I spent a good part of this past fall hammering the woke wonders of the Canadian North in British Columbia over the unfolding disaster that is the First Nations' land grab. It seems as if you'd have a hard time finding a square acre that some now-entitled and equally militant Indian tribe (or coalitions of tribes) aren't salivating over and trying to lay what's known as 'aboriginal title' claims to.
They are encouraged by the uber-woke British Columbian premier (a white-guilt-wracked virtue-signaler named David Eby), the BC courts, who routinely find in their favor, and a confusing, non-standard system of treaties between either the Crown or territory in question and the various indigenous peoples at the time that go back a couple of hundred years in some cases.
It makes for a huge mess, and no one, but no one, is on the side of the folks who might have owned their homestead since either the turn of the century or the young couple who managed to purchase a home three years ago and never missed a tax payment.
Tough luck if a tribe wants your crib in B.C. - they are literally swallowing up whole towns in court-sanctioned gulps.
The First Nations, with Premier Eby's help, have also started actively blocking the construction of oil pipelines from neighboring Alberta, which is landlocked and needs access to BC ports to export its liquid gold.
The final cherry on the BC progressive parade, I thought, was in mid-February. A Royal Canadian Mounted Police officer stated he was using the 'preferred pronouns' of a deceased and murderous transgender garbed in a dress who'd gone on a homicidal rampage through a tiny, Northeastern school after first killing his stepbrother and mother at home.
Guy shoots his 11 year old brother in the head (and dozens others) for nothing and the Canadian Police are determined to make sure his "pronouns" are respected. Open air asylum. https://t.co/S3yNQ6e2sd
— captive dreamer (@captive_dreamer) February 11, 2026
A local paper used a beauty filter on the dead perp's picture to gussie him up.
Like, WHUT even is that?
But I missed it a week later when dear David found this BC abomination:
It is illegal to say that there are only two sexes, and that indoctrinating children to believe otherwise is dangerous.
How illegal? Well, at least in British Columbia, it can bankrupt you.
He wasn't exaggerating in the least. The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal (you already know there's trouble when it's a name like that) fined a BC teacher $750,000 for insisting there were but two sexes.
A TEACHER
British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal:
— Michael Shermer (@michaelshermer) February 23, 2026
How many fingers am I holding up?
It looks like four fingers, but the politically correct answer is five fingers.
Say it and it will be so.
Everyone until 2015 believed there are 2 sexes.
The state says there are more.
What is the truth? https://t.co/h4o5KgTD3Q
Why did I find it now? Well, there's a funny story - actually, a comedian and his theatrical tour are the reason.
A piece I was putting into the headline had me scratching my head, wondering how I'd missed something so egregious when even John Cleese knew about it. And was canceling part of his upcoming Canadian tour due to it.
He's not willing to risk offending the lunatics. And lunatics, they are. Do soak up the argle-bargle sop in the decision quoted in the article below.
Is It Still Legal To Criticize Gender Ideology in Canada?
British comedian John Cleese of Monty Python fame has announced on X that he will not risk performing in British Columbia during his upcoming theatrical tour of Canada this fall after the BC Human Rights Tribunal ordered a former school trustee to pay one of the largest hate speech fines in history for his public opposition to gender ideology and stating that there are only two sexes.
Seventy-eight-year-old Barry Neufeld was fined $750,000 by the tribunal, claiming that at least 24 of his “publications” constituted “hate speech” and “discrimination.” Defenders of the ruling are insisting that Neufeld crossed clear lines, but the basis of the ruling is that denying the premises of gender ideology—a phrase that the tribunal specifically cites as hateful—cannot be permitted in Canadian public life.
“If a person elects not to ‘believe’ that gender identity is separate from sex assigned at birth, then they do not ‘believe’ in transpeople. This is a form of existential denial,” the tribunal stated. “A person does not need to believe in Christianity to accept that another person is Christian. However, to accept that a person is transgender, one must accept that their gender identity is different than their sex assigned at birth.”
The tribunal further noted that calling gender ideology an ideology is, itself, crossing a legal line. “But behind this insidious veneer is the proposition that transness is not real,” the tribunal opined. “Such phrasing can make it easier to ignore that trans people are human beings. Referring to ‘gender ideology’ or ‘transgenderism’—‘-ism’ denoting a belief or ideology such as capitalism or communism—pushes the idea that trans people have an agenda rather than being just another demographic group.”
YOU MUST BELIEVE IN TRANS PEOPLE...OR ELSE
Now that I've discovered this anti-science, dystopian gem, what I'm finding about it is even more horrible.
They've taken a page out of the British book...or maybe the British have used theirs, no?
Your social media posts on gender and the 'ideology,' which this court has determined to be criminal to call an 'ideology,' are all fair game for investigation, prosecution, and fines.
Did you know that the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal now has the power to find you guilty of discrimination for comments you may have made here on X?
— goinglikeelsie #KPSS (@goinglikeelsie) February 22, 2026
In a previous ruling in the Chilliwack Teachers v. Neufeld BCHRT case (that I have not seen discussed but will…
...In a previous ruling in the Chilliwack Teachers v. Neufeld BCHRT case (that I have not seen discussed but will hopefully be put forward for judicial review) the BCHRT ruled that Section 7 of the B.C. Human Rights Code applies to comments made on the internet.
This is despite the fact that for all of its previous history, all the way back to 1973, the BCHRT and its predecessor has ruled that Section 7 of the B.C. Human Rights code did not apply to the internet as it was an aspect of telecommunications regulated by Federal government and so under the Federal government’s exclusive constitutional purview.
In doing so the BCHRT, in a massive power grab, has usurped the constitutional power of the Federal government and given itself the power to regulate and judge as discriminatory or not, the online comments of all British Columbians!
I finding this both outrageous and chilling!
As one commenter said, this is basically the imposition of a state religion through tribunal.
🚨 Canadian woman fined $10K for privately warning female friend against transgender top surgery
— Pro-life Canadian Man (@PeteBaklinski) April 3, 2025
The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal imposed a $10,000 penalty on Kirstin Olsen for warning her female friend in a private conversation against getting transgender top… pic.twitter.com/PB80xNgZLG
The transgender friend filed a discrimination complaint.
Shockingly, the Tribunal ruled that Kirstin Olsen's comments expressing concern about the decision of her friend to get a mastectomy were discriminatory. For “injury to dignity,” the Tribunal ordered Olsen to pay her trans "friend" $10,000.
Thankfully, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms is stepping in to appeal the decision.
“It is very concerning to see a government tribunal policing private communications between friends, and imposing a $10,000 penalty, without giving any heed to the fact that Canada’s Charter guarantees freedom of expression,” stated constitutional lawyer Marty Moore. "The BC Human Rights Tribunal should focus on combatting genuine cases of discrimination rather than policing speech.”
What does it matter if it's unconstitutional when you're too broke to take the fight to the British Columbia Courts, which work cheek by jowl with the tribunal in any event?
Besides gender, the BCHRT has determined that one can also 'self-identify' by race.
The Assistant Professor of Philosophy at SFU must self-identify as black.
— Billboard Chris 🌎 (@BillboardChris) March 1, 2026
This is pursuant to section 42(3) of the British Columbia Human Rights Code.
Our Human Rights Code is racist. pic.twitter.com/41O1N7rPXR
This is really something else.
Rachel Dolezal and Talcum X should have decamped to BC. They'd be tenured professors by now with bulletproof career tracks.
There are still brave Canadians marching into the lions' den, though. A nurse filed two complaints last fall and is taking her pile of fines for gender discrimination to the BCHRT. She's stoic about her chances but says publicizing the tribunal's rampant constitutional abuses is her main goal.
Amy Hamm: The zealotry of the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal must be exposed
Appalling $750,000 ruling was motivated entirely by ideology
It’s clear, after former Chilliwack school trustee Barry Neufeld was ordered by the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal (BCHRT) to pay $750,000 to LGBTQ teachers in the district, that I do not have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning my own complaints, for discrimination on the basis of political belief, at the same tribunal. The two complaints I lodged at the BCHRT in 2025 have yet to be reviewed or accepted. With lawyer Lisa Bildy, and the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, we hope to obtain a ruling that would discourage discrimination based on gender critical political beliefs. (Like Neufeld, I’ve been slapped with outrageous costs for stating biological facts.) I’ll take my fight (against the B.C. College of Nurses and Midwives and Vancouver Coastal Health Authority) into that den of woke zealots, regardless. They need all the exposure they can get.
...At the root of Neufeld’s supposed heresy is his insistence that biological sex is real and immutable. The BCHRT has proclaimed that anyone who dares to say this aloud, as Neufeld and me both have, is spewing discriminatory hate speech that can “erase” the existence of transgender-identified persons. (Never mind the BCHRT’s contradictory assertion, written in their latest ruling, that Neufeld was simultaneously guilty of erasing trans existence and weaponizing trans persons’ “very existence (as) a threat to children, families, and social order.” How can both be true?)
The BC Human Rights Commission wants everyone to know they're not messing around.
ALL YOUR THOUGHTS ARE BELONG TO US
...BC Human Rights Commissioner Kasari Govender immediately put all elected officials on notice. “The decision is significant for ensuring that human rights laws apply to political and public statements from our elected officials and affirming that trans people are entitled to have their identities recognized and rights respected,” Govender said. The message is clear: Comply, or we may bankrupt you. Just look at what happened to Barry Neufeld.
Ah, the exhilarating sense of ultimate power and what it doesn't do to those with teeny, tiny tyrant genes just waiting for the 'go' signal.
