Texarkana, TX 73° View Live Radar Sat H 74° L 40° Sun H 61° L 36° Mon H 62° L 43° Weather Sponsored By:

Selective outrage about Kevin Spacey

Selective outrage about Kevin Spacey

November 14th, 2017 by Christine Flowers in Opinion Editorial

I first saw Kevin Spacey in an old crime series called "Wiseguy." It was about three decades ago, and he played a character who had biblical knowledge of his sister, who obligingly shot him full of heroin through his big toe. I was enchanted.

I followed his burgeoning career, through two Oscars and an Emmy-winning performance in Netflix series "House of Cards." The man was our own Olivier, and I loved him. In fact, I considered myself the wife he didn't know he actually had.

Which became a running joke with my friends, who apparently already sensed what I had deliberately ignored: Kevin was gay.

For decades, the man kept his private life exactly that: private. I'm sure there were rumors among the Hollywood types, and I'm sure some of those rumors had incredibly salacious details, but I was quite happy in my imaginary menage a who-are-you-kidding?

And then it all came tumbling down this week when Kevin bypassed me completely (you don't call, you don't write!) and admitted to the world that he was, in fact, "living as a gay man."

The problem is that this revelation was the second clause of a two part sentence, and the first clause implied that he didn't remember a drunken episode where he tried to assault a 14 year old three decades ago. Whether he meant to or not (and he probably meant to), Kevin pushed open the door to that dark closet in the hopes that the noise it made would drown out the accusations of sexual assault.

It didn't work. Oh boy did it not work. Instead of garnering the support of those Hollywood types who love a good coming out story (including those who were actually forced by cattle prods out of the closet kicking and screaming against their will), Kevin's cohorts in La La land went ballistic. They were angry that he seemed to be mixing his La Cage "I Am What I Am" moment with an attempted deflection of past pedophilia (alleged, of course).

As I tweeted after the revelation, it seemed as if Hollywood was angrier that Kevin had offended the LGBT community than that he had sort of, kind of admitted his attempted assault of a teenager back in 1986. I kept reading the tweets from the icons of liberal tolerance, trying to find some profound vein of anger at his sexual misconduct, and they were there. But there were also condemnations along the line of that exhibited by Dan Savage, a man who regularly condones pretty disgusting sexual behavior between "consenting adults." The aptly-named Savage tweeted that ""There's no amount of drunk or closeted that excuses or explains away assaulting a 14-year-old child."

He's right, of course. Spacey's obvious attempt to deflect attention from his alleged predation is the worst moral flea-flicker pass in history, seconded only by former New Jersey Gov. Jim McGreevey.

But I cannot get the word "chutzpah" out of my head reading this sex columnist's moral outrage against Spacey when in the past, some of the "advice" he's handed out about threesomes, dildoes and other delightful accessories for debauchery is just this side of felonious in some third world countries.

The outrage at Spacey's timing made me wonder how people would have reacted had the actor made this statement: "I honestly do not remember the encounter. It would have been 30 years ago. This story has encouraged me to address other things about my life. I know that there are stories out there about me, and that some have been fueled by the fact that I have been so protective of my privacy. I choose now to live as a Catholic priest."

Imagine that the Hollywood crew were faced with a future seminarian Spacey who had sort of acknowledged inappropriate relations with a young boy instead of a "finally here I am gay man" Spacey admitting the same sordid acts. Would they be angry that he had slandered Catholics in general, and Catholic priests in particular?

I mean, how horrible to try and conflate priests with sexual misconduct? Right? Hello?

Yes, I am being facetious, as if I even had to mention it. Hollywood has spent decades attacking the church, as recently as a couple of years ago with that incredibly biased piece of fiction "Spotlight." Conflating priests and predators is par for the course with the California crew. And these days, any heterosexual man who can breathe without a respirator is fair game.

But God forbid there should be any suggestion of sexual misconduct in any community protected by race, religion (not Catholicism of course,) sexual orientation or gender? If you do that, you will be shunned.

It's a shame my ex-husband didn't check out the Jesuits. It could have saved him a lot of grief.

Getting Started/Comments Policy

Getting started

  1. 1. If you frequently comment on news websites then you may already have a Disqus account. If so, click the "Login" button at the top right of the comment widget and choose whether you'd rather log in with Facebook, Twitter, Google, or a Disqus account.
  2. 2. If you've forgotten your password, Disqus will email you a link that will allow you to create a new one. Easy!
  3. 3. If you're not a member yet, Disqus will go ahead and register you. It's seamless and takes about 10 seconds.
  4. 4. To register, either go through the login process or just click in the box that says "join the discussion," type your comment, and either choose a social media platform to log you in or create a Disqus account with your email address.
  5. 5. If you use Twitter, Facebook or Google to log in, you will need to stay logged into that platform in order to comment. If you create a Disqus account instead, you'll need to remember your Disqus password. Either way, you can change your display name if you'd rather not show off your real name.
  6. 6. Don't be a huge jerk or do anything illegal, and you'll be fine.

Texarkana Gazette Comments Policy

The Texarkana Gazette web sites include interactive areas in which users can express opinions and share ideas and information. We cannot and do not monitor all of the material submitted to the website. Additionally, we do not control, and are not responsible for, content submitted by users. By using the web sites, you may be exposed to content that you may find offensive, indecent, inaccurate, misleading, or otherwise objectionable. You agree that you must evaluate, and bear all risks associated with, the use of the Gazette web sites and any content on the Gazette web sites, including, but not limited to, whether you should rely on such content. Notwithstanding the foregoing, you acknowledge that we shall have the right (but not the obligation) to review any content that you have submitted to the Gazette, and to reject, delete, disable, or remove any content that we determine, in our sole discretion, (a) does not comply with the terms and conditions of this agreement; (b) might violate any law, infringe upon the rights of third parties, or subject us to liability for any reason; or (c) might adversely affect our public image, reputation or goodwill. Moreover, we reserve the right to reject, delete, disable, or remove any content at any time, for the reasons set forth above, for any other reason, or for no reason. If you believe that any content on any of the Gazette web sites infringes upon any copyrights that you own, please contact us pursuant to the procedures outlined in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (Title 17 U.S.C. § 512) at the following address:

Copyright Agent
The Texarkana Gazette
15 Pine Street
Texarkana, TX 75501
Phone: 903-794-3311
Email: webeditor@texarkanagazette.com