Connect with us

National

Daughter of Canadian PM Mark Carney uses ‘they/them’ pronouns

Published

7 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Jonathon Van Maren

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has a daughter who identifies as “non-binary” and uses “they/them” pronouns. 

The Daily Mail first reported these details on March 10: 

Carney’s other daughter Sasha, 24, who graduated cum laude from Yale University with a degree in English and Gender Studies, uses they/them pronouns, according to their social media profiles. They previously went by the name Sophia. Sasha Carney, who currently works as a freelance writer and reviewer in Brooklyn, New York, has previously posted about their mental health struggles online.   

Sasha’s Facebook profile, which was publicly accessible at time of publication, shows that she self-identified as “non-binary” in 2018:

Many of Carney’s publicly stated views are avowedly leftist; one of her profile pictures identifies her as a supporter of socialist Bernie Sanders. In 2019, she made a Facebook post stating that “Yale is an institution which has promoted and legitimized eugenics, global warfare, genocidal policies, the racialized carceral state, and the hyper-privileging of white voices in academia. In the face of this, it is crucial that we invest time, energy, thought, resources, and love into ethnicity, race, and migration studies, which looks at the world, and Yale itself, through a critical anti-racist and anticolonial lens.” 

Juno News, formerly known as True North, broke additional details earlier today, publishing excerpts of an essay written by Sasha Carney in an alternative magazine called Authenticity in April 2020 titled Mumsnet, and Transmasculine Childhood. As reporters Cosmin Dzurdzsa and Alex Zoltan noted, the essay reveals that “Mark Carney sent [his] daughter to [the] discredited U.K. Tavistock Transgender Clinic.” The published excerpt reads: 

In 2013, shortly after I chopped off all my hair into a deeply regrettable floppy Justin Bieber cut, I moved to London, the land of Enid Blyton murder mysteries. A block from my new house was the Tavistock & Portman NHS Foundation Trust, an imposing grey building which contained the country’s only child and adolescent ‘gender identity clinic.’

I watched as my friend, after a year of weekly appointments trying desperately to get an official diagnosis of gender dysphoria, was denied the diagnosis, and with it any hope of top surgery because they sometimes wore skirts. I watched organisations with names like ‘Transgender Trend’ refer to trans Tavistock patients as ‘experimental subjects’ who didn’t know what was best for them. I watched as my school’s former principal told a national news outlet that trans students like me and many of my close friends were cis women who were only coming out to ’cause turbulence’ and ‘adhere to anything a bit radical.’ I watched all this happen, and I quietly stopped wearing underwire bras, and wore baggier clothes, and I felt a fierce surge of jealousy every time I walked into the Tavistock for therapy and saw patients turn left, towards the medical spaces I didn’t feel ‘trans enough’ to enter. 

The essay has since been scrubbed from the internet. 

In 2022, it was announced that Tavistock was being shut down, with over 1,000 families expected to join a massive lawsuit over the damage done to their children due to the “treatment” they received at the gender clinic. Last year, the U.K. National Health Service announced that it would stop prescribing puberty blockers to minors entirely. Juno News also reported that Sasha has expressed her support, in writing, for “puberty blockers” for children. 

It is difficult to overstate the potential political impact of this story. Last year, Danielle Smith’s government in Alberta banned sex change surgeries and puberty blockers for minors; in a press conference in February 2024, Smith specifically cited the Tavistock clinic as a motivation behind her legislation.

The fact that the prime minister’s daughter went to Tavistock clinic is certainly an indication of his views on such legislation, and an indication that his commitment to the transgender agenda will likely be every bit as fervent as his predecessor’s.  

Featured Image

Jonathon Van Maren

Jonathon’s writings have been translated into more than six languages and in addition to LifeSiteNews, has been published in the National PostNational ReviewFirst Things, The Federalist, The American Conservative, The Stream, the Jewish Independent, the Hamilton SpectatorReformed Perspective Magazine, and LifeNews, among others. He is a contributing editor to The European Conservative.

His insights have been featured on CTV, Global News, and the CBC, as well as over twenty radio stations. He regularly speaks on a variety of social issues at universities, high schools, churches, and other functions in Canada, the United States, and Europe.

He is the author of The Culture WarSeeing is Believing: Why Our Culture Must Face the Victims of AbortionPatriots: The Untold Story of Ireland’s Pro-Life MovementPrairie Lion: The Life and Times of Ted Byfield, and co-author of A Guide to Discussing Assisted Suicide with Blaise Alleyne.

Jonathon serves as the communications director for the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

COVID-19

Mark Carney was an early supporter of government crackdown against Freedom Convoy

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Jonathon Van Maren

It is difficult not to conclude that he was publicly building the case for what Trudeau would ultimately do: freeze bank accounts, invoke the Emergencies Act, and launch a crackdown. Ironically, a federal justice would conclude, based on a mountain of evidence, that the government crackdown Carney appeared to be advocating did precisely what he accused the convoy protesters of doing: violating the fundamental rights of Canadians.

The Freedom Convoy arrived in Ottawa on January 29, 2022. Two weeks later, on February 14, Justin Trudeau declared the Emergencies Act (which replaced the War Measures Act in 1988); his Public Safety Minister, Marco Mendicino, insisted that law enforcement had requested the measure. Police from all over the country began arriving in Ottawa, and on February 18, they were sent to clear the streets — including a contingent on horseback. I was in Ottawa for the crackdown, and some of the scenes were surreal.

On January 23, 2024, Federal Court Justice Richard Mosley ruled that Trudeau’s decision to invoke the Emergencies Act was both “unreasonable” and a violation of the rights of Canadians as guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He found that the invocation of the act lacked “justification, transparency, and intelligibility,” infringed on freedom of expression, and violated protection against “unreasonable search and seizure” due to the freezing of bank accounts and suppression of protests.

The Trudeau government is appealing this decision, insisting — against all evidence — that the Emergencies Act was essential to restoring peace despite the fact that there was not a single incident of documented violence during the Freedom Convoy. Further to that, Royal Canadian Mounted Police commissioner Brenda Lucki directly contradicted the claims made by Mendicino, stating that law enforcement had not requested the Emergencies Act, a key aspect of the government’s justification for invocation. “There was never a question of requesting the Emergencies Act,” Lucki told the Public Order Emergency Commission bluntly.

Interestingly, one of the early advocates of a crackdown on the Freedom Convoy was … now-Prime Minister Mark Carney. On February 7, a mere week into the protests, Carney penned a furious editorial in the Globe and Mail titled “This is sedition—and it’s time to put an end to it in Ottawa.” He claimed that people were being “terrorized”; that women were “fleeing abuse”; he stated, bluntly, “This is sedition. That’s a word I never thought I’d use in Canada. It means ‘incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.’”

Carney went further, writing that although the protest might have been initially peaceful, “by now anyone sending money to the convoy should be in no doubt: You are funding sedition,” and called on the government to “identify those who are prolonging this manufactured crisis and punish them to the full extent of the law.” He opined that donating to the Freedom Convoy amounted to supporting an insurrection, concluding:

It’s time to end the sedition in Ottawa by enforcing the law and following the money … Decisive action must be taken to protect Canadians and our democracy. Our Constitution is based on peace, order and good government. We must live up to this founding principle in order to protect all our freedoms.”

Carney was already a key figure in Trudeau’s circle at this point, and it is difficult not to conclude that he was publicly building the case for what Trudeau would ultimately do: freeze bank accounts, invoke the Emergencies Act, and launch a crackdown. Ironically, a federal justice would conclude, based on a mountain of evidence, that the government crackdown Carney appeared to be advocating did precisely what he accused the convoy protesters of doing: violating the fundamental rights of Canadians.

Carney has kept understandably mum on all this since his leadership race and subsequent victory, although presumably he will be continuing the Trudeau government’s ongoing appeal to overturn the federal ruling that they violated the rights of Canadians. Indeed, for his Chief of Staff, Carney chose … Marco Mendicino, the very cabinet minister who appears to have blatantly lied about law enforcement requesting the Emergencies Act. Ironically, Carney also selected Chrystia Freeland, the minister directly responsible for freezing (at minimum) the bank accounts of hundreds of Canadians, as Minister of Transport.

To state that the Trudeau government violated the fundamental rights of Canadians in cracking down on protesters often rendered desperate by their vaccine mandate policies — which they cynically used as a wedge issue in a (failed) attempted to secure a second majority government — is not a right-wing conspiracy theory. It is the considered opinion of a federal judge that, to date, has not been overturned. Carney appears to be cut from precisely the same cloth — and has surrounded himself with those who carried out the crackdown.

Featured Image

Jonathon’s writings have been translated into more than six languages and in addition to LifeSiteNews, has been published in the National PostNational ReviewFirst Things, The Federalist, The American Conservative, The Stream, the Jewish Independent, the Hamilton SpectatorReformed Perspective Magazine, and LifeNews, among others. He is a contributing editor to The European Conservative.

His insights have been featured on CTV, Global News, and the CBC, as well as over twenty radio stations. He regularly speaks on a variety of social issues at universities, high schools, churches, and other functions in Canada, the United States, and Europe.

He is the author of The Culture WarSeeing is Believing: Why Our Culture Must Face the Victims of AbortionPatriots: The Untold Story of Ireland’s Pro-Life MovementPrairie Lion: The Life and Times of Ted Byfield, and co-author of A Guide to Discussing Assisted Suicide with Blaise Alleyne.

Jonathon serves as the communications director for the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform.

Continue Reading

International

Trump says Carney would be ‘easier’ to deal with than Poilievre as Canada’s prime minister

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

‘I think it’s easier to deal actually with a Liberal,’ Trump said in an interview on Tuesday, adding that Poilievre seems to have a ‘negative’ view of him.

U.S. President Donald Trump suggested he would prefer Mark Carney to continue as Canada’s prime minister instead of Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre, who Trump said was “no friend” of his.

In an interview with Fox News’ Laura Ingraham that aired Tuesday night, Trump said that Carney would be “easier” to deal with than Poilievre and said virtually nothing negative about Carney.

“I think it’s easier to deal actually with a Liberal, and maybe they’re going to win, but I don’t really care. It doesn’t matter to me at all,” Trump said,  adding that, in his view, Poilievre seems to have a “negative” view of him.

Trump said that the “Conservative that’s running is stupidly no friend of mine.”

“I don’t know him, but he said negative things,” Trump observed, adding, “So, when he says negative things, I couldn’t care less.”

Today, Poilievre hit back at Trump, saying that the reason Trump endorsed Carney was that he “knows” he will be a “tough negotiator.”

“Last night, President Donald Trump endorsed Mark Carney. Why? Because, as Trump said, he’s ‘easier’ to deal with, and knows that I will be a tough negotiator and always put Canada First,” noted the Conservative leader.

“Carney is weak and would cave to Trump’s demands, just like he did when he moved his company headquarters from Canada to New York City. Canadians don’t want a weak and conflicted leader. They want a strong Prime Minister who will put Canada First.”

Carney, who was installed as Canada’s 24th prime minister last Friday, now serves as the leader of the nation despite never having been elected as a member of Parliament.

Poilievre has blasted Carney as an “establishment” Liberal politician who was “installed” by “Justin Trudeau’s insiders.”

In recent weeks, Trump has stated many times that he thinks Canada should be the “51st” state, a comment that was rebuked by former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Carney, and Poilievre.

A little over a week ago, Trump announced he was giving Mexico and Canada a 30-day reprieve on 25 percent export tariffs for goods covered by the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) on free trade.

Continue Reading

Trending

X