The BC Human Rights Tribunal ruling: you need to understand what is actually being argued in paragraph 19.
Most people will focus on the headline and the money.
The more important issue is the logic. It appears to collapse the distinction between recognizing a person and affirming a contested theory of sex and gender.
deadwildroses.com/2026/02/22/par…
Most people will focus on the headline and the money.
The more important issue is the logic. It appears to collapse the distinction between recognizing a person and affirming a contested theory of sex and gender.
deadwildroses.com/2026/02/22/par…
@FSU_Canada @jonkay @ConceptualJames @MeghanEMurphy @Psychgirl211 @preta_6 @cawsbar @Women___Exist @JCCFCanada
What this article argues in one paragraph:
TL;DR: The BCHRT can punish discrimination without requiring Canadians to affirm a contested theory of sex and gender as the price of being considered non-discriminatory. Paragraph 19 matters because it blurs that line: it treats disagreement with a conceptual framework as “existential denial” of a person. That is a legal and civic problem, even for people who support anti-discrimination protections.
TL;DR: The BCHRT can punish discrimination without requiring Canadians to affirm a contested theory of sex and gender as the price of being considered non-discriminatory. Paragraph 19 matters because it blurs that line: it treats disagreement with a conceptual framework as “existential denial” of a person. That is a legal and civic problem, even for people who support anti-discrimination protections.
Typos gets me again - it is page 19, paragraph 55. 
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
