Outing-ish, 2009 Redux

Jason Zengerle is a senior editor at The New Republic who, as recently as the end of March had a lengthy piece (about tax scofflaws) published in The New York Times Magazine.  Andy Towle is the former editor-in-chief of Genre who runs one of the best general interest LGBT blogs on the Internet.  John Aravosis has been a well-known blogger (and e-mailer before that) and commentator on LGBT issues, recently appearing on CNN’s Reliable Sources to discuss recent marriage developments.

What do they have in common?  Well, a percolating story about the youngest (and HuffPo readers say hottest) Member of Congress, Rep. Aaron Schock, and implications and innuendo that some might perhaps possibly question his sexual orientation.

The beginning of this story comes from Zengerle’s piece in Details, which — despite other characterizations of it from Towle and Aravosis — meticulously avoids asking Schock about his sexual orientation.  It tip-toes around sexual orientation (or at least sexuality) in a very 1990s way — with the exception of the stark notice that he “is ardently opposed to . . . gay marriage.”

The piece contains this almost wink-worthy description of Schock: “With his carefully mussed hair, pastel ties, and resemblance to Neil Patrick Harris . . . .”  What?  It also notes that in addition to Keith Urban, Schock’s musical selections include Justin Timberlake and Rihanna.  Um, ok?  Then, there’s the really awkward Nathan Lane-Rosie O’Donnell-Tony-Awards-style paragraph:

Schock is hoping his romantic prospects will improve too, once he settles in. He’s the only one of his siblings not married with children, and is similarly an outlier among his friends. “I had a group of five or six guys, and we hung out and traveled—ski trips and stuff,” he says. “They slowly got picked off—married, married, married.” His pals try not to dog him about his love life. “I think he’s got enough pressure as it is,” says Shea Ledford, a concrete worker who’s been Schock’s good friend since high school. Indeed, there’s been enough speculation about Schock’s confirmed-bachelor status that, as far back as 2004, a Chicago newspaper asked him whether he was gay (his response: “No . . . I’m not.”). But D.C. receptions and fund-raisers where the other attendees are, as Schock notes, “two and three times my age” hardly make for a ripe pickup scene. Neither do the baby-kissing events back in Illinois. “There’s no line of young ladies at my door every morning,” he says. “Maybe when they read my Details profile . . . “

If that’s not the most awkward, more-questions-raised-than-answered paragraph, I don’t know what is.  Notably, though, the “gay” question is not asked of Schock, so far as is reported.  There is reference to long-standing speculation about his sexual orientation (again, how ’90s) and then a parenthetical reprint of his response at that time.  In fact, if Zengerle didn’t ask Schock directly, it seems a little unfair to report the longstanding speculation and then only give a five-year old response.

Then, Towleroad picked it up, with the headline, “Congressman Aaron Schock ‘Not’ Gay, Details Reconfirms,” and the concluding sentence, “Of course, that’s the same answer Charlie Crist gave…” (which links to a still earlier post titled “Closeted Gay Republicans Hung Out to Dry in Outrage”).

Implication, but no direct outing.

Then, today, John Aravosis jumps on board with the more “out” there headline, “GOP Congressman Aaron Schock wants you to know that he’s really not gay. Really.”  True, Schock did mention that there were no women lined up to meet him and that perhaps Details might help change that.  So, I suppose that headline could be on the side of the truth.  (Although, technically, Schock could be bisexual and hoping some women, and not just men, start lining up for him.)  And again, the actual “No . . . I’m not” gay comes from a 2004 report.

But then, John goes a little further stating four things that don’t at all, in today’s world make someone gay in an effort to imply quite clearly otherwise:

But if Schrock [sic] isn’t gay, he needs to learn a few things about how not to be gay.

1. Don’t obsess about your body and your abs (you do). It’s kinda gay.
2. Don’t do interviews with Details magazine (you did). We love them, but then again, we’re kind of gay.
3. Don’t go to dinner at gay diners where you’re the only “straight” guy in the place. You did, and people noticed.
4. Don’t make excuses for why you’re 27, gorgeous, smart, successful, powerful, and just can’t seem to find the right girl (you did, you are, and you can’t). We’ve heard them all before, they’re cliché as hell, and they just convince people even more that something isn’t quite right.

He then writes that “It would be the height of hypocrisy were you to spend your days in bed with the enemy, and your nights in bed with your community.”  Again, walking the not-quite-outing line very carefully.  And then, a bit of a threat (at least, as I take it):

And if anyone thinks this post is mean, you should read what I’m not writing about. It’s a small town, Aaron. People talk.

Um. Awkward.

So, is this acceptable?  And, if not, from whom is it unacceptable?  From Schock, if, in fact, he is closeted?  From Zengerle, who dances around with some not-so-subtle implications but on the face of things allows the appearance of heterosexuality for the congressman?  From Andy Towle, who references other allegedly closeted politicians in a wink-and-nod follow-up to Schock’s 2004 denial?  From John Aravosis, who appears to put Schock on notice that he knows things that he’s not yet writing?  (And, if Aravosis actually knows that Schock is gay — or has, at least, engaged in homosexual behavior — then why do this “dance around the issue, I’m not gonna say” bit?  This isn’t Pete Williams in J.R.’s way back when.)

And what if he — gasp — is straight?  Not a one of these people has actually said he’s not straight but, to varying degrees, they’ve all implied otherwise (with Zengerle straddling the line in a plausibly deniable way).  Is it fair for a politician to be put through this just because the guy had dinner in Dupont one night?

It’s 2009.  This is an elected official who lives in a nation where four states have granted marriage equality to same-sex couples.  It’s completely unrealistic for a closeted anti-gay politician to think his or her hypocrisy won’t be revealed.  It’s just as unseemly, though, to play with innuendo and carefully worded hypotheticals or implications in order to create a narrative about a person without reporting one fact that justifies that innuendo.

Popularity: 4% [?]