Austin Ruse — Knight of Malta and Defender of the Faith — takes Milo Yiannopoulos far too seriously while claiming that gay men are pederasts who prey on adolescents. I noticed a similar piece, with similar arguments, by Peter LaBarbera in LifeSiteNews yesterday. That alone should give Mr. Ruse pause unless he got the idea from “Porno Pete.”
I have already addressed the Milo issue. Simply stated, Milo has (or perhaps had) an economic interest in saying things that cause controversy. Milo’s currency is outrage. Milo isn’t trying to inform or engage in discourse. He does not shape opinion The self-absorbed Mr. Yiannopoulos is interested in garnering attention for himself. Negative attention is as good as positive attention. Perhaps, for him, it is even better. Taking Yiannopoulos seriously as a political lathe is comparable to taking Sarah Palin seriously as a scholar. Ruse’s adulation is misplaced:
He has repeatedly written against the killing of unborn children in
abortion. Even though he is homosexual, he has spoken against same-sex
“marriage.” He has been so outspoken against contraception that Hillary
Clinton attacked him for this during the campaign. He has written more
on this issue than practically any bishop in the country. He repeatedly
praises traditional sex roles, and he has consistently defended the
teachings of the Catholic Church.
I would wager that Milo doesn’t give two shits, for example, about abortion. Milo’s calculus is simple. What position will be most inconsistent for a British, gay, Jew (raised Catholic) and will appeal to an Alt-Right constituency and provide Milo with the most attention? Milo, by the way, miraculously becomes Jewish in order to defend charges of anti-Semitism.
But let us discuss gay men
Personally, I am rather boring. I had a monogamous relationship for over 30 years. I have bisexual attractions but identify as a gay man because the homosexuality is (usually) more dominant than the heterosexuality.
Mr. Ruse opines:
What he [Yiannopoulos] described was pederasty, which is an ancient and current
practice among homosexuals where an older man will teach a young boy
about the world and also sodomize him. Pedophila is always against the
law. Pederasty is, too, but only when it involves a boy under the age of
consent; 16 in the United States but, shockingly, 14 or 15 in most of
the European Union.
In addition to characterizing gay men as child predators, Ruse seems to be suggesting that we create gay people by having sex with them. There is no connection between childhood sex abuse and sexual orientation.
Homosexual pederasty is actually a heterosexual hobby. Ruse fails to make the distinction between homosexual sex and homosexuality as a sexual orientation. That confusion is the foundation of religiously driven homophobia.
I am more well read regarding ancient Rome than Greece. My favorite author is Mary Beard. I also like Goldsworthy and Holland. One of the scarcest, most sought after commodities in ancient Rome was the pretty slave boy. It was perfectly acceptable in the upper classes of Roman society for a man to have sex with boys as long as the man was the one doing the inserting. These were heterosexual men, married to teenage brides who were kept perpetually pregnant. Sex with boys was always non-consensual; not because of age but because the boy was undoubtedly a slave. The notion that this had something to do with “teaching a young boy about the world” is unfounded.
Actual homosexuality in Rome was dealt with differently. Were two members of the Legion caught in the act both would be crucified.
More recently, we have become aware of the continuing practice of bacha bazi among senior military officers in Afghanistan. Batchas, or dancing boys, have existed in Central Asia since ancient times. They have been, and are, used mostly by married straight men for sex. Again, this is the practice of exploiting a subservient non-consenting youth. While it was outlawed by the Taliban under penalty of death, bacha bazi has been generally tolerated (or at least ignored) by Islam while homosexuality between consenting adults has severe consequences.
The left wants you to know that what Milo describes was pedophilia because it lets them off the hook for what it is, pederasty, which is common among them and also disgusting.
Common among whom? It is not common among gay men.
You’ll recall the priest sex scandal. That was almost exclusively pederasty—homosexual men preying on teen boys—though even now is still presented as pedophilia, including by the Church. Peter Wolfgang of the Family Institute of Connecticut tells the truth, “The culture only recognizes something unhealthy in the homosexual lifestyle when it is convenient to the Left to do so. And then they pretend it’s about pedophilia.”
The priest sex scandal also involved young girls. More importantly it has nothing to do with homosexuality — only homosexual sex between a more powerful adult and a youth under their control who would not disclose the abuse. These priests have totally undeveloped sexuality. Some are certainly gay but unable to form healthy adult sexual relationships. It is intellectually dishonest to suggest that these priests are representative of gay men.
The fact is Milo told the truth when he said this sick coupling is seen by homosexuals as important to confused teen boys. They see it that way but it is something they are eager to hide and to deny.
Gay men are not pederasts and gay boys are not “confused.” Milo speaks for Milo and no one else.
How common is it? A 1992 study of homosexual and bi-sexual men showed that 37 percent had “been encouraged or forced to have sexual contact before age 19 with an older or more powerful partner.” The Sigma Project carried out in Great Britain found “50 percent of homosexuals had their first same-sex experience with an adult by the age of 14,” which is two years below the age of consent in that country.
That 1992 study is not of homosexual and bisexual men. It was a study of 1,001 adult homosexual and bisexual men attending sexually transmitted disease clinics between 1989 and 1990. Obviously it is not a representative sample and attitudes were different nearly 30 years ago which affects the study result.
Ruse does not provide a link to the Sigma Project. The UK Sigma Project that I found would seemingly have nothing to do with human sexuality. That percentage sounded familiar and I did find this:
The SIGMA Project (1992), which interviewed and followed almost a thousand homosexuals in Britain over a three-year period, found that 50% of homosexuals had had their first same-sex experience with an adult by the age of 14. According to FRI, which reviewed the SIGMA data, 25% of those homosexuals had had sex with an adult by the age of 12 and 10% by the age of 10.
The source of that quote is the hate group, American Family Association in an undated piece titled: “Activists lure children into homosexual experimentation.” The “FRI” that is referred to is Family Research Institute which is headed by the infamous Paul Cameron. It is all very compelling. Shame on Ruse if that is where he got the sentence that he quote.
There are many more studies that show the same thing but there are
also men who come from that world who speak out. Robert Oscar Lopez came
to fame a few years ago when he announced he was raised by lesbians,
was bi-sexual himself, and still opposed gay “marriage.” He agreed with
Milo. Writing at the Stream he said, “…what [Milo] said is quite common
in gay subculture, almost banal…”
Email a list of those studies please. Introducing the crackpot and crank, Robert Oscar Lopez, into any sane discussion of human sexuality is self-defeating.
Lopez talks about Dustin Lance Black, the director of a movie celebrating the life of San Francisco politician and noted pederast
Harvey Milk, who seduced the 19-year-old star of that movie. Homosexual
provocateur Michelangelo Signorile boasted of Black’s
“intergenerational intimacy” in the Huffington Post and said if you
objected you were no more than a bigot.
Black is a very youthful 42 (33 around the time in question). Ruse doesn’t offer a link and I am not into a treasure hunt today. Signorile’s point is probably that no one would accuse a 33 year old straight man with a 19 year-old girlfriend of impropriety. Nearly twice as many years separate Mr. and Mrs. Trump.
Ex-gay porn actor Joseph Sciambra writes extensively on this subject …
Mike Albo published a story in New York Magazine called “Rise of the Daddies” and his own shock when his own younger boyfriend first said to him, “You’re my daddy.” The father-son relationship is one of the biggest sellers in gay pornography. A homosexual porn star who specializes in the genre said, “These guys are constantly throwing themselves at Dad … and how many of us wished we had an older someone to guide us and at lease advise us and we are left on our own.”
Again no link. I will provided one. To quote the first paragraph:
I remember the first time I was called Daddy. I was 38, dating a 26-year-old, and gray was appearing in my beard. We stood there in my apartment, kissing. “You’re my daddy,” he said.
Nothing illicit going on there. That is not what Ruse is trying to suggest.
In short, what Milo described and what he is being excoriated for is
common in the homosexual world. So, it is heartening that the left is up
in arms about Milo and pederasty. Heartening, too, that the writers of National Review, RedState and other conservative outlets are outraged.
This has been an exercise “in long” and utterly absent in evidence. Let’s have a repetition of the same unsupported bullshit:
Not even the paladins of the traditional marriage movement have been willing to talk about the subject of gay sex. That has been left to such heroes as Bobby Lopez, Joe Sciambra, Brian Camenker of MassResistance, and Robert Reilly, all of whom have been largely ignored both by Conservatism Inc. and Traditional Marriage Inc. If Milo’s conservative critics are sincerely opposed to pederasty as they now claim, should we not expect to hear their outrage over the gay lifestyle more often than we do?
It is tedious, I know, but a sexual orientation is not a lifestyle. This is not entirely Ruse’s fault. It is formed from the gay community that presented itself to straight people many decades ago. Back then most of the people who were out were fey hairdressers and interior decorators. The rest of the community was in the closet. It was, and still is, the basis for a stereotype. Most people, by now, have realized that we are cops and firemen; business executives and Navy SEALS; leaders and followers. We are pretty much like everyone else and are certainly not defined by sexual orientation.
Finally, it should be understood that Milo is a work in progress. A faithful Catholic I know well is in almost daily touch with him, and I hear there are others. Milo himself describes himself as a Catholic who “would be far worse if not for the Church.”
A holy priest I know has viewed hours of Milo tapes where he talks about his homosexuality and he says Milo does not evince any intellectual justification for his homosexuality, which is considered the biggest stumbling block for anyone considering exiting the gay world.
One does not need to justify their sexual orientation which is a natural variant of human sexuality. It looks like Ruse has ambitions for Milo to become “ex-gay” which only means re-closeted. Milo 2.0. With a jerk like Milo anything is possible.
Getting back to the subject there are many gay men who are attracted to younger gay men just as their are many straight men who are attracted to their baby sitter or the average college co-ed. However, there is nothing in the literature to suggest that gay men disproportionately prey on underage boys. The bottom line is that we are not a community of perverts and we did not become gay because we had underage gay sex with an adult.
While I am not a person of faith I respect those who are. However when people of faith try to conform science to their religious views their faith becomes nothing more than superstition.