TotallyOz Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 I personally believe that someone that wants to stay in the closet should. I wish they would not as I think it is detrimental to themselves and to the community. However, I don't think someone should be forced to come out. I know it would have pushed me further into the closet in my 20's. Now, there are widespread reports about the Lt. Gov of SC. What do you think about this kind of reporting? http://www.blogactive.com/2009/08/rumors-confirmed.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JKane Posted September 2, 2009 Members Share Posted September 2, 2009 If it's somebody who's actively worked against gay rights (Larry Craig, much of the "religious right") then I support it 100%. Otherwise it is pointless and damaging. Why alienate somebody who may come to your side a couple years down the road and become a great advocate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Conway Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 I actually knew the guy in college and still see him occasionally (really rarely) through friends, so I'll speak personally to the allegations based on what I know. It wouldn't surprise me. Andre is a very successful person both professionally and politically in South Carolina. He made a small fortune in real estate development on the coast before moving into politics. He rose very quickly through the political ranks and has won at least two elections to the disbelief of many political observers. I can attest to the fact that he definitely has been with his fair share of women. But, then again, the same could be said of me and I'm gay. If Andre wanted a trophy wife, he could have one. He has the reputation of being an extremely wreckless person personally. He lives fast and hard (pardon the pun). He parties hard, spends money liberally, and drives really fast in really nice cars. He has, historically, been somewhat abusive of his official power while in office. I don't view Andre as a particular advocate of the social right agenda. He's more a spoiled kid who was given a great deal of power at a relatively young age and never knew how to use it. Those of us who grew up in or live in the south know what an unforgiving place it can be as far as sexual orientation is concerned. It still is so in the 21st Century. For that reason, you'll find a lot more closeted people in the south than you'll find elsewhere. South Carolina is probably as backward in that regard as any place I have ever been. Getting rid of Andre Bauer is not going to make South Carolinians any more open, tolerant or accepting of gay people. There will be, in Andre's absence, if he is removed from office, anothet right winger to take his place. The state is fiercely and staunchly conservative. That will not change as the result of the outting of a public official. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted September 5, 2009 Members Share Posted September 5, 2009 As a lifelong Southerner myself, don't you mean 19th Century? I agree, forcing people out is contra-indicated, a waste of time and political resources. Rich, spoiled kids can do well (at least for themselves); look at Ted Kennedy. Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 Rich, spoiled kids can do well (at least for themselves); look at Ted Kennedy. Rich, yes. Spoiled? Word does not really do justice to the almost (!) fatal levels of ambition that papa Joe instilled in his boys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted September 5, 2009 Members Share Posted September 5, 2009 Almost fatal? There is more than one way to exhibit being spoiled. Isn't unrestrained ambition a manifestatin of being spoiled? Not trying to start an argument about TK. Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Isn't unrestrained ambition a manifestatin of being spoiled? Well, dunno about that. "Unrestrained ambition" fits Richard Nixon if it fits anyone in the last century. But would you really call him spoiled? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted September 6, 2009 Members Share Posted September 6, 2009 I don't think I said it was "the" manisfestation of being spoiled, only "a". Yes, all politicians wish power. I think much of the time, money and benefits are only secondary. Of course, they want those also, but power seems to be the operative motive. That is not a new observation. Wealthy people seems to use money as "chips" to see how they are doing in the "game" of life. Also, not a new observation. In fact, I don't know if there are any new observations. Every joke seems to be a version of older ones, at best. So when you start off telling me there was this priest, rabbi and duck, I may not know exactly where you are going but in the middle of the story I will very often know the point. Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Conway Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 As a lifelong Southerner myself, don't you mean 19th Century?I agree, forcing people out is contra-indicated, a waste of time and political resources. Rich, spoiled kids can do well (at least for themselves); look at Ted Kennedy. Best regards, RA1 You certainly made me chuckle over that one. I recently relocated back to the south. Actually, to one of its larger and more progressive cities. I have to admit that I'm even a bit taken aback by how low key gay life is in this city that is a mecca for so many gay boys in the south. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiBottomBoy Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 I think outing is pointless and dangerous because it puts people further into the closet and makes them do more and more reckless things. I think a lot of the public rest room culture - which is almost always unprotected - is based on people being closeted and I'm willing to bet that when closteted guys hook up on business trips or whatever they are going to be far, far less likely to use protection, because carrying condoms around would arouse their wives suspicions and make them have to confront what they are planning on doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caeron Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 I think if you make yourself a public enemy of the gay community, the gay community owes you no privacy. Who cares if it fucks up your life? If it's that big a secret for you, then make sure nobody finds out. Don't enjoy the fruits hard won by our community while bashing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiBottomBoy Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Yes, but it often hurts people other than the intended target. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caeron Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Yes, but it often hurts people other than the intended target. Like who? People who slept with such a person? Their family that they've been lying to? Sorry, I have more sympathy for the folks of the out gay community who are hurt by the activities of closeted bigots. Obviously, I think the list of folks who have done enough to warrant this treatment isn't very long, but if you make your bed, you lie in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiBottomBoy Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 But by pushing them further into the closet you are creating a situation where they are more likely to engage in risky sexual behaviors which can result in diseases they can pass onto their wives, who, in general, have done nothing against the gay community except marry one of us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caeron Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 He's a bachelor. And I don't think you can push someone like that further into the closet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiBottomBoy Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 But by doing it to him you terrify others who are not bachelors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caeron Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 If they're conservative politicians working against us, I want them to be terrified. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Conway Posted September 10, 2009 Share Posted September 10, 2009 I think if you make yourself a public enemy of the gay community, the gay community owes you no privacy. Who cares if it fucks up your life? If it's that big a secret for you, then make sure nobody finds out. Don't enjoy the fruits hard won by our community while bashing it. Then, would you be ok with conservative politicians outting closeted liberal politicians, who are friendly to gay causes, in front of their wives and children? Because, that's essentially what you'll end up with. You don't care about them. They don't care about you. All that's created is a bloodbath of people's personal lives. There's no gain for the community in that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiBottomBoy Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 Very well said, conwoy. I don't think that just because someone disagrees with me means they don't have a right to sexual privacy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MsGuy Posted September 11, 2009 Members Share Posted September 11, 2009 If they're conservative politicians working against us, I want them to be terrified. How about the gay 16 year old watching the destruction of a Lt. Gov. play itself out on TV? What lesson is he likely to draw from this outing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiBottomBoy Posted September 11, 2009 Share Posted September 11, 2009 He'll probably need lots of therapy and decide to try to force himself to date girls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caeron Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Then, would you be ok with conservative politicians outting closeted liberal politicians, who are friendly to gay causes, in front of their wives and children?Because, that's essentially what you'll end up with. You don't care about them. They don't care about you. All that's created is a bloodbath of people's personal lives. There's no gain for the community in that. That's just silly. I should modify my moral judgements based on the assumption that what I do controls what others do? That if I don't out an enemy of the community that conservatives won't out a friend of the community? No. If you make yourself an enemy of the community, you are not owed privacy. Simple as that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caeron Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 How about the gay 16 year old watching the destruction of a Lt. Gov. play itself out on TV? What lesson is he likely to draw from this outing? Don't be a hypocritical dick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiBottomBoy Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Who is being a dick? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caeron Posted September 12, 2009 Share Posted September 12, 2009 Who is being a dick? You apparently think the gay community owes privacy to its enemies. I don't. cope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
