General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Advocate.com: Graham consistently denied being gay [View all]SpankMe
(3,834 posts)I was trying to make parallels to, say, straight clergy who consciously chose to remain celebate and to not even date or seek physical companionship or even the company of a woman. This is a choice that they make for reasons of morality (and other factors) even though it goes against their nature as a heterosexual human capable of sexual impulses.
There are also voluntarily celebate straight people who - through religious or some other motivation or emotional condition - find any type of physical or sexual attraction repulsive and distasteful to the point where they live their whole lives completely sexless. In some cases, they won't even hang out alone with people of the opposite sex.
I'm saying that one possibility if Graham was gay is he may have been such an individual who was so guilty or self-hating or disdainful of homosexualty that he consciously chose to not to engender any aspect of it. No dating men, no sex with men, no hanging out socially with other gay males - no social or cultural traits commonly associated with gay men (which is what I meant by 'trappings'. Poor word, I admit.)
The controversial aspect of my hypothesis is that if he consciously suppressed all aspects of homosexuality in his personal life and lived no part of it, then his commentary (or votes) against LGBT interests wouldn't neccessarily be hypociritcal since he was not living, or enjoying, the things he was voting against (like when an anti-abortion lawmaker votes against abortion and then takes his teenage daughter two states over for an abortion).