I am sorry for that headline, but this is our world now.
A Canadian court seriously has to decide if taxes should pay for a man's "gender-affirming" surgery. This individual wants a surgically constructed vagina, but still wants to keep his penis because he says he's "non-binary."
Canada's Dr. Jordan Peterson had an apt response to the madness:
In an email to the National Post, Pamela Buffone, founder of the parents' group Canadian Gender Report, said Canada's public healthcare system is "at the breaking point and really needs to focus on procedures that are medically necessary."
Is this type of surgery health care? The patient will not be physically healthier because of the operation, which is likely to result in complications and the need for corrective surgeries and further demands on the health system.
This case has become a drawn-out legal fight that could pave the way for these types of barbaric and perverted "gender" surgeries with public money, straining an already strained system in the process.
The National Post first reported on this individual back in September. The case revolves around a 33-year-old identified as K.S. in court documents.
K.S., a man, identifies as "female dominant" and goes by a feminine name. Ontario's Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) initially turned down K.S.'s plea in 2022 to fund a penile-sparing vaginoplasty, a procedure not offered in Canada. The surgery was to take place at the Crane Center for Transgender Surgery in Austin, Texas.
Legal documents showed that K.S. argued that "to ignore ‘the other third' of her and how she presents would be invalidating; she is ‘both,' not exclusively one or the other but literally a mix."
OHIP made the case that a vaginoplasty without a penectomy (removal of the penis) is seen as experimental and isn't covered under OHIP benefits.
K.S. then took the matter to Ontario's Health Services Appeal and Review Board, which sided with him, saying that vaginoplasty is one of the 11 genital surgeries covered publicly and shouldn't automatically mean having a penectomy.
OHIP appealed the review board's decision to Ontario's Superior Court of Justice, which heard the case back in February. According to K.S.'s lawyer, John McIntyre, the decision could still take months.
K.S.'s doctor, an endocrinologist, wrote a letter to OHIP supporting the government funding of his patient's unique bottom surgery.
It is very important for (K.S.) to have a vagina for her personal interpretation of her gender expression but she also wishes to maintain her penis. (K.S.) is transfeminine but not completely on the ‘feminine' end of the spectrum (and) for this reason it's important for her to have a vagina while maintaining a penis.
K.S. argues that forcing a "non-binary" person to undergo traditional binary surgery — choosing one or the other, a penis or a vagina — would worsen his gender dysphoria. He compared it to conversion therapy, which Canada banned in 2022.
(Do you see how far down the line the crazy train is now?)
Another concern of his is actually a valid one. He's worried that removing his penis could cause urinary incontinence problems - which is a known complication of any bottom surgery.
I have one solution: Just don't do it. You don't need it. According to looney progressives, the sex you're born with doesn't dictate your gender. Gender is just a social construct. So, why does it matter what's between your legs???
Unfortunately, a precedent has already been set.
In a similar case last year, a female 41-year-old government employee identifying as "transmasculine non-binary" (woke language is hard to understand, but please try to keep up) going by the name Nathaniel Le May wanted a surgically-constructed penis without moving her vagina and uterus. OHIP initially denied coverage, but later reversed its decision and funded the surgery.
Le May told the National Post that her outcome is the same as K.S. - "We will both have a penis and a vagina."
And Canadians are going to pay for it.
P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇
