The Arrogance Behind the Smirk

It’s What Poilievre Won’t Say Troubles Me Most

Sidestepping Accountability at the Costs of Trans Canadians 
During an interview yesterday (January 22, 2025) on CTV News, Pierre Poilievre delivered a masterclass in deflection, showcasing his “debating team” skill at avoiding complex issues by pivoting to well-rehearsed talking points. The reporter asked a straightforward question about a controversial Presidential Order signed by Donald Trump, which declared that only two sexes exist. The question: If Pierre Poilievre were to form a government, would he negotiate with the Americans to ensure the gender markers on Canadian travel documents are recognized, even when they differ from the sex assigned at birth? (Source:  https://youtu.be/lwfC9z4YWhs)

Poilievre’s responses were dismissive and evasive. His repeated quips, like “I’m not aware of any other genders” and “if you come up with another list, you’re welcome to do that,” trivialized the question. When pressed about advocating for the recognition of gender-neutral passports, he pivoted to “more important priorities” like homelessness and affordability. These issues are critical, but his rhetorical sidestep ignored the original question about the safety and dignity of transgender Canadians abroad, framing it as unworthy of serious consideration.

His Non-Verbal Communication Said it All

His facial expressions and body language made his dismissal even sharper. Smirks, eye rolls, and exasperated sighs conveyed impatience as though he found the topic beneath him. At one point, he closed his eyes and tilted his head slightly, signalling he could barely tolerate the conversation. These non-verbal cues amplified the dismissiveness, projecting an air of superiority and disdain.

Language like “just minds its own damn business” and “I have to be honest with you” reinforced the impression of annoyance. His characterization of the Liberals’ work as “talking about different labels for gender” further trivialized the issue, reducing the conversation to something frivolous. Both his words and demeanour signalled an unwillingness to engage meaningfully with the concerns of marginalized Canadians.

Poilievre missed a vital opportunity to show he aspires to be a Prime Minister for all Canadians. His response sent a clear message: the safety and dignity of marginalized groups are not a priority. The reporter’s question addressed practical realities faced by transgender Canadians under discriminatory U.S. policies. Ignoring it does not make these issues go away.

I Read the YouTube Comments; Big Mistake
The responses to this exchange provided a troubling insight into why Poilievre’s deflection is resonating with many Canadian voters. It frightens me because I hear the echo of what I will politely label American Conservatism; for example:

• Transgender rights as distractions: Transgender rights as distractions: Many commenters framed discussions about transgender rights as distractions from "real issues" like affordability, housing, and the economy. Poilievre taps into this sentiment by positioning himself as a leader focused on tangible concerns while dismissing the safety and rights of marginalized groups as niche or ideological.
• Oversimplifying gender: The reduction of complex conversations about gender into binary “common sense” narratives appeals to voters alienated by nuanced discussions of inclusion and diversity, presenting these issues as overly complicated.
• Marginalization as unimportant: By framing transgender rights as a "strange priority," Poilievre signaled these issues do not warrant governmental attention. This shores up his support among those who view inclusion and equity as secondary to economic concerns.

Poilievre’s verbal and non-verbal dismissive tone won him points with commenters who praised his willingness to challenge “identity politics.” This rhetoric, however, comes at the cost of affirming the dignity of marginalized groups.

Leadership Means Answering Tough Questions
Effective leadership addresses challenges directly, even when inconvenient or politically risky.  Transgender Canadians are not asking for special treatment; they are asking for the same rights and safety afforded to everyone else. Affordability, housing, and jobs are critical, but these priorities are not mutually exclusive. Ironically, when it comes to these economic issues, transgender Canadians are among the most vulnerable, and research shows they disproportionately live below the poverty line. So, I say yes, fix the economy, but don't throw us under the bus. 

A Prime Minister for all Canadians must also ensure every citizen lives with dignity, safety, and respect. Ignoring these questions sends a clear message that the struggles of transgender Canadians are unimportant.

For me, as a transgender woman living in Canada with many ties to friends and family in the United States, these questions are not abstract. How they are answered could determine whether I feel safe visiting loved ones. The prospect of a Conservative government following the Trump administration’s example by restricting recognition of gender diversity raises significant concerns. These policies are not just political rhetoric; they have the potential to disrupt lives and sever connections for transgender Canadians and their families both at home and abroad.

Poilievre’s silence on these matters leaves me deeply uneasy. Over the past year, I have paid close attention to his statements about transgender people, but he has been careful to avoid directly commenting on trans issues. He has avoided the inflammatory rhetoric of some conservative politicians in Canada who openly seek to roll back trans inclusion in education and healthcare. Instead, he references protecting “parental rights” and dismisses media inquiries about his stance, steering the conversation to “real issues” like the economy and affordability. 

His deliberate avoidance raises unsettling questions about his intentions. Is it paranoia to wonder if he plans to mirror Project 2025’s strategy regarding transgender people? Or is his silence a tactic to keep these concerns out of the public eye until it’s too late?

If Mr. Poilievre is serious about being a Prime Minister for all Canadians, he must answer the following questions:

1. Safety for Trans Canadians Abroad: What measures will your government take to ensure transgender Canadians travelling to the U.S. are safe and their gender identity, as reflected on their travel documents, is respected?
2. Freedom and Individual Rights: How does your emphasis on freedom and individual rights align with the freedom of Canadians to live and travel without discrimination based on gender identity?
3. Negotiating with the U.S.: If a Canadian citizen is detained or denied entry at the U.S. border because their gender identity does not align with the sex assigned at birth, what steps would your government take to advocate for them?
4. Human Rights Leadership: Do you believe Canada has a responsibility to advocate for the human rights of all its citizens, including transgender individuals, on the international stage? If so, how would you demonstrate this?
5. Your Stance on Inclusion: Do transgender Canadians deserve the same safety and recognition as other citizens? If so, why avoid their specific concerns?
6. Balancing Priorities: How does ensuring the rights and safety of marginalized Canadians detract from focusing on jobs, housing, and affordability?

A leader who cannot answer these questions is not prepared to lead a country as diverse and complex as Canada. Challenges require a leader who can address both economic realities and the safety and dignity of every citizen.

The Cost of Avoidance
Canadians deserve a leader who can tackle affordability and housing while addressing the concerns of marginalized groups with integrity and care. Leadership is not about choosing one priority over another but about demonstrating that both can be pursued with courage and accountability.

Pierre Poilievre owes Canadians more than deflection. He must show how he will lead all of us, not just those whose concerns align with his talking points. His silence is not neutral. It is a deliberate choice, leaving Canadians guessing—at the cost of those who cannot afford to be ignored.