Pride Toronto must return to its political roots, advocates say as sponsors leave
Ahead of last month's Pride parade, organizers sounded the alarm over Pride Toronto's $900,000 shortfall after sponsors such as Google, Nissan, Home Depot and Clorox pulled their support.
Pride Toronto executive director Kojo Modeste attributed the corporate withdrawals to backlash against diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in the United States, though some of the companies said their decisions were made solely because of budgetary considerations.
Although this year's festivities went ahead as planned, Modeste warned that next year's Pride festival may have to be scaled back.
Fatima Amarshi, a former executive director of Pride Toronto, says this is the right moment for a reset.
Amarshi led the organization for three years starting in 2005, right after Canada legalized same-sex marriage, and helped lay the foundation of its current funding model.
Story continues below advertisement
At that time, she said Pride Toronto vetted corporate sponsors only to ensure their internal policies were supportive of LGBTQ+ employees and the broader community.
'We weren't looking at how corporate sponsors were funding arms manufacturers or fossil fuels or efforts to suppress Indigenous land claims. We were linking queer rights to human rights at the level of state repression and legislative oppression, but not via those who fund those efforts,' she said.
2:07
Pride Toronto loses some key corporate sponsors
During her tenure, Pride Toronto's budget grew from a little under $1 million to around $3 million, Amarshi said.
Get daily National news
Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day. Sign up for daily National newsletter Sign Up
By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy
But as that budget expanded over the years thanks to major corporate sponsors, some criticized the increasing commercialization of the annual Pride festival at the expense of its original purpose. More recently, Pride Toronto has faced calls to cut ties with corporations that allegedly profit from Israel's offensive in Gaza.
Story continues below advertisement
Gary Kinsman, one of the founding members of the Lesbian and Gay Day Pride Parade – the organization that eventually became Pride Toronto – resigned in 2024 over that issue and what he called the organization's refusal to hear the demands of the group Queers in Palestine.
Founded in 1981, the Lesbian and Gay Day Pride Parade was a grassroots picnic and political march formed in response to increasing right-wing opposition to the LGBTQ+ community and a series of violent raids by Toronto police at bathhouses in the city. The first event involved a march down a much shorter strip of Yonge Street in front of the police detachment that organized the raids.
Kinsman said the grassroots spirit of the festival continued throughout the 1980s, but a turning point came in the '90s when organizers started looking to involve corporate sponsors, which prompted early signs of division that came decades later.
'This begins to change its (Pride) character fundamentally. It moves quite sharply from being a community-based organization to becoming an organization not defined by communities but by alliances with corporate forms of organization,' Kinsman said in an interview.
Pride Toronto did not respond to requests for comment for this story.
For Beverly Bain, who along with Kinsman co-founded a group called No Pride in Policing, the growing calls to break Pride Toronto's ties with corporate sponsors is long overdue.
Story continues below advertisement
'Pride Toronto, as it exists today, is a corporate pinkwashing Pride. I do not think it's an organization that should be continuing to exist,' Bain said.
Pride Toronto hasn't adequately highlighted issues that disproportionately affect the LGBTQ+ community, such as poor access to housing, mental health struggles and increased substance use, Bain said.
'We go back to the political roots of Pride … a political struggle for the liberation of queer and trans and non-binary and those who are racialized and those who are Indigenous and two-spirited and Indigenous and queer.'
Monica Forrester, executive director of Trans Pride Toronto, said she started attending the Pride festival in 1998, when it was still very much a protest organized by local shops, bars and community centres.
1:51
Thousands take to city streets in Toronto's Annual Dyke Rally and March
'We were still in a time of the bath house raids … and the transphobia and violence that a lot of queer people were facing, not only by people, but by systemic violence. It was really a time where we stood up to show our visibility, that we were here, we were queer and we weren't going anywhere,' Forrester said.
Story continues below advertisement
But that changed over time, with corporate sponsors appearing to be at the forefront of Pride events, Forrester said. The fact that some of them have pulled support for the festival is 'a testament that they were never really our allies,' she added.
Faisal Ibrahim, a spokesperson for the Coalition Against Pinkwashing, said it would be a 'bare minimum' for Pride Toronto to cut ties with sponsors who financially benefit from Israel's war efforts in Gaza, and agrees with Forrester that a heavy corporate presence can detract from the overall message of Pride.
Looking back, Amarshi said it was 'incredibly short-sighted' to bring corporate sponsors into what she said has been a vital institution in advocating for queer rights.
'If Pride doesn't find a way to manoeuvre and be accountable to the community and continue to be in a position where the community feels it legitimately represents them, the community will find its own voice and will find its own path forward.' Amarshi said.
'It's never needed scale. It's needed to be loud and it's needed to be brave. That's what started Pride and that certainly hasn't gone away.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
6 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Trump's demand for Washington NFL team name change ignores years of psychological data, experts say
This week, President Donald Trump threatened to hold up a new stadium deal if Washington's NFL team did not restore its name to a racial slur, despite decades of psychological research showing the negative mental health impacts of Native American mascots. The president is demanding a private company change its name to something that researchers have linked to a variety of negative mental health outcomes, particularly for children, said Mark Macarro, president of the National Congress of American Indians. The organization has been pushing back on stereotypes of Native Americans since the 1950s, including Native sports mascots. 'This is a big reminder with this administration that we're going to take some backward steps,' Macarro said. 'We have our studies, we have our receipts, and we can demonstrate that this causes real harm.' More than two decades of research on Native mascots have shown they lead to heightened rates of depression, self-harm, substance abuse and suicidal ideation among Indigenous peoples, and those impacts are the greatest on children. Citing this data, the American Psychological Association has been recommending the retirement of Native mascots since 2001. The president believes that franchises who changed their names to 'pander to the Woke Left' should immediately restore their original names,' White House spokesperson Davis Ingle said in a statement to The Associated Press. 'Thanks to President Trump, the days of political correctness and cancel culture are over,' he said. Some teams change names while others resist Under pressure from decades of activism, the Washington Redskins — a racial slur and arguably the most egregious example — retired the name in 2020, eventually settling on the Commanders. Later that year, the Cleveland Indians changed its name to the Guardians. Two major league teams, the NFL's Kansas City Chiefs and the NHL's Chicago Blackhawks, continue to resist calls to change their names. The Chiefs have banned fans from wearing headdresses or face paint meant to depict Native Americans at games but has resisted prohibiting the use of the 'tomahawk chop', which critics have long called derogatory. More than 1,500 grade schools across the country — a decrease over the past few years — still use Native mascots, according to the National Congress of American Indians, using names like 'Savages' as well as the slur that Trump aims to bring back to the Washington team. Experts say Native mascots reinforce racial bias Native American people, activists, and leaders have been asking for the retirement of Native mascots for generations. Popular arguments defending the mascots have been that they 'honor' Native people or that it simply boiled down to people being 'offended,' said Steph Cross, a professor of psychology and researcher at the University of Oklahoma and a citizen of the Comanche Nation. But now we have decades of data that agrees on the negative mental health impacts, she said. 'Being offended is not even really the problem. That's a symptom,' Cross said. She noted that Native mascots aren't just harmful to Indigenous peoples, they also reinforce racial prejudices among non-Natives, including people who will work directly with Native people like health care professionals and teachers. 'I think about these people who are going to be working with Native children, whether they realize that or not, and how they may unintentionally have these biases,' Cross said. Stephanie Fryberg, a professor at Northwestern University, who is a member of the Tulalip Tribes and one of the country's leading researchers on Native mascots, said, 'The ultimate impact, whether conscious or unconscious, is bias in American society.' Her work has also shown Native mascots increase the risk of real psychological harm, especially for young Native people. 'Honoring Native peoples means ending dehumanization in both imagery and policy,' she said. 'Indian Country needs meaningful investment, respect, and the restoration of federal commitments, not more distractions or excuses for inaction.' Several states pass Native mascot bans In recent years, several states — including Maine, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, and New York — have passed laws or issued directives that ban or require districts to change Native mascots. A law prohibiting them in Illinois stalled this year in the state Senate. The Trump administration has interjected into other efforts to change Native mascots. This month, the U.S. Department of Education launched an investigation into a Long Island public school district working to retire its Native American-themed mascot. 'The Department of Education has been clear with the state of New York: it is neither legal nor right to prohibit Native American mascots and logos while celebrating European and other cultural imagery in schools,' said U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. When it comes to grade schools specifically, the negative impacts on children's mental health is compounded by the fact that U.S. history standards largely ignore Indigenous history and rarely frame Native Americans as modern people, said Sarah Shear, a professor and researcher at the University of Washington. In 2015, she was part of a study that found 87% of schools in the U.S. teach about Native Americans in only a pre-1900 context. That hasn't improved much in the decade since the study, Shear said. Most curriculum also doesn't present the arguments against harmful stereotypes, like Native Mascots. 'Just on the standards documents alone,' Shear said, 'I'm not surprised that Trump and other folks continue to advocate that these mascots are celebratory when they're not.'
CBC
10 hours ago
- CBC
Will we have thinking robots by 2030? Or is this just hype from big tech?
These days many people use artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots for everything from dinner suggestions to battling loneliness, but could humanity be on the cusp of creating machines that can think for themselves — and potentially outthink their creators? Some big tech companies say that kind of breakthrough, referred to as general artificial intelligence (AGI), is just a few years away. But skeptics say you shouldn't believe the hype. "Whenever you see someone talking about AGI, just [picture] the tooth fairy, or like Father Christmas," said Ed Zitron, host of the tech podcast Better Offline and creator of the Where's Your Ed At? newsletter. "These are all fictional concepts, AGI included. The difference is you have business idiots sinking billions of dollars into them because they have nothing else to put their money into," he told The Current. Experts disagree on the fine details of what counts as AGI, but it's generally considered to be an artificial intelligence that is as smart or smarter than humans, with the ability to learn and act autonomously. That intelligence could then be installed in a robot body that could complete a multitude of tasks. WATCH | Google's humanoid robot can pack your lunch: Demis Hassabis, CEO of Google's AI lab DeepMind, recently said that his company will achieve AGI by 2030. "My timeline has been pretty consistent since the start of DeepMind in 2010, so we thought it was roughly a 20-year mission and amazingly we're on track," he told the New York Times in May. Zitron isn't convinced. He said that Hassabis is "directly incentivized" to talk up his company's progress, and pointed to uncertainty about the profitability of AI chatbots like Google's Gemini or OpenAI's ChatGPT. "None of these companies are really making any money with generative AI … so they need a new magic trick to make people get off their backs," he said. AGI 'always 10 years away' AI expert Melanie Mitchell says people have been making predictions about this kind of intelligent AI since the 1960s — and those predictions have always been wrong. "AGI or the equivalent is always 10 years away, but it always has been and maybe it always will be," said Mitchell, a professor at the Santa Fe Institute in New Mexico who specializes in artificial intelligence, machine learning and cognitive science. She said there isn't a universal agreement about what a working AGI should be able to do, but it shouldn't be confused with large language models like ChatGPT or Claude, which are a type of generative AI. Large language models (LLMs) that power generative AI programs have been trained on "a huge amount of human-generated language, either from websites or from books or other media," and as a result are "able to generate very human-sounding language," she told The Current. Zitron said that distinction is important, because it highlights that "generative AI is not intelligence, it is calling upon a corpus of information" that it's been fed by humans. He defines AGI as "a conscious computer … something that can think and act for itself completely autonomously," and has the ability to learn. "We do not know how human consciousness works," he said. "How the heck are we meant to do that with computers? And the answer is, we do not know." Mitchell worries that without a widely agreed definition, there's a risk that big tech companies will "redefine AGI into existence." "They'll say, 'Oh, well, what we have here, that's AGI. And therefore, we have achieved AGI,' without it really having any deeper meaning than that," she said. AGI could be 'a suicide race' There are people outside the tech industry who believe AGI could be within reach. "If our brain is a biological computer, well, then that means it is possible to make things that can think at human level," said Max Tegmark, a professor at MIT and president of the Future of Life Institute, a non-profit that aims to mitigate the risks of new technologies. "And there's no law of physics saying you can't do it better," he said. Tegmark thinks there's a hubris or excessive pride in asserting that AGI can't be achieved, in the same way that many people once thought human flight was impossible. Some early inventors had tried in vain to create machines that mimicked the rapid wingbeats of smaller birds. But success came with a greater understanding of birds' wings, and the idea of a machine that glides instead. "It turned out it was a much easier way to build flying machines," Tegmark said. "We've seen the same thing happen here now, that today's state-of-the-art AI systems are much simpler than brains. We found a different way to make machines that can think." Tegmark says he wouldn't be too surprised if "it happened in two to five years," but that doesn't mean we necessarily should create robots that can outthink humans. He described these intelligent machines as a new species, one that could easily threaten humanity's place in the food chain "because it's natural that the smarter species takes control." WATCH | Teaching AI literacy to the next generation: Teaching AI literacy to the next generation 7 months ago A group of Calgary high school students is offering free courses on artificial intelligence to younger students. The classes are open to kids in grades seven to 10, take place at the University of Calgary library, and aim to teach students how to responsibly use AI tools like ChatGPT. "[The] race to build superintelligence is a suicide race, but we don't need to run that race," he said.
Vancouver Sun
a day ago
- Vancouver Sun
Majority of Canadians see progress a decade after Truth and Reconciliation report: poll
Most Canadians believe the country is making good progress on reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples, a new poll from Leger suggests. 'The extent to which people feel progress on reconciliation is being made or not has an important bearing on how they feel about the country,' said Jack Jedwab, president and CEO of the Association for Canadian Studies, which commissioned the poll. The survey of 1,580 respondents was conducted between June 20 and 22. A margin of error cannot be associated with the survey because online polls are not considered to be truly random samples. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. Forty-seven of the respondents self-identified as Indigenous. Jedwab said that small number and the lack of regional breakdowns of the numbers means the poll should be interpreted with caution. But the poll still shows where Canadians are 10 years after the final report from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission was released, he said. 'There's several attempts to measure progress on reconciliation by virtue of the extent to which we, collectively, have met the conditions of the various calls to action in the Truth and Reconciliation (Commission's) report,' Jedwab said. 'But we're not really taking, up to now, the pulse of Canadians in terms of whether or not they feel progress is being made. 'It's sort of a proxy for helping us understand how Canadians feel about their relationships.' Fifty-five per cent of poll respondents said they believe Canada is making good progress on reconciliation, but their answers vary widely between age groups — 40 per cent of respondents aged 18 to 24 said Canada was making progress, while 67 per cent of respondents 65 and older said the same. Jedwab said he was surprised to see such a large number of respondents reporting progress, given the many issues in the Crown-Indigenous relationship still unresolved. 'The survey suggests there's something to build on with respect to the relationship, with respect to reconciliation and with respect to how people feel about the country,' he said. The survey also asked whether Canadians trust other Canadians — the vast majority of respondents said they do. But respondents aged 18 to 24 reported being the most trusting of others, at 77 per cent, while those aged 35 to 44 were the least trusting at 52 per cent. Roughly six in ten non-Indigenous respondents said they trusted Indigenous people. Reported trust in Indigenous people is highest in Nova Scotia (71 per cent) and Ontario (64.3 per cent) and lowest in Saskatchewan (38.3 per cent), P.E.I. (43.8 per cent) and Manitoba (44.8 per cent). The survey also suggests respondents who said they are proud of Canada's history are more likely to report Canada is making good progress on reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples, at 68 per cent. Of those who reported they're not proud of Canada's history, just 39.3 per cent said they believe Canada is making good progress. Pride in Canada's history seems to be strongly correlated with the age of respondents. Just 36 per cent of respondents aged 18 to 24 reported feeling proud of that history, while 78 per cent of those 65 and older said the same. Francophone youth reported being more proud of Canada's history (59 per cent) than anglophones (35 per cent) — a finding Jedwab said he was surprised by, given the persistence of the province's separatist movement. Jedwab said while the poll found most Indigenous respondents reported feeling pride in Canadian history, it can't be taken at face value because the sample size was so small. 'There's a need to actually pursue further research in this area to get a better idea of how Indigenous Peoples feel,' he said. 'We need to be more attentive to that diversity in terms of drawing conclusions about the views of Indigenous Peoples … We do need to better understand what the nature of the relationship is right now, how people feel about whether progress is being achieved or not and how we go forward together.' The polling industry's professional body, the Canadian Research Insights Council, says online surveys cannot be assigned a margin of error because they do not randomly sample the population. Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here .
