I had a similar experience to the one dramatized in the video. It was in the late spring, early summer of 1980. I had graduated from high school and eagerly looked forward to enrolling at Queen’s University in the Fall. I served as a Reservist in the Canadian Army in an artillery regiment in Ottawa and made friends with another young man I met in the unit. We became fast friends. I made friends with that man and others in my regiment. Still, I was ribbed, called the “Regimental Fag” in the banter among the ranks. When I came to the Christmas Party in 1979 with a young woman for my date, I was asked, “So, you like girls?” We spent time alone together at his mother’s house. We sat on the living room floor and listened to Beatles records on the stereo. I remember my overwhelming desire for him; I wanted to throw my arms around him and kiss him. I did not understand why I felt that way, which was horrifying. I dared not try it as that would have gone badly for me (assuming he was not gay or did not return my feelings). Had I been singled out as a homosexual in 1980, it would have meant dismissal from the Service. I would likely have lost my friends and become the butt of salacious gossip.
Continue readingCategory Archives: Current Events
It is the difference between men and women, not the sameness, that creates the tension and the delight. — Edward Abbey

Humans are a sexually dimorphic species. They come in two sexes: male and female, and I appreciate and celebrate the difference. I like men. What is not to enjoy about men? That said, having seen journal articles and YouTube videos giving detailed instructions on how gay men can interact with a transman’s pussy (to use the vernacular), I am puzzled at the absurdity of the claims.
Continue readingThose who know that they are profound strive for clarity. Those who would like to seem profound to the crowd strive for obscurity. ― Friedrich Nietzsche, The Gay Science

Listening to a true believer in gender identity and gender expression explain why they believe reminds me of when I was a pious Roman Catholic. I am sure I sounded much the same to non-believers when I explained why I had taken the leap of faith to practice Roman Catholicism. I accepted the theological arguments, the authority of Scripture, and the Apostolic Tradition that compose Roman Catholicism. I attended mass daily, said my prayers, and tried to do good and avoid doing evil. I regularly examined my conscience and tried to turn away from sin. It was reasonable to me at the time. Though I tried to be true to my faith, lingering doubt remained. Eventually, I realized that I could not continue as it was hypocritical of me. I stopped going to mass. I no longer believe in the claims of Christianity.
I would say that I’m a feminist theorist before I’m a queer theorist or a gay and lesbian theorist. — Judith Butler


The quotation by Judy Rebick at the start of the Wikipedia article on lesbian feminism prompted me, in part, to discuss the detrimental effect of the infiltration of feminism on the gay rights movement. “According to Judy Rebick, a leading Canadian journalist and feminist activist, lesbians were and always have been “the heart of the women’s movement,” while their issues were “invisible” in the same movement.” (Cited in Wikipedia) Rebick is an American ex-pat who lives in Toronto. I could write at great length about her impropriety, but I digress. What I remember about Rebick is what she said in an interview in 1990 regarding feminism. She said, in short, that feminism was dominated and too focused on the interests of middle-class heterosexual white women. It needed to be more inclusive, broaden its scope to include lesbians and non-white women, and take up the cause of gay rights. When I heard that, I was aghast. “Whoa there, Medusa,” I thought, “stay in your own lane! No one asked for your help. Gay men are doing just fine in standing up for their civil rights.” Continue reading
Masculinity is not something given to you, but something you gain. And you gain it by winning small battles with honor. — Norman Mailer

Kyle Rittenhouse, the seventeen-year-old from Illinois, who got into deadly confrontations with rioters in Kenosha, Wisconsin, showed he is more a man than the older men who attacked him. He found himself in the same situation that millions of young men throughout history have: when confronted by an attacker in warfare or civil unrest, you make the stark choice–it is him or me. Rittenhouse did everything possible to avoid the confrontations. He tried to leave the rioting scene when he was separated from the older men he accompanied in a local business’s defence. He was asked to take part in protecting the local business that was set on fire in the rioting the night before. He armed himself, yes, for self-protection, and that is how he used his rifle, an AR-15, in the end.
Moreover, he knew how to use his rifle. He fired five shots at the first attacker (when the first shots were fired), and one shot each at the second and third attackers as a last resort when cornered by them. Regrettably, two of the attackers died, and the third suffered a grievous wound to his arm. Whether he should have been there or not is academic. The fact remains, had Rittenhouse not used deadly force to stop the attackers, he would be either seriously injured or dead at the rioters’ hands. A second-hand account of what happened to the attacker who survived states, “I just talked to [name redacted] too–his only regret was not killing the kid and hesitating to pull the gun before emptying the entire mag into him. Coward.” (National File) Following the shootings, he ran to the law on the scene, trying to surrender to the police. The police on the scene told him to move along. He turned himself in to the police in Illinois, and he faces several criminal charges in Wisconsin.
He will have his day in court. He killed two men and wounded a third. Being a man means facing the consequences of your actions. I think he understands that. He will have to live with the reality that he killed two men. It will remain on his conscience for the rest of his days. He is caught up in a critical situation, not of his own making that will determine the rest of his life. As the investigation into the shootings is underway, the available evidence supports the argument that he acted in self-defence. It will be some time before a judgement is handed down–he faces six charges. In the meantime, he will endure the media’s efforts and various interest groups to paint him and his family being all manner of villainy. I wish him well as he rides out the storm ahead. I hope he will be able to get on with his life when the court proceedings are concluded. Given how the young Rittenhouse handled himself when he came under attack that fateful night, I think as he matures and leaves his adolescence behind, he will become a fine man. He aspired to join the police force; I hope he can realize his ambition as he showed excellent character strength for such a young man. I think he will be an acceptable candidate for the police force if he stays the course he took before the unfortunate events in Kenosha interrupted his career path. Regardless, his life will never be the same.
Posted by Geoffrey
“Nothing is more deceitful,” said Darcy, “than the appearance of humility. It is often only carelessness of opinion, and sometimes an indirect boast.” ― Jane Austen, Pride and Prejudice

Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister of New Zealand, posing with Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada and Sadiq Khan, Lord Mayor of London.
I remember in 1968, my mother enrolled me in a class at the Holy Family parish in Kingston, Ontario. The class was to prepare me for my First Communion. I was seven years old, and in the class, I received my first lessons from the Roman Catholic Church in its perceived need that I learn humility. I have fleeting memories of the classes–on the whole, I think I enjoyed attending them. After our lesson, we got to play games like hide and seek. One night we got to watch That Darn Cat. The experience that lingers in my memory was delivered by the young woman who taught the course. She told us that Jesus, as a boy did not talk back to his parents and teachers; neither did he fight with other children. I think the children in the class took this lesson to heart. The experience was not unreasonable in and of itself–Christianity, Roman Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant, teaches that we should try to be like Jesus. Knowing that I talked back to my parents on occasion and got into scraps with my siblings left me feeling a little abashed–so I did my best to follow the example set by the boy Jesus. I learned at that early age that I am not perfect–that despite it, I should strive to do good and avoid doing evil. At the time, I did not appreciate that it was easy for the boy, Jesus, as He was Divine, unlike the rest of the children in the class and me. Continue reading
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary. ― H.L. Mencken


Geoffrey out duck hunting.
The words “gun lobby” and “gun nut” are slurs invented by prohibitionists–people opposed to gun ownership and hunting–to besmirch the character of gun owners and hunters. I heard the term “gun nut” used on American television sitcoms like “All in the Family” as early as the 1970s. I shrugged it off at the time as inconsequential. I had no reason to believe as a boy that there was anything wrong with gun ownership and hunting. I remember how other children brought things like duck wings for show and tell in kindergarten and primary school. Wings taken from the wild ducks that their older brothers and fathers shot while out hunting. Other children proudly told the class about their fathers, who had returned from successful big game hunts. My dad and my uncle enjoyed hunting cottontail and jackrabbits when I was a boy. It was not until late in 1989, following the mass shooting at the engineering school at the University of Montreal that I first heard mention of the “gun lobby” used as a pejorative term in public parlance. It came as an unwelcome surprise. Continue reading
The personal is political. — Carol Hanisch

Jason and Fran on their way to their deer stands on a November afternoon.
The Liberal government led by Justin Trudeau enacted the prohibitions of 1500 makes and models of semi-automatic rifles via an Order-in-council. It came as no surprise as I knew long before now that the Liberal Party of Canada does not care about the rights and freedoms of Canadians when it comes to gun ownership. I am a gun owner–I started handling guns in 1969 when I was eight years old. My father gave me and my siblings our first lessons in the safe handling of firearms. He bought a .22 calibre pellet rifle and taught us how to handle safely, take aim and shoot at targets in our back garden. While my siblings did not take up an interest in guns, I am a lifelong enthusiast for firearms and hunting. My dad gave me my first shotgun, a Savage hammerless single shot in 16 gauge, back in 1975 when I was fourteen. I had to wait until I was fifteen and completed the Hunter Safety Course and pass the safety test before I got my first hunting license. Once certified as a licensed hunter in 1976, I took to the field with my single shot 16 gauge shotgun and never looked back. Continue reading
Ready! Fire! … aim?

The Liberal reign of error under the leadership of Justin Trudeau continues. On May 1st, the Liberal government announced a new round of prohibitions of 1500 makes and models of semi-automatic rifles via an Order-in-council. The decision to prohibit these rifles is arbitrary, and like every other policy, the Liberals imposed on Canadians are rooted in divisive identity politics. Justin Trudeau made no secret of his faith in feminism–repeatedly declaring since he became Prime Minister in 2015 with a majority in parliament. He proudly formed a gender-balanced Cabinet “because it is 2015.” He would like everyone to become feminists. Rest assured, Justin Trudeau is a true believer in feminist doctrine–or so he says. Unfortunately, the Trudeau government stumbled in its zeal to promote feminist causes when it passed Bill-C-16 into law. Bill C-16 An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code, added gender identity and gender expression to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination. Bill C-16 was passed into law by the Parliament of Canada in 2016. Continue reading
Sing if you’re glad to be gay, sing if you’re happy that way. — the Tom Robinson Band

An accusation was levelled at me last year when I publicly rejected the notion that gay became “queer.” The charge, in short, is that I am a selfish gay man. Now that gay rights are secured–the removal of the stigma of being gay, the freedom to live openly, to participate fully in society, and the right to marry among them–I am content to “pull the ladder up after me.” That I reject “queer theory” is true; I made no secret of that. In particular, I object to the conflation of the transgender ideology with male homosexuality–notably gay rights advocacy. In a recent essay, I discussed the emergence of a movement called the LGB Alliance–an initiative to separate the T from the LGB. The problem I found with the LGB Alliance is that it is part of a struggle among feminists–a quarrel over whether transgender women are women or not and if there is a place for transgender women in the feminist movement. I stand by what I wrote in my earlier essay: feminist causes have no bearing on gay men’s issues, no more than does the transgender ideology. The gay rights movement and transgender ideology are unrelated and neither the twain should meet. Continue reading
