blogcutter (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
blogcutter) wrote2025-08-25 04:22 pm
blogcutter) wrote2025-08-25 04:22 pm
Entry tags:
C'mon people, now... : Pride, prejudice, persuasion and politics
You'd think it would be self-evident that there are gays and lesbians and trans and non-binary people from all walks of life and at every conceivable point on the political spectrum. Certainly they vary immensely in terms of whether they're huddling at the back of the closet, peering through the keyhole or totally out and proud, but you can bet they're there. And everyone deserves to come out (or not) on their own terms.
To my mind, the purpose of a Pride Parade is twofold. On the one hand, it's to celebrate who we are, who we love, who our friends and family and colleagues and allies are, and the progress we've made over time towards a more harmonious gender-diverse society. On the other hand, it's to remind everyone that there's still plenty of work to be done: locally, regionally, nationally and internationally and also at the level of the individual and the culture. Shifting hearts and minds, questioning and altering long-held assumptions and traditions, and so forth.
When the early gay rights marches took place in the 1970s, the common enemy seemed obvious: The Establishment. Authority figures, both personal and institutional. They might be parents, teachers and other school officials, employers, police, the infamous Fruit Machine ... I don't want to tar all of these entities with the same brush, but the villains were typically found amidst those categories.
I was dismayed to see how Ottawa's Capital Pride March essentially disintegrated yesterday:
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/ottawa-pride-parade-dissolves-after-palestinian-demonstration-blocks-route/ar-AA1L7SxN
Yes, Queers for Palestine would have been perfectly justified in carrying placards stating who they are and what they stand for. They did not, however, have the right to hijack the parade and demand that certain parties meet with them immediately, demand that everyone agree with them and that they apologize for having disagreed with them previously. Frankly they're shooting themselves in the foot with tactics like that, as even folks like me who generally support their political agenda (and there are lots of us) are turned off by their approach.
I really think pride rallies should do what they do best: celebrate and promote gender diversity and advocate for the progress we still need. Instead, they are dividing and disgusting their allies from within the movement. Capital Pride looks to me like a bureaucratic nightmare and quagmire.
Smaller groups within the Pride week events have, it appears, been a little more successful in achieving their goals: the Trans March and the Dyke March, for example, and the myriad one-on-one and small group conversations that other events may have spawned.
Yes, the Pride March has always been a protest as well as a celebration. Yes, the personal is political. But does it have to be Polarizing Partisan Political?
To my mind, the purpose of a Pride Parade is twofold. On the one hand, it's to celebrate who we are, who we love, who our friends and family and colleagues and allies are, and the progress we've made over time towards a more harmonious gender-diverse society. On the other hand, it's to remind everyone that there's still plenty of work to be done: locally, regionally, nationally and internationally and also at the level of the individual and the culture. Shifting hearts and minds, questioning and altering long-held assumptions and traditions, and so forth.
When the early gay rights marches took place in the 1970s, the common enemy seemed obvious: The Establishment. Authority figures, both personal and institutional. They might be parents, teachers and other school officials, employers, police, the infamous Fruit Machine ... I don't want to tar all of these entities with the same brush, but the villains were typically found amidst those categories.
I was dismayed to see how Ottawa's Capital Pride March essentially disintegrated yesterday:
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/ottawa-pride-parade-dissolves-after-palestinian-demonstration-blocks-route/ar-AA1L7SxN
Yes, Queers for Palestine would have been perfectly justified in carrying placards stating who they are and what they stand for. They did not, however, have the right to hijack the parade and demand that certain parties meet with them immediately, demand that everyone agree with them and that they apologize for having disagreed with them previously. Frankly they're shooting themselves in the foot with tactics like that, as even folks like me who generally support their political agenda (and there are lots of us) are turned off by their approach.
I really think pride rallies should do what they do best: celebrate and promote gender diversity and advocate for the progress we still need. Instead, they are dividing and disgusting their allies from within the movement. Capital Pride looks to me like a bureaucratic nightmare and quagmire.
Smaller groups within the Pride week events have, it appears, been a little more successful in achieving their goals: the Trans March and the Dyke March, for example, and the myriad one-on-one and small group conversations that other events may have spawned.
Yes, the Pride March has always been a protest as well as a celebration. Yes, the personal is political. But does it have to be Polarizing Partisan Political?
Thoughts
It's sad to see things like this happen, but at least it's not currently at the stage of riot and vandalism that happens when people really feel unheard. And the first Gay Pride event, at Stonewall, literally was a riot. It's what happens when people get pushed too far and snap. I'm hoping things don't get that bad again, but they are certainly heading that direction. Thanks for sharing the incident; it's important to keep an eye on the warning signs.
Re: Thoughts
Now I feel old, remembering cases before then.
One of the first protests I attended (against tuition hikes) had a very large turnout, filling the Halifax Commons. As soon as TV cameras showed up, someone literally pushed the student organizers off the stage, took out a megaphone, and started shouting about her issue (something about retirement funding, not anything tuition-related). When the camera crews started packing up, she literally stopped talking mid-sentence, and left.
Re: Thoughts
Thanks for sharing an earlier example.