QuAIA members meet with Toronto's city managers
TORONTO NEWS / Pennachetti waiting for CAP recommendations before reporting to council
Andrea Houston / Toronto / Wednesday, December 08, 2010
Share |

Elle Flanders chats with police at the offices of Pride Toronto on June 7, 2010.
(Matt Mills)
City staff will likely wait for the findings of the Pride Community Advisory Panel (CAP) before telling city council whether or not the group Queers Against Israeli Apartheid (QuAIA) violates the city's anti-discrimination policy.

A July 6 city council motion to defund Pride Toronto directs city managers to determine whether QuAIA's presence in the Toronto Pride parade violates the policy. If the city managers determine that it does, Pride Toronto would be ineligible for city funding. There is nothing in Canadian jurisprudence to suggest that criticism of government, foreign or domestic, is discriminatory. But many in the Jewish community believe that the phrase "Israeli apartheid" is anti-Semitic.

QuAIA members, including Elle Flanders and Tim McCaskell, met with city manager Joseph Pennachetti on Nov 29 in a bid to convince Pennachetti that QuAIA does not violate the city's policy.

“This is a decision that councillors have punted over to city staff,” says Flanders. “And no one wants to make this decision because no laws have been broken.”

McCaskell says the meeting was “interesting,” adding that there were four members of QuAIA there. City staff included Pennachetti, executive director of culture Rita Davies, city lawyer Ward Earle and Mike Williams, general manager of economic development and culture.

McCaskell says Pennachetti talked about the process the city plans to follow in making its determination. Still, says McCaskell, the city is reluctant to give specifics. That may not be entirely surprising, considering the recent municipal election.

“It appears they are waiting to hear from the Community Advisory Panel before they make any recommendations to council as to whether or not we violate city policy,” says McCaskell. “That’s odd because the purpose of the Community Advisory Panel is not to determine that.”

Xtra could not reach Pennachetti for comment, but he clarified his position in an email to McCaskell.

“I did indicate that we want to understand the Pride Community Advisory Panel's results before finalizing our conclusions and recommendations, as it only makes sense to be aware of all perspectives and consultations before approaching executive committee,” Pennachetti wrote. “In no way, however, are we saying that the Advisory Panel findings will be the ‘basis’ for our recommendations.”

At the ongoing CAP sessions, Flanders has been quick to remind people that city staff will use the information collected in that process. She says the city's scrutiny of Pride is unheard of for any other city-funded cultural festival or event. The CAP recommendations are expected in late January or early February.

“People who come to the CAP sessions are completely unaware of what happened last year [surrounding QuAIA],” Flanders told Xtra following the Dec 6 CAP session at the University of Toronto. “The panel needs to be aware of this and talk about it. People at the panels need to talk about this. That’s my insistence in bringing it up at these meetings.”

McCaskell says Pennachetti plans to report to the city executive committee, likely in April. Pride is in early July.

“I think they will be hard-pressed to find we’ve broken any city policy,” McCaskell says. “Anyone with an understanding of equity issues would understand that. But who knows, I think [city staff] are scared of council, scared of the new administration, and they see themselves as squeezed.

“I just hope that the Community Advisory Panel takes this off their hands somehow, so they don’t have to make a decision they know they can’t uphold," he adds. "That’s just my analysis, but that’s what looks like what’s going on.”
McCaskell points out that the city's cultural funding policy does not exclude political expression. Cultural expression almost always reflects political expression, he notes. The city does not attempt to censor political expression during any other cultural events.

“This idea that [organizations] that accept public funds somehow means there can be public influence is crazy,” Flanders says. “I have no say in the Santa Claus parade, nor do I want it. I don’t think it’s my place, but they take public money. “Pride puts way more money into the city pockets than it takes out.”

“The obvious difference between Luminato and this is Pride is a queer festival,” says McCaskell. “Do they go through all the art pieces at Nuit Blanche to ensure there’s nothing that is critical of Israel? No, that would be ridiculous.”

So now we wait. McCaskell says nothing will happen until after the panel sessions wrap up and reports and recommendations are drafted.

“A major focus right now for QuAIA is to ensure we are well-represented at the panel meetings,” he says. “Then we just wait and see. There’s not much we can do until we see how the city reacts to the recommendations, and what the city manager brings to city council.”

Read more - Xtra's coverage of the Community Advisory Panels





Share |


Reader Comments


 
Thanks, Elle and Tim
Elle Flanders and Tim McCaskell - Remember these names. It's increasingly clear that these two may well be responsible for destroying pride. If the city denies funding to this event, you know now who to thank.
Jim, Toronto Ontario
12/09/10 12:45 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Queer festival?
According to Tim, "Pride is a queer festival". Queer festival? 99.5% of the people who to pride wouldn't dream of using the word "queer" or "festival". Cripes, Tim, shut the f-ck up. Really, just keep your opinions to yourself. You do not speak for the gay community, you two-bit demagogue. How do we make sure that the city knows that these idiots do not speak for us. If anyone from the city is reading this: please stop listening to these people. They do not speak for the gay community.
Jim, Toronto Ontario
12/09/10 12:52 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Wait, is Jim speaking for the gay community now?
I don't think anyone is claiming that Tim McCaskell speaks for the whole of the gay community. As you so clearly illustrate, people have different opinions. "The Gays" are not a homogeneous blob with a single agenda, just like every other broad group of people (e.g. "The Straights," "The Women," "The Muslims," "The Jews," "The Christians," etc). As for who to thank if the City defunds the Pride Toronto, blame will lie with the City for being cowed into censoring perfectly legal speech. And frankly, the state trampling the Charter rights of a group of citizens is a far bigger problem than making a subsection of a broad group of people uncomfortable ... not just for "The Gays," but for our entire democracy.
Dan, Toronto ON
12/09/10 1:26 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Tim speaks for me...
...and for the majority of people who bothered to show up to the community advisory panel public meetings. Jim might just be upset that the loser community is not being adequately represented in this process.
Patrick, Toronto Ontario
12/09/10 5:04 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Most Gays/Lesbians have had enough of QuAIA
QuAIA should demand to march in Caribana and the Santa Claus Parade. They would be equally appropriate at those venues as at Pride. Most Gays/Lesbians have had enough of QuAIA. The QuAIA are a prime example of vociferous splinter groups, whose need for power and attention, destroy the internal workings of many organizations and cause a hostile working environment. Most Gays/Lesbians don't feel that our Freedom of Expression rights are in jeopardy, and if they were, we would not look to the QuAIA to protect us. QuAIA are totally “free” to take up their cause elsewhere. They are not alone in their condemnation of Israel's practices in their occupied territories. They would be more welcomed to protest with others who have similar concerns, than at Pride. After all the trouble, anger and embarrassment they have caused, it would be logical for them to bow out gracefully.
QuAIA in Caribana :-), Toronto Ont
12/09/10 5:20 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Ed's note
Hi QuAIA in Caribana :-) To be fair, QuAIA marched in the Pride Parade in 2008 and 2009 without incident. It was not until Martin Gladstone et al approached city councillors to demand council move to keep the group out of the parade that this issue roared to the fore. It takes at least two parties to perpetuate conflict. And if Gladstone had not lobbied city officials for QuAIA's removal, there would be no story here. Ultimately this issue runs much more deeply than simply QuAIA. Players in this story include some in the straight Jewish community, the overarching nature and conduct of Pride Toronto, and notions of censorship. And I'm not sure your assertions about "most gays/lesbians" are entirely accurate.
Matt Mills, Toronto Ont
12/09/10 5:52 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Only one thing is clear from these comments...
... and it is that "Jim" does not speak for the gay community. Really, Jim, just keep your opinions to yourself.
Bruce, Toronto ON
12/09/10 6:23 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
No, only one thing is clear...
I feel I do speak for most gay people, although not perhaps the ones that you see at the 519. The issue is not just QuAIA, but about the politicization of the gay community. The gay community has been hijacked by "queers" with a political agenda. I'm sure they're telling the city that they speak for all of us. And they are going to f-ck up pride if we let them carry on this way. Another problem is that that these politicos are not interested in gay unity. That concept is clearly dead. Thanks Dan. Thanks Tim. Thanks Elle. There is only solution left: have two prides. Put someone who knows how to run a good party in charge of the mainstream pride (and get them to go back to the city to beg for funding) and then let the politicos run their unfunded dreary fiasco at Queen St. West or wherever they want to do it. I urge the party organizers and especially the bars to step away from this political pride. If anyone from the city is reading this: please understand that some gay people are OK with pride being defunded, given that the gay community is being held at ransom by these people.
Jim, Toronto Ontario
12/09/10 7:57 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Awfully big voice...
@ JIm "you don't speak for me" Not man enough to leave a last name... you seem to have a grasp on the pulse of the community and can speak for them. It is really nice to see someone is stepping up to the plate to be the solitary voice of reason. I do have a few problems with your understanding of what is happening. First this is whole discussion is what Pride is all about, ALL voices within and from "the community" having a place to be heard, even if we all have to shout over the music. Second the blame for failure must be spread a little wider then your focus. The Blame must lie not only Martin Gladstone but the Board members and staff that put Pride into a deficit position and forced them to find scapegoats and point blame. He just catalyst that provided the target.
Mark Smith, Toronto ON
12/10/10 1:01 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Matt, that's inaccurate
Matt, the issue of QuAIA participation in Pride was a non-issue only in the eyes of someone from the media looking for a dramatic story to cover. Just because no big sparks flew prior to this year doesn't mean that Mr. Gladstone created the issue, though he certainly gave it legs. Had he not touched off a pre-existing raw nerve, you wouldn't have this this defining story of the year. The comments on these boards have revealed a community which while it may support freedom of expression is decidedly non-thrilled about QuAIA itself. Issues boil beneath the surface all over the place. Sometimes you need to go looking for them, but they're there, quietly waiting to be discovered. And I do recall rumblings if not roarings. Kyle Rae was even quoted in the media saying that Pride was political from its inception. Of course the next year, he had changed his mind. Elle Flanders even talked about how Rae had previously supported them against assertions that Pride wasn't political. This isn't a spat between two parties, QuAIA and Gladstone. There are a lot of players. I think you've reduced it to something beyond a useful rendering.
Nadine Oberman, Toronto ON
12/10/10 2:52 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Ed's note
Hi Nadine: It's a huge octopus of a story, one with many legs, and more than a few suckers, too. There is a bit more nuanced analysis in Pride Toronto censorship: How it came to this. And for those wanting to read the whole story, here's all our coverage in one place. And I don't know if you remember this from 2009? To be fair, it seems clear that some in the Jewish community are afraid of what QuAIA represents, and that fear is rooted in a history of real-world horror. But we haven't found any indication that QuAIA or its members pose any threat to anyone's safety. They are, after all, gay and lesbian human rights activists.
Matt Mills, Toronto Ont
12/11/10 8:20 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Hateful words lead to violence
Hey Matt, as gays we know the repercussions of hateful messaging. It's not hate speech to say that homosexuality is an abomination, or that God hates fags, but the more the public hears it, the more of us are going to be beat up. We can't ban the message, because free speech is free speech, but we can and should ask ethical organizations to exclude it from events having nothing to do with homosexuality. And we should ask Pride to exclude hateful messaging that has nothing to do with gay rights. QuAIA may not be violent, but the anger they foment towards Jews by their hateful messaging makes us targets for violence. Please don't tell us we should feel safe, we don't feel safe. When people get angry at the Jewish state, they send a bomb to a synagogue in Chicago, they attack Jewish students on campus, maybe tear a sign out of the hands of Jew at the Pride parade (which one did). Any Jew can pay the price, any Jew can be the target.
BJ, Toronto ON
12/11/10 9:31 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Waiting for the word from on high...
Matt, thanks. I agree. I don't think that QuAIA are dangerous, just - from my point of view - shrill, annoying and misguided. That's not illegal. Accept that in a democracy free speech means hearing things you don't like; it is central to plurality. As far as I'm concerned, if they keep the peace and don't cross the hate line, we put up with them. You don't have to approve of everything you see at Pride - since when has Pride catered to a general consensus? But I did want to improve?! on your distillation of the story as one started by one Martin Gladstone. He turned out to be a poor messenger. My reading of this is that most of us have no love for QuAIA, but even less love for censorship, which should only be used when clearly over the line. Where is that line? That's what we're talking about, I think. And I think that we need to remember that the entire anti-discrimination edifice that pervades government was a product of the left. Does the left now believe that what constitutes hate speech or discrimination is an entirely subjective and personal issue? Has it abandoned the idea of OHRCs and tribunals? It's a rather precarious position to take that the City has no business overseeing that. They might have made a bad call here, but if taxpayers were funding something clearly offensive, say a white pride event, we'd rightly be angry. I think it's appropriate that the city mete out funds cautiously. But then, they need to make a fucking decision. Is Israeli apartheid hate speech, or not? And why? Everyone involved needs an answer. This isn't fair to Pride, taxpayers, QuAIA, Jewish activists or anyone else. Hold their feet to the fire, and let's not leave Kyle Rae out of this. Retiring doesn't get you out of responsibility for what your actions have wrought, and what a mess he left us on several fronts.
Nadine Oberman, Toronto ON
12/11/10 3:44 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Ed's note
Hi BJ. I didn't write that you should feel safe, I wrote that there is no indication that QuAIA poses a threat to anyone. The group is critical of some of the choices of the Isreali government, and criticism of goverment is a cornerstone of liberal democracy. The suggestion that a group of gay and lesbian human rights activists marching in the gay pride parade is irrelevant to gay rights seems odd to me. It wouldn't seem reasonable, for example, to forbid Kulanu from marching. And the notion that in order to foster an environment of welcome inclusion in the parade we should forbid groups of activists from participating seems very strange indeed. The suggestion that supression of dissent prevents violence doesn't seem right to me either. Homosexuality as an abomination and God Hates Fags are good cases in point. The expression of these views is not, as you point out, hatespeech, yet it persists even as gay people have gained influence and popular legitimacy. Our lives have gotten better depite the free exercise of those profoundly flawed views. Overall, our objectives, I submit, ought not to be to shut people up, rather, they ought to be to genuinely turn hearts and minds.
Matt Mills, Toronto Ont
12/11/10 3:55 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Both sides can make the free speech argument
Matt I have a lot of respect for the fact that Xtra is persuing the issue from a free speech perspective and not wanting any voice within the community to be excluded from Pride on the basis of its political outlook. With due respect, I don't think this is a free speech issue at all for the larger community although it may be within Pride. Without going into the reasons why many people find this anti- Israel group offensive, no reasonable person is saying they should not be allowed to publicly express themselves. The question is, whether as taxpayers, do we want to fund an event that is giving a venue to what many consider a hate group? If Pride doesn't take public funds, it can do whatever it wants, but the issue at hand is whether the city will subsidize it. I can think of only a few things more fundamental to democracy than the public's right to express themselves on how public funds are allocated. To deny people theat right is denying THEIR free speech. People have a right to make represenations to elected officials and ultimately, the politicians will exercise some in the final decision. If the overall Toronto community indicates it's something they don't want and politicians act on that, then that still doesn't mean that free speech is being supressed. It means that Pride has to decide whether it wants to continue with the anti-Israel group and without public funds, or vice versa. The question isn't what can or can't be said in public, the question is whether the public has a right to refuse public funding to messaging it finds deplorable. But one thing that needs to be pointed out is the absurdity of "Queers against Israel" framing their messaging as being "critical" of Israel. Attempting to deligitimize (by falsely labelling it "apartheid") and sanction (they are involved in the movement to boycott and sanction Israel) and destroy it as a Jewish state isn't criticism, it's indici
Rick, Toronto Ont
12/11/10 4:49 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
continued
it's indicitive of hate filled bigotry
Rick, Toronto Ontario
12/11/10 4:52 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Our lives have gotten better?!
The free exercise of profoundly flawed views has left untold gays dead or physically and/or emotionally damaged. We can't stop all the hateful words, but we have a duty to keep them out of places where we can or should have some control. It is our duty to call upon schools, public institutions, publicly funded events and groups of decent people to make every effort to curb the publication of homophobic messaging. Your life may be better. Matthew Sheppard is dead, and the 5 teens that committed suicide last month. The hateful speech spewed by the "peace loving QuAIA activists" promotes violence towards Jews, and it is a stain on our community that we allow it in our Pride parade.
BJ, Toronto ON
12/11/10 6:04 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Where is the line?
Good comment, Rick. Nadine suggests that censorship should only be used when the message is over the line. Where is the line? Check out this short trailer. http://campusintifada.com/widget/LP_V_W.html Learn why the labelling of Israel as an apartheid state is anti-semitic and hateful.
BJ, Toronto ON
12/11/10 7:50 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
is it really just the word thats the problem?
Israel may not practice a policy that is identical to South African apartheid even if its policies are similar but I find it hard to believe that people are getting so upset just because some are labeling Israel an apartheid state. It is after all just a word that describes a set of policies that divides people based on their ethnicity and provides for different treatment and laws based on those ethnic divisions. If I were a part of QuAIA I would want them to change their name since by using the word apartheid it allows people to focus on that while ignoring the real problems and abuses in Israeli policy towards the Palestinians. Just because apartheid is the closest word to describe such Israeli policies doesn't mean its a perfect fit and that allows many people to claim that they're not an apartheid state and then ignore the real problems. Perhaps a new word is needed to describe those policies based on ethnicity that is unique to Israel. I don't know what that word might be but I see too much focus placed on one word while what it describes is ignored and that is a problem. I definitely don't support that idea Israel should be free from criticism because its a Jewish state, doing so would mean one set of standards for all nations except Israel who isn't subjected to any standards at all. That might be nice for Israel and its supporters but much less so for those concerned about human rights and the victims of the state of Israel, it also sets Israel above every other nation on this planet as being the lone state that no one is allowed to criticize. Somehow I doubt those attacking QuAIA would be satisfied with them dropping the word apartheid from their name, if they were Queers Against Israeli Oppression of Palestinians, a title more in line with their message anyways, that those against them would be satisfied. Its not the word that's the problem after all, its the criticism of Israeli policy they object to no matter what word is used to describe that policy.
Rich, Toronto Ontario
12/11/10 9:09 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
re: Where is the line?
BJ I checked out the link you provided and and it contained nothing about why using the word apartheid is considered anti-semitic and hateful when applied to Israel. It does mention what it calls the 3D method for telling if criticism is anti-semitic or not, I agree with parts of it, disagree with a lot of it though, for one thing many states have had their legitimacy questioned an denied over the years by different people, nothing anti-semitic about that, its a criticism most often sued against Canada and the US by native protesters. I do partially agree with the double standard part in that if one were to say its okay for another country to do similar things to particular ethnic group under its control that Israel does to the Palestinians but that its not okay for Israel to do those same things then yes I would say that's anti-semitc, but just because those critical of Israel aren't also focused on every country that violates human rights is anti-semitic is ridiculous, people pick and choose their causes based on any number of factors, no one can effectively protest every country that violates human rights. Demonization may or may not be anti-semitic, it depends wholly on the context besides which there is far more demonization of the Palestinians and critics of Israel than anything else. In the video a woman says "we know that Israel isn't an apartheid state" but that isn't a fact, just an opinion no different than those who do call Israel an apartheid state, claims can easily be made for both opinions. What I would consider anti-semitic criticism of Israel is that which attributes blame for the problems faced in Israel and the occupied territories to the majority of its citizens being Jewish or having Jewish leaders, I've read such criticisms and they are indeed ugly and completely unlike anything uttered by anyone from QuAIA. The one part of the site you provided a link for that I totally agreed with and which I think is an appropriate respons
Rich, Toronto Ontario
12/11/10 9:54 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
re: Where is the line? (cont'd)
The one part of the site you provided a link for that I totally agreed with and which I think is an appropriate response to groups such as QuAIA is "It is important for Jews to educate themselves, and be proactive on campus, to express their Jewish views proudly, show solidarity with Israel, and correct misinformation campaigns launched by opponents of the Jewish State". No where does that site talk about censoring or banning those you disagree with, and that is something I believe in. If you believe that QuAIA is wrong about something then say so and explain why. If you just don't like Israel being criticized then talk about the positive aspects of Israel. But throwing around claims of anti-semitism willy-nilly as has been done so often doesn't help your cause at all, if anything it becomes like the boy who cried wolf and a lot of people just stop taking claims of anti-semitism seriously any more. Its like saying the police were being homophobic for arresting a gay man on drug charges, or saying criticism of a gay artist's work is homophobic. Israel and its supporters like to call the country the Jewish state but that doesn't mean its policies take on the same weight as theology or that the state itself is a religion or even has a religion unlike theocracies. Express your support for Israeli policy all you want, but don't expect those policies to be spared criticism the same as religious beliefs would be. You can call people anti-semitic all you want too, but don't be surprised if the term loses all meaning and impact because of improper usage.
Rich, Toronto Ontario
12/11/10 10:10 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Afraid of Violence at Pride
Rich, your scholarly appraisals are very accurate. However, the name change has already been suggested directly to QuAIA members, but they refuse any suggestions. In the other camp, the pro-Israeli group including Martin Gladstone and his entourage consider any criticism of Israeli policies as Anti-Semitism and refuse to listen. Similarly right-wing Israelis believe that they can freely settle in the LeftBank and Israel's chief rabbis recently advocated a refusal to rent or sell property to Palestinians, which even some members of the Knesset have condemned as racism. On the other hand Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East, with a fair judicial system which protects Human RIghts, and condemns even Jews who violate Palestinian rights. Israel is also a refuge to LGBT, even to Palestinian Gays. BUT this whole argument does not belong in the Toronto Pride Parade. I'm tired of the arguments. I have heard people saying that they are afraid to go to next Pride in case these arguments flare up and become violent.
Name Change for QuAIA, Toronto Ont
12/11/10 10:15 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Ed's note
Hi Rick: I would ask why Pride Toronto would want city money if it means allowing council to decide what is and isn't appropriate messaging for the Pride Parade. Nevertheless it seems to me another central question is whether criticism of Israeli foreign policy is discriminatory or hateful. It just doesn't seem reasonable to suggest that it is.
Matt Mills, Toronto Ont
12/11/10 10:48 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Not just about QuAIA and the Jews
This debate is not restricted to the Jewsih community. There are many gay gentiles who dislike this attack on Israel. ... And let me remind everyone of the elephant in the room: there are also many, many gay people who are socially and politically more to the right of the political spectrium. The emergence of this QuAIA does not just represent the appearance of the new antisemitism in gay politics, it also shockingly illustrated for many gay people the extent to which the left has taken over gay politics and is pushing its agenda on the rest of us. Was I the only one who started reading the gay news at that point and became a little upset at what I saw there? All of this happened in the context of the G20, an event that shocked mainstream Toronto to its core. Although I didn't, I'm sure there are many gay people who did vote for Steven Harper and Rob Ford. An important side issue here is that the gay movement appears to have been hijacked by leftist extremists. There is perhaps a place for G20 activitism, but the gay community is not one of them. ... If we are to be a single community we are going to have to remain a generic, rather bland grouping that accommodates people with diverse political views, diverse ethnicities, and so on. The left cannot say they represent the gay community when by word and deed they are representing only one part of it. ... The challenge is that the more mainstream members of our community are not going to be politically active. They're not going to do things like write for the gay press. This is something that political activists tend to be attracted to. ... However, you can't just pretend the gay community consists only of left-wing individuals. ...I know you're response will be that the gay liberation movement was an inherently left-wing enterprise. I'm sorry but I just don't agree with that. Everyone was part of that. Mainstream people believe in human rights as much as the left do. Gay rights is not "owned" by any
Jim, Toronto Ontario
12/12/10 2:15 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Ed's note
Jim, you use words like "attack," "leftist extremeist," "hihacked," "anti-Semitism in gay politics," "taken over," "pushing its agenda on the rest of us." You employ this us-versus-them, left-versus-right, dichotomous narrative. You repeat over and over this odd notion that a conspiracy of nameless and faceless gay people is stealing the voices of an equally nameless and faceless, but silent, group of gay people. You lament how unjust it all is. Then you strangely purport to speak, virtually anonymously, for a nameless and faceless silent mass. It's all posed in this completely abstract non-specific context. It just seems like fear-mongering rhetoric.
Matt Mills, Toronto Ont
12/12/10 12:31 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Xtra is now a queer leftist rag
Matt, I don't find Jim's narrative that different from QuAIA's on the Palestinians, using words like "occupation" "hegemony" or "pink-washing". It's all us versus them, dichotomous narrative with Evil (US Backed) Israel and the Innocent Palestinians. Why go solely after Jim? Have you seen some of the tripe that Ellen Flanders has written? I think you're too far into it that you can't see your own bias. Which is fine - no media is without ideology, as the pomos never tire of telling us. Just admit it - you side with QuAIA. You have yet to point out the hypocrisy of the Pride Coalition for Free Speech and QuAIA, many of whom have opposed free speech for critics of feminism and racial extremism. So, come on, write me a rebuttal. Tell us all why we're wrong, unless we're Ellen Flanders. She gets a pass.
Andrew Kostas-Kostas, Toronto ON
12/12/10 6:41 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Ed's note
Hi Andrew: I wrote to Jim because he responded to my comment above. The jist of his comment is not QuAIA, it's, as he writes "the extent to which the left has taken over gay politics and is pushing its agenda on the rest of us." I see a few similarities between his hyperbole and some of what I've heard from QuAIA members. But it's QuAIA that some seem to want so badly out of the parade, not Jim. I am familiar with Elle Flanders and her views. I don't know the word "pomos." As for an admission, I've written and said repeatedly that QuAIA ought not to be excised from the Pride Parade. There's just no rational basis or prescedent for suggesting that criticism of Israeli foreign policy by a group of gay and lesbian human rights activists disqualifies them. Simply calling them hatemongers, extremists, or purveyors of tripe, doesn't make it so. It's simply not just.
Matt Mills, Toronto Ont
12/12/10 8:59 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Excuse me?
Pomo is post-modern. Critical theory everything. Calling Margaret Somerville a homophobe didn't make it so either, Matt. She quite clearly is not, but when that word was being bandied about, no-one at Xtra came to her defence. Put that in your pipe and smoke it. Ellen Flanders says partying is a privilege she won for us. Time for you to display her extremist views which most gay people I know find repugnant.
Andy, Toronto on
12/12/10 9:21 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Fair is fair is fair
You pointed out Jim's us-versus-them narrative, apparently finding it worthy of a pull-out. WHAT ABOUT ELLEN FLANDERS us versus them narrative. Will you critique that too? Or is it just the non-freaky left that you go after? Don't come on here and comment on every fucking comment as though everything awaits your fucking clarification and final word. You're the publisher, not the voice of God. Do your job and show some balance.
Andrew Kostas-Kostas, Toronto ONTARIO
12/12/10 9:26 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
responding to Matt
Hi Matt, I'll address your second point first by saying you seem to have overlooked the distinction between valid criticism and what Quaia does, which is attempt to deligitimize, sanction, and ultimately destroy Israel. Since they are oblivious to the far worse human rights conditions among all of Israel's neighbors and are de facto supporting homophobic regimes opposed to Israel by attacking the one mideast country that respects gay rights, what they are doing isn't criticism, it seems like bigotry, plain and simple. About your first point, about whether Pride should tell the city to get stuffed, I think that's a valid question. It depends on what kind of Pride the community wants. I think the businesses would not want that, but speaking for myself only, I remember the early days when I would go to Pride, get cheap beer and food and spend time with some cool people. Now it's a big tourist event where I feel get gouged on anything I purchase. I think it would be more fun if it were less corporate (and you can be pretty sure the corporate donations will also dry up if Quaia is in Pride), so I will be interested to see how that turns out. To reiterate an earlier point, this is not a free speech issue. If Pride stops taking tax funds, then as disgusting as I find Quaia, it is up to Pride and no one else whether they are allowed to participate.
Rick, Toronto Ont
12/13/10 12:17 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Ed's note
Andy, I can't speak for what happened in the pages of Xtra in 2006, I was working in Vancouver at the time. But I have reread Xtra's work on the Somerville honorary degree story. Xtra writers and editors applied a clear-eyed, rational, critical analysis of her work. They published at least one reader letter in her defence, and the paper never called for her to be kicked out of anywhere. Writer Sky Gilbert alleged that Somerville is homophobic, but then went on in the same piece to call for a repeal of hate speech laws. He wrote, "As long as we persist in the naive view that outlawing homophobia will force people to love queers, homophobes will be able to run legal and political rings around us and keep their hatred even safer..." I wish this piece were online.
Matt Mills, Toronto Ont
12/13/10 12:37 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Ed's note
Andrew: I generally reply to comments that are either directed to me or that contain factual or rhetorical errors. I’m also hoping to keep the dialogue moving in a cogent, respectful, and constructive direction. My hope is that it encourages reader participation. I’m not actually the publisher, technically I’m editorial director. As for the voice of God, I’m an atheist. But I’ve always been fascinated with the human propensity for religiosity. If I were one of the faithful, I would be very suspicious of the authorship of text messages or online forum postings that profess to be the word of God;-)
Matt Mills, Toronto Ont
12/13/10 12:57 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
[Editor's Note]
Ed's note
Rick: I've never seen any indication that QuAIA wants to deligitimize, sanction, and ultimately destroy Israel. QuAIA was in the parade this year and last. Businesses didn't complain, sponsorship didn't dry up and people didn't stay home. This is clearly is a freedom of expression issue.
Matt Mills, Toronto Ont
12/13/10 1:07 PM EST
Matt Mills on the QuAIA website they do
deligitimize, sanction, and ultimately destroy Israel and they even defend the actions of Iran when they seem to have a problem with Israeli Queers fighting Iran
James, Toronto ON
12/13/10 1:16 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
[Editor's Note]
Ed's note
Quite right James. I typed too quickly. QuAIA does want to sanction Israel.
Matt Mills, Toronto Ont
12/13/10 1:17 PM EST
Of course Toronto can never have
a hate free Pride and you wonder why everyone in Canada hate's your city.
The rest, of Canada
12/13/10 1:18 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Comment above
of course everyone hates Toronto but it is only a few who show their white hoods even at Pride.
WTF, Toronto ON
12/13/10 2:09 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
re: WTF
WTF, I never knew what a troll was until recently, but now looking back you fit the definition perfectly.
Rich, Toronto Ontario
12/13/10 2:55 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Rich is the Troll
just speak for yourself and sweetie your the troll since you attack anyone who does not agree to agree with the QuAIA.
WTF, Toronto ON
12/13/10 3:03 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
“Ass-Sniffer”, “Wicked”, “WTF” --Fu*k Offf !!!
“Ass-Sniffer,” “Wicked,” and now you are “WTF.” You're an idiot. Rich is brilliant. You don't have the intelligence to understand the subtle philosophical points that Rich has written. “WTF” please take a sedative or an anti-depressant before you communicate with the world, to save the planet from your Troll personality. Or better yet, just Fu*ck Offff !!!! Nobody likes you !!!
Brilliant, Toronto Ont
12/13/10 3:25 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Specious argument
The argument that Israeli policy meets the United Nations definition of apartheid is widely accepted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_the_apartheid_analogy Detailed analysis in a report by South Africa's Human Sciences Research Council strongly endorses the case: http://www.hsrc.ac.za/Document-3227.phtml So whether you agree or not, it's clearly legitimate to argue that Israel's treatment of Gaza and West Bank Palestinians, and even those resident in Israel, is apartheid. (Apartheid literally means separateness, which is hard to dispute in this context.) But that's hardly the point. In recent years, as Israel's brutal treatment of Palestinians and their supporters has become ever more indefensible - in legal, moral and humanitarian terms - the pro-Israel lobby has responded by trying to shut down the debate. Israel is officially very concerned about Toronto as a test market for its propaganda, and is anxious to shift the discussion away from its misdeeds. This is well manifested in this online discussion. In my view, few people are genuinely taken in by the claim that describing Israel as an apartheid state is anti-semitic. Most people are simply, or cynically, grasping a false argument with emotional (but increasingly ineffective) power to support their own biases, whether personal or geo-political. That the city should try to shut down groups advocating social justice is bad enough, but that Pride would be craven enough to follow suit is appalling. Fortunately, the community gave Pride a wake-up call last June when it wavered, and I hope Pride will continue to act with pride.
Eric, Toronto ont
12/14/10 8:00 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Eric, Really?
Wikipedia? Wow! just a quick edit to make your point but I wonder did Israel copy Canada's Indian Act like South Africa did to create Apartheid?
Peter From, Toronto ON
12/14/10 8:49 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
PRIDE needs focus --QuAIA is off-topic
ERIC, you are absolutely right about Israeli injustices in their occupied territories. Even some members of their Knesset and their supreme court have condemned specific acts which have violated international human rights. I admire QuAIA for their stance on bringing light to injustice. But Israeli/ Palestinian politics is as appropriate to the Toronto LGBT Parade as it would be to Caribana or the Santa Claus Parade. If we allow one political group which is off-topic to the LGBT focus of our Pride Parade, because of “Freedom of Speech,” then in the future we have to allow any and all off topic groups -- “no matter how heinous.” Allowing anything and everything will create a bigger, and longer, and longer, parade (yawn) and a more scattered parade. We need a focus, and we have one --LGBT (plus alphabet soup).
Enough QuAIA, Toronto Ont
12/14/10 8:51 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Brilliant or Rich dual personality?
Yes, you are a troll, what is most interesting is how your other trolls follow suit and you might follow under another definition.
WTF, Toronto ON
12/14/10 9:03 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
There are many racists like me in Canada?
Respect my authoritah!
Eric Cartman, SToronto Ontario
12/14/10 9:14 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
@Eric: Israel Lobby at work?
So anyone who opposes the QuAIA are members of the Pro Israel lobby? Lololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololol So I bet anyone who opposed the Gaza Strip Club really believe in freedom of expression or freedom of Speech for all. This is censorship, individuals who have different opinion then you or the QuAIA is not the evil Israel Lobby.
Peter From, Toronto ON
12/14/10 9:25 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
QuAIA = end of PRIDE
The QuAIA has the freedom to its opinions about whatever country it wants to vent at. However - I think their relating apartheid as experienced in South Africa to the cultural and political situation in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza is totally misguided and erroneous. Along with many Jewish Israeli citizens (I am not Jewish) I abhor the expansion of settlements into any territory that is still disputed. The state of Israel is doing more harm to itself in this situation and many Jewish people around the world are appalled at this as well. But to slander Israel with the term apartheid is ludicrous. I was in Israel during the most recent intifada (2000) and lived and worked with Jews, Arabs, Russians, and people from all walks of life. There is no apartheid in Israel. Is there a war going on? Damn right there is: suicide bombers blowing themselves up in cafes, nightclubs, buses and killing Jew and Arab citizens. And the rest of the world wants Israel not to respond and when it does (in a war theatre) they are condemned? Don't confuse that with apartheid. The QuAIA do the rest of us Canadians a disservice by falsely using our right to free speech by spewing lies and ignorance about an issue they have not thoroughly investigated. From what I've seen in the media and on youtube - they hardly look or sound like an intelligent group of individuals. For all it's worth - they might as well be marching in parades like St. Paddy's, Santa Claus, Labour Day and Caribbana. But they would never do that. Those groups aren't queer enough. Stop tagging your sexual identity to an issue and then demanding you should participate in the annual PRIDE celebrations. Go march in Cairo - Damascus - Beirut - Tehran for the rights of GLBT folks who are maimed and killed. But they're so blinded by their anti-Semitic vitriol (even the Jewish members of QuAIA) you'll spread ignorant lies just because you can. Israel's a great kicking stone. Arabs are all saints. Now let's celebrate.
Peter, Toronto Ontario
12/14/10 11:53 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Lame!
I support QuAIA's right to participate, as squeamish as the make me. Of course, freedom of expression. But how about using that freedom responsibly? Give up the self-seeking? But there's a real passive-aggressive and drama-seeking aspect to them. First the get excluded, and couldn't believe their luck at being victims! After a bunch of community agitating, they were readmitted. But they couldn't take yes for an answer. Pride was flawed. The panel is flawed and undemocratic. Corporations are ruining everything. And of course, the poor activists live in fear of losing their place in the spotlight that they so cherish. All deeply drama-seeking. Hey, how's things in Ramallah? Remember them, poor little middle-class over-educated activists? I support your right to participate. But I think you are wretched and pathetic and an embarrassment. I hate being asked to explain you, because I can't. You're about the most ineffective spokespeople for a cause on can imagine. You've become the story instead of highlighting those you would seek to liberate from Israeli oppression. Pathetic.
Mahmoud, Toronto ON
12/15/10 11:01 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
ouch
Mahmoud - Don't forget Xtra's role in all this. This issue (and the story) has taken on a life of its own because it supports some people's impression of what the media and gay life should be about. Just as QuAIA have made it all about themselves, the left are working against gay rights because they subordinate it to their own issues. It's all about them and their views. Who's the polarizing faction here?
Jim, Toronto Ontario
12/15/10 2:58 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
kinda funny
Jim, Mahmoud, it's funny hearing you guys claim that QuAIA soaks up all the attention and the "its all about us" stuff. The fact is that you guys are the ones who bring all the media attention to this issue. If no one had ever attempted to ban QuAIA from Pride, then when we marched last year there would have been one article in Xtra about us, maybe an article in the Star and that would have been the end of it. But the massive spotlight you guys shined on us when you tried to kick us out is exactly what enabled us to reach international media attention. What's funny is that you created that spotlight for us, and now you guys are on here constantly whining about it. Seriously, find something better to do with your time.
Sav., Toronto ON
12/15/10 4:34 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
and btw- Jim
Jim, I'm so sick of reading your claim that YOU speak for everyone in the community. Over and over and over again on here you make that claim. At the same time you project that claim onto QuAIA. The fact is, we never claimed to be the majority, that's not our point. We only claimed to be one part of the community like everyone else... it's a diverse community. And I wonder if you have been attending the Community Advisory Panel meetings?? If you had attended, you would notice that consistently people are either neutral on QuAIA or else in favor of us marching. At the panel for People of Color in particular it was clear that QuAIA's presence was completely supported. And at the rest it was largely neutral or supportive, or at the Trans panel we just didn't discuss it very much because there were so many other important issues.
Sav., Toronto ON
12/15/10 4:42 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
@ Sav
you or the QuAIA do not speak for the community either. Why are you attacking freedom of speech and expression?
Peter From, Toronto ON
12/15/10 4:57 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Wow! Sav the 45 people who attend those
meetings are not whole the community either. Wow! the voices of thousands and thousands are not represented by 20 to 45 people who do not have a life or jobs
James, Toronto ON
12/15/10 5:03 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
MY QuAIA
MY QuAIA Since everyone has now jumped on the free speech bandwagon (a strange idea since those who started it are the very people who for years shoved political correctness down our throats, trying their best to censor our vocabularies...) I'd like to start a new group to march in Pride next year... Its name: QUEERS AGAINST ISLAMIC ATROCITIES... yep, that would read QuAIA... same as another group which has been creating problems for three years now! MY group finds that it is highly suspect that those upbraiding Israel have never noticed that in Darfur, approximately 10 times as many people have been killed in the last ten years than have been killed in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict...not to mention those who have been wounded, crippled, raped...and the atrocities are continuing as I write this; yet NO-ONE in Toronto seems to care about THESE deaths. Are Black Muslims - being killed by Arab Muslims - NOT worth our concern? Are only those Muslims being harmed by JEWS of interest? Time to stop discriminating! Let's protest Muslim on Muslim atrocities! Those deaths (and so many more of them!) are JUST as unacceptable, no? If anyone wishes to join me in this worthy cause, please contact me via this email: pogostiks@yahoo.fr Next year we can have OUR float at Pride... yeah, I know, it has nothing to do with gays...but neither does the other QuAIA. If this continues, pretty soon Pride will be about everything EXCEPT gay issues!! Way to go Toronto! That's what will happen if we listen to the Pride-was-always-political crowd, who seem to forget that the rest of the year can be used for THOSE issues which have no gay content, DUH!
Ken, Paris France
12/15/10 7:14 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
QUEERS AGAINST ISLAMIC ATROCITIES
QUEERS AGAINST ISLAMIC ATROCITIES group for the next Pride Parade is the best idea I've heard so far in these posts. Who will be brave enough do it? It is true that Moslem countries discriminate against Gays and Christians and perpetrate violence on other Moslems as well. The Shia/Sunni have been blowing up each other since the 7th Century even though the Koran writes that no Moslem shall enslave or kill another Moslem. They are hypocrites. They have been killing Christians in Iraq and Egypt. There is also Moslem on Moslem violence in Afghanistan, iraq, Darfur, Somalia, Lebanon... They are exporting their terror around the world one dumb suicide bomber at a time. Sweden was the latest. In Europe a bomb attack is foiled every six weeks. Only a few extremists, the Politically Correct Apologists argue. A few too many I for my liking. Let's march in the next Toronto Pride Parade to protest them. QUEERS AGAINST ISLAMIC ATROCITIES. Who wants to create a website?
GREAT IDEA, Toronto Ont
12/15/10 11:07 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Face the truth
Peter From: > did Israel copy Canada's Indian Act like South Africa did to create Apartheid? Yes, indeed. Does that make you proud? Should the model be emulated around the world? Peter: > There is no apartheid in Israel. According to members of the Knesset and even some Jewish Israelis, there is. An MK who recently toured Canada said Israel has 25 laws that discriminate against non-Jews in Israel. They include subjects like who can own land, and who can marry whom (does the latter carry any resonance here?). Queers Against Islamic Atrocities? Sure, but let's draw attention to the regimes kept out of that spotlight in North America, such as Saudi Arabia (which buys a lot of U.S. bonds). It's easy to join the bandwagon against Iran (which should be criticized for its human rights abuses), but less common to criticize friends of Washington. Re QuAIA, I'm not sure why anyone thinks drawing attention to oppression and denial of rights is damaging to Pride. Is human liberation even possible if it is restricted to one issue?
Eric, toronto ont
12/17/10 7:21 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
The real question
The real question is this: who represents the gay community and gets to organize things like Pride? Answer: left-wing activists like Matt, Sav, Elle, Tim and so on. They have hijacked the gay community and are turning it into a playground for their own political ends. And if the playground gets messed up and defunded, too bad, because their views are more important than the gay community. If Jews feel excluded, tough titties. If mainstream gays are annoyed, they don't care. You have to crack a few eggs to make an omelette, right?
Jim, Toronto Ontario
12/18/10 6:46 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
The real question
The real question is this: who represents the gay community and gets to organize things like Pride? Answer: left-wing activists like Matt, Sav, Elle, Tim and so on. They have hijacked the gay community and are turning it into a playground for their own political ends. And if the playground gets messed up and defunded, too bad, because their views are more important than the gay community. If Jews feel excluded, tough titties. If mainstream gays are annoyed, they don't care. You have to crack a few eggs to make an omelette, right? And if any gay person dares to speak out against this group in public, they turn on them like the borg and do everything in their power to convey the impression that it is they who speak for the community. Sav, Elle, Tim, Matt, all of you -- pleas stop this nonsense for the good of the gay community. There's more at stake than your cheesy politics.
Jim, Toronto Ontario
12/18/10 6:52 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Eric, just copy and pasting from Anti Israel
blogs to make your point. You can not handle the truth but is just spreading Propaganda. South Africa used Canada's Indian Act as a model for Apartheid and the Indian Act is still in place. From this Act most of Canada's native do feel they are second class citizens and conditions on most reverses are conditions that are found in most third World countries. Also many Native groups have compared conditions on reserves to Apartheid in South Africa when dealing with the Federal Government under Liberal and Conservative governments . Wow! names please on these MK's and political party (was he Arab MK from the United Arab list? and he was elected into the Knesset?) Also, some of your arguments are typical of most Anti- Israel Blogs that tells it users how to talk on comment forums and Hi jack them. So far two of your links come from this blog and even what to say came from this blog as well. Also, Wikipedia is not a source, I bet it was just a quick edit to make your point.
Peter From, Toronto ON
12/18/10 9:28 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Its only freedom of Speech!
To many leftists are showing heir white hoods and I wonder they can never defend free speech from anyone but themselves.
WTF, Toronto ON
12/18/10 9:38 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
@Sav
You seem to forget that Jim has the right to freedom of Speech and Expression and you seem to be censoring him on almost everything. He is right on a few things here such as you or anyone does not speak for us as a collective.
Peter From, Toronto ON
12/18/10 9:47 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Also Eric you live in a Aparthied State
So why are you saying Israel is when some even in this country has even say Canada could be a Apartheid State. The Globe and Mail run a series of stories on Canada's Apartheid November 2001. (http://ht.ly/3rszc) and the QuAIA will not fight Apartheid here in Canada? This is what I mean when our Native leaders have describe the Indian Act as Apartheid. Also sweetie in Canada we did have Racial segregation in the 1950s when South Africa model their Apartheid System and in Israel they do not have Racial segregation and that is what the word Apartheid was in South Africa. So face it sweetie, you can not handle the truth either but just tell all the leftists lies when it comes to Israel and Apartheid. When you Eric live in an Apartheid State.
Peter From, Toronto ON
12/19/10 2:06 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
I support the QuAIA
I say down with Israel
Zezi, Toronto Ontario
12/19/10 2:36 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
A Queer issue
We shouldnt have to run to the (mainly straight) city for help to protect our gay pride from that Hate group. The gay pride committee should have the balls to keep them away on their own.
Queer Boy, Toronto Ont
12/20/10 7:20 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Pride by U2
I was at my first Pride parade last year. Wow. Love was in the air. Took a picture with a young jewish girl who saw my QAIA shirt and said..whats on your shirt? Palestine! Cool! It has a big heart on it and it says we all belong. God bless her. But interestingly..my shirt didnt say anything about Palestine. Just fight the Ban Fight the Occupation. Words.. Powerful Words with Undeniable Connotations. Queers in Toronto adamant about a homeland for Palestinians! Three generations going on four living as refugees and prisoners in their native land. But QAIA marched with little fanfare for the last three years. Why the big fuss now? Is it the words used? Of course it is...it targets Israel. But after 100 years of ethnic strife in Palestine is there any debate about the occupation and the existing apartheid? I may not be Queer not that I havent thought about it...but...its minorities helping minorities. Its a civil rights campaign. The Palestinians will never join the family of nations while the baby boomer generation is alive...So it is important that this civil rights campaign is nurtured and that it grows because the youth must realize Canadas destiny is the Human Rights Charter and Equality.
Ezra P, Toronto Ontario
01/08/11 4:09 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.