.png){kind=small}
The board of the organization that plans and hosts NYC Pride has put a five-year ban on law enforcement involvement in the events, even for those in the LGBTQ+ community.
In the ensuing debate, the issue has been distilled into a single question: Who is Pride for? For many, the answer is easy: It’s not for cops. After all, the march commemorates the 1969 Stonewall Uprising, in which the NYPD brutally enforced unjust laws that effectively criminalized being gay. The protests that followed became the foundation of the gay rights movement.
For these participants, Pride can only be true to form if it maintains its original anti-establishment bent. Stonewall is — and should always remain — a protest. But if the intervening decades of activism and progress are to have any meaning, Pride also has to be a place for those who have fought for change from within the very establishments that most need reform.
Why not? They're still people after all, and attending pro-Pride events doesn't take take away from their position as law enforcement officials. In fact, it could help LGBTQ+ community members to feel more at ease among their local police, since they know some support their advocacy.
💯, this quote says it all “Police cannot peacock as allies for one day a year and not expect to be held accountable for their actions the rest of the time."
In my opinion, cops are the antithesis of Pride. Any member of the community should be able to celebrate their identity, but, to me, there's no place for an on-duty, in-uniform cop at a historically anti-police brutality movement. If an LGBTQ+ member of law enforcement wants to attend, they should do so completely out of uniform.