Lecturer raised red flags, dodged vital questions

Opinion

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 27/03/2023 (927 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

As Canada’s longest operating LGBTTQ+ community centre, Rainbow Resource Centre knows centring community voices is essential for nurturing safe spaces where people can thrive. When individuals not from our communities speak to LGBTTQ+ issues in ways that might incite harm, it is even more imperative to speak plainly and to be accountable for one’s words and actions.

Each day, queer, transgender and gender-diverse people make decisions based on the information available to them in the public forum — we all have a responsibility to ensure that that information is accurate and reliable.

On March 3, Joanne Boucher, professor in the department of political science at the University of Winnipeg, spoke publicly about her research of the intersection of capitalism and transgender health and care. She spoke of her concerns about the profit-motives of gender-affirming care, something of which the community is already aware.

While, at times, Boucher presented her work as informed by the latest research, closer scrutiny of her language, attitudes and methodology suggests she may have less honourable intentions than simply the relaying of information.

Words such as “transgenderism” and “transsexualism” were featured in her promotional material and were peppered throughout the presentation, sounding an alarm for the LGBTTQ+ communities and their allies. These coded terms and ideas, curated to speak to those who oppose trans rights, raise questions about what Boucher was truly intending to accomplish.

In the weeks leading up to the lecture, our communities raised concerns that Boucher would be contributing to the rising harmful anti-trans rhetoric. However, in the end, what was most shocking was her lack of accountability.

Indeed, she remarked that “as an academic” she did not need to justify her reasoning for discussing the matter, account for her research methodologies, or even cite a credible source (the only source cited was a New York Times article, a weak academic source, and also the same paper that recently published an article supporting notoriously transphobic author J. K. Rowling).

After years of living in a society where false information permeates all our channels for reliable information, it is critical that sources are cited to ensure we may all make informed decisions about the “facts.”

Moreover, it is devastating and harmful to have a professor scoff at speaking with transgender and gender-diverse people in creating this presentation, when we know the best research comes from treating people as partners, not as objects to be investigated from afar.

Boucher seemed to overlook the countless studies available about the realities of queer, transgender and gender-diverse people, and their families, as they move through their health journeys. She could have emphasized how essential gender-affirming care, social networks, community support and correct information are for allowing people to authentically live a full, healthy life.

Throughout the question-and-answer portion of the lecture, Boucher emphasized that she was neutral on the topic and would not be sharing her opinions on the results of her research. Research without action is not sufficient; trans people deserve better.

At a time when anti-trans rhetoric has been on the rise, it is not enough to be neutral. The trans community needs support. It needs allies. It needs advocates.

Boucher’s presentation raises valid points: that more research should be done to understand gender-affirming care, even at the intersection of big pharma and capitalism; that research should be available to the LGBTTQ+ community, their allies and those who care for them; and that information should be shared publicly by people with the platform to reach wider audiences.

However, that research needs to be done mindfully. It needs to be balanced, ensuring the language is chosen carefully, the methodologies explained, the sources cited and made available and, most of all, the perspectives of the communities impacted by that research heard and included.

The trans and gender-diverse community, indeed all of us, deserve better.

Ashley Smith is director of advocacy for Rainbow Resource Centre.