Gay Life in Canadian Cities

[wg_flamip]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

BLM makes a lot of sense in the United States where police killings of blacks are relatively common. But in Canada, where the number of blacks killed by police is low (in many major cities it's literally zero), and where Indigenous people and Middle Eastern people face more police discrimination than blacks do, it doesn't make much sense.

A broader version of BLM, focused on all racial minorities including Red, Black, and Brown people, and focused on overall issues of police harassment/brutality instead of specifically killings, is a much more logical movement in Canada.

This subject touches on something that's always bugged me... that Canadian social justice activists often simply transplant American issues and concerns onto Canada, without taking into account Canadian perspectives. As an example, look at how many SJW types in Canada constantly tweet about police killings of blacks in the US, but almost never talk about judicial racism against Indigenous Canadians.

Canada has a problem with anti-Black racism, and that problem is made worse by dismissing it as an American issue transplanted here. Canada is a colonial New World society. All colonial New World societies - Latin America, the Caribbean and Anglo-North America - have a history of anti-Black and anti-Indigenous racism (both distinct from each other, and both distinct from the racism directed at other groups). We cannot ignore that anti-Black racism has a centuries-old history in this country that still informs our culture. There were Black slaves in New France, there was segregation in 1950s small town Ontario, there were terrible abuses perpetrated against children at the Nova Scotia Home for Colored Children, &c. Sure, the numbers weren't anywhere close to those in the US, but it still happened (and, in many ways, is still happening).

For what it's worth, the people I know who are involved in BLM make a very concerted effort to tie anti-Black racism to anti-Indigenous racism. Whether the media reports on that or the armchair activists at home recognize that is another thing entirely.

[eemy]

Originally Posted by wg_flamip

For what it's worth, the people I know who are involved in BLM make a very concerted effort to tie anti-Black racism to anti-Indigenous racism. Whether the media reports on that or the armchair activists at home recognize that is another thing entirely.

I've noticed that, actually. How involved in BLM are indigenous people?

[SignalHillHiker]

Originally Posted by ciudad_del_norte

Just out of curiosity, where abouts would the threshold population number be before it was a pressing issue?

Point taken - but still interesting to consider.

I'd guess somewhere around 3-4% of the population is when these sorts of things start becoming a visible issue, when you start having things such as public and poor interactions with the police, segregated neighbourhoods, etc.

We don't really have that yet - the closest thing is the Muslim community's presence in Virginia Park. They're now numerous enough, and concentrated enough, that you can see, sense, feel their presence in the neighbourhood.

My neighbourhood, Rabbittown, is probably the main one for black people. I definitely see a handful of black people out and about every day, which is certainly more frequent than most residents of the city.

To give you an idea... ranked by black population, lowest to highest. Statistics Canada, 2006 Census:

City - Visible Minority Population (Black Population)

St. John's: 3,460 (620)
Moncton: 2,425 (1,035)
Saint John, NB: 3,805 (1,250)
Saskatoon: 14,870 (1,900)
Regina: 12,605 (2,170)
Victoria: 33,870 (2,360)
Quebec City: 16,355 (5,080)
Halifax: 27,645 (13,270)
Winnipeg: 102,940 (14,470)
Edmonton: 175,295 (20,380)
Vancouver: 875,295 (20,670)
Calgary: 237,890 (21,060)
Montreal: 590,375 (169,060)
Toronto: 2,174,065 (352,220)

So I'd say Halifax is a good cut-off for where maybe they should ask if police are welcome to support the Pride parade.

[ssiguy]

I'm actually not totally in agreement in the police showing up at Pride parades.

Despite Pride parades now being far more about tourist dollars than anything else, they do still have a political bent and the police should stay completely clear of any display of backing a political movement.

They can certainly display support in human rights events if the laws ensure those rights.........there is no political overtone. This, however, is NOT the case with Pride parades as they clearly support legal protection of Transgendered people which is NOT protected under the Constitution.

By showing up at an event with their uniform at a Pride parade they are projecting their views that transgendered people should also be protected by the law ......that is very much a political statement and the public has the right to know that the police are not creating or advocating for laws. Their job is to be impartial enforcers of it and they must be unbiased and equally important to be seen as unbiased or they lose credibility with the public and the judicial system.

If they want to go as a regular person without the uniform then they can knock themselves out but while they are wearing the uniform they project the image of enforcers of the laws but should never be seen influencing the laws whether for good or ill.

[SignalHillHiker]

A few pictures, via M.B. on Facebook, of the Pride parade.



• Video Link







































And it all ends at Bannerman Park, in previous years it was at Quidi Vidi Lake instead.

[wg_flamip]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

This, however, is NOT the case with Pride parades as they clearly support legal protection of Transgendered people which is NOT protected under the Constitution.

AFAIK, the courts have never ruled that Trans rights are not protected by the Charter. The equality rights articulated in Section 15 almost certainly apply to Trans people - just as they apply to 'LGB' people, even though the Charter never specifically mentions sexual orientation. Court challenges have had Trans rights "read into" various pieces of human rights legislation across the country. In CF v Alberta (Vital Statistics), the courts ruled that - under Section 15 equality protections - Trans people who have not undergone sex reassignment surgery must be treated the same as Trans people who have. IIRC, this decision never directly states that Trans rights in general are protected under Section 15, but the ruling suggests that the court believes they are. If a similar case were to make it to the Supreme Court, I don't see how they could avoid reading Trans rights into the Charter (or why they, or any current government, would want to).

[kwoldtimer]

I will spare a good thought today for the black, apparently Jewish, apparently gay man in St John's. I imagine he has some stories to tell.

[ssiguy]

The ultimate and final determinant of Human Rights and Constitution is the Supreme Court of Canada. Having proposed ideas that have not been cleared by the provincial/federal houses of Parliament are not laws but suggestions.

If the laws are disputed then the Supreme Courts will make their decisions regarding their legal validity. Until a province/feds brings in legislation and/or the Supreme Court makes a ruling then it is NOT law.

The RCMP/local police do not have the legal or moral right to be proposing and/or advocating for a new law or for the rescinding of another for that matter. They are part of the judicial system and act as enforcers of the law, nothing more nothing less. Just as judges do not have the right to give out parking tickets or lay charges, police do not have the right to advocate for legal or political change.

By the Police showing up in uniforms they are representing the actual police force while doing so and can do so if their are participating in events that ensure the law but not in ones that are not enshrined in law which transgendered rights are clearly not.

The police must be unbiased and equally important be seen as being unbiased enforcers of the law..........creating or advocating for particular laws are not within their mandate, legally or morally.

[kwoldtimer]

Seems to me that you are over-thinking it. AFAIK, no Canadian or provincial government has expressed any concern about police participation in Pride celebrations. I'd be surprised as well whether any police participation in Pride has a specific transgender rights agenda, as opposed to a broad message of inclusion.

[SignalHillHiker]

One of the most widely known members of our local LGBT community has come out as trans (previously, he was a lesbian). I may know who did the interview.

The Woman I Was | The Man I Am Becoming

Gemma Hickey is a name most Newfoundlanders and Labradorians recognize. A passionate and successful activist, they have often led the charge on countless social justice campaigns that align with this year’s Pride Week theme proving that we truly are ‘Stronger Together.’

By being so open about intimately personal experiences, from coming out as lesbian to coming out as a survivor of clergy sexual abuse, Gemma has provided comfort and support to many in our community, and helped our province come to know, accept, and love us. This Pride Week, Gemma sat down with The Outport for an exclusive interview to share some exciting news about their personal journey.

“About seven months ago, I began hormone therapy and started testosterone,” they said. “Now that I’ve gotten older, and have been through a number of experiences in my life, in particular my walk across Newfoundland last summer – which really, really gave me the alone time and perspective that I needed to make this decision…I’m coming out as trans.”

...

Gemma said thus far the changes they’ve experienced have been gradual and satisfying. “The first thing I noticed was that within a couple of weeks my voice started cracking,” they said. “Ultimately I’m noticing that my voice has deepened. When I talk on the phone, people call me sir now. I started lifting more weight at the gym almost immediately. I remember weight feeling lighter to me, and that changes every time I go to the gym. My sex drive is really high so I’m kind of navigating what it’s like to be a teenage boy. I want to eat food all the time. I had a little bit of acne and I started getting hair on my face and neck after a few months. I have to shave every day. My upper legs have a lot more hair. I’m getting more hair on my forearms, and it’s kind of creeping up on my hand. And I have hair on my back, but it’s not that dark. My guy buddies say that I’ll get over the shaving part because it’s annoying after a while. But as a woman, I shaved my legs and armpits every second day so that took a lot longer than taking a couple of minutes to shave my face each day.”

...

“People ask me if I’m going to change my name, but I like my name and I don’t know if I’ll change it. I’m not there yet. A number of people in my family and my close friends call me Gem, or I may even go by GM, which are the initials of my first and middle names. My friend TA Loeffler inspired that possibility. But there’s lots of time and I don’t have to decide yet,” they said. “This is a process and at this point, I’m just honoring the process. I’m not trying to erase anybody’s history with me either. In terms of former partners who identify as lesbian, I don’t want to take that away from them. I was a woman when I was with them, and I’m proud of that. And for a long time, my parents have known me as their daughter. I’m not trying to act as if that never happened. I want to honor my past as I go forward. My walk across Newfoundland was a metaphor for my life. I’m taking this step-by-step. Right now, I’m at a fork in the road. I’m caught between the woman I was, and the man I’m becoming.”

...

Gemma didn’t take the decision to begin hormone therapy lightly. As a feminist, they questioned what it meant for their history and activism to inject testosterone. “I had to think hard about what it meant to shoot testosterone into my body, as a woman and a feminist,” they said. “Because I was more masculine in appearance, I’ve always had masculine currency in situations with other men. I’m a straight shooter and they respect me for that. I haven’t experienced sexism in the same ways that many of my female-identified friends have. Now that I’m going through this process, I know that I have the unique perspective of having lived as a woman, knowing what it’s like to be oppressed in that way, but also now taking that in, informing me on how to be the best man…and an even better feminist.”

...

When it comes to pronouns, Gemma acknowledges that it may take time for some family and friends to catch on. “There may be a grieving period for some people, but I get that. When I was little, people asked my mother: is that a boy or a girl so she would announce it right off the top to avoid confusion or awkwardness.”

Gemma welcomes male pronouns, but is particularly fond of using they and them because it honors their past and embraces their future.

...

Gemma admits that they can’t be everybody’s teacher, adding, “There have been a few conversations with people where their questions were too much for me. I felt like I was being interrogated. But when I feel safe and open, I can talk with people. Humor has always been my greatest asset. Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have a great sense of humor and we know how to turn our pain around and make a joke out of it. I think that’s really helped me.”

...

Gemma said they have never let their gender or sexuality limit them in any way, something they hope for all members of the LGBT community. “We need to reflect on sexuality and gender and what that means. Just because we’ve been conditioned to think of things in a certain way doesn’t mean it’s the only way. I may want to be both female and male. I don’t want to completely dismiss anything that has made me the person I am today. I like Gemma.”

*You can read more about Gemma’s story published in Out Proud: Stories of Pride, Courage and Social Justice (Breakwater Books, 2015).

http://theoutport.com/index.php/2016...i-am-becoming/

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Seems to me that you are over-thinking it. AFAIK, no Canadian or provincial government has expressed any concern about police participation in Pride celebrations. I'd be surprised as well whether any police participation in Pride has a specific transgender rights agenda, as opposed to a broad message of inclusion.

Perhaps that is true but I only brought it up due to the recent events at Toronto Pride.It's not like I spend night awake thinking it over or anything, just that I do think it is a legitimate concern.

Let's reverse the situation to help explain where I am coming from. What if the police in their uniforms showed up at a diversity parade that advocated equal right and social participation for all persons protected under the Constitution.....in others words a parade/event where everyone is welcome but specifically not transgendered because their rights are not included under the Constitution.

I can hear the gay establishment screaming from here yet legally and morally they would be on safer ground than a Pride parade which advocates the changing of laws to bring in transgendered protection. The Police would be advocating the protection of current rights but NOT advocating for the protection of new ones and/or laws.

I just think that when it comes to the police who' sole job is to be the enforcers of laws, decretion is better to ensure they are not seen as being non-political.

It may sound trivial but the protection of laws is one of the corner stones of a free and democratic society.

[eemy]

It's not so simple. Being absent can be a political statement in certain contexts as well.

[wg_flamip]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Perhaps that is true but I only brought it up due to the recent events at Toronto Pride.It's not like I spend night awake thinking it over or anything, just that I do think it is a legitimate concern.

Let's reverse the situation to help explain where I am coming from. What if the police in their uniforms showed up at a diversity parade that advocated equal right and social participation for all persons protected under the Constitution.....in others words a parade/event where everyone is welcome but specifically not transgendered because their rights are not included under the Constitution.

I can hear the gay establishment screaming from here yet legally and morally they would be on safer ground than a Pride parade which advocates the changing of laws to bring in transgendered protection. The Police would be advocating the protection of current rights but NOT advocating for the protection of new ones and/or laws.

I just think that when it comes to the police who' sole job is to be the enforcers of laws, decretion is better to ensure they are not seen as being non-political.

It may sound trivial but the protection of laws is one of the corner stones of a free and democratic society.

That's not how our constitution works. There is no definitive list of who is and who is not protected by the constitution. There isn't even a definitive list of all the documents that comprise the constitution, and there is (by its nature) no written list detailing what comprises the unwritten part of the constitution either. You can cite words in the Charter or various court decisions where the rights of specific groups are articulated, but that only tells part of the story. As I said earlier, given the human rights landscape in this country (including legislation at all levels of government), it is probably safe to assume that trans rights are protected by the constitution.

[someone123]

Halifax Pride today:


Source

[giallo]

This popped up in my Youtube subscription box. Seems like a cool initiative.

• Video Link

[ssiguy]

LGBTQ is in itself a discriminatory term as it excludes asexual persons.

Anti-racism terms don't name every race in the book but just "anti-racism" and everyone seems fine with that. Almost no one outside of the old gay establishment or politically correct government agencies call says LGBTQ {I don't even know what the Q stands for and I'm gay} but rather just 'gay' community.

What many countries {like Mexico} are turning to is the term that encompasses everyone and puts it on the same platform as other rights.....sexual minorities.

[kwoldtimer]

I don't know that there is any problem with "sexual minorities" but, hey, everybody gets a trophy with LGBTQ2IA.

Or, perhaps I should say "almost everybody"......

[wg_flamip]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

LGBTQ is in itself a discriminatory term as it excludes asexual persons.

Anti-racism terms don't name every race in the book but just "anti-racism" and everyone seems fine with that. Almost no one outside of the old gay establishment or politically correct government agencies call says LGBTQ {I don't even know what the Q stands for and I'm gay} but rather just 'gay' community.

What many countries {like Mexico} are turning to is the term that encompasses everyone and puts it on the same platform as other rights.....sexual minorities.

It's important that we're all recognized because our society has spent so much time and effort trying to erase our lives and our communities - and because, under the LGBTQ+ banner, some parts of the "community" (including a depressingly large portion of the "old gay establishment") have spent a great deal of time and effort pretending that the other parts don't exist and/or aren't very important. I am a proud part of the gay community, but that community exists within a larger context. FWIW, I have found that the people who try to distance themselves from that context - those who are "just gay" - also try to distance themselves from the gay community as it exists (the type who might claim to be "ethnically straight," whatever that is supposed to mean).

[ciudad_del_norte]

Originally Posted by wg_flamip

It's important that we're all recognized because our society has spent so much time and effort trying to erase our lives and our communities - and because, under the LGBTQ+ banner, some parts of the "community" (including a depressingly large portion of the "old gay establishment") have spent a great deal of time and effort pretending that the other parts don't exist and/or aren't very important. I am a proud part of the gay community, but that community exists within a larger context. FWIW, I have found that the people who try to distance themselves from that context - those who are "just gay" - also try to distance themselves from the gay community as it exists (the type who might claim to be "ethnically straight," whatever that is supposed to mean).

This is very important point that is often forgotten or ignored. There is a decent amount gay men especially (usually white) that don't care or even purposely exclude others from "the community". It's pretty gross sometimes.

Ethnically straight? That's a new one I haven't heard before. Based on the term though, I imagine that I wouldn't like some of the assumptions I imagine underpin the need to identify as such.

[1overcosc]

I prefer the term "queer". It's an umbrella term that can refer to everybody without having to use insanely long acronyms that, given the huge range of gender and sexual identities, will always be inherently exclusive no matter how many letters you throw on.