Man Charged In Murder Of January Lapuz

Many of us in the US see Canada--and Vancouver in particular--as a safe, tolerant haven. After all, it was the first country outside of Europe to legalize same-sex marriage, and Toronto and Vancouver are reputed to be among the world's more trans-friendly cities.

Even in those places, though, trans people are apparently not immune to violence and worse.  On 30 September, January Lapuz was found stabbed in her New Westminster, BC home.  She later died in the hospital.   Now a 20-year-old man has been charged in her slaying.

If it's not disturbing enough that the social coordinator of Sher Vancouver (a South Asian gay, lesbian and transgender group) was murdered in metropolitan Vancouver, it would come as another shock to most people to realize that the arrest in her case represents more police work than is done in most other places on most other cases of murdered transgender (or otherwise gender non-conforming) people.   

Sher Vancouver founder Alex Sangha correctly sees Ms. Lapuz's murder, and that of other trans women, as part of an even larger problem.  "There's violence against women, period," he explained.  "[A]nd, if you're different, you're even more vulnerable."

Perhaps that is one reason why there were people who sought to minimize this tragedy.  Although British Columbia isn't Brazil, there is still enough ingrained misogyny that some people sought to, in essence, blame Ms. Lapuz for her stabbing.   When some of the local media reported that she'd been a prostitute, one commenter even said, of her murder, that he was "relieved" for his family.  "I don't have room in my heart to love a gangsters (sic), or a crackhead or an alleged hooker," he explained.

Even if she had been a "hooker", how in the world could he compare her to a gangster, or even a crackhead?  One reason why a larger percentage of trans people than other kinds of people are involved in sex work is that too many of us have no other way to make a living.  Even in a relatively trans-friendly city like San Francisco, in the relatively good economy of 2005, it was estimated that half of all trans people didn't have legitimate paid work.  Much of that, of course, has to do with discrimination.  But many other trans folk--especially the young ones--were bullied out of their schools or kicked out of their homes.  They have no credentials and, too often, lack skills because they've missed so much school and have had chaotic home lives.   So few, if any, legal jobs are available to them.

Even in the unlikely event that she became a prostitute by choice, it is no reason to dismiss the tragedy of January Lapuz's death.  If any other woman--someone's mother, wife, daughter, sister, niece or friend--had been stabbed to death, someone would, rightfully, mourn her.  Ms. Lapuz deserves no less.

Brazil's Transgender Beauty Pageant

A few days ago, I wrote about the murder of a Brazilian transgender woman who went by the name Madona, and how it is just one example of the endemic violence against trans women--and women generally--in that country.

On the other hand, the country's health-care system provides free gender-reassignment surgery, with this caveat:  Those approved for surgery have to be approved by clinicians who, basically, have the same notions about gender, sexuality and transsexualism that their American counterparts abandoned at least twenty years ago.

And, as I mentioned, only a few legal occupations are open to trans people.  Those jobs pay so poorly (if they pay at all) that many trans people in them double as prostitutes--or sex work becomes part of their unwritten job descriptions.

So, in this environment of paradoxes about gender and sexuality, is it a surprise that Brazil has just hosted its first transgender beauty pageant?

On its face, it seems like a positive step for trans people.  Most of the more "progressive" countries on gender issues have not hosted such an event.  Some would argue that hosting the event could be a sign that at least some segments of Brazilian society are willing to accord respect and dignity to trans people.  Others might see it simply as an expression of a culture in which, perhaps more than in any other, physical beauty is celebrated.

But the contest could also be seen as a sign of segregation.  After all, in May, Jenna Talackova became one of the twelve finalists in the Miss Universe Canada Pageant.  Her victory did not come without a fight: Pageant organizers challenged her right to be in the competition although there was no written rule forbidding her entry.

Now, I've never been to Brazil.  I suspect, though, that if I were going to leave the US, I'd rather live in Canada than in Brazil (or most other places). I'd probably feel even more strongly about that if I were still transitioning, or if I were planning on getting married to another woman.

Having said that, I am glad that Brazil held a transgender beauty pageant.  It's one of the best things they could do at this point in their history.  Of course, if and when things change, the pageant may be unnecessary.  Then again, I think beauty pageants in general are obsolete institutions if, in fact, they ever had any meaning.

Potty Mouth In Calgary

It's always about the bathrooms.

At least, it is whenever someone wants to oppose equal rights for transgender people.

That's exactly what's happening now in Canada, the country that beat its southern neighbor in legalizing same-sex marriage.

MP (Member of Parliament) Rob Anders of Calgary is calling on his fellow Canadiens and Canadiennes to oppose Bill C-279, which would recognize gender identity and expression in the hate crimes section of Canada's Criminal Code. It also would offer protection to gender-variant individuals protection under the Canada Human Rights Act.

Anders and other opponents of C-279 have dubbed it the "Bathroom Bill."  (Original, isn't he?)  In a petition on his website, Anders claims that the bill's aim "is to give transgendered men access to women's public washroom facilities."

Anders' colleague in the Canadian Parliament, Randall Garrison, said that Anders' petition shows a basic misunderstanding of the bill's concepts.  "He obviously missed the fact that similar provisions have been adopted in [the Northwest Territories], Manitoba and Ontario, with none of the absurd consequences he fears," Garrison wrote in a statement.  "At best, Mr. Anders failed to do his homework."

Let's hope that Anders is merely a poor researcher or simply read the bill in a rush.  Otherwise, he is, as Garrison says, "deliberately promoting prejudice against transsexual and transgender Canadians by equating them with sex offenders and paedophiles."

Given Anders' history, he may well be exploiting stereotypes.  Or, he may simply be a "shoot from the lip" type of person.  Recently, he claimed that current New Democratic Party leader Thomas Mulcair deliberately hastened the death of his predecessor, Jack Layton. 

Perhaps he's so obseesed with what happens (or, more precisely, doesn't happen) in bathrooms because he spends so much time in them. What comes out of his mouth may be evidence of that.

What Is Denis Davila Afraid Of?

Would you let Jenna Talackova compete in your beauty contest?

If not, what are you afraid of?


I'd like to ask the latter question of Denis Davila, the National Director of Miss Universe Canada.  He claimed that only "natural born" women are qualified to compete in the pageant.  


However, Maria Keisling, the Director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, claims that she read the rules and couldn't find any prohibition against transgenders.  "It seems that they made (the rules) up on the fly to disqualify her," she explained.


In defending the ban on Talackova, Davila said, "Just because she can't compete doesn't mean we stopped loving her."

When Pierre Is Allowed To Become Pauline But Can't Go Home

Imagine that you've just won the right to do something about which you've always dreamed--in this case, serving in the Armed Forces of your country.

Now, having become a soldier, sailor or member of your country's air force, imagine that you can't fly home to visit your family.

That is exactly the situation faced by transgender people in a Western country that's among the world's most respected, at least when it comest to human rights and general civility.

That country would be Canada.  Yes, the same country that had gay marriage before its powerful neighbor to the south.  Said neighbor still has it in only a few states, while the entirety of Canada--the second-largest nation on the planet--has it.

And Canada not only allows LGBT people to serve in its armed forces, it also allows members of the military who are making gender transition to wear the uniform of their "destination" gender.  So, if Pierre is in the process of becoming Pauline, he can wear Pauline's uniform even if he hasn't yet had surgery.

As far as I know, no other country has such a policy.   In the United States, transgenders still can't serve, at least not openly, in the military.  If they have been diagnosed with Gender Identity Disorder or have begun to transition, they can't join; if, once they're in, they visibly transition or reveal their identities, they can't stay.

Yet the same country that has no problem with transgenders serving in its armed forces has a policy that is, if unintentionally, as discriminatory against transgenders as anything its southern neighbor, and any number of other countries, have.

In July of 2011, Transport Canada instituted a rule stating that a passenger could be barred from boarding a plane if he or she doesn't appear to be the gender indicated on his or her passport.

Just for its sheer subjectivity alone, it's a terrible policy.  There are plenty of masculine-looking women and feminine-looking men, most of whom never thought about transitioning.  If this law can wreak havoc with them, imagine what it can do for any number of transgender people-- such as those who, for various reasons, never have the surgery or wait many years for it.

The argument made for this law--and the policies the US and other countries have regarding gender identity indicated on passports--goes something like this:  "Well, some suicide bomber might disguise pretend to be a woman to get on a plane." 

It's a silly--not to mention offensive--argument for any number of reasons.  First of all, suicide bombers, and terrorists generally, aren't people who try to "fly under the radar."  They are driven by some sort of rage or resentment, or out of  fervent (if twisted) political or religious beliefs that matter more to them than their own lives.  People who are about to blow themselves up for the sake of killing a bunch of other people aren't much concenred about whether or not they'll be found out.  If anything, they want to be known for committing the terrible deeds they plan to do.

Someone who is simply insane (which, according to some people, includes the would-be terrorists I've just mentioned) also isn't going to trouble him or herself with concealing his or her identity or carrying a false passport.

Also, consider the fact that someone who really wants to commit a terrible crime on a plane has to, well, get on the plane.  If he's carrying a false passport and is caught, that won't happen.  Most likely, he'll be arrested.  And, if he is caught wearing a dress and carrying a female passport that isn't his, he'll probably get the shit beaten out of him in the airport parking garage.

Now tell me, what self-respecting suicide bomber would do that?

I remember that when I first tried to get a new passport that indicated me as female,  the State Department gave, essentially, the reasons I just mentioned for denying me (as well as others in my situation).  Yet, one State Department representative with whom I spoke said that, to his knowledge, no terrorist had ever committed his or her deeds while presenting him or herself as a member of the other gender. 

Even one who could "pass" as a member of the other side is unlikely to represent him or herself as one in order to gain access to something and blow it up.  Even such people would have to spend a lot of time and money (As far as I know, Al Queda and Hamaz aren't paying for hormones or GRS.) to be a convincing member of the gender they were trying to represent.  And, if you're a male-to-female, the hormones rob you of a good part of your physical strength and quickness--not to mention that it's easier to do the sorts of things terrorists do in most men's than in most women's clothing!

So, what would-be terrorists Transport Canada expects to stop with such a policy is beyond me.  And, given the other laws Canada has, I rather doubt they were trying to exclude transgender people from boarding planes.  So what, exactly is the rationale for such a law?

Fortunately, there is a movement to repeal it.  I trust Canadians to have the good sense, and good will, to do so.  Hopefully, lawmakers in my country will start looking north for their cues.