Our Fight for Privacy & Freedom


You know what? Sometimes, the world is not a very nice place. I’m sure that doesn’t come as a revelation to my LGBQT2+ friends, but I’m a white, middle class, heterosexual, cis-gendered male. The poster child for privilege. But now…. Now I’m a deviant. A threat to my neighborhood — and the fabric of society. And so are you, if my neighbors are to be believed.

Identifying under this umbrella of “ethical non-monogamy” is part of my biological makeup, not just something I do for fun on a Saturday night. I got to a point in my life where I felt confident and could be unapologetically transparent. The symbol generally associated with Ménage was actually created as a family marque. After, the name Ménage was chosen. French for “members of a household”, it was selected to reflect my chosen family within the community.

Over the years, I have surrounded myself with people in this community and ones outside who are accepting of my personal choices regardless of their own beliefs. This has created an artificial sense of reality: we’re finally accepting non-binary genders, non-traditional sexual orientations, and non-traditional relationship structures. Sure, some of the laws have to catch up, but social conscience is improving. I believed that the rest of the world – that peripheral circle of influence in which we must all operate as members of society – was evolving and if not accepting, was at least acquiescent.

My privilege made me naïve.

In early 2019, the City informed me that my house was being deemed a “Social Organization”, in contravention of the Land Use Bylaw. This is a continuation of an investigation I dealt with in 2016, and thought was resolved. Contrary to what I was told, the City continued to be fueled by a few squeaky wheels in my neighborhood, who object to my lifestyle.

Through the process of appealing this label, the neighbors have been given a forum to say what they really think of all of us:

  • “a devisive, sexually driven group of individuals”
  • “we are opening up our children and our residents to possibly dangerous situations”
  • “our streets are not safe as a result”
  • “some…cars are still parked…the following morning…affording people of questionable character the opportunity to meet with children”
  • “sexual practices not suitable for our family neighborhood”
  • “having individuals…gather at this location for activities that we find personally objectionable…are totally unacceptable”
  • “ensure there is no continuation of objectionable activities that are so abhorrent to our…community”
  • “we would like our neighborhood back to where we could be proud and feel safe of our surroundings”
  • “brings us great concern for the health and safety of our children and our community”
  • “built on the business of infidelity”
  • “it is our fear minors may be allowed to enter the premise [sic] unaware of the intentions and sexual nature”
  • “how will the City…enforce and ensure no minors be allowed on or within a residential property?”
  • “everyday [sic] young children walk past…these children run the risk of being exposed to many dangers and age inappropriate sights”
  • “the City…should require that all surrounding schools be notified for the dissemination of information to each student’s families”
  • “no place in a residential community, does not belong near an elementary school”
  • “the lure of sexually promiscuous individuals to our neighborhood”
  • “we have three young adult daughters…as parents, this gives us great case [sic] for concern as we do not know if these people are intoxicated or what state of mind they may be in after engaging in, or having been a spectator of, explicit sexual activities”
  • “they cannot account for what their guests do, and to whom they may do it to [sic], in the neighborhood once they leave”
  • “there is increased risk to our children which can be affected by the…presence of sexually promiscuous people present in the neighborhood”
  • “I…have concerns about…the property value of our…homes”

There you have it, friends. We are pedophiles, rapists and criminals – degenerates and deviants, the lot of us. I don’t actually bear them ill-will, and ask you not to, either. I was astounded at the ignorance, vitriol, and incredible leaps in logic. There is no educating or even debating this kind of mindset.

The “Social Organization” label includes any place “where members of a club or group assemble to participate in recreation, social or cultural activities; where there are sports, recreation, cultural, or social events for the members of the group”. This language is overly broad, and flies in the face of at least 6 areas of the Charter of Rights. Despite the broadness of the definition, not a single person has ever been pursued under it – not a Scout troop meeting, not a Bible study group, not a bowling group, not a weekly Game of Thrones party, nor any other group. Until us.

Because the Appeal Board which hears these issues has no jurisdiction over Constitutional matters, I have no choice but to take the case to the Court of Queen’s Bench. This is no small feat, nor at small expense; so far, I’ve spent over $50 000 defending against this ongoing witch hunt.

This will be precedent-setting and will have a positive impact on our freedoms and our community,  no matter which sections of the Charter are accepted by the Court as a reason to strike down this section of the bylaw. We may not be able to educate the closed-minded and ignorant, but we can at least put laws in place to protect ourselves, and strike down those which discriminate against us.

Make no mistake, I will continue to invite my chosen family, my friends, and their friends, to my home. But if this overreach is allowed to stand, we will all have to fight for that right, every time a neighbor has a moral objection.




Court of King’s Bench Hearing – 2024.05.08

Dear Friends,
The long-awaited court decision has been released and we got the clarity we had asked for from the Court. They’ve provided a clear list of criteria by which a “social organization” can be measured. They’ve been clear that I can’t run a “social organization” from my home, but the vagueness of what that means has been corrected by the Court. This is precisely what I’d been asking for throughout this fight. I’ve always said that I will NOT stop having parties, in my own home, for my friends and community. This decision affirms my right to do so. the Court has clearly said the bylaw “does not touch upon or preclude the use of one’s home for the private hosting of social gatherings, including when these involve gatherings of individuals who share common sexual philosophies, interests, and activities. The Applicant is free to host members of his ethically non-monogamous community, and engage in social and intimate activities with them, in the privacy of his residence.”
I’m confident that I can make adjustments to *how* those parties are held and organized, to respect the Court decision and follow the list of criteria provided. You might see some changes to how you get invited but the parties are not going away, nor is the space for us to gather. The Court recognized the motivations at work here, and said “personal sexual expression, in all its many-splendored forms, is a fundamental aspect of human life, experience, and fulfilment. Legislative or other state restrictions targeting legal, consensual, private sexual activity will attract close Charter scrutiny, in particular where they manifest religious moralism as their animating purpose.” While I’m disappointed that the Court didn’t recognize the Charter rights issues, I’m happy that there’s a clear path forward.
I’m not going anywhere, my friends. You know how to reach me.
With love and gratitude for all your supportive energy through this,


Court of King’s Bench Hearing – 2024.02.29

We have a hearing date!

We’re excited to finally be able to argue this in Court, and call out the bigotry driving what we have characterized in Court filings as a witch hunt. There are 5 areas of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms at question:

s.2(a) freedom of conscience
s.2(c) freedom of peaceful assembly
s.2(d) freedom of association
s.7 liberty, security of a person and principles of fundamental justice
s.8 freedom from unreasonable search

As I’vc said all along: Ménage is my home, and my principle residence. I will see this through, and I will always maintain my right to welcome my friends and Chosen Family under my roof.


Court of Queen’s Bench Hearing

After a long delay due to public health measures surrounding COVID-19, we have now requested a court date. This space will be updated once we have a date scheduled, and we will re-appear before the Justice to argue the Charter issues.


SDAB Hearing

As expected, the limitations of the SDAB jurisdiction meant they could only consider whether the Stop Order had been properly applied to the law as stated. They didn’t consider anything outside that scope. This extremely limited scope meant they didn’t consider the “justice” of the application of this bylaw, nor whether a different section of the Bylaw should/could be considered (s.308 instead of s.307, which the City refuses to do because it would invalidate their argument). With their ruling, however, we can now move back to the Court of Queen’s Bench where this issue belongs.


Court of Queen’s Bench Hearing

The SDAB is not able to make decisions on Charter issues. Given the arguments are Charter-related, we entered into an agreement with the City to acknowledge that the first court of competent jurisdiction was the Court of Queen’s Bench. We agreed to forego the SDAB hearing and proceed directly to Court.

The Justice, however, was reluctant to rule on Charter issues before all administrative rulings had occurred. So we must go to SDAB to have them rule on the limited jurisdictional issues under their authority.