Christian right leader George Rekers takes vacation with "rent boy"

Discuss

137 Responses to “Christian right leader George Rekers takes vacation with "rent boy"”

  1. UncaScrooge says:

    Wow, this far down the thread and no one has mentioned the film “Outrage”. It’s an interesting film in that it spends its best moments in meditating on the horror that is Closeted Life. The kind of self-loathing that a public figure, who is also a closeted gay, deals with is a strange motivator. These people are to be pitied, but not so much that we can’t call them on their hypocrisy. After all, they chose public life — they can’t get upset about their Facebook settings after they’ve logged on.

  2. Chris Tucker says:

    “Why do all these homosexual rentboys keep sucking my cock?”

    Professor George Alan Rekers

  3. Chris Tucker says:

    This story supplies 100% of your weekly Schadenfreude requirement.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Remembers me of Roy Marcus Cohn…

  5. Anonymous says:

    Old story, and probably off-topic comment, but I just realized that a good friend of mine from high school was one of the pair of journalists that broke this story! He’s barely 21! Holy crap!

  6. Notary Sojac says:

    Cnsrvtv hypcrsy gvn bnnr stts n BB: 2,850 tms.

    Lbrl hypcrsy gvn bnnr stts n BB: 1 tm (th trndy bg bx sk rsrt tht ws prnng bt hw “grn” t ws, fr th bnft f ts glt rddld Glfstrm-wnng clnts).

    Ths s jst my wn prcptn nd my b ff smwht n th cnt. Nxt tm ‘m sttng rnd n rny wknd ‘ll hv t dg rnd n th rchvs nd strt kpng scr fr rl.

    • robulus says:

      Yes. Yes, you do that.

    • MrWeeble says:

      There are two possible explanations for that statistic (assuming it is true)

      A) BoingBoing is a liberal publication and there is an inherent systematic bias towards liberal issues due to the interests and beliefs of its contributors

      B) Hypocrisy amongst conservatives occurs more often than amongst liberals.

      Personally I believe it is a little of A, and a lot of B.

      Now I don’t mean that as an attack on conservatism, I believe that it is a natural consequence of the difference between conservative and liberal positions – it is a lot harder to be a liberal hypocrite. Let me explain further

      The above issue is a sexual one so let’s use this. Take two people, one ultra-conservative who believes that sex should be between a man and woman, within holy matrimony and only for the purposes of procreation; the other an ultra-liberal who believes that consenting adults should be free to do whatever they want with each other as long as no-one is harmed without their consent.

      Now lets look at some acts and see if there is hypocrisy there if they do it

      Sex within marriage
      con = ok
      lib = ok

      Oral sex with wife
      con = hypocrite
      lib = ok

      Anal sex with wife
      con = hypocrite
      lib = ok

      Sex with another woman
      con = hypocrite
      lib = ok

      Sex with a man
      con = hypocrite
      lib = ok

      Sado-masocistic role-play
      con = hypocrite
      lib = ok

      Sex with an entire football team and their wives and girlfriends
      con = hypocrite
      lib = ok

      As you can see there is far more opportunity for hypocrisy by the conservative. There are things that would not be ok for the liberal (paedophilia, rape, bestiality), but these would also not be ok for the conservative, and furthermore would be reported as crimes, not hypocrisy. I can’t think of a single thing that would be considered hypocritical for the liberal to do but *not* hypocrisy for the conservative. Therefore it is, I believe, much much harder for liberals to be hypocrites which explains the bias you have noted.

      • Notary Sojac says:

        f th nvrs f hypcrsy s lmtd t sxl mttrs yr nlyss s rsnbl crrct. f w wdn t t ncld nvrnmntl sss, fnncl nd tx sss, nd crrptn t’s ntrly dffrnt mttr.

        Mst BB’rs wld gr wth m n mny sss (prvcy, bss by lw nfrcmnt, cpyrght) nd d spprt ql rghts fr ll ctzns rrspctv f sxl rnttn.

        jst fnd t stndng tht th mjrty pnn hr sms t b: “W’r gnst th gvrnmnt ntrdng nt th lvs f fr ctznry. Th gvrnmnt s crrpt, ssfd nd ntrstwrthy. xcpt whn t cms t cnmc nd bsnss ffrs. n tht sphr, thr’s n sch thng s t mch gvrnmnt. Gv s mr!”

        • stanleyk says:

          “when it comes to economic and business affairs. In that sphere, there’s no such thing as too much government. Give us more!”

          Find me one example of someone expressing such a sentiment (i.e. sincerely – it doesn’t count if they’re someone else setting up their own straw man).

          The observation that sometimes a centralized approach works better (e.g. a federal military has more resources, more efficiently distributed than would state or local militaries, single-payer health care would probably allocate health care services much more efficiently and equitably than the current or planned US system, etc)is very, very different than “no such thing as too much government.”

          As is the observation that unregulated industries tend to develop cancers (e.g. monopolies, ridiculous practices like those observable in the finance industry lately, etc.).

          In other instances, regulation, oversight, central organization and the like are liabilities. I don’t think anyone I know, including the most liberal, fit your “give me more government” characterization. In fact I don’t think anyone in the world does.

        • Chris Tucker says:

          Global Warming/Climate Change denialism, the “cash for Clunkers” program didn’t work, Obama raised my taxes, etc, from Sojac in 3… 2… 1…

      • Snig says:

        Liberal hypocrisy is driving a SUV and similar crimes, but only if the pol has gone on record saying no one should drive an SUV. Though for security, it’d be hard to have a Prius, between poor pickup and being structurally pretty porous. Good for crashes, but likely less bullet proof than other cars.

        Gingrich is the one who always comes to mind when hypocrisy is discussed. I always think that whenever Gingrich is being interviewed, the first question should be: So when you were excoriating Clinton and halting the work of governement to investigate his having extramarital oral sex, were you at the time having extramarital oral sex? If not, can you describe in detail exactly as explicit as that used in the Clinton hearings where you’re johnson was in relation to your extramarital partner? What color was her dress, if one was worn? And since this distraction happened while Clinton was adressing rising terrorism, including coordinating missile attacks on the then largely unknown Bin Laden, how responsible are you for the 9/11 attacks?

  7. bklynchris says:

    @The Chemist re-comment to Xeni:

    Wow, really? No exposure to any feminist theory? Yeah, that’s what everybody thinks, that older men with underage women are just dirty old men. Or maybe that’s what a lot of men think. Not a single woman I know thinks older men having sex with underage women is anything but pedophilia, even if they are paying for it.

    You insult me sir. Or maybe I am a fool for assuming that most bb readers are willing to subvert the dominant paradigm. I guess just not maybe you?

    • The Chemist says:

      Underage? What are you on about? I’m talking about older men with consenting ADULT women who happen to be the same age as their ADULT daughters- whatever that age difference actually happens to be (it’s a minimum of eighteen years, right?) “Dirty old men” is used here as an archetype- because I’m lazy and don’t feel like unpacking all sorts of other things to get to the point. But if it means something specific to you that it apparently does not to me, then dispense with it and replace it with a less problematic term.

  8. Symbiote says:

    Since when was 20 years old “barely legal” and grounds for calling someone a paedophile?

    The rentboy is four years older than the age of consent in the relevant country (UK).

    Would you be saying the same if this was a 20 year old woman?

    • Anonymous says:

      Dr.George Rekers is 61. If he had been caught hanging out with a 20 year old woman in suspicious circumstances, there would be just the same shock and consternation at the age difference between the two.

  9. bklynchris says:

    oh yeah, 71 comments and not a single one about the mustache? Readers, we ned to up our game.

  10. Anonymous says:

    @bklynchris – that’s no moustache. That’s a beard.

  11. Xenu says:

    I’m thinking if there’s a god, this is what he wanted all along.

  12. brian rutherford says:

    This is nothing. A rent boy hiring an ant-gay activist to carry his luggage. That would have been something!

  13. Anonymous says:

    I would like to see this sort of article more and considered as a public service informing the brainwashed who they are bowing down to. Who they are following. Who they are joining hands with. Let freedom ring!

    Now boys and girls- Sit, stand, shake the hand of the person next to you, sing like your in kindergarten (they have you than), lift up your antennas and feel the emotional need- I mean feel the power!, Get your paranoia/isolation/peer group reinforcement. Abandon your children to us at our camps. Vote for this president, vote against this bill, vote for this bill, hate this or that or them.

    This has been a public service message

  14. Brainspore says:

    With so many closeted men among the right-wing homophobes it’s almost surprising that their conventions don’t all end in gay orgies.

  15. Anonymous says:

    I agree with The Chemist. Further, it doesn’t follow that all paedophiles would necessarily consider it acceptable to abuse their own (or adopted) children… I’m sure for some of them, that’s a line they wouldn’t cross.

    So even if you accept the ridiculous proposition “anyone who is attracted to young looking men/women over the legal age limit is a pedophile”, or the even more ridiculous proposition that one ought to replace “anyone” with “a homosexual”, it doesn’t necessarily follow that said person would think it acceptable to have relations with their (possibly adopted) son/daughter. Ergo, calling this bloke a paedophile is a step too far, let’s be accurate: he’s a hypocrite and a customer of the sex trade, but we have no evidence that allows us to call him a paedophile.

    I love news stories like this though. America: why can’t we all just get along?

    • robulus says:

      I was just trying to find the post where someone was calling this guy a pedophile, and implying that all gay men were pedophiles, but I can’t seem to find it. For clarity, can you just point it out to me?

      • Antinous / Moderator says:

        I think that there’s an indication that Mister Heavy Bags may be inclined to take advantage of dependent, younger men. Not pedophilia, but creepy nonetheless.

        • Felton says:

          Antinous: Mister Heavy Bags

          Hahahahaha!

          Brainspore@81: With so many closeted men among the right-wing homophobes it’s almost surprising that their conventions don’t all end in gay orgies.

          For all I know, they do.

          Xenu@80: I’m thinking if there’s a god, this is what he wanted all along.

          You mean it’s what he’s doing in his private life that’s really God’s work, not the “family values” stuff? I’ll go along with that, since I’m sure we can find a passage in the Bible to back it up. ;-)

        • robulus says:

          I also think that might be indicated. But anon seems to be addressing a stronger, and more imaginary, version of that position.

          Mister Heavy Bags. Heh heh.

        • RynTheTyn says:

          I’d put him in the same category as Mark Foley–both of them very strongly campaigned for protecting children from predatory older men, and both of them turned out to have a think for the barely legal.

          Neither of them would go for people who are actually underaged, but since they are themselves attracted to the very young looking, they assume that everyone else must be too.

  16. Anonymous says:

    As a Christian, I am embarrassed by this. His mustache, at least. Gayest. Facial hair. Ever.

  17. Anonymous says:

    Rekers is funny until you realize the path of destruction he leaves behind him.
    Florida begged Gil & his partner to initially take two children despite them being in the process of moving to Georgia-promising it would only be short term. When the Social Workers never moved the kids and couldn’t find them another home-Gil and his partner actually sold their home in Georgia and stayed in Florida simply so that the boys wouldn’t have to be moved or separated into two foster homes. That was their level of commitment to those kids.
    The boys are doing fantastic with them and are obviously bonded at this point. So naturally those children want a permanent home. Mental Health therapists have already testified that it would be devastating to the boys to move them at this point. But Florida’s AG chose to ignore those facts and dug up Reker as a way to deny the adoption.
    The two foster boys in Florida’s adoption’s are being appealed by Florida’s Attorney General, Bill McCollum. These boys have been with their adoptive parents since 2004, one was an infant when placed. Florida has already made it clear they plan on REMOVING both boys and finding them new homes if their ban is upheld in the Court of Appeals!

    Here’s a brief story on them
    http://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights_hiv-aids/re-gill-case-profile

    And here’s the latest update on the boys:
    http://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights_hiv-aids/re-gill-case-profile

    Isn’t is amazing that in Florida a gay couple is good enough to be licensed as foster parents but not a permanent home! And Florida’s Attorney General was willing to stack the deck and spend $120,000 on a fake expert (that was discredited in an Arkansas Court 3 yrs earlier) who has since been revealed as man who hires male prostitutes.

    Of course, that same Attorney General is now running for Governor-so I guess him making children pawns in some political game is what appeals to him conservative base in Florida.
    Check him out at his Facebook page:
    http://www.facebook.com/mccollumforgovernor

  18. Anonymous says:

    “I had surgery and I can’t lift luggage. That’s why I hired him.”

    Well that … and for the hot, gay sex!

  19. TheAmazingYeah says:

    It’s getting harder to defend myself as a Christian every day…

    • Psychanaut says:

      I hope I don’t offend you, but why do you defend yourself as a Christian? Again, no offense, but as a non-christian (I was raised with a healthy spiritual feeling for all life, but no bible, etc), I basically see Christianity as synonymous with lying, hypocrisy, hatred, fear, militaristic organization/discipline, judging personalities, closeted pedophilia and usually these days, when I see an “anti-gay” Christian, I rightly assume he’s gay and simply ashamed of it-and about 99% of the time, I’m proven right. Isn’t it possible that Christianity is just plain wrong? When I think of all the wars and rapes and children slaughtered all in the name of “religion”, I can’t help but wonder…..Is Religion EVIL?

      • Xopher says:

        Your logic is lacking. You lump all Christians together (they can’t be so monolithic, there are billions of them), but in addition you talk all about Christianity then suddenly ask if “Religion” is evil, which betrays your Christianocentrism. There’s plenty of non-Christian religion out there. Visit a Hindu temple and tell me if you recognize anything.

      • Anonymous says:

        I know many fine upstanding people who have lived their entire lives in accordance with the principles espoused by the Christ. I admire them and their dedication to doing and being good, even though I think their religion is essentially an overwrought personality cult with the usual goofy mysticism religions accumulate tacked on later.

        I also know many total dirtbags that I’d rather not waste spit on – completely useless amoral pieces of shit – that are not Christian at all.

        Therefore, membership in the cult is not synonymous with the characteristics you assign to them.

        Look, there are good and bad people everywhere. When any particular worldview or social movement gains power, regardless of whether it’s by the sword or simply by number of adherents, amoral shitheads will attempt to control that power. This is why there are Stalins and Torquemadas and Reagans and always will be regardless of whether religions exist or not.

    • Felton says:

      I agree with Cory. I’m not religious either, but being Christian doesn’t necessarily mean you’re anything like this schmuck. Of course, as I understand it, guilt is an integral part of many religions, so carry on. ;-)

    • Webbie says:

      I know of a website where you can hire somebody who…

      • TheAmazingYeah says:

        In the words of Rosie O’Donnell, in Exit to Eden, “No matter what your sexual preference, true love is always the ultimate fantasy.”

        And also in response to the question,
        “How can I fulfill your fantasy?”

        “Go paint my house.”

        • cory says:

          Yeah. I think sometimes I get more respect than I deserve around here because I share his name. (Last initial too, as it happens.) I’m not changing mine though!

          Still appreciate the mad respex. My Christian wife and I have lots of interesting discussions about religion.

    • Anonymous says:

      I FEEL THE SAME! :( if you cant behave like a christian, dont say you’re a christian! you’re only ruining it for the rest of us :(

    • Anonymous says:

      I feel sorry for you.

      I have lost ALL respect for Christians and Right Wingers because behind every corner is a story like this.

      It’s gotten SO bad that an open minded person such as myself, has shut the door hard on his mind. I take NOTHING a republican or Christian says seriously anymore. I’m sorry, you have had your chance many times and continually fail. Your groups are dead to me. Completely dead.

      I was raised Catholic and attended a decade of Catholic school. I’ve attended more Masses (twice a week for years) than most Christians I know.

      Do I practice today? Hell no. I’m evolved. I know science, I know writing, I know a lot of things, and one of them is it’s very CLOSE MINDED to only believe in Christianity and try to force feed others your twisted, tiny, ignorant point of view.

      Sorry Church, I’m out. Sorry Gaybashers, you are all gay in my book now. Sorry gays. Sorry you have some of these complete hypocrites in your club.

      • Roach says:

        “It’s gotten SO bad that an open minded person such as myself, has shut the door hard on his mind. I take NOTHING a republican or Christian says seriously anymore. I’m sorry, you have had your chance many times and continually fail. Your groups are dead to me. Completely dead.

        I was raised Catholic and attended a decade of Catholic school. I’ve attended more Masses (twice a week for years) than most Christians I know.”

        The odd thing about this story is that you suggest that every Christian group is hypocritical, and yet that you were not when you were Catholic/Christian – that you did not continually fail. Are you the only exception? Did the Church lose its only stalwart when you left?

      • TheAmazingYeah says:

        Discourse! The whole reason I love BoingBoing! I wish I could find this diversity of worldview anywhere else!

  20. Xopher says:

    First, I never said he was a pedophile. For one thing, guys who are attracted to adolescents are ephebophiles, not pedophiles.

    Second, when someone hires a rentboy who a) is the same age as his adopted (at 16!) son and b) looks even younger, it’s reasonable to be suspicious of his motives in adopting the son, and of his behavior toward said son.

    I stand by that. No, I don’t think queer == pedophile. But look at the pictures of Gio. I haven’t seen pictures of Rekers’ son, and if he looks nothing at all like Gio and never has, that would somewhat put the suspicion to rest.

    But the key point is that he’s a lying hypocrite who’s been hiding behind conservative anti-gay religion. We’ve learned from the crisis in the Roman Catholic Church that the sexually abusive like to hide behind just such respectable fronts.

    Right-wing homophobe == secretly sexually abusive is an identification I’m much more comfortable making!

  21. Anonymous says:

    The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

  22. cory says:

    Look, I’m an atheist and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with being a Christian (other than that, as a purely factual matter, I believe that being a Christian is wrong :).

    Just don’t be a friggin self-hating hypocrite like this piece of crap.

  23. The Chemist says:

    Okay… does this surprise anyone? I’m almost with Dan Savage that every anti-homosexual advocate should be asked point-blank: “Are you now or have you ever been gay?”

    It should be asked with a straight-face and the answer is to be filed away indefinitely. If they’re not complete douchebag hypocrite scum-of-the-earth closet-cases, great it’s not an issue. If they are then they can’t be anywhere near politics evereverever for the rest of their lives. Like I said, I’m almost with him on that.

    I will say this though: Hypocrisy isn’t everything. I personally never lose sight of the fact that the main problem with these bigots is that they’re wrong, which is enough.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      I’m almost with Dan Savage that every anti-homosexual advocate should be asked point-blank: “Are you now or have you ever been gay?”

      I’ve noticed that closeted queers will rarely say “I’m straight” or “I’m not gay.” It’s usually something tangential like “I don’t support that lifestyle” or “I love my wife.”

    • Felton says:

      Hypocrisy isn’t everything. I personally never lose sight of the fact that the main problem with these bigots is that they’re wrong, which is enough.

      Well said. The main problem is that he’s an influential bigot. At least the hypocrisy could end up damaging his credibility among the “family values” crowd. Or not.

  24. Stefan Jones says:

    The most aggravating thing about this is that no matter how many times figures from the self-righteous, sanctimonious, Family Values-rhetoric-spouting right wing in this country get caught with their pants down and peckers inserted various orifices (male, female, human and otherwise) . . .

    . . . they get forgiven. Or their base just shrugs it off and pretends it didn’t happen.

    And they resume smugging and pontificating, and the base resumes reveling in their smugging and pontificating.

  25. Antinous / Moderator says:

    Wow, rentboy has really upgraded their site since the last time that I checked it out. International hustler websites are one of the internet’s best resources for mullet-viewing. Yeah, I’m looking at you, Slovakia.

  26. robulus says:

    Who Am I? Lord.

  27. ultranaut says:

    Homophobia is gay

  28. SamSam says:

    Really, this pedophilia canard is getting silly. The guy in the pictures linked above does not look 16, he looks 20. This old bigoted hypocritical tard certainly liked younger men juggling his bags for him, but there’s no need to pull out the p-word.

    • Xopher says:

      I agree. Some people would call a 50-year-old who likes 25-year-olds a pedophile, because it offends their stupid, narrowminded ideas about appropriate age differences, and the p-word is a convenient weapon.

  29. Anonymous says:

    The singularity is near.

    At some point in the near future, a right-wing anti-gay activist is going to go to a site like rentboy.com and rent another right-wing anti-gay activist.

    Awkward.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      A friend of mine, who used to hustle, quit when he got to a john’s hotel room and the guy looked just like his own father. When he found out that the john was a fundamentalist minister, just like his own father, his universe imploded a little, and he made an immediate career change.

  30. TheAmazingYeah says:

    @cory – mad respect, and I’m a Christian heart trapped in an atheist’s mind and body. I’ve been working on some fiction for quite a while that revolves around people who use religion and it’s historical power and context to deny or defend who they really are, i.e. queer, racist, hateful, abusive. It’s my firm belief that even if I read the New Testament as simply a rough moral guide sans the spreading of gospel, that loving others and working towards the best possible outcome for all mankind is a fairly noble pursuit. And hell, that sounds like evolution. XOXOXO

  31. Mitch says:

    Oh, dear. As I recall Focus On The Family was very pro-spanking.

  32. dculberson says:

    Well, duh! With “boys” that advertise themselves as things such as “Young Well Hung Muscular Top Ready For Your Pleasure,” it’s clear that carrying luggage will be their primary responsibility.

  33. TheAmazingYeah says:

    and Mr. Doctorow, I’m a huge fan and perhaps only brain-chemically a Christian. Just kind of what “feels” right.

    • Anonymous says:

      I dinna think the “Cory” in this thread is Mr. Doctorow, as he uses his full name as his handle.

      And hey, “Doctorow” autocompletes on the iPhone.

  34. Tdawwg says:

    It’s like a Zappa tune:

    Rent boy carry my baggage,

    carry those bags of pain and guilt:

    and then I’ll bury my manhood

    in your sweet tight ass up to the hilt.

    Or something.

  35. Angela says:

    After I searched on Google for “rent boy” and clicked on a link a few down from the top:

    “Meet Geo, The Male Prostitute Hired By NARTH Member & Family Research Council Co-Founder Dr. George Rekers”

    http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2010/05/meet-geo-male-prostitute-hired-by-narth.html

    He’s a very attractive young man. :)

    • RynTheTyn says:

      So this guy’s type is barely legal twinks who could pass for 15? No wonder he likes to claim that gay people are predators, he’s projecting his own proclivities and attraction to questionably legal guys on to everybody else.

      It’s more than a little disturbing that this guy adopted a 16 year old boy four years ago. Rent boy is the exact same age as his adopted son.

      • robulus says:

        he’s projecting

        You think?

      • robulus says:

        “It’s more than a little disturbing that this guy adopted a 16 year old boy four years ago. Rent boy is the exact same age as his adopted son.”

        Wait. What? Holy crap.

        • Xeni Jardin says:

          Yup, from that same Miami New Times article, last graf:


          Well, it’s a good thing Rekers isn’t gay himself. Lucien tells us that Rekers frequently takes in foster children and that four years ago he adopted a 16-year-old boy. We found the boy, who is now Lucien’s age, on Facebook. He declined to be interviewed.

          • robulus says:

            Holy. Fucking. Crap.

            That just sucks the fun out this story and leaves me feeling empty and sad.

          • The Chemist says:

            I have a real problem with the idea that seems to be rearing it’s ugly head in this thread all of a sudden. Just because he likes guys young enough to be his (now adult) son, it doesn’t automatically make him a pedophile. The whole “gay parent=pedophile” idea is not a conclusion I’m quite so comfortable to jump to. Dirty old straight men are not subjected to the same accusations when they date adult women the age of their daughters and while I think George Rekers is scum, I don’t think it’s constructive to suddenly jump on the “homosexuals are pedophiles” wagon because it’s someone we don’t like.

          • Antinous / Moderator says:

            Heterosexual couples also sometimes adopt teenage girls with nefarious intent, although they usually make money off of them as well as using them themselves. Adoption in general and teen adoption in particular are fraught with problems.

          • RynTheTyn says:

            It’s not that the guy is young enough to be his son so much as it is the fact that if you look at the pictures linked earlier, the rent boy looks really really young, young enough that he could pass for an underaged teenager.

            It would be like a creepy old guy dating a girl that is not only young enough to be his daughter, she looks like she could pass for 15.

            Sure, they’re legal, but someone who has a taste for barely legal people who could pass for teens is creepy no matter the genders involved.

          • Unfair Robot says:

            That’s why I’ve always wondered which would be creepier (legalities aside): dating a 15 y.o. girl who looks 21, or dating a 21 y.o. girl who looks 15?

          • robulus says:

            You mean his now adult son he apparently adopted when he was 16.

            I get your point, but I don’t think anyone is implying “homosexuals are pedophiles”. There are very significant differentiators here that are deeply troubling and have nothing to do with sexual orientation.

            He hid his behaviour and was apparently ashamed of it. If I found out an older man had been secretly hiring very young female escorts, and had also recently adopted young girls of a similar age, I would think it a matter of concern. If the man in question had been a fervid campaigner against child abuse I would find the apparent contradiction extremely worrying, and the same blaring alarm bells would be ringing.

          • The Chemist says:

            Still… questionable, very questionable. Accusing someone of being a pedophile is a much more serious act that requires a bit more evidence than accusing someone of being gay.

            I mean, it’s possible he’s a pedophile. I say this in the most neutral way possible, because the connotations of the word make even acknowledging the possibility someone could be a pedophile sound accusatory. He could just be creepy, which plenty of people are, gay and straight. Still, it’s a serious crime if it’s the former and a matter of evidence and trial before we can actually say that’s true. I for one hope that he’s not, if only for the sake of his son.

          • robulus says:

            Whatever. You should probably get stuck into Xopher, he seems to be going pretty hard on this point.

            I’ll come back later and see how it all works out.

          • wrybread says:

            Chemist-

            For my part, I absolutely agree with your premise that gay != pedophile, but adopting a 16 year-old is a bit unusual to begin with and, while certainly not in the least bit suspicious on its own, is a whole other thing when you’re attracted to 16 year-old boys. That might not be conclusive proof that he’s a pedophile *yet*, but you have to admit its at least suspicious. Not conclusive, but suspicious.

          • loonquawl says:

            Gay!=Pedophile
            Hetero!=Pedophile
            In fact, only Pedophile==Pedophile
            By the way:
            Being attracted to 16 year olds is not typically a trait of pedophiles – they,by definition, go for the pre-pubescent look (which might be present in 40year olds, any age in fact, but typically is found in <15 year olds).
            Fun fact: Rekers was ‘expert witness’ on a gay adoption case in Florida, 2008. More of an expert than he let on, i presume :)

    • llazy8 says:

      Nice. Loved the comments: “whatever lifts your luggage . . ”

  36. Tensegrity says:

    All I can think of when I hear “rentboy” is Flight of the Conchords’s “You Don’t Have to Be a Prostitute”.

    You can say no to being a night looker, boy hooker, rent boy, bro-ho

  37. delt664 says:

    Haggard’s Law : The more vehemently you protest/lobby/rail against gays, the more butthumping you are doing in secret.

  38. tim says:

    OK, let’s get it over with;

    “He isn’t a real Christian”
    “I’ll pray for him”
    “He needs counselling and forgiveness, not ridicule”
    “You wouldn’t be disparaging him if he was Muslim!”

  39. Anonymous says:

    You got it all wrong! He was doing field research,

    • Xopher says:

      For his Teen Sex Today site, you mean? Nah, as we’re reminded the rentboy was 20. That’s not a teen any more.

      What? You say teenagers sometimes have sex with people over 20? Shocking, I tell you, shocking. Everyone should have sex only with people born on the same day they were, clearly. Then we wouldn’t have these problems.

  40. Philip Chandler says:

    Professor George Rekers assures the world that he had no idea that his “travelling companion” was a gay male prostitute.

    Yeah — right!

    Let’s examine the facts. Rekers hired a gay male prostitute – a person who at least earns an honest living, which is one hell of a lot more than can be said of people such as Rekers, who specialize in stirring up hatred of gay Americans through organizations such as the thoroughly discredited “National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality” (NARTH) and the viciously homophobic “Family Research Council” (FRC) (Rekers sits on the board of NARTH and is a co-founder of the FRC) – who advertised on a web site named http://www.rentboy.com, to accompany him on a 10-day vacation in Europe!

    Rekers initially stated that he hired the rent boy because he had a back complaint and needed somebody to handle his luggage for him.

    Yes, I can see that – were I a heterosexual man dedicated to stirring up hatred of gay persons, harming the gay community and doing everything in my power to prevent the enactment of gay marriage and civil unions, and were I in need of somebody to carry my luggage for me due to medical reasons, the very first place I would look to for a porter would be a web site named http://www.rentboy.com, advertising the services of gay male prostitutes (excuse me, “escorts”!) — advertising the size of their endowments!
    Upon returning to Miami from his 10-day romp with the rent boy, Rekers was photographed carrying his own luggage while the rent boy stood in the background, carrying nothing. Rekers then changed his story – he ostensibly had hired the rent boy so as to be able to preach to this (barely legal) young man about the error of his ways, and to “save” his soul from eternal damnation! (Come to Jesus, son!)

    This is horribly reminiscent of the fate of the erstwhile poster boy for the “ex-gay” movement, John Paulk, who worked for the FRC opposing homosexuality until he was photographed desperately trying to leave a gay pickup bar (Pete’s) on DuPont Circle by a gay rights activist. Paulk had been there for more than an hour, chatting up another gay patron and asking for sex, before the activist arrived with his camera. When questioned by his FRC handlers about his dalliance at this watering hole, Paulk first claimed that he had needed to use the men’s room. When it was pointed out to him that there were any number of rest rooms he could have used at other establishments much more conveniently located, Paulk changed his story and claimed that he was merely “curious” about the “lifestyle” that he had supposedly left.

    This was too much for even an organization as bigoted and disreputable as the FRC to stomach, and Paulk was thrown out in disgrace, neck and crop, losing his job with the FRC and fading into ignominious obscurity.

    When all is said and done, what emerges from this sorry imbroglio is a portrait of a self-hating closet case who is prepared to go to any lengths, regardless of the extent to which he insults the intelligence of his handlers at the NARTH and the FRC, to lie, obfuscate, and disguise the fact that he hired this young man (whose endowment was prominently advertised on the web site in question) for the purpose of having sex – period.

    The only speculation still worth addressing is whether this man, who is utterly bereft of any redeeming social value, was the “top” or the “bottom” in this pathetic relationship. And the only sympathy worth bestowing on anybody should be reserved for the young rent boy who had to shut up and pleasure this disgusting piece of slime for 10 whole days and nights.

    PHILIP CHANDLER

  41. Anonymous says:

    I don’t know why this guy is getting so much flack over this. I hire hookers to clean my apartment at least twice a week.

  42. Anonymous says:

    Pick up the book _Gender Shock_ by Phyllis Burke from your local university library to read about some of the fucked up ways this asshole and his ilk have treated so-called “gender identity disorder” in children (which is how they get The Gay out of ‘em since homosexuality hasn’t been on the books as a disorder in decades). I guarantee you will be filled with righteous indignation.

  43. Anonymous says:

    You would think that somewhere along the way, a professor of neuropsychiatry would have heard of Jung and the shadow self.

  44. Anonymous says:

    I know the Republicans don’t have a monopoly on filthy stinking hypocrites (I’m looking at you, John Edwards), but their hypocrisy seems to be extra spectacular when it, ahem, comes out.

  45. PopeRatzo says:

    Maybe Dr. Reker was undercover in the war against the Homosexual Agenda.

    You didn’t think of that, did you?

    Maybe he was trying to help this troubled young boy toy get into some Christian Sexual Orientation Re-assignment Therapy to help him pray away teh gay.

    It’s possible.

    • RynTheTyn says:

      I’m too lazy to go find the links now, but that is pretty much the excuse that he’s giving for the whole thing.

  46. Anonymous says:

    I’m not just the President of The “Guilt club for gay men”, I’m a customer!

  47. hal14450 says:

    I can’t stop laughing at the hypocrisy of people like this. @Tdawwg FZ did come to mind but I was thinking of sy-borg: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu6dUX5MNcY

    Sadly he’ll probably be ‘cured’ of being gay by the ‘fabulous’ Ted Haggard. Then he can go back to be an upstanding Christian again right?

    I gave all my money to some groovy religious guy two songs ago so I can’t afford being cured of my athiesm.

  48. Glindie says:

    Bah, if you’re gonna rent a guy to “carry your bags”, at least rent a cute one!

    Ahem.

    >.> *backpedals*

    This is deplorable! What a horrible hypocrite!

    Seriously though, I can’t help but feel a little bit sorry for people like this. There’s nothing healthy about this man’s delusions.

    Having said that, I have no sympathy for the mess he’s gotten himself in. He dug his own grave, he can figure out how to get himself out. ;) ‘Course, his cronies will throw him far more rope than he needs…

  49. Ben Morris says:

    To ensure maximum ridicule, I think we all need to start using the new idiom “to lift one’s luggage” as a euphemism of some sort.

  50. Xopher says:

    I wonder what this disgusting lying fucktard has done to the poor boy he “adopted” (besides subjecting him to his sick, twisted beliefs, I mean).

    George, in America we have this thing called “adoption.” It’s important to distinguish between that and “buying a sex slave,” which is not allowed, even for rich white fuckheads like you.

    • hungryjoe says:

      What does his race have to do with anything?

      • Xopher says:

        What does his race have to do with anything?

        In combination with being upper class, it ordinarily would insulate him from prosecution for any serious crime, unless the crime is so egregious and public that the prosecutors can’t afford to make deals behind the scenes.

  51. Anonymous says:

    People wake up..Christian Right is tantamount to a railroad “crossing” signal going “ding,ding,ding” Its a warning that the political hypocrisy express with all the Family Values pols is coming down the track.The box cars on the train are owned by FRC,James Dobson,Pat Robertson, and in Florida Bill McCollum.Rekers was a known quantity and had his own tank car “loaded with milk”

  52. Hagrid says:

    It’s always the ones who scream “homo” the loudest…

  53. Luki says:

    Every christian who is too much about gay people is gay themself. Church is actually a place for pedofile gays to hide their pedofile gayness. If church was a good place they would stop marching against gays and treat disieases in Africa instead.

    • Glindie says:

      Wow. Just wow. There are so many things that need to be said in response to what you’ve said here, and I’m sure many of them will be said, so I’ll just say this:

      Have you never heard of missionaries?

      That’s a pretty big tar-covered brush you’re wielding there, ranting against “the church”. I think you might want to be a bit more specific with your anger.

      Also, you should try Firefox–it has an automatic spell-checking feature which I find very handy. I have trouble with spelling too, sometimes–pedophile, ridiculous, hebetudinous…some words are just hard to spell!

      :D

  54. rob ray says:

    Well yes. I too would hire a rentboy to carry my luggage. The site does an excellent job showing how physically fit those young lads are. Perfect candidates!

  55. AirPillo says:

    Talk about taking your denial too far…

    You really don’t need to make an entire culture suffer to make the world think you’re straight… this fellow could have just married a nice woman and kept to himself if he wanted to pretend he was something he isn’t.

  56. Anonymous says:

    He’s in as much denial about being GAY as he is about being BALD!!! That wig’s fooling nobody :-)

  57. tkaraszewski says:

    I’m glad that Boing Boing is such a warrior for individual privacy rights that you go ahead and post this guy’s private vacation activities without his consent. It’s ok to stick your nose in other people’s business as long as they’re not people you like.

    • benher says:

      Oh yes, I’m sure that when pedo-christ signed up boingbook and failed to check a few boxes he had no idea it would bite him in the ass like this…

      Sorry dude, it’s different for reasons too pedantic to explain.

    • The Chemist says:

      What a tiresome comment. Public figures are held to a different standard, but that doesn’t matter here, especially because in this case they’re doing things in public. What he did with the rent-boy in private is up to either of them to disclose, the fact that he was seen associating with the rent-boy in public shouldn’t suddenly become a state-secret, should it?

      Last I checked, BoingBoing not only didn’t break the story, but they regularly draw attention to stories where people got caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

  58. Avram / Moderator says:

    Rekers even publishes a website called Teen Sex Today!

  59. Random Royalty says:

    Obviously anyone who becomes “righteous” or otherwise thinking they have access to some kind of supernatural moral authority have serious anxiety issues. It still does not give them the right to judge others for their sexual orientation.

    Ironically, this was exactly the type of behavior the historical Jesus spoke against. Ultimately Christianity promises a path of discernment that does not proscribe how others should live.

    This makes Rekers as much a voice for Christianity as Bin Laden the voice of Islam.

    People who find refuge, solace and political morality in religious teachings completely miss the spiritual message.

  60. Alan says:

    Too bad Eliot Spitzer didn’t think of that excuse.

    “I hired her to carry my luggage. Really.”

  61. Anonymous says:

    I love it when these fools slip up! “I had surgery and I can’t lift luggage. That’s why I hired him.” What kind of idiot would say something that stupid and expect people to believe it?

  62. Chuck says:

    Deport him to whichever nation has the best record on gay rights, and damn him with the freedom he fears.

    • jackie31337 says:

      Deport him to whichever nation has the best record on gay rights, and damn him with the freedom he fears.

      That’s a great idea. I would suggest Finland, but I don’t particularly want him to come here.

  63. orwellian says:

    So it didn’t occur to him as he was googling long-term international boy escorts that he might have some soul-searching to do? Maybe anti-gay ministry was contraindicated with his rampant boyhumpin’? Or do you think he just went into the ministry for the access to troubled boys and a company van to ‘provide ministry’ in? He worked at Harvard and was a professor at another university. There weren’t enough gay/questioning freshmen for him? He couldn’t have become an Episcopalian priest/bishop? How many bad choices did he make to get to this place? At this point you seriously have to consider serious mental illness.

  64. Airsick says:

    The article is slanted as a slam piece and is full of innuendo. This isn’t news, its gossip!
    Why is every anti-gay Christian activist “out” there actually a closet homosexual? Is it Christians that are messed up, or is it homosexuals that are messed up? Are Christians causing problems for homosexuals, or are homosexuals causing problems for homosexuals? Or are homosexuals causing problems for Christians like James Dobson? Or are they joining forces with him? My head hurts.
    I think ultranaut is right: Homophobia is gay.

  65. this_is_not_dan says:

    I just punched Dr. George Alan Rekers into google scholar. Interesting that many of the articles/books are old and not very well cited, while the article states that they are “ubiquitously cited by lobby groups that work to deny equality to LGBT Americans.” I guess lobby group publications don’t go into the google scholar counts. I recommend reading the review by Edward Hindson (http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1131&context=sor_fac_pubs). The last sentence says it all “This book is professional in the highest sense and a must for every parent, pastor, teacher and youth worker.” Wow! Good stuff George, and great review Edward?!

  66. bakelblog says:

    In honor of Dr. George Rekers, the homophobe who hired a male escort to (ahem) “lift his luggage” during a recent vacation, I would like to give that expression greater use. You can help. Instead of saying “Whatever makes you happy” or “Whatever floats your boat,” from now on let’s say “Whatever lifts your luggage.”

    Do it for George! And pass it on!

  67. IWood says:

    Do thou likewise in thy house as in the temple, particularly when it comes to buggery.

    -Gospel of Enoch the Cretin 2:1

  68. Felton says:

    Hah! Good one, IWood.

Leave a Reply