A tense exchange unfolded last week before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, revealing a startling admission from a high-ranking State Department official. Representative Brian Mast, R-Fla., pressed Sarah Rogers, the undersecretary for public diplomacy, about the purpose of Biden-era grants allocated to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs globally.
The questioning began with a direct, almost incredulous query: “Can you tell me what is queering the map?” Mast’s words hung in the air, challenging Rogers to explain a phrase that seemed to defy logic. Rogers’ response was equally surprising, stating the administration was “trying to make the maps more gay.”
Mast immediately challenged the statement, demanding clarification. “Literally? How do you make a map more gay? Or gay at all?” he asked, highlighting the absurdity of the concept. Rogers, visibly flustered, admitted she didn’t know, offering a convoluted explanation involving critical theory and the potential for “queer” to be used as a verb.
She attempted to contextualize the statement, suggesting the effort focused on Czechia and Slovakia, and speculating those countries might have requested such initiatives – a claim she quickly conceded she doubted. The exchange underscored a growing frustration among some lawmakers regarding the allocation of taxpayer funds.
Mast expressed dismay that Congress was forced to address such programs while facing critical national security concerns, specifically the “imminent threat of Iran.” He argued that valuable time and resources were being diverted to projects of questionable value and relevance.
He detailed a series of grants that appeared to prioritize ideological initiatives over practical foreign policy goals. These included funding for a DEI flash mob in Kyrgyzstan, a diversity roadshow in India, and programs in Luxembourg, Spain, New Zealand, Canada, and Malaysia.
The list extended to initiatives focused on teaching trans and intersex leaders in India, and even funding for research into “non-binary and transfranophones, linguistic attitudes and ideologies toward inclusive French in Montreal, Canada.” Mast characterized these expenditures as deeply problematic.
With pointed frustration, Mast declared a desire to identify the individuals responsible for writing these grant proposals, asserting they had “no business receiving another paycheck from the people of the United States of America.” The hearing concluded with a clear indication of escalating scrutiny over the use of foreign aid funds.
