Last week, in response to a derisory letter from the board of the Liberty City Democratic Club (LCDC), a meandering change.org petition concocted by one of said board members that garnered only 350 signatures, and the divisive rhetoric of fringe activists, the Philadelphia chapter of the Gay Officer Action League (GOAL) nobly removed themselves from serving as Grand Marshals of this year’s Pride parade. As much as their withdrawal reflected GOAL’s standing as understanding and responsive member of Philadelphia’s LGBTQ community, their decision was also a disappointment for many.
One of the concerns raised about GOAL’s appointment as Grand Marshals centered around the current state of police community relations—particularly the relationship and tensions between the police and communities of color, and the message that such an appointment would send. These concerns should not be dismissed. Nevertheless, the approach taken by a few fringe activists was designed only to divide and to exclude LGBTQ members of our community from participating in Pride, which is something that the LGBTQ community, as a united whole, should condemn.
We should condemn the fringe’s rhetoric as much as we should condemn police brutality and discrimination in minority communities. Both GOAL and COLOURS may agree on this position.
The letter from LCDC that legitimized the voices of this fringe was shameful, counterproductive, and ill-conceived. The message is counter to COLOURS’ vision of “Enhancing communities, building collaborations, creating alliances, and display[ing] the creativity and beauty of our community.” Likewise, it is counter to part of GOAL’s mission to, “stand together, with the LGBTQ community to which they belong and love, and represent what it is to wear the badge while being LGBTQ.” And it is counter to what Pride should be about.
This misguided approach toward affecting change has placed Philly Pride Presents, COLOURS, and GOAL in a unique position to send a powerful message to our community and beyond. I propose that Philly Pride Presents could, if both groups agree, name GOAL and COLOURS co-Grand Marshals at Pride this year. Imagine the show of unity such a move would make: standing united, rather than caving to divisiveness. The LGBTQ community in Philadelphia could serve as an example to the country as a whole, where tensions between the police and communities of color are both very real and very pervasive. A real alliance and promise to work together is a real message for change, not a message that seeks to prolong the historical tensions between police and communities of color. As Ernest Owens argued in his GPhilly opinion piece, “The local black HIV/AIDS advocacy group COLOURS, celebrating its 25th anniversary this year, would have been a more deserving recipient [of the position of Grand Marshal].” Although I disagree that we should be arguing over who is more or less deserving, Mr. Owens is correct that the work of COLOURS over 25 years does indeed merit the Grand Marshal position. As Philly Pride had initially decided, so, too, do the efforts of many police officers who worked toward creating the local chapter of GOAL over several decades. I urge these two groups to formally come together and demonstrate that the LGBTQ community is too strong and has fought for too long to be divided. As a diverse community, we can work together and commit to affecting real change.
It is worth examining the positions of the LCDC board in order to demonstrate that they are not serious about affecting change in our community or uniting us, and that their position is against what both COLOURS and GOAL purport to stand for. I write this while recognizing that LCDC’s letter—which was written behind closed doors by their board members and without consulting their general membership—does not speak for the entirety of LCDC. Nevertheless, the LCDC board was voted on by their membership, and the LCDC board’s letter was written on their letterhead. It will become the responsibility of LCDC membership to hold their board accountable for their divisive letter and clarify the organization’s position if they choose to do so. I offer a rebuttal to their letter, not on behalf of LCDC, as I am not affiliated with the group, but for whatever portion of the Philadelphia LGBTQ community might disagree with the LCDC board’s letter.
On the one hand, in their letter, LCDC’s board contends that their, “concern is rooted in making sure that Pride is a place where our entire community feels safe and valued,” yet their letter was penned knowing full well that it would cause members of GOAL (LGBT police officers, fire fighters, military personnel, first responders, etc.) to not feel valued. They state that, “Our variety of experiences and perspectives is what has driven our movement from Stonewall all the way to the Supreme Court, and Pride is our time to not only celebrate that, but also take time to focus on the progress we have yet to achieve.” The LCDC board, however, in their letter, demonstrates an unwillingness to recognize the contributions that LGBTQ civil servants have added to this fight. It is perhaps more concerning that they either misunderstand or dismiss the progress toward LGBT equality that GOAL members seek to bring to institutions that have historically been, and in some cases remain, unwelcoming to LGBTQ employees. This “progress we have yet to achieve,” however, is apparently not a platform that the LCDC board cares to stand behind or “focus on.”
LCDC’s letter states that, “We are a diverse community and that diversity is what makes us strong,” but GOAL members, as LGBT citizens and civil servants of varied sexes, races, gender identities, and religions, apparently do not contribute to making our community strong and diverse, according to the LCDC board. On the one hand, they contend that “Pride should be a day for our entire community to come together, and to leave out large swaths of LGBT Philadelphia goes against the spirit of what we are celebrating at Pride,” yet their distress over excluding community members apparently does not extend to members of the LGBT community who are also members of GOAL—in fact, their letter actively advocates for the exclusion of these members of the LGBTQ community.
Perhaps most self-indulgently, LCDC suggests that, “We believe that in light of the national conversation around state violence aimed at people and communities of color, we must publically support the members of our community working to create a Philadelphia that is safe for all of its citizens.” Activists working to address state violence in communities of color and to hold police officers responsible for such violence accountable are no doubt involved in important work. Yet, this comment dismisses the equally important work of the police officers, some of whom are LGBTQ and members of GOAL, who dutifully work in these communities to ensure safety and prevent crime; who, when social control and the efforts of activists fail, run toward ghastly crime scenes while most people are running away; and who, as a majority, do so while treating these communities fairly and without bias. By taking the positions that they have, the LCDC board paints all police officers as violent and bigoted.
Once dissected, it becomes clear that the LCDC board’s positions are flimsy and Janus-faced.
By attributing the acts of a minority of police officers to an entire organization, the LCDC board joins the ranks of those that they condemn. Their arguments are as feeble and simplistic as those made by individuals like Donald Trump, whose proposed temporary Muslim ban was justified by painting an entire religious group as potential terrorists based on the actions of a small minority.
The LCDC board’s folly offers an opportunity to draw attention to our Pride celebration not because we are divided, as current media reports have done, but attention that shows that we seek to unite. As my boyfriend’s beloved Beyoncé stated in Elle magazine after her video “Formation” came under attack by certain law enforcement groups for being anti-police:
“Anyone who perceives my message as anti-police is completely mistaken. I have so much admiration and respect for officers and the families of officers who sacrifice themselves to keep us safe. But let’s be clear: I am against police brutality and injustice. Those are two separate things.”
We do not need to be divided as the fringe hopes. We are a reasonable community, and we can support our LGBTQ officers while also condemning police brutality and discrimination. As a 15-year member of the Philadelphia LGBTQ community, I urge Philly Pride Presents to offer the groups co-Grand Marshal status, and for GOAL and COLOURS to discuss this possibility. Lets stand together and serve as an example to this country.
Dr. Evan Sorg holds a Ph.D. in Criminal Justice from Temple University, is a Professor of Law and Justice Studies at Rowan University, a former New York City police officer and a 15-year Philadelphia resident. He is not affiliated with GOAL, COLOURS, LCDC or Philly Pride Presents.