Wednesday, October 4th, 2006...12:09 am
Last Thing I’ll Write About Foley, I Promise
As if there isn’t enough to outrage anyone with half a soul in this stupidity, I was disturbed by the mea non culpa press conference by Mark Foley’s lawyer, David Roth. I understand that this man never did an album with Steve Vai.
Since when is “I’m gay” a defense to pedophilia? Okay, first of all, I know that the DSM IV will tell you it is ephebophilia, but legally and ethically they are the same darned thing. His assertion of this defense only contributes to the homophobic myth that somehow being gay is the same as liking young boys. This guy was just a creep who liked to use his position to pick up young people, could have been guys, could have been girls. Neither one is excuseable.
I’ve already heard several conservative commentators use this pretext to attack gays as somehow predatory towards young men. You can blame Foley for that since he is making the connection. Conservatives seem to be mentioning the Gerry Studds case, which happened over 30 years ago. They neglect to mention the more recent cases of Dan Crane or “Buz” Lukens. I don’t know if that is because they were Republicans, or because the victims in those cases were female. No fun if you can’t gay bash, I guess.
To think that this sort of thing is exclusive to gay men is preposterous. My brother has reported to me boorish behavior on the part of some of our own legislators to the young female pages at the state capitol. Some of this is stuff that if I said it to one of my students would get me fired immediately, but, like Foley, they get away with it because of their office.
The other thing that got me is the invocation of his prior sexual abuse, as if that somehow “caused” him to be gay. Here is another attempt by him to invoke long disproved myths about homosexuality to defend himself. I guess that he is more concerned about saving his own neck right now than what perpetuating such myths will do to the gay community.
4 Comments
October 4th, 2006 at 5:02 am
I wonder if Congress is going to start having a NAMBLA Caucus? We will have to wait and see.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAMBLA
October 4th, 2006 at 8:04 am
Thanks for this post. I deeply appreciate it when straight men name homophobia for what it is.
October 4th, 2006 at 11:43 am
Really, this situation has little to do practically with either age or gender, except that these aspects can be sensationalized for public discussion, outrage, humor, etc. These are red herrings and solipsisms.
In fact, what we have here are a clear-cut example of sexual harassment as defined by law, and of a violation of the principle of “in loco parentis”.
Understanding this doesn’t change the judgements one might form about malfeasance and irresponsibility on the part of Congressman Foley and of the House bureaucracy and its leadership, but it is not only logical, but also a way of removing the stereotyping, innuendo, and hate speech from the discussion.
October 5th, 2006 at 8:30 am
This most certainly does have to do with age. It’s yet one more power imbalance in this relationship. What would you say if this case was about a 52-year-old man and a 16-year-old girl? At the very least, that age difference does not make for a healthy relationship. Because of the power imbalance inherent in that age difference, via life experience and other factors, it is abusive. It is definitely sexual harassment, I agree, but it has deeper implications too. No sensationalization needed. Outrage is appropriate.