ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2020 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, April 18, 2014

The Hollywood mafia in the media crosshairs

It's interesting to see this story surface so soon after the Mozilla debacle. It will be informative to discover if the media is as willing to go after the homosexual pedophiles of Hollywood as they were to go after the homosexual pedophiles of the Catholic hierarchy:
A man who claims he was sexually abused by "X-Men" franchise director Bryan Singer said Thursday that he reported the molestation to authorities at the time, and he does not know why charges were never pursued.

With his voice occasionally wavering, Michael Egan III described abuse he said began when he was 15 years old at the hands of Singer and others. He told of being plied with drugs and promises of Hollywood fame while also enduring threats and sexual abuse in Hawaii and Los Angeles over several years....

Egan and his attorney said at a news conference that the alleged abuse was reported by Egan's mother to the FBI and Los Angeles police and that interviews were conducted. The lawyer, Jeff Herman, later said he was not sure if his client spoke to police detectives or if the case was referred directly to the FBI. He said Egan did not report any abuse to Hawaiian authorities.

Los Angeles Police Commander Andrew Smith said the department is looking into whether a report was made. FBI spokeswoman Laura Eimiller said the agency could not comment on what Egan reported unless it resulted in a case or matter of public record.
One tends to assume that there is going to be a serious media effort to belittle and stymie any investigation due to disingenuous fears of fanning the flames of anti-semitism and anti-sodomism. But I doubt that effort is going to be effective because Americans increasingly dislike Hollywood, are largely unmoved by appeals to Holocaustianity, and are not going to give secular Jews any more of a pass to commit homosexual child-rape than they gave Catholic priests.

And perhaps more importantly, the mainstream media doesn't control the narrative anymore. One hopes it will give the Corey Feldmans of the world the courage to speak out and start the process of cleaning out the Hollywood cesspool.

In the meantime, I think I'll give the new X-Men movie a pass.

Labels:

195 Comments:

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 9:15 AM  

I think they'll try to sweep this one under the rug as well...

Blogger The Deuce April 18, 2014 9:27 AM  

In the meantime, I think I'll give the new X-Men movie a pass.

I may watch it, when it comes out on free download.

Blogger Nate April 18, 2014 9:32 AM  

While I don't minimize ideology's effects on the media... this is a story... and there will be some in the media that will go after it as a story... because they love stories.

I don't think its going to be totally squashed.

I do note the differences in the way its reported as compared to how it would be reported if say... it had been a bunch of women making the accusations.

Blogger Unknown April 18, 2014 9:35 AM  

15 years old is not pedophilia, gays are the biggest allies against feminism, loving fellow men means complete freedom from the only power women have over men, sexual power. Homosexuality is not a real ally to feminists and is question of time to see it, probably Bryan did it because there aren't many natural gay men who would love men back, I know is immoral but he acted more of despair I guess. Up to 33% of men could be homosexualized like in ancient Rome and feudal Japan

Blogger Bogey April 18, 2014 9:38 AM  

Bring a bottle of Vodka and take a drink every time you spot a twink on screen.

We're the last ones to find out; it looks like Singer's been flaunting young boys around town for years.

No one should be surprised though, not only did people support homosexual behavior but they allowed it to be sanctified under the law. If I was a supporter of gay rights I would be feeling mighty foolish right now. A pervy is going to perv.

Anonymous Pseudo-Nate April 18, 2014 9:48 AM  

http://www.donmurphy.net/naked.html

Not singers first rodeo either. Sad to see how the Hollywood elite are victimized by those underaged boys

Blogger Jeff Burton April 18, 2014 9:50 AM  

Me Guerreo - love how the homosexual apologists break down stuff like this into pedophilia, hebephilia, ephebophilia - basic problem is that homesexuals are disproportionately more likely to go after really young sex partners (another fact swept under the rug). If I caught you with one of my teenage sons and I had my Sig in one hand, not sure your hairsplitting is going to save your life.

Anonymous Seymour Butz April 18, 2014 9:51 AM  

‘[…] Americans […] are largely unmoved by appeals to Holocaustianity, and are not going to give secular Jews any more of a pass to commit homosexual child-rape than they gave Catholic priests.’

 

I dunno, Mister Day, I WANT to believe that, but I look at how long the nation of Israel has kited us along on theological premises which aren’t even credited by a huge chunk of the secular, degenerate Israelis — and that’s eating up our tax dollars. I know this situation isn’t completely analogous — pederasty rape isn’t even faintly theologically defensible — but it’s close enough that I have to question whether this story has legs.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 9:58 AM  

"If I caught you with one of my teenage sons and I had my Sig in one hand, not sure your hairsplitting is going to save your life."

And then go to jail for murder or even worse, have all of your family killed in revenge because you're an unthinking hothead.

Why wouldn't you shoot your faggot son for not saying no?

I mean, granted, 15 is quite young, but still. If I was part of such a situation I'd beat the shit out of both of them.

Blogger Jeff Burton April 18, 2014 10:01 AM  

Tommy Hass, I like pretending I'm a real man. In real life, I'd probably curl up in a corner and suck my thumb.

Anonymous VD April 18, 2014 10:03 AM  

Why wouldn't you shoot your faggot son for not saying no?

Presumably because 15 is a child unable to consent and he was legally raped.

Anonymous Post April 18, 2014 10:04 AM  

I'm shocked that the director of propaganda movies about a fantasy school for gays would himself be a mutant.

Anonymous Anonymous April 18, 2014 10:07 AM  

I'm not sure if our resident Buddhist above was offering a serious list of justifications, or doing a parody of the ones we'll hear, but either way -- well done!

I'm surprised this one came out at all, really. As a nice side note to another regular topic here, look how easily the cops sidestep it. The local cops pass the buck to the FBI, the FBI passes it back, and both hide behind privacy regulations and bureaucracy to avoid any responsibility.

Anonymous YIH April 18, 2014 10:07 AM  

By the old saying ''don't get caught in bed with a live boy or a dead girl'' there was the Jimmy Savile scandal. They had to move his grave due to the vandalism.
Not to mention the claims of Corey Feldman and of course the Michael Jack-son allegations that crippled his career and haunted him the rest of his life. IIRC circa 2000 or so, Jack-son was doing another music video and a casting call of child extras was put out. From what I heard there were about a 1000 kids with parents vying for that chance. WTF?
How can anybody be surprised though? Hollyweird is pretty much the perfect place for a pedo, a ready supply of good-looking naive kids with parents who are so star-struck (and/or greedy) that they will either ignore possible trouble or even act as a pimp for their kid(s).

Anonymous Post April 18, 2014 10:08 AM  

And then go to jail for murder or even worse, have all of your family killed in revenge because you're an unthinking hothead.

Gays like to kill themselves as well as others afflicted with their own mental illness, but I don't think straights have anything to fear from a queer uprising.

Anonymous Michael April 18, 2014 10:10 AM  

Even if the allegations hold water, the MSM will never link Hollywood's immorality with secular Jewish ownership and rampant homosexuality. As a matter of fact, the MSM is working hard to present immorality as moral, which likely explains part of the reason for their massive ratings plummet.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 10:18 AM  

"Presumably because 15 is a child unable to consent and he was legally raped."

Yes, LEGALLY. If one changed the law to make the AoC 25, then technically, sodomizing a 21 year old is rape as well.

It's all bullshit. If something is immoral, all the laws in the world won't suffice to make it OK. It's legal in some Islamic countries to have sex with girls once they start bleeding. (i.e. 9-12) We know that this is wrong and disgusting despite the fact that it is legal.

Now, I've been 15 year old an I know this for a fact: I certainly wasn't an Eloi that would unthinkingly let a faggot sodomize me like that. The boy was 15 not 8. Regardless of what the law says, he didn't say no and deserves to be thought of as a deviant as well.

"Jeff wouldn't necessarily go to jail, or even be charged with a crime.

In Texas last year a man caught someone trying to rape his daughter and beat him to death. The sheriff laughed at a reporter who asked what crimes they would charge him with."

That kind of thing isn't very reliable though. Besides, there is the revenge angle. I bet he wouldn't feel great about killing his son's "rapist" if the family members of said person were crazy enough to put his family members underground for doing that.

I mean, once that happens one really wonders if it wouldn't have been better to let the cops handle it or at least use non lethal violence. I mean, if your 15 year old son let it happen, he probably would've let someone sodomize him anyway, just a couple of years later. Wow, you sure made a difference.

So yeah, I can understand the urge to destroy, but it's important to THINK.

Blogger Jeff Burton April 18, 2014 10:27 AM  

Hass: I'm not going to kill anyone. I'm the wuss in the family. I'd be afraid of getting blood all over my shiny automatic. My wife on the other hand... The first/second person viewpoint was rhetorical. My point is that gays like to make these idiotic distinctions between underage sexual targets. Because a higher proportion of them are predators. It's still a small minority (numbers I've seen are still under 10%). This also relates to the incessant push to lower age of consent.

Anonymous YIH April 18, 2014 10:29 AM  

On a lighter note; From the late Shirley Temple Black:
REHM
11:26:43
I love the fact that as you relate in "Child Star" what you did when this adult male exposed himself to you was exactly what you did just now.
BLACK
11:26:51
Well, I giggle. In fact, I laughed hardily. I was 12 years old and it was my first day away from our wonderful Fox studio, which took such good care of me. And mother and I went to this new big important studio. And when he exposed himself, I said to myself, I thought he was a producer. It turns out he's an exhibitor but I laughed so hard that he was infuriated. And he said, get out of here, out, out, out, which I think saved me maybe from a big problem. I think the laughter saved me.

Anonymous Curtis April 18, 2014 10:32 AM  

This is alleged to have happened 15 that is FIFTEEN YEARS ago. There's no proof, no evidence, nothing. Why don't you just haul out the accused give him quick witch trial and then burn him?
There is no justice in hanging an unprovable accusation on someone years after the alleged incident.

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 April 18, 2014 10:36 AM  

Maybe Hollywood should relocate to Germany or Japan where the age of consent is 14.

Blogger Nate April 18, 2014 10:40 AM  

"Why wouldn't you shoot your faggot son for not saying no? "

Can you even read? In several articles he makes it clear he refused. He was drugged. He was physically forced in some case by two grown men.

Moron.

Anonymous Roundtine April 18, 2014 10:41 AM  

There are cases that go way back. If someone wants to dig in, it will rival the church abuse scandal. And Hollywood has lots and lots of money.

Corey Feldman can write entire books on the subject and all that happens is the ladies on the View say, "That's so sad." Corey Haim is dead. F these people. The Church responded to the abuse and banned men with deep seated homosexual tendencies from becoming priests. Pope Benedict XVI defrocked priests by the hundreds. Is Hollywood cleaning out their rapists? No, they give them awards and promote them. Sick sick people.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 10:44 AM  

"This also relates to the incessant push to lower age of consent."

And I'd say it's justified. I wouldn't say I'm thinking about gay men fucking teenage boys here. But the fact that you can go to jail for CHILD MOLESTATION because you had sex with a nubile 16 or 17 year old girl is asinine. Especially considering that a) many of them have well dveloped secondary sexual characteristics, b) many of them already have extensive sexual experience. (it's not like doing anything to them that they're not already doing) c) historically speaking, girls frequently got married at that age and d) many civilized countries in the world (and the majority of states in the USA) see 16 as the AoC.

I personally never cared for the "anyone under the age of 18 is a child" argument. By the argument, anyone above the age of 18 is an adult. Now, would you classify the average 19 year old as an adult? A 19 year old is a much an adult as a 17 year old is a child. That is, not at all.

It all comes donw to personal experience. We've all been teenagers. Are you gentlemen seriously telling me you would've accepted the advances of a homosexual due to your lack of maturity? If the answer is yes, then it would follow that only people above the age of 18 should go to jail for any crimes. How can you be expected to be charged for crimes while simultaneously be deemed so mentally undeveloped that your consent is meaningless?

Anonymous Don April 18, 2014 10:45 AM  

Hass - Go get yourself a keeper now. Make sure you wear a yellow helmet to let everyone know you are likely to harm yourself if not properly dressed and protected. You are too stupid to trust out in public on your own.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 10:47 AM  

"
Can you even read? In several articles he makes it clear he refused. He was drugged. He was physically forced in some case by two grown men.

Moron."

It says "plied with drugs". I understood that as "putting out in exchange for drugs". (English isn't my first language)

Sorry I guess.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 10:50 AM  

"You are too stupid to trust out in public on your own."

Because I believe the age of consent should be around 16 instead of 18?

Blogger Nate April 18, 2014 10:50 AM  

Tommy....

From the very article Vox linked:

"Bryan Singer attended several of the parties and forced Egan into sex, giving him drugs and threatening Egan when he resisted advances, the lawsuit states."

Drugs. Threats. Force.

Dumbass.

There are plenty of articles that go into much greater details. The kid flatly refused over and over again and was repeatedly physically forced.

Blogger Nate April 18, 2014 10:51 AM  

"Because I believe the age of consent should be around 16 instead of 18?"

No. Because you form very strong, and ridiculously incorrect opinions, without bothering to inform yourself.

Anonymous Daniel April 18, 2014 10:54 AM  

Evidence Curtis (aside from the reports made at the time)?

Exhibit A:

These films are haunted by the idea of the knock on the door. Being Jewish yourself, was this something you responded to when you read the comic books?

I always wanted to get involved in science fiction fantasy, and the notion that Professor Xavier was Martin Luther King and Magneto was Malcolm X, and these were two men who had very strong, decent beliefs, but had taken different roads. And the irony of that, and the moral ambiguity of that, intrigued me. It was a step beyond simple crime-solving, superhero action. It was much more socio-political, and in that way exposed more truth.

How much, though, have you personally brought to these films? It has been suggested that because you're gay and Jewish, you know what it is like to feel like part of a minority...

I'm actually part of a number of minorities. I grew up being a horribly awkward kid. A terrible student. And now I find myself as a filmmaker, and you feel kind of alone in the world because you're separate from everyone else. So, yeah, it's definitely everything from the [coming out] scene with Bobby Drake and his family, to Wolverine's journey to uncover his past. I'm adopted, so even my own origins I'm not completely precise on.

The journey of Wolverine has always been a very personal one, because it's not just about where did I come from, who am I really, but how important is that to who I am now and to who I'm going to be? That journey, particularly through this picture, has been a kind of odd, personal one for me.

It seems that "X-Men" and "X-Men 2" represent your identities as a Jew living in America and as a gay man respectively, because in this one there is a homosexuality/homophobia subtext...

Well, yeah. That is also a very relevant analogy because where certain races, even a Jewish boy or a Jewish girl, will be born into a Jewish family, or a Jewish community sometimes, or an African American or whatever minority in any given area, a gay kid doesn't discover he or she is gay until around puberty. And their parents aren't gay necessarily, and their classmates aren't, and they feel truly alone in the world and have to find, sometimes never find, a way to live.

So you're exploring your own situation in these films?

Absolutely. And what better way than in a giant, action, summer event movie! I could think of no better place to spill out one's own personal problems and foist them onto the world [laughs]. And for that, I apologise.

Does the fascination with evil that runs through all your films have its roots in the fact that you are Jewish?

I think so. I was very obsessed with the Holocaust as a child and man's inhumanity to man. And, ultimately, it came from my fear of intolerance. In certain places, for whatever reason, just for being Caucasian or having blue eyes, someone might want to cut my head off. For being American, for being anything, for just being myself, someone might want to destroy me. That concept is so terrifying that it constantly bears exploration.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 11:04 AM  

"No. Because you form very strong, and ridiculously incorrect opinions, without bothering to inform yourself."

Well, the excerpt that Vox posted didn't go that much into detail. *shrug*

Besides, I was more debating the idea that it's justified to kill a sodomite you've found in bed with your "teenaged" son, because it was "rape". I mentioned the Hollywood case tangentially.

Anonymous Josh April 18, 2014 11:04 AM  

Singer has an incredibly strong case of gay face.

Blogger Nate April 18, 2014 11:08 AM  

"Besides, I was more debating the idea that it's justified to kill a sodomite you've found in bed with your "teenaged" son, because it was "rape". "

Yes. and yet you argue that it is justified to kill your own son for "not saying no".

Make up your mind.

Anonymous stats79 April 18, 2014 11:09 AM  

I think Mr. Hass protests too much. What do you have your closet, Tommy?

Anonymous Don April 18, 2014 11:13 AM  

Nate - Thanks, I was too angry to really articulate what I wanted to say without profanity. The terrible thing is most men remember when they were kids other boys who would be easy prey for men like Singer. Boys who perverts know are vulnerable, easy to manipulate, and will keep silent either through fear or shame. With proper supervision and a good environment boys like that might never meet a piece of slime like Singer and would get through their teen years becoming normal men.

Hass would make it easier for such perversion to happen. I am not surprised to learn English is not his first language. So many here but especially abroad make apologies for the Singers and Polanskis of the world.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 11:14 AM  

"Yes. and yet you argue that it is justified to kill your own son for "not saying no". "

I should've been more precise: I don't think it's justified to kill your son for engaging in homosexuality. However, I disliked the way Jeff acted as if his son (in this hypothetical scenario) was a mere passive victim. 15 is not young enough that you would be justified in solely blaming the predator. Again, if you do think so lowly of the decision making capability of teenage boys, you should stop prosecuting juvenile criminals since they're too young to take responsibility for their actions.

Anonymous Josh April 18, 2014 11:16 AM  

I think you're the only one who read what Jeff wrote that way.

Anonymous rycamor April 18, 2014 11:18 AM  

Josh April 18, 2014 11:04 AM
Singer has an incredibly strong case of gay face.


There's more than just gay face there. This face makes me want to kill. This is the face of someone I would have nothing to do with, no matter who recommended him.

Anonymous Don April 18, 2014 11:19 AM  

Hass - Adult sodomite in bed with my boy? I guess you really, truly do not understand what a man should do in that situation so I'll make it clear. Take my boy to counseling for rape. Let the police take the rapist to the morgue.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 11:19 AM  

"Hass would make it easier for such perversion to happen. I am not surprised to learn English is not his first language. So many here but especially abroad make apologies for the Singers and Polanskis of the world."

Bullshit. Singer apparently straight up raped that boy (no "statutory" needed) and Polanski's victim was 13, which is too young to be prosecuted for crimes (where I live), not at an age where many girls already fuck like hobby prostitutes and too young to be married at ANY point in history.

So no.

Anonymous The other skeptic April 18, 2014 11:20 AM  

I think so. I was very obsessed with the Holocaust as a child and gentile inhumanity to Jews which means we are entitled to rape a few gentile boys.

Fixed it for him.

Anonymous Michael April 18, 2014 11:21 AM  

That didn't take long. First they push for SS'M -- well, more like force it through via judicial fiat, but who's keeping track? -- and now we've got someone proposing changing 'age of consent laws' to legalize sex with minors. Hence the LGBT's insistence on gaining access to children in the Boy Scouts and public schools.

No agenda there, I'm sure. /s

SCOTUS argued that giving legal recognition to civil unions for same-sex couples had absolutely nothing to do with marriage, so as to discredit slippery slope arguments ...and here we are.

How much more of this perverse filth are people going to tolerate?

Anonymous Godfrey April 18, 2014 11:22 AM  

You won't here a thing in the controlled media about this. Just like you didn't hear a thing about it when it happens in the government schools.

Blogger Nate April 18, 2014 11:24 AM  

I think the "statutory" angle is how the media is going to try to play this. But there are already to many articles out there that give the real details.

It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 11:25 AM  

"Hass - Adult sodomite in bed with my boy? I guess you really, truly do not understand what a man should do in that situation so I'll make it clear. Take my boy to counseling for rape. Let the police take the rapist to the morgue."

False dichotomy. You could find an adult sodomite in bed with your boy without rape involved. Furthermore, what if you're in one of those states where the AoC is 16, you know, the MAJORITY of states in your country?

Hey I don't blame you for feeling murderous rage at the notion. I would feel similar if something like that happened with my nephews. But feeling murderous rage doesn't automatically mean you're justified in acting on that rage. If I found my wife in bed with some other man, I would hope that there is nothing I can use to kill them, because I might. Doesn't mean I'm under any illusions that I'm justified in doing so.

Anonymous Don April 18, 2014 11:27 AM  

Hass - quit wasting time and go get that keeper. You insist on digging yourself in deeper. You understand that there is an age of consent for a reason? Where are you from Albania or Germany, Spain maybe? Other civilized nations reject decadence and filth for a reason.

Why would I kill my child for being raped? Sounds like something an Albanian goatherd would do not a normal father. No that's not fair to the goatherd.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 11:29 AM  

" and now we've got someone proposing changing 'age of consent laws' to legalize sex with minors."

Sex with minor IS LEGAL ALREADY you doofus. In NY, Nevada or many other states I can't be bothered to list, you can fuck minors as much as you like already.

Anonymous Don April 18, 2014 11:34 AM  

Hass - Let's break this down again. I have a boy below the age of consent. I do not allow sodomites in my home under any circumstances. I find an adult sodomite in bed with my boy. One he is trespassing in my home, two he is trespassing to commit a crime, three he is raping my son. He'd go quick because I need to deal with my son's trauma but he would go.

Done talking about it. Rapist in my house? Dead as a doorknob.

Anonymous hausfrau April 18, 2014 11:36 AM  

There is quite a bit of flexibility in US when charging a minor with a crime. Some teens under 18 are charged as adults if the crime is serious enough. The law recognizes the grey area of maturity in that age bracket by allowing discretion in how the kid is charged. A 15 year old knows right from wrong but they have little life experience and emotional maturity. They are so much easier to manipulate than a 20 year old. Thus the law is supposed to protect teens from adult predators.

Blogger Bogey April 18, 2014 11:39 AM  

SCOTUS argued that giving legal recognition to civil unions for same-sex couples had absolutely nothing to do with marriage, so as to discredit slippery slope arguments ...and here we are.

Slippery Slop is reliably a non-fallacy.

Anonymous Don April 18, 2014 11:40 AM  

Back to the subject at hand. Hollywood. Will they deal with it on a 24/7 news cycle? I am confident you will find far more coverage over the far less pervasive abuse by Catholic priests. You'll see less even than what coverage they give to public schools which is far more likely than the priest scenario.

Why it's all about 'who, whom'. Singer, Polanski, Jackson, et al. are their kind of people. It's not 'you know rape, rape'. Because drugging and sodomizing children is okay if you're a really good artist.

Anonymous Anonymous April 18, 2014 11:41 AM  

Tommy,

I went to school with a couple of boys who turned out to have been molested by priests at that time, at about the age of 15 and later. Now, by all accounts, they were "willing" in the sense that they had some attraction to men and wanted to please these men they looked up to. They never claimed they were held down or forced to do anything. However, their molesters only knew about their same-sex attraction through counseling them, and it's possible that they would have gotten over it if they'd been helped instead of having it used against them. The men knew all the tricks to gain their trust and keep them coming back.

Maybe that's technically not coercion, but it's something pretty close. I agree with you that the age of consent is ridiculously high, but as long as it IS that high, and we encourage kids to stay childish and tell them they'll be protected from predators until that age, we're obliged to back that up.

Anonymous stats79 April 18, 2014 11:43 AM  

Mr. Hass is sick to death of having to register every time he moves. If only he had lived in NY or Nevada when he indulged himself.

Anonymous Michael April 18, 2014 11:49 AM  

Tommy, no, I'm referring to the (predominantly LGBT) push to legalize sex with children younger than 16-18. You sound like a NAMBLA advocate or something.

http://www.ruthblog.org/2010/08/27/%E2%80%98lower-age-of-consent%E2%80%99-says-gay-rights-campaigner/

http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/gay-laws-set-stage-for-pedophilia-rights/

Strange how LGBT activists always seem to argue in favor of giving full legal recognition to perverse, deviant activity...

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 11:50 AM  

"A 15 year old knows right from wrong but they have little life experience and emotional maturity. They are so much easier to manipulate than a 20 year old. Thus the law is supposed to protect teens from adult predators."

Socially awkward adult men have litte life experience and emotional maturity as well. Many of them end up married to women who use their fading looks to entrap them into marriage, which is essentially indentured servitude because you cannot just get out of marriage without losing a good amount of property.

Why is there no law that protects socially inexperience young men from being snatched up into marriage by women with infinitely higher social experience? I would say that the consequences of that are more significant than getting nailed by an older man at the age of 16-17.

I know you will be groaning at this analogy but using logic it does make sense. One isn't supposed to engage in sex with 16 year olds because of X. (X being lack of experience and emotional immaturity) That X is also present with many adult men and that X also makes them easy prey for women who lead them into a relationship which is disadvantageous for them and has potentially lifelong consequences depending on the jurisdiction.

Do you really believe that sleeping with this (http://www.rx8club.com/attachments/west-rx-8-forum-34/143851d1250090950-socal-lounge-jailbait-5-jpg) is RAPE? (ignore the caption)

Anonymous Veorary April 18, 2014 11:56 AM  

In California there's no such thing as an age of consent. The Legislature did away with that in the 70s. Instead, there are crimes where consent is a defense even if against a child (forcible rape), and crimes where the person is guilty regardless of whether or not the child consented (child molestation, intercourse with a minor). Of course, if the child is young enough, the jury may find that he did not actually have the mental ability to consent. Other states may be different.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 11:59 AM  

"Tommy, no, I'm referring to the (predominantly LGBT) push to legalize sex with children younger than 16-18. You sound like a NAMBLA advocate or something."

Lol. Yeah, I'm dying to make it possible for homosexuals to have sex with 14 year old boys.

My problem is more with people calling it "pedophila" when you'e attracted to girls at almost peak nubility, who are already engaging in sexual acts frequently. How can something so normal be considered deviant?

Having sex with children (and I mean actual children, not "legal children") is wrong for obvious reasons. They do not even have the secondary sexual characteristics their sex is expected to have. They are young enough that they wouldn't even be sent to jail if they ever committed a crime. They are young enough that the overwhelming majority of them hasn't engaged in any sex acts. And finally, they are young enough that (even historically speaking) they are below the average age of marriage.

12-13 year olds are bonafide children. 16-17 year olds aren't.

Anonymous RedJack April 18, 2014 12:04 PM  

THis will be hushed up.

It doesn't advance the narritive of "White Christians/Catholics = Child abuse". That and since you will see pushes to decriminalize pedophila soon, they could spin this as "love" just like they are with the numourous cases of female teachers sleeping with their students.

Anonymous Josh April 18, 2014 12:10 PM  

Dammit Tommy, why are so adamant about your innate right to have sex with an underage Japanese sports car?

Do you have a fetish for wankel engines?

Blogger Giraffe April 18, 2014 12:11 PM  

I'm betting he gets a pass from Hollywood, little mention in the press, and the victim has 50-50 odds on winning the lawsuit, assuming he's not lying. The guy should be suing the FBI and the State of California.

Anonymous Harold Carper April 18, 2014 12:12 PM  

With proper supervision and a good environment boys like that might never meet a piece of slime like Singer and would get through their teen years becoming normal men.

Another reason God said to kill open homosexuals.

Blogger Brad Andrews April 18, 2014 12:13 PM  

> "12-13 year olds are bonafide children. 16-17 year olds aren't."

You need to open your eyes a bit. Sexual maturity can vary greatly in that age range. Some 13 year olds are VERY mature sexually.

It is only repulsive to consider marriage at that age because of our modern culture. The maturity of the individual would have been much more of a guiding factor 500 years ago.

Suppressing sexuality prior to an arbitrary age brings us the mess we have now.

Note that I am not in favor of sex at any specific age, but arbitrary is arbitrary, whatever age you pick. You sure like that "flexible standard" don't you?

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 12:14 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 12:21 PM  

"Dammit Tommy, why are so adamant about your innate right to have sex with an underage Japanese sports car?

Do you have a fetish for wankel engines?"

Well you know what they say about Japanese exhaust pipes...

Anonymous YIH April 18, 2014 12:23 PM  

Here's how Florida breaks it down;
16-18: Misdemeanor, may or may not have to register as a sex offender.
13-15: Felony, sex offender.
12-under: Major Felony (25 to life), sex offender.
I learned this from the Kaytln Hunt case from last year. When the story first came out Hunt's parents were claiming Kaytln was 17 and her *ahem* 'girlfriend' was 15. The usual suspects kicked of a ''free Kate'' campaign complete with online petition.
Then the police report came out. First, they were quite the busy lezzies, you name it, and pretty much everywhere.
Second it established Kaytln's age as 18 (and had turned 18 before the school year began) and the 'victim' was 14.
Next thing you know HuffPo was saying mea culpa and announcing the petition had been withdrawn.

Anonymous hausfrau April 18, 2014 12:24 PM  

"Socially awkward adult men have litte life experience and emotional maturity as well. Many of them end up married to women who use their fading looks to entrap them into marriage, which is essentially indentured servitude because you cannot just get out of marriage without losing a good amount of property"

Some immature adult men are victimized in bad marriages therefore it is acceptable for adult homosexuals to have sex with 15 year old boys.

Blogger Nate April 18, 2014 12:25 PM  

"My problem is more with people calling it "pedophila" when you'e attracted to girls at almost peak nubility, who are already engaging in sexual acts frequently."

Peak nubility?

Anonymous hausfrau April 18, 2014 12:35 PM  

16-18: Misdemeanor, may or may not have to register as a sex offender.
13-15: Felony, sex offender.
12-under: Major Felony (25 to life), sex offender.


This is a reasonably breakdown as it recognizes increasing ability to consent on behalf of the minor. Unfortunately the law doesn't recognize the uniquely negative aftermath of homosexual predations on young people.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 12:35 PM  

"Some immature adult men are victimized in bad marriages therefore it is acceptable for adult homosexuals to have sex with 15 year old boys."

More like "If you truly believe in the argument you made, you'd have to extend the same rule to emotionally immature men, since they also get taken advantage of. Since you most likely don't extend it that far, you most likely don't really believe in your argument."

"Peak nubility?"

Yeah. Like the "japanese sportscar" that I posted. As in 17-24.

Blogger Outlaw X April 18, 2014 12:36 PM  

"Peak nubility?"

Looks like you are behind on your NAMBLA Membership dues?

And to answer Vox, he will get away with it i.e. Jimmy Savile Hollywood is infested with perverts, as is our government. Hell they not only run drugs but are heavily involved in child sex trafficking.

Anonymous rycamor April 18, 2014 12:38 PM  

"Peak nubility."

Clueless aspies love to use analytical language when talking about stuff like this. Understand... that's a big part of what makes you seem creepy.

Anonymous Don April 18, 2014 12:40 PM  

Nate - Perverts will be perverts. I think this is what is known as "normalizing". Minimizing and excusing perversion, deflection, changing the subject, all while explaining why the perversion is normal maybe preferred even.

Anonymous rycamor April 18, 2014 12:41 PM  

Those of you who haven't witnessed men like Singer firsthand... realize: men who play that sort of "in between" age game targeting teens can be *extremely* subtle and patient. They are masters at lacing everything with plausible deniability, while always subtly (incredibly subtly) advancing their case, manipulating the young man bit by bit into compliance. So yes, a 15-year-old is not psychologically ready to deal with this sort of thing. I was the target of one such attempt at the age of 19, and even that took me months to discern what was really going on. The man in question was a churchgoer in his early 30s, very smart and interesting, and took on the mentor role. Just some odd occasions he would do something to push my boundaries ever so slightly, then back off and see what my reaction was, always giving himself an out. I as the young Christian man who wanted to believe the best in everyone... had a few niggling doubts but told myself I was being judgmental and stereotyping. Then someone tipped me off that this guy had been in some gay relationships before, and it all fell into place. I looked back at everything he had said and done, and there it was, that slow, insidious push into other territory. Be very careful what influences you allow in your young men's lives.

Over the years, I have witnessed some very bizarre behavior from men, all of whom seemed to wear expressions similar to Singer in those photos above. Bald-faced lies, told with such level gaze, even in the face of clear evidence. When my wife and I were church youth leaders we had some guy trying to pass himself off as a neighborhood kid who wanted to get involved. He started to walk in the door with the other kids and I said "Hi, whose parent are you?"

He looked me in the eye and said "I'm Danny [X]. I called you the other day about visiting."
I put my arm across the door "Whoa. Sorry but you look at least 30 years old. What's the deal?"
He shrugged and said "No, I'm 18, really."
"I don't know what your game is, but I can't let you in."
Without even expressing any surprise or outrage, he said something like "Well, it's the truth. But if you don't see me as what I really am, then I guess that's God's business and I guess He doesn't want me here."
Me: "Yeah, I think that's right. Goodbye."

Anonymous Discard April 18, 2014 12:41 PM  

If 13 year old girls are fucking like hobby whores, Hollywood is their pimp. Legalism aside, most of the whole lot is guilty.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 12:45 PM  

"
Clueless aspies love to use analytical language when talking about stuff like this. Understand... that's a big part of what makes you seem creepy."

I can't be an asspie, I'm not an atheist.

In all seriousness, if you're going to pretend that fucking 17 year old girls as an adult is a tragedy or a massive injustice, be my guest. Unfortunately for you, where I live, that's perfectly acceptable.

Life sucks.

Anonymous YIH April 18, 2014 12:49 PM  

hausfrau:
The two exceptions in FL law are ''equality'' (within 24 months in age) such as a 15 yo boy/14 yo girl (technically, stat. rape on both) and the ''Romeo and Juliet'' clause within 48 months in age, hetero only and didn't apply to Hunt.

Anonymous hausfrau April 18, 2014 12:51 PM  

More like "If you truly believe in the argument you made, you'd have to extend the same rule to emotionally immature men, since they also get taken advantage of. Since you most likely don't extend it that far, you most likely don't really believe in your argument"

There are always outliers on the maturity scale. If you are going to use the sliding scale argument to justify lowering the age of consent to 16 or 15 then we could use the same argument to lower it to 13 or 12. Maybe we could go to 10 if there's parental consent? Or maybe because some men are immature well into their 30's we should raise the age of consent to 25? After all, kids can be on their parent's insurance till 26 now. Some 16 year old's are mature and sexually precocious but the vast majority do not have the emotional and physical maturity to deal with the consequences of sexual activity even if they are willfully involved in it. I favor Florida's sliding scale of criminal prosecution.

Blogger Outlaw X April 18, 2014 12:51 PM  

In all seriousness, if you're going to pretend that fucking 17 year old girls as an adult is a tragedy or a massive injustice, be my guest.

Corn holing little boys is not a 17 year old girl.

Anonymous hausfrau April 18, 2014 12:53 PM  

The two exceptions in FL law are ''equality'' (within 24 months in age) such as a 15 yo boy/14 yo girl (technically, stat. rape on both) and the ''Romeo and Juliet'' clause within 48 months in age, hetero only and didn't apply to Hunt.

Hetero only? oh my. You know the equality banshees threw a tantrum about that. Must be a relic from a more decent time.

Anonymous Harold Carper April 18, 2014 12:54 PM  

Peak nubility?

It's like peak oil. It's all down hill from here!

Anonymous Don April 18, 2014 1:03 PM  

Moving the goal posts. Another tactic of normalizing. Homosexuals and pedophiles always want sliding goal posts. 'I'm not a pervert for having sex with a seventeen year old girl'. No you're right, if you're a high school aged boy.

Blogger Chiva April 18, 2014 1:03 PM  

I asked myself how can such a person as Byran Singer be so successful while doing things such as he is being accused of. Then I saw the saying at the bottom of this page.

"SUCCESS COMES MOST SWIFTLY AND COMPLETELY NOT TO THE GREATEST OR PERHAPS EVEN TO THE ABLEST MEN, BUT TO THOSE WHOSE GIFTS ARE MOST COMPLETELY IN HARMONY WITH THE TASTE OF THEIR TIMES."

Terrible times indeed.

Anonymous Racialist Heretic April 18, 2014 1:09 PM  

Here's an anonymous post (w/photos) on the IMBd forum from 2012 discussing some of Singer's activities with teen boys:

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001741/board/thread/206514215

Anonymous Post April 18, 2014 1:13 PM  

Do you really believe that sleeping with this (http://www.rx8club.com/attachments/west-rx-8-forum-34/143851d1250090950-socal-lounge-jailbait-5-jpg) is RAPE? (ignore the caption)

Judging by that link I know better than to click on one of your masturbation fantasies.

Anonymous Discard April 18, 2014 1:13 PM  

I would not screw a pretty teen because I am married and old and decrepit, but if you can't see that they are awfully attractive, you're blind. "Peak nubility" is a very apt phrase.

Blogger tz April 18, 2014 1:14 PM  

Hollywood Babylon...
Wrong chapter of Genesis.

Anonymous hausfrau April 18, 2014 1:19 PM  

Adulthood doesn't magically descend on a person at a certain age. It's more of a process and young adults need to be protected from the predations of adults as they enter adulthood. The criteria of sexual consent may be different in other cultures. So be it. Most people would acknowledge that sex between a 17 year old girl and a 25 year old man is not the same as sex between a 15 yr old boy and a 40 year old man. The law can't exactly draw a hard line between the two cases so the age of consent is set high enough (18) that most individuals could give full consent to whatever relationship they wanted.

Anonymous YIH April 18, 2014 1:23 PM  

Prior to the late 70's FL was the classic ''fifteen'll get you twenty'' and applied only to males of any age. Then it was changed to what I stated above. Under the old laws the worst thing that could have happened to Debra Lafave was 'contributing to the delinquency of a minor'.

Anonymous Post April 18, 2014 1:23 PM  

In all seriousness, if you're going to pretend that fucking 17 year old girls as an adult is a tragedy or a massive injustice, be my guest.

In all seriousness, you're likely a creep pushing that acceptable number as low as you dare in public.


...17 year old girls...
...16 or 17 year old girl...
...around 16...
...15 is not young enough that you would be justified in solely blaming the predator...

Anonymous rycamor April 18, 2014 1:29 PM  

Discard April 18, 2014 1:13 PM
I would not screw a pretty teen because I am married and old and decrepit, but if you can't see that they are awfully attractive, you're blind. "Peak nubility" is a very apt phrase.


The *point* is not whether the term is apt or factual. It's the type of terminology and language that surrounds it that gives me the willies. Perhaps if you had a teenage daughter you would understand.

Men are always going to objectivize women, and to a certain extent that is natural, but when it leans to the aspbergers-style cold and analytical language, and the dissection of one's impulses along with ever-so-carefully-couched terms, that's the creep factor.

Anonymous map April 18, 2014 1:34 PM  

Tommy Hess,

You misconceive the nature and purpose of AoC laws because you keep equating double standards and a lack of individual freedom as the only criteria. The real issue is parental control vs. control by strangers.

Anonymous Anonymous April 18, 2014 1:41 PM  

Interestingly, John Zmirak recently wrote a review of the new Jason Bateman movie, in which he claims it tries to normalize the "grooming" behavior that molesters use to form a bond with a target while breaking down his inhibitions. Things like getting the kid to drink, swear, or break other rules with him (making him feel grown up), setting up secrets for him to keep from everyone else, sharing porn with him, and so on.

Most of his commenters said he was being ridiculous, that it was all just in fun, stuff older brothers do with younger brothers and friends all the time, no big deal. But the acts he described sure sounded like the kind of behavior they told us to avoid in the "keeping kids safe" class that I had to take to help out at my church (in our diocese, that's now required for anyone who wants to volunteer at anything, even collecting the money on Sundays). So for a couple decades now we've been told to avoid all these behaviors and suspect anyone who engages in them, and now this movie says they're just harmless fun? What gives?

Anonymous Anonymous April 18, 2014 1:44 PM  

Peak nubility?

It's like peak oil. It's all down hill from here!


There's a "slippery slope" joke in there somewhere, but I can't quite get a grip on it.

Anonymous Jack Amok April 18, 2014 1:52 PM  

"Why wouldn't you shoot your faggot son for not saying no? "

Because i'd have emptied the mag into your skull for making a comment like that. You really are socially incompetent.

Anonymous rycamor April 18, 2014 1:57 PM  

cailcorishev April 18, 2014 1:41 PM
Interestingly, John Zmirak recently wrote a review of the new Jason Bateman movie, in which he claims it tries to normalize the "grooming" behavior that molesters use to form a bond with a target while breaking down his inhibitions. Things like getting the kid to drink, swear, or break other rules with him (making him feel grown up), setting up secrets for him to keep from everyone else, sharing porn with him, and so on.


Yes, yes, and yes. There will always be genuine friendships with *slighty* older guys that are just boys acting up and testing the world a little. The predators know how to use this impulse.

Anonymous Anonymous April 18, 2014 2:00 PM  

Part of the problem is that we're required by political correctness (if not yet by law) to pretend that a man having sex with an X-year-old boy is the same as the same man having sex with an X-year-old girl. It's not. We need to be able to say that an adult man having sex with a 15-year-old boy is wrong because it's perverse and will mess the kid up. If our objection is based strictly on age, then it's simply a social convention that would have been different in other eras, not a moral absolute.

In a different time and place with different social conventions and expectations, a 15-year-old girl could marry a 25-year-old man and start having kids quite happily and healthily. Different social conventions aren't going to allow 15-year-old boys to be happy and healthy being buggered by older men. If we can't make that distinction, we might as well surrender World War P now.

Anonymous dw April 18, 2014 2:19 PM  

The media is going to ignore this, but the public won't. The Left pretends like there aren't black mobs attacking people in cities all over the country, and that's with scores or hundreds of attackers, hundreds of witnesses, and lots of video evidence. I can't imagine they'd have any problem ignoring (yet another) a gay Jew raping boys, especially since so many in the media and Hollywood fit that description themselves.

If anything they'll simply say the people condemning him are 'homophobic'. Singer will probably win best picture or something.

Anonymous rho April 18, 2014 2:20 PM  

IIRC there were studies that showed the pre-frontal cortex wasn't fully developed until around age 25. The studies could be flawed, but there's something to that. Car insurance rates drop for males at that age, for example, and actuaries didn't pick that number out of a hat.

Age of consent laws are about as low as a responsible society should let them be. Teenagers may or may not be fully capable of understanding the full extent of the decisions they make, which is why it is wise to teach them while simultaneously protecting them. I don't mean making them wear helmets 24/7 or never allowing them to do dangerous things, but having somebody around to put an end to shenanigans before they spiral out of control is a good thing.

If adult society can no longer be trusted to reliably act in the interest of protecting teenagers and young adults from their own folly, then something is wrong. Low-trust environments and sexually permissive societies may plant the seeds of their own doom if they end up raising too many broken adults.

Anonymous Discard April 18, 2014 2:34 PM  

rycamor: OK. I must have missed the context.

Blogger John Wright April 18, 2014 2:45 PM  

"My problem is more with people calling it "pedophila" when you'e attracted to girls at almost peak nubility, who are already engaging in sexual acts frequently. How can something so normal be considered deviant?"

Note how cleverly this is phrased: it conflates a disapproval of an immorality on the grounds of the immorality being wrong with a disapproval of an abnormality on the the grounds of the abnormal being unusual. The argument then slides into the assumption that if everyone is doing it, it cannot be wrong. It is an argument meant to persuade lemmings off a cliff.

If you want to see the real root of the immorality, ladies and gentlemen, you are in for an uncomfortable conclusion: the wrongness here is because sex outside marriage is permitted in our society. Look at the Common Law. The one defense against a charge of statutory rape was marriage: if you married a seventeen year old, well, yes, there was no rape. You cannot rape your wife. (Of course, in those days, divorce was difficult or impossible, so no one, not even a minor, would make such a vow lightly).

The world mocked the conservatives for opposing the sexual revolution; the world mocked the Christians for opposing no-fault divorce; the world mocked the Catholics for opposing divorce and contraception, but, guess what? -- the world is on the side of the pederasts and sodomites.

Anonymous Jack Amok April 18, 2014 2:47 PM  

So for a couple decades now we've been told to avoid all these behaviors and suspect anyone who engages in them, and now this movie says they're just harmless fun? What gives?

Cail,

The problem is, the grooming behaviors used by predators are normal and healthy in moderation. That's how they hide their intentions. "Breaking the rules" in moderation is also called "using common sense", especially when we have so many poorly thought out rules. And helping kids to recognize poorly thought out rules and how to deal with them is an important part of their maturity. Forming a bond is a great thing, if the guy doing it is a healthy, normal man. I've been a co-conspirator with my son in "thwarting" society's dumber ideas a few times. You want teenage boys to learn what society expects from a man, and he can't really learn that unless men are willing to reward his good efforts with a little bit of acceptance - make sure he feels "grown up" when he behaves like one.

And these days, when so many boys lack fathers and are fed so many dumb notions by the feminized society they're forced to marinate in, it's kind of important for men to be willing to invest in boys. Remember, they'll be the ones keeping the power plants going so we don't have to shuffle around the Old Folks Home in the dark...

The perverts play on all this by emulating the behavior. On the surface, you can't distinguish between normal and perverted. They try to keep the "sharing porn" part secret, cause they know that isn't normal. The key sign to look for - which I'm sure your training covered so this is for the benefit of those playing along at home - is when they try to separate the kid from others. If the guy keeps trying to set up situations where he's alone with the kid, that's a red flag.

Anonymous Don April 18, 2014 2:56 PM  

John - I remember back in the sixties a woman asking my mother if she believed in 'free love'. My mother said, "It's not love and it's not free."

I had no idea what they were talking about because I was properly sheltered.

Blogger Marissa April 18, 2014 2:56 PM  

It is only repulsive to consider marriage at that age because of our modern culture. The maturity of the individual would have been much more of a guiding factor 500 years ago.

Suppressing sexuality prior to an arbitrary age brings us the mess we have now.


I agree with Brad Andrews by way of John Wright (darn you, John, you beat me to it!). There are some young women who need to be married off early or they will be humping behind the tool shed or what have you and bearing illegitimate children. That doesn't mean 14-year-old gals should be having sex outside marriage with some college senior or that there should be laws permitting it.

Blogger Marissa April 18, 2014 2:58 PM  

I remember back in the sixties a woman asking my mother if she believed in 'free love'. My mother said, "It's not love and it's not free."

That's freakin' awesome. Your tales of your family clearly show you had great influences. Meanwhile, there are many of us whose parents tell us, "You've got to take the car out for a test drive before you buy it!" Because apparently God views fornication in the same realm as comparison shopping.

Anonymous Idle Spectator April 18, 2014 3:00 PM  

I always suspected it Vox. I mean look at all that spandex.

Anonymous YIH April 18, 2014 3:02 PM  

cailcorishev:
Part of the problem is that we're required by political correctness (if not yet by law) to pretend that a man having sex with an X-year-old boy is the same as the same man having sex with an X-year-old girl. It's not.
This. Remember Macauly Culkin (back in the Home Alone hanging out with Michael Jack-son? What has happened since he turned 18? From what I've seen pretty messed up.
BTW, I'm also one who believes that 'gay' males aren't born, they are made - mainly by older 'gay' males. Lesbos, not so much, for some it's either they reject men altogether, (think Ellen) for others because it's 'hip and fashionable' (like tattoos), like that whacko chick she was with for a while who wound up dumping Ellen for a guy.
I don't hate 'gays' and I certainly don't fear them. I just tell them 'seek help' just like I would an alcoholic or a drug addict.

Anonymous Don April 18, 2014 3:03 PM  

Marissa - I was mostly raised by my grandparents and great grand parents but yes my mother was a wonderful woman. I know she wished she could have spent more time with us when I was younger. My grandmother is still around but nearing 100. She's always felt more like my mom than grandmother in some ways.

Anonymous pseudo-nate April 18, 2014 3:05 PM  

"Peak nubility?"

Only applies with a patent of nubility

Anonymous Comic Book Spectator April 18, 2014 3:17 PM  

like that whacko chick she was with for a while who wound up dumping Ellen for a guy.

Anne Heche, the one who thought the aliens were after her. Let's hope the UFO takes her up there far away real soon and out of our theaters near you.


Gay Jew sex aside, this is still <3 in everyone's <3.

X-Men Intro

That Storm. She can reign on any day she wants. Cyclops was always a little bitch though, "Waaaa, Jean is dead. Let me cut myself."

Anonymous Josh April 18, 2014 3:21 PM  

Remember who runs Hollywood. It's not the Jews. It's the gay Jews.

Anonymous Jack Amok April 18, 2014 3:24 PM  

Comic book superheroes. Last year, my mom was cleaning out the attic and found my old comic book stash. She gave it to me, thought maybe some might be worth a few dollars. Sadly, no. Looks like I bought my last comic book when I was 10 years old. . I think that's about the same age that I bought Victory in the Pacific. The cash flow that had gone to Marvel got redirected to Avalon Hill after that.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 18, 2014 3:32 PM  

"Note how cleverly this is phrased: it conflates a disapproval of an immorality on the grounds of the immorality being wrong with a disapproval of an abnormality on the the grounds of the abnormal being unusual. The argument then slides into the assumption that if everyone is doing it, it cannot be wrong. It is an argument meant to persuade lemmings off a cliff. "

I'm flattered that you would consider my phrasing clever John. But my argument wasn't that having extramarital sex wasn't immoral. My argument was that it is merely as immoral as all extramarital sex is. It isn't as immoral or deviant (as we will all agree) like genuine child molestation i.e. engaging in sex acts with an 11 year old. THAT is deviant and pedophilic. Engaging in sex with a female that is a mere year or 2 removed from being able to vote may be immoral because it is fornication, but it does not make sense to label it as something that is better reserved for genuine child molesters. Plenty of 17 year olds engage in sex or have the natural desire to do so. The same could not by said about preteens or those in their early teens.

Blogger Marissa April 18, 2014 3:36 PM  

Leave it to the resident Turk to whitewash buggery. Come on, dude, don't be a stereotype.

BTW, I'm also one who believes that 'gay' males aren't born, they are made - mainly by older 'gay' males.

Yeah, kinda like turning elves into Orcs.

Anonymous Josh April 18, 2014 3:37 PM  

Tommy, please stop digging

Anonymous Idle Hitler April 18, 2014 3:50 PM  

Remember who runs Hollywood. It's not the Jews. It's the gay Jews.

If only they had listened.

Anonymous Anonymous April 18, 2014 3:50 PM  

Jack, right. One thing I noticed when reading about homosexual priest abuse cases was how often the guy would pick out a particular boy as his favorite, and pretty soon that one boy would be hanging out alone with him, even going on trips with him. And apparently no one thought that was a bit odd at the time; people might even remark on how lucky the kid was to have such a bond with a good mentor.

Of course, as with so many things the left corrupts, we have to go all the way to the other extreme to protect ourselves; so now it's impossible to have any sort of close friendship with a kid. I've thought before of hiring a neighbor kid to help me with some projects around the farmstead that could use an extra pair of hands. But as a single male, I can't do that without opening myself up to accusations. Oh well.

Anonymous Idle Spectator April 18, 2014 3:58 PM  

I think Tommy is very brave for his sex positions.

We could all learn a lot from him, and grow and show as people.

Anonymous rho April 18, 2014 4:32 PM  

But my argument wasn't that having extramarital sex wasn't immoral. My argument was that it is merely as immoral as all extramarital sex is. It isn't as immoral or deviant (as we will all agree) like genuine child molestation i.e. engaging in sex acts with an 11 year old.

If I'm reading this correctly, sex is just sex, until it becomes pedophilia. And Tommy Hass is arguing that it's not pedophilia to have sex with a 16-year-old.

Fine, but I don't think many people are miffed at 18-year-olds having sex with 17-year-olds. But what about 34-year-olds having sex with 16-year-olds? Can a teenager properly consent with somebody who is twice their age? Especially considering that 16-year-olds don't know many 34-year-olds who are not directly or indirectly in a position of power over them?

Your argument seems to boil down to "pedophilia is bad, and age of consent laws are set too low". Okay, where's the line below which lies pedophilia?

Anonymous pseudo-nate April 18, 2014 5:10 PM  

Okay, where's the line below which lies pedophilia?"

If you're Japanese, 12. Then only if it's anal.

Anonymous Don April 18, 2014 5:12 PM  

Good God what the Hell is wrong with people! Okay we get it you want it to be okay for a man to have sex with a boy or girl. Now go away. You are a pervert of the first order and we got into this stinking mess because our parents listened to perverts like you in the first place. John Wright was right. We made a wrong turn some time back when we decoupled sex from marriage and decided to just let our freak flags fly.

Kinsey et al normalized perversion. Now we have people like sliding goal post boy starting off with 'a fifteen year old is partially responsible when he is raped' to 'What's so wrong with liking peak nubile girls' to 'age of consent is just too high'.

Same pervert wants to know why I don't 'shoot my raped son' while I am shooting the man who raped him. What is wrong with these people?

Okay lets raise the, age of consent. That way we won't have perverts saying 15 year olds are fair game. It should be 18 or until marriage. Marriage no earlier than 16.

Right about now I would vote for recriminalizing sodomy, lewd acts, fornication, and a whole host of other things. I feel sickened just reading some of this. If the perverts keep pushing after they've gotten everything adult they wanted and keep going after kids they will get the backlash we should have seen fifty years ago.

Anonymous YIH April 18, 2014 5:41 PM  

BTW, I'm also one who believes that 'gay' males aren't born, they are made - mainly by older 'gay' males.
Singer Lawsuit Is Tied To Marc Collins-Rector, Infamous Child Abuser Of The Dot-Com Boom.
Not only was he the architect of one of the most famous implosions of the time — the bankruptcy of Digital Entertainment Networks, an early provider of online video — but he is also a convicted child molester, according to federal records.

Anonymous Idle Albert Fish April 18, 2014 6:36 PM  

If that child did not want it, why was it smiling at me?

Blogger Outlaw X April 18, 2014 6:40 PM  

John Wright was right. We made a wrong turn some time back when we decoupled sex from marriage and decided to just let our freak flags fly.

Ummmm? That wasn't John C Wright, that was the Church. The one that many Protestants hate and call a cult (present host included). There is a reason for the seemingly unreasonable. People may think they are smart and they may be; not hard to be smarter than me, but it is damn hard to lead me astray because of the RCC.

Anonymous Idle Andrei Chikatilo April 18, 2014 6:43 PM  

I like the way that Albert thinks. He sure is a real character.

I think it is cool we can hang out here at Vox Popoli like this without people judging us.

Blogger Nate April 18, 2014 6:44 PM  

"The one that many Protestants hate and call a cult (present host included)."

except protestants never decoupled sex from marriage. They decoupled sex and pro-creation.

Those aren't the same things.

Blogger Marissa April 18, 2014 6:46 PM  

Wow the face of that man, YIH. Looks like Dorian Gray's portrait

Anonymous rycamor April 18, 2014 6:58 PM  

@YIH @Marissa

Textbook perv face. And seriously. I'm not a violent man, but...

Anonymous Jack Amok April 18, 2014 7:00 PM  

Tommy, please stop digging

No, no, keep digging. Just toss the shovel up here when you're through. We'll need it.

Blogger Outlaw X April 18, 2014 7:01 PM  

except protestants never decoupled sex from marriage. They decoupled sex and pro-creation. Yeah, and in doing so led to recreation instead of procreation which led to, as I told John that no one ever saw, my body, my fun, my abortion. Now once achieved everything is up for debate, isn't it? Hrmmm?

Anonymous Jack Amok April 18, 2014 7:07 PM  

But as a single male, I can't do that without opening myself up to accusations. Oh well.

Tell me about it, I volunteer as a Scoutmaster. But I'll say this - the vast, vast majority of people - even mothers - are reasonable and have common sense about this issue. But we empower the nitwits to cause trouble. And we do it on both sides of the issue. We empower the nitwits who think every man is a rapist to abuse men who are trying to be responsible members of society. And we empower the nitwits who celebrate deviancy to put kids in danger.

Blogger Nate April 18, 2014 7:11 PM  

its easy for a catholic to claim that ignoring their fascination with sperm lead to abortion. Never the less its abundantly clear that it is no where near that simple.

Abortion is the direct result of feminism. It has nothing to do with the protestant / catholic divide. As is abundantly clear by the fact that so many protestants are rabidly against it.

Anonymous Idle Tsutomu Miyazaki April 18, 2014 7:12 PM  

You sure said it Andrei. There are too many judgments in modern society. I would post more but it is hard to type. I have deformed hands that are gnarled and fused directly to the wrist.

Blogger Outlaw X April 18, 2014 7:13 PM  

But we empower the nitwits to cause trouble. And we do it on both sides of the issue. We empower the nitwits who think every man is a rapist to abuse men who are trying to be responsible members of society. And we empower the nitwits who celebrate deviancy to put kids in danger.

That's powerful. Copy it and paste it into a file. Save it!

Anonymous Don April 18, 2014 7:14 PM  

John Wright is a Catholic and I believe there was no conflict between what he said and the Catholic church's stance. Since (as far as I know) no member of the Catholic clergy wrote the same thing here in this thread, I referenced Mr. Wright. I am aware that the church holds the same view and they said it first since he was a child when the church first warned of this. But like I said since neither the Pope nor anyone working for him came here I wanted everyone to know what I was referring to without writing an epistle. Which it appears I have anyway. And BTW I am one of the fewpeople who meet the qualifications to be Pope or I was last time I checked anyway. So of course, I have some weight in this matter.

Blogger Outlaw X April 18, 2014 7:18 PM  

Abortion is the direct result of feminism. It has nothing to do with the protestant / catholic divide. As is abundantly clear by the fact that so many protestants are rabidly against it.

OK Nate I'll give you the fact, because it is a fact, that Protestants are vehemently apposed to abortion. What I won't give you is that recreation instead of procreation didn't lead to abortion, feminism or not.

Anonymous Full-Fledged Fiasco April 18, 2014 7:24 PM  

"Okay, where's the line below which lies pedophilia?"

Here's your line:

"Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children, generally age 11 years or younger. As a medical diagnosis, specific criteria for the disorder extends the cut-off point for prepubescence to age 13. A person who is diagnosed with pedophilia must be at least 16 years of age, but adolescents who are 16 years of age or older must be at least five years older than the prepubescent child before the attraction can be diagnosed as pedophilia."

Blogger Outlaw X April 18, 2014 7:28 PM  

I am one of the fewpeople who meet the qualifications to be Pope or I was last time I checked anyway. So of course, I have some weight in this matter.

Bullshit.

There are only two requirements for becoming pope: being male and being baptized into the Catholic Church. So Don go make stuff up somewhere where people don't know the Catholic Church or just be ignorant here.

Anonymous Don April 18, 2014 7:31 PM  

Outlaw that was sarcasm. I was joking and not making up bullshit. It just depends on your definition of 'few'. Kind of what 'is' 'is'.

Blogger Nate April 18, 2014 7:31 PM  

"What I won't give you is that recreation instead of procreation didn't lead to abortion, feminism or not."

Mate... I'm not at all certain you can even make a decent Biblical case against marital recreational sex. The Bible is profoundly pro sex and the sex that is described goes a lot farther than missionary work.

Anonymous Don April 18, 2014 7:33 PM  

I do happen to be a baptized, catholic male. I think I deserve an apology. My tender feelings have been hurt so badly....

Blogger Outlaw X April 18, 2014 7:43 PM  

I do happen to be a baptized, catholic male. I think I deserve an apology. My tender feelings have been hurt so badly....

I'm Sorry!

Anonymous Don April 18, 2014 7:47 PM  

Outlaw - All is forgiven.

Blogger Outlaw X April 18, 2014 7:55 PM  

Mate... I'm not at all certain you can even make a decent Biblical case against marital recreational sex. The Bible is profoundly pro sex and the sex that is described goes a lot farther than missionary work.

You don't think so?

Christians have always condemned contraceptive sex. Both forms mentioned in the Bible, coitus interruptus and sterilization, are condemned without exception (Gen. 38:9–10, Deut. 23:1). The early Fathers recognized that the purpose of sexual intercourse in natural law is procreation; contraceptive sex, which deliberately blocks that purpose, is a violation of natural law.

Many Protestants, perhaps beginning to see the inevitable connection between contraception and divorce and between contraception and abortion, are now returning to the historic Christian position and rejecting contraceptive sexual practices.

Anonymous Josh April 18, 2014 8:29 PM  

Song of Solomon 2:3:

"As an apple tree among the trees of the forest,
so is my beloved among the young men.
With great delight I sat in his shadow,
and his fruit was sweet to my taste."

Song of Solomon 6:2

"My beloved has gone down to his garden
to the beds of spices,
to graze[a] in the gardens
and to gather lilies."

Blogger Nate April 18, 2014 8:33 PM  

outlaw... The Catholic Church itself has taught and still teaches contraception... the rythmn method I believe has be taught and likely still is. of course now they've changed the name to "Natural Family Planning".

Which in other words... is recreational sex.

Do try again.

Blogger Outlaw X April 18, 2014 8:37 PM  

Do try again.

No Thanks, believe what you will. If the Bible ain't good enough, if the early Church Fathers ain't good enough, who am I?

Anonymous Josh April 18, 2014 8:39 PM  

If the Bible ain't good enough

The Bible talks about oral sex in very graphic terms.

Oral sex is recreational.

Blogger Nate April 18, 2014 8:40 PM  

"No Thanks, believe what you will. If the Bible ain't good enough, if the early Church Fathers ain't good enough, who am I?"

The Bible is on my side Outlaw. Its full of recreational marital sex.

And your own Church is on my side as well. Natural Family Planning they call it.

Blogger Nate April 18, 2014 8:43 PM  

http://www.beginningcatholic.com/catholic-natural-family-planning.html

there ya go Outlaw.

Recreational Marital Sex.

Apparently its the latex that makes it a sin.

Blogger Outlaw X April 18, 2014 9:15 PM  

The Bible is on my side Outlaw. Its full of recreational marital sex.

You mean "approved recreational sex?" Show me.

Apparently its the latex that makes it a sin.

Your argument basically is since the Catholic church is Liberal as you see it, then it's okay to be more liberal as you see it. So the liberalism you see in the RCC is now the confident explanation of being more liberal. You proved my first point, by pointing to NFP, that leads your logic to contraception and recreational sex, which leads others to extra marital sex and abortion. Basically the break down of the family, Because The RCC is too liberal and confirms you, because on this Good Friday isn't that who this is about?

Anonymous Don April 18, 2014 9:21 PM  

Nate - I believe it is the conscious effort to deny the chance to generate life is the sin not the latex but I am not 100% sure. It has never mattered in our marriage. We wanted kids while we could have them and after we were no longer able to we still wanted them. Absent Elizabeth's miracle we won't have any more of our own. I could be entirely wrong.

Anonymous rycamor April 18, 2014 10:04 PM  

Outlaw X April 18, 2014 7:55 PM
Mate... I'm not at all certain you can even make a decent Biblical case against marital recreational sex. The Bible is profoundly pro sex and the sex that is described goes a lot farther than missionary work.

You don't think so?

Christians have always condemned contraceptive sex. Both forms mentioned in the Bible, coitus interruptus and sterilization, are condemned without exception (Gen. 38:9–10, Deut. 23:1).


Outlaw, I say this in love: that's lame. Lame lame lame. And I say this with all respect to a Christian brother. Anyone reading with an ounce of context knows that God's displeasure with Onan was not the fact of recreational sex, but that he was abdicating a profoundly serious responsibility within ancient Jewish culture. He was denying his brother an heir. It says so right in the text.

The second verse you quote quite clearly is not even about the same subject matter. In fact, I find it hilarious that a Catholic would quote this when their priests are essentially geldings themselves.

Yes, from the Bible we definitely have the message that God takes procreation seriously. And, that one has a responsibility to carry on generations of God's people. That can easily be accomplished even if 99% of the sex you have is "recreational". And if sex is ONLY for procreation, then I guess married couples where the wife is past menopause should just... quit?

My thoughts: no one should ever make a major doctrine out of something that is not even clearly stated in Scripture. But, we've gone afield now.

Blogger Nate April 18, 2014 10:09 PM  

" I believe it is the conscious effort to deny the chance to generate life is the sin not the latex but I am not 100% sure."

This cannot be the case... as Natural Family Planning is exactly that... and is advocated by the Catholic Church.

Blogger Nate April 18, 2014 10:12 PM  

"Your argument basically is since the Catholic church is Liberal as you see it, then it's okay to be more liberal as you see it."

Its not liberal Outlaw.

Its what the Bible says. The Catholic Church has a storied history of taking single verses out of context and drawing ridiculous conclusions based on them.... Peter and the Rock... Onan... These are just a few examples.

Josh already sited two of the dozens of examples from Song of Solomon... and there are plenty more where that came from.

Why do you hate blow jobs outlaw? why?

Anonymous Recursion. April 18, 2014 10:23 PM  

** It will be informative to discover if the media is as willing to go after the homosexual pedophiles of Hollywood as they were to go after the homosexual pedophiles of the Catholic hierarchy**

Why should they? Obviously a double standard is acceptable to you. Ei, women should be insulted for malingering, but the exact same sort of malingering is quite acceptable to you, in men. So why shouldn't the media be entitled to the same sort of double standard, in which they scold the church for pedophilia but find it acceptable in Hollywood? Unless, of course, you have a double standard about who is allowed to have a double standard.

Anonymous kh123 April 18, 2014 10:24 PM  

"You proved my first point, by pointing to NFP, that leads your logic to contraception and recreational sex, which leads others to extra marital sex and abortion."

By a similar token, being more (in the originally intended sense) liberal than federal law concerning guns - for pragmatism and for fun - eventually leads to gun-related homicides, school shootings, all around murder.

As with anything concerning law and allowance, it all comes back to the individual, circumstances, and what they do with it. One could argue that since Cain murdered after getting a pep talk from God, all anger leads to fratricide, and any theophany leads to the same.

Anonymous dw April 18, 2014 10:25 PM  

Well this thread took an unexpected turn.

Anonymous kh123 April 18, 2014 10:25 PM  

...And no, that's not a cue for Ann Morgan to launch into a very special monomania marathon.

Anonymous rycamor April 18, 2014 10:31 PM  

@dw,

No... all threads at Vox Popoli in which morality is discussed will eventually bring up something about Catholicism/Protestantism. All threads where theology is discussed will of course lead to Calvinists contra mundi.

And there will always be at least one snarky potshot by one of the Vox/Ilk anklebiters that comes from shakily-held mental weaponry, and completely misses its target.

Blogger Outlaw X April 18, 2014 10:36 PM  

Yeah, continue on, I am done with my 3rd, if I want to I will continue on my own blog without calling names or name calling.

Everyone have a great Easter weekend.

Anonymous Don April 18, 2014 10:41 PM  

Shut up Ann.

Anonymous zen0 April 18, 2014 10:55 PM  

And there will always be at least one snarky potshot by one of the Vox/Ilk anklebiters that comes from shakily-held mental weaponry, and completely misses its target.

And that is what is called, in polite company, Premptive BS.

Anonymous zen0 April 18, 2014 11:18 PM  

dw April 18, 2014 10:25 PM

Well this thread took an unexpected turn


Fear not. At this point, the zeitgeist is divisive. By Sunday it will be all hunky-dory. Just you wait and see.

Anonymous Godfrey April 18, 2014 11:18 PM  

@Nate April 18, 2014 8:40 PM
"The Bible is on my side Outlaw. Its full of recreational marital sex. And your own Church is on my side as well. Natural Family Planning they call it."


Make sure your wife takes her pill Nate. I'm sure it's really good for her. We wouldn't want anything to interfere with your pleasure and your acts of selfless love.

Blogger tz April 18, 2014 11:27 PM  

You cannot find any Protestant church befow 1930 that did not consider contraception a grave sin. Luther called it a Sodomic sin. Calvin and Wesley were of a similar opinion. Are those here smarter than every protestant preacher and theologian for the first 400 years after the reformation? See Charles Provan, The bible and birth control which exhaustively documents it.

If the bible is clear, it should be clear that the few moderns here claiming a novel interpretation are confused. Otherwise the bible isn't so clear and is itself confusing without an interpretive authority. Like Paul told Timothy the church was the pillar and foundation of the truth. The bible.thus itself says the church has the truth including the correct interpretation and meaning of scripture.

Scripture is a foundation of theology and morality, but capital t Tradition - Jesus spoke and demonstrated, and except for drawing in the dirt when the Pharisees tried to trap him, isn't recorded to have written anything. The third is the Magisterium - the church hierarchy. Jesus promised inerrancy to the church, not to individuals reading scripture.

Anonymous zen0 April 18, 2014 11:40 PM  

The third is the Magisterium - the church hierarchy. Jesus promised inerrancy to the church, not to individuals reading scripture.

And the "church" is defined by what parameters? (rhetorical, no need to reply) And yet,

Acts 17

In Berea

10 As soon as it was night, the believers sent Paul and Silas away to Berea. On arriving there, they went to the Jewish synagogue. 11 Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. 12 As a result, many of them believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men.

13 But when the Jews in Thessalonica learned that Paul was preaching the word of God at Berea, some of them went there too, agitating the crowds and stirring them up. 14 The believers immediately sent Paul to the coast, but Silas and Timothy stayed at Berea. 15 Those who escorted Paul brought him to Athens and then left with instructions for Silas and Timothy to join him as soon as possible.


Are you a Thessalonican, tz?

Anonymous rycamor April 18, 2014 11:53 PM  

zen0 April 18, 2014 10:55 PM

zen0 April 18, 2014 11:18 PM
dw April 18, 2014 10:25 PM

Well this thread took an unexpected turn

Fear not. At this point, the zeitgeist is divisive. By Sunday it will be all hunky-dory. Just you wait and see.


Those who don't know better might think that Nate and Outlaw are enemies, but as a matter of fact, Outlaw is a regular esteemed guest at Nate's blog and online radio show. I suspect tz would be welcome to call in also.

Anonymous zen0 April 18, 2014 11:58 PM  

Psalm 1

1 Blessed is the one
who does not walk in step with the wicked
or stand in the way that sinners take
or sit in the company of mockers,
2 but whose delight is in the law of the Lord,
and who meditates on his law day and night.
3 That person is like a tree planted by streams of water,
which yields its fruit in season
and whose leaf does not wither—
whatever they do prospers.

4 Not so the wicked!
They are like chaff
that the wind blows away.
5 Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment,
nor sinners in the assembly of the righteous.

6 For the Lord watches over the way of the righteous,
but the way of the wicked leads to destruction.


Seems King David here is recommending that one get familiar with scripture, and think about it. Not just take what some authority figure lays out.

And in the first Psalm, no less.

Anonymous zen0 April 19, 2014 12:01 AM  

I suspect tz would be welcome to call in also.

I am not totally unaware, but it's nice to let the folks know that.
Thanks.

Anonymous roo_ster April 19, 2014 12:55 AM  

This is a rather horrifying accusation. More horrifying is that (given photographic and textual evidence) this director was open about his abuse of young men.

I do not hold out hope that the legacy media will cover this with vigor, for the obvious reasons:
1. Portrays sainted homosexuals and sacred sodomy in a bad light.
2. Hollywood / entertainment industry ally.
3. Singer's ethnicity.

Anonymous wEz April 19, 2014 1:33 AM  

Damn. I feel for ya Tommy Hass. Perfectly logical position and these PC bitches get their panties in a bunch.
Middle aged men feel no remorse in jerking off to and desiring barely legal "women". Yet they're the first ones to cry "rape" if a low IQ, immature 26 year old is banging some busty skank 16 year old who sought him out? Riiggght. Both are horny and stupid.18 is just an arbitrary number that makes it easier to simplify the complex legally.
Isnt law just a mirage of mutual consent? Just because 18 is this magical number doesnt make it unequivocally adult/child..just within the culture and its laws.

Some 15 year out shoots and kills someone and avoids hard time and name release because theyre a "child". BS. They knew what would happen if they pulled the trigger. Adult decision, adult consequence. Trayvon was an innocent child too right?

Anonymous wEz April 19, 2014 2:01 AM  

People get so obsessed within their logic that they get emotional and stupid over it.
OT..reminds me of when some so-called believer here, cant remember who, said they would rather live next to an athiest then to a Calvinist...wtf? Thats emotional and stupid on so many levels...especially because many, if not most of us struggle to understand difficult doctrine. So to say that when they're striving to give God all the glory by accepting the redemptive work of Christ crucified for us sinners, is so sad.
One guy even started calling others he disagreed with satanists. Wow. Really Christ like there buddy.

Anonymous AdognamedOp April 19, 2014 2:13 AM  

Of course the perv media isn't goint to touch this scandal. Just look at Woody Allen. He was perving on his on own kids and even married his adopted daughter. Here's a guy who should be locked up. Instead, he's given awards and has a new movie coming out.
Here in NYC, there were 104 confirmed cases of "inappropiate relations" between student and teacher going back to 09'. There were over 500 accusations/ complaints in that same time.
A huge scandal by any measure. Yet the local media suppressed the story.

The pervs are running rampant in this environment of cultural filth. Hopefully that sense of security will cause more of them to out themselves. Not like I didn't know Spielbergs obsession with children was borderline creepy 30 yrs ago or that Singers gay mutant theme screams directors hot tub buggery in his past. But alot of folk dont realise that a cult of child rapists currently controls the entertainment industry.

Anonymous zen0 April 19, 2014 8:04 AM  

@ wEz

One guy even started calling others he disagreed with satanists. Wow. Really Christ like there buddy.

Did you miss this part?

John8: 43"Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear My word. 44"You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father.

Anonymous rycamor April 19, 2014 12:45 PM  

wEz April 19, 2014 1:33 AM

Damn. I feel for ya Tommy Hass. Perfectly logical position and these PC bitches get their panties in a bunch.
Middle aged men feel no remorse in jerking off to and desiring barely legal "women".


...

wEz April 19, 2014 2:01 AM

People get so obsessed within their logic that they get emotional and stupid over it.


<<>>... more aspieness. No, wEz, it's not about what is logical or factual here. It's about the personality and characterization in this interplay. Tommy Hass's whole bizarre, hedging way of getting in this discussion, the language, and the things of which it seems he doth protest entirely too much... just give off a bad vibe. Maybe he's an entirely OK guy who just doesn't know how to communicate, but my hackles were raised.

I happen to know a couple who met when he was 21 and she was 15. But a very mature, thoughtful, (and worshipful)15-year-old. She knew from the moment she met him that this was the guy she wanted to marry, and in fact it took some convincing on his part, as he was embarrassed about the age difference at first. But by the time she was 16, they were making their plans for life, and they were married when she was 17 or 18. They've been married over 25 years, have 5 kids, and she's been a lovely, dedicated wife and mother. He's now legally blind (hard for a lifelong outdoorsman and hunger) and she sticks by him through it all.

So no, I don't find the facts of that relationship creepy at all. But, a man who dwells too much on such things, and makes all sorts of overwrought arguments about them, making odd comparisons, as well as showing the odd spurt of anger and misplaced profanity in the process ... that sets me off.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 19, 2014 3:14 PM  

"Fine, but I don't think many people are miffed at 18-year-olds having sex with 17-year-olds. But what about 34-year-olds having sex with 16-year-olds? Can a teenager properly consent with somebody who is twice their age? Especially considering that 16-year-olds don't know many 34-year-olds who are not directly or indirectly in a position of power over them?"

I'm not saying that a 34 year old sleeping with a 16 year old is normal or that you'd be wrong for thinking less of such a man doing that. However, in the US (and to a lesser extent in Europe) people slap the label of "child molester" on people who engage in sex with females in late adolescence, or those who desire to do so. This has always bothered me. I mean it's one thing to hate the grown man who slep with your 17 year old girl and wanting to punch his face in. It's another thing to label them with a term that is reserved for people that deserve death or at least lengthy prison sentences.

"Your argument seems to boil down to "pedophilia is bad, and age of consent laws are set too low". Okay, where's the line below which lies pedophilia?"

I would say that the following would be ideal:

a) if the girl is 16 or above, no charges.

b) if the girl is 12 or below, death penalty or long prison sentences

c) anything in between should depend on the circumstances (age of the minor and the adult, their respective levels of maturity, the level of physical development of the minor, her previous sexual experience, the nature of the relationship etc)

"Leave it to the resident Turk to whitewash buggery. Come on, dude, don't be a stereotype."

I literally didn't even know that buggery was common among our people before you told me.

Believe me, I'm only talking about God sanctioned heterosexual intercourse here. Buggery of this nature makes me want to grab a pipe and smash a NAMBLAnt.

Btw, Idle Spectator, did you really just compare me to ALBERT FISH?

I don't remember eating children or sticking needles up my taint for fun.

Anonymous Don April 19, 2014 3:34 PM  

Yes it is a stereotype that Turks like to bugger boys and little girls. You're not exactly changing anyone's view of that stereotype. If you want us to shoot the victims of child rape along with the rapist who knows what else you might do? I would not put anything past somebody who wants to lower the age of consent and fantasizes about 'peak nubile' children.

This is such an old stereotype that whole movies are made about the subject. Face it, you're just confirming our view of Turks.

Anonymous Idle Spectator Cares April 19, 2014 4:00 PM  

Btw, Idle Spectator, did you really just compare me to ALBERT FISH?

I don't remember eating children or sticking needles up my taint for fun.


No I just used those three for the lulz. I am all about maximizing my lulz-lulz when posting.

Besides Tsutomu was way cooler and if I was doing an actual comparison, Emin Baro would be the best.

Anonymous CorkyAgain April 19, 2014 4:01 PM  

It will be informative to discover if the media is as willing to go after the homosexual pedophiles of Hollywood as they were to go after the homosexual pedophiles of the Catholic hierarchy

Of course they won't, because the "crime" of the latter wasn't that they were pedophiles or homosexuals, but that they were Catholics.

(I haven't read all the comments yet, so apologies if this has already been pointed out.)

Anonymous Concerned Rabbit Hunter April 19, 2014 4:06 PM  

"Of course they won't, because the "crime" of the latter wasn't that they were pedophiles or homosexuals, but that they were Catholics."

I think you will find that their crime is that they are Christian and not members of the tribe.

Anonymous Don April 19, 2014 4:22 PM  

Concerned Rabbit Hunter - I think I said it earlier, it's all about 'who, whom'.

Anonymous CorkyAgain April 19, 2014 4:48 PM  

I think you will find that their crime is that they are Christian and not members of the tribe.

Oh, I agree. They'd go after an evangelical Protestant pederast with equal glee.

But the Left's special animus toward the Church has a long history. In fact, opposition to Throne and Altar was one of its founding principles.

Anonymous Anonymous April 19, 2014 5:21 PM  

Corky, yes. There's a reason that the non-Jewish liberal members of the SCOTUS are apostate Catholics rather than liberal Protestants. There's a special hatred there.

Blogger Tommy Hass April 19, 2014 6:49 PM  

"Yes it is a stereotype that Turks like to bugger boys and little girls. You're not exactly changing anyone's view of that stereotype. If you want us to shoot the victims of child rape along with the rapist who knows what else you might do? I would not put anything past somebody who wants to lower the age of consent and fantasizes about 'peak nubile' children."

Children are by definition not at peak nubility you dunce.

Anonymous Don April 19, 2014 8:21 PM  

Hass - 'Peak Nubility' has nothing to do with age but physical maturity correct? So say a thirteen year old could conceivably be 'Peak Nubility'? You already indicated that it was okay to get with a girl as long as she was 'peak nubility'. You indicated a fifteen year old boy was culpable for his rape. You want the age of consent lowered. Now you are trying to back track on your asinine peak nubility statement. We get it we know you like to wack it to little boys and girls.

Go crawl under your rock with other pedophiles you lying sack of pervert shit.

Anonymous Don April 19, 2014 8:33 PM  

Hass - Direct Questions did you or did you not say a fifteen year old boy was 'partially responsible' for being raped?

Did you complain about the age of consent being too low?

Did you say men are attracted to peak nublility?

Did you illustrate your point with a picture of a (presumably by the caption) an underage girl?

Anonymous H April 19, 2014 9:46 PM  

Of course there is such a thing as peak nubility: on average, women in the 18-24 range are more sexually attractive than women who are 38-44, and both groups are more attractive than women who are 68-74. This is what female SMV is mostly based on, as Roissy, Rational Male or Vox Day's AlphaGame would tell you. Some girls are fully developed at 16, for example that girl Courtney Stodden who was famous for getting married at 16, and some aren't. Most should be fully developed by 18. 18 is a useful bright line rule to apply. If the argument is that people's brains aren't fully developed until they're 25, then I'd be more concerned about letting 18 year olds vote than letting 18 year olds having sex with 30 year old men.

Anonymous Don April 19, 2014 10:33 PM  

The point is that Hass was not holding up an adult but a child as 'peak nubile'. And making excuses for rapists and saying that victims were culpable. 18 is an acceptable bright line as far as I am concerned but I would have no trouble setting it at 21 unless married.

Blogger Brad Andrews April 20, 2014 7:21 PM  

I suppose some of you will argue that Adam and Eve didn't have sex until conceiving Cain. You lack a lot of support for that, but believe what stupidity you want to believe.

The RCC has a huge number of flaws of its own. Blaming societal sins on protestants ignores the fact that the unregenerate heart of man is just that, dead. Even the reborn heart must continually renew the mind and walk in a fallen world.

It is not a surprise we have the sin we have now, it is a surprise we don't have more.

Anyone for some indulgences BTW? I have a sale going on this week....

Blogger Brad Andrews April 20, 2014 7:24 PM  

I don't agree with older men perping on younger men, whatever their age, but I fail to see how someone like Miley Cyrus was a child one day and adult the next. I will be the seeds of what we see now were fully present when she was 15 and 16. Society supports those seeds so it gets the plants they produce.

Some idiot may take the right position that 15 year-olds are not really children, but that doesn't mean the principle is wrong. Those who claim they are children are just as dangerous to society as those who want to exploit them. Nixing parental authority, as noted by someone earlier, is far more harmful.

Anonymous Anonymous April 20, 2014 9:13 PM  

In ancient Israel the minimum age of marriage for males is 13 and for females its 12:
http://www.womenintheancientworld.com/women%20and%20the%20law%20in%20ancient%20israel.htm

Let this sink in for a moment. Much of what we now consider as pedophilia is not. As pedophilia refers to attraction prepubescents . But the media under the influence of feminism refers to attraction to pubescents as pedophilia. Originally the raising of the age of consent coincided with the women's movement of social purity:
http://historyoffeminism.com/summary-of-the-social-purity-movement/

To raise their own SMV via artificial scarcity. Before the advent of such a movement particularity in victorian times marriages at such ages were not considered shocking.

Blogger Marissa April 21, 2014 12:11 PM  

I see nothing wrong with marriages at those ages, but that's not what some people here are discussing. They are talking about fornication, not marriage.

Blogger Unknown May 05, 2014 5:59 PM  

Not The Same At All!

(no correlation!)





1. Isn't being "Sexually and Romantically attracted to the "Same Sex" a MENTAL ILLNESS?



2. But sitting at a Lunch Counter because a Person wants something To Eat & Drink (Ego, Food, Water) Because they are Hungry & Thirsty is NORMAL!!! It's Not a Question! It's a Statement!



3. Almost Every Motion Picture from Hollywood has the "N" Word in it. This Insulting and Offensive! And Most People Know Hollywood is run and Controlled Completely by Homosexuals!

By the Way....."Holly-wood" is a piece of Wood found in Europe Witches and Warlocks use to Conjure Spells ie; Pine Wood, Red Wood, Oak Wood...... Holly-Wood!

Not The Same At All!

(no correlation!)





1. Isn't being "Sexually and Romantically attracted to the "Same Sex" a MENTAL ILLNESS?



2. But sitting at a Lunch Counter because a Person wants something To Eat & Drink (Ego, Food, Water) Because they are Hungry & Thirsty is NORMAL!!! It's Not a Question! It's a Statement!



3. Almost Every Motion Picture from Hollywood has the "N" Word in it. This Insulting and Offensive! And Most People Know Hollywood is run and Controlled Completely by Homosexuals!

By the Way....."Holly-wood" is a piece of Wood found in Europe Witches and Warlocks use to Conjure Spells ie; Pine Wood, Red Wood, Oak Wood...... Holly-Wood!

Not The Same At All!

(no correlation!)





1. Isn't being "Sexually and Romantically attracted to the "Same Sex" a MENTAL ILLNESS?



2. But sitting at a Lunch Counter because a Person wants something To Eat & Drink (Ego, Food, Water) Because they are Hungry & Thirsty is NORMAL!!! It's Not a Question! It's a Statement!



3. Almost Every Motion Picture from Hollywood has the "N" Word in it. This Insulting and Offensive! And Most People Know Hollywood is run and Controlled Completely by Homosexuals!

By the Way....."Holly-wood" is a piece of Wood found in Europe Witches and Warlocks use to Conjure Spells ie; Pine Wood, Red Wood, Oak Wood...... Holly-Wood!




Not The Same At All!

(no correlation!)





1. Isn't being "Sexually and Romantically attracted to the "Same Sex" a MENTAL ILLNESS?



2. But sitting at a Lunch Counter because a Person wants something To Eat & Drink (Ego, Food, Water) Because they are Hungry & Thirsty is NORMAL!!! It's Not a Question! It's a Statement!



3. Almost Every Motion Picture from Hollywood has the "N" Word in it. This Insulting and Offensive! And Most People Know Hollywood is run and Controlled Completely by Homosexuals!

By the Way....."Holly-wood" is a piece of Wood found in Europe Witches and Warlocks use to Conjure Spells ie; Pine Wood, Red Wood, Oak Wood...... Holly-Wood!










Blogger Unknown May 05, 2014 6:02 PM  

Sorry! about the constant repetition!
FIRST POST EVER!

Blogger Unknown May 05, 2014 6:12 PM  

Something To Know About The media!



(Read this column below first) NOT Necessarily in this Order



INDENTIFY WHO




LABEL WHAT



AUGMENT WHERE

MAKE GREATER, INCREASE



DIMINISH WHEN

BELITTLE, DISPARAGE


NEUTRALIZE HOW



Just Thought You'd Like To Know..........






Post a Comment

Rules of the blog

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts