John Aravosis seems to be doing a great job of attracting attention with his efforts to bully Aaron Schock, and yes, I chose all of those words carefully. His latest justification is, wait for it… gaydar! Yes, for him gaydar is a real thing, and it is the reason why what he has to offer about Aaron Schock is acceptable proof the guy is gay. When in reality, what Aravosis is doing is the equivalent to how teenage girls say “that’s SO gay” in a dismissive and critical manner. Here’s Aravosis:

Schock’s clothing is flaming.



Let’s call this what it is.

Itay Hod has reason to suspect that Aaron Schock is a gay conservative who votes everytime in ways harmful to the LGBTQ community. Hod is frustrated wit the media.  Hod offers no real proof, simply hearsay. Hod is in my opinion not out of line.

Aravosis is busy making fun of Schock. His clothes, who he follows and his instagram photos. Aravosis also lacks any real proof, but he is busy pushing hard (bullying). These two guy’s efforts amount to an effort to force Schock out of the closet. Which I doubt is going to work. Can you really force a conservative homophobe to do anything? Even Larry Craig is still denying what he was doing in that restroom stall!

As for gaydar…

Try as he might, Aravosis can’t really get by claiming that gaydar is real. It isn’t. Gender expression is all over the place today, and so many of the visual queues that at one time may have been a part of gaydar just don’t always apply anymore. And gaydar was never really all about physical queues like clothing or having a gym body (yes truly male sexist I know, but this is John Aravosis we are talking about.) Gaydar perpetuates stereotypes, and Aravosis’ willingness to cling to it as his justification is more evidence that he is simply being a bully.

Gaydar is also the way two people share a glance that may last a microsecond to long; it is about where someone is, many qualities to their body language. in addition to some physical queues. Gaydar is completely- learned behavior and the ability to pick up on that.

What is really needed.

How about some real journalism? And I said this a few days ago:

If Schock is gay, how about this roommate? What’s his story? If Schock is gay, the roommate isn’t likely to be the only guy he has been naked with. And what of those bar excursions? How is it that gay bars full of guys  do not turn into multiple reports of seeing this guy out being gay? Where a real story is, revolves around the “turn a blind eye” mentality and to report as much about him as possible to see if it explains what this guy does. The Washington gay scene as well as the political arena in general has been complicit before in protecting closet cases, and that can not be tolerated any longer.

Don’t get me wrong.

Aaron Schock is no friend to the LGBTQ community as well as to many others under the progressive umbrella. Getting him out of Washington will benefit many, but really- is this the way to do it and still talk about what is ethical?

Why isn’t anyone talking about Washington Culture?

Why isn’t anyone talking about the DC gay bar and politics culture that allows someone like Aaron Schock to be so out while not being out at all? I guess it is easier t attack one person rather than go after the system which allows this type of behavior to happen.

Maybe Aravosis will be successful and his aggressive pushing will be the right stuff to force Aaron Schock out of the closet, but I’m predicting it won’t succeed. Aravosis simply hands the Far Right crazies more fodder with which to paint gays as monsters trying to wreck havoc with the way things ought to be. Those folks are good enough with that argument without us handing them anything.

Hey John, why not simply own what you are doing? Instead of lashing out at everyone else, just admit that you are being aggressive in your efforts to force Schock to come out. Or better, do the leg work needed to find some real evidence of this guy’s sexual orientation.


    • This is such an interesting question. I was raised in a household where these persons were seen as flamboyant, creative and eccentric but their sexual orientation was never considered or discussed. I can’t say that as a child I did know they were gay. I knew they were different, but in my household this difference wasn’t a bad thing. For me these guys and their expression has nothing to do with gaydar.