Bill C-389 The inclusion of Gender Identity + Gender Expression into the Cdn Human Rights Act + Criminal Code

[Chico]

Help NDP Member of Parliament Bill Siksay pass Bill C-389: The inclusion of gender identity & gender expression to the Canadian Human Rights Act & Criminal Code

Fellow Canadians,

As you may or may not know, NDP MP Bill Siksay introduced a bill into parliament in May of this year (third time round); this bill would amend the Canadian Human Rights Act [CHRA] and Canadian Criminal Code to include gender identity and gender expression as prohibited forms of discrimination in Canada. It would also amend the Criminal Code of Canada to include crimes based on gender identity and gender expression under the 'hate crime' designation:

http://www.ndp.ca/press/siksay-tables-bill-to-protect-transsexual-t...

Under current Canadian law, trans* folks have zero legal protection against discrimination!

I urge you to email your MP and let them know that you expect them to stand up for trans* rights on your behalf:

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Parlinfo/Compilations/HouseOfCommons/MemberB...

Template for Letter to MP:


I, __________________, believe that enshrining explicit protections for transgender and transsexual people in our human rights legislation and our Criminal Code is essential in the pursuit of full equality and acceptance for transgender and transsexual Canadians.

Transgender and gender-variant individuals suffer disproportionately higher rates of discrimination, unemployment, denial of services, addictions, infectious disease, depression and suicide.

Trans* persons are too frequently the victims of verbal and physical attacks that can occur at any time and place, including the workplace.

As my legislative representative, I expect you to support Bill C-389 at every opportunity, and work within the full scope of your position to see that it becomes law.

Sincerely,
[name]
[address]

[Casey Kieran]

Hi Everybody and thanks Chico for posting this. Everybody here knows all too painfully well how important this is. I pasted it into a note on my Facebook as an appeal to my friends there to help too. However, there are some issues I have with the wording that sound like scratching on a blackboard to me. I think I summed them up pretty well in what I said in my Facebook note so I'm pasting that note in here for discussion.

I want to say up front that I do listen to and respect the opinions of others - people may disagree with me and I could just as well keep my head down so as not to get it cut off for saying these things. However, I feel it couldn't be a more important time for the community to have it out about this. After all, the core cause of the problems that Bill C-389 is meant to address is *misunderstanding*.

Society doesn't understand us, hence they fear us. Fear manifests itself in different ways in different people and this is what leads to those various things (discrimination, unemployment, denial of services, etc.) from which we need protection. Therefore, how we explain our plight to society (e.g. through press releases) is significantly important to winning this fight.

My Facebook note explains...
===============================================
I received the following in an email from a discussion board I belong to and I'm asking *all* my friends to send emails (it's not necessary to be a Canadian citizen to help with this). I'm glad to see that Bill Siksay (a Member of Parliament) is still carrying the torch on this subject and it would be warm hearted of you to take a few minutes to send a letter to your MP - or for my foreign friends - to send a letter to Stephen Harper (the Prime Minister of Canada).

I want to comment on the terminology too - I actually made a little change to the "template letter" below. In the original, the second paragraph of the template letter began, "Transgender and gender-variant individuals..." Arrrrgh!! They had it right up until then by referring to "transgender and transsexual individuals".

FYI "transsexual" people are either male or female - i.e. "gender-normal" - and "transgender" people are male, female, or *other* - and some transgender people express gender one way sometimes and another way at other times - i.e. "gender-variant". Transsexual people always express their gender as either male or female.

Transsexual = gender normal.

Transgender = gender variant.

There's a lot of confusion that arises simply because people don't use appropriate terminology and couldn't explain what the terms mean if they needed to. So thanks for trying to *straighten* them out (pun intended). Even people in the trans community are getting it wrong sometimes. If you visit the link (below) to the NDP website and read the press release, you will find a quote from Victoria Stuart of the Trans Alliance Society (TAS). More and more transsexual people are fed up with TAS and Victoria Stuart in particular - she and TAS are no longer the "voice" of the transsexual community here.

Ms. Stuart's quote opens with, "For merely challenging society's expectations..." As though that's the point - to challenge people. Like saying, "Gee, all I did was challenge people and they got all angry about it." Personally I don't understand transgender people; perhaps some of them are out to challenge society in some way, I simply don't know. Transsexual people just want to live normal lives. In any case, I think all people should share the same human rights and nobody ought to be left behind - either here or anywhere in the world.

Here's the message I received from the discussion board:
===============================================

If the consensus is that I'm wrong, then I want to drop out of the community. Sure people can stick any label on me they want. It would be easy for me to simply not care, I wouldn't be any better or worse off if I just shrugged off the label I wear: transsexual. No different from the every day shrugging off of other labels I hear people using to describe me.

To me the term "transsexual" is concise and distinct. I am not "transgender". I am not "gender-variant". If society is going to treat me "fairly" then they need to understand these distinctions. If the trans* community is going to muddy that water then I'll climb out of the pond and just tell people I meet, "Look, all this trans-this, trans-that is all so confusing; just think of me as a woman and forget all that." Then, if the legal landscape ever changes more favourably for me under whatever *legal* label I wear, that would be great. If not... oh well. Either I'll go on taking it in stride or I'll check out one day if I don't want to deal with it any more. That's no different than the way things are today.

[Casey Kieran]

I want to elaborate on my disappointment with Ms. Stuart's press release quote. It isn't my intention - and I don't think it's the intention of the community - to "challenge" society. Challenge means we're looking for a fight. That society's expectations are "challenged" are secondary side-effects of expressing our gender the way we need to express it. I would rather Ms. Stuart would have opened with a remark that underscores the importance of our being able to express our gender as any other human being naturally does.

Also, society's expectations with respect to gender expression *are* important. Ms. Stuart put it this way, "For merely challenging society's expectations..." This is not a mere trivial challenge, it's not appropriate to dismiss it like that. Most of us find it a challenge ourselves to make sense of our own gender identity disorders, we can't expect the rest of society to just shrug off their confusion. However, as I'm saying, I don't think that pushing peoples faces into that challenge is a great way to foster support for this cause. When a person gets down to the challenge part, we should already have pumped them full of good reasoning that will help them get through it and come out the other end on our side.

Press releases ought to be crafted with care - without ambiguity and meaningless phrases like, "expectations of what is expected". I suppose we could call those "meta-expectations" then? ~LoL~

I wish all that wasn't plastered there on the NDP website where all Canadians can read it.

[Chico]

I didn't write the template but, I believe the author chose to use the word "transgender" b/c it is an umbrella term. I think the error might be including gender-variant in the letter after using the word transgender, as again it is an all encompassing term including gender-variance under it.

[Ethan James]

hi casey,

i actually *am* the author of that post and letter template [though, to be honest, i just tacked together a few related quotations i found and added a bit here & there].

I understand your point about the difference between transgender & transsexual, but i would beg to differ. i am an FTM and i use the word transgender to describe myself, even though [for all intents and purposes], i am "gender normal" as you put it.

The reason I included 'gender variant' in the original template is because I know a great many deal of gender-variant folks [genderqueers, gender-fuckers, etc] who don't feel that the term 'transgender' applies to them, as it still implies a transition from one gender to another.

i personally feel that 'transgender' is simply an updated word for 'transsexual', where we focus on the difference between sex & gender. I generally use the term 'trans*' [that's 'trans-asterisk'] when referring to the community at large, as an umbrella term meant to encompass "gender normal' and 'gender variant' folks at once. i just didn't think many of the people the letter was directed to would understand the meaning behind it.

the great thing about gender expression is the idea of self-identification; if one feels that 'transsexual ' is the word that best sums them up, by all means use transsexual. but the english language is ever-changing, and labels will never accurately sum up everyone. i wonder if attempting to split everyone into two groups: the 'gender normals' and the 'gender variants' is a futile endeavor.

[Casey Kieran]

Well this is at the heart of what I'm driving at. As a transsexual woman, I felt left out of Ms. Stuart's statement. As I said...

To me the term "transsexual" is concise and distinct. I am not "transgender". I am not "gender-variant".

What I'm talking about doesn't really matter with respect to the legislation so long as the wording isn't changed before it is put to a vote. The terms in the bill are "gender identity" and "gender expression" - no mention of trans-anything. Now I don't mind standing side by side with transgender people just like the LGB community stood together with us (TS and TG people) back in the old days (and still today except as we all know, they conceded to dropping us in order to get themselves included in the Charter - I don't begrudge them for doing that though).

But we all know that gender identity and sexual orientation have nothing to do with each other. The only thing the LGB community had in common with the TS and TG communities was that we were all disenfranchised from the Charter. It makes sense to me that the separate and distinct groups rally together to fight for the same thing but they're like oil and water. You could put them together for some purpose but when that purpose has been served, at the end of the day, you still have oil and water - distinct in their own unique ways.

Transsexual people have health care needs that transgender people don't have. This is an important reason for us to hang onto our distinction and be considered differently from transgender people. We (transsexual people) have other battles to fight that are not the concern of transgender people. Of course, it's always nice to have as much support as we can get, but that's not *their* fight - that's not a struggle for something that (directly) benefits them.

This is why I feel TAS has totally let me down. In fact, I consider TAS as the "Trans*gender* Alliance Society" - it has nothing to do with me. As far as I know there is no organization representing me and other transsexual people with respect to our specific problems.

Take the THP for example. Now you have to understand that I want TG people to have access to support groups and whatever - everything they need - but I feel like the (piddly amount of) government money that goes to supporting my health care needs is diluted. The Thursday drop-in group is inclusive for TG and TS people and while I have found TG people's stories interesting, they don't have anything to do with me or my health care issues. Why is money from the government health-care budget going to support people who don't have TS health care issues? I mean, the Ministry of Health could be paying to have MADD lecturers come in and talk about drunk driving. Yes, drunk driving is an important issue and I support MADD totally but do you see what I mean? That's something else, deal with it elsewhere.

The TS distinction is important from the point of view of my core identity and how I "metabolize" it in my own mind. The people who refuse to acknowledge that distinction are not respecting my identity. That's what this was all about in the first place - having our own identities respected. I want the public to understand the distinction too so that they can respect me for who I am and you (everybody) for who you are. Of course I have no objection if other people want to stand under that umbrella label (transgender) but it doesn't cover me.

In every way I support TG people having equal rights, access to everything they need, and most of all respect and fair treatment - just as any human being deserves. I would petition for TG people's causes and stand side by side in a fight for protection under the Charter. I have close TG friends whom I adore and love. What I'm saying is in no way meant to dis TG people. I hope nobody reads it like that.

In fact, I've had this conversation with people before and heard some mutter things about how talk like this will "fragment" the community and so on. I'm saying we were never just one community, you can't "fragment" something that was never one distinct body in the first place. Like seriously, if you were straight before you spoke up for GLB rights, did you feel a little B, L, or G after? heehee Of course not or maybe for some but hey it's all good ;')

[Casey Kieran]

Just fyi ... i wrote my last comment before I saw your last comment (I was probably typing up mine at the same time you were posting yours). As a fan of poetry I have always found the english language interesting in how the meanings of words change over time. However, "transsexual" has a distinct meaning today and as such I think it's beneficial to recognize that and use the term when and where appropriate. It wasn't until more recently that I started to see the importance of the distinction. I used to use the terms interchangeably too. Now I quickly object when people use the term "transgender" in reference to me. Like when people say, "Oh well, you're gay so you can probably understand ...." It's like, why are you assuming I'm gay and, well I'm a woman so if you were going make assumptions about my sexual orientation, why not guess lesbian? This may come from the whole thing with Stonewall and standing side by side with the LGB community to fight for rights since those early days. The general non-GLB non-TS and non-TG communities saw us always presenting a unified front so we're LGBT now in their eyes - Bi, Lesbian, or Gay by association. It's not exactly an insult but it's annoying that people don't understand the difference. Transsexual is *not* an archaic term. Transgender is *not* an updated term for us in the same way as LGB isn't an updated term for us. Keep the distinctions!!! They are important!!!

[Casey Kieran]

I want to try to make this crystal clear... take as example a lesbian black woman. Unfortunately, in various places she would face discrimination on three fronts: 1. Sexual orientation, 2. Race, 3. Gender. Now if the LGB community were to disregard as insignificant or unimportant, the problems this woman faces on the other fronts - her race, her gender - then they are doing her a disservice. They're no better than the rest of the public who look upon those plights as frivolous. I'm talking about the exact same thing here - TS people have other fronts. Rights for all, I'm totally for that. However, beyond that the war goes on for some of us in other places. Those issues are important to us - some of us more than others. I mean, in Canada if you can afford to pay for the medical procedures you need out of your own pocket great but the 'public option' here in Canada is not an option - not when it comes to TS health-care needs anyway.

This is how we got screwed before. For years and years too many legislators shrugged off what we're asking for in Bill C-389 because they thought we were already covered under the CHRA with the inclusion of the "sexual orientation" wording. You're right, people don't understand the meanings of the terms we use - but that's exactly why we need to clarify them and distinguish them. Look at it this way, let's say C-389 passes... then everybody's like, great the trans* community is all fixed up and we don't need to do anything more for them. Where does that leave people like me? I can't afford to pay for my health care needs and nobody gives a crap. They'll care less once the rights issue is dealt with. I don't want people to forget that I AM STILL LEFT OUT HERE IN THE COLD!!!

[Casey Kieran]

Oh I'm so ticked off about this that I deleted the note asking people to write their MP's off my facebook. The conspiracy theorist in me is ever wondering if TAS and people like you Ethan are in the pocket of a government that wants to white-wash us into oblivion so that our health care issues will never have to be addressed. Once we are blended into a group that doesn't share our concerns then those concerns can be dismissed. Our minority will be just a handful of "transgender" people asking for more than other transgender people are asking for. Truthfully I don't even care much about C-389. I already adjusted my life to an existence within a society that discriminates against me. I'm used to it. It's not a big effort any more to put up with that. My TS health care issues are far more important to me. I feel like I'm just being used to prop up somebody else's agenda at the same time I'm being sold down the river. Saying that TG is an updated word for TS ... bleh!!! You're selling short your brothers and sisters Ethan.

[Ethan James]

casey, i fully respect your right to identify with whichever label suits you best, but i think that needs to be a two-way street.

and to suggest that i am part of some "conspiracy" attempting to "white-wash" the issues is ludicrous. i am just as concerned about the health-care access as you, as i, too, am medically transitioning, and have opted to pay for my surgeries out of pocket, rather than navigate the bureaucratic obstacle course that is MSP's SRS system.

as a matter of fact, the idealist in me believes that the passing of C-389 will further help us with our medical battles, as we deal with governments, insurance companies, health care workers, employers and the like, who may or may not see our medical needs as "essential." as if SRS should EVER be considered "cosmetic."

i just think it's important to recognize that there is more than one way to be trans, and an MTF or FTM person is still transsexual, to use your preferred term, whether they pursue medical transition or not. there are a lot more barriers to transition than just the cost of health care.

[Chico]

I think this is an interesting discussion and a common one among folks that are exploring their gender identities.

I personally identify as a man, I've dropped the "prefix", but that is just me. I view myself as a person who went through a "transition", but I don not go around introducing myself or labeling myself as Trans*. Ten years ago, before I started my journey, I didn't even know it was possible for a female to transition to male. As society changes and evolves more possibilities and opportunities opened up for me. I am eternally grateful for this phenomena, b/c I know I wouldn't be the happy healthy dude that I am today with out this process.

Ten years later we have folks coming out saying.... I am not sure where I fit on the gender spectrum. I think that is amazing! On some levels I can relate and on others I can't, but again let me reiterate I love that they are standing up for themselves and expressing their needs. There is no conspiracy, it's called evolution.

I think a better question to take up or challenge Casey..... is why are folks with any gender issue whether it be transexual or gender queer; lumped in with the Gay and Lesbian community. Sexual orientation and gender expression are two very different things.

My final point... I think there are quite a few transexual people in this province who would like to start their own lobbying group, rather then relying on TAS. I challenge you Casey to put the word out and get things started! I would join. Don't you think you would feel better being pro-active rather then re-active?

[Casey Kieran]

Hi Guys,

Ethan, of course I respect your right to use whatever term feels right for you. I have been saying that all along - "That's what this was all about in the first place - having our own identities respected" were the words I used. I was never saying you shouldn't identify as TG. You say, "...but i think that needs to be a two-way street". Well Ethan, I didn't write a letter that skews the terms did I?

You're basically saying that *you* decided the term TS is archaic and *you* decided that TG is now the term that we ought to use. You wrote a template letter that presumably many people will sign and send to their MP's - people who are already confused by these terms. I'm not out there telling people that the TG term is archaic or interchangeable with some other term. Who's putting up the "One Way" sign here? Like seriously? If I were going to write a letter to petition for the cause I would write it in a way that is sensitive to you. I feel your letter just bulldozes me to pave the one way street you want - the one that assimilates me into some melting pot that I don't fit in, isn't right for me, and isn't how I want the rest of society classifying me.

Sadly Ethan, some of us cannot afford to pay our way around the MSP obstacle course. We either have to go through it or die trying. I can see how access to MSP coverage and the likes of that are unimportant to you, so it's easy for *you* to just blend into the TG camp and not make this important distinction. The distinction that transsexualism requires medical intervention is critically important to some of us. We're supposed to have a medicare system here that doesn't discriminate against us but we all know that it does. Obfuscating the distinctions that define us and our various health care needs is not helping us with that.

I don't go around waving my TS flag either. I'm just a normal woman with no interest in gender experimentation or variation or whatever. I try to live a normal life and the subject of my congenital disorder rarely requires mention. However, when it does come up - when there's a need to talk about it - then I want to talk about it in ways that will foster understanding instead of confusion. Why don't we all just go around using the LBGT label? Like just say, "I'm a GBLT person" ... that's confusing, ambiguous, and issue-insensitive. Haha I'm a bisexual transsexual person - so I have a foot in the LBG camp too - but I see the importance of having people understand that not all transsexual people are bisexual and not all bisexual people are transsexual. Ethan, you can identify as TS, TG, whatever you want but don't try to redefine my identity to suit your fancy. That's hypocrisy.

As for Bill C-389 helping us with our medical battles... my question is, help whom? You didn't comment on my remark about how health-care budget $$ earmarked to help TS people is paying for a TG group instead. Like I said, my services are already diluted. The distinction is already erased. The government *already* sees us your way Ethan. There is no TS health program - there's the Transgender Health Program. I - and other TS people who don't have the private personal resources that you have - need a Transsexual Health Program. As I have said repeatedly, we have health care requirements that are *not* shared by TG people - so why are we lumped into their program? Our rights, our fair treatment has already been stripped away from us and where... where, I ask are the TG people who will speak up on our behalf? Where are the TG people who will say, "Yeah, TS people deserve to have the programs and services they need"??? There's nothing in it for TG people to do that, so they don't. Nobody gives a damn about us. Once the TG agenda (the Charter inclusion) has been won, they don't need us any more. I feel like I'm being used to prop up what's important to TG people.

Chico, I already spoke at length about lumping us in with the BGL community and surmised that this could have come from Stonewall/Pride and years of presenting a unified front in a quest for equal rights and fair treatment. We're always out there with the LBG community - in the press, on the streets at Pride and so on, so the naive society we live in just associates us with that group. That mistake has caused us problems - legislators who naively thought that we were covered under the "sexual orientation" wording that was added years ago to the Charter.

I'm glad the point comes up again because this is what I see happening here when we TS people are lumped in with TG people. Like I said, I think there's something to the idea of all pushing together for rights or whatever common causes we share, but we are oil and water. When our mutual causes are put to bed then I'm still not going to have characteristics that define a person as TG and TG people aren't going to have characteristics that define a person as TS. We can go our separate ways.

As for being pro-active and starting up our own lobby group and all that... yes, Chico I have thought about it. Several people I have talked with agree that this is what we need. Other friends have also tried to encourage me to do that. For some reason people seem to think I would be a good candidate to light that torch and run with it. So far my struggles with depression have dissolved my interest there. I'm just hanging on day to day because my mom is alive and I don't want her to have to deal with losing me to suicide. I already put her through that.

I'm not saying that I have decided against starting the TS advocacy group. I would do better to direct my efforts there rather than to rant on here in a TG group where I'm like an alien creature. I don't feel like I have a drop of understanding or respect from the TG community. Why do I bother bitching and complaining to them? That's obviously futile. This is your (TG people's) forum, I should just shut up.

[Chico]

Casey,

You are correct, this is a community for Trans* and Gender Variant persons. We might not all agree at times, but I would rather this site be used for discussions around how we can support each other better, rather then slamming folks who don't share the same view points. I think the one thing that every person on this site would agree upon is.... life is tough! And sometimes, it really sucks. Some of us have had it harder personal journeys then others, but the one thing we all do share is the world, is the ability to make Choices. We all have the power to make positive or negative choices, around any and every situation we are in.

You've spent all day being mad and venting about Ethan's PRO-ACTIVE attempt to make change in this world. That can't be good for you and your depression.

Again I encourage you to do the same, it might make you feel better. This may sound cliche- but you are the only one who can turn your frown upside down.

I will be behind you if you start a group for TS people!

Warmest Regards,

Chico