I don't think only straight people take photos or are you saying you don't care about ruining a gay person's photo by being in the way? Pride day is sad state about our society, think about it, who celebrates something that is a normal part of their life, something they did not have any say in choosing one way or the other. Sexually straight or gay is only one part of what we are it is not who we are as a person or a society. We should be able to be proud of the advancement of acceptance of others regardless or their sexuality, race, religion, monetary status or even their gender but we can not since as a society we are still not accepting others out side of our own little groups, none of us are.

I find this article incredibly narrow minded, especially considering the topic you are covering. You are right when you say it is a Toronto event. I feel you suggesting you turning it into an exclusive event appalling. Your views go against the very ideals behind Pride. Why does it have to be an "us" and "them" situation? Pride is about love, and acceptance of everyone no matter what their race, gender, sexual orientation etc. Your article suggests that you would rather just "queers" should come out and celebrate that that you long for the days 10 years ago when it was just "queers" who came out. Shouldn't you be celebrating how far we have come as a society? Shouldn't you be embracing the fact that, though not perfect, things are getting better? As far as your points about photos, it is a PARADE, of course people are going to take photos! And everyone takes photos! I do not believe it has nothing to do with people 'gawking at weirdos', maybe they are just documenting a wonderful day with friends and family. Why you would assume such negativity is beyond me, and perhaps an indication of your own insecurities. Every year I am moved to tears when I see PFLAG walking down the street with their signs stating their unconditional love for their sons/daughters/friends. I hope you aren't honestly insinuating that you'd rather them not attend so people can have a bit more elbowroom when watching the parade. I appologize for the tone of my comment but I truly find your article offensive.

Maybe Miz Cole had her nose out of joint because nobody could be bothered to take HER picture ...

Really? I normally am a big fan of NOW, but how did this piece get published?

Maybe I am reading the article wrong but it seems to say: "Yes, you straight folks are invited but we would really prefer it when you don't attend".

This article is based off a single individual's casual observation on one street corner out of a parade route that accommodates THOUSANDS. By the same logic, since 7 of 10 people I knew in the parade were heterosexual, it was nothing but another Straight Pride Parade. I guess I should be furious at them. CRAP, wait, I'm smart enough to know that a sample group that small doesn't count for squat. I guess I'll have to settle for being embarrassed by Susan for acting as a voice of the LGBT community and getting it all very wrong.

Could the "special kind of solidarity" felt have come from the less compact crowds? From the weather being more mild than normal? From what ever recreational aspect of Pride you were taking part in? No? I guess the only logical answer then is the lack of straight community members from the party.

If Susan Cole is correct, and there was a strange absence of Heterosexual visitors from the celebrations this year perhaps it explains why the entire weekend had a slightly lackluster feel to it. I was going to blame the weather but...

NOW should be embarrassed for publishing such a discriminatory, us versus them, piece of trash. Toronto has enough garbage on its street corners with the strike; I don't need to find it weekly inside your magazine boxes.

And yes, I understand that this is NOW DAILY and not the actual print publication but still...

Comment removed

this article is so fucking stupid. honestly. when did it become acceptable for your writers to be so blatantly discriminatory?

i would venture to guess that MANY of the people at the parade or at pride were in fact not gay. you know what they are ms cole? SUPPORTERS. don't discourage people and make yourself so fucking exclusive. you should encourage the participation of everyone in the festival.

this mentality only leads to a suggestion that segregation is appropriate when THAT IS NOT EVEN WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.

if you want a gay festival that is exclusive to gay people, throw it yourself. in the meantime shut the fuck up.

Alright, so apparently no one read the 'don't get me wrong' part of the article... Anyway, call me crazy but I agree with SGC, the parade is usually taken as some sort of freak show... I know a lot of gay friends that go and take thousands of pictures. But I also know of a lot of people that go just for the opportunity to take pictures of 'the gays'. So bitch at her all you want, but when you have to wade through the gawkers taking pictures of 'the gays' all dressed up in their drag, or down to their leather chaps... or less. Don't even try to tell me they're there to support anything. A 'gays only' pride would be interesting, but for obvious reasons impossible, and that isn't what SGC is asking for. Take a deep breath, and calm down already.

Cole is another shitty angry NOW writer that needs the boot like Perlich. Most NOW writers are angry about something when it's enjoyable for all. Very scenester of them.

Gay/Straight, Pride is about sexual acceptance, not elbow room. Maybe next year Susan, you should not show up, wouldn't want to be squeezed in next to you.

Queer? No, you're just fucked.

Having successfully made men including your gay brothers feel unwelcome at the Dyke March, (while oddly welcoming heterosexual female politicians like NDP leader Andrea Horwath) Cole and her ilk apparently want to bring the same tone of fascist intolerance to Sunday. Could ya confine your obsessive need to control and exclude to Saturday only, please? I gladly stay away, like you want. But I like having a welcoming all-inclusive event on Sunday, even an imperfect one. (You see, my straight 70 year-old mom likes to come when she's in town. She likes the music, and the humour. She has a good time. Please don't tell her she's unwelcome! She collect mementos for her dyke friends back in rural BC.)

And by welcome, I don't mean chilly, formalistic multi-culti official tolerance. I mean good old-fashioned fruity GAY warmth. For everyone. It might never have existed except in our imagination, but lets make it a goal please? No racism. No sexism. No transphobia. And now, apparently, no heterophobia either.

(If you are straight and reading this, Susan Cole doesn't speak for most of us. I straw polled my housing co-op and everyone agrees with me that she's just being a cow. Ignore her.)

I'm acknowledge I'm simplifying here, but wasn't a key point behind the pride parade that of raising the visibility of a community? It's disingenuous to claim to be raising visibility in a closed parade unwelcoming to heterosexuals. If you want to be visible (as any public figure can attest, I'm sure), you don't get to be so picky about who does the seeing. Get over yourself.

Well, Susan Cole, you're certainly racking up the fans this week, aren't you? What's the point of having a "parade" demonstrating your pride if you want to exclude other communities from viewing it? How ridiculous.

And as for commenter "James" above, I would ask the same question. He writes: "when you have to wade through the gawkers taking pictures of 'the gays' all dressed up in their drag, or down to their leather chaps... or less. Don't even try to tell me they're there to support anything." ....

Again, what's the point of a parade and dressing up in said gear if you don't want your photo taken?

Ridiculous, pointless piece of hack journalism yet again from Now.

Just read Susan's Martin bit then came here. Wow, seriously? What is up with NOW? What happened here? How can you publish this?? It's not edgy, it's angry. Reminds me of Ann Coulter on the other side.

Funny, I bet that you're still willing to accept my "straight" tax dollars in order to PAY for your little "members only" shin-ding.

The City of Toronto lays out millions to subsidize Gay Pride. Hell, even the Conservatives in Ottawa wrote a cheque for 400 grand this year. I didn't hear any protests from the gay community about that. (Ah the hipocrisy - it's everywhere.)

As such, everyone should be welcomed.

You know what I'd just be dying to ask Ms. Cole, were I ever to have the misfortune of meeting her in person?

Would she want her daughter s to be excluded from Pride Parade?

As I understand it, from her own writing, she has two:

One who's around eighteen, and another younger girl she adopted with her partner.

So, would these girls have to be gay to attend? Or would Susan make them stay home were they straight?

And say both of them were gay--would it be okay for some straight person to write about how her girls would be unwelcome at the Santa Claus Parade? Or the Easter Parade? Or the St. Patrick's Day Parade? Or the Thanksgiving Parade?

I mean, would that be okay with her?

Fair being fair, and all...

Just a little thought experiment for you, Susan. ;)

And, yes, to the above poster--we do indeed pay for this stuff. ALL of us taxpayers. Not just the gay ones or the straight ones.

Ms. Cole seems soooooooo sensitive to discrimination. Against her own peeps, of course. When it doesn't involve her own interests, she really doesn't seem to give an airborne act of fornication.