Madonna jokes about asking her son (who was 14 at the time): "Do you have any friends you could introduce me to?"
That was easy for me to find because I blogged it at the time and I have a tag for pedophilia.
What should Milo do now? These Drudge screenshots suggest an answer. Yesterday:
Today:
I don't know how far Milo had gotten into writing an actual book. It seems to me that he was preoccupied with promoting an unwritten book and that the sensible way to cause the promised book to come into existence would be for someone else to cut and paste from transcripts of his many spoken-word performances and edited them into something as readable and amusing as possible.
But the life of Milo has taken a darker turn. This is a new and rich source of material. If the man is any good and worth listening to at all, he needs to sit down and write, really write — not just an object that can be sold as a book, but something true and worthy. Work through all of your experience, who you are and why you are here.
IN THE COMMENTS: MayBee brings up "The Vagina Monologues," and that got me looking back in my archive. I found this post from October 2006, just before the midterm election that was harshly affected by the Mark Foley scandal. David Brooks had written a column criticizing liberals for their celebration of "The Vagina Monologues," which includes one story of a woman who (like Milo Yiannopoulos) had as a young teenager been initiated into sex by an adult and who spoke of the experience in an excitedly positive tone. Brooks wrote:
This is a tale of two predators. The first is a congressman who befriended teenage pages. He sent them cajoling instant messages asking them to describe their sexual habits, so he could get his jollies.
The second is a secretary, who invited a 13-year-old girl from her neighborhood into her car and kissed her. Then she invited the girl up to her apartment, gave her some vodka, took off her underwear and gave her a satin teddy to wear.
Then she had sex with the girl, which was interrupted when the girl’s mother called. Then she made the girl masturbate in front of her and taught her some new techniques.
The first predator, of course, is Mark Foley, the Florida congressman. The second predator is a character in Eve Ensler’s play, “The Vagina Monologues."
Foley is now universally reviled. But the Ensler play, which depicts the secretary’s affair with the 13-year-old as a glorious awakening, is revered. In the original version of the play, the under-age girl declares, “I say, if it was a rape, it was a good rape, then, a rape that turned my [vagina] into a kind of heaven.” When I saw Ensler perform the play several years ago in New York, everyone roared in approval. Ensler has since changed the girl’s age to 16 — the age of Foley’s pages — and audiences still embrace the play and that scene at colleges and in theaters around the world.
पोस्ट्स
१०६ टिप्पण्या:
OH come on. Madonna doesn't count. She hates Trump.
Dittos, Meade.
Plus, she is a "good person"(tm)
John Henry
One more day of playing smeer the queer?
Madonna offered blowjobs to get people to vote for Hillary. Because she is a lefty. And a whore.
There's also this one, when Justin Bieber was the new, super-cute boy singer. A female teacher starts daydreaming about her student, Bieber.
https://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/teacher/n12770?snl=1
Interestingly, what makes the sketch so unfunny is that SNL (likely Tina Fey) wanted to be careful about outright sexualizing a 16 year old.
For Milo who at an age of under 13 Learned how to give good head to a priest is not his problem. Perhaps our response to it is, but I think that, just as in girls' gymnastics, it ignores the difference in power and status to rationalize desire and exploitation.
If I remember right, you also blogged about a tape that emerged showing Hillary laughing about how, as a young lawyer, she was able to get a guy off who she knew had brutally beaten and raped a twelve year old girl?
"Bob Boyd said...
If I remember right, you also blogged about a tape that emerged showing Hillary laughing about how, as a young lawyer, she was able to get a guy off who she knew had brutally beaten and raped a twelve year old girl?"
Phrasing!
Comprehensive sex ed and current liberal belief is that it is healthy for young teens to look at adult material. We shouldn't oppress teen hormone and such, but we can't consent to engage with it.
Now we have Milo. I feel bad for the guy. Of course I don't agree with his comments, but he is a result of the mess up messages we are received as young adults. Think about all the creepiness of 'barely legal', and waiting for female celebrities to be 18.
This is "progressive' privilege.
Lefties can do whatever they want and the media yawns, or sometimes even celebrates (Lena Dunham and her exploitation of her little sister makes an interesting story in her book!). Everyone else will be crushed for their mistakes.
We need to stand up against sexual child abuse - it needs to be taboo.
What irks me more than anything about this sorry episode is how the professional conservatives out there are jumping on this to try and whip Milo Y. from the public square. Honestly they have had a monopoly on Conservative Thought for a long time and are comfortable being "couch conservatives" who sit like smiling buddas and make statements or perhaps write a book or a paper on how awful and stupid those liberals are, but never really change anything or challenge the status quo in any meaningful way.
Sorry guys, those days are over. This Milo guy may stand or fall, but normal folks are not just going to continue to stand by while Left is ruining the country. This vicious public shaming/virtue signaling has got to be defeated.
Think about all the creepiness of..... waiting for female celebrities to be 18.
They were waiting? Please, the media has exploited a lot of these young ladies. Think about those two youngest Jenner girls - hyper sexualized by everyone around them, including their own parents.
And of course, who among us will ever forget the John Tesh baby-fucking incident? Dark, dark stuff....
There is something to be said about consequences from suppressing base impulses, but there does seem to be a limit that normal (i.e. distribution) people will not violate. So, is normalization (i.e. process) a progressive condition, by natural right, by popular indoctrination, by judicial decree?
Guggenbuhl-Craig in "From the Wrong Side" had an essay on the insane response to anything pedophilia.
After explaining heavily that he was against pedophilia and treated victims of it, he tried to open the question of why the extreme response to it in public debates.
Being a Jungian, he concluded it was a partial archetype. Namely that the child is always completely innocent, and by grammatical reflex the other is always completely evil.
The crowd proved his point by attacking him.
Guggenbuhl-Craig's motivation was to point out that the hysteria, satisfying as it may be to the crowd, is harmful to the victims.
That the victims are at an age where they're learning to take responsibility for what happens to them, at least partly, that they play a part in it, that they are growing up, and the hysteria cuts off any inclination to grow that way.
I haven't checked the Milo tapes (and there is an unedited one, which sounds like a Trevon Martin hatchet job to me), but the segments I've seen suggest a similar insight. That the situation is more complex, and in a Milo-like PC overturning moment, your virtue signalling is harmful to even the people you claim to be helping.
How leftist is that.
“Heil Baby Heil: I was Hitler’s Groupie” (Excerpt)
One thing you have to understand, people: the Hitler I loved was indeed a Controversial Figure, but I really didn't follow politics much then, because I was only twelve at the time...
He may have had his hard dictatorial side, but Adolf was always tender with me: bubble baths, eiderdown pillows, light German tickling and gentle anal sex...
Hitler may have had sex with children, but they were all female as far as I know, so please remember THAT: he was NOT gay, he was ALL Man...!
Some people may say "Hitler killed six million Jews AND was a pedophile? That's DOUBLE bad!", but I think such people just can't understand the love a twelve-year-old girl can have for a Great Man. Or they are Jewish...
I remember Hitler once gently crying when reading the latest reports from Auschwitz: he said he'd bet some of those young girls were probably rather pretty, in a Jewish way of course. Yes, the Hitler I knew had Regrets, things he'd do over if he could, but don't we all? Don't we all...?
I am Laslo.
What about The Vagina Monologes?
Alan Ginsburg.
"it ignores the difference in power and status to rationalize desire and exploitation." And as the Polanski-Studds-Clinton-Madonna left has shown us for many years, that is terrible, just terrible -- when done by someone not on the left.
Milo didn't say he was a perp, he said he was a victim, but he didn't think it was so bad.
Aren't we constantly being told that rape victims don't always react the way we might think? That they might not know they were victims? Why are they blaming the victim here?
Of course we know the answer to that question.
First, we shouldn't use the word "pedophilia" when talking about post-pubescent minors. (There's another word for it I'm too lazy to look up) Second, it's worth noting that the only reason we make sex with minors illegal is because we believe that below a certain age a person is incapable of true consent. This is obviously the case with a small child, but what about someone closer to the line, say 16 or 17 years old? In those cases most of us say "that shouldn't be a problem if the older partner is only a couple years older, say 18 or 19" but then that raises the next question--if age imbalance is the problem, then why do we consider it ok (or at least legal) for an 18 year old to consent to sex with a 60 year old? (And I won't even delve into the double standard for men and women, or gay relationships)
What it boils down to is these are worthwhile questions to ask, particularly as real people end up on sexual predator lists for sleeping with their girlfriends while both are in high school (and usually only because the girl's parents don't like the guy). And even if you disagree with Milo's take on it (which at least from what I read was not so controversial--he was simply saying that for him, he felt he could consent at a much younger age--tarring him as a pedo is unfair.
"Think about all the creepiness of..... waiting for female celebrities to be 18.
They were waiting? Please, the media has exploited a lot of these young ladies. Think about those two youngest Jenner girls - hyper sexualized by everyone around them, including their own parents.
Yeah... but that's ok. Apparently.
This would be a good opportunity to point out that pedophilia has a meaning more like "foot fetish" than "sexual attraction to pre-pubescent kids," which would be "paedophilia," pronounced with a long 'e' like pediatrics and literally meaning "a friendly love of children."
It should also be noted that our laws governing sex with minors are a poor fit with the concept of paedophilia, since they generally cover post-pubescent persons as well. The laws of Germany and Japan make a closer fit.
Let's not forget Hollywood giving a standing ovation to pedophile Roman Polanski.
1. Milo didn't commit pedophilia
2. Milo doesn't advocate for pedophilia.
Milo did nothing wrong. At worst, he mangled the nuanced distinction between mature teenagers having sex (sometimes with young adults) and pedophilia.
I'm a boring, middle class, middle age married man, so Milo's views and mine are somewhat different.
But I do recall back in my high school days that some of the hot teenage senior girls would date college men (likely violating age of consent laws) and that the high school senior boys (some of whom were 18 by Spring) would swoop down on the hottest Freshman and Sophmore girls.
My senior year in high school when I was 17, I had a girlfriend who was also a senior, but my hazy recollection is that she turned 18 two months before I did. I guess in retrospect she was, briefly, a habitual lawbreaker! Heh - but I digress.
If Milo is describing, albeit awkwardly, this type of consensual activity, superimposed onto a modern day gay-friendly era, let's not lose our collective heads over the issue.
Of course, Milo has riled up a lot of Leftists, who would like nothing better than to sink his ship for political reasons, but I reckon that's a different story too.
Madonna offered blowjobs to get people to vote for Hillary. Because she is a lefty. And a whore.
And she didn't follow through, because she's a Lefty. And a lyin' who-er.
Work through all of your experience, who you are and why you are here.
Write something for women to read, in other words.
Guys just want gays to be clever and amusing.
Milo is there for the same reason Trump is there - overturn the insane rule of PC.
They operate the same way as well, but Milo has a third rail to work through.
It will be impressive if he can do it. The partial archetype always wins.
It's a mistake to charge hypocrisy. They're completely different cases. The leftists are good people, and the conservatives are evil.
The mistake is a mistake because it won't work.
What's needed is zingers.
There's always Roman Polanski, right? Never mind - presumably he hates Trump, too.
Hmmmm, Milo is a bad boy because he apparently boasted about being the victim of a pedophile, while Lena Denham is revered despite boasting about being an incestuous perp.
"If the man is any good and worth listening to at all, he needs to sit down and write, really write..."
Either that or do a special, season-long, guest role on Duck Dynasty.
I believe Phil Robertson could also provide Milo an opportunity to work through all of his experience, who he is and why he wound up squatting in a duck blind at 4 AM with a 12 gauge across he knees.
The "tu quoque" hypocrisy charges are not the way to go. Much better to point out how atrociously the left are violating their own beliefs in the sanctity of victimhood.
Milo was discussing his personal experience as a victim of child sexual abuse. Saying that it wasn't that bad -- joking about it -- is a coping mechanism. Attacking him for that is like slut-shaming a rape victim. It's disgusting.
Sarah Silverman has told tons of paedophilia jokes. Gatewaypundit posted a couple choice tweets but there is plenty more in her oeuvre.
Plus, of course, The Aristocrats -- not to be confused with a Disney feature film about upper-class felines.
But these are jokes. What Milo said was also jokes, at his own expense. People must not be familiar with what gets said on satellite shows and podcasts. This kind of hard-edged humor is not unusual at all, and on top of it, Milo was talking about himself, it's not like he was trivializing someone else's experience.
Don't we already do this with Lena Dunham? Maybe there will be a role for Milo on Girls.
Lena Dunham is revered despite boasting about being an incestuous perp.
Nah. You were supposed to believe that her baby sister (who now self-identifies as being gay) put the pebbles in her own vagina because lesbians are sexually precocious. It probably didn't happen anyway because Dunham is known for bullshit stories like her scripts for Girls portray. You get an automatic "A" if you write a story about having explosive diarrhea in public. It's "real."
Naw, Ann. Milo has been writing his book for the last two years since Gamergate. This is not just something he has ginned up.
I will add as a conservative it is dismaying to see Evan McMullin and other NeverTrumpers attempting to destroy Milo along with the conservative Wall Street Journal attempting to destroy PewDiePie.
To win in 2018 and 2020 we need lots of young Millennial and Gen Z voters. PewDiePie has 53 million fans and his videos have been seen billions of times. Half of his viewers lean Right. All of them like Milo's fans are ardent cultural libertarians and hate the Left's PC thuggery.
Milo has brought more young people to conservatism than any other contemporary figure. It is suicidal for the Right to destroy him and PewDiePie. The Right continues to have a tin ear for popular culture in the Millennial Internet Age.
"Madonna offered blowjobs to get people to vote for Hillary. Because she is a lefty. And a whore."
And that my dear friends is the real reason Hillary! lost the election.
This attempt to blame Milo's downfall on the hypocrisy of the left is a little bit nutty. Milo was a product of the right-wing-entertainment complex and his downfall was precipitated by a right wing web site (The Reagan Battalion) and amplified by another product of the right-wing-entertainment complex (CPAC). The left had nothing to do with any of this, they just sat on the sidelines in rapture.
If I understand him correctly, Milo said he was initiated into gay sex by his priest. I suppose there are more traumatic sexual experiences, but in terms of betrayal and psychological conflict that has to be devastating. Some of Milo's contradictions and paradoxes may perhaps be explained by that early experience.........There are a number of literate, thoughtful gays on this site. I ask them: what is the best way to acclimate a gay teenager to his sexuality? I can't think of a worst way than being seduced by your priest or, for that matter, any trusted older figures.......I don't think a teenager would benefit from an affair with Madonna. To be fair, however, Madonna seems to pick on people her own size. I was saddened to read about her break up with Sean Penn. if ever two people were made fo each other, it was those two.
Well Bill Clinton runs around with a rich pedophile.
So what do you expect?
@ARM,
" The left had nothing to do with any of this, they just sat on the sidelines in rapture."
To believe this, you must live in a secluded fantasy-land. When the Left was actively rioting against Milo's speech at UC Berkeley last month, it was anything but rapture.
It is partially true that sone fussy Conservatives at CPAC got spooked about Milo, but that's not the driving force.
Funny how downfall makes a guy look like Justin Bieber
Bay Area Guy said...
To believe this, you must live in a secluded fantasy-land. When the Left was actively rioting against Milo's speech at UC Berkeley last month, it was anything but rapture.
Do you not understand the business model? The protests only made Milo more famous. The protests were what he was aiming for.
Milo can't help it that he was a Catholic school boy who Honored the authority of a Father the Church had craftily imposed over him.
When in Rome , you do as the Romans do it to the Greek boys. Psychologists tell us Secretive sex creates the problem, and confessing is the first step to health.
But this free speech is Milo's confessional. Taking it away takes away also takes away the great theater he puts on.
Left Bank of the Charles said...Don't we already do this with Lena Dunham?
Gosh you're right! Poor Lena's career was destroyed by it.
If you're a lefty, you can say/do these things and the President of the United States sends his daughter to intern with you.
Milo appeared to be trying to be honest during the interview. I think he DID blur some very bad lines, but I think his voice should not be censored. I think he is an example of why adults getting into bed (or just engaging in sexual activity out of it) with young teens is so distorting.
Teens do need practice in engaging with adults, which helps them explore their emerging adult identity. And teens do have to figure out sex. But when the two processes of exploration are mixed, lifelong severe confusion can result. Milo is an example of that, and anyone who watched his behavior with Maher could see that. Milo is stuck looking for a daddy.
So when he said:
“Yeah, I don’t mind admitting that. I think particularly in the gay world and outside the Catholic church, if that’s where some of you want to go with this, I think in the gay world, some of the most important, enriching and incredibly life affirming, important shaping relationships very often between younger boys and older men, they can be hugely positive experiences for those young boys they can even save those young boys, from desolation, from suicide (people talk over each other)… providing they’re consensual.”
http://heavy.com/news/2017/02/milo-yiannopolous-pedophilia-transcript-pederasty-video-full-sex-boys-men-catholic-priest-cpac-quotes/
I think you are seeing someone struggling with that life-long damage. He's not going to recover. His voice should be heard precisely because of that. He is injured. He is an example of why that line should be maintained.
A while back some law professors were advocating for the legalization of incest. They were not run out of town on a rail. If Milo were a professor and came up with this, he wouldn't be attacked. He should not be canned from doing what he does well for this (I doubt he belongs at a political conference) - those who react with horror to what he says should engage with him. In an adult fashion.
OMG. I am in agreement with a ReasonableMan @8:38.
It is a language police hit job done by the Conservatives who want their hammer back from the academics they loaned it to.
ARM: This attempt to blame Milo's downfall on the hypocrisy of the left is a little bit nutty. Milo was a product of the right-wing-entertainment complex and his downfall was precipitated by a right wing web site (The Reagan Battalion) and amplified by another product of the right-wing-entertainment complex (CPAC). The left had nothing to do with any of this, they just sat on the sidelines in rapture.
I agree that Milo's downfall (if indeed this ends up being his downfall) will be the work of "the right-wing-entertainment complex" aka the cuck-right. They can always be relied on to police the right and grovel to the left when it's time for a ritual purge. But one may still point out the hypocrisy of the left on any given issue and be correct about that.
This sorry (but very interesting) business prompted me to look at the 'age of consent' page at Wiki; who knew. 7 in Delaware until 1895.
There is a great continuum of human sexuality. All societies place arbitrary limits on what is considered "decent" and "acceptable" behavior. These arbitrary limits cannot usually be justified by argument starting from first principles. To my mind, human biology is a logical guide and so puberty is a good general guideline. Societal attempts to limit the sexuality of post-pubescent teenagers usually fail laughably - precisely because the teenagers are chock full of hormones.
Putting the arbitrary limits of what is acceptable in play is necessarily disruptive, and we did it to ourselves in the west by mainstreaming homosexuality, formerly one of numerous sexual deviancies. Bluenose gasping over the idea that adult homosexuals are interested in teenage boys is ridiculous. "Chickenhawks" were a known phenomenon in ages ago - certainly in my midwestern boyhood - and boys who were uninterested in sucking dicks or having older men suck theirs steered clear of them. I suspect this has been going on just about forever, and it appears to be what Milo is talking about. And it isn't just the "boys" either. David Hamilton the "artist" was certainly all about pubescent girls back in the '70s. Since then, feminism has demonized sexual contact between older men and younger women, ala Woody Allen. Mick Jagger is cool enough to do what he wants, though.
A great deal of Milo's schtick is being brazen. His comments about so-called "pedophilia" are part and parcel of that. And if we are honest, and discuss REAL pedophilia (as so many insist on conflating with pederasty), what do we REALLY know about it, other than our society conditions people to find it morally repulsive? Is there rigorous scientific evidence to prove it is ever-lastingly damaging to the participants without exception?
What if real pedophiles are BORN that way, as we are conditioned to believe that homosexuals and the entire LGBTQ-whatever spectrum is? What should we do with them? Kill them? Castrate them? Imprison them? Let them furtively jerk to cartoon sex? Give them Japanese child-sex robots at tax-payer expense? Wait for Hollywood to make sentimental movies about it? Wait for a sitcom that shows funny, lovable, child-buggerers?
Note: meant to post this comment here, not is yesterday's Milo thread - Oso
This is a complex subject, and we do it a disservice by pretending it is simple. Kids in puberty are sexual creatures. They are fully capable of making decisions, including bad decisions. They are also too young to make very good decisions, most of the time.
The way the law usually handles it is by putting all the blame on the older person. Usually that's right and sometimes it's misleading. Especially because sexual drives are really really powerful. It's pretty common for otherwise sensible people to wreck their lives because of them.
Somewhat similar are cases of power asymmetries. Boss and secretary, president and intern. It can be pure abuse by the boss, and it can be a secretary who wants something and a boss who doesn't have much sense or self-control. At least in those cases we grant the subordinate legal agency - though not necessarily good sense.
These aren't easy to judge, and a little charity is helpful: there but for the grace of God go I. Those of us who aren't in these situations should be grateful for our good fortune, because I don't know that we would always do as well as we think we should.
I think that's roughly what Milo was saying in his videos, and he's right. We can't say so, because pedophilia is generally horrible.
If it weren't for double standards, they'd have no standards at all:
“I know it wasn’t rape-rape. It was something else but I don’t believe it was rape-rape. He went to jail and and when they let him out he was like ‘You know what, this guy’s going to give me a hundred years in jail I’m not staying,’ so that’s why he left.”
-- Whoopi Goldberg defending 44 year-old Roman Polanski's sex with a 13 year-old girl and his leaving the county to avoid facing trial
"We need to stand up against sexual child abuse - it needs to be taboo."
On the one hand I totally agree because that is our cultural norm. On the other hand our preferred treatment of sexuality and children is very different from most of history. Would I want to go back to the 'good old' days? Nope, but it is a squincky topic that isn't exactly black and white and that's were people like Milo trip themselves up because most people don't even want to think about such nuances. And for the record I'm not interested in 'exploring' such nuances but I am aware that they exist.
Roman Polansky's great crime was, like Cosby's, doping up his victim in order to have non-consensual sex with her.
I'd forgotten about Lena Dunham's story about her sister.
Hey, if that doesn't ruin someone's career -- admitting to sexually molesting a younger sibling -- then Milo say something that needed to be clarified probably shouldn't either.
But, frankly, pop culture might do better to just get rid of both of them and try and start fresh. I'm not invested in either; I could be persuaded to make that trade.
Marc Puckett said...
This sorry (but very interesting) business prompted me to look at the 'age of consent' page at Wiki; who knew. 7 in Delaware until 1895.
Age of criminal responsibility varies from 6 years-old in the US and Mexico to 18 in much of S. America.
Nihilist Ann probing the basement under the guise of bastardized tikkun olam but not being a full frontal gal she hasn't taken the flight of stairs down.
I know very little of Milo, but I did watch his interview with Bill Maher. In that interview, he came across as glib, and insincere. He also seemed to be flirting with Maher.
MaxedOutMama: Teens do need practice in engaging with adults, which helps them explore their emerging adult identity. And teens do have to figure out sex. But when the two processes of exploration are mixed, lifelong severe confusion can result. Milo is an example of that, and anyone who watched his behavior with Maher could see that. Milo is stuck looking for a daddy.
[...]
I think you are seeing someone struggling with that life-long damage. He's not going to recover. His voice should be heard precisely because of that. He is injured. He is an example of why that line should be maintained.
Illuminating comment (as always).
People who want to either normalize all kinds of deviancy, or reduce everything to a "rights" issue, tend to impose a simple-minded "born that way" template on deviant behavior. As a result just about everything obvious and interesting about human sexual development will be excluded from the discussion.
Same with reducing it to a simple matter of getting the age-of-consent "right". Though it's necessary and important to have that legal "solution", the legal aspect is a very small part of the issue.
The GOPe cucks took a scalp. It's probably the most manly they've felt in a decade.
"I think that's roughly what Milo was saying in his videos, and he's right. We can't say so, because pedophilia is generally horrible."
That's the thing--people are so bent out of shape because they hear someone questioning our norms and toss it in the same basket as 30 year olds screwing ten year olds. And so we're stuck with crazy standards (and double standards) because no one wants to risk even bringing up the topic.
"But, frankly, pop culture might do better to just get rid of both of them and try and start fresh. I'm not invested in either; I could be persuaded to make that trade."
But is it really equivalent? I recall Dunham's (possibly made up) story involved her touching her infant sister inappropriately, while Milo's story was about him as a post-pubescent minor being sexually involved with a priest, and him considering it a positive thing. He's not the "predator" in this case.
HoodlumDoodlum:
Unknown said...Now rightists embrace and normalize adults engaging in sex with underage young people?
For heaven's sake, Unknown, are you THAT new around here? About once a year we all talk about The Vagina Monologues, that celebrated non-Rightist play performed across this vast nation...and someone always brings up the fact that part of the play discusses a (lesbian) rape of a 13 year old girl (statutory & through the use of alcohol) which part ends with the summation that "if it was a rape, it was a good rape." Which, you know, is pretty outrageous, but also hugely adored and celebrated by the Left.
2/20/17, 5:22 PM
This is true; Milo's getting a raw deal because, frankly, he was never going to get a fair one. Reading his whole comment in context, while I don't necessarily agree with what he's saying, he's not saying, "abusing kids is OK."
This attempt to blame Milo's downfall on the hypocrisy of the left is a little bit nutty....The left had nothing to do with any of this, they just sat on the sidelines, not saying a word in defense of a foreign victim of sexual abuse who made challenging and provocative statements about consent while defending current American law. Hypocrisy.
If Milo had the political view you'd expect from a young gay Brit, and the book was about the stuff he was talking about in those podcasts, and the book deal was canceled after this incident, the left would be firebombing Simon & Schuster.
(Remember Simon & Schuster? They're the publisher ARM likes to pretend isn't on the left.)
Milo was discussing his personal experience as a victim of child sexual abuse. Saying that it wasn't that bad -- joking about it -- is a coping mechanism. Attacking him for that is like slut-shaming a rape victim. It's disgusting.
This is my takeaway too. We should feel sorry for him, not beat him down. He is trying to come to terms with his experience.
The "right-wing-entertainment complex"?
That's a new one for me. I didn't know there was such a thing.
Small complex.
Who's in it, I wonder.
Free thinking gays are the thin edge of the wedge that is disrupting the PC bubble. I watched the entire Joe Rogan video before the controversy and again to the excerpt, and it's clear that Milo was speaking from the perspective of his 13-14 year old rebellious self, coming of age. I think that what he is learning at the moment is that now as an adult, he should merge both perspectives of both selves when he relates this story. Certainly everyone with a moral compass will frown on the sexual predation of youth by adults. But when you get into the weeds, there's a lot of flux and grain in this subject. People mature at different rates. The calendar is not a reliable indicator of the onset of adulthood. Each sex is charged with different values about this topic (the long history of copulation between teachers and pupils illustrate this well, as far back as ancient Greece). Pop culture encourages the velocity of maturation and each succeeding generation is shortening childhood. The coming of age is chaotic. By and large, we do nothing to protect the bubble of childhood and curate adulthood in carefully controlled phases.
Meanwhile, this enterprise of busting up elitist political correctness is in danger of losing the most effective hammer: free thinking gay men. (BTW, are there any free thinking lesbians who are breaking rank? Can't think of any, save Camille Paglia.)
We recently learned that a young girl in our extended family had been inappropriately touched by a 12 year old boy also in our extended family years ago. They are both adults now. The thing is she spent time with him for years, on her own, even when she didn't have to. They generally got along quite well. Are any of us questioning that behavior? Not at all.
Why is that normal behavior for a victim in my instance, but in Milo's, he's advocating pedophilia?
Milo has to be destroyed because he's a conservative and the liberals think they've found the weapon to get the job done, never mind the hypocrisy.
@ARM,
"Do you not understand the business model? The protests only made Milo more famous. The protests were what he was aiming for. "
Broken windows fallacy.
I'll make a deal with you. Persuade your wacko college leftist friends to not riot and violate Milo's First Amendment rights, and I'll persuade Milo to accept a few less shekels, deal?
Between Islam, cultural Marxism (polymorphous perversity), and polygamy the pedophilia horse has already left the barn.
In Eros and Civilization Herbert Marcuse argues that under a capitalistic order, repression is the essence of that order and that gives us the person Freud describes – the person with all the hang-ups, the neuroses, because his sexual instincts are repressed. We can envision a future Marcuse wrote, if we can only destroy this existing oppressive order, in which we liberate eros, we liberate libido, in which we have a world of "polymorphous perversity," in which you can "do you own thing." And by the way, in that world there will no longer be work, only play.
In 1955, however, with the publication of Eros and Civilization Marcuse essentially made Wilhelm Reich's case that sexual liberation was the best counter to the psychological ills of society. Marcuse preferred a society of "polymorphous perversity,"--which is Just what it sounds like--people having sex every which way, with whatever.
It wasn't so much the freshness of Marcuse's message that made the difference as his timing--the kids brought up with Fromm and Freud and Spock were coming of age. The misplaced guilt of the Greatest Generation brought forth a new generation free to embrace Marcuse.
“One can rightfully speak of a cultural revolution, since the protest is directed toward the whole cultural establishment, including the morality of existing society…there is one thing we can say with complete assurance: the traditional idea of revolution and the traditional strategy of revolution has ended. These ideas are old fashioned… What we must undertake is a type of diffuse and dispersed disintegration of the system.” Herbert Marcuse
Nothing he said was even shocking.
He defended age of consent. Said it is probably the right thing.
He also said that some might be able to offer legit consent before that age. People mature at different rates and I'm many of us have known 16 year olds who were more mature than a lot of adults.
He was a victim of "pedophilia" (he defines it as attraction to people who haven't hit the age of actual sexual maturity physically but his critics don't like that nuance) but doesn't feel it harmed him. He made jokes about how it improved his oral skills, but he also says that he was the one pursuing it.
He said those kinds of young boy/older man sexual relationships are hardly rare in the gay community --- NAMBLA has always been part of the "movement" for a reason.
Hell, Salon has quietly erased several articles defending pedophilia --- not pederasty, but outright pedophilia --- that Milo loudly condemned over a year ago.
I will add as a conservative it is dismaying to see Evan McMullin and other NeverTrumpers attempting to destroy Milo along with the conservative Wall Street Journal attempting to destroy PewDiePie.
McMuffins sucks up to wannabe black dude Shaun King. Fuck Evan.
dreams:"Milo has to be destroyed because he's a conservative and the liberals think they've found the weapon to get the job done, never mind the hypocrisy"
Milo's "conservatism" is bounded simply by his aversion to radical islam and his absolutism on free speech.
Either position alone makes him anathema to the current PC insanity/marxist/alinskyite crew.
If you have the correct politics you can literally say and do anything, especially under color of "art," that would result in normal people being shunned, marginalized, hated and subject to public humiliation. If you are the right kind of artist you are celebrated for being "edgy" and "important" and "empowering" and above all enlightened!
But enough generalizing. I really want to know, where are the gay activists who would normally defend "one of their own?" Because growing up in SoCal and living around many gay boys and men I learned it is extremely common for young gay dudes to put themselves into dangerous situations to meet adult men: public parks, restrooms, camp sites and highway rest stops. I often feared for my best friend's safety after he confided in me and revealed a world that was, until then, hidden. Once my eyes were open I saw this activity in those places. (And to think I thought there were just a lot of people using those facilities. Afterward it was kind of obvious that actual families were far outnumbered, especially as darkness approached.)
Compared to most hetero boys, gay boys are a lot more sexually active and my friend died of AIDS by age 30, having been infected before we all really knew what the hell was happening. I can't say if Milo's story is more "important" than Eve Ensler's or Madonna's or Woody Allen's or Michael what's-his-name from WHAM! but the general public is sure getting yet another lesson in how differently the special people treat this kind of thing when it someone they hate.
I could be persuaded to make that trade.
Besides the fact that it isn't a fair trade (an abuser for a victim), that trade isn't available. It's either defend the guy who's opposed to pedophilia and basically agrees with the current laws on consent, yet thinks some people are capable of informed consent sooner than the rigid chronological age the law demands, or help your political opponents defenestrate this man. Lena Dunham's career isn't at risk.
Liberals love Lena Dunham who describes sexually abusing her younger sister in her book. And the right was silent.
Katy Grimes: Liberals love Lena Dunham who describes sexually abusing her younger sister in her book. And the right was silent.
You don't read much, do you?
"Milo's "conservatism" is bounded simply by his aversion to radical islam and his absolutism on free speech."
Well, not just that, Drago. He defends capitalism, mocks Third Wave feminism and calls America the greatest country on earth.
Any one of those positions would cause him to be branded a heretic by the Church of the Left.
And this is how the dishonest leftist media operate. Down the memory hole with their pro-pedophile author so they can attack Milo unimpeded by conscience.
I do agree that there are some segments of the fussy Conservative movement, likely coterminous with the #NeverTrumpers, who: (a) dislike Milo and (b) helped squashed his speaking engagement at CPAC.
I don't like those fools either.
The attempts to drag the left into this remain unconvincing. The left were opposed to Milo on multiple grounds, unrelated to his Pedophilia Lite comments. Because of this, even if the left were cool with pedophilia, they would not be hypocritical in rejoicing over Milo's downfall. But, taken in sum the left is not cool with pedophilia. The left is a vast diverse group and it is always possible to find conflicting views on any subject, just as it is on the right. This does not make individual members of either the right or the left automatically hypocritical. The left contains Catherine McKinnon and Andrea Dworkin, who are not in the slightest bit cool with pedophilia.
The rise and fall of Milo reflects internecine fighting on the right. CPAC could have and should have stood by him, given that their entire rationale for inviting him was to highlight the insidiousness of PC thinking. Nothing less PC than pedophilia.
Gotta agree with ARM on this--CPAC made their decision and I'm pretty confident that the organizers did not say "uh oh, the Left wants us to dump Milo! We have to do it!" The Left had a problem with him for a while, and were already going after CPAC before this story came out. This is CPAC losing their cool over any hint of pedophilia.
@ARM,
There are fools and hucksters and miscreants on the Left. There are fools and hucksters and miscreants on the Right.
But I wouldn't trade my fools and hucksters and miscreants for your fools and hucksters and miscreants.
More so, you are blind to the fools and hucksters and miscreants on your side.
I've never seen a right-wing mob on a college campus shout down and riot, when Noam Chomsky or Angela Davis or Al Gore speaks. Have you?
I see stories of female teachers having sex with 13/14 year old students. I wonder why I did not get that lucky at that age. In eighth grade, the girl sitting behind me tapped on my shoulder and whispered, "Quit staring at Miss "Teachers" ass". Half the class started laughing 'cause they were watching me watching her.
Sounds like Milo kinds considers himself one of the lucky ones. The priest thing is creepy because priests are supposed to be representatives of God, and more special than your average adult.
FullMoon said...
I see stories of female teachers having sex with 13/14 year old students.
The Daily Mail has turned this into a minor art form. Apparently it attracts a lot of clicks from disgruntled older men.
Apparently it attracts a lot of clicks from disgruntled older men.
Obviously, you're never been hot-for-teacher!
madAsHell said...
Obviously, you're never been hot-for-teacher!
Disgruntled in the sense that they were not afforded the same educational opportunities.
The left contains Catherine McKinnon and Andrea Dworkin, who are not in the slightest bit cool with pedophilia.
Or sex with adults, either.
This is CPAC losing their cool over any hint of pedophilia.
It's CPAC turning itself into clowns by not actually listening to what was actually said, but instead, relying on laughable reports of what he said.
What truly torques my jaws is the virtue signaling from the right. OK Milo said something stupid over a year ago. Suddenly he's a non-person and scrubbed from Breitbart.
Now, today, everything else he's said and done either never happened or is tainted because of two comments.
To paraphrase Pogo (A reference probably missed by most under 70.); 'We have met the self righteous prigs & they is us!'
Bob Boyd wrote:
"Either that or do a special, season-long, guest role on Duck Dynasty."
Now that would be hilarious!
I never got hit on by a man when I was in my early teens.
Titus said...
I never got hit on by a man when I was in my early teens.
Are you braggin', or complainin'?
Prog sexual ethics, like all their ethics, is strictly situational. Sure, tu quoque and pointing out hypocrisy only go so far--nothing can shame the left into doing anything to change course--but the Ensler-Polanski left has no leg to stand on.
""Either that or do a special, season-long, guest role on Duck Dynasty." Now that would be hilarious!"
It's not a crazy suggestion. While I have enjoyed seeing Milo provoke lefties and expose their absurdity, from casual observation it did not appear that he was a happy, grounded person. To some extent, of course, that may the vibe non-gays get from the sex-uber-alles posture publicly adopted by some gay men. Still, there's something missing.
The real objection to institution of a sexual maturity license is not that it would allow some teenagers to start sex early, but that it would end up barring many young "adults" from sex, marriage and breeding.
In any case, it is stupid to have rules allowing people, based on age alone, to freely choose sex partners, drink, drive, vote, marry, breed, practice law or medicine, or teach.
Now that we have achieved sex, gender, marriage and racial equality, we should start to focus on age-equality or at least eliminate all laws based arbitrarily on age.
“Cuckservative” is a term that the “alt-Right” uses to describe a normal conservative (for lack of a better phrase). “Cuck” comes from “cuckold.” The idea is, white conservative men enjoy seeing their wives have sexual relations with dark-skinned men, for the purpose of making the country at large darker.
Last year, the conservative journalist Ben Shapiro and his wife had a child. Ben sent out a tweet that said, “With infinite gratitude to God, we’re overjoyed to welcome to the world our new baby boy, who arrived at 10:30 this morning.”
Ben got the usual torrent of Nazi tweets, wishing his new baby and the rest of the family to the gas chambers. There were tweets showing the Shapiro family as lampshades. And so on.
Yiannopoulos wrote a tweet of his own. It said, “Prayers to Ben who had to see his kid come out half-black. And already taller than he is!” Accompanying this tweet was a comical picture of a black baby.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/445056/what-conservative-question-c-pac-and-milo-yiannopoulos
1) It is indefensible that so many people have posted items on Milo's video's, without including a link to said videos..... Ooooooh! Must be hard to include a link. (yes. that's snark. and yes. you can search, but are they the same video's?) (Ann's low on my "Angry Old Man " list, but her having links would have been nice.)
How is anyone capable of an honest comment with no knowledge of the source material?
2) Young gays, as soon as they hit the horny adolescent stage we all seem to pass through, can have more sex with more partners, most much older, than we poor straights ever though possible. This has been a "thing" in gay culture since forever, or at least whenever they could openly write about it. Being openly gay has been a death sentence more than once. Once you approve of open gays, this also comes with that and the Milo flap is just a distraction.
"Are you braggin', or complainin'?"
I am thinking...why didn't a man ever think I was attractive in my early teens?
Girls fucking loved me and wanted to do me, but no men.
i don't pay attention to that milo guy, and i don't really care about his opinion on anything. all i know is that if conservatives had a problem with milo's views on this subject (and they did) they would obviously have problems with madonna's views as well.
Milo has resigned from Breitbart.
I love this so much, because I learned about this part of The Vagina Monologues from Althouse. Yay!
Eric: “Cuckservative” is a term that the “alt-Right” uses to describe a normal conservative (for lack of a better phrase). “Cuck” comes from “cuckold.” The idea is, white conservative men enjoy seeing their wives have sexual relations with dark-skinned men, for the purpose of making the country at large darker.
[...]
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/445056/what-conservative-question-c-pac-and-milo-yiannopoulos
Where would we be without NR to keep us up to date?
"Cuck" is a general term of abuse for "conservatives" who've rolled over for the left on just about everything, and have been busily selling out Western people in the name of a "conservatism" that is nothing but a boutique brand of neoliberal universalism.
(See also "true conservative"; "lifelong Republican".)
NR types fixate on the obscene insults and literal meaning because they'd rather not think about the aptness of the metaphor in describing their beliefs and behaviors.
McMuffin was behind the hit?
Seriously, fuck that clown.
Whatboutism is lazy.
Milo did make the dumb statements and didnt clarify at hte time, so it is understandable somewhat that he's getting slammed. But even if his critics were 100% right about what he is alleged to have said, he wasn't talking about pedophilia. He was talking about the age of consent. And, he said he mostly agreed with the age of consent as is.
But we have to be cognizant of the fact that, despite this age of consent, a whole lot of teens are having sex. Including Milo. And we can all remember back in high school when we WANTED to be the teens that got lucky early.
one of my friends for example who was 13 at the time and was taller than the rest of us so seemed to be more adult got hit on by a 20 something year old. and he went out with her. And all of us were jealous of this fact. The fact that the age of consent was what it was was irrelevant to consideration. Do we think he considered it a RAPE? or a rite of passage?
Milo later clarified (having the ability to clarify is a great thing and should be afforded to more people under a microscope) that what happened to him was in fact abuse. But he didnt consider it abuse at the time.
(cont) so when HE was 13 he was sexually active and promiscous with men. You see this with groupies of rock stars who are in fact underage (and if you rewatch the movie Almost Famous which glorified groupies you'll realize that the main groupie played by Kate Hudson was actually underage and so, all the rock starts doing her and her pals, were all statuatory rapists)
But he also described himself on the tapes as an outlier. Just becuase he was able to handle this as a 13 year old doesnt mean that he said OTHER 13 year olds could handle it. THough he now admits that having a man touch him then was abuse AND it probably determined how he acted going forward.
I think, people who are that 13 year old and sexually active dont get that the person who deflowered them was wrong. THey see the statuatory age but say "I'm different"
I didnt realize this until looking into the Milo incident, but David Bowie is known to have slept with a 14 year old groupie. So is in fact guilty of statuatory rape. I didn't know this, because no one really mentioned it. After he died we heard all the great stories about how Bowie was a musical icon. But no one tweeted "...but did you know, he also diddled underage girls and is a pedophile" that same girl then went with Jimmie page and had a long three year relationship when she was only 15. And her mom, apparently approved.
The girl who had the affair did not view it as a rape, either. She said that basically her sister was screwing bikers, and all her friends in HS had already lost their virginity. ANd it was David bowie. who WOULDNT want to be deflowered by David Bowie? And there is some truth to this. The age is set in stone in the law, but so many people engage in behavior despite this law, and is it ALL rape? Technically, yes, but clearly there is some nuance here. And in other countries, like Germany for example, the age of consent is actually 14. So, having sex with 16 year old woudlnt be that out of place. But if someone mentioned sex with a 14 year old here, everyone is up in arms. Its a different standard all around the world. That's what Milo was hinting at.
He later mentioned the german age of consent being 14 (his mother was german) so as to provide context. They do it differnetly there. but he then said he thought that age was too low.
on the tape he sasy "The age of consent is MOSTLY right" meaning, that 16 is mostly right. But he does have his own experiences and he knows that when he was that age, he felt justified and that he was able to deal with situations better than probaly most 13 year olds (even though he also says it was abusive and he realizes that his perspective as a 13 year old is different than perspective now..
He also clarified that when he was talking about an older gay man having a relationship with a younger man he was again addressiing his own relationship. He was 17, so past age of consent in UK, and dated a 29 year old. ANd he was saying this sort of relationship is in fact common in the gay world. AND IT IS. gays might want to sweep this under the rug, but until gays became normalized the idea that older gay men would usher in boys who just became men into manhood was COMMON PLACE.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा