Beyond the requisite rue surrounding Sandusky's alleged victims, we're permitting ourselves to feel superior to those who didn't intervene in the right ways. But have we forgotten about the McMartin case?
While the details of the victims' experiences are beyond shocking, it is the culture of silence surrounding Sandusky's alleged criminal behavior that ultimately raises some of the most perplexing moral questions.
It has now been two months since scandal rolled into the Happy Valley. Much is still uncertain and yet the university, the surrounding community, and the nation as a whole remains fixated on the question of responsibility.
As a gay man, over the years I have met men with varying degrees of comfort with their sexuality. The most repressed men were insistent that they were 100 percent heterosexual, and that any same-sex activity they would engage in was "just horsing around."
In this type of homophobic environment, where everyone knows policy is one thing and practice is another, perhaps Penn State was paralyzed not only by the alleged rapes, but by the fear of having a gay coach.
Gov. Corbett has spent much of his time since the scandal exploded getting out in front of it, all the while deflecting all personal questions, saying that he isn't allowed to talk about the case because of grand jury restrictions.
His main supposition is that none of us truly knows what we would do in that very same situation until we're in "McQueary's shoes," and that it's easy for us to judge and condemn others when we might actually behave in the same manner.