Search Box

Thursday, January 19, 2017

Caitlyn, may I have this dance?

An article in the NY Post this morning reported that Trump's advisers are suggesting he dance with long time Republican Caitlyn Jenner at the Inaugural Ball. They're saying it would assuage the LGBTQ community and allay their fears.

Most readers of this blog will probably recoil at this suggestion, and Trump himself probably would as well, but it's not a bad idea.

Trump spent most of the campaign being attacked for being too enthusiastically heterosexual, so it's not as if anyone will suspect he's switched teams.

It's also not as if Trump is some back country rube who despises all gays. He's a big city billionaire who has brushed shoulders with all types. Dollars to dimes his Trump Tower apartment -- done up in Louis XIV -- bears the touch of a gay man:

(Any man who can bear to live in an apartment like this ought to be able to grit his teeth through one dance with another man. No one's asking him to kiss Jenner.)

Trump, unlike both Hillary and Obama, was never publicly against gay marriage.

It would allow Trump to appear magnanimous, the kind of guy who can rise above himself. And if there's ever been one person who needed to rise above the fray, it's that compulsive Tweeter Trump, who thus far has found no target too small to savage.

It would be interesting to see how the MSM reacts. They, of course, see only the bad and never any good in Trump, but what could they say about this? They might even have to swallow their bile, because putting the dance in a negative light would make them appear "unenlightened," something they couldn't stand.

Of course, there's never any underestimating the hypocrisy of the Left. They took great delight in referring to the Tea Party as "tea baggers," idiom for the gay practice of placing one's scrotum in the mouth of a sexual partner. Had the roles been reversed, the Left would have screamed homophobia.

Keep in mind, Bruce/Caitlyn himself might be somewhat revolted by this. My information may be old, but as of about a year ago, Bruce/Caitlyn had not had the operation, meaning he's still physically male, and from what I understand, he was still dating women even after he came out.

A dance with Jenner would also provide a contrast to Obama, who never publicly dared do anything like this, because in his case it would have made people wonder.

In any case, I hope Trump does heed his adviser's counsel, and if he does, manages to do so with an air of forbearance and even a grin, rather than a grimace.

Update, a few hours later: my son tells me I'm absolutely crazy to recommend this. I'm starting to wonder if maybe he's not right.


Anonymous said...

I agree with your son - bad idea.


John Craig said...

Birdie --
I'm sort of coming around to that viewpoint too. I was thinking at first that it would sort of undo some of the Tweet damage he's caused himself by making him look like someone who's more accepting. And I also thought that it would make him look super confident, in a way, since most guys wouldn't be caught dead doing that. But the ick factor is probably too big, and there's just not enough to be gained politically.

Anonymous said...

Your son is absolutely right. Even the thought of Trump dancing with a man at the most momentous occasion of his life is yuk yuk. In a way Trump is a breath of fresh air, saying what he feels instead of pretending - being politically correct. The only advice to him now would keep his mouth shut and stop reacting. He should let Ivanka handle his twitter and other social media accounts. And he needs to start developing a sense of humor. The only reason Obama had a no legacy 8 years was his self-deprecating humor. But behind that facade is a shrewd, calculating man who managed to survive 8 years practically scandal free.


Anonymous said...

It is just a matter of time until Trump gives you a nice job, Mister Craig.

You are above average. He can use your help.

A stricken nation calls:


I am sure Birdie and everyone else who comments here agrees with me.

(Or maybe you know Trump already, and you are just laying low now, strategically...Hmm)

====Fake Baba

High Arka said...

"Ostentatious" doesn't always mean "gay." It can just mean "soulless" or "asshole." It's kind of silly how many negative character traits on Terra right now are almost exclusively correlated with homosexuals, just because many homosexuals also engage in them. I once knew a family that kept the greatest preserved art of like a hundred dead civilizations on different floors of their tower, not because they appreciated it the way its creators (or many other unwilling bypassers) had, but because it was an even better way to show refined dominance than a bunch of heads on pikes. As a Terran, I look at Trump's room up there and think "fruity" (I can't help but do that; that is the popular context here), but in a more meaningful way, I see that display as an expression of conquest--unrefined attempting to be refined.

Re: dancing, dancing with Jenner would only benefit diehard Trump supporters who wanted to believe that the occurrence gave them some kind of ammo to use against anti-Trump LGBT people in arguments over whether or not Trump was good. E.g., in response to any kind of accusation of sexuality-based unfairness, they could imagine themselves saying, "Yeah, well, then why did he dance with Caitlyn Jenner, huh?" It wouldn't affect those arguments anyway, though, anymore than Trump having a woman run his campaign affected people who still argue he's more sexist than Bill Clinton.

John Craig said...

Sherie --
You're right, I hadn't thought of that angle, that it would make him look less genuine. He should stick to being honest about how he feels, which is what has worked for him so far. And yes, the way to undo the Tweet damage is to just stop Tweeting. (Though his advisers must have already tried to get him to stop, to no effect so far.)

As far as Obama goes, I think the main reason he's "scandal free" is because the media simply refused to dwell on Fast and Furious, Benghazi, using the IRS to go after conservative groups, or anything to do with his sexuality (from what I can see, he had multiple male Monica Lewinsky's).

Anyway, yeah, I was wrong about the dance.

John Craig said...

Fake Baba --
Thank you, as always. Unfortunately (for me), I'm just another crazy guy pecking away at his keyboard to little effect.

John Craig said...

High Arka --
I agree with you about the definition of "ostentatious," it can refer to all sorts of different ways of showing off. And Trump's apartment is a particularly transparent way of expressing dominance. In a way, he's saying, "I am a modern day king," today's equivalent of Louis XIV. The apartment also reminds me of a guided tour I took of an English castle once; the guide explained that the purpose of the grand entrance hall was to make the visitor feel small. There's probably some of that at work too. I recognized that impulse in myself the one time I ever bought a fancy car, back in 2001; after a while, I realized that the statement I was making was, *I* am the human equivalent of a Lexus LS 430. As silly as it sounds, I have to admit, that that feeling was there, skulking around in my subconscious.

Yeah, you're right, dancing with Jenner would not win any converts from the Left; they're pretty much unconvertible (is that a word?) anyway. All it would do is make the Left despise Jenner. (And remember how incredibly celebrated he was by the left when he first came out? You'd have thought he'd just invented penicillin.) I was thinking in terms of Trump somehow appearing more magnanimous and self-confident, but Ive come to the conclusion I was wrong, overall it's probably a bad idea.

Rona said...

John, I have to side with your son on this one. Can't really see the benefit to Trump, or even Trump supporters to use in an argument with libs.

Trump no only build his image on being fearless and pol. incorrect but also, as weird as it seems, on being normal. Unlike the coalition of various subnormal victims of oppression he takes great pride in being a good father, his children being good-looking and successful, wife feminine and beautiful...

It would be viscerally jarring to see this man embrace Jenner and lead him on the podium, with Jenner holding Trump with those giant man-hands. I believe it would disturb even liberals to see such a thing. Only hardcore trannies would really feel this was something wonderful, for everyone else it would be horrifying and sad.


John Craig said...

Rona --
Yes, you just described the situation well, I was definitely wrong on this one.

Lucian Lafayette said...

Apologies in advance if this posted twice. I kept getting an error message.

Jenner is an outspoken Republican and Trump supporter. If he does cross paths with the new President I think a handshake and a moment of friendly small talk might be in order. Of course, there would be an enormous number of photographs taken: some will look horrible but I think that overall Trump, who in person is usually described as thoughtful and gracious, will come off as congenial and pleasant. The probability of bad photos and video increases exponentially if dancing is involved. Trump has not had the years, nay decades of theatrical training that would be required to overcome his alpha male genetic tendencies and make a waltz with Jenner look anything other than forced and uncomfortable at best.

High Arka said...

Sheesh, so many negative comments. I feel I should speak up for John and say why the idea, though non-strategic, holds such intrinsic appeal: it would make many wrongheaded people burn with private horror at the thought that Trump had such a dance. They'd feel that they were losing all control of what progress was, as the emblem of the past unified with the emblem of the future (I wouldn't agree with them, but still), and they'd feel that a lifetime of work on fluid gender roles and sexuality was itself betraying them. Trump could do the dance as an act of pointless sadism, sort of like the existence of that Milo Yiannopoulos character. And in that sense, it would be a victory. Just depends where your priorities lay.

The thought would be something along the lines of, "Gay itself is collapsing!" Like if modern Christians went to Heaven and found out Jesus and Mohammed were "seeing each other."

And John, those LS 430s lasted really well. I knew someone whose made it to 220K+. Is yours still going, or is it long traded-in?

John Craig said...

Luke --
You're right on all counts. The required acting is another aspect I hadn't thought about.

John Craig said...

High Arka --
I appreciate the support, but I'm afraid the other commenters (and my son) are right: the ick factor would predominate here, and outweigh the outreach-type benefits. Plus, I hadn't taken into account that it would detract from Trump's reputation for blunt honesty, which was a large part of his appeal, as Sherie and Rona pointed out. And the fact that he would probably be unable to go through with it without wearing a grimace, as Luke just pointed out. (My son put it in stronger language.)

As far as the sadism aspect, ha, yes, there's something to that. But the price would be too steep.

Mine is still going strong at 149k. (I just drove out to California and back, believe it or not.)

Lucian Lafayette said...


As to the comments, just remember that it is always easier to criticize (in the literary sense, not the pejorative one) an idea than come up an original one. You're the one doing the hard work here.

It IS a good day. ;)

PS I have to also admit that anything which holds the potential for making some lib/prog's head explode on live TV is extremely attractive to me.

John Craig said...

Luke --
Thanks for your kind words, but they're unnecessary. Every commented above is a friendly one who happens to disagree with this post, and if I had a problem with that, there'd be something wrong with me. (And I've come around to their viewpoint anyway.)

I liked the speech, thought it struck just the right tone, hit the right points, was combative but not too combative. He started out graciously thanking the Obamas for their help with the transition, then in broad outline said why he disagreed with the previous administration. He also struck the required tone of unity, saying that increased patriotism would result in more of a bond among Americans. At the same time he made it clear that his policies weren't going to encourage welfare. The stock market hasn't collapsed, so that's a good sign.

The usual suspects are evidently doing their thing, breaking windows and screaming in DC a few blocks from the inauguration, which, as always, pushes people in Trump's direction.

Anonymous said...

John, I respectfully disagree with you. Remember, he had a huge support from the Bible Belt. I doubt they'd look at this favorably. A picture lasts a lifetime. I could only imagine the distorted memes that will come about. As already mentioned, there's no upside to this


John Craig said...

Spartan --
I'm convinced; I was really out to lunch on this one.

High Arka said...

"[I]ncreased patriotism would result in more of a bond among Americans..." Just another globalist bagman. I wonder if it'll take as long as it did with Dubya for "the electorate" to realize Trump isn't secretly advancing genetic science,* but is just another honorless shill in a long line of them.

(*Even the leftists think he is.)

John Craig said...

High Arka --
I'm not suggesting Trump believes every last thing he said. I was just saying that his speech hit the right notes. A couple conciliatory nods, some lip service to unity, and enough raw meat for the partisans. I don't see Trump as a particularly honorable guy, but I do think he's a relatively honorable politician. That may sound like a fine distinction, but what I mean by that is that I think he believes in his own platform. I think he honestly believes in the main themes of his campaign: restricted immigration, especially from Muslim countries, better trade deals for the US, growing jobs and helping the middle class, and law and order. Contrast that to Bill Clinton, who was all about triangulation, i.e., being successful for himself. Or Barack Obama, who, for instance, proposed a surge in the war in Afghanistan, a war he personally didn't believe in and couldn't have cared less about. Or Hillary, who flip flopped on so many issues it was hard to keep track. I do emphasize the word "relatively," which I used above, all politicians being what they are.

Nor sure what you mean by "advancing genetic science." (Improving the human race? No politician who wants to get elected would ever mention eugenics; but maybe I'm misinterpreting you.)

I've never particularly liked Trump the person, but I believe in his platform, and I do get a kick out of the fact that he disdains political correctness, at least by the average politician's standards. We'll see how it all works out.

Steven said...

The idea of the Donald doing that seems absurd but I also think it probably would assuage or at least wrongfoot his critics. On the other hand, it would upset or alienate too many of his supporters.

Ambrose Kane said...

Seriously, John, I think it would backfire against Trump. The Lefties, as one might imagine, would view it as a disingenuous act on Trump's part to make think people think he's not 'homophobic.' Granted, I know he's not, but a whole lot of Americans want him to be, and nothing good will come out of trying to change such perceptions at this point. He must focus on other more important matters.

Those on the Right who voted for Trump because they were sick and tired of political-correctness being shoved down their throats and having the Left's values portrayed as something they should celebrate, will recoil at this kind of thing. Many Trump supporters (though, admittedly, not all) will see it as Trump weakening, getting 'soft' as it were and becoming part of the Left's culture of filth.

Trump is at his best and will retain his approval among large numbers of American when he continues his course of being the 'outsider,' the one who breaks all the politically-correct rules and remains a thorn in the side of liberals.

Anything less will be viewed as weakness, vacillating in his convictions, and unnecessary compromise.

I think your son is right.

John Craig said...

Ambrose --
Good to hear from you. You're right, and if you take a look at the comments above, I've been completely outvoted here, every single commenter agrees with you. I wasn't taking into account the jarring optics and also the fact that it would mean Trump wasn't being true to himself, which has always been part of his appeal.

And you're right, the Left won't give him a scintilla of credit no matter what he does, so why bother?

I've been missing your posts on the Big Fella recently.

Dave Moriarty said...

i have to weigh in and join the chorus of those whop agree with Johhny. I doubt you would dance with Jenner ( nor would I ) let alone Trump. I also doubt he is going to do anything one way or the other for the LGBT world. the libs want to give a parade for anyone coming out but Trump has his focus elsewhere.

John Craig said...

Dave --
Agreed. I think he has no problem with gay marriage, but will roll back some of the more ridiculous use-whichever-bathroom-and-locker-rom-you-want edicts of the Obama administration. Trump's focus is on jobs and immigration.