As I see all the posts about Obama nominee for the Supreme Court, Kagan, it both amuses and saddens me. She's short, white, Jewish, a woman, slightly round with hair only a little longer than my own. She's got a double chin and she's almost as old as I am. However, she's got no court experience that would seemingly be a root consideration for anyone applying for the position...hmmm...but then, again, she's "from Harvard", and we all know what that means...we've seen those credentials in the recent past, haven't we?
Many pundits cite that she's "similar to Obama in her thinking". I don't know for sure what that means. I don't for sure know what Obama is thinking. Seems like a lot of flash and dazzle and a spectacular group of youngish people surrounding "his image". The most recent intersection/traffic jam about Kagan and Obama (and all that image-making ) seemed to come to a head when the rumors about "Kagan is gay" broke.
So many people responded: why does it even matter...who cares? Obama's people wrangled Kagan's college roomie and some guy she seemed to date, a few times, to give "expert witness" that she's "straight". Now, for one thing, I am totally thrilled that the hate-mongers seem to be in the minority. Either times are shifting for real or homophobes are less likely to use their computers for blogging. But the second point is more problematic. People thinking that "it doesn't matter" when, clearly, it very much matters. Just ask Obama's staff...
Let me explain: as long as some groups are hated in this country or targeted for hate crimes, as a collective, then belonging to those groups matters. Being gay/lesbian means belonging to one of these targeted groups.(Even being thought to be queer can put a bulls-eye on your back. Still. Even though Showtime would tell you otherwise.)
We don't want our society to necessarily act in this way, but certain segments still do. Let's be real. Or, as real as the President, when he claims to be both White and Black--depending on which days and what speeches he is delivering. Obama and his "gang" know full-well the importance of identifying (or not) with a certain segment of the population. (All the more sensitive if one was born into that segment and didn't "just choose" to be a member.)
It matters if you believe an individual will exclusively represent ALL MEMBERS of that special group. Does the President, then, represent ALL WHITE PEOPLE in a special way? Or does he represent ALL BLACK PEOPLE? Or ALL HETEROSEXUAL MALES? Or ALL HARVARD GRADUATES? Or,as he's told us, does he represent, in a special way, ALL his Gay friends?
Obama has made many promises, like past Pres. Clinton, to move forward on human rights issues for his lgbt constituants. And like Clinton, he has mostly been slow-moving and back-burnering those promises. Yeah, the economy sucks; yeah there are wars waging all around us;yeah the ocean is dying as we sit here and the planet looks like a toilet in many patches. But, most of these situations were in place before Obama stepped up to his job. A job that his gay and lesbian support base made possible--just like Bill's. So, even as Obama seems to waffle about promises made to a specialized "group" that helped to elect him; he claims that he has many lgbt friends and wants to do right by them. He's told us that WE MATTER. Our fight for civil rights matters.
You'd think, then, maybe he WOULD nominate a queerbaby for the Supreme Court, if she had all the right stuff. (Because it does matter. ) It shows he is thinking about people as individuals. He is including voters from minorities; groups that he doesn't belong to. He is a new kind of leader. You'd think.
Instead, his "gang" hunt down and leak out info about Kagan that may or may not be true--from sources that knew her as a college student "back in the day"; who are offering sound bites regarding social networking that cannot really be verified as far as its intimacy quotient. Basically, a fluff story that sends just enough questions into the atmosphere to offer "something for everyone". Is Kagan a lesbian? Is she protesting too little? Too much? What would it mean if? (Oh,if only...and then, what WOULD that mean?)For me, the bigger question is ,what does it mean that Obama allowed "his group in the White House" to handle the issue of Kagan's sexuality in such a slip-shod, Planet Hollywood way. The stakes are higher than that.
It does matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment