Dear Rechie: How do you define a woman?
- Gender Dissent
- Jun 8
- 5 min read
Updated: 11 minutes ago
By Concerned Canadian Women
An Open Letter to the New Canadian Federal Minister for Women and Gender Equality
A post-election message
Another four years.
Another cohort of pre-school children force-fed the gender pablum.
Another contingent of elementary and secondary school students drowned in the gender Kool-Aid.
Another cadre of university-degreed workers conditioned to be "gender-creative," "gender-expansive," and "gender-inclusive" while condemning and excluding those who refuse to comply.
An entire generation educated to understand that failure to recite that men can be women, or that girls can be boys, will result in social ostracization, familial breakdown, employment uncertainty and political suicide. To state the opposite may constitute a crime.
So, what’s next?
We’re battening down the hatches, fortifying our ranks and honing our tactics.
We will continue to assertively advocate for our sex-based rights.
We will ensure that our concerns are broadcast, that our efforts are recorded, and that our successes are celebrated.
And we will hold to account the decision makers who fail us—because they are failing society.
Our speaking points remain the same:
Women are adult human females
Transwomen are men / Transmen are women
Woman is not a costume
Children are never born in the wrong body
Puberty blockers are NOT reversible
"Gender-affirming care" is sex-denying harm
"Intersex" people are male or female with differences in sexual development
Keep Prisons Single Sex
Save Women’s Sports
Let Women Speak
I Stand with Amy Hamm
May 29, 2025
The Honourable Rechie Valdez
Canadian Federal Minister for Women and Gender Equality
Dear Ms. Valdez,
Congratulations on your recent appointment as Minister for Women and Gender Equality following the Canadian federal election on April 28, 2025.
I’m writing today to raise concerns about issues that affect women and children in Canada, and I am hoping that the government will consider listening to voices such as mine when Parliament reopens on May 26, 2025.
His Majesty King Charles III delivers the Speech from the Throne, May 27, 2025: “The government will always protect the rights and freedoms that the Charter guarantees for every Canadian.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nm47Olsx8s
In 2017, Federal Bill C-16 amended the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code by adding gender identity and gender expression as prohibited grounds for discrimination. Since then, most institutions in Canada have adopted gender ideology as an integral part of their operations.
Gender ideology is the belief that people can change sex, or that it is important to profess that people can change sex, in order to bring about other social justice objectives. It is now tacitly understood within media, education, health care, and the public sector in Canada, that declaration of belief in the tenets of gender ideology is a condition of ongoing employment.
The adoption of this doctrine was done largely under the argument that it is “kind” to tell people that they can change sex. Very little thought has been given as to whether this belief system might impact men and women differently. There is an active prohibition in most spheres against discussing this novel and under-analyzed belief system. Women who express reservations with the tenets of gender ideology are regularly told that they must be arguing from the position of bigots and fascists.
Under the neo-religion of Gender Ideology, day-to-day life for women has been unnecessarily complicated by the insistence that self-selecting men now require access to women’s bathrooms, change rooms, sports, refuges, prisons and dormitories, in order to affirm their gender identity. Of course, men have always found reasons to transgress women’s boundaries, but men are now backed up by a federal government that demands that women move over and make room in our spaces for any man with a gender claim.
Children in school boards across the country are regularly being told that gender nonconformity is a condition that requires medical interventions in order to allow individuals to better conform to sexist stereotypes. The Ottawa-Carleton District School Board (OCDSB), for example, undertakes to diagnose gender dysphoria in children and to refer them to the gender clinic at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario for medical treatments.
In 2021, the OCDSB committed to keeping secrets from parents when it socially transitions children at school.
Now in 2025, gender dysphoria remains a largely unknown ailment in the non-industrialized world, while its diagnosis and treatment has significantly escalated in the world’s wealthiest countries where the middle class lives largely online. However, even in wealthy, developed countries, such as the US and the UK, governments are starting to roll back some of the demands that this doctrine has imposed on public life.
The Cass Review in the UK has put an end to the use of hormonal interventions on gender-nonconforming youth, and the recent decision by the Scottish Supreme Court clarified that the 2010 Equality Act never actually authorized men to access women’s spaces on the basis of “identity”. This Supreme Court decision now applies to the whole of the UK, where women have won back the right to have their own spaces that exclude all men.
The American Health and Human Services Department has just published their Comprehensive Review of Medical Interventions for Children and Adolescents with Gender Dysphoria. This review arrives at the same conclusion that the Cass Review did, namely, that there was never any evidence that puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgeries improve health outcomes for children and youth experiencing gender dysphoria.
An Executive Order issued in the U.S. on February 5, 2025, also announced that any institutions that receive federal funding must now exclude males from female sports categories.
Some of these announcements will come as a surprise to Canadian politicians who have been adhering to the gender activist demands of No Debate on this topic. As the rest of the world moves on to policies that protect women’s spaces in public life and ensure that children are not subject to unproven medical experiments, Canada remains stuck in an ideology that peaked in 2020 and is steadily receding.
Many Canadian women refuse to comply with the demand that we accept men in our spaces with docility and good grace. Among other organizations, we have Canadian Women’s Sex-Based Rights that formed in 2019 to examine and resist the demands imposed on women through Bill C-16. Anyone who is new to the field of women’s sex-based rights will find caWsbar.ca a great place to start learning.
There is an enormous constituency of women in Canada who would not only like our spaces back but would like the freedom to talk about women’s experiences without having to constantly include and centre men. In your position as Minister of Women and Gender Equality, I hope you will give some thought to allowing these voices some space in Parliament, even if those voices challenge the voices of men.
As we await the day that the regressive, ill-thought-through legislation known as Bill C-16 is rescinded, many Canadian women are happy to meet with our political candidates to provide the women’s perspective, so wholly lacking when this legislation was passed ten years ago.
I remain entirely at your disposal should you require any further information.
Janet Mark Wallace janetmarkwallace@gmail.com, Concerned Canadian Woman
CC
Frances McRae, Deputy Minister of Women, Gender Equality and Youth
Dominique Vien, Opposition Critic for Women and Gender Equality
Leah Gazan, New Democrat Shadow Minister for Women and Gender Equality
Andréanne Larouche, Bloc Québecois Shadow Minister for Women and Gender Equality andreanne.larouche@parl.gc.ca
Alison Lam, Green Shadow Minister for Women and Gender Equality info@greenparty.ca
Maxime Bernier, Leader, People’s Party of Canada info@peoplespartyofcanada.ca
NOTE: Readers are encouraged to use this letter as inspiration or basis for their own letters to their parliamentary representatives.
Comments