Thread by @sunnshiiny

Misogyny is alive and well in Canada.

Strange that it comes from the most unexpected places.

The last 24 hours have seen Margaret Trudeau reduced to a vessel that produced 3 male heirs and a woman capitalizing on her husband’s and son’s birth rite: her last name.

But where is this misogynist attack coming from?

Not the far right.

It’s coming from the party that purports to offer superior morals and virtues. A party that aligns ideologically with feminism and equal rights.

We’ve entered the twilight zone of Canadian politics.

I wrote a thread the other day about just this very thing.

It’s central theme: when power attainment replaces the welfare of the people you serve, you’ve lost all moral authority and ethics. You can no longer justify a bid for leadership.

It’s helpful to review the definition of misogyny. Much more than belief in patriarchy, and worse than sexism, misogynists denigrate women and present them as vessels useful for reproducing heirs or arm candy. Or sexual pleasure (no inherent value beyond male gratification).

That’s how the mother of the Prime Minister is being presented. His brother Sacha, more or less uncriticized, is left alone. He’s a white male.

But Margaret Trudeau is being raked over the coals so to speak. Portrayed as a desperate wannabe trading in on her famous last name.

Worth nothing more than the attention that name inspires from those who attend WE’s charitable functions as participants or as donors.

So who is using grossly misogynistic rhetoric to describe the PM’s mom?

NDP MPs and supporters.

https://twitter.com/waytowichneil/status/1288234113355448320?s=21

Perhaps Margaret Trudeau should be cloistered, refused a platform or compensation for the duration of her son’s time as leader of LPC and Prime Minister of Canada? Surely a former wife & now mother of a PM wouldn’t conduct herself accountably & might provide a back channel to PM.

That’s the insinuation behind Charle Angus’s comments during committee questioning.

Doug Little, an NDP supporter, labels her a dipstick. Refers to her speeches as pathetic and worthless.

She’s just a name. It’s not even her name, it’s her former husband’s and her son’s.

The implication that the PM’s mother is irrelevant beyond her name is being propagated by the NDP.

Let that sink in.

A woman, a nationally recognized feminist leader, former spouse of a global leader, mother of another one, successful survivor of mental illness. Worthless.

That’s what NDP is currently amplifying. About women. About a particular woman. A woman who is a mother of the current PM. Being accused of personal irrelevancy and possible corrupt back room dealing to benefit her son?

That’s the level of conversation in Canadian politics being offered by NDP.

This is disgusting!

It’s also a complete betrayal of socialist ideology, beliefs and values about women. It’s overtly misogynistic and a nefarious insinuation meant to undermine the PM & LPC.

What would motivate NDP operatives to use rhetoric so disgusting and toxic and completely antithetical to their professed beliefs?

Power.

LPC and the popularity of the PM stands in the way of NDP attainment of political power.

It’s not the first example from NDP.

A quick search turned up an article written in 2001. Apparently a high school teacher was offering disinformation and propaganda to colleagues in Ontario to raise awareness about the plight of displaced Palestinians.

The article reveals the strategy to provide a subjective and manipulative narrative is not a new tactic for Mr. Little or the NDP.

Mr. Little offers rationalization and justification for providing propaganda to teachers and potentially students. His ends justify his means.

Truth and facts are now irrelevant. Winning approval and raising awareness is the objective. Of course the awareness is skewed. No matter. Balance is restored by over compensation with counter propaganda.

That is from 19 years ago.

Those are the arguments of a demagogue.

When you willingly abandon your beliefs and values to adopt a false and hateful narrative used to gain power and popular approval, you have crossed the line and no longer have trustworthy moral or ethical standards.

It wasn’t Charlie Angus who offered this rationale. And I realize Margaret Wendt has also got credibility issues. But what would be the reason for NDP to so viciously attack the PM’s mom? The Wendt article provides a reasonable explanation.

NDP have abandoned principles, beliefs and values in exchange for pursuit of political power.

Neither CPC or NDP communicate using truth and fact. There are numerous examples from both parties.

But this one is quite overt and rather an ugly example of the lengths NDP will go to obtain power.

I’ve been saying NDP rhetoric is as bad if not worse than CPC for over a year. With some reluctant yo accept that as fact.

Believe me now?

How much do those NDP misogynist statements about Margaret Trudeau set women’s rights back in Canada? Why would CPC supporters support women’s rights when even the NDP denigrate and devalue women and treat them like worthless sexual objects?

Singh, Angus, Ashton are working to destroy LPC because LPC and PM Trudeau are their main competition. They’re willing to lie, smear, accuse and publicly convict opposition MPs and their family members in pursuit of power. That’s the current NDP. A Layton legacy.