Of Course It’s Different
When one of the party faithful says something like
“There’s A’s and there’s B’s. The A’s are guys like me, the B’s are homosexual faggots with dirt under their fingernails that transmit diseases,”
Shouldn’t some dutiful Tory backbencher be standing up in the House of Commons during nationally televised question period and asking what action the government will be taking?
And shouldn’t someone important from the Cabinet stand up and speak about how ‘extremely disappointed and disturbed’ the government is about ‘past comments’ that have been ‘very hurtful, inappropriate, and go against everything that this country stands for’ — and then, in (no doubt) grave and somber tones, say that the government will be ‘reviewing the relationship’ it has with the people of Regina-Lumsden-Lake Centre ‘including the funding that goes with it’?
If they weren’t such hypocrites that would happen - but they are, and it won’t.
Minor after snark: who knew Conservative debate after-parties were such hotbeds of sophisticated conversation ‘eh?
Update [h/t Christian Conservative]: Tories stand by MP
But Government house leader Peter Van Loan later said the Conservatives are standing by Lukiwski since he’s apologized for his remarks and stated that he no longer hold the opinions expressed in the video.
“We welcome that quick and unequivocal apology and consider the matter is now closed,” said Van Loan.
Gee…. how surprising
For those of you with failing memories: David Ahenakew also apologized for his remarks, said that when he made them he was “caught up in the heat of the moment”, and said they did not represent his beliefs.
I really gotta get around to making a “f*cking hypocrites” category to file this stuff under.
[ratings]
It was 16 years ago. Everyone has made comments, or held beleifs that you regret over time. Most of us aren’t stupid enough to tape it or say it to a reporter. I’m not sure how genuine the regret is in Lekiwiski, or Ahenakew, but forgiveness can be a great thing if the regret is genuine.
Ya know what nasyboy, if the Lekiwiski in that video had been a 16 year old swaggering around with a beer in his hand trying to impress his mates or some girl I’d be the first to agree with ya. But the Lekiwiski in that video is, by accounts I have read elsewhere, 40 years old and (at least should have been) long passed that stage in his life.
According to news reports I saw Lekiwiski was “frog marched” to the cameras and told to make an apology, that’s not to say he wouldn’t have made it anyway (what else could he do fergodssake?), and then the party welcomed him back into the fold with open arms, let bye-gones-be-bye-gones, it’s all over with now, one short day after much political theatre, posturing, and chest thumping over bigoted comments made by others.
– and that hypocrisy, and not what Lekiwiski said then (or even how he may feel today), is the point of my post.
I dunno, I was 26 before I figured out that AIDS wasn’t a “gay” disease (about 20 years ago). I would fight pretty hard with anyone that tried to lay that on my doorstep today.
It’s a historical gold mine, but a little context and grain of salt is required, especially given that Pat Atkinson was being the release of it. It really contains nothing very new from what we didn’t know. Tories like to get drunk and show off for a home video. Sounds like half the kids in this province, unfortunately.
Did Lekiwiski in the video remind anyone else of Eric Roberts from “Star 80″?
Too obscure?
Whooee! Unless we believe that people’s attitudes can and do change, we’re completely wasting our time with any meaningful discussions, dialogs, rants, blogs, essays, op-ed pieces, church sermons, parental lectures or any proselytizing, at all.
If we do not believe that a Hummer-driving polluter can see the light and slow down his contribution to the death of the planet, why waste our breath and energy trying to convince environmental miscreants to change their attitudes? If we do not believe that a racist can see the error of her ways, what point is there in trying show her that error?
I agree with SL on the Ahenekew hypocrisy. As to why the Con’s are forgiving Lukiwski but not Ahenekew, you only need to look at the targets of the bigotry. Hatred of queers is not as bad as hatred of Jews, at least in the official view of the CPoC.
I know that people can and do change. I know it from personal experience. I’ve changed over the years and I’ve seen huge changes in family members — positive changes. When a seemingly sincere apology is given and a person renounces formerly held beliefs, I want to take them at their word. Call it idealistic optimism but without such a belief, I might as well give up all my do-gooder preachifyin’ an’ become an eco-terrorist.
JB
At the risk of sounding repetitive, Lekiwiski ’s attitude then and now are not the point here Candace, neither is the concept of “personal change”.
The point is the hypocrisy of the Harper government when one of ‘theirs‘ is involved.
Ahenakew makes bigoted comments, apologizes, suffers legal and personal penalties for his stupidity, and the Harper government threatens the fiscal stability of a provinces culture.
Lekiwiski makes bigoted comments, apologizes, suffers personal penalties for his stupidity, and the party says, well, that’s it then, it’s all behind us now, he said he was sorry.
It’s hypocritical political b/s based on nothing more than party affiliation and favour - the current foundation of party politics in Canada.
“Did Lekiwiski in the video remind anyone else of Eric Roberts from “Star 80″?”
Holy crap, get out of my head….
I’ll jump on the bandwagon here too - its not so much about what he said, but with the official hypocrisy surrounding it. I think people can change their views - radically at times - in 16 years. Like Candace, I’m sure some of the things I may have said 20 years ago I would fight hard against today (mostly involving the glories of Marxism).
The same people defending Lukiwski will no doubt be the ones that continue to claim that Trudeau was a fascist because he belonged to them in his youth (and a “card carrying commie” as my mum used to say - even when she voted for him).
Lukiwski has it the worst and he between a rock and a hard place - reviled my the more moderates because of what he said and reviled by the rest because the seem his apology as too “politically correct” (even if he meant it, which at this time I have no reason to doubt.)
Lekiwiski ’s attitude then and now are not the point here Candace, neither is the concept of “personal change”.
Is it reasonable to draw a direct comparison of the consequences and ignore the differences of the actions? Can that still be hypocracy?
If we made everyone quit who uttered anti-gay words it would be the end of the male workforce.
It is very hypocritical, I agree fully. I think it goes deeper than party loyalty, though.
There is still plenty of homophobia that goes either unnoticed or we let it slide. A popular schoolyard taunt in the 50’s and 60’s when I was alad was to call someone a “queer” or a “fag.”
Today, things haven’t changed much. I don’t frequent schoolyards but even I’ve heard the derogatory exclamation, “That’s so gay!” I’ve even heard parents of teenagers use this expression. And, yes, I did react with, “What do you have against gays?” Shocked silence and then they never speak to you again. In 2008.
Males in my generation were given a negative portrayal of homosexuals from the very time we learned such people existed. In fact, we learned of their existence by asking just what it meant when the big boys called someone a fag or a queer. Anti-gay prejudice lives on today and has been far more acceptable than racial or religious prejudice.
JB
For a very long time I believed that the hype over redneck bigots in the Conservative movement was mostly a creation of the left-leaning media in this country. I was willing to give the benefit of a doubt to people whom I knew on the right that they were not a party to this sort of stuff.
The blogoverse has been an education for me. Nowhere is the bigotry and hate of the right so proudly on display as it is in right-wing land online. What I find even more amazing is that these people are so very very comfortable with their bigotry and prejudices that it never even occurs to them that there is a huge segment of the Canadian population that simply does NOT believe in their point of view.
Clearly the fact that this Lukiwski character could make these kind of remarks to the giggling and chuckling audience in the film and not be taken to task for it speaks not only volumes about him, but about the zeitgeist of the Conservative “culture” at that time.
I take it as read that all the “It was 17 years ago… get over it.. bleh bleh bleh” remarks are rationalizing sick behavior. They don’t care that homosexuals were being attacked in this fashion. They regret only that one of their own was caught out.
Any 40 year old politician who doesn’t understand the historical resonance of calling a group of people “disease carriers” …. I don’t know. People do change, and I wish to forgive - but that particular kind of discussion of a whole group of people makes me queasy. If I heard his story on how and why he put his dehumanization down - the story of his shift, rather than just “I’m so sorry”, which MIGHT mean “I’m so sorry that I was frankly honest in a way that would come back to bite me” - I would have a much easier time with understanding this man.
As it is, I don’t get it, and it scares me.
That’s what it comes right down to. This kind of language scares me; I’m not going to be unscared by an apology that could be for political expedience.
KevinG - It wouldn’t be the end of the male workforce if all adults making homophobic comments were asked to quit! This sort of universalism, even as a ‘joke’, is a statement. It suggests one particular experience is the standard for Male. I don’t know how old you are, but in my generation (GenX), things were already changing.
A good chunk of out-from-the-start adult gay males may not have to quit under your statement, and they’re men. I know a bunch of straight dudes who as early as high school were members of friends of GBLT groups; and a bunch who experimented; and a bunch of folks whose families include queer or trans folks; and there were lots of straight dudes out with me on Queer Patrol; etc., etc. Go to a theatre and make a hilarious homophobic joke in the green room and watch your ass hit the pavement outside before your joke finishes sullying the air.
There is more than one way to be a man. Standing firm against hatred is one way. Don’t lump all men under the same banner - y’gotta hate to be a dude - because it’s simply not true. Nothing sexy nor sexed about hate.
(And I don’t think all homophobes should have to quit.)
Don’t lump all men under the same banner - y’gotta hate to be a dude - because it’s simply not true. Nothing sexy nor sexed about hate.
Oh please, don’t be so quick to jump on the hate bandwagon and lets keep the straw men with the tin men.
It was a time of transition as you note. What percentage of males do you think have never made a statement more offensive that Lekiwiski’s. 10%? 5%?
In the early 1990’s I had two friends who were gay and even before that I was generally respectful. Still I’m pretty sure I used the word faggot and homo. I certainly used homo in the same way that offend Jim Bob (ie as a synonym for lame). It never occurred to me to inspect their fingernails.
The point beneath the hyperbole is that this sanctimonious fascination we seem to have developed of trolling through a person’s history to find remarks that are by todays standards intemperate and then demanding they resign is the real hypocrisy here.
Why is anybody trying to put this into historical context as though hate speech can be excused by time frame?
Those guys were in their forties when they made those sophomoric, idiotic comments and they were gunning for public office, old enough that their personal social conscience was already well established. 1991 wasn’t that long ago, the dinosaurs had already died off and anybody with half a brain considering a life in politics should have known better.
This is indicative of a conservative mindframe that haunts us all to this day. So I have to ask the question: If the tables were turned, would Lukiwski or Wall be so charitable to you as to place it in historical context?
If the man was 40 then and said that, then I don’t think he should be given the free pass. He was an adult - a prominent one at that.
I will understand if he was a kid, or even a young man. But 40 is too much. You can’t teach an old dog new tricks.
Throbbin, I have a close relative who was a biker, woman-abuser, petty criminal and heroin addict. He bottomed-out at age 42, 15 years ago. Today, he’s happily married, owns a home, has his own contracting business, employs other people. He’s clean and sober and a different person at 57 than he was from 18 to 42. One bad thing: he’s become a bit of a right-winger since he’s changed his life.
Lukiwski and Ahenekew may or may not be sincere in their late life conversions but such conversions are not impossible or all that uncommon. Many middle aged parents are forced to re-examine their ideas and beliefs when confronted with a gay child or a son/daughter-in-law from a different race or ethnicity.
JB
What about the Conservative Party and its’ hypocrisy in this Kevin?
Oh fer christs sake, Lukiwski’s “conversion” happened yesterday when he was exposed to the media. Have you checked his voting record on gay rights? Sorry, I’m not buying it.
Stageleft, that’s a very good point; why are we allowing these assholes an historical free ride when their own hypocrisy shows it doesn’t make any difference anyway?
SL-
For the reasons I’ve stated I don’t see the two episodes as similar so the hypocrisy doesn’t jump out at me. Also, I suppose, I’m a little inured to hypocrisy in politics.
I’m just offended as someone with a sense of humor. Nothing they said was even remotely funny. Not even in an ironic way. It was just plain dumb and sophomoric.
Oh fer christs sake, Lukiwski’s “conversion” happened yesterday when he was exposed to the media. Have you checked his voting record on gay rights? Sorry, I’m not buying it.
And Bruce nailed it right there! 17 years ago , Lukiwski made that awful comment on a video.
Now, yes it is possible to change ones stripes. Intelligent people do have the ability to do that. But….lol. (That’s not what we dealing with here)
Deeds count too.
He may not be saying that absolutely unacceptable crap anymore, but deeds speak louder than words.