He’s another one of these noisy religious types that rant interminably about ‘homosexuals’. They all seem to eventually be exposed as self-hating gays, usually by young hustlers they have hired (usually with church funds), or young people they have molested. I casn probably recall a half-dozen of them without much thought. (Maybe there ought to be a Wikipedia page listing them all.)
Now when I read about someone devoting such efforts about ‘homosexuals’, the Shakespeare quote comes to mind: “methinks he doth protest too much”.
And now Roy Moore seems to be in trouble for his attentions to young girls. Really young, like 13 or 14. That age, they still look pretty much the same as teenage boys!
So I’m wondering – is it teenage boys that Roy Moore really wants?
But his fundamentalist religious upbringing won’t allow him to actually pursue (at least, not that we’ve heard of so far).
I confess, when confronted by someone with vocal, virulent homophobic views my first instinct is to assume that they must be very insecure in their own sexuality and desires. That may be repressed homosexual thoughts or a general unhealthy relationship with sex. If it isn’t based on that well, why be so obsessed about what other grown-adults do in the privacy of their own home?
If that is the case then not only is it harmful to those they villify but also to their own peace of mind, especially for those trapped by a conservative religious dogma while being “tormented” by those very feelings you are forced to condemn. That must be terrible.
Of course as the term has been weaponize in those circles it will be impossible to explain it as an example on how the patriarchy is harmful to men without causing “wailing and gnashing of teeth”
I find it unlikely that a gay man would molest teenage girls. Thirteen and fourteen year old girls are generally pretty ‘‘womanly’’ by that age. Why would he not molest boys instead? The sexual abuse of boys is almost as common as the sexual abuse of girls.
If Moore’s actions are supposed to be a closet cover story, this doesn’t seem like the best one. Dating numerous teen girls not only draws attention to your sex life but cuts into your valuable gay-sex-having time. In his case, I’m not buying it. It’s clear which honey pot he prefers to dip into.
I think he’s tortured by his skeevyness, but can’t rally against skeevy Christian dudes because 1. It would damn most of his supporters and 2. It would have made those women come out a lot sooner.
Instead he turned his tortured feelings to persecuting gays, so he could feel better about himself and win a ton of supporters.
I agree. Going after underage girls is not something somebody would choose as a cover story. If Moore was a gay man in denial, he would go after adult women in an attempt to show everyone he was “normal”.
I think the denial and self-hatred may be present but in Moore’s case it’s more generalized. Moore has a history of attacking people he sees as sexual degenerates as a psychological defense mechanism against his own sexual proclivities.
This whole approach annoys me more than it should, to be honest. People love to jump to the “he’s secretly one of the things he’s preaching against” conclusion, because it’s happened often enough in the past, and because we all love to see people we dislike exposed as hypocrites. But it’s become a lazy method of dismissing people and what they’ve done, and that’s not good. Plenty of people are shitty for a wide variety of reasons, and reducing them to one simple stereotype brushes all those other reasons under the rug instead of addressing what actual problems exist.
Also, there do exist people who take unpopular stances out of genuine, honest belief. They oppose gay marriage or abortion or whathave you not just to piss off the other side, but because that is what their sincerely held opinions compel them toward. Again, dismissing these people with this sort of generalization instead of being willing to engage them honestly and on their terms is counterproductive.
That all said, Roy Moore is a creepy scumbag who needs to disappear forever. I just don’t think there’s any reason to suspect he’s a closeted homosexual.
I think he learned early on that adult women weren’t interested in him and thought he’d try something else. I assume he found one teenage girl along the way who went along with his reindeer games and he thought he found a solution to his lonely self-loathing life, so he spent a few decades trying to find another one. Maybe he eventually learned that the vast majority of 13 to 18 year old girls couldn’t stand him either.
The downside of jabbing the religious right for supposedly being closeted gays, is that it looks like you’re blaming homosexual orientation for the shitty behavior of some of their heroes.
The same thing is true with people who have an obsession with adult virgins. That’s NOTB either.
BTW, Moore has been married to the same woman since 1985. :eek: I wonder what kind of trainwreck she is, not to mention their FOUR children. I’m waiting for Sandusky-esque accusations to come out from the kids’ friends.
It’s not like nobody was on to him; that was obvious when I heard the story about him being banned from a shopping mall because he wouldn’t leave teenage girls alone.
That’s not at all what I read. I read an account in which he took her to some house in the woods, groped and kissed her and she begged him to take her home, so he did. So she wasn’t at all into it (and it wasn’t rape, not that I wish to minimize the damage he may have done.)
Per this cite (see p18), he’s guilty of “2nd Degree Sexual Abuse”. Rape involves penetration. I do not believe the 14-year-old girl is claiming penetration (or intercourse). Note that this cite also indicates that most states don’t use the term “statutory rape”, and that includes Alabama. So I’m not sure what your claim means, especially since the girl is not claiming there was penetration.
I’m happy to be corrected if you wish to produce a cite that does so.