« Quick note | Main | Kyoto »

Let's Out The Dogs of War?

Chris Geidner writes a piece which, although he later backpedals a bit, does seem rather more positive on the politics of 'outing' gay politicians and their employees than I would have expected. It's personal and emotional, which makes for compelling reading, but in the end it seems fundamentally dissatisfying. To illustrate why I would say this, let me lead with a wholly heterosexual vignette.

When I was working at a large Japanese firm in Osaka, I was seconded into one of their various departments, and was only on my first or second day when a minor scandal erupted. A young man in the department had presented the Department Chief with a letter, was doing much formal bowing, and the Department Chief was making some rather shocked, then angry, then flustered statements.

The letter in question was a wedding invitation. It turns out that the young man had been dating the woman who sat across from him--one of the section secretaries--for more than a year. Company policy would have been for the woman to be moved to another division to avoid any potential conflicts. Because they enjoyed working together, they concocted a rather elaborate scheme of bickering with one another, making rude comments, and keeping a certain distance. Strange as such behavior might seem, I gather that it worked: only one member of their workgroup, a close friend, knew of the engagement before the announcement.

I mention this because it was a beautiful and strangely affecting scene. The Chief was both happy and frustrated--he was supposed to know what was going on, wasn't he? The young man was alternately nervous, repentant, and I think just a little bit smug that they'd managed to pull it off. And the woman was... well, let's just say she had the most beautiful eyes when she looked at him.

Now, suppose I had known about the relationship before I arrived, because I'd happened to see this couple emerging from a Sakuranomiya love hotel. (The ways in which couples can carry on clandestine affairs in Japan is itself a wonderful topic for another day.) Most of the arguments for outing would come into play: obviously, their workgroup may have a right to know because others might suspect the groom-to-be of playing favorites in assigning his lover her work. Outing would have been in line with policy. I'm sure someone could come up with a scenario in which, as a member of the Administrative Division, I would have been ethically obliged to reveal their relationship. Heck, my section was probably the one that made the rule.

It would also have been deeply, deeply ugly.

I'm quite happy to say I oppose outing not because of any particular discrimination between homosexuals and heterosexuals, but because announcing someone's romantic preferences to the world is in general a reprehensible act. That counts for same-sex relationships just as much as heterosexual ones. Indeed, I've been worried ever since I first mentioned the occasional happy discussion of my romantic life. Were my relationships to be 'outed' I would not take it kindly. And were it to be done without my ever mentioning a lady in question? I hope Chris would not find it in his heart to sanction that.

But of course, even Chris admits that kindness is the only factor involved in such things:

Then, there's the anger. Outing helps right a fundamental unfairness placed upon the shoulders of a large segment of the LGBT population that is avoided by some who choose to avoid the sticky areas in which their sexuality might raise "issues." Through their positions of privilege or ability to be "straight-acting" (please, don't get me started), these people will go to the bars (as Pete Williams had) and enjoy many of the benefits of "gay living" -- all the while living a straight-laced life (with all its benefits) amongst anti-gay individuals (or even by advancing anti-gay causes).

But this is the 'with us or against us' attitude common to so many activists of however many stripes which quickly becomes a thinly-veiled excuse for hurting individuals. Suppose that we have the worst-case scenario: a homosexual Legislative Assistant (LA) working for Senator Homophobe on his bill to introduce the FMA. What, precisely, does this LA owe to someone who is also homosexual? While his sexuality may define who it is he loves, it certainly doesn't paint him with some obligation to some arbitrary community with which he may or may not choose to identify.

Indeed, the entire concept of outing seems based on the idea that one's sexuality must define one's opinions: "I am gay, and thus I must oppose the FMA and support ACTUP." Otherwise the implicit charge of hypocrisy wouldn't be worth making in the first place: if you don't think there's 'right' view for one to hold, it would be as useful as 'outing' Phil Gramm as a Republican. But despite Chris' protestations otherwise, there's nothing inherently contradictory about supporting the FMA and being homosexual: such a position would be non-standard, but is hardly logically indefensible. Indeed, what if the person in question were just to answer back, "I didn't consider it an anti-gay issue, whatever that may be"? What the heck was all of this "rights" stuff about if it wasn't about the right to individual opinions? And if one has a right to those, are there certain opinions that mean one gives up one's ability to conduct romantic affairs in private?

"But I am suffering, and he is not, and this is unfair." I suppose it's a point of view, and one suitable to one who is angry, but not one that elicits much sympathy from me. Such unfairness is certainly not 'fundamental,' unless one posits that one's point of view is the fundamental center from which such things must be judged.

The above should be the end of the article, and unless you're worried about a particular detail, quit reading here. But I'm sure that someone will chime in, and quickly, with something about our former president's peccadillos with a charming White House intern, and how this proves that all Republicans are hypocrits or some other such, and I feel the need to nip that in the bud.

There are two points which distinguish Clinton from the discussion of outing above. First of all, nothing I say above should be taken to apply within the realms of a lawsuit. Bill Clinton's sex life came out in the context of a sexual harassment lawsuit, and that makes a world of difference.

Now, I'm on record from years ago as stating that the best thing Republicans could have done with the whole Lewinsky affair would have been to use the political capital it gave us to reform sexual harassment law, instead of poking a wounded but undying bear. Paula Jones should not have had the right to trawl through Clinton's entire sexual history as a part of her discovery process, and I would love to see federal and state law amended to prevent that. But so long as it was part of a lawsuit, and Congress or a state legislature has ordained that such things are part of a public record, then so be it. We can change those laws, after all.

So I suppose if those wishing to 'out' public figures had wished to charge them with sodomy--if they were in jurisdictions where they could be charged--I'd have no major objection, although I'd question their tactics. (After all, accusing a single individual of sodomy after a night at a gay bar exposes a lot of other folks to a potential dragnet.) Nonetheless, post-Lawrence that option seems foreclosed.

Secondly, Clinton's travails came within the context of adultery. (Well, OK, it depends on how your adultery statute is defined and where exactly he was sticking his 'cigar,' but you get my drift.) Chris is fond of a looser, less traditional definition of marriage than I am, even outside of the sexuality issues involved: I, for instance, think love is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for legal marriage, while his website happily proclaims "marriage is love." Nonetheless, we both would agree that marriage is a public institution entered into in the full light of the law. Adultery can be brought to light in divorce proceedings and become, as a certain Illinois senate candidate now knows, public knowledge. But so long as homosexuals are not getting married, that reasoning simply doesn't apply. I suppose outing a married politician may be seen differently.

All in all, I'd be happier if Clinton's sex life hadn't become public. Nonetheless, there are different issues here than are involved with the standard 'outing': a lawsuit, marriage, what have you. In cases where those two factors are implicated, I suppose it's fair game. Otherwise, I simply don't think that anger is a sufficient justification.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.threeyearsofhell.com/cgi-user/mt/mtPleaseLinktoMe.cgi/618

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Let's Out The Dogs of War?:

» 2 Cents on "Outing" from Fool's Blog
My, my, what a stirring topic! (See here, here, here & here.) I had begun crafting my own post yesterday on this topic. Coincidentally, I was privately solicited for my thoughts on the matter. So, here goes! As a general... [Read More]

» 2 Cents on "Outing" from Fool's Blog
My, my, what a stirring topic! (See here, here, here & here.) I had begun crafting my own post yesterday on this topic. Coincidentally, I was privately solicited for my thoughts on the matter. So, here goes! As a general... [Read More]

» 2 Cents on "Outing" from Fool's Blog
(Given the length of this post, it's more like a buck fifty.) My, my, what a stirring topic! (See here, here, here & here.) I had begun crafting my own post yesterday on this topic. Coincidentally, I was privately solicited... [Read More]

» Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Out from The Curmudgeonly Clerk
It is apparently no surprise to those familiar with Rep. Barbara Mikulski that she is a confirmed bachelorette, though Mikulski... [Read More]

» Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Out from The Curmudgeonly Clerk
It is apparently no surprise to those familiar with Rep. Barbara Mikulski that she is a confirmed bachelorette, though Mikulski... [Read More]

» Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Out from The Curmudgeonly Clerk
It is apparently no surprise to those familiar with Rep. Barbara Mikulski that she is a confirmed bachelorette, though Mikulski... [Read More]

» Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Out from The Curmudgeonly Clerk
It is apparently no surprise to those familiar with Rep. Barbara Mikulski that she is a confirmed bachelorette, though Mikulski... [Read More]

» Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Out from The Curmudgeonly Clerk
It is apparently no surprise to those familiar with Rep. Barbara Mikulski that she is a confirmed bachelorette, though Mikulski... [Read More]

» Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Out from The Curmudgeonly Clerk
It is apparently no surprise to those familiar with Rep. Barbara Mikulski that she is a confirmed bachelorette, though Mikulski... [Read More]

» Coming Out from Crescat Sententia
Andrew Sullivan writing at TNR Online speaks out forcefully, and quite persuasively, against the non-consensual "outing" of public figures. Longtime blog readers will remember this as one of those blog-debates-that-does-not-die, with thoughts from Chri... [Read More]

» Coming Out from Crescat Sententia
Andrew Sullivan writing at TNR Online speaks out forcefully, and quite persuasively, against the non-consensual "outing" of public figures. Longtime blog readers will remember this as one of those blog-debates-that-does-not-die, with thoughts from Chri... [Read More]

Comments

Excellent thoughts. Thanks for sharing them.
Since I've lived in Jim Kolbe's district on and off most of the last decade, I've had a fairly close view at how his coming out of the closet has effected his politics. Short answer: not at all Oh, the gay press might say it's "improved his support for gay issues", but not really. It mostly means that now he actually shows up at certain events that a Republican wouldn't normally be caught dead at, but always with a nasty grimace on his face that seems to say "why the hell am I here?" His personal life was already in a shambles when he outed himself on threat of being outed, it seems to have punctured the boil on a marriage that had become an increasingly sick sham. Don't look for any of THAT in press archives though, oh no! On the ground local political gossip is the only place much mention is made of that business. End result politically: Kolbe is even more electable in his district, at least the parts of it that are in Pima County, the one real Dem. stonghold in AZ (the large gay population here holds their nose and votes for his as he's 'one of theirs' now, and the old-line GOP holds their nose, if they're aware he's gay, as his voting record and donation base are so solidly on the right). So he's even more dug in now than he was before he was outed, and he STILL votes like a straight war hero on almost all social issues. So what was once one of the most contested districts in the state now is locked up by the GOP because some queer Donks were gonna out him.

Post a comment

NOTICE TO SPAMMERS, COMMENT ROBOTS, TRACKBACK SPAMMERS AND OTHER NON-HUMAN VISITORS: No comment or trackback left via a robot is ever welcome at Three Years of Hell. Your interference imposes significant costs upon me and my legitimate users. The owner, user or affiliate who advertises using non-human visitors and leaves a comment or trackback on this site therefore agrees to the following: (a) they will pay fifty cents (US$0.50) to Anthony Rickey (hereinafter, the "Host") for every spam trackback or comment processed through any blogs hosted on threeyearsofhell.com, morgrave.com or housevirgo.com, irrespective of whether that comment or trackback is actually posted on the publicly-accessible site, such fees to cover Host's costs of hosting and bandwidth, time in tending to your comment or trackback and costs of enforcement; (b) if such comment or trackback is published on the publicly-accessible site, an additional fee of one dollar (US$1.00) per day per URL included in the comment or trackback for every day the comment or trackback remains publicly available, such fee to represent the value of publicity and search-engine placement advantages.

Giving The Devil His Due

Choose Stylesheet

What I'm Reading

cover
D.C. Noir

My city. But darker.
cover
A Clockwork Orange

About time I read this...


Shopping

Projects I've Been Involved With

A Round-the-World Travel Blog: Devil May Care (A new round-the-world travel blog, co-written with my wife)
Parents for Inclusive Education (From my Clinic)

Syndicated from other sites

The Columbia Continuum
Other Blogs by CLS students

De Novo
Theory and Practice
Liberal Federalism?
Good News, No Foolin'


Althouse
Nancy Pelosi covers her head and visits the head of John the Baptist.
Vlogging in from Austin.
Omikase/"American Idol"


Jeremy Blachman's Weblog: 2007
Happy Passover
Looking for Advice re: LA
Google Books


Stay of Execution
What I've Learned From This Blog, or My Yellow Underpants
The End
Mid Thirties


Legal Theory Blog
Program Announcement: Summer Programs on the Constitution at George Washington
Book Announement: Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy by Whittington
Entry Level Hiring Report


The Volokh Conspiracy
Making the Daily Show:
Civil unions pass New Hampshire House:
Profile of Yale Law Dean Harold Koh:


Crescat Sententia
Hillary II
Hillary
Politics and Principal/Agents


Law Dork
Election Approaches
Following Lewis
New Jersey High Court: 'Same Rights and Benefits'


IrishLaw
Homecoming
Surveying the revival
Birds of paradise


Half the Sins of Mankind
Cheney Has Spoken Religious conservatives who may ...
Does Ahmadinejad Know Christianity Better Than MSN...
Borders as Genocide In discussions of climate chan...


pf.org
Progress
For lovers of garden gnomes...and any China-freaks out there
We Interrupt Your Regularly Scheduled Programming


Ideoblog
Does SOX explain the flight from NY?
More Litvak on SOX effect on cross-listed firms
What did the market learn from internal controls reporting?


The Yin Blog
Iowa City = Riyadh
Jeffrey Rosen's "The Supreme Court"
Geek alert -- who would win between Battlestar Galactica and the U.S.S. Enterprise?


Letters of Marque
Graduation
And there we are
Oil!


BuffaloWings&Vodka
Signing Off


Dark Bilious Vapors
Jim (The Waco Kid): Where you headed, cowboy?
Bart: Nowhere special.
Jim: Nowhere special. I always wanted to go there.
Bart: Come on.
--"Blazing Saddles"

Technical Difficulties... please stand by....
The Onion should have gotten a patent first....


Legal Ethics Forum
Interesting new Expert DQ case
Decency, Due Care, and The Yoo-Delahunty Memorandum
Thinking About the Fired U.S. Attorneys


Ex Post
Student Symposium- Chicago!
More Hmong - Now at Law School
Good Samaritan Laws: Good For America?


Appellate Law & Practice
Those turned over documents
CA1: courts can’t help people acquitted of crimes purge the taint of acquitted conduct
CA1: restrictions on chain liquor stores in Rhode Island are STILL okay


the imbroglio
High schoolers turn in plagiarism screeners for copyright infringement
talisman
Paris to offer 20,600 bikes at 1,450 stations to rent by the end of the year


The Republic of T.
The Secret of the Snack Attack
links for 2007-04-04
Where You Link is What You Get

Distractions for stressed law students

The Other Side: Twisted AnimationsSomething Positive, a truly good webcomic

Syndicate This Site

Sitemeter

Technologies


Stop Spam Harvesters, Join Project Honey Pot