Is Pride isolating itself?
EDITORIAL
Noreen Fagan / Ottawa / Monday, August 23, 2010
Share |

Eating pancakes at 7am is not my idea of a good breakfast, but since the occasion marked the beginning of Pride Week, I hauled myself out of bed and wandered up the street to the Ottawa Police Station.

I had debated whether or not to attend but decided, since I had been coming to the monthly meetings of the Police Liaison Committee to the queer community, that it would it would be good to be seen there — blearily eyed, but not armed with a tape recorder.

As I was walking there, I bumped into a friend who was leaving to catch a plane. When I told him where I was going, he gave me a big hug and wished me luck.

His well wishes reminded why I wasn’t exactly eager to go — it has been bumpy road for police-queer relations the last couple of months. The divisions between police and the queer community seems to be widening, and the liaison committee has exacerbated the growing schism rather than bridge the gap.

For months, the queer representatives on the liaison committee have largely refused to challenge the police’s move to release the name, photo and health status of a man charged with HIV non-disclosure.

After exchanging goodbyes, I continued on my way — hesitating at the traffic lights opposite the station before I finally crossed the road.

The first person I met was Brent Bauer from the Gay Men’s Wellness Initiative. He had just finished talking to the media about the police’s handling of a recent high-profile HIV-nondisclosure case.

Inside the station, tables were set up, but Bauer and me sat together on the outskirts — either as wallflowers or pariahs — watching the social gathering go through the motions of a community celebration.

I say community, but I am struggling with that description.

From my perspective, there wasn’t a whole lot of queer community represented — there were the members of the liaison committee, a number of youth and what looked like the entire Capital Pride committee. There was no one else there — not even the usual smattering of reluctant leaders from other organizations.

Capital Pride’s presence was understandable, since they were the only group to accept donations from the breakfast. The other two community groups, Ten Oaks Project and AIDS Walk for Life, refused to accept any money — they recognized the need for queer groups to stand side-by-side when facing a form of discrimination that is disguised under the name of ‘public safety.’ (In the interests of full disclosure: I am a volunteer on the board of directors of the Ten Oaks Project.)

Last week, the liaison committee’s Marion Steele promised to rustle up other charities to take the place of Ten Oaks and Walk For Life. No dice, I guess.

Up until now the Police liaison committee has failed to see the magnitude of what has happened after the Ottawa police released private medical information — of a man already in custody — that included his name and photo to the public. An act, by the way, that has also been criticized by Ottawa Public Health.

In taking the police cash, Capital Pride has shown that they too, fail to see the magnitude of the disaster that the police actions could cause. They have also distanced itself from other community groups — a decision they made with eyes-wide-open when it became clear that other groups were walking away from the breakfast.

The groups who understand the damage the police actions have done have already shown their solidarity — the Youth Services Bureau, Aids Committee of Ottawa, Bruce House, Pink Triangle Services, the Gay Men’s Wellness Initiative, Jer’s Vision, Xtra and Ten Oaks Project have all stated their dismay at the Police handling of the HIV non-disclosure case.

Capital Pride does, however, have another chance to show their solidarity with queer and HIV activists working on the HIV criminalization file. At the Human Rights Vigil on Thursday, they have asked a police officer from the Hate Crimes Unit to speak. Bauer has asked them to un-invite the police.

The question is, will they stick to their guns, or will they change the lineup?

But, back to the breakfast. It is an event intended to show off collaboration between the police and the queer community.

I am not sure it did. Marion Steele co-chair of the committee tried to speak out about the liaison committee being committed to the community — especially in the aftermath of the HIV non-disclosure case — but she got sidetracked by the smell of sausages and the seriousness of her message was lost in humour.

Doug Saunders-Riggins, Chair of Capital Pride also spoke, but only to announce the opening of Pride week.

If there was someone who did shine at the event, it was Bauer — he is not a face that anyone was eager to see and he is definitely not a favourite with the liaison committee. But he was there, alone, representing an increasing number of queers, AIDS activists and community groups who are not happy with the police’s recent actions.

It is partly because of Bauer that I am glad I went to the breakfast. He restored my belief in what standing up for the queer community means and what Pride should represent.

The pressure isn’t going away until the liaison committee — and now Capital Pride — understands the magnitude of what’s happening. What Capital Pride decides to do about Thursday’s vigil will be interesting — and god knows what will happen on Sunday when the police march in the Pride Parade.





Share |


Reader Comments


 
Is pride isolating itself?
No, only the minority of the queer community willing to distance itself from the police is. The police are there to protect queer people if they get bashed for being queer. Do we really need to shun them because of what they did to one HIV-positive man? Is this really the smartest thing to do? They are still doing their job to protect us. If we'd like, we can shun them and deal with gaybashers ourselves. I'd love to see how many more people go free after hurting us. If these groups want to be angry with Capital Pride and boycott them, go head. Capital Pride is there to celebrate past and present queer history and our accomplishments. If you want nothing to do with the festival, then don't go. I find this editorial, entertaining though it is, to reveal some really backwards thinking from the community.
Brad, Toronto ON
08/23/10 10:21 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
The simple fact
If we let them do what they did to "one HIV-positive man", then they can do it again. Not one of us is safe until all of us are safe.
Alan, Ottawa Ontario
08/24/10 11:44 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
It goes beyond
It goes beyond one person. All minorities in the city are targets of the police. Whether it's homeless youth, blacks or Muslims, the police will discriminate against them. It is a good idea to distance ourselves from the police. Remember, it was police who used to beat the shit out of queers back in the day.
Phobos, Ottawa ON
08/24/10 11:56 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Isolation?
It was your choice to sit on the outskirts of the event. Also, it's a huge conflict of interest that you're reporting on this and are also a board member of Ten Oaks. Just saying. Are you actually making the effort to talk to Capital Pride people and community members other than those that fall under this coalition at events?
RG, Ottawa Ontario
08/24/10 1:15 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Dealing with gaybashers ourselves - a great idea!
Check this out: http://www.680news.com/news/local/article/92678--neighbours-in-leslieville-defend-gay-couple-against-homophobic-attack Police culture is homophobic, racist and sexist. These liaison teams are PR exercises. So, yes, by all means let's deal with gaybashers ourselves - nothing really new with that, actually. Note that there's far more straight allies than cop allies out there, folks. Cops will always take care of their own. Good for you in attending, Noreen, and shame on RG for suggesting you were somehow in a conflict of interest is either seriously deluded, defending his pals, or desperately seeking to curry favour for future employment opportunities.
John, Ottawa Ontario
08/24/10 1:22 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Different Event?
It would seem Ms. Fagan and I went to entirely different events. The event I attended had a diverse and large crowd of queer folk of several descriptions, food kept running low and the general atmosphere was collegial and upbeat. Politics was kept out of it a merry time seems to have been had by all except perhaps a few agenda driven myopic types.
David, Ottawa Ontario
08/24/10 1:30 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
HIV stigma demonstrated
"Do we really need to shun them because of what they did to one HIV-positive man?" If you consider the lives and identities of people with HIV expendable, no. If you automatically assume that people with HIV are guilty before so proven and get what they deserve, no. If you think queers generally need to be protected FROM people with HIV, no. If you are at all decent and have any sense of solidarity or respect for people who are fucked over by the system, then GODDAMMIT HELL YES!
Tony, Toronto ON
08/24/10 3:22 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Not all gays are opposed to the Police actions
With the exception of calling the HIV+ person a "sexual predator" I feel the police public handling of this case was great. Xtra reporters are all clearly bias to one side of the argument and position it as if all gays feel offended by the police actions. I am gay and I commend the police for taking the PR hit in order to protect our community. I ask all Xtra reporters to please stop trying to speak for everyone, because far too often you speak for only a small minority. I was a member of the Police liaison committee ~11 years ago when the hot topic was public sex. At that time, I found that the committee was effective in making sure a lot of listening went on from all sides. Right now it seems everyone wants to send a message to the police but no one is waiting to hear from them when the shackles of the criminal process allow them to speak openly about what they know/knew. Please keep in mind that they can not release all of the damning evidence that they have so the public that is judging the police now are in effect hypcritically committing the same offence that they accuse the police of doing (punishing the person before the trial). Folks need to read between the lines and give the police at least a bit of a chance. The police are in effect accusing the HIV+ person of intentionally trying to spread the virus to as many people as he could before he was caught. There are anecdotal reports of numerous people who were infected who didn't know they were. Those people could have created a mini-outbreak in our community if it were not for the Police taking the steps they did which drove a number of people to go and get tested. Let us also remember that knowingly exposing a person to danger without them knowing is a crime. I really feel for the situation HIV+ people are put in, but that does not justify becoming an "Angle of death". Let's wait for the full truth be out before judging the police because you may be defendin
Jason, Ottawa Ontario
08/24/10 6:05 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Not all gays are opposed to the Police actions...
My last sentence should have read...Let's wait for the full truth be out before judging the police because you may be defending a monster without knowing it.
Jason, Ottawa Ontario
08/24/10 6:09 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
RE: Tony
If you note the sentence before the one you quoted, you're realize what my point is. "The police are there to protect queer people if they get bashed for being queer." Do you think it's smart to stop working with the police over an issue that is not so much queer as it is sexual HEALTH? Their actions towards the aforementioned case may be appalling to many, but the police still do another job for the queer community: protecting us from homophobia and transphobia. I think it's not fair to judge other queer organizations for not standing with others over an issue that is not unique to this community anymore. The police still protect us for practicing our right to love people of the same gender. The police are AIDSphobic, but they do help queers to live as their sexual orientations. And that's why I feel dismantling and splitting the queer community over this issue is ridiculous.
Brad, Toronto ON
08/24/10 6:24 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Innocent until proven guilty...?
Dear Jason and others who think like you, I don't believe that queers are generally opposed to the idea of exposing a man who has be proven to have intentionally spread HIV/AIDS. What we are worried about, is police exposing a man as guilty of such a crime before trial even began. One is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty... this man is being portrayed as guilty unless proven innocent. Let's also remember that the Liason Committee was created after a straight man was killed because he was assumed to be gay. The police does not seem to be there for queers as much as to protect everyone from homophobic or heterosexist acts... which is good in and of itself but is flawed in its execution leaving plenty of space for aids-phobia like Tony called it...
STGal, Ottawa Ontario
08/25/10 2:38 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
RE: STGal
Hello STGal. The police have a wide range of powers that they can choose to use or not use in the course of an investigation. One of those powers is the choice over what evidence will be made public. That decision comes with a huge risk for the police. If the police make too much information public before the trail, the defense has a lot of ammunition to claim bias throughout the process. In addition, if the police are wrong over the information they make public (once a trail is complete) than they can potentially be held liable for the damages caused by the release of inaccurate information. Those dangers alone are usually enough to force the police to carefully consider the information they release and to be darn certain that they must release that information in order to further justice and protect the community. I am not opposed to the GLBTQ community being a major player at a debriefing and evaluation of the police actions after all of the information is known. There may be better ways to handle these matters. What I am opposed to is the GLBTQ community committing the same offense that they are accusing the police of doing (judging a case before all the facts are known). The opposition against the police is all occurring right now without a full understanding of the position the police were in. To me, this approach is just as bad as judging the HIV+ person before his trial. I happen to know a few of the people who where in contact with the person in question. Each of those people who went and got tested were very thankful that they knew because of the police actions that there were put in a dangerous situation without even knowing what they were exposed to. Let us not forget the victims of this case are also part of the GLBTQ community. Who is rallying up support for them right now? Some of these people feel very violated and seeing that no one is standing up for them makes one question some the priorities of the media and supposed GLBTQ leaders
Jason, Ottawa ON
08/25/10 4:57 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
I am not opposed to the Police actions
The issue of the disclosure has been extensively debated, and I won't get into that here as I've talked about it many times. I would just like to say, that the solidarity of the queer organizations in regards to this issue is in fact telling of THEIR isolation from the community. By far the majority of my personal friends and peers support the police actions. I don't buy the public health/harm reduction argument, and I think this man should be in prison and everything except the "predator" part was well handled. I hope they do the same in the future. I don't know exactly how all the activists that represent queer groups came to their current positions, but I think they aren't representative of the community - only the activist community, which is far different. The fact queer groups weren't willing to suck it up for a pancake breakfast and be cordial is quite frankly, pathetic. You're not going to always agree with the police, the liaison committee isn't about ordering them around and always getting what you want, it's about opening a channel of communication, and you're evidently failing.
Alex Freeman, Ottawa Ontario
08/25/10 7:33 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
But Noreen I went up to you and said hi!
I guess it was so early you don't remember? The current case before the courts, once he was arraigned his ID was public. Anyone attending the arraigments know there are many reasons why the action taken was necessary. What I don't understand is this...And surely Brent knows this also, to change policy, to bring the issue of decriminalization the issue cannot be resolved by the Liaison Committee, or police, or regional or provincial govt. This is something that can only be changed at the Federal level. So why aren't you lobbying the Feds? I cannot wonder just what is the real agenda of the handful who are protesting police presence. Times have changed, and the actions of the Brent Bauers and the Marcus' are creating an us against them mentality, and taking us back in time instead of into a future of dialogue. Again, the Liaison Committee meetings are open to anyone, and we are all welcomed to share and make suggestions, but what I have witnessed is Jeremy, Brent, Marcus, show up for like the first time in a year, and bitch, complain, point the finger, leave before the meetings are over, and offered no alternative methods in which to work together but to then try and organize boycotts. I am truly perplexed......Note, interesting most of the blogs on different sites support the police decision and often those who don't live out of town. go figure.
Sylvia Martin, Ottawa Ontario
08/25/10 7:42 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Innocent until proven guilty?
I can understand the anger some have towards the police for releasing the name of the man in the non-disclosure case. You feel that he is innocent until proven guilty in court. I ask you this..when there's a serial killer on the lose, would you rather wait until he is caught, brought to trial and deemed guilty before you get a warning that he is out there? Knowing you are infected and spreading it anyway is no different than being a serial killer. The public deserves to be warned.
Cassidy, Ottawa ON
09/19/10 3:48 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.