The Merged Thread on Gay/ Homosexual Topics and the CF.

[Zell_Dietrich]

Well if he had a chance in hell of winning the riding it would be different.  I'd turn my crack berry's camera to video mode and say something to set him off on a rant. (I had to stop myself when I saw a prominent Liberal cabinate minister kissing and holding hands with someone who wasn't his wife. )  But as it is he is just typical of the anti-military crowd. 

I respect people who are principled and stand up for their convictions - but there must be considerations given to how legitimate ones position is and how respectfull one is of others.  The fist part is debateable,  but the second is something one can see. Like others have said here, banning a group from participating based upon preconceptions, is both ignorant and disrespectful.  Another example: Fred Phelps.  The legitimacy of his point of view ( http://www.godhatescanada.com ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEQuW2v6U2o but I certainly can see how respectful one is.  ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_ukGKVvwXU )

 

[mpo060]

Homosexuality poses a direct threat to the heteronormative constructs of the military institution. It is not surprising that there would be a number of officers and men opposed, either publicly or privately, to a mainstream acceptance of homosexuality. Having said that, this thread was particularly refreshing for me - especially after having read many others on the army.ca forums.

Canada has, without a doubt, been a human rights leader insofar as attempting to break down these heteronormative constructs. The Palm Center (an institute of the University of California at Santa Barbara committed exclusively to the study of Sexual Minorities in the military) has documented Canada's growing pains in this respect with moderate success. The more 'informal' progress on these matters is a matter of debate.

On the topic at hand, I disagree with Ms. Groom's decision to prohibit the participation of the Canadian Forces in the Pride Parade. But her decision, and that of the organizing committee, should be respected. Our Forces are actually fully/partially interoperable with several NATO countries that still allow for discrimination against GLBTQs (including, most prominently, the United States). I would be interested to find out whether or not our interoperability agreements protect our own soldiers against discrimination at the hands of our American counterparts. Other countries, such as Great Britain, have only as recently as 2000 begun to allow GLBTQs to serve. Echoing the sentiments of another poster, I would be hesitant to pass judgement on the decision because of how sensitive our global Queer community is to military issues. As lame as it might sound to the uninformed observer, the loyalties of our local queer community still lie with the global queer community. In terms of the relationship between the Canadian Forces and the GLBTQ Community, the institutional memory of both can very easily recall a time and place when things weren't as they are today. Growing pains are going to happen on both sides.

On the more general topic of Gay Pride events ... every social movement has its fringe membership. It would be a terrible mistake to let that fringe membership define the broader aims of the social movement. A good majority of the folks marching in Pride are just that ... proud. There are a few that demonstrate their pride with a little more flamboyance than I, myself, would be comfortable with, but a thorough understanding of the Gay Rights movement in light of broad Queer Sociological Theory makes it easy to understand: oppression begets passionate defiance. Canadian Queers are fortunate that our parades are no longer protests, but rather celebrations.

Saying that one is proud of oneself is a profound social statement; one not often made in contemporary society (on any subject!). Being modest and humble are the aim of any game. I would argue that this is the new challenge for contemporary soldiers: to change institutional attitudes about homosexuality, one must be 'out' everywhere. A gay officer should be comfortable in public with his/her 'other.' I've heard many of my fellow officers express concern over being 'outed' in the forces. One common concern: that there exists potential for unspoken inflammation in the relationship between a queer Platoon/Company Commander and his/her 'old school' NCMs. You're right when you say that tolerance does not imply acceptance. But, just as in the relationship between parents and a child, acceptance characterized by understanding makes for a richer relationship. A queer can't change who they are.

And a quick closing note on the ridiculous idea of straight pride parades (mentioned earlier) ... every day is Straight Pride day! Check out your billboards, turn on your TV, and open up a magazine. GLBTQs are acutely aware of how heterosexual everything is. For one day a year, a bunch of queers get together, honk horns, build floats, wear assless chaps, parade around in their underwear, and transform a few city blocks into a sexually inclusive paradise. It shouldn't be this difficult.

 

[chrisf]

Some disjointed thoughts on this subject...

While in highschool, a very good friend of mine came flaming out of the closet one day. He came to me and said "Hey, if I had a coming out party, would you come to it?".

I said "Sure".

He said "You know what that means right?"

"Yeah."

"It means I'm gay!"

"I know. You're actually the last one to notice."

Some years later, this same friend, who at the time, was, for lack of a better word, a bit of a "queen" (I think this was more him still getting used to himself, he's since "calmed down" quite a bit. To quote the simpsons version of the gay pride parade "We're here, we're queer, get used to it!" "We are used to it! You do this every year!" "Spoil sport") , asked me about joining the reserves, to which I said "Go for it, you might want to tone down the the "queer attitude a bit"

"Oh, they're not very accepting are they?"

"No, it's just really irritating."

Which is how I view it, and why I view this whole issue of the forces in the gay pride parade as bothersome.

While I admit that the fact that I'm younger then the majority of the members of the armed forces, and growing up in a "more enlightened time" (It was around the same time as my QL3 grad parade that the first homosexual marriage was performed by a padre) may have given me a slightly different perspective then my baby-booming peers, I don't see homosexuality as an issue. I've always been a subscriber to the "if you can do the job, then do the job" mentality. I'm willing to accept anyone that can do the job and conduct themselves as a professional.

That being said, I take some issue with CF members marching in the gay pride parade in uniform, because as far as I'm concerned, the forces should remain "politically blind", with no association with any causes (purely philanthropical causes, such as fund-raising for medical care and treament, etc, being the exception). I don't like the fact that the uniform can be associated with poltical cause. I have no problem with these individuals marching in the parade, and I have no problem with them identifying themselves as CF members if interviewed... it's just against associating the uniform with the cause... alternatively, I'm quite open about the fact I generally vote conservative, and I'd have just as much problem with a CF member showing up to a conservative rally in uniform.

Fortunately, I take much more issue with the organizers of the hamilton gay pride parade, in being so ignorant of their surroundings and reality as to make a decision like this...

End result, after looking at the pictures provided on the CBC website (And of course noting the prominent navy uniform ;D) I'm glad to see that the members taking part in the parade conducted themselves as professionals, and mainted their dress to an acceptable standard.

 

[garb811]

mpo060:

If Canadian pride parades are now a celebration and no longer a demonstration, how does Queer Sociological Theory justify continued passionate defiance?  Other than using it as an academic excuse for exhibitionism or borderline activities meant to shock "the prudes"?

1991 was 17 years ago and in my opinion, the vast majority of CF members today could really care less about the sexual orientation of an individual until that individual makes an issue of it.  At this point in time, if an officer is really concerned that their sexual orientation is going to poison their relationship with their Snr NCOs, I'd submit the officer should stop being so paranoid and just get on with becoming a competent and professional leader.  If the officer is able to achieve that not so simple goal then they've already won the battle, no matter what the Snr NCO actually privately thinks about their sexuality.  I know many Snr NCOs and WOs (myself included) who have absolutely detested their officer for a variety of reasons but continued to carry out their duties to the best of their ability because it is what professionals do; put their personal feelings aside and get on with it and pray for the day not too far down the road when the officer will be shuffled off to tick another box and a fresh young face comes in.

Personally, I do not think it is the CF which needs a change of attitude but rather people like yourself who seem to be living in the past even though you never experienced "the bad old days".  Yes, pre-'91 was not a great time to be gay and in the CF but I challenge you to show me any other employer, either public service or private, which has taken the steps the CF has to not only acknowledge and accommodate but also to integrate those of the community and to educate the CF as a whole about what that meant.  I would also challenge you to show me any organization with the robust safeguards in place that the CF has to ensure everyone is treated equally with an institutionalized mechanism to accept, investigate and redress any breaches of acceptable behaviour of all types, not just discrimination against those in the community.  It's funny you should bring up the issue of loyalty to the greater GLBTQ community as the concern about where the loyalties of GLBTQ individuals lay was a large factor in it taking so long for the CF to decide that sexual orientation wasn't a security concern any longer.

If you think you need to blaze a trail in the CF, or more specifically the MP Branch, don't worry about it.  In the Branch, that I know, are a LCol who is out to those that know them, a MWO who is out and who has been in a declared, committed relationship for the past 10 years at least, and who always brings their spouse to CF functions, no questions asked, no eyebrows raised.  I am aware of numerous others, some officers, some NCMs, who are publicly out, some who aren't except to those who they are friends with and some who I believe are GLB but they haven't told me and I haven't asked because, at the end of the day, I could really care less, which is the same attitude I have about those who I believe are straight.  Since joining the Branch I have personally worked with numerous individuals who were GLB.  In the early days it was an open secret in the guardhouses and when the time came, some came out, some didn't.  It was their choice and everyone respected that choice.  It certainly didn't impact on how we interacted, socially or professionally, because it just didn't matter then just like it doesn't matter now.

You state that it is your belief that "one must be out everywhere".  That sounds dangerously close to advocating the community "outing" CF members who choose to keep their sexuality a private matter for the "greater good".

Reference your questions regarding interoperability (and somehow using that to justify the exclusion of the CF from the parade when that was not even on of the issues publicly stated by the organizers), your ignorance of what that actually means is showing.

The vast majority of the items you listed are heterosexual in orientation because, believe it or not, the vast majority of Canada's population is heterosexual.  On the other hand, you don't have to look too far to find community oriented publications, television shows, public personalities etc etc etc even within the mainstream sources.

Finally, you stole the line my mother used to use when I asked when "Kids Day" was going to happen and it is as idiotic now as it was way back when she replied "Everyday is Kid's Day".  One day the community is going to have to face up to the fact that, at least in the major metropolitan areas of Canada, it is essentially mainstream and stop with the "in your face" confrontational attitude because there really isn't much more to be gained at this point because those who are non-accepting at this point never will.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Here's a question:  Why do people feel the need to share their predilections with the world?  At the end of the day, I don't care, nor am I interested in, who you decide to sweat up the sheets with.  Keep your shit to yourself, I'll keep my shit myself, and let's just get on with things.

 

[George Wallace]

Here's a question:  Why do people feel the need to share their predilections with the world?  At the end of the day, I don't care, nor am I interested in, who you decide to sweat up the sheets with.  Keep your shit to yourself, I'll keep my shit myself, and let's just get on with things.

;D

Says the man sitting in a rocking chair on the front stoop, cleaning his shotgun and watching his timepiece very closely, waiting for his daughter's date to bring her home.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Okay, where's the camera hidden, George?  I really don't need to do that, they all get to come in and see my collection of edged weapons hanging on the walls.

 

[FascistLibertarian]

Finally, you stole the line my mother used to use when I asked when "Kids Day" was going to happen and it is as idiotic now as it was way back when she replied "Everyday is Kid's Day". 

My mom said that as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children's_Day#Canada

Canada
Canada's "National Child Day" is held November 20th each year as enacted in Bill C-371, otherwise known as the Child Day Act, by the Parliament of Canada in 1993 to fulfill Canada's commitment to the United Nations General Assembly's recommendation to observe a Universal Children's Day. Canadian Children's Rights Council It is not a holiday in Canada.

I wish I had wikipedia back in the day.....

 

[Greymatters]

Regarding the Hamilton parade organizers, has anyone considered that the complainant was another anti-war protest group type, just expanding their opinion in a new direction...?  And that the organizers fell for it hook line, and sinker?  They're pretty up the only group out there that keeps parroting the same old line about human rights violations ad nauseum...

 

[mpo060]

I'm sorry that my original post was so unclear. I don't advocate "outing" members, and certainly don't feel the need to "blaze a trail." It's too bad that you have read those themes into my post.

When I say that "one must be out everywhere," I am referring to the individual choice to be out not being limited to a gay pride event. I have already stated that I know of many members that choose to keep their sexuality a private matter, but should not have assumed that my respect for that decision would be read into my statement. I believe that the true challenge of any GLBTQ CF member is to be comfortably out. Admittedly, many of the barriers to actually 'coming out' in the Canadian Forces are self imposed.

When I speak of "interoperability," I am referring to the practice of appointing the senior officers of allied nations to senior command positions within other allied militaries (i.e., Gens Hillier and Natynczyk both served in senior command positions in Fort Hood). My concern should have been articulated more precisely to ask: With the current "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy of the United States, would a senior officer identified gay/lesbian/bisexual be eligible for senior appointments with the United States military? I might not agree with Ms. Bloom's decision; but I am hesitant to pass judgement on it. There is too much information missing.

I am most appreciative for the strides that the Canadian Forces has made in accepting GLBTQ folks and have applauded them in this regard. Their leadership, especially when contrasted with the progress of our allies, has been exceptional. I had thought I had adequately expressed that in my post.

(In response to your 'challenge': it should be noted that the decision to cancel CFAO 19-20 could be characterized as "hesitant" to say the least. For more information on the complicated process, you can see the Gade section of "Out In Force: Sexual Orientation and the Military" published in 1996. If you would like to see examples of private corporations that have made the transition far more willingly, check out the HRC's Corporate Equality Index. Because many of these corporations are American, only a handful of them have been legally required to change their workplace policies in the same manner that the CF was.)

With respect to your comment in response to my invocation of Queer Sociological Theory: I was only explaining the origins of the pride event. Just because the word of law says we're equal, doesn't mean that we actually are. GLBTQs will continue to be discriminated against so long as we live in a heteronormative society. As you have so courteously pointed out, we're severely outnumbered (6%, + or - a few). The discrimination faced by sexual minorities is only slightly different than the discrimination complained of by women or racial minorities. A concealable stigma still presents the stigmatized with extraordinary challenges. Gay Pride events are a social response to those stigmas: "I don't care what you say, I'm proud of who I am and what I do." Many might argue that this attitude and the way that it is expressed in the form of gay pride events is a little self destructive; but the flamboyance of such demonstrations will eventually tone down. For a more explicit example, look no further than the second wave radical feminist movement of the 60's and 70's.

Having said that, I can most definitely see where you are coming from. Pride is very often misunderstood and comes off as a touch unnecessary.

This was a card that I got from a friend a while ago that I thought was absolutely hillarious:

 

[Zell_Dietrich]

I'm reading on this thread, from a few people, that pay pride parades don't serve their purpose of convincing the majority that GLBT community is worth of their respect.

The pride parade isn't primarily for anyone but the GLBT community.  It is about shaking off the shame and degradation one has piled on oneself.  If you doubt me, have a quick peek at the history of St Patrick's day. 

http://www.history.com/minisite.do?content_type=Minisite_Generic&content_type_id=851&display_order=2&mini_id=1082
"The First Parade
St. Patrick's Day is celebrated on March 17, his religious feast day and the anniversary of his death in the fifth century. The Irish have observed this day as a religious holiday for thousands of years.

On St. Patrick's Day, which falls during the Christian season of Lent, Irish families would traditionally attend church in the morning and celebrate in the afternoon. Lenten prohibitions against the consumption of meat were waived and people would dance, drink, and feast—on the traditional meal of Irish bacon and cabbage.

The first St. Patrick's Day parade took place not in Ireland, but in the United States. Irish soldiers serving in the English military marched through New York City on March 17, 1762. Along with their music, the parade helped the soldiers to reconnect with their Irish roots, as well as fellow Irishmen serving in the English army.

Over the next thirty-five years, Irish patriotism among American immigrants flourished, prompting the rise of so-called "Irish Aid" societies, like the Friendly Sons of Saint Patrick and the Hibernian Society. Each group would hold annual parades featuring bagpipes (which actually first became popular in the Scottish and British armies) and drums.

No Irish Need Apply
Up until the mid-nineteenth century, most Irish immigrants in America were members of the Protestant middle class. When the Great Potato Famine hit Ireland in 1845, close to a million poor, uneducated, Catholic Irish began to pour into America to escape starvation. Despised for their religious beliefs and funny accents by the American Protestant majority, the immigrants had trouble finding even menial jobs. When Irish Americans in the country's cities took to the streets on St. Patrick's Day to celebrate their heritage, newspapers portrayed them in cartoons as drunk, violent monkeys.

However, the Irish soon began to realize that their great numbers endowed them with a political power that had yet to be exploited. They started to organize, and their voting block, known as the "green machine," became an important swing vote for political hopefuls. Suddenly, annual St. Patrick's Day parades became a show of strength for Irish Americans, as well as a must-attend event for a slew of political candidates. In 1948, President Truman attended New York City 's St. Patrick's Day parade, a proud moment for the many Irish whose ancestors had to fight stereotypes and racial prejudice to find acceptance in America.

Wearing of the Green Goes Global
Today, St. Patrick's Day is celebrated by people of all backgrounds in the United States, Canada, and Australia. Although North America is home to the largest productions, St. Patrick's Day has been celebrated in other locations far from Ireland, including Japan, Singapore, and Russia."

I took liberties with the pink,  showing some of the parallels that can be drawn.  I think it is important to note that many of the immigrants did actually talk funny, they really did attend a different church but guess what, they still could be proud of who and what they are.

 

[Zell_Dietrich]

In my last post I didn't really tie into the theme of the thread - oops.  I'm not having any luck getting ahold of the socail network for Hamilton Pride,  but just in case someone here wants to http://www.hamiltonpride.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=52&Itemid=61  That's the contact page:

Contact Us       
About HPFI 
Hamilton Pride wants to hear from you.  We welcome all comments and questions, especially those that help us adjust the programming during Pride week to best reflect our diverse community.
Get in touch by email:

Website & General queries: info@hamiltonpride.com
Volunteers: volunteer@hamiltonpride.com
Media requests: media@hamiltonpride.com

Once again, I used the pink for my own emphasis.
Programming, partnership and sponsorship: chair@hamiltonpride.com
Accounts payable and receivable: treasurer@hamiltonpride.com
Call us at: 905-528-0207 ext. 245

Send us mail at:

Hamilton Pride Festival, Inc.
101 - 140 King St. East (map)
Hamilton, Ontario
L8N 1B2

 

[Jarnhamar]

I'm reading on this thread, from a few people, that pay pride parades don't serve their purpose of convincing the majority that GLBT community is worth of their respect.

The pride parade isn't primarily for anyone but the GLBT community.  It is about shaking off the shame and degradation one has piled on oneself.

mpo060's attached picture sums up my feelings on the whole gay pride thing perfectly.
I don't see how the theme and flavor of some of these parades/floats helps the "were just like you" imagine.

The pictures I see coming out of these parades make it look like a circus. I'd rather my children think homosexual means prefer partners of the same sex and not someone who dress up like it's Halloween.

 

[Springroll]

I'd rather my children think homosexual means prefer partners of the same sex and not someone who dress up like it's Halloween.

But Halloween is so much fun!!!  ;D

I kid, I kid.

Just saw some pics from our local pride parade, and it seems pretty tame compared to some that I have seen.
Hope everyone who went had a great time.

 

[mpo060]

I'm reading on this thread, from a few people, that pay pride parades don't serve their purpose of convincing the majority that GLBT community is worth of their respect.

The pride parade isn't primarily for anyone but the GLBT community.  It is about shaking off the shame and degradation one has piled on oneself.  If you doubt me, have a quick peek at the history of St Patrick's day. 

Bang on.

The pictures I see coming out of these parades make it look like a circus. I'd rather my children think homosexual means prefer partners of the same sex and not someone who dress up like it's Halloween.

We get preferences?

 

[Poppa]

The pride parade isn't primarily for anyone but the GLBT community.  It is about shaking off the shame and degradation one has piled on oneself.  If you doubt me, have a quick peek at the history of St Patrick's day. 

http://www.history.com/minisite.do?content_type=Minisite_Generic&content_type_id=851&display_order=2&mini_id=1082
"The First Parade
St. Patrick's Day is celebrated on March 17, his religious feast day and the anniversary of his death in the fifth century. The Irish have observed this day as a religious holiday for thousands of years.

On St. Patrick's Day, which falls during the Christian season of Lent, Irish families would traditionally attend church in the morning and celebrate in the afternoon. Lenten prohibitions against the consumption of meat were waived and people would dance, drink, and feast—on the traditional meal of Irish bacon and cabbage.

The first St. Patrick's Day parade took place not in Ireland, but in the United States. Irish soldiers serving in the English military marched through New York City on March 17, 1762. Along with their music, the parade helped the soldiers to reconnect with their Irish roots, as well as fellow Irishmen serving in the English army.

Over the next thirty-five years, Irish patriotism among American immigrants flourished, prompting the rise of so-called "Irish Aid" societies, like the Friendly Sons of Saint Patrick and the Hibernian Society. Each group would hold annual parades featuring bagpipes (which actually first became popular in the Scottish and British armies) and drums.

Ah yes...however, my ancestors didn't dance on floats wearing assless chaps and G-Strings to techno music.

 

[vonGarvin]

I still find the notion of being proud of your sexual orientation, though neither would I find it to be a source of shame, either.
Anyway, given that some 1-2 % of our population is homo- or bi-sexual(according to Statscan), it would be crazy to have anything other than a heteronormative culture.
As I've stated (and I'll say it again in case people are too lazy to look back in this thread), there are many "bad" things in this world, and bigotry is probably one of the worst.  Stop making excuses for the organizers of the Hamilton parade.  Even though I believe that homosexuality is anything other than "natural", that's not the point.  Have your parade, have a great day, and I wish you all the best. Having said all this, it's none of my business if anyone is gay, straight or otherwise.  In fact, it should be as moot as the fact if you're left handed, right handed or ambidextrous.
Okay, I've come off as a bigot enough I suppose :, suffice it to say here's to hoping that bigotry won't affect next year's Hamilton parade (or any other parade, for that matter).

 

[Greymatters]

I still find the notion of being proud of your sexual orientation, though neither would I find it to be a source of shame, either.
Anyway, given that some 1-2 % of our population is homo- or bi-sexual(according to Statscan), it would be crazy to have anything other than a heteronormative culture.
As I've stated (and I'll say it again in case people are too lazy to look back in this thread), there are many "bad" things in this world, and bigotry is probably one of the worst.  Stop making excuses for the organizers of the Hamilton parade.  Even though I believe that homosexuality is anything other than "natural", that's not the point.  Have your parade, have a great day, and I wish you all the best. Having said all this, it's none of my business if anyone is gay, straight or otherwise.  In fact, it should be as moot as the fact if you're left handed, right handed or ambidextrous.
Okay, I've come off as a bigot enough I suppose :, suffice it to say here's to hoping that bigotry won't affect next year's Hamilton parade (or any other parade, for that matter).

Unfortunately that's incorrect - at Statscan, some 1-2% of the population have self-declared their sexual orientation, which is quite a bit different from how many people are actually GLBT. 

Private surveys have had results of up to 5%, and studies on the subject at US institutes indicate that up to 10% of the population in North America could be GLBT. 

 

[vonGarvin]

Unfortunately that's incorrect - at Statscan, some 1-2% of the population have self-declared their sexual orientation, which is quite a bit different from how many people are actually GLBT. 

Private surveys have had results of up to 5%, and studies on the subject at US institutes indicate that up to 10% of the population in North America could be GLBT. 

Private surveys, funded by "someone" usually have an agenda, irrespective of the questions involved.  That 10% is a myth from the Kinsey report.  Long debunked, often quoted.
Still, suppose it's 20% or 2 %.  It matters not.  After all there are lies, damned lies, and statistics, right?

 

[Greymatters]

True, its hard to tell what's skewed and what isnt.