When Straight People Attack

A few months ago I was invited to a friend's house for a mini-vacation. It was a wonderful breath of fresh air. I was introduced to a group of friends of my friend. During the conversations I typically drop some line about being gay. My friend asked me, "Why do gay people have to say they are 'gay'?" I have learned through the years that it really is a self-defence method. "To prevent misinterpretations and to ensure it is well established fact." My friend didn't quite understand but it really is about establishing that I'm not in the "straight" market or available.

A female friend of a friend was walking by and I said "hello" and pleasantly had a talk about things in general like the weather and gardening. A week or so after this conversation, my friend told me his friend thought I was flirting with her. My jaw dropped in amazement of what I was hearing. Can't a gay man be pleasant in the gay neighbourhood to a straight person without it being interpreted as flirting? I guess not. I should have some sorta sticker that says, "gay". Several straight neighbours have said they thought I was straight when they met me at first. It's a curse in disguise.

Originally I had moved to my neighbourhood thinking I was in the gay area and I should be safe. It has been anything but safe. A number of years ago a woman that does not live here started participating in the community. I'm all about gardening and this individual approached me about gardening. It was rather intense gardening stuff and interaction which was a bit "clingy" but I'm into the gardening thing so it was cool with me. All-of-a-sudden this individual turned mean, very mean. What I now realize is that this individual had "ear-marked" me as a "boy-toy". Once someone had informed this individual that I'm gay and have a boyfriend, I was not available for what they wanted and was declared "the enemy". I had no clue what was going on or why this woman became so mean so tried to avoid any contact. From this point forward I was a target. This individual did aquire another tenant for the purposes that they set-out for who was then recruited for mob bullying. I was not made aware when I moved to my current residence that I'd be subject to sexual predation. When this individual became the landlord, it became the most unpleasant intense mob bullying scene a nice gay guy should endure.

I'm not surprised the current mob bullying group are comprised of mostly straight people in a position of power. They've all been led to believe something different from the truth. I was previously made out to be someone completely different than I am. I'm a pleasant, helpful, thoughtful, respectful, honest person that has been discriminated for being gay. Considering I live in a gay neighbourhood, it isn't much of a surprise there is little to no recognition of the gay pride parade or anything gay. It's like a straight world in the middle of the gay ghetto. I respect and appreciate the straight people I have as neighbours and friends that are respectful to me.

Maybe I should just wear a rainbow feather boa to be clear from now on.

Privacy Breaching

Just over a year ago I was planning a trip south so that I could avoid the painful affects of Seasonal Affective Disorder. I had spent quite a bit of time preparing my vehicle to drive into the unknown to counter the negative affects of the "dark season". As I needed to prevent any problems with my housing situation, my doctor so graciously prepared a letter of support. I dropped this off to BC Housing as the funding and rules associated with subsidized housing were established by BC Housing. I was debating how to approach my landlord and deliver the letter.

On a day I was feeling rather unwell, I decided to catch-up on my laundry. As I was doing my laundry, my landlord entered and started a discussion. At first I couldn't figure out what the landlord was talking about but I started realizing through the discussion that my landlord knew quite a bit about my planned trip. I wasn't sure if it was the gossip mill that had informed my landlord or what. My landlord stated they had received the letter from BC Housing. I was informed by the landlord that BC Housing had faxed the letter containing confidential health information to my landlord without my knowledge or approval. I hadn't been given the chance to figure out how to deal with it. I was being confronted by my landlord about a private matter in a public space and I had no way of controlling this breach or the manner it was being addressed. My landlord also stated that they had contacted my doctor to discuss the matter. I don't blame the doctor as the letter did state, "feel free to contact me." The doctor presumed I had given the letter to my landlord and that I have a normal landlord.

It became abundantly clear that BC Housing did not respect my privacy and neither did my landlord. At first I ignored this as a possible anomaly but with additional breaches of my privacy, it appears to be "the norm" with my landlord. Under PIPA (Personal Information Protection Act [SBC 2003] CHAPTER 63)
Part 9 — Care of Personal Information

Protection of personal information

34  An organization must protect personal information in its custody or under its control by making reasonable security arrangements to prevent unauthorized access, collection, use, disclosure, copying, modification or disposal or similar risks.

This particular situation was a significant breach by BC Housing and my landlord. There also seems to be multiple breaches between the landlord and "preferred tenants" as many of the "in the know" tenants seem to know far too much about vulnerable tenants than they should. The whole purpose behind PIPA is to ensure an individual has control over their personal information. Once this is breached, it is a free-for-all.

I often wonder about the emails I get from my landlord. Not at any time did I approve or were asked if I'd like to be added to the distribution list. In addition, several emails expose my email address to all of the tenants where I live. Did anyone think to check PIPA for email related issues? Nope. How do you tease an ostracized and excluded tenant from the community? Send them emails about activities that they're not allowed to participate in that you know they'd be interested in. I'm not biting. They call that "bait and hook" and it is childish.

Last year, during a bout of bullying by the mob, the landlord joined in and used BC Housing subsidy applications to bully. On the third application I asked my parents to drop off the application as I did not feel comfortable looking in the eyes of liars. Much to my amazement, the landlord pulled my parents into a meeting that I neither authorized or knew was going to happen to discuss me. The first thing my landlord said to my parents, “We know (tenant) has mental health issues and we have been very accommodating towards him.” Wow Nelly! Now there's a Human Rights violation if I've ever heard one. I am familiar with bullies discrediting the target as "mentally ill", but to the target's parents? On an unauthorized meeting? Talk about breach-o-rama! In addition to all of this, a board member of the housing complex followed my mother down the back lane a block from the complex to the car where I sat. When I pointed this out to my mother the individual scurried off like a rat.

Privacy is important to ensure fair and honest treatment and to ensure accountability. Unfortunately, when there is little regard for privacy there is no trust.

The New Sheriff In Town

Quite a few years ago a community gathering was held with the, then, new landlord. A variety of community members were in attendance including a friend and neighbour. My friend observed the new landlord making inappropriate sexual advances on one of the tenants. She approached the new landlord and adviced him to back-down. The new landlord's reply, "I'm the New Sheriff in Town!" From this point forward my friend and neighbour was a target for relentless bullying. Luckily, it was determined that this individual had a white-collar crime history, demonstrated in a Canadian law database, to which I brought up and a hasty departure, "due to health reasons". It was amusing to watch the budget change from healthy to not so good in such a short time. I realize I am bullied because I am a whistleblower.

 In the complex I live in, I have a friend who I've known for a number of years. One day I visited him to say hello. He was crying that he had to return his box heater outlined in a letter from the landlord. "What's wrong? Don't your heaters work?", I said. "No", was his reply and his apartment was quite cold. "How long has it been like this?", I asked. "A year". I looked at his heater and, sure enough, it wasn't working. I decided to check the heaters in the cold hallways and they were also not working. The entire building had been without heat for an entire year. I understood why the tenants had not spoken up as they are either all or almost all BC Housing subsidized tenants. They were concerned about losing their home if they speak-up so either you live in cold and keep your home or speak up, get heat and lose your home. Being a subsidized tenant myself, I phoned the office and advised them that there was no heat in the building. I guess that's one of the reasons I'm a target. Kind of an "unheated" topic.

This same friend asked me a few weeks ago if he should go to the police as the landlord has relentlessly accused him of being a drug dealer. How do you prove a negative? Having known this fellow for a number of years I am fully aware he is not a drug dealer. He is, though, a social person and has many friends. Culturally speaking, english is not his first language and his ethnic cultural background, which is Latin American, is social in nature. So, if you have a number of friends, you are labelled a "drug dealer". I think back to the Citizenship ceremony of another friend and the Citizenship judge discussing the importance of respecting different cultural backgrounds as a Canadian value. One could easily say that the landlord is encouraging and participating in discrimination based on ethnicity. By mentioning this, I am concerned he may lose his housing.

In a society that encourages "Have" over "Have-Nots", the differences in rights, dignity and respect granted to the "Have-Nots" diminish with each passing moment. As a prime example, the housing complex I live in has BC Housing "subsidized housing" and "market-rate" housing, which really isn't "market" as it is also subsidized. Over a number of years the "market-rate" tenants have become the "Have" and the "subsidized tenants" are the "Have-Nots". The market-rate tenants enjoy quick repair services, regular maintenance, access to all amenities and services, power influence of the landlord and society board of directors, dignity and respect. The subsidized housing tenants are subject to less building maintenance, limited access to amenities and services, little to no respect and dignity and discrimination. A market-rate tenant who possesses a great deal of power and has been a stalker and bully towards me once expressed that the subsidized housing was only meant as "temporary housing". I liken the situation to classism based on socio-economic position in housing.

It is without question that writing about this issue will result in my eviction. It is my fundamental freedoms of conscience, thought, and expression, amongst others, that I exercise according to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that I write this blog.

Act In Good Faith

I have often wondered what, "Act in Good Faith", really means when described in the BC Society Act [RSBC 1996] CHAPTER 433. In this Society Act Review - Discussion Paper December 2011, from the Ministry of Finance it;

1. 17) Allow societies to indemnify directors and officers: Currently, societies need court approval to indemnify their directors and officers for legal liability and expenses incurred as a result of their good faith actions. Allowing societies to provide indemnity without court approval would help ensure that individuals continue to be willing to take on these important roles.
2. 19) Provide defence of due diligence for directors and officers: This defence would allow directors to be relieved of liability if they rely in good faith on the statements and reports prepared by professional advisors, including lawyers, accountants and appraisers. As well, there would be a remedy allowing the court to relieve directors or officers of liability in a legal proceeding brought against them where they have acted in good faith and ought, in the circumstances, to be relieved. These defences will ease the legal risks of directing or managing a society. It is not proposed, however, to grant directors of not-for-profits blanket immunity for personal liability for negligence.

In a Not-for-Profit society I am well familiar with, the membership voted a few years ago to remove the Executive Director from position. The ED is a paid position, hired by the Board of Directors. When the vote was approved by membership, the ED hired a lawyer, threatened the society with an expensive wrongful dismissal case and stronghanded the directors and society to change the ED from term position to permanent with a nice raise. I guess my question is, if the membership of the society voted and approved the removal of the ED, by ignoring this vote and passing, was the Chair of the Board "Acting in Good Faith" by avoiding an expensive wrongful dismissal case and saving the society legal fees or would it have been "Acting in Good Faith" in carrying out the wishes of the society membership? I'd imagine this area is quite "grey" due to the employment aspect. Did the Chair of the Board and Board of Directors have the power to vito such a vote? I find it amusing that records associated with this vote have been removed from society meeting minutes.

The words, "Act in Good Faith", really is about honesty and integrity. Is it honest to ignore the membership's wishes? In the same society, the board of directors must approve all society membership applications and decline those they wish. You could say that the very thing that our forefathers fought for, democracy, is deteriorated with every added step. Can you imagine if there were conditions on voting in the Federal or Provincial election? Technically, the board could approve their friends and decline those that they feel are differing from the boards direction. Food for thought.

Big Leaf Maple = Future Big Problem as a Street Tree

7 February 2013 (I have sent the below mentioned comments as an email to every media outlet I could find, many arborists in multiple municipalities, municipal politicians, The Mayor of Vancouver, City Counsillors, etc)

Recently I received a press release (above) from Mole Hill Community Housing Society, my landlord, that the City of Vancouver has approved Big Leaf Maple Trees as a replacement tree for dying Cherry trees along the 1100 block of Pendrell Street in downtown Vancouver. The boulevard is under 2 metres in width between the curb and the sidewalk. Having been an admirer of this fine native species of Maple, with the largest leaf of any maple, I am troubled by this choice of tree as a street tree in the city core.

Acer macrophyllum (Big Leaf Maple) can grow to over 45 metres in height, have a trunk with a circumference of up to 3 metres and a significant surface root system (Mature Tree). My further concern for this Friday, 8^th February, planting by the Vancouver City Street Tree Program on Pendrell Street brought me to a Seattle City Ordinance, No. 90047, prohibiting the planting of this species in the City of Seattle on boulevards. In reviewing background on the use of this tree in Seattle, I found reference in “Trees of Seattle” by Arthur Lee Jacobson which states, “Around 1900, it was our most widely planted street-tree, but due to the ruinous effects of root-heaving on adjacent sidewalks, its use as a street-tree is now illegal by City ordinance.” Most municipalities I spoke to shy away from this magnificent tree due to its over-all size, wide and damaging root system, and tendencies to break large limbs during wind storms. Additional problems with this species include excessive seed production and excellent seed germination, powdery mildew and internal trunk rot. The City of Bellingham requires a planting strip with a minimum width of 30’+ for this species to be utilized in the city. Arborists for other municipalities stated that it was not a species they’d consider or had in their approved street tree lists. Don’t get me wrong – I find this tree to be a magnificent native maple with excellent fall colour, large leaves and a prominent trunk, but, it belongs in a suitable growing situation such as a park.

I spoke to Bill Steven, Acting City Arborist and Brad from the Vancouver Street Tree Program regarding the use of this tree and whether Mole Hill will be held responsible for future maintenance and repair costs, and their response was, “40 years and we will see sidewalk repair crews there and taxpayers will be responsible for paying for it.” It will, no doubt, be more like 30 years or less when roots will heave sidewalks and cause street damage with the potential of falling limbs and person/property damage. I’d imagine the city has good liability insurance. It was only little more than a year ago that a mature Big Leaf Maple in Nelson Park, only a block away, dropped a large limb during a wind storm. This tree is situated at the north-west corner of the school playground. The tree had become dangerous and was heavily pruned, no doubt at significant cost to tax payers. The expression, right plant-right place, wrong plant-potentially costly disaster applies to this situation. The City of Vancouver may be creating a costly future problem due to Mole Hill’s insistence for a native tree, namely the Big Leaf Maple. A native plant does not mean it is better than non-native plants. I outright stated to Bill Stevens & Brad, “…so what you are saying is that politics weighs stronger than common sense by planting this tree and taxpayers will end up paying for the end result of this decision?” I was dismayed that little regard for tax payers was expressed in the making of this decision. A street tree decision should be based on what is best for the tree, the city, tax payers and the environment. Just because this tree was planted extensively 100 years ago as a street tree does not mean it was a good choice, then or now, and probably explains the lack of seeing this tree currently as a common street tree. Brad mentioned that he had a hard time finding this tree, and for good reason. It is not a tree utilized in urban forestry for street tree use because of the aforementioned problems. Mole Hill Community Housing Society has long pushed for “native-only” plantings in the heritage block and ostracised those that appreciate non-native plants. Having had the front garden sprayed with herbicide a few times and killed and mob bullying has re-iterated this “native-only” drive. The overplanted and poorly kept native plant walk-through at Mole Hill has created a dangerous environment of drug dealing and criminal activity. With this commentary, I smell an eviction in my future!

What it really boils down to for the tree’s sake is I am asking for anyone’s assistance to prevent “Street Tree Abuse” that starts on Friday of this week. I am a plantsman and I care about plants. This, to me, is the same misguided environmentalist-type of action that Grant Hadwin bestowed on the Golden Spruce. If the City of Vancouver is vying for the “Greenest City” status, it should be done smartly, with the future in mind and without political motives at the forefront. If planting this tree is considered illegal in Seattle and punishable by a fine, wouldn’t the City of Vancouver take heed to this warning? Bill Stephen stated they will go ahead with this planting, despite my concerns. I’m encouraged that Drew Gilchrist, Superintendent of Arboriculture, Bill Stephen, Acting Vancouver City Arborist, Vancouver Parks Board, Donald Luxton, President of Heritage Vancouver Society, Sean McEwen, architect and Blair Petrie, Mole Hill founder and native plant person have vested interest in the community and I trust a sound resolution to this predicament will be found. None of us would want to end up paying for a poorly thought-out decision down the road. It would probably be best that Mole Hill Community Housing Society leave tree choices to the experts. After all, it would be an embarrassment for the Vancouver City Street Tree program, which I have held in high regard for tree diversity, arborists and urban foresters to make decisions based on politics instead of tree sense.

“I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees. I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues.” Dr. Seuss – The Lorax (1972)

Update 9 February, 2013

The trees were planted on the 8th February, 2013 as promised by the Vancouver City Street Tree Program. One could easily surmise that tree sense and common sense have been superseded by politics and misguided environmentalism. Out of curiosity I looked through several of my books to see what they said. The Western Garden Book, which is often considered the gardening "bible" of the west, states under Acer macrophyllum, "...Dense shade tree 30-75 ft. tall, 30-50 ft wide - too big for a small garden or a street tree." In Maples, by Rosemary Barrett, "There are other maples that call North America home, such as Acer macrophyllum (Big leaf Maple, Oregon Maple) and A. spicatum (Mountain Maple), but these are not suitable garden subjects nor are they readily available. This should not be of concern as the maples that have been described are so beautiful that we should not want for more." In An Illustrated Guide to Maples, by Antoine Le Hardÿ de Beaulieu, which is a marvelous book, it states, "...The tree's root system has adapted to these conditions and is very broad and superfial." I also found this Seattle Times article (October 21, 2002) regarding the tree which states,

"The tree is banned in Seattle for planting as a street tree because of its sidewalk-bursting roots and widow-making branches.
Plagued by compacted soil from parked cars and foot traffic, pavement and construction, the bigleaf is prone to root rot, said Linda Chalker-Scott, associate professor at the Center for Urban Horticulture.
Rot can make it more vulnerable to shattering in stormy weather.
The trees are also just too big to fit into street tree-planting strips, said Nolan Rundquist, city arborist for Seattle.
He has cut many a chunk of sidewalk out to make room for burgeoning bigleafs, and Rundquist remembers one sidewalk muscled up 18 inches by bigleaf roots.
"You had to just kind of fly over that part."
It's a tree for wild, open places, not the straitjacket life of a street tree. "Everything has its place," Rundquist said. "It's place just isn't between the sidewalk and the street."

I also wonder if the Cherry Trees (Prunus sp.) were suffering from honey fungus as almost all Maples (Acer) are susceptible species to this disease. I also noticed in the original Press Release that Acer macrophyllum is pluralized, which I don't even think is legal.

Fate

The supporting evidence is everywhere and experience with this species has taught some arborists but it seems others have forgotten or don't care. I guess some must error repeatedly to learn...or maybe not. It really comes down to understanding plants. Their characteristics, requirements, habits, negative and positive attributes and practical applications.

Stalker Persona

For years I have been a subject of stalking and mob bullying in Vancouver. It has been a lesson in human psychology and social humping. One of the positions in a mob bullying ring is the Stalker. By definition a Stalker is one who engages in Stalking. The act of Stalking refers to "unwanted or obsessive attention by an individual or group toward another person". "Stalking behaviors are related to harassment and intimidation and may include following the victim in person or monitoring them". The stalking definition, I find, is very similar to the definition of harassment: “Engaging in a course of vexatious comment or conduct against an individual that is known or ought reasonably to be known to be unwelcome.” One could say that stalking and harassment are synonymous. I’ve noticed male and female stalking is significantly different. A male focuses on observation from a distance with patience, quite persistently so, whereas the female stalker initiates intrusive measures while attempting to remain incognito or under the guise of something else.

Stalking really comes down to predatory behaviours with the intention of “taking down” the prey by the predator(s). The example of Senior abuse by scam artists uses a very similar technique, preying on the trusting vulnerability of a senior. I’m often amused that so many people forget humans are animals, just like hyenas, baboons and lions and the human instinct and behaviours are mammalian in origin. Many references use the term, "victim", whereas I prefer the term, "target" for the intended recipient of the stalking and bullying. Targeted Individual (TI) is a term used in gang stalking and bullying. Just like a bullseye, the bullying mob goes for the target's red dot on their back/forehead/social status/etc. with the intention of removing self-sustainability (finance), social status (reputation), mobility (safety), functionality (ostracism), etc.

A few months ago I was outside in the park and noticed a problemsome neighbour lurking from across the street. It really was funny to watch the sneaky yet unsure behaviour. It reminded me of a cat, checking to see if anyone was noticing and then slowly moving forward with hesitation towards the target. I, the target, was in a different place than anticipated. A strange thing that I've noticed with stalkers is that they typically have squinty eyes when they are stalking. I knew there was something going on but not sure exactly what. Within days this stalker confronted me. Within a few weeks the City of Vancouver showed up to do an inspection and complaint letters had been sent to the landlord. Since this time, the neighbour has followed me along streets and participated in hate gossip.

A Stalker also looks for opportunity when a targeted individual is alone. Solitude is dangerous for a Targeted Individual. When the target is alone it is a chance for the stalker to bring the situation to the next level. Verbal or physical confrontation, backing the individual into a corner or confinement are the next steps in the intimidation process. The target will either "fight" or "flee". Any attempt by the target to do either will be brought forward to the authorities as "dangerous", "aggressive", "unstable", "paranoid" or "mentally ill", with the stalker denying any involvement in stalking or confrontation. In mob bullying, additional stalkers join the participation in stalking to further intimidate the target based on the description by the primary stalker of the "incident". The target is made out to be "playing the victim" and described as the perpetrator.

Signs you are being stalked:

• repeated walk/drive-bys by the same individual(s)/vehicle
• lurking behaviour which may include visual determination if you are alone, and once determined that you are not, the individual leaves
• requests for odd information that is not the business of those who ask
• multiple complaints to authorities that may be half-true or completely false
• expressing concern to an authority figure may intensify stalking
• excessive criticism
• increased interest and observation of what you are doing by an individual or several individuals
• being repeatedly photographed via cell phones or cameras
• an aquaintance becoming particularly friendly, later to want nothing to do with you once they have their information
• friends or family are asked questions about you by an aquaintance(s)
• perpetual existance of an individual between an area the targeted individual requires ie bathroom, laundry room, grocery store, etc.
• following an "incident", enquiries/discussion as to the results or "damage" are made of you
• particular interest by individuals of your intended "escape plan" with added suggestions
• requests for dealing with stalking to authority figures is met with a pre-conceived notion of who or what you are like. This particularly includes political or/and power figures.
• damage or vandalism to home/office/work/vehicle
• an individual from work/home/etc showing up at non-related venues
• a previous problemsome co-worker shows up at your new employer. This is particularly difficult to deal with in retail or service jobs

This list is quite extensive and certainly does not cover all of the possible signs you may be stalked. Dealing with stalking includes reducing availability to stalkers, randomly changing routines, walking with someone, making others aware of what is going on. Stating clearly to the individual, "You are stalking me!" or try something overly nice like, "Hi Sharon, nice weather we're having!" or "Nice to see you John!", within the ear-shot of others. Acting as if you are photographing them when they are photographing you. Mob bullying makes it particularly difficult to count on authority figures as they work as a group to discredit the target. This also makes going to the police particularly difficult and probably not the best choice.