With Pride events ramping up in the Seattle area, local activists have been answering questions like: Where will people park? Where will porta-potties be placed? And how will we ensure safety?

This year, the organization behind Capitol Hill Pride believes that safety means banning police from attending the Pride march and rally.

(Since Seattle Pride, organizers of the downtown march, is again going virtual for the weekend's events, it doesn't have to make that decision this year.)

According to a press release issued by Capitol Hill Pride on May 21, "[For] the safety and courtesy [sic] of the LGBTQ and diversity community as well as the general public, our responsibility is to present a safe event and [create] an atmosphere free of fear or harm for members of the community. As such, Capitol Hill Pride is announcing a ban of police at the event and will continue to request police to stay at the perimeters."

The banning of police has found support among "Defund the Police" activists, who feel that having police at the event will do more harm than good. But those who "Back the Blue" are upset by this seemingly exclusive move by a community known for its inclusivity.

One group of people who are unhappy with the ban are LGBTQ+ officers at the Seattle Police Department. According to an article written by Jason Rantz for MyNorthwest.com, one such officer is Sgt. Doug Raguso, an openly Gay member of the SPD. He told Rantz, "I was shocked. I was incredibly surprised, because the SPD and the LGBTQ+ community have enjoyed a phenomenal relationship in the last 18 years that I've been with the department." He also said that this move by Capitol Hill Pride "brought up painful memories of living in the closet."

The decision to ban police at the event was confusing to some SPD officers because of the Safe Place Program, which was created by a Gay SPD officer. The program was created for people who have experienced a hate crime: local businesses give them a safe place to go to after an incident, where they can call 911 for help.

According to Rantz, the ban "sends the message that LGBTQ activists are happy to engage in the same kind of hateful discrimination they used to condemn."

While the LGBTQ+ community has a legacy of inclusivity, one might wonder if this sends the right message, or the wrong one. In the past, safety and inclusivity were somewhat synonymous, but in this case, some might see them as mutually exclusive. What do you think? We'd love to hear your thoughts. Send a letter to the editor at [email protected].