Insulting a rival politician’s appearance is a low blow

Open this photo in gallery:

In a debate, one can go low or high, to borrow from Michelle Obama.

High: question – even attack – your rival’s policies, decisions or actions.

But if low is a politician’s preferred route, there are other options. Among the ugliest, if you will, is targeting an opponent’s physical appearance.

So one could hardly believe their ears when Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, generally a fine debater – smart, articulate, knowledgeable, passionate, informatively fierce – went after Pierre Poilievre’s grooming habits in the House of Commons this week.

“The Conservative leader is wearing more makeup than I am,” she said, during a heated Question Period exchange about the cost of living.

Mr. Poilievre had rerouted the discussion to focus on the Liberals’ drug decriminalization efforts. “They’ve been forced to backtrack right before the election on their legalization of hard drugs because Canadians are revolting against the policy,” he said, demanding to know whether the Liberals plan to legalize drugs after the next election.

That’s when Ms. Freeland delivered her shot about Mr. Poilievre’s makeup routine. Shouts of outrage erupted, rightly so, in that playpen they call Parliament.

The Speaker admonished Ms. Freeland and asked the Honourable Deputy Prime Minister to withdraw the statement. “We don’t comment on the appearances of members,” said Greg Fergus (who is currently dealing with his own political mess regarding accusations of using “partisan language”).

She apologized and withdrew the comment. What she said, instead, is that Mr. Poilievre is “phony, all the way through.” When he raises concerns about the economy as he talks down about Canada; when he states his worries about the opioid crisis.

That’s appropriate debate. But Ms. Freeland’s points were lost in the mire of her low-brow, not at all honourable insult.

This is not the only recent example of a politician going for this kind of low-hanging fruit. In the U.S. Congress last week, Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene said to Democratic rival Jasmine Crockett: “I think your fake eyelashes are messing up what you’re reading.”

With enormous goodwill (of which Ms. Greene is really not deserving), this would maybe have been understandable – but still not okay – if the discussion at hand was about, say, proposed regulations around cosmetics. Even then, it would have been far below the belt. As it stands, they were in fact debating whether Attorney-General Merrick B. Garland should be held in contempt of Congress.

Contemptible behaviour.

“That’s beneath even you,” Democrat Jamie Raskin hurled at Ms. Greene.

The Georgia congresswoman has repeatedly shown herself to be unworthy of her position, so the lazy stab in the eyelashes wasn’t exactly shocking. This Donald Trump sycophant’s low blow was entirely in keeping with her record of stupidity and nonsense, including promoting conspiracy theories. One really cannot expect better from her.

But Ms. Freeland? And then there’s Ms. Crockett, who was successfully goaded into insinuating that Ms. Greene has a “bleach blonde bad built butch body.” (She has since expressed interest in trademarking the phrase.)

Insulting someone’s appearance – especially in a public, political sphere, on the taxpayer dime – says more about the person making the quip than it does about the person they’re mocking.

For a man to do it today would be unthinkable, thank goodness.

With a notable exception.

Mr. Trump not only seems to get away with it (saying E. Jean Carroll was not his “type”; calling Stormy Daniels “horseface,” etc.), but he earns laughter and applause for it – which says a lot about his supporters. Don’t you miss the good old days, when you could comment on a woman’s looks without facing the wrath of the woke?

It could have been a career-killer back in 2011 when former B.C. NDP MLA David Schreck, now a self-described political pundit, used his Twitter account to ask whether then-B.C. premier Christy Clark was dressing inappropriately in the legislature, revealing too much cleavage.

Afterward, in response, Ms. Clark told reporters she was used to “stupid criticism.” But she also noted, “I don’t think we can groom a lot of young female leaders if this is the level of comment we have.”

Wise words from the high road.

Have we learned nothing since then? This kind of playground insult is so off-base it’s hard to believe this even needs to be said.

As much as, Mr. Trump aside, a male politician would (and should) be castigated for making these types of remarks, it feels particularly egregious when women, who have no doubt had much life experience in being judged by their appearance, stoop to this kind of behaviour – apologies or not.