p. 763; Whatcott, at para. 104), its close proximity to the values at the core of s. 2(b) is [82] Counter-speech motivated by the defence of a vulnerable or marginalized group in society also engages the values at the core of s. 15(1); namely, the equal worth and dignity of every individual (Quebec (Attorney General) v. A, 2013 SCC 5, [2013] 1 S.C.R. 61, at para. 138; see also Pointes, at para. 80). Targets of degrading expression belonging to a vulnerable group in society may lack the ability or authority to effectively combat the harmful speech themselves (Lepoutre, at p. 157). Discourse can then take on an uneven quality, making protective counter-speech by the group or individual’s more powerful advocates all the more influential and important (Zwibel, at p. 333; see Whatcott, at para. 75 (recognizing the importance of maintaining a “path of reply by [a] group under attack”)). [83] Mr. Hansman spoke out to counter expression he perceived to be untrue, prejudicial towards transgender and other 2SLGBTQ+ individuals, and potentially damaging to transgender youth. [84] The transgender community is undeniably a marginalized group in Canadian society. The history of transgender individuals in our country has been marked by discrimination and disadvantage. Although being transgender “implies no impairment in judgment, stability, reliability, or general social or vocational capabilities” (J. Drescher and E. Haller, Position Statement on Discrimination Against Transgender and Gender Diverse Individuals, 2018 (online)), transgender and other 2023 SCC 14 (CanLII) beyond doubt.