Since the death of Denise Bombardier, much has been said about her courage. In particular that of having denounced the pedophile acts of Gabriel Matzneff on the set ofApostrophes. And the courage to have stood up to an environment that still believed that literature justified everything, and to have accepted being ostracized and even threatened for it.
We also recall that M.me Bombardier had the courage of his opinions. She wasn’t afraid to speak her mind, no matter the consequences. Integrity and firmness of conviction were supreme values for her. It has also often been said how the search for a consensus at all costs and the fear of “chicaneism”, so widespread according to her among Quebecers, were repugnant to her.
In his text of July 7, Patrick Moreau praises Denise Bombardier’s ability to go against the current of dominant ideas, despite blows and contempt, even against her own interests. It is the lot, he says, of those who put the agreement with their conscience before any other consideration.
But this determination led Mme Bombardier to support certain ideas without always bothering with the necessary nuances or always reflecting on the impact of these ideas. Francis Dupuis-Déri recalls that the thesis according to which feminism has caused terrible disarray among men has been taken over by masculinists. Moreover, Denise Bombardier’s assertion that wokism constitutes an existential threat to a Quebec in full decline ignores the social advances allowed by this new left, such as greater tolerance towards traditionally marginalized people.
That said, it is completely legitimate to think about the possible excesses of feminism or the new left and to want to flush out possible ideological tendencies. But at the same time one must seek to oppose the biases and limits of one’s own convictions and not only those of others. This work of nuance sometimes requires as much courage, if not more, than sticking to your ideas to the end…
To see in video