[Will88]

I think Whitlock has gone off on a tangent on this one. The overwhelming motive that worked against the four higher ups handing the Sandusky crimes as they should have was the Penn State football culture, and a desire to not reveal that such a sordid and disgusting situation could exist within that glorified culture. They hoped they could sweep it under the carpet and that it would stay there.

Plus, the molester was an esteemed colleague who’d made great contributions to PS football success. They probably had great difficulty admitting he was what the evidence said he was. Again, easier to sweep it under the carpet and hope it stayed there.

The idea that the sexual proclivities of men somehow influenced their action, or inaction when dealing with a child molester makes no sense. I don’t think most men have allowed their sexual nature to blind them to the abuse of children by other adults.

[workerbee]

Whitlock isn't implying the men involved were homosexuals. He's talking about the "old boy network" -- IOW, the things you mentioned: the football culture, men's embarrassment that something like homo pedophilia exists within that culture, esteemed colleague, etc.

All Whitlock is saying is that, perhaps, had their been women involved somewhere along the line, all this "old boy" crap wouldn't have enabled these crimes as long as they did.