The usual suspects in the media, sadly many women, are fast at work fanning the flames of alleged male victimhood, ignoring the facts that contradict their assumptions. Whether they intend it or not, they are helping to spawn a backlash that will ultimately discourage real victims from coming forward again to hurt their favourite man-boys.
It was fascinating that this story emanated out of CTV News, the private sector broadcaster not exactly known for its liberal biases. Far from it. Thus, when CTV unleashed this bombshell of a story about Brown, it was interesting that no one claimed the messenger of the story was biased. Instead, it added credibility to the claims.
Had the story come from the CBC, you can bet all of those private sector whiners like Christie Blatchford would be arguing as well this was also an unfair attack from a left-leaning "state broadcaster," in addition to her other tirades against the teenagers Brown allegedly threw himself upon.
Is it fair in politics that a leader would have to resign because of some allegations that seem to ring true to the objective viewer, even though they haven't been proven in court?
Let's re-read that sentence's first five words: "Is it fair in politics...?" There is no fairness in politics. So that answers my question. I am in agreement with Chris Selley on that one.
"What about due process?" many scream in defense of men they assume are innocent in the face of multiple allegations. It seems everybody accused of egregious acts gets removed from positions of power over the course of the investigation, once allegations are made. Patrick Brown shouldn't be any different.
These same folks, of course, have little to say when the accused are black or Muslim or gay. In the face of racial profiling by police, these folks typically make the argument, "If you haven't done anything wrong, what are you afraid of?" Perhaps they should consider asking men that question today instead of giving credence to the bogus argument that white men are somehow today's biggest victims.
Patrick Brown led a coup against the PC Party establishment in 2015 to become the leader by out-hustling Christine Elliott in membership sales and voter turnout. He's an expert organizer. But in the other crucial tasks of politics, like earning love, loyalty and commitment from colleagues, the kind of which wouldn't evaporate instantly the moment a story like this breaks, he clearly wasn't great.
So weak an impression he had made as leader, it wasn't entirely stunning to see him fall so fast this week. It was fitting. Suddenly, his strange bachelorhood despite being modestly attractive and clearly talented made sense. He's not the settling type, it seems.
My impression has always been if any straight man looking to settle down possesses a tiny amount of decency and talent, even barely above mediocre, to say nothing of his looks, there's at least ten wonderful, more decent, more talented, more attractive women out there willing to commit to him should he love them back. Such is how our society works in North America, I find. The good ones always get scooped up early. It's the not-so-good ones who can't seem to settle down, I find. Christie Blatchford would blame women for this, of course, even though the fault lies with the guys.
That, of course, doesn't apply to gay men, who have an entirely different life experience having to seek out romance and love from other men (that is, after enduring the trauma of accepting ourselves and coming out of the closet.) Generally, most men just aren't that great at giving love, sadly. We're great at taking it, that's for sure. Many of us do eventually learn to give love too as most women do.
Why are women better at this than men? Well, look at how society treats all women. It's a humbling experience from start to end. Arrogance, the kind of which seems intrinsic in even the most mediocre of men, is not something that is tolerated in women, as we know. If Hilary Clinton can be defeated by the likes of Donald Trump, then all women are vulnerable. I wonder when Christie Blatchford or Rosie Di Manno are going to write about that topic?
But back to Patrick Brown.
I never thought much of him. As a leader, he was mediocre at best. The best thing he had going for him was the sense that his governing opponents, the Ontario Liberals, deserve tossing out of office. I was not looking forward to him possibly governing Ontario. In fact, I had major doubts he'd get elected, despite Kathleen Wynne's unpopularity.
Now who knows what will happen with the Ontario PC leadership? There doesn't seem to be any one candidate who will be the consensus choice. Christine Elliott was that person in 2015 and she got crushed by the likes of Brown.
Sadly we cannot underestimate the stupidity of the Tory base, who have shown themselves more than capable of rejecting the best candidates in favour of the crappiest the last two leadership races. These are folks who think a 19-year-old, home-schooled ideologue is more qualified to be an MPP than others three times his age and life experience.
We shall see. Brown is finished, thankfully. Now this gives the Ontario PC Party a chance to get it right. Will they?