Posts Tagged ‘ parliament ’

Why can’t we all just get along?

This morning I had the opportunity to serve as a guest on a local call in talk show. The host was discussing bill C-389, The Trans Rights Bill which passed in the House of Commons not long ago. One of the most widely discussed objections to this bill is the fear that this bill will allow ANY man to simply claim ‘an innate feeling of femaleness‘ as an excuse to engage in behaviour that is sexually inappropriate in women’s washrooms.

The Honourable Marlene Jennings mentioned during her conversation with the show’s host,
“….it is a criminal act to assault, sexually assault a child, to lure a child, to sexually exploit a child, or an adult. Any sexual assault, it doesn’t matter where it happens it’s a criminal act and nothing in bill c-389 changes that.”

Essentially what that tells me, as a transgender person, is that I will still be held to the same standard of the law as every other Canadian or visitor to Canada. This is as it should be.

One of the callers to the show questioned the need for this bill. Essentially their argument was that as this applies to such a small minority of people, there really is no need to single out this group out as in need of protection.

In 2001, census statistics put Canada’s population of disabled persons at about 12.4% of . There were over 28 million people counted in that census. That figure translates into about 3.6 million people living with disabilities and  we don’t dispute the need to protect the rights of disabled Canadians.  As per Canada’s Human Right’s act, discrimination based on disability is illegal.

Why? Because they are Canadians, plain and simple.

I don’t believe that protection should be extended to a group of Canadians ONLY if their numbers exceed a certain arbitrarily set amount.  Firstly because, who would set that number? Our government? Our population? Some obscure think tank? So let’s go ahead and say that someone has said that any special interest group must have more than 1000 people who qualify for inclusion into this group. How exactly do the rights of 999 people mean any less than the rights of 1000 people? I know that when we say one person can make a difference we really mean it, but does not hitting that arbitrary number invalidate the rights of all the other people included in that group? I don’t believe it does.

Secondly, even if we did decide who would set that number, how do we know that the people who went ahead and set that boundary are well and truly qualified to assess the needs of a group of Canadians that they may not even know? Does this same group of policy makers decide what criteria need to be met in order for inclusion in this group? How do they go about that process? Do they ask the Canadians who are seeking to have their human rights spelled out what constitutes inclusion into that group or do they again make arbitrary decisions about what inclusion means? Are these policy makers in touch with the Canadians who’s rights they are deciding on?

As a person of transgender experience I find it insulting when people who have never had the experience of living in a gender role other than what they were assigned at birth presume to be able to say with any certainty what transgender means, what it looks like or even how it’s experienced.

We protect our ‘special interest groups’ and their rights because every one of them is Canadian. End of story.

%d bloggers like this: