The author is a professor of literature in Montreal, contributor to the journal Argument and essayist. He notably published These words that think for us (Liber, 2017) and Why do our children leave school ignorant? (Boreal, 2008).
The CAQ government, and particularly Minister Suzanne Roy, is criticized for having set up a committee of wise people on gender identity without it including trans or non-binary people in its ranks.
Several commentators spoke of an absurd decision, or even a farce, Yasmine Abdelfadel, in particular, who began her editorial in Montré’s Journalal with this apparently common-sense remark: “Imagine for a moment the absurdity: a Council on the Status of Women without a single woman. »
For their part, organizations defending the interests of trans and non-binary people, through the voice of James Galantino, general director of the Conseil québécois LGBT, also complained, in the pages of Dutynot only of the composition, but also of the creation of this committee, which they “did not want” and which was going to monopolize “resources which could have been used to fill “more urgent needs””.
“They are going to put $800,000 into this committee,” said Mr. Galantino, “while we, the groups, are suffering from underfunding, we are having trouble improving our services, there is exhaustion. So, it’s definitely a tough pill to swallow. »
These arguments put forward by one or the other seem at first glance convincing, but, in reality, they miss the objectives of this committee of wise men and the motives which led to its creation.
Indeed, the Council for the Status of Women, with which Mme Abdelfadel compared it, is “a government study and consultation body on matters of equality between women and men” whose mission is to advise “the government of Quebec on any subject related to equality, with the aim of of social justice” in order to contribute “to government action to achieve a more equitable and egalitarian society”. As for the groups that constitute the Quebec LGBT Council, their mission is obviously to support these sexual or gender minorities and to look after their interests.
A different mandate
The mandate given to the committee of elders on gender identity is completely different. For him, it is mainly a question of “taking stock of public policies and practices” in terms of gender identity, of “analyzing their potential effects on the whole of Quebec society” and of “comparing” these policies with those “implemented within states comparable to Quebec”.
It is therefore not a question here of “equality consultation”, nor of defending the interests of trans or non-binary people, but of thinking about the impact that certain of their demands can have on the whole of the society.
However, it seems obvious to me that beyond the question of individual rights and equality, these new gender identities and some of the demands associated with them raise a multitude of questions that concern us all. Let us mention a few of them. What happens to equality between women and men or non-mixing if it is possible to change gender while retaining all or part of the biological attributes of the original sex? As we know, the question arises particularly in the sporting field. But it also has repercussions in schools, women’s shelters, prisons, etc.
Should we teach in science classes or in medical faculties that the objective distinction between the two sexes is less important than the gender chosen by individuals? This undoubtedly involves reconsidering from a new perspective, both scientifically and philosophically, the relationships between the body and the mind. Still in the medical field, should we authorize, including for minors, heavy medical treatments of gender “reassignment” (taking hormones or ablations) whose effects are often irreversible? Is it necessary to review our language, and therefore both its use and its teaching, by adding new pronouns, new agreements, etc.? ?
These are just some of the questions that the members of the committee will have to consider, and, from this point of view, it seems fully justified to find among them a former president of the Council on the Status of Women, a member of the medical profession having was deputy director of the College of Physicians and an eminent jurist, professor whose specialties are constitutional law and rights and freedoms.
If we indeed want to find a precedent in this committee, the one that immediately comes to mind is the Bouchard-Taylor commission on reasonable accommodation. There was also a question of reflecting on the collective issues raised by this controversial practice and it was logical on the part of the Charest government to appoint at its head two commissioners who were two great intellectuals both known and respected, rather than a Hasidic Jew. and a veiled Muslim, whose impartiality would have risked being immediately called into question by at least part of public opinion.