Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras has moved to formally censure two board directors following alleged governance breaches—sparking backlash after one of the censure motions repeatedly misgendered a transgender board member.
The controversy comes amid ongoing community concern over the organisation’s decision to ignore several member-passed motions related to trans rights and corporate influence, raising broader questions about Mardi Gras’ commitment to its activist roots.
What Happened?
On Sunday, 25 January, Mardi Gras co-chairs Mits Delisle and Kathy Pavlich introduced formal motions to censure board directors Luna Choo and Damien Nguyen.
According to Mardi Gras, the proposed censures relate to the alleged use of official board email accounts to campaign against board decisions, and the unauthorised disclosure of confidential board information.
“We want to be very clear about why this action was taken, as it has been mischaracterised,” said Delisle in a statement.
“These email accounts exist solely to support directors in carrying out their governance responsibilities. Using them for campaigning or advocacy against the organisation crossed a clear governance boundary.
“That boundary applies to all directors, regardless of who they are or what cause they support. Upholding it is about protecting the integrity of the organisation, not silencing anyone.”
The Backdrop: Member Motions Ignored
The censure motion follows the Board’s controversial decision not to implement a number of non-binding member motions passed at the organisation’s November 2025 Annual General Meeting (AGM).
These motions included:
- Making trans rights a visible focus of the 2026 festival
- Advocating for law reform
- Reducing reliance on corporate sponsorship
The Board declined to adopt these recommendations, citing governance obligations, legal and reputational risk, and the need to maintain creative independence for parade participants.
While Mardi Gras reiterated its support for trans and gender-diverse communities, former board members and activists have expressed dismay, saying the decision reflects a move away from the organisation’s activist legacy.
Misgendering of a Trans Board Director
Separate from the governance concerns, the formal motion to censure Luna Choo repeatedly misgendered her, referring to her as “he/him” throughout the document, instead of her correct pronouns: she/they.
Choo is the only openly transgender person currently serving on the Mardi Gras Board.
In a public statement, Choo described the incident as deeply upsetting:
“Having been on the board for less than 2 months, I have been called a man, locked out of my emails, chastised for communicating to members on the issue of transgender rights, and now threats of being censured,” she said.
Her fellow board member Damien Nguyen echoed her concerns:
“For the leadership of one the biggest LGBTQIA+ organisations to so misgender a trans woman is utterly humiliating.”
Mardi Gras Responds
In response to public outcry, Mardi Gras issued an apology and said it had corrected the internal document.
“We sincerely apologise for the misgendering of Luna Choo in an internal document,” said Delisle.
“We have apologised directly to her, corrected the record, and correct pronouns or gender-neutral language will be used going forward.”
Why This Matters
Mardi Gras is one of Australia’s most visible LGBTQIA+ organisations, with a long-standing reputation for supporting trans and gender-diverse people.
In that context, the misgendering of a trans board director in a formal internal document has raised serious concerns within the community—particularly about safety and respect in organisational leadership.
If a sitting board director is not safe from such treatment, many are asking: who is?
While the apology has been issued, community leaders and allies are questioning whether that alone is enough.
Is an apology sufficient when misgendering occurs at the highest levels of an LGBTQIA+ organisation?
As Mardi Gras moves forward with planning for the 2026 festival, calls for transparency, accountability, and stronger internal safeguards are growing louder.
