Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: Who first referred to Kamala Harris as a queen?
Executive Summary
Among the materials you provided, the earliest explicit use of “Queen Kamala” as a label appears in a 2019 commentary that critiques the trope but does not identify who coined it, while the first identified individual to publicly call Kamala Harris a form of “queen” is Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who labeled her the “queen of DEI” in July 2024. The record in your dataset therefore distinguishes between anonymous media usage [1] and an attributable political slur [2], and it leaves open who—if anyone—originally applied the epithet.
1. Tracing the Phrase: Media Commentary That Frames the Term as a Problem
The earliest dated material in your set that uses or discusses the “queen” label is a 2019 analysis that explores the gendered implications of calling a female candidate “anointed” or a “queen,” arguing that such language can be perceived as sexist and diminishing. That piece frames the term as part of a broader critique of how female politicians’ power is characterized, but it explicitly does not identify an originator for the specific “Queen Kamala” phrasing in its text [3]. This leaves the 2019 item as the first documented examination in your corpus, but not as evidence of the first user.
2. An Identified Source: Dan Patrick’s 2024 “queen of DEI” Label
The clearest attributable instance in your materials comes from Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick, who in July 2024 called Kamala Harris the “queen of DEI” while criticizing what he characterized as her accelerated ascent tied to diversity and inclusion politics. That statement is recorded as a direct political attack and is the only item in your provided set that names a specific public official using a “queen”-based epithet for Harris [4]. The quote is political in nature and functions as partisan critique rather than neutral description.
3. Conflicting or Irrelevant Entries: What the Dataset Omits or Distracts From
Several of the supplied documents are privacy-policy excerpts or unrelated royal gossip pieces that mention “queen” in other contexts but do not bear on Kamala Harris’s label at all. These entries (p1_s1; [5]–p2_s3) are irrelevant to the question of who first called Harris a queen and illustrate how noisy datasets can obscure attribution. The presence of unrelated content in search results or scraped corpora can create false trails unless filtered; your dataset demonstrates this by mixing commentary, political quotes, and non sequitur corporate text (p1_s1, [5]–p2_s3).
4. Multiple Meanings: How “Queen” Is Used Differently Across Sources
The sources show at least two distinct usages: one is a critical gendered framing that discourages calling women “anointed” or “queen” [3], while another is a pejorative political jab targeting Harris’s perceived ties to diversity initiatives [4]. The two uses serve different rhetorical goals—one analytical and normative, the other adversarial and partisan—and your materials contain both types without a single origin point. That distinction matters for interpreting intent and for assessing whether the term operates as a sexist trope or straightforward political insult.
5. Assessing Credibility and Possible Agendas
The dataset attributes the partisan usage to a Republican state official, which signals a political motive consistent with campaign rhetoric aimed at undermining a Democratic figure. The 2019 commentary, by contrast, aims to critique media language and may carry an agenda rooted in gender analysis. Both items are interpreting Harris through political lenses, so any claim about “who first” must account for the possibility of unrecorded uses prior to 2019 and for selective amplification by partisan actors [3] [4]. The dataset does not include neutral, contemporaneous evidence tying the phrase to an initial originator.
6. What the Available Evidence Allows Us to Conclude—and What It Doesn’t
Based solely on the documents you provided, one can conclude that the earliest recorded discussion of “Queen Kamala” in your set dates to 2019 and that the first named public figure to call Harris a “queen”-related epithet is Dan Patrick in 2024. The materials do not establish who originally coined the label, nor do they prove that Patrick was the first person ever to use such phrasing. The record is incomplete and leaves open the possibility of prior use by other commentators, social-media users, or anonymous writers [3] [4].
7. Paths Forward: How to Close the Attribution Gap
To determine an actual first user, investigators should search earlier media archives, social-media timelines, and political-opinion pieces predating 2019, prioritizing primary-source timestamps and archived webpages. Any follow-up should filter out unrelated corporate text, flag partisan motives, and seek corroboration from multiple outlets before attributing origin. Given the limits of your dataset—where unrelated items appear alongside relevant ones—this targeted archival research is necessary to move from plausible earliest mentions to a definitive attribution.