I continue to watch the media reaction to the Penn State, Jerry Sandusky-Joe Paterno-sexual abuse scandal with mild disgust. Mild disgust not for the horrendous, criminal acts performed on young boys by a dirty old man, but because we saw this coming. We live in a society today that dictates gay men (Sandusky may swing both ways, but these were gay sex acts) are always victims, NEVER predators.
College legend and Penn State head coach Joe Paterno was fired because he failed to tell the police when Sandusky’s acts were made known to him. While I won’t excuse his choice of going to the athletic director instead of the police, I understand it.
Given the hypersensitivity and eggshells we’re all supposed to walk on concerning anything “gay”, what do you think would have happened if Paterno had reported this to the police and there wasn’t enough evidence to prosecute? Sandusky could have sued, and Patero would have been attacked as a homophobe (which is a helluva lot worse than being a snitch).
Joe Paterno would never have been put in the situation he now finds himself if Jerry Sandusky was found in a shower with a 10-year-old girl. Public awareness dictates the police be called immediately. Anything less on a liberal campus, where all men are deemed to be rapists thanks to college feminists, would have been unthinkable. It would appear, the non-judgmental progressive line was adhered to in this case and gay sex, no matter the age of the participants, was nobody’s business because public perception must be that gay men are always victims, NEVER predators.
The left has long ago sewn these seeds with the normalization of what were previously common sense non-starters.
Imagine the drama that would ensue if Girl Scouts (in the name of equality) could be taken on camping trips by male scoutmasters unsupervised. What would be a reason for outcry? Because it would be assumed some men might be sexually attracted to little girls, duh! But that reasoning was never allowed when political correctness (and fear of constant litigation) pushed the Boy Scouts into allowing gay scoutmasters to take little boys into the woods unsupervised.
Gay men are always victims, NEVER predators.
Do you think the term “pedophile priest” was used simply because it was accurate? The left has always had it in for the antiquated moralities of the church, but the Catholic Priest scandal had a speed bump. The vast majority of those priests weren’t doing little girls; that would be easy to condemn. No, most of these priests were doing little boys and progressives had to attack the church, not the “men” committing the crimes from within.
Subsequently, churches had to close so settlements for the victims could be covered as well as the nature of the priests who abused the boys. Can any of you name one of the priests involved? Maybe not, but we all know know the name Matthew Sheppard.
Many questions have yet to be answered as to how the actions of Jerry Sandusky could have gone on so long unreported. The answer is simple.
If Sandusky had been realized to have molested ONE little girl, he would be been promptly reported to the police. That’s what we’ve been trained as a society to do. But since we are talking about gay sex acts, the ones politicians even look the other way at, this whole Penn State scandal should be a proud example of “Didn’t Ask, Didn’t Tell” being properly implemented, because what one does in the privacy of a college locker room shower is nobody’s business, right?
The Penn State students who rioted on campus following the dismissal of Coach Joe Paterno had it right. They were defending Paterno’s not being judgmental and informing the police of gay sex on campus, because the demonization of gays leads to their lack of self-esteem and such bullying can lead to suicide. Joe Paterno was acting in a way most activists should admire and he was a victim of retribution by an intolerant majority of homophobes within Penn State’s Board of Trustees.
I often watch for code words when analysing media coverage of stories and when men abuse young girls, it’s called sexual assault: rape. (The only place where this doesn’t apply is in Hollywood.) When women abuse young boys, we’re told how much fun they must have had. When gay men abuse boys, we very seldom hear the word “gay” in respect to the acts because gay men are always victims, NEVER predators.
When proven to have the same potential for deviant behavior as anyone else, that celebrity victim status cannot allowed to be tarnished and an agenda talking point cannot be allowed to be diminished.
No number of abused little boys is worth that.
The whole GLBT victim class cannot by PC definition be predators. Can straight men sue or bring criminal charges, if they are harassed by gay men or bi-men? Would complaining of gay sexual advances result in being labeled homophobic? What happens if adult lesbians pursue adolescent girls? We are being controlled by the media and the PC harpies.
This case has bothered me too. I can’t understand how a person, much less a man, could have just quietly walked past a man raping a little child. I would have grabbed something and begin beating the guy’s head in and then called an ambulance to come take care of the little boy and the city morgue to take care of the perv.
People have criticized Paterno for not informing the police and two administrators have been charged with not reporting a crime. However, I’m not sure they are to blame. Yes, you are correct that if this was a man raping a little girl things would have been different. But I am not certain if this is just due to sexism but more from just the perverted view of sex, heterosexual and homosexual, that our society promotes.
The problem is that the graduate assistant who witnessed the rape wasn’t certain it was wrong, much less a crime. If it was a little girl, she probably would have been in pain and crying. Thus, it would be more obvious that she was being harmed. With a little boy who is being forced into an act that is confusing, traumatic, but not necessarily physically painful, a stupid person may think that it is consensual–as if a child can consent to something he is too young to understand. The assistant was merely embarrassed rather than outraged. He did not intervene or even ask what was going on. He just slunk off and called his daddy. Daddy told him just to tell his boss the next day. So he told Paterno that he saw something of a “sexual nature” that was disturbing and inappropriate. He later told the administrators that he saw something that made him feel “uncomfortable.” The witness did not have any sense that an adult having sex with a child is wrong, regardless of whether the child is in pain or not.
Yes, I agree there is an added layer of confusion and protection of the perpetrators when it is homosexual sex. But the big problem is that our society cannot just say it is wrong for children to have sex. Yes, there are the old statutory rape laws, but I get the sense that a lot of people think they are old fashioned. The legal age of consent may be 15 or 16, but we are teaching middle school children about birth control. Why is that legal?
People need to understand that having sex with a child is not just “inappropriate”–it is evil. Maybe if we reinstated the death penalty for child rape, people would get the idea that it is wrong.
Apparently Bob didn’t see the big sign.
DANGER!
DO NOT TOUCH THE THIRD RAIL
Homosexual behavior, as heterosexual behavior, is voluntary. When the former is engaged between consenting adults, it is likely that it can be tolerated. However, unlike the latter, it is wholly unproductive. It does not positively contribute to the fitness of our species, and therefore there is no legitimate reason to normalize it.
The need to distinguish between “adult” and “child” is related to maturity or awareness of real-world consequences (especially long-term). A child is exceedingly incapable of nuanced discernment and yet children cannot and should not be permitted to escape responsibility for their actions. This is, however, not applicable when a child is corrupted by an adult who presumably is sufficiently mature and capable of self-moderating behavior and sound judgment.
This transgression is principally about an adult who corrupted a child. It was a crime committed against an individual and society. Since corruption of this nature is in most cases progressive (e.g. generational), the imperfections associated with the individuals and their influence on society cannot be permitted to propagate.
Both dreams of physical and material instant gratification are corruptive influences on individuals. The corruption is greatly amplified when dreams are fulfilled through involuntary exploitation.
If you remember back that far, those egg-shells are the major reason Jeffrey Dahmer wasn’t arrested sooner, and that the 14-years old (as I recall) boy that he was in the process of murdering, and who had managed to escape from him, was turned over to him after he “explained” to the police that the reason the young man (the boy) was running around nude and bloodied was due to a “lovers’ spat”.
If you remember back that far, after it all came out and the record of the 911 call and the police radio-banter became public, we were all expected to be more outraged at the “homophobia” expressed by the police talking about the call to one another over the radio than to the fact that those egg-shells allowed a serial murderer to finish the job on a victim who had escaped from him.
There are people, possibly with good intentions, and perhaps acting in good faith, who are extremely nearsighted, likely due to their own prejudice.
Read this:
http://claytonecramer.blogspot.com/2011/11/pedophiles-what-are-they.html
Pedophiles go after boys about 10 times more often than gay adults exist. And yet, they aren’t called Gay. Interesting, eh?
Mauser, to do so would mean that…. GASP!… the Homosexual lifestyle and thinking is wrong. Can’t have that! Not with today’s crowd.
Go report yourself to HR for sensitivity training. The beatings will continue until your morale improves.