Thursday, June 17, 2010 1:56 PM

The only response to this is: OH SNAP.~Morgan

Morgan Page

Thursday, June 17, 2010 1:57 PM

Keep in mind that figure does not include such things as police services (some $100k) due to a council resolution a good many years ago. Should council vote to revoke support, it would be hard to argue for that bill to be covered by the city.

That said, it seems fairly obvious that seeking an injunction against council's motion - either by PT or QuAIA (as the group whose charter rights are at question) would be a logical tactical step should Pride Toronto want to fight council on this.

Much has been said in support of my fellow volunteers. We are grateful for that. We are also tremendously grateful for the efforts and support of many wonderful and dedcated staff at the City of Toronto who have shown great passion for the event and it's success over the years.

I'm gutted that blatant, crass electioneering by a mayoral candidate has put them in an unwinnable position this year.

Martin Kuplens-Ewart

Thursday, June 17, 2010 8:15 PM

I wonder how much money Pride Toronto brings to the city in terms of visitors, corporate investment, and international visibility. I'm sure that the city gets that $173,000 back many times over, which makes me suspect this threat is an empty (or at least a foolish) one.

Marc G.

Thursday, June 17, 2010 9:32 PM

The point some may be missing is that Pride's revenue doesn't come from angry grassroots LGBTTQQIA community organizers who are the loudest complainers - the money comes from the private sector, beer sales, and the government/taxpayer. So yea, Pride IS a big corporate party for tourists, paid for by corporate beer drinking tourists and people who work hard all year and just want to enjoy the festival. Reminds me of the scene in The Boys in the Band when Michael gets all up in Harold's face about everything he thinks is wrong about him and Harold says, 'But, in the meantime, you've left out one detail — the cosmetics and astringents are paid for, the bathroom is paid for, the tweezers are paid for, and the pills are paid for!'. Check it out.

Ryan

Friday, June 18, 2010 10:39 AM

To this pie chart, I say. So what?

Just because City of Toronto's funding is a small piece of the pie, doesn't make it any better if PT falls short and goes into the red. Remember we don't know which sponsors are saying what, and they have every right to be anonymous on their views, especially when themselves need to be sensitive to their workers, and clients.

Someone

Friday, June 18, 2010 11:20 AM

Ryan> The problem is that anyone can throw a party. The reason why Pride draws so many people is as much because of the art, the music, the agitation, the poems, the prose, the symbols, the -culture- generated by the angry grassroots LGBTTQQIA community organisers as it is from comporate money. Toronto Pride relies heavily on the cultural capital generated by the people who are now so very upset. To describe the situation as if it's a small group of malcontents who haven't made any significant contributions to Pride is disingenuous. The city makes millions off of the creative output of these people: otherwise, Pride is just another party. If that's the case, I hope the artists, speakers, and community leaders DO create their own festival and maybe reap some of the benefits of their own hard work.

Marc G.

Friday, June 18, 2010 1:00 PM

I'm all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that death-cult corporatist, their structures, systems and self-loathing shills masquerading as politicians and community leaders have sanctioned pride. None of them would know fairy dust if it hit them in the eye.
Yep, warm and fuzzy.

tim

Friday, June 18, 2010 7:32 PM

@Marc, I understand Toronto's active queer community contributes to the city's cultural capital, that draws in the Pride tourists. So why then are those same people trying to shut down the whole show?? (The aggitators) Why can't they find a more mature and appropriate way of expressing their protest instead of pissing on everyone else? What they have done is unilaterally declare that Pride is dead and that they alone have to "take it back" for the sake of the whole queer community. What authority do they have to dismantle the work of others? Who made them more important than everyone else? It's one thing to withdraw support out of protest, it's another thing to stoke the fire of a political/cultural divide very alive in the city. Sure they can say "but Pride started it" - and whether you believe that or not, how childish is it to then make the situation worse? Disrupting Official Pride events!!??! C'mon, that's so low. It's gone too far.

Ryan

Saturday, June 19, 2010 2:03 PM

Ryan: "Why can't they find a more mature and appropriate way of expressing their protest instead of pissing on everyone else?"

Possibly because those avenues have, for all practical purposes, been eliminated?

- One general meeting this fiscal year (for the sole purpose of addressing business that should have been dealt with at the AGM);
- no broad community engagement (let's not begin to pretend the 'focus groups' were anything of the sort);
- only post-facto communication of issues.

Incidentally – how are we doing with that charitable status application?

Martin Kuplens-Ewart

Saturday, June 19, 2010 5:43 PM

@Martin, No broad community engagement? Attendence is always very high and very diverse, the whole local queer business community gets involved each year, a dedicated volunteer committee, anyone can buy ad space for a reasonable price considering the size of the festival, a and variety of different themed venues and exhibits and parties are held each Pride. Basically if you have something to contribute and not just a laundry list of complaints, real participation and influence can be acheived. Not enough general meetings? Communications can go beyond the town hall forum. Those meetings always become shouting fests for microphone/camera hogs, and thus accomplish nothing. I'm not saying Pride is perfect, clearly this year we have seen their weaknesses exposed, but if they had allowed QuAIA to march they would have been condemned just as hard, had just as many (or more) sponsors withdraw support, and the voices of dissent would not be satisfied until it changed its position. Then the mayhem would never end!!

Ryan

Saturday, June 19, 2010 8:07 PM

@Ryan so community engagement == community consumption?

General meetings are critical to steering the organisation – they're the only way for members to give direction to the board (and through the board, the rest of the organisation). Not holding any meetings during the year effectively means the membership has been disenfranchised, arguably a terrible error in a year marred by apparent crisis.

Martin Kuplens-Ewart

Sunday, June 20, 2010 1:28 PM

@Ryan. Are you Ryan Lester, Fundraising Director of Pride Toronto?

Curious Miss

Sunday, June 20, 2010 5:23 PM

Embarrassed to share the name Ryan after that dude's comments. This Ryan's Pride includes dissident voices.

Ryan L

Sunday, June 20, 2010 10:13 PM

No I am not Ryan Lester or a Pride operative of any kind. And other Ryan, I'm sorry if you feel I bastardize our shared given name, but if your Pride includes dissident voices then you have to deal with my voice too.

Ryan

Monday, June 21, 2010 4:12 AM

If Pride is going to serve Canada's Right and the Israel Lobby, then I say: Starve Pride to death. I see no reason to celebrate subservience and apartheid.

Rick

Monday, June 21, 2010 6:45 PM

Give up people, you've already lost your cause. Pride is here and a million people will be celebrating and don't care about international politics that don't affect them. That's reality. Jump on the bandwagon or get pushed aside. Now if this were for queer rights, then I'm sure you'd have a lot more support out there. Happy Pride!

Chris

Monday, June 21, 2010 6:53 PM

@Ryan...perhaps this is about more than ' a list of complainers' and people trying to piss on your parade. Infact, its the exact opposite- these people are dedicated to Pride, REAL people EDUCATED, and aware of queer theory and history. Unlike the current staff who are both uneducated ( as indicated by many of their decisions) in any kind of Canadian queer political theory and disconnected with any type of passion for the organization, or the community. People are not happy with the people that have been hired to represent them.

Tom Smith

Tuesday, June 22, 2010 3:32 PM

To every story there's two sides. I'm disappointed that in the past two months that this QuAIA issue has been happening that Xtra seems to exlusively support their fight. There doesn't seem to be two sides to the story. Its just Pride Toronto has to change to include. They don't have to do anything. I don't see why people are overly concerned about the amount of commercial / corporate sponsorship events such as Pride (and numerous others) have gotten in recent years. I challenge you to pickup a flyer for any large scale party and show me there isn't more than one sponsor. It just doesn't happen these days. If you don't want business sponsorship, perhaps you should move to a non-capitalist country. Because everytime we buy a beer at Woodys or Buddies we're supporting more than one business. Furthermore, any corporations connected to gay-friendly events we're more likely to see an improved understanding from workers in that company towards the LGBT community. Its win-win, whether you're for it or not.

Steve

Wednesday, June 23, 2010 12:07 AM

Steve: Huh?! The issue is censorship. Pride Toronto is censoring the lawful political speech of an LGBT group that meets all the requirements for participation. Either you support censorship -- or you support legitimate free speech. Which is it?

Rick

Wednesday, June 23, 2010 2:51 PM

Notice I've made no attempt to censor you, Ryan.

Ryan L