Vancouver activist Morgane Oger wins ‘landmark’ transgender rights decision

[EweSurname]

Oh Canada. This is awful

www.thestar.com/news/canada/2019/03/27/transgender-rights-upheld-in-landmark-decision.html

“I am really so happy, that in a tribunal, using the law, we finally put it down that someone publishing hateful material that says that a transgender woman is a man, got in trouble,” she said.

Dangerous precedent. Let the shitshow begin.

Canada is batshit crazy. Jordan Peterson may not be right about the patriarchy but he is right about Trudeau.

It's a worrying development but I understand why the judge rejected an argument based on the morality of being transgender. However I don't think the debate, for most people, has ever been about whether it's OK to be transgender or whether transgender people are real and it's frustrating that TRA's frame it this way.

^In defence of the flyers, Whatcott had argued that he was contributing to important public debate about the morality of being transgender. The judgment rejects this argument, Quail explained.

It is no longer “a legitimate subject of public debate, whether or not it’s OK to be transgender or whether transgender people are real,” she said.^

So Canada has rejected biology, science and facts in favour of supporting delusions?
Transwomen can claim whatever “gender” they like, but they are biological males. They should be given the same human rights as everyone else, but the state should not impose their ideology and beliefs on other people. This is disgraceful - I hope there will be an appeal and legal challenge.

This view is not illegal in the U.K. (although I’m sure a lot of tras would like it to be) but institutions are acting as though it is/should be- see harry the owl’s updated version of “an inspector calls”.

Guidance where it states that saying ttansowmen are men is a legal view to hold:

www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/freedom-of-expression-guide-for-higher-education-providers-and-students-unions-england-and-wales.pdf

I am gender critical but this case seems to be about a man trargetting a trans woman by distributing flyers riddled with accusations. It just seems on a whole different level to having a heated discussion with someone. I think the trans person was right to take action in the case.

It’s a bit like if someone started printing and distributing leaflets about Bindell or Farrow. It’s a whole new level of personal targeting.

It’s the extreme personal attack on someone that I don’t like. If it had stayed on Twitter that would be one thing but the man went to a lot of effort to target this TW.

I was just reading an interview with Oger about the public funding for Vancouver Rape Relief.

I was struck by this quote:

"Morgane Oger, who chairs the Trans Alliance Society, said she has been advocating since 2013 for Rape Relief’s municipal funding to be stopped.

“Vancouver Rape Relief and other organizations that are publicly funded are responsible for keeping up the highest standard of inclusion,” Oger said, adding the group helps only a subset of women."

vancouversun.com/news/local-news/trans-woman-hopes-funding-cut-will-send-message-to-vancouver-rape-crisis-group?

The article also interview Kimberley Nixon. Background to Nixon's failed legal attempts to sue the women's charity in this 2012 Feminist Current article:

www.feministcurrent.com/2012/05/14/rape-relief-v-nixon-transphobia-and-the-value-of-women-only-space-an-interview-with-lee-lakeman/

And here is the ruling from the tribunal.

I personally don't think this is too bad. Stating that "Oger is transgender and hence unfit for office" is reasonable to prohibit. It doesn't mean that Oger's plentiful abusive and bullying behaviour can't be highlighted and criticised.

Too be fair that Bill bloke sounds like a fundamentalist loon.
People can judge MO on their actions.

This quote tickled me. Why would the Ogres kids even have to know about this? I'm sure those poor children are in no doubt to the biological reality of their parentage. Mentioning them in a pathetic attempt to gain sympathy is ridiculously transparent.

This quote tickled me. Why would the Ogres kids even have to know about this? I'm sure those poor children are in no doubt to the biological reality of their parentage. Mentioning them in a pathetic attempt to gain sympathy is ridiculously transparent.

This is the second time recently I have seen children used this way.
Its not neccessary or a good look, regardless the 'side' of the adult with a platform.

Perhaps the 'morality' aspect relates to the fact that we all know that no human can change sex; that no man can be a woman [and vice versa]; yet Canadian society is being gaslit by the most massive confidence trick. It is a nation state promoted deceit enforcing people to believe something they know not to be true.

Thanks for the ruling - .

I think my issue was with how it's being framed as being illegal to call a transwoman a man, although as it is Oger who is doing the framing, this probably shouldn't come as a surprise. Distilling all the other things that Bill into "it's illegal to say a transwoman is a man" results in equating stating biological truths to the awful things that Whatcott said, which I don't think is helpful.

I agree that your are on a hiding to nothing debating the morality of being transgender, but surely one ought to be able to debate the reality of it.

I don’t have an issue with dead naming or photos. These are public record, it’s chilling the way people are attempting to re-write history.

Carowiththegoodhair

"but surely one ought to be able to debate the reality of it."

Exactly, it is a social/ideological construct which has no connection to biology or logic.
Human beings cannot change sex.
I have no problem with someone identifying as they wish, unless it impacts negatively on society as a whole.
In the case of transgenderism, it is impacting negatively on women and anyone who states simple facts.

People's feelings about themselves and their 'identity' is has never been in question. I'm really not sure if this talk of having one's "existence denied" is down to wilful ignorance, or just plain stupidity. This line of thought does not pass the most simple tests of reason or rationality.

In no other situation does a person's feelings about themselves and their identity trump all else. This is the apotheosis of Identity politics - because at the end of the day it really is just about Identity.

Identity is always a construct, though. 'Identity' and feelings about self shift and change throughout one's life. Being a woman; being black; being disabled; being one's age, is not about identity, but about factual reality.

Yeah, but that Bill bloke was knocking on doors going "God does not want you to vote for this tra* supporter of homosexuals etc etc"
He probably did more harm than good. Bonkers.

Yep he is an arse as well.

“Vancouver Rape Relief and other organizations that are publicly funded are responsible for keeping up the highest standard of inclusion,” Oger said, adding the group helps only a subset of women."

So actual real uterus having women are "only a subset" of women.
We're the ones deserving of compensation for the appropriation and insult.

Both parties sound odious tbh. But the ruling is unhelpful if it can be used (and I'm sure it will) to stifle future, more reasonable, debate on women's rights v trans rights.

Morgane Oger is a politician, and as such lives a lot of life in public (or in publications). I've dug up a few articles, for background interest:
A 2014 profile in a national publication uses the natal name without apology.
www.macleans.ca/news/canada/morgane-oger-embraces-her-trans-identity/

Another early interview, in which Oger's young child is quoted:
www.straight.com/life/696296/pride-2014-parents-morgane-oger-being-transgender-parent

Trail-blazing in 2016
www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/morgane-oger-historic-nomination-bc-ndp-1.3870285

From July 2018
Toxic Trans: The Strange Case of Morgane Oger and the BC NDP [British Columbia New Democratic Party]

Another detailed analysis (hosted on a website called Transanity):
The Curious Case of the Reality Denying Oger; or, How to Succeed in the Business of Cultural Fascism

And the latest news story:
Vancouver activist Morgane Oger wins ‘landmark’ transgender rights decision

Stating that "Oger is transgender and hence unfit for office" is reasonable to prohibit.

Did you just make that up? Or is it something that was said?

The decision is here: www.westcoastleaf.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/58_Oger_v_Whatcott_No_7_2019_BCHRT_58.pdf

I don’t think it as dire as it seems; the media and Ogers lawyer represent this is a landmark case for Canada but not really:

1. This was under BC Human Rights legislation that has a section on discriminatory publication. Each province has their own legislation, has their own process, their own precedents, their own tribunals. Human rights cases are very fact specific. Oger’s lawyer plays it up as significant across the country but not really. Other tribunals in other provinces may find it “interesting” but they certainly aren’t bound by it. And it certainly is not binding on higher courts. Section 7 of the BC legislation reads:

• ^Discriminatory publication

7 (1) A person must not publish, issue or display, or cause to be published, issued or displayed, any statement, publication, notice, sign, symbol, emblem or other representation that (a) indicates discrimination or an intention to discriminate against a person or a group or class of persons, or (b) is likely to expose a person or a group or class of persons to hatred or contempt because of the race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, religion, marital status, family status, physical or mental disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or age of that person or that group or class of persons. (2) Subsection (1) does not apply to a private communication, a communication intended to be private or a communication related to an activity otherwise permitted by this Code^.

1. This was a case specifically about a flyer campaign directed at a very specific person who is also in the political arena, not an overall discussion of trans ideology. The campaign from Whatcott had zero to do with Ogers suitability for office other than attack them as transgender (ie saying unsuitable for office because they are transgender.). It was definitely not a rounded discussion about “gender identity” or other concerns about trans ideology. Whatcott is not from Ogers riding (indeed, I thought he had moved to the Philippines or something, guess not). Whatcott is well known for running these attack campaigns though generally not targeted against one person (campaigns to make homosexuality and abortion illegal like sending flyers to people with fetal parts, for example). He has been in numerous tribunals across Canada and I have no doubt that is a strategy of his.

1. The hearings were a mess. I don’t think Whatcott did Whatcott any favors. He ‘objected’ to the authority of the tribunal (not sure if he is a “freeman of the land” or not, I don’t think so but that is common for them). Whatcott’s side/support had many outbursts, counsel recited bible verse, insulted the tribunal. During proceedings Whatcott left to distribute more flyers. This is where the extra $20,000 came from.

1. I am not sure if it will be appealed or not. I don’t think section 7 of the BC act has ever really been tested in court but I also think the facts in this one are terrible ones to make this is a test case.

PalatineUvula

Whatcott’s campaign was flyer based. From the decision:

Whatcott created a flyer entitled “Transgenderism vs. Truth in Vancouver‐False Creek” [Flyer]. In it, he called Ms. Oger a “biological male who has renamed himself... after he embraced a transvestite lifestyle”. He expressed a concern “about the promotion and growth of homosexuality and transvestitism in British Columbia and how it is obscuring the immutable truth about our God given gender”. He described being transgender as an “impossibility”, which exposes people to harm and constitutes a sin. Mr. Whatcott ended the Flyer with a call to action: do not vote for Ms. Oger or the NDP.

Mr. Whatcott handed the Flyer out on street corners, taped it to doors, and put it in mailboxes. In this way, he distributed 1500 copies of the Flyer in and around Ms. Oger’s riding. The Flyer was then further disseminated through the internet. Mr. Whatcott estimates that 10,000 people saw the Flyer.

Anyone else wonder if Trudeau is an AGP behind clothes doors? I just cannot fathom why else he is so on board with this bollocks.