Posted on March 28th, 2010
Poor Ann Coulter.
Upon her recent visit to Canada, not everyone was polite to her. The more I’ve pondered her situation, the more I’m sure that some terrible things happened in her childhood.
Before last week, all I knew about this woman was that she was an American right-winger with a tendency to say and write inflammatory things. This week, since her odd little tour of Canadian universities, I have come to realize she is the victim of insidious cruelty. It’s written all over her.
All teachers worth their salt know that the most inflammatory students – the annoying, attention-grabbing, hostile ones who know all the buttons to push to upset people – have reasons for being the way they are. Their short lives have been filled with sad circumstances you wouldn’t wish on anyone. I am convinced Ann Coulter had just such a childhood, even whilst growing up in the affluent community of New Canaan, Connecticut.
Now, I’m making educated guesses here… but let’s look at the evidence.
I was intrigued by the news last week that poor Ann had been drummed off the University of Ottawa’s campus, before her scheduled speech, but after having been snarky, in her previous speech, to a young Muslim student at the University of Western Ontario. My first thought was, Huh, I guess they didn’t like her attitude. Then I found a report of what was said in that first speech. Just look.
From the Toronto Sun on March 23rd:
Fatima Al-Dhaher, a political science student from London, rose and spoke about comments Coulter made after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
The firebrand Republican had suggested Muslim countries be invaded, their leaders killed and all Muslims converted to Christianity. She later suggested Muslims denied air travel take “flying carpets” instead.
“As a 17-year-old student of this university, Muslim, should I be converted to Christianity? Second of all, since I don’t have a magic carpet, what other modes do you suggest,” Al-Dhaher said to loud and sustained applause.
“I thought it was just American public schools that produced ignorant people,” Coulter replied, prompting her own round of applause.
Coulter then noted many Japanese were converted to Christianity after the Second World War and “we haven’t heard a peep out of them.”
To shouts of “Answer the question,” Coulter finally replied “What mode of transportation? Take a camel.”
“Are you going to convert her now?” another student shouted out.
“No, there are some people I just as soon not convert,” Coulter retorted.
Ann’s first comment on the question shows that she is not tracking; it’s totally irrelevant. I looked Ann Coulter up on Wikipedia, so I know she is well-educated and was successful in her studies – she’s a smart cookie. But here, like so many students, she opts to veil her intelligence with flippant words and jokes that, at best, can only be classified as stupid, racist groaners. She also neglected to do any homework about Canada whatsoever before visiting. The obvious explanation: she must have been twitted for her smarts and her studiousness as a kid.
Then she finishes up with a remark that exposes her need for exclusivity by saying, despite her apparent belief that all Muslims should convert, that she doesn’t want this one. I cannot but conclude that she was the victim of exclusion and catty bullying, as are many young girls. Oh, Ann… so sad!
So, after this evening of mixed response, she hied herself to the University of Ottawa, where she and her contingent found a rabble of a few hundred protesters (she says thousands) telling her to go home (she says throwing tables). (I wasn’t there, I’m not sure who has it right. Of course, poor Ann wasn’t there either – she never made it that far.)
I have been unable to determine whether this controversial email was leaked by Ann’s people or the university provost who sent it prior to Ann’s visit:
“Our domestic laws, both provincial and federal, delineate freedom of expression (or “free speech”) in a manner that is somewhat different than the approach taken in the United States. I therefore encourage you to educate yourself, if need be, as to what is acceptable in Canada and to do so before your planned visit here,” University of Ottawa academic vice-president François Houle wrote.
“Promoting hatred against any identifiable group would not only be considered inappropriate, but could in fact lead to criminal charges.” (You can read the whole email here.)
I had just assumed the U of O students had heard about Ann’s rudeness at Western and were angry that people at their university were paying a bully to come to speak to them… but maybe they WERE incited from the inside. There are rumours that protest organizers instructed the crowd not to “let her leave unharmed”, which is indeed the wrong way of going about a protest.
So then Ann’s security folks (she says “police”), led by Ezra Levant, cancelled that gig, saying it was too dangerous, and Ann began accusing Mr. Houle of a hate crime for sending the email before she’d even given her (second) speech. After all, why should he have assumed that, just because she was openly malicious to a Muslim at Western, she would similarly shoot off her mouth at Ottawa?
This is classic suffering-child syndrome: exaggerating one’s status as a victim, threatening retribution, wallowing in self-righteous indignation, reveling in negative attention, and failing utterly to see one’s own hypocrisy. Clearly she was a victim of some kind of inhumanity in her formative years. Such issues, such baggage… it’s enough to break your heart.
To try to get to the bottom of this, I visited Ann’s website. For March 24th, it showed, naturally, a rant about her treatment at U of O. It contained these remarks:
Posters advertising my speech have been officially banned, while posters denouncing me are plastered all over the University of Ottawa campus. Elected officials have been prohibited from attending my speeches. [Oh, my dear lady. This pride in being a "bad girl", even at this age... I beg you to seek therapy!]
“…University of Ottawa, average student IQ: 0…”
“…Francois A. Houle (French for ‘Frank A. Hole’)…”
“…’Ottawa’: Indian for ‘Land of the Bed-Wetters.’…”
“…How did the country that gave us Jim Carrey, Mike Myers, Martin Short, Dan Aykroyd and Catherine O’Hara suddenly become a bunch of whining crybabies?…”
“…Local reporters couldn’t make out what the crowd was chanting, but it was something about ‘Molson’ and a ‘sled dog.’…”
And then this from her interview with the Globe and Mail:
“You guys used to be so cool. You were smokers. You had epic hockey fights. We had half our comedians from Canada. Now you’re all a bunch of girls named Francois.”
Sadly, she has somehow ended up with the sense of humour of a twelve-year-old boy… and as we all know, twelve-year-old boys will continue with their jokes as long as there are other twelve-year-old boys to laugh at them. But Ann… I’m sure with your brains you could learn to be much funnier! Why do you think we “gave you” Jim Carrey, Mike Myers, Martin Short, Dan Aykroyd and Catherine O’Hara?
The more I find out, the more pathetic the picture. After all this, I discovered that Ann is part of that unfortunate group I call “Fake Christians“: that is, people who call themselves Christians because they are anti-abortion (because “a life is a life” – unless you’re Muslim), but tragically missed Jesus’ whole point about loving others. Back to those times she spent being excluded as a child – she obviously feels a deep need to be part of a group, but is bitter enough only to be able to join certain ones.
Also, according to Wikipedia, she has been “engaged several times, but never married”. So it’s not that she isn’t seeking a husband, it’s that she hasn’t been able to stay in a relationship. That’s tough – the dating scene gets harder the older and more obnoxious you become, right?
Most pitiful of all, she is one of those rarest of birds: a female misogynist. How lonely and depressing must it be to hate your own sex?? How much misogyny must she have endured as a young person to have internalized it so thoroughly? To proudly give sound bites like this one?:
“If we took away women’s right to vote, we’d never have to worry about another Democrat president. It’s kind of a pipe dream, it’s a personal fantasy of mine, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. And it is a good way of making the point that women are voting so stupidly, at least single women.
It also makes the point, it is kind of embarrassing, the Democratic Party ought to be hanging its head in shame, that it has so much difficulty getting men to vote for it. I mean, you do see it’s the party of women and ‘We’ll pay for health care and tuition and day care — and here, what else can we give you, soccer moms?’”
It’s no wonder she is unable to age gracefully, forced to bleach her hair blond, wear way too much eye makeup, and dress like a twenty-something going clubbing as she fast approaches age fifty. It’s the kind of look designed to turn the heads even of woman-haters.
You and I both know that hatred is not a fun feeling. It consumes and embitters and eventually destroys its hosts. Take a moment to put yourself in Ann Coulter’s stilettos and feel her pain.
It must really suck to be her.