The Ó Searcaigh story keeps on running, and seems likely to until the man himself genuinely confronts the media, and for that matter the people of Ireland, directly.
The Irish Times letters page has once again raised a new angle - Ó Searcaigh travelled to a country where the legal age of consent was a year lower, and apparently sought out boys of that younger age. Does that make it more pre-meditated? It may be technically legal, but surely it can’t be considered morally okay?
Having finally seen the film last week, I have to admit that it was much more subtle than I expected given the director-bashing that has been going on since the story broke. It seems to me that if Neasa Ní Chianáin had set out to expose what she ultimately did, there was potential there for much more investigation and frankly for a much more aggressive approach to her subject.
But all that is besides the point. Now that the film has been aired, and the story is out there, and we know that Interpol have been investigating Ó Searcaigh for two years, the remaining issue is his position in Irish society - his membership of Aosdána, his poetry’s position on the leaving cert syllabus, etc.
There are a few obvious questions to be asked.
If CÓS was having sex with seventeen year old boys in Ireland, would the uproar be the same? If he was paying them, would it be the same? If he was waiting at school gates for 16 year old girls, how would his artist friends react? And how would the police? Again, the money has to come into it. If he handed over a month’s salary to a 16 year old girl from Blackrock/Foxrock/wherever, and then invited her to his hotel room for the night, would Máire Mhac an tSaoi still be defending him? Would Mary Hanafin think twice about leaving his poetry on the syllabus? If he was a priest instead of a poet, would Pauline Bewick be preaching that his sermons were so beautiful and full of love that he couldn’t possibly be traumatising very young men even if he was paying them for sex?
I’m sure most of these questions will never get answered. But more important ones have been answered already, and those answers can’t be ignored. CÓS admits having had sex with many of the boys. He admits that he prefers to give money directly to individual boys rather than donating to, say, a reputable charity. He admits that he then leaves his bedroom door open for them.
Cathal Ó Searcaigh writes beautiful poetry. Which has nothing to do with it.
Cathal Ó Searcaigh speaks beautiful Irish. Which has nothing to do with it.
Cathal Ó Searcaigh has had a difficult life, growing up as a gay man in a small town in rural Ireland when that was (somehow) even less acceptable than it is now. Which has nothing to do with it.
Cathal Ó Searcaigh is 52 years old, and makes annual trips to one of the poorest countries in the world, where he hands huge sums of money to 16 year olds, and subsequently has sex with them. Which is better known as ‘Exploitation and Sex Tourism 1.01‘.
Anyone choosing to ignore those facts is at best on very shaky moral ground, and at worst is bathing - and may soon be drowning - in a sea of their own hypocrisy.