So yet another homosexual condones sex with under age boys. This time it's Milo

[NYcarbineer]

Milo did not condone pedophilia. I hate you Gramps for jumping the gun. Milo was talking about how hard it was for him to come out and that having an older man in his life helped him.

Any conservative who goes against Milo now I will hate for the rest of my life. Because it means you did not read the whole story behind it.

so sad to see thiw is what it comes down to, supporting a pedophile because he supports trump

Gay conservatives are a rightwing treasure, for some reason, which is a mind boggling inconsistency.

All you just did they was expose you complete lack of understanding and the fact that you can't even imagine judging someone EXCEPT by a label.

That's a substanceless post by you. Was that your intent? If so, well done.

 

[Correll]

Milo did not condone pedophilia. I hate you Gramps for jumping the gun. Milo was talking about how hard it was for him to come out and that having an older man in his life helped him.

Any conservative who goes against Milo now I will hate for the rest of my life. Because it means you did not read the whole story behind it.

so sad to see thiw is what it comes down to, supporting a pedophile because he supports trump

Gay conservatives are a rightwing treasure, for some reason, which is a mind boggling inconsistency.

All you just did they was expose you complete lack of understanding and the fact that you can't even imagine judging someone EXCEPT by a label.

That's a substanceless post by you. Was that your intent? If so, well done.

1. Watch Milo drive a lefty to sputtering rage, and then understand that we cons judge Milo on his work, not his sexuality, you bigot.

2. Your belief system that the Right is anti-gay is incorrect.

 

[Rob37]

Milo did not condone pedophilia. I hate you Gramps for jumping the gun. Milo was talking about how hard it was for him to come out and that having an older man in his life helped him.

Any conservative who goes against Milo now I will hate for the rest of my life. Because it means you did not read the whole story behind it.

I dunno, TinyDancer. I hear what Milo was saying about 13 year olds being sexually ready for anything, and therefore the contact is consensual. However, I remember a specific case I was involved in where several men came forward to testify against a teacher who had individually plied them all with alcohol, showed them porn movies and engaged in circle jerks with them when they were 13 or 14. Twenty years later, they were still humiliated and deeply stained by that, and some were willing to travel many hundreds of miles to the trial where he was once again being accused. One fought tears on the stand. And he'd been in prison--not a snowflake.
I'm not sure that most who go through that feel as Milo did about it.

What that teacher did in my mind was in effect was "rape" those boys even if there was no penetration involved. And by all means let that teacher stand trial.

I interpreted Milo's statements to be related to he and others after realizing they were gay finding acceptance and security with older gay men.

It's not easy to be a gay teen even in this day and age. I get where he was coming from.

ETA: I absolutely do not accept the premise that just because someone is gay that they lust for children.

"... finding acceptance and security with older gay men."

The Creep-O-Meter is broken after THAT comment.

 

[Rob37]

Milo did not condone pedophilia. I hate you Gramps for jumping the gun. Milo was talking about how hard it was for him to come out and that having an older man in his life helped him.

Any conservative who goes against Milo now I will hate for the rest of my life. Because it means you did not read the whole story behind it.

so sad to see thiw is what it comes down to, supporting a pedophile because he supports trump

Gay conservatives are a rightwing treasure, for some reason, which is a mind boggling inconsistency.

All you just did they was expose you complete lack of understanding and the fact that you can't even imagine judging someone EXCEPT by a label.

That's a substanceless post by you. Was that your intent? If so, well done.

1. Watch Milo drive a lefty to sputtering rage, and then understand that we cons judge Milo on his work, not his sexuality, you bigot.

2. Your belief system that the Right is anti-gay is incorrect.

I don't know, man... Milo's statement was pretty creepy.

 

[tinydancer]

Democrat front group.

The Reagan Battalion is nothing more than a Democrat Front Group pretending to be conservatives in order to attack Milo Yiannopoulos and give the Democrats/SJWs in the GOP like the Guy Bensons, the Erick Ericksons, the Leon Wolfes, etc. cover to call for his ouster at CPAC. How dare an America firster get the prime slot at the pro-illegal alien amnesty conference.

Caught! The Reagan Battalion is a Democrat Front Group - Sparta Report

 

[Rob37]

24 hours.....that's all it takes....then the Drumpfsters defend defend defend.....even a pedophile supporter like Milo.

Milo effectively agrees with NAMBLA.

Who is to say that Milo is not "mentoring" 13 yr old boys, helping them realize who they are in a loving, caring environment?

BLEEEEEEEEECCCCCHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

That was me puking.

But back to the point, if Milo appreciates old gay men "helping" 13 yr old boys, then it is conceivable that he wants to pay it forward and do the same,

BLEEEEEEEECCCCCHHHHH!!!!!!! SPLAT!!!!

Excuse me.

 

[tinydancer]

Milo did not condone pedophilia. I hate you Gramps for jumping the gun. Milo was talking about how hard it was for him to come out and that having an older man in his life helped him.

Any conservative who goes against Milo now I will hate for the rest of my life. Because it means you did not read the whole story behind it.

I dunno, TinyDancer. I hear what Milo was saying about 13 year olds being sexually ready for anything, and therefore the contact is consensual. However, I remember a specific case I was involved in where several men came forward to testify against a teacher who had individually plied them all with alcohol, showed them porn movies and engaged in circle jerks with them when they were 13 or 14. Twenty years later, they were still humiliated and deeply stained by that, and some were willing to travel many hundreds of miles to the trial where he was once again being accused. One fought tears on the stand. And he'd been in prison--not a snowflake.
I'm not sure that most who go through that feel as Milo did about it.

What that teacher did in my mind was in effect was "rape" those boys even if there was no penetration involved. And by all means let that teacher stand trial.

I interpreted Milo's statements to be related to he and others after realizing they were gay finding acceptance and security with older gay men.

It's not easy to be a gay teen even in this day and age. I get where he was coming from.

ETA: I absolutely do not accept the premise that just because someone is gay that they lust for children.

"... finding acceptance and security with older gay men."

The Creep-O-Meter is broken after THAT comment.

I'm as conservative as you can get and as straight as you can get but I understand why a young gay man would find acceptance and security with others that are older.

 

[Rob37]

Milo did not condone pedophilia. I hate you Gramps for jumping the gun. Milo was talking about how hard it was for him to come out and that having an older man in his life helped him.

Any conservative who goes against Milo now I will hate for the rest of my life. Because it means you did not read the whole story behind it.

I dunno, TinyDancer. I hear what Milo was saying about 13 year olds being sexually ready for anything, and therefore the contact is consensual. However, I remember a specific case I was involved in where several men came forward to testify against a teacher who had individually plied them all with alcohol, showed them porn movies and engaged in circle jerks with them when they were 13 or 14. Twenty years later, they were still humiliated and deeply stained by that, and some were willing to travel many hundreds of miles to the trial where he was once again being accused. One fought tears on the stand. And he'd been in prison--not a snowflake.
I'm not sure that most who go through that feel as Milo did about it.

What that teacher did in my mind was in effect was "rape" those boys even if there was no penetration involved. And by all means let that teacher stand trial.

I interpreted Milo's statements to be related to he and others after realizing they were gay finding acceptance and security with older gay men.

It's not easy to be a gay teen even in this day and age. I get where he was coming from.

ETA: I absolutely do not accept the premise that just because someone is gay that they lust for children.

"... finding acceptance and security with older gay men."

The Creep-O-Meter is broken after THAT comment.

I'm as conservative as you can get and as straight as you can get but I understand why a young gay man would find acceptance and security with others that are older.

Sure. They are vulnerable. The old gay men are predators. It is the perfect recipe for life altering abuse.

 

[Rob37]

 

[Correll]

so sad to see thiw is what it comes down to, supporting a pedophile because he supports trump

Gay conservatives are a rightwing treasure, for some reason, which is a mind boggling inconsistency.

All you just did they was expose you complete lack of understanding and the fact that you can't even imagine judging someone EXCEPT by a label.

That's a substanceless post by you. Was that your intent? If so, well done.

1. Watch Milo drive a lefty to sputtering rage, and then understand that we cons judge Milo on his work, not his sexuality, you bigot.

2. Your belief system that the Right is anti-gay is incorrect.

I don't know, man... Milo's statement was pretty creepy.

Here is his formal position on the subject, as opposed to the Drunken Peasant podcast.

"Milo on Facebook:

I am a gay man, and a child abuse victim.

I would like to restate my utter disgust at adults who sexually abuse minors. I am horrified by pedophilia and I have devoted large portions of my career as a journalist to exposing child abusers. I’ve outed three of them, in fact — three more than most of my critics. And I’ve repeatedly expressed disgust at pedophilia in my feature and opinion writing. My professional record is very clear.

But I do understand that these videos, even though some of them are edited deceptively, paint a different picture.

I’m partly to blame. My own experiences as a victim led me to believe I could say anything I wanted to on this subject, no matter how outrageous. But I understand that my usual blend of British sarcasm, provocation and gallows humor might have come across as flippancy, a lack of care for other victims or, worse, “advocacy.” I deeply regret that. People deal with things from their past in different ways.

As to some of the specific claims being made, sometimes things tumble out of your mouth on these long, late-night live-streams, when everyone is spit-balling, that are incompletely expressed or not what you intended. Nonetheless, I’ve reviewed the tapes that appeared last night in their proper full context and I don’t believe they say what is being reported.

I do not advocate for illegal behavior. I explicitly say on the tapes that I think the current age of consent is “about right.”

I do not believe sex with 13-year-olds is okay. When I mentioned the number 13, I was talking about the age I lost my own virginity.

I shouldn’t have used the word “boy” — which gay men often do to describe young men of consenting age — instead of “young man.” That was an error.

I am certainly guilty of imprecise language, which I regret.

Anyone who suggests I turn a blind eye to illegal activity or to the abuse of minors is unequivocally wrong. I am implacably opposed to the normalization of pedophilia and I will continue to report and speak accordingly."



SO, which part of this do you find creepy?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Milo is now fleeing in panic from his own statements. lol

 

[NYcarbineer]

Gay conservatives are a rightwing treasure, for some reason, which is a mind boggling inconsistency.

All you just did they was expose you complete lack of understanding and the fact that you can't even imagine judging someone EXCEPT by a label.

That's a substanceless post by you. Was that your intent? If so, well done.

1. Watch Milo drive a lefty to sputtering rage, and then understand that we cons judge Milo on his work, not his sexuality, you bigot.

2. Your belief system that the Right is anti-gay is incorrect.

I don't know, man... Milo's statement was pretty creepy.

Here is his formal position on the subject, as opposed to the Drunken Peasant podcast.

"Milo on Facebook:

I am a gay man, and a child abuse victim.

I would like to restate my utter disgust at adults who sexually abuse minors. I am horrified by pedophilia and I have devoted large portions of my career as a journalist to exposing child abusers. I’ve outed three of them, in fact — three more than most of my critics. And I’ve repeatedly expressed disgust at pedophilia in my feature and opinion writing. My professional record is very clear.

But I do understand that these videos, even though some of them are edited deceptively, paint a different picture.

I’m partly to blame. My own experiences as a victim led me to believe I could say anything I wanted to on this subject, no matter how outrageous. But I understand that my usual blend of British sarcasm, provocation and gallows humor might have come across as flippancy, a lack of care for other victims or, worse, “advocacy.” I deeply regret that. People deal with things from their past in different ways.

As to some of the specific claims being made, sometimes things tumble out of your mouth on these long, late-night live-streams, when everyone is spit-balling, that are incompletely expressed or not what you intended. Nonetheless, I’ve reviewed the tapes that appeared last night in their proper full context and I don’t believe they say what is being reported.

I do not advocate for illegal behavior. I explicitly say on the tapes that I think the current age of consent is “about right.”

I do not believe sex with 13-year-olds is okay. When I mentioned the number 13, I was talking about the age I lost my own virginity.

I shouldn’t have used the word “boy” — which gay men often do to describe young men of consenting age — instead of “young man.” That was an error.

I am certainly guilty of imprecise language, which I regret.

Anyone who suggests I turn a blind eye to illegal activity or to the abuse of minors is unequivocally wrong. I am implacably opposed to the normalization of pedophilia and I will continue to report and speak accordingly."



SO, which part of this do you find creepy?

I love it when a big mouth has to eat his own words.

 

[Correll]

All you just did they was expose you complete lack of understanding and the fact that you can't even imagine judging someone EXCEPT by a label.

That's a substanceless post by you. Was that your intent? If so, well done.

1. Watch Milo drive a lefty to sputtering rage, and then understand that we cons judge Milo on his work, not his sexuality, you bigot.

2. Your belief system that the Right is anti-gay is incorrect.

I don't know, man... Milo's statement was pretty creepy.

Here is his formal position on the subject, as opposed to the Drunken Peasant podcast.

"Milo on Facebook:

I am a gay man, and a child abuse victim.

I would like to restate my utter disgust at adults who sexually abuse minors. I am horrified by pedophilia and I have devoted large portions of my career as a journalist to exposing child abusers. I’ve outed three of them, in fact — three more than most of my critics. And I’ve repeatedly expressed disgust at pedophilia in my feature and opinion writing. My professional record is very clear.

But I do understand that these videos, even though some of them are edited deceptively, paint a different picture.

I’m partly to blame. My own experiences as a victim led me to believe I could say anything I wanted to on this subject, no matter how outrageous. But I understand that my usual blend of British sarcasm, provocation and gallows humor might have come across as flippancy, a lack of care for other victims or, worse, “advocacy.” I deeply regret that. People deal with things from their past in different ways.

As to some of the specific claims being made, sometimes things tumble out of your mouth on these long, late-night live-streams, when everyone is spit-balling, that are incompletely expressed or not what you intended. Nonetheless, I’ve reviewed the tapes that appeared last night in their proper full context and I don’t believe they say what is being reported.

I do not advocate for illegal behavior. I explicitly say on the tapes that I think the current age of consent is “about right.”

I do not believe sex with 13-year-olds is okay. When I mentioned the number 13, I was talking about the age I lost my own virginity.

I shouldn’t have used the word “boy” — which gay men often do to describe young men of consenting age — instead of “young man.” That was an error.

I am certainly guilty of imprecise language, which I regret.

Anyone who suggests I turn a blind eye to illegal activity or to the abuse of minors is unequivocally wrong. I am implacably opposed to the normalization of pedophilia and I will continue to report and speak accordingly."



SO, which part of this do you find creepy?

I love it when a big mouth has to eat his own words.

I never really got much out of gotcha games. Seems silly.

I prefer when I'm manage to get the lefty in question to admit what they really believe and then demonstrate somehow that they are full of shit.

 

[Rob37]

Gay conservatives are a rightwing treasure, for some reason, which is a mind boggling inconsistency.

All you just did they was expose you complete lack of understanding and the fact that you can't even imagine judging someone EXCEPT by a label.

That's a substanceless post by you. Was that your intent? If so, well done.

1. Watch Milo drive a lefty to sputtering rage, and then understand that we cons judge Milo on his work, not his sexuality, you bigot.

2. Your belief system that the Right is anti-gay is incorrect.

I don't know, man... Milo's statement was pretty creepy.

Here is his formal position on the subject, as opposed to the Drunken Peasant podcast.

"Milo on Facebook:

I am a gay man, and a child abuse victim.

I would like to restate my utter disgust at adults who sexually abuse minors. I am horrified by pedophilia and I have devoted large portions of my career as a journalist to exposing child abusers. I’ve outed three of them, in fact — three more than most of my critics. And I’ve repeatedly expressed disgust at pedophilia in my feature and opinion writing. My professional record is very clear.

But I do understand that these videos, even though some of them are edited deceptively, paint a different picture.

I’m partly to blame. My own experiences as a victim led me to believe I could say anything I wanted to on this subject, no matter how outrageous. But I understand that my usual blend of British sarcasm, provocation and gallows humor might have come across as flippancy, a lack of care for other victims or, worse, “advocacy.” I deeply regret that. People deal with things from their past in different ways.

As to some of the specific claims being made, sometimes things tumble out of your mouth on these long, late-night live-streams, when everyone is spit-balling, that are incompletely expressed or not what you intended. Nonetheless, I’ve reviewed the tapes that appeared last night in their proper full context and I don’t believe they say what is being reported.

I do not advocate for illegal behavior. I explicitly say on the tapes that I think the current age of consent is “about right.”

I do not believe sex with 13-year-olds is okay. When I mentioned the number 13, I was talking about the age I lost my own virginity.

I shouldn’t have used the word “boy” — which gay men often do to describe young men of consenting age — instead of “young man.” That was an error.

I am certainly guilty of imprecise language, which I regret.

Anyone who suggests I turn a blind eye to illegal activity or to the abuse of minors is unequivocally wrong. I am implacably opposed to the normalization of pedophilia and I will continue to report and speak accordingly."



SO, which part of this do you find creepy?

First, Milo apologizes. Next, he said he has nothing to apologize for. He sounds exactly like an abuser.

Who jokes about such a thing? Who is flippant about such a thing? Who says such reckless things? Moreover, is Milo himself "paying it forward" and "mentoring" boys?

It is ALL ******* gross.

 

[Correll]

View attachment 113473

All you just did they was expose you complete lack of understanding and the fact that you can't even imagine judging someone EXCEPT by a label.

That's a substanceless post by you. Was that your intent? If so, well done.

1. Watch Milo drive a lefty to sputtering rage, and then understand that we cons judge Milo on his work, not his sexuality, you bigot.

2. Your belief system that the Right is anti-gay is incorrect.

I don't know, man... Milo's statement was pretty creepy.

Here is his formal position on the subject, as opposed to the Drunken Peasant podcast.

"Milo on Facebook:

I am a gay man, and a child abuse victim.

I would like to restate my utter disgust at adults who sexually abuse minors. I am horrified by pedophilia and I have devoted large portions of my career as a journalist to exposing child abusers. I’ve outed three of them, in fact — three more than most of my critics. And I’ve repeatedly expressed disgust at pedophilia in my feature and opinion writing. My professional record is very clear.

But I do understand that these videos, even though some of them are edited deceptively, paint a different picture.

I’m partly to blame. My own experiences as a victim led me to believe I could say anything I wanted to on this subject, no matter how outrageous. But I understand that my usual blend of British sarcasm, provocation and gallows humor might have come across as flippancy, a lack of care for other victims or, worse, “advocacy.” I deeply regret that. People deal with things from their past in different ways.

As to some of the specific claims being made, sometimes things tumble out of your mouth on these long, late-night live-streams, when everyone is spit-balling, that are incompletely expressed or not what you intended. Nonetheless, I’ve reviewed the tapes that appeared last night in their proper full context and I don’t believe they say what is being reported.

I do not advocate for illegal behavior. I explicitly say on the tapes that I think the current age of consent is “about right.”

I do not believe sex with 13-year-olds is okay. When I mentioned the number 13, I was talking about the age I lost my own virginity.

I shouldn’t have used the word “boy” — which gay men often do to describe young men of consenting age — instead of “young man.” That was an error.

I am certainly guilty of imprecise language, which I regret.

Anyone who suggests I turn a blind eye to illegal activity or to the abuse of minors is unequivocally wrong. I am implacably opposed to the normalization of pedophilia and I will continue to report and speak accordingly."



SO, which part of this do you find creepy?

First, Milo apologizes. Next, he said he has nothing to apologize for. He sounds exactly like an abuser.

Who jokes about such a thing? Who is flippant about such a thing? Who says such reckless things? Moreover, is Milo himself "paying it forward" and "mentoring" boys?

It is ALL ******* gross. View attachment 113473

He lists quite a number of things he did wrong. That is not saying that he had nothing to apologize for.


Thus, by your own standard, he does NOT sound like an abuser.


You don't sound like you are seriously here to discuss anything, but merely here to smear the Right in general.

 

[Rob37]

View attachment 113473

That's a substanceless post by you. Was that your intent? If so, well done.

1. Watch Milo drive a lefty to sputtering rage, and then understand that we cons judge Milo on his work, not his sexuality, you bigot.

2. Your belief system that the Right is anti-gay is incorrect.

I don't know, man... Milo's statement was pretty creepy.

Here is his formal position on the subject, as opposed to the Drunken Peasant podcast.

"Milo on Facebook:

I am a gay man, and a child abuse victim.

I would like to restate my utter disgust at adults who sexually abuse minors. I am horrified by pedophilia and I have devoted large portions of my career as a journalist to exposing child abusers. I’ve outed three of them, in fact — three more than most of my critics. And I’ve repeatedly expressed disgust at pedophilia in my feature and opinion writing. My professional record is very clear.

But I do understand that these videos, even though some of them are edited deceptively, paint a different picture.

I’m partly to blame. My own experiences as a victim led me to believe I could say anything I wanted to on this subject, no matter how outrageous. But I understand that my usual blend of British sarcasm, provocation and gallows humor might have come across as flippancy, a lack of care for other victims or, worse, “advocacy.” I deeply regret that. People deal with things from their past in different ways.

As to some of the specific claims being made, sometimes things tumble out of your mouth on these long, late-night live-streams, when everyone is spit-balling, that are incompletely expressed or not what you intended. Nonetheless, I’ve reviewed the tapes that appeared last night in their proper full context and I don’t believe they say what is being reported.

I do not advocate for illegal behavior. I explicitly say on the tapes that I think the current age of consent is “about right.”

I do not believe sex with 13-year-olds is okay. When I mentioned the number 13, I was talking about the age I lost my own virginity.

I shouldn’t have used the word “boy” — which gay men often do to describe young men of consenting age — instead of “young man.” That was an error.

I am certainly guilty of imprecise language, which I regret.

Anyone who suggests I turn a blind eye to illegal activity or to the abuse of minors is unequivocally wrong. I am implacably opposed to the normalization of pedophilia and I will continue to report and speak accordingly."



SO, which part of this do you find creepy?

First, Milo apologizes. Next, he said he has nothing to apologize for. He sounds exactly like an abuser.

Who jokes about such a thing? Who is flippant about such a thing? Who says such reckless things? Moreover, is Milo himself "paying it forward" and "mentoring" boys?

It is ALL ******* gross. View attachment 113473

He lists quite a number of things he did wrong. That is not saying that he had nothing to apologize for.


Thus, by your own standard, he does NOT sound like an abuser.


You don't sound like you are seriously here to discuss anything, but merely here to smear the Right in general.

Sorry you get that impression of me. I am pretty far to the right. But if red flags are not going off about Milo then you are damaged.

As an aside, Milo himself may have intended to stir up this crap, creating controversy to sell his book. Of course, if that was the plan then it backfired.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[


I never really got much out of gotcha games. Seems silly.

.

That's a rather worn out conservative line that we hear when it's a rightwinger's turn in the barrel.

 

[Correll]

View attachment 113473

1. Watch Milo drive a lefty to sputtering rage, and then understand that we cons judge Milo on his work, not his sexuality, you bigot.

2. Your belief system that the Right is anti-gay is incorrect.

I don't know, man... Milo's statement was pretty creepy.

Here is his formal position on the subject, as opposed to the Drunken Peasant podcast.

"Milo on Facebook:

I am a gay man, and a child abuse victim.

I would like to restate my utter disgust at adults who sexually abuse minors. I am horrified by pedophilia and I have devoted large portions of my career as a journalist to exposing child abusers. I’ve outed three of them, in fact — three more than most of my critics. And I’ve repeatedly expressed disgust at pedophilia in my feature and opinion writing. My professional record is very clear.

But I do understand that these videos, even though some of them are edited deceptively, paint a different picture.

I’m partly to blame. My own experiences as a victim led me to believe I could say anything I wanted to on this subject, no matter how outrageous. But I understand that my usual blend of British sarcasm, provocation and gallows humor might have come across as flippancy, a lack of care for other victims or, worse, “advocacy.” I deeply regret that. People deal with things from their past in different ways.

As to some of the specific claims being made, sometimes things tumble out of your mouth on these long, late-night live-streams, when everyone is spit-balling, that are incompletely expressed or not what you intended. Nonetheless, I’ve reviewed the tapes that appeared last night in their proper full context and I don’t believe they say what is being reported.

I do not advocate for illegal behavior. I explicitly say on the tapes that I think the current age of consent is “about right.”

I do not believe sex with 13-year-olds is okay. When I mentioned the number 13, I was talking about the age I lost my own virginity.

I shouldn’t have used the word “boy” — which gay men often do to describe young men of consenting age — instead of “young man.” That was an error.

I am certainly guilty of imprecise language, which I regret.

Anyone who suggests I turn a blind eye to illegal activity or to the abuse of minors is unequivocally wrong. I am implacably opposed to the normalization of pedophilia and I will continue to report and speak accordingly."



SO, which part of this do you find creepy?

First, Milo apologizes. Next, he said he has nothing to apologize for. He sounds exactly like an abuser.

Who jokes about such a thing? Who is flippant about such a thing? Who says such reckless things? Moreover, is Milo himself "paying it forward" and "mentoring" boys?

It is ALL ******* gross. View attachment 113473

He lists quite a number of things he did wrong. That is not saying that he had nothing to apologize for.


Thus, by your own standard, he does NOT sound like an abuser.


You don't sound like you are seriously here to discuss anything, but merely here to smear the Right in general.

Sorry you get that impression of me. I am pretty far to the right. But if red flags are not going off about Milo then you are damaged.

As an aside, Milo himself may have intended to stir up this crap, creating controversy to sell his book. Of course, if that was the plan then it backfired.

I have posted his formal position on the issue. Do you have a comment on that, as opposed to the transcript from the Drunken Peasant?

 

[Correll]

[


I never really got much out of gotcha games. Seems silly.

.

That's a rather worn out conservative line that we hear when it's a rightwinger's turn in the barrel.

Nope. I've been consistent on that always.

I find such games to be completely uninteresting.


My wife just told me how she was planning a sleepover at "Aubrey's" a friend of my daughters.

I commented that that was odd, but that I and our daughter would be fine without her for one night.

It was funny. And that was the end of it.


I was only pretending to misunderstand her. I knew what she meant.

If I tried to hold her to her actual statement, that would be me being a complete ******* asshole.



Even with people I don't like, that process of holding them to positions that did not really mean, strikes me as a complete wasted of time and not demonstrating anything.

 

[Rob37]

View attachment 113473

I don't know, man... Milo's statement was pretty creepy.

Here is his formal position on the subject, as opposed to the Drunken Peasant podcast.

"Milo on Facebook:

I am a gay man, and a child abuse victim.

I would like to restate my utter disgust at adults who sexually abuse minors. I am horrified by pedophilia and I have devoted large portions of my career as a journalist to exposing child abusers. I’ve outed three of them, in fact — three more than most of my critics. And I’ve repeatedly expressed disgust at pedophilia in my feature and opinion writing. My professional record is very clear.

But I do understand that these videos, even though some of them are edited deceptively, paint a different picture.

I’m partly to blame. My own experiences as a victim led me to believe I could say anything I wanted to on this subject, no matter how outrageous. But I understand that my usual blend of British sarcasm, provocation and gallows humor might have come across as flippancy, a lack of care for other victims or, worse, “advocacy.” I deeply regret that. People deal with things from their past in different ways.

As to some of the specific claims being made, sometimes things tumble out of your mouth on these long, late-night live-streams, when everyone is spit-balling, that are incompletely expressed or not what you intended. Nonetheless, I’ve reviewed the tapes that appeared last night in their proper full context and I don’t believe they say what is being reported.

I do not advocate for illegal behavior. I explicitly say on the tapes that I think the current age of consent is “about right.”

I do not believe sex with 13-year-olds is okay. When I mentioned the number 13, I was talking about the age I lost my own virginity.

I shouldn’t have used the word “boy” — which gay men often do to describe young men of consenting age — instead of “young man.” That was an error.

I am certainly guilty of imprecise language, which I regret.

Anyone who suggests I turn a blind eye to illegal activity or to the abuse of minors is unequivocally wrong. I am implacably opposed to the normalization of pedophilia and I will continue to report and speak accordingly."



SO, which part of this do you find creepy?

First, Milo apologizes. Next, he said he has nothing to apologize for. He sounds exactly like an abuser.

Who jokes about such a thing? Who is flippant about such a thing? Who says such reckless things? Moreover, is Milo himself "paying it forward" and "mentoring" boys?

It is ALL ******* gross. View attachment 113473

He lists quite a number of things he did wrong. That is not saying that he had nothing to apologize for.


Thus, by your own standard, he does NOT sound like an abuser.


You don't sound like you are seriously here to discuss anything, but merely here to smear the Right in general.

Sorry you get that impression of me. I am pretty far to the right. But if red flags are not going off about Milo then you are damaged.

As an aside, Milo himself may have intended to stir up this crap, creating controversy to sell his book. Of course, if that was the plan then it backfired.

I have posted his formal position on the issue. Do you have a comment on that, as opposed to the transcript from the Drunken Peasant?

I already commented on it. I said that his words resemble what you would expect to hear from an abuser. I also said that his statement was disgusting.

Please Fact Check prior to posting and we will all be much better off. Thank you.