I’ve been relatively mute over this whole Dr. George Rekers incident because I felt it was amply covered on other blogs, E.g. Joe. My. God.’s coverage is excellent if you want background on the whole thing, including pictures.
But I do have a few issues with some of JMG’s coverage. Calling the rentboy barely legal at 20 years old is something of a sticking point with me. Yes he’s young but he’s an adult. He can vote, serve in the military, etc. just can’t legally have a drink of alcoholic beverage yet.
Enough of the dinging of the coverage thus far. If you are in for a short read visit this site. The study was done in 1996.
Actually the entire paper is here.
I can’t find any more recent studies of this nature. I’d love to see this repeated again and see if the results jibe with those of 14 years ago.
Now that I’ve said that I find the defenses that Rekers is throwing up ridiculous. Can’t lift heavy things so you hire a male prostitute? Never heard of valet and car services?
Then it’s evangelical sessions with the young guy. Yeah, and I can guess what kind of evangelizing Rekers was doing. More likely than not one that involved a large uncut cock and an orifice or two.
The homophobes will try to throw up any defense no matter how ridiculous. From Larry Craig’s “Wide Stance”, and Ted Haggard’s crisis of faith, Rekers joins a very ludicrous bunch.