I am a senior woman. Recently, a “man” claiming to be transgender, who had not yet begun physical treatments, was permitted by our local Y to use the women’s locker room. There are no secure change rooms. The person they allowed in was not courteous and stared at me while I struggled out of a wet bathing suit. He was naked, had an erection and playfully asked ‘do you come here often?’ I understand that gender is no longer judged solely by genitalia, but does a brief contact with the duty manager mean that men not yet committed to gender reassignment are free to disrobe anywhere they choose?
This behavior is precisely the kind of behavior overbroad gender identity laws sanction (see, e.g., the Evergreen College debacle). Ontario’s law is overbroad in this regard, and permits a man who “says he’s a woman” in sex-segregated spaces.
Gallinger responded that “From a human rights perspective, a transgender woman is a woman, full stop.”
He then goes on to say “I don’t know, obviously, whether the person you encountered was truly trans, or merely a poseur getting his kicks; the physical evidence makes me suspect the latter. In any event, this person’s behaviour was unacceptable and, arguably, illegal.”
Gallinger fails to realize that the law DOES NOT ACCOUNT for poseurs. that is, the law protects Men “getting their kicks.” Indeed, almost all gender identity laws protect Men “getting their kicks.”
If Gallinger were truly “ethical,” he would point out the glaring injustice of expecting Women to discern between the “friendly transwoman” and the poseur getting his kicks. He would not lecture Women that a Man playing with his dick is “a woman, full stop.”
We also wait for Trans Activists to “collect” Gallinger for questioning who is “truly trans.”