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

[tinydancer]

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."

I am stunned at the sheer viciousness of the attacks not from liberals. That's to be expected. But from conservatives who didn't even take the time to sort out the truth.

I take charges of pedophilia or condoning pedophilia extremely seriously and witnessing someone's name gets dragged thru the mud on every media outlet is appalling. All over politics.

I think we have hit a new low in journalism. To actually leave out that most important sentence in the news stories is criminal.

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.

maybe that point can be made from all this. as for MILO I hope we can set up some arrangement between independent left and right media who care more for the truth than agenda, and can help him correct the record. Will the REAL media watchdogs please come out! Whoever can correct this in the eye of the public, that's what we need. To sort out ALL the garbage out there!

I'm with you on this. These "hang 'em high" media lynchings must be stopped. To be certain this is a disturbing trend.

 

[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."

I am stunned at the sheer viciousness of the attacks not from liberals. That's to be expected. But from conservatives who didn't even take the time to sort out the truth.

I take charges of pedophilia or condoning pedophilia extremely seriously and witnessing someone's name gets dragged thru the mud on every media outlet is appalling. All over politics.

I think we have hit a new low in journalism. To actually leave out that most important sentence in the news stories is criminal.

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.

maybe that point can be made from all this. as for MILO I hope we can set up some arrangement between independent left and right media who care more for the truth than agenda, and can help him correct the record. Will the REAL media watchdogs please come out! Whoever can correct this in the eye of the public, that's what we need. To sort out ALL the garbage out there!

I'm with you on this. These "hang 'em high" media lynchings must be stopped. To be certain this is a disturbing trend.

tinydancer had he denied his mistake in wording and part in this, then he would deserve some of that backlash. But since he honestly tried to correct it,
the bad karma from whatever they are doing is on THEM not on him.

It could be some of the karma from him being so anti in the past, so this is that anti ness come back to bite him, too.

But the more they attack him, the more karma he is owed to correct this.
So the momentum will swing proportionally in his favor when given the
chance to correct this AS LONG AS HE DOESN'T TURN IT INTO A BLAME WAR. But truly focused on correcting it and making peace not inflaming more.

I'd be the first to help him set this up where the focus is on CORRECTION
and not to let these political divisions kill any more relationships that we
need to build bridges not walls. We could do so much more TOGETHER.
If we can use this incident to ask for change, in that direction, we could all benefit from this horrible disaster. Yes, it is his fault for inciting it; and for that matter, he deserves the space and opportunity to correct that error he made and resolve this. No, he shouldn't use the platform to bash back. It needs to be set up right.

 

[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?

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

 

[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.

 

[tinydancer]

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?

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

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?

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

 

[cnm]

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

He clearly stated he didn't.

 

[cnm]

After all, being free to indulge one's sexual attraction to a 13 year old boy is what conservatism is all about.

And how does that pertain to Milo?

It pertains to your opinion of conservatives.

I'm royally furious with so called conservatives who keep falling for the bullshit the left spoon feeds them.

 

[tinydancer]

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

He clearly stated he didn't.

Hello?

Milo: “The law is probably about right, that’s probably roughly the right age. I think it’s probably about okay....."

Agreeing with the age of consent laws.

READ: Transcript of Milo Yiannopoulos Video on Pedophilia

 

[tinydancer]

After all, being free to indulge one's sexual attraction to a 13 year old boy is what conservatism is all about.

And how does that pertain to Milo?

It pertains to your opinion of conservatives.

I'm royally furious with so called conservatives who keep falling for the bullshit the left spoon feeds them.

WTF?

 

[EverCurious]

I'm going to repeat what I said last Monday: Breaking: Milo was sexually abused, not an abuser

At worst case, intentional or not, he is forwarding the idea of "individual age of maturity" - which sounds somehow okay on the surface, but frankly opens the door to far too many abuses - very much on the same lines as allowing men to use the girls bathroom opens up an unacceptable window for abuse. I'm quite sure the majority of 12-16 year old's would scream their faces blue that they are "mature" enough to make their own decisions, but that doesn't mean they actually are. And especially not in America, look around, we have 18-25 year old's all over the nation throwing temper tantrums right now; it's bad enough that these immature "adults" are having kids, we cannot float an idea that 13-17 year olds are capable of making /adult/ decisions that effect the rest of their lives. That's why we consider the age of maturity, as in the legal divide, to be 18; and I think half the time that's too damn young judging from the immaturity I see from folks these days.


Personally I'd already found all the defenses and the footage - I reject it, Milo is very clearly promoting the idea that a 13-14 year old might be mature enough, something I deeply disagree with having raised children. I'm frankly quite pissed about it because I know damn well the right wing will use this as a weapon against myself and my friends in the LGBT community. Milo's personal opinion just threw us all under the bus and likely set our causes back even more than the election of Pence and the conservative party did/likely will. How the hell could he have that big a flaw in his thinking; or be so /stupid/ as to say it even knowing damn well it was not acceptable. That's what his little spiel about thinking he could get away with it was about. He decided to play shock games with something that is a reoccurring and serious issue within the LGBT community; the constantly being accused of being pedos, and of being mentally damaged by sexual abuse. He plays right into the stereotype and tries to fucking defend it, worse still, blatantly accusing the rest of us of being as mentally fucked in the head as he is thinking that 13 year olds are even sometimes mature enough. Who the fuck does he think he is too speak for /me/ and my many LGBT friends, for the LGBT community, for other gay men? To fuck all with him. His attraction to "boys" is his thing not ours, but you know damn well that the rest of us will end up paying for his bullshit.

 

[cnm]

Hello?

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

 

[EverCurious]

Of course he didn't, because at 13 a child doesn't have the mental maturity to understand that they are being "taken in" by a pedo. They see the elder as an adult/authority figure and presume them wiser, thus falling prey to their own emotional immaturity. As I mentioned yesterday: It's abusive to think that they don't automatically kind of look up to and respect an elder adult, praying on that innate 'trust' is disgusting to me.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

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

He's right. We throw that term around pretty loosely. It doesn't mean what most people today say it means.

 

[Disir]

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

He's right. We throw that term around pretty loosely. It doesn't mean what most people today say it means.

Most people don't throw the term around loosely.

 

[Compost]

What disappoints me most about this episode is the right wingers who immediately run from anyone who says something that may or may not be controversial. We've seen it before. CPAC invited Milo because he is outspoken. They uninvited him because he's outspoken. Instead of having a discussion about what he said, he is abandoned. It doesn't make sense. Why not clarify, before reacting? It seems to me that in general, the knee jerk reaction to unpleasantness by the left is to vilify, the right runs away.

Interesting side note. Salon just removed opinions normalizing pedophilia. Isn't THAT convenient?! Salon deletes all articles defending pedophiles from their site

 

[Carl in Michigan]

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?

 

[Disir]

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?

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

Start at about 10 minutes.

 

[Disir]

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?

No she doesn't.

 

[L.K.Eder]

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?

yep. welcome to alt-factistan.

 

[L.K.Eder]

leave miro alone!!!!