Of course it is inevitable that questions will be raised about the sexual orientation of President Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court. The Republicans want any excuse to derail it, and they know full well that the media would cooperate by creating a circus around the issue.
The fact is that the White House felt the need to respond to the question by saying that Elena Kagan had volunteered the information that she is not gay. See how forthcoming she is? I think we can assume that Obama himself couldn't care less -- but he knows that the other side would use it as a political smear and it could complicate the confirmation process.
But isn't it time for the answer to be: So what if she is lesbian?
I was going to just ignore the whole issue, thinking that was the best response -- until this morning, when something I read prompted me to think about the bigger implication.
I think most Americans are ready to accept that it should be a non-issue whether she is straight or gay. But it apparently is an issue that we feel the need for an explanation for why a 50 year old woman has never married -- because we are so immersed in a culture that says it is the norm, we assume there is something wrong if she hasn't. As Janet Reno said in a similar awkward moment about rumors that she was lesbian: She denied it but then, to explain her unmarried status, said: "I'm just an awkward old maid." So, either she's gay or she's a failed heterosexual woman.
Right? Or could it simply be that she has other priorities? Even among us psychoanalysts who revere individual autonomy and self-determination, and even among us gay activists who revere freedom to be who you are -- both groups tend to act as though we think being in a committed relationship is somehow just a little bit healthier than being a lone wolf. Is there something missing in a woman who chooses not to become a mother?
So what's that all about? We should ponder, not Kagan's sexuality, but our own assumptions about relationships and parenthood.
Ralph
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Good points Ralph. All of them. (And someone - I think it was Colbert - did a hilarious take on this).
ReplyDeleteBut there is a major point that is being missed in the coverage of this. Prior to her official nomination someone in the Obama administration floated the story that she was gay. Not sure why, but I thought, at the time, it was floated in an attempt to curry favor with the left because the administration was concerned about Kagan's less-than-stellar credentials with progressives. It was a way to reassure the left that, although the conservatives seemed to like her, and her hiring record on women and minorities was abysmal at Harvard, she really is someone who is 'on our side'.
But of course this doesn't justify the idiotic and demeaning way the conservatives have addressed it.
But it was the administration which brought it up first. Then later, when it became a distraction, denied she was gay. It would have been better if someone in the administration had been the one to stand up and make the points you're making, rather than releasing a claim that she wasn't gay.
richard
I don't know, as you seem to, that the administration floated the idea that she might be gay. But if that's true, I can think of another explanation: perhaps they floated it to see what would surface -- either supporting evidence that they would have to address or how strong the negative reaction would be.
ReplyDeleteThat is a fairly standard tactic in preparing for opposition to an appointment.
I find it hard to believe that Obama's people would use that to try to curry approval from the left.
not progressive enough,
ReplyDeletetoo progressive,
unmarried,
gay,
not gay,
jewish,
ivy leaguer,
short,
pudgy,
dowdy dresser,
no judicial experience,
softball player,
conservatives oppose her,
liberals are suspicious of her.
I think she's sufficiently opaque to be the next Dalai Lama!
But can they have a Dalai Lama from Harvard?
ReplyDeleteBy the way, the story about her being gay was covered by all the leftist media outlets. Not sure why they'd float it there if they were seeing how it would be accepted by the middle. In any case,it was pretty odd that the administration said she came forward and told them about her sexuality before they asked. But then didn't clarify what she said.
The entire handling of that aspect is offensive(by the right) and bizarre(by the left).
richard
Can they have a Dalai Lama from Harvard? No, but we have one (The One) on the faculty at Emory. He is a Distinguished Visiting Professor who makes periodic visits and holds conferences on campus, where Emory has the best Institute of Buddhist Studies in the country.
ReplyDeleteHe is one of the foremost promoters of new theories of mind using neuroscience techniques to study, among other things, the part of the brain involved in meditation. He was involved in an international conference here two years ago on the subject. It seems that the same brain areas are active whether the subject is a Buddhist doing meditation, a Catholic nun praying, or a Sikh doing whatever it is that they do.