Jim Egan (activist)
| Jim Egan | |
|---|---|
| Born | 1921 Toronto, Ontario |
| Died | March 9, 2000 Courtenay, British Columbia |
| Nationality | Canadian |
| Known for | gay rights activist |
Jim Egan (1921 - March 9, 2000) was a Canadian LGBT rights activist, best known for his role in the landmark Supreme Court of Canada case Egan v. Canada.
Born and raised in Toronto, Ontario, Egan realized he was gay at a young age. He met John Norris "Jack" Nesbit, his lifelong partner, in 1948.
Beginning in 1949, Egan was a regular writer of letters to publications, criticizing inaccurate portrayals of lesbian and gay people, and to politicians, advocating for fairer treatment of lesbians and gays under the law. His letters appeared in daily and weekly newspapers, and in magazines such as Saturday Night and Time.
He later went on to contribute journalism pieces about homosexuality to publications such as True News Times and Justice Weekly.
In 1964, he was prominently featured in Sydney Katz's "The Homosexual Next Door", a Maclean's article which was the most positive portrayal of homosexuality ever to appear in a mainstream Canadian publication up to that time; even though Egan appeared in the article under a pseudonym, Nesbit — a more private person who was uncomfortable with Egan's public visibility — demanded that Egan give up his activism if he wanted to continue their relationship.
Although Egan initially refused and the couple broke up, Egan soon decided that he wanted to reunite with Nesbit and dropped his activist pursuits. Egan and Nesbit moved to Vancouver Island in 1964, starting their own business. Egan was also active in local politics, serving as a representative for Electoral Area B (Comox North) on the Comox-Strathcona Regional District board from 1981 to 1993.
Having reached retirement age, Egan began collecting Canada Pension Plan benefits in 1986, and applied for spousal benefits for Nesbit the following year. The couple would actually have been better off financially if they collected separate individual pensions, but chose the spousal benefits route as they felt their situation would make a strong test case for the legal rights of same-sex couples. After the spousal benefits were denied, they took the case to court; following losses at the Federal Court in 1991 and the Federal Court of Appeal in 1993, the case reached the Supreme Court in 1994. The case was argued before the Supreme Court on November 1 of that year.
...
Wikipedia