MPP Cheri DiNovo: Toby’s Act made Same-Sex gatherings in Ontario illegal for Women

July 7, 2013

Cheri DiNovo

Cheri DiNovo

File this one under “unintended consequences” for Lesbians, Gays, and Women’s Rights advocates living in Ontario. MPP Cheri DiNovo announced Friday that bill C-389, “Toby’s Act”, the 2012 bill she sponsored which intended to protect the rights of transgender persons, actually makes all same-sex gatherings illegal in the province. This will come as some surprise to many lesbians and gays who often exercise their rights to assemble freely in meetings, conferences, and social groups with other same-sex persons.  In addition, DiNovo claims the right of Ontarian women to assemble in any same-sex gatherings: whether they be reproductive rights orgs, Islamic faith gatherings, or lesbian support groups- has been eliminated by her bill. She has appealed to the Ontario Human Rights Council to back up her legal position.

DiNovo made her announcement in response to male complaints surrounding a small group of feminists holding a female-only meeting in a Toronto art gallery. DiNovo characterized same-sex meetings as “reprehensible” and vowed to use Toby’s Act to eliminate and prosecute current and future same-sex gatherings of women or lesbians in the province. “I’m hoping that now under Toby’s law, this will be considered illegal.”

Somehow I doubt this was the intent of the women, lesbians and gays who supported DiNovo and the passage of Toby’s Act. Like Washington State’s Colleen Francis using that state’s non-discrimination act to exercise his “right” to expose his penis to schoolgirls in women’s locker rooms, Toby’s Act had the unintended consequence of eliminating the rights of women, gays, lesbians, muslims, feminists, to hold same-sex gatherings. Presumably this also eliminates the rights of transgender people to assemble in sex-segregated meetings, although DiNovo has not yet clarified that point. Planned Parenthood Toronto sponsored “Breaking Through The Cotton Ceiling” seminars for transgenders to strategize how to convince lesbians to accept sex with penises. The “cotton ceiling” in that case referred to the underwear of lesbians. These public meetings were restricted to male transgenders only.

Canada faces another set of unintended consequences with Bill C-279, the Federal Gender Identity Act, which is set for a vote in the next legislative session. This bill, like Toby’s Act, purports to eliminate discrimination based on “Gender Identity”, which is the right to identify with the social role of the opposite sex.  Obviously this proposed new legal “sex-role” status is problematic for those – such as feminists and progressives- who believe stereotypes based on sex are antiquated, sexist, offensive, (not to mention they sanction inequality for women and girls). Many feel the government should not promote the belief that citizens should look/behave/think certain ways based on our reproductive sex (or our identification with the opposite sex). But what are the other, specific, legal consequences of Bill C-279, which like the erosion of women’s and gay rights to assemble caused by DiNovo’s Toby’s Act, might not become apparent until after the law is passed?

According to Senator Nancy Ruth, the first lesbian Senator in Canada, we already know what some of the unintended consequences of Bill C-279 will be. From the DailyExtra:

“Women and girls in Canada are not protected from hate speech under the Criminal Code, and this bill does not rectify that when it could,” Ruth said.

 “For 35 years, across numerous bills, Parliament has told the girls and women of Canada that, despite alarming rates of violence against girls and women, violence that typically includes hate speech, they are not worthy of protection,” she explained.

 “The omission is not an oversight. In 1985, the federally appointed Special Committee on Pornography and Prostitution said that there was ‘ample evidence’ indicating women were the targets of hate material. The committee recommended that the Criminal Code hate laws be amended to extend protection to women, but no Parliament has done that. Why? I have spoken before in this chamber about this gap in the law,” she continued.

 “This bill will privilege men who choose to become women over women who are born female,” Ruth said. “While I do not question the good intentions of the sponsor and the supporters of the bill, I simply do not understand how they could advance this bill without including all women. Passage of Bill C-279 will mean that only if a woman is born a man who later chooses to identify as a woman will she receive protection, but a woman born a woman will not receive the same protection.

Senator Ruth has proposed an amendment to Bill C-279 which simply maintains “sex” as a protected status along with “gender identity”. This will prevent sex-based protections for women from being eliminated by Bill C-279, in the way that Toby’s Act inadvertently eliminated the legal rights of women and lesbians to free assembly.

Senator Nancy Ruth

Senator Nancy Ruth

Women of Canada must not lose human rights in order to protect the rights of transgender people, due to sloppy lawmaking. The battle to reclaim women’s human right to assemble- that DiNovo claims was lost by the passage of Toby’s Act- will now start its long winding legal trail towards correction, after the fact. With Bill C-279 we have an opportunity to correct an unintended consequence before it occurs, and we have a lesbian Senator making a stand for our rights, right now. Do not leave her standing alone. She needs your support on this issue. Please organize to support Senator Ruth’s amendment now. Create awareness of the issue among women’s groups and legislators. Write letters to the editor. Contact her office and ask what you can do to help.

Let us protect the rights of all Canadians. Including the rights of Women and Girls.

2012-10-24-Canada-flag

[bolding by me-GM]

51 Responses to “MPP Cheri DiNovo: Toby’s Act made Same-Sex gatherings in Ontario illegal for Women”


  1. I LOVE YOUR REPORTING! THIS IS SO GOOD! Thank you, thank you, thank you!

    PS. Love Nancy Ruth!

    So, here’s what I’ve been trying to figure out about Toby’s Law:

    HOW IS “gender identity” BEING DEFINED??

    Well, it’s NOT defined. When I google the “toby’s act definition of gender identity” it appears to be an acknowledged oversight.

    This is the link I have for the law itself.
    http://www.ontla.on.ca/bills/bills-files/40_Parliament/Session1/b033ra.pdf

    NO definition, not even like the crappy ones we have in the States.

  2. Mary Sunshine Says:

    Thanks for this Gallus. Canada is definitely not (anymore) my home on Native land.

    Fuck Canada

  3. Morgan Says:

    A lesbian senator. I had no idea.

    Ontario’s premier, Kathleen Wynne, is a lesbian, too. But of course Cheri DiNovo belongs to the NDP, a party on the left. The NDP also introduced, on the federal level, that “bathroom bill” from last year. I wonder if any political party gives a shit about women anymore, or is willing to recognize that 1) women are oppressed and 2) there are differences between women born that way and women later constructed via hormones and/or surgery (and/or self-declaration?).

    What a mess.

    Can’t think of a much more obvious example of how the law and government are on the side of the oppressors – men, or “women” born as men – than this, as demonstrated by the ease with which they get favorable responses to things they don’t like. Women never get reactions like this from government, as Senator Ruth points out. We are brutalized daily, abducted, raped, tortured, murdered, and still we cannot call it a hate crime. What DiNovo has done is erase the history of women’s oppression and therefore the necessity for women-only space. How progressive.

    • sipiy Says:

      Don’t forget the purpose of the conference that brought this about: RadFem Rise Up is happening primarily to bring attention to the wrong-mindedness, racism and misogyny of Canada’s prostitution laws. I hope that doesn’t get overshadowed here.

      I understand Cherry Smiley’s presentation spared nothing. Thank you Sam Berg and Cherry and all the women with the courage to present and attend this conference in the home of the Cotton Ceiling and the official Canadian left, the NDP who think making serial rape a taxed business is a career choice.

  4. sallyarcher Says:

    News like this would be utterly depressing if I hadn’t found Mary Daly’s “Pure Lust” book with its prescription for female evolution and connections to the “background.” First I learned to avoid men whenever possible. Next I learned the hard way (trial and error) that women were too often plagued by their own egos, broken dreams and internalized misogyny to be a reliable source of connection, despite my belief that outside of and beyond patriarchy women could and would be there for each other. Last I learned to find solace in nature, the elements, laughter.

    Reform by human means is futile. Everything reformist women try to do on behalf of womankind, the monied manunkind undoes. Read Louise Armstrong’s book, “Rocking the Cradle of Sexual Politics” if you have any question. She, and it, are brilliant, but erased so quickly from herstory. (She died in 2008. In the decade prior, her books were being discarded from public libraries. My copy of “Rocking the Cradle…” was discarded by the public library in San Francisco and later in turn discarded by the feminist bookstore that had bought it and is now out of business..

    Yet the “Rocking” book is so excellent a chronicle of how womanist/feminist reform efforts get erased and replaced with new and improved patriarchal methods of woman-hating. In Armstrong’s case, it was the issue of paternal child rape (now called “incest” and gender-equalized as if women rape children in their families as often as men do, as if boys are targets as often as girls are). In today’s era, it is the MtT transgender empire replacing the needs of girls and women politically, everywhere. The tactics remain the same. We do not control the manmade media memes, and reform is futile. Only evolution will help us now, forces bigger than our own about Life itself.

    The deceptive patriarchs and their insane control freakishness and their violent hatred of women will have to evolve out of existence. I call on the spirits of the trees rooted in Mother Earth, the strong winds, the harmony of song, the fiery passions of the cosmos, and the raging waters to help us.

    Heaven surely hasn’t. And fighting men on turf they control in mensgame they invented doesn’t help us either. (Said as one who tried many reformist efforts in her lifetime, and wasted much energy. Not to say that fighting one’s own battles for economic survival in mensgame is unworthy; we have to do that to survive and, yes, be here to evolve.)

    • wildwomyn Says:

      Thank you for the book referral, I’ve ordered it (used copy). I’m eager to add it to my RadFem library and to read it. So sorry to hear what is going on in Canada. Leftist women (not feminists to my way of thinking) are a hindrance to women.

      • Sally Archer Says:

        And thanks back to ya for the acknowledgment. Even (especially?) cats appreciate acknowledgment, as do all creatures, and that’s just creaturely (I hope) and not my own big ego talking! Being Self-identified in womanly Be-ing does not have to be fraught with masculine-type ego, and we’re all in progress. btw not for a minute, not for even one breath do I believe that the consequences of this legislation are “unintended.” That’s part of the ruse of misogyny, to claim unintended consequences, also tokenism of using women to do the dirtiest political work (except for horrors of rape, murder and impregnation, which men do) against other women. Ick. Sick. It would literally make me crawl under the nearest rock and never come out to know this if I hadn’t been buoyed by the radiant words of women like Mary Daly and now so many of us online. Gratitude to all! We’re spinning a web of elemental support even if we never meet face to face.

  5. Ashland Avenue Says:

    “Passage of Bill C-279 will mean that only if a woman is born a man who later chooses to identify as a woman will she receive protection, but a woman born a woman will not receive the same protection.”

    I love her I love her I love her I love her

  6. hearthrising Says:

    So Muslim women can’t have sex-segregated groups? Somehow I doubt the law disallows Catholic priests or monks from being in their all-male conclaves. How is the religious issue handled?

    • amazondream Says:

      Hi hearthrising–The instigator in me says the best way to get this thrown out is to act in exactly the way it allows and invade these all-male conclaves–If that had been done in Toronto at Planned Parenthood over the ‘cotton ceiling’ imagine how that would make them think twice about what they’re doing.

  7. Versa Says:

    “Passage of Bill C-279 will mean that only if a woman is born a man who later chooses to identify as a woman will she receive protection, but a woman born a woman will not receive the same protection.

    If that’s how it is now, does that mean that we real women can obtain equal protection by claiming to be FtM trans*, and then transitioning back to female?

    Is that what it has come to?

    Heaven help us.

    • Adrian Says:

      Supposedly “identity” is all the matters these days, right? So maybe we can just say we “identify” as FTMTF…

      • Versa Says:

        I could get on board with that. As I just posted on another thread, I had a fleeting desire as a small child to be a boy. I guess that makes me FtMtF, therefore I’m trans*, therefore I’m entitled to all the kid glove treatment and privileges that the trans* community demands.


  8. Reblogged this on Privilege Denying Tranny and commented:
    This is the essence of Privilege Denying Trannys. Getting the rights of women stripped away so no opposition can be heard. Hell, women don’t even want to talk about Trans. We want to talk about the systematic violence against us around the globe. But, because they’ve forced themselves on us now they have become a big topic of conversation. It’s disgusting how women are being hounded for trying to meet while these men in drag feel comfortable holding conferences at women’s health centers on how to rape women. Fuck these dudes.

  9. Guls Says:

    I wonder what the cost will be to Ruth’s career for taking this stand? I’m sure Julia Gillard’s stand against sexism in the Australian parliament was a prime factor in her losing the confidence of her party in Oz. All power to her, though.

    And Planned Parenthood sponsoring …Cotton Ceiling meetings?! The Liberal politic has either become hopelessly muddled by falling over itself to please everybody all of the time or it’s every bit as sinister as my (conservative) parents brought me up to believe. Lol (not!)

  10. Bev Jo Says:

    Thank you so much for this, Gallus Mag. More proof that girls and women count for nothing when compared with males.

  11. Ks Says:

    I don’t think this has been discussed. “Orange is the New Black”

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/thomaspagemcbee/how-actress-laverne-cox-broke-the-trans-glass-ceiling

    Which includes a M2T character, who’d have guessed they are also hetero with a wife and son. Set in a women’s prison!

    Of course the show will try to reiterate how sorry we should feel for this poor, poor oppressed person. It’s all propaganda, male inmates shouldn’t be in women’s prison’s just look at the amount of rape carried out by male prison guards for starters.


    • The creator Jenji Kohan always tries to stuff as much liberal bullshit as she can in her shows. She’s the creator of Weeds and had a lesbian teenager in the show. In the later episodes we find out that the girl has become a trans dude named Bruce. Oh so progressive! Erasure of lesbians in favor of men once again.

      • anonymous radical feminist Says:

        I’m so glad I wasn’t the only one who got irked by Kohan’s shit. I liked Weeds to begin with (being strongly in favour of the legalisation of cannabis blah blah snore,) but man, rewatching/rethinking, so much woman and lesbian hate on that show.

        Like waaaay back in S01 when Nancy’s talking about being with another woman as “over rated” and when Ceila in the later seasons became intimate with another woman and she’s all about strap ons and saying stupid shit like “I miss dicks.” gross.

        I find it interesting I guess doing media studies, the way the media represents/re-presents issues for the world at large. And the fact that shit like this is being normalised and accepted in the media (even in small amounts,) is of huge fucking concern.

        but yeah what Ks said about the media being propaganda is totally true. Interestingly enough, this shit is becoming enough of a problem that even white dudes are noticing, two non radfem books that deal (if anyone reading is interested in media studies, works great into woman centred analysis,) empire of illusion by Chris hedges and you are being lied to which is a collected anthology of sorts.

        So sorry for the babbling but the media picking up on this shit and the way it’s showing it I think is important/insidious/worth investigating/whatever.

  12. Sally Archer Says:

    Please know that I’m not minimizing the substantial contributions and encouragement to womankind of Senator Ruth and all like her, committed to the cause of women. It’s just that all of their best efforts, encouraging as they are, don’t seem to do anything but strengthen the resolve and engender the heightened hypocrisy of men opposing women in every political way possible. The encouragement may be worth it, though. Wendy Davis of Texas is another major encourager, no matter what happens in the short term about abortion there in the lone-star state.

    Here’s another hard-to-find book (hated by patriarchy) for women and our reproductive agency: “A Woman’s Book of Choices (Abortion, Menstrual Extraction, RU-486”), Rebecca Chalker and Carol Downer, 1992, fowrard and introduction by Barbara Ehrenreich and Barbara Herbert, M.D., respectively.

    I’m so past ever lusting after a man, but there was a time … Now I’d be a political lesbian if such a category still existed after the trans (BLT QQ WTF ETC) political invasion, so instead I stay celibate. But the pull of sexual attraction to men (maybe it’s just our programming) and the risk of impregnating rape by men makes women’s freedom from unwanted pregnancy rather important, and there was a time some decades ago when women were taking back agency. Then abortion “rights” of Roe v.Wade and there’s been only a fight on our hands from men and their token torturing female cohorts ever since.

    It is no longer for me to be involved in activist politics, but I admire those still able to do it who encourage other women. Also there’s something I accomplished years ago on a neighborhood council that remains as a good work, and I met women campaigning who were moved by my ability to articulate the problem and empowerment of our own Be-ing as the primary solution. Death threats deterred me from continuing a political career, so now I just speak to strangers who are also women wherever I go, and have a close-knit few of an inner cadre who know me well. Plus comment on wonderful blogs where I feel that women searching for answers are welcome without derision. And enjoy the stars, wolves, spiders and trailing flowers in the winds…

    Cheers to you all! May you take heart and know your own mind.

    • femmeforever Says:

      I’m so past ever lusting after a man, …..I stay celibate.

      *Fist bump of solidarity*

      *waves to Sally*

  13. pantypopo Says:

    Excellent coverage, hopefully the USA will learn from this. Be proactive, contact the Canadian Civil Liverties Association and ask them to investigate this discrimination against women. Copy to the ACLU and ask them to ensure similar issues are not built into ENDA.

    “CCLA is not a community legal clinic and does not generally provide members of the public with legal advice or direct legal representation. In some instances, we are able to provide individuals with general legal information and/or referrals to appropriate agencies or organizations. If you would like to make us aware of a civil liberties issue:

    Please send us an email at: publicenquiries@ccla.org or contact us by phone at 416-363-0321 ext. 257.”

  14. justbunny Says:

    Scary shit! Thank you for bringing this to our attention.

  15. justbunny Says:

    Scary shit! Thank you for bringing this to our attention.

  16. anonymous radical feminist Says:

    Gallus and all,

    I’d really like to do something to help, but honestly I’m not too sure what I can do as an Aussie. Any suggestions? This is such a fucking abomination.😦

  17. wwomenwwarriors Says:

    Reblogged this on when women were warriors and commented:
    Exactly…we’ve gone back at least 100 years or more now.

    This is PRECISELY why radical feminists have been keen on pushing back when legislation is introduced to accommodate trans interests: we see the potential for this being dangerous for women. And here we have it, back 100 years or more of feminist progress. We cannot meet alone as women now.

    Saw this coming, saw this coming, saw this coming.

    When will other women wake up!?!??!

  18. wwomenwwarriors Says:

    That’s it, sisters. It’s time for us all to start identifying as women.

    I am now a FtoF. Anyone want to join me? My gender identity is now transwombyn. I transitioned from WbW to a transwombyn 5 minutes ago, because I identify as a wombyn. I think this makes me more oppressed, because not only am I trans, but I am also a born woman. There must be some legislation I can get. Who’s in?😛

    But seriously. The humor is cause I don’t want to cry or scream. This is awful.


  19. […] in the concurrent female-only Radical Feminist gathering. Eliminating the rights of females to women-only spaces is the number one priority of the transgender movement, whose aim is to roll-back sex-based legal […]

  20. Lizzy Shaw Says:

    Wow, that is really disturbing. So, a bunch of men whinned about not being invited to a women-only feminist thing, and now women can’t organize or meet together, and neither can lesbians, gays, or Muslims in sex-segregated spaces, but those rapist male assholes who want to be women can have a rape meeting about raping lesbians? Wow liberals, you really suck. I am a Leftist, and while I usually dislike conservatives more than liberals (happens when you live in a red state in the US), at least they keep these ridiculous gender identity laws from being passed.

    I don’t live in Canada, but I strongly encourage civil disobedience against this law. What the heck was that woman smoking?

  21. FeistyAmazon Says:

    Reblogged this on FeistyAmazon and commented:
    I will never give my support to ANY “GEender identity law! Good for her mending it to protect bio females

  22. elfkat Says:

    I can’t imagine the Girl Guides are happy about this either, have they said anything?

  23. margaret Says:

    FYI transgender rights bill c279 passed in the Senate here in Canada with amendments – from the Toronto Star today: Sen. Donald Plett, a Conservative member of the standing committee, proposed during the meeting on Wednesday that the legislation be amended to exclude federal “sex-specific” facilities like crisis facilities, washrooms, changing rooms and correctional facilities.
    “This act will no longer allow biological males to identify as female and gain access to vulnerable persons,” he said during the meeting.
    Throughout the bill’s debate in the Senate, Plett, who is a former president of the Conservative Party, has repeatedly opposed allowing transgender people to use the bathrooms that corresponds to their gender identity.

    “I have no problem with people that identify as women when they’re biological male in housing and employment. They need to be treated absolutely equally,” Plett said during committee on Oct. 2.
    “The issue I have is that many elements of society are separated based on sex and not on gender — shelters, change rooms, bathrooms, even sports teams. They are not separated based on internal feelings but on sex, physiological and anatomical differences. Whether or not we like the fact that men and women are biologically different is irrelevant.” – thanks to Senator Nancy Ruth for her advocacy and also to Gallus Mag for activating us on this issue in the above piece

    • GallusMag Says:

      Thanks for the update!

      ———————

      (bolding by me-GM)

      http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/02/25/trans-rights-bill-amendment-would-bar-trans-people-from-public-washrooms.html

      By: Robin Levinson King Staff Reporter, Published on Wed Feb 25 2015
      The Senate has passed an amendment to the transgender rights bill that would effectively bar transgender people from public washrooms.

      The Senate on Wednesday passed Bill C-279, which seeks to add gender identity to the Canadian Human Rights Act, with additional amendments. Transgender advocates say the bill is essential to protect transgender Canadians from discrimination.

      But the bill has been stuck in the Senate after passing its second reading in the House almost two years ago.
      The bill’s sponsor in the House, New Democrat MP Randall Garrison, said he believes the amendments are a stalling tactic to kick the bill back down to the Commons. With the 2015 election looming, any delay is likely to kill the bill.
      “I think the amendments were designed to provide additional delay to defeat the bill,” he said.

      Sen. Donald Plett, a Conservative member of the standing committee, proposed during the meeting on Wednesday that the legislation be amended to exclude federal “sex-specific” facilities like crisis facilities, washrooms, changing rooms and correctional facilities.

      “This act will no longer allow biological males to identify as female and gain access to vulnerable persons,” he said during the meeting.

      Throughout the bill’s debate in the Senate, Plett, who is a former president of the Conservative Party, has repeatedly opposed allowing transgender people to use the bathrooms that corresponds to their gender identity.

      “I have no problem with people that identify as women when they’re biological male in housing and employment. They need to be treated absolutely equally,” Plett said during committee on Oct. 2.

      “The issue I have is that many elements of society are separated based on sex and not on gender — shelters, change rooms, bathrooms, even sports teams. They are not separated based on internal feelings but on sex, physiological and anatomical differences. Whether or not we like the fact that men and women are biologically different is irrelevant.”

      Liberal Sen. Grant Mitchell, the Senate sponsor of the bill, said he’s wary of any changes that lessen the protection of transgender people in public washrooms or other public spaces.

      “The very act that is designed to prohibit discrimination is being amended to allow discrimination,” he said during the meeting.
      Plett has resisted criticisms that excluding transgender people is discriminatory, and instead has insisted it is a public safety issue.

      “Whether or not it is called ‘the bathroom bill,’ it allows for pedophiles to take advantage of legislation that we have in place,” he said Feb. 4, 2014 during a Senate debate, referring to the bill’s nickname.

      Plett also proposed two other amendments, which Mitchell did not oppose. One would be to add “sex” to the list of protected identities under the Criminal Code, the other would be to remove the definition of gender identity.

      Amanda Ryan, from the Ottawa transgender support organization Gender Mosaic, said any amendment that restricts transgender rights in public restrooms or locker rooms is “totally unpalatable.”

      Gender Mosaic, along with other human rights organizations like Amnesty International, is part of the Trans Equality in Canada coalition. The coalition said there is no way it could support the bill if the amendment is passes.
      “We would put all our effort into having that amendment deleted (in the House),” Ryan said.

      • >:) Says:

        Ok, this is what I dont get, they keep the penis, but want to go naked on the ladies’ side of the locker room,
        Ok, if their gender expression is in the sexy clothes, and they look like any other naked dude when naked without it in sex segregated spaces, then what’s the problem with them being naked with other men with penises? They cant tell without the clothes. You want to wear make up to the locker room? Most women don’t.

        They blend in with the ‘have-dicks’, when naked.

        Some one passing- and they keep their dick, they will not pass when they get past a certain adult age, so this is a short-lived time.

        Paris is getting broad shoulders, I would not call this passing anymore. If I passed this person on the street, who is now man sized/shaped, I would think it was just another college kid pledging to get in a frat house.

        That is the case with most these men, they don’t look like tall women. Their shoulders are too wide, and straight het men get gynecomastia, it is on the rise.

        The bones change from natural T production as they approach 35.. Wearing a dress into the men’s locker room and passing? In the short time they are passing, Maybe that would cause a guy to take a look[hey a lady walked in- like that happens all the time] but when the dick is pulled out at the urinal, I am sure they will look away and be polite about it.

        I mean, look, here is Paris in a photo that was taken by someone else, and not filtered by him or chosen for that odd angle that makes him look like he still-passes. He doesn’t take many photos next to a woman, only you see his huge shoulders and male upperbody right away. He has what I call a male silhouette. If you look at photos from him out in the community or in a group photo, let you eye wander to an actual woman in the crowd, even a much older woman, and rightaway you see this is a guy.

      • kesher Says:

        Drag queens, at least in LGBT inclusive areas, don’t use the women’s bathroom. I guess I don’t know what they’d do if they were in a more hostile environment while in full drag regalia.

        But, aside from fetishistic crossdressers who get off on invading women’s spaces, I’m not seeing a push from drag queens to be allowed to use women’s facilities. I’ve also heard of drag queens being the victims of gay bashing, but almost invariably on the street, not in the men’s bathroom.

    • GallusMag Says:

      Replacing “sex” as a protected category into statutes that have been passed codifying “gender identity” into law is absolutely key for women.

  24. margaret Says:

    Yesterday Cheri DiNovo introduced a bill to ban conversion therapy although health minister Eric Hoskins said that it is already prohibited by anti-discrimination provisions in the human rights code and that there is no billing code for the therapy under OHIP – it is a private member’s bill which do not usually pass but toby’s law proposed by DiNovo did ,,, in announcing the bill she trashed the Alcorns and used the suicided teenager as the inspiration for the law – as there seems to be little need for the bill and as DiNovo was almost defeated in the june election, one might question her motives in proposing this bill

  25. margaret Says:

    You nailed it Gallus ! and you’ll never guess who is taking credit for ‘bringing down’ Dr Zucker,,, Sophia Banks!!! – is it not libelous to accuse someone of driving ppl to suicide without any proof ,,,

  26. liberalsareinsane Says:

    Dinovo has that tranny smirk.


  27. […] Cheri DiNovo  thanked our little girl by name in testimony at the passage of Bill 33 which stripped Canadian […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: