The Dominion - Nat Gray

The Self-Determination We Deserve

Maya Rolbin-Ghanie — Thu, 13 Jan 2011 05:15:03 +0000

Landmark charter challenge launched as Bill C-389 raises debate

MONTREAL—“Remember Stonewall?” read a banner dropped by two young people before they were arrested at this year's Trans-* Day of Remembrance in Ottawa. They were asking the community to remember a landmark riot against state repression and police brutality, led by Sylvia Rivera, a trans- woman of colour. The event is commonly known as “the hairpin drop heard around the world,” and remembered as having catalyzed North American trans- organizing.

In 1969, the year of the Stonewall Uprising in New York, it was hard to believe that a politician would ever seek to better the lives of trans- people; however, NDP MP Bill Siksay of Burnaby-Douglas hopes to do just that. Bill C-389, introduced by Siksay, would add gender identity and gender expression to the list of protected classes in the hate crimes section of the Criminal Code of Canada, and also to the Canada Human Rights Act, which protects against discrimination in housing and employment. On February 9, 2011, the bill passed the House of Commons and and now awaits Senate approval.

When asked about Bill C-389, Matt McLauchlin, Co-chair of the NDP LGBT Committee said, “A clear law banning discrimination based on gender identity or expression would make it clear...that discrimination on these specific grounds is not to be tolerated. This would help not only with litigation but also with public education and similar initiatives to stop transphobia.”

Conservative MP LaVar Payne, of Medicine Hat, Alberta, wrote in a letter to a concerned constituent that broadening identifiable groups in the Criminal Code “will further infringe on Canadians’ right to free speech.” Other right-wing opponents have deemed it “The Bathroom Bill,” suggesting that it would facilitate sexual assault in public washrooms. This attitude demonstrates the current lack of popular education surrounding gender, as well as the portrayal of trans- people as deceptive and suspicious.

However, not all critics of the bill are right-wing. Some trans- organizers argue that C-389 is limited in its analysis of systemic barriers facing the community, while others suggest that it may be more harmful than helpful.

“In a culture that penalizes transgression, legal recognition of gender identity and expression can be important in order to access benefits including housing, legal rights, healthcare and some sense of safety,” says Mattilda Bernstein Sycamore, prominent queer anti-war activist and editor of the anthology That’s Revolting!: Queer Strategies for Resisting Assimilation. “But I don’t think we should be lulled into thinking that legal changes will give us the self-determination that we all deserve.”

“I think that an interesting question to ask might be, ‘Whose lives will it impact?’” says Jackson Ezra of l'Action Sante Travesti(e)s et Transsexuel(le)s du Quebec. ASTTeQ is a group that works to encourage the health and well-being of trans- people through access to resources and support.

“While I think that this bill opens up some really interesting discussions and debates, I [question] the impact that it [would] have on the lives of trans- sex workers, migrant and non-status people, poor people, people who use drugs, people who are homeless and turned away from shelters, people who struggle every day just to get by [and] access basic services, and [those] whose lives and realities are criminalized,” he said.

In 2009, a similar bill—named the Gender Employment Non-Discrimination Act (GENDA)—was proposed and passed in the New York State Assembly, and awaits Senate approval. While garnering the support of many LGBT groups, a coalition of five organizations (The Sylvia Rivera Law Project, FIERCE, Queers for Economic Justice, The Peter Cicchino Youth Project and The Audre Lorde Project) wrote a letter to the GENDA coalition voicing their non-support of the bill, arguing that “[r]ather than serving as protection for oppressed people, the hate crimes portion of this law may expose our communities to more danger—from prejudiced institutions far more powerful and pervasive than individual bigots."

The letter continues:

Hate crime laws are an easy way for the government to act like it is on our communities’ side while continuing to discriminate against us. Institutions can claim 'anti-oppression' legitimacy and win points with communities affected by prejudice, while simultaneously using 'sentencing enhancement' to justify building more prisons to lock us up in. Hate crime laws foreground a single accused individual as the 'cause' of racism, homophobia, transphobia, misogyny, or any number of other oppressive prejudices. They encourage us to lay blame and focus our vengeful hostility on one person instead of paying attention to institutional prejudice that fuels police violence, encourages bureaucratic systems to ignore trans- people’s needs or actively discriminate against us, and denies our communities health care, identification, and so much more.

Seeking to address barriers regarding sex designation and identity for trans- citizens, a challenge has recently been launched against the Directeur de l'Etat Civil du Quebec (DECQ) by Elias Dean. “If this case makes it to court,” Dean told The Dominion, “it will be the first time in this province that the bodily autonomy of trans- people is addressed in a court of law.”

Dean explained, “I am a transsexual man whose demand for a change of legal sex designation was recently turned down. It was denied to me because even though I've received a GID diagnosis [trans- people are considered to experience Gender Identity Disorder, a diagnosis within the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders] and have undergone chest reconstruction and hormone therapy, I have not had a hysterectomy. Sterilization is mandatory to access a legal change of sex in Quebec. In the case of trans- women, vaginoplasty is required, and for trans- men, it's a hysterectomy.”

Requirements for changing one's sex marker—that is, the "M" or "F" designated by the state on one's identification—vary from province to province. While Sex Reassignment Surgery (SRS) is not needed for one to change one's legal name, it is consistently required to change the sex marker on provincial identification. The same set of laws are applicable nation-wide, but are inconsistently interpreted provincially.

In June 2010, trans- people and their allies rallied at the the office of the DECQ demanding access to name changes without excessive delay, sex marker changes without forced sterilization, sex marker changes for those without citizenship status (after living within the province for one year), the removal of sex indication on birth certificates, and clear guidelines available online regarding name and sex marker changes. PolitiQ: Queers Solidaires, a queer and trans- collective working towards creating spaces for the open discussion of sexuality and gender, organized the rally, which was endorsed by Stella, the 2110 Centre for Gender Advocacy, l'Association des Transsexuels et Transsexuelles du Quebec (ATQ), Project 10 and ASTTeQ.

Swan Kennedy, a speaker at the rally, expressed the need for identification congruent with one's chosen identity, saying, “We need the DECQ to recognize that our livelihoods and lives are put at risk when we have identification that does not reflect our gender...The DECQ requires that an applicant have a "serious reason" to change their name on identity documents. Surely, discrimination against us [is a] serious reason.”

Dean expands on this, saying, “Having mismatched paperwork jeopardizes our chances of obtaining jobs, housing and health care, [often pushing] us into committing survival crimes, which often results in jail time, with trans- women getting incarcerated in male prisons where they face serious violence, et cetera.”

Whether or not one supports Bill C-389, the right to self-identify is central to ongoing trans- struggles. Trans- movements have been largely grassroots, mobilizing outside of government institutions. With Canada's history of institutional repression of trans- organizing, many question whether or not a representative or a piece of legislation could ever truly address the needs of such a diverse community.

“There are so many ways that trans-, genderqueer, gender defiant and gender nonconforming people continuously challenge the violence of state control of our lives, and [we] need to continue to build our own cultures, values, norms, institutions, and families while challenging all the violence around us," says Sycamore. "[This is] not just a state that asks us to submit to the prying and spying of medical professionals in order to grant us a basic need, but the state that continues all other forms of oppression as well, from oil drilling on Indigenous lands to a continuous crackdown on free speech and freedom of assembly."

“Not all trans- people experience the same kinds of violence, and not all trans- people’s needs are the same. As [allies], we need to understand trans- rights as the fight against police brutality, racist immigration policies, and the struggles against the criminalization of sex work, homelessness and drug use,” says Ezra.

“Even though my being trans- is sometimes a source of grief for me, I am thankful to be part of a resilient community that has found its voice after having our lives narrated through medical discourse for so long—[a community] that is actively organizing and fighting back," adds Dean. "It is thanks to those who have walked this path before me that I can go ahead with this challenge.”

*In this article we use the term "trans-" as an umbrella term to be inclusive of all transsexual, transgendered, gender-variant, genderqueer, and gender nonconforming individuals. While it is not our intention to conflate these identities, we seek to be inclusive.

Jesse Grass is a genderqueer, working-class fuck-up. Nat Gray is a poet, a dumpster skid, and an intern with The Dominion.

GenderIdentity

Riding Out the G20 Judicial Roller-Coaster

Moira Peters — Wed, 10 Nov 2010 05:56:41 +0000

Hundert threatened with solitary, Rainville released, Ichim's charges dropped

MONTREAL—The fence has come down, the police have returned to their respective cities and the G20 leaders have gone home, but the saga of arrestees continues. While charges in some of the most spectacular arrests have now been dropped, others are just beginning to face the repercussions of the G20 convergence in Toronto.

In the latest arrest on October 14, Montrealer Youri Couture turned himself in to Toronto police. He faces several charges, including mischief over $5,000 and disguise with intent.

Ryan Rainville, a young Indigenous rights advocate from the Sakimay Nation, was released from prison yesterday after spending nearly three months in jail. In early August, while out on bail for other G20-related charges for which he had spent six days in jail in June, he was re-arrested for allegedly causing mischief over $5,000, assaulting a police officer, intimidating a justice system participant by violence and breaching his bail conditions.

Rainville was released on non-association bail conditions which block him from contacting some other G20 defendants and community organizers. He will go to trial in early 2011. A week prior to his release, Rainville was offered release and a reduced sentence if he co-operated with G20 Integrated Security Unit officers in identifying individuals in photographs. He refused.

G20 defendant Alex Hundert was arrested for a third time, this time for allegedly attempting to intimidate a member of the judicial system. Hundert was arrested four days after he filed an application for a review of his most recent bail conditions, which included “no expressing of views on a political issue.”

After initially refusing the “no expressing of views” bail condition, Hundert was coerced by the security manager of the Toronto East Detention Centre into agreeing to it.

“They said that they would keep him [in solitary confinement] until he was eventually released from prison if he didn’t sign his bail conditions right away. He was not allowed to make a phone call,” said Jonah Hundert, Alex’s brother, in an interview with CBC.

Alex Hundert had been found by a Scarborough Justice of the Peace to have breached his "no-demonstration" bail condition on October 8, 2010, by speaking as an invited panelist at two university events.

Gary McCullough was arrested June 24, 2010, after police pulled him over and found a crossbow, a chainsaw and other outdoor equipment in his vehicle.

McCullough’s home in Haliburton County, Ontario, had burnt down, and his remaining possessions were in his car when he drove to Toronto to get his car window fixed. McCullough has spent most of the last three and a half months in solitary confinement before being assessed as unfit to stand trial, and now awaits transfer from prison to a psychiatric hospital.

Byron Sonne, a computer security expert who had created a G20 counter-surveillance “how-to” guide, was arrested on June 22, 2010, on a slew of charges, including possession of an explosive. There is a publication ban on his case, and it is unknown why he was denied bail on July 20, 2010. Sonne remains behind bars.

Toronto-based organizer Syed Hussan, an alleged co-conspirator, has been unable to get his work permit to Canada renewed and is facing inadmissibility proceedings, which may lead to his deportation. Hussan was arrested after being swarmed by plainclothes officers and thrown into an unmarked van the morning of June 26, 2010.

“I think it’s rare for this much resources and energy to be put into so vehemently going after people who are allegedly guilty of nothing more than vandalism,” said Jonah Hundert.

Indeed, it seems that many of the charges are not holding up in court. Conspiracy charges against nearly 100 protesters of the G20 who were arrested in the widely publicized and violent 9am raid of a gymnasium at the University of Toronto (U of T) were dropped due to lack of evidence. Charges against three members of Montreal’s Anti-Capitalist Convergence (ACC) who were “preventatively” arrested on the morning of June 26, 2010, were also dropped.

“A lot of [the U of T arrestees] are more radical now, [they’ve] seen you can be arrested for your political beliefs,” said Blandine Juchs, a member of the ACC.

Leah Henderson, another accused of conspiracy successfully challenged her non-association bail conditions on October 20, 2010.

"[Superior Court Justice Todd] Ducharme said it was a nebulous condition, it was setting someone up to breach, essentially, because it just wasn’t defined,” Henderson told the Vancouver Media Co-op in a phone interview.

Anti-poverty activist Julian Ichim had his charge of counseling to commit mischief dropped by the crown on November 1, 2010. He appeared in court with eight of the 19 alleged co-conspirators, all of whom still face charges.

Following the same hearing, Peter Rosenthal, lawyer for Montreal-based organizer Jaggi Singh, argued for more disclosure regarding the case against his client. He told reporters after Singh's hearing that many of the accused still have not received full disclosure of the evidence being used against them.

Such judicial harassment is only strengthening the conviction of those resisting G20 policies. Before Alex Hundert was banned from speaking to the media, he urged people to continue organizing. "The way to assert our right to resist is to resist."

“If they’re trying to break [Alex] down with these sorts of things, it’s certainly not working,” affirms Jonah Hundert.

Nat Gray is a poet, an activist and an intern at The Dominion.

G20 UofT Press Scrum