Not a big fan of Milo Yiannopoulos. Have listened to some of his stuff over time but am learning more about him in the last few weeks due to the riots at UC Berkeley. Then all this went down in recent days. Oy. Was already on the topic of pedophilia due to Andy Warski’s videos on that Omnipolitics16 guy. Then some Deep Web-related YT channel told of that Australian man convicted for creating snuff child porn videos in the Philippines.
Anyway, here’s the Drunken Peasants podcast from back in January 2016: episode #193. Relevant portion begins at approximately 51:26 in:
About 52:45 in they show a video from somebody who included some footage from Milo’s appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast.
Pausing 1:05:08 into that DP podcast…okay, I do comprehend the importance of distinguishing between actual PEDOPHILES (people sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children) versus HEBEPHILES who are interested in very young pubescent youths (in the age range of 11-14 generally). That is a noteworthy distinction because the two involve differing psychologies. That does matter. Because the Law does not make this distinction in its wording, the public is being misled. I do understand that and have openly discussed this since back in my undergrad criminal justice curriculum. But I also grasp that so far as legal purposes go, the lines drawn must be pretty damn clear in order to enforce them effectively. Hence why we have age of consent laws and yet there is leeway granted for youths only a few years apart in age, dependent on the state in question. AND the authority of the adult party in question. A priest or a teacher are in a special classification precisely because of their sway and influence over youths as well as the community-at-large. So they do deserve to be more heavily scrutinized due to the authority their positions grant them. Same with law officers.
Now, I’ve viewed several videos on this ordeal and read and watched Milo’s recent responses on the matter. Posted up his resignation from Breitbart speech. Watched Styxhexenhammer666’s first (now removed), second and third videos covering this topic. Watched Milo’s recent Bill Maher appearance. Read an article about Bill Maher basically defending the same thing back in 2007 and before. And am generally not a stranger to the controversy over age of consent laws and specific cases where victims claim they weren’t harmed, etc.
But I have to say that people who are sexualized young wind up seeming to mature sexually earlier. That’s apparently a byproduct OF early sexualization of youths. I understand it from my own perspective and upbringing, as well as through taking in so many, many stories from others over the course of my life thus far. Any defense of that shit does get me prickling with aggravation precisely because I do comprehend this complex situation personally and the mixed emotions that can and often do arise from it. And it does differ between hebephilia and pedophilia — that is true. But people who are sexualized explicitly when they are very young and pre-pubescent, it tends to incline them toward greater promiscuity once they do hit puberty. And though they are inclined this way, it doesn’t mean they are emotionally mature enough to handle the potential consequences. Sometimes that promiscuity continues on well into our 20s or 30s before we even seriously start grappling with its origins and its impact on our lives. All is not a bed of roses there. Many regrets are common for such terrain.
This is where I get to thinking a much more nuanced discussion on these matters certainly is warranted. But one of the problems that arises there is our own biases and sorting out how much of our opinions evolved out of a drive toward self-protection and/or “owning” our experiences. Though we may be made “stronger” as a result of what we’ve been subjected to, we also tend to get a bit mentally fucked up. Let’s be honest here. So our own relation of experiences on this topic can very easily be skewed if we developed close bonds with the persons we were sexualized by. Our loyalties wind up screwed up as a result, hence why our boundaries tend to become so loose and permeable. We don’t wish to live as “victims,” yet we can also do a disservice to others by downplaying such matters and trivializing them. So sometimes our contributions to such conversations wind up doing more harm than good since we’re coming from a place where that seemed normal to us, at least at the time. Or we had no basis for comparison to anything else. Even now, as grown adults, we can’t erase that early programming (which is essentially what it is). It’s a part of what all has constructed us into who we are now. In short, we cannot help but be biased there. It’s sown into us.
I’ll be honest. Milo creeped me out at times as well. Kinda like how Justicar did also, before he too came out with claims that at age 9 he felt sexually mature enough to consent to sexual acts with a man in his 20s. That was very disturbing to read (hence why I screen-captured it and posted it elsewhere on this blog back in 2015 — Justicar has since deleted the relevant videos). Sickens and saddens me to read that sort of thing because it definitely does serve as justification to pedophiles and hebephiles interested in pursuing young individuals, whether the one who experienced the early sexualization is aware of that or intends it or not. That really does matter here. It’s not all about the particular victim in question and their own thoughts on the subject; it’s also about the ramifications of sharing such thoughts openly and widely and allowing them to further entice those who are inclined that way. As omnipolitics16 demonstrated himself, these people tend to be on the lookout for anything and everything that supports their attempts to justify their actions against children. They want to believe it’s not so bad for them, that kids aren’t horribly harmed in many cases, that psychological injuries aren’t a direct consequence of their sexual activities with immature minors. They want to believe the pleasure they may experience in the moment trumps the potential for long-term pain.
Each individual child likes to think they know what they are doing. They see no problem with staying up super late despite it leaving them tired the next day at school. They would eat whatever they fancy if restrictions weren’t imposed upon them by external authorities. And they will harm themselves unintentionally in countless different ways if not provided proper and healthful guidance from others who genuinely care about their individual well-being.
There are lots of wolves out here in the world, let’s face it. Lots of selfish opportunists who will take advantage where they think they may be able to get away with it. Children are especially vulnerable in this regard, and that includes young teens who are in the process of budding into adulthood. We don’t yet know at that age what the wisest decision might be, what the long-term consequences may prove to be, how momentary slips can haunt a person literally for years. We had no way of understanding all of that back then. But that consideration never stops those who are out in pursuit for their own jollies. They may have been harmed themselves when young and therefore have fetishized what they themselves were subjected to (or whatever else their sexual compulsiveness drove them toward exploring). The effects spread out and can impact generations of people. This is certainly no small concern when countless people’s psychological well-being is at stake. Pain pays forward, in one way, shape, or form.
I also find it interesting how many homosexuals I’ve personally met who were sexualized early on as kids, whether in an outright abusive fashion or through grooming by older individuals they trusted at the time. Began noting that back in my teen years and have only uncovered more evidence of this trend ever since. Should look into what research studies might exist on the subject.
Anyway, today I listened to Styx’s update on Milo’s situation:
I find it very interesting what he said there about how the political Left isn’t so much in favor of NAMBLA types as it is in trying to justify Islam and its Sharia Law. Hmmm. I can see that, but I also see where both wind up justified regardless. It’s a disturbing trend either way.
Recently heard about what Salon magazine put out in the past. Rarely read that rag anymore. Gonna look more deeply into what Salon published in a new post.