photographed against the backdrop of a political slogan was not just expressed by corporations, it was also shared by some community groups and individuals.
Some persons complained that there was too much overt political campaigning in last year’s Parade. This was seen as part of the larger problem of the Parade becoming a message to the LGBT community, rather than about the LGBT community.
Some people in the community would prefer that the Parade keep a purely positive tone, and that politics be left out of it altogether. Even those who support the presence of politics and human rights in the Pride Parade admitted that it is difficult to get a clear message across or to get the attention of the crowd in the festive atmosphere of the Parade. It is clear to us that funders of Pride such as the City are not concerned about the presence of LGBT politics in the Parade. However, they are concerned about other unanticipated and controversial political issues, especially QuAIA.
On balance, there was considerable support for continuing to feature LGBT politics in the Pride Parade. Indeed, despite our progress, it should be recognized that the Parade remains a political act. We need to challenge our complacency, as there are many issues still confronting our community, from homophobic bullying in schools to trans rights. The Parade should not downplay or ignore these issues, nor should we allow other issues to drown out LGBT issues. This is the one major opportunity the LGBT community has each year to showcase its issues to the LGBT community and the community at large. We are entitled to insist on our own space and our own voice.
The issues in the Middle East are extremely complex and far beyond the capacity of this Report to analyze in any detail. The Pride Parade has become another proxy battlefield in the Middle East struggle.
CAP recognizes that Jewish people have legitimate concerns about anti-Semitism in Canada. There are many people, and not just those in the Jewish community, who support the state of Israel and its right to exist. We know that some cloak their anti-Semitism in the rhetoric of anit-Zionism. Many people in the Jewish community, and some important Jewish organizations like the CJC, have been actively supportive of the struggle for LGBT rights. We value and respect the Jewish members of the LGBT community.
CAP also recognizes that there are many people in Canada who are concerned about the plight of the Palestinians, including many in the Jewish community. We recognize that many respected activists in the LGBT community are passionate about their support for this cause, and they see it as part of our community’s broader struggle against oppression in all its forms. We value and respect the Palestinian members of the LGBT community. We recognize that some of the organizations that support this struggle, such as CUPE, have also been very supportive of the LGBT cause. Finally, we acknowledge that freedom of speech and freedom of expression are cherished values in the LGBT community. Canadians have a right to engage in criticism of the policies of foreign governments, including Israel, even if that criticism offends supporters of those governments. Criticism of Israel is not synonymous with anti-Semitism.
The apartheid system was designed in South Africa to allow the minority white population to control the majority black population. It was widely and rightly condemned, and was eventually dismantled.
In recent years, the term “apartheid” has been used by some observers, including by some Israeli Jews, to describe the current policies of Israel toward the Palestinian people, either within Israel or in the occupied territories of the West Bank, or as the unhappy direction of Israeli policy. It is a term that has been used in political discourse in mainstream newspapers in Israel, and by some prominent non-Israelis like former President Jimmy Carter. “Israel Apartheid Week” has become a controversial event on many university campuses.
The comparison to the odious former regime in South Africa naturally upsets many Israelis and their supporters, especially Jewish people, who so often identify closely with Israel as the only Jewish state. They have reacted strongly to condemn and to attack what they view as hateful speech. The vast majority of Toronto’s City Council last year voted to suspend this year’s funding to pride Toronto because of concerns about QuAIA’s presence in the Parade.
This reaction and the level of controversy created seem to have reinforced the usefulness and effectiveness of this phrase for those critics of Israel who have deployed this slogan.
QuAIA is Toronto’s LGBT chapter of this larger political movement, inside and outside Israel. On its website, QuAIA notes that its parade contingent is the “largest anti-Israeli Apartheid gathering.”
This context explains why both sides of this controversy have such strong views about the importance of these two words. Although there has been political condemnation of the phrase, there has never been a finding that the use of the phrase constitutes a violation of any law in Canada. Although the City suggested the phrase violates its policies, it has not sought any court ruling on the point and has not even given a clear statement to that effect to Pride Toronto. Although is not equipped to make legal rulings, the City has expected Pride Toronto to make a ruling that the City appears unwilling to make itself about its own policy.
The protagonists have been unable or unwilling to compromise thus far. The LGBT community will have to choose a solution. We propose new rules for the parade and a dispute-resolution process to help Pride Toronto respond to this and any future controversies around Parade participation.
On its website, the group says this about the coalition’s origins:
At a public forum at Toronto’s Israeli Apartheid Week 2008, queer activists spoke from the audience about the use of gay rights as a propaganda tool to justify Israel’s apartheid policies. They agreed to start a coalition to fight against this appropriation.
In 2008, queer activists formed contingents in the Dyke March and Pride Parade, sending out the messages that queers do not support apartheid wherever it exists.
In 2009, Queers Against Israeli Apartheid held two forums, at the University of Toronto and at Buddies in Bad Times Theatre. Speakers included:
El-Farouk Khaki, grand marshal of the 2009 Toronto Pride parade;
John Greyson, prominent Canadian filmmaker who boycotted the Tel Aviv gay film festival;
Tim McCaskell, co-founder of the gay activist group Simon Nkoli Anti-Apartheid Committee, which fought against South African apartheid in the 1980s;
Rafeef Ziadah, leading member of the Coalition Against Israeli Apartheid;
Members of Aswat, a Palestinian gay women’s group.
In 2009 we marched again at Toronto Pride, despite attempts by Zionist organizations to ban us.
The organization notes that in the context of the parade, they organized “one of the largest anti-apartheid contingents ever.”
Also from its website, the group says this about its organization and purpose:
Queers Against Israeli Apartheid, or QuAIA, formed to work in solidarity with queers in Palestine and Palestinian resistance movements around the world. Today, in response to increasing criticism of its occupation of Palestine, Israel is cultivating an image of itself as an oasis of gay tolerance in the Middle East. As queers, we recognize that homophobia exists in Israel, Palestine, and across all borders. But queer Palestinians face the additional challenge of living under occupation, subject to Israeli state violence and control. Israel’s apartheid system extends gay rights only to some, based on race.
There is no pride in apartheid, and QuAIA is dedicated to fighting it wherever it exists. We work in solidarity with anti-colonial struggles and with queers leading their own struggles of resistance.
QuAIA works to:
mobilize in solidarity with groups and individuals to advance these political goals
engage in a queer analysis of colonialism and anti-colonial struggles
build a queer, anti-colonial, anti-racist, feminist movement against apartheid through mutual education and dialogue
foster a culture of radical queer organizing
QuAIA supports the Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement.
QuAIA has attracted support from leaders who are well-known and respected in the LGBT community. Although many people unfamiliar with QuAIA might perceive them to represent a conflict between ethnic or religious groups, in fact QuAIA has a diverse membership. It includes Israeli Jews who have had links to similar groups in Israel, such as Black Laundry.
As noted above, QuAIA marched for the first time in the 2008 parade. Its presence went unnoticed by many at the Parade, but it was noticed with dismay by some supporters of Israel and in particular, by Martin Gladstone and Jewish LGBT group Kulanu. Attempts were made by the anti-QuAIA organizers to have QuAIA barred from the Parade. To our knowledge, this is the first time one LGBT group has sought to exclude another from the Parade. Pride Toronto had no policy or process for dealing with this type of complaint. Pride Toronto management rejected the demand, and QuAIA marched in the 2009 Pride Parade and the Dyke March.
The anti-QuAIA organizers increased the pressure to bar QuAIA from the 2010 parade. A documentary film was made by Martin Gladstone and widely disseminated called “Reclaiming Our Pride,” to encapsulate the objections of the anti-QuAIA group. QuAIA condemned the film as misleading propaganda. The anti-QuAIA organizers encouraged Jewish community organizations, such as the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC), a traditional supporter of the LGBT community, and the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Centre (FSWC). Pressure was brought to bear on Pride Toronto, and its government and commercial sponsors, to bar QuAIA. For example the City of Toronto hinted the possibility that Pride Toronto might be in violation of the city’s anti-discrimination policy by permitting QuAIA to march.
As will be noted elsewhere in this Report, this pressure was difficult for Pride Toronto to respond to effectively, and difficult for it to resist. Pride Week has become large and expensive to operate. Pride Toronto was heavily dependent on government and commercial sponsors. Donations from the community were paltry. Pride Toronto had become somewhat detached from the community, and was under strong criticism from groups such as the trans community and the black community. Its leadership did not have the stature in the community to respond effectively at the political level. It made some serious missteps, including failing to meet with FSWC in response to a letter sent by the FSWC requesting such a meeting. However, some efforts were made to achieve a compromise. For example, one request was to have QuAIA march as “Queers for Palestine.” However, no compromise was achieved.
There was no mechanism for resolving this except at the Board level. Some of the leadership of Pride Toronto believed that allowing QuAIA to march would lead to financial disaster. The anti-QuAIA organizers made it clear that their bottom line was that they did not want the phrase “Israeli Apartheid” appearing in the Pride Parade. The decision was made to change policies, and to ban the phrase, but not the group, from the Parade.
This appeared to satisfy the anti-QuAIA organizers, but it provoked a strong reaction from QuAIA and its supporters. The Pride Coalition for Free Speech was born. Although it had some links with QuAIA, many of its members were concerned with the implications of Pride Toronto censoring a political slogan to be used in the parade just because of political and/or financial pressure. Some also advocated that there is no justice for one unless there is justice for all, identifying linkages between Palestinian issues and those of other marginalized peoples. The Pride Coalition for Free Speech also had the support of Xtra, a major print media outlet in the Toronto LGBT community. The leadership of QuAIA and the Pride Coalition for Free Speech included some seasoned activists with extensive connections in the LGBT community, as well as attracting new community members who had been disaffected by Pride Toronto for various reasons. They worked hard to bring countervailing pressure to bear on Pride Toronto. Many prominent LGBT activists returned their honours to Pride and called for a reversal of policy or a boycott of Pride Toronto. Grand Marshals and International Grand Marshals declined to accept their posts.
The controversy was having a negative effect on Pride Toronto. Both sides were using threats and sanctions to pressure Pride Toronto, at a time when it was very fragile.
In the meantime, there were many others in the LGBT community who felt that Pride had been unfairly and improperly “hijacked” by a Middle East controversy. Many were concerned that Pride Toronto’s Board was making decisions based on expediency rather than principle, and that it was too susceptible to change positions in response to pressure from the latest and loudest protest. Concern grew about the effect on Pride Toronto and its long-term survival.
A group of community leaders met informally to try to work out a solution. A consensus was achieved that in the short term the unprincipled decision to ban the phrase could not stand, and would be lifted. In its place, the concern about violation of the city antidiscrimination policy would be met by requiring all groups to sign in writing that they would uphold that policy in the Parade as a condition of being allowed to march. However, in the long term, a panel of community leaders would be established to try to put Pride back on track and to provide principled rules to apply in future.
QuAIA portrayed Pride Toronto’s decision as a victory of the community over the Board. The anti-QuAIA organizers portrayed it as a victory for anti-Semitism, a betrayal and a fraud on the City. Many felt the “flip flopping” was evidence of weak governance structures and a lack of strong leadership at Pride Toronto.
This controversy has cost Pride credibility, and it has hurt it financially.
Pride Toronto took a financial hit last year. In July 2010, City Council passed the following motion:
City Council direct that funding for Pride Toronto be paid after the parade and be conditional upon Pride Toronto requiring all registered participants to comply with the City of Toronto’s Anti-Discrimination Policy.
City Council request the City Manager to advise Pride Toronto on what is required of them to meet the Policy.
City Council request the City Manager to advise Pride Toronto whether the participation of QAIA and the signs or banners they carry contravenes the City’s Anti-Discrimination Policy.
Pride Toronto’s 2010 cultural grant was placed on hold. For 2011, the effect of the City Council’s decision means that if QuAIA marches for whatever reason, the City cultural grant remains in doubt.
As it is, the current mayor expressly campaigned on a platform to eliminate this grant as a fiscal restraint measure. There does not appear to be any imminent threat to the Parade permit; however, if the cultural grant is lost Pride opponents will doubtless next turn their attention to the “in kind” contributions to Pride Toronto. While we do not have precise figures, if Pride had to pay for services such as garbage collection and policing, the additional costs might easily exceed $100,000. Pride Toronto can ill afford that expense at this time.
More importantly, other levels of government will take their cue from the City. Federal funding has been declining and it seems that it may have been cancelled altogether for 2011 Pride. It is a symptom of the troubles that Pride Toronto and the LGBT community has experienced that last year’s federal cut went virtually unchallenged. Queen’s Park is watching what happens at the City closely, as are major commercial sponsors.
The harsh reality is that the LGBT community will either have to live with a drastic and immediate “downsizing” of Pride, or we will have to resolve this issue in a principled and reasonable way that will hopefully ensure continued financial support from governments and companies.
Some people have suggested to us that Pride should “stand up” to funders, either in the expectation that they will feel obliged to support us regardless, or on the basis that we will simply have to increase support from our own resources to make up the difference. Sometimes that defiant approach is appropriate and necessary, as it was at Stonewall. However, that is not always the right approach. We have won recognition for many of our rights in Canada through battles we have chosen to wage in courtrooms rather than in the streets.
Three things have become clear in our consultations.
First, there are some who will only be satisfied with Pride Toronto taking a position that Israel is, or is not, an apartheid state. In our view, Pride Toronto has neither the mandate nor the resources to make such a decision. It should take no position on that issue.
The second is that the controversy itself has cost Pride Toronto valuable support, both financial and moral. The wavering and the lack of principled decision-making have been widely and justifiably criticized. It is absolutely imperative that Pride Toronto resolves the question of Parade participation on a principled basis. Once it decides on those principles, it must stick to those principles even if they are criticized for them. The application of those principles by Pride must be subject to an outside impartial complaints process, so that the Board does not become bogged down in these issues. Disputes must be decided based on facts and principles, and not based on political and financial pressure or popularity.
The third point is that whether Pride chooses an approach that results in QuAIA being included, or one in which it is excluded, there will be people unhappy with that decision. It is an unhappy dilemma that either choice will dismay people who have been historic supporters of the LGBT community. Neither side can legitimately claim to speak for “the community,” as it is apparent from our consultations that the LGBT community is deeply divided on this issue.
Pride Toronto has to make a principled choice and live with the consequences. The community appears to be fairly evenly divided about QuAIA’s participation. It is less clear to what extent the community is aware of the financial consequences of the options. Pride Toronto has to be realistic about the financial consequences of its choices. Rightly or wrongly, we can anticipate there is a greater risk of a reduction in public funding, and possibly a reduction in private funding. This means a decision that is made which results in the inclusion of QuAIA will likely have to be coupled with a decision to reduce the scope, scale and/or cost of Pride Toronto’s activities.
On the other hand, if Pride Toronto adopts an approach that leads to the exclusion of QuAIA from the Pride Parade, it is unlikely that there will be any increased resources for Pride Toronto. They will simply avoid a dramatic reduction. Further, it is apparent that there are important elements in the LGBT community who will be unhappy with any decision that results in the exclusion of QuAIA from the Pride Parade. It is quite possible, perhaps even probable, that they will choose to organize a separate event, like the “Take Back the Dyke March.” This has been the experience in other cities, including Vancouver and Montreal. This will hurt our community’s unity. Pride may fracture, and could collapse, because of a lack of community support.
In the short term, Pride Toronto will have to be conscious of the fact that either choice has risks, and is likely to result in a smaller Pride Week.
During the course of our consultations, we heard a number of suggestions for resolution of the Parade issue. Out of fairness to those who helped our work with these suggestions, and in order to provide the Board of Pride Toronto with some guidance as it considers our recommendations, we thought it would be helpful to outline our reasons for rejecting the other options. Some of the other options had considerable merit, but we ultimately concluded our option was preferable for reasons outlined below.
Many people were very emotionally battered by the changing debate and decisions over QuAIA’s participation in last year’s parade. As our survey shows, and our consultations confirmed, the community is deeply divided over this issue with strong feelings on all sides. One QuAIA supporter noted that the community had been through a great deal of anxiety over this issue, and pleaded with us for closure.
Some QuAIA supporters and some QuAIA opponents presented arguments simply on the basis of including or excluding QuAIA from the parade. It is recognized that there are many diverse opinions on this topic, and that the following should be considered a summary of these various opinions.
QuAIA supporters’ arguments could be broadly characterized into two groups. First, some QuAIA supporters invited us to conclude that Israel is an apartheid state. According to them, since that is true our community as one which has experienced oppression must stand in solidarity with the oppressed (Palestinians). For them, the use of the phrase “Israeli Apartheid” is not only a reasonable exercise of free speech, but it is also a moral imperative inextricably linked to their queer identity.
Second, some who supported QuAIA did so based on different considerations. Some proponents of broad free speech argued that, even though they found the expression “Israeli Apartheid” offensive, it should be permitted. For them, this phrase is political speech that must be protected given our community’s experience with oppressive restrictions on free speech. This history includes the persecution of now defunct The Body Politic over defamation allegations, the targeting of the Little Sisters Bookstore by Canada Customs and the current controversies over attempts by Catholic Bishops to prohibit “Gay Straight Alliance” groups in publicly funded separate schools.
The voices against QuAIA’s participation could also be broadly characterized into two groups.
One group of QuAIA opponents invited us to find that Israel is not an apartheid state. According to them, since the assertion that Israel is an apartheid state is false, it is a moral imperative to ban the phrase from use since we are a community that has been victimized by hate speech and hate crimes. According to them, we should be in solidarity with the Jewish community in this regard, especially as Jewish members of our community expressed feelings of exclusion and fear of personal safety because of QuAIA’s presence. They also noted that QuAIA’s presence might be a violation of Pride’s letters patent as outside the scope of its corporate powers, and that it might be a violation of the City’s anti-discrimination policies. They further noted that supporters of Israel had withdrawn their support for Pride Toronto, and would continue to do so if it was perceived to be endorsing anti-Semitism. From their perspective, ”Israeli Apartheid” is code language and symptomatic of growing anti-Semitism cloaked as anti-Zionism. They feel that QuAIA has driven a painful wedge between the Jewish community and the LGBT community.
There was a second group in the community who objected to QuAIA. These persons had no particular opinion about the merits of QuAIA’s position, or lack thereof. These persons expressed the view that QuAIA’s message had nothing to do with the message of the Pride Parade, which should be about sexual orientation and gender identity. Allowing other kinds of political messages was distracting from our own issues, according to them. A number of persons pointed out that considerable energy and much press attention last year focussed on the QuAIA debate at the expense of other issues more directly impacting on our community, especially efforts to promote law reform for trans people. They saw QuAIA’s presence as divisive and harmful to the community’s feelings of unity. In addition, they noted that government sponsors and perhaps some commercial sponsors were cutting support to Pride Toronto. For some, QuAIA’s presence posed a threat to the very existence of the Parade that they were not willing to accept.
We understood all of these concerns, and took them into account in formulating our proposal for the Pride Parade. However, we were of the view that it was not appropriate for us to simply decide that QuAIA was out of the Parade, or in the Parade.
We know that the some people in the groups discussed above will feel disappointment, and may even believe that we are trying to avoid grappling with this controversial issue. In the interests of transparency, we thought it important to share our analysis on why it was not appropriate to make a simple and clear decision about QuAIA and its message.
CAP had neither the mandate nor the resources to “rule” on the question of whether Israel is or is not an apartheid state. We are not the International Court of Justice, or an official human rights tribunal, and neither is Pride Toronto. Although there are a number of statements by politicians and others supporting or condemning the use of the phrase, we were provided with no legal authorities that concluded that the phrase was, or was not, discriminatory. Ontario and Canada have human rights legislation such as the Ontario Human Rights Code. The fact that neither side of this debate has sought the guidance of a Human Rights Tribunal or a court of law suggests to us that both sides prefer to keep the matter in the political and public opinion relations realm rather than risk losing their argument through a fair legal process. Nothing in this report should be construed to exclude anyone from accessing the services of the Ontario Human Rights Commission, for example.
We also believe that the Canadian approach to discrimination requires a case by case determination through a fair process, focused on the perspective of the marginalized group and the effects on that group in full context. The context of a slogan in the Pride Parade in Toronto is not the same context as an academic article or a debate in the Knesset (Israeli parliament). As examples, we would suggest that a banner headline in an Israeli newspaper like Haaretz referring to “Israeli apartheid” could not reasonably be considered anti-Semitic. However, a banner referring to “Israeli Apartheid” carried in a neo-Nazi parade could reasonably be perceived to be anti-Semitic.
We also note that there have been factual disputes about what QuAIA and their opponents may have said or done during the Parade that remain unresolved and in respect of which CAP feels ill-equipped to make findings of fact.
CAP was firmly of the view that a decision to either exclude or include QuAIA would have to be based on some clear reason or principle, based on the law or on clear rules established by Pride and fairly enforced. One of our primary concerns about how the QuAIA issue was handled by Pride Toronto in the past was that decisions to include the group, on the one hand, or to ban the phrase “Israeli Apartheid,” on the other hand, did not involve principled decision-making. Rather, they were decisions made on an ad hoc basis by a Board in response to pressure tactics from inside and outside the community, without clear principles being articulated.
A number of reasons were advanced for excluding QuAIA, including that the phrase was “false,” “offensive,” “provocative,” “inflammatory” and made Jewish members of our community “unwelcome” or “fearful for their safety.” QuAIA and its supporters argued that the phrase should be allowed because it was “true,” “political,” “solidarity with other marginalized persons,” “not anti-Semitic” and “free speech.”
In our view, everyone participating in the Parade needs to understand in advance the rules and principles that govern the Parade, and then must abide by those rules. If QuAIA wishes to participate in the Parade or someone else wants to exclude them, any arguments advanced will have to be based on law, evidence, and violations of clear rules through a fair process.
Since QuAIA could only be included or excluded on a principled basis, we determined that we could best serve the community by identifying and articulating those principles for Pride Toronto. It should be for the proposed dispute-resolution process, and not CAP, to rule on any application of those principles.
We also concluded that while the QuAIA controversy had been particularly polarizing, Pride Toronto would inevitably face decisions about similar controversial groups in future. The New Mardi Gras in Sydney, for example, was forced to grapple with the issue of Parade participation rules not because of an organization akin to QuAIA, but because of a group of queer animal rights activists called Animal Liberation. While there is obviously a significant difference between QuAIA and Animal Liberation, the underlying problem for Parade organizers was the same: the lack of clear rules or any dispute-resolution process led to a bitter political debate about who should and should not be allowed in the Parade. In a large multicultural city like Toronto, and in a community with diverse interests and politics, future debates about other groups are inevitable. Pride Toronto needs to be equipped to respond to such future controversies based on principles that are fairly applied, and are seen to be fairly applied, rather than making up ad hoc rules as controversies emerge.
It was apparent during the QuAIA controversy that some members of each side were prepared to put financial and other pressure on Pride Toronto, and on the community, in order to ensure that Pride Toronto would either exclude or include QuAIA. For example, some opponents of QuAIA advocated for the elimination of City and other funding to Pride Toronto if QuAIA was permitted in the parade. On the other side, some supporters of QuAIA, as a way of protesting the decision of Pride Toronto to ban the phrase “Israeli apartheid,” gave back Pride Toronto honours and awards, and organized alternative, competing events during Pride Week, with the effect of reducing attendance at Pride events. The harm that resulted affected the entire community.
The community will have to shoulder the burden of the harm that will flow from a decision that results in either the inclusion or exclusion of QuAIA. If the community is to be expected to make that sacrifice, it has to be done in defence of principles and not just because we want to include someone we like, or to exclude someone we dislike.
It is apparent that the QuAIA question is the main issue for some, but not all, members of the community regarding the Parade. The City council debate last year revolved around that question. However, it appeared to us that most members of the community were more concerned about commercialization than either the presence of QuAIA or the absence of QuAIA. Some concerns were also expressed regarding other parade entrants perceived as not historically supportive of LGBT communities, notably the military, police or more conservative political figures.
If CAP were to make a narrow ad hoc decision about QuAIA, it would have been ignoring important issues. CAP is of the view that our mission regarding the Parade was to articulate a vision of the Parade that tried to address all of the community’s concerns, and not just the question of QuAIA’s participation. In fact, many persons complained to us that the QuAIA debate was taking too much attention away from other critical issues for Pride Toronto, and was diverting the community’s leadership and energy.
For all of these reasons, we rejected any special rule for or against QuAIA. Instead, we have opted for rules and a dispute-resolution process that will apply not just to QuAIA, but to everyone who wishes to participate in the Parade.
Some people argued that the Parade should have no restrictions on participation, that we should embrace unlimited free speech. Their vision of the Pride Parade could be described as a group of celebrants and protestors with diverse and even divergent views. Proponents of this model argued that Pride Toronto should not be in the business of “censorship.”
CAP rejects this model for several reasons.
In this model, absolutely unlimited free speech could mean allowing unlimited commercial messages, homophobic or transphobic messages, and the inclusion of groups or messages that were unconnected to sexual minorities and issues of sexual orientation.
The primary reason for rejecting this model is that Pride Toronto as an organization also has freedom of expression and freedom of association rights that it is entitled to assert and protect on behalf of the community. The Pride Parade is not a random gathering of people. The community gathers in the Pride event for a purpose, and the Parade has a theme that relates to that purpose. Similar to other major parades in Toronto, Pride Parade organizers are entitled to and must set and enforce rules for a variety of reasons, including safety and ensuring that parade entries are faithful to the theme of the Parade. For example, one would not expect to see a union marching in the Santa Claus Parade any more than one would expect to see Santa Claus in the Labour Day Parade. Those parades are products of collective expression on a particular theme, and participants are expected to respect the theme. Pride Toronto is entitled to set rules about content in the Parade based on the theme and purpose of Pride, and the community expects them to do so.
The community is clearly concerned about the presence of too much purely commercial speech in the Parade. Not only are they prepared to tolerate censorship of such messages, they insist on censorship of such messages. They expect Pride Toronto to exclude homophobic or transphobic businesses from participation, and to permit but limit commercial speech, and then only from responsible commercial sponsors. As noted elsewhere in our report on commercialization, we agree that Pride Toronto should set standards for commercial participation in Pride even if that means losing sponsors. While we believe it would be desirable for Pride Toronto to expand the numbers of sponsors by increasing responsible commercial sponsorship, the community has clearly stated that they want to decrease the prominence of commercial messages in the Parade. We agree that the Parade needs to reduce the prominence of commercial messages, even though this involves what some might describe as “censorship.”
In an unlimited free speech model, we would have to allow groups of so-called “ex-gays” to march. We would have to allow religious groups in the parade who marched under banners denouncing homosexuality as sin. There is virtually no support in our community for these kinds of groups participating. We believe that the purpose of the Parade is to celebrate, and not denounce, diverse sexual orientations and gender identities.
Finally, this model would allow groups to participate in the Parade who had no obvious connection to our communities or issues of sexual orientation and gender identity. Many people bemoaned the fact that Pride was the one time each year when we feel like we are in the majority, and when we can get the community at large to focus on sexual orientation and gender identity issues. A common concern expressed to CAP was that the Parade was being “hijacked,” that is, groups or commercial interests who wanted to get publicity were using our Parade as a marketing opportunity for their products or ideas. The result of this approach has been a loss of focus for the Parade.
Although Dyke Marches and Trans Marches do not appear to have formal restrictions on participation, none of the other major Pride parades have adopted an unlimited freedom of speech model. This is true even in the USA where free speech enjoys a high level of constitutional protection. Their major parades have rules which constrain “free speech” to various degrees.
Most have rules restricting commercial speech. For example, San Francisco Pride imposes a variety of rules on what material can be used, what activities are permitted and what can be said during the Parade. In discussing rules about commercial participation, the San Francisco organizers say this:
National corporations or franchises must obtain express written permission from the Pride Committee in order to participate in the Parade. Your contingent cannot be sponsored by or display logos or trademarks from third party businesses or organizations without the express written permission of the Pride Committee. Such permission, if granted, may include additional fees and conditions.
In discussing the rules about political participation and political speech in their parade, the organizers say this:
San Francisco Pride has a long history of empowering the LGBT Community and providing a venue for freedom of expression. This tradition is and has always been subject to the regulations which we must observe in relation to political activity in order to preserve the 501(c)3 charitable status for the event and to comply with our agreement with the City and County of San Francisco for funding from the Grants for the Arts/Hotel Tax Fund.
The community, and CAP, support a broad approach to free speech. However, the right to free speech does not mean that anyone has the right to say whatever they want, whenever they want and wherever they want, and without regard to the rights of others.
CAP is concerned that the reported loss of focus of the Pride Parade reflects complacency on the part of segments of our community combined with increased commercialization of Pride. There is a sense that since our victory in the struggle for equal marriage, that far too many in our community believe that there are no more battles to fight. This is simply untrue. The failure to secure rights protection for our trans brothers and sisters is but one clear example of a victory that still eludes us at home. Our gay brothers and lesbian sisters in some other countries also continue to face horrendous challenges – many are still fighting for the right just to hold a Pride Parade. Youth in our communities are still being subjected to homophobic bullying. Transgender people continue to face high rates of suicide and homelessness. Many voices in our community remain marginalized because of racism, sexism, transphobia, ageism, and other forms of discrimination.
One of the main purposes of the Parade has been to fight against the invisibility of “living in the closet,” and the feelings of isolation so many of us experience growing up. As the recent “It Gets Better” campaign has shown, the message that it is OK to be “out” is still a vital message. This message is especially important for people who are just coming to terms with their sexuality, and people who know their true selves but who have recently moved here from environments where it is not safe to be “out.” Many people told us how they found acceptance, and even love, during Pride Week.
We need to preserve Pride as an opportunity to showcase our community in all its diversity and issues of sexual orientation and gender identity. We believe that the community has an expectation, and Pride Toronto has a right, to insist that parade entries are consistent with that theme and advancing that objective.
A parade about everything becomes a parade about nothing. We are entitled to a Parade about us.
The word most commonly associated with Pride by persons completing our questionnaire was “celebration.” Accordingly, some people felt that appropriate limits on expression would be to require participants to have only positive messages. Some suggested this approach be enforced as a ban on “negative” messages, excluding messages using a variety of criteria including “controversial,” “offensive,” “provocative,” ”hurtful,” “hateful” and “inflammatory.”
Until recently, Pride had brought nothing but joy to many of our lives. We had come to greet each other with the salutation “Happy Pride!” The atmosphere was festive and fun – gay, in the old-fashioned sense of the word. We looked forward to the colourful costumes and floats, and the sense of a reunion, where you have the chance to connect again with people you know and love. Our consultations show that the high profile debate about QuAIA’s participation in the Parade polarized our community, and divided us into aggrieved factions. It is understandable that some people want to recover and preserve the joyful and unifying spirit of Pride by eliminating negative messages from the Parade.
In our interjurisdictional research, we found no other jurisdictions with “positive only” rules for their Pride parades. The closest parallels we could find among other major Pride events for a rule such as this was New York and Montreal. The New York organizer’s Vision addresses celebration and joy, but also discusses education and the struggle for civil rights:
Heritage of Pride, Inc. strives to empower individuals, groups and our community as a whole through the commemoration of our history, in particular the Stonewall Riots of June, 1969. New York City’s Pride Events provide an opportunity to join together to celebrate our lives, take joy in all that we have done, and honor all those who have helped make our progress possible. They provide a safe and affirming space in New York City while educating both those in and outside our own community. In creating these Pride events, we reaffirm the self-worth of all lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and all those who join the ongoing struggle for our civil rights.
New York City has only one Parade rule we could identify which pointed to a requirement for positive messages or images during the Parade:
Decorations: All vehicles must be decorated and must make a positive statement appropriate to the day’s event.
In Montreal, as discussed elsewhere in these reasons, the original Pride event, known as Divers/Cité,has now become “an arts and music festival that illustrates and celebrates the value of diversity in a spirit of sharing, solidarity and openness with the world.” There appears to be only positive messages, with little politics or protest, throughout the Divers/Cité events. There are two other events organized in Montreal, where there may be messages that are not necessarily considered positive, where political or protest elements are present in different way and to different degrees.
The Toronto Pride Parade has evolved from its original form as a protest march. However, our communities still face many challenges directly related to our sexual orientation and/or our gender identity. It is hard to deliver a positive message about gay-bashing or the murders of transsexuals. Yet, these are issues we cannot afford to ignore. In fact, in our consultations we found that when people complained about keeping negative messages out of the Parade, or keeping “politics” out of the Parade, they usually meant messages about issues not directly related to sexual orientation or gender identity issues. There was strong support for keeping issues of LGBT rights, and sexual orientation and gender identity, whether “positive” or not, in the Parade. Although “celebration” was by far the most important purpose of Pride among those who completed our questionnaire, “political” was the second most important purpose.
CAP agrees that the Parade should be a place for celebration and fun. However, CAP does not support limiting Parade entries to positive messages. If we organized our Parade so as to avoid giving offence to anyone, we would never have had a Parade at all. We reject any limits on free speech that are purely subjective. A Parade that is no longer provocative in any way will be a Parade that has lost its soul.
We believe, however, that it is not only reasonable, but necessary, for Pride Toronto to have clear limits on images and expression to preserve the identity and values of the Parade itself.
For example, as discussed previously, we do not believe that the Parade should tolerate intolerance. Many, though not all, advocates of a pure-free-speech model balked when it was suggested that unlimited free speech could mean permitting homophobic and transphobic speech. There was really no support for permitting that kind of speech in the Parade. As a result, even strong advocates of free speech would support some limited “censorship,” at least to the extent of insisting on “queer positive” messages in the Parade.
CAP agrees that homophobic and transphobic images and messages have no place in the Pride Parade as a matter of principle. However, we do not believe that this is a broad enough principle of exclusion or limitation. Other minorities and marginalized groups have been victimized by discriminatory messages and images, and by messages and images of hate. Our community contains members of all of those groups. CAP believes that Pride Toronto should not limit protection to a ban on homophobic or transphobic messages and images, but bar all discriminatory messages or images as a matter of principle. Moreover, similar to the constraints on Pride organizers everywhere, Pride Toronto must comply with the relevant regulations of the City of Toronto which may require such protection.
A number of persons who we consulted supported a broad approach to freedom of speech, but objected to the participation of controversial groups like QuAIA. These persons argued that Pride should not be permitting groups to introduce other controversies into the Pride Parade. They argued that such issues would inevitably risk overshadowing sexual orientation and gender identity issues, and would also inevitably alienate allies and create unjustified and unnecessary sponsorship risks for Pride Toronto. In short, they believed that messages that caused controversies harmful to the community and Pride Toronto should be barred.
Many cities that began with an all-inclusive or omnibus Pride, such as we have in Toronto, have been unable to sustain that “big tent.”
The Montreal experience is instructive on this issue. In Montreal, Pride has divided into three different organizations and events:
Montreal Pride established in 2007 (which most resembles Toronto Pride with a parade and a community fair),
the long established Divers/Cité (described as “focused around nearly a week of parties, celebrations, film screenings, and fun”) and
Pervers/Cité,which bills itself as “the Underside of Pride,” with a program that is described as a “collaboratively organized summer festival that aims to make links across social justice groups, queer communities, and radical visions of pride.”)
Montreal Pride has opted for a community fair and parade model. The organization bans any messages or groups about “geopolitical and religious conflicts”:
The Montréal Pride Celebrations could refuse the participation of any organisation if they do not reflect the mission and values of the Montréal Pride Celebrations. Any organisations promoting racism, xenophobia, homophobia, lesbophobia, transphobia or any geopolitical and religious conflicts, will be refused and will not take part in the Community Day and the Pride Parade.
There is a group similar to QuAIA in Montreal called Queers Come Out Against Israeli Apartheid. Notwithstanding the above restriction, it appears that the group marched in the Montreal Pride Parade. It is noted that the Quebec Jewish Congress did not ask that the Queers Come Out Against Israeli Apartheid be banned from the parade. The Pervers/Cité festival organizers appear to facilitate the participation of Queers Come Out Against Israeli Apartheid in the Montreal Pride Parade.
Pervers/Cité festival organizers also facilitated a trans protest within the Montreal Pride parade. It is evident from the website description that the trans group was there to protest against Montreal Pride:
“This is what they call “LGBT Pride”? The last two years’ themes were “Circus” and “Fiesta”; this year it’s “Our Superheroes.” Seriously?! Is this a joke?
When we realize how much discrimination and stigma trans people face and how far from trans/cis equality we are, it becomes starkly obvious how much this is a parade organized by gay white men. As radicals, we have to confront them with their responsibilities.
The T in LGBT is not silent.
In Montreal, the split off from the main event resulted from differences of political opinion. The political philosophy that leads to these schisms is well described on the website for Pervers/Cité: “In a climate of corporatized gay agendas and whitewashed homogeneity amongst queers, Pervers/cité strives to provide a critical and accessible schedule of activities, designed to bring back the radical underpinnings to the pride movement.” The Montreal case study illustrates that separation of Pride into distinct events did not resolve underlying conflicts. If anything, separation appears to have created a more oppositional approach to conflict resolution.
Montreal is not alone. Many cities are finding it difficult to maintain the omnibus or all-inclusive nature of Pride Week in the face of our communities’ political diversity. For example, media reports suggest that Tel Aviv, Israel is heading toward 2 additional “politicized” marches this year in addition to the main parade which is organized by the city of Tel Aviv itself.
Even here in Toronto, a city that has kept to the omnibus format, last year our community split and the “Take Back the Dyke March” was organized, apparently by those who wanted a more “politicized” Pride event. The Trans March, now an official event, began as a community initiative that began outside the umbrella of Pride Toronto.
Other cities have seen their Pride events fracture, not along political lines, but based on communities of identity. In several cities lesbians have their own events organized by their own organization, and the trans community has opted for separate events and organized by a separate organization in some places.
Montreal’s ban on messages about geopolitical and religious conflicts must be seen in this context of separate types of Pride organizations. There are alternative events for those who want more “celebratory” and those who want more “radical” choices. At the same time, the restriction used by Montreal Pride is somewhat unsatisfactory as it is not clear what would or would not fit within the rubric of “geopolitical conflict.”
While the restriction imposed by Montreal Pride may or may not be appropriate in the context of a city with three distinct “Pride” events, in our opinion it would not be appropriate in Toronto. Our community places a high value on inclusion. It was instructive that some of the most outspoken supporters of QuAIA and some of QuAIA’s most outspoken critics have been harshly critical of two separate Pride organizations or Parades as a solution to our challenges. In the first instance, the argument was that a hateful message is a hateful message, regardless of on which day or in which parade it is stated. On the other side, there were concerns of the feasibility in determining which ideas should go in which event. We believe that the imposition of a Montreal-style restriction would likely result in the creation of another Pride organization and event, probably one akin to Pervers/Cité.
While such an outcome may not be avoidable, we do not believe it should be the goal. We believe that the community has a strong appetite for a Pride Week, and a Parade, that is as inclusive as possible. The challenge is finding a way to accommodate the differing visions of the Parade.
New Mardi Gras in Sydney, Australia is among the largest Pride events in the world. We believe that Pride Toronto could learn a great deal from the shared experiences of their sister organization in Australia, which has faced similar financial challenges. The original organization went bankrupt in 2002, and the new organization faced an operating loss of $305,000 in 2005 when their main fundraiser experienced drastically reduced attendance. The organization recovered. New Mardi Gras had a successful 2009 but a large operating loss again in 2010.
New Mardi Gras has also had to deal with controversies over Parade participation, but the issue was not the Middle East. For many years the parade included the participation of a group called “Animal Liberation New South Wales.” The group had been recognized for their creative floats.
The group’s entry was apparently rejected for the 2010 Mardi Gras as not being “queer related.” The group changed its name to Sydney Queers for Animal Rights, but the organizers apparently maintained the exclusion decision. This decision was especially controversial because the New Mardi Gras held a fundraiser at, and welcomed a float from, the Taronga Zoo, among other corporate sponsors. The controversy prompted Sydney Mardi Gras to revisit the Parade participation criteria and formulate new rules. This year an offshoot of Animal Liberation called Queer Animal Liberation NSW sought to participate on the theme of “we as queers agree, set the chickens free!” They hoped to draw attention to the plight of battery hens as a question of “social justice.” Apparently the group was approved under the new rules.
The Australian controversy underscores for CAP that the issue of Parade participation is not just about QuAIA. Resolving the question of QuAIA’s participation on an ad hoc basis will leave Pride Toronto ill equipped to properly address future controversies, which seem to CAP to be inevitable.
The Sydney rules were designed to address the question of participation by members of the community who want to highlight their passion for a cause other than the cause of sexual orientation and gender identity rights, while limiting messages from those who are not members of our community.
The basic Sydney requirements fall into two categories:
GLBTQ’s Saying Something An Entry primarily involving GLBTQ people or a GLBTQ organisation. The Entry can say something about any aspect of culture, politics or society.
Non-GLBTQ’s Saying Something for GLBTQ’s An Entry by individuals or organisations not part of the GLBTQ community that supports or celebrates the rights, achievements, culture and aspirations of GLBTQ people. These Entries must communicate a clear message of support or celebration relating to GLBTQ people.
Sydney parade-participation rules are illustrated in the following graphic:
All entries must also meet the following criteria:
Entries must not be discriminatory. An Entry will not be accepted if it supports, promotes or facilitates homophobia, racism, sexism, or harm to self or others. Entries will also not be accepted from discriminatory organisations.
Sydney makes it clear that that anyone breaking these rules, or its other parade rules, may be denied the right to march the following year. A similar warning was introduced into the Pride Toronto undertaking for the 2010 Parade.
The Sydney model has compelling features to it, but CAP ultimately rejected it as a solution for Pride Toronto on the basis of four concerns.
The first concern is readily apparent: the list of communities of identity is much narrower in Sydney than the one Pride Toronto claims to serve. The Sydney test is “GLBTQ,” whereas ours would presumably have to be “LBTTI2SQQA.” More fundamentally, the community of “Allies” arguably could include any organization. Given Pride Toronto’s current mission statement, the adoption of the Sydney model would simply result in everyone and anyone having the right to “say something.” That would not be acceptable to most people in our community, especially as it relates to commercial speech.
The second concern relates to their non-discrimination rules. While CAP supports the principle of a non-discrimination rule, the grounds have to include those protected by the Ontario Human rights Code and the City’s anti-discrimination policy. This is both a funding condition of the City and a moral imperative for Pride Toronto.
The third concern relates to the question of enforcement. It is challenging but possible to police the messages and images used in the Parade, it is far more difficult to police the sexuality or gender identities of Parade participants. The fact that a group called Animal Liberation simply changed its name to Queers for Animal Liberation illustrates the problem. Apart from their discussion about participating in Mardi Gras, there is nothing on that group’s website indicating that the group has membership criteria that limits its members to “queers” or that it even has any particular mission to the LGBT community. Apparently this Australian group had marched for several years and was known to have a majority of queer members. While that may have been adequate for Sydney, it is no basis for a rule in Toronto. This problem is exacerbated by the longer list of communities served by Pride Toronto. If someone asserts that they are “questioning” or an “ally” it would be virtually impossible to test the truth of that assertion.
The fourth concern we have with the Sydney model is its lack of transparency and due process. Animal Liberation was unhappy last year when it was excluded. Animal Liberation is happy this year that it is included. The latter decision was at least based on clearly articulated rules. However, both decisions suffer from the same problems of lack of transparency and due process. Animal Liberation had no way of knowing the precise reasons for its exclusion last year and did not have a fair chance to argue that it qualified. This year, those who oppose the participation of Animal Liberation have little way of knowing why they were included, and they were given no opportunity to object.
For these reasons, we believe the Sydney model was very helpful in providing an option for consideration in Toronto, but ultimately would not work given our current context.
R111. Pride Toronto should have clear and transparent rules of universal application governing participation in its Parade and marches. The rules should be consistent with and designed to advance the purposes of Pride Toronto. The rules must be consistently and fairly enforced for all participants through a new Pride Toronto dispute-resolution process that ensures due process for all.
R112. Once Pride Toronto adopts these rules, it is important that the rules remain consistent and in force for a set period without change in order to stabilize Pride Toronto. Frequent and dramatic changes of rules in response to political pressures from inside or outside the queer community must be resisted. Equally importantly, Pride Toronto should commit to a formal process of review of its parade and march participation rules and dispute-resolution process after the initial trial process has been completed.
R113. Pride Toronto must provide adequate training about the new rules to its volunteers, especially Parade Marshalls, and to proposed participants in the Parade or the marches.
R114. All participants in the Pride Parade and marches must agree in writing to abide by the rules of Pride Toronto governing the Parade or the march in question, and to submit any dispute about the application of those rules for binding resolution through the Pride Toronto dispute-resolution process. Any group that refuses to provide these undertakings must be officially barred from participating in the Parade or the march in question.
R115. All groups applying to participate in the Parade or a march must complete an undertaking to abide by Pride Toronto’s anti-discrimination policy. Included in this undertaking will be the following phrase “The applicant will not present images or messages that promote or condone, or may promote or condone, violence, hatred, degradation or negative stereotypes of any person(s) or group(s).” Allegations that this undertaking has been or will be violated by any group, like other allegations of rule violations, will be resolved through the Pride Toronto dispute-resolution process. Groups violating this undertaking or other Pride Toronto rules may be subject to sanctions, including being denied the right to participate in the current or future Parades or marches. (Appendix A)
R116. Each year the Parade should feature an “Honoured Community” from among the sexual and gender minorities served by Pride Toronto.
R117. Commercial participation in the Parade and marches will be governed by the following criteria:
All commercial entries in the Parade and marches must meet Pride Toronto’s general rules regarding minimum equity (queer community support) standards;
An “Honoured Business” should be selected by a committee or subcommittee established for this purpose each year with representatives from business organizations. The object of this honour would be to recognize those corporations or other commercial entities that have a record of excellence in their support of their queer employees or their commitment to the queer community at large. The business selected would have a right to an entry in the first section of the Parade identified as the winner of the “Honoured Business Award”;
Businesses with queer employee affinity groups, or umbrella organizations such as Pride at Work that promote queer employee affinity groups, should be encouraged to participate in the first section of the Parade with the name and logo of their employer, provided that they are clearly identified as the employer’s affinity group and there are no additional commercial messages;
Businesses will be entitled to sponsor non-commercial entries in the parade, and to indicate their sponsorship with the business name and logo provided that the sponsor’s identifying information must be less prominent than the sponsored group’s information;
Other purely commercial messages will be banned from the Parade and marches;
Any restrictions on commercial messages in the marches other than (a) and (e) will be determined by the committees of Pride Toronto responsible for those marches.
R118. The Parade will be divided into three sections as follows:
The first section (tentatively named “Celebrating Our Communities”) will be open only to those groups who commit to limiting their entry’s message to issues expressly and directly about sexual orientation and/or gender identity;
The second section (tentatively entitled “Diverse Voices United”) will be open to groups who do not wish to have messages that are limited to messages directly and expressly about sexual orientation and/or gender identity. Such additional messages will be permitted provided that (i) the group also delivers a message expressly and directly about sexual orientation and/or gender identity that is more1 prominent than theadditional message or messages, (ii) the additional message is not a purely commercial message, and (iii) the additional message does not violate the Parade’s anti-discrimination rule, including the undertaking to abide by Pride Toronto’s anti-discrimination policy;
The third section (tentatively entitled “We Are Family”) will be for individuals who wish to march as individuals and not as members of groups. Individuals will be expected to abide by Pride Toronto rules banning purely commercial messages, and images or messages that promote or condone, or may promote or condone, violence, hatred, degradation or negative stereotypes of any person(s) or group(s).
R119. In the Parade, an escalating fee structure should be imposed for groups in excess of 50 individuals. A firm ceiling of 200 individuals should be imposed on all groups. The purpose of this rule is to ensure that newer or more marginalized groups are not swamped by a larger or more established group, the size of the Parade is kept manageable, the diversity of the Parade is encouraged and additional sources of independent revenue are created for Pride Toronto.
R120. The Parade should remain an inclusive and diverse event including celebration and protest, as one of the highlights of the Sunday that ends Pride Week.
R121. The weekend that commences Pride Week should be designated as Stonewall Day(s), to remember our past and accent our communities’ tradition of protest and dissent. Stonewall Day would be organized by Pride Toronto’s Human Rights Committee or a special Stonewall Day Committee working with Pride Toronto’s Human Rights Committee. Education activities must be integrated throughout Pride Week, including the closing Parade and the two marches. Stonewall Day should be developed as a day to especially showcase a broad range of human rights issues, including sexual orientation and gender identity issues. In order to recognize intersectional human rights issues, Pride Toronto should select one such issue each year as a special intersectional human rights theme. The precise format and content of events on Stonewall Day could be based on the New York City approach and could be a rally in a prominent public space such as Nathan Phillips Square or Queen’s Park. However, the Panel does not wish to insist on any particular activity being either included or excluded. This must be allowed to evolve, and decisions must be made by the organizers in part based on logistical issues such as resources, available spaces, permits, availability of speakers and the support of community partners. The Panel recognizes that it may be too late to develop this concept fully for this year’s Pride Week.
R122. Other than the undertaking to abide by Pride Toronto’s anti-discrimination policy and the general rules regarding commercial participation, the dyke community through Pride Toronto’s Dyke March Committee must determine the rules for participating in the Dyke March.
R123. Pride Toronto should encourage its Dyke March Committee to reach out to the organizers of the Take Back the Dyke March to attempt to restore unity, if possible.
R124. Other than the undertaking to abide by Pride Toronto’s anti-discrimination policy and the general rules regarding commercial participation, the Trans community through Pride Toronto’s Trans March Committee must determine the rules for participating in the Trans March.
R125. Pride Toronto should continue to seek and obtain government support for its important cultural and educational activities. However, in order to reduce Pride Toronto’s vulnerability to political pressures or ideologically motivated funding decisions, Pride Toronto should move to a budgetary model that ensures that the Parade, the Dyke March, the Trans March, and Stonewall Day activities do not receive any government funding.
R126. Pride Toronto should continue to seek and obtain meaningful commercial support from corporate sponsors who meet Pride Toronto’s equity criteria for its activities, including the Parades and marches. However, Pride Toronto must ensure that it has both diverse sources of revenue and diverse sources of commercial funding, so that it does not become unduly vulnerable to funding cuts by commercial sponsors who become unable or unwilling to support Pride Toronto.
R127. In reordering its finances this year, Pride Toronto must demonstrably recognize that the community has clearly identified the community’s top preservation events as the Parade, the Dyke March and the Trans March. Pride Toronto must operate in a financially prudent manner so that these and other activities are not imperiled.
R128. Despite the clear need for additional financial restraint and prudence by Pride Toronto this year, adequate support must be given to the Dyke March and the Trans March as central priorities of our community. In determining what is adequate, Pride Toronto must have particular regard to the marginalized nature of the Trans community and the special challenges faced by that community, including high levels of unemployment and poverty. Previous and current support levels to the Trans March have been, and are, woefully inadequate. This lack of tangible support has contributed to the poor relationship between the Trans community and Pride Toronto.
R129. Pride Toronto establishes a robust, fair, and independent dispute-resolution process to be known as the Pride Toronto Dispute-Resolution Process (Pride Toronto DRP). The Pride Toronto DRP must be binding on Pride Toronto and groups or persons who wish to participate in Pride festival activities. Details are included in the next section under Complaints and Appeals – Human Rights and Anti-Harassment Policy. It is up to the Board and the members of Pride to decide on the principles that will guide Pride Toronto, and to establish the rules that will carry out those principles. However, neither the Board nor management should be called upon to make final decisions on whether the rules have been broken.
R130. That as a condition of becoming a member of Pride Toronto or participating in the Parade or marches that groups or individuals agree to be bound by the Pride Toronto DRP.
With regards to participation in the 2011 Pride Parade, Pride Toronto shall forthwith post lists of all groups who participated in the 2010 Pride Parade. All such groups will be deemed to have applied on the date this policy is approved by the Pride Toronto Board. For new applicants and future parades and marches, Pride Toronto shall post on its website the names of any applicants, the nature of their application (sponsor, Pride Parade, Dyke March, etc.) and their proposed message(s). Anyone wishing to object to an applicant will have 15 days to object to the Pride Toronto DRP.
R131. Pride Toronto adopts the process recommended in this report for the DRP.
The panel recommends that Pride Toronto adopt an Anti discrimination and Harassment Policy and complaint and dispute-resolution process as follows.
Note that nothing in this policy limits any person from filing a complaint under the Ontario Human Rights Code and other applicable legislation.
Our object is staging in the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto an annual celebration and informational, educational and cultural festival by and for lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans people of their sexual and gender orientations and identities and their histories, cultures, communities, organizations, relationships, achievements and lives [and such other complementary purposes in furtherance of and not inconsistent with the foregoing objects.]
Pride Toronto supports the right of participants, volunteers, community members and citizens to access a fair and transparent process to make complaints about the programs; services and/or dispute decisions we make that they perceive are adverse to them.
Pride Toronto welcomes input. We believe complaints are a valuable source of information. We document, evaluate, and analyze complaints to help us adjust and improve the way we do our work.
We believe that the most valuable input comes from people who use our services or who are a part of this community. To this end, we are committed to providing an accessible complaints process that balances the rights of participants / community and maintains a safe and welcoming environment for the broader community and for our employees and volunteers.
In order to achieve constructive resolution of complaints, we strive to investigate, review and gather information in a non-biased manner so that we are able to fairly assess and resolve situations. Our complaints and appeals processes involve participants in identifying ways to resolve the issues/complaints.
Pride Toronto is a not-for profit corporation and we are required comply with various regulations and legislation and may be subject to conditions of funders from time to time. Strategic directions, organizational mission, values and mandate are approved by the Board and the membership. The management of our day-to-day operations is delegated to the Executive Director.
This policy applies whenever participants, neighbours, and/or community members want to complain about Pride Toronto, participants, employees and volunteers and/or the services we provide, or appeal a decision made by Pride Toronto.
This policy does not apply for employee-to-employee complaints. Those are addressed either through informal resolutions and investigations within the framework of the Pride Toronto’s Anti-Harassment/Anti-Discrimination Policy.
Pride Toronto is committed to creating and maintaining an environment that supports and fosters positive appropriate interpersonal interactions in our day-to-day work. Pride Toronto values honesty, ethical conduct, positive solution based decision-making, integrity and the fair, equitable, and respectful treatment of all people regardless of their circumstances.
The employees and volunteers of Pride Toronto are the most important and valuable assets in ensuring that we are able to meet our mission, vision and mandate. We are expected at all times to foster an atmosphere of friendly, respectful, professional, helpful community service.
Employees and volunteers in the course of their duties are expected at all times to comply with the policies and procedures of Pride Toronto and all other applicable legislation and regulations including but not limited to the Occupational Health and Safety Act, the Ontario Human Rights Code, and Pride Toronto’s Anti-Harassment and Discrimination Policy and Complaints Procedures.
Pride Toronto respects and abides by confidentiality and privacy legislation. People who are directly involved in the complaint will have access to specific details on a need-to-know basis. If a complaint is about the behaviour of an employee, the Supervisor/Manager will determine the investigation process, including what information is shared. The Supervisor/Manager must balance the participant’s or volunteer’s right to confidentiality and/or fear of reprisal and the employee’s right to understand the details of the identified concern.
For the purposes of confidentiality, complaint records (electronic and hard copy) are only accessible to the employees and volunteers who deal with complaints.
Anonymity refers to making a complaint without revealing one’s identity. Pride Toronto accepts anonymous complaints, however, the effectiveness of our follow up and resolution may be limited.
Complaints are often an expression of dissatisfaction sometimes specific to Pride Toronto or larger systemic issues within the community. They can often be resolved by providing information and helping the complainant understand our mandate. Complaints may take place after informal resolution or regular problem solving has failed.
The subject matter of complaints may include but are not limited to:
The quality and types of services or programs we provide
The way we operate our services and programs
Our policies and procedures
Our expectations of behaviour and community rules
How we as employees and volunteers work with and treat the public
How we operate within the neighbourhood
The impact of programs and services in the neighbourhood
Decisions regarding the allocation of resources
Pride Toronto will accept a complaint from anyone from the public, including participants, participant advocates, volunteers, our neighbours, and other members of our community.
Once informal resolution or problem solving for any situation has failed, a written complaint may be filed. When an employee receives a complaint, they are expected to try and resolve the issue/concern whenever possible within Pride Toronto’s policies and procedures.
Employees and volunteers are expected to explain the complaint’s process, facilitate resolutions to conflict, include participants in developing solutions, and provide referrals if necessary.
Employees and volunteers are also expected to provide reasonable assistance to help the complainant complete any necessary forms. Assistance may include verifying what the participant wrote in their complaint, completing a complaint form accurately based on the participant’s dictation, or arranging translation service for the participant.
To make an appeal means to ask a higher level/authority to review a decision in order to have the decision changed, or reversed, or reconsidered.
Anyone may appeal a decision Pride Toronto makes that they perceive as being adverse to them. Decisions that can be appealed include but are not limited to:
The quality and types of services or programs we provide
The way we operate our services and programs
Service restrictions/program
Non-admission to a particular program
Readmission conditions
How we as employees and volunteers work with and treat participants
The impact of programs and services on the neighbourhood
Decisions about resource allocations
In most cases, Pride Toronto accepts appeals only from the individual or community group affected by the decision being appealed, though we support the right of participants to be supported in the appeal process by workers and/or advocates.
Appeals to decisions must be made in writing. When participants indicate that they want to appeal a decision made by Pride Toronto, employees and volunteers are expected to assist them to complete the necessary form(s) as required.
Assistance may include verifying what the participant wrote in their complaint, completing a complaint form based on the participant’s dictation using their exact words, or arranging translation service for the participant. Employees and volunteers are also expected to assist participants with appeals by explaining the Appeals Process.
A complainant may take their complaint or appeal regarding decisions to successively higher levels within Pride Toronto if they feel the issue has not been satisfactorily resolved. The successive levels are:
Volunteer or Employee
Coordinator or Supervisor
Manager
Executive director
Board of Directors
Dispute Resolution Officer in some cases
Dispute Resolution Appeal Panel in some cases
It is understood that some complaints will necessarily bypass some of these levels.
Complaints are usually dealt with by front-line employees and volunteers initially, though a complainant may go directly to a higher level of appeal.
Pride Toronto will not conduct additional follow-up on or investigate complaints deemed to have been effectively dealt with through Pride Toronto’s complaint process or where Pride Toronto demonstrates that the response to the complainant was appropriate.
Policy decisions are decisions about the rules that govern the activities of Pride Toronto. All other decisions are operational decisions. Appeals regarding policy and operational decisions may be made to the Executive Director and Board of Directors. In an appeal regarding a policy decision or an operational decision (other than an alleged violation of the Anti-Discrimination and Harassment Policy or an alleged violation of the Parade or march rules), the decision of Board of Directors is final.
Appeals regarding violations of Pride Toronto’s Anti-Discrimination and Harassment policy or an alleged violation of the rules governing the Parade or marches may be referred (at the request of either the complainant or the Board of Directors) directly to the Dispute Resolutions Process.
Allegations that the Executive Director has violated the Anti-Discrimination and Harassment policy must be referred directly to the Dispute Resolution Officer.
Allegations that any member(s) of the Board of Directors has violated the Anti-Discrimination and Harassment policy must be referred directly to the Dispute Resolution Officer.
The Dispute Resolutions Process has jurisdiction only to hear complaints about alleged violations of the Anti-Discrimination Policy, and alleged violations of the Parade and march rules. The provisions of the Arbitrations Act apply to the Dispute Resolutions Process, and a final decision under that process is final and binding on all parties.
The Pride Toronto Dispute-Resolution Process (Pride Toronto DRP) is binding on Pride Toronto and groups or persons who wish to participate in Pride Toronto’s activities. The Pride Toronto DRP has optional originating jurisdiction and final appeal jurisdiction regarding alleged violations of Pride Toronto’s Anti-Discrimination and Harassment Policy (the “Policy”) and with respect to alleged violations of the Parade and march rules. The Pride Toronto DRP has no jurisdiction to change the Policy or rules. Its sole role is to mediate or adjudicate alleged violations of the Policy or rules.
The Pride Toronto Board will establish a roster of independent and impartial Dispute Resolution Officers (DRO). During a two-year trial period, these DRO will have to be wiling to serve on a pro bono basis. A majority of the DRO should self identify as members of the queer community, and the rest should be self identify as “Allies.” A DRO should be a member in good standing of the Law Society of Upper Canada, or have other relevant experience or training in human rights issues, mediation or adjudication. Persons who are current employees or Directors of Pride Toronto would not be eligible to serve as a DRO.
The Community Advisory Panel will provide a preliminary list of suitable DRO to Pride Toronto for approval. Pride Toronto should approve some or all names on this list and then open the process for applications from qualified volunteers. The Board shall also appoint one of the approved DRO as Chair of the DRO. Pride Toronto shall arrange for appropriate training of DRO in the DRP.
It will be a condition of becoming a member of Pride Toronto or participating in the Parade or marches that groups or individuals agree to be bound by the Pride Toronto DRP for matters within its jurisdiction.
Regarding participation in the 2011 Pride Parade, Pride Toronto shall forthwith post lists of all groups who participated in the 2010 Pride Parade. All such groups will be deemed to have applied on the date this policy is approved by the Pride Toronto Board. For new applicants and future parades and marches, Pride Toronto shall post on its website the names of any applicants, the nature of their application (sponsor, Pride Parade, Dyke March, etc.) and their proposed message(s). Anyone wishing to object to an applicant will have 15 days to object to the Pride Toronto DRP.
Anyone wishing to complain that a Parade participant or March participant violated the rules governing that Parade or march during that Parade or march shall file their complaint within 60 days of the alleged violation.
Pride Toronto, in consultation with its Governance Committee and the Chair of the DRO, will review whether other Pride Toronto rules or policies should be subject to the Pride Toronto DRP.
Anyone complaining about a violation of the Policy shall file their complaint within 60 days of the alleged violation.
In filing its complaint, a complainant shall:
specify the Parade or march rule or Relevant Policy that has been violated;
identify the specific nature of the violation;
identify the person(s) or group(s) they say are responsible for the violation;
identify the nature of the corrective action they request or the penalty they seek to have imposed;
whether they prefer to have their dispute resolved through mediation or arbitration.
For any complaint that does not seek the imposition of a penalty and where the corrective action requested is within the power of Pride Toronto to correct unilaterally, on receipt of a complaint, Pride Toronto shall within 14 days either accept the complaint as well founded and take the corrective action requested or refer the complaint to the Chair of the DRP. Anyone directly and adversely affected by the decision of Pride Toronto to take corrective action in response to a complaint shall be entitled to file a complaint within 60 days of the corrective action coming to their attention.
Any complaint that requests a penalty, calls for corrective action outside the control of Pride Toronto, seeks mediation, or which is in response to Pride Toronto taking corrective action in response to another complaint shall be referred by the Board to the DRP process
A person or group directly affected by a complaint is referred to in the Pride Toronto DRP as the Respondent. The Respondent will be promptly notified of the Complaint.
If the Complainant has requested mediation, it shall include in its request the name of 3 DRO’s who are acceptable to it as mediators. The Respondent will be asked to notify Pride Toronto within 7 days whether it accepts mediation and the names from the Complainants’ list of DRO that are acceptable to the Respondent as mediators. If more than one name is agreeable to the Respondent, the Chair of the DRO shall select the mediator from the list of agreed mediators.
If a mediation is held and is unsuccessful, the complainant shall have the option of transferring its original complaint to the arbitration process.
All complaints which are not able to be placed into the mediation process shall be referred to the arbitrations process.
Where a complaint must be arbitrated, the Chair of the DRO shall appoint a DRO to arbitrate the complaint within 7 days of receipt of the complaint. The DRO shall be selected at random by proceeding through the list alphabetically by surname, and ascertaining the next available complaints officer without a conflict of interest. On the next occasion a DRO is required, the Chair will begin with the name following the name of the last DRO appointed. If the Chair is of the opinion that the matter is of sufficient complexity or sufficient precedential importance for Pride Toronto that it ought to be determined at first instance by an appeal panel of three DRO’s, the Chair will invite the complainant and the Respondent to each nominate a DRO to the Panel. If either party fails to nominate a DRO who is available to hear the matter, the Chair shall appoint a DRO on behalf of that party. The Chair will designate a DRO to be the President of the appeal panel.
A DRO will be free to determine his or her own process on any mediation. However, any mediation must be completed within 30 days from the date the mediator is appointed except with consent of both parties to the mediation.
On receipt of the complaint, a DRO shall have three options: (i) if the DRO determines that the complaint is patently frivolous or vexatious, or that the DRO lacks the jurisdiction to determine the matter, it may be summarily dismissed on that basis without conducting any hearing or investigation; (ii) the DRO may determine that the matter is suitable for resolution by a single DRO and proceed with the arbitration; (iii) the DRO may determine that the complaint is of sufficient complexity or of sufficient precedential importance for Pride Toronto that it ought to determined at first instance by an appeal panel of three DRO’s, in which case the Complainant and Respondent will be each invited to nominate an available DRO to complete the panel and the original DRO shall act as the president of the panel. Panels of three DRO are known in this process as the Dispute Resolution Appeal Panel.
An arbitration shall be completed within 14 days from the date the DRO is appointed unless the Complainant and Respondent agree otherwise. A decision with reasons must be issued within 21 days from the date the DRO is appointed.
An initial decision by a DRO to dismiss a complaint as frivolous or vexatious, or to dismiss a complaint for lack of jurisdiction, is not subject to appeal.
Where an initial decision on a complaint is made by a panel of three DRO, the majority ruling governs and there are no appeals.
Where an initial decision on a complaint is made by a single DRO, any party to the original complaint may appeal that ruling to a panel of 3 DRO officers by filing an appeal within 7 days of the original ruling. The DRO arbitrating the original complaint shall be ineligible to participate in the appeal panel. On filing the appeal notice, the appellant shall name a DRO as his or her nominee to the appeal panel from the roster of DRO. Within 7 days, the Respondent to the Appeal shall name his or her nominee to the appeal panel from the roster of DRO. The two nominees will then choose a third person from the roster of DRO, who shall serve as the president of the appeal panel. If the two nominees are unable to agree within 7 days, the Chair of the DRO shall appoint the third member of the panel. The appeal panel shall be free to determine its own process. However, a decision on the appeal with reasons must be issued within 21 days from the appointment of the chair of the panel.
The Dispute Resolution Officer, or the Dispute Resolution Appeal Panel, where they find that the rules have been violated or that an applicant is otherwise not in compliance with the rules shall be entitled to impose any or all of the following penalties:
a warning or direction;
a financial penalty in the form of a requirement for payment of an additional fee as a condition of future participation;
an order disqualifying a group from participating in Pride Toronto’s activities for a period from 1 to 2 years. A decision of a DRO or the Dispute Resolutions Appeal Panel, as the case may be, will be final and binding on Pride Toronto, the applicant and the complainant. The Arbitrations Act will be specified to apply to the Pride Toronto DRP.
The filing of any complaints or appeal with the Pride Toronto DRP, and the decisions made shall be posted on the Pride Toronto website.
Pride Toronto recognizes that a robust complaints process is vital to its accountability to the community and to help Pride Toronto understand when its rules have been violated so that the integrity of its rules is preserved. As such, it is Pride Toronto’s policy that there will be no retaliation by Pride Toronto against a person or group who files a complaint in good faith.
A frivolous complaint is one found upon investigation to have no reasonable grounds or to make no sense or to be not serious. A vexatious complaint is one made only to annoy others.
Because all complaints are treated seriously, frivolous and vexatious complaints and inappropriate use of the escalation process consume resources that could be put to better advantage. Pride Toronto will not conduct additional follow-up on or investigate frivolous or vexatious complaints.
When dealing with individuals who frequently contact Pride Toronto, it is important that their complaint is not dismissed and that the process is followed.
If Pride Toronto receives a complaint it has already dealt with, the complainant will be informed verbally and/or in writing that Pride Toronto will not conduct further follow up on the issue unless the complainant provides new information. Persistent complainants are those who tend to have an obsessive and excessive preoccupation with the complaint. Strategies when dealing with these types of complaints may include involving the Manager and/or Executive Director to assist throughout the resolution process, or referring the complaint to the Dispute-Resolution Process for a determination as to whether the complaint is frivolous or vexatious, or should be mediated or adjudicated.
The time limit for the filing of complaints under this policy is sixty days from the time of the incident. Consideration will be given on a case-by-case basis as to whether the time limit should be waived in extenuating circumstances.
Specified time limits for complaints about allegations of sexual harassment/abuse, or physical violence are outlined in Pride Toronto’s Anti Harassment Policy, the Human Rights Code and other applicable legislation.
Pride Toronto will make all reasonable efforts to complete the complaints process in a timely manner while ensuring that we undertake an appropriate and thorough investigation. Expected standards of complaint follow-up are included in the procedures.
The following documentation is required for complaints and appeals:
Complaint Tracking – All formal complaints must be recorded. Files are subject to Pride Toronto’s Records Retention Policy.
Other Letters – Pride Toronto will follow up with complainants or appellants in writing. Management may issue a letter to a complainant/appellant for the following reasons:
To acknowledge serious complaints
To inform complainants/appellants of follow up management is taking
To inform complainants/appellants of follow up they should be taking
To inform complainants/appellants of management’s position on an issue
To document when a complaint has been found to be frivolous or vexatious
Letter from the Executive Director/Board – Whenever a complaint or appeal is escalated to the Executive Director/Board, a letter will be sent informing the complainant/appellant of the decision in the matter.
Periodic and Annual Reports – Pride Toronto is committed to examining how we manage complaints and will issue an annual report on our complaints and resolutions.
For all periodic and yearly reports and analysis, personal information will be removed and the substance of the complaints and resolutions will be analyzed.
Under the Ontario Human Rights Code, every person has a right to equal treatment.
Pride Toronto adopted this Human Rights and Anti-Harassment Policy to ensure ethical and respectful service and employment practices that incorporate equitable treatment for all employees, volunteers and recipients of services.
The goal of the Human Rights and Anti-Harassment Policy is to create a climate of understanding and mutual respect where each person feels a part of the community and is able to contribute fully to the development and well-being of Pride Toronto.
Pride Toronto will not tolerate, ignore, or condone any form of discrimination or harassment and is committed to promoting appropriate standards of conduct at all times.
All employees are responsible for respecting the dignity and rights of their co-workers and the general public. Discrimination and harassment are serious forms of misconduct that may result in disciplinary action up to and including discharge.
Any member of the public, including visitors to our facilities or individuals conducting business with Pride Toronto, are expected to adhere to this policy, including refraining from harassment of employees, other members/contractors, elected officials, and persons acting on behalf of Pride Toronto.
If such harassment occurs, Pride Toronto will take any steps available to ensure a harassment-free workplace, including barring the harasser from its facilities, where appropriate, or discontinuing business with contractors or consultants.
Application
Services and Facilities
Every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to Pride Toronto services and facilities, without discrimination or harassment because of the following prohibited grounds and any combination of these grounds:
race
citizenship
sexual orientation
political affiliation*-ancestry
creed
age
level of literacy*
place of origin
sex (including pregnancy and breast feeding)
marital status
colour
gender
family status
ethnic origin
disability
receipt of public assistance
record of offences
membership in a union or staff association*.
Occupation of Accommodation and Sites
Every person has a right to equal access with respect to the occupancy of Pride Toronto accommodation and sites, without discrimination because of the following prohibited grounds and any combination of these grounds:
race
citizenship
sexual orientation
political affiliation*-ancestry
creed
age
level of literacy*
place of origin
sex (including pregnancy and breast feeding)
marital status
colour
gender
family status
ethnic origin
disability
receipt of public assistance
record of offences
membership in a union or staff association*
Contracts
Every person having legal capacity has a right to contract on equal terms without discrimination because of the following prohibited grounds and any combination of these grounds:
race
citizenship
sexual orientation
political affiliation*-ancestry
creed
age
level of literacy*
place of origin
sex (including pregnancy and breast feeding)
marital status
colour
gender
family status
ethnic origin
disability
receipt of public assistance
record of offences
membership in a union or staff association*
Employment
Every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to employment with Pride Toronto without discrimination or harassment because of the following prohibited grounds and any combination of these grounds:
race
citizenship
sexual orientation
political affiliation*
ancestry
creed
age
level of literacy*
place of origin
sex (including pregnancy and breast feeding)
marital status
colour
gender
family status
ethnic origin
disability
receipt of public assistance
record of offences
membership in a union or staff association*
*These grounds are included in Pride Toronto’s policy, because they are grounds required by the City of Toronto, even though they are not explicitly covered by the Ontario Human Rights Code.
This policy applies to all Pride Toronto employees, volunteers, board members and to all aspects of the employment relationship. Board Members and staff are expected to abide by this policy and the Ontario Human Rights Code by refraining from any form of harassment and discrimination and by fully co-operating in any investigation of a harassment or discrimination complaint. Human rights are a shared responsibility.
All staff, e.g. executive directors, managers and supervisors have obligations under the Human Rights and Anti-Harassment Policy. Under the Ontario Human Rights Code management can be held personally liable for failing to take appropriate action. All management staff have the following general responsibilities with respect to human rights:
Setting and enforcing standards of appropriate workplace conduct
Having thorough knowledge of the policy
Being able to clarify what constitutes harassment and discrimination and ensuring that their workplace is free from harassment and discrimination
Advising and educating employees to ensure that they know that harassment and discrimination will not be tolerated and that they know what their rights and responsibilities are under the policy including ways in which policy violations can be resolved
Taking appropriate action upon becoming aware of discriminatory and/or harassing conduct contrary to the policy (even if a direct complaint has not been made), in a timely fashion while maintaining as much confidentiality as possible
Documenting details of human rights concerns, actions taken, outcomes or remedies implemented
Where discrimination or harassment occurred, monitoring the situation after a complaint to ensure the harassment or discrimination has stopped and implementing appropriate measures to prevent reoccurrence
Consulting the Chair of the Dispute Resolution Officers where there may be a perceived or real conflict of interest in addressing an alleged policy violation or for assistance with a human rights issue
Keeping the Chair of the Dispute Resolution Officers of complaints, investigations, outcomes and cooperating in investigations
Ensuring policy and program development and implementation are consistent with the Human Rights and Anti-Harassment Policy
Responding to and taking action to remedy complaints of personal (non-Code) harassment
In addition to the above responsibilities, Executive Directors are responsible for:
Providing leadership in creating and maintaining harassment-free, respectful workplaces
Not engaging in behaviour that would constitute discrimination or harassment under the policy
Receiving employee formal investigation reports and making final decisions in consultation with the Chair Of The Dispute Resolution Officers about disposition of a complaint
Communicating final decisions about the disposition of a formal complaint in writing to the parties
Ensuring resource availability and effective implementation of complaint settlements, remedies and corrective actions
Ensuring that staff who have responsibilities under the policy are held accountable and have the appropriate knowledge and skills to meet policy obligations
Board of Management Members are responsible for:
Providing leadership in creating and maintaining harassment-free, respectful workplaces
Not engaging in behaviour that would constitute discrimination or harassment under the policy
Ensuring policy and program development and implementation are consistent with the Human Rights and Anti-Harassment Policy
Advising and forwarding to the Chair Of The Dispute Resolution Officers complaints against the Executive Director
Abiding by policy confidentiality expectations
Receiving (in camera) investigation reports involving the Executive Director
Consulting the Chair of the Dispute Resolution Officers when making final decisions about the disposition of a complaint against an executive director
Communicating final decisions about the disposition of a formal complaint in writing to the parties
Employees and volunteers are responsible for:
Being familiar with their rights and responsibilities under the policy and the Ontario Human Rights Code
Not engaging in behaviour that would constitute discrimination or harassment under the policy
Raising concerns as soon as possible if you have been discriminated against or harassed
Documenting details of harassment and, or discrimination that are experienced or witnessed
Co-operating in interventions and investigations to resolve human rights and harassment issues
Maintaining confidentiality related to human rights investigations
Employees and other members/contractors are strongly encouraged to report incidents of harassment, discrimination or retaliation that they witness
The Pride Toronto Dispute Resolutions Process (PTDRP) is an impartial and independent dispute-resolution process designed to assist in resolving dispute relating to alleged violations of the rules applicable to Pride Toronto’s Parade and marches, or alleged violations of Pride Toronto’s Anti-Discrimination and Harassment Policy. The PTDRP as no jurisdiction to hear complaints about other matters relating to Pride Toronto, and any complaints filed with the PTDRP related to matters outside its jurisdiction will be summarily dismissed by the Chair of the Dispute Resolutions Officers as frivolous and vexatious.
The PTRDP is not empowered to modify the rules governing Parade or march participation, or the Anti-Discrimination and Harassment Policy. Such policy changes remain the exclusive responsibility of Pride Toronto through its Board and membership.
The Dispute Resolution Officers do not advocate, act on behalf of or represent any party in dispute (complainant, respondent, management). All complaints to the PTDRP will be dealt with in an unbiased manner. The focus of the PTDRP is to correct and remedy harassing and/or discriminating behaviours that are contrary to the Policy, to ensure fair application of the rules for Parade and march participation and to ensure compliance with those rules.
Responsibilities of the PTDRP and its Chair include:
Interpreting and implementing this policy
Assessing the merits of a complaint and determining appropriate complaint investigation and resolution options, including whether concern(s) can be referred to management to address
Undertaking neutral, independent informal and formal investigations
Providing mediations
Adjudicating disputes fairly, impartially and independently
An allegation is an unproven assertion or statement based on a person’s perception.
The person alleging that discrimination or harassment occurred. There can be more than one complainant in a human rights complaint.
Discrimination is any practice or behaviour, whether intentional or not, which has a negative impact on an individual or group because of personal characteristics or circumstances unrelated to the person’s abilities or the employment or service issue in question (e.g., disability, sex, race, sexual orientation). Discrimination may arise as a result of direct differential treatment or it may result from the unequal effect of treating individuals and groups in the same way. Either way, if the effect of the behaviour on the individual is to withhold or limit full, equal and meaningful access to goods, services, facilities, employment, or contracts available to other members of society, it is discrimination.
The legal obligation of an employer to take steps to eliminate disadvantage caused by systemic, attitudinal or physical barriers that unfairly exclude individuals or groups protected under the Ontario Human Rights Code. It also includes an obligation to meet the special needs of individuals and groups protected by the Code unless meeting such needs would create undue hardship. Failure to accommodate a person short of undue hardship is a form of discrimination
For the purpose of this policy, the term employee includes: full-time, part-time, temporary, probationary, casual and relief employees, co-op students and job applicants.
For the purpose of this policy, the term other members/contractors refers to volunteers, volunteer coordinators, contractors and consultants working for Pride Toronto
Equal treatment is treatment that brings about an equality of results and that may, in some instances, require different treatment.
Harassment means improper comment or conduct that a person knows or ought to know would be unwelcome, offensive, embarrassing or hurtful. It is a form of discrimination. Harassment may result from one incident or a series of incidents. Harassment can occur between co-workers, between management and employees, between employees and volunteers, between employees and vendors, between employees and recipients of services, between employees and members of the public.
Means improper comment or conduct based on one or more of the prohibited grounds listed in the Ontario Human Rights Code, that a person knows or ought to know would be unwelcome, offensive, embarrassing or hurtful.
There is no legal obligation for an individual to tell a harasser to stop. The fact that a person does not explicitly object to harassing behaviour, or appears to be going along with it does not mean that the behaviour is not harassing or that it has been consented to.
This policy is not intended to interfere with constructive, feedback regarding performance or operational directives provided to employees by their supervisors or managers.
Personal (non-Code) harassment is harassment that is not related to a prohibited ground identified in the Ontario Human Rights Code. Personal harassment is improper comment and/or conduct, not related to a legitimate work purpose, directed at and offensive to another person or persons in the workplace and that the individual knows or ought to reasonably know would offend, harm or is derogatory, demeaning or causes humiliation or embarrassment.
Personal harassment often involves a course or grouping of behaviours. However a single serious incident of such behaviour that has a lasting harmful effect on an employee may also constitute personal harassment.
Examples of personal harassment include:
Frequent angry shouting/yelling or blow-ups
Regular use of abusive or violent language
Physical, verbal or e-mail threats, intimidation
Violent behaviours – throwing objects
Targeting individual(s) in humiliating practical jokes
Excluding, shunning, impeding work performance
Spreading gossip, rumours, negative blogging, cyber bullying
Retaliation, bullying, sabotaging
Unsubstantiated criticism, unreasonable demands
Insults, name calling
Public humiliation
Communication that is demeaning, insulting, humiliating, mocking
Personal harassment does not include:
Legitimate performance/probation management
Appropriate exercise and delegation of managerial authority
Operational directives
A disagreement or misunderstanding
Conflict between co-workers
Work related change of location, co-workers, job assignment
Appropriate discipline
Less than optimal management
A single comment or action unless it is serious and has a lasting harmful effect
Rudeness unless it is extreme and repetitive
Racial harassment is harassment on the ground of race. It may also be associated with the grounds of colour, ancestry, where a person was born, a person’s religious belief, ethnic background, citizenship or even a person’s language. Racial harassment can include:
Racial slurs or jokes
Ridicule, insults or different treatment because of your racial identity
Posting/e-mailing cartoons or pictures that degrade persons of a particular racial group
Name-calling because of a person ’s race, colour, citizenship, place of origin, ancestry, ethnic background or creed
Harassment on the ground of sex. This includes a sexual advance or solicitation from anyone if they know or ought to know the advance is unwelcome, especially if the advance is from a person in a position to give or deny a benefit or to engage in a reprisal or if a threat of reprisal is made if the advance is rejected. Other examples are sexually suggestive or obscene remarks or gestures, leering (suggestive staring) at a person’s body, unwelcome physical contact, circulation or posting of sexist jokes or cartoons, negative stereotypical comments based on gender, sex or sexual orientation and gender related comments about an individual’s physical characteristics or mannerisms.
This policy is not intended to interfere with normal social interaction between employees.
Gender-based discrimination is currently implied in the Code under the grounds of both sex and disability. It relates to the way a person identifies their gender, or how their gender is perceived by others. Transphobia and gender-based discrimination occurs when a person does not conform to societal norms of gender in terms of their lived identity (living as a man or as a woman), clothing, hairstyle, chosen occupation, name, physical body, etc. Common examples of transphobic harassment and discrimination include:
Name-calling; demeaning and insulting someone
Deliberately not using someone’s preferred name or pronoun
Revealing confidential information about someone’s sex designation, surgical status, or legal name
Restricting access to washroom facilities
Creating a poisoned work environment
Saying someone isn’t a “real” man or “real” woman
Enforcing gender-based uniforms which do not acknowledge a person’s lived identity
Excluding someone from a gendered service because they are not perceived to be a “real” woman or man
Imposing criteria beyond self-identity for “proof” of one’s legitimacy, i.e., legal sex designation or surgical status
Denying employment opportunities – i.e., not hiring, not promoting or outright firing an employee
Refusing to work with a person because of their gender
A voluntary process where parties in dispute consent to meet with a trained mediator to determine whether the dispute can be resolved in a mutually satisfactory manner. Mediation discussions between parties are treated as private and confidential to the full extent permitted by law.
A poisoned work environment is a form of indirect harassment/discrimination. It occurs when comments or actions ridicule or demean a person or group creating real or perceived inequalities in the workplace.
The list of grounds related to employment for which a person or group is protected under the Ontario Human Rights Code. The prohibited grounds include race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex (includes pregnancy, breast feeding, gender identity), sexual orientation, age, record of offences, marital status, family status, and disability. Under the Code and this policy, there are protections where there is a perception that one of the above grounds applies or where you have been treated differently because of an association or relationship with a person identified by one of the above grounds.
This is an objective standard to measure whether a comment or conduct is discrimination or harassment. It considers what a reasonable person’s reaction would have been under similar circumstances and in a similar environment. It considers the recipient’s perspective and not stereotyped notions of acceptable behaviour. This standard is used to assess human rights complaints under this policy.
This is the person who is alleged to be responsible for the discrimination or harassment.
There can be more than one respondent in a human rights complaint.
The workplace includes all locations where business or social activities of Pride Toronto are conducted. Workplace harassment can also include incidents that happen away from work (e.g., inappropriate phone calls, e-mails or visits to an employee’s home, incidents at luncheons, after work socials) or harassment from clients and service recipients.
Among many other things, Pride Toronto is about celebration.
Pride Toronto is subject to the laws, regulations and governing decisions regarding alcohol in outdoor facilities within the Province of Ontario. Such stipulations include selling of tickets to acquire alcohol (instead of purchasing alcohol directly with cash), amount of security and staff requirements, capacity and line-up issues. There are restrictions on bringing in your own water bottle to licensed areas. There are long-standing concerns among the Pride attendees regarding line-ups to enter licensed areas, line-ups to purchase tickets, line-ups to purchase alcohol. All of these regulations have an impact on Pride Toronto’s ability to generate revenue from alcohol sales.
Some Pride attendees look longingly at successful festivals around the world, with their much more free and open systems, and think: why not here? An example quote from the online survey:
Once inside the area I felt trapped due to long line ups to return. Our liquor laws are terrible as well.
Media articles have noted that Ontario’s legislative regime is unique in the world, with little opportunity for change. There are also concerns with insurance. It is time to try to resolve these issues, and be seen doing so. Given the potential for Pride Toronto to experience reduced government and corporate funding, it is time for Pride Toronto to embark on bold steps to address challenges of raising its own revenues from its attendees. It is recognized that all outdoor festivals face similar challenges. Vancouver Pride has pointed to more efficient beverage sales as one of the secrets of its success last year. Given Pride Toronto’s history of advocacy, perhaps Pride Toronto is best suited to take leadership on this issue.
R132. Pride Toronto participate in initiatives with other outdoor festivals to advocate for provincial reform of Alcohol and Gaming Commission regulations or stipulations with respect to serving alcohol in enclosed areas.
Pride is the result of hundreds of volunteers who give their time and energy each year. Volunteers bring a wealth of experience, knowledge, as well as specialized skills to Pride Toronto. The CAP decided to save the last recommendation in honour of the thousands of volunteers who put in their time and energy to make Pride Week happen. In the words of Pride Toronto:
Pride Toronto is a volunteer-run organization. We have approximately 100 volunteers working year-round on 19 committees, while our Board of Directors plans and organizes the Pride Week Festival. Who are these volunteers? They are teachers, activists, writers, students, graphic designers, programmers, web developers, youth workers, firefighters, entertainers, bankers, accountants, city employees, addiction counselors, real estate agents, consultants, copy editors, and much more.
Volunteers at Pride Toronto face challenges and have opportunities to help make Toronto and the world a more welcoming and inclusive place for people of all sexual orientations and gender identities. We can’t thank the volunteers enough!
Unfortunately, too many volunteers leave Pride Toronto feeling “burned out.” Some volunteers are feeling the stress and pressure of criticism of Pride Toronto. In the words of one frustrated volunteer:
“I am still pretty ticked off that there is so much bashing of Pride Toronto... This institution has been around for 30 fkn [sic] years... So they do know what they are doing, oh yeah... And we got World Pride 2014... Gee, I wonder how we got that, hmm? ’Cause we suck? No... ’Cause Pride Toronto knows what it’s doing.
– Proud Volunteer for Pride Toronto
This is not an example of a happy volunteer. Concerns such as these are not sustainable for volunteer attraction and retention. Such perceptions of conflict between volunteers and the community is not sustainable for anyone.
Volunteers need to feel pride in the organization for which they volunteer, and need to have the support of a community to have the energy and determination to make their organization even better. The recommendations in this report will require many more volunteers. It is hoped that through these recommendations we can develop a culture of working together to solve problems, rather than “bashing.” Together we can encourage, support and retain even more volunteers, and make better use of their skills, knowledge and community connections. Together, we can make a better Pride Toronto for all of us.
R133. Pride Toronto ensure adequate guidance and support to its volunteers to prevent burnout and turnover among those whose skills and enthusiasm are required to ensure its success going forward.