Gay politicians ala Foley

[spiro3]

I've always been curious as whether there is a preponderance of closeted gays among political types in Washington....seems like a professional hazard there.

 

So, escorts, my question is, without naming names (unless you want to!)is Washington a particularly fertile field for your line of work?

[Guest ncm2169]

I'm not an escort, but as to your surmising about closeted gays in DC, check out this article (to run in tomorrow's NYT):

 

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/NYT_Foley_scandals_impact_on_gay_1007.html

[+ glutes]

Jeffy-Lube Gannon seemed to have had a client base...

[+ Tom Isern]

Yes, Washington is a particularly fertile territory, and the closeted and/or married gay Repuli-con politic-ho is a stock character there—especially these Bushy days.

[Bilbo]

I just have to complain somewhere and this will do as well as any. This Senator is not gay. He is only homosexual. To be gay, IMHO, you have to be out and proud. If he was out of his closet, so much of what has happened would not have happened. Now, if we allow him to be called gay without challenging people on it, we are painted with the same brush.

[Guest Jesse Dane]

I can't say about washington, but I think that politicians in general are a good client base. I had my fair share in NYC.

[Damascene]

I can speak only of in the early nineties when I used to go to Rounds. One of the regulars used run local political campaigns. He was a nice guy and ran managed democratic campaigns in a conservative part in NY. He would never admit to the political machine he was gay despite it is easier in NY even then to be an out political operative.

 

Coming out is still a hard process. Older men have problems with it. Older men in the limelight even more problems. I feel sorry Mark Foley. If we lived in a better America, he would not have to hid. He made his choices, he has to live with them, and how sad it is.

 

Damascene

 

- A optimist believes we live in best of all possible worlds; a pessimist fears the same thing.

[Guest icon513]

The closeted pol list, courtesy of http://blogactive.com/

 

 

US Representatives

Rep. Ed Schrock (VA)

Rep. David Drier (CA)

Rep. James McCrery (LA)

Rep. Mark Foley (FL)

 

US Senators

Sen Barbara Mikulski (MD)

 

Senior GOP Staff

Jay Timmons, NRSC

Dan Gurley, RNC

Jay Banning, RNC

 

Senior Senate Staffers

Robert Traynham, Santorum

Jonathan Tolman, Inhofe

Kirk Fordham, Martinez

Dirk Smith, Lott

John Reid, Allen

Paul Unger, Allen

Linus Catignani, Frist

 

Senior House Staffers

Jim Conzelman, Oxley

Lee Cohen, Hart

Robert O'Conner, King

Pete Meachum, Brown-Waite

 

Bush Staff

Israel Hernandez

Jeff Berkowitz

 

Local Officials

Vincent Gentile, NYC

 

The rest...

Ed Koch, NYC Mayo

Jennifer Helms-Knox, Judge

Armstrong Williams, Radio host

Matt Drudge, Headline writer

Steve Kreseski, MD Gov.

Chip DiPaula, MD Gov.

Lee LaHaye, CWA

John Schlafley, Eagle Forum

[jasoncarter_dfw]

>I can't say about washington, but I think that politicians in

>general are a good client base. I had my fair share in NYC.

 

A good escort keeps his ears open and his mouth shut! (well, other things do stay open of course! :->)

 

- Jason Carter - Dallas, TX

- 2006 rentboy.com Sexiest Escort of the Year

- jasoncarter53@hotmail.com

- (972) 365-0120

[SAdler]

Leaving Washington DC today and staying at a delightful and highly secure luxury'ish hotel just off of Capitol Hill ... I can safely say without question that .......

 

.... if I told you I'd have to kill you. Let's just say that it's a good think my blog and Page 6 have very little in common.

[Guest justinwakefield]

First off, probing for gossip and/or name-dropping (even half jokingly) is entirely inappropriate. As someone who takes their profession very seriously, it goes against everything that any REAL escort would ever do. Second, as D.C. is the nation's capital - the last thing anyone directly involved in such a politically volatile machine would want is for someone to "out" them. That is no one's inherent right... ever. Having escorted in D.C. and danced at Cherry I can say that D.C. is full of affluent gay men "of a certain age" who have NO trouble treating themselves to a professional sex-trade worker. Along with NYC, L.A. and a few other major U.S. cities (Vegas being key), it is a hotbed for escorts. It is simply learning how to target and market yourself acoordingly. As a Canadian, if I can spot these trends, they should be fairly obvious to most of you 'Marikans'!

[Guest PWIT]

even though you are re-postinog someone else's outings, I still think it is in bad taste. I assume you condone such behavior and are opening the door for all your personal information to be posted. Of course I know that is not so and was just stating so as an impact statement...firing for effect if you will.

[SAdler]

Not sure if you're responding to my post or the one that PWIT made a very fair and rational response to with the LIST of people but in any respect ... you really need to calm down.

 

If you ARE referring to me then it needs to be clarified, I'm definitely one of the most discreet escorts in this business and would NEVER share information ANYONE politically, industrially, or even socially affiliated with anyone but myself. The only time ANYONE hears about a client of mine is if I'm setting up a threeway and that's it. To insinuate otherwise is a serious insult. Jumping to conclusions doesn't suit anyone so perhaps in the future you should take a step back before writing such accusatory posts.

 

If you WEREN'T referring to me I still think that your post was a little over the top and your message could have been conveyed with a little bit less "holier than thou" and a tad more tact. Of course that is just the way that I read it.

[Yeswell]

I must (respectfully) disagree with PWIT. As I see it, the whole point is that being gay or straight or whatever is not private or personal. Whom one has sex with and how--that's personal information. What we should all want is a society in which sexual orientation cannot be a secret.

[SAdler]

Last I checked Utopia was nowhere in sight. It's a nice thought but as long as society is the way that society is, sexual orientation will constantly be a factor. When there's a new "them" and the gays assimilate into the "us" in the "Us v. Them" society perhaps the ideals of which you speak could be possible.

 

For more on this I'd look into some Queer Theory by Judity Butler or Seidman. Will give you a headache but it's the same concept. It's a noble thought but seemingly unlikely in the world we live in.

 

As long as there has been public there as been public figures. If these people want to be public figures then they unfortunately have to roll with the punches of what comes with the territory. It sucks, it's wrong, and it's unfair most of the time but these people could just as easily take jobs out of office when given the choice. In most if not all cases, they know what they're getting themselves into.

 

What I find funny are the McGreeveys out there who do everything to stay in the closet and then when they're found out turn into the poster boys for Gay America. Gee, weren't they the ones cowering in the closet a few years ago? What kind of PR move is THAT?

[Guest PWIT]

>As long as there has been public there as been public figures.

> If these people want to be public figures then they

>unfortunately have to roll with the punches of what comes with

>the territory. It sucks, it's wrong, and it's unfair most of

>the time but these people could just as easily take jobs out

>of office when given the choice. In most if not all cases,

>they know what they're getting themselves into.

 

So what denotes a public figure? Are staffers included?

[Guest PWIT]

>I must (respectfully) disagree with PWIT. As I see it, the

>whole point is that being gay or straight or whatever is not

>private or personal. Whom one has sex with and how--that's

>personal information.

 

I'm confused. Did you mean 'private or public' instead of 'private or personal'?

[Guest PWIT]

>If you WEREN'T referring to me I still think that your post

>was a little over the top and your message could have been

>conveyed with a little bit less "holier than thou" and a tad

>more tact. Of course that is just the way that I read it.

 

Take a deep breath Scott and read Justin's post again. I didn't get the holier than thou impression - read it as an independent statement just stating his views.

 

But I do like it when you get your shorts in knot Scott! :9

[alanalt]

>Not sure if you're responding to my post or the one that PWIT

>made a very fair and rational response to with the LIST of

>people but in any respect ... you really need to calm down.

>

 

Ah, Scott, it's posted as a reply to the initial post, not yours. Nor does he refer to your post in any way... Maybe you're the one who needs to 'calm down' a bit. Not everything's about you (or me, for that matter)

 

As a client, I very much appreciate it when an escort makes a point about professional discretion, whether it's Justin's post, your reply, or some of the other escorts who have posted above...

[KY_TOP]

>A good escort keeps his ears open and his mouth shut! (well,

>other things do stay open of course! :->)

>

>- Jason Carter - Dallas, TX

 

Very well said.

 

This thread reminds me of a certain Escort/Porn actor that decided to get his 15 minutes of fame by outing a certain American Idol star. Thankfully most Escorts seem to adhere to your philosophy and many clients appreciate that.

[dfw2sfo]

To clarify about the list from Blogactive.com, these are not simply gay people minding their own business and doing no harm. These are gay people who are, through their role in politics, legislating or supporting legislators who are, to varying degrees, anti-gay. If it were a complete list of all gay politicians who weren't out or staffers who are not out, it would be much, much longer.

 

For example, one of these guys is high up in Rick Santorum's office. There has been almost no other senator or representative who is more anti-gay.

 

I say out the fuckers!

[Yeswell]

No I meant private or personal. I meant that being gay is, exactly like being straight, something that shouldn't be secret. That's what equality means, after all. And I must say, dear Scott, that it depresses me that someone as young as you is so cynical as to think that the idea that people might be openly gay is utopian. Of course, I'm Canadian and you live in a far more conservative country so it's different for you. The fact that certain people (Republican politicians, for instance) can't say that they're gay is not 'realism' or 'just the way things are' but rather the result of homophobia pure and simple. And of course I'm familiar with Butler and Seidman, but I don't see how their writings would help here.

[Guest PWIT]

>No I meant private or personal. I meant that being gay is,

>exactly like being straight, something that shouldn't be

>secret.

 

But you know that is not a universal. Everyone doesn't believe, feel and act as you. Information one chooses to reveal about themselves to others is in my opinion a personal choice and not for someone else to post on a blog or website.

 

>That's what equality means, after all. And I must

>say, dear Scott, that it depresses me that someone as young as

>you is so cynical as to think that the idea that people might

>be openly gay is utopian.

 

I believe you missunderstood his point. I took it that it wasn't his point that someone could be openly gay was utopian, rather that all could feel comfortable being openly gay (or whatever) without any societal judgments - now that would be utopia.

 

Not trying to put words in Scott's mouth (other things yes, words no), just that is how I read his point.

[+ glutes]

You took the words right out of my mouth KY!

But I am sure the Right Reverend will still be revered.