Scarce Health $$ To Preserve 'Quality of Life'

"The Charter-protected right to security of the person safeguards individual dignity and autonomy. [Requiring a transgender or non-binary person born male] to remove their penis to receive state funding for a vaginoplasty would be inconsistent with the values of equality and security of the person."

"Such an interpretation would force transgender, non-binary people like 'K.S.' to choose between having a surgery [penectomy] they do not want, and which does not align with their gender expression, to get state funding on the one hand, and not having gender-affirming surgery at all on the other."

"Such a choice would reinforce their disadvantaged position and would not promote their dignity and autonomy."

Justice Brees Davis, Ontario Provisional Court

The surgery, which is not available anywhere in Canada, involves creating a vaginal canal, or opening, without removing the penis. Photo by Getty Images

In Ontario, the Ontario Health Insurance Plan the purpose of which is to provide life-saving surgeries paid for through tax dollars to preserve the lives of residents, has now been ordered by an Ontario court ruling to pay for a resident's surgery for constructing a vagina, and at the same time leaving the penis intact. This was an unanimous decision by a three-member panel of judges at the provincial Divisional Court. And this ruling could very well serve to expand access to a new "bottom surgery" for individuals who identify as non-binary (neither fully male nor fully female).

The individual in question identified only as 'K.S.' has, since 2022, been immersed in a legal battle with the Ontario Health Insurance Plan which had denied the funding request revolving around a penile-preserving vaginoplasty surgery at a specialized clinic in Austin Texas; a surgery considered 'experimental' not recognized or available anywhere in Canada. The process involves the creation of a vaginal canal, leaving the penis intact for 'K.S.', born male, identifying as female.

 

The surgical request was denied on the basis that the procedure is not one included on the OHIP list of sex-reassignment procedures, therefore not an insured service.The decision was appealed by the applicant, to Ontario's Health Services Appeal and Review Board, on the basis that forcing the penis removal would invalidate 'her' identity, similar to an illegal act of conversion therapy. Of concern to the applicant was the risk of complications and urinary incontinence from urological rerouting, along with risk of orgasm dysfunction. 

When the appeal board overturned OHIP's decision OHIP appealed to the Division Court with the argument the review board erred in its ruling of the procedure eligible for public funding. The court responded that the appeal board's decision was consistent with the World Professional Association for Transgender Health standards of care. An Association that is given undeserved credit, and recently now the recipient of a scathing review by a massive British report into gender-affirming care.

 

K.S. is fighting for public funding of a surgery previously argued to be 'experimental' by the Ontario government. (Submitted through counsel)

 

The Inequality of Woke Entitlements

"I got suspended for comments made during a class discussion. It was about male students using female washrooms, gender dysphoria and male breastfeeding. Everyone was sharing their opinion on it, any student who wanted to was participating, including the teacher."

"I said there were only two genders and you were born either a male or a female and that got me into trouble. And then I said that gender doesn't trump biology."

"Freedom of religion is probably one of our most important freedoms [in Canada], so I'm not going to surrender it in the face of persecution. It just goes to show how little freedom of expression we have in our country."

"I walked into one of my classes. I sat down and everyone looked pretty surprised to see me there. Within two minutes the vice-principal was in the classroom asking me to leave. Almost immediately I was met with the police."

Josh Alexander, 16, Grade 11 student, St.Joseph['s Catholic High School, Renfrew, Ontario

Josh Alexander, was suspended from St. Joseph’s Catholic High School in Renfrew, Ontario. The teen asserted in class that there are only "two genders”, which offended some trans students and he was suspended and then arrested when coming back to the school. Twitter screenshot/Twitter/@officialJosh_A

 

The student was informed he could return to school only "if he agreed not to use the 'dead name' of any transgender student and agreed to exclude himself from the two afternoon classes that two transgender students attend since they disapprove of Josh's religious beliefs", explained James Kitchen, a lawyer representing him, from the Liberty Defense Fund. 'Dead naming' refers to addressing a trans person by their previous pre-transition birth name.

"Compelling Josh to utter falsehoods regarding gender contrary to his beliefs and segregating him from classes are repugnant manifestations of religious discrimination."

"Under the guise of 'safety', as that term has been revised by woke gender activists now pervasive in public institutions, Josh has been penalized for expressing his Christian beliefs regarding gender and modesty, beliefs which also  happen to align with both objective truth and actual safety."

"Josh not only has a right to express himself during class discussions and through public forums, he also has a right not to be discriminated against by his school for his sincere religious beliefs. Being suspended and excluded from attending classes is the height of discrimination."

"Josh will continue to courageously stand for his beliefs, for truth, and for girls whose voices of concern over their actual safety are being drowned out by the outraged nonsense of the woke mob, even if that means sacrificing his ability to attend St.Joseph's."

Lawyer James Kitchen

Having disobeyed his school administration's order not to attend his afternoon classes shared by two transgender 'females' because his presence and his stated opinion of the legitimacy of their girlhood claims along with their 'right' to use the girls' bathrooms offends them, this 16-year-old boy was ordered to leave the school premises. Persona non grata for stating his thoughts and concerns, stemming from his deep Christian-inspired statements of truth and reality as he saw them.

Placed in a police cruiser, he was driven off the school property, released, and charged with trespassing. The question now looms, who is the intolerant party? The transgender girls whose presence in a class of another student who doubted their gender claims offended them; the school administration that felt it appropriate to have a student arrested because of his honest, stated beliefs; or the boy whose impression was that speaking the truth is never forbidden and represents a fundamental human right.

"I think I used to be seen as a Christian kid following my beliefs, but now apparently I'm the rebel. The school knows I'm not trying to be a problematic kid."

"The police know that as well. They didn't even put me in cuffs when they arrested me.:"

"They knew that I wasn't actually a threat to anybody."

Josh Alexander

Depriving a boy of his right to an education in a publicly-funded school, a school that prides itself on its Christian heritage -- that chooses to elevate the emotional security of students with gender dysphoria over that of another student who posed no threat to their security, but expressed concern over the human rights of the girls at the school, whose right to privacy and feelings of safety were being ignored. Somewhat misaligned decision-making on the part of adults charged with the responsibility of treating all students equally with the realization that all are equally entitled to a proper education.

The school's website states that St.Joseph's promotes "education within a framework of a Catholic Christian environment. We truly believe in the enhancement of the spiritual, moral and emotional well-being of those belonging to our community". On human rights issues, the board states it is guided by the policies of the Ontario Human Rights Commission, along with directives issued by the Ministry of Education. Washroom rules are in line with OHB guidelines which state that trans people "have the right to access these facilities based on their lived gender identity".

"[The Board] deeply respects religious freedoms. This is fundamental to our values as a Catholic school board."

"Our Mission states: 'We are an inclusive Catholic learning community called to love unconditionally and educate hearts and minds in the way of Christ."

Renfrew County Catholic District School Board

Hello, Are You Woke Yet?

"A lack of access to menstrual products in men's toilet rooms has raised concerns regarding washroom equity."

"[Under proposed regulations employers will be required to provide menstrual products] in each toilet room. [One product dispenser] is assumed to be purchased for each toilet room, regardless of gender, across all work sites under the control of large business employers in the federal jurisdiction."

"[In addition  to the dispensers government would also] require one covered container for the disposal of menstrual products to be installed in every toilet compartment, in women's, men's and gender-0neutral toilet rooms."

"Therefore, these covered containers would be added to all toilet compartments [stalls] in men's toilet rooms across the federal jurisdiction."

"[The proposed regulations will improve sanitation and help] build a more inclusive Canada."

Government of Canada

Kevin Hiebert with the advocacy group Changing the Flow based in the Region of Waterloo in Ontario, says the groups directly impacted by lack of access to period products should lead the discussion on how to get menstrual equity right. (Mike Stewart/Associated Press)

Yes, this is what consumes the Liberal government of Justin Trudeau. Live and let live just won't cut it. Very special arrangements must now be made into law to address 'equity' and provide the transgendered who represent 0.2 of Canada's population with considerate comfort. The balance of the population not needful of that kind of 'comfort' may find themselves accommodating a government move to see that there is free and ample menstruation products available to that vanishingly small component of the population, courtesy of the taxpayer and those who must purchase their own hygiene products

 

Four government departments -- the Ministries of Development, Indigenous Services, Natural Resources and Transport Canada -- are sponsoring this inspired move to improve hygiene and accommodate transgender individuals in federally regulated workplaces. Employers under the proposed regulations would be required to see that menstrual products are freely available in bathrooms, whether designated for male or female use. 

The proposed new regulations, according to government, will result in a more inclusive atmosphere for individuals who have moved from their natal birth identification to the gender of their choice. This is a private process, individual determination of how one wishes to conduct their lives as far as gender is concerned. Why it has become a matter of public display and attention requiring the entire population to fall into place behind the delicate subject of gender choice is puzzling indeed.

Within the wider public many women are and will continue to be uneasy about sharing bathroom space with a man living as a woman and the reverse is also a reality; many men will feel extremely uncomfortable in the presence of a woman now living as a man, in their midst while in the process of performing normal evacuations. 

But the proposed regulations are to become a government-sponsored instrument that will result in more worker productivity, an increase in workplace safety, the improvement of employees' physical and psychological health, a reduction in discrimination against 2SLGBTQ1+ communities while impacting positively on Indigenous workers and disproportionately benefit the poor. Gender-based discrimination will be addressed by this initiative resulting in increased fairness and equality. All this to be achieved by mandating menstrual product dispensers be placed in each men's washroom

According to government estimates the full cost of the regulations would come in at $116.6 million stretching from 2024 to 2033. Details such as estimates of how costly the purchase of the products and their installation [containers for disposal], represents part of the total cost. Thoroughly thought out and justified by the dire need to provide former women now living as men with female menstrual products. Meant as well to be used by anyone who requires them. Another free benefit for government workers.

The products will be there, widely available for the select few that will take advantage of their presence as a bonus salute to their newly-acquired status, while the majority of workers will no doubt become accustomed to the presence of these products which the larger balance of employees may find their presence peculiar, even annoying in the presumption that they are needed at all. In that perhaps it would be more useful to assign singular toilet stalls separate and apart from others for the specific use of individuals requiring these menstrual products to begin with?

The 2021 Census of Population included for the first time a question on gender and the precision of "at birth" on the sex question, allowing all cisgender, transgender and non-binary individuals to report their gender.

Canada is the first country to collect and publish data on gender diversity from a national census.

Of the nearly 30.5 million people in Canada aged 15 and older living in a private household in May 2021, 100,815 were transgender (59,460) or non-binary (41,355), accounting for 0.33% of the population in this age group.

The proportions of transgender and non-binary people were three to seven times higher for Generation Z (born between 1997 and 2006, 0.79%) and millennials (born between 1981 and 1996, 0.51%) than for Generation X (born between 1966 and 1980, 0.19%), baby boomers (born between 1946 and 1965, 0.15%) and the Interwar and Greatest Generations (born in 1945 or earlier, 0.12%).

Over time, the acceptance and understanding of gender and sexual diversity has evolved. Further, there has been social and legislative recognition of transgender, non-binary and LGBTQ2+ people in general. Younger generations may be more comfortable reporting their gender identity than older generations.

In May 2021, the Canadian population aged 15 and older had an average age of 48.0 years. In comparison, the transgender population had an average age of 39.4 years, while the non-binary population had an average age of 30.4 years.

Just under 1 in 100 young adults aged 20 to 24 were non-binary or transgender (0.85%).

Nova Scotia (0.48%), Yukon (0.47%) and British Columbia (0.44%) had the highest proportions of transgender and non-binary people aged 15 and older among provinces and territories.

Victoria (0.75%), Halifax (0.66%) and Fredericton (0.60%) had the most gender diversity among Canadian large urban centres.

Just over half of non-binary people aged 15 and older (52.7%) lived in one of Canada's six largest urban centres: Toronto (15.3%), Montréal (11.0%), Vancouver (10.8%), Ottawa–Gatineau (5.6%), Edmonton (5.4%) and Calgary (4.5%).

Nearly 1 in 6 non-binary people aged 15 and older (15.5%) lived in the downtown core of a large urban centre. This share was more than twice that of transgender people (7.0%) and over three times higher than that of cisgender people (4.7%).

Statistics Canada

 

Under Ottawa's proposed regulations, employers would be required to provide menstrual products in women’s, men’s, and gender-neutral toilet rooms. Photo by DEREK RUTTAN/London Free Press files