Good Canadians Hunted In The Name Of Anti-Hate

The Hostile Targeting Of Caring Parents, Teachers And All Who Disagree With Trans Activism Or Critical Race Theory

Introduction - Heroes & Villains

Catherine Kronas is a mother and a concerned citizen who organizes Canadian parents, teachers and other concerned citizens around issues of woke indoctrination in our school system. She is the founder of stopwoke.ca - where you can sign a petition expressing your outrage at the illiberal and race essentialist Ontario legislation known as Bill 67. 

I met Catherine through her organizing efforts. I share her concern regarding reified postmodern identity politics (wokeism) and her alarm at it having taken on a totalitarian nature in this latest stage of its development. This essay aims to tell the stories of a handful of people brought together directly and indirectly through Catherine’s efforts. These brave people are outspoken about the harm the postmodern turn into woke identity politics has wrought. They speak out at great personal cost. Their efforts result in automatic accusations of bigotry and hate. This of course is the well known bullying tactic of the woke.

Chanel Pfahl, whom I’ll discuss in detail later,  has been targeted by a handful of individuals who want to see her punished (fired, canceled, ruined), because they disagree with her. One such person is Peter Smith (possibly a fake name), who along with his co-conspirator Elizabeth Simons,  represents a group called Canadian Anti-Hate Network CAHN. (It should be noted that another group called Cyberhate.ca lists both CAHN and Peter Smith as online hate accounts, having approx. 150 combined complaints of online harassment and bullying against them.)

The woke are petty and insecure and rely on accusing others of being hateful (the irony of their blood lust and desire to see their targets destroyed is lost on them - the woke do not see themselves as hateful). I think what you will find particularly troubling about Peter Smith and his group is that they seem to conduct very little research before deciding to dox a target. 

Frank Spiegelberg, Billboard Chris and Chanel Pfahl were all targets of Peter Smith and CAHN, yet Peter Smith did not meet or interview any of the three. He was not at Bowmore School (a school in Toronto, where Billboard Chris chose to have conversations with parents), nor was he in Ottawa where Chris displayed his “Children cannot consent to puberty blockers” sign and Chanel stood with him.

I’ve met them all. I was there at Bowmore. I’ve interviewed them and/or informally had discussions with them and learned their back stories. And, I’ve been able to “reassemble” the process used by Peter Smith (presumably his usual tactic), where he circumvents all standards civilized people universally associate with etiquette and decency. Peter Smith does not interview his targets, he does not consider their views, he does not investigate anything - he is convinced that his targets are bigots (I’m sure some of them are) and does not believe any further discovery is needed to make sure of it. Just like naive members of Antifa, his moral superiority is sufficient to judge others as hateful. 

Because he does not require corroborating or substantiating evidence, Peter Smith thinks his gut feelings are enough. He feels he has a “spidey sense” that reveals the signature of hate only to him. He convinces others that he has identified hateful bigots and goes about doxing and ruining his targets. What a hero his followers must think he is, out there in the shadows of the underground world of hate exposing all the domestic terrorists. But what if Peter Smith is an opportunistic phony and fully captured religious woke ideologue? More on this guy later.

We Begin At Bowmore

On Oct. 14 2021 Catherine invited me to Bowmore School in Toronto to meet Billboard Chris, who was scheduled to appear outside the school wearing one of his signature billboards. As always, Chris’ presence is an invitation to parents, teachers, students and community members to engage in open dialogue on the issue of gender ideology and the related use of puberty blocking drugs and cross sex hormones in children. However, this was not a random visit. 

Just days before, a recording made by a grade six student at Bowmore was leaked to Chris. It was a cellphone recording of a gender workshop conducted by an outside group contracted by the school board. I wrote previously about Chris’ trip to Bowmore in the piece Billboard Chris Takes His Message To Toronto And Ottawa Schools.

Here is a podcast where Chris breaks down the content in the Gender presentation at Bowmore. 

Shortly after Catherine and I met up with Chris, another supporter named Frank Spiegelberg arrived. Frank is the Canadian coordinator of Parents of ROGD Kids (a support group for parents of children affected by a phenomenon commonly described as a social contagion called Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria). Standing on the corner waiting for members of the public to approach and hopefully engage in respectful conversations (which is Billboard Chris’s only objective when appearing in public spaces), Frank told us his story about his family and their experience with ROGD.

Frank Spiegelberg's Story

At this point in time (2022), Frank Spiegelberg has talked to every expert he could find, read every book and study on the topic of gender dysphoria and ROGD, and has attended hundreds of hours of zoom meetings and seminars outlining all points of view on the topic - all of this in a desperate effort to find the information that he and his wife knew they needed before they could make sense of the issue that had visited their family.

On the 4th of July 2017 (well before Frank and his wife had any knowledge of trans issues) their 13 year old daughter came to them with some startling news. She didn’t want to be a girl anymore, she wanted to be a boy. 

Frank and family ended up initially finding support with PFLAG (Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays), who told Frank’s family that they must “affirm” their daughter’s condition or risk the high likelihood she might commit suicide. We now know that this is a common trope used by Trans Rights Activists (TRAs) and it has no bearing on the truth. But in 2017, Frank and his family were terrified by this. 

They attended a seminar in Collingwood organized by PFLAG. The presenter was a female to male trans person named Jake. Jake repeated all the slogans of TRAs - “affirm or risk suicide”, “there is no such thing as a child that says they are trans and isn’t”, “if they say they are trans, then they are trans.”

A bizarre moment came at the end of Jake’s presentation when he announced that he was detransitioning back to his female form. Frank remembered thinking - you are telling me that this is immutable, and that if a kid says they are trans then they are. But here you are giving this presentation and telling us that you are now detransitioning. Jake’s response to Frank’s confusion was to say “Gender can be a journey. If you get a double mastectomy and later change your mind, you can always get breast reconstruction surgery and electrolysis.”

Some hope returned to Frank and family in 2018 when Dr. Lisa Littman’s peer reviewed paper detailing the social contagion phenomenon known as Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria was published. Frank said - “when Lisa Littmans paper came out, it was like holy crap! This is exactly what we are experiencing with our daughter.”

Frank immediately shared Littman’s paper with the facilitators at PFLAG who flat out rejected it as transphobic. They refused to share this research with other parents. When Frank pressed them insisting parents need all the information not just one viewpoint, they responded saying “It would harm parents.” What? How? “It would harm parents that have already started transitioning their children.” At this point in the essay, I think it might be appropriate to give you a moment to collect your jaw from off the floor. 

Needless to say things didn’t go well at PFLAG. Frank and family were kicked out - blocked from the facebook group and all email communication. Thankfully, Dr. Zucker, who Frank and family saw for over a year, suggested some other groups that could help them. Fourth Wave Now was one group,  the other was Parents of ROGD Kids (where Frank now volunteers his time as national coordinator to help other families). But just because parents learn about ROGD and consider it as a possible explainer for what their child may be going through, does not mean that the child themselves will see it the way the parents do. It took a “watchful waiting” approach and time for Frank’s daughter to mature and feel comfortable with her body and identify as her natal sex, but eventually she did (one of the happy endings thankfully).

At Bowmore I watched Frank retell his story to several different adults and groups of students. The most gripping part is when he takes his wife and daughter to Sick Kids Hospital for a consultation. Within 50 minutes of the meeting with the Sick Kids social worker, it was affirmed that Frank’s daughter was indeed trans and that they should make a follow up appointment right away so they can administer this 14 year old girl puberty blocking drugs (any push back that might have come from Frank and his wife would have been ignored, as they had deemed her a “mature minor” in the time of that same meeting). Frank played it cool and booked the appointment for 90 days later, and was able to walk out of the hospital with his wife and daughter. Frank later canceled the appointment citing a “scheduling conflict” and indicating he would call back to rebook the appointment, but never did.

In the car, Frank told his daughter they would not be returning to SickKids Hospital.  He told her she was too young to make such a life altering permanent decision and explained all the risks and harms that puberty blockers pose to her health. She protested a little, pouted a little. But soon went silent. After a brief moment, she asked if they could go for ice cream. Frank took his family for ice cream and his daughter never brought up puberty blockers again. She has since grown to be a happy healthy young woman. 

But Peter Smith, who knows none of the history and struggles Frank has been through with his daughter, or about how close she came to being medicalized on a pathway to transition sex that she most definitely would have regretted, sees Frank simply as a target. Not a human, with a family that depends on him. Peter Smith also does not see a father trying to share his experience and help other families and young girls who are having similar struggles. 

Peter Smith made no effort to contact Frank before first contacting Frank’s employer on October 20th, 2021 claiming to be a reporter asking for comment on their employee Frank Spiegelberg that was taking part in anti trans protests and showing support for anti transgender activists, and asking them about their policy towards members showing support for discriminatory groups. Clearly this was a disingenuous move intended to trigger an investigation into Frank by his employer (which is ongoing at the time of this writing). It has also led Frank to take over 5 months of stress leave, and of course all the anxiety that goes along with being investigated (like Frank and his family hadn’t already been through enough). Peter Smith did contact Frank on October 26th just hours before his defamatory hit piece was published on October 27th, but being under investigation (which Peter Smith must have knowingly triggered), Frank was unable to comment.

Why does Peter Smith seem to wish to not only suppress the views of people who have experience with gender nonconformity, gender dysphoria or ROGD in their families, but also further harm these people who have already been through such stressful ordeals? One thing I picked up from the CAHN website is that they consider ROGD to be a debunked theory. Again, the entitlement and moral superiority of this group is boundless. Do they think they are the arbiters of which studies are valid? Is this what empowers them to speak over the experiences of families who have lived with ROGD and assert that these poor people are in fact hateful bigots? 

Do they do these things because their platform requires constant content? Or because they feel their audience deserves the hate they signed up to have exposed? It's a lot of pressure to constantly be finding more hate, especially in Canada where most people only hate winter.

Enter Chanel Pfahl - A Teacher Who Cares Enough To Ask Questions And Challenge Ideological Assumptions

I met Chanel Pfahl through the organizing efforts of Catherine Kronas. She has recently come under fire for voicing her concerns regarding Critical Race Theory on social media. Here is an interview she did with Rebel News about it. And here is her story in her words. But before I get into it, let me begin by detailing Chanel’s first run in with the woke mob.

After Billboard Chris left Bowmore school in Toronto, he headed to Ottawa to build on his message and momentum. There are groups of parents and teachers brought together by Catherine and others in Ottawa (of which Chanel is one) who share the same concerns as their counterparts in Toronto and all over the country. Catherine’s grass roots approach to organizing is a national effort, hundreds of Canadians are waking up to the absurdities and dangers of woke politics in schools, and Catherine is helping direct them to other groups or efforts where they can contribute to the counter woke resistance in the way that best reflects their values and abilities.

Chanel was present with Billboard Chris during his protest at various sites in Ottawa. As was detailed in the post mentioned above, things got pretty nasty for Chris, Chanel and the other supporters. They were surrounded by a mob that screamed at them, threw things at them, and in at least one case Chris was physically assaulted. At least two Ottawa city counsellors attended that day, as members of this mob, and later boasted about their “activism” on Twitter.

On occasions like this, productive conversation with members of the public is next to impossible, the mob is not interested in hearing what anyone has to say. Their minds are made up; Billboard Chris is a transphobe and so too must his supporters be. Even though Peter Smith calls himself an investigative journalist, in this case he did little more than echo the hate of the mindless mob who verbally and physically assaulted Billboard Chris and friends. He has also self described as a “goon” and “divisive radical” on his twitter page. Does the world really need more divisive radical goons who receive funding from the government to advance their agenda?

As I mentioned previously, Chanel has recently run up against the woke again. This time for a complaint lodged against her (by a fellow teacher) for innocuous comments she made on social media — comments that no sane person would take offense to. However, someone did take offense and for some reason the Ontario College of Teachers has decided to take the complaint seriously and start an “investigation”. The woke are forcing through an agenda and they aim to destroy all who oppose them.

Chanel and Frank’s comments on social media and in the public square are based in real, genuine concern for the well being of children, but the woke ignore the truth. If an opinion goes against the tenets of their ideology, lodging hate complaints with the employers of their targets is commonplace. Whether it’s CAHN or some anonymous ideologue who happens to be a teacher, it is intolerance, hate and resentment that define their actions. They are opportunistic doxers out to build their audience and brand by destroying people who disagree with woke nonsense. Unfortunately they cannot see past their self-righteousness that the vast majority of Canadians disagree with woke ideology, and find the tactics used by Social Justice Warrior’s abhorrent!

Targeted By The Bloodthirsty

Chanel was photographed with Billboard Chris, as was Frank in Toronto. On Oct. 27, 2021. Peter Smith got ahold of those photos and published his defamatory hit piece on the CAHN website. Both were characterized as transphobes. Perhaps most outrageously, Frank’s wife, who was not at any of the events and is not active on social media, was also included (featured first actually, targeted for nothing more than being a mother and Frank’s wife).

Only after filing legal action against CAHN and the authors of the hit piece did the defamatory article get updated to exonerate Frank’s wife and apologize for implicating her — evidence that CAHN are not conducting investigations or practicing legitimate journalism. They are simply following woke mob sentiments. 

The hit piece recognizes the size and international nature of Billboard Chris’s following, but in their lazy negligence they just assume that Chris’ followers (43,000 on Twitter alone) must all be transphobes too. No need to interview Chris, any of his followers, Frank or Chanel; Nope they are just transphobes, simple as that. Reckless ideologues too lazy to look deep into why people might feel so strongly about these issues that they are motivated to wear signs in public or speak out against the medicalization of children and gender ideology on social media.  They are too self-righteous to care about the impact that their neglectful actions have on the people and families they target.  The fact that CAHN received a government grant to conduct smear campaigns on innocent Canadians exercising free speech and questioning why we are medicalizing children and causing irreversible harm is hard to accept. CAHN should without a doubt lose their funding and be shut down.

Conclusion

The final question I had for Chanel after we discussed her case was, what do we do to fix this problem? Chanel’s answer:

“The most important thing, I think, is to speak freely, not self-censor because of fear. As Dr Gad Saad has said, if everyone spoke up, we could end all this by “next Tuesday”. However, I understand that this is easier said than done, as it involves a great amount of risk. Less costly ways of speaking up might involve simply asking questions, or standing up for someone who is unjustly taking heat, not by saying “I agree with them” but simply “I support their right to say this,” or ‘‘this seems unfair to me.” This shows others who might share your views that they are not alone, and that is huge.”

I agree Chanel. We must make our voices heard!