A BC woman who alleged the Salvation Army discriminated against her because the charity allowed trans women to live on her floor in a transitional housing building has lost a legal challenge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The woman, referred to as J in a recently published March 27 BC Human Rights Tribunal decision, argued the Salvation Army was obliged to provide her housing and services for cis women only.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
However, the BC Human Rights Tribunal disagreed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cJ\u2019s complaint is about her beliefs and speculation about trans women, and not actual adverse impacts she experienced while accessing Salvation Army housing and services,\u201d the Tribunal said in the decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Tribunal said that J\u2019s \u201cspeculative beliefs\u201d were not evidence that the inclusion of trans women in its transitional housing and services for women had an adverse impact on her.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The decision says J experienced domestic violence and has challenges dealing with men due to past trauma and has undiagnosed PTSD.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In 2020, she began living on the women\u2019s floor of a transitional housing building run by the Salvation Army.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The charity said the woman\u2019s floor was for individuals who \u201cgenerally present physically and socially as female.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
J argued the Salvation Army\u2019s recognition of trans women was a denial of \u201csexed bodies\u201d and resulted in unsafe \u201cunisex spaces\u201d rather than \u201cwomen only\u201d spaces.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The housing was supposed to be for a maximum of two years as staff supported residents in finding more permanent housing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
When J\u2019s two years were up, the Salvation Army extended her stay in concern for her well-being.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201c(Staff) met with J to address her housing needs, but J was not willing to consider housing options that required her to be around trans women or cis men,\u201d the decision reads.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In October 2022, J went to a yoga class, which was also attended by a trans woman.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cJ left the class stating it had been changed to co-ed,\u201d the decision stated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
She also continued to seek extensions of her stay, which the Salvation Army rejected, saying it had already extended J\u2019s stay several times and there was a year-long waitlist for the building.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In January 2023, she moved out.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIn her complaint, J asserts that because she is a cis woman with PTSD, who experienced gender based violence in the past, she needs housing and services for cis women only,\u201d the Tribunal said. \u201cShe alleges that the Salvation Army ignored these needs and contributed to her inability to secure safe housing and services.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
However, the Tribunal ruled she didn\u2019t point to an actual adverse impact that she experienced while living there, or while attending the yoga class.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe bulk of the rest of J\u2019s materials are reiterations of her belief that trans women are not women. Other than repeating this belief, she has not supplied any evidence of an adverse impact she experienced at the Salvation Army,\u201d the Tribunal ruled. \u201cShe alleges that the Salvation Army\u2019s inclusion of trans women in its housing and services is \u2018unsafe,\u2019 but this allegation is based only on her belief and speculation.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Ultimately, the Human Rights Tribunal dismissed J\u2019s complaint.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The woman argued the Salvation Army was obliged to provide her housing and services for cis women only.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":292,"featured_media":8185,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"guid":"","source":"","byline":"","published":"","updated":"","_infotelid":"","_prepressid":"","_multisite_post_sync":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1680,541,543],"tags":[],"region":[322,323,324,325],"class_list":["post-8184","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-featured","category-local","category-topnews","region-kamloops","region-kelowna","region-penticton","region-vernon"],"blocksy_meta":[],"parsely":{"version":"1.1.0","canonical_url":"https:\/\/infonews.ca\/inhome\/news\/8184\/why-a-complaint-that-trans-women-were-in-bc-womens-transitional-housing-was-tossed\/","smart_links":{"inbound":0,"outbound":0},"traffic_boost_suggestions_count":0,"meta":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@type":"NewsArticle","headline":"Why a complaint that trans women were in BC women’s transitional housing was tossed","url":"http:\/\/infonews.ca\/inhome\/news\/8184\/why-a-complaint-that-trans-women-were-in-bc-womens-transitional-housing-was-tossed\/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"http:\/\/infonews.ca\/inhome\/news\/8184\/why-a-complaint-that-trans-women-were-in-bc-womens-transitional-housing-was-tossed\/"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/infonews.ca\/inhome\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/inhome-2025\/02\/fd3cb2374c77a9bb5498b10fe5994a48b9f2ace751fae2712ff05007b476acd8.webp?w=150&h=150&crop=1","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https:\/\/infonews.ca\/inhome\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/inhome-2025\/02\/fd3cb2374c77a9bb5498b10fe5994a48b9f2ace751fae2712ff05007b476acd8.webp"},"articleSection":"Featured","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Ben Bulmer"}],"creator":["Ben Bulmer"],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"iNhome","logo":""},"keywords":[],"dateCreated":"2026-04-28T01:00:00Z","datePublished":"2026-04-28T01:00:00Z","dateModified":"2026-04-28T01:00:10Z"},"rendered":"