回复: 移民部步步为营 我方兵团突围遇不作为法官Barnes
I Think Jason Kenney is Gay
Posted in
Unfounded Speculation on March 7th, 2010 by
Stephen DeGrace
Topics:
Gay Stuff,
Politics
< First | Previous |
Next | Last >
Jason Kenney, Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, image from Wikipedia. (
Larger Image)
Recently,
CBC news ran a story about how
Jason Kenney, the Conservative federal government's Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, had the short discussion about gay rights in Canada removed from the new edition of the handbook that immigrants seeking citizenship must study. Kenney's office received the draft handbook, with the references to gay rights in Canada, and the minister's office issued a memo ordering it be deleted. The authors of the handbook asked the minister to reconsider and were refused. I wrote a comment on the CBC article, which was not approved by the moderators, where I stated that I have always thought that Jason Kenney was gay, and that this is a classic self-hating closet-case move.
Apparently that comment was too radical to approve, although many comments were approved openly calling Jason Kenney a bigot or worse. So apparently, according to the supposed bastion of liberalism, the CBC, saying that someone is a bigot is non-actionable fair comment, but saying that someone is gay is a slander beyond the pale.
Incidents like this should serve as a reminder that gay rights are not as firmly entrenched in our society as we would like to believe, and haters like Kenney can still get their hands on the levers of power to try and erode the equality of gay and lesbian Canadians. But let's forget about that for now and look at the specific incident and what it says about Kenney.
The details of the incident are damning. First of all, equality for gays and lesbians, including marriage rights, is a very important fact about Canada which is very different from the situation in the countries the majority of our immigrants come from. So the department responsible for preparing the new edition of the study guide added a concise section on the status of gays in Canada. The document was sent to the minister's office for review and this section, and apparently no other, was nixed. When pressed for an explanation, all Kenney would say is that the document can't be "encyclopedic," as though this extremely unusual social situation in Canada were a triviality unworthy of even a mention.
Then to top it off,
Kenney later flat-out lied about having the section on gay rights removed from the guide.
Granted, Kenney is a long-time outspoken opponent of gay and lesbian equality, and the Conservative party is filled with haters, but my strong first impression was that this is coming from somewhere deeper than just anti-gay ideology. I have suspected Kenney of being a closet homosexual since back during his days as the Official Virgin of the Canadian Alliance, and this incident only strengthens my impression. I think a straight man, however homophobic, would not go out of his way the way Kenney did to remove the reference, particularly when there was no political gain to be had from it. A straight man would not scan through the document zooming in on gay references with laser-like precision, either. Kenney did say he left in a reference in a photo caption to the sexual orientation of Olympic swimmer
Mark Tewksbury as evidence he didn't have it in for gays, but to my mind that just underlines Kenney's particular interest in the topic that he could still rhyme off every passing reference to gays in the guide.
As I said above, this is all classic self-hating closet-case behavior. The icing on the cake is that Kenney is by his own admission a 40-year-old virgin (older than that, now!) and does not plan to have sex until he gets married (presumably to a member of the opposite sex - it really takes forty years to find the right gal, Jason?).
If it weren't for his recent hijinx where he showed himself to be a lying, passive-aggressive bigot and weasel, I might find a perverse sort of honour in Kenney's stance. He certainly had honesty and integrity in his beliefs, WRONG though they may be... but I think that this episode just goes to prove that not all points of view are equally valid, there is such a thing as absolute truth and better and worse representations of it. The fundamental perverseness and lack of integrity of the anti-gay position is ultimately morally corrosive, as is the tissue of lies that a closet-case like Kenney needs to weave to maintain a relationship with the world even if he refuses to marry for expedience. No matter what lengths you go to to try and hold an untenable position with integrity, the lack of internal integrity of the position itself will always get you in the end.
And it is with that in mind that I, as a humanitarian, am offering Jason Kenney some advice. Sweetheart, while the gay male world is not the evil place you imagine it to be, it does, however, happen to be composed of men, and therefore tends to be focused on things like youth and beauty, which you, being a man, if you were honest with yourself, could no doubt appreciate. I hate to be the one to tell you this, but you're not getting any younger, and you're
definitely not getting any prettier. You've already wasted the best years of your life and pissed away the happiness and fulfilment you could have had on false and meaningless religious convictions. Before you fritter away what's left, you might want to reconsider your position. And, also, get to the gym.
< First | Previous |
Next | Last >
Comments:
There are 34 comments on this item.
On April 4th, 2010 Emilia wrote:
The last sentence made me laugh. I have to scan articles on Jason Kenney, so I once absentmindedly remarked that Jason Kenney was a "chubby dub" within earshot of my two-year-old daughter. So now whenever I have to read over my articles on Kenney and say the name "Jason Kenney" out loud my daughter screams, "Chubby dub!"
I can't say whether Kenney is gay or not, and frankly, to me it really doesn't matter that much. However, I just want to say that even if he is, family values hypocrisy is hardly the exclusive domain of the Conservative Party. Remember Tom Wappel? He was the self-styled "family man," opposed to same-sex marriage, abortion, and what not but later took up with a (female) staffer. Well, he was a Liberal, not a Conservative.
Finally, and this might be a bit jarring, but even if I don't for example share Kenney's views on same-sex marriage (I joke I don't have any particular problem with gay marriage in particular, just with the concept of marriage in general), I do think he's made some sensible decisions regarding immigration. Again, even in that arena I don't approve of everything he's done, but for example, reforming the refugee system is in my view a must. I mean it's a bit of a joke that people from a democratic country like the Czech Republic are coming here claiming persecution back home. And I agree with Kenney that the refugee system needs to be reformed, even if I might not agree with 100% of the changes he makes.
So this is my take on Kenney.
On April 4th, 2010
Stephen DeGrace
wrote:
Hi Emilia,
Thanks for your comments! Since no one pretty much reads this blog, it's really nice to get a bit of reaction to be article
.
There's really no comparison between the Conservatives and the Liberals on the issue of gay rights, though. Tom Wappel is certainly a low down sack of shit. He's also on the *fringe* of his party. Tom Wappel never got near any Liberal cabinet - the closest he ever achieved to respectability was as a critic (ironically, for immigration) in the early 90's, which he managed to flub by taking extreme positions. Whereas, Jason Kenny is a cabinet star, is talked about as a possible leadership contender, and represents very much the mainstream of his party.
The Liberal party is a big-tent party with at most a watered-down ideology compromised for the realities of seeking power, and the Conservatives have part of their roots in such a party, so you get all kinds in both camps... but taken as a whole, the two parties are miles apart on gay rights. I think that would be much clearer if the Conservatives had a majority and felt less need to muzzle their huge social conservative caucus. Forget about gay marriage, there is a significant proportion of the Conservative party which would be in favour of recriminalizing homosexuality.
And frankly, I'm sick and tired of jackass self-hating closet cases like Jason Kenney heaping shit on gays, regardless of their political affiliation or lack thereof. I'm not saying his record is all bad in every area of his work, or that the Conservative party is all bad, for that matter. Certainly a more conservative tilt on immigration (ironically, in part to protect our liberal society from being flooded by illiberal newcomers- c.f.the Netherlands) is probably long overdue in Canada. But regardless, there is no way in hell he deserves a pass for his anti-gay actions, nor does the Conservative party in any way deserve to receive a pass for what Kenney's actions say about them as a group.
On the whole, I want to see Kenney go *down*.
On April 5th, 2010 Emilia wrote:
You by the way are not the only person who's speculated that Kenney might be gay. I myself remain agnostic on the issue... but if it turns out he is he should be remembered as the biggest hypocrite in Canadian politics.
On April 5th, 2010 Emilia wrote:
Here's some of the speculation I've run into:
http://canadiancynic.blogspot.com/2010/03/what-fuck-is-jason-kenney-babbling.html
http://queer-liberal.blogspot.com/2008/09/that-creepy-little-jason-kenney-guy.html
On April 20th, 2010 Emilia wrote:
As a (heterosexual) woman I understand your apprehension about illiberal immigrants coming to Canada - and they don't have to be Muslim; I once dated a Lebanese Christian man whose views on women made Sigmund Freud look like a radical feminist. Also, I have to commend the Netherlands for putting their foot down and insisting that immigrants to the country embrace Dutch values. I understand the Dutch pride themselves on being tolerant, but there should be a limit to "tolerating the intolerant."
In fact, though I don't share either his gender or his sexual orientation, I find the late Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn an inspiration. RIP, Pim.
On October 20th, 2010 Sarif wrote:
I don't like Jason Kenney, he is telling the Lost Canadians to get lost, hates LGBT people and agree he maybe a fellow gay but poking at the fact he is fat. It just cheapens your writing down to that of a 4chan thread.
Now don't get me wrong here, I don't care about his feelings.
On October 20th, 2010
Stephen DeGrace
wrote:
Hey, I'm not the one who called him fat, that was you
. I just suggested in a subtle way that he might want to get to the gym if he wants to enjoy the good gay years he has left
. Men are shallow. And it's actually not unreasonable to be be more attracted to people who take care of themselves physically. Despite what some people believe, getting laid is not an inalienable human right.
On November 17th, 2010 Emilia Liz wrote:
There aren't any gays who like fat men? I know some straight men like fat women - well, not all; my brother, for instance, nearly ripped my head off when I tried to set him up with a fat girl - but Kenney just might find a "market" among some gays if he really is gay. By the way, my daughter's favourite refrain now is "Jason Kenney, get to the gym!"
On November 17th, 2010
Stephen DeGrace
wrote:
Haha yes I have to give you that one. Still, my observation is that it's a bit of a specialized market, to put it delicately. Of course, naturally enough, a lot of guys do find power itself intoxicating, so maybe that's a card Jason could think of playing while he's still in government.
On November 17th, 2010 Emilia Liz wrote:
I also joke that I'm sure one reason Jason Kenney likes being Minister of Multiculturalism is that he can go to all the ethnic festivals and eat all the food there.
On November 17th, 2010
Stephen DeGrace
wrote:
Good point. Jason does look like a man who enjoys his perogies.
On November 24th, 2010 Emilia Liz wrote:
Either you've got ESP or you're closely following Mr. Kenney's itinerary, because he recently attended a Polish function so I'm sure he enjoyed his perogies there.
By the way, speculating on Kenney's actions vis-a-vis the citizenship guide, if it is true he is gay, he might be one of a long line of homophobic gay men. One example is Bishop Eddie Long, a Baptist pastor in the United States who spoke out strongly against same-sex marriage but who was apparently seducing teenage boys in his charge. So maybe a strongly homophobic man should raise suspicions.
On the other hand, I don't get the impression that most famous homophobic women - of which there are probably fewer than men - are closet lesbians. Rather, it seems like the majority of them are women who extol the virtues and sanctity of "the family" and appeal to the innocence of "the children" but who behind their facade lead desperately unhappy family lives. One example is the country singer Anita Bryant, who campaigned against gay teachers in California in the '70s (the "Save Our Children" campaign) and who later divorced her husband saying he had put her up to her anti-gay activity.
That's my observation anyway. Any thoughts?
On November 29th, 2010
Stephen DeGrace
wrote:
That's an interesting observation, and I don't really have much to add. Of course I have noted as have many others the link between virulent homophobia and closet homosexuality in men... but I have to confess I hadn't given much thought to the parallel situation in women. I have to say that I think you're right, homophobia in women seems to be more an exercise in social control, and perhaps you are right that it is an act of compensation.
On March 26th, 2011 Emilia wrote:
On the subject of Kenney's girth, I found this:
http://www.uglychinesecanadian.com/?p=3485
On April 15th, 2011 Conservative Insider wrote:
Actually, the original poster is right. I had a friend who worked at Kenney's Office and my friend attested to the fact that Kenney is Gay. In fact, he had an affair with his 20 something executive assistant named Jamie Ellerton! John Baird is Gay too!
On April 15th, 2011
Stephen DeGrace
wrote:
I've heard that about Baird. John Baird at least has an honourable voting record - he voted against the motion to reopen the issue of same-sex marriage.
Just because you're gay doesn't define your political temperament, and of course lots of gay men are conservative, and that's OK. A person's sexuality is not necessarily the single most important part of their character and priorities, and I can see how a person like Baird might support a mostly anti-gay party if its politics support principles he weighs as more important to him. So I don't have to like Baird's politics or personality, but I don't begrudge him the right to hold his political opinions or support his party. He hasn't sold his soul to do so, and I think if we were honest with ourselves we would all find that we have some hypocrisy ion our associations. I actually respect John Baird.
I don't know how people like Jason Kenney sleep at night, though. If what we think about Jason Kenney is correct, he's a man with no integrity.
On April 30th, 2011 J.R. wrote:
I'm gay and find him attractive. He's what we call bears. The heavy set type of men are usually called this. So yeah there is a market for him. Come out Jason!
On June 12th, 2011 Emilia wrote:
Well, to each his (or her) own. It's funny; a (heterosexual female) colleague and I were discussing the other day who we thought was better looking, Jason Kenney or his Ontario counterpart, Minister Eric Hoskins. She said Kenney; I said Hoskins.
Regarding fat men, personally, if I were back on the mating market, I can't say a man's weight would be a deal-breaker for me, but having dated a fat man before (the above-mentioned Lebanese man), there would be a few things to watch out for. First, at least with that guy, the missionary position was basically out - though here I think part of the reason was that I'm very thin, almost underweight. Also, fat men are more likely to suffer from erectile dysfunction, which happened in my case (another complicating factor here too: he blamed me for it). Maybe on average straight women are more likely to accept fatness in a partner than straight men (and gay men?) are. So I'm not saying I'd rule out a fat man as a lover, but I might be on guard for certain things.
Now to Kenney as a politician, to give the devil his due, so to speak, I have to commend him for speaking out in the recent citizenship guide against 'barbaric practices' like honour killing and female circumcision. He risked being labelled as racist, which he was called. Unfortunately some so-called liberals are scared excrementless - pardon the pun - of being called racist, so they don't take a strong stance against sexist cultural practices in non-Western cultures. So even if I don't agree with Kenney on things like same-sex marriage (if he's still against it), I have to give him credit for calling a spade a spade.
Anyway, that's it for me!
On June 13th, 2011 Joan wrote:
It doesn't bother me whether Jason Kenney is gay or not. You are what you are. But to deny citizenship to those of Canadian descent, Lost Canadians, whose families have lived here for generations, fighting for the country, toiling through hard work and making the country what it is today is quite plainly wrong. I doubt very much whether Mr Kenney would like to be discriminated against if he is gay, so why is he discriminating against those born in wedlock before 1947 to Canadian Mothers or those born out of wedlock to Canadian fathers.
On July 19th, 2011
Stephen DeGrace
wrote:
Sorry, folks, I had a problem with my comment system on the site and I did not see and approve these comments until long after they were posted. All a part of the never-ending battle to deal with comment spam without losing the meaningful comments! I think I have it finally worked out, though.
Emilia, I agree whole-heartedly with the points you made at the bottom of your last comment... this is an area where the Conservatives (and conservatives, small-c) have a real strength. They can call a spade a spade and a genital mutilation a genital mutilation without being paralyzed by an intellectual quasi-religion of cultural relativism which prevents many intellectual feminists, who should be at the forefront of the fight against such practices at home and around the world, from mounting a meaningful attack.
So props to Jason on that point - not that he was likely to take the slightest bit of flak from his base on that, so his risk was much diminished from the courage it would take a liberal to make such a statement or permit it to be made (since in a liberal's case it would be your friends and colleagues trying to eviscerate you). Nevertheless, it was a courageous stance in the sense that it would not be universally popular and could cost him some votes without necessarily balancing out as more votes elsewhere, and I applaud him for his moral uprightness and intestinal fortitude in making it.
On August 8th, 2011 Emilia wrote:
I'm glad your site is back on track, and thank you for your response to my comment.
I just wanted to add that I'm not so familiar with the gay scene, but I have heard of some gays questioning the cultural relativism that, as you say, passes for a kind of religion in much of the left-wing world. One gay forum I spotted some time ago noted that some liberals who wouldn't hesitate to condemn the stupid but relatively harmless Fred "God hates fags" Phelps (though last thing I heard he was going to picket the funeral of Liz Taylor, who as far as I know was NOT a lesbian) would just nod their heads at some imam in the Middle East who calls for gays to be hung. I think even some liberal women, like myself, are starting to question this reluctance to criticize sexism abroad on the part of some left-wingers, so maybe gays are starting to do the same.
On August 8th, 2011 I'mnotgay wrote:
Gay or not, either way it would involve seeing him with his clothes off, and I, for one, don't want to go there.
On August 9th, 2011
Stephen DeGrace
wrote:
LOL @ I'mnotgay. I'm sure that's a risk none of us wish to take.
Emilia, I think the secular religion of cultural relativism is firmly in decline along with the pseudo-intellectual discipline of cultural studies which helped to spawn it. These days many of us acknowledge the existence of a complex and inborn human nature and an objective reality, including an objective moral reality based in innate human nature, which allows us to condemn atrocities like genital mutilation and otherwise make moral judgements on the practices of other cultures.
After all, if it is not possible to make objective judgements about the practices of other cultures, how is it possible to make such judgements about our own? Saying that sexism is wrong in our own culture, or that Fred Phelkps is a dick, are precisely such judgements. Somewhere, a healthy admonition not to rush to judgement in situations we don't necessarily properly understand has mutated into a general surrender of all judgement.
Cultural relativism makes a convenient stick to beat the left with, and deservedly so, but it is not at all representative of the entire secular left, and less so with each passing day as its intellectual vacuity is laid bare. This poisonous philosophy is not necessary to support principles of liberalism, and the sooner it finally dies, the better.
Given that women and gays are the principal targets of the brutality of many of the foreign cultures we are supposed to accept uncritically, I think the fact there is a problem with this kind of thinking is or should be more evident to us and it is not surprising that many gays and feminists and leaving that particular sinking ship.
On August 13th, 2011 a policy refugee wrote:
Mark Twain said God made the Idiot for practice, and then He made the School Board. I say Jason Kenney came before the school board.
On September 9th, 2011
Russell Barth
wrote:
Kenny probably is a virgin because he is such a creep. I was talking to someone who used to work with him and he was HAMMERED at an xmas party and hitting on every woman, trying to get his nut.
The reason he is a virgin is because he couldn't get lucky in a women's prison with a handful of pardons. He is a creep.
On September 9th, 2011
Stephen DeGrace
wrote:
Wow, Russell, that's a colourful image! Well done!
On September 14th, 2011 Emilia wrote:
So Kenney's not gay after all? (Not that I'd be romantically interested in him; I tend to be attracted to Black and Hispanic men.)
On September 14th, 2011
Stephen DeGrace
wrote:
I'm sticking with my hypothesis
. One anecdote against a much larger body of anecdotal evidence suggesting the opposite. Besides, he may just have been just sober enough to take the opportunity to make a show of hitting on women in his drunken state.
On September 15th, 2011 Emilia wrote:
Maybe we should have a betting pool on whether Kenney is straight or gay (with small odds that he's bisexual; some sources say that true bisexuality is rare in men and that some self-declared male bisexuals are 100% gay in reality - i.e. Elton John). I'm still agnostic about Kenney - though I don't know; more and more I'm sort of leaning towards the 'gay' side. Even him hitting on women, I know that 'in vinum veritas,' but somehow I think if he were really drunk, he'd been hitting on one woman, not a whole bunch, so maybe it was just a show.
And we may never know for sure. Even his single status doesn't really say much; plenty of heterosexuals remain unmarried. Or perhaps he's basically asexual and isn't really interested in individuals of either sex.
On September 18th, 2011
Stephen DeGrace
wrote:
I want to tell a story about an old friend in a group I used to hang out with who we were all sure was gay, but I'm not sure how much I should say. Anyway, there was a lot of ambiguity, and evidence planted (including under the influence of alcohol) that could support the hypothesis that he was straight, but it turned out we were right and years later he came out. I guess the point is, hitting on women absolutely doesn't prove anything, drunk or not.
I actually go the other way on bisexuality. I do think that almost all men have a strong preference one way or another, but I don't think sexual orientation is usually "pure." In my own case, after I came out and accepted I liked guys, and sort of relaxed and stopped trying to like girls, I was sort of freaked out to sometimes find myself sometimes being sexually attracted to girls. I'm serious, it was actively upsetting. After going through all that hell coming to terms with being gay and coming out, having bisexual urges was one step too far lol. I think that's why a lot of gay men make a big deal about being grossed out by women - it's the mirror image of homophobia. Myself, I'm not even slightly vagophobic, and I would totally do it with a girl (and did, once, long after coming out. It was OK, I'm glad I did it once). But I'm a lot more motivated towards men, and men being pretty goal-oriented, the practical outcome is that that is a possibility I just never act on, except that one time. The stars really have to align in a funny way.
I compare it to liking chocolate or vanilla. If you like chocolate a lot more than vanilla, you are probably going to grab the chocolate pudding every time, when you have a choice. Liking chocolate doesn't automatically make you hate vanilla. Given the messiness of biology, even if most men are wired to have a strong preference one way or another, it would be very strange to me if there did not exist a significant subset with more complex or less distinct preferences.
I think a lot of straight men are the same way in reverse, and this is the source of a lot of homophobia, since the "wrong" feelings fly straight in the face of masculine identity and are upsetting - as well as the source of a considerable body of evidence that otherwise straight men will "play" with another guy "when the stars align." Quite a lot of that stuff goes on, homophobia or no.
Men and women are both physically beautiful and have the ability to appreciate the beauty of the sex they are not usually attracted to, whether they would admit it or not. And creating a pure sexual orientation in a species that is not robotically controlled by pheromones released during scheduled mating seasons is probably a tough engineering problem. The evidence suggests that a less precisely focused sexuality is still more than able to get the job done, making-little-humans-wise.
"Imprecise" sexuality is probably something with ancient roots, anyway, for reasons of mechanistic constraint, or else for deeper reasons we don't yet understand. Look how ubiquitous homosexuality is in the animal kingdom, after all.
http://www.salon.com/it/feature/1999/03/cov_15featurea.html
But anyway, back to Kenney, my money is still on "gay." We have only one life to live on this earth, and nothing recognizable (if anything) after, so he should get over it his issues and move on. Time's a-wasting.
On December 12th, 2011 Apemate wrote:
Isn't today a good day for Kenny to remove his VEIL?
On February 20th, 2012 Sharon ~ LetsTalkCandidly wrote:
Hi Stephen;
You said: "I think that would be much clearer if the Conservatives had a majority and felt less need to muzzle their huge social conservative caucus. Forget about gay marriage, there is a significant proportion of the Conservative party which would be in favour of recriminalizing homosexuality."
Hmmm ~ then how do you explain our liberal Conservative gov't, with a majority, virtually leaping all over itself to preserve the "gay marraige" or should I say "gay divorce" agenda just recently (Feb. 2012)? As a conservative, I keep waiting, and hoping, for the CPCs "hidden" agenda that liberals keep threatening about but, alas, all I get is more liberalism.
On February 21st, 2012
Stephen DeGrace
wrote:
Sharon,
I explain it as strategy. A given administration only has so much time in which to accomplish anything, and so it has to pick its battles. For a move to revoke a basic civil right with broad public support, the Opposition would be willing to use every tactic in the book to draw out the Parliamentary vote. After all that, it is about 99% clear that the Supreme Court would overturn the law on the first challenge.
On top of that, not all potential Conservative voters are anti-gay, and taking a side on a polarizing issue that the majority is rapidly deciding the other way on is not a recipe for a second majority. Then you have inner-circle gay Conservatives like John Baird who support gay marriage and who have a voice at the table.
The religious Conservative faction will need years to mount an effective attack on gay marriage, and social conditions may never be right. For the moment, therefore, it makes sense not to give their opponents even the slightest opening in this area and to keep their own ideological faction disciplined and resigned to the status quo - do what it takes to keep the debate firmly closed.
Instead, Harper is using his capital where he thinks it can be spent the most profitably - changing the criminal justice system to a more punitive orientation, changing the nation's foreign policy to a more militaristic orientation, and slowly eroding Canadians' expectations of what government can and will do for them, in order to eventually dismantle much of it.
On March 5th, 2012 Kafka wrote:
Kenney definitely gives off the gay vibe
- From a Gay guy
她那边诉讼，你这边发信。我一保守派两边都深表支持，不过我一葛朗台伪君子只动口不动手。
期待您们的好消息，盼望吃葡萄，摘桃子，天上掉馅饼。
.jpg)
好久不见！
