![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
The article discusses criticism of Rekers without actually mentioning his important research- that children of same sex couples are at higher risk of suicide and other related behavioural issues. andycjp ( talk) 10:59, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Article should have more detail on who the individual is, his work etc. 82.18.164.15 ( talk) 05:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Certainly this article needs to have some scholarly discussion of the man's work, in addition to what the judges have said about him. There might be some difficulty finding actual scholars who take him seriously, since he forms his expert opinions from his Christian beliefs and anti-gay agenda. By the way, what do you call the syndrome we see in so many of these rabid anti-gay people who are gay themselves? Shouldn't there be a link to that, if there's an article on it? 70.112.186.143 ( talk) 17:27, 4 May 2010 (UTC) Eric
I just added a link to Unzipped magazine's blog, which gives more information about the means by which the gentleman whom Dr. Reker is alleged to have hired advertises himself for hire. I know blogs are typically questionable as reliable, but this one is an official blog managed by a magazine, which is in turn owned by a major media conglomerate, so I see this as writing with more authority than an independent blog.
I am a little concerned about an invasion of the escort's profile. Anyone else have thoughts on this? Blue Rasberry 00:58, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Unzipped, a monthly gay magazine, identified the sex worker as being a particular person on the rentboy.com website based on the quoted description in the Miami New Times. [1]
I think we are going to have a major edit war on our hands here very quickly if the first comments are anything to go by.
As pleasurable as it is to see another christianist hypocrite debunked, and as lacking as the original article was in describing the harm this hateful man has done to gays (not to mention his fake College of Pediatricians) we have to make sure the article is serious and from a NPOV.
That goes for both sides. Christians who hate gays and gays who suffer from their attacks. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 05:28, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I won't add anything for a while because I agree that it is important to be as precise as possible. To the above objections, however: - It is now being covered as "straight" news by Huffingtonpost and Daily Kos and BoxTurtle among many, many others. - His "American College of Pediatricians" has been denounced by every single real group of doctors and scientists including the NIH as fake science. Their theoretical background is based on fundamentalist Christian beliefs, not science and this has been thoroughly demonstrated. In the interest of fairness, I'll be making that case quite thoroughly and say thank you, now, to the conservative Christians concerned that his "valuable" work was being ignored. -Family Research Council is hastily removing all references to him as co-founder, researcher, etc. from their website. Missing quite a bit, given their haste and the depth of his involvement. We should definitely make note of that as they are indisputably "notable".
This horrible man has directly caused much persecution, court imposed suffering and suicides of gay teens. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.194.231.143 ( talk) 11:30, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I would like to second the motion that historical references regarding Mr. Rekers' associations and contributions be documented. As noted, the Family Research Council has already edited their page. A quick search on Archive.org shows the original version. Alexsandyr ( talk) 15:55, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Off2riorob, what about my changes did you find tittilating and tabloidish? Tdslk ( talk) 18:12, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for commenting, please don't take it personal, it is hard to add content from titilating opinionated editorial reports in an encyclopedic way. I don't know who this person is and my edits are simply made in good faith in regard to WP:BLP policy to protect the living people and the wikpedia. Off2riorob ( talk) 19:02, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I hate to say it, but once the deleted material has been restored, I think we should have this page temporarily locked down so that such christianist attacks can be avoided 92.194.231.143 ( talk) 19:14, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
There are now photos of Rekers pushing the luggage cart while the escort stands by published on the original Miami New Times article as well as other sites. Go and check. The claim that he was seen pushing the luggage cart has photographic proof. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.39.166.26 ( talk) 15:29, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
He admits to hiring him but not from any specific place, we don't need to add the alleged website, please consider that this is tittilating breaking news from a free newspaper that has been taken up and propagated by LGB sources and we should take care , we are an encyclopedia not a tabloid report. Off2riorob ( talk) 19:15, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Again, please restore the text and stop editing this to satisfy your own world view. I request you respond to me here, else I shall assume bad faith and restore the text myself. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 19:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Second, to Nomoskedasticity (hope I spelled that right!) My objection is based on the damage which Off2riorob did to: Section 3 "Rent boy" allegations. Since Off2riorob is pretending not that there are no qualified resources and there are, in fact, here are some. I appreciate your willingness to help here, by the way: Statement from Dr. Rekers to blogmaster at: www.joemygod.blogspot.com, you can find it under the title: Dr. George Rekers, Patron Of Male Prostitutes, Responds To Me On Facebook It is rather long. Second, we have the photos which Dr. Reker has not denied of him and the male prostitute: http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2010/05/photo_anti-gay_activist_george.php Hmm, what more do you want to restore the original text? Jay Leno's comments? The male prostitute's comments? Rachel Madow's site with statement? The Huffingtonpost is not exactly what one would call a "free newspaper" or LGBT biased site: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alvin-mcewen/anti-gay-organization-fou_b_563633.html
I have stated above as have many, that it would be better, given the fast changing nature of the current affairs in this man's life to leave things be for a while and let the dust settle. I have also suggested we make any changes public here on the discussion page (as set out in more than one of the many, many guidelines) instead of just jumping in and changing things around to satisfy our world view.
Look, this one is not going to be taken lying down by either the persecuted LGBT community or the christianists. Better to recognize that and try to work together than to make changes which are not based on research but the desire to bias the biography to fit ones own desires. Personally, I'd be perfectly happy if the biography were restored to the situation prior to 4 May 2010 until the dust settles, but if changes are to be made, then they need to be honest and accurate. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 20:12, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
http://theweek.com/article/index/202604/George_Rekers_rent_boy_escort_scandal http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/05/family-research-council-head-h.html?wprss=44 http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/another-anti-gay-activist-accused-of-gay-tryst/19465448 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7117037.ece
Yes, that is THE Times and THE Washingtonpost, not some pretend near-name-alias. Poor as my writing skills may be, I want to see this article not be left as whitewash for the christianist agenda. It needs to be fair and accurate - and that applies to the christianists, too. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 20:34, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
But, hey - that's not enough for you. Oh, no, you, speaking no doubt ex cathedra have decided all by yourself that each and everyone is just cut and pasting from the miaminewtimes. I provided you with Dr. Rekers own statement, did I not? That isn't enough? The Times and Washingtonpost do not "only" quote the article - especially seeing as how three different sources on the Washingtonpost website present different accountings. Look, if Wikipedia says water is H²O and every physics book and chemistry book in the world agrees, does that mean it is invalid? Or they all copied from each other? What will satisfy you - and rest assured, you might be able to silence me, but this is not going to go away. Again, what level of evidence do you now require, the old hurdle having been jumped? Panthera germanicus ( talk) 20:55, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
What is so tough about that? For the last time I ask you to please put it back as it was. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Panthera germanicus ( talk • contribs) 21:12, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
What text? Please post it here, so I can see what you are talking about Off2riorob ( talk) 21:14, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
The subject has a blog and has posted a comment about this matter. [2] Perhaps most important is the that he denies having sex with his travel companion. Will Beback talk 21:35, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Fortunately the article here doesn't assert that he had sex with his travel companion. I support keeping claims about his having had sex with his travel companion out of the article here. As I read the sources, not even his Rentboy has said anything about having had sex with Rekers. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 22:03, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Basically we have this in the article and it is a false representation of the reported content, According to The Times, Rekers admitted to hiring a companion from Rentboy.com for the 10-day European trip to help carry his luggage Off2riorob ( talk) 22:41, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
The matter is not helped any when you have an editor who is too high-handed to bother with discussion pages. Once the dust settles on this, I intend to add a section on each of his positions, organizations and claims. We know, for instance, that the NIH (not just some liberal blog) has publicly stated that Dr. Rekers' American College of Pediatricians is not a genuine professional board but a cover group to push the christianist agenda. We have the public statement of the judge in Florida who was so upset by his expert testimony (paid for by the State of Florida) being based on zero science and purely christianist goals that she rejected his entire argumentation and that of the State. We have...well, anyway, once things quiet down I want to make sure that there is a solid entry on his misdeeds and the damage he has thus done to the human status and civil rights of homosexuals. I will post every suggestion on the discussion page first, I will careful to ensure that every citation is from a non-free-newspaper. Wonder if the National Institute of Health is notable enough for those editors here driven by the christianist agenda? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Panthera germanicus ( talk • contribs) 09:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
An example. You wrote:
"Media reports focused on how the man appears to work as a male-prostitute who can be booked online through Rentboy.com."
This is very nicely written, except for "appears". He doesn't appear to work as a male-prostitute, he says he is one. Nor does Dr. Rekers deny booking him online through rentboy.com. I understand the concept of being neutral, however facts are facts and we don't need to say "appears" when the truth is indisputable.
I also accept that there is a need to remove improper text from biographical articles without longw winded discussion when they are libelous or not fact based. My objection is to the manner in which this article was edited to minimize the damage to this christianist and his movement. I also find the high handed manner in which those of us who pointed out statements made in media which are normally recognized as notable and orderly sources here on wikipedia were totally brushed aside.
I firmly believe the best thing would have been for all of us to have left the article alone until the dust settles (one reason I have not changed anything nor made any additions). Anybody who thinks we gays are just going to let the christianists abuse NPOV and the guidelines on biographical entries to white-wash this and promote their hateful agenda is in for one heck of an edit war. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 10:57, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Good morning. I hardly think this requires saying .."Rekers' credibility as a leading anti-gay activist was questioned in the media after being photographed returning from a European holiday with a male prostitute." and Panthera, we need to be careful with things like this, you say.. "He doesn't appear to work as a male-prostitute, he says he is one.".. has the man made any statements? no? Off2riorob ( talk) 11:12, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Also far as this turning into an advertisement for rentboy dot com... Rekers on his website... Off2riorob ( talk) 11:19, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
"A recent article in an alternative newspaper cleverly gave false impressions of inappropriate behavior because of its misleading innuendo, incorrectly implying that Professor George Rekers used the Rentboy website to hire a prostitute to accompany him on a recent trip. Contrary to Internet stories based on this slanderous article, following medical advice Professor George Rekers requires an assistant to lift his luggage in his travels because of an ongoing condition following surgery. His family, local friends, and even another university professor colleague have offered to accompany him on trips to assist him in his travel. Dr. Rekers found his recent travel assistant by interviewing different people who might be able to help, and did not even find out about his travel assistant’s Internet advertisements offering prostitution activity until after the trip was in progress. There was nothing inappropriate with this relationship. Professor Rekers was not involved in any illegal or sexual behavior with his travel assistant."
He doesn't name the (as he refers to as a) slanderous article, we have this opinionated editorial from the dallasvoice dot com, The premier media source for lesbian gay bi-sexual and trans-sexual texas-official blog of the dallasvoice http://www.dallasvoice.com/instant-tea/2010/05/04/anti-gay-activist-george-reker-outed-after-hiring-male-escort-from-rentboy-com Off2riorob ( talk) 11:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
A couple of small comment, thanks. The comments support Rekers claims, those comments do not support that he hired him as a prostitute or that he went to rent boy dot com either... Both Rekers and Geo, who declined to give his real name, deny they had a sexual relationship during their 10-day journey to Spain and England.."In all honesty, I did go on the trip with him," Geo, 20, told The Miami Herald on Wednesday. "He was setting me up as a companion. In all honesty, he's a very kind family-values man." Rekers, 61, said via e-mail that he hired Geo as "an assistant to lift his luggage in his travels because of an ongoing condition following surgery."He added: "Dr. Rekers found his recent travel assistant by interviewing acquaintances. There was nothing inappropriate with this relationship. Professor Rekers was not involved in any illegal or sexual behavior with his travel assistant." Off2riorob ( talk) 11:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
The whole thing doesn't matter at this point - NBC carried it, among others and several 'real' newspapers are now also covering the details of yes, he got him through rentboy, yes the guy is a male prostitute, yes, yes and, sadly, yes. I hope my request for a full protection until the dust settles is accepted. This is really only causing bad feelings and not helping things at all when the christianists keep making changes to promote their agenda. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 13:46, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
This statement: "Subsequently, the Family Research Council removed the fact that Rekers was a member of their founding board from their web site" is not verifiable, and because it relies on a comparison of a source now and three years ago, is original research based upon a primary source. It does not belong here. If it were something that featured in a reliable souce commenting on this, then it could well be valid, but as it stands it is speculation. Even then, it is unclear that it beloings here, in an article on Rekers, but as it relates to actions possibly taken by the FRC in relation to this, then it would belong in an article on FRC, where their relationship with Rekers is discussed, no? Mish ( talk) 14:50, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Wouldn't it be better to just stop editing for a few days, let things settle down and then take a fresh look at it? All these continuing edits are doing is to give me ammunition to go back and argue for a full-protect. Biographical entries, as is continually pointed out here are special. We neither improve the reputation of the encyclopaedia nor our ability to work together on topics on which christianists and the glbt community do not agree with these continued edits on a rapidly changing matter. Note, please - I am not making edits. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 15:06, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
I'll add my two cents: The website still states that he was a founding member: http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=WU10E03 (retrieved 11 am EST, 5/6/10) So can we remove the part saying the website no longer acknowledges his role? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.244.78.179 ( talk) 15:11, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Second, thanks to internet caches and archives, we can easily prove that FRC immediately after the scandal hit went through their entire website and deleted all current references and links to Dr. Rekers and his work, his projects, his books, etc. They are pretending to have had nothing to do with him the last 10 years which is stupid because we have documentation showing otherwise. But, hey - I'll not be putting any of that in right now because the article is semi-protected and it really, really is not a good thing to be editing a biographical article when every hour brings a major new revelation, attack or counter-attack in the media. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 15:16, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Straight sex blogs are aimed at purient interest. Gay blogs need not be. I don't think anyone would ever confuse pam'shouseblend, for instance, with the 'free-newspapers' with which quite a few sources are being dismissed. It's just a thought, but a lot of heterosexuals and conservative Christians really don't have the first clue about us or our lives. Kinda shows, actually in some of the comments here. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 18:43, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Let's try to get to grips with the Rentboy.com thing. A variety of perfectly respectable newspapers assert unambiguously, on the basis of their own reporting (i.e., not in a derivative way via reference to other sources) that Rekers found/made contact with Lucien on Rentboy.com: [8], [9], [10] for starters. What exactly is the difficulty with reporting this element of the story in a straightforward manner? Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 19:14, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Okay, Off2rio, since you don't want to read the articles yourself, let me help you out:
Is anyone else having trouble with this? Three separate reports from perfectly reliable sources, right? Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 19:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Off2riorob, thanks for you note on my talk page. I do feel strongly that conservative Christians frequently change things around in articles to present their views as opposed to NPOV. Why aren't you willing to just let this one sit for awhile? I'm done for the evening. Unless I see some consensus in the morning - regardless of whether it is on "my" side our "yours", I'm going to ask again that the article not be edited for a while or at least that somebody come in and try to moderate this mess. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 19:55, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
It is simply no longer true to maintain that there is only one source for all of this. We have the actions of FRC. We have the actions of his university. We have the statements both by him and by Geo. That dawg just won't fight, no matter how hard his apologists want it,too. You know, we have now put enormous time and effort into this and all we have achieved is that this article is now on my permanent, personal watch list and the moment the dust settles, I will be in here presenting material to be edited into the article and quite a bit to be taken out. Since an edit-war between the "individual" perspectives and those of us who live in the fact-based world appears inevitable, would it not be better to just not fight it out now and then again in a few weeks? By then, those apologists for Dr. Rekers might well have been forced by the events to accept that there is no way to present an NPOV biography without the damning details. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 21:13, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
This might be another gay-in-denial story, or it might be a smear launched by homosexuals at an opponent of theirs. All contributions to this article should be mainly interested in which is true, not with pushing one agenda or another. Specialy needed are:
-Sources for the statement that he found the person in question on rentboy.com. This is relevant since one who is anti-gay would not look for a luggage handler there.
- Confirmation of the rentboys statement that he was hired for sex. Anyone can say a thing like that. In the smear scenario, an unscruplous gay might have decided to lie about his new employer. But how likely is it that he could have been employed legitimately? More info about the rentboy's previous employment history could help. 12.149.136.2 ( talk) 22:54, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
In the rent boy bit, it says: "He make it clear that he had met Rekers through Rentboy.com and denied that he had been hired to carry luggage.[17]" I think it's meant to say "He made it clear..." -- made, not make. But this page can't be edited by users at the moment, so if a mod would like to fix it, that'd be good. Also, not to start anything, cos I see the furore up the top, but a mod may wish to consider "He claimed that he had met Rekers through Rentboy.com and denied that he had been hired to carry luggage.[17]" -- the 'made it clear' sounds a little like the matter was settled by this guy's word. And if the above is anything to go by, I'd say it's definitely not settled.
If one wants to include the idea that the rent boy was clear about where he was hired from, the sentence could read: "He stated clearly that he had met Rekers through Rentboy.com and denied that he had been hired to carry luggage.[17]"
Anyway, if POV isn't being changed by anyone -- mod or not -- at the moment, then I really would like to see the typo changed. Really sux that the edit-discussion war has prevented us from spelling correctly (even I have to use the word 'sux'). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.45.146.36 ( talk • contribs)
There was a written contract between Rekers and Roman, which called for Roman earning $75 per day in exchange for spending eight hours a day with Rekers, carrying his luggage, and providing one massage per day.
Read more: [16] Off2riorob ( talk) 16:57, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
The rent boy contradicts Rekers's contentions that he hired the escort to help carry his luggage and that he was trying to save the soul of a lost sinner. Lucien decided to speak out after a heart-to-heart with a friend, Michael, who alerted him to the grim realities of his client's anti-gay activities. Lucien, who had originally declined to speak about the trip, now says he can do little good by protecting his erstwhile, fundamentalist client. The rent boy has told Miami New Times Rekers is a homosexual who paid him to provide body rubs once a day in the nude, during their ten-day vacation in Europe. Rekers allegedly named his favorite maneuver the "long stroke" -- a complicated caress "across his penis, thigh... and his anus over the butt cheeks," as the escort puts it. "Rekers liked to be rubbed down there," he says...Lucien decided to speak out after a heart-to-heart with a friend, Michael, who alerted him to the grim realities of his client's anti-gay activities. Lucien, who had originally declined to speak about the trip, now says he can do little good by protecting his erstwhile, fundamentalist client. George Rekers Is a Homosexual, Escort Says (unsigned content posted by User:66.40.56.242
The Miami New Times reported in its May 4, 2010 issue that on April 13, 2010, Rekers was photographed at Miami International Airport with a man reported to be a twenty-year-old " rent boy". [2] [3] Rekers claimed that the man was there to help carry his luggage since he had had recent surgery and was unable to carry it himself. [2] [4] Rekers admitted to hiring the companion for the 10-day European vacation as a "travel assistant" and denies any impropriety. The man, named only as "Lucien", was reported to be available for hire through the internet site " Rentboy.com", where his profile advertised his "smooth, sweet, tight ass" and "perfectly built 8 inch cock (uncut)" and described him as "sensual," "wild," and "up for anything". [2]
Rekers was quoted as commenting, “If you talk with my travel assistant ... you will find I spent a great deal of time sharing scientific information on the desirability of abandoning homosexual intercourse, and I shared the Gospel of Jesus Christ with him in great detail.” [5] The incident was covered by media outlets worldwide, including the Associated Press [6] BBC News [7] and The Australian. [8] The comedians Stephen Colbert and Jay Leno made the news the subject of monologues on their shows. The Miami New Times followed up its exposé with an interview with "Lucien", who told the newspaper that Rekers was "a homosexual who paid him to provide body rubs once a day in the nude." [9] He stated that he had met Rekers through Rentboy.com and described him as a man who "likes younger guys to hang out with." [2]
Isn't user ChrisO bound by an arbitration agreement not to edit any BLP's? I saw this here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Justallofthem
If this is the case, ChrisO should not be working on this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.39.166.26 ( talk) 20:19, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Its like a very poor tabloid report. Personally I also don't think it is correct to name Lucian, his name adds nothing of value and the sexy details of his website profile are pure titillation. The content is totally excessive, Leno and the other guy mentioned it on their show, so ? what is notable about that? It is just fluff enlarging the content but actually adding nothing Off2riorob ( talk) 00:05, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
To avoid confusion, most of the above was already in the article. What I added was the following:
As I've already said, it's a gross violation of NPOV and BLP to focus on one side's version of the story and suppress any mention of the other side's account. Suppressing "Lucien's" own chosen name/pseudonym is particularly bizarre. That's how he identifies himself publicly; how can it "add nothing of value"? I'm willing to leave out "Lucien's" description of himself if you think it's too titillating, but the name and "Lucien's" side of the story are non-negotiable - it's simply not acceptable to censor one side of the story. I've raised the issue on the BLP noticeboard to get some outside views. -- ChrisO ( talk) 00:11, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
In an interview the next day (Lucian) said he gave Rekers massages. That would be a decent addition. Off2riorob ( talk) 00:47, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
There is more to the story. Reker was on speakerphone talking to Lucien in the presence of two reporters: http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2010/05/things_rekers_said_to_lucien_w.php 216.39.166.26 ( talk) 05:18, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Panthera germanicus ( talk) 06:51, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
I have replaced the term 'gay' with 'homosexual', as the source does not say the rent boy says he is gay, but is a homosexual. There is a difference. Clearly, whatever his sexual orientation, Rekers is not gay, he is anti-gay, and has spent many years campaigning against gay identity and trying to avert people from expressing being gay. He has never identified himself as gay, and neither has the source. I also question whether this sentence needs to be given this much weight over and above other information (such as Rekers' statements) by placing it in the lead? It needs to be in the body of text where it can counterbalance Rekers' own statement. Mish ( talk) 10:55, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
The article is begining to look less like a mad hatter ran through it with his scissors excissing every fact and more like something one would expect to find in an encyclopedia. Still, I don't think the sexuality of this horrible man can or should be minimized - he has destroyed countless lives of gays over the decades and been, personally, responsible for some of the most un-humane legislation imposed in the non-Islamic world since the Nazis. And that is saying something. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 13:31, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Now, as for my political agenda. First, I have neither posted nor deleted nor changed one thing here and have, from the very beginning said I wouldn't while things are changing so rapidly. Second, I feel it is enormously important that the truth be told about these vermin. Sure, respect NPOV, but facts are facts and the sort of whitewash which Off2riorob has attempted here over the last days made me furious. There is a tremendous difference between NPOV and presenting the facts in such a manner as to pretend that being accurate means saying "alleged" and "some have suggested that" when we have the facts to hand. Not being argumentative here and am very thankful that people with better writing skills than I have were able to intercede and stop Off2riorob from turning this into a hageography of the poor wee Dr. and his battle with teh gayz. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Panthera germanicus ( talk • contribs) 15:42, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks again - I'm gonna let this one be for a while then come back to it when the dust settles. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 16:35, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
The article discusses criticism of Rekers without actually mentioning his important research- that children of same sex couples are at higher risk of suicide and other related behavioural issues. andycjp ( talk) 10:59, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Article should have more detail on who the individual is, his work etc. 82.18.164.15 ( talk) 05:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Certainly this article needs to have some scholarly discussion of the man's work, in addition to what the judges have said about him. There might be some difficulty finding actual scholars who take him seriously, since he forms his expert opinions from his Christian beliefs and anti-gay agenda. By the way, what do you call the syndrome we see in so many of these rabid anti-gay people who are gay themselves? Shouldn't there be a link to that, if there's an article on it? 70.112.186.143 ( talk) 17:27, 4 May 2010 (UTC) Eric
I just added a link to Unzipped magazine's blog, which gives more information about the means by which the gentleman whom Dr. Reker is alleged to have hired advertises himself for hire. I know blogs are typically questionable as reliable, but this one is an official blog managed by a magazine, which is in turn owned by a major media conglomerate, so I see this as writing with more authority than an independent blog.
I am a little concerned about an invasion of the escort's profile. Anyone else have thoughts on this? Blue Rasberry 00:58, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Unzipped, a monthly gay magazine, identified the sex worker as being a particular person on the rentboy.com website based on the quoted description in the Miami New Times. [1]
I think we are going to have a major edit war on our hands here very quickly if the first comments are anything to go by.
As pleasurable as it is to see another christianist hypocrite debunked, and as lacking as the original article was in describing the harm this hateful man has done to gays (not to mention his fake College of Pediatricians) we have to make sure the article is serious and from a NPOV.
That goes for both sides. Christians who hate gays and gays who suffer from their attacks. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 05:28, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I won't add anything for a while because I agree that it is important to be as precise as possible. To the above objections, however: - It is now being covered as "straight" news by Huffingtonpost and Daily Kos and BoxTurtle among many, many others. - His "American College of Pediatricians" has been denounced by every single real group of doctors and scientists including the NIH as fake science. Their theoretical background is based on fundamentalist Christian beliefs, not science and this has been thoroughly demonstrated. In the interest of fairness, I'll be making that case quite thoroughly and say thank you, now, to the conservative Christians concerned that his "valuable" work was being ignored. -Family Research Council is hastily removing all references to him as co-founder, researcher, etc. from their website. Missing quite a bit, given their haste and the depth of his involvement. We should definitely make note of that as they are indisputably "notable".
This horrible man has directly caused much persecution, court imposed suffering and suicides of gay teens. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.194.231.143 ( talk) 11:30, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I would like to second the motion that historical references regarding Mr. Rekers' associations and contributions be documented. As noted, the Family Research Council has already edited their page. A quick search on Archive.org shows the original version. Alexsandyr ( talk) 15:55, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Off2riorob, what about my changes did you find tittilating and tabloidish? Tdslk ( talk) 18:12, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for commenting, please don't take it personal, it is hard to add content from titilating opinionated editorial reports in an encyclopedic way. I don't know who this person is and my edits are simply made in good faith in regard to WP:BLP policy to protect the living people and the wikpedia. Off2riorob ( talk) 19:02, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I hate to say it, but once the deleted material has been restored, I think we should have this page temporarily locked down so that such christianist attacks can be avoided 92.194.231.143 ( talk) 19:14, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
There are now photos of Rekers pushing the luggage cart while the escort stands by published on the original Miami New Times article as well as other sites. Go and check. The claim that he was seen pushing the luggage cart has photographic proof. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.39.166.26 ( talk) 15:29, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
He admits to hiring him but not from any specific place, we don't need to add the alleged website, please consider that this is tittilating breaking news from a free newspaper that has been taken up and propagated by LGB sources and we should take care , we are an encyclopedia not a tabloid report. Off2riorob ( talk) 19:15, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Again, please restore the text and stop editing this to satisfy your own world view. I request you respond to me here, else I shall assume bad faith and restore the text myself. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 19:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Second, to Nomoskedasticity (hope I spelled that right!) My objection is based on the damage which Off2riorob did to: Section 3 "Rent boy" allegations. Since Off2riorob is pretending not that there are no qualified resources and there are, in fact, here are some. I appreciate your willingness to help here, by the way: Statement from Dr. Rekers to blogmaster at: www.joemygod.blogspot.com, you can find it under the title: Dr. George Rekers, Patron Of Male Prostitutes, Responds To Me On Facebook It is rather long. Second, we have the photos which Dr. Reker has not denied of him and the male prostitute: http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2010/05/photo_anti-gay_activist_george.php Hmm, what more do you want to restore the original text? Jay Leno's comments? The male prostitute's comments? Rachel Madow's site with statement? The Huffingtonpost is not exactly what one would call a "free newspaper" or LGBT biased site: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alvin-mcewen/anti-gay-organization-fou_b_563633.html
I have stated above as have many, that it would be better, given the fast changing nature of the current affairs in this man's life to leave things be for a while and let the dust settle. I have also suggested we make any changes public here on the discussion page (as set out in more than one of the many, many guidelines) instead of just jumping in and changing things around to satisfy our world view.
Look, this one is not going to be taken lying down by either the persecuted LGBT community or the christianists. Better to recognize that and try to work together than to make changes which are not based on research but the desire to bias the biography to fit ones own desires. Personally, I'd be perfectly happy if the biography were restored to the situation prior to 4 May 2010 until the dust settles, but if changes are to be made, then they need to be honest and accurate. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 20:12, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
http://theweek.com/article/index/202604/George_Rekers_rent_boy_escort_scandal http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/05/family-research-council-head-h.html?wprss=44 http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/another-anti-gay-activist-accused-of-gay-tryst/19465448 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7117037.ece
Yes, that is THE Times and THE Washingtonpost, not some pretend near-name-alias. Poor as my writing skills may be, I want to see this article not be left as whitewash for the christianist agenda. It needs to be fair and accurate - and that applies to the christianists, too. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 20:34, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
But, hey - that's not enough for you. Oh, no, you, speaking no doubt ex cathedra have decided all by yourself that each and everyone is just cut and pasting from the miaminewtimes. I provided you with Dr. Rekers own statement, did I not? That isn't enough? The Times and Washingtonpost do not "only" quote the article - especially seeing as how three different sources on the Washingtonpost website present different accountings. Look, if Wikipedia says water is H²O and every physics book and chemistry book in the world agrees, does that mean it is invalid? Or they all copied from each other? What will satisfy you - and rest assured, you might be able to silence me, but this is not going to go away. Again, what level of evidence do you now require, the old hurdle having been jumped? Panthera germanicus ( talk) 20:55, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
What is so tough about that? For the last time I ask you to please put it back as it was. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Panthera germanicus ( talk • contribs) 21:12, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
What text? Please post it here, so I can see what you are talking about Off2riorob ( talk) 21:14, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
The subject has a blog and has posted a comment about this matter. [2] Perhaps most important is the that he denies having sex with his travel companion. Will Beback talk 21:35, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Fortunately the article here doesn't assert that he had sex with his travel companion. I support keeping claims about his having had sex with his travel companion out of the article here. As I read the sources, not even his Rentboy has said anything about having had sex with Rekers. Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 22:03, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Basically we have this in the article and it is a false representation of the reported content, According to The Times, Rekers admitted to hiring a companion from Rentboy.com for the 10-day European trip to help carry his luggage Off2riorob ( talk) 22:41, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
The matter is not helped any when you have an editor who is too high-handed to bother with discussion pages. Once the dust settles on this, I intend to add a section on each of his positions, organizations and claims. We know, for instance, that the NIH (not just some liberal blog) has publicly stated that Dr. Rekers' American College of Pediatricians is not a genuine professional board but a cover group to push the christianist agenda. We have the public statement of the judge in Florida who was so upset by his expert testimony (paid for by the State of Florida) being based on zero science and purely christianist goals that she rejected his entire argumentation and that of the State. We have...well, anyway, once things quiet down I want to make sure that there is a solid entry on his misdeeds and the damage he has thus done to the human status and civil rights of homosexuals. I will post every suggestion on the discussion page first, I will careful to ensure that every citation is from a non-free-newspaper. Wonder if the National Institute of Health is notable enough for those editors here driven by the christianist agenda? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Panthera germanicus ( talk • contribs) 09:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
An example. You wrote:
"Media reports focused on how the man appears to work as a male-prostitute who can be booked online through Rentboy.com."
This is very nicely written, except for "appears". He doesn't appear to work as a male-prostitute, he says he is one. Nor does Dr. Rekers deny booking him online through rentboy.com. I understand the concept of being neutral, however facts are facts and we don't need to say "appears" when the truth is indisputable.
I also accept that there is a need to remove improper text from biographical articles without longw winded discussion when they are libelous or not fact based. My objection is to the manner in which this article was edited to minimize the damage to this christianist and his movement. I also find the high handed manner in which those of us who pointed out statements made in media which are normally recognized as notable and orderly sources here on wikipedia were totally brushed aside.
I firmly believe the best thing would have been for all of us to have left the article alone until the dust settles (one reason I have not changed anything nor made any additions). Anybody who thinks we gays are just going to let the christianists abuse NPOV and the guidelines on biographical entries to white-wash this and promote their hateful agenda is in for one heck of an edit war. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 10:57, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Good morning. I hardly think this requires saying .."Rekers' credibility as a leading anti-gay activist was questioned in the media after being photographed returning from a European holiday with a male prostitute." and Panthera, we need to be careful with things like this, you say.. "He doesn't appear to work as a male-prostitute, he says he is one.".. has the man made any statements? no? Off2riorob ( talk) 11:12, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Also far as this turning into an advertisement for rentboy dot com... Rekers on his website... Off2riorob ( talk) 11:19, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
"A recent article in an alternative newspaper cleverly gave false impressions of inappropriate behavior because of its misleading innuendo, incorrectly implying that Professor George Rekers used the Rentboy website to hire a prostitute to accompany him on a recent trip. Contrary to Internet stories based on this slanderous article, following medical advice Professor George Rekers requires an assistant to lift his luggage in his travels because of an ongoing condition following surgery. His family, local friends, and even another university professor colleague have offered to accompany him on trips to assist him in his travel. Dr. Rekers found his recent travel assistant by interviewing different people who might be able to help, and did not even find out about his travel assistant’s Internet advertisements offering prostitution activity until after the trip was in progress. There was nothing inappropriate with this relationship. Professor Rekers was not involved in any illegal or sexual behavior with his travel assistant."
He doesn't name the (as he refers to as a) slanderous article, we have this opinionated editorial from the dallasvoice dot com, The premier media source for lesbian gay bi-sexual and trans-sexual texas-official blog of the dallasvoice http://www.dallasvoice.com/instant-tea/2010/05/04/anti-gay-activist-george-reker-outed-after-hiring-male-escort-from-rentboy-com Off2riorob ( talk) 11:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
A couple of small comment, thanks. The comments support Rekers claims, those comments do not support that he hired him as a prostitute or that he went to rent boy dot com either... Both Rekers and Geo, who declined to give his real name, deny they had a sexual relationship during their 10-day journey to Spain and England.."In all honesty, I did go on the trip with him," Geo, 20, told The Miami Herald on Wednesday. "He was setting me up as a companion. In all honesty, he's a very kind family-values man." Rekers, 61, said via e-mail that he hired Geo as "an assistant to lift his luggage in his travels because of an ongoing condition following surgery."He added: "Dr. Rekers found his recent travel assistant by interviewing acquaintances. There was nothing inappropriate with this relationship. Professor Rekers was not involved in any illegal or sexual behavior with his travel assistant." Off2riorob ( talk) 11:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
The whole thing doesn't matter at this point - NBC carried it, among others and several 'real' newspapers are now also covering the details of yes, he got him through rentboy, yes the guy is a male prostitute, yes, yes and, sadly, yes. I hope my request for a full protection until the dust settles is accepted. This is really only causing bad feelings and not helping things at all when the christianists keep making changes to promote their agenda. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 13:46, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
This statement: "Subsequently, the Family Research Council removed the fact that Rekers was a member of their founding board from their web site" is not verifiable, and because it relies on a comparison of a source now and three years ago, is original research based upon a primary source. It does not belong here. If it were something that featured in a reliable souce commenting on this, then it could well be valid, but as it stands it is speculation. Even then, it is unclear that it beloings here, in an article on Rekers, but as it relates to actions possibly taken by the FRC in relation to this, then it would belong in an article on FRC, where their relationship with Rekers is discussed, no? Mish ( talk) 14:50, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Wouldn't it be better to just stop editing for a few days, let things settle down and then take a fresh look at it? All these continuing edits are doing is to give me ammunition to go back and argue for a full-protect. Biographical entries, as is continually pointed out here are special. We neither improve the reputation of the encyclopaedia nor our ability to work together on topics on which christianists and the glbt community do not agree with these continued edits on a rapidly changing matter. Note, please - I am not making edits. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 15:06, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
I'll add my two cents: The website still states that he was a founding member: http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=WU10E03 (retrieved 11 am EST, 5/6/10) So can we remove the part saying the website no longer acknowledges his role? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.244.78.179 ( talk) 15:11, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Second, thanks to internet caches and archives, we can easily prove that FRC immediately after the scandal hit went through their entire website and deleted all current references and links to Dr. Rekers and his work, his projects, his books, etc. They are pretending to have had nothing to do with him the last 10 years which is stupid because we have documentation showing otherwise. But, hey - I'll not be putting any of that in right now because the article is semi-protected and it really, really is not a good thing to be editing a biographical article when every hour brings a major new revelation, attack or counter-attack in the media. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 15:16, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Straight sex blogs are aimed at purient interest. Gay blogs need not be. I don't think anyone would ever confuse pam'shouseblend, for instance, with the 'free-newspapers' with which quite a few sources are being dismissed. It's just a thought, but a lot of heterosexuals and conservative Christians really don't have the first clue about us or our lives. Kinda shows, actually in some of the comments here. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 18:43, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Let's try to get to grips with the Rentboy.com thing. A variety of perfectly respectable newspapers assert unambiguously, on the basis of their own reporting (i.e., not in a derivative way via reference to other sources) that Rekers found/made contact with Lucien on Rentboy.com: [8], [9], [10] for starters. What exactly is the difficulty with reporting this element of the story in a straightforward manner? Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 19:14, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Okay, Off2rio, since you don't want to read the articles yourself, let me help you out:
Is anyone else having trouble with this? Three separate reports from perfectly reliable sources, right? Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 19:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Off2riorob, thanks for you note on my talk page. I do feel strongly that conservative Christians frequently change things around in articles to present their views as opposed to NPOV. Why aren't you willing to just let this one sit for awhile? I'm done for the evening. Unless I see some consensus in the morning - regardless of whether it is on "my" side our "yours", I'm going to ask again that the article not be edited for a while or at least that somebody come in and try to moderate this mess. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 19:55, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
It is simply no longer true to maintain that there is only one source for all of this. We have the actions of FRC. We have the actions of his university. We have the statements both by him and by Geo. That dawg just won't fight, no matter how hard his apologists want it,too. You know, we have now put enormous time and effort into this and all we have achieved is that this article is now on my permanent, personal watch list and the moment the dust settles, I will be in here presenting material to be edited into the article and quite a bit to be taken out. Since an edit-war between the "individual" perspectives and those of us who live in the fact-based world appears inevitable, would it not be better to just not fight it out now and then again in a few weeks? By then, those apologists for Dr. Rekers might well have been forced by the events to accept that there is no way to present an NPOV biography without the damning details. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 21:13, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
This might be another gay-in-denial story, or it might be a smear launched by homosexuals at an opponent of theirs. All contributions to this article should be mainly interested in which is true, not with pushing one agenda or another. Specialy needed are:
-Sources for the statement that he found the person in question on rentboy.com. This is relevant since one who is anti-gay would not look for a luggage handler there.
- Confirmation of the rentboys statement that he was hired for sex. Anyone can say a thing like that. In the smear scenario, an unscruplous gay might have decided to lie about his new employer. But how likely is it that he could have been employed legitimately? More info about the rentboy's previous employment history could help. 12.149.136.2 ( talk) 22:54, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
In the rent boy bit, it says: "He make it clear that he had met Rekers through Rentboy.com and denied that he had been hired to carry luggage.[17]" I think it's meant to say "He made it clear..." -- made, not make. But this page can't be edited by users at the moment, so if a mod would like to fix it, that'd be good. Also, not to start anything, cos I see the furore up the top, but a mod may wish to consider "He claimed that he had met Rekers through Rentboy.com and denied that he had been hired to carry luggage.[17]" -- the 'made it clear' sounds a little like the matter was settled by this guy's word. And if the above is anything to go by, I'd say it's definitely not settled.
If one wants to include the idea that the rent boy was clear about where he was hired from, the sentence could read: "He stated clearly that he had met Rekers through Rentboy.com and denied that he had been hired to carry luggage.[17]"
Anyway, if POV isn't being changed by anyone -- mod or not -- at the moment, then I really would like to see the typo changed. Really sux that the edit-discussion war has prevented us from spelling correctly (even I have to use the word 'sux'). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.45.146.36 ( talk • contribs)
There was a written contract between Rekers and Roman, which called for Roman earning $75 per day in exchange for spending eight hours a day with Rekers, carrying his luggage, and providing one massage per day.
Read more: [16] Off2riorob ( talk) 16:57, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
The rent boy contradicts Rekers's contentions that he hired the escort to help carry his luggage and that he was trying to save the soul of a lost sinner. Lucien decided to speak out after a heart-to-heart with a friend, Michael, who alerted him to the grim realities of his client's anti-gay activities. Lucien, who had originally declined to speak about the trip, now says he can do little good by protecting his erstwhile, fundamentalist client. The rent boy has told Miami New Times Rekers is a homosexual who paid him to provide body rubs once a day in the nude, during their ten-day vacation in Europe. Rekers allegedly named his favorite maneuver the "long stroke" -- a complicated caress "across his penis, thigh... and his anus over the butt cheeks," as the escort puts it. "Rekers liked to be rubbed down there," he says...Lucien decided to speak out after a heart-to-heart with a friend, Michael, who alerted him to the grim realities of his client's anti-gay activities. Lucien, who had originally declined to speak about the trip, now says he can do little good by protecting his erstwhile, fundamentalist client. George Rekers Is a Homosexual, Escort Says (unsigned content posted by User:66.40.56.242
The Miami New Times reported in its May 4, 2010 issue that on April 13, 2010, Rekers was photographed at Miami International Airport with a man reported to be a twenty-year-old " rent boy". [2] [3] Rekers claimed that the man was there to help carry his luggage since he had had recent surgery and was unable to carry it himself. [2] [4] Rekers admitted to hiring the companion for the 10-day European vacation as a "travel assistant" and denies any impropriety. The man, named only as "Lucien", was reported to be available for hire through the internet site " Rentboy.com", where his profile advertised his "smooth, sweet, tight ass" and "perfectly built 8 inch cock (uncut)" and described him as "sensual," "wild," and "up for anything". [2]
Rekers was quoted as commenting, “If you talk with my travel assistant ... you will find I spent a great deal of time sharing scientific information on the desirability of abandoning homosexual intercourse, and I shared the Gospel of Jesus Christ with him in great detail.” [5] The incident was covered by media outlets worldwide, including the Associated Press [6] BBC News [7] and The Australian. [8] The comedians Stephen Colbert and Jay Leno made the news the subject of monologues on their shows. The Miami New Times followed up its exposé with an interview with "Lucien", who told the newspaper that Rekers was "a homosexual who paid him to provide body rubs once a day in the nude." [9] He stated that he had met Rekers through Rentboy.com and described him as a man who "likes younger guys to hang out with." [2]
Isn't user ChrisO bound by an arbitration agreement not to edit any BLP's? I saw this here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Justallofthem
If this is the case, ChrisO should not be working on this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.39.166.26 ( talk) 20:19, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Its like a very poor tabloid report. Personally I also don't think it is correct to name Lucian, his name adds nothing of value and the sexy details of his website profile are pure titillation. The content is totally excessive, Leno and the other guy mentioned it on their show, so ? what is notable about that? It is just fluff enlarging the content but actually adding nothing Off2riorob ( talk) 00:05, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
To avoid confusion, most of the above was already in the article. What I added was the following:
As I've already said, it's a gross violation of NPOV and BLP to focus on one side's version of the story and suppress any mention of the other side's account. Suppressing "Lucien's" own chosen name/pseudonym is particularly bizarre. That's how he identifies himself publicly; how can it "add nothing of value"? I'm willing to leave out "Lucien's" description of himself if you think it's too titillating, but the name and "Lucien's" side of the story are non-negotiable - it's simply not acceptable to censor one side of the story. I've raised the issue on the BLP noticeboard to get some outside views. -- ChrisO ( talk) 00:11, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
In an interview the next day (Lucian) said he gave Rekers massages. That would be a decent addition. Off2riorob ( talk) 00:47, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
There is more to the story. Reker was on speakerphone talking to Lucien in the presence of two reporters: http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2010/05/things_rekers_said_to_lucien_w.php 216.39.166.26 ( talk) 05:18, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Panthera germanicus ( talk) 06:51, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
I have replaced the term 'gay' with 'homosexual', as the source does not say the rent boy says he is gay, but is a homosexual. There is a difference. Clearly, whatever his sexual orientation, Rekers is not gay, he is anti-gay, and has spent many years campaigning against gay identity and trying to avert people from expressing being gay. He has never identified himself as gay, and neither has the source. I also question whether this sentence needs to be given this much weight over and above other information (such as Rekers' statements) by placing it in the lead? It needs to be in the body of text where it can counterbalance Rekers' own statement. Mish ( talk) 10:55, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
The article is begining to look less like a mad hatter ran through it with his scissors excissing every fact and more like something one would expect to find in an encyclopedia. Still, I don't think the sexuality of this horrible man can or should be minimized - he has destroyed countless lives of gays over the decades and been, personally, responsible for some of the most un-humane legislation imposed in the non-Islamic world since the Nazis. And that is saying something. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 13:31, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Now, as for my political agenda. First, I have neither posted nor deleted nor changed one thing here and have, from the very beginning said I wouldn't while things are changing so rapidly. Second, I feel it is enormously important that the truth be told about these vermin. Sure, respect NPOV, but facts are facts and the sort of whitewash which Off2riorob has attempted here over the last days made me furious. There is a tremendous difference between NPOV and presenting the facts in such a manner as to pretend that being accurate means saying "alleged" and "some have suggested that" when we have the facts to hand. Not being argumentative here and am very thankful that people with better writing skills than I have were able to intercede and stop Off2riorob from turning this into a hageography of the poor wee Dr. and his battle with teh gayz. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Panthera germanicus ( talk • contribs) 15:42, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks again - I'm gonna let this one be for a while then come back to it when the dust settles. Panthera germanicus ( talk) 16:35, 7 May 2010 (UTC)