Another Man’s Wife

Jim Burroway

January 6th, 2012

Sigh:

YouTube Preview Image

Stahl: So you’re pro-choice?

Diana Cantor: I am.

Stahl: Gay marriage? What does that mean?

Diana Cantor: I don’t-

Stahl: You disagree with him?

Diana Cantor: I do disagree. There’s really that respect. If I expect him to respect my views that could be different, I certainly need to respect his.

Here we go again. Yet another wife of an anti-gay politician supports gay marriage. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s wife Diana Cantor joins Cindy McCain and Laura Bush as being gay supportive in ways that contrast with their political husbands. It’s a long if not necessarily a well-trod tradition; Nancy Reagan fretted over the health of her Hollywood friends while her husband’s administration stonewalled on AIDS.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m glad Mrs. Cantor holds those positions and is willing to speak up about them. More wives should. But more to the point, more wives — or more particularly, more Republican women — should speak up, become more active in their party, and even run for office.  Remember, we wouldn’t have DADT repeal today if it weren’t for Sen. Susan Collins refusing to let it die on the Senate floor. Rep. has signed on as cosponsor for the Respect for Marriage Act, which would repeal DOMA. So, please excuse me if I’m appreciative but not entirely thrilled to my toes over learning that another anti-gay politician’s wife supports us. What am I supposed to do with it? Congratulate Rep. Cantor for choosing such a plucky little lady?

TampaZeke

January 6th, 2012

Truth be told a lot of these Republican politicians also personally support gay rights, including marriage equality but they couldn’t get elected dog catcher as a Republican if they said so. I think that is even more shameful than those who have genuine, yet misinformed, religious beliefs that cause them to be anti-gay.

And, to be clear, it should be noted than neither Obama, NOR (as far as I know) his wife, have stated support for marriage equality (the 1996 Senate questionnaire not withstanding).

Lindoro Almaviva

January 6th, 2012

I understand the respect part, but excuse me for a moment while I disagree in certain aspects of this.

If my husband was a racist, I would challenge that until the day I die. there is no “well, he is a racist and I am not, he respects my views and I respect them…” type of thinking there. If my husband was a racist, there would be consequences for his behavior, one of them would be the biggest fight he will ever have with me and I would reserve the right to throw his ass on the streets for a week and change the locks on him until he commits to get the sensitivity training he needs to broaden his horizons.

If i was a political wife, i would be a thorn on the side of that husband util either he divorces me (and I take with me half of what he owns, a HUGE deterrment given his earning potential). I would seeks every speaking engagement i could get, and as publicly as I could to make sure people know how i feel. I would contribute to groups that support marriage equality and i would make sure my picture and name is displpayed in big letters, to make sure my dear husband knows that my campaigning will come to haunthim. I would be relentless until he either “evolves” on the subject or divorces me.

This might sound shortsighted, but the fact is that as wives/husbands we hold sway in how our partners behave and are perceived in public. For a public figure, there is nothing more humbling than a spouse taking a very public stand against a husband/wife that we know is wrong on something as basic as human rights. If this was an argument of sushi vs paella and the spouse goes public, well, we can safely say she is nuts, but we are not talking about minor things, we are talking about basic human rights and for me those are big enough that I would throw it all on the line.

Gus

January 6th, 2012

Following the political model of the pol cutting public school funding, but the spouse supports a ‘reading’ program.

dan

January 6th, 2012

it’s bullshit. this is how anti gay pols try to have it both ways. they can still be vehemently anti gay and secure the hate vote then their spouses can be trotted out demonstrating a “softer” side to try to secure the waffley people who are not so much haters.

Timothy Kincaid

January 6th, 2012

The more that we hear that people like Diana Cantor support equality – however tepidly – the more it gives permission for equality to be an accepted position by republicans.

Most people have not really spent time thinking about every position of their party. They have an issue it two that they strongly identify with and the rest is just accepted as “what we believe”.

Once anti-gay discrimination ceases to be “what Republicans believe” and becomes just an option, we win. Other than theocratic dogma, they have little to commend their position.

andrew

January 6th, 2012

First, yes, you should support the fact that he’s constructed a modern and respectful relationship with an intelligent and independent women — sadly, that is NOT a given in Republican circles — there is still a vicious streak of misogyny in the party.

Secondly, my personal feeling is that very few of these candidates either truly espouse or actually care about gay issues (the Santorums of the world obviously notwithstanding). In many cases, they are reflecting the base, engaging in cheap demagoguery (cheap for them because they probably weren’t going to get our votes, and they don’t pay a price by sacrificing us), or safeguarding against attack from the right. Their personal and professional beliefs on gay issues – which tend to be weakly held unless personal to them – are very likely to be entirely at odds. Assuming they give a shit in the first place.

Lastly, I want to commend you for highlighting the contribution (as rare as they are) of Republicans in our issues. With good reason, our community often has a kneejerk reaction relative to party, and it’s great when we can actually get “gay” out of partisan straitjacketing and actually get Republicans to appreciate that some gays have conservative views on many topics, and to remind Democrats that the gay community is not beholden to them and cannot be taken for granted.

Joseph Singer

January 6th, 2012

What’s your problem? You don’t go picking fights with your allies. Complain about their husbands who are not as enlightened but you have no right to whine about people who do support us.

Andrew

January 7th, 2012

Joseph, I know you weren’t talking to me, because I’d have to remind you that until the current administration, the most progressive governor in the state I grew up in (MA) with respect to gay rights – the guy who invented gay/straight alliances – was a Republican (Bill Weld) – after decades of Democrats (ex, Dukakis – http://www.nytimes.com/1988/05/15/us/gay-rights-groups-question-dukakis-on-foster-care-issue.html) who did nothing for our community. I’d have to remind you that although DOMA and DADT were overwhelmingly supported by the GOP, it was Democrat Robert Byrd who made enshrining DADT into law his personal mission (no gays in his grandson’s army, he said), and a Democrat president who signed both bills into law. I’d have to remind you that the current occupant of the White House is on record as being opposed to gay marriage. I’d have to remind you that when California (my adopted state) considered altering its constitution to ban gays from teaching in the 1970’s, one of the most prominent opponents was (wait for it)… Ronald Reagan. Oh, and Dick Cheney is pro-gay-marriage (lesbian daughter is also one of his political operatives), G W Bush appointed more gays to office at the Federal level than any preceding president (including Clinton), and even Rush Limbaugh is in favor of civil unions.

Please excuse me while I throw up a little bit into my mouth – you just made me defend the worst president in recent U.S. history, the most craven VP in all American history, and the man who has single-handedly ruined political discourse *and* AM radio for America while causing the collective IQ of the nation to fall so hard, it was picked up by seismometers at the USGS – all while criticizing someone I admire greatly (Clinton).

But the facts remain: the GOP is not always our enemy and the Dems are not always reliable friends. By and large, the GOP sucks on gay issues. And by comparison, Dems usually do a better job. But it’s not something any of us should rely on.

The only language politicians understand is expediency, and as a minority, that means it’s incumbent on us to hold their feet to the fire, and never EVER let them take us lightly, either as foes or as supporters.

I mean, for crying out loud, we are getting the bare minimum out of this administration – something that only happened at the 11th hour after the Dems had controlled the White House and BOTH chambers for 2 years. You know which administration I mean, right – the one that invited a vocally antigay preacher to preside over the inauguration? The progress we made in Dec 2010 only happened after normally overgenerous gay donors withheld their cash, and after loud, vocal, public criticism mounted to an untenable level. That’s what we get – we’re the afterthought. That’s what it took to get one piece of legislation taken seriously — we still have no action at the Federal level on DOMA or ENDA. And ENDA (Employment Non-Discriminations) bill has been promised to us by the Dems for over 20 years now. They just can’t ever quite find the time.

Nationally, Dems just look good by comparison, and locally, it’s easier to find allies on both sides of the aisle. It just gets a little tiring when my support is supposed to go to the person who offers to beat me the least.

So… “allies”, my shiny red ass. The reason Mrs. Cantor is our ally is because she’s not running for office. Gays aren’t allies to politicians – we’re a reliable source of donations, a group that turns out at over 90% (http://tcf.org/commentary/2007/nc1658) with just enough population to swing key districts (the 50% gay support for G W Bush in 2000 arguably won him Florida), and one that is easily subjected to fear and intimidation because the other party’s operatives, some of whom are actually gay themselves, are using homophobia to manipulate the GOP fringe for donations and turnout.

As the Christian Right discovered in W’s 2nd term, there are no such things as “reliable allies” in politics. So: applaud anyone who does the right thing, especially when it comes from unexpected quarters. Hold everyone accountable. And never give someone a “pass” because you know, in your heart of hearts, that s/he would totally support your fundamental rights if only it weren’t so darned politically costly (but secretly, they love you).

Unless, of course, you weren’t actually talking to me. In that case, um… does “sorry” cover it?

Man I’ve got to stop hitting the Redbull and posting after midnight.

Mary in Austin

January 7th, 2012

Well said, Lindoro Almaviva!
As a Texan, it drives me crazy that Mrs. George W. Bush, pro-choice and relatively sane, gets a pass for a lifetime of enabling the hateful idiocy of her husband. Imagine if she and the other helpmates of Republican pooh-bahs would rouse themselves to use their power for good!

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

 

Latest Posts

Today's Agenda Is Brought To You By...

Emphasis Mine

Today In History, 1948: "Homosexual Ring Broken Up" At Mizzou

Today In History, 1960: Daughters of Bilitis Hold First National Convention

Today In History, 1969: "One Profession Frowned Upon In Hollywood"

Today In History, 1993: Russia Decriminalizes Homosexuality

Born On This Day, 1927: Marijane Meaker

House GOP Caucus Heard "Homosexuals Worthy Of Death" Verse Before Spending Bill Vote

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.