Not these "exposures" in themselves, no. But if it helps normalize gay sex,
> it undermines them.
>
You think that public scandals tend to normalize the "scandalous" behavior? I typically assume the opposite (and can think of few scandals that would disprove my assumption).
> Like I said, I'm not interested in the hypocrisy angle. I'm interested in
> what it says about the psychology of homophobia.
It's interesting how you, and most of the left, categorize all heterosexist sentiment as a "phobia," and hence a psychological issue. I'll be the first to admit that I often err in the opposite direction - looking for the material basis behind everything - but the notion of "homophobia" has always struck me as uniquely ridiculous. It's as if some early gay activist read Foucault on medicalization, thought that it was a capital good idea and should be put to use immediately, and didn't bother to slow down and avoid taking it to obviously absurd lengths. Did anyone ever present some historic argument in favor of "homophobia" as a mental disorder, or was it rather an example of carefully-crafted modifications to the language shaping public assumptions?
-- "Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen lytlað."