Building the Links

The Intersection of Race and Sexual Orientation

Prepared by: Chris Boodram

With contributions from Wayne van der Meide, Kim Vance, John Fisher, Fiona Meyer Cook, Anthony Mohamed, and Lisa Lachance (collectively the Egale Canada Building the Links organising committee)

Acknowledgements

Egale Canada and the Egale Canada - Human Rights Trust wish to acknowledge the generous assistance of the following sponsors of this consultation:

Canadian Heritage
Canadian Race Relations Foundation
Olivia Chow, Toronto City Councillor
Xtra!

We would also like to extend our heartfelt thanks to consultation participants for their time, energy, thoughts and commitment to the process of dialogue.

Table of Contents

Section 1: Introduction and Context

• About Egale
• About the Egale Canada - Human Rights Trust
• Egale, Intersectionality and Multiple Oppression
• Research Project on the Intersection of Race and Sexual Orientation
• Egale’s participation in WCAR
• Goals of the consultation

Section 2: Preparation and Lead-up to the Consultation

• How intersectionality shaped our view of the consultation
• Identifying participants
• Agenda-setting
• Organisation and logistics

Section 3: Consultation Weekend

• Tone/Atmosphere
• Summary of discussions
• Saturday
• Saturday Night Public Forum
• Sunday

Section 4: Evaluation

• Evaluation comments
• Lessons learned

Section 5: Recommendations for Egale & Next Steps

• Egale’s Response: Mainstreaming Intersectionality
• Conclusion: Next steps

Appendix

Section 1: Introduction and Context

Egale Canada is pleased to present this report on Building the Links: The Intersection of Race and Sexual Orientation, a consultation with lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered (“LGBT”) people of colour and two-spirited people held on February 16th and 17th, 2002. Building the Links is the latest stage of Egale’s work on intersectional, or multiple, oppressions, and the issues arising from them.

Section 1 of this report situates this consultation within the previous work of Egale, both conceptually and with regard to work on issues of race and sexual orientation. Section 2 describes the organisational process and logistics of setting up the consultation, with especial attention to the way in which we used our understanding of intersectionality to shape the consultation. Section 3 focuses on the weekend itself, summarising the issues discussed and the recommendations made. Section 4 evaluates the consultation, describes the response to the consultation recommendations by Egale as an organisation, and outlines Egale’s next steps.

About Egale

Egale Canada is a national organisation with members in every territory and province of Canada. We are committed to advancing equality and justice for lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and transgendered people and their families across Canada.

Egale has been active politically in lobbying for changes to ensure the equal treatment of LGBT people in federal law. Egale has met with members of Parliament from every political party on a number of occasions, and has been active in securing an amendment to the Canadian Human Rights Act to add “sexual orientation” as a prohibited ground of discrimination, in securing hate crimes legislation and in obtaining passage of omnibus legislation recognising the equality of same-sex couples in some 68 federal laws.

Egale has intervened before the Supreme Court of Canada on a number of occasions to support equal rights for LGBT people and those in same-sex relationships. Recent examples include a challenge to the Surrey School Board’s decision to ban books depicting same-sex couples and diverse family forms; a challenge to an Ontario printer’s refusal to print business cards and letterhead for the Canadian Lesbian and Gay Archives; a challenge to Canada Customs’ discriminatory practice of seizing books bound for bookstores serving LGBT clientele on the grounds of “obscenity”; and playing a part in the far-reaching M. v. H. case, which set the precedent for equal recognition by government of the rights and responsibilities of same-sex couples and sparked legislation recognising those rights and responsibilities at the federal level and in a number of provinces.

In the past two years, we have developed a public education and research committee and have become increasingly involved in international activities. Our new relationship with the Egale Canada - Human Rights Trust will allow us to further develop the research and public education aspect of our work towards equality. We have also recently seen a dramatic increase in membership and volunteer support, which has been crucial to the success of our activities.

Egale is a member of the International Lesbian and Gay Association, and Egale representatives attended the United Nations World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna, the United Nations World Conference on Women in Beijing, the International Year of the Family Conference in Montréal, and most recently the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in Durban. Egale participates annually in consultations organised by the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade to support the fulfillment by Canada of its international obligations regarding human rights generally and specifically the human rights of LGBT people worldwide.

About the Egale Canada - Human Rights Trust

The Egale Canada - Human Rights Trust was federally incorporated in 1995 as the Canadian Human Rights Trust, and obtained status as a registered charity in 1996.

Its mission is to forward the policy that the dignity and worth of all persons be recognized and that equal rights and opportunities be provided to all Canadians without discrimination because of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, family status or physical or mental disability. The Trust advances this mission by undertaking, directing and encouraging research into practices that discriminate, and by developing, implementing and conducting programs of public information, awareness and education designed to eliminate practices that discriminate.

In the past, the Trust has prepared public education kits, developed brochures, maintained information booths at Canadian Pride festivals, and prepared information packages on issues arising from the 2001 Census.

Current projects of the Egale Canada - Human Rights Trust include:

• conducting research and developing education kits on how same-sex couples are impacted by recent changes to federal legislation and follow-up information sessions and workshops in different regions of Canada;

• developing a Web site and regular fact sheets on current issues affecting LGBT people;

• developing a network for LGBT youth and educators;

• participating in a conference on LGBT health needs;

• planning a national conference on LGBT issues in May 2003;

• beginning research into the documentation of hate crimes across Canada.

Egale, Intersectionality and Multiple Oppression

The concept of intersectional oppression is one that recognises the fundamental diversity of all minority communities, as well as the complexity of the oppressions facing them. Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered communities in Canada, for example, include people with a wide range of racial, ethnic and linguistic backgrounds. They include women, men and people who identify as neither. They include poor, working-class, middle-class and rich people. They include people with and without disabilities. They include people with a wide range of gender identities and expressions.

Members of the LGBT communities are therefore members of a range of other communities at the same time. LGBT people experience oppression on the basis of their sexual orientation and gender identity, and may experience advantage or disadvantage on a range of other grounds. The crux of intersectional oppression is that LGBT people also face oppression on the grounds of their race, ethnicity, sex, linguistic background, ability, economic circumstances or any of a number of other factors. Oppression on the grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity and oppression on other grounds complicate each other, creating complex oppressions that for many reasons are more than simply the sum of their parts. 1

Thus, to work towards equality and justice for all members of the LGBT communities requires an understanding of the theoretical linkages between heterosexism, homophobia and transphobia, and other forms of oppression such as racism, sexism, ableism, anglocentrism and classism. It also requires a commitment to work actively on all equality issues facing members of our communities, alone or in coalition with like-minded equality seeking groups as appropriate.

As an organization working for equality and justice for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people, and their families, Egale is committed to recognising the links between different forms of oppression, and building alliances with other disadvantaged communities to affirm the universality of human rights and the principle of equal dignity for all.

Egale’s commitment to recognising linkages and building alliances is set out in our Bylaws:

 Egale recognizes that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people are as diverse as the Canadian population and embraces that diversity. Egale acknowledges that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people experience the world differently depending on their sex, race, age, class, dis/ability, language and other factors, and that for many of us the struggle for equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people cannot be separated from other campaigns for justice in which we are engaged.

This principle of the indivisibility of human rights is also reflected in the title of the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance (“WCAR”), which recognizes that the struggle against racism is intertwined with the struggle against other forms of intolerance.

Here are some of the ways in which Egale has advanced an intersectional analysis of human rights issues:

• Egale supported the inclusion of a “multiple grounds of discrimination” clause in the Canadian Human Rights Act, recognizing that human rights are indivisible and that diverse grounds of discrimination cannot be meaningfully compartmentalized;

• Egale has worked collaboratively with race and other equality-seeking groups in national consultations to strengthen Canada’s human rights protections for all disadvantaged groups;

• Egale has opposed mandatory HIV-testing for immigrants, and advocated measures to expand Canada’s immigration and refugee protections;

• Egale has sought measures to increase protections against hate crimes and to combat hate on the internet;

• Egale participated in the Hate and Bias Activity Roundtable organized by the Department of Multiculturalism;

• Egale was commissioned by the Court Challenges Program to prepare a paper on “Working In Coalition” in partnership with the Metropolitan Toronto Southeast Asian Legal Clinic;

• Egale coordinated a coalition of 12 other equality-seeking groups, including the Chinese Canadian National Council, the Toronto Chinese and Southeast Asian Legal Clinic, and the Minority Advocacy and Rights Council, in a legal intervention before the Ontario Court of Appeal to promote a substantive approach to Charter equality rights;

• Egale sits on an Advisory Committee to the Court Challenges Program, together with other equality-seeking groups such as the African Canadian Legal Clinic, the Minority Advocacy and Rights Council, the National Indo Canadian Council, the Native Women’s Association of Canada and the Association multiculturelle francophone de l’Alberta. We work collaboratively with these other groups to develop and advance a common vision of equality;

• Egale attended the United Nations World Conference on Women in Beijing, as well as the follow-up Beijing + 5 Women’s Conference in New York;

• Egale received funding from CIDA/SEAFILD to sponsor a conference on “Human Rights and Sexual Orientation in Southeast Asia”, which took place in early 2002. Participants from Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand attended, and the intersection of cultural norms and sexual orientation issues was a core focus of discussion;

• Egale participates in annual consultations organized by the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade in preparation for Canada’s Annual Report to the United Nations Human Rights Committee.

Building the Links focused on the intersection of race and sexual orientation, as an immediate area in which we recognise a need for work. Notwithstanding our commitment to intersectional analysis and the recent work we have done on race and sexual orientation issues, Egale has historically not had a good sense of the ways in which racism complicates heterosexism and homophobia for LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people. Part of the problem is that Egale’s membership, volunteers, Board and staff have historically been, and still are, primarily white. The absence of LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people from the work of Egale has led to a lack of understanding of the issues facing these particular communities, and perhaps more generally, the dynamics of intersectional oppression. It is for these reasons that Egale decided to begin with strategic efforts to consult with LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people.

Research Project on the Intersection of Race and Sexual Orientation

In preparation for our participation in the World Conference Against Racism, Egale commissioned Wayne van der Meide, a Toronto-based lawyer with a Master’s degree from the University of British Columbia in human rights law and theory, to write a research paper on the intersection of race and sexual orientation. The paper, titled The Intersection of Sexual Orientation and Race: Considering the Experiences of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered (“GLBT”) People of Colour and Two-Spirited People, was completed in August 2001.

Wayne’s research included an extensive review of published and unpublished material on the subject, interviews with organisations serving the needs of LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people, and a survey of LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people. The final paper concluded that:

Substantial efforts must be made to challenge the oppression of GLBT people of colour and Two-Spirited people as people, not a collection of separated issues. This, of course, necessitates that all aspects of their identity and all sources of the oppression they face be considered and challenged. Until this happens, GLBT people of colour and Two-Spirited people will only have partial access to justice, dignity and equality, they will gain nothing more than the status of equality without being equal.2

This conclusion confirmed and reinforced Egale’s previous commitment to recognising and working with the principle of the indivisibility of human rights and of forms of oppression. With this conclusion in mind, Egale approached the next phase of its work on the issue: participating in the World Conference Against Racism.

Egale’s participation in WCAR

Egale sent two delegates to the World Conference Against Racism (WCAR) in Durban, South Africa in August and September 2002. These were Kim Vance and Fiona Meyer-Cook, both of whom were later involved in the organising committee for the consultation.

Egale’s participation in WCAR was important for two main reasons. First, it is important that members of our communities who experience oppression because of their racial or ethnic background are also protected from oppression based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. Second, the category of “related intolerance” opens up space for issues of sexual orientation and gender identity to be dealt with in ways and arenas that were not available before. While there were a number of controversial issues that arose throughout the conference and the NGO forum preceding it, Egale delegates succeeded in making sexual orientation and gender identity issues more visible.3

Goals of the consultation

Following on the conclusions of the research paper and our experience from WCAR, the consultation was based on a fundamental recognition of the diversity of Canada’s queer communities. Even though all LGBT and two-spirited people experience homophobia and inequality related to our sexual orientations, we do not share one identity. We experience oppression in different ways and to varying degrees. Many of us experience oppression and disadvantage related to other aspects of our identity, such as gender, class, dis/ability, and racial/ethnic background, in addition to our oppression as LGBT or two-spirited people.4

The other fundamental perspective from which we approached Building the Links was the indivisibility of human rights. Working towards equality for LGBT people cannot be separated from the struggle against racism, sexism, ableism and other forms of intolerance and oppression, without seriously compromising the effectiveness of our work in addressing the equality needs of the full diversity of our communities.

The goals of the consultation were fourfold:

1. To give participants from the communities in question a space in which they could share their experiences as LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people, and their strategies for resisting the unique oppression they face.

2. To follow-up on the World Conference Against Racism and gather feedback about what position, if any, Egale should take in the future regarding the Canadian government’s role as a member of the international community.

3. To identify issues of priority for LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people in Canada.

4. To identify strategies by which Egale could most appropriately work to address these issues.

It was with these goals in mind that we approached the organisation stage of the consultation.

Section 2: Preparation and Lead-up to the Consultation

How intersectionality shaped our view of the consultation

Aware that the voices of people of colour and two-spirited people have not historically been well-represented either in Egale or in society generally, the organising committee felt it was crucial that we not allow the consultation planning process to recreate this dynamic. We recognised that a power imbalance exists between Egale, as a mainly “white” organisation, and people of colour, whether part of other organisations or not. It was therefore important that people of colour and two-spirited people participate in setting the agenda themselves as opposed to being offered a place at someone else’s table. A number of people of colour, all of whom had previously worked with Egale on other projects, participated in the work of the organising committee as a continuation of their work on race issues within Egale. Thus people of colour formed the majority on the organising committee.

We recognised that Egale, as a historically and currently white-dominated organisation, would likely lack credibility with queer communities of colour and two-spirited communities. As such we knew that we would need to make a genuine, visible and sustained effort to keep the perspectives and agendas of the groups in question central to the consultation. We therefore attempted to prioritise the perspectives and agendas of queer people of colour and two-spirited people by making the agenda-setting process as transparent and as inclusive as possible of the views of consultation participants, as described below. Input on a discussion agenda was solicited and incorporated at several points during consultation planning. Please see the description of the agenda-setting process below for a more detailed description of how this was done.

Identifying participants

Potential participants were made aware of the consultation by word of mouth among networks of equality-seeking organisations, by widespread use of announcements on a number of e-mail lists, and by fax announcements sent to a number of social service and community health organisations.

A number of white LGBT people expressed interest in participating, based on their interest in issues of race within the community. However, we felt that in light of our concerns around representation and our limited funds, it was important to prioritise the participation of queer people of colour and two-spirited people.

We were also especially interested in hearing at this stage from people who were, or had been in the past, actively working on issues of race and/or sexual orientation. We took into consideration racial and ethnic diversity, regional representation, and gender balance in prioritising participants.

In the end, twenty-four people of colour and two-spirited people took part in the consultation, including four from the organising committee. Three white Egale representatives also took part in the consultation. These were Kim Vance, Egale’s President, John Fisher, Egale’s Executive Director, and Egale Board member Lisa Lachance. The participation of these three was seen to be important to facilitate Egale’s learning from the consultation as an organisation and as a demonstration of Egale’s commitment to the consultation, and to the recommendations that would arise from it.

Our efforts to ensure that the consultation included a diversity of people and perspectives were relatively successful. Participants attended from every region of Canada. The gender balance was roughly equal, and there was good representation of Aboriginal, Black, East Asian, South Asian and mixed-race people. However, our success was not unqualified. No participants identified as disabled, or transgendered. No older community members participated. We strove to ensure that cost would not be a barrier to participation by paying travel costs for all participants, making arrangements for accommodation and providing meals or per diem allowances. However, we cannot be sure of the class background or economic circumstances of participants, since we did not feel comfortable asking. 

Agenda-setting

The agenda-setting process took place in close consultation with participants, once they were identified. The organising committee first solicited e-mail feedback regarding issues to be discussed at the consultation. Responses were collected and distributed by e-mail to participants.

Participants then took part in an agenda-setting conference call on January 24th. Previously submitted agenda items were the starting point for discussion on the agenda for the weekend. About 25 people, most of who later participated in the actual consultation weekend, were on the call.

Catherine Meade ably facilitated the discussion. Catherine was a National Association of Women in Law (NAWL) delegate to WCAR, and currently studies law at the University of Ottawa. The committee received some very useful feedback regarding issues that participants wished to see discussed at the consultation.

Participants also had the opportunity to flag potential concerns regarding atmosphere and process of the consultation, and thus to give the organising committee a chance to address them. It was pointed out during the call that the consultation represented a relatively rare opportunity for queer people of colour to caucus and share their experiences, and that as such it was important to participants that they be able to have space during the weekend to explore their needs and share their experiences and strategies, as well as to strategise and make recommendations for change generally and for Egale. This was important feedback for the organising committee, as the draft agenda had not previously devoted much time to information sharing and caucusing among groups of people who identified along one or more particular identities, such as Aboriginal people, mixed-race people and others.

Organisation and logistics

The consultation was held in Toronto on Saturday February 16th and Sunday February 17th, 2002. A public forum was also held on the night of Saturday February 16th, which was a chance to connect with a wider segment of the Toronto community on the issues in question. Toronto was chosen as a convenient central location with excellent travel connections. With the assistance of Canadian Heritage and the Canadian Race Relations Foundation, we were able to cover the round-trip travel costs of participants from wherever they were in Canada. We also provided catered meals during the actual consultation, a per diem allowance for the Saturday evening meal, and a small local transportation allowance. While we wished to ensure that a lack of accommodation was not a barrier to participating, we decided to make arrangements to billet participants who needed it so as to maximize the number of participants we could support. Most participants were able to make alternate arrangements and those who were not were billeted. 

We were able to secure meeting space at Toronto City Hall with the assistance of Toronto City Councillor Olivia Chow.

Section 3: Consultation Weekend

Tone/Atmosphere

Participants remarked favourably and repeatedly on the tone and atmosphere of the weekend. 

The group met at 9 a.m. on Saturday morning for a continental breakfast and then participated in a Mohawk welcoming ceremony, conducted by participant Diane Labelle. This ceremony and the shared food set a tone of openness, honesty and community for the rest of the weekend. Time was also allocated for greetings from participants from their own cultural backgrounds on Saturday afternoon after lunch. Sunday began with an Aboriginal grounding ceremony on Sunday morning and a closing Mohawk two-feather ceremony on Sunday afternoon before everyone’s departure.

Catherine Meade facilitated the weekend’s large group discussions and, in consultation with the organising committee, was responsible for the overall implementation of the agenda. In evaluating the consultation, participants consistently remarked on the skill and sensitivity of her facilitation style, and praised her contribution to the creation of an open, comfortable and respectful group atmosphere.

Because of the emphasis on togetherness and sharing, discussions that might otherwise have been confrontational were relatively pleasant. More was said and more achieved because of the comfortable and congenial tone and atmosphere set for the consultation.

Summary of discussions

On Saturday, consultation participants discussed themes and issues previously identified in the agenda-setting process, and took the opportunity to share experiences and perspectives and also to caucus.

At Saturday night’s public forum, Egale representatives and others reported back on Egale’s participation in WCAR and more generally on its past and present work on race and sexual orientation issues.

On Sunday, discussions were focused on strategy and recommendations, both generally for our communities and specifically for Egale.

The complete agenda is attached as an appendix.

Saturday

Saturday’s discussions focused on sharing experiences and perspectives related to identified themes. Aboriginal participants took the chance to caucus amongst themselves. Below are brief summaries of issues and themes that were discussed for each of five small groups: the 2-spirit caucus; challenges to us in our communities; health, wellness and healthy sexualities; conceptualising multiple oppressions; and connecting with the most disadvantaged in our communities.

Two-Spirit Caucus

The consensus from this caucus was that two-spirited people needed time and space in which to gather a nationally representative group of two-spirited people from all parts of Canada’s Aboriginal community for a two-spirited specific consultation. Put simply, they expressed a need to identify and explore the own experiences and needs before being able to address what Egale’s role might be in helping to support them.

The group spent some time discussing the standpoint of individual participants. A variety of nations, perspectives and experiences were represented even within this relatively small caucus, which emphasises the diversity of LGBT/two-spirited Aboriginal communities and the range of needs that exist within them. It was also pointed out that while diverse, this caucus was not representative of Aboriginal communities. Many people were not at the table: rural people were absent, some regions and many nations were not represented, and decision-makers within Aboriginal communities were not represented. This emphasised the need for separate consultations. It was pointed out that a range of human rights issues, including LGBT issues, are important to two-spirited people and much work needs to be done on all these fronts. This work cannot be planned, nor can Egale’s role in it be ascertained, without Canada-wide consultation among two-spirited people.

Challenges to us in our communities

Homophobia/heterosexism in ethnic communities, both in act and in attitude, was identified as a significant challenge. Some discussion took place on how one might identify or measure it, and on whether or not we could meaningfully say that any particular community was more or less homophobic than any other.

Racism in queer communities was also identified as a challenge, and it was pointed out that it most often takes the form of people of colour being either ignored or fetishised by the white majority. The question of fetishisation is especially pertinent in relationships between white people and people of colour, and several participants in this group expressed a wish for a “people of colour with white partners” caucus to explore this issue separately. Racism can also be internalised by LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people, affecting our self-esteem and the way in which we relate with other people of colour and with the white majority. Related to this is the idea of being able to “pass,” either as white or as heterosexual/traditionally gendered, and the fact that pressure exists to do so if one can in both ethnic and queer communities.

It was pointed out that LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people are themselves a very diverse group, with members from a wide range of ethnic, national and socio-economic backgrounds, not to mention age, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and ability differences. Racism and heterosexism/homophobia therefore can be expected to work differently for different members of the group depending on their standpoint, and a holistic view needs to be taken. Specifically, the point was made that class oppression often ties in with racism, in that people of colour tend to be disproportionately at the lower end of the income scale.

The final issue discussed in this group was the idea of “hierarchies” of identities. Some members of the group felt comfortable identifying aspects of their identity that they considered to be more personally significant than others, while others did not. This introduces an interesting wrinkle to intersectional thinking.

Finally, discussion took place on the tension between acting to address the oppressions facing us, and the mental weight of oppression. On the one hand, group members felt that oppression should be challenged wherever it manifests itself. If one feels that something is oppressive, one should work to change it. However, members of our communities face complex systemic oppressions, many of which are deeply rooted historically and which are not likely to be changed overnight or by the actions of one person. Fighting these on our own, as we often do, can be very wearying. We are not always as strong as we would like to be! The suggested middle ground was acting strategically to challenge oppression and realising that it is difficult to change the world, however desirable it may be.

Health, Wellness and Healthy Sexualities

This group focused on the deleterious effects of multiple oppressions, and specifically of racism and heterosexism, on health and wellness.

As we all know, racism and heterosexism both have a significant effect on the health of affected communities. Racism generally speaking and specifically in queer communities can be a barrier to racial minorities in coming out, which is mentally a healthy and self-affirming thing to do. The combination of racism and heterosexism means that there is often no safe space for LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people. Lack of awareness of this particular intersection of oppressions can lead to a tendency to pigeonhole people into either ethnic or queer communities. It is important to keep in mind that even healthy, vibrant communities can exclude some people. Some discussion also took place regarding the importance of moving away from the labels applied to us in various contexts and towards an acceptance of our unique identities.

Consequences of growing up with multiple oppressions include feelings of invisibility and depression. It is important to find strategies for resistance to these. Such strategies may include working for access to one’s language and culture for all members of one’s community, learning how to care for oneself, providing healthy role models in one’s communities, and working to improve self-esteem. The latter is important because if LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people can validate and affirm all aspects of their identities, they are more likely to feel that they deserve to be healthy.

An important part of working for community health is seeking out and working with allies, which for LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people may mean anti-racist white queer people and/or anti-heterosexist people of colour. In both cases, work may need to be done to ensure that allies understand our issues.

Another important piece of work that needs to be done is to study the many ways in which we as individuals and as communities have overcome the barriers to living a healthy life that heterosexism and racism place in front of us. This information represents a huge and valuable quantity of cultural knowledge, and should be used to educate others on how to these barriers to health can be overcome.

Finally, it was pointed out that much of the negativity we face begins in elementary schools. Working to have our issues addressed this early in a positive and healthy manner could be the key to solving the problems of heterosexism and racism.

Connecting with the most disadvantaged

Discussion in this group raised the question of who the “most disadvantaged” are, where they are (at the table or not) and how to build and sustain links with them.

Discussion began with the question of what “most disadvantaged” means. The term itself could be problematic, in that it may be setting up a “hierarchy of oppressions,” which paints some (not us) as victims and disempowered.

The point was made that many segments of our communities that face complex oppression are not at the table with us. Among those who perhaps should be here are sex workers, people who are or have been in the corrections system, transgendered people, older LGBT people, youth, and people with disabilities. We need to engage those in the mainstream of our communities to understand and work on the issues of those of us at the margins, often people who face intersectional oppression.

Finally, it was pointed out that it is often difficult for clearly defined communities to create and sustain links with other communities, which is an issue for those of us who identify as members of more than one community. We need to figure out how we can create and sustain those links.

Conceptualizing Multiple Oppressions

Discussions in this group focused mainly on the politics of identity and labelling, and the uses and effects of these with respect to our communities. Discussion began with the issue of terminology. It was agreed that what we call ourselves is important, and contentious. One example of this is the use of the word “queer” as an umbrella term, which not everyone is comfortable with. One alternative to “queer” is “alphabet soup” inclusion, such as referring to the “LGBT” or “LGBTTQ” communities. The alphabet soup option is less than ideal because the list inevitably continues to exclude some members of the community and can quickly become unmanageably long. A similar problem with terminology is with the term “people of colour.” Some indicated a preference for the term “world majority” as more reflective of the global reality.

Another thread of conversation focused on the use of and need for labels. It was pointed out that labels do not do justice to the diversity within any given group. The need for labels was also questioned: why do we insist on labels given our common humanity? The response to this was that by eschewing labels we may obscure the fact that some “human beings” face oppression due to personal circumstances or group membership, which needs to be named and perhaps is difficult to name without labels.

Finally, it was suggested that Egale’s work so far has mainly benefited white middle-class LGBT people. Working for same-sex relationship recognition/marriage, for example, helps those who have sufficient income to benefit from spousal tax regimes, those who have jobs offering them benefits they could share with their partners, and those who have sufficient property that they benefit from spousal support and property division provisions under family law. Relationship recognition does not tend to benefit poor LGBT couples, who are disproportionately people of colour and Aboriginal people. It also does not challenge the view that marriage is/should be the foundation of society, which many in our communities do not believe. Other examples of this exist.

Saturday Night Public Forum

Saturday night’s public forum was held at City Hall on February 16th. About thirty community members attended the forum. Kim Vance, Catherine Meade, Mary Woo Sims and Fiona Meyer Cook, all delegates to the World Conference Against Racism reported on their activities and achievements in Durban. Wayne van der Meide then presented his Egale-sponsored research paper on race and sexual orientation, and a public discussion on Egale’s work on the intersection of race and sexual orientation took place. A number of people raised questions regarding Egale’s lack of work in areas such as transgender issues, its lack of diversity in membership and Board and its lack of work on the issues of people of colour and two-spirited people. Egale representatives described the work we have done to date in these areas, but conceded that in the areas of transgender inclusion and rights, the issues of people of colour and Aboriginal people, and the general diversity of Egale, much work remains to be done. Sign-up sheets were distributed so that participants could be informed of the outcome of the consultation and next steps, and a number of participants also expressed interest in becoming involved in Egale.

Sunday

Sunday’s discussions focused on strategies and recommendations for change. It began with a general discussion and then split into small group discussions on the themes of mixed-race/intersectionality, a two-spirited caucus and health/healthy sexualities.

General discussion

The morning began with a general facilitated discussion over breakfast that ranged freely over a number of themes. 

Some participants expressed a certain amount of scepticism regarding Egale’s commitment to addressing intersectional oppression. One person suggested that perhaps we were all there to appease white liberal guilt. Others questioned the political and identity assumptions that lie behind the liberal human rights language Egale uses to frame the issues it works on, which tends to draw attention away from the structural inequalities along race, class, gender, and other lines inherent in our society.

Frustration was expressed at the fact that yet again, in the context of this consultation, people of colour were being called upon to explain the dynamics of racism to white people, with no guarantee of any change as a result. In light of this, participants suggested that it is very important that Egale be seen to be moving forward in a meaningful way on issues of racism and diversity, or risk losing all credibility outside of its traditional constituency. It will take more than cosmetic measures such as token representation on the Board to make people of colour feel welcome at Egale. People who experience multiple oppressions need, among other things, to be supported in speaking out on them. One way in which Egale could help in this is to make available its expertise in working within traditional power structures to effect change by teaching those facing multiple oppressions how to lobby effectively.

Another related point was the issue of whether and how the white participants in the consultation should be participating in the discussions taking place. It was pointed out that given the context of a white-dominated society, the presence of the “white gaze” in the weekend’s discussions made some people uncomfortable and might have affected their ability to discuss racism and other relevant issues openly and frankly.

The white participants in the consultation agreed to take their lead from individual caucuses on how and if they should participate in smaller group discussions. They reaffirmed Egale’s commitment to an intersectional lens. It was pointed out that Egale’s Board was supportive of intersectionality and of any changes being made to Egale work and/or structure as a result. At the same time, Egale representatives freely acknowledged that the organisation has a long way to go towards being truly welcoming and supportive of people of colour and other members of the LGBT communities experiencing multiple oppressions. The consultation is one small step towards that eventual goal. Some consultation participants expressed the view that the participation of decision-makers within Egale was important as an indication of the organisation’s commitment to the goals of the consultation and to facilitate organisational learning from the experience. 

Discussion then turned to ways in which Egale could go about mainstreaming an intersectional analysis in the work it does. Possibilities included outreach to other equality-seeking groups and organisations representing them, working with Human Rights Commissions as possible allies and sources of support, and striking an “intersections committee” to oversee the implementation of an intersectional analysis within the work of Egale. Especial mention was made of the need for work in the education system and the possibility of coalitional work with others working on diversity issues there.

Finally, participants asked for a synopsis of the discussions taking place at the consultation to take back to their communities for discussion.

Following this general discussion, participants formed smaller groups to continue discussions on issues defined the day before, with an emphasis on strategy.

Mixed race/Intersectionality

Group members expressed their feeling that as mixed-race LGBT people, intersectionality and intersectional oppression are a part of their daily lives. LGBT people of colour and two spirited people, and especially the mixed-race people among them, often have to “choose” a culture to be a part of or be outsiders in all cultures. Having to “choose” means denying parts of oneself. A multi-layered, intersectional analysis of both identity and oppression is therefore essential to LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people. It was pointed out that human rights discourse often speaks of identity in terms of false single categories that do not adequately reflect reality for those experiencing intersectional oppression. The dynamics of oppression cannot be fully understood in this way. For this reason, Egale needs to mainstream intersectionality!

This group made the additional point that no one group can be representative of the diversity of the LGBT and two-spirited communities, and that perhaps Egale’s role should therefore be supportive rather than seeking to be representative.

Health/Wellness/Healthy Spirituality

The recommendations of this committee focused on the two main areas of educational initiatives and of outreach to communities of colour on the part of Egale. In addition, this group called on Egale to commit to an ongoing dialogue around diversity.

A number of educational initiatives on health, wellness and spirituality were suggested. One was to hold regional information sessions in conjunction with local health organisations on how racism, homophobia and other forms of discrimination affect health. Another was to organise campaigns to increase self-esteem among LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people. A third was to update the Egale web page and add clear information on rights and the issues of LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people, and what you can do if you experience discrimination. Finally, group members suggested that Egale use its media contacts to influence media, both LGBT and otherwise, to teach people about issues relating to intersectional oppression and how to resist it.

Outreach was also identified as a priority for Egale. It was suggested that Egale actively recruit members who are LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people so as to increase the diversity of the organisation. Another way to diversify the membership of Egale would be to do coalitional work with organisations addressing issues of interest to a more diverse group. One identified example of a possibility for coalitional work was to organise the first Egale national conference, planned for May 2003, in conjunction with groups such as the Rainbow Youth group at Guelph University so as to include youth in the planning of the overall conference and to ensure that issues of importance to LGBT youth are addressed. Another such possibility would be to work with provincial Human Rights Commissions to address areas of intersectional oppression.

2-Spirited Caucus

The two-spirit caucus met again on Sunday to strategise. Again, a major theme of the discussion that took place was the need for discussion and consultation with a wider range of people within the two-spirit community on self-definition and other issues relevant to two-spirited and Aboriginal communities.

One member of the group expressed discomfort with the term “two-spirited” and asked Egale to consider examining the term closely before using it again. The perspective was also expressed, however, that few terms are uncontroversial, and there is insufficient consensus within the Aboriginal community at this time on any alternative term.

The group pointed out that in organising future consultations with two-spirited people, Egale should be aware that using regions as a basis for representation is problematic, since borders between regions are arbitrary and often not recognised by Aboriginal people. Other bases for representation should be considered.

Concluding session

The Sunday sessions concluded with reports back from each of the small groups and caucuses. General discussion led to the formulation of a number of specific recommendations for Egale, which are detailed in Section 5.

Participants expressed their appreciation to Catherine for her facilitation, to the organising committee and to each other for the spirit of openness and collaboration which prevailed throughout the weekend.

Diane Labelle ended the consultation with a closing ceremony, and participants filled out evaluation forms, providing feedback on the logistics and content of the weekend.

Section 4: Evaluation

Evaluation comments

Here are some comments from participants regarding various aspects of the consultation. They are transcribed from evaluation forms for the weekend. Some comments have been highlighted in boxes in the appropriate sections elsewhere in this report.

Pre-consultation organising and logistics:

“I honestly did not feel pre-consultation communication was clear, i.e. billeting. I did not know I had billeters until the day before. Perhaps making confirmations and acknowledgements of plans would make communications more clear.”

“The teleconference was not particularly lucid. However, for practical concerns, it was perhaps necessary. E-mail notices seemed to work fairly well for the most part, but may not be accessible to everyone.”

“Chris did a great job [at e-mail communication leading up to the consultation], it’s just that it’s hard for me to read my e-mail everyday.”

“I heard [about the consultation] late but was not able to phone in on the conference call, but the e-mails were very detailed and useful for preparation.”

Tone, Atmosphere and Facilitation:

“I really appreciate the prayer ceremony, bill of rights and everyone’s willingness to work, listen and acknowledge what others have to contribute.”

“Facilitation was fabulous. Thanks, Catherine!”

“Excellent job, Catherine!”

“I felt that the Egale people were very open -- even to some abuse. I do not respect any view that says one group of people are stupid/evil. I found the jokes around that made me feel somewhat uncomfortable. I thought that Egale took that in graciously but I was concerned that John was being too open to being verbally abused.”

“Sometimes I felt the facilitation was not strict enough with time when one person was talking. I find that people ramble and that gets tiring. The agenda was too compact and rigid -- needed a more open structure.”

“Very good, respectful and flexible.”

“Catherine did an excellent job. She created an atmosphere that allowed for full participation, a safe space, humour, respect, ability to allow all voices to be heard.”

Meeting Space:

“Given the limited resources (time, $$, etc.), I realize the meeting space was a satisfactory venue. However, I would have preferred a different space.”

“I thought that the meeting space was not a good choice. For many people of colour who have been abused by the state, City Hall represents an institution that does not always represent us. Does Mel Lastman work in this building? He has made some very offensive statements about Africans. I did not want to come to this space. I found that sitting at a table in a boardroom frustrating. The chairs are so heavy and squished together that it was difficult to get in and out. The fluorescent lights made me tired after 8 hours. Was there not a community centre/Aboriginal Friendship Centre -- some place with an anti-racist feel -- some place with natural sunlight and easy access to outdoors?”

“Bigger meeting space and private break out rooms need to be available.”

“Some people were feeling ill which I suspect is stemming from past traumatic issues of racism, discrimination and personal history. [We need] a break out room and/or an elder (any denomination) [to address any issues or need for support that may come up].”

“Next round, a room with windows!”

Important Outcomes:

“Understanding the need to include all forms of differences within the GLBT group, i.e. ethnic, cultural differences, colour and so on in the staff, volunteer crew and board.”

“Bringing together GLBTQ and two-spirited people of colour to speak on issues pertaining to the intersection of race and sexual orientation. [Also] formulating recommendations to Egale.”

“Egale’s plan of action when we get it. [Also] The opportunity to talk with each other.”

“This consultation was very important as a tool for Egale to include issues of concern to the diverse communities that make up the GLBT community.”

“Interesting discussions/exchanges, but is there a position paper or stance on the goals of this conference?”

“Catalysing and facilitating change for all members of intersectional communities.”

“Finding a place for myself within a race framework and within Egale.”

“Networking and discussion -- it was vital to giving concrete suggestions to have that time to frame the debate together.”

“The opportunity to meet people of varying backgrounds and exchange knowledge and information. Appreciated the opportunity to caucus, but given the time constraints I was not able to hear and share ideas with participants who used small-group discussion time to caucus. If there was more time it might have facilitated the opportunity to speak with them more often.”

Agenda and Content of Discussions:

“Don’t jam-pack the agenda, more room for discussion!”

“I think that Egale could have given much more structure to the conference. I know that you wanted for us to set the agenda -- but were there people who set the agenda that was not helpful to Egale? Today it was said that Egale is in a process of restructuring. The details of what restructuring has already been done and the ideas you have already formed for future restructuring were not articulated clearly enough. That should have been done early. It would also have been helpful to assign a facilitator to each group just so that it isn’t all over the place.”

“It was only on the second day that I felt that I understood why Egale was consulting.”

“Greater emphasis should have been placed on religious/spiritual issues.”

“I think due to time constraints that we didn’t get much of a chance to talk about intersectionality and what it really means to our work and that of Egale.”

“Perhaps there might have been more space provided for small-group discussions.”

“During first and second day, not always enough time for small group discussions or all items or issues identified for discussion. However, I felt the issues identified for small group discussion did touch on many relevant issues. Other issues that I would have liked to discuss: creating safe space, youth issues.”

Overall Comments:

“This is an important step and I really do hope we continue to stay focussed on all that we have discussed this weekend.”

“Please be diverse as soon as possible.”

“I felt like the consultation was a safe space and I basically felt comfortable to talk about any issue.”

“Since race/orientation interaction was discussed very little, the consultation felt like a discussion on racism and Egale structure.”

“I think the composition of the participants should have a wide range in age groups. This is because the more mature group position will be able to share and also learn from the younger crowd/participants and vice versa. This is mentioned for the purpose of balancing the expectations of either group.”

“I’d like to become more involved, long-term. Great job, Egale!”

Lessons learned

In addition to the insights gained into issues relevant to LGBT people of colour and two spirited people, and substantive recommendations made for integrating an intersectional analysis into the work of Egale (both summarised in section 5), we learned a number of lessons regarding process and logistics from the consultation. These include:

Participants consistently saw Toronto City Hall as poor choice of venue for the consultation. A number of people, both during the weekend and on the evaluation sheets, described their discomfort with City Hall as a centre of institutional and political authority emblematic of the oppression many individuals and communities of colour have faced at the hands of white-dominated political and legal authority structures over the centuries. As such, a number of participants felt very uncomfortable at City Hall, and would have preferred meeting at a community centre or Aboriginal Friendship Centre. Some participants also referred to the less-than-ideal facilities at City Hall: the lack of private space for small-group discussions, the small space for the number of participants, and the tiring effect of bright fluorescent lighting and no natural light over the course of a day full of meetings. While we are very thankful to Councillor Olivia Chow for making the meeting space available free of charge, we also hear and appreciate the concerns participants raised and will have to think carefully on the best way to balance cost, availability, convenience and historical and cultural appropriateness in our choice of venue for such events in future.

Participants wanted more time and space in which to share experiences and strategies amongst themselves. During the initial agenda-setting conference call, participants indicated that they viewed the consultation as a valuable opportunity to network, share their experiences and perspectives on the intersectional issues in question, and in some cases to caucus around specific issues and/or communities (such as the two-spirited caucus). A number of participants said that they would have liked to have more time for small group discussions, and more time in which to network and share. Given that Saturday was primarily devoted to networking and the sharing of perspectives, we recognise that it was difficult to strike the balance that many participants sought between sharing perspectives and identifying outcomes, particularly since different participants will have different needs. The comment and the need it describes will, however, be taken into account by Egale in organising future events such as the national conference planned for 2003. 

Participants identified a number of problems with pre-consultation communication and organising. Specifically, a number of people noted that the use of e-mail as a primary organising tool was problematic since it presumes regular and reliable internet access, which is not always the case and especially not for people of colour who tend to be disproportionately poor and thus are not as likely to have access to e-mail, or to the e-mail networks we used to disseminate information regarding the consultation. E-mail was used because of its convenience and low cost for those with e-mail access, and because it makes distributing documentation much easier, but we acknowledge the importance of maintaining alternative forms of communication.

Also, some participants described the agenda-setting conference call as “not particularly lucid” and even “chaotic.” Because of its nature as a national organisation with volunteers and members across Canada, Egale uses conference calling routinely for meetings and other committee work. It is important to know that it can be a confusing and intimidating medium for those who do not use it often, or for those already not comfortable speaking up in a group, particularly when so many participants are involved. Finally, some logistical problems were mentioned, such as confusion on the part of a participant who had offered to billet out-of-towners as to whether or not people had been billeted with them.

These will all serve as important points of information and challenges for us in our future work. Planning, organising and holding this consultation has been a major learning experience for Egale; allowing us as an organisation to build knowledge of the substantive issues facing LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people; challenging us to learn to work in alliance with people and organisations from this group; and teaching us more regarding the logistics of organising a consultation of this nature. Learning was, of course, the point of the consultation, and as such Egale considers these “lessons learned” as positive steps towards change.

Section 5: Recommendations for Egale & Next Steps

The recommendations contained in this section are drawn from the discussions that took place on the weekend of the consultation. In coming up with recommendations, participants noted that the responsibility for change rests with Egale, with consultation participants and with LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people in general. Egale needs to demonstrate good faith in its work on these issues. LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people need to get involved and help to implement change.

The recommendations fall into three fairly distinct categories: coalitions and partnerships, specific projects and changes within Egale.

A. Establishing Coalitions and Partnerships

• Identify other groups with whom Egale could partner (anti-poverty groups; ethno-cultural communities; disability rights groups etc). Develop mechanisms to ensure relationships are clearly defined, accountable, and sustainable.

• Host semi-annual policy forums with partner groups to share information, discuss issues of common concern, and build strategic alliances.

• Connect with other equality-seeking groups, to inform them of our work and inquire what strategies have worked for them in diversifying their organizations and what challenges they have faced. This will be useful to Egale, and will also help other groups consider strategies for diversifying their organization to better represent LGBT members of their own communities.

• Develop and offer workshops or materials on LGBT issues and invite other groups to provide us with workshops or materials on issues affecting their communities.

• Initiate dialogue with aboriginal groups to better define our relationship.

• Build working coalitions around specific Egale projects, e.g. the Brockie case (a human rights case involving an Ontario printer who refused to print letterhead and business cards for the Canadian Lesbian and Gay Archives), the Jubran case (a human rights case involving a BC youth who was bullied at school because he was perceived to be gay) case. Invite consultation participants, members of Egale and eventually a broader group of interested parties to provide feedback on other specific projects.

• Establish working coalitions with anti-poverty groups as a specific area of concern.

• Health: working with communities of colour and queer health groups to define and address health issues of queer communities of colour and two-spirited aboriginals.

B. Projects

• Identify priority areas of research and conduct research projects in partnership with other groups, e.g. issues affecting 2-spirited people. Specifically, investigate jurisdictional issues in aboriginal communities through research and dialogue.

• Build streams into the planned national conference on intersectional issues. Establish coalitional working groups with interested organizations and individuals to establish the content and structure of these streams. 

• Develop workshops and discussion themes for Court Challenges Program AGM, through the Equality Advisory Committee.

• Through the CCP Equality Advisory Committee, develop and distribute materials to inform communities about the CCP and the resources that exist to facilitate access to justice.

• Set up an Education Committee/working group to develop strategies on advancing diversity in the education system, e.g. diversity poster, development of resource materials, strategies to combat harassment, “league of peaceful schools.”

• Lobby Human Rights Commissions to produce educational materials for employers, unions etc. regarding diversity and especially intersectional issues. Raise awareness on the existence of multiple grounds.

• Research piece on how the courts have approached intersectionality.

• Lobbying governments to include multiple grounds clauses in human rights legislation.

• Set up a Hate Crimes Committee/working group to develop strategies on combating hate crimes e.g. establish national network of those active on hate crimes issues/community liaison committees, building on the work of the Canadian Jewish Congress in its monitoring and reporting on anti-Semitic hate crimes, lobbying police services to monitor hate crimes statistics on a national level, lobby police to do outreach on diversity/intersectional issues in the schools. 

• Strategize with other non-governmental organisations in preparation for the annual Department of Foreign Affairs consultation. Lobby the government for a more effective process and involve community members from regions around the world affected by intersectional oppressions.

• Hold community forums as part of the national tour.

• Investigate intersectional issues around reproductive technologies, particularly issues affecting queers and people of colour, such as selection for race or sexual orientation.

• Egale can work with provincial Human Rights Commissions on these issues at their annual meetings. Perhaps ask regional board members to strengthen these links.

• Influence PrideVision TV to teach queer people about their rights, issues and responsibilities. Also work with them to ensure diversity in their programming.

C. Changes within Egale

• Establish an Intersections Committee to oversee the integration of an intersectional analysis into the work of Egale. Add an intersectional analysis (including gender, race, youth and anti-poverty analysis, for example) to all aspects of Egale’s work, e.g. through participation by members of Intersections Committee in general Committee work.

• Get demographic information about our current makeup, and consciously seek to work towards a more diverse makeup of our membership, volunteers, board, and committees.

• Develop a database of groups working on intersectional issues, including poverty. Link to the Egale website. Update the Egale webpage and add clear guidelines and links about what you can do if you experience discrimination. Increase links to people of colour/two-spirited groups.

• Include more information about Egale’s international work on the website.

• Examine the structure of Egale’s Board, review for representativeness and effectiveness.

• Explore issuing a statement of affirmation/committing to an on-going dialogue around diversity.

• Organise a membership drive for LGBT people of colour/aboriginal groups and individuals.

• Hold regional information sessions in cooperation with local health organizations to discuss how homophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination affect health.

• Anti-racism work specifically and diversity work generally within the board.

These recommendations formed a basis for our next steps, detailed in the next section.

Egale’s Response: Mainstreaming Intersectionality

Egale’s Board of Directors received this list of recommendations from the consultation at their annual Board retreat in early March. The Board adopted the recommendations, including the key recommendation of integrating an intersectional analysis into all the work of Egale, and struck an Intersections Committee to oversee the implementation of these recommendations. The Intersections Committee has met at least monthly since the consultation. It is now in the process of developing Egale’s work plan to implement the many constructive recommendations made at the consultation, and to bring an intersectional analysis to all aspects of Egale’s work.

The intersectional lens has already strengthened Egale’s work in a number of areas. One example is our factum on the Surrey book banning case, in which we pointed out that the books were as much about issues such as racial diversity and size acceptance as they were about homosexuality. Another was that in doing media around the 20^th anniversary of the Charter, we emphasized that having Charter rights does not guarantee one can exercise them, and spoke about the importance of extending the Court Challenges Program to ensure greater access to justice for people on low incomes. A third example in our facta on the marriage challenges was a critique of the racist origins of the common-law bar to same-sex marriage established in the Hyde decision, an 1866 judgment that cited authority condemning Turkey as an “infidel nation” and describing Turkish marriages as “infidel” marriages.

The adoption of an intersectional perspective has also led us to begin to seek out coalition partners and to establish linkages between heterosexism and transphobia and other forms of oppression. For example, recognising that the treaty principles referendum in British Columbia was an attack on the human rights of Aboriginals in British Columbia in that it attempted to put those rights to a majority vote, Egale consulted with Aboriginal organisations in British Columbia, following which we made our opposition known by sending an open letter to Premier Gordon Campbell urging him to call a halt to the referendum process. Another example came in response to the British Columbia government’s announcement that the BC Human Rights Commission was to close. Egale released a statement to the media denouncing the move as another attack on the human rights of British Columbians, and has made initial contact with equality-seeking groups in British Columbia, seeking to support any local organising efforts being made around this issue. In seeking inclusion of “sexual orientation” among the grounds on which hate propaganda is prohibited, we have begun the process of identifying other groups who are also excluded from the current legislation, and will be liaising with them to develop a coordinated strategy.

The explicit adoption of the intersectional framework of analysis and of the consultation recommendations is the first step in what Egale hopes will be an ongoing process of mainstreaming an intersectional analysis of the work carried out by the organisation, as well as working more closely with members of our communities experiencing intersectional oppression and with other equality-seeking communities.

Conclusion: Next steps

Egale has identified a number of next steps stemming from our experience of the consultation and from the recommendations given.

Work plan

Quite a few important recommendations came out of the consultation process. As mentioned previously, these recommendations were collated, presented to the Egale Board at their annual retreat, and adopted. The intersections committee has been tasked with overseeing their implementation within the work of Egale and is in the process of developing a detailed, realistic plan of how it proposes to do so.

Systemic analysis tool

A major recommendation was the mainstreaming of the intersectional framework of analysis throughout all of Egale’s work. Egale’s Board has adopted this recommendation, and an intersectional analysis has already strengthened our work in a number of cases over the past few months. The Intersections committee is developing a systemic analysis tool for each Egale committee or working group that will help them think through the effects of their work intersectionally. It is hoped that organisational emphasis on intersectional thinking and an easy to use step-by-step guide will aid in mainstreaming intersectionality in all our work.

Exploring coalitional work

Egale’s work is primarily with the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender communities, on equality issues affecting these communities. If we are to understand and represent the interests of those members of our communities who also experience oppression on the basis of race/ethnicity, or other forms of intersectional oppression, we need to build working partnerships with organisations serving other equality-seeking groups around issues of intersectional oppression. These partnerships need to be based on mutual understanding of our communities and how and where they intersect, and on trust. Another next step, therefore, will be to establish a database of other equality-seeking organisations and to actively seek out working coalitions where it makes sense to do so. This will serve to help Egale to understand the intersectional oppression faced by members of the LGBT communities, to help Egale understand and appreciate the struggles of other oppressed groups and to connect Egale to other organisations engaged in the broader struggle for equality and social justice.

Follow-up with consultation participants

Egale recognizes and appreciates the willingness of participants to share their time, experience and perspectives, and is committed to following up with consultation participants to obtain their continued feedback on the recommendations arising from this report, and next steps.

Egale does not presume to think that all the answers to the issues faced by LGBT people of colour and two-spirited people lie, or should lie, within Egale’s work. We do hope, however, that the discussions and recommendations from Building the Links contained this report will provide a starting point for discussion among community members as to what else needs to be done and what it is and is not appropriate for Egale to do.

Appendix

Agenda for Building the Links: The Intersection of Race and Sexual Orientation

Toronto City Hall, 100 Queen St. West, Toronto, Ontario

Saturday, February 16^th, 2002 (Room 4, Toronto City Hall)

* We encourage any participants who wish to share a short greeting from their cultural background, or one that has a special meaning to them, to do so during this time.

Saturday, February 16^th, 2002—Public Forum (Room 1, Toronto City Hall)

Sunday February 17th, 2002 (Room 4, Toronto City Hall)

EGALE gratefully acknowledges the support of the Canadian Race Relations Foundation, Canadian Heritage and Xtra! for this consultation.

Small Group Themes (Saturday)

Please note: Bulleted items are suggested topics for discussion, and are not intended as an exhaustive list!

1. Challenges to us in our communities, and our responses to them:

• Racism in the queer community: what it looks like and strategies for resistance

• Homophobia in communities of colour/aboriginal communities: what it looks like and strategies for resistance

• Internalized racism/homophobia

• Racial/ethnic stereotyping

• Racial/ethnic preference/“fetishism” – problematic or kinky or both?

• Our relationship to religion(s)/spirituality

2. Health, Wellness and Healthy Sexualities

• HIV/AIDS

• Limited resources, e.g. in northern communities, on LGBT-specific health issues, and health issues generally

• Suicide, an especial problem for two-spirited youth, GLBT youth of colour, and aboriginal communities generally

• Other determinants of health, such as economic and social disadvantage among queer people of colour and two-spirited people

3. Conceptualizing multiple oppression

• Roots of racism in queer communities/heterosexism in communities of colour and aboriginal communities

• The impact of other axes of oppression on race/sexual orientation intersectionality: bringing an intersectionally aware and multi-layered analysis to our issues

• The conflation of “two-spirited” with “queer”

• Bisexuality, biphobia and bi invisibility: racial/cultural considerations

• Language and how it structures our oppression, e.g. use of terms like “race” and “people of colour” to describe ourselves

4. Working internationally: local/global, post WCAR, immigration and refugee issues

• Global alliances with other queer folk of colour

• Immigration and refugee issues for queer people of colour

• The impact of the World Conference Against Racism

• Linking with the work of Amnesty International

• Settlement services for queer immigrants of colour, or lack thereof

5. Connecting with the most disadvantaged in our communities

• On-reserve two-spirited people and rural queer people of colour

• Urban poverty and queer people of colour/two-spirited people

• Limited resources available to aboriginal people, especially in northern communities

Strategy Streams (Sunday)

Please note: Bulleted items are suggested topics for discussion, and are not intended as an exhaustive list!

1. EGALE

• how can EGALE analyze issues (e.g. marriage, hate crimes, Vriend) in an intersectionally aware and multi-layered manner?

• Can/should EGALE do more community-based work and organizing, e.g. local chapters?

• How should EGALE go about learning from communities of colour regarding issues of race? How and on what can (and should?) EGALE go about engaging communities of colour/aboriginal and queer communities on issues of sexuality and gender diversity?

• How should EGALE proceed in its traditional legal and political work in light of issues raised in this consultation and at the WCAR?

• Should/can EGALE change its

• Structure (board, staff and membership, e.g. should EGALE mandate racial representation on its board?)

• Mandate

• Strategies

• Issues it works on to be more responsive to the concerns and issues of queer people of colour and two-spirited people?

• Can/should EGALE address more social and economic issues of relevance to queer people of colour and two-spirited people?

• How can EGALE become a more welcoming organization to queer people of colour and two-spirited people?

2. Us and our Communities: Coalition-Building

• How do we work towards promoting equality and respect for queer people of colour and two-spirited people in our communities and reduce stereotyping?

• Developing mentoring networks for queer people of colour and two-spirited people?

• How can (should?) EGALE facilitate national coalition-building among our communities?

3. Working Internationally

• Strategies on immigration and refugee issues

• Strategies responding to WCAR

• Strategizing global alliances

• Role of EGALE?

4. Education and Outreach

• Strategizing on education and outreach within and outside our communities

• Does EGALE have a role to play?

5. Health, Wellness and Sexuality

• How do we address issues of limited resources, suicide in our communities, other determinants of health?

• Role of EGALE?

Footnotes

1 For a fuller analysis of the concept of intersectional oppression, please see “The Concept & Reality of Intersectional Oppression,” in The Intersection of Sexual Orientation and Race: Considering the Experiences of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered (“GLBT”) People of Colour and Two-Spirited People, by Wayne van der Meide, available at http://www.egale.ca or by mail on request from Egale Canada.

2 Wayne van der Meide, Building the Links, Executive Summary.

3 Summarised from Kim Vance, Reflections on WCAR.

4 Wayne van der Meide, summarised from correspondence with consultation participants.

Egale Canada ©2010

Advancing equality and justice for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans-identified people and their families across Canada