An Open Letter to Jenn Smith

Dear Jenn Smith,

Whether you want to admit it or not, the things you say are harmful towards LGBTQ2+ youth and the line you walk is incredibly close to hate speech (if not completely crossing the line). Allow me to outline why.

I have been following the things you say online for quite some time now. I am a person who believes that you must hear both sides of every argument as it could either help me realign my beliefs or strengthen the ones that I already hold. I know for a fact that after reading the things that you have written online and against my better judgement attending your “information session” titled “The Erosion of Freedom: How Transgender Politics in society is undermining our freedom and harming women and children,” that the latter is true for me.

Before we dive into it, I would like to mention that I am a cis-gender female who has been sexually assaulted. Based on your beliefs, statistically and theoretically, I should have lots of reason for me to oppose “transgender politics” and “SOGI123” because I shouldn’t have to be exposed to the male body after being sexually assaulted… but I simply cannot stand where you are. My background having a Master’s Degree in an area of Educational Psyhology (No, big Pharma or the BCTF don’t influence my beliefs) helps me to better understand the statistics that you have presented… or rather not presented… and the problems that arise when you continually spread misinformation to scare parents (who’s first job and sometimes only job is to care about and protect their children) into aligning with you. Additionally, I have a younger sibling with ASD and have worked with children and youth who have exceptionalities for the last eight years (more if you consider the fact that there is only a two-year age difference between my sibling and I). I come at this from a position of statistics based on science and my personal experience working in the field. You come at this from a position of opinion. There is a difference.

I find it interesting that using your platform, you say you value freedom of speech… Yet, when I pointed out some pretty considerable issues you blocked me on facebook and called me a troll rather than responding to those issues. Furthermore, you said in a post towards me, “I am amazed at all these people pontificating and commenting and criticizing a presentation they have never seen and know nothing about.” So, I attended your presentation… Absolutely nothing you said surprised me or differed from the rhetoric that you post constantly online. Nothing new, nothing hidden.

You say you have a background in History and Political Science from Simon Fraser University and you use that as a license to pretend like you have any authority or knowledge of Psychology or how Psychology even works. Someone at the event I attended asked you point blank if you had any knowledge of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). You said, “Psychology is not my main area of interest.” It begs the question, then why do you continually make disparaging comments about some of the LGBTQ2+ community and base it on psychological studies you apparently have no interest in, and frankly no working knowledge in?

To remind you, and to inform anyone who could be reading this… this again is just one of the issues that I have stated with your stats thus far.

Jenn believes that teachers, psychologists and parents that support SOGI123 are misleading “vulnerable children.” Jenn specifically uses the example children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). He believes that there is a high comorbidity rate between ASD and Gender Dysphoria (GD).

From Jenn’s article in The Post Millennial, “The Pied Pipers of Gender Ideology: a Different Transgender Perspective”

Jenn says, “Depending on what study you look at, autism among transgender kids ranges between 8% up to as high as 55%.”

Jenn quotes Charmichael, Di Celgie & Skagerberg (2015). As a study that states prevalence of GD amongst children and youth with ASD is 55%. This sounds alarming however there are significant problems with Jenn’s research and connecting them to trans issues in British Columbia.

Firstly, the article didn’t say that any child was formally diagnosed with Gender Identity Disorder only that they were at the beginning stages of seeking help. It should be noted that terminology has changed between the DSM-4 and 5… the DSM 4 diagnosis was formally called Gender Identity Disorder and gender dysphoria was a symptom. Under the DSM-5 it’s now labelled Gender Dysphoria (GD). A little confusing… but words matter none the less. No youth was formally diagnosed with GID under the DSM-4, only with the symptom of GD.

Secondly, demographics matter. Studies from the UK don’t represent Canadian norms from a scientific perspective. For example, when we score B Level learning assessments using the WIAT-IV we specifically need to score our data based on Canadian norms.

Thirdly, a sample size of 166 from one geographic area isn’t something that I would consider to be a significant study.

Fourthly, the sample size in this article looks at newly referred youth as opposed to youth who longitudinally demonstrate symptoms of gender dysphoria. If we want to look at prevalence we should look at the rate in which children are formally diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Naturally, a percentage of those seeking help will either not meet the criteria requirements based on the DSM 5or 4 (whichever one they were using) and/or will find comfort in the gender they were born with.

Fifthly, the measure in this article, the Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) is a questionnaire given to parents/carers/teachers. Parents/carers/teachers has too broad of a scope to provide any consistency… Many different people have many different view-points and even the way in which I would score data would be different than the next person. We also don’t know anything about the SRS as the researchers didn’t give us all 65 questions they asked of the participants. Again, what we should be looking at is comparing data with psychologists based on how many youth and children they see that live with the comorbid issues of ASD and GD.

Something to consider would be that this article was created shortly before and during the creation of the DSM-5 where GID was reclassified as Gender Dysphoria and came with a shift in guidelines for diagnosis as did ASD. For example, in the DSM-5 there are no longer subcategories such as Asperger’s Syndrome, PDD-NOS. They all fall under ASD. And diagnostic symptoms have also shifted. During this time doors had opened for a lot of individuals to seek help which is why we could have seen a spike but that doesn’t mean that there is a rise in prevalence. These individuals always existed. It just means we now know more and a means to help those individuals.

Besides the research Jenn did on this article, he relies on his own lived experience. In his article, Jenn states he was never tested for autism but had “autistic traits.” Jenn doesn’t know whether or not he actually has ASD. In Jenn’s favour, I am certain there are many people with autism that live their lives undiagnosed for myriad reasons… but there are lots of people who have some symptoms of ASD that don’t meet the criteria requirements for ASD too… Only a Psychologist with the ability to administer a C Level assessment can make that judgement call. Anecdotal accounts are useful in some cases… but to use this particular anecdotal information as a rational to connect GD to ASD is completely flawed at best.

To claim that the prevalence of GD amongst youth with ASD is 55% is at least poor research or at worst spreading misinformation, which Jenn says he does not… So, Jenn can choose… is he a poor academic? Or an intentional spreader of misinformation? Either way, we should call into question Jenn’s fitness to speak on this topic.

You respond and say that “Autism is not the primary focus of your presentation anyway” as a way to deflect from the facts. Yet, I attended your presentation and you stated the prevalence of ASD and GD at upwards of 55%. You cited this prevalence no less than three times and two days later you cited this to be factual information while you were on a Podcast on Freedom Free for All. This was after I had pointed these flaws out to you. You continue to spread misinformation. That is wrong. You have knowingly opened up the doors for parents to not trust teachers and professionals who have trained for years in this field and perhaps even anger that has no basis. How does your research on www.randompeople.net give you any authority on this topic? Furthermore, even if there was a correlation between ASD and GD (and I could believe with the right literature that there is) it doesn’t negate causation (Rule #1 in scientific statistics) and to insinuate that is also incredibly misleading.

For your knowledge(and anyone else’s knowledge), comorbidity is not something that is unique to people in the LGBTQ2+ community, and it’s not unique to people with ASD. Humans are complicated beings and nothing is black and white. Everything, I repeat everything, is a spectrum. I attended a lecture put on by Autism Community Training in 2015 titled: “Identifying and Treating Co-Occurring Mental Health Challenges” The Psychiatrist (Who is now a professor at the University of Toronto might I add), related treating comorbidity to a Rubik’s Cube. Humans have so many things going on that you must treat the underlying condition first before anything else can improve.

Let’s take for example, someone who presents as having GD also has comorbid conditions of anxiety, depression etc. If we treat and help the person through their GD (I agree not every person has to medically transition but they should have the right to autonomy to choose what is right to do with their body) eventually the conditions of anxiety and depression will lessen. You argued in your presentation something to the effect of “People with GD who medically transition get everything that they want and they still kill themselves.” That’s not true. I believe that many people who experience GD still experience crippling oppression, lack of support from their families, friends, and frankly if someone continued to tell me that I was delusional (as you suggested in your presentation), I’d probably still feel suicidal too. So, no… People with GD don’t get everything they want. What they ultimately want is to be treated with kindness, dignity and respect. They certainly didn’t get that from your presentation.

In your presentation, you rely on Black’s Law Dictionary as a supporting document to define what the word women means. Firstly, Black’s Law Dictionary comes from United States Law. We live in Canada. Secondly, Black’s Law Dictionary was first published in 1891, a time when women had no rights… I don’t think the definition has been updated since then… And then to be told the definition of women by someone who identifies as male… The irony of all this is not lost on me.

You also made a point that the government has lied to us in-regards-to Bill C-16 because 99% of people don’t medically transition (citation missing) because their genitalia is still intact. Why this matters I’m still not sure. If someone came up and asked you if you had a penis and if they could see it, I’d like to think you would be pretty offended. If someone came up to me and asked me if I had a vagina and if they could see it, I know I’d be pretty offended. Respect is just respect, Jenn. People’s genitalia is none of yours, my, or anyone’s business.

Another defence of yours is this need to ignore preferred pronouns in order to remain “tethered to reality.” Does that mean that in order to remain tethered to reality we should use your male name? Also, if someone were to approach you and say, “Hello, my name is John.” would you say, “I’d like to see your birth certificate where it says John… actually it’s Johnathan… we must remain tethered to reality… it is delusional to to call you John.” Using preferred pronouns is just plain respectful, Jenn.

Without getting too into it, I’m curious to see if your talk including a provincial case that has a current publication ban will be an issue for you in the future. I also wonder if you’re aware that despite your request for no recordings that you can’t demand that in a public space. Just some food for thought.

I suppose now you’re going to ask me to prove that anything you’ve said borders hate. And I suppose you’ll threaten me with some kind of legal action or what not… Here it is anyways:

1. To advocate that parents pay no regard to their children’s pronouns, or to deny them medical care has been held up in B.C. court as an act of family violence (the same case that also has that publication ban you disregarded). To use your platform to potentially (whether it happens or not doesn’t matter) expose anyone to an act of violence based on their gender identity is by definition hate speech.

2. To advocate the denial of services such as a rape center based on someone’s gender identity (potentially exposing someone the denial of services based on your misinformation) is hate speech.

3. Let’s consider the very title of your “Info Session”… “The Erosion of Freedom: How Transgender Politics in society is undermining our freedom and harming women and children,” would it be acceptable to you that someone holds an information session titled “The Erosion of Freedom: How Black/Jewish/Muslim/Christian/Indigenous Politics in society is undermining our freedom and harming women and children,” ? If not, why do we not apply the same logic? They are all protected under our Charter of Human Rights whether you like it or not.

3. Just because you say “I have invited anybody who stands for Free speech to attend my events in Nanaimo or Victoria, but I am not inviting anybody specific and certainly not anybody that promotes racism or actual hatred” doesn’t mean that people can’t be exposed to hatred at your hands. You don’t control who is in your audience at a public event. If you by chance have used your platform to bring out those people and exposed transgender persons to hatred, that is absolutely on you.

4. You cite your charter rights to free speech often, however “The rights and freedoms in the Charter are not absolute. They can be limited to protect other rights or important national values.” Gender identity, whether you like it or not, is a demographic protected by the charter of rights and freedoms.

In your defense, you also take issue with people coming to protest your “Information Sessions,” stating often that we would like to silence you. Even if you were protected under free speech (questionable), free speech does not mean freedom of consequences. The things that people say are not hate. Most people from the opposition don’t hate you based on your gender identity, we hate the things that you are saying and your behaviour. There is a difference and you are not the victim here.

On a personal note I’d like to ask… How does it feel as a self-identified transgender person and bisexual to align yourself with Kari Simpson, a woman who’s been protesting “THE GAY AGENDA ™” since at least the 1990’s? I must admit, you bring out the best people to your cause. I know you said that you’re not a token of the Christian community but by aligning yourself with Kari Simpson/Culture Guard and the Canadian Christian Lobby it sure appears that way…

As I’ve said before, I’ll say it again… I know that you’ve started creating “stealth” twitter and facebook accounts since you’ve been continually banned for going against the community guidelines against hate speech… How does that help you to spread your message? Despite my displeaseure in your ability to rent publicly funded venues to spread your misinformation and potentially expose trans youth to hate… I’m content with the knowledge that the only people you are able to communicate with are the same closed minded people that you’ve been preaching to the last two years. You’re not gaining any more followers or traction. In fact, many people are showing up in protest.

I hope after your whirlwind “Information Tour” you’ll go home, take same time to learn to love yourself and learn that your lived experience as a transgender person doesn’t mean that the rest of the world is immoral, or incorrect for living their lives the way they want to.

Since you used a quote in your talk to compare people who oppose you to Hitler… I’ll leave you with this:

“Darkness cannot drive out darkness, only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that.” — Martin Luther King Jr.

Despite all of this harmful rhetoric you push, I wish you nothing but love and light in your life, Jenn.

All the best,

A concerned Islander.

Further summary of Jenn’s talk can be found here.