‘This was hate speech’: Ontario drag performers win defamation case against blogger

A Landmark Victory Against Hate Speech: Drag Performers Win Defamation Case

A recent court ruling in Thunder Bay, Ontario, has sent a powerful message to those who use hate speech and anti-LGBTQ+ slurs online. Felicia Crichton, a local drag performer, along with two other performers and an LGBTQ+ non-profit organization, successfully sued a Facebook blogger for defamation after he falsely accused them of being pedophiles. The blogger, Brian Webster, was ordered to pay $380,000 in damages for his reckless and harmful posts, which targeted the performers during drag story time events at libraries in northwestern Ontario. Crichton, who was among those defamed, hopes the ruling will serve as a cautionary tale for those who spread vitriol and bigotry. “We’re tired of it,” she said, emphasizing that bigots should no longer feel emboldened to spew hate without consequences. The case highlights the growing issue of hate speech directed at the LGBTQ+ community and the importance of accountability in the digital age.

The Case and Its Implications

The performers and the non-profit organization, Rainbow Alliance Dryden (RAD), filed two separate lawsuits against Webster, alleging that his posts falsely accused them of “grooming” children during drag story time events. These events, which are meant to promote inclusion and education for young people, have become a frequent target for anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric. Webster’s posts, which included links to unrelated child pornography cases, further sensationalized the accusations and incited hateful comments from his followers. The court found that Webster’s actions were not only defamatory but also malicious, intending to smear the reputations of the plaintiffs by labeling them as pedophiles. Justice Helen Pierce of the Thunder Bay Superior Court granted a summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, noting that the accusations were baseless and deeply harmful.

The ruling is significant, as it establishes a legal precedent for how “groomer” terminology has been weaponized against LGBTQ+ individuals and drag performers. Douglas Judson, the lawyer for the plaintiffs, called the decision a landmark ruling that repudiates the notion that such hate speech has any public interest value. The case underscores the importance of holding individuals accountable for spreading malicious falsehoods, especially in the digital space where such remarks can quickly go viral.

The Toll of Hate Speech on the Community

For the drag performers involved in the case, the fallout from Webster’s posts was devastating. Many feared for their safety and reputations, as the false accusations spread rapidly online. Caitlin Hartlen, a performer and co-chair of RAD, expressed concerns that the defamatory statements could harm her professional reputation and community standing, particularly in her role at an Indigenous child and family services agency. Felicia Crichton, a mother of four, shared the heartbreak of imagining her children hearing the false accusations at school or in public. The emotional impact of the ordeal was compounded by the knowledge that some of those who shared Webster’s posts were people with whom they had mutual friends.

Despite the pain caused, the court’s ruling brought a sense of relief and validation. Crichton described the decision as a restoration of her faith in humanity, noting that it was uplifting to know someone was willing to listen and “cut through all the nonsense” to see the truth. The performers hope the ruling will discourage others from engaging in similar acts of malice and hate.

Rising Hate Crimes and the Broader Context

The case occurs against a backdrop of increasing anti-LGBTQ+ violence and hate crimes in Canada. According to the ruling, hate crimes motivated by sexual orientation have increased by 388% from 2016 to 2023. Drag story hour events, in particular, have become a target for threats and harassment, often forcing organizers to cancel or reschedule events. An expert witness in the case warned that extremist-inspired violence against the LGBTQ+ community remains a growing concern, as highlighted by Canada’s intelligence agency in 2024.

This context makes the Thunder Bay ruling even more important. It sends a clear message that hate speech and defamatory accusations will not be tolerated and that those responsible will face consequences. The case also highlights the need for greater awareness and education about the harm caused by such rhetoric, particularly when directed at vulnerable communities.

Moving Forward: A Call to Action

The outcome of the case has been met with hope and optimism by the LGBTQ+ community and its allies. For Crichton and the other performers, the ruling is more than just a financial victory—it’s a declaration that their voices matter and that their work promoting inclusion and acceptance is valued. The case also serves as a reminder of the power of legal action in combating hate speech and protecting vulnerable individuals from malicious attacks.

As the LGBTQ+ community continues to face threats and harassment, the ruling offers a glimmer of hope. It reinforces the importance of standing up against bigotry and challenging false narratives that seek to dehumanize and marginalize. For Crichton, the case is a testament to the resilience of the LGBTQ+ community and its determination to fight for justice and equality. “This was hate speech. It was malice. It was intentional,” she said. “End of story.”

In the end, the Thunder Bay case is a powerful reminder that words have consequences, and those who weaponize them must be held accountable. As the LGBTQ+ community continues to advocate for acceptance and inclusion, this ruling stands as a beacon of hope—a reminder that justice is possible, even in the face of overwhelming hate.