Mar 21, 2011
Op-Ed: Transgender Rights Bill
The critical response to the recent Bill C-389 affecting transgender rights is both perplexing and potentially damaging.[1] The Bill has just made it through the House of Commons and will be headed to tough opposition in the Conservative held Senate.[2] This bill has been dubbed the “Bathroom Bill” by critics in what can only be called a serious misunderstanding of its true implications.
The Bill’s only salient effects are to include transgendered individuals in the Canadian Human Rights Code as a group protected against discrimination, and in the Criminal Code in sections 318(4) and 718.2(A).[3] Section 318 targets Hate Propaganda, the dissemination of information intended to promote the destruction of the group. Section 718(2) allows for the motivation of the commission of the offence by reason of bias against the group to be considered in sentencing. Neither of these effects should illicit controversy. Even the most vehement opponent to the Bill would surely admit that transgendered individuals are a group that suffers from prejudice and misunderstanding in the general public, currently with no protection from the state. The value of a constitutional democracy is the protection of the minority from the whim of the majority. This situation epitomizes this need.
Why “Bathroom Bill” is a Woefully Ignorant Title
Though the true implications of the Bill in no way change the status quo relating to bathroom use, the contention that allowing transgendered persons access to the washroom of their choice would somehow create deleterious effects warrants independent rebuttal.
The consequence that critics see as a possibility is that, in the wake of the Bill, transgendered individuals, or individuals pretending to be transgendered, would enter washrooms of the opposite anatomical sex and prey on young women.[4] It’s also plausible that there is a fear that transgendered individuals would expose their genitalia to the opposite sex when changing in public washrooms, affronting moral sensibilities, without fear of sanction.
These fears are not only ignorant of the realities of the life of transgendered individuals and of their own desire for dignity, but misunderstand the issue as a whole. Critics seemingly fail to comprehend that transgendered individuals currently go to the bathroom in public places and there is no evidence of harm caused to cisgendered individuals as a result of this. Awareness of behavioural norms prevents problems from occurring.
Proponents of the Bill in the House agree that the implications are limited to preventing discrimination against transgendered persons, and that this controversy is unfounded in fact.[5] It is worth noting that the Bill makes no changes to the Criminal Code’s sections pertaining to Disorderly Conduct (i.e. public nudity – s174 or indecent exhibition – s175) or Pedophilia (s151). These are changes at the Federal level that have no impact on sanctions for inappropriate behaviour in washrooms. An editor at Burnabynow explained this with an astute analogy to the situation of homosexual individuals, “If we’re talking about appropriate and inappropriate behaviour, we have standards for that. Gay and lesbian people, those kinds of standards of behaviour are as important to them as to anybody else, and that’s true in this case as well.” In essence, if there are problems of behaviour that present themselves, they will be addressed. Any sexual offence carried out in a washroom will be convicted as such, irrespective of the offender’s sexual identity.
More importantly than irrational apprehension, critics ignore the true damaging reality of the current status quo. When most individuals have to use the washroom they don’t think twice about where to go. Transgender individuals often live in fear of the condemnation and physical violence where they exhibit a different visual appearance than gender norms.[6] The protection of this Bill would at least mean that assaults based on transgender biased grounds would be recognized and sentenced as such. This is a vulnerable group who have gone through a difficult experience, allowing them recourse in anti-hate legislation will at least make it easier for them to express their thoughts and feelings without fear of reprisal. If anything, Bill C-389 doesn’t go far enough.
[1] http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Docid=4943895&file=4
[2] http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/transgendered-rights-bill-headed-for-defeat-in-tory-held-senate/article1902266/
[3] http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/C-46/FullText.html
[4] http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/canadas-house-of-commons-passes-transgender-bill/
[5] http://openparliament.ca/bills/2076/
[6] http://gayteens.about.com/od/transgenderteenissues/a/trans_bathroom.htm
One? day the Feds will come for you.
You secured the loan with your car. If you don’t pay the loan, you forfeit your car.