- Major corporate sponsors like Home Depot and Google have withdrawn funding from Toronto’s Pride parade amid backlash over sexualized displays and public nudity near children.
- Pride Toronto’s director blamed U.S. «anti-LGBT trends,» while critics cite public outrage over indecent behavior involving minors at past events.
- Toronto’s city council increased taxpayer funding for LGBT festivals by 33%, allocating $2.5 million to replace lost corporate sponsorships.
- Past Pride parades featured nudity, fetish gear, and sexually explicit performances around children—actions that would typically violate public decency laws.
- Despite Canada’s laws against exposing minors to sexual content, police refused to intervene, raising legal and ethical concerns about taxpayer-funded events.
Toronto’s annual Pride parade, long criticized for its overtly sexualized displays and public nudity in front of children, is now facing a financial crisis as major corporate sponsors—including Home Depot, Google, Adidas, and Nissan Canada—have withdrawn their support ahead of Pride Month.
Pride Toronto executive director Kojo Modeste lamented the loss of funding, blaming «anti-LGBT trends» from the U.S., while critics argue the exodus reflects growing public backlash against exposing minors to indecent behavior. In response, Toronto’s city council has increased taxpayer funding for LGBT festivals by 33%, allocating $2.5 million to ensure the parade continues despite corporate withdrawals.
Corporate sponsors flee amid controversy
Home Depot and Google confirmed they have ended their sponsorships of Pride Toronto, joining Adidas and Nissan Canada in distancing themselves from the event. Home Depot stated it «continually review[s] our nonprofit giving» and opted not to contribute this year, though it pledged to support LGBT activism elsewhere. Google offered no public explanation.
Modeste expressed disappointment, claiming the withdrawals stem from U.S. political influences rather than Canadian values. «We believe that a lot of what we saw in the U.S. has impacted us,» he said, referencing corporate pushback against divisive LGBT and DEI initiatives. However, critics argue the real issue is Pride Toronto’s history of allowing explicit displays around children, including public nudity, fetish gear, and simulated sex acts—content that has sparked widespread condemnation.
Taxpayers forced to foot the bill
With corporate sponsors fleeing, Toronto’s municipal government stepped in, boosting funding for Pride Toronto and 14 other LGBT festivals. The city’s Cultural Festivals Funding Program increased its grant to Pride by $90,000, totaling $350,000, while another $2.1 million was allocated for event security. Critics argue this prioritization of taxpayer dollars is misguided, especially as families struggle with rising costs of living.
Previous Pride parades have featured naked men marching past young children, performers in grotesque costumes, and sexually suggestive floats—scenes that would typically violate public decency laws if not for the event’s political backing.
A parade of indecency
Footage from past Pride Toronto events reveals disturbing scenes: naked men carrying signs like «Life is short: Play naked,» adults in fetish gear interacting with minors, and performers wearing giant phallic costumes. In 2023, videos showed nude men rinsing themselves near a fountain surrounded by children, while a stage sponsored by Bud Light featured dancers in fishnets and nipple pasties.
Despite Canada’s criminal code prohibiting exposing genitals to minors for sexual purposes, Toronto police refused to intervene. Legal experts questioned this inaction, noting that similar behavior outside Pride events would likely result in charges.
The sponsor withdrawals signal a growing rejection of corporate involvement in controversial social agendas. With Toronto’s government doubling down on funding Pride, the debate now centers on whether taxpayer money should support events that many argue harm children. While activists decry the loss of sponsors as discrimination, the real issue remains protecting children from inappropriate content. Toronto’s decision to replace corporate funding with public dollars ignores these concerns, prioritizing political agendas over community standards.
Sources for this article include: