7.8.10 Editor’s Desk

7.8.10 Editor’s Desk

SteveBlanchardHeadshotMuch has been made of Elena Kagan’s sexuality. The is-she-isn’t-she-a-lesbian nominee to the Supreme Court has been a top story in newspapers and news reports the last several weeks.

Kagan, who has never said if she is gay or not, was immediately thrust into the middle of the rumor mill based on her marital status (single) and her appearance (stout body and short hair). The White House claims she is not gay, but if she is indeed a lesbian and is appointed to the nation’s highest court, that would be a historic moment for our country. Imagine the excitement among LGBTs knowing that we have one of our own sitting on the Supreme Court. She would redefine the term “power lesbian.”

But on the other hand, why does it matter if she’s gay? Why should someone’s sexual orientation have any bearing on the job they possess? It shouldn’t. So why do we care so much about that label?

Ask any out politician what it feels like to be labeled the “openly gay commissioner” or a “lesbian city councilwoman” and you’ll learn that the novelty of that title quickly wears thin. Hillsborough County’s Kevin Beckner, Orlando’s Patty Sheehan and St. Petersburg’s Steve Kornell have all gone through the label mill. And every one of them has tired of the moniker.

Tampa Police Chief Jane Castor is out and proud, and we’ve featured her on the cover of this newspaper. But her sexuality had no bearing on the way she handled the manhunt following the recent killing of two Tampa Police officers. She’s a good leader and a good cop. She showed her abilities and proved that her appointment was suited perfectly to her skill set. We’re proud she’s one of us, but we’d be proud of any police chief who handled a cop-killing manhunt so effectively.

We can easily blame the “right wing” fringe of religion and politics for painting targets on the back of our LGBT political leaders. Those who support Proposition 8, which bans gay marriage in California, made a big fuss last year when the judge hearing the case was suspected as gay. They said his gay orientation would have made him sympathetic to Prop 8 opponents. Couldn’t we have argued the same based on a judge’s heterosexuality?

Labeling someone as gay or lesbian is too often portrayed as a negative if it’s preached by a certain sect of people. But we’re just as guilty as anyone when it comes to labels. The LGBT community, at times, forces our leaders to wear a label just as a means of showing progress.

And I support that.

One reason we don’t refer to leaders as our “straight commissioner” or “heterosexual judge” is because heterosexuality is never considered defining. Unfortunately, being gay, lesbian or transgender is still sometimes seen as a negative in the eyes of the overall community. The only way to change that is with increased visibility.

Not coincidentally, this issue is dedicated to Law & Order. Not the television franchise, but to the people dedicated to protecting us and ensuring our rights are protected. LGBT lawyers, law enforcement officers and investigators are forcing agencies to see LGBTs in a different, equal way. Laws finally protect LGBT citizens from discrimination, and hate crime legislation signed into law by President Obama last year will hopefully lead to a drop in crimes committed against the LGBT community.

Those are all positive steps. But in order for LGBTs to truly be seen as equals, our leaders—and those of us living everyday lives—must embrace our sexuality until it is no longer seen as an issue. Anyone who is anti-LGBT has more difficultly arguing his or her case when a respected leader is out and proud.

If Kagan is indeed a lesbian, I hope she comes out of the closet soon. Not only would she be an amazing historical footnote for our country and a powerful endorsement of the LGBT community, she would also prove that LGBTs are just as capable as anyone else to hold a position of power.

That would be the most powerful statement she could make.

More in Editor's Desk

See More