babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
No one has said that, remind.
I'm familiar with some of her life story, but before today I was unaware that she self-identifies as queer. I'm curious if this was the first time she's come-out and stated this publicly. Did anyone else know this?
And I have to agree with Michelle's comments. When this story first began I followed the drama on Babble and FB with a mixture of disappointment, frustration, and amusement. Now I mainly feel pity.
Not direct quotable stating of that, but that is the overarching message and directed attack against her, both here and at FB.
My sympathy and solidarity with Cheri. Regardess of what people may think of her positon on this issue, she has the balls and the creds to put it out there/ She has walked the talk or paid her dues, call it what you will and right now is not playing this as some smooth talking head politican, She took a stand in the midst of some heavy duty issues and has publicly discuused, with some emotion, her thinking and her feelings on the issue and around the reaction to her stand. I don't have a problem with that. Why do you = think she shoudl suck it in,refuse to comment isue a prepared statement and stick to the talking points of some media consultant?Personally, I would rather see this dealt with en famille.
Sounds like Bev Desjarlais to me. Michelle, did you think that comparison was apt? Or was Bev just plain bad through and through, not just on equal marriage?
Peterjcassidy, when Cheri's friends tried to deal with it "en famille", she deleted their posts. You apparently think her "courage" in stating her position outweighs the content of her position. That is astounding. You must appreciate Jason Kenney and John Baird too. Nothing scripted and mealy-mouthed about them.
Or do you maybe support what Cheri said in the legislature?
Tommy, you may have bigger fish to fry, but I don't know of any bigger fish at the moment than torture.
I think you missunderstand me. Yes, I think DiNovo was wrong for all the reasons already mentioned here. But my point is, I can't get all fired up against her when people who took an active roll in the Arar affair are skating from their responsibilities. It'd Cotler, a man of international reputation and long history of fighting for human rights giving his blessing on C 36, that lead a good ways down that path. And, it's members of the RCMP and CSIS who should be garnering much more vitriol than Cheri DiNovo.
And, there's a lot of good people on Parliament Hill that did nothing when the time came to do something, that more richly deserve to be impuned than Cheri DiNovo.
Which, just because there are worse people than DiNovo on this score, doesn't mean she should get a free pass or anything. I just think because it's current, and she's accessable to a greater degree, she's catching it out of proportion.
Sorry, Tommy, I didn't understand your post - are there worse people than DiNovo on those issues who speak on behalf of the NDP in a legislature? Surely that's the appropriate comparison. We know there are tonnes of people ready to crush pro-Palestinian activists, including a few on this board.
Do you think, Tommy, that if she doesn't recant her speech, she should be allowed to stay in caucus?
No I for one, certainly do not, as Bev had absolutely NO, I repeat NO, social justice credentials, nor indeed any meaningful societal actions to her credit.
Exactly, but hey let's just ignore the implicit sexism, and gang bullying of her by mainly men, as women really are to blame, eh!
I have a lot of sympathy for what Cheri said in the legislature, including her reference ot how the death of Julius D. affected her. I ,ay or may nte agree with all the words, but I think she did take a postion in accord with her values after much thought, a position that I see in acord with NDP and democratis socialist/ social democratic valuse. I have a lot of symathy for what she is saying in the semi-public cyber sphere starting with the fact sheis sharing her thoughts and feelings in a manner some see as innapropriate. Persoannly I like to see my legislatorrs cry and curse and rant and argue and be human.
To be honest, I am not sure. That's the leaders call, and as a member-- for now-- I have to wait and see what reasoning from that quarter is applied on the issue one way or the other.
You might be asking the wrong guy. If it was up to me, the ONDP and Federal NDP caucus' would be pretty small indeed if they were kicked out every time they ran afoul of my personal ethics.
Mostly men? On the Facebook page it looked like a roughly equal number of men and women. Does the Iranian woman who posted above not count? Do you agree with diNovo's views, remind? Should such reactionary opinions be overlooked because they were uttered by a woman? Just what is your point?
Not going to repeat myself if you simply refuse to read FM.
No one is upset with Cheri DiNovo because she is a woman. People are upset with Cheri DiNovo because she voted to condemn them and she's saying ridiculous things about them.
I'm not saying sexism doesn't exist in society, but it's a pretty big leap to say that all these Palestinian solidarity activists, male and female, are a bunch of sexist men. Just because someone has political criticisms of a female politician doesn't mean they hate women. I think this is just more of you using the fact that an NDP politician happens to be female to deflect any criticism of her with allegations of sexism for partisan reasons.
This'll probably hit the MSM tomorrow - she needs to apologize.
I'm also a bit puzzled by her assertion that she's queer; maybe she misspoke. She's married to her 2nd husband and has 2 kids.
Maybe she misspoke, but maybe she didn't. Lots of people who identify as bi, for instance, wind up in monogamous hetero relationships.
Unionist, I'll come back to this later - I don't have the energy right now for a long response, and I'm still thinking. :)
I think that remind was provoked in the first place by the play I did on Buffy Sainte-Marie's lyrics to "The Universal Soldier." I probably should have written "S/he's the universal soldier and s/he really is to blame ..." I didn't think of that at the time, although if you know the song, you know that shouldn't be necessary (try finishing that line, and you'll see). It's a song about the responsibility of every individual to have a conscience, to nurture it, and to act on the basis of it.
I don't find it that hard to say, eg, that if people are dying in Afghanistan, in some significant sense it is my fault. That's what Buffy was singing about and warning about. If Cheri DiNovo or anyone else does not think that s/he will be responsible for those who will die if Iran is attacked, then maybe it's worth singing the song again, eh? I very much doubt there are any Iranian women asking to be bombed.
got your call to action, eh!
"all these Palestinian solidarity activists"
you got evidence that they are that? sure we know a few are and know few here were involved with setting up IAW, but I am also aware people do those types of things all the time to self-promote, moreso than any real solidarity in cause.
It was one of the main things I learned in the feminist, and environmentalist movements, and being in solidarity with FN's.
but beyond that we "know" squat about whom her incessant carpers were/are.
and you like FM fails to read apparently so you can attack me, as I stated my disagreement with her positioning, long ago.
And oh ya, i have so much invested in the ONNDP that i would call this attack upon her person, not her politics, for partisan reasons. :rolleyes:
again skdadl you think way too highly of your own words and person.
Like her, you apparently have trouble distinguishing between Jews and Israel. Because some Jew shared a dying regret with her, she decided Israel is a pretty cool place, and anyone who tells the truth about it should be silenced by an all-party vote. I should be forthright, honest, blunt (you appear to appreciate those qualities, or is it only in those you agree with) - your support for her on this issue disgusts me, as a Canadian, as a progressive person, and as a Jew.
Thank you for putting it simply and bluntly. Some people here appear not to understand that point.
I'm a bit puzzled why anyone would give a damn about Cheri DiNovo's sexual predilections, when what is under discussion is her prostrating herself at the feet of some two-bit Conservative enemy of freedom and justice. I personally don't care whom she likes to copulate with or how, and find her exhibitionism rather astounding.
My point - which, I concede, I didn't explicitly make - is if she said something so basic about her identity that is (far as I know) manifestly untrue, what else did she say that really isn't an expression of anything other than astoundingly bad judgement?
It's news to everyone I know that Dinovo is queer -- very queer-friendly, yes, but until now, no one had heard of her being queer, and the sudden revelation happened to come conveniently right after her own privilege was questioned.
Sorry, we're dealing with a sitting MPP who has attacked a justice movement, attacked and silenced individuals, and is using her pulpit to propagate hateful lies and stereotypes. I for one am not going to go out of my way to make excuses for her.
As to remind's hyperbole: perhaps if Dinovo hadn't defriended most all the women and people of colour who were critical of her, and deleted their comments, you would have seen a great many more women and people of colour taking issue with her position. Ironically, you yourself are silencing and ignoring those same women and people of colour in making your assertions. And it's quite ridiculous to say that anyone goes into Palestine solidarity activism for self-promotion -- there is no surer way to make yourself a target for vilification and hate.
i wonder if her outbursts will actually help her politically, in terms of attracting voters from the right.
Sorry, you feel that wa,but for my own reasons I can feel for Cheri. Does it help of I say I have been thinking a lot lately about issues like those explored in the song: Easy to be hard= especially those who believe in social justice?.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjOvjPJ3pXM&feature=related
I'm sorry if I got confused with your sarcasm, but... oh, fuck it, I'm withdrawing from this shit. I have too many personal issues right now to deal with babble.
It's an interesting thought, takeitslowly, but I'm thinking you don't broaden your support by attacking your base.
She may have known that DiNovo was going to abstain on the motion but, unless she has precognition, it's unlikely she knew what DiNovo would be saying in her speech which is rambling and thus appears not to have been proofed by anyone other than DiNovo (more likely she spoke extemporaneously based on a few notes)
Anyway, while I agree that it would have been better had Horwath's letter been posted on the NDP website and had their been a press release it's ridiculous to allege that an "open letter" was somehow hush-hush. Horwath would have known, indeed expected that something called an "open letter" would be public domain and find its way into the media which is, in fact, what has happened.
First-time commenter here, motivated by what I witnessed on Twitter last night.
I'll preface this by stating that I believe diNovo is wrong to condemn Apartheid Week. BUT I think some of the comments she made on FB yesterday aren't wrong - specifically her points on women's activism and the problem w/ a male-dominated debate. We all know there are many Palestinian women activists, Iranian women activists, etc. - but Cheri is right to say that in Canada they are rarely heard outside of (small) progressive circles. Now, the fact that Cheri herself could spend some more time listening to women of colour as mention by gita above - absolutely. But diNovo is already half right when it comes to women. Which is frankly more right than most other people.
My reading of diNovo's FB comments, and Andrew's response, was different from many posters here. It seems to me like it was a frustrated response to violent threats against her family. And for someone to be in a state of fear, anger, & defiance, who is already upset with white men dominating the debate, who continues to get nasty phone calls (from men) threatening her family, to be told by a guy to "back away from the computer," I mean, come on! It's easy to see how that can be interpreted as patronizing, even if Andrew didn't mean it that way. So the "idiot" comment, jeez, let that go. He picked the wrong time to boss her around on her own FB wall. And frankly, Andrew's claim that Cheri "told me to call her office to set up a fight" - that's not what I read. She was referring to the dudes making threats - I don't think that had anything at all to do with him. But he was sure eager to jump on it and make it about him and declare she was having a "meltdown."
Cheri is obviously wrong not to accept that what is going on in Israel is apartheid. But that, to me, isn't a deal-breaker for a provincial MPP. I am so frustrated today with people eager to jump on her and tear her down. Dippers have a habit of tearing each other apart over who is more "true to the cause." Cheri might come around eventually on Israeli Apartheid, but she sure as hell won't do it if fellow "progressives" keep ripping in to her for one frustrated rant that followed a week of harassment and threats to her family. The way to go is to keep engaging her, not tearing her apart. And on a hell of a lot of other issues, she's right.
The opinions of one Ontario MPP are not going to make a difference in the Middle East, and maybe this is naive but I don't think they'll make that much difference to the future of our party. But if we lose her seat because we made a mountain out of a molehill and bring down one of our own, that will sure make a difference to Ontario.
double post
People can be queer and married with a child. Her sexual orientation came up because she was saying that it's only "straigh white men" who are opposed to her support of apartheid. Following that a queer man asked that she not lable him as such.