Ship of Fools: Milo

Thread: Milo Board: Hell / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=005667

Posted by Ian Climacus (# 944) on :

No, not the tasty drink available in the Antiopdes, but Milo Yiannopoulos.

His latest comments. Basically he spoke positively about sexual relationships between 13 yr old boys and men.

My mind boggles about why conservatives, who are seemingly against teh gayz, love, or loved, him. One article I read put it down to:

quote:
But right from the start, that hasn’t been Milo’s mode. He has flung his sexual life and personal style — Hitler-Youth-Tom-of-Finland chic — in the face of conservatives across the world. And they’ve loved it. They can’t get enough of it.

...

The answer is not simply because he’ll gleefully go further than many others, wading into the mire of racism repeatedly ... Milo appeals because he embodies male libidinal energy to a movement that has so exhausted all its sources of such with its own incessant intoxicating anger, that it must now import it from outside.

Any other thoughts?

It makes me ashamed to share a species with such a creature...you really wonder how scared or frightened they must be of women or minorities sharing in power that they swing so far that way... And, someone gay [his preferred term I read] like him, is so willing to hitch his wagon to those who may detest his sexuality and who he is.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

He's a cartoon character only designed to infuriate and distract. The best thing to do is not to take any notice.

Posted by passer (# 13329) on :

I used to follow him on Twitter (from which he was banned last year - a significantly unusual event in itself) but unfollowed a couple of years ago.

He was initially fascinating, and came to my attention as he waged a "battle" against the Gamer community for reasons which I was unaware of. However, it soon became apparent that he had his own self-aggrandization agenda, and was anti-anything he could raise a crowd about. When he started trolling and outing people I dropped him, as there was nothing either amusing or harmless about him.

He was already flirting with Breitbart at that point, and they seemed like a well-dodgy group to me, after I had followed them also, and unfollowed after about a day. When his own enterprise went bankrupt, he started to work for Breitbart, and eventually went to the States.

It seemed to me that the Breitbart platform provided him with a larger, and already-existing audience who were ready to accommodate him, and he continued his m.o. of embracing any cause or activity which would provide him with somewhere to preen.

An evil narcissist, convinced of his own beauty and attraction, and a pretty face for Bannon to display. Uncanny similarities to the Donald, in the way he conducts himself, shouty and unyielding, convinced of his own importance. He has found his home.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

There is a certain gay stereotype that enjoys being arch and shocking people as a way of getting attention.*** I took one look at him and thought "oh, he's THAT guy" and basically ignored him afterwards.

It doesn't surprise me in the least that eventually one of his remarks designed to get a reaction got the wrong kind of reaction.

*** In all seriousness, a lot of drag queen acts are based on this. He just decided to do it without the makeup to a different audience.

[ 21. February 2017, 08:54: Message edited by: orfeo ]

Posted by Erroneous Monk (# 10858) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ian Climacus:
Any other thoughts?

Just prayers for him and for the whole world. ISTM we all damage each other in so many ways and then point at each other's brokenness and laugh and/or judge.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

I'm sorry to return thoughts to Hypernormalisation, but I think Adam Curtis has it right; the purpose of all this contradictory noise is to disorientate so that nobody knows exactly what is or isn't news, is or isn't truth or where the next blow will come from.

It seems entirely possible to me that someone behind the scenes (probably Russia) is pulling strings in contradictory directions just to sow confusion. So on the left they're - on some level - providing a narrative for Occupy, Wikileaks and The Intercept. That's the narrative that exaggerates the neo-Chomsky agenda that claims the US is the root of all evil in the world.

And at the same time they're on some level providing succor to Milo-the-arsehole, Breithart and the Pizzagate conspiracy theorists.

The intention isn't to win an argument based on either of these extremes, but to tear apart the centre ground so that centralist politicians become so contaminated by the random muck thrown at them that they can't get elected.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

If ever the advice "don't feed the troll" was appropriate, it's with anything to do with the vile Yiannopoulos.

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

I only recently came across Milo when a friend on FB (who I had credited with more common sense) posted an Islamaphobic video he had produced, ripping material out of context from a BBC documentary (which, of course, was a much more balanced exploration of Islam in the UK). That one example was more than enough to convince me that he fits in the "right wing nut-job" category of people, and that I have a lot of better ways to spend my time than listening to what he has to say.

Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :

Edmund White wrote a very odd book called States of Desire which contain some very powerfully put arguments in favour of man/boy sex; powerfully put but repellent and wrong.

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:

quote:
Originally posted by Ian Climacus:
Any other thoughts?

Just prayers for him and for the whole world. ISTM we all damage each other in so many ways and then point at each other's brokenness and laugh and/or judge.

It is appropriate, especially in a Christian context, to pray and wish for healing despite the foulness of the words and deeds. Still, it must be made clear that this is not OK. Neither is almost* everything else he has said.
The broken are influenced by the events of our lives, but we must take responsibility for ourselves none the less.

*This is presuming that there might be something rational escaping his lips, not in defence of anything particular.

[ 21. February 2017, 11:08: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]

Posted by Erroneous Monk (# 10858) on :

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:

quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:

quote:
Originally posted by Ian Climacus:
Any other thoughts?

Just prayers for him and for the whole world. ISTM we all damage each other in so many ways and then point at each other's brokenness and laugh and/or judge.
It is appropriate, especially in a Christian context, to pray and wish for healing despite the foulness of the words and deeds. Still, it must be made clear that this is not OK. Neither is almost* everything else he has said.
The broken are influenced by the events of our lives, but we must take responsibility for ourselves none the less.

Can't argue with that

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
It is appropriate, especially in a Christian context, to pray and wish for healing despite the foulness of the words and deeds.

Oh. Do we have to? In Yiannopoulos' case I'd really rather not.

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

He's a very silly little boy who once got a gratifyingly shocked reaction from his parents when he said 'poo' in front of the vicar and has been looking to recapture the thrill of that moment ever since.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

We used to have a shipmate, I forget the name, who was a proponent of men having sex with teenage boys. He may have even been a member of NAMBLA, as I would suspect Milo is. Anybody remember who that was?

[following conversation back stage, I'm putting a cautionary on that link. If you don't want to be recorded by your bosses or sysadmin as looking up the wiki entry for a paedophilia advocacy organisation, don't click it. DT]

[ 21. February 2017, 23:59: Message edited by: Doc Tor ]

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

I'm going to gently suggest that name remains lost in the mists of time.

DT
HH

Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :

Orfeo wrote:

quote:
There is a certain gay stereotype that enjoys being arch and shocking people as a way of getting attention.*** I took one look at him and thought "oh, he's THAT guy" and basically ignored him afterwards.

Thing is, that schtick probably did seem fresh and appealing to the late-to-the-party GOP hipsters Yiannopoulos was apparently appealing to.

From the little I've seen of him, he strikes me as a low-rent version of Camille Paglia, who also extolled the seamier aspects of marginalized sexuality(including NAMBLA). Though with Paglia(as with Yiannopoulos, I assume) the subtext was "But all this wonderful, exotic deviance is the reason why gay culture needs to REMAIN marginalized".

Speaking of Paglia, she was defending Trump all throught the primaries, pretty much out of simple animosity to the liberal feminist Clinton. Since she admitted that he wasn't qualifed for the job, however, I'm wondering what she thinks now that he's got it.

[ 21. February 2017, 13:28: Message edited by: Stetson ]

Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :

And while I don't really care one way or another whether Yiannopoulos gets to speak at some forum somewhere, like I was saying on the Purg. thread, it is always funny to see the "anti-politically correct" right-wingers hoist on their own free-speech petard.

Anyone who has heard that Bartlett's Voltaire quote hollered out by some FOX News dittohead can probably relate.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
Orfeo wrote:

quote:
There is a certain gay stereotype that enjoys being arch and shocking people as a way of getting attention.*** I took one look at him and thought "oh, he's THAT guy" and basically ignored him afterwards.

Thing is, that schtick probably did seem fresh and appealing to the late-to-the-party GOP hipsters Yiannopoulos was apparently appealing to.

This will not prevent the religious right from trotting him out, though, as an excuse to put forth ever sort of anti-LGBTQ legislation imaginable. He will be the reason why gay marriage & adoptions by gay couples need to be revoked, why bakers and landlords get to refuse gay customers/ tenants, why LGBTQ folks can't teach school or lead scout troops. The fear-mongering GOP loves him because he's the walking epitome of the bogey-man stereotype they've been flogging for decades. [Mad]

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

Yes, he'll be their Token Gay just like Ben Carson (who I learn, with horror, is moving to within a mile or so of my house) is their Token Negro.

Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :

quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:

quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
Orfeo wrote:

quote:
There is a certain gay stereotype that enjoys being arch and shocking people as a way of getting attention.*** I took one look at him and thought "oh, he's THAT guy" and basically ignored him afterwards.

Thing is, that schtick probably did seem fresh and appealing to the late-to-the-party GOP hipsters Yiannopoulos was apparently appealing to.
This will not prevent the religious right from trotting him out, though, as an excuse to put forth ever sort of anti-LGBTQ legislation imaginable. He will be the reason why gay marriage & adoptions by gay couples need to be revoked, why bakers and landlords get to refuse gay customers/ tenants, why LGBTQ folks can't teach school or lead scout troops. The fear-mongering GOP loves him because he's the walking epitome of the bogey-man stereotype they've been flogging for decades.

I'm not sure what you mean here. Do you mean that he'll be trotted out as a conservative-in-good-standing, who, while gay himself, recognizes that it's a deviant lifestyle, thus proving that the Religious Right was correct all along?

Or do you mean he'll be pointed to as someone totally outside the movement, as just an example of how awful gays are? Like a previous generation of conservatives might have pointed to, say, groupie-fucking, devil-worshipping rock musicians?

Personally, I don't see Yiannopoulos having much future in the conservative movement(or likely any movement), after talking about how much he learned from sucking off old men as a kid. You can bet Democrats are down on their knees praying praying PRAYING that someone discovers that Yiannopoulos had once written a speech for Trump.

Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :

Oh gosh, Brenda, you should pretend you don't know who he (Ben Carson) is and call the police on him for breaking into is own home -- see how he likes being treated like those less rarified and protected.

I'm with Cliffdweller. Milo isn't just another troll, he works for the "news" site that helped elect the president. Some people actually listen to him and think all his hatred for women, fat people, ugly people and the poor is, "Just what we're all thinking."

He thinks he's So cute.

[ 21. February 2017, 15:02: Message edited by: Twilight ]

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
Oh gosh, Brenda, you should pretend you don't know who he (Ben Carson) is and call the police on him for breaking into is own home -- see how he likes being treated like those less rarified and protected.

I'm with Cliffdweller. Milo isn't just another troll, he works for the "news" site that helped elect the president. Some people actually listen to him and think all his hatred for women, fat people, ugly people and the poor is, "Just what we're all thinking."

He thinks he's So cute.

I think this observation is important. There's a lot of people who seem to think that everyone shares their prejudices, and those of us who are LGBTI+ allies, feminist allies, anti-racist and so on are pretending in order to be seen as "politically correct." They really don't seem to think it's possible to really not share their bigotry.

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :

A "certain stereotype"? No, there is no excusing any portion as "arch" or "shocking". Simply wrong. Audience and drag queen make no one iota of difference. You cannot counsel murder nor terrorism either.

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
It is appropriate, especially in a Christian context, to pray and wish for healing despite the foulness of the words and deeds.
Oh. Do we have to? In Yiannopoulos' case I'd really rather not.

Hey, it's your rule book.
Not very long ago, my POV was summary execution for abusers. Literally, not hyperbolically. But a combination of a change on my attitude towards killing and a better understanding of the pathology of abuse, has led to a less draconian view.
That said, abuse creates a vast amount of anger and shits like the one we are discussing infuriate me. I would have difficulty not pummeling him should we meet.

Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :

A few thoughts.

I have known many closeted gay men who grew up in repressive situations. These men frequently come up with different defense mechanisms to survive their teenage years. A few I have known developed extreme mean streaks to deflect stress, self loathing, and bullying. I can think of one person in particular who delighted in needling people to the point of tears, and then mocking them for crying. So I can see how Milo probably developed his mean streak. As my wife (who just learned of him yesterday) said, you don’t get to be that mean unless there is a lot of pain in your life.

Being a young conservative places you on the outside of many of your peers, and if you are on a college campus, on the outside of most of the faculty. There are varying ways to deal with this. In every campus conservative group, there is one guy who has learned to double down on every dodgy position, accept positions that other members of the group might not be willing to accept, and go to extremes to anger campus liberals. I see a lot of that in Milo as well, and I suspect it is usually that guy who comes up with the bright idea of inviting him to speak on campus.

He has said that every generation discovers that the fastest way to get a rise out of adults is to reject the norms and stomp on the taboos. He suggests that in the 1950s and 60s, the norm was to be a clean cut patriot who waited until marriage to have sex, and thus the easiest way to rebel was to grow your hair out, question authority, and start the sexual revolution. Today’s norms and taboos, in his view, surround acceptance and diversity. So it is easy to get a rise out of people by rejecting those values. And as it turns out, there are plenty of older people out there who will take you at face value because they think that trans folks should still be sent to asylums, and they will jump on board.

So what do we do now? I don’t know. I suspect that his publisher canceling his book deal will just prove his point in the eyes of the folks who feel like outsiders because of their views. Teenagers will always be jerks to one another, but I hope that a little more acceptance from peers in earlier years may lead to fewer closeted men taking on nasty defense mechanisms. And I think that we can think about more productive ways to engage with conservatives. Yelling and mocking do less good than frank conversation about why some disadvantaged groups deserve extra protection in society.

There are two ways to deal with life’s difficulty. You can acknowledge that life can be hard for everyone, and strive to make tough stretches easier for others. Or you can take your own pain out on others. Milo went rout two, and seems to be making a living out of it. I try to be the first kind of person, and hope to teach my daughter to do the same.

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

Carson bought a million dollar house, but he is not exactly next door -- it's a much more posh neighborhood about a mile and a half away. With luck I will never learn (never have to learn) exactly where his house is. However, the odds are good, now, that I will run into him at the gas station, the farm market, etc. Luckily I have impaired eyesight, and will probably not recognize him.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
A "certain stereotype"? No, there is no excusing any portion as "arch" or "shocking". Simply wrong. Audience and drag queen make no one iota of difference. You cannot counsel murder nor terrorism either.

Where did I excuse it? I merely said it existed.

Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :

And now we know what constitutes one step too far for Brietbart, as Milo resigned under pressure this afternoon.

I know he makes a living off of this kind of behavior, and I have no doubt that he will still be working the speaker circuit. But when you lose a major speaking engagement, book deal, and job in 36 hours, you seriously fucked up.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
[following conversation back stage, I'm putting a cautionary on that link. If you don't want to be recorded by your bosses or sysadmin as looking up the wiki entry for a paedophilia advocacy organisation, don't click it. DT]

[and]

I'm going to gently suggest that name remains lost in the mists of time.

DT
HH

Right you are. Apologies.

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

I wasn't aware of Milo until the protests at Berkeley, when he was scheduled to speak there. I've seen a little TV coverage.

He's a horrible piece of work, shocking and insulting people for the heck of it, and to get attention and money.

The protest turned into a riot when some people came in from off campus. AIUI, they were disguised and had weapons. Someone from the administration (?) said they weren't from the university. Might Milo have hired them to get himself more attention??

I hear he resigned from Breitbart. It would be lovely if no one else would take him on.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

One of the many (oh so many) things I loathe about Milo is his pleading that his "act" is the same as the on-the-edge humour of a drag act. Well, I know a few drag queens, and Milo's vile hate tirades are nothing like you would get from them. The reason drag acts are popular - and the more this is true, the more popular they are - is that people know that behind the grotesquery is someone with a heart. They know that the queen on stage would never really hurt or humiliate anyone and that, for all apparent appearances to the contrary, when you're in that crowd you're in a place where it's safe to be whoever and whatever you are, and just be laughingly, raucously human.

Milo's "shows", with his entourage of sneering brownshirt boys visibly in attendance, are precisely the opposite.

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

"Brownshirt boys" as in neo-Nazis? Or is that code for something else?

Thx.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
"Brownshirt boys" as in neo-Nazis? Or is that code for something else?

Thx.

Neo-Nazis. I've read one critic who suggests the parallel is apt because Milo's entourage, like the original brownshirts, has a limited shelf-life. When the boss gets what he wants (if he ever does), they'll be dumped.

Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Og, King of Bashan:
And now we know what constitutes one step too far for Brietbart, as Milo resigned under pressure this afternoon.

In this excellent article, Nathan Robinson deals with that that one step means. He purports that there are things being tolerated and things not being tolerated. For breitbart and that book publisher, Islamophobia, xenophobia, transphobia, prejudice against lesbians, misogyny and fat-shaming were OK. The writer, as I think, believes that Yiannopoulos' latest outrage wasn't that bad, which includes a joke about alleged sexual abuse he suffered.

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

I'm sorry, but that was rubbish. If homosexual youth were accepted by their parents and society, the idea that "kindly" adults are some sort of boon would be highlighted as the abuse it is. Subculture is shaped by abuse as well as support and not all things that become features are healthy.

[ 22. February 2017, 12:42: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:

quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:

quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
Orfeo wrote:

quote:
There is a certain gay stereotype that enjoys being arch and shocking people as a way of getting attention.*** I took one look at him and thought "oh, he's THAT guy" and basically ignored him afterwards.

Thing is, that schtick probably did seem fresh and appealing to the late-to-the-party GOP hipsters Yiannopoulos was apparently appealing to.
This will not prevent the religious right from trotting him out, though, as an excuse to put forth ever sort of anti-LGBTQ legislation imaginable. He will be the reason why gay marriage & adoptions by gay couples need to be revoked, why bakers and landlords get to refuse gay customers/ tenants, why LGBTQ folks can't teach school or lead scout troops. The fear-mongering GOP loves him because he's the walking epitome of the bogey-man stereotype they've been flogging for decades.
I'm not sure what you mean here. Do you mean that he'll be trotted out as a conservative-in-good-standing, who, while gay himself, recognizes that it's a deviant lifestyle, thus proving that the Religious Right was correct all along?

Or do you mean he'll be pointed to as someone totally outside the movement, as just an example of how awful gays are? Like a previous generation of conservatives might have pointed to, say, groupie-fucking, devil-worshipping rock musicians?

Either is possible, and even both, since the GOP has proven they're not at all adverse to spinning two mutually exclusive claims simultaneously (immigrants are lazy, welfare-sucking bums who are stealing our jobs; accusations of Russian collusion are both "fake news" and illegal leaks of classified info...).

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Og, King of Bashan:

So what do we do now? I don’t know. I suspect that his publisher canceling his book deal will just prove his point in the eyes of the folks who feel like outsiders because of their views.

Which only gives free publicity so that when he inevitably self-publishes or finds some dodgy press he'll make even more $$ than he would have under his prior imprint.

quote:
Originally posted by Og, King of Bashan:

Teenagers will always be jerks to one another, but I hope that a little more acceptance from peers in earlier years may lead to fewer closeted men taking on nasty defense mechanisms. And I think that we can think about more productive ways to engage with conservatives. Yelling and mocking do less good than frank conversation about why some disadvantaged groups deserve extra protection in society.

Praying this might be true. [Votive]

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Which only gives free publicity so that when he inevitably self-publishes or finds some dodgy press he'll make even more $$ than he would have under his prior imprint.

He's threatened to write two other books, neither of which ever saw the light of day.

It strikes me that he simply hasn't got the temperament to sit down, day after day, and concentrate on making an coherent argument on paper. He's too much of the 'look at me', and trust me, writing a book involves a lot being on your own with no distractions.

His only alternative would be to hire a ghost-writer who doesn't mind a career-ending gig. And even then, I'm not sure he could even consistently talk to another human being without pissing them off completely.

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

To shame, I discover that he grew up in my county in the UK. I don't think I ever taught a Milo Hanrahan, though.

Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
To shame, I discover that he grew up in my county in the UK.

Well, I'm sure you'll be delighted to know that Yiannopoulos is defending his polemical style as characteristically British:

"...my usual blend of sassy gay British sarcasm..."

[ 22. February 2017, 15:47: Message edited by: Stetson ]

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

I am so glad I have never met any sassy British gays. Not one of those I've known to be gay have been anything like him.

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

Counting down until he announces that he is being persecuted because of his ethnic group/sexual orientation...

Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Counting down until he announces that he is being persecuted because of his ethnic group/sexual orientation...

Don't hold your breath. You don't make it as far as he has without being pretty smart- intelligence and general decency don't always go hand in hand. Why would he consciously allow himself to be called a hypocrite when all he has to do is say "See? You really don't appreciate a diversity of opinions or value freedom of speech." This plays right into his hands.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:

quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Which only gives free publicity so that when he inevitably self-publishes or finds some dodgy press he'll make even more $$ than he would have under his prior imprint.
He's threatened to write two other books, neither of which ever saw the light of day.

It strikes me that he simply hasn't got the temperament to sit down, day after day, and concentrate on making an coherent argument on paper. He's too much of the 'look at me', and trust me, writing a book involves a lot being on your own with no distractions.

His only alternative would be to hire a ghost-writer who doesn't mind a career-ending gig. And even then, I'm not sure he could even consistently talk to another human being without pissing them off completely.

He has, however, already written a book of awful poetry which steals phrases from various people including Tori Amos (how I know about it of course). He's subsequently tried to pass it off as ironically bad, as opposed to incompetently bad, but the bits I've seen show no signs of parody.

Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Og, King of Bashan:
A few thoughts.

I have known many closeted gay men who grew up in repressive situations. These men frequently come up with different defense mechanisms to survive their teenage years. A few I have known developed extreme mean streaks to deflect stress, self loathing, and bullying. I can think of one person in particular who delighted in needling people to the point of tears, and then mocking them for crying. So I can see how Milo probably developed his mean streak. As my wife (who just learned of him yesterday) said, you don’t get to be that mean unless there is a lot of pain in your life.

The same can be said of any and all mean people. I don't know why Milo is being excused over his imagined unhappy childhood when say, Donald Trump or the gay bashing preachers aren't.

quote:

He has said that every generation discovers that the fastest way to get a rise out of adults is to reject the norms and stomp on the taboos. He suggests that in the 1950s and 60s, the norm was to be a clean cut patriot who waited until marriage to have sex, and thus the easiest way to rebel was to grow your hair out, question authority, and start the sexual revolution.

There's no comparison with 60's rebels who wanted to have sex with consenting adults outside marriage and an old man with a 13 year old boy.
By saying that the older man is providing comfort to the young man and helping him learn about his orientation he is reinforcing what every pedophile likes to tell himself. It's just as likely that the older man will push the unprepared 13 year-old into the sort of self-hatred that causes him to jump off the Talahatchee bridge.

quote:
I suspect that his publisher canceling his book deal will just prove his point in the eyes of the folks who feel like outsiders because of their views.

IMO men who spew hatred toward women, poor people, and physically unattractive people; old men who think they should be teaching sex lessons to 13 year olds, should feel like outsiders. I hope they stay there.

Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :

Twilight:

When the asshole I mentioned above finally came out, I spent a lot of time wondering if my new understanding of his personal unhappiness mitigated any of the awful things he said to me and my friends. And I will say that it is still hard to let go of it. I guess the point of that paragraph was less to excuse his behavior, but rather to try to get to the root of how he became the mean person that he is. I think you can do that without excusing behavior.

I think you are also missing the point of his comparison of himself to young people in the 60s and 70s. That had nothing to do with the pedophilia comments, and he is not comparing baby boomers to pedophiles. All he is saying is that when society has norms and taboos, young people will discover that they can get a rise for saying and doing things that violate those norms. If society doesn't want people to have sex outside of marriage, you can upset people by doing that. If society condemns pedophilia, you can upset people by saying that it isn't that bad. He got in trouble because in his brain he divorced the actual ramifications of what he was saying from the shock that he was hoping to elicit by taking the position.

I'm not a fan of his, and I'm not excusing anything he has said. I just think it is valuable to put his brand of meanness into context, as it takes some of the shock out of him.

Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :

Just in case it is causing confusion, when I said that you don't "get to be that mean," I wasn't trying to say that you are allowed to be mean, but rather that you don't arrive at a point in life where you are that mean.

I saw the potential for confusion shortly after posting the original post, but just realized that it might have thrown you off of what I was saying.

Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :

No, I understood what you meant by "get to be that mean," and I agree that it's a good thing in general to recognize that the harm done to a person in their childhood usually has a lot to do with the harm they do as an adult.

Wife beaters probably watched their fathers beat their mothers, etc. But we walk a tricky path if we start down playing the adults actions based on those things unless we're careful to do it for everyone. Overweight children suffer all sorts of abuse in school. Does that mean we shouldn't mind the things Rush Limbaugh says? What about the one out of three West Virginia girls who are sexually abused by family members? Is it then sort of okay for them to grow up to be like the West Virginia politician who said awful, racist things about Michelle Obama last fall?

I just have a suspicion that Milo is getting this defense more than those people because he's so good looking.

Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Counting down until he announces that he is being persecuted because of his ethnic group/sexual orientation...

He 'splained that he thought being a victim of abuse meant he could say anything he wanted on the topic, so I think he's already played his victim card.

Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :

It's easy to find a ghostwriter; he will have no problem doing it. Despicableness no object. Even the PGinC had no difficulty.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

I thought the first part of this article about Milo and his entourage, in particular, was excellent.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
I thought the first part of this article about Milo and his entourage, in particular, was excellent.

Chilling.

Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :

I thought the whole article was very interesting. I'm going to keep an eye out for Laurie Penny from now on.

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

It was a thoughtful article overall, but I still have a problem with the narrative of older people and underage relationships being part of the gay narrative. It only is because gay youth are not accepted by society, especially their parents. It is no less an abuse for all that.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

This story talks about the dangers of lionizing bullies, essentially.

Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
It was a thoughtful article overall, but I still have a problem with the narrative of older people and underage relationships being part of the gay narrative. It only is because gay youth are not accepted by society, especially their parents. It is no less an abuse for all that.

It's also part of the narrative of an awful lot of women, who aren't rejected by society or across the board rejected by their parents.

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
It was a thoughtful article overall, but I still have a problem with the narrative of older people and underage relationships being part of the gay narrative. It only is because gay youth are not accepted by society, especially their parents. It is no less an abuse for all that.
It's also part of the narrative of an awful lot of women, who aren't rejected by society or across the board rejected by their parents.

Yes, I know. But those articles were addressing the gay community, so that is what I was responding to.

Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :

I'm questioning your explanation of why such relationships develop.

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
I'm questioning your explanation of why such relationships develop.

Women are not rejected in the same way, but misogyny is part of our cultures. Rejection, objectification and marginalisation are still there.
And far fewer people say that paedophilia is a feature of heterosexual culture.
I have a hard time thinking you are defending older gay people taking advantage of younger gay people, especially under-age. Or that it is somehow inherent in homosexuality.
What, then, do you think is the reason?

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
It was a thoughtful article overall, but I still have a problem with the narrative of older people and underage relationships being part of the gay narrative. It only is because gay youth are not accepted by society, especially their parents. It is no less an abuse for all that.

I'm not sure I understand what this actually has to do with the article. Gay youth barely get mentioned. In fact it's fairly explicit about not painting the young men travelling with Milo as gay.

[ 24. February 2017, 07:10: Message edited by: orfeo ]

Posted by Ian Climacus (# 944) on :

Interesting articles; thanks both.

And thanks all for the responses to my original post. Helped me flesh out a bit more of what could make him tick and why he is who he is.

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
It was a thoughtful article overall, but I still have a problem with the narrative of older people and underage relationships being part of the gay narrative. It only is because gay youth are not accepted by society, especially their parents. It is no less an abuse for all that.
I'm not sure I understand what this actually has to do with the article.

I'm assuming that the comments came from this section of the article (near the end)

quote:
When he spoke about consenting relationships between adult men where there’s a large age gap, he was talking about something that is a real and meaningful part of romantic experience for a lot of gay men — and something that American conservatives seem to have no problem with when the participants are heterosexual or, indeed, presidential candidates.

Now, I can't comment on whether or not this "large age gap" is part of the experience of gay men. But, it certainly is part of the stereotype that many conservatives use to criticise gay relationships - that a large age-gap between partners is (almost by definition) an unbalanced relationship, and when the younger partner is very much younger it doesn't take much imagination to start thinking that if he was a few years younger it would be paedophilia. By painting this as the normal pattern in gay relationships (almost certainly inaccurately) it gives people a chance to point out that these relationships are wrong.

The hypocrisy is that the same conservatives using this to criticise gay relationships rarely use the same arguments against heterosexual relationships with a substantial age gap - stereotypically the rich, powerful older man with a much younger woman. And, when it is commented on it seems much more common to describe the woman as a "gold digger", putting her in the position of being in the wrong, rather than the probably more accurate description of a dirty old man wanting to demonstrate to all that he is rich and powerful, and still able to get a beautiful (read: young) woman.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

Yeah, so in fact the article ISN'T painting it as specifically a "gay experience", but as one that occurs in heterosexual relationships as well and isn't commented on.

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

I don't know, this bit

quote:
he was talking about something that is a real and meaningful part of romantic experience for a lot of gay men

still seems to be excusing it to me.
As does the
earlier linked article.
Yes, the hypocrisy is being pointed out, but the language used appears to me to treat something as nuanced and at least partially positive that is still wrong.
ISTM, straight men don't consider the Lolita thing as exactly OK as they are not happy when it is their own daughter.

[ 24. February 2017, 09:23: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Yes, the hypocrisy is being pointed out, but the language used appears to me to treat something as nuanced and at least partially positive that is still wrong.

Only because you chopped off the part of the sentence that explicitly referred to adult relationships.

Seriously, if you're going to skate straight past "When he spoke about consenting relationships between adult men where there’s a large age gap" then you're going to end up reading something complete different from what the author actually wrote.

[ 24. February 2017, 10:35: Message edited by: orfeo ]

Posted by beatmenace (# 16955) on :

Heres one interesting one i found ....

"Milo may seem new and fresh, but he is the strongest tool that the Catholic church and Bible-based values has at its disposal"

Item written by a self-declared Atheist so may have a small axe to grind, but even so...

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/barrierbreaker/milo-yiannapoulos-leading-catholic-guilt-evangelist/

He did write for the Catholic Herald anf the Telgraph as well as Breitbart, you know.

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Yes, the hypocrisy is being pointed out, but the language used appears to me to treat something as nuanced and at least partially positive that is still wrong.
Only because you chopped off the part of the sentence that explicitly referred to adult relationships.

Seriously, if you're going to skate straight past "When he spoke about consenting relationships between adult men where there’s a large age gap" then you're going to end up reading something complete different from what the author actually wrote.

I did not explicitly chop it off. I missed it. Perhaps* because adult relationships is not what the Milo quote which touched it off was refering to. Maybe I am misreading the second article, but I don't think I did so in the first.

*Also because any adult taking abusing any child, no matter sex or gender.

[ 24. February 2017, 14:05: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]

Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :

quote:
Originally posted by beatmenace:
Heres one interesting one i found ....

"Milo may seem new and fresh, but he is the strongest tool that the Catholic church and Bible-based values has at its disposal"

Item written by a self-declared Atheist so may have a small axe to grind, but even so...

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/barrierbreaker/milo-yiannapoulos-leading-catholic-guilt-evangelist/

He did write for the Catholic Herald anf the Telgraph as well as Breitbart, you know.

That really is interesting. I can see a few good Purgatory threads from some of his statements:
"people are Anglicans, they’re Baptists, or Methodists, or whatever because they believe they’re good people. Well, Catholics are Catholic because they know they’re not."
As well as his belief that The Catholic church in Ireland has done more than any other institution to protect gays when they were widely persecuted.

Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :

quote:
As well as his belief that The Catholic church in Ireland has done more than any other institution to protect gays when they were widely persecuted.

Well, it's not implausible to speculate that the priesthood provided a subculture for gay men to enter, where they were at relative liberty to have active(if highly cloistered) sex lives, free from the judgemental eyes of public opinion or the law.

Granted, I don't know how much sex was going on in seminaries, rectories, etc, but to the extent that it was, the conjugants were probably better protected than their counterparts in the secular world. I can't imagine the police in most places would be as willing to raid a priests' residence as they would a gay bar, for example.

Plus, the priesthood provided you with the perfect excuse to remain a bachelor past early adulthood.

Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:

quote:
Originally posted by Ian Climacus:
Any other thoughts?

Just prayers for him and for the whole world. ISTM we all damage each other in so many ways and then point at each other's brokenness and laugh and/or judge.

Reminds me of something Mr Bennett says in Pride and Prejudice.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0