Barbara Kay: How misandry scuttled Steven Galloway’s career
This opinion piece by Barbara Kay argues that Canadian author Steven Galloway was professionally destroyed by unsubstantiated sexual assault allegations driven by a hostile ideological stance toward men. The article describes the ongoing defamation trial involving University of British Columbia individuals who made or supported these claims, characterizing the decade-long conflict as a 'vendetta' that damaged Galloway's career and mental health. It references previous National Post reporting by other columnists to frame the narrative around the impact of these accusations on the writer.
A defamation trial involving former University of British Columbia creative writing department head Steven Galloway is currently underway in the B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver. The proceedings focus on allegations made over a decade ago regarding sexual misconduct. On Tuesday, the court heard testimony from Stephen Bohnen, a retired UBC community relations officer. Bohnen stated that he has no recollection of calling Galloway a serial predator, a claim previously advanced by Galloway’s accuser. This testimony directly challenged the narrative presented by the complainant, identified in court documents as A.B. due to a publication ban protecting her identity. The trial marks a continuation of a long-standing legal dispute initiated by Galloway in 2018. He sued individuals associated with the university who either alleged rape against him or publicly supported such accusations. According to reports, the majority of defendants named in the original claim have since settled out of court. Many of these parties have issued public apologies. However, four defendants remain in litigation. Additionally, A.B., the primary alleged victim, recently withdrew from participating in the trial. By doing so, she dropped her legal defenses based on truth and fair comment. Bohnen testified that A.B. visited his office in 2013. She complained that Galloway had provided her with multiple drinks of hard liquor and subsequently propositioned her for sex. A.B. told Bohnen that this interaction was not an isolated incident. Bohnen explained that his department produced incident reports for documentation purposes rather than conducting formal investigations. During cross-examination, Galloway’s lawyer, Daniel Burnett, reviewed the 2013 incident report with Bohnen. Burnett then displayed an email sent by A.B. to another individual. In that correspondence, A.B. described Bohnen, whom she referred to as Steve, as the head of campus security. She claimed he assisted her in putting safety measures in place. The current hearings follow previous coverage detailing what observers describe as a ten-year campaign that significantly impacted Galloway’s professional standing and personal well-being. Galloway is an award-winning Canadian writer. His tenure at UBC ended amid the controversy surrounding these allegations. The legal battle has drawn attention to the broader implications of unsubstantiated claims within academic institutions. Columnists Jamie Sarkonak and Amy Hamm have provided detailed accounts of the procedural history leading to the present trial. Their reporting highlights the duration of the conflict and its effect on Galloway’s mental health and artistic output. Witnesses have taken the stand to clarify specific interactions from 2013. The role of campus staff in handling complaints during that period is under scrutiny. Bohnen’s position as a community relations officer contrasts with the title attributed to him in A.B.’s later communications. The discrepancy forms part of the evidentiary record being examined by the judge. Legal teams are testing the consistency of statements made years apart. The withdrawal of A.B. from active participation complicates the defense strategy for the remaining defendants. Her absence means the court relies heavily on documentary evidence and third-party testimonies to establish the sequence of events. Galloway exited the courthouse on October 5, 2026, following the day’s proceedings. Photographers captured him leaving the building. The case involves complex questions regarding institutional response protocols and individual liability for speech. The settlement of most claims suggests a resolution for many parties, yet the core issues persist in the ongoing litigation. The remaining defendants face the prospect of continued judicial review. The outcome will depend on how the court weighs the conflicting accounts of the 2013 encounter and subsequent communications. The trial environment remains focused on factual reconstruction. Lawyers present emails, reports, and witness memories to build their cases. The distinction between documenting an incident and investigating it was highlighted in Bohnen’s explanation of his duties. This nuance may influence how the court views the initial handling of the complaint. As the trial progresses, further witnesses are expected to provide perspectives on the dynamics within the creative writing department at that time. The stakes involve both civil damages and reputational restoration for Galloway. Conversely, the defendants seek to validate their past actions and statements. The legal process continues to unfold with daily hearings scheduled at the B.C. Supreme Court.
3 reports
National PostIndependentCenterFactual: no official source document/info detectedObjective 90
This article reports on legal proceedings involving author Steven Galloway, whose accuser previously claimed that a former UBC community relations officer had identified Galloway as a serial predator. The former officer testified that he has no recollection of making such a statement, directly challenging the credibility of the accuser's narrative. The piece notes that Galloway appeared at the B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver on October 5, 2026. The reporting focuses on this specific discrepancy between the two parties regarding past communications about Galloway's conduct.
Bias read (Center): The subject matter involves a civil or criminal legal dispute concerning allegations of predatory behavior against a private individual, which is primarily a true crime or legal issue rather than a contested political policy debate. While the article appears in a publication known for conservative评论
Why factuality: no official source document/info detected
Why objectivity (90): The tone is neutral and journalistic. It presents the denial as a direct challenge to the accuser's story without using emotionally charged language or taking sides. The phrasing 'shuts down claim' is slightly strong but acceptable in headline style, while the body text remains measured ('says he ha
The Globe and MailIndependent🔒CenterFactual: no official source document/info detectedObjective 90
In a defamation trial involving Steven Galloway, the ex-husband of the woman who accused Galloway of misconduct testified that his wife refused to report the incident to the police. He stated that she informed him that Galloway had placed his hands around her neck. This testimony is part of the legal proceedings where Galloway is defending himself against allegations of defamation.
Bias read (Center): The article presents a factual account of a testimony provided during a defamation trial. It does not exhibit clear bias towards either side, merely relaying information given by the ex-husband without editorializing or emphasizing one perspective over another.
Why factuality: no official source document/info detected
Why objectivity (90): The article maintains a neutral tone, presenting facts without overt bias or emotional language. It avoids taking sides in the legal matter while reporting the testimony objectively.
This opinion piece by Barbara Kay argues that Canadian author Steven Galloway was professionally destroyed by unsubstantiated sexual assault allegations driven by a hostile ideological stance toward men. The article describes the ongoing defamation trial involving University of British Columbia individuals who made or supported these claims, characterizing the decade-long conflict as a 'vendetta' that damaged Galloway's career and mental health. It references previous National Post reporting by other columnists to frame the narrative around the impact of these accusations on the writer.
Bias read (Conservative): The article employs strongly right-leaning framing by labeling the opposition's actions as 'misandry' and a 'male-dehumanizing ideology.' It uses emotionally charged terms like 'scuttled,' 'laid waste,' and 'vendetta' to describe the legal proceedings and social dynamics, presenting the accused as a
How each side covered it
The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.
progressive
center
conservative
★
How each side covered it
Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.