15
2012Human Rights
The government of Ontario has become the first jurisdiction in North America to add gender identity and gender expression to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination under its Human Rights Code.
Woo! hoo!
But, while I am ecstatic to be protected from discrimination, I cannot escape a nagging feeling of dread.
I am generally wary of the abuse of power by the unelected officials of Human Rights Commissions, who have repeatedly shown – at least in this country – an inclination to overstep their mandate and meddle in the freedoms of people to disagree or express opinions they don’t like, without regard for balance or reasonableness.
I guess I am hoping that these new protections are not abused, either by the Commission or by claimants.
It will be up to some unseen bureaucrat to determine what “gender expression” means. Will it cover someone who likes to crossdress occasionally at work? How about men, or MTF trans, in 6-inch platform heels and micro-miniskirts? Will it allow businesses to impose any kind of dress-code on trans people, or require that they conform to the expectations of the gender they are presenting? Will it allow a business to ask that a person choose one gender or the other?
Applying these protections with some sort of sanity and balance with the needs of work and business decorum would be wonderful.
But, to me there’s a danger here.
As the HRC has shown a tendency to go all the way rather than take a balanced approach to its mandate, a very positive piece of legislation may turn into a mockery rather than a shining example of the protections we seek.
One example: I would be happy to see the same expectations for grooming and attire applied to an MTF trans-person as to women generally. To allow the trans-woman to come to work in wholly inappropriate female attire and successfully claim that this is the way she expresses her gender would undermine the serious and important aims of the new law.
That would be a huge setback. Other jurisdictions would take note.
Let’s hope these badly needed protections are applied judiciously…
Ashley
Dress codes should remain legal provided they are non-discriminatory in nature. It would be in-appropriate, for example, to prohibit ethnically identifiable clothing unless there was an employee safety concern. In my company, women, and this includes transwomen, are not allowed to wear open toed shoes, jewelry, makeup or skirts in the factory. In the office environment, it is perfectly acceptable for women (or men) to wear skirts to work. (Not many men do but I’ve seen more than one in a Utilikilt).
So the upshot will likely be that T-gals will be expected to wear the same as women generally. Whether many non-transitioners will start wearing their skirts and dresses will remain to be seen. Probably not as a general rule even though I think a lot of men would enjoy the comfort of a sundress in summer.
shantown
Amen to the sundress! 🙂