Today Monday Tuesday
It is forcast to be Chance of a Thunderstorm at 10:00 PM CDT on May 19, 2013
Chance of a Thunderstorm
90°/66°
It is forcast to be Thunderstorm at 10:00 PM CDT on May 20, 2013
Thunderstorm
86°/68°
It is forcast to be Thunderstorm at 10:00 PM CDT on May 21, 2013
Thunderstorm
84°/66°

25 Comments

news

“Israeli Apartheid” Doesn’t Violate City’s Anti-Discrimination Policy

20100609pride1.jpg
Photo of Pride 2008 by Sweet One from the Torontoist Flickr Pool.

City staff have determined that the phrase ‘Israeli Apartheid’ in and of itself does not violate the City’s Anti-discrimination policy as it does not impede the provision of services and employment provided directly by Pride or the City to any group on any grounds provided for in the Policy. The City staff has carefully reviewed the matter of whether the participation of QUAIA [Queers Against Israeli Apartheid] violates the City’s Anti-Discrimination Policy. To date, the phrase “Israeli Apartheid” has not been found to violate either the Criminal Code or the Human Rights Code (Ontario).

This, taken from a report released this morning [PDF], just made Pride Toronto’s quest for ongoing funding from the City a bit easier. Mayor Ford and many other councillors have been making noise about pulling funding from Pride if the organization allowed QuAIA to march again this year, on the grounds that it would be promoting hate speech. That particular line of attack is now largely toothless—though of course Ford may continue to argue that even if the terminology doesn’t violate the letter of any existing policy or legal code, it is morally questionable or inappropriate.


More likely, in the current cost-cutting climate at City Hall, any cuts to Pride’s funding will now be justified on more directly fiscal grounds. Last year the City gave just over $120,000 to Pride, and during last year’s election campaign Ford repeatedly said that under his administration the City may no longer fund festivals in the manner or to the extent that it has in recent years. (Caribana was the other major festival for mentioned most often, as an example of a festival that may see some changes.) On the campaign trail Ford’s mantra was “we fund all of them or we fund none of them”—the implication being that since the City only grants money to some festivals right now, out of equity it should simply cease funding them all.
The staff report will be discussed by the City’s Executive Committee at its April 20 meeting; the City’s funding for Pride this year has not yet been decided. Meanwhile, the Globe is reporting that: “A study of the 2009 Pride Festival found that it generated over $90-million and 600 full-time jobs for the city.” This, on top of an unquantifiable contribution to Toronto’s culture, will ensure that any proposed cuts to Pride would be one of the bitterest fights at City Hall yet.
UPDATE, April 13, 2:20 PM: Speaking to reporters shortly after the report’s release, councillor Doug Holyday (Ward 3, Etobicoke Centre) rejected the staff report’s conclusions, stating he’d oppose funding for Pride if QuAIA were allowed to march this here. “If they want to go out and have a good time and celebrate their gayness, that’s up to them,” he said, and then going on: “But when they’re using that money to make some political points and to put people down, we’re not into putting our money up for that, as far as I’m concerned.”

Comments

  • http://twitter.com/accozzaglia accozzaglia

    Now I get to watch my close friends on totally opposing factions of this proxy debate use this report finding to resume figuratively slashing each others' throats without actually listening to a single word being uttered from them.

    I feel like the kid in a failed marriage saying, “Ima and papa, please stop fighting over this one! For the children? For the children? For the children?*”

    * Yes, that was very Scott Pilgrim of me, but I'm serious about the core point.

  • http://twitter.com/MichaelWent Michael Went

    All kidding aside, you can look at the statistics of LGBT youth suicide (as noted by the It Gets Better campaign) or increasing HIV/AIDS rates (as evidenced by my work with the Black Coalition for AIDS Prevention). Pride Toronto, particularly in the community fair and the Blockorama stage, provides a venue for information about vital services that build community, create jobs and save lives.

  • isyouhappy

    Here's hoping that the Liberals have a booth in the community fair showcasing their “equity” policy, so that we can have a discussion about their silence(the Minister of Education and the Premier continue ignore emails, tweets and questions from journalists) towards the Catholic Board banning #GSAs using their 'Pastoral Guide' as a reference on how to deal with LGBT youth issues.

  • http://blog.abugfreemind.com/career-change Career Change

    Hope they can solve this early….and I agree with you @isyouhappy …

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=509203497 Patrick Clobo

    good to see a few people at the city don't have their heads as far up their asses as rob ford. israel is undeniably an apartheid state. it's been said by countless prominent south africans, renowned human rights activists, and even many prominent israelis. people should be less concerned about israel's image problem and more concerned with its reality problem. given the unconditional support that israeli apartheid state gets from the canadian gov't, it's the responsibility of canadian citizens to hold our leaders accountable for supporting war crimes and apartheid against palestinians.

  • tyrannosaurus_rek

    Rob Ford will find another excuse to cut funding, this would have been a useful avenue to do it.

    Remember: he's a homophobe.

  • http://twitter.com/accozzaglia accozzaglia

    I have a dumb, uninformed question to ask you: were the optics of apartheid policy lifted, the nation-state of Palestine founded and recognized by most other UN states, and the walls between the two states came down, would the nation-state of Israel be respected a lot more than it is now, or would there be a voiced effort to dismantle that nation-state?

    I ask this as a clueless n00b, as someone who has close friends staunchly on both sides of this local fracas, this kerfuffle — friends whom I donʻt ever want meeting one another given the current polarization between them on this matter (amusingly, one is plain-jane straight, and the other is straight but identifies as queer for purposes of the kind of intimacy they consensually enjoy). I also ask this as someone who is quite openly queer as a dyke here in Toronto and refuses to pick sides — or friends.

    Cheers.

  • munnemun

    accozzaglia, that's actually a good question (believe it or not). There are a lot of different opinions on how a Palestinian state would effect the legitimacy of Israel.

    Some leaders in the middle east would like to normalize relations with Israel, but this is impossible while the West Bank remains occupied by the Isreali army. Countries like Morrocco, UAE, Qatar, etc. don't have specific disputes with Israel per se, but establishing relations now would be very difficult unless a political agreement was made with the Palestinians. Although Egypt and Jordan have peace treaties with Israel, their relationship would be much better once Palestine is recognized as free and independent. The same goes with Turkey, as certain elements of the country (e.g. military and business leaders) believe it is in the national interest to have better ties with Israel, but the current situation with the Palestinians strains this relationship considerably.

    On the other hand, many believe that the establishment of a Palestinian state would be a step towards further attacks and the delegitimization of Israel. I have heard this from both Israelis and Palestinians. We should also keep in mind that there would remain disputes between Israel and Palestine, and it is likely that there will be continued armed attacks between the two states. Many Palestinians do not accept the legitimacy of the Israeli state, even within its 1948 borders. It is quite likely that some groups would continue to conduct attacks, and that the optics would remain quite similar to how they are today.

    Just as some militants fire rockets from Gaza into small towns in Israel's south, it is possible that militants would fire rockets from the Palestinian state in the West Bank, and would be able to strike Tel Aviv, and shut down Israel's international airport.

    So it's not quite clear what would happen if a Palestinian state is established, as you asked. I believe that it would improve day to day life for Palestinians, and may help Israel's relations with certain countries, though for the most part there would still be a campaign against the legitimacy of the state of Israel, as there has been since 1948. Hopefully we'll get a chance to see what happens for ourselves.

  • tyrannosaurus_rek

    “Israeli Apartheid is quite possible the most intellectually bankrupt term of the last decade and distracts people from the horrible treatment of Palestinians at the hands of Arab regimes where the vast majority of Palestinians live (75%).”

    Whether true or not, QuAIA has apparently decided they are far more concerned with the treatment of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank and choose to voice it. And it's their right.

    “If you changed the name to Palestinian Apartheid, then we could jointly focus on their mistreatment where ever they are and not divide our energies.”

    There's nothing stopping anyone from starting Queers Against Palestinian Apartheid, if they are that passionate about the matter. I can only speculate that they've chosen the name and focus they have because it gets them and their cause attention, it dovetails with other organizations' and international concerns about the issue, and perhaps seems more achievable than taking on a dozen individual nations.

  • http://twitter.com/accozzaglia accozzaglia

    Thanks so much for this response. I may still not understand many of the specifics you mentioned, but this broad view sort of helps.

  • asdfg1

    Good points, t-rex! Of course it's their right and while I disagree with their position, it's an issue of free speech am I support that. Free speech isn't just for those who agree with you.

    As for focussing on just one nation vs dozen arguement..that still strikes me as very unbalanced and disingenuous. 20% of Israel is Arab and a smaller percent of that is Palestinan. Since Israel recognizes gender equality, gay rights, ect, the less that 20% of their population is suffering from the human rights abuses (which is unconscionable).

    The surrounding Arab state hang gays(10% of any population), women aren't equal (52% of the population), and discriminate/ghettoize their Palestinan population (at least 10%). While there is some crossover in the numbers, these countries forcibly discriminate against at least 2/3 (66%) of their population. If you attack Israel for it's abuses on less than 20%, to be consistent you should have at least equal action against countries that abuse 66% of their population. It would be better to target your actions where there is more widescale abuse.

    It just seems to me easier/flashier to target a open, free-press democracy like Israel than the work it would require to attack Saudi Arabia or Lebanon since, like you said, so many other groups already do it..but where are the marches in front of the Saudi Embasy when women/gays are executed? What about their actions for the plight of First Nations Canadians? You can protest all you want against another country but you have little political capital. As a citizen of Canada, you have tremendous resources/voting rights to better the situation of First Nations Canadians.

    Back to the original point you made. It is their right but what other groups would be involved into a parade that should about gay rights? I free Pride would soon become just a flashpoint for any worldwide grievance instead if being a joyful, unifying event. It'll soon become..

    Queers against Indian Kashmir
    Queers against Pakistan Kashmir
    Queers for a united Spain
    Queers for a independent Basque region
    Queers for a independent Catalonia region
    Queers for an independent Quebec
    Queers for an Independent Northern Ireland
    Queers for a United Ireland
    Queers for an Independant Kosovo
    Queers for a Untied Serbia
    Queers for a Greek Cyprus
    Queers for Turkish Cypus

  • tyrannosaurus_rek

    So it has to be all or nothing? If QuAIA doesn't become Queers Against All Forms of Injustice Everywhere, it's, what, hypocritical?

    “What about their actions for the plight of First Nations Canadians?”

    What about the WWF's, PeTA's, or Greenpeace's? Why does the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty remain silent on the Bhopal Disaster? Why haven't the Sea Sheppards rammed their ships into the Burmese junta? I really hope you see where I'm going with this.

  • asdfg1

    No it doesn't have to be all or nothing and I do appreciate we can have a rationale talk on this. Very rare these days and thank you.

    Good point about Sea Sheppard vs Burma et al but it does seem that a bit of a stretch for them to focus soley on Palestinians in two strips of land when they are being as badly treated (if not worse) just a few miles further. OCAP is about poverty in Ontario so that's what they focus on. If your group is about the treatment of Palestinians, it seems disengenious to parse things so finely..but that's just me. Comparing things to apartheid seems a juvenille ways of getting attention and is more divise than constructive..but that's just me though.

    Regardless of that issue, I think this controversy speaks more to the growing pains that Pride is growing through and a redefinition of what it is and what it's going to be. Is just about gay rights and acceptance? Is it about reflecting their communities concerns? Will be be more inclusive or more strictly defined as there's a greater acceptance in the general society? Wherever they draw the line, people will be angry but it will cause discussion of issues that people might not have thought about before.

    Personally, I hope it doesn't turn into an 'airing of grievances' festivus parade and retains it joyfulness!

  • http://twitter.com/TransPride Trans Pride Canada

    Pride Toronto's lack of responsiveness to its constituents and tone-deaf management of community relationships are the root cause of this particular battle.

    As divisive and destructive as this issue is, it is just a symptom of a much deeper malaise – Namely, a lack of compliance with equity practices. Pride Toronto's compliance (or non-compliance) is the question which the City is investigating.

    The “apartheid” question has received the most publicity – But it is by no means the only compliance issue which the executive has to consider. The transgender community has put forward a strong case to suggest that Pride Toronto's policies and practices have been discriminatory.

    These discriminatory practices are more tangible, less academic… and hence easier to demonstrate…Combine this with a volatile and radicalized trans community and one has the makings of an interesting debate.

  • tyrannosaurus_rek

    “If your group is about the treatment of Palestinians,”

    As the name indicates, their group isn't about the treatment of all Palestinians, just those under “Israeli Apartheid”. They've picked their area of focus, just as OCAP restricts their involvement in poverty issues to Ontario.

  • asdfg1

    Agreed. It's just the hyperbolic use of the term apartheid that gets under my skin. Comparing any unequitabe treatment in the world to the actual institutional barbarism of those that suffered under apartheid cheapens the arguement and implies israelis are acting like Apartheid supporters. Kind of like when people compare Canadian politicians to Hitler.

  • torontothegreat

    Apartheid was a system of legal racial segregation. Until that changes, there is nothing hyperbolic about it.

  • asdfg1

    Torontothegreat, did you even read my first post outlining why it's flawed to use the term apartheid to Israel's treatment of Palestinians? Palestinans have full rights of citizenship and protection in Israel..unlike how they are LEGALLY discriminated against in the rest of the middle east. Here's what I wrote, when you can come back to me with actually facts instead of 'truthiness' that fit your wounded and convienient narrative.

    'Israeli Apartheid is quite possible the most intellectually bankrupt term of the last decade and distracts people from the horrible treatment of Palestinians at the hands of Arab regimes where the vast majority of Palestinians live (75%). If you changed the name to Palestinian Apartheid, then we could jointly focus on their mistreatment where ever they are and not divide our energies.

    1) Apartheid mean no legal status. In Israel, Palestinians have voting rights, are elected to the government, have been in the ruling cabinet, have been in the supreme court, given national health-care, have afirmative action quotas in universites/college, are in high ranks in the military, are directors of hospitals and universities. This did not happen in South Africa.

    2) Every Arab country in the middle east have denied Palestinians citizenship so they can't vote, labout laws don't apply to them, are forced to live in refugee camps and not freely in the rest of the country, the labour codes specify what jobs they are not allowed to do (anything where they'd be in a supervisory position over 'citizens'), denied national health care, restricted access to colleges..not to mention sharia law, stoning of women, honour killing. In 2007, Lebanese security opened fire on a Palestinan ghetto they had chased bank robbers into. The siege went on for days and they even called in helicopter gunships to continually strafe the area. Where were the pro-palestinian protestors outside of the Lebanese embassies? If Israeli did even a little of this..imagine the world wide outrage.

    3) Israel is the only country in the region that legally protects and give full equality/rights to homosexuals and women, recoginzes gay marrige, and is the area where gays from all over the middle east seek refuge to they can live for free.

    Israel does have things to answer for but whatever scale you use to judge Israel by, just use the same standard for it's neighbours as well.'

  • tyrannosaurus_rek

    “Apartheid mean no legal status.”

    Strictly speaking, no it doesn't. It means people are separated by race/etc, and the suppression and punishment are legal and systematic, regardless of how the group or individual is otherwise recognized (or not) by the law.

    In this light, the Jewish-only settlements, collective punishment of neighbourhoods and households, the “Wall of Separation” containing Palestinian land, forced emigration of 12 year olds out of Israel and denial of residency and citizenship… well, there's a reason the comparison to South Africa is being made. QuAIA didn't coin the phrase.

  • torontothegreat

    Hauled out of your home by a non-ruling military, told to relocate and sent to an internment camp until you could rebuild your life again.

    Clearly apartheid is the wrong word to use here :P

    *Rek, sorry the reply was meant for asdfg1

  • torontothegreat

    “Palestinans have full rights of citizenship and protection in Israel”

    Full citizenship? On who's terms? Israel's or Palestines?

    Protection? Yea, I always hear about Israeli airships launching missiles into the general Jewish population. Also that whole Lebanon war in 2006, you remember? Where Arabs were NOT protected but Jewish “settlers” were?

    “On 31 July 2003, Israel enacted the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law (Temporary Provision), 5763-2003, a one year amendment to Israel's Citizenship Law denying citizenship and Israeli residence to Palestinians who reside in the West Bank or Gaza Strip and who marry Israelis; the rule has been waived for any Palestinian “who identifies with the State of Israel and its goals, when he or a member of his family has taken concrete action to advance the security, economy or any other matter important to the State.”"

    “While most Arabs remaining in Israel were granted citizenship, they were subject to martial law in the early years of the state. Travel permits, curfews, administrative detentions, and expulsions were part of life until 1966. A variety of legal measures facilitated the transfer of land abandoned by Arabs to state ownership. These included the Absentee Property Law of 1950 which allowed the state to take control of land belonging to land owners who emigrated to other countries, and the Land Acquisition Law of 1953 which authorized the Ministry of Finance to transfer expropriated land to the state. Other common legal expedients included the use of emergency regulations to declare land belonging to Arab citizens a closed military zone, followed by the use of Ottoman legislation on abandoned land to take control of the land.”

    “However, tension continued to exist with many Arabs calling for Israel to become a “state of all its citizens”, thereby challenging the state's Jewish identity. During the 1999 elections for Prime Minister, 94% of the Arab electorate voted for Ehud Barak. However, Barak formed a broad left-right-center government without consulting the Arab parties, disappointing the Arab community”

  • billy3b

    I just want to reply to see how narrow the reply column can get. I have absolutely no interest in this debate. I started off sort of caring but the constant juvenile attitude of both sides has rendered the debate pointless.
    When you think aout it this narrow reply is a good metaphor. the more it is debated the narrower the scope and the less people will notice it.

  • billy3b

    I just want to reply to see how narrow the reply column can get. I have absolutely no interest in this debate. I started off sort of caring but the constant juvenile attitude of both sides has rendered the debate pointless.
    When you think aout it this narrow reply is a good metaphor. the more it is debated the narrower the scope and the less people will notice it.

  • http://twitter.com/AndreiMincov Andrei Mincov

    Most people unwittingly consider laws against private discrimination one of the greatest social achievements of the modern times.  In my new article in support of abolition of anti-discrimination laws, I explain how these laws are nothing more than a tool of everyone’s enslavement.
    Read it at http://mincov.com/articles/ind

  • O’hara

    July 2010 & Sep. 2011 – Two dates in official ‘Arab apartheid Palestine’ – ethno-religious cleansing – Nazi judenrein policy

    * July 2010, “Palestinian” PM Mahmlud Abbas declars the region should be ‘Jew free’ [http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3929819,00.html]

    * Sep. 2011, ‘Palestinian’ [PLO] ambassador to the US Maen Areikat declares that a Palestine “State,” should be ‘Jew free.’

    [http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/judenrein-palestine_593537.html]
    [http://www.israeltoday.co.il/News/tabid/178/nid/22948/language/en-US/Default.aspx]
    [http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/147927]

    Why, they are all about “fighting the occupation” of-course.

    And these are the same hypocritical-propagandists who would brand self-defensive anti-terror operations with a falsified “apartheid slur”, mind you. All the while multi-racial democratic Israel treats its 20% Arab citizens [eventhough, most Arabs in the area, the so-called "Palestinians" are not really natives... their parents or grandparents immigrated from: Egypt, Syria, etc.] with preferential treatment / affirmative action.

Our weather forecast is from Wunderground for WordPress