Accessibility at Pride has been a battle for a long time now, and one where we’ve seen significant progress being made. More Pride events are being held in barrier-free spaces, more parades are including low-sensory and accessible spectating areas, and more events are featuring both ASL interpretation and audio description. There is of course work to be done, but for the most part it seems that Pride event organizers are stepping up, and more and more of us every year have access to participate in Pride. The barrier now is, sadly, the rest of us, the attendees, many of whom seem determined to gatekeep who can, and cannot, celebrate our community.
Let me be clear. Pride is not for everyone, nor should it be. Hatred and bigotry have no place at Pride, and anyone showing up to try to shame and intimidate our community should be enthusiastically rejected and sent packing. But in my opinion, that is where the gatekeeping should end. This is apparently not a widely held opinion.
Every year I hear in public discourse and even casual conversation with friends about who should, and should not, be welcomed at Pride. Sometimes there are good arguments to be made, rooted in historic and ongoing oppression and intimidation. The argument that uniformed police have no place in a Pride parade is one I can understand for these reasons. Pride grew from a need to defend our community from police violence, violence many members of our community still face and are still being traumatized by. ‘But what about the gay cops?’ isn’t a strong enough argument in my head to allow uniformed police at Pride. I don’t wear my workplace affiliation to Pride events, and gay cops don’t need to either.
But if we ban police from participating in Pride because of historic and ongoing trauma and violence, why are we so accepting of the ever growing number of religious organizations entering floats in our parades? Their histories of traumatic anti-LGBTQ violence are just as well documented, and often much longer. For that matter, why do we allow corporations and banks to sponsor events and enter parade floats when a month from now they’ll go right back to donating to anti-gay politicians and making massive investments in violently homophobic countries?
‘It’s a slippery slope’ is an argument that has been used against our community’s fight for basic rights for so long that I feel a bit grimy using it here, but it fits. Gatekeeping some groups from Pride, even for valid reasons, makes it easier to justify blacklisting others. It also makes it easier and more acceptable for folks to start opposing all kinds of people at Pride, including some of those who stood up, fought back, and started this whole movement in the first place.
For years I’ve heard that there is no place for straight people at Pride. (Who really needs allies?) And that there is no place for kink and sexuality at Pride. (Hysterical considering sexuality is, last I checked, a rather important part of LGBTQ life and identity.) I’ve heard there’s no place for bisexuals in straight-presenting relationships at Pride. (You’d better turn in that membership card the minute you start dating someone of the opposite sex!) All of these arguments have struck me as deeply silly and uninformed by history, but nothing makes me want to throw a history book at someone’s head more than hearing someone argue that Pride ‘is about gay rights, not trans rights’.
Trans folks haven’t always had our backs in the fight for LGBTQ rights, because they’ve usually been too busy throwing bricks from the front. Our fight has often had the same enemies, motivated by the same ideas, denying us the same or similar rights. And how have we repaid our trans allies? In the 70s and 80s we banned trans activists from our gay rights events so we could focus on presenting fine, upstanding, ‘normal’ gays who wouldn’t freak out our hetero neighbors. When the fight for marriage equality finally succeeded across Canada, a lot of gay men and women dusted off our hands, hung up our ‘Mission Accomplished’ banners, and went home without a thought for our longtime allies who are still being denied rights, medical care, and safety at work, school, and home.
Gatekeeping at Pride is, at its most excusable and understandable, counter-productive. Banning uniformed police from Pride protects the traumatized, but it also sows more division between our community and a group we know from experience can be a powerful and dangerous enemy. It’s understandible, but ultimately perhaps undermines our own long-term interests.
Gatekeeping at Pride within our own communityis nothing but a celebration of ignorance and injustice. Cis-presenting gays celebrating the ‘LGB’ community with the explicit omission of the T, something that sadly seems to be growing in popularity on social media, should be no more acceptable than the gay dating profiles proclaiming ‘white masc guys only’ or the ever so charming ‘no fats, no femmes, no Asians’.
If you don’t feel safe having uniformed cops at Pride, I understand. If it feels weird having big corporations and churches at Pride, I can understand that too. But if you think members of our community don’t deserve to be at Pride because they’re wearing too little or they’re dressed too weird or they don’t fit the ‘wholesome gay couple’ image of a marriage equality campaign ad, feel free to skip the parade. Stay home, read a book. Maybe read a history book. (Seriously, are any of us learning from history?) Frankly, I’m not sure what you’d have to show up and feel pride about anyway.
