I just don’t understand some people


Ohio political news has been abuzz with salacious reports following the resignation of a state legislator named Wes Goodman, after he was reportedly found having sex with another man in his office. Goodman had been described as an up and coming star in Republican politics, which means of course that he campaigned on the ‘family values’, evangelical Christian platform which means espousing the anti-poor, anti-women anti-abortion, anti-gay, anti-contraception agenda, because that is what ‘family values’ has come to mean.


But here is what I don’t get. Goodman was a closeted, married, gay man. That is not unusual for someone who wants to advance in the Republican party in a conservative state. But you would expect such a person to be extremely discreet about the fact that his private sex life was very different from how he presented himself in public. What amazes me is that reports have emerged that he aggressively sought out other men for sex, even students and people he only casually met in person or online and even people who were heterosexual.

Goodman has a reputation of reaching out to those involved in politics via Facebook Messenger — but things tend to quickly turn south, as he has been known to flirt with men, solicit sex, and even send pictures of his genitals, according to dozens of sources. The majority of the people he targets are between the ages of 18 and 24 and have had very little interaction with him personally.

The article details all manner of sexually explicit messages, photos, and videos that Goodman sent out.

What was he thinking? How could he not realize that such reckless behavior would become public knowledge? What is surprising is not that he has been exposed but that it did not occur sooner, given how widely and indiscriminately he threw his net.

There is a theory that says that people burdened with secret guilt will sometimes deliberately behave in reckless ways that result in the truth coming out. This may be one of those cases, unless the truth is simpler, that he is as stupid as a box of rocks.

Comments

  1. Holms says

    “What was he thinking?”

    I am not certain that deep thought and introspection are well represented within conservatism. To put it very mildly.

  2. jrkrideau says

    I’d go with he is as stupid as a box of rocks.
    Somehow, I would also expect he comes from privilege and thought he could get away with anything.

    I am a bit puzzled why he would have to resign. Maybe the laws in Canada are different or the real problem was misuse of a Government office?

  3. says

    Or, similar to sexual harassers, once he got away with it the first few times, he thought he would get away with it forever.

  4. sonofrojblake says

    I don’t think he’s stupid, any more so than any horny male is stupid.

    It’s been said – he assumed he’d keep getting away with it after the first few times, because he’s the big important politician and his targets are just plebs.

    But there’s also the thrill of maybe he won’t get away with it – danger is a turn-on for some.

  5. John Morales says

    Well, I don’t understand religious people. Nor do I understand sadists/masochists.
    Hell, I don’t understand people who like silent ‘c’ so-called music (or, rap for the rest of you)

    I don’t understand a most people. Who the fuck would like, say, ballet or opera? It’s plain stupid to my senses.

    I don’t like meat or vegetables with added sugar — it’s a disgusting combinations of flavour.

    Conversely, I know for a fact most people don’t understand me, or why I don’t understand those things.

    So <bleeped out> what?

  6. shanti rasiah says

    People have a choice. If they want to respond to these perverts due to favours received then they should not feel like victims.
    These perverts have been in existence for centuries. It is only now that they are being exposed. If innocent children are abused by these maniacs that is the time we should take action and get rid of them for ever.

  7. Storms says

    This may be one of those cases, unless the truth is simpler, that he is as stupid as a box of rocks.
     
    These conditions (reckless & stupid) are not mutually exclusive. But I agree with most of the above that the formula is something like “privilege * power * horny * thrill of risk > estimated vulnerable to discovery * estimated severity of consequences.”
     
    The terms on the left seem to me to all be linked to animal evolutionary impulses, while those on the right are intellectual estimates. I think this is another case that proves we’re mostly homo with a thin veneer of sapiens.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *