Comments on: Long Way 2 Go

By: Classical Values

Classical Values — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 16:14:56 +0000

When “outing” isn’t enough

it is hard to deny the sweet, sweet justice of Republicans being politically damaged by a lurid sex scandal in Washington. — Glenn Greenwald. Yeah, and it’s also hard to deny the irresistible nature of the Foley “pedophile sex scandal.”…

By: Sean Kinsell

Sean Kinsell — Thu, 05 Oct 2006 18:28:25 +0000

Well, we all seem to agree (or at least, I assume Alan will agree after he wipes his mouth). One interesting anthropological point raised by Portia: I do think that having cut-offs that are recognized by the community can be a good thing. Arbitrary to a certain degree, yes, but meaningful; otherwise such rights of passage at designated ages wouldn’t be nearly universal. Granted things aren’t quite so ceremonial in America: I grew up in one of those environments in which it was common for parents to tell their fractious children, “You can make your own rules when you’re eighteen, but now you’re under MY roof.” It was always in the back of your mind that you had time to take on an adult sense of responsibility gradually and as new competencies came naturally to you…but that at a recognized point you were supposed to be ready to be on your own.

By: Alan

Alan — Thu, 05 Oct 2006 08:19:53 +0000

It is comments like this

the Alkie Derby, Gayness, and the Molestation Stakes

that led computer labs to ban drinks.

By: Portia

Portia — Thu, 05 Oct 2006 07:49:29 +0000

Drudge report is saying now they were both “legal”

Also, what’s been making me want to scream is exactly that. Perhaps because of being raised in Europe, (where the laws now are the same) I find this “he’s eighteen, now he’s legal. Yesterday at seventeen he wasn’t” mind set BIZARRE.

There is a world of difference between a predator who goes after pre-pub or barely pub and someone who might have made a mistake about someone else’s age, male or female. And many sixteen year olds look eighteen. Or twenty.

All this said, there’s something singularly unatractive about a — old meaning — chicken hawk. And Mark Foley strikes me as unlovely. And even if his correspondents were over 18, probably a predator on the level Clinton was a predator. (Though using power and influence to get laid is also only a sin in our very civilized age. Normal procedure through most of history.)

Still… not exactly the stuff of witch hunts. Or it shouldn’t be. And I don’t like it.

And now, gentlemen, I’m going to go read the newest Pratchett arrived today in my mailbox.

By: Maria

Maria — Thu, 05 Oct 2006 02:37:47 +0000

Why doesn’t someone label it for what it is: sexual harassment. I don’t know that Foley broke any laws…he was definitely inappropriate. Everything else I have to say has all ready been said.

Well, maybe not everything–it is unfortunate that the issue of being molested as a teenager is being tangled up in the “explanation” of why he did what he did. It’s too bad he couldn’t just come out, apologize for his poor judgement, resign, and get his ass into counseling…messy, messy, life is so messy–especially when you’re in the spotlight.

Anyway, ’nuff said. (For now).

By: submandave

submandave — Thu, 05 Oct 2006 01:27:45 +0000

Amen. I am so tired of all the talk of “pædophile sex scandal” and “child molester” when there is (to date) no actual sex involved and the supposed victims were sexually mature, albeit young, individuals. If nothing else, the rabid attacks from the left are doing more to reinforce the “gay = pædophile” stereotype than Phelps has ever done.

By: Zak

Zak — Wed, 04 Oct 2006 17:09:15 +0000

Look, these guys Foley was emailing were 16 to 18. Maybe underage, but definitely not children.

This isn’t to say that what he did wasn’t wrong, but it certainly wasn’t pedophilia–a blatantly erroneous term bandied about way too readily–and it wasn’t child abuse either. These people were young adults. For most of history they would have been considered full adults.