Frank Bruni: Mayor Pete Is Plenty Gay

Why is this man not gay enough to be President?

Pete Buttigieg, mayor of South Bend, Indiana, shared in frank terms his very moving coming-out story in a speech at the LGBTQ Victory Fund in Washington, D.C., last Sunday, a story that your Head Trucker can relate to:



Your Head Trucker has not quite given up hope that the American ship of state will right itself instead of capsizing under the howling, shifting gales of fanaticism coming from both right and left; but he is very nearly there.  The oh-so-pure, oh-so-righteous snowflake generation of young Democrats now coming to power in the party (the mirror image of their Trumpista equivalents in Bizarro world) makes me feel rather seasick, to tell you the truth.

It is, however, heartening to see an openly gay politician throwing his hat into the presidential ring for the first time ever in our history.  But is he gay enough?  And if not, just who is?  Is it RuPaul or nothing?  What bar must we clear now to be really and truly gay?

And will the new Kweer Kommissariat take away my pink card?

Frank Bruni has something to say about these matters in his New York Times column this week.  Excerpt:

It’s nonnegotiable that Democrats hold their presidential aspirants to high standards on issues of racial justice, gender equality and more. It’s crucial that the party nominate someone who can credibly represent its proudly diverse ranks. But it’s also important that the party not demand a degree of purity that nobody attains.

I’m not recommending the Republicans’ course in accepting and protecting Donald Trump, which was to bury principles so deep that they may never be exhumed. I’m saying that to turn the Democratic primary into a nonstop apology tour when the nominee will be going up against a president never expected to apologize for anything is a risky strategy. It obsesses over the flaws in candidates who have many strengths, defining them in terms of what they seek forgiveness for. It blurs the line between job interview and inquisition. Taken too far, it rips contenders to shreds before Trump even takes out his scissors.

As for the mini-debate about Buttigieg’s gayness, it arose principally from this column in Slate, which included the following paragraph:

“A marginalized sexual orientation can remain unspoken and unnoticed for as long as a queer person desires. A gay man who conforms to a critical mass of gendered expectations can move through life without his sexuality attending every interaction, even after he comes out. Buttigieg, for instance, would register on only the most finely tuned gaydar. Most people who are aware of his candidacy probably know he’s gay, but his every appearance doesn’t activate the ‘Hey, that’s that homosexual gentleman’ response in the average brain. That doesn’t mean he’s not gay enough — there’s really no such measure. It just means that he might not be up against quite the same hurdles that a gay candidate without such sturdy ties to straight culture would be.”

The author is asserting that Buttigieg, 37, the mayor of South Bend, Ind., doesn’t come across as particularly gay, meaning  . . . what? That he lacks stereotypical mannerisms? That his voice isn’t high-pitched? I’m kind of floored, because I and other gay people around my age (54) or older spent most of our lives educating people about the bigotry and inaccuracy of those very stereotypes and trumpeting the message — the truth! — that gay people can be every bit as buttoned-down and strait-laced as, well, Pete Buttigieg! Now his divergence from those stereotypes is deemed remarkable and in need of dissection? Strange days indeed.

Also, I guarantee you that Buttigieg’s adherence to “a critical mass of gendered expectations” and failure to “activate” the homosexual-alert siren don’t mean that being gay has been incidental to his life and is incidental to his perspective. That he didn’t come out until he was 33 is all the proof you need that he wrestled privately with his sexual orientation and with fears about how the world would respond to it and to him.

I like what little I have seen of Pete Buttigieg so far - his Oxford degree and Navy service are big plusses in my book.  But I think he needs some experience in national politics before trying out for President; he's a big fish in a little pond right now, but that's just a starting point for any candidate.

And I will say this about good old Joe Biden - a great guy with a big heart and a fine political record, but simply too old.  If by some twist of fate he did win the 2020 election, he would be 78 on election day, which would be worrisome for several very good reasons that should be obvious to anyone.

I thought it very curious during the election campaign of 2016 that both of the major contenders - and a couple of minor ones - were right at 70 years old.  Why was that?

Why is there no Democratic figure of statesmanlike character between the ages of 40 and 70?  I ask you.