"Outrage" Documentary: Activists Outing Gay Conservatives

  • dglater

    Posts: 255

    Apr 28, 2009 11:00 PM GMT
    "Outrage," a new documentary from filmmaker Kirby Dick, takes issue with the secret lives of closeted gay politicians -- especially conservative Republicans who outwardly oppose gay rights.

    The film, which premiered last week at the Tribeca Film Festival, features tell-alls from men who say they've had relationships with various Republicans, including Florida Governor Charlie Crist, Bush strategist Ken Mehlman and former Senator Larry Craig.

    According to Magnolia Pictures, "Outrage" is a "searing indictment of the hypocrisy of closeted politicians with appalling gay rights voting records who actively campaign against the LGBT community they covertly belong to."

    In the documentary, Dick lambastes the mainstream media for not better investigating the politicians' "hypocrisy" and double lives. He told New York magazine that the film explores "the issues surrounding closeted politicians and their hypocrisy in voting anti-gay -- and how these people have harmed millions of Americans for many years."

    "Outrage" premieres May 8 in five cities, including Washington, D.C.

  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Apr 28, 2009 11:51 PM GMT
    From the trailer, it looks like all they're doing is talking about it without actually naming names, other than Larry Craig (who was already convicted after being caught in a mens restroom, and, who is now out of office). Do they name the names of sitting Senators and Representatives ? I highly doubt it.
  • jlly_rnchr

    Posts: 1759

    Apr 28, 2009 11:57 PM GMT
    If this film actually outs politicians, then I do not support it. I don't care if they oppose gay rights or not, it's no one's place to tell the world that someone is gay. This could ruin people's lives, it would make the filmmaker no better than the hypocritical politicians that he's outing.
  • dglater

    Posts: 255

    Apr 29, 2009 12:28 AM GMT
    "This could ruin people's lives"

    so its ok for this conservative homophobic people to ruin our lives?

    if they play with fire they should get burned.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 29, 2009 12:39 AM GMT
    I tend to agree with jlly-rnchr.
    Sample line from the clip:
    "Each one of these outings puts a little chink in the armor of the anti-gay movement".

    So...maybe outing the guy causes him to lose his party's nomination for the next election. And then he gets replaced by a genuine anti-gay congressmen.
    ...And gays come off looking even more sneaky and subversive in the eyes of the irrational extreme right.
    This puts a chink in the armor somehow?

    The film masquerades as furthering the cause, but it appears to represent more of a salt-earth strategy.
  • jlly_rnchr

    Posts: 1759

    Apr 29, 2009 1:02 AM GMT
    dglater said"This could ruin people's lives"

    so its ok for this conservative homophobic people to ruin our lives?

    if they play with fire they should get burned.


    Yeah, but aren't we better than that? That is an incredibly malicious way to go about getting people to be honest. And look at the outed gay politicians and religious people from the past couple years. They are totally removed from public life and certainly have not changed their tune on the gay movement. What function does that serve to our cause?

    I mean, I know it's cliche, but two wrongs don't make a right. The politicians could kind of argue that they're serving their constituents, the filmmaker is just being a dick.
  • dglater

    Posts: 255

    Apr 29, 2009 2:33 AM GMT
    look what i will be against is outing people who are not involved... like when Perez Hilton outed that a N sync dude... yea i know it wasn't a big surprise that a n sync member is gay, but the guy didn't do anything bad towards the gay cause.

    Those politicians are actively passing anti gay laws, started with gay marriage now it transformed against gay adoption, whats next?

    I am for do all you can to remove people who are anti gay from power.

    if those people Molested kids... expose them (and hopefully jail them), if those people cheated or had an affair expose them. if those people are gay?... expose them.

    I truly hope that this movie did not target people who are very natural on gay causes, but only targeted people who are actively anti gay.

    I hope this will bring them down from a power position. Bigots should not be in power.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 29, 2009 2:37 AM GMT
    dglater said"This could ruin people's lives"

    so its ok for this conservative homophobic people to ruin our lives?

    if they play with fire they should get burned.

    I'll gladly light the bonfire.
  • BeingThePhoen...

    Posts: 1157

    Apr 29, 2009 2:48 AM GMT
    Beaux saidI tend to agree with jlly-rnchr.
    Sample line from the clip:
    "Each one of these outings puts a little chink in the armor of the anti-gay movement".

    So...maybe outing the guy causes him to lose his party's nomination for the next election. And then he gets replaced by a genuine anti-gay congressmen.
    ...And gays come off looking even more sneaky and subversive in the eyes of the irrational extreme right.
    This puts a chink in the armor somehow?

    The film masquerades as furthering the cause, but it appears to represent more of a salt-earth strategy.

    Whether they are genuinely anti-gay or not, they injure the gay community anyway with their voting records. The aren't hiding their sexuality to further gay causes, they do so to further their onw carrers. I don't like the idea of outing anyone myself, but these guys have to be held accountable for their hypocrisy.
  • BeingThePhoen...

    Posts: 1157

    Apr 29, 2009 2:55 AM GMT
    jlly_rnchr said
    dglater said"This could ruin people's lives"

    so its ok for this conservative homophobic people to ruin our lives?

    if they play with fire they should get burned.


    Yeah, but aren't we better than that? That is an incredibly malicious way to go about getting people to be honest. And look at the outed gay politicians and religious people from the past couple years. They are totally removed from public life and certainly have not changed their tune on the gay movement. What function does that serve to our cause?

    I mean, I know it's cliche, but two wrongs don't make a right. The politicians could kind of argue that they're serving their constituents, the filmmaker is just being a dick.


    Believe it or not, but we are in an all out war with these people. All is fair in love and war.

    What function, you ask, does it serve? It serves to discredit them, to bring gay causes into the living rooms of their constituents and across the US, and it shows the hypocrisy of those who oppose us. I don't like the methods either, but as I said, all is fair in love and war.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 29, 2009 2:58 AM GMT
    I am not for outing the average closeted Joe. It is when that person is hurting others that I feel it is ok.

    Cheating on your wife? Outed.
    Condemning gays from the pulpit? Outed.
    Voting against GLBT rights? Outed.

    Politicians are elected to represent people. If they cannot even represent themselves what good are they?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 29, 2009 4:46 AM GMT
    Any closet gay "politician" working against gay people needs to be exposed. I would not sacrifice one single right of my fellow gays for a self loathing hypocrite. I think there are too many closeted gays that are too afraid too rock the boat when they feel like something doesn't affect them personally, but don't consider that other gays are being abused and suffering every day because complacency. Would you just stand by if a homophobe were beating a gay man or friend of yours or would you do something to stop the beating? Would you not at least report him? icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 29, 2009 6:40 AM GMT
    My question: Are they really voting against us? No, they just wanted gay sex and could care less about "us." It's not illegal to have gay sex and that's all they want. They aren't like us, the ones that want more, and as such cannot see the hypocrisy - as there is none on their part. You can be gay, but not want gay marriage. It's sad, but true. In any case, I say out their asses - keep outing them until the world sees just how many of us their are if that's what it takes. Let the world know the scum that becomes of bigotry's affect on what would have been a normal person.
  • BeingThePhoen...

    Posts: 1157

    Apr 29, 2009 7:49 AM GMT
    Looknrnd saidMy question: Are they really voting against us? No, they just wanted gay sex and could care less about "us." It's not illegal to have gay sex and that's all they want. They aren't like us, the ones that want more, and as such cannot see the hypocrisy - as there is none on their part. You can be gay, but not want gay marriage. It's sad, but true. In any case, I say out their asses - keep outing them until the world sees just how many of us their are if that's what it takes. Let the world know the scum that becomes of bigotry's affect on what would have been a normal person.

    Yes they are voting against us. They do so, as an attempt to hide their own actions, by making it seem as though they would never, ever consider having sex with men. They throw us under the bus, so they can have the career they want and still have a little man time on the side. I think they do see the hypocrisy, but they get what they want, so they don't care that they are hypocrites.
  • junknemesis

    Posts: 682

    Apr 29, 2009 8:26 AM GMT
    You know, nobody has the place to out anyone else. On top of that these "outings" may not even be true. During the whole Catholic Scandal back when I was in Highschool, it was later revealed that a ot of thoes accusations of priests molesting children were untrue.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 29, 2009 8:32 AM GMT
    Looks interesting to me.

    I think outing a normal personal and outing an anti-gay politician are totally different things.
  • BeingThePhoen...

    Posts: 1157

    Apr 29, 2009 8:35 AM GMT
    junknemesis saidYou know, nobody has the place to out anyone else. On top of that these "outings" may not even be true. During the whole Catholic Scandal back when I was in Highschool, it was later revealed that a ot of thoes accusations of priests molesting children were untrue.

    It isn't about outing someone's sexuality. It's about outing someone's hypocrisy. If accusations are made that are unwarranted, then it will be discovered, just as they were in the Catholic Scandal. Gay's have been the brunt of far too many "witch hunts" over the years, many of which were founded by people just like these. It's high time the tables were turned and we took the fight to them for a change.
  • BeingThePhoen...

    Posts: 1157

    Apr 29, 2009 8:39 AM GMT
    Lost_And_Found saidLooks interesting to me.

    I think outing a normal personal and outing an anti-gay politician are totally different things.

    Exactly. I'm not suggesting outing anyone for being gay. I'm suggesting outing those who want to vote against gay causes and ridicule the gay community to further their own self-interests, while secretly taking it up the a _ s.
  • junknemesis

    Posts: 682

    Apr 29, 2009 8:42 AM GMT
    Hmmm... Okay I see a point there.
    I guess my problem with this is that I have been attacked by two (or more) different parties trying to call me a "Hypocrite" because I'm a gay christian.

    Close minded ignorant people in both the Gay Comunity and the Christian Comunity have made attack rolls on me (Geek Referance, but you get the idea) and I'm sick of it. I don't like seeing others do it. Hmmm...

    I guess you are right, Dyersburg, if it's false, it'll be made known. And if not, then whatever may be will be. Ce'st La Vie.

    EDIT: Besides, that's the risk when people go into politics, right? Oposing sides will try to find and use whatever dirt they can find. Even if it was a simple one time kiss back in highschool or something. (For example)
  • BeingThePhoen...

    Posts: 1157

    Apr 29, 2009 8:57 AM GMT
    junknemesis saidHmmm... Okay I see a point there.
    I guess my problem with this is that I have been attacked by two (or more) different parties trying to call me a "Hypocrite" because I'm a gay christian.

    Close minded ignorant people in both the Gay Comunity and the Christian Comunity have made attack rolls on me (Geek Referance, but you get the idea) and I'm sick of it. I don't like seeing others do it. Hmmm...

    I guess you are right, Dyersburg, if it's false, it'll be made known. And if not, then whatever may be will be. Ce'st La Vie.

    EDIT: Besides, that's the risk when people go into politics, right? Oposing sides will try to find and use whatever dirt they can find. Even if it was a simple one time kiss back in highschool or something. (For example)


    I actually am anti-religion. I think religion is probably the most dangerous thing mankind has ever created, but it's against my nature to consider anyone a hypocrite for believing what they believe and being honest to one's self and that includes a belief in Christianity. That being said, I am all for outing any member of the clergy who uses the Bible as their shield, while being hypocritical to what the book stands for.

    "Your religion is what you do when the sermon is over." ~Quoted in P.S. I Love You, compiled by H. Jackson Brown, Jr.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 29, 2009 10:30 AM GMT
    They're hurting more people by staying in the closet and supporting anti-gay legislation vocally. They deserve to be outed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 29, 2009 10:32 AM GMT
    Strategically, it's probably a good idea to accuse every politician and preacher of being gay. Throw the whole pot of spaghetti at the wall and see how much sticks.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 29, 2009 10:39 AM GMT
    If a politician takes money from a lobbyist, denies or hides it, and then votes for an issue the lobbyist works on, is that news? Yes. How he/she votes and not being honest with the electorate about why is valid for an open discussion.

    If a politician argues in favor of one man - one woman marriage, and cheats on his or her spouse, is that news? Yes - it exposes their hypocrisy and dishonesty, which is something voters have a right to know. if they are silent on that issue, and cheat on their spouse, then it is not the public's business.

    If a politician works against equality for gays & lesbians, and speaks about against gay people, and that politician is gay, then it too is news and they have no right to claim privacy. They are exploiting "us" for their political advantage. They have no claim on the gay community to hide or protect them from the truth.

    The key issue (in my opinion) is saying one thing, and doing something else, when you hold a position of public power. Other than that, everyone has a right to privacy,

    ....and one more thing, since when is being gay something we, or anyone, needs to be ashamed about and hide? If you lived in Iraq or Iran, perhaps, but in the "West" ? We do not need and do not deserve, any more self hating elected officials.

  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Apr 29, 2009 10:59 AM GMT
    I support the outing of gay politicians who vote against gay rights. Their rights end where my rights begin.
  • junknemesis

    Posts: 682

    Apr 29, 2009 11:09 AM GMT
    dyersburg_dude said
    I actually am anti-religion. I think religion is probably the most dangerous thing mankind has ever created, but it's against my nature to consider anyone a hypocrite for believing what they believe and being honest to one's self and that includes a belief in Christianity. That being said, I am all for outing any member of the clergy who uses the Bible as their shield, while being hypocritical to what the book stands for.

    "Your religion is what you do when the sermon is over." ~Quoted in P.S. I Love You, compiled by H. Jackson Brown, Jr.


    See... here is an example of what I meant by being able to agree without tainting that disagreement with hate. And I respect that view.

    But when it comes to clergy, who is to say what they are being hypocritical about? Many people on here believe it's perfectly acceptible to have our own perceptions about what we believe, to be able to accept what we will from religious teaching and let go of that which we can't agree with? Many people say they study different religions, and take what they will of each to get a balanced mix of values from each.

    So who is anyone to assume what someone else believes, without discussing it with that person?

    Then again, if they activly preach (be it priest or polatition) against something and then practice it I can totally understand wanting to call out that hypocrasy. But you just can't call every gay christian, priest or no, a hypocrite. Well, I don't think anyone should, cause that's not rght or fair.