Gay writer, radio show host, and activist Michelangelo Signorile writes an interesting piece in today's LA Times. He argues that not only should the media have outed Mark Foley as a gay man years ago, but that had he been outed he might not have preyed on young boys. What do you think?
Foley's closet wasn't just about protecting his political career. He seemed to be filled with shame. According to one gay man quoted in the Washington Post last week who challenged Foley on his voting for the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, Foley justified marginalizing gay marriage by saying, "I could never compare any relationship I have ever had to the nature of my mother and father's relationship."And the logical conclusion of Signorile's article is that those who help perpetuate the closet, and the shame, help perpetuate the abuse of children in cases like this. Thus, ironically, some of the biggest to blame would be the religious right and its leaders who help make the closet a necessity for so many gays and lesbians.
For Foley, homosexuality meant second-class status.
That kind of self-loathing is bound to play out in harmful ways. Would Foley have made online sexual advances on teenagers if he were openly gay or if he'd been reported on, truthfully, by the media as a gay man long ago, and faced the consequences? It's quite possible the answer is no.
