That controversy over Elena Kagan\’s rumoured lesbian sexuality dealt with in full

In the comments here.

Folks I\’m a straight long time married (44 years to the same woman) white haired guy. And I\’m politically and socially conservative. But I could give a flaming rat\’s ass about what Kagan does, or doesn\’t do, in her bedroom. She can screw alligators for all I care. It\’s simply a non issue.

I care about what she thinks–not who she screws. The left is the part of the country that\’s got its little tighty whities in a twist over this. Yes, if she\’s a full blown lesbian–16 forward speeds and a Georgia overdrive butch if you will, she might favor gay marriage. Then again, she may not. Who knows? Who cares? It\’s just one of a multitude of issues to come before the court.

Some of the twits in the \”reality based community\” need to get a grip and get on with life.

Quite. Munchee rugee or no munchee rugee: it\’s as relevant to her qualifications as a Supreme Court Justice as John Roberts\’ taste for doggy style (or not, as the case may be) is.

Irrelevant.

Jesu C….aren\’t we all supposed to be good little liberals these days?

19 thoughts on “That controversy over Elena Kagan\’s rumoured lesbian sexuality dealt with in full”

  1. I’d gladly vote for a lesbian MP.

    Not only would they have more experience, having not taken time out to raise children, they’ll be more rational and more likely to understand what male voters want.

  2. What I found particularly amusing was the way the originators of this whole storm in a teacup went about it.

    The NYT put up an article headlined something like “Kagan has many questions to answer”. This was then followed by text that mentioned homo/hetero sexuality not once and a picture of the aforementioned candidate for the Big Bench playing softball.

    Yep. The NYT had to find a picture of Kagan playing softball (a game, I gather is popular in the mug runching community), plonk it next to an article carrying her name and then hope people would get the message.

    Damn! You have to admit being a bigotted rightie makes life so much easier. If we want to start scurilous rumours about someone’s sexuality we just ask: “Is XXXXX a screaming dyke or not?”. These poor little leftie saps have to try and hide their deeds so hard – poor things 🙂

  3. Just goes to show the difference between the left (is she/isnt she?) and the right (dont give a rats ass – what are her policies?).

    Say’s it all really.

  4. er, it’s pretty much indisputable that over the past, hmm, 50 odd years gay liberation and tolerance has come from and been driven by the political left.

    Notwithstanding a few fringe libertarians, the right has been largely a consistent obstacle to gay rights and equality.

    So it’s a bit bloody rich to turn round and start claiming the evil leftie are all anti-liberal and nasty and stuff. Get a grip Tim, you yourself may not be a rampant or even a mild homophobe, but you share political space with many who are and have been.

  5. “Notwithstanding a few fringe libertarians, the right has been largely a consistent obstacle to gay rights and equality.”

    Not really. A consistent obstacle to granting special rights, that’s all.

    As JohnRS points out, it isn’t the right that’s obsessed with who does what to whom and making sure, like Noah, they collect one of each sort.

  6. @Paul Sagar
    conservative does not equal Conservative.

    I’ve know quite a number of left wingers who are totally against gay rights. Mostly of the older generation. They would have conservative views.

    Similarly I’ve known right wingers who believe everyone should be treated equally regardless of gender or race. They would have progressive views.

  7. I think her inclinations are relevant: it is very rare for someone who is a practising homosexual or lesbian not to use their position of authority (MP, judge, etc) to promote that lifestyle.

  8. “Not really. A consistent obstacle to granting special rights, that’s all. ”

    What? It used to be illegal to be gay. Labour sorted that out.

    Now it has to be admitted that he did so against a lot of his own party, but he also did so against a lot more of those self identifying as conservative. That wasn’t a special right was it?

    Would allowing gays to adopt be a special right?

    I’m just curious because it doesn’t look like it to me.

    Lots of people have crap records on gay rights. But conservatives has a slightly worse record than liberals or lefties on average. Not meant to reflect on the conservatives of today, but it should give pause for thought on what you believe now that might make you look like “a bigoted woman” down the road.

  9. The main criterion I would apply is this:

    Is she likely to be a judicial activist? Or is she ready to uphold the Constitution?

    Some people accept a job to do what it says in the job description. That’s fine by me.
    But some

  10. Oops:

    But some accept the job so they can get their feet under the table, and then change the job to what they want it to be.

  11. So Much For Subtlety

    Joseph Takagi – “I’d gladly vote for a lesbian MP. Not only would they have more experience, having not taken time out to raise children, they’ll be more rational and more likely to understand what male voters want.”

    What? Sex with Co-eds?

    I am not convinced of this.

  12. “…but it should give pause for thought on what you believe now that might make you look like “a bigoted woman” down the road.”

    Unlike the left, who cringe in fear at not being found to hold the ‘right’ views for the time of day, regardless of what was considered the ‘right’ view just a few months or weeks ago, I couldn’t give a twopenny damn how my views make me look to others.

    They are my views, and I change them in response to actual evidence and fact, not to what the chaps in the Islington Diversity Co-ordinators Jamboree currently believe…

  13. A consistent obstacle to granting special rights, that’s all.

    the word you are looking for is equal

  14. JuliaM,

    “Unlike the left, who cringe in fear at not being found to hold the ‘right’ views for the time of day, regardless of what was considered the ‘right’ view just a few months or weeks ago, I couldn’t give a twopenny damn how my views make me look to others.”

    The most racist comment I heard recently was from a Graun reading friend of a friend at a party (after some drinks had been consumed). He let the facade drop and rather than talking about Israel’s government, just referred to “the bloody jews”.

  15. Joseph,
    Perhaps you should let your Graun reading friend know that he’s not supposed to be saying that out loud, at least not yet.
    He’s giving the game away.

  16. Er, no Luis, special is the correct term.

    How else do you describe the fact that if a gay man gets beaten up his crime is treated differently and his assaulter is punished more severly than if he’d beaten up a straight bloke?

    How else do you explain the fact one can have agay police officers’ forum but not a white heterosexual police officers’ forum?

    How else do you explain the fact you get gay countryside access facilitators working for local councils?

    Equality happened a long time ago, now it’s pushing for special treatment.

  17. Thinking about this I couldn’t understand why the NYT was making such a big thing about whether Kagan is gay or not. At least I couldn’t until I started thinking like a leftie (or a sneaky, twisted, little sh1t-weasel, if you prefer).

    There are some genuine concerns about Kagan’s suitability for the post – her lack of judicial experience being the biggest*. Obama’s supporters know these could be a real problem, but they also realise they have no real defence against this line of questioning. Now what does a leftie do when faced with a losing argument? Call his opponent an -ist, of course. The problem is it’s hard to be an -ist when your “victim” won’t play ball and fall into a defined category of victimhood.

    Kagan’s white, so racist is out. She is a woman, but there enough rightie women around nowadays to make sexism a hard charge to make stick. She doesn’t drive round in a wheel chair so disablism’s out and she’s younger than half the bench, so her opponents can’t be called ageist. All in all our champion stubbornly refuses to jump into any nice little box. Indeed although she’s never come out of the closet, about the only help she gives her supporters is the fact she isn’t married and likes to play softball.

    So with this limited ammunition Kagan/Obama supporters decided to start a rumour that Kagan is of the mug runching persuasion in the hope that the wicked righties would pick it up and run with it, thereby enabling the leftes to brand any and all Kagan detractors homophobes.

    Sadly for them, it appears the right has moved on in the past few decades (or at least learnt to avoid such obvious traps). Instead of falling for the ploy, critics of Kagan’s candidacy all lead with: “Who gives a stuff who Elena sleeps with?” before moving on to: “there are some more serious questions that need answering.”

    Well, that’s how I managed to explain this rather odd story. Anyone else got a better theory?

    *Not necessarily a deal breaker, but definately a point of concern

  18. RM

    Christ, if you can’t understand why minority groups form ‘associations’ etc. while majority groups don’t you really are dim.

    aside, as I think you are asking me to do, justifying hate crime legislation (I understand how you must bridle against ‘special’ laws against racist/homophobic violent attacks) your claim that “equality happened a long time ago” instantly identifies you as barking mad.

    equality in: age of consent, adoption rights, legal status of marriage happened when?

  19. “Christ, if you can’t understand why minority groups form ‘associations’ etc. while majority groups don’t you really are dim.”

    With all due respect, Luis, you are being dim here. The issue isn’t about the relatively likelihood of different groups forming associations, it is about the fact that some groups are allowed to form associations that other groups are not.
    White Police Officer Association? I think not!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *