Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - What is your opinion of "outing" closeted gay men or women?

Quote:

Originally Posted by pigglet

FoolThemAll,

I think your second sentence in the post above is the key for me - I disagree that in these types of instances, the relevance is wholey within the domain of the the hypocrite's personal life. They set themselves up for political office by buidling an image of their private lives. (Once again, I'm not speaking about this particular guy - rather, the question in general and the situations under which I can understand the validity of "outing" someone for closet behavior, whether it be specifically homosexuality or something else) If their private lives, in actuality, are significantly different than the image of the private lives they build up, run on, and are elected for - then I think its entirely valid to point that out. They are inherently lying to their constituents about topics they have inherently conceded are of political importants to their consituents - otherwise they wouldn't run on family imagery in the first place. They would just stand up in their commercials, outline their platform, and then stfu. I'd be fine with that.

It's a lie, yes, but it's an irrelevant lie that's not hurting the constituents. Even if the constituents would mistakenly think otherwise. Now, it certainly hurts the wife... but the activist was clearly interested in letting many more people than just her know about it. And I'm honestly not sure what I think of a third party revealing adultery to an unknowing spouse - undecided there.

Quote:

In addition, I can understand how someone within the community that the politician is secretly a member of, while publicly enacting legislation and enforcing attitudes counter to the interests of the affected community, could easily have an attitude of "fuck you asshole hypocrite bastard," such that they might feel empowered by the outing. I find that reason less compelling, but I can certainly understand it. As I said, I think the affected politician sets themselves up for it, and if the accusation is a lie, the politician can always sue for slander or libel - like anyone else in the States.

Yeah, I find it less compelling as well. Tearing down someone else to build yourself up?

I agree that the politician set himself up for this to happen. Hell, someone walking down a Detroit alley wearing white power insignia is obviously inviting violence. But that doesn't make the response moral. I can't make the move from "the politician should've expected this" to "the politician deserved this".