Milo resigns from Breitbart over underage sex comments

Post Reply New Topic

Pedophilia is a problem throughout our society. There's always a certain percentage of people in any city or town who are attracted to underage people.

There are people who might not tolerate pedophilia, per se, but who tolerate more sexual exploration than the average person--and hence more toleration of the espousal of sexual acts, in general, which most people would find "perverted."

Hence, perhaps, a tacit toleration of pedophilia, without an explicit toleration.

There have been a lot of changes in age of consent laws. It's also important the age at which people can get married, since sex inside of a marriage is legally protected. Dowries still exist in rural USA, you can be sure of that. I think that we have to protect children, and writing a simple law to do that would be difficult. When I was 18 and 19, I knew 17 year olds who had more maturity than plenty of 21 year old people. I know several people who became emancipated minors, in fact.

However, if you have to make a simple law, I think the 18 year old limit with a few years of Romeo/Juliet clause for all ages makes sense. I don't remember ever not having an intense interest in my penis, and the bathing suit areas of others. I was never exploited, though. As an adult, I have to support laws to protect people who might otherwise be exploited, even if my own experience reveals some problems with our current approach.

I think it boils down to seeing children as property in a broad sense, or as people with less developed agency but all the fundamental rights of real people. Society holds some of their rights in trust, delegating their protection to the parents, in my conception. However, a lot of arguments about molestation and even rape turn into "what if it happened to YOUR sister, YOUR child, YOUR mother?" and I can't overlook the way some people only use that possessive language. Everyone uses it sometimes, but conservative voices use it exclusively and it is indeed a traditional view to see children and women as property.

Oh yeah, that related to Milo. He treats people as objects, so I don't really value his estimation of anyone. Allen Ginsburg also sat on the board of NAMBLA. People's attitudes are often shaped more by their experience than from a realistic view of human nature overall. I think it's fine to reject Milo based on what he said, but the fact that polygamists use their fake marriages to avoid prosecution must be addressed. However, they are right wing darlings as we see from Waco.

It should be noted that Ernst Rohm was killed by Hitler about 1934, when he found out that the SA outlived its purpose.

All this talk about Nazis has caused me to rethink fascism. I'm getting on board with the idea that it happens on both left and right, and should really be on a separate axis.

If you know about the structure of the Nazi party, the plan was to gradually kill everyone except the Death Head SS, although of course they didn't make that part public. Some of their plans were also so darn weird that the Nuremburg court excluded a lot of it out of concern that it would confuse the trial process. Having observed some court cases involving magicians, I have to conclude that they had a point.

Getting away from calling everyone on the right or everyone on the left Nazis is a good plan. Stop using the term so much and reserve it for cases where it really fits well, like this one.