I can't relate to this. Most police forces in Australia's states have dedicated offices devoted to building strong relationships with the LGBTI communities: in many cases, they're called "GLLOs",...
I can't relate to this. Most police forces in Australia's states have dedicated offices devoted to building strong relationships with the LGBTI communities: in many cases, they're called "GLLOs", or Gay and Lesbian Liaison Officers (this old acronym has been retained even though the current focus is broader and more inclusive, because it has brand recognition).
Sure, the police forces' relationships with the LGBTI communities in the past have been bad and shameful. However, the modern police forces are putting in sincere efforts to redeem themselves.
They march in Pride marches and the Mardi Gras, and I see absolutely no reason why they should be excluded. At the very least, the LGBTI members of the police should be allowed to participate - and if they can get permission from their commanders to march in uniform, this should be encouraged. If the GLLOs also want to march (and there's definitely some overlap between GLLOs and LGBTI officers), they should be allowed: building connections between the police and the LGBTI communities is their role.
Why should today's police be blamed for the sins of their predecessors? They've disowned that behaviour, in some cases apologised for their past wrongs, and are actively trying to be better.
I can understand wanting to exclude corporations who are participating for profit motives, rather than sincere support. Back in the mid-2000s, I helped to found and set up an LGBT employee network at the large multinational corporation where I worked. It quickly became clear that the corporation's motive in supporting us was more about being able to advertise how pro-LGBTI they are, rather than out of any sincere desire to assist their LGBTI employees. When they put a float in the Mardi Gras, it was an advertisement, not a supportive gesture. So, those corporations should be excluded.
But police are not driven by profit. And our police, at least, are trying to make up for the past wrongs done by their predecessors. It's not fair to punish them for those past wrongs after they've apologised and are making amends.
I can't relate to this. Most police forces in Australia's states have dedicated offices devoted to building strong relationships with the LGBTI communities: in many cases, they're called "GLLOs", or Gay and Lesbian Liaison Officers (this old acronym has been retained even though the current focus is broader and more inclusive, because it has brand recognition).
Sure, the police forces' relationships with the LGBTI communities in the past have been bad and shameful. However, the modern police forces are putting in sincere efforts to redeem themselves.
They march in Pride marches and the Mardi Gras, and I see absolutely no reason why they should be excluded. At the very least, the LGBTI members of the police should be allowed to participate - and if they can get permission from their commanders to march in uniform, this should be encouraged. If the GLLOs also want to march (and there's definitely some overlap between GLLOs and LGBTI officers), they should be allowed: building connections between the police and the LGBTI communities is their role.
Why should today's police be blamed for the sins of their predecessors? They've disowned that behaviour, in some cases apologised for their past wrongs, and are actively trying to be better.
I can understand wanting to exclude corporations who are participating for profit motives, rather than sincere support. Back in the mid-2000s, I helped to found and set up an LGBT employee network at the large multinational corporation where I worked. It quickly became clear that the corporation's motive in supporting us was more about being able to advertise how pro-LGBTI they are, rather than out of any sincere desire to assist their LGBTI employees. When they put a float in the Mardi Gras, it was an advertisement, not a supportive gesture. So, those corporations should be excluded.
But police are not driven by profit. And our police, at least, are trying to make up for the past wrongs done by their predecessors. It's not fair to punish them for those past wrongs after they've apologised and are making amends.