Women’s rights activism may soon be construed as hate speech under the Canadian Criminal Code, unless Canadian citizens organize to oppose the totalitarian laws.
Women's rights activism may soon be construed as hate speech under the Canadian Criminal Code, unless Canadian citizens organize to oppose the totalitarian laws.
If the proposed reforms are made, informative articles such as this one in The Post Millennial will become criminal acts.
The specific beliefs set to be criminalized are known as "gender critical feminism," to distinguish them from misogynistic beliefs passed off as benefiting women, known as intersectional feminism.
Any form of campaigning for, or asserting, the sex-based rights of women would become a criminal act.
"Gender critical" feminists share with the general population an understanding that sex is binary and immutable, and that it should take priority over subjective "gender identity" in public policy and law.
In 2017, Canada's House of Commons passed Bill C-16, popularly known as 'the bathroom bill,' but with ramifications for free speech as well as single-sex spaces and resources.
Only women's rights campaigner Meghan Murphy, and free speech campaigner Jordan Peterson, spoke to oppose the bill, to no avail.
Bill C-16 created a conflict of rights between women, and children, on the one hand, and men with autogynephilia—a paraphilia that leads them to want to be 'treated like women'—on the other.
Autogynephiliac men, who derive erotic satisfaction from dressing and behaving like their submissive and hyper-sexualized idea of a woman, were granted access to women's transition houses and other single-sex services.
Any woman who objected to the blatant injustice of this was silenced by the same legislation, and compelled to refer to those men as "she."
A prime example was Jonathan Yaniv, who adopted a second name "Jessica," and tried to bully numerous poor immigrant women into waxing his testicles, taking them to the human rights court when they refused to handle his male genitalia.
In that hearing, the absurd consequences of the conflict of rights created by Bill C-16 were clear for all to see. The legislation is an abuser's charter that disturbed men can use to coerce and dominate women, socially and psychologically.
However, this is not common knowledge in Canada, thanks to a media whitewash. Canadians continue to labour under the illusion that Bill C-16 is about "being kind" to a sexual minority of vulnerable men with the purest of intentions.
This state of affairs can continue because any woman who tries to speak publicly about it is ruthlessly suppressed.
First, she is labelled "transphobic," then her arguments are censored and mischaracterized, then she is thrown off social media, deplatformed, doxxed and assaulted. In one early case, a trans activist actually murdered two women who objected to men's presence at a women-only music festival.
In order to prevent women from publicly lifting the hood on gender identity ideology, trans activists have to prevent us from talking about reality. Behind their concept of "trans rights" is an outright denial that sex is immutable and dimorphic.
Trans activists insist that their subjective identification with feminine sex stereotypes is so much more important than biological sex, that the latter should be erased from law and public policy. This has already happened in various countries including Spain and Ireland.
Gender identity ideology depends upon denying what is real, and ruthlessly suppressing dissent.
A trans-identifying male named Morgane Oger lobbied the City of Vancouver to defund Canada's sole remaining women-only rape crisis centre.
In 2019, Oger's foundation called upon the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights to criminally regulate as 'hate speech' feminist criticism of gender identity ideology.
It also called for the censorship, within Canada, of the web publication Feminist Current, founded and run by renowned women's rights scholar, journalist and campaigner Meghan Murphy who has long been an adversary of Oger.
Incredibly, since that 2019 speech, two bills were proposed to meet Oger's political demands.
In November 2020, Liberal Party Member and Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault introduced the Censorship Bill C10 in the House of Commons. It proposes to amend the Broadcasting Act to include internet and digital media.
In June 2021, Liberal Party MP David Lametti introduced Bill C-36. It proposes amendments to the Human Rights Act and Criminal Code concerning hate speech and hate crimes.
Libby’s Desk
Commentary and must-reads from Libby’s desk, straight to your inbox.
TPM Newsletter
The Post Millennial’s top stories, delivered to your inbox.
"The bill defines 'hate speech' as the content of a communication that expresses detestation or vilification of an individual or group of individuals on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination. These grounds of discrimination are race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression…"
"These amendments would apply to public communications by individual users on the Internet, including on social media, on personal websites, and in mass emails. For example, they would apply to an individual publishing a blog or posting on a social media platform. They would also apply to operators of websites that primarily publish their own content but also publish comments by users and visitors, including in articles on online newspapers and in user comment sections."
In a speech in June 2021 Lametti said, "The bill would also establish a tool for those who fear, on reasonable grounds, that another person will commit a hate crime or hate propaganda offense. These individuals would be able to seek a court ordered peace bond with the consent of the Attorney General to prevent those crimes from occurring."
So there we have it, readers. The "pre-crime" of dystopian fiction is on its way to Canada. Compelled speech has been in place for several years: preferred pronouns are now mandatory in the courts of British Columbia. When the Law Society of British Columbia requested a debate, a ruling member of the Canadian Bar Association British Columbia Branch framed the mere request as "hate speech."
Big Brother has it all sewn up — unless concerned citizens speak up while there is still time.
Women's rights defenders in Canada, and beyond, have for over a decade been driven from the public square by transgender ideologues—the legally-protected group designated by "gender identity and gender expression"— for questioning gender identity ideology, and for asserting the basic facts of life.
Transgender ideologues exhibit abundant hatred for women who do not abide by their sex denialist belief system, and absolute intolerance of women speaking about our specifically female life experiences, such as periods, pregnancy and birth, and male violence.
Something as simple as saying "he's a man" or "women don't have penises" can get you permanently banned from social media platforms for "hate speech."
The new bills, if they become law, would have the effect of criminalizing women's rights campaigning, making basic feminist observations about which sex oppresses which, and simple discussions of biological reality upon which medical science and rational public policy depend
If you haven't already written to your MP about this, why on earth not? Act now. If speaking up alone is difficult, form a small local group and show your representative that there are votes to be won by opposing transgender totalitarianism.
The safety, privacy and dignity of women and children depend on your action.