Blog

  • Free Speech

    Free Speech

    Here are some experiences I’ve had:

    • I go on a date. While saying goodbye to the date, a man comes up to me, inquires about my gender, and gropes my breasts to find out if I am a man or a woman.
    • I go to the gym. After my work out, a patron tells me to get out of the change room.
    • I eat in a food court. The table next to me has five older men talking about trans people derisively, with straw-men arguments.
    • I go to an outdoor music festival. A woman pulls at my sports bra. A man follows me to inquire why I’m wearing feminine attire.
    • I watch a new movie. There’s a tranny joke.
    • I go buy clothes. A sales associate follows me around the store after I try on leggings, stops by me, and eyes me up and down giving me a look of disgust.
    • I go get my brows done. The aesthetician laughs in my face when I ask for thinner more feminine eyebrows.
    • I’m at work. A coworker tries to bond by deriding their ex for being trans. He doesn’t know I’m trans.
    • I go to a laser hair removal clinic. The receptionist looks at my file, sees the medications I’m on, and berates me for being on hormone replacement therapy.
    • I walk to a coffee shop downtown. On the way a pedestrian yells that I’m a man.
    • I walk to the grocery store. A guy at a pub patio along the way mocks me over my breasts to his friends.
    • I walk up to a bus stop. A lady waiting for the bus ogles so hard that she nearly falls over when she bends forward to get a better view.
    • I take the bus home. A man points at me repeatedly and laughs.
    • I buy a coat. The sales associate tells me I’m in the wrong section, the men’s is over there.
    • I take a walk. A man passing me mutters that I’m wearing a women’s coat.
    • I walk to work. A man loudly asks his friend if I’m a guy or girl. I turn around to see if he’s talking about me, then he promptly yells that I’m a dude.
    • I take a cab. The driver solicits me for sex.
    • I go to a bar and use the facilities. I overhear a man say that a guy went into the ladies washroom. Leaving the bar, a patron yells at me that I’m a guy.
    • I read a national newspaper. There’s an op ed portraying trans rights as a threat to children.
    • I update my insurance info. They won’t let me change my gender marker until I have surgery that renders me sterile.

    The views that led people to act in the above fashion are widespread. They are so widespread that I’m still afraid when accessing gendered public spaces like change rooms.

    Ad that appeared a few months ago in Hamilton.

    It irks me when people claim that these views are silenced because some university declined to give this transphobia a platform or because some trans people protest it.

    No. This view is all around us. Trans students at that university are immersed in that view, whether the administration hosts a transphobic speaker or that speaker finds another venue. I don’t buy for one second that free speech is under threat; not when this view is literally shouted from the streets of Ottawa. Not when this view is voiced in change rooms, in washrooms, in clothing stores, in food courts, outside bars, in clinics. Not when it’s advertised on Parliament Hill and in this country’s national and local newspapers, in recital halls, and television programs. That free speech is being exercised all the time with very significant displays.

    Don’t conflate particular venues declining to lend their name to these views with being silenced. Don’t mistake trans people protesting this prejudice for a loss of free speech. To the contrary, that’s adding a voice to the mix that wasn’t heard before. But to those whose views monopolized the public sphere, having these new voices gain prominence can feel like a loss. It may be a loss of comfort from having to share space with trans voices, but it is not a loss of free speech.

  • Away from Catholicism

    Away from Catholicism

    I go to church almost every Sunday and have been for a year and a bit now. I occasionally read Bible passages during service or help out here and there as well. I love the community around this particular church and a lot of my friends originate from there.

    I grew up Catholic, but now attend an Anglican church. To me these are two branches of the same Christian faith, but one is safe and welcoming of me, and one is not. I wanted to talk about why I left Catholicism and do so by asking you to step into someone else’s shoes.

    Imagine for me that you’re Catholic and that you’re gay and/or trans. Let’s also imagine that you’re a young adult, so that you’ve only experienced the church as it is now.

    (Catholic) School

    In elementary school, you might have learned that your Catholic school considered talking about people like you having rights inappropriate. In 2014, the principal of an Ottawa Catholic school prohibited a student from doing a project on gay rights, after the student had been asked to pick a topic on social justice.

    In high school, dealing with the rejection you face based on your sexuality or gender identity, you might have tried to turn to a support group. In 2011, support groups for gay youth were banned in Ottawa Catholic schools, as they were in all Catholic schools in the province. The provincial government had to pass a law to prohibit Catholic schools from enacting these bans. It was hard fought with assertions that accepting gay youth was incompatible with the Catholic faith.

    As a student you might have also looked to teachers for help, only to find no real support. In my exchanges with teachers, and discussions with social workers that dealt with teachers, there were numerous accounts of Catholic teachers who were afraid to support queer youth on account of what it might do to their career.

    Out of high school now, you might hear that the Assembly of Catholic Bishops of Ontario, responsible for religious teachings in Ontario Catholic schools, continues its guidelines for gay students which affirms that they’re “intrinsically disordered” and that they are “immoral” for pursuing loving relationships. Equal rejection is accorded to trans students in separate guidelines. These are in documents to support the students.

    In university, you might joke with other students about about your presence being contentious when you go to Pride, because by this point you’re all too familiar with the rejection from Catholic schools and know they would never support an environment where you were accepted.

    Meanwhile, stories of the Catholic faith in schools might make your news aggregator or Facebook feed. Trustees for the Halton Catholic school board vote against including sexual orientation and gender identity in its anti-bullying policy. The Edmonton Catholic district doesn’t let a seven year old transgender girl use the girl’s washrooms. Greater St. Albert Catholic Schools fires a teacher after he transitions.

    Church

    As a young adult, you now have agency on which church you wish to attend. If you’re new to Ottawa, it might mean church hopping or looking at options.

    As an individual well acquainted with the Internet, you might look at the website for these churches. You might find, as I did, blog posts by the Father of the nearby Catholic church you were interested in attending expressing exasperation that people are making a fuss over the church’s stance on sexual orientation. You’ve witnessed great hurt being done and now see it paired with a complete lack of understanding for that hurt.

    Meanwhile, you see the Ottawa archbishop, Terrence Prendergast, call the deep bonds of affection and love like that for your significant other “sterile, destructive social arrangements” and regard inclusion as “unrelenting attempts to change or destroy the Church“. You see him assert that Catholics who consider doctor-assisted death could be denied last rites and funerals.

    Catholic bishops call this love.

    It does not resemble the love you were taught as a young child in Catholic school. But then again, those words were for a child that was assumed to be a straight, cisgender, male.

    Another Way

    Then you discover it. A church that worships the same faith you do and that at its core accepts you.

    You finally witness the love that was missing. You see that others have found it too, in the diversity of those with you on those Sunday mornings, young and old, queer and not. In the little things they say and do.

    And so you walk away from Catholicism but do so feeling more Christian than ever before.

     

  • Vegan Cookie Cats

    Vegan Cookie Cats

    Steven Universe, the wonderfully queer animated show, features a fictitious ice cream sandwich treat called Cookie Cat (shown below.) I attempted to make them. The result was pretty well received. This is how I went about it.

    Making a Cookie Cat Cookie Cutter

    First I needed a Cookie Cat shaped cookie cutter. I bought a large round cookie cutter for a dollar, then took pliers to them to shape them into the Cookie Cat shape.

    Making the Cookie Cats

    Then I needed a vegan ice cream sandwich recipe. I went with this one from So Delicious, doubling the amounts. This recipe makes 18 cookie cats.

    • 1L Vegan Ice Cream
    • 2 Cups Flour
    • 1 Cup Cocoa Powder
    • ½ Tsp Baking Soda
    • 1 Tsp Salt
    • 1 Cup Vegan Butter, Room Temperature
    • ⅔ Cup Sugar
    • 1 Tsp Vanilla
    • 4+ Tbsp Water
    1. In a medium bowl, whisk together the flour, cocoa, baking soda, and salt.
    2. In a large bowl, cream the butter, sugar, and vanilla.
    3. Add ½ cup of the flour mixture to the creamed butter and mix to combine.
    4. Add the rest of the flour mixture to the creamed butter and mix until crumbly.
    5.  Add the water, a table spoon at a time, until the mixture comes together.
    6. Make two balls of dough from the mixture. Wrap them in plastic wrap and refrigerate for an hour.
    7. Preheat the oven to 325 °F.
    8. Take the balls of dough out of the fridge. Place a ball between two sheets of parchment paper. Press them down into a square, then roll them out with a rolling pin until the dough is ⅛ to ¼ inch thick.
    9. Cut out the cookies using the Cookie Cat cookie cutter. Place them on a cookie sheet that’s lined with parchment paper or a silicone mat (eg. silpat).
    10. Bake for 6 minutes.
    11. Roll out the second ball of dough, cut out the cat shaped cookies, and place them on a cooled cookie sheet lined with parchment paper or a silicone mat. Bake them for 6 minutes as well.
    12. Let the cookies cool completely before removing them from the cookie sheet.
    13. Once the cookies have cooled, place a dollop of ice cream between two cookies and sandwich them together to make the cat-shaped treat. I had the side of the cookie that was against the cookie sheet face outwards in the sandwich, as it was flatter and made them look more professional.
    14. Put the individual completed cookies in the freezer as soon as you make them, or otherwise do what I did and work in a garage in -20 °C weather while questioning my life choices. You just don’t want the cookies to melt away like you hopes and dreams. It’s good to line the container you put them in with parchment paper or something, as the cookies might otherwise stick to the bottom of the container.
  • The Opposition to Bill C-16

    The Opposition to Bill C-16

    A little while ago, I spoke about how professor Jordan Peterson acted as a lightning rod for Canadians to express their opposition with acceptance of trans people. This opposition has reached a point where it is threatening the passage of Bill C-16, also known as the trans rights bill. In this article, I’m going to cover the opposition.

    Jordan Peterson

    A few months ago, professor Jordan Peterson published an incoherent rant against non-binary people and Bill C-16, invoking the Soviet Union, calling the Ontario Human Rights Commission a “particularly pathological organization”, stating that using gender-neutral pronouns would make him a “mouthpiece of some murderous ideology person’s gender identity definitions.”

    In response, trans people attending the University of Toronto where the professor taught spoke out about this vitriol and demanded that trans students at the university be treated with respect. They organized a teach-in.

    An immense backlash followed, not against the professor, but against the trans students. Canadians perceived the opposition to Peterson’s assertions as an affront to their freedom of speech. As I documented in that blog entry, major media outlets in Canada indicated their support for the professor, with seemingly only small queer outlets sympathizing with those on the receiving end of his words. As best as I can tell, the only acceptable response that Canadian public would have tolerated was silence on the part of trans people and no demands for the professor to treat them with respect.

    Peterson spoke against Bill C-16 in his rant, stating that it would infringe on freedom of speech. The backlash picked up that narrative, making its way through the media and Parliament. What was initially about a transphobic professor and students objecting to his bigotry at one university became much much bigger.

    What Bill C-16 Does

    As a refresher, Bill C-16 adds “gender identity and gender expression” to the Human Rights Act and to the criminal code. You can see the full text of the bill here.

    The modification to the Canadian Human Rights Act, Section 2. This is the section that explains the purpose of the Act:

    2 The purpose of this Act is to extend the laws in Canada to give effect, within the purview of matters coming within the legislative authority of Parliament, to the principle that all individuals should have an opportunity equal with other individuals to make for themselves the lives that they are able and wish to have and to have their needs accommodated, consistent with their duties and obligations as members of society, without being hindered in or prevented from doing so by discriminatory practices based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, disability or conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered.

    The modification to the Canadian Human Rights Act, Subsection 3(1). This is the subsection that identifies the eligible grounds for discrimination:

    3 (1) For all purposes of this Act, the prohibited grounds of discrimination are race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, disability and conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered.

    The modification to the Criminal Code, Subsection 318(4). This is in the subsection that makes it illegal to advocate or promote genocide:

    (4) In this section, identifiable group means any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, national or ethnic origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or mental or physical disability.

    The modification to the Criminal Code, Subparagraph 718.‍2(a)‍(i). This is in the section for sentencing after an individual has been found guilty of a crime:

    (i) evidence that the offence was motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity or expression, or on any other similar factor,

    The Opposition

    Bill C-16 is currently in the Senate. The Senate is where the previous incarnation of this bill, Bill C-279, was killed. There is much more opposition now as a result of the lightning rod effect. According to Amnesty International, who have been involved in the effort to advance C-16, “Senators are being flooded with messages opposing” Bill C-16.

    Current public exposure to Bill C-16, through Google search results, Twitter, newspapers and the media is being framed through the lens of the opposition. The focus of the opposition is around free speech and the claim that misgendering an individual would now be a hate crime.

    Examples of Public Exposure to Bill C-16
    A search for “Bill C-16” on Google shows, as a top result, the ad with the text “Tell Canada’s Senators that Bill C-16 Destroys Women’s Rights and Identity”
    Top results on Twitter for “Bill C-16”.
    Latest results on Twitter for “Bill C-16”.
    Ottawa Citizen article. The article supports Peterson and highlights his opposition of Bill C-16.
    National Post article showing support for Peterson and opposing Bill C-16.
    The Hill, an American publication, featuring an article written by Jordan Peterson that takes aim at Bill C-16.
    TV Ontario’s The Agenda, hosting a panel with Jordan Peterson. The case is made against Bill C-16 in the show on the basis of freedom of speech.
    Google Trends Data on Bill C-16
    Google Trends on “Bill C-16” and “Jordan Peterson”.

    The chart above shows the popularity of particular Google searches over time. Two things to note. First, there’s much more interest in “Jordan Peterson” than there is in “Bill C-16”. Second, that the attention to Bill C-16, in particular it’s much publicized introduction on May 17th, 2016, is insignificant as compared to the attention it got following the Peterson affair. In other words, attention on Bill C-16 is shaped by interest in Jordan Peterson and his negative take on the legislation.

    Google Trends comparison of “Bill C-16” to “Jordan Peterson”.

    The chart above shows the popularity of Google searches by region, as well as showing related searches. A few things to note. First, there is interest in “Jordan Peterson” coming from the United States. Second, far more people are interested in Jordan Peterson than Bill C-16. Third, when they search for “Bill C-16” it’s in association with an interest in “Jordan Peterson”. Fourth, those with an interest in Jordan Peterson also demonstrate interest in “SJW”, which is an acronym for “social justice warrior”, a pejorative often reserved for individuals advocating for the rights of trans people and other marginalized communities.

    Observations about the Opposition to Bill C-16

    There’s a few things to note about the opposition.

    • Opposition is far exceeding support. The opposition is dominating Google, Twitter, newspaper editorials, and television. It is flooding Senators offices.
    • The opposition is almost entirely associated with Jordan Peterson.
    • Americans are getting involved in the opposition.
    • There is a fundamental misrepresentation of what Bill C-16 does that echoes Peterson’s alarmist and misguided take on the legislation.
    • As a result of its dominance in the media and online, the opposition is getting to frame the bill for the public. In doing so, the content and effects of the bill are being misrepresented and reduced to fear mongering around pronouns, much like previous opposition had reduced the discourse around trans rights to fear mongering about washrooms.
    • There is little interest by major media outlets in listening to trans people and presenting a more sensible review of the legislation, much less doing so without invoking Jordan Peterson. Non-binary trans people are being regularly lambasted for their pronouns in the media and the suggestion is made that Bill C-16 will restrict freedom of speech.
    • Freedom of speech appears to be the main argument made in opposition of the bill. Freedom of speech seems to be the successor to the freedom of religion argument, presenting anti-discrimination legislation as infringing on the rights of perpetrators.
    • The opposition would have been unlikely to exist in this amount had the bill proceeded through Parliament before the events surrounding Jordan Peterson. It could also die out in a year, as other lightning rod issues have. This is perhaps the most inopportune time for the bill to make its way through Parliament.

    What You Can Do

    Contact Senators

    Here’s a list of priority Senators, provided by Amnesty International. Contact them. Let them know you support Bill C-16 and oppose the discrimination trans people face.

    Opponents are reducing discourse of the bill to fear mongering around freedom of speech and washrooms. Discussions about the discrimination faced by trans people and what the bill actually does is getting sidelined. I’ve provided talking points below to assist in redirecting the discourse back to discrimination and the need for such simple anti-discrimination measures.

    Talking Points – Supporting Bill
    Talking Points – Addressing “Freedom of Speech” Narrative
    Talking Points – Addressing “Bathroom Predator” Narrative

     

  • Bill C-16 Moves on to Senate

    Bill C-16 Moves on to Senate

    I was in Parliament on November 18th, to attend the vote on the third reading of Bill C-16 in the House of Commons. Three years ago, I was here watching the same for the failed precursor of C-16, Bill C-279.

    Left to right: Susan Gapka, me, the Special Advisor to the Prime Minister on LGBTQ2 Issues MP Randy Boissonault, Kaden, unknown, Kye, Amanda Ryan.
    Left to right: Susan Gapka, me, the Special Advisor to the Prime Minister on LGBTQ2 Issues MP Randy Boissonault, Kaden, unknown, Kye, Amanda Ryan. The photo was taken before entering the House of Commons for third reading.

    I was there with activists from Gender Mosaic, who deserve much credit for their work in advancing this bill and its precursors. While waiting to enter the House of Commons we were greeted by MP Randy Boissonault, the Special Advisor to the Prime Minister on LGBTQ2 Issues.

    There was almost no one sitting in the House of Commons. At one point, I counted only five MPs visible from the gallery. At another point, when an MP was speaking on the bill, the speaker of the house was on his phone, and only a single other MP was actually listening. Whatever was said that day was for the benefit of posterity or the public record, but not for the people in attendance.

    There were long speeches. Liberal MP Julie Dabrusin and NDP MP Randall Garrison came to visit us in the gallery. Randall Garrison is the one who introduced the previous incarnations to Bill C-16, Bill C-279. This parliamentary session, previous to Bill C-16 being introduced, he worked on another private member’s bill that would have done the same thing, adding pressure to the Liberals to introduce their version as a government bill. The result was Bill C-16.

    I listened to the speeches. Conservative MP Michelle Rempel gave a speech that ended with this bit, which had me in tears:

    I especially want to thank the trans activists who have lived through this discrimination, through the upheaval of transition, through the upheaval of guilt or confusion over knowing their truth is something different than what society pressures them to be. While they have lived through that, they have had to sit through years of committee meetings, while their sexual behaviours have been questioned. They have stood up against intolerance and in doing so, they have sustained Canada’s pluralism.

     

    They deserve our thanks, and they also deserve an apology for when we have failed them in the past.

    There was some opposition, and the name of Jordan Peterson came up with the suggestion that recognizing trans rights would undermine free speech. Opposition though was really insignificant, a welcome reprieve from previous debates around Bill C-279 or Bill C-389.

    Conservative MP Cathay Wagantall proposed a motion so that the bill would not pass third reading, but be send back to committee. Then came the vote for the motion. It was done by whichever side could yell “yay” or “nay” the loudest. The motion to send the bill back to committee did not pass. Then the Conservative MPs tried to force a vote where each MP would stand up and individually say “yay” or “nay”, which would have pushed the rest of the deliberations to next week. They needed 5 people to stand up. They had 4. Then with no fanfare and no pause the vote for third reading came. The “yay” side had it, it passed.

    It was so quick, I wasn’t even sure that this was the vote for third reading. I had to keep listening to see that they had moved onto something else. Here’s a clip of the vote:

    An hour later, MP Jody Wilson-Raybould, who held a press release for C-16’s introduction but was absent on this third reading, released the following statement:

    Today, I am very proud that Bill C-16 has passed the House of Commons. This Bill would amend the Canadian Human Rights Act to add gender identity and gender expression to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination. It also proposes to amend the Criminal Code to add gender identity or expression to the definition of “identifiable group” for the purpose of the hate propaganda offences and to the list of aggravating circumstances for hate-crime sentencing.

     

    All Canadians should feel safe to be themselves. Our strength as a nation lies in our diversity and our inclusiveness. It is our responsibility to recognize and reduce the vulnerability of trans and other gender-diverse persons to discrimination, hate propaganda, and hate crimes, and to affirm their equal status in Canadian society.

     

    I am pleased that so many Members of Parliament supported this important piece of legislation and I look forward to working with the Senate as it continues through Parliament.

    After the bill passed, we exited the gallery. MP Randal Garrison came by to congratulate us and briefly chat, before he went off on a flight home. Then the lot of us went to D’Arcy McGee’s for a late lunch.