The Guerrilla Angel Report by Lexie Cannes
Rational thinking (with humor) from Lexie Cannes.
Is the updated Canadian Aeronautics Act excluding some transgender people from flying?
January 30, 2012 • 3:22 AM
http://lexiecannes.wordpress.com/2012/01/30/is-the-updated-canadian-aeronautics-act-excluding-some-transgender-people-from-flying/ (http://lexiecannes.wordpress.com/2012/01/30/is-the-updated-canadian-aeronautics-act-excluding-some-transgender-people-from-flying/)
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flexiecannes.files.wordpress.com%2F2012%2F01%2Fcanada170.jpg%3Fw%3D150%26amp%3Bh%3D112&hash=4227c32ba8d00693a113d3eebacff4692994d4cb)
Updated Canadian air regs appear to prevent pre-op and transiting trans from boarding planes.
THE GUERRILLA ANGEL REPORT — Admittedly, I've spent hours trying to google some sense into this without finding satisfying results. It is clear, however, that a look at the updated Aeronautics Act regs at the Canadian Department of Justice website raises a few eyebrows, particularly this one:
"Sec 5.2(1)(c) of the ID screening regs of Aeronautics Act: "An air carrier shall not t
ransport a passenger if the passenger does not appear to be of the gender indicated on the identification he or she presents."
Regulation in question...
Department of Justice
www.justice.gc.ca (http://www.justice.gc.ca)
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2007-82/FullText.html (http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2007-82/FullText.html)
Identity Screening Regulations
SOR/2007-82
AERONAUTICS ACT
Registration 2007-04-26
Identity Screening Regulations
P.C. 2007-602 2007-04-26
Her Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, pursuant to sections 4.71a and 4.9b of the Aeronautics Act, hereby makes the annexed Identity Screening Regulations.
aS.C. 2004, c. 15, s. 5
bS.C. 1992, c. 4, s. 7
Boarding Gate
5.2 (1) An air carrier shall not transport a passenger if(c) the passenger does not appear to be of the gender indicated on the identification he or she presents;
Retrieved from the Internet on January 30, 2012 by SJ
Oh my God that's so terrible...
http://chrismilloy.ca/2012/01/transgender-people-are-completely-banned-from-boarding-airplanes-in-canada/ (http://chrismilloy.ca/2012/01/transgender-people-are-completely-banned-from-boarding-airplanes-in-canada/)
Identity Screening Regulations are a set of rules implemented unilaterally by the Ministry of Transportation, as part of Canada's so-called Passenger Protect:
5.2 (1) An air carrier shall not transport a passenger if ...
(c) the passenger does not appear to be of the gender indicated on the identification he or she presents;
Hmmm, interesting that. Stop people in disguise? Don't think so. Presumably you can wear a false beard on a plane? Wonder what the logic, if any, is behind it?
What do they mean by not appear to be the gender? Are they going to look in our underwear? Do a genetic check? The more you think, the sillier this gets. So two people get on a plane, both wearing a T and jeans, security stop and say one of you cannot get on the plane because your outfit doesn't fit your gender. Now one is male and one is female, who is stopped? Both are female, who is stopped? Both are male, who is stopped? On is an MtF and the other an FtM, who is stopped? (I'm not gender dis-identifying here, it is an example of the issue).
Then we can start on ethnic groups. Scotsmen generally have a short fuse when they are told they are wearing a skirt.
An aside, the only time I checked what a Scotsman had under his kilt, I had my hand under his kilt and I said 'That's gruesome' He replied 'Aye Lassie, keep holding and it'll gruesome more'
Sorry :embarrassed:
But this 'law' seems to be totally unworkable and plain silly.
Cindy
This is really silly. It took about 15 seconds to check the link provided for the regulation in its proper context.
Note that just a paragraph below the regulation cited is this:
5.2 ... an air carrier may transport a passenger who presents a piece of photo identification but does not resemble the photograph if (2) (a) the passenger's appearance changed for medical reasons after the photograph was taken and the passenger presents the air carrier with a document signed by a health care professional and attesting to that fact;
The idea of the regulation is to prevent someone from using a faked identification. ::)
"Please post responsibly"
Much ado about nothing!
See HERE (https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,114847.msg879142/boardseen.html#new) for the original post on the subject.
Quote from: Jamie D on January 31, 2012, 01:57:12 AM
This is really silly. It took about 15 seconds to check the link provided for the regulation in its proper context.
Note that just a paragraph below the regulation cited is this:
5.2 ... an air carrier may transport a passenger who presents a piece of photo identification but does not resemble the photograph if (2) (a) the passenger's appearance changed for medical reasons after the photograph was taken and the passenger presents the air carrier with a document signed by a health care professional and attesting to that fact;
The idea of the regulation is to prevent someone from using a faked identification. ::)
"Please post responsibly"
Touche' my dear Jamie D...but in real life not so simple. Yes to confirm that one is who they say they are, but we know that governmental agencies do not operate that "smoothly". So if you don't appear to be the gender that you say you are )according to your ID), then you can be denied access, not allowed to board, sounds like a recipe for trouble and befuddlement...
And yes I did post post responsibly ;)
Quote from: SandraJane on February 01, 2012, 08:37:56 AM
Touche' my dear Jamie D...but in real life not so simple. Yes to confirm that one is who they say they are, but we know that governmental agencies do not operate that "smoothly". So if you don't appear to be the gender that you say you are )according to your ID), then you can be denied access, not allowed to board, sounds like a recipe for trouble and befuddlement...
And yes I did post post responsibly ;)
SandraJane, what is the purpose of the regulation? The safety of the flying public. I don't like being subjected to an inquisition any more than the next person, but if I know that I will be the object of increased scrutiny, it would only be prudent to have documentation with me that supports my presentation.
Quote from: Jamie D on February 01, 2012, 12:55:47 PM
SandraJane, what is the purpose of the regulation? The safety of the flying public. I don't like being subjected to an inquisition any more than the next person, but if I know that I will be the object of increased scrutiny, it would only be prudent to have documentation with me that supports my presentation.
Yes, seems only logical one would do so, but why another regulation?
This would make it difficult, if not impossible for pre-op or transiting people to board planes. -Lexi Cannes
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs.huffpost.com%2Fimages%2Fv%2Flogos%2Fbpage%2Fgay-voices.gif%3F17&hash=dcf483caa702462483b7fcff3dfde11875e11cc5)
Canadian Air Travel Regulations Over Gender And Appearance Spark Concern Among Transgender Rights Advocates
First Posted: 01/31/2012 11:26 am Updated: 01/31/2012 4:43 pm
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/31/canadian-air-travel-regulations-transgender-passengers_n_1244222.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/31/canadian-air-travel-regulations-transgender-passengers_n_1244222.html)
(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.huffpost.com%2Fgen%2F483475%2Fthumbs%2Fr-CANADA-PASSPORT-large570.jpg&hash=8e5ce840c175bbc3094595370fca44d25e9afa73)
A number of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights advocates and media outlets are expressing concern over recent Canadian air travel regulations which they feel exclude transgender passengers from flights.
SandraJane, what is the purpose of the regulation? The safety of the flying public machines. Really, those things cost millions and millions apiece, and they can be used in turn to destroy billions of dollars of property. People? Really, who cares about people?
Quote from: Jamie D on February 01, 2012, 12:55:47 PM
SandraJane, what is the purpose of the regulation? The safety of the flying public. I don't like being subjected to an inquisition any more than the next person, but if I know that I will be the object of increased scrutiny, it would only be prudent to have documentation with me that supports my presentation.
Until last spring I had been living as a woman full time for years with zero medical intervention. There are PLENTY of transgendered people who don't go to doctors, they just deal with it. How exactly can someone have documentation that supports their presentation, or should they just "man up" for the flight? This is a total BS regulation.
Quote from: SandraJane on February 01, 2012, 04:14:04 PM
Yes, seems only logical one would do so, but why another regulation?
This would make it difficult, if not impossible for pre-op or transiting people to board planes. -Lexi Cannes
It seems to me that a pre-op or transitioning person would possess a therapist's letter (if they are following the protocols) that explains the process they are in. And of course, one could always travel in the presentation of the sex listed on their identification.
Quote from: tekla on February 01, 2012, 04:37:27 PM
SandraJane, what is the purpose of the regulation? The safety of the flying public machines. Really, those things cost millions and millions apiece, and they can be used in turn to destroy billions of dollars of property. People? Really, who cares about people?
I enjoy the cynicism, but the damage claims paid out to victims of terrorist air disasters usually exceeds the cost of property destroyed.
For instance, the damages assessed in the Lockerbie 747 bombing are well in excess of 500 million dollars. The price of a new 747? About 300 million dollars.
I don't think the costs of the 9-11 terroism, in lives destroyed and property damaged, have yet been realized.
Quote from: Stephe on February 01, 2012, 05:24:05 PM
Until last spring I had been living as a woman full time for years with zero medical intervention. There are PLENTY of transgendered people who don't go to doctors, they just deal with it. How exactly can someone have documentation that supports their presentation, or should they just "man up" for the flight? This is a total BS regulation.
Do you resemble the picture on your drivers license?
If, for medical reasons, a passenger's facial features do not correspond to the photo on his or her identification, the air carrier may authorize the passenger to board a plane if he or she provides a medical certificate relating to this.The problem arises when the person traveling does not look like the identification presented.
Quote from: Jamie D on February 02, 2012, 01:09:04 PM
Do you resemble the picture on your drivers license?
The problem arises when the person traveling does not look like the identification presented.
Well that isn't an issue, all my ID's have pictures of "Stephe" (basically like my avatar) given I'm full time and have that name on them. But my state ID has M even thought I appear to be F. If it's only if your picture doesn't match your appearance, then I agree that is a OK rule.
I wouldn't like if it was a "Well your picture matches you but the gender marker on your ID doesn't match your picture..."
Quote from: Stephe on February 02, 2012, 06:46:47 PM
Well that isn't an issue, all my ID's have pictures of "Stephe" (basically like my avatar) given I'm full time and have that name on them. But my state ID has M even thought I appear to be F. If it's only if your picture doesn't match your appearance, then I agree that is a OK rule.
I wouldn't like if it was a "Well your picture matches you but the gender marker on your ID doesn't match your picture..."
We are in agreement.
I don't believe the regulation is anti-trans by design, or by inference.
A law may not be put in place to fend or even interfere with a minority's freedom. But once it is in place it can be used for that. Legally. And it always seem far more difficult to revoke a bad law than it is to put it into place.
Quote from: Cindy James on February 03, 2012, 01:20:58 AM
A law may not be put in place to fend or even interfere with a minority's freedom. But once it is in place it can be used for that. Legally. And it always seem far more difficult to revoke a bad law than it is to put it into place.
The regulation acts on all persons equally. If you don't look like the person in the identification you offer, and if you don't have documentation with you explaining the variance, you don't fly.
The regulation acts on all people equally, the interpretation of the act by local officials does not. From my personal experiences and those of colleagues with extensive International travel, I can assure you that regulations are used by local officials in anyway they wish. Including once in Singapore being kept in a room at the airport, with security outside, for 48 hrs with my Syrian PhD student because 'he looked like a terrorist'. We had planned a 48 hr stop over to do some sight seeing after a conference trip.
It happens. And it will happen