07/13/2009
Republican Senator's Grope Makes David Brooks Go into Gay Panic
NYT columnist David Brooks tells MSNBC a story about a Republican senator who groped his thigh at a dinner party.
Said Brooks: "You know, all three of us spend a lot of time covering politicians and I don't know about you guys, but in my view, they're all emotional freaks of one sort or another. They're guaranteed to invade your personal space, touch you. I sat next to a Republican senator once at dinner and he had his hand on my inner thigh the whole time. I was like, ehh, get me out of here."
Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...
(via gawker)
Posted 4:45 PM EST by Andy Towle in News, Republican Party | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
"REPUBLICAN SENATOR'S GROPE MAKES DAVID BROOKS GO INTO GAY PANIC" = a rather sensational headline, no?
I don't sense any "gay panic" in Brooks' statement. Do you suppose, if the senator groping his inner thigh had been female, that he would have had a different response other than "ooh, get me out of here"? It would have been a creepy sensation, regardless of gender, and would just as equally warrant his reaction.
Posted by: seeldee | Jul 13, 2009 4:52:31 PM
Bitch, please. You flatter yourself.
Posted by: Sean | Jul 13, 2009 4:55:31 PM
"....and he had his hand on my inner thigh the whole time"
But did Brooks keep a hardy the whole time? Well, we know it wasn't Larry Craig that groped him since there was no toilet in sight.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Jul 13, 2009 4:56:59 PM
Uh, David, that wasn't a dinner party it was a tea party.
Posted by: Christopher | Jul 13, 2009 4:59:11 PM
I agree with Seeldee I don't see the gay panic. Hell if that would have happened to me I would have had an "ehh, get me out of here" reaction. Would you run a headline that says "Makes a gay going into a gay panic?"
Posted by: kujhawker | Jul 13, 2009 4:59:23 PM
So, we have not only a closeted Senator, but one with bad taste?
Posted by: Hank | Jul 13, 2009 5:03:39 PM
that was a fucking homophobic comment!
asshole!
Posted by: steve | Jul 13, 2009 5:12:51 PM
I think the guy wishes he was groped...honestly you would have to pay me to grope David Brooks
Posted by: shan | Jul 13, 2009 5:20:53 PM
Seriously, like some of the others, I don't think this is a homophobic comment at all. Regardless of it were a male or female, if I went to a dinner party and someone put their hand on my inner thigh, I'd want to escape the situation, too.
This isn't news. To even consider it offensive does damage to the real problems - the DOMA brief, DADT, ENDA, and the other host of acronyms that are standing between us and equality.
Posted by: John | Jul 13, 2009 5:21:10 PM
That's not gay panic -- that's totally reasonable. No one gets to touch my inner thigh unless invited.
Posted by: Tom | Jul 13, 2009 5:23:10 PM
http://fablog.ehrensteinland.com/2009/07/11/thighs-and-whispers/
Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Jul 13, 2009 5:26:36 PM
i think i'd go into a panic if a Republican Senator grabbed my leg...
you would have no way of knowing where that hand has been before!
Posted by: mike/ | Jul 13, 2009 5:27:57 PM
Can you all just lighten up? Brooks has an understated sense of humor, and he's just trying to tell a funny story.
And no, I don't think his reaction was a gay panic. Andy was trying to punch up the headline with a bit of humor, too.
Posted by: DC Guy | Jul 13, 2009 5:30:08 PM
It's a surprisingly inappropriate headline. The creepy hand-on-thigh story was a great illustration of his broader point about emotionally needy politicians. It had nothing to do with gender/sexuality.
Posted by: David | Jul 13, 2009 5:30:41 PM
Like some others have said, that isn't homophobic or unreasonable in any way whatsoever. How many times have you been to a club and someone gropes you a bit too aggressively (I might add that a club is a more appropriate place to expect a groping) and you just want to get out of there? Same thing. I'm gay, he is straight, we both have the same reaction.
Posted by: Jon B | Jul 13, 2009 5:32:44 PM
The Senator in question:Sen Craig of Washington.Who would know?.
Posted by: Oscar in Miami Beach | Jul 13, 2009 5:37:29 PM
If a man or woman made an unwelcome advance by putting their hand on my thigh, I can assure you I would not have allowed it to go on all through dinner. Has David Brooks every heard of the word "no"?
Posted by: Voet | Jul 13, 2009 5:38:42 PM
John Kyle didn't have his hand on his thigh the "whole time", just 3/4ths' of the dinner. He needed the other for his jello shots and cheesecake.
Posted by: David | Jul 13, 2009 5:43:37 PM
I agree that it's hard to imagine the senator's hand being there for an entire meal. So he never had to cut any of his food, and managed to use one hand for everything? Other people at the table would likely notice.
I definitely agree with the point that politicians are emotional freaks. Like Hollywood celebrities, they either have huge egos or are utterly lacking in confidence. Either way, they need validation from large numbers of people. The main difference is that actors are better looking.
Posted by: Paul R | Jul 13, 2009 5:53:32 PM
If he was good looking he could grope me all he wanted to.
I think it would be VERY erotic to have a man's hand on my inner thigh while at a dinner party of stuffed shirts.
Personally I would move his hand to my crotch and see what developed after the dinner party.
*** snap *** Heyyyy!!!!
Posted by: Sacgary | Jul 13, 2009 6:03:59 PM
I found the hand on inner thigh thing during a snoozy dinner sexy till I got to the "Republican senator" part. Not that the Dem's are a bunch of hotties! But, he really didn't mean it that way. His point was that politicians--of the male variety at least--are needy dogs who'll lick any face or hump any leg in sight cause they crave affection. Presumably the headline was tongue in cheek; his remarks didn't smack of gay panic at all.
Posted by: Ernie | Jul 13, 2009 7:10:00 PM
I agree. Not homophobic. It'd be weird to have ANYONE'S hand on your inner thigh at a professional dinner ... even a hot guy's hand would make me feel uncomfortable if it's so far out of the appropriate context. David Brooks is one of the decent Republicans out there (he supports marriage equality), and he'd probably say the same thing if a woman had his hand there.
Posted by: CJS | Jul 13, 2009 7:14:18 PM
Agreed -- it was not a homophobic comment, but it is a stupid headline.
Posted by: Michael | Jul 13, 2009 7:24:36 PM
Am I the only one who thinks Brooks is clearly being facetious?
Posted by: Rodolfo | Jul 13, 2009 7:34:14 PM
Do straight women who get groped go into a "straight panic"? What's the deal with all these women complaining! Stop "straight panicking" and enjoy the sensual massage of your inner thighs by skeezy old men, ladies.
Posted by: minty | Jul 13, 2009 8:50:05 PM