Posted on 02/20/2017 9:06:35 PM PST by TigerClaws
Milo Yiannopoulos will be making his first on-camera comments to press regarding the recent controversy over statements Milo made during Joe Rogan and Drunken Peasants podcasts. Questions will be taken following a statement.
If you believe that, then you haven’t done your research. He clearly and directly affirmed man-boy relationships. Numerous videos exist showing him, in context, affirming man-boy sexual relationships.
I have done my research.
Pedophilia is a sexual attraction to prepubescent children.
He has emphatical condemn that.
What you are talking about is not pedophilia.
I’ll leave it to you to research the proper term for what you are talking about.
Milo has repeatedly spoken out against pedophilia calling it a disease. He was molested as a child and outed 3 individuals for participating in pedophilia.
According to Milo that age of 13 comment was due to the fact that he had his first sexual encounter at 13. Its unfortunate that the never Trumpers have managed to turn this I to a circus.
Right. He says that it is fine for a grown man to have a relationship with a 13-year-old boy, as long as that boy is post-pubescent.
And you’re fine with that? Really?
OK, you are apparently fine with man-boy sexual relationships, so long as that boy is not pre-pubescent. I don’t think that’s cool, but it’s a free country, within limits.
Agreed.
This is what Milo said:
“Yeah, I don’t mind saying, I don’t mind admitting that, and 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, you know, 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, from drug addiction, all those things, provided they’re consensual. Provided they’re consensual.”
He also said, without a hint of sarcasm:
“I am grateful for Father Michael. I wouldn’t give nearly such good head if it wasn’t for him.”
And this:
“This arbitrary and oppressive idea of consent which totally destroys, you know, the understanding that many of us have of the complexities and subtleties and complicated nature of many relationships. You know, people are messy and complex, and actually, in the homosexual world particularly, some of those relationships between younger boys and older men, those kind of coming-of-age relationships, the relationships in which those older men help those young boys to discover who they are, and give them security and safety and provide them with love and a reliable — a sort of a rock for when they can’t talk to their parents.”
I like Milo. I think he’s done a lot of good. But by promoting man-boy sexual relationships (though he clarifies that the little boy needs to be post-pubescent and the relationship must be “consensual”), he has disqualified himself from speaking for conservatives like me.
Still haven’t found the term for it?
I don’t have time to study pedophilia. I’m not going to google pedophilia. You can spend time with pedophilia, but I personally don’t care to.
I do know that Milo explicitly affirmed man-boy sexual relationships. Call it what you want. It’s not right, and not something we should support.
Not sure why you’re putting up such a strong defense of man-boy sexual relationships, kanawa. Do you support sex between men and boys, so long as the boy is post-pubescent and “consenting” to the sex?
He did not advocate pedophilia. Pedophilia is sex with a pre-pubescent child. He denounced that in no uncertain terms.
He did, however, discuss the difficulties experienced by persons like himself who were seduced under the age of consent but after the age of puberty, which is defined as hebephilia in early teens and ephebophilia in older teens. These are clinically different thresholds than pedophila, as he has attempted to clarify, being himself a victim of sexual molestation and statutory rape, and obviously struggling to come to terms with it.
Ordinarily, the left adores victims and encourages them to use their condition to batter, blame, sue and denounce society but never to put it behind them -- instead, they must make their victimization an "identity." And the right prides itself on compassion for victims, along with wanting victims not to wallow, but to achieve healing and renewal. But because Milo is rejecting the left's "born that way" battering ram, progressives despise him and want to destroy him. And because the right is in large part ignorant about many of the yucky aspects of illegal underage sex, many react with blanket condemnation instead of learning how or why to be appropriately compassionate.
While he has said some great things in defense of conservatism, his sexual deviation kinda disqualifies him from speaking for us.
He has never accepted the label of "conservative", so what is your point? But to the extent that he rejects the fundamental untruths being put forward by Political Correctness, Marxist social theory and the complicit media, and to the extent that he admires and upholds the uniquely American right to free speech (even his native UK has no equivalent to our First Amendment), he is helpful to "the right."
Being grateful for his voice does not make one also gay or in favor of the gay political agenda; even Milo is not in favor of the gay political agenda other than being allowed to engage in the lifestyle with other consenting adults without being jailed or violently persecuted for it. Appreciating the pro-free speech message delivered by an imperfect vessel actually is more conservative than the shut-it-down message to speech hated by the fascist left, who demand obedience to their version of social justice.
We who believe in the freedoms of conscience and the rest of the Bill of Rights are not so quick to condemn a person who openly admits he is conflicted about his ow sexuality and who has rejected the homosexual political agenda over and over.
No, I support truth in reporting.
MILO RESPONDS:
I am a gay man, and a child abuse victim.
I would like to restate my utter disgust at adults who sexually abuse minors. I am horrified by pedophilia and I have devoted large portions of my career as a journalist to exposing child abusers. I’ve outed three of them, in fact — three more than most of my critics. And I’ve repeatedly expressed disgust at pedophilia in my feature and opinion writing. My professional record is very clear
.
But I do understand that these videos, even though some of them are edited deceptively, paint a different picture.
I’m partly to blame. My own experiences as a victim led me to believe I could say anything I wanted to on this subject, no matter how outrageous. But I understand that my usual blend of British sarcasm, provocation and gallows humor might have come across as flippancy, a lack of care for other victims or, worse, “advocacy.” I deeply regret that. People deal with things from their past in different ways.
As to some of the specific claims being made, sometimes things tumble out of your mouth on these long, late-night live-streams, when everyone is spit-balling, that are incompletely expressed or not what you intended. Nonetheless, I’ve reviewed the tapes that appeared last night in their proper full context and I don’t believe they say what is being reported.
I do not advocate for illegal behavior. I explicitly say on the tapes that I think the current age of consent is “about right.”
I do not believe sex with 13-year-olds is okay. When I mentioned the number 13, I was talking about the age I lost my own virginity.
I shouldn’t have used the word “boy” — which gay men often do to describe young men of consenting age — instead of “young man.” That was an error.
I am certainly guilty of imprecise language, which I regret.
Anyone who suggests I turn a blind eye to illegal activity or to the abuse of minors is unequivocally wrong. I am implacably opposed to the normalization of pedophilia and I will continue to report and speak accordingly.
T H A T
I haven’t condemned Milo. I’m just saying that we should be careful finding solidarity with someone who supports man-boy sexual relationships, provided they are consensual and the boy is post-pubescent.
This explanation is somewhat helpful.
But the videos I’ve seen of him talking about the subject *clearly* shows that he supports man-boy sexual relationships, provided they are “consensual” and the boy is post-pubescent.
I remain opposed to this behavior, and consider it quite deviant. You, as I’ve said before, are free to affirm such deviancy and find solidarity with others who affirm such sexual deviancy.
Research?
It's obvious you don't have a clear understanding of the term "advocacy," so any "research" you may have performed is highly suspect.
I think a man, or a woman for that matter, should take off all their clothes
and stand in front of a full-length mirror and do a complete and honest examination of their body.
Understanding that the Creator has intended a specific purpose for each part of their body, attempt to ascertain that purpose.
What is the purpose of, or what was that particular part designed for?
Am I using that part in the way in which the Creator intended it to be used?
I hope someday Milo will do this.
He is intelligent enough and if he is honest enough he will cease his homosexual behavior.
Are you really so vapid as to think that reed provides you any cover?
The way you've repeatedly lied and defamed Milo as an advocate is EVERY BIT as intellectually dishonest and slimey as those claiming "grab them by the pussy" is an admission of sexual assault.
You're lucky JimRob runs this place and not me. I'd not only ban you: I'd doxx you on the way out....
Jim, papertyger is lying about me to you.
I have appreciated what Milo has said in bold defense of free speech.
I do not, however, affirm his defense of man-boy sex (provided the boy is post-pubescent and the relationship is “consensual”).
I have not said a single non-truthful thing about Milo.
papertyger, quit lying about me and threatening me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.