An article published on Nov. 11th reported the following comments made by Senator Amy Klobuchar to CNN’s Jake Tapper that were also discussed on The View:

Klobuchar criticized fellow candidate Pete Buttigieg’s experience, telling CNN’s Jake Tapper, “I’m focusing here on my fellow women senators — Sen. Harris, Sen. Warren, and myself. Do I think we would be standing on that stage if we had the experience that he had? No I don’t. Maybe we’re held to a different standard.”

The same article quotes comments made by Joy Behar of The View:

Joy Behar also disagreed with the sexism label, pointing out that a recent poll indicated voters would choose a woman over a gay man. “A recent Gallup Poll said that 97 percent of Democrats were willing to vote for a woman, and only 83 percent were willing to vote for a gay candidate,” she said. www.yahoo.com/...

Yesterday, Klobuchar’s remarks to CNN were reported in a diary published here on Daily Kos and the intention of this diary is give another perspective on the topic in defense of her.

Though yesterday’s diary referenced slightly different statistics than those cited on The View, the diarist appeared to agree that the numbers show bias against a gay candidate’s sexuality is more of an obstacle than bias against a woman candidate’s gender.

The diarist strongly expressed the opinion that Klobuchar’s comments were an example of “Queer Erasure.”

In support of this opinion, an article titled: Queer Erasure was referenced by the diarist:

What is so incredibly frustrating in the recent backlash to media coverage of Buttigieg, is that so-called allies and liberals are taking an inherently conservative approach in their criticisms by ignoring Buttigieg’s sexual orientation. You cannot lop off and look at facets of a person’s identity discretely. Buttigieg is always gay. He was born gay, wakes up gay, eats gay, goes to sleep gay, breathes gay, and walks around gay. By focusing almost exclusively on his race and sex, critics are erasing his status as a gay person to highlight his privileges as a white, cis man. This is heterosexist, queer erasure. Clearly he is also always white and always a cis man. There is no question that membership in these groups gives him unearned social benefits. And yet.

After reading the article, Queer Erasure, twice, I would like to point out other statements made by its author that were not included in yesterday’s diary (emphasis mine):

LGBTQ people are consistently removed from their own stories. Because we live in a racist and sexist society, queer erasure often hits women and people of color first and hardest. They live at the intersection of multiple oppressions. Lesbians — and often lesbians of color — are erased. Historically, lesbians with AIDS have been under-served or even outright excluded when it comes to AIDS activism, education, and research. ...Trans people are so marginalized even within the queer community that the “T” in LGBT is often treated like a joke or an afterthought. While LGBTQ women and men of color and LGBTQ white women bear the brunt of erasure, white gay men are also erased … … It is possible and indeed necessary to talk about the benefits Buttigieg gets both within the queer community and the straight community by virtue of being a white cis man.

If the author of Queer Erasure acknowledges that, in our racist and sexist society, Buttigieg benefits from being a white cis man – in both the gay and straight communities – is it fair to accuse Amy Klobuchar of Queer Erasure when she’s essentially saying the same?

No. It’s not fair.

Amy Klobuchar was not “erasing” Pete Buttigieg as a gay man but rather speaking to the same white cis male advantages as stated in the article defining Queer Erasure.

Which brings me to another quote from the same article (emphasis mine):

When we erase queer people from their own contributions, we create a society that teaches us queer people contribute nothing.

When Amy Klobuchar referred to our 2020 women candidates in her comments to CNN, she was pointing to how contributions to society made by white women and women of color are erased because women are “held to a higher standard.”

Is it not true that, for centuries, women of every color were thought to contribute nothing of value to our society?

Is it not true that countless contributions to society made by women – white, black, brown, straight and gay – are virtually ignored by the present-day media and omitted from our history books?

Why is it I had to teach my now 17-year-old daughter that, “No, Hillary Clinton was not the first woman to ever run in a Democratic presidential primary. Shirley Chisholm was the first.”

Shirley Chisholm, the first black woman elected to Congress in 1968. Shirley Chisholm, the first woman of any race to run in the Democratic presidential primary of 1971. Shirley Chisholm who famously said: “I have certainly met much more discrimination in terms of being a woman than being black, in the field of politics.”

This is NOT a contest about which “group” of marginalized people in our society have “suffered the worst.”

However, when I read a diary accusing Amy Klobuchar of practicing Queer Erasure — when the article cited in that diary acknowledges Pete Buttigieg benefits from being a white cis man in gay and straight communities — I feel it is only fair to present a point of view in her defense.

In closing I must say I’m still on the fence as to whether or not criticism of Amy Klobuchar’s remarks to CNN — in the news, DKos and on The View — is in itself an example of covert sexism.

What say you?

***

Sources:

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/abby-huntsman-says-amy-klobuchars-sexism-accusations-are-a-nail-in-the-coffin-for-her-campaign-222700059.html

https://medium.com/@fanofpete/queer-erasure-76c6c5bd3901 (Note: (I highly recommend read this article to better understand the struggles of our LGBTQ citizens):