On Charlie Kirk: You Can't Pick and Choose Your Martyr

By Abbigale Kernya for The 44 North

Managing Editor

Charlie Kirk speaking into a microphone

"What began as a goal to further the reach of conservative ideology on college campuses evolved into a right-wing pipeline that grounded itself in exploiting marginalized communities and inciting violence against anyone who dared to call out the deplorable white supremacist behaviour."

On September 10th, 2025, American Conservative podcaster Charlie Kirk was fatally shot at Utah Valley University on the first stop of his “Prove Me Wrong” campus tour. Kirk, who made his career founding Turning Point USA and debating college students on campus about controversial topics like abortion, same-sex marriage, transgender existence, and the right to bear arms, has left behind a legacy that continues to polarize and divide. 

Kirk’s final words that afternoon perhaps speak most of all to his work, where he riled up the MAGA crowd in attendance—fearmongering about transgender gang violence—moments before he was fatally shot by a rifle 200 yards away. The suspect charged is 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, whose motives remain unknown at the time of writing, despite republican claims his actions were a blatant attack from the left. 

It is without question that no matter Kirk’s controversial and bigoted stance, nobody ‘deserves’ to die by gun violence. This remains true, even after Kirk plainly stated in 2023 that he supported civilian casualties to protect and uphold the Second Amendment right to bear arms. The outcry following his assassination is as polarizing as it is frightening. Far right MAGA leaders are calling on violence towards the left (or, their “political opponents”) and conspiracy theories are headlining mainstream media, stating that this shooting was somehow a result of transgender violence—the same “violence” Kirk conspiratized seconds before the fatal shot. 

And yet, on the same day Kirk was shot and killed on campus, an elementary school in Illinois was attacked by a lone gunman, marking the 146th American school shooting in 2025, as Kirk became the same “civilian casualty” he supported.

Kirk’s platform was built on oppression and harm to anyone who wasn’t a straight, white, Christian, middle-class American cis-male. It can be hard to feel empathy for someone who would not give you the same courtesy. Empathy, which, in Kirk’s own words, was seen as a made-up emotion.

Right-wing extremism has been rising steadily in America, bleeding the harmful rhetoric mainstreamed by people like Kirk into nearly every crevice of the West. When the news broke that Kirk had succumbed to his fatal shot, the response heard everywhere from the internet to sports venues was shocking, to say the least. 

This is not to say that Kirk deserved what he got—nobody, no matter which side of the political line they stand on, deserves to be murdered in broad daylight. Nobody deserves to witness bloodshed, and in breaking down the hypocrisies of republican outcry, it is not a pro-firearm message. Rather, it’s one that aims to draw light toward the mass mourning of a white supremacist podcaster who made a career demonizing marginalized communities under the guise of “free speech” and the right to have your own opinion.

The irony of this whole situation is hidden under the calls for violence and continued “us vs. them” rhetoric, steeped in racist comparisons between Kirk and the murder of George Floyd, to further blame the left for his assassination. However, the argument that one must feel sorry for Kirk is somewhat missing the mark in this conversation. Especially given that Kirk himself advocated for public executions, saying they should be televised to children and sponsored by major corporations like Coca-Cola. It comes as somewhat ironic, then, that the conversation around his death is spiralling into that of a memorialized martyr who died for his own opinion, not one that aims to look at the broader picture of the violence he made a career out of. 

Kirk’s advocacy for the right to one’s own “opinion” is a trapdoor that invites unsuspecting viewers through the guise of free speech into the chasm of extremist ideology. As a reminder, an opinion is whether or not you like summer over winter, or what TV show deserved an Emmy Award, or how you like your eggs cooked. An opinion is not whether or not you believe the Jim Crow laws were a good thing for the Black community, or that women aren’t capable of holding equal careers to men, or that transgender people are dangerous, bloodthirsty criminals. Charlie Kirk did not die for his opinion. He held no ‘opinions’ that were not factually incorrect or spewed in the pursuit of a divided country, fueled by hatred and fear. 

His “Prove me Wrong” tour would be the final act in his legacy of rage-baiting college students into falling for the ultra-right-wing pipeline, spinning every disadvantage young people face into a calling card for bigotry and white-supremacy. It is extremely telling how school shootings and the rise of hate speech in North America have become so normalized that they’ve become desensitized to mainstream media. On the afternoon of Charlie Kirk’s shooting, when a man armed with a semi-automatic weapon opened fire in an elementary school in Illinois, the narrative instead became focused on protecting the legacy of someone who didn’t believe in equal rights based on “freedom of expression” rather than the epidemic of gun violence that is plaguing America.

The truth is, if people were truly outraged that this horrific act of gun violence cost Kirk his life, a conversation of change would spark. Instead, conversations around further demonizing left-leaning voters and the trans community have infiltrated online forums. Additionally, we’ve seen countless examples where anyone speaking out against the hypocrisy of Kirk’s shooting is facing harassment and, in increasingly frequent cases, being fired from their employment after speaking against Charlie Kirk's “opinions.”

How have we strayed so far from the plot that merely bringing attention to the hypocrisy and somewhat ironic nature of September 12th is an act of war against the right-wing? To say that you don’t support what happened to Charlie Kirk, but Charlie Kirk (by his own words) supported what happened to him, has become controversial—as if his platform was built around not only protecting the Second Amendment, but also advocating for looser gun restrictions. 

How can one mourn Charlie Kirk and ignore the victims of his rhetoric?

What began as a goal to further the reach of conservative ideology on college campuses evolved into a right-wing pipeline that grounded itself in exploiting marginalized communities and inciting violence against anyone who dared to call out the deplorable white supremacist behaviour. 

To truly mourn Charlie Kirk must mean you mourn all victims of gun violence. 

To mourn him as a father, as a husband, is to also mourn the innocent families ripped apart by ICE raids.

To mourn him as a political activist for free speech is to also mourn the journalists murdered in Gaza who died documenting a genocide. 

To mourn Charlie Kirk is to mourn victims of violence perpetuated with hands cradling guns and microphones. 

To mourn him is to mourn trans people and childbearing folks who have died due to lack of access to gender affirming care and abortion resources.

You cannot pick and choose your martyr. 

Reflections on the Sexual Assault Trial of Former World Junior Hockey Players: More Yhan Just a few 'Bad Apples'​

Gillian Smith-Clark, ​for The 44 North

Editor-in-Chief

A blurry photo negative of five men in suits

"Layered underneath that fabric of an unhealthy masculine ideal is the broader objectification and commodification of women and gender expansive people, and a culture that too often confuses coercion with consent." ​​

The exact number remains unverified, but a group of young men got the text from Michael McLeod to come to a London, Ontario hotel room that night. E.M. testified at trial that as many as eleven men were in the room over the course of the evening; the Crown’s argument stated that ten showed up. The trial record does not fix a single, undisputed number for how many got the text or how many were present in a way that all sides accept – what we do know is that there was a group text sent to multiple players: some responded, others didn’t. It has also been reported that McLeod, after having consensual sex with E.M., went out into the hallway of the hotel that night and invited more people into the room. 

No one involved, as far as we know, recognized that this could be a situation where a young woman might need help, that she might have found herself in a situation she was not anticipating, might have felt blindsided – possibly scared and overwhelmed in an environment where her judgment was impaired by alcohol, was surrounded by men who were not only strangers to her, but physically intimidating. 

There are so many lingering questions about both the events of that night and the subsequent trial and verdict – the lack of empathy by the judge and prevalence of victim blaming and shaming (e.g. Justice Carroccia’s petty and demeaning finding that E.M.’s evasive response to a mistake she had made about her weight was “telling,”) that was present both at trial and in the verdict; the noticeable absence of expert testimony on trauma; the gruelling nine days of testimony that E.M. was put through on the stand, a judicial system that seems incapable of handling sexual assault cases well and a 91-page final written decision that reeks of bias and internalized miso

gyny.  

Further, a crucial and haunting question is: Out of those men who didn’t respond or participate, why did none question or intervene in any way? Reach out for help or advice from a friend, coach or parent? And by extension, how can we work as individuals and as a society to ensure that future outcomes, in similar situations, end differently? 

The question of the young men who did nothing to help is one that immediately invokes a toxic mixture of strong emotions – sadness, fear, revulsion, anger, contempt – yet understanding the motivation behind the thought processes of the men involved can provide at least some insight into how to change behaviour, change culture, and offer a measure of hope for the future. 

Understanding the ‘Why’

Beyond the bystander effect, fear of social consequences and moral disengagement, we live in a cultural landscape that often characterizes an ideal vision of masculinity as one of power, dominance, aggression, emotional suppression, and impulsivity. Pete Hegseth articulated this philosophy perfectly in a recent speech to U.S. generals, where he describes ideal leadership culture as defined by ‘aggressiveness and risk-taking.’  Hegseth went on to say, “[…] an entire generation of generals and admirals were told that they must parrot the insane fallacy that quote, our “diversity is our strength”.” 

Layered underneath that fabric of an unhealthy masculine ideal is the broader objectification and commodification of women and gender expansive people, and a culture that too often confuses coercion with consent.  Underneath that layer, at the base of everything, is a cultural foundation where boys are inundated from early childhood with the message that they must suppress and lock down their own emotions or risk rejection from those they depend on and love. Activist and writer Jeff Perera speaks about this phenomenon particularly well in a recent podcast episode for The 44 North, “Moving From Harmful to Helpful Ideas of Manhood” alongside his written companion essay, “Five Truths on Not Buying into the Manosphere Bait and Switch.”

 

The result, on that particular evening in London in 2018, was that the text received probably didn’t trigger any alarm bells or uneasiness because this type of behaviour is not only normalized but expected. And too often, it is still celebrated.

These were young, male, elite athletes who were raised in an environment where objectifying and commodifying women was so typical, so woven into the fabric of their society, that they didn’t see it as alarming – they probably didn’t see it at all. Therefore, there was no cause for alarm or an impulse to intervene.

One of the many unintended consequences of boys and young men being systematically taught emotional suppression (and often punished and shamed for certain types of emotional expression, e.g. ‘boys don’t cry’) from an early age, is that they also learn to subconsciously ‘switch off’ their feelings, the prerequisite for an ability to switch off cognition, critical thinking and their humanity in the moment. That foundational mechanism can allow an otherwise intelligent, kind, talented young human to ignore any alarm bells that might be sounding in their heads. This isn’t a case of ‘a few bad apples’, but a foundational problem requiring systemic change. 

Taking Action: What makes a difference?

It starts with us. As individuals and as a society, we play a foundational role in shaping how boys and all genders understand masculinity — what it means to be a “good man,” how to express emotion, how to relate to others with empathy and respect, and how to take responsibility for our actions. Together, we can build a new vision of healthy masculinity — one that values wisdom, integrity, moral courage and thoughtfulness. 

A simple place to start is by celebrating and recognizing the right qualities in all genders – by recognizing our own humanity so that we can see it in others – and by finding everyday role models who exhibit strength through emotional intelligence, compassion, and moderation.  

Further Reading

• One Night in London by Katie Strang, Dan Robson, and Ian Mendes, NY Times

• On Healthy Masculinity by Helena Nikitopoulos and Asante Haughton

• Full Written Verdict

• Analyzing Justice Maria Carroccia’s Hockey Canada Verdict by Sean Fine and David Ebner, The Globe and Mail

• The Skeletons in Hocket Canada’s Closet are our Own, by Asante Haughton, The 44 North

Resources

• Higher Unlearning

• Re: Masculine

• Next Gen Men

Artist Spotlight: Wenzdae Anaïs Brewster (she/her)

by Mikaela Brewer ​for The 44 North

Wenzdae sitting on a wooden chair next to a window. She is wearing a green, brown, and red patterned skirt and a flowy white top. She has tattoos, lots of jewelry, piercings, and large glasses. Her hair is blond and cropped short, and she has light brown skin. Next to her are several plants and a wooden side table with a lamp.

Multimedia Artist: digital, traditional beadwork, oddity work, and painting 

Wenzdae (she/her) is an Afro-Indigenous, multi-media artist hailing from the Georgian Bay Metis Community, of which she is a registered and claimed member. She is a direct descendant of the Clermont-Dusome, Trudeau-Papanaathyhianencoe and Beausoliel-Giroux family lines, and her lineage is traced to Manitoba as well as Barbados on her paternal side.

Wenzdae is an accomplished artist with many credits to her name. She specializes in jewellery production, Indigenous beadwork, graphic design, and traditional hand-poke tattoos. Wenzdae has over 13 years of experience and mentorship under her belt.

Her credits include artworks published in both media and television, including creating beadwork for ‘Motherland: Fort Salem’ and an upcoming season of

‘Sullivan’s Crossing’ as well as outfitting several Indigenous community leaders and celebrities.

She is a published author, illustrator and photographer, with one of her iconic images being named amongst CBC’s top 12 best Canadian book covers of 2017. She was also a recipient of the 2013 James Bartleman Aboriginal Youth Creative Writing Award and has multiple upcoming projects and publications coming in the following years through her agency (Trans Atlantic Agency) and Swift Water Books.

Website: wenzdaeweird.ca

Instagram: instagram.com/wenzdaeweird.ca

---

“My roots will always play a key role in how I think, how I create and perceive the world but they will not define or limit me as an artist. I hope people see that art and culture are not the same as history. Culture is forever shifting and growing, evolving and expanding. Finding new ways to implement old techniques into modernity is one of the ways we carry our ancestors into the present.”

---

For a few years, I've had the absolute privilege of wearing and admiring Wenzdae's art. Please spend some time with her responses to my questions about her work, alongside photographs of the variety of art she crafts!

M: For each of your projects/artworks, is there a story behind their crafting/creation process that you'd like to share?

W: Each creation is made different but with equal intention and care. I never truly have a plan going into a new piece (even when I think I do—haha). The theme of the work varies based on what I want to emphasize or project into the world, but the foundation of all my creations is my culture. I spent years under the mentorship of my chosen aunt, June Taylor, who taught me everything I know about Indigenous beadwork (specifically woodlands aesthetic) while we sat at her kitchen table. No matter what I create, the foundation of my knowledge stems back to those days. 

M: How do you, your family, ancestry, community, politics, and values braid into your work on these projects? Where/how, especially, would you like folks to witness/experience this when spending time with your work? Is there anything you hope people pay particular attention to? Take action with/from?

W: I am an intuitive artist who also happens to be Black and Indigenous, as well as European and South Asian. My creative knowledge stems from my Metis heritage, which I grew up deeply entrenched in—from plant medicine knowledge to resistance through storytelling. I like to think of my work as culturally rooted in that heritage but able to be enjoyed by all. I have no intention of separating myself, my beliefs or morals from my work. I like to call myself a radical hippie—as I strongly stand for freedom and equality, which has never truly been achieved by the “peace and love” motto we typically identify with hippie culture, particularly as it pertains to non-western communities. My roots will always play a key role in how I think, how I create and perceive the world, but they will not define or limit me as an artist. I hope people see that art and culture are not the same as history. Culture is forever shifting and growing, evolving and expanding. Finding new ways to implement old techniques into modernity is one of the ways we carry our ancestors into the present.

M: If these projects could speak, what might they say/offer? If not in words, what might they offer in energy? Mind, body, heart, spirit? 

W: My work would offer a new perspective on mixed identity, not one that “waters down” any one of the cultures in my background but one that incorporates, shares and enhances each, in particular, the ways in which they connect and alchemize into something uniquely beautiful. Love knows no boundaries or borders, so cultural appreciation is essential for the ethical trading of knowledge, skills, stories, and arts. My work embraces elements of the aesthetics and environmentally informed processes that underpin my understanding of art, while also bringing its own unique characteristics that have been made possible through the act of true cross-cultural communication. 

Hand-painted ethically harvested animal skulls with upcycled vintage frames (2024-2025).

Accessibility text: An array of animal skulls painted in many different colours, shapes, and designs.

---

Modern beadwork created for the set of “Motherland: Fort Salem (2023)”

Accessibility text: Several women (characters) from the show "Motherland: Fort Salem" wearing a variety of Wenzdae's beaded jewelry, especially earrings.

---

A sample of diverse styles & mediums re: original illustrations for current & forthcoming projects

Accessibility text: 2 paintings of Indigenous women in pink and purple dresses decorated with rainbows, flowers, and butterflies. They are also wearing black and white feathers in their hair.

---

Eighteen unique images commissioned by Indigenous Geographic

Accessibility text: "A diverse and visually vibrant range of illustrations inspired by Métis culture, ensuring accuracy and respect for traditional design elements.” The images include canoes, flowers, moccasins, and more!

---

Utilizing natural & upcycled materials, glass cut beads and ethically harvested and treated animal products. Samples from recent commissioned and creative projects (2022-2025)

Accessibility text: Many pieces of beaded jewelry in different colours, including rings, earrings, necklaces, and small purses. They feature images of water, trees, people, flowers, and other shapes.

---

Early draft illustrations for ‘THE GIRL WHO COLLECTED STARS’ (Swift Water Books/Penguin Random House Canada, forthcoming 2026)

Accessibility text: 2 drawings of a young girl with medium brown skin, brown curly hair, and round glasses. In the first, she is looking out the window of an apartment building at night, through purple curtains. The building is surrounded by flowers and stars, and a small black cat looks out the window next to her. In the second image, the girl is standing on a green stool with blue flowers, looking into a mirror. She's wearing a striped purple dress and pink socks.

---

Signature Beadwork Style

Accessibility text: This signature style came from a dream Wenzdae had of beautiful birch bark paddles dripping with beaded florals and berries, and they carried people to and from the river banks. Upon waking up, she knew she had to re-create this vision. The Métis (also known as the floral beadwork people) are known for their intricate botanical beadwork designs on materials such as plush velvet. Wenzdae combined the teardrop shape of an ore with colourful materials and glass cut beads to make her staple beadwork design she’s now known for. You can view these creations on her website or on the big screen.

---