nelsonroyale
Member
I kind of got this from his Maher interview. He couches his vitriol in small talk and his bitchy, camp delivery.
Wtf... why would you assume he's secretly trans?
I'd wait a while before getting optimistic.Well at least the right draws the line somewhere.
Also GAF we're better than equating pedophilia with child molestation. Pedophilia is a horrible disorder and non-criminals suffering from it should be met with at least a sliver of empathy and viable avenues to get professional help, not stigma.
In the context of the thread Milo is literally advocating for child molestation.
I'm not sure how that is pertinent to this thread. What he is advocating for is child molestation.
Also GAF we're better than equating pedophilia with child molestation. Pedophilia is a horrible disorder and non-criminals suffering from it should be met with at least a sliver of empathy and viable avenues to get professional help, not stigma.
In the context of the thread M*lo is literally advocating for the "benefits" of child molestation
We've had the pedophilia vs "pederasty" or whatever conversation plenty of times. In the videos, Milo is specifically standing tall for the value of grown men having sexual relationships with young boys, so there's no nuance getting lost in the shuffle here.
I've never placed my personal information on the internet. I don't have a facebook account. If someone had an axe to grind with me, what means would they have of doxing me for the purpose of harassing me?
Have immigrants and transgender people begun taking more precautionary tactics in light of these incidents?
edit: Also, as a gay man, why would he of all people take it upon himself to wage a personal vendetta against transgender people? It makes no sense. You hear stories about gay bashers turning out to be gay themselves, so what's at play for Milo. Is it possible he's being this douchey agent provocateur in order to tap into a lucrative vein so that he can one day afford a sex change operation? Sorry if I seem crass, but I'm using the Larry Craig incident as my frame of reference here.
Honestly, he's pretty much a homophobe too. He was against gay marriage and is catholic.He definitely isn't trans. If you followed Milo at all you would know that the one group he loves to hate on more than trans women is cis women. Being anti-feminism is basically his #1 thing.
Honestly, he's pretty much a homophobe too. He was against gay marriage and is catholic.
Exactly. He not only seems to be all that but he also genuinely despises women in general in every sense of the word.Oh he's absolutely homophobic, and racist, and anti-Semitic. He checks the box on pretty much every kind of bigotry there is.
I'm just saying that feminism and women in general is what he rails against the most. Which makes sense because his fanbase is a bunch of sexually repressed losers who hate women because of their inability to get laid.
Exactly. He not only seems to be all that but he also genuinely despises women in general in every sense of the word.
I haven't had cable tv in years, so my knowledge of this guy comes mainly from articles from Rolling Stone and NYT.
Personally, I can't sit through conservative polemicists on television such as Ann Coulter or Laura Ingram. I imagine I'd get that same sickening feeling by watching this dude pontificate on television a well. What I hear and read of him, as well as his own quotes are basically what I know of him.
I'm here for Bill Maher looking even worse post interview.
He's literally the gay male version of Coulter. Like 100%.
Josh Duggar also comes to mind. -_-You have far too much faith in College Republican groups.
Also, the majority of elected GOP officials had no issues whatsoever defending Dennis Hastert, an actual pedophile and child molester. Pedophilia and child abuse are fair game to the GOP.
As a child I remember a story about the mythological Norwegian creature the troll, that lived under a bridge halting goats to eat as the goats attempt to cross the bridge in order to gain access to a meadow . The first two crossed the bridge by arguing the troll should wait for the next larger goat to eat, finally the last and largest goat attempts to cross and headbuts the troll off the bridge.Why people feed the troll is beyond me.
I'm not. I was just going by the pattern of homophobes who end up being gay themselves. I'm trying to wrap my mind around why this shitbag, who happens to be gay, is dumping on the transgender community, who like gay people are marginalized to a great extent. I'm not saying that proof positive he's secretly trans, but it's a real fucked up cycle of self loathing, crapping on another demographic with the confidant assumption that none of this shit will backfire on you one day. Someone compared him to a modern day Ernst Rohm. I tend to agree. And if CPAC is hesitant to drop this guy if the allegations of him advocating pedophilia turns out to be true, well, I don't know what to say.
When people start going into semantics about the term, and start discussing hebephilia (11-14) or ephebophilia (15-19), it's time to be really suspicious of what they're trying to normalise and it's all still sex with minors by older people.So...he's saying he doesn't defend pedophilia by arbitrarily changing what counts and doesn't count as pedophilia in certain cases that he arbitrarily considers to be special? Is this seriously the stance he's pushing here??
Milo literally is the cartoonishly evil version of gay people that only exist in the minds of bigots cept for real.
He makes me wanna choke him both as a decent human being with morals and as a gay man who hates what he's doing to our community. Purposefully.
Here's Milo passionately defending adult men who enter into sexual relationships with teenage boys in order to give them "real love" and help them "discover who they are."
https://twitter.com/ReaganBattalion/status/833405993006616576?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
When people start going into semantics about the term, and start discussing hebephilia (11-14) or ephebophilia (15-19), it's time to be really suspicious of what they're trying to normalise and it's all still sex with minors by older people.
i would never have heard of this cumstain if not for gaf
Just out of curiousity Mess, you are a Muslim, is that correct? Well didn't the prophet Muhammed enter into marriage with a 7 year old? Do you yourself condemn that behaviour as well?
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Pedophilia
Can you state the inaccuracies in that for me please if there is any?^
If you do condemn it then why are you a follower of Islam? I mean every argument I have seen lately involves 'If you agree with (insert person here) and some of their beliefs are disagreeable to the group think then you must be guilty by association' does this pattern of thinking follow in this instance as well?
Or is this different?
And before I get dogpiled, let me just say, it's the hypocrisy that bothers me here and religion is an ideology, it's free to be criticised, unless of course criticising ideas is outlawed now?
It sounds to me as well that Milo may have faced abuse himself at a young age, hence why he is trying to normalize it, sadly these things are commonplace in the world and in all religion where it is easy to hide behind faith to justify horrible behaviour.
I find it morally wrong that Milo is justifying this but I am also questioning WHY he is.
Mess's religion literally has nothing to do with the topic.Why should I have to PM? It's in relation to the topic.
Why should I have to PM? It's in relation to the topic, I am not making a "public show of it" it' s a forum with open discourse, just because it might make you feel uncomfortable doesn't mean it shouldn't be addressed.
And before I get dogpiled, let me just say, it's the hypocrisy that bothers me here and religion is an ideology, it's free to be criticised, unless of course criticising ideas is outlawed now?
Mess's religion literally has nothing to do with the topic.
Yes, I know what I am doing, calling out hypocrisy when I see it, that much is evident, I even said so in what I wrote.
Why? The topic is Milo (wrongly) defending Pedophilia, Mess follows Islam, I have always taken issue with the issue Pedophilia within Islam and as an individual who follows Islam and his criticism of pedophilia here I wish to know his stance on it.
That's really not hard to understand, is it?
Yes, I know what I am doing, calling out hypocrisy when I see it, that much is evident, I even said so in what I wrote.
Play the victim? This is a fact, this forum encourages discourse, it's literally on the front page and has always been the case since I have been a member, it's only been in recent times that it's looked down upon by groups of individuals who want to try and censor conversations.
I am not playing a victim, you wish to make it look that way so I can fall victim to a dogpile though, that much is evident.
It really is.Gross as fuck.
So discuss this specifically.Why? The topic is Milo (wrongly) defending Pedophilia
Is literally irrelevant. If you wish to be more relevant, you should probably admit how fucking wrong you were about how good of an idea it is to have "an intelligent debate" with neo-nazis.Mess follows Islam
As someone who was molested as a young boy, I feel sorry for Milo if that is something that happened to him. But I hold a very, very special hatred for him for parroting and normalizing the same fucked up rationalization that many adult men use to excuse forcing themselves on young boys. That, "I'll help you understand these feelings," "don't worry, this is only because we're really close," bullshit is out of the standard sexual abusers playbook. And no, that shit is not comforting. No, that shit does not make you feel loved. It makes you feel frightened within an inch of your life.
Milo deserves a good elbow to his fucking throat for that.
So you have taken a post of mine, agreeing with him about something completely unrelated and then used it as a way to say that I agree with him on his view about pedophilia?
I have already condemned Milo for his views on it, so why would I agree with Dawkins on it?
No I do not agree with him on that, also, I love how you framed what I said in the manner to which it seems like I was agreeing with the article.
The irony of you calling ME disingenuous after what you have just done is not lost on me.
So you have taken a post of mine, agreeing with him about something completely unrelated and then used it as a way to say that I agree with him on his view about pedophilia?
I have already condemned Milo for his views on it, so why would I agree with Dawkins on it?
No I do not agree with him on that, also, I love how you framed what I said in the manner to which it seems like I was agreeing with the article.
The irony of you calling ME disingenuous after what you have just done is not lost on me.