Sex and the Judge: sex negativity in court

Check out the latest issue of our ezine Public Sex. It examines the judge's decision in our case against Canada Post and what it reveals about judicial attitudes towards sex.

Our case raised for the first time in a court in Canada the issue of institutionalized prejudice against sexuality.

While we won the decision on a technicality, we think the judge's response to our detailed and nuanced arguments about sex-negativity reveals a classic example of  sex-negativity itself.

The judge ignores almost all the key arguments of our case pertaining to sex. Yet he rules against us on that issue. He utters conclusions without real reasons.

Not answering the core of a litigant's case is highly unusual behavior for a judge.

However as we show, this omission is quite common when sex is  the issue before our courts.  Judges are no more inclined to discourse fully about sex than are average people.

But judges are trained extensively and paid handsomely to back up their decisions with finely crafted reasons.  Our judge failed to do that.

More than any other example we could present, his decision shows why our community needs a political party to challenge sex negativity  in our institutions.

For our discussion of sex in court, read  Public Sex.

Email us your thoughts.