advertisement
advertisement
|
By KERRY ELEVELD
Monday, October 09, 2006
Former Rep. Mark Foley has really brought new meaning to tiptoeing around the Pink Elephant in the room. Insiders refer to his sexuality as "the worst kept secret in Florida," yet the revelation that he sent explicit e-mails not just to teenage pages, but to male teenage pages, has apparently been shocking.
At first, Foley said nothing of his sexuality after the scandal broke. Instead, he checked himself into rehab for his alcohol problem—what all repentant celebs do when they need to retreat from the press. A couple days later, his lawyer tells us that Foley is both gay and was molested by clergy as a boy, and by the way, he was "never" intoxicated while on the job—whew, that’s a relief! Voters can rest assured he was making decisions of sound mind.
PART OF WHAT IS fascinating about this from my perspective as a journalist who works at a gay outlet, is that everybody "in the know" apparently knew about Foley’s sexuality, yet it was treated like his little dirty secret–never mentioned publicly nor talked about in the mainstream press. It must have been a real conundrum for journalists who knew more than they were supposed to say.
While journalists of all stripes almost always know more than they are supposed to say, gay journalists have a special unwritten code about "outing" people in the press. Coming out is still supposed to be a personal decision that we, as people entitled to our privacy, have the right to make on our own time. Having made this decision at some point ourselves, gay journalists relate to the dilemma in a personal, soul-searching sort of way.
The question is, at what point does it violate the public trust not to say something? As with all personal matters, gay journalists usually decide to go public about a politician’s sexuality when their internal "hypocrite" meter has been pushed too far—when that politician’s political persona, or hubris in some cases, belies their personal life.
Republican Congressman Jim Kolbe in Arizona, now openly gay, was more or less forced out of the closet after his vote in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in 1996 caused a stir among gay activists. The Advocate outed Foley for the same vote back then, but only one mainstream paper ran a story about it. And Rep. David Dreier of California—who incidentally was voted the best-dressed Congressman on the Hill in September’s Washingtonian magazine with Foley finishing second—was outed in the alternative publication L.A. Weekly after he stringed together a record of anti-gay votes on DOMA, gay adoption, hate crimes and employment discrimination. Bloggers have been sniping ever since, but mainstream outlets haven’t touched it.
APPARENTLY, THE SUBject of sexuality is still a bit too dicey for the mainstream press unless it’s attached to a scandal—then it becomes a topic they can’t ignore.
The overwhelming message here: Don’t talk about it... gay is still a dirty word and made even dirtier when we don’t talk about it. Gay politicians shouldn’t be a protected class of politician; they should be no different from other politicians, whose personal lives are always on display. When you run for office, especially at the national level, you should assume that your personal will become political. These are the times we live in, and voters should have the same information they have about other politicians.
When an African-American votes for or against Affirmative Action, we know a part of what informs their thinking. When a female politician votes for or against abortion rights, we have a view into her perspective. When straight white men vote for or against anything, we know a little about their experience. It’s not the whole experience, but it’s a piece of the puzzle. And though I don’t think every personal detail of a politician’s life matters to the public, some details do speak to a politician’s world view.
Mark Foley’s problem was not that he was gay, it’s that he solicited teenage boys. The fact that his gayness was only scrutinized in the mainstream press after he was tied to "naughty e-mails" has now inextricably linked his sexuality with his inappropriate advances.
Being gay will always be "dirty" if straights and gays alike don’t have license to talk about it on its own merits. And all journalists have an obligation to break the silence when they deem that it’s in the public’s interest. We are, after all, arbiters of fairness. We should be no more fair to gay politicians than we are to the public they serve.
Kerry Eleveld is a reporter for The New York Blade and can be reached at keleveld@hx.com.
|
