To be fair, that’s only one possible conclusion that might be drawn from the facts as presented.
Yes, it’s possible that he had an unhealthy sexual interest in the children he fostered, and that he had a relationship with the adopted 16-year-old.
Or he could be Batman.
Batman had an unhealthy sexual interest in a 16 year old boy so you might be on to something.
For some reason, I am very amused that the reporter decided he needed an adverb there to describe how the sodomy was conducted. “Wait . . . what if the reader gets the impression that is was all languorous killing-time-on-a-Saturday-afternoon kinda sodomy in the pictures? Why, they’d be utterly lost not knowing the context!”
Hell no.
They pretty much have to believe that if they don’t want to lose their paranoia about how the gays are going to convert people. If they admit that most people are just plain not interested much of their campaign against homosexuals looks even more baseless than it already does.
Yes, that’s one reason. Not arranging outings so much as just no longer willing to cover for people who attack the gay community in public, but then want to be ‘discretely’ welcomed at gay bars, etc.
The second reason that it’s more common is that the news media is willing to report such stories, rather than cover them up as they did for so long, at least for people in well-connected positions.
Oh, that’s just a nasty rumour put about by Green Arrow (he’s not just a Queen, he’s a bitch, too). Try asking him the real reason why Speedy started shooting up.
I’d also add to what you said that we have additional information sources now (e.g., the internet) and new ways to capture evidence (e.g., camera phones).
That’s certainly true.
We had a gay Republican legislator in Minnesota who came out (but just barely before he was likely to have been outed). He was going to gay bars, and was dumb enough to hit on the bartenders boyfriend, right in front of the bartender! And with nearly everyone carrying cell phone cameras now, there was video of him circulating around town, showing him at bar-closing time, “drunk, disheveled, and desperate”. That would have hit the news media eventually.
I was intrigued by the idea that Rekers reserved two twin beds in London, so I’m going to surprise myself by defending him. Perhaps he was trying to help the kid get out of prostitution? In other words, perhaps he wasn’t boning the kid?
I sincerely beg the forgiveness of all GLBT Dopers for almost falling out of my chair laughing at that turn of phrase. Intentional or inadvertent, Autolycus?
I suspect a few decades ago a much larger chunk of the gay community were themselves in the closet to one degree or another, so the impetus to cover for eachother was a lot stronger. Now that a lot of the stigma of homosexuality is gone and a lot more men are openly gay, carrying water for some guy whose day job is to slander you in the media seems like a much worse deal.
While I think there’s almost zero chance this is true, I’m nonetheless surprised that it isn’t the first excuse Rekers used, since… isn’t that ostensibly what he does? Help lead wayward gay sheep back to the Lord?
Well, that and chronic embarrassment at premature ejaculation. (Why do you think everybody called him ‘Speedy’, anyway?)
Why not say that then?
Plus, is paying him to take trips to Europe and Bermuda really the standard method of getting him out of the prostitution business?
I take it the second R in “Brazilian Trail” is silent?
Hey - at least the teenager GA’s in an unhealthy relationship is a girl.
So … this guy with the Atavistic Mustache (didn’t they open for Vanilla Fudge at the Fillmore back in '68?) runs across this poor wretch of a gay prostitute (who happily announces his penis size for all and sundry on the internet) and decides to get him on the straight and narrow … by whisking him off for an all expenses-paid European vacation.
Yeah, I’m sure he’s seen the error of his ways.
I suppose this all depends on what sort of baggage Rekers wanted him to handle.
So to speak.
Wrong Speedy…