Politics & Policy

The Culture War over Gays in Government Is Over

Richard Grenell on Fox News in 2016 (Screengrab via YouTube)
Remember ‘I am not going to put a lesbian into a position like that’?

During the Clinton years, an era of theatrical polarization not unlike our own, the president would occasionally flaunt his progressive bona fides by nominating an openly gay man or woman for some low-level government job. Republicans, for their part, would oppose such moves just as dramatically.

In 1993, Clinton proposed openly gay San Francisco councilwoman Roberta Achtenberg for a minor job in the executive branch. Senate Republicans called it a provocation. “I am not going to put a lesbian into a position like that,” thundered Jesse Helms about the office of assistant secretary of housing and urban development.

Four years later, Clinton put forth the openly gay James Hormel, a rich Democratic donor, as ambassador to Luxembourg — though in a classic bit of Clintonian triangulation, he was willing to concede to Helms (now chairman of the Senate foreign-relations committee) that Hormel’s partner “would not get ambassadorial spouse status.” It didn’t help much.

Many Republicans claimed to not oppose Achtenberg and Hormel for their homosexuality per se, but rather for their willingness to agitate on behalf of what Bob Dole called “a lifestyle most Americans reject.” Among other things, this included Hormel’s support for the then-radical notions of same-sex marriage and gay-themed museum exhibits, and Achtenberg’s fierce criticism of the Boy Scouts of America for their policy (at the time) of denying leadership roles to open homosexuals. After much Republican foot-dragging, both Achtenberg and Hormel were eventually installed —though Hormel required the use of a recess appointment.

Today, however, it is 2018 and many things are different. A Republican president has proposed an openly gay man, Richard Grenell, America’s former U.N. spokesperson and a longtime conservative pundit, for a deeply substantial job: U.S. ambassador to Germany.

One can only imagine what the late Senator Helms would say. Grenell is, after all, an outspoken defender of the gay “lifestyle.” He’s in a longtime romantic relationship with a man, and has, as a National Review columnist once rather uncharitably put it, “made a particular crusade of the marriage issue, with a kind of unhinged devotion that suggests a man with questionable judgment.” During that weird period when President Obama was posturing as a guardian of traditional nuptials, Grenell consistently blasted him — as well as the legions of Democrat-aligned gay activists who gave the White House a pass — for this obviously disingenuous cynicism. In 2015 he was one of over 300 dissident Republicans who signed a Supreme Court amicus brief in favor of gay marriage.

Like many gays in the GOP, Grenell has been a proponent of the idea that support for gay rights is a logical outgrowth of the broader “conservative ideal of limited government involvement in our lives,” as he put it in a 2012 Wall Street Journal op-ed. When his side eventually triumphed in Obergefell v. Hodges, he cheered the ruling as a “landmark victory for conservative principles.”

None of this raises any eyebrows in Congress these days, even among the Republicans who had so much to say about the Achtenberg and Hormel nominations way back when. During a short-lived period when Grenell was being floated as a possible U.S. representative to NATO, The Atlantic did a quick reaction survey of various Republican-aligned evangelical leaders, including Jerry Falwell Jr., and received a collective shrug.

To the extent anyone is trying to weaponize Grenell’s sexuality it’s been the Log Cabin Republicans, who have taken to claiming that Senate Democrats are holding up Grenell’s nomination (they voted unanimously against it on the Foreign Relations Committee) because he’s gay. The new line is that liberals just can’t handle seeing a successful LGBT person who’s not on their side. The New York Times has reported on this with excessive incredulousness, characterizing the gay-Republican alliance in Grenell’s favor a curious coalition of “opposing factions.”

Yet by the standards of our time, citing the homosexuality of Grenell — a hawkish figure known for provocative language — as a relevant variable in his story feels as contrived and archaic as similar efforts to frame the nomination of Gina Haspel as CIA director through a gendered lens. Gay office-holders are to politics today as women have been for quite a while now: something marginally interesting as a point of historic trivia, but long ago drained of their cultural power to polarize in any politically useful way. This obviously reflects the broader normalization of homosexuality that has occurred in America in recent decades — a success, it should be stated, that reveals as much about the inability of homosexuality’s critics to offer a viable alternative agenda or argument as anything else.

As gay-friendly policy goals are achieved, once-threatening ideas and activism similarly become just another boring piece of the status quo.

As our collective awareness of homosexual people has become deeper, and the language we use to describe them more honest and respectful, reserves of traditional conservative skepticism to installing gays in positions of importance — that they are too odd or dangerous — have dried up. As gay-friendly policy goals are achieved, once-threatening ideas and activism similarly become just another boring piece of the status quo.

To be sure, President Trump has likely accelerated this process. Six short years ago, even milquetoast Mitt Romney considered Grenell too radioactive to serve as his personal spokesman, one of the many supposed base anxieties whose bluff Trump has since called. Trump’s social liberalism on everything but abortion and trans rights has helped solidify the norms of a new era where social conservatism is more transactionally focused on these two narrow policy fronts, and less on using politics as a forum for broader cultural protest.

As endorsing an openly gay executive-branch appointment devolves from intolerable point of principle to cost of doing business, it seems reasonable to declare the homosexuality-themed chapter of the American culture war, if not formally closed, at least in its boring denouement.

J. J. McCullough is a columnist for National Review Online and the Global Opinions section of the Washington Post.

Most Popular


Men Literally Died for That Flag, You Idiots

The American flag’s place in our culture is beginning to look less unassailable. The symbol itself is under attack, as we’ve seen with Nike dumping a shoe design featuring an early American flag, Megan Rapinoe defending her national-anthem protests (she says she will never sing the song again), and ... Read More

The Plot against Kavanaugh

Justice on Trial, by Mollie Hemingway and Carrie Severino (Regnery,  256 pp., $28.99) The nomination and confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court was the political event of 2018, though not for the reasons anyone expected. All High Court confirmations these days are fraught with emotion and tumult ... Read More
Politics & Policy

He Just Can’t Help Himself

By Saturday, the long-simmering fight between Nancy Pelosi and her allies on one side and the “squad” associated with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on the other had risen to an angrier and more destructive level at the Netroots Nation conference. Representative Ayanna Pressley, an African-American Massachusetts ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Ilhan Omar Is Completely Assimilated

Beto O’Rourke, the losing Texas Senate candidate who bootstrapped his way into becoming a losing presidential candidate, had a message for refugees who had come to America: Your new country is a hellhole. The former congressman told a roundtable of refugees and immigrants in Nashville, Tenn., last week: ... Read More
White House

On Gratitude and Immigration

Like both Rich and David, I consider it flatly inappropriate for the president of the United States to be telling Americans -- rhetorically or otherwise -- to “go back where you came from.” In consequence, you will find no defense of the president from me, either. What Trump tweeted over the weekend was ... Read More

We All Wanted to Love the Women’s Soccer Team

For the first time in my life, I did not root for an American team. Whatever the sport, I have always rooted American. And if those who called in to my radio show were representative of my audience, many millions of Americans made the same sad choice. It takes a lot for people like me not to root for an ... Read More

The ‘Squad’ Gives a Gift to Donald Trump

On Sunday, Donald Trump gave the Democrats a gift -- comments that indicate he thinks native-born congresswomen he detests should “go back” to the countries of their ancestors. On Monday, the four congresswomen handed Trump a gift in return, managing to respond to the president’s insults in some of the most ... Read More