The Dignity of Women in Canada
Should Mohamad Al Ballouz serve his sentence in female prison? Challenging the blanket approach of gender affirmation in correctional facilities
Second, the concept of human dignity is also occasionally misused to justify an arbitrary proliferation of new rights, many of which are at odds with those originally defined and often are set in opposition to the fundamental right to life.[41] It is as if the ability to express and realize every individual preference or subjective desire should be guaranteed. This perspective identifies dignity with an isolated and individualistic freedom that claims to impose particular subjective desires and propensities as “rights” to be guaranteed and funded by the community. However, human dignity cannot be based on merely individualistic standards, nor can it be identified with the psychophysical well-being of the individual. Rather, the defense of human dignity is based on the constitutive demands of human nature, which do not depend on individual arbitrariness or social recognition. Therefore, the duties that stem from recognizing the dignity of the other and the corresponding rights that flow from it have a concrete and objective content based on our shared human nature. Without such an objective basis, the concept of dignity becomes de facto subject to the most diverse forms of arbitrariness and power interests. — Dignitas Infinita
“one cannot condemn enough the phenomenon of femicide”
Reader, reread the above excerpt from Dignitas Infinitia a few times, let it sink in.
Without … an objective basis … the duties that stem from recognizing the dignity of the other and the corresponding rights that flow from it have a concrete and objective content based on our shared human nature … the concept of dignity becomes de facto subject to the most diverse forms of arbitrariness and power interests. With rights that flow from a concrete and objective content based on our shared human nature, we become a society ruled by the arbitrariness and amorality of power brokers.
What if humans lack an objective basis for freedom? What happens if a subjective declaration rules the entirety of any nation of people? What happens to dignity and what does freedom mean? Can we really have free will and freedom of choice when subjective declarations of truth reign supreme?
What does reproductive freedom of a woman to choose mean when a carceral female is not free to exclude a male from her space, and the state mandates that she share space with a convicted rapist or femicider? She cannot decide not to get raped and she has no reproductive choice not to have unprotected sex but she can freely choose to abort the fetus once she’s pregnant by rape from a dangerous male convict? Can readers explain how this policy meets the standard of respecting a woman’s right to choose? You’ve prevented her from choosing by locking her in a prison facility with a dangerous male offender, because that’s what gender equality in Canada now means.
Reader, have you heard of the case of Mohamad Al Ballouz? Mr. Al Ballouz brutally and sadistically killed his wife and two young sons the evening of September 24, 2022. Below is a PDF copy of the full judicial decision, which is also linked below.
Here’s an excerpt from the court decision, R c. Al Ballouz (Ballouz) 2024 QCCS 4662.
[10] The evidence at the trial showed that on September 24, 2022, the accused caused the death of his spouse Synthia Bussières and their two children Éliam Al Ballouz Bussières (5 years old) and Zack Al Ballouz Bussières (2 years old) in their residence, located at 8320, boul. Saint-Laurent, unit 1202, in Brossard.
[11] All the direct and circumstantial evidence revealed that between 8:30 p.m. and 9:00 p.m., the accused violently killed his spouse, Synthia Bussières, inflicting 23 wounds with a sharp and “piquante” weapon, two of which proved fatal, thus causing her death by a vascular cervical trauma.
[12] By stabbing his spouse with a knife, the accused injured himself in both hands, and mainly in the right hand. Noting his injuries, the accused tried to dress his wounds with bandages. He then tried to burn Synthia Bussières' body by placing her near a heat source, causing burns on her lower limbs on her thigh.
[13] Then, the accused tried to clean the premises using household products. Unable to do so, he took a break, a time of reflection on the outdoor balcony by drinking two beers and smoking a cigarette. It was then that he meticulously planned the death of his two children.
The Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) provides all offenders, regardless of their sex or gender the same protections, dignity, and rights. This is consistent with the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA). — Corrections Canada
Mohamad Al Ballouz now identifies as “Levana” and has requested to serve his life sentence in a women’s prison. Reader, do you think this MASS MURDERED should serve his sentence in a female correctional facility? The Department of Corrections has taken that request of this MASS MURDERED under consideration. Yes, our corrections system thinks it might be okay to house a dangerous and sadistic MASS MURDERED in a female facility. That’s gender affirmation and it’s all part of the Liberal government’s policy on gender equality.
Section 3(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. H-6) includes sex as a protected characteristic, as you can see below.
Prohibited grounds of discrimination
3 (1) For all purposes of this Act, the prohibited grounds of discrimination are race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, genetic characteristics, disability and conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered.
In February of 2023 April Kitzul, former corrections officer, wrote about the impact of Bill C-16 on carceral women. Women have different rehabilitative needs from men, and women’s correctional facilities have less differentiation between levels of security than so men’s facilities. Prison for Women (P4W), which was modelled after men’s prisons, with uniformed staff and static security (e.g., cells, fences, gates, bars, locks, etc.) … led to high rates of suicidality and … eventually a Commission studied the matter and realized that women have different needs than men and were not rehabilitated in such an environment. The P4W was shut down and replaced with six regional prisons that are completely different.
Kitzul describes these regional correctional facilities for women as small housing communities, in which inmates live in residential facilities that emulate houses. The mother-child program accommodates mothers with young children up to preschool age. Women’s prisons have multi-level security, and there is a max unit for situations where an inmate’s risk becomes unmanageable in the lower security levels, Kitzul reports, however the aim of these facilities is to reintegrate the inmates as much as possible. Correctional Officers only [do] rounds once every two hours. The only real difference is that medium security has a fence around it, whereas minimum security has no fence. In women’s correctional facilities inmates have more independence and less supervision, in contract to facilities for men, where security risks are higher and stricter measures need to contain the prison population.
“Since the passage of Bill C-16, the ability for trans-identified male prisoners to transfer to women’s prisons has been made much easier. Now all that is required is self-identification, and self-identification is just based on the inmate’s say-so. No surgery or hormones are required.” — April Kitzul, February 2023, MLI
Bottom line— women are less dangerously violent than men. It’s a well studied valid and reliable empirical fact. Governing and organizing a prison system based on the subjective category called gender identity upends the carriage of justice. It prioritises the feelings of femicidal and rapey male convicts over those of women — it sends a giant fcuk you to all female people in Canada. It undermines the way women receive correctional rehabilitation.
So let’s return to our MASS MURDERER. Since the passage of Bill C-16 into law and the unilateral decision Trudeau made to house inmates by gender rather than sex, any male convict can simple declare a desire to be in women’s prison and correctional administrators indulge the request, lest accusations of violation of human rights arises.
the concept of dignity becomes de facto subject to … arbitrariness and power interests
Yes, reader, it’s discriminating against a violent male convicted of a dangerous crime to house him in male prison when he decides he is woman so he can serve his sentence in lower security women’s prison. Yes, reader, in Canada we endanger the safety of women and young children to accommodate the whims of a dangerous narcissistic male convict. According to Kitzul, there are several key reasons a male convict would want to serve his sentence in a female correctional facility.
Easier sentence in a lower security facility with a nicer setting.
Immediate and easy access to female sex partners who can’t escape.
Easy access to a pool of female and child victims on an ongoing basis.
Avoiding the treatment sex offenders receive from male inmates in male prison.
So, again, reader, do you think it’s serving and human rights value or any kind of dignity to house the MASS MURDERER Mohamad Al Ballouz in a women’s correctional facility? Do you think it meets the standard of Prime Minister Carney’s respect for a woman’s right to choose? It’s become routine to house dangerous male offenders in women’s facilities. Heather Mason has reported widely on these experiences and she coordinates nationwide protests outside correctional facilities to raise awareness of the issue. Women have suffered sexual assault and intimidation and bullying from male inmates being housed with them in close quarters. When they complain to staff they receive dismissive treatment and advice to re-educate themselves because they are the problem.
Reader, I will share with you the way Mr. Al Ballouz murdered his young sons.
[14] By premeditating the gestures he intended to make in order to give death to his two boys, the accused went to their room where they slept, with the intention and deliberate purpose of giving them death using a pillow. He slipped between the dresser and the headboard of the first child. He took the pillow to cause them death by asphyxiating his first boy, leaving a projection of blood on the front of the dresser, as well as a trace of his right hand on the pillow used.
[15] After killing his first child, the accused then went to his second boy to kill him using the same modus operandi.
[16] After the murders of his two children, the accused made the following gestures, in order or disorder. He placed the inert bodies of the children on the bed in the master bedroom, leaving a space between them to lie down between the two. The accused took a shower. He changed his clothes and took care to remove all the smoke detectors from their base, he gathered the blood-stained fabrics, personal belongings and created a cluster to set it on fire. He then went down to his car located in the building's interior parking lot, in the basement, to retrieve a windshield washer can. Back in unit 1202, the accused set fire to the heap of objects at the foot of the bed, swallowed the windshield washer to end his life, he lay down between the two lifeless children wishing to take with him the secret that he is the one who caused the death of her family, ultimately wanting that all that remains to be only burned bodies.
[24] According to Dr. Dazé, the victim had 11 defensive wounds, nine of which were in the left hand. The sharp … weapon wounds found on the upper limbs are characteristic, by their situation, of defense wounds, caused while the victim, still alive, tries to protect [herself] from assaults against [her] or tries to grab the weapon.
The accused indicated that he intended to use section 726 C.cr. in order to address her observations. The accused tried to read a statement to the Tribunal, and the court stopped the proceeding … [the] document containing inadmissible, defamatory, slanderous and odious remarks. Sylvie Guertin read her victim impact statement in court, Montreal Gazette reported on it here.
Sylvie Guertin fears that the MASS MURDERER who sadistically and brutally killed her daughter and grandsons will serve his sentence in female prison. You can check the Radio CBC interview and report here.
«Je commence à peine à sortir et parler sans pleurer » – Sylvie Guertin, September 2023
There are conflicting reports as to where Mr. Al Ballouz is being held, one report (dated December 2024) says Leclerc Detention Facility for women and several other reports say that (as of January 2025) the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) confirmed that Ballouz is currently being housed in a men's prison (unnamed), despite his request to serve his sentence at Joliette Institute for Women.
NB: I do not use “preferred pronouns” for dangerous male convicts, and I certainly will never use them for this femicidal MASS MURDERER who slaughtered his wife and young sons. I did take the time to change all the preferred pronouns used in the judicial decision written by the honourable Eric Down, JCS because I refuse to participate in the charade of preferred pronouns for violent mass murdering child killing criminals. I am never sorry for standing up for human dignity and material reality, so, readers will have to cope with my supposed irreverence.