The curse of pride

A fighter-friendly review of The Iron Claw.

Photo by Martin Martz on Unsplash

On Saturday afternoon I invited one of my personal social justice warriors (aka Middle Child) to the Cineplex for a testosterone shower. I’d read somewhere that The Iron Claw was useful to debunk toxic masculinity, or something equally woke. We simply had to see for ourselves whether it was true. It wasn’t, but we had a great time anyway.

Middle Child did some martial arts as a kid, reaching brown-black belt (that’s one below black in the kids’ program where we used to train). Me, I have a third-degree black belt, competed in point fighting and won several championships including Canadian nationals (twice), Scottish nationals (once) and world championships (twice). I retired from competition in 2018 but continue to train in kickboxing six days a week when I’m not traveling.

I never did any wrestling — I’m too claustrophobic for the greco-roman style and while I’m a decent enough showboat I don’t like the theatrics of American wrestling.

I don’t mind that it’s staged. Unless you have learned to fall — hard — and get up quickly to keep fighting, you shouldn’t comment too casually on how easy this looks. Being so skillful that you can hit someone full force without actually hurting them takes years of dedicated practice. I don’t for one second scoff at those showy antics. There is way too much athleticism, agility and sheer theatrical talent for that. And that’s to say nothing of the discipline required to build your body to where you need it to be, and maintain it there over years of very hard physical work.

The film gives us a great taste of that, one that might be a little intense at time for the uninitiated. Even Middle Child, despite their training and exposure to such things, was a touch put off by some of the more extreme scenes. Let’s just say there’s a lot of grunting in that two hours and 12 minutes, and sweat all over everything.

The movie is based on true events, and is sort of a biopic but having since read a little bit on the Von Erich family it’s clear they’ve taken a lot of liberties with the story. I’d be curious to hear the opinion of true wrestling fans, of course. But for my money it’s a surprisingly good story very well told.

I especially appreciated how lovingly the movie is filmed. Including that the wrestling matches were filmed live in front of audiences (all extras, but still) instead of short sequences edited together in post. And it shows. You have the impression of being there — movie magic at its best.

It’s obvious the director of photography and director appreciate the sport and the athletes who perform it. We see the grity side of the business and almost none of the sleaze. You could call this a love story. Just one with a great deal of muscle and some shit-talking in it.

From the Wikipedia entry about the family.

A central character in the plot is what was believed to be the “curse” afflicting this family and leading to the death of all but one son — Kevin, played by an extraordinary Zac Efron, about whom a little more below. To Middle Child and I it was very clear, not even 45 minutes into the film, that the curse was the father himself, his pride and refusal to listen to anyone about anything ever. A pro wrestler himself, he believed he’d been robbed of a coveted world title and pushed everyone in his family to be the strongest, toughest and most successful they could be.

The film’s greatest weakness is the puzzling decision to leave the wife/mother mostly untouched as a contributing factor to the family’s losses. Clearly this man, the terrorizing and ruthlessly pitiless father, could not have been this harsh on his kids without his wife’s approval. All we know is that she believed religion would save everyone and otherwise left the men to deal with things. I have a lot of trouble believing that was the true story.

Yes, to a point, she too was a victim. He was controlling and not just a little. But — without inserting spoilers — in the movie she is clearly OK enough with what he’s doing yet this isn’t exploited at all as an arc in the overall story. Not even as a subplot. It should have been because here’s a very unpleasant truth about toxic masculinity: some women contribute a great deal to it.

And then there’s Zac.

You may remember Efron from High School Musical — not exactly Muscle Central. While healthy and fit, the actor had to train, train and train to get in the shape he needed to be to play Kevin. And wow, what a transformation. It took many months of gruelling work and then doing the fight stuff in the ring was a process, too. GQ (of course) ran a long piece detailing the steps you’d have to take if you really wanted to transform yourself that way, too.

I went into that movie expecting to work up a political rant and instead I got lost in a well-told story of love, family, grit, loss and too much pride. Worth seeing.

Saying goodbye to 2023

The last newsletter of the year is a great place to express gratitude -- griping shall resume in due course.

Photo by engin akyurt on Unsplash

In my Ottawa Citizen column this week I express gratitude for the privilege I have of engaging with readers in the paper, online, and on jogging and bike paths throughout the city. Columnizing is my absolute favourite thing to do, because a) it’s cheaper than therapy to get most of the bees in my bonnet a solid airing and b) it allows me to highlight great work done by great Ottawans who toil in a city that’s entirely too famous for politics and nowhere near famous enough for the good people who live in it.

A special word for those of you who read what I write on this platform and engage with the material. A writer is nobody without readers. You make someone out of me. Thank you.

Photo by SHUBHAM RAIKWAR on Unsplash

This year I wrote lots. I had 130 articles and columns published in a variety of outlets. That’s in addition to 51 pieces published exclusively on Substack. That’s almost 3.5 published articles a week. Assuming an average of 600 words per (a thoroughly unscientific and probably low-ball estimate), that’s 108,600 words published in a year, or just under 300 per day.

Look at me doing math on an holiday. I just about sprained a sinew…

Add to this speeches, statements, reports and all kinds of other stuff I write that goes out into the world without my name on it. Plus the book projects I’m working on about which I hope I’ll be able to talk more soon.

Yes, I do write every day. By that I mean there is not a day in the year during which I don’t write. There are no exceptions to this rule, ever. Just by doing my morning pages, three pages long-hand, every single day of every single year, I scribble close to 1,000 words. And that’s just to wake up.

I feel incredibly privileged to earn a living doing what I can’t live without doing. Also relieved. Not entirely sure what I would do otherwise. I would have been ace as a lawyer, but I would hate it, myself, and every living being. Ditto sales. It’s better for everyone if I get to keep writing. Feel free to do your part for public safety by subscribing to keep me in that business.

I perused my 2023 output to highlight some of my favourites, and see which ones were most popular. The Poilievre-related articles win that contest (and more, about which in a minute) but my own personal favourite is about food. I got myself all cracked up and cry-laughing re-reading it so I beseech you to take a gander at my review of the fucking fuckery that was the (mercifully since killed dead) Chicken Big Mac.

The other reason I’m pleased to have re-aligned my writing a little bit to include more federal politics is that going to the Conservative Party convention in Quebec City (where I was notoriously not welcome) didn’t just allow me to write some stuff that wound up pleasing a great many of my readers. It was also the most unlikely setting for an out-of-the-blue (as it were) chance meeting with a most wonderful someone who knows how to make me smile and how to bring out my inner sunshine. La vie a choisi 2023 pour me faire le plus beau des cadeaux.

I wish you all the good things for 2024.

Let’s talk

All the news that’s fit to email include a raised middle finger to the pope, conservatives scared of voters and a Canadian judge who lets a sex offender go easy because he can’t get any at home.

Photo by Jon Tyson on Unsplash

It’s difficult to be festive these days, what with so much nonsense happening everywhere and a dramatic rise in hate crimes right in this town. In my Ottawa Citizen column this week I express hope that with more talking to one another and better listening to each other that we can maybe reduce the polarization that’s leading to so much violence.

Not a single line of legal writing from me this week (or next). I’ve written a lot of it but it won’t be published until January so if I were you I’d enjoy the break.

My message to the pope.

So many people were excited to hear the pope say priests could “bless” same-sex couples and I have a few things to say. First, he didn’t say what you think he said. It’s a conditional approval to bless — but NOT approve — some same-sex relationships that are not marriages, under some circumstances. As this most excellent column on the subject says, “It’s a fig leaf, a PR exercise, a means of laundering your prejudice to make it seem like a step towards acceptance.” It is not progress, it’s just a shiny coat of progress-lite paint on the same old retrograde controlling bullshit and if you fell into that trap, do yourself a favour and walk out of it. This church is like your violent ex — it will never stop trying to impose its will on you until it dies.

South of the border, after several elections returning pro-choice results (including, remarkably in freaking Ohio), Republicans in many states including Arizona, Nevada and the always-entertaining-in-the-wrong-ways Florida are now trying to prevent more pro-choice propositions to be put on ballots, for fear it might undo their overthrow of Roe v. Wade. It’s telling when elected officials don’t trust voters, innit.

“I do not want to see abortion put in our constitution,” said Rep. Brad Hudson, a Missouri Republican. “I believe the right to life is a fundamental right that all human beings have and certainly should not be taken away because of a vote by a simple majority.”

If your party’s modus operandi is “If you can’t convince them, gag them,” you aren’t winning.

A little bit of good news and also some puzzling judicial gooblahoy

A Thunder Bay court has found that using the term “groomers,” which refers to manipulating children to commit sexual abuse, does not count as public-interest expression protected by the anti-SLAPP provisions under s. 137.1 of Ontario’s Courts of Justice Act.

As a result, the defamation action can continue against a man who posted on Facebook that organizers and performers of a series of drag events were “groomers.” He argued that his comments' focus was a CBC article about the events and the CBC’s public funding. But those suing him for defamation successfully argued that his post promoted myths and stereotypes that associate the 2SLGBTQI+ with pedophilia and harming children.

In less-so-good news, a judge in British Columbia referenced a man’s “marital intimacy deficits” when handing a voyeur a conditional discharge since it was a factor in why he secretly filmed an international student who lived in his home as she was in various states of undress. I guess we still have work to do to rid ourselves of misogyny especially where it should have no business being, like in court.

And to try and end this on a less awful note, I want to say that picking Pierre Poilievre as your newsmaker of the year was thoroughly unfair to the apple.

Be like Paris

The French capital is doubling down on its mission to prioritize pedestrians and other non-car road users. Why can't we do that here?

Source: City of Paris website

A lighter roundup this week as I am taking some much-needed personal time to recharge.

In my Ottawa Citizen column I highlight the latest pedestrian plan unveiled by the city of Paris last month and ask why on earth we can’t do something like that here. We even have money for this.

In my legal writing this week you’ll find a piece outlining easy ways to stop fraudulent immigration practices targeting international students. And I have another one on how Canada is failing in its duty to ensure solitary confinement doesn’t breach inmates’ fundamental rights.

Have yourselves a lovely weekend.

A vote in every house

Not to be cynical or anything, but the flurry of housing initiatives are all suspiciously timed to benefit a party that was trailing in the polls. It might just work, too.

Sometimes, boring is good. Photo by Samson Vowles on Unsplash

My, oh my is there a lot of activity suddenly on housing.

About time, of course. But at the same time, shame that it’s all upside-down. I guess when you’re dealing with politicians politicking in political ways, that’s to be expected.

Momentum got going in October when a previously-announced housing accelerator fund was re-announced (we’re like that, it’s almost charming) to somewhat bigger fanfare. The deal is that the feds are making money available to cities for housing provided they make certain zoning changes. Here’s a handy summary:

The Housing Accelerator Fund, a $4-billion federal funding program introduced in the last federal budget, earmarks funds for municipalities to support housing. These incentives are tied to zoning changes that would allow for more mixed and middle housing options to be built.

The CMHC said the top priority for any municipality looking to get federal funding is to end exclusionary zoning.

“Stop low-density zoning and regulation that excludes housing types such as affordable and social housing in residential areas,” it said, adding that cities should “encourage high density by allowing mixed-use development and high-density residential as-of-right within proximity to urban cores and transit corridors.”

In much of the country, zoning restrictions mean developers are only allowed to build either single-family homes or condo towers in residential areas. There is a huge chunk of housing options, often referred to as “missing middle housing,” that does not get built.

As a professional non-expert, I say hell yes. The missing middle is exactly what cities like Ottawa need to make more housing available in urban-ish areas near-ish transit.

The first city I saw taking advantage of this was Guelph. Then I saw Vaughan. After that came Halifax and other cities. The constitutional purist in me hates this thing. Housing is provincial jurisdiction. So are municipalities. And for sure premiers are bitching. But there is nothing in the way our federation is set up to prevent the feds from spending money in ways they find congenial. Or, you know, useful in the context of an upcoming federal election, I say without the slightest hint of cynicism in my voice.

That said, I hope the city of Ottawa gets its own ducks in the proper kind of row and greenlights the changes needed to get the money required to build housing units we desperately need right away. Apparently it’s coming.

And another thing.

Photo by Barbara Krysztofiak on Unsplash

You should never doubt the power of a good electoral fright on politicians’ ability to come up with innovative solutions. Or even with old solutions that are somehow extraordinarily well suited to the times — again.

When the federal government wanted to get a shitload of cheap houses built for returning soldiers after the Second World War, by golly it got a shitload of cheap houses built. You can see many of them still standing today, lovingly cared for even, in the area between Fisher Avenue and Merivale, just south of Carling. And in many other communities besides. They are small tidy houses built cheaply and quickly on small lots. Perfect for people with modest means.

This week the feds said this sort of program was going to be revived, except the catalogue of pre-approved housing plans would include a wider variety of housing than the old tiny single family house.

Again, as a professional non-expert, I say hell yes. Not that we couldn’t have gotten houses built quickly using methods that are less constitutionally offensive. But the thing is, we weren’t building those homes. Now with this program, we just might. When you’re a person in search of housing that’s affordable, timing means a lot.

In addition to increasing the offer of affordable housing options at a time when so many people are clearly desperate for just that, this initiative does something else. It shows everyone in Canada that Pierre Poilievre is not serious.

The leader of the Conservative Party has enjoyed a good couple of months ahead in the poll, in great part because he took up an issue that is clearly a sore spot for a lot of people in this country — affordability — and rightly pointed out how sluggish the governing Liberals were in addressing it.

I don’t know whether voters in this country will think it’s enough to look away from Poilievre — who, it must be said, has been very vocal on who’s to blame but very quiet on actual practical solutions to the crisis other than to keep people working overnight in Parliament. Worth noting also that an Abacus poll commissioned by the Toronto Star showed a certain reversal in public opinion — a five-point drop is not insignificant.

“It’s not that people are saying, ‘oh, all of a sudden I love what the Liberals are doing and I think the country is back on track,” Abacus CEO David Coletto explained. “It’s more of ‘I’m still anxious about it. I still want change. I’m not any less fatigued with Trudeau, but maybe some of the things that Conservatives have done this week is showing us their true colours.”

And how.

I don’t want to make too many predictions about the future but I’ll say this: in order to win an election, the Conservatives have to keep their core supporters (relatively easy) while gaining a significant number of voters who don’t typically vote blue in enough ridings (including in Quebec and/or Ontario), which isn’t so easy. Especially when they play games and don’t offer sensible solutions to real problems.

If I were advising Poilievre I’d say, dude, do what Stephen Harper did. Take your core supporters for granted and try to make the folks in the middle think you’re safe enough. So far he’s doing the opposite. It might just sink him.