Milo: if you are saying I’m defending it (pedophilia) because I’m certainly not

[bodecea]

I'm not even pissed off at liberals. This is the type of dirty shit they pull all the time. I'm royally furious with so called conservatives who keep falling for the bullshit the left spoon feeds them.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!

How do liberals even factor into this? Conservative Milo says x. Conservative CPAC dumps him. Conservative Breitbart drops him. Conservatives all over the place are disavowing him. And all this is somehow the fault of liberals?

It's always the Liberals' fault when Con-servative things go awry.

 

[Faun]

LOLOL

I quoted him expressing how much he hates the left for establishing consent laws because they protect 13 year olds who he believes can be capable of giving consent. That you can't understand that is on you.

LOLOL you took something out of context and you look stupid as hell.

Again, your own personal struggles with English are your problem, no one else's. He said what he said. Simon & Schuster understood what he said even though you cannot. Same with Breitbart.

Many on right have become so depraved, they're actually defending that piece of shit and making excuses for him. <smh>

No. You're a nitwit that took it out of context. You look stupid.

Sure, ya depraved conservative.

I'm a liberal. You're a nitwit.

LOLOL

Sure, uh-huh.

 

[bodecea]

well tinydancer perhaps this at least proves the liberals aren't into pushing pedophilia just because of pro-LGBT agenda. if there is THAT much outrage and protest, at least that shows they don't approve of that as has been conjectured about the left.

Nah. Just another opportunity to bash anyone with conservative views. They DO support what they condemn in him.
.Ruthie Ginsberg supports lowering the age of consent to twelve. See any libtards opposing her? Driving her from the Supreme Court?

With Liberals in charge over the decades, the Age of Consent has gone UP......Perhaps this is what chaps Milo's lips....or hide?

 

[emilynghiem]

I'm not even pissed off at liberals. This is the type of dirty shit they pull all the time. I'm royally furious with so called conservatives who keep falling for the bullshit the left spoon feeds them.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!

How do liberals even factor into this? Conservative Milo says x. Conservative CPAC dumps him. Conservative Breitbart drops him. Conservatives all over the place are disavowing him. And all this is somehow the fault of liberals?

It's always the Liberals' fault when Con-servative things go awry.

No bodecea Milo admitted his terrible error in using the British/gay terms "young boys" to mean "young men"
That's what really caused this irreversible misunderstanding. it really DID SOUND EVERY BIT like he meant pedophilia.
But the issue with the priest was a separate issue. They were run together in context and the whole thing was a disaster.
He admits that.

What the media isn't prepared for is how to allow him to correct this mess.
That's the media's problem. Even the rightwing Breitbart couldn't help after the fact but fled.

I have no issue working with both the right and the left.
And even I could make no sense of what he said except it meant pedophilia.
Anyone would have taken it that way, regardless of agenda. Milo admits that.
The rest is such a mess, that's going to take a whole other level to sort through.

Everyone was justified in reacting as they did, given the words he said and the jumbled context.
I would have done the same had I not been forewarned that something else was going on here.

 

[emilynghiem]

well tinydancer perhaps this at least proves the liberals aren't into pushing pedophilia just because of pro-LGBT agenda. if there is THAT much outrage and protest, at least that shows they don't approve of that as has been conjectured about the left.

Nah. Just another opportunity to bash anyone with conservative views. They DO support what they condemn in him.
.Ruthie Ginsberg supports lowering the age of consent to twelve. See any libtards opposing her? Driving her from the Supreme Court?

With Liberals in charge over the decades, the Age of Consent has gone UP......Perhaps this is what chaps Milo's lips....or hide?

RE age of consent
it depends on the agenda bodecea for example
1. with abortion the left wants underaged teens to be able to access this
without parental consent because the parents coudl be part of the abuse that got the teen pregnant
2. with transgender transition, the left wants parents to be able to decide this
for their kids at ages as early as 6. do you call that progress or child abuse?
3. with reparative therapy, the left doesn't want this choice at all especially not minors.

Most people think it means "coercive torture malpractice or abuse," and have no understanding or
experience with the REAL "spiritual healing and generational therapy" that is voluntary and helps that
person restore peace with their natural selves, regardless if
someone comes out gay straight trans bi or whatever through the process by natural free choice.

 

[emilynghiem]

I found this gem. Same interview as being reported on. But gee. That part of the quote seems to be missing in many reports.

Here's the segment. Sort of a biggie to leave out, but then in the quest to destroy someone I guess you could leave it out.

Milo: “You’re misunderstanding what pedophilia means. Pedophilia is not a sexual attraction to somebody 13-years-old who is sexually mature. Pedophilia is attraction to children who have not reached puberty. Pedophilia is attraction to people who don’t have functioning sex organs yet. Who have not gone through puberty. Who are too young to be able (unclear and cut off by others)…

That’s not what we are talking about. You don’t understand what pedophilia is if you are saying I’m defending it because I’m certainly not.”

READ: Transcript of Milo Yiannopoulos Video on Pedophilia

LOLOLOL

Look folks, this is how depraved some on the right have become that they're defending a piece of shit conservative who condones sex with young children. And I don't care what you call it, it's illegal in all 50 states and Great Britain.

And Milo agrees with you Faun That's the controversy
He said the wrong words and mixed in the other context
there was no other way to take that except as promoting pedophilia.
But anyone who knows him and his history knows he
holds the same views of pedophilia as illegal and abusive as you do.

Imagine Faun if someone took your words and suddenly you
were in Milo's shoes being falsely portrayed as promoting pedophilia.
When you totally oppose that as illegal sick abuse!!!
Wouldn't you try to correct the record? Because you know that's false and backwards?

 

[emilynghiem]

Thanks tinydancer I found this below on his facebook.

He corrects himself, that he should NOT have used the word 'boy' or 'young boys' when HE MEANT YOUNG MEN. This is very unfortunate that the unforgiving media ran away with his poorly worded statement where you cannot tell what he meant unless you KNOW his history his personal intent etc.

I'd really like to give MILO the public opportunity to correct the record.
Similar happened to another friend of mine, who used the WRONG wording and gave the exact OPPOSITE impression of what he was conveying. This is too easy with the media we have ready to pounce on any mistake and run wild with it.

Thanks and I hope he gets the chance to correct the record.
I hate when this happens to me or anyone. SEE BELOW in BOLD/LARGE PRINT

I found this gem. Same interview as being reported on. But gee. That part of the quote seems to be missing in many reports.

Here's the segment. Sort of a biggie to leave out, but then in the quest to destroy someone I guess you could leave it out.

Milo: “You’re misunderstanding what pedophilia means. Pedophilia is not a sexual attraction to somebody 13-years-old who is sexually mature. Pedophilia is attraction to children who have not reached puberty. Pedophilia is attraction to people who don’t have functioning sex organs yet. Who have not gone through puberty. Who are too young to be able (unclear and cut off by others)…

That’s not what we are talking about. You don’t understand what pedophilia is if you are saying I’m defending it because I’m certainly not.”

READ: Transcript of Milo Yiannopoulos Video on Pedophilia

A note for idiots (UPDATED):

I do not support pedophilia. Period. It is a vile and disgusting crime, perhaps the very worst. There are selectively edited videos doing the rounds, as part of a co-ordinated effort to discredit me from establishment Republicans, that suggest I am soft on the subject.

If it somehow comes across (through my own sloppy phrasing or through deceptive editing) that I meant any of the ugly things alleged, let me set the record straight: I am completely disgusted by the abuse of children.

Some facts to consider:

1. I have outed THREE pedophiles in my career as a journalist. That's three more than any of my critics and a peculiar strategy for a supposed pedophile apologist.

(a) Luke Bozier, former business partner of Louise Mensch
http://kernelmag.dailydot.com/…/menshn-co-founder-embroile…/
http://kernelmag.dailydot.com/…/…/3746/luke-bozier-arrested/

(b) Nicholas Nyberg, anti-GamerGate activist who self-described as a pedophile and white nationalist
http://www.breitbart.com/…/leading-gamergate-critic-sarah-…/

(c) Chris Leydon, a London photographer who has a rape trial starting March 13 thanks to my reporting.
http://www.breitbart.com/…/tech-city-darling-chris-leydon-…/

2. I have repeatedly expressed disgust at pedophiles in my journalism.
http://www.breitbart.com/…/heres-why-the-progressive-left-…/

3. I have never defended and would never defend child abusers, as my reporting history shows. The world is messy and complicated, and I recognize it as such, as this furore demonstrates. But that is a red line for any decent person.

4. The videos do not show what people say they show. I *did* joke about giving better head as a result of clerical sexual abuse committed against me when I was a teen. If I choose to deal in an edgy way on an internet livestream with a crime I was the victim of that's my prerogative. It's no different to gallows humor from AIDS sufferers.

5. National Review, whose journalists are tweeting about this, published an article defending Salon for giving a pedophile a platform.

6. I did say that there are relationships between younger men and older men that can help a young gay man escape from a lack of support or understanding at home. That's perfectly true and every gay man knows it. But I was not talking about anything illegal and I was not referring to pre-pubescent boys.

7. I said in the same "Drunken Peasants" podcast from which the footage is taken that I agree with the current age of consent.

8. I shouldn't have used the word "boy" when I talked about those relationships between older men and younger gay men. (I was talking about my own relationship when I was 17 with a man who was 29. The age of consent in the UK is 16.) That was a mistake. Gay men often use the word "boy" when they refer to consenting adults. I understand that heterosexual people might not know that, so it was a sloppy choice of words that I regret.

9. This rush to judgment from establishment conservatives who hate Trump as much as they hate me, before I have had any chance to provide context or a response, is one of the big reasons gays vote Democrat.

10. In case there is any lingering doubt, here's me, in the same interview the other footage is taken from, affirming that the current legal age of consent is about right: "And I think the law is probably about right. It's probably roughly the right age. I think it's probably about ok. But there are certainly people who are capable of giving consent at a younger age. I certainly consider myself to be one of them, people who were sexually active younger. I think it particularly happens in the gay world, by the way."

Doesn't matter if he called them boys or young men. He specifically discussed 13 year old males. That's disgusting.

NO there were two different things he was discussion.
1. with pedophilia he was discussing that this meant people before they are sexual developed
2. what he meant about the relationships is the gap between 17 and 29, for example, where both are still adults who can consent. But the 'cross generational' still applies.
3. He made it clear he is opposed to any such abuse of underage persons who can't give legal consent.

Even if he misspoke, that is NOT what he meant, and he makes this very clear what his history and his intent really is.

Odd that he didn't mention 17, but he did say he didn't consider sex with a 13 year old to be pedophilia.

Okay BULLDOG I see where this is getting mixed up
^ the underage sex is still illegal as "rape"
but he's saying the LITERAL term "pedophilia" refers SPECIFICALLY to undeveloped children

He's not contesting the illegality but the TERMINOLOGY

I can TOTALLY see how that got lost and completely screwed up, too. YIKES!!!

 

[irosie91]

"under-developed" as in kids who just do not grow up normal"?

 

[emilynghiem]

Hello?

Ffs. Milo has intimated clearly that as a 13 year old he did not obey the age of consent laws.

WHAT cnm it's the ADULTS who are legally responsible for respecting or violating those laws.
The underaged victims are not of legal age or competence, what are you saying am I missing something here?

From what I understand two different contexts were mixed into one.
He started talking about his own past experience abused by a priest.
so of course that wasn't consensual, it was abuse. by the priest.
it didn't respect consent or age of consent, but it's the priest who is legally responsible.

Let's NOT mix that in any way with what he was TRYING to say
about CONSENSUAL relations between "young men" say 17
with "older men" such as 29.

Running those two contexts together (plus the mixup over
terminology with what pedophilia means technically
as opposed to statutory rape, and using young boys to mean young men)
was another mistake on top of mistakes.

What a mess. No wonder Breitbart dropped this rather than
try to untangle a huge ball of twine that got twisted on itself...

 

[emilynghiem]

"under-developed" as in kids who just do not grow up normal"?

I would suppose:
* undeveloped means they haven't developed yet.
* under-developed means they are below the average state of development compared to other.
are you asking if someone is mal-developed, and isn't going to develop normally even over time?

regardless irosie91 in all cases of
children/minors being either
* undeveloped
* underdeveloped
* mal developed or whatever
it is still unlawful to abuse them for sex

it seems that never got communicated
because the whole discussion got sidetracked
or sideswiped over the terms "pedophilia" vs "statutory rape"
and "young boys" used in British/gay culture to mean "young men."

 

[emilynghiem]

Most people don't throw the term around loosely.

?????
What Disir ?????
at a time where people are labeling LGBT as pedophiles?
that isn't throwing the term around loosely? what???

 

[irosie91]

Hello?

Ffs. Milo has intimated clearly that as a 13 year old he did not obey the age of consent laws.

WHAT cnm it's the ADULTS who are legally responsible for respecting or violating those laws.
The underaged victims are not of legal age or competence, what are you saying am I missing something here?

From what I understand two different contexts were mixed into one.
He started talking about his own past experience abused by a priest.
so of course that wasn't consensual, it was abuse. by the priest.
it didn't respect consent or age of consent, but it's the priest who is legally responsible.

Let's NOT mix that in any way with what he was TRYING to say
about CONSENSUAL relations between "young men" say 17
with "older men" such as 29.

Running those two contexts together (plus the mixup over
terminology with what pedophilia means technically
as opposed to statutory rape, and using young boys to mean young men)
was another mistake on top of mistakes.

What a mess. No wonder Breitbart dropped this rather than
try to untangle a huge ball of twine that got twisted on itself...

Emily-----again I will bore you with my anecdotal stuff------I was in school----
when the NORM was "lets look at this stuff all over again"-------My school
was so damned ON THE EDGE that MASTERS AND JOHNSON came along
to lecture us on their theories rendering EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING ---
"normal human sexuality"------ ( I think they later divorced????) So many
of my colleagues fell for the crap so HEAVILY-----that they decided to find
relations between grandpa and little johnny ----just part of the "NORM" ----
I was a hold out in group discussions.....

 

[L.K.Eder]

Aha. When he said young boys he meant young men. We need a translation service for milo to english, as well as for trump to english.

 

[BULLDOG]

If you're good with grown men and 13 year old boys, that is supporting pedophilia.

He never said he condoned any illegal activity and certainly not pedophilia. Milo was clearly expressing that sexual maturity comes at different ages.

Some early, some later. But Milo sticks with the age of consent laws. He clearly states that.

A grown man having sex with a 13 year old boy is illegal. Milo clearly said he thought it was often a good thing. I'm not sure how you can't understand that. His remarks were so offensive till CPAC uninvited him and Breitbart fired him. How long have you supported Milo's type of pedophilia?

Flat out lie that he thought sex with a 13 year old boy was a good thing. That's outrageous. And obviously CPAC was understandably pressured into uninviting him.

And piss right off that I would support pedophilia.

Brietbart didn't fire him. He resigned for the good of Brietbart News. It's a lie that he was fired.

You're on a roll with those lies.

You haven't read the transcript,idiot

Milo: “You’re misunderstanding what pedophilia means. Pedophilia is not a sexual attraction to somebody 13-years-old who is sexually mature.

READ: Transcript of Milo Yiannopoulos Video on Pedophilia

If you're good with grown men and 13 year old boys, that is supporting pedophilia.

He never said he condoned any illegal activity and certainly not pedophilia. Milo was clearly expressing that sexual maturity comes at different ages.

Some early, some later. But Milo sticks with the age of consent laws. He clearly states that.

A grown man having sex with a 13 year old boy is illegal. Milo clearly said he thought it was often a good thing. I'm not sure how you can't understand that. His remarks were so offensive till CPAC uninvited him and Breitbart fired him. How long have you supported Milo's type of pedophilia?

Flat out lie that he thought sex with a 13 year old boy was a good thing. That's outrageous. And obviously CPAC was understandably pressured into uninviting him.

And piss right off that I would support pedophilia.

Brietbart didn't fire him. He resigned for the good of Brietbart News. It's a lie that he was fired.

You're on a roll with those lies.

You haven't read the transcript,idiot

Milo: “You’re misunderstanding what pedophilia means. Pedophilia is not a sexual attraction to somebody 13-years-old who is sexually mature.

READ: Transcript of Milo Yiannopoulos Video on Pedophilia

Oh I have read the transcript. Now let's put up the quote in context. Milo was being clinical. From a fair and balanced article...


"He said “You’re misunderstanding what pedophilia means. Pedophilia is not a sexual attraction to somebody 13-years-old who is sexually mature. Pedophilia is attraction to children who have not reached puberty.”

BINGO!

"He’s right. The English language has different terms – hebephilia and ephebophilia – for people attracted to post-pubescent boys.

I’m not sure why Milo didn’t use those terms to clarify his point, but he shouldn’t be condemned for having a better vocabulary than his critics."

More at link:

Attacks On Milo Yiannopoulos Are About Homophobia, Not Pedophilia

You're pathetic.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Milo has better vocabulary. Trump has the best words. If they are misunderstood, it is the fault of the damn libruls.

 

[BULLDOG]

The attention whore is twisting to try to stay in crazy right winger's minds, and they will twist with him

What the hell are you talking about? That quote is in the original interview. There's no twisting involved. All the other reports I have seen has that part of the quote edited out.

It was edited out for the hit pieces on Milo.

If you're good with grown men and 13 year old boys, that is supporting pedophilia.

He never said he condoned any illegal activity and certainly not pedophilia. Milo was clearly expressing that sexual maturity comes at different ages.

Some early, some later. But Milo sticks with the age of consent laws. He clearly states that.

A grown man having sex with a 13 year old boy is illegal. Milo clearly said he thought it was often a good thing. I'm not sure how you can't understand that. His remarks were so offensive till CPAC uninvited him and Breitbart fired him. How long have you supported Milo's type of pedophilia?

Notorious ‘Never Trump’ Org Funded Group Behind Milo Controversy

If you want to support a pedophile, that's your right, but admit what you're doing.

 

[L.K.Eder]

He never said he condoned any illegal activity and certainly not pedophilia. Milo was clearly expressing that sexual maturity comes at different ages.

Some early, some later. But Milo sticks with the age of consent laws. He clearly states that.

A grown man having sex with a 13 year old boy is illegal. Milo clearly said he thought it was often a good thing. I'm not sure how you can't understand that. His remarks were so offensive till CPAC uninvited him and Breitbart fired him. How long have you supported Milo's type of pedophilia?

Flat out lie that he thought sex with a 13 year old boy was a good thing. That's outrageous. And obviously CPAC was understandably pressured into uninviting him.

And piss right off that I would support pedophilia.

Brietbart didn't fire him. He resigned for the good of Brietbart News. It's a lie that he was fired.

You're on a roll with those lies.

You haven't read the transcript,idiot

Milo: “You’re misunderstanding what pedophilia means. Pedophilia is not a sexual attraction to somebody 13-years-old who is sexually mature.

READ: Transcript of Milo Yiannopoulos Video on Pedophilia

He never said he condoned any illegal activity and certainly not pedophilia. Milo was clearly expressing that sexual maturity comes at different ages.

Some early, some later. But Milo sticks with the age of consent laws. He clearly states that.

A grown man having sex with a 13 year old boy is illegal. Milo clearly said he thought it was often a good thing. I'm not sure how you can't understand that. His remarks were so offensive till CPAC uninvited him and Breitbart fired him. How long have you supported Milo's type of pedophilia?

Flat out lie that he thought sex with a 13 year old boy was a good thing. That's outrageous. And obviously CPAC was understandably pressured into uninviting him.

And piss right off that I would support pedophilia.

Brietbart didn't fire him. He resigned for the good of Brietbart News. It's a lie that he was fired.

You're on a roll with those lies.

You haven't read the transcript,idiot

Milo: “You’re misunderstanding what pedophilia means. Pedophilia is not a sexual attraction to somebody 13-years-old who is sexually mature.

READ: Transcript of Milo Yiannopoulos Video on Pedophilia

Oh I have read the transcript. Now let's put up the quote in context. Milo was being clinical. From a fair and balanced article...


"He said “You’re misunderstanding what pedophilia means. Pedophilia is not a sexual attraction to somebody 13-years-old who is sexually mature. Pedophilia is attraction to children who have not reached puberty.”

BINGO!

"He’s right. The English language has different terms – hebephilia and ephebophilia – for people attracted to post-pubescent boys.

I’m not sure why Milo didn’t use those terms to clarify his point, but he shouldn’t be condemned for having a better vocabulary than his critics."

More at link:

Attacks On Milo Yiannopoulos Are About Homophobia, Not Pedophilia

You're pathetic.

The result of at least 6 decades of polytoxic shenanigans, i guess.

Leave lilo alone, waaah.

 

[Moonglow]

It was a manufactured hit piece and Milo will emerge from this whole thing stronger than ever.

I hope you are making him a wreath...

 

[Moonglow]

I found this gem. Same interview as being reported on. But gee. That part of the quote seems to be missing in many reports.

Here's the segment. Sort of a biggie to leave out, but then in the quest to destroy someone I guess you could leave it out.

Milo: “You’re misunderstanding what pedophilia means. Pedophilia is not a sexual attraction to somebody 13-years-old who is sexually mature. Pedophilia is attraction to children who have not reached puberty. Pedophilia is attraction to people who don’t have functioning sex organs yet. Who have not gone through puberty. Who are too young to be able (unclear and cut off by others)…

That’s not what we are talking about. You don’t understand what pedophilia is if you are saying I’m defending it because I’m certainly not.”

READ: Transcript of Milo Yiannopoulos Video on Pedophilia

It is a confusing subject to those that have the silly, knees-bent, running-about, advancing behavior

 

[BULLDOG]

Thanks tinydancer I found this below on his facebook.

He corrects himself, that he should NOT have used the word 'boy' or 'young boys' when HE MEANT YOUNG MEN. This is very unfortunate that the unforgiving media ran away with his poorly worded statement where you cannot tell what he meant unless you KNOW his history his personal intent etc.

I'd really like to give MILO the public opportunity to correct the record.
Similar happened to another friend of mine, who used the WRONG wording and gave the exact OPPOSITE impression of what he was conveying. This is too easy with the media we have ready to pounce on any mistake and run wild with it.

Thanks and I hope he gets the chance to correct the record.
I hate when this happens to me or anyone. SEE BELOW in BOLD/LARGE PRINT

I found this gem. Same interview as being reported on. But gee. That part of the quote seems to be missing in many reports.

Here's the segment. Sort of a biggie to leave out, but then in the quest to destroy someone I guess you could leave it out.

Milo: “You’re misunderstanding what pedophilia means. Pedophilia is not a sexual attraction to somebody 13-years-old who is sexually mature. Pedophilia is attraction to children who have not reached puberty. Pedophilia is attraction to people who don’t have functioning sex organs yet. Who have not gone through puberty. Who are too young to be able (unclear and cut off by others)…

That’s not what we are talking about. You don’t understand what pedophilia is if you are saying I’m defending it because I’m certainly not.”

READ: Transcript of Milo Yiannopoulos Video on Pedophilia

A note for idiots (UPDATED):

I do not support pedophilia. Period. It is a vile and disgusting crime, perhaps the very worst. There are selectively edited videos doing the rounds, as part of a co-ordinated effort to discredit me from establishment Republicans, that suggest I am soft on the subject.

If it somehow comes across (through my own sloppy phrasing or through deceptive editing) that I meant any of the ugly things alleged, let me set the record straight: I am completely disgusted by the abuse of children.

Some facts to consider:

1. I have outed THREE pedophiles in my career as a journalist. That's three more than any of my critics and a peculiar strategy for a supposed pedophile apologist.

(a) Luke Bozier, former business partner of Louise Mensch
http://kernelmag.dailydot.com/…/menshn-co-founder-embroile…/
http://kernelmag.dailydot.com/…/…/3746/luke-bozier-arrested/

(b) Nicholas Nyberg, anti-GamerGate activist who self-described as a pedophile and white nationalist
http://www.breitbart.com/…/leading-gamergate-critic-sarah-…/

(c) Chris Leydon, a London photographer who has a rape trial starting March 13 thanks to my reporting.
http://www.breitbart.com/…/tech-city-darling-chris-leydon-…/

2. I have repeatedly expressed disgust at pedophiles in my journalism.
http://www.breitbart.com/…/heres-why-the-progressive-left-…/

3. I have never defended and would never defend child abusers, as my reporting history shows. The world is messy and complicated, and I recognize it as such, as this furore demonstrates. But that is a red line for any decent person.

4. The videos do not show what people say they show. I *did* joke about giving better head as a result of clerical sexual abuse committed against me when I was a teen. If I choose to deal in an edgy way on an internet livestream with a crime I was the victim of that's my prerogative. It's no different to gallows humor from AIDS sufferers.

5. National Review, whose journalists are tweeting about this, published an article defending Salon for giving a pedophile a platform.

6. I did say that there are relationships between younger men and older men that can help a young gay man escape from a lack of support or understanding at home. That's perfectly true and every gay man knows it. But I was not talking about anything illegal and I was not referring to pre-pubescent boys.

7. I said in the same "Drunken Peasants" podcast from which the footage is taken that I agree with the current age of consent.

8. I shouldn't have used the word "boy" when I talked about those relationships between older men and younger gay men. (I was talking about my own relationship when I was 17 with a man who was 29. The age of consent in the UK is 16.) That was a mistake. Gay men often use the word "boy" when they refer to consenting adults. I understand that heterosexual people might not know that, so it was a sloppy choice of words that I regret.

9. This rush to judgment from establishment conservatives who hate Trump as much as they hate me, before I have had any chance to provide context or a response, is one of the big reasons gays vote Democrat.

10. In case there is any lingering doubt, here's me, in the same interview the other footage is taken from, affirming that the current legal age of consent is about right: "And I think the law is probably about right. It's probably roughly the right age. I think it's probably about ok. But there are certainly people who are capable of giving consent at a younger age. I certainly consider myself to be one of them, people who were sexually active younger. I think it particularly happens in the gay world, by the way."

Doesn't matter if he called them boys or young men. He specifically discussed 13 year old males. That's disgusting.

NO there were two different things he was discussion.
1. with pedophilia he was discussing that this meant people before they are sexual developed
2. what he meant about the relationships is the gap between 17 and 29, for example, where both are still adults who can consent. But the 'cross generational' still applies.
3. He made it clear he is opposed to any such abuse of underage persons who can't give legal consent.

Even if he misspoke, that is NOT what he meant, and he makes this very clear what his history and his intent really is.

Odd that he didn't mention 17, but he did say he didn't consider sex with a 13 year old to be pedophilia.

Okay BULLDOG I see where this is getting mixed up
^ the underage sex is still illegal as "rape"
but he's saying the LITERAL term "pedophilia" refers SPECIFICALLY to undeveloped children

He's not contesting the illegality but the TERMINOLOGY

I can TOTALLY see how that got lost and completely screwed up, too. YIKES!!!

His original discussion wasn't about the meanings of certain words, or terminology. It was about his belief that underage boys are a proper sexual partner for grown men. That is pedophilia, Only a dishonest person would try to pretend it wasn't.