Posted on 02/21/2017 5:06:22 AM PST by Kaslin
It was quite the weekend for Milo Yiannopoulos. After Friday nights typically compelling sit-down with Bill Maher on HBOs Real Time, the Saturday web buzz crackled with the news that the 32-year-old British provocateur had been named keynote speaker in the usually comfortable mainstream environment of CPAC.
This came as a surprise to many, including some on the American Conservative Union board that oversees the event. A debate ensued over whether a speaker sure to energize some and repel others was the smartest keynote choice.
Then Monday, the questions ran deeper, including but not limited to: Would Milos publisher cancel his book, due out in June? (Yes.) And would he be fired from the very job that lofted him to high visibility, writing and editing at Breitbart?
The bomb that exploded in his path is a video clip in which he explores with unfortunate imprecision the occasional gay teen who winds up in a relationship with an older (sometimes much older) adult man. This sparked instant cries that he was advocating pedophilia, which he denied in lengthy detail in a Sunday Facebook post, announcing to all: I am completely disgusted by the abuse of children.
But the video keeps alive the question of Milos definition of children. Or at least his definition of what constitutes pedophilia.
He rightly asserts that an adult eyebrow raised in the direction of todays rapidly developing older minors is not the same as a sexual taste for pre-pubescent children. But at this point, those layers of nuance became sufficiently uncomfortable that from the brain trust of CPAC to the offices of Simon & Schuster, conclusions were reached that it was time to distance.
So are these decisions justifiable, or has Milo been done wrong by people who should have stuck up for him?
Any perusal of Milos writings (and even more so his speaking) reveals that he makes life hard for defenders, and that seems to be the point. A tireless advocate for freedom of expression, he is a useful example of the old adage that innocuous speech requires no protection; it is the edgy firebrands who will draw negative attention requiring the armor of the Bill of Rights.
But I hope even Milo understands that this moments predicament has nothing to do with free speech. Unlike campus fascists who have sought to disrupt his invited appearances, a convention and a publisher have the right to associate with whomever they please. This includes the right to disassociate for whatever reasons they may cite.
We, in turn, are free to understand or lament these abandonments of Milo. So lets move to whether he deserves such banishment.
Maybe its the months of explaining Donald Trump to people who cannot grasp his appeal, but I can understand the points Milo makes in the video without subscribing to any of them. While he may wistfully appreciate an older gay man offering comfort to an empathy-starved 17-year-old, my preference would be for young men to introspectively explore whether they might find and cling to the slightest thread of heterosexuality.
But thats not the point. The issue surrounds whether Milo has crossed a line into ambivalence (if not approval) of even younger teens coming under the wing of gay mentors decades older.
Discussion groups are free to dive into the tricky layers of where those lines are drawn. A worthy distinction can be drawn between sexual attention toward pre-pubescent children and blossoming post-adolescents. But this is a roundtable millions of Americans have no interest in, and the very sound of these ruminations is apparently mortifying in a number of locations that mere days ago were pleased to do business with Milo.
His book deal, his CPAC speaking gig and his Breitbart job strike me as three different cases. CPAC first: it was stupid to invite him.
I can understand, even appreciate, how a Milo invitation looks appealing for about ten seconds. Heres the guy whose very words sparked riots at Berkeley, the kind of thing that confers instant conservative heroism. Throw in his boldness on issues from Black Lives Matter to global jihad, wrapped in glib Brit-millennial patter, and its easy to see his potential for broadening the appeal of some conservative ideas.
But his caustic style, which he constantly brands with the asterisk of satire, may well have repulsed as many as it attracted. A speaking window somewhere at CPAC was justifiable. The keynote slot was not. Now one wonders if hell be allowed into the building.
Which brings us to another location considering his fate: his employer. Breitbart is free to cut ties with anyone whom it feels has damaged its brand, but has he? The Breitbart brand is so vague and splintered now, that it is hard to suggest that Milo has somehow caused a wave of new bad pub aimed its way.
Breitbart is the one forum where he should be able to expect a full ear for his denial of pedophilia advocacy, an argument that takes him some time, but resonates once made. There are smatterings of stories of Breitbart employees threatening to quit if he is not shown the door, but Ill guess those are people who grew weary of his excesses long ago. My gut feeling is that this episode should not be a career-ender.
So if CPAC never should have reached out to him and Breitbart should restrain itself from jettisoning him, what about the book deal?
Totally the publishers call.
I would probably appreciate Simon and Schuster saying something like: We signed Milo with the full knowledge that his views are intentionally, entertainingly incendiary. We expected his book to draw fiery reaction, and we welcome it as part of todays many styles of political engagement, and we believe his assertions that he in no way turns a blind eye to the victimization of children.
But thats a lot to ask. Their job is to sell books in a nation currently filled with various hopped-up constituencies ready to wage economic warfare upon provocations large and small. I do not blame them for reducing to zero the chances of pickets swarming their midtown Manhattan headquarters.
So, the lessons? A livelihood steeped in edgy discourse has its hazards. It can reward its practitioners, but trap doors are common. Donald Trump can be elected president, surviving rhetorical moments his supporters chose to ignore. But Milo might suffer mightily as support he enjoyed mere days ago is yanked from various corners where his act grew too hot to handle. Our parents were right: life is unfair.
But if Milo Yiannopoulos is as resourceful as he seems to be, he can probably spin this into some new chapter, flaunting these latest rejections as further marketable evidence of the dangerous persona that some folks did not have the stomach for.
Who's "us"?
You and your pet Gerbil, Mr. Stinkywiggles?
No the fact that you are a coward and wont offer an alternative
An alternative to what? Being gay? You're a bit slow aren't you.
Pot....kettle....black!
Pot....kettle....black!
Pot....kettle....black!
Gee, maybe it was Neoliberalnot who went on the Joe Rogen show and stood up to Joe when he said religion was just a fairy tale, No wait, that was Milo
Maybe it was Neoliberalnot who last friday was on the Bill Maher show explaining why you made fun of a transgender student trying to get into the girls locker room. And for your effort to explain that transgenderism is a disease, and the new pronoun use is stupid, you were told to F off at least 5 or 6 times. No wait that was Milo too.
Maybe Neoliberalnot had to put on a bullet proof vest to speak in Orlando after the shooting. Not just calling out radical Islam, but saying that Islam as a whole is the problem due to their backwards thinking. No wait, darn, that was Milo as well.
This time I will get it right, Neoliberalnot was on the Dave Ruben podcast convincing a gay left host that gay marriage and bullying bakers is a terrible thing to do. Nope, Milo again.
okok, I know I will find something you have done, maybe
Neoliberalnot drove to Indiana to Memories pizza to apologize for the bullying tactics used by the gay agenda, to this little pizza place. Shucks, that was Milo as well.
Were you that guy who had to leave in a bullet proof vest in Berkley a few weeks ago because anti free speech folks were there trying to shut down the event. No wait, that was Milo.
Im going to get this one right. I think Neoliberalnot didnt bother to see if this Joe Rogan video had been edited where they left out the question that Milo was asked about the current age of consent laws, and he said he agrees with them. Yep, got that one right.
Once you guys start doing anything other than falling for the same old tricks and preaching to the choir, you may want to be appreciative of those risking their own safety to win this war of we the people against the globalists.
Just to be clear, he is not a conservative per se and has said repeatedly he is not. He is speaking in support of freedom of expression and freedom to throw off the shackles of political correctness. Many of his views resonate with conservatives, but he does not accept the label.
Actually, that is what your gutter comment is doing.
Actually, she has gone farther, although on different topics, such as saying she didn't care if Trump performed abortions in the White House, saying (of islam) "we should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity", as well as calling John Edwards a "faggot" at CPAC 2007and the like. I suggest she is not still "one of us" in many quarters due to her support of Romney -- look up any of the old threads on FR about that and see the vitriol from "us." She also used to be invited on the mainstream morning shows for interviews with people like Matt Lauer every time she published a new book, due to her sales volume; but starting with her excellent book Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama just before the 2012 election, she has become a persona non grata on the networks.
This is no condemnation of Ann, but a realistic look at the scorched earth the fascist libs routinely demand. Ann has suffered setbacks along with every other breakthrough commentator. Now it's Milo's turn.
“You and your pet Gerbil, Mr. Stinkywiggles?”
What a f*cking child.
Explains so much about you losers.
I wonder if fabulous Milo would like one of those.
Like you, I hope he can overcome this misstep in speech.
I found him entertaining and refreshing in his “freshness” toward the Marx0-Progs.
Here’s a tip for you Vande, the homosexuals are 98% for the left and vote 90% for the rat party. We all know it and that is why they are not welcomed to this site. If the right doesn’t have anything to show as you so blindly state, I suggest you check the last election results.
Why don’t you try telling the truth? At the least you are clearly homophilic and have little knowledge of the diseases vectored by male homosexuals to, not just other people, but to young boys. Try doing some of your research on NAMBLA.
Just to be clear, he is not a conservative per se and has said repeatedly he is not. He is speaking in support of freedom of expression and freedom to throw off the shackles of political correctness. Many of his views resonate with conservatives, but he does not accept the label.
Correct. Milo is a libertarian. Self described libertarian. On that basis alone - I reject his political values. Then add in his homo agenda - and there are wild eyed militant FReepers here (VDK) supporing him?
I asked this question on another thread. If Milo was an ordinary FReeper making these unedited comments - would he get the zot?
What if he was pro-abortion to the degree he is pro-homo? Would he last long here?
Of course not.
Nope, I’m just a public health guy and have an understanding of infectious diseases and the odd transmission methods used by your male homos. I have no idea what TV shows you are referencing, but just so you know there is a wide gap in TV marketing fantasy and the science of infectious disease.
Sometimes the facts must be stated in simple terms.
I have no idea what TV shows you are referencing,
So, you don’t know who this guy is, yet comment on threads about him? Yeah, the party of stupid continues to lose. This is really a big lose for our side, unless of course we don’t need to do a darn thing about the indoctrination on our college campuses. What’s your plan to start turning these hotbeds of feminist pc crap around?
I know the lifestyle from the disease and public health threat. I’ll leave the TV shows to your expertise. Try to minimize the name calling and keep it adult level.
Homopholic?
Jesus, you guys are becoming ever more retarded.
It’s like some people on the right see every damn person through some form of filter like SJWs do!
If they don’t pass your door test, well they are worth less than those that do, but contribute nothing!
“You cant support what Milo has done with college conservatives, and giving them a real push to be more vocal and stand up for themselves! Why....he’s a homo and diseases, and God shall hate you”....and other tangents.
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.