Thread by @MorganeOgerBC

Hi @torontolibrary,

An event has been announced in your main branch that appears to intend to make the arguments that gender identity is fiction, our #HumanRights laws are bad policy, and #transgender women are not women:

@CheriDiNovo @StraightLGBT @VPL

eventbrite.ca/e/gender-ident…

TPL policies were put in place that prohibit the rental of your facilities for events intended, or likely, to result in discrimination on prohibited grounds. I will delve further into this below.

You also have policies prohibiting discrimination "of any kind" on your premises.

In 2019, the BC Human Rights Tribunal ruled in "Oger v Whatcott BCHRT 2019 (7)" that displaying material advertising an intention to discriminate on explicitly-prohibited grounds or urging others to do so was prohibited discrimination.

The case ruling: canlii.ca/t/hzdgk

I am mindful that Ontario and British Columbia are quite far and different provincial jurisdictions. I am also mindful that the Oger stands, however.

I would like to believe that your institution will heed the arguments in the above case when evaluating the appropriate step.

Whereas I doubt Ms Murphy will personally discriminate against anyone, it seems probable given her past conduct she will urge others to do so by making the claim doing the opposite is unjust, unwise, and un-#feminist.

Ms Murphy has a documented history of claiming that transgender women are not women. Ms Murphy also has a documented history of using libraries to incite prohibited discrimination and to export hatred prohibited in Canada.

I have some questions I ask you consider...

Does claiming Canada's human rights laws are "putting ideology and good intentions before sound and valid policy" because they protects Canadians like me and my children from discrimination fall under your policy?

Would an event proposing that the laws protecting immigrant or other Canadians from special treatment by police harms Canadians because those people are inherently dangerous also be allowed to proceed?

I wonder, as an observer who appreciates your anti-discrimination and anti-hatred measures, how your actions will play out in the light of your anti-discrimination policy which sets out the conduct of people INSIDE your facilities:

torontopubliclibrary.ca/content/about-…

"Members of the public, service recipients, visitors to and users of Library facilities/public space and individuals conducting business with, for or with support from the Library, are expected to adhere to this Policy."

I wonder what your policy means, specifically, in this sentence:

"Every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to Library services and facilities, without discrimination or harassment"

Does "every person" include library users Ms. Murphy targets in her talks?

Do you believe that discrimination include providing your facility for use by groups or persons targeting them when people targeting OTHERS would not be allowed to rent the facility?

For example, have you rented to supremacists targeting other groups?

If not, why this supremacist, targeting this group?

What is the difference?

If you are being inconsistent when it comes to who you protect from persons or groups urging explicitly-prohibited discrimination, why?

I also wonder about this policy:

Rules Of Conduct:
torontopubliclibrary.ca/terms-of-use/l…

These rules include the statement that "#Discrimination and/or #harassment will not be tolerated under any circumstances."

Does that include the statement "the principles of gender identity often, in practice, reinforce sexism and undermine women's rights"?

if not, why not?

Is it because saying

"the principles of religious identity often, in practice, reinforce sexism and undermine women's rights"

Is it equally true and welcome to say the two at Toronto Public Library?

Also, is it discriminatory to argue that the legal protection of the basis of how 150,000 Canadians identify is a betrayal of principles?

"the reification of gender is a betrayal of long-held leftist and feminist principles".

Is "reification" at all a charged term?

"Reification" is the pretending that something immaterial is in fact real, say wiser people than me. Is it not discriminatory to claim as if it was a fact that gender is somehow less real than a core belief?

Below is the link and an excerpt of Section 4.4 (Denial of Use) of your policy governing space rentals:

torontopubliclibrary.ca/terms-of-use/l…

Conditions of use exclude rental "for a purpose that is likely to promote, or would have the effect of promoting discrimination, contempt or hatred for any group or person on the basis of...gender identity, gender expression...or any other similar factor"

Considering Meghan Murphy's trans-antagonistic conduct has seen her banned from social media, and considering she has publicly stated she refuses to accept that trans women are anything but men, do you expect to be hosting an event in which she adheres to your policies?

As you ask yourselves whether Ms Murphy has indeed rented your facility for the purpose of denying the validity of the fact that persons like me are who we say we are and for the purpose of encouraging others to ignore this fact, I urge you to consider her 100% track record.

If a municipality chooses not to protect people from ONE explicitly-prohibited grounds of discrimination, how does this impact its credibility and ability to protect people from the OTHER prohibited grounds of discrimination?

Also, this:

https://twitter.com/RMComedy/status/1184243436397793281