In the Canadian Senate, a bill that would make transgender people a protected group under human rights law is still mired in debate. Bill C-279 has been around for a decade now, and though it passed the House of Commons in March of last year, it still hasn’t come to a Senate vote. One factor in its way is the troubling claim that it could give sexual predators a legal “in” to women’s shelters and bathrooms, simply by claiming they are transgender.
But even as the “bathroom bill” struggles to survive the Senate, other areas of Canadian life are not quite so adverse to its suggestions. This month, Hockey Canada announced that it was changing its policies on transgender players, allowing them to use their preferred names, be addressed by the correct pronouns – and use the dressing rooms that correspond to their identities.
The change was prompted by a complaint put forward by transgender teenager Jesse Thompson, who said that he was tired of being excluded from conversations and parties. Coaches wouldn’t allow him to change with the other boys, but other parents got upset when he tried to change with the girls. Finally, Thompson approached the Ontario Human Rights Commission, who reached a settlement that included not only accommodations for transgender players, but an educational component for all trainers and coaches on transgender issues.
Since the changes are in response to a specific complaint, so far they only apply to the Ontario minor leagues, and Hockey Canada has denied any plans to extend them further. However, advocates are hopeful that the policy will soon become nation-wide, and see the settlement as an important milestone, one that might inspire other organizations to follow suit.
Hockey Canada’s decision shows that transgender protections don’t have to be complicated. Furthermore, they’re a lot more than simply symbolic, even at the most basic level of names, pronouns, and who gets to use which dressing rooms. For Thompson, being able to change with the guys isn’t just about pride, it’s about being seen as an equal member of the team, someone who doesn’t have to spend his time before and after the game alone in a tiny room because parents and coaches can’t agree where he belongs. And it’s about showing other players that they don’t have to hide who they are to play the game they love.
Crucially, although it’s been over a week since the decision, there seems to have been virtually no negative press, no concerns about young people abusing the regulations to get an illicit peep at each other – or worse. Maybe that’s because the bathroom argument is fundamentally a non-issue. Opponents of bill C-279 like to cite cases like that of Chris Hambrook, who pretended to be transgender in order to harass residents of a Toronto women’s shelter. However, court psychologists were able to conclusively determine that this was a ruse, and, more to the point, his actions in his transgender disguise were more than enough to get him arrested for attempted sexual assault, regardless of identity.
Â
And, of course, broader transgender protections are about far more serious issues than bathrooms. Transgender people, especially transgender women, are at high risk of violence themselves; one study found that at least one-fifth of Canadian trans people have experienced physical or sexual assault because of their identity. Canadian courts have yet to label any of these assaults a hate crime. Bill C-279 would change that. Isn’t that what the Senate should be talking about?
Â
Article References
Picture References