When police refused to investigate a man who was harassing a young girl, her parents tracked him down and arrested him—now they are the only ones facing charges.
The post After Police Ignored Her, Mom Catches Child’s Attempted Rapist Herself—Then Cops ARREST HER appeared first on The Free Thought Project.
A 14-year-old girl who took pictures of herself and sent them to her boyfriend is now facing child pornography charges in Minnesota.
(RT) — Sexting minors is illegal, but having sex with them is okay, an Indiana Supreme Court has ruled.
Indiana high school teacher Sameer Thakar faces three years in prison for sending nude photographs to a 16-year old girl after the Supreme Court ruled earlier this week to reverse a lower court’s decision to throw out the case.
Thakar began texting the teenager in 2014, when he was 38. After a short period in which the girl told him she was underage, he then sent her images of his erect penis, court documents reveal.
Advertisment
The State charged then-38-year-old Sameer Girish Thakar with Class D felony dissemination of matter harmful to minors under Indiana Code section 35-49-3-3(a)(1) (2008) (“the Dissemination Statute”), after Thakar sent a photograph of his erect penis to a 16-year-old girl. The trial court dismissed the charges, relying upon Salter v. State, 906 N.E.2d 212 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009), trans. not sought, which found the Dissemination Statute void for vagueness as applied, because the intended recipient met Indiana’s age of consent to sexual activity. We now overrule Salter, hold that the Dissemination Statute is not unconstitutionally vague, and reverse.
He was charged with one count of felony dissemination of matter harmful to minors, but argued in court that the charge doesn’t make sense.
In Indiana, it is legal for adults to have consensual sex with 16 year olds. It is illegal, however, for a person to knowingly send sexually explicit photographs to someone under 18, which is classed as disseminating material harmful to minors.
READ MORE: Ferguson Police Chief Attempts to Join Michael Brown Protest, Chaos Ensues
The court originally threw out the charges, explaining it was “patently illogical” that a man could have sex with a teenager, but not send them images. The case was appealed and ended up in Indiana’s Supreme Court.
Believing that it was patently illogical that an adult man could legally show his penis to a 16-year-old through consensual activity in person, but not through photography, the Salter court held the statute was unconstitutionally vague as applied because the activity in question would not be understood by a person of ordinary intelligence as “‘patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community as a whole with respect to what is suitable matter for or performance before minors,’” which is a necessary element of the statutory definition of “harmful to minors” contained in Indiana Code section 35-49-2-2 (2008).
The Supreme Court found the charges should be upheld, despite the “inconsistent” law. It found no conflict between the two rules, as both can be complied with at the same time.
“With respect to a 16-year-old, consensual sexual activity in person is permitted, the dissemination of a sexually explicit photograph (consensually or otherwise) is not,” Justice Mark Massa wrote.
Massa said the court interprets the text of the law, and that it’s up to state lawmakers to sort out the inconsistency.
Earlier today we reported that as part of the government"s sentencing memorandum (published at the bottom), federal prosecutors asked that disgraced former Congressman Anthony Weiner, and the man Hillary Clinton has quietly added to what has become a virtually infinite list of reasons why she lost the presidential election, be sentenced to about two years in prison for engaging in sexting with an underage, 15-year-old girl. Prosecutors filed paper in Manhattan Federal Court on Wednesday in advance of Weiner’s sentencing. In the document, prosecutors asked that the judge use the sentencing as an opportunity to send a message to other perverted politicians:
The Government respectfully submits this memorandum in connection with the sentencing of Anthony Weiner, which is scheduled for September 25, 2017, following his guilty plea to transferring obscene material to a minor. Although the defendant’s self-destructive path from United States Congressman to felon is indisputably sad, his crime is serious and his demonstrated need for deterrence is real. The non-custodial sentence that Weiner proposes is simply inadequate; his crime deserves time in prison. For the reasons set forth below, the Government respectfully requests that Court sentence Weiner to a term of imprisonment within the range of 21 to 27 months.
Weiner"s sentencing will take place almost exactly a year after the New York Post published a story about him sexting with another woman who wasn’t his wife. Weiner said he would plead guilty in May after prosecutors brought charges following revelations that he also sexted with the 15-year-old, whom he met over Twitter. Both the girl and her father told the Daily Mail that Weiner knew she was underaged when they were corresponding.
And just to make sure that Weiner does end up in jail, the US Attorney for the district of New York, Joon Kim, laid out in vivid - and gruesome detail - the circumstances of his pedophilia. As taken from the prosecutor memorandum:
In the evening of January 23, 2016, a 15-year-old girl (the “Minor Victim”) initiated contact with the defendant by sending him a direct message on Twitter. Over the next several hours, the Minor Victim and Weiner exchanged a series of messages, ranging from the mundane to the provocative. Early in the exchange, the Minor Victim revealed to Weiner that she was in high school. Despite knowing he was communicating with a high school student, Weiner participated in increasingly suggestive exchanges, telling the Minor Victim, among other things, that he thought she was “kinda sorta gorgeous.” Their communications continued the next morning on Facebook messenger, then moved to Kik, and at some later point, Confide and Snapchat. The latter three all are messaging and photo-sharing applications that delete messages and images once viewed.
As January turned to February, their intermittent exchanges grew more lascivious. This was despite the fact that there could be no reasonable doubt in Weiner’s mind that he was chatting with a minor – in addition to having revealed that she was a high school student, the Minor Victim told Weiner that she was getting her learner’s permit. She explained in Facebook chats that she has “parents that wouldn’t approve of some of the things” she does, and that she likes “older guys,” “[b]ut that’s illegal.” The defendant correctly observed, “You are young,” in one Kik message.
Against that backdrop, between February 17 and 23, 2016, Weiner and the Minor Victim participated in three video chat sessions on Skype.
There is no dispute that the Minor Victim repeatedly suggested that she and the defendant participate in video chats on Skype. Those suggestions were not, however, one-sided. For example, Twitter records reveal that during their first exchanges the night of January 23, 2016, at some point after the Minor Victim had suggested that they Skype, the defendant said “Leave the complex stuff for Skype.” That night as well, after a suggestive exchange, the defendant said “Maybe Skype someday.” Thus, although it was the Minor Victim who initially sought out Weiner, as the Government readily concedes, Weiner immediately responded to the Minor Victim’s overture and willingly participated in the offense conduct thereafter.
It was then that the Minor Victim made clear that she was not just a minor – she was, in fact, only 15 years old. That did not stop Weiner. During the latter two Skype sessions, on February 18 and 23, 2016, and in a Snapchat communication on March 9, 2016, the defendant used graphic and obscene language to ask the Minor Victim to display her naked body and touch herself, which she did. He also sent an obscene message to the Minor Victim on Confide, describing what he would do to her, if she were 18. Part and parcel of these disturbing – and criminal – exchanges, the defendant also sent the Minor Victim adult pornography. In approximately March 2016, after several months of intermittent exchanges, communications between the defendant and Minor Victim largely stopped. The Minor Victim made efforts to re-engage, but was met with limited responsiveness.
The instant conduct was revealed to the public and law enforcement in September 2016, when the Daily Mail published the Minor Victim’s account of her communications with Weiner after she participated in a paid interview.
And some further commentary from the proscuting attorney:
This is not merely a “sexting” case. The defendant did far more than exchange typed words on a lifeless cellphone screen with a faceless stranger. With full knowledge that he was communicating with a real 15-year-old girl, the defendant asked her to engage in sexually explicit conduct via Skype and Snapchat, where her body was on display, and where she was asked to sexually perform for him. That offense – transmitting obscenity to a minor to induce her to engage in sexually explicit conduct by video chat and photo – is far from mere “sexting.” Weiner’s criminal conduct was very serious, and the sentence imposed should reflect that seriousness.
The defendant claims that he “responded to the victim’s request for sexually explicit messages not because she was a teenager, but in spite of it.” While the Government does not contend that Weiner engaged in inappropriate sexual exchanges with other minors or that he is a pedophile, his professed ambivalence towards the Minor Victim’s age is belied by the defendant’s own statements to the court-appointed evaluator during his evaluation. Moreover, the defendant has acknowledged an interest in legal, adult, teen-themed pornography. In the context of this admitted interest, his insistence that he deserves a lighter sentence because the Minor Victim’s age meant nothing to him rings hollow. Even if the Court were to credit Weiner’s claim of ambivalence to the Minor Victim’s age, that purported ambivalence is part of the problem. That his victim was a minor – and therefore his conduct a serious crime – did not deter Weiner from forging ahead.
The defendant’s submission repeatedly makes note of the 15-year-old Minor Victim’s various motives for communicating with Weiner and her profit from sharing those communications with the media. While careful not to cast blame on the Minor Victim outright or disclaim ultimate responsibility for his crime, he relies, in part, on the circumstances of their communications in arguing for a sentence of probation. That argument should be rejected, and Weiner should be sentenced for what he did – not what motived the Minor Victim. Weiner, a grown man, a father, and a former lawmaker, willfully and knowingly asked a 15-year-old girl to display her body and engage in sexually explicit conduct for him online. Such conduct warrants a meaningful sentence of incarceration.
Defense lawyers had portrayed the girl as an aggressor, saying she wanted to generate material for a book and possibly influence the presidential election. Prosecutors responded that Weiner should be sentenced for what he did, and his victim"s motives should not influence his punishment. A defense lawyer declined to comment Wednesday.
Weiner, 53, said in a submission last week that he"s undergoing treatment and is profoundly sorry for subjecting the North Carolina high school student to what his lawyers called his "deep sickness."
In a plea bargain, Weiner agreed not to appeal any sentence between 21 and 27 months. Prosecutors said the sentence should fall within that span, and they noted that Probation Office authorities had recommended a 27-month prison term.
He will be sentenced to prison next Monday.
The full sentencing guildeline filed by prosecutors is below.
After being widely blamed by Hillary Clinton supporters – and even the candidate herself – for inadvertently prompting the FBI to reopen its investigation into whether the candidate mishandled classified information, it looks like Anthony Weiner, once believed to be a strong contender for Mayor of New York City, is going to prison.
The Associated Press reports that federal prosecutors are asking that the former Congressman be sentenced to about two years in prison for engaging in sexting with a 15-year-old girl. Prosecutors filed paper in Manhattan Federal Court on Wednesday in advance of Weiner’s sentencing, which is scheduled for Monday. In their paperwork, the prosecutors asked that the judge use the sentencing as an opportunity to send a message to other perverted pols.
The 53-year-old said in a submission last week that he"s undergoing treatment and is profoundly sorry for subjecting the North Carolina high school student to what his lawyers described as his "deep sickness." Prosecutors say this isn’t the first time Weiner has promised to reform himself.
Weiner’s lawyers portrayed the girl as an aggressor, saying she wanted to generate material for a book and possibly influence the presidential election, according to the AP.
As part of his plea bargain, Weiner has agreed not to appeal any sentence between 21 and 27 months. His sentencing will take place almost exactly a year after the New York Post published a story about Weiner sexting with another woman who wasn’t his wife. Weiner said he would plead guilty in May after prosecutors brought charges following revelations that he also sexted with the 15-year-old, whom he met over Skype. Both the girl and her father told the Daily Mail that Weiner knew she was underaged when they were corresponding.
Weiner pled guilty to a single charge of transferring obscene material to a minor after turning himself in to the FBI.
The description of Weiner’s conduct that his victim provided to investigators was truly sickening.
“He had some rape fantasies. It would just be him showing up at my house when my dad was out of town,” the girl told the Mail. “And just start undressing me, being forceful, asking me if I want to be dominated, strange questions.”
Weiner reportedly once told the girl, “I would bust that tight p–y so hard and so often that you would leak and limp for a week,” and sent her bare-chested pictures of himself.
His Congressional career imploded back in 2011 when he accidentally tweeted a picture of his bulging erection. He had meant to direct message it to a woman who wasn’t his wife. Speaking of Weiner’s wife, top Clinton lieutenant Huma Abedin announced her separation from the Congressman a year ago.
Hudson, FL — A career police officer, who spent nearly two decades in the line of duty in New York, is now one of the latest school resource officers to be fired for inappropriate relationships with children under his supervision.
Pasco County Sheriff’s Deputy Corporal Milton Arroyo was fired last week, after investigators said he used police computer systems to find personal information about individuals for his own personal reasons, and he broke police department policies involving social media and minors, with students at a local school.
Detectives said Arroyo was “dancing on that fine line” between what is legal and what is illegal, when it was discovered he had been propositioning minor schoolchildren for “sexting” on Snapchat.
Advertisment
For example, instead of asking a girl to show him her breasts—which would have been a felony—Arroyo reportedly asked her only to show him her bra. That simple distinction kept him from being charged with child sex crimes. Instead, he only lost his job.
OFFICER FIRED: A Pasco County school resource officer was fired for social media contact with students. We expect more details from the sheriff in this press conference: http://www.fox13news.com/news/local-news/266466179-story
Posted by FOX 13 News – Tampa Bay on Friday, July 7, 2017
Arroyo was the school resource officer for Fivay High School in Hudson, Florida. In April, a parent approached the school alleging an inappropriate social media relationship between Arroyo and her daughter. Here are just a few of the inappropriate comments investigators claim Arroyo made to students:
“Unzip her sweatshirt” “send a picture of her bra” “Why don’t you go into the bathroom and take a picture?” “How old of a guy would you date?” and “Wanna see my ‘d’?”
WFLA News Channel 8 reported that Arroyo “also asked a female student to perform a sex act and admitted to having a dream about having sex with the student.”
Arroyo is one of the latest school resource officers to be caught—either intentionally or unintentionally—engaging in inappropriate, unethical, illegal and immoral activities with kids and teenagers.
READ MORE: Congress Passes Bill to Throw Parents of Sexting Teens in Jail for 15 Years
Unfortunately, even if the officer is caught “red-handed,” very little in the way of punishment takes place. In a case from May, a Texas school resource officer, who was reportedly having sex with a middle schooler in the school’s girls’ bathroom, not only avoided jail time, but was given a short probation and may be able to return to duty after his probation period ends.
However, some states do seem to hold certain officers accountable. One North Carolina school resource officer who was accused of kidnapping and raping a student was allowed bond—but the bond was set at $2.5 million.
Deputy Christopher Kelly has been charged with statutory sex offense with a child, first degree sexual exploitation of a minor, second degree sexual exploitation of a minor, indecent liberties with a child, sex acts with a student, and second degree kidnapping.
In the case of Milton Arroyo, he has not been charged with any sex crimes involving children, but that may be because some of his victims are remaining silent.
Studies suggest very few victims of sexual assault ever report their crimes, and are sometimes not believed when they do turn in their perpetrators. If you are a sexual assault victim of Arroyo—who spent 20 years in New York—or you know someone who is, you are encouraged to contact the Hudson Police Department with your story.
We applaud the teenage girl who approached her mother with the inappropriate comments allegedly made by the school’s resource officer. We applaud her mother for believing her and taking those serious concerns to the school and police department. That is how change happens—when victims refuse to remain silent.
The United States House of Representatives has passed a bill to criminalize “sexting” among teenagers. But that’s not all. This ominous bill also punishes their parents by making them face a 15-year mandatory, minimum sentence.
H.R. 1761, the Protecting Against Child Exploitation Act of 2017, seeks to “criminalize the knowing consent of the visual depiction, or live transmission, of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct, and for other purposes.”
“Any person who, in a circumstance described in subsection (f), knowingly—employs, uses, persuades, induces, entices, or coerces a minor to engage in any sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of producing any visual depiction of such conduct, or transmitting a live visual depiction of such conduct; produces or causes to be produced a visual depiction of a minor engaged in any sexually explicit conduct where the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct and such visual depiction is of such conduct; or transmits or causes to be transmitted a live visual depiction of a minor engaged in any sexually explicit conduct.”
But the teenagers who are caught “sexting” are not the only ones who will be punished. The bill also states that “any parent, legal guardian, or person having custody or control of a minor” who “knowingly permits such minor to engage in, or to assist any other person to engage in, sexually explicit conduct knowing that a visual depiction of such conduct will be produced or transmitted shall be punished.”
As the Public Defender Blog points out:
The key words here are “knowingly permits.” That’s an extraordinarily low standard for a criminal offense. This language would apply to any parents who discover that their teenager is sexting with a romantic partner and then fail to cut off the child’s phone and internet access.
It is certainly justifiable for parents to take such decisive action when they catch their children sexting. But it is also understandable that some parents might prefer a different approach. Phones and the internet are essential to modern life, and parents might reasonably choose to tolerate sexting while warning their teenagers against it. Indeed, experts advise that parents should supervise their kids’ phone and internet use, but also caution that “throwing the book” at teens when they’re caught won’t do much good.
Even if the clause that punishes parents was taken out of the bill, it still leaves the question of why 15-year-olds are being subjected to mandatory minimum sentences.
READ MORE: Disturbing Video Shows Cops Force K9 to Maul Man for Not Getting Out of Car Fast Enough
During a debate over the bill on the House floor, Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Virginia), noted that one of the most alarming parts about the bill is that it “explicitly states that the mandatory minimums will apply equally to an attempt or a conspiracy.”
“That means if a teenager attempts to obtain a photo of sexually explicit conduct by requesting it from his teenage girlfriend, the judge must sentence that teenager to prison for at least 15 years for making such an attempt,” Scott said. “If a teenager goads a friend to ask a teenager to take a sexually explicit image of herself, just by asking, he could be guilty of conspiracy or attempt, and the judge must sentence that teenager to at least 15 years in prison.”
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), ranking member of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, also noted that the bill raises “new constitutional concerns” and would arguably “exacerbate overwhelming concerns with the unfair and unjust mandatory minimum sentencing that contributes to the over-criminalization of juveniles and mass incarceration generally.”
“While the bill is well intended, it is overbroad in scope and will punish the very people it indicates it is designed to protect: our children,” Lee said.
The bill, which was introduced by Rep. Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) in March, passed in the House of Representatives last week with a larger majority. It was opposed by 53 Democrats, and just two Republicans—Reps. Justin Amash (R-Mich.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ken.).
While supporters of the bill argue that each individual case would be up to the discretion of the judge, the fact is that if this bill becomes law, and it includes a 15-year, mandatory minimum sentence, it will set a troubling precedent for both teenagers, and their parents. It also serves as a reminder that making something “illegal” won’t scare teenagers out of doing it—instead, it will just create another way for the government to meddle in the personal lives of citizens, and it will do so by punishing only the ones who are caught.
Naperville, IL — The weekend before Corey Walgren dove off of a five-story parking garage, he confessed to his parents he’d had sex for the first time. Unfortunately for Corey, a 16-year-old Junior at Naperville North High School, he was never allowed to explore the joys of sex again before school and police officials decided they had to intervene in his personal life.
A female classmate became aware of a consensual sexual encounter between another classmate, who was also 16, and Corey. Saying he’d played a recording of the sexual encounter for a group of his friends, the girl went to school officials to report the incident.
A school administrator called Corey into an office where the school resource officer, a cop named Brett Heun, proceeded to interrogate Corey. Heun told Corey that being in possession of videos of a sexual nature involving minors is considered, under the law, child pornography, and that he might have to register as a sex offender. According to the Chicago Tribune;
There, with a police officer and campus dean, Corey was questioned about possessing and possibly sharing “child pornography,” allegedly threatened that he’d be put on the state’s sex offender registry, then was left alone to wait for his mother.
The threat of having to register as a sex offender must have terrified Corey, who would then be possibly labeled a pedophile by his peers. Even though the video recording was too dark to see any sex act take place, the cell phone did contain a file with audio of the sexual encounter.
Police did not intend to pursue charges, records show, and they indicated they wanted to handle the matter in a way that ensured Corey understood the seriousness of his actions and how it affected his classmate.
The officer then called Mrs. Walgren to come to the school to discuss the action the officer was going to take against Corey.
READ MORE: WATCH: Cop Punches Innocent Man in the Face for Questioning His Authority
Instead of waiting patiently for his mother to come, and possibly being humiliated his sex acts that had come to light, the young man left the school afoot. He owned a vehicle, and it was parked at the school, but the distraught young man walked to town.
After Mrs. Walgren arrived at school, she was surprised to find her son was nowhere to be found. Police asked her if Corey was suicidal — she said he wasn’t — but he was.
Walking into downtown Naperville, Corey climbed the stairs of a five-story parking garage, and sat on the garage’s ledge, within eyesight of an officer whose attention was grabbed by the boy’s decision to sit there. But by the time the officer decided to park his patrol car in a nearby parking space, in an effort to keep an eye on the boy (whom he didn’t know had just walked out of his high school) Corey had already thrown himself to the ground.
The boy was cared for by a doctor who was passing by, but even with the emergency medical attention he was given, he later died at the hospital. The honor student, hockey player, and bass fisherman took his own life.
Walgren’s death is an indictment on a society so obsessed with security that it places armed officers of the law inside schools to supposedly serve and protect the student populations. Many times, those officers are directly responsible for arresting teens, giving many thousands of them criminal records for doing what kids have done for hundreds of years; questioning authorities, fighting in school, and creating disturbances.
READ MORE: Ex-Navy Seal Creates Veterans Organization to Expose Pedophiles and Rescue Trafficked Children
In the past, bold teachers and administrators would handle those situations in house, without the need of any law enforcement officials. That was then, this is now.
Now those same officers who are sworn to protect and serve, often trample the rights of the students to enjoy civil liberties afforded to them by the Constitution. Who teenagers choose to have sex with is the business between those teens, and should be of no concern to the state, the school’s, and especially the police.
The Walgren family is now suing the school district, as well as the police, for 5 million dollars, a million for each floor of the parking garage Corey passed on the way to his death. But the school, in a statement, says they’ve done nothing wrong. They wrote;
At the outset of this incident, we worked to ensure a thorough and fair review of the facts, and involved the appropriate school and law enforcement officials,” the statement said. “Our main concern with any matter involving students is fairness, discretion and objectivity. The school district feels confident that we handled this issue appropriately and engaged the right officials pursuant to the protocols and procedures that govern student affairs.”
It’s understandable the police wanted to question the teen about the sexual encounter on his phone. With so many pedophile teachers and adults in the community, maybe they wanted to know he wasn’t being abused by an adult. But, as Mrs. Walgren said, “I think they wanted to scare him straight…Instead, they scared him to death.”
READ MORE: Victims Come Forward Alleging Seattle Mayor Raped Them as Kids, Expose Police Cover-Up
As TFTP has long contended, police have no business taking up residence in public schools. When police are involved in the daily lives of teenagers, bad things happen.
Unfortunately, Corey’s story, as well as the hundreds of students in Colorado all suffered from a 21st Century dilemma; a clash of law, technology, youthful lusts, and life-changing regret.
Submitted by Howard Kunstler via Kunstler.com,
Remember that one? It was about as weird as it gets. A meme generated out of the voluminous hacked John Podesta emails that some conspiracy connoisseurs cooked up into a tale of satanic child abuse revolving around a certain chi-chi Washington DC pizza joint. I never signed on with the story, but it was an interesting indication of how far the boundaries of mass psychology could be pushed in the mind wars of politics.
Sex, of course, is fraught. Sex and the feelings it conjures beat a path straight to the limbic system where the most primitive thoughts become the father of the most primitive deeds. In our American world, this realm of thought and deed has turned into a political football with the Left and the Right scrimmaging ferociously for field position — while the real political agenda of everything important other than sex lies outside the stadium.
The Comet Pizza story was understandably upsetting to Democrats who didn’t like being painted as child molesters. Unfortunately for them, it coincided with the bust of one Anthony Weiner — and his infamous laptop — disgraced former “sexting” congressman, husband of Hillary’s top aide and BFF, Huma Abedin. The laptop allegedly contained a lot of child porn.
That garbage barge of sexual allegation and innuendo couldn’t have helped the Hillary campaign, along with all the Clinton Foundation stuff, in the march to electoral loserdom. I suspect the chthonic darkness of it all generated the “Russia-did-it” hysteria that cluttered up the news-cloud during the first month of Trumptopia. The collective superego of America is reeling with shame and rage.
On the Right side spectrum stood the curious figure of Milo Yiannopoulos, the self-styled “Dangerous Faggot,” who has made a sensational career lately as an ideological provocateur, especially on the campus scene were he got so into the indignant faces of the Maoist snowflakes with his special brand of boundary-pushing that they resorted to disrupting his events, dis-inviting him at the last moment, or finally rioting, as in the case at UC Berkeley a few weeks ago.
Milo’s battles on campus were particularly ripe because his opponents on the far Left were themselves so adamant about their own brand of boundary-pushing along the frontier of the LGBTQ agenda. The last couple of years, you would’ve thought that half the student population fell into one of those “non-binary” sex categories, and it became the most urgent mission of the Left to secure bathroom rights and enforce new personal pronouns of address for the sexually ambiguous.
But then Milo made a tactical error. Despite all the mutual boundary-pushing on each side, he pushed a boundary too far and entered the final dark circle of taboo: child molesting. That was the point were the closet Puritan hysterics went in for the kill. This is what he said on a Web talk radio show:
What normally happens in schools, very often, is you have an older woman with a younger boy, and the boy is the predator in that situation. The boy is like, let’s see if I can fuck the gym teacher, or let’s see if I can fuck the hot math teacher, and he does. The women fall in love with these nubile young boys, these athletic young boys in their prime. We get hung up on the child abuse stuff to the point where we’re heavily policing consenting adults, grad students and their professors, this arbitrary and oppressive idea of consent, which totally destroys the understanding many of us have about the complexities, subtleties, and complicated nature of many relationships. In the homosexual world particularly, some of the relationships between younger boys and older men, the sort of coming-of-age relationships in which these older men help those young boys discover who they are, and give them security and provide them with love…. [Milo is shouted down by his podcast hosts]
So that was the final straw. Milo got bounced by his platform, Breitbart News, and went through the now-routine, mandatory, abject ceremonial of the televised apology required by over-stepping celebrities — though he claimed, with some justification I think, that his remarks were misconstrued. Anyway, I’m sure he’ll rebound on his own signature website platform and he’ll be back in action before long.
His remarks about the “coming-of-age” phase of life prompted me to wonder about the boundary-pushers on the Left, on the college campuses in particular, who are encouraging young people to go through drastic sex-change surgeries, at an age before the development of that portion of their frontal lobes controlling judgment is complete. Who are these diversity deans and LGBTQ counselors who lead confused adolescents to self-mutilation in search of some hypothesized “identity?” Whoever they are, this dynamic seems pretty reckless and probably tragic to me. There ought to be reasonable doubt that an irreversible “sexual reassignment” surgery may not lead to personal happiness some years down the line — when, for instance, that person’s frontal lobes have developed, and they begin to experience profound and complicated emotions such as remorse.
Our sexual hysteria has many more curious angles to it. We live in a culture where pornography, up to the last limits of freakishness and depravity, are available to young unformed personalities at a click. We stopped protecting adolescents against this years ago, so why should we be surprised when they venture into ever-darker frontiers of sexuality? It was the Left that sought to abolish boundaries in sex and many other areas of American life. And yet they still affect to be shocked by someone like Milo.
I maintain that there is a dynamic relationship between our inability to act on the truly pressing issues of the day — energy, economy, and geo-politics — and our neurotic preoccupation with sexual identity.
The epic amount of collective psychic energy being diverted from what’s important into sexual fantasy, titillation, confusion, and litigation leaves us pathetically unprepared to face the much more serious crisis of civilization gathering before us.
