Right. Maybe it was something as innocent as him rubbing his erection along the kid’s backside until he ejaculated. What’s the harm in that?
You sure seem to know a LOT about child rape, don’t you?
And so fucking WHAT if it wasn’t rape – IF IT WAS SEXUAL ACTIVITY IT WAS FUCKING WRONG AND IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN REPORTED TO THE FUCKING POLICE, GODDAMMIT!!! Good god, what the fuck is wrong with you?
And “morality is a matter of opinion” IS moral relativism. How can it not be? What the fuck’s the difference, dumbass?
Quit defending Sandusky, you sick fuck.
Again, why are you bothering? Starving Artist is fully aware that anal penetration is possible between children and adults. He’s also aware that sexual behavior between children and adults doesn’t always have to involve actual penetration to “count” as assault/molestation/rape. He knows that Sandusky was accused of sexual molestation of children, that Paterno knew of it, that Penn State officials knew of it, and that no one did anything.
He just wants to justify his post-mortem hero-worship and dick-sucking of Paterno. It’s understandable for someone of his advanced age, really - in his experience, no one actually talked about the abuse of children when it happened, so it never happened. Everyone was happier that way. So any talk of child abuse, even (and especially) sexual abuse, is unseemly, because it forces all of us to admit that things are not perfect.
We should simply return to “The Way We Were,” when child abuse was understood but ignored. Otherwise, we’re causing trouble.
Maybe it was. The point is, we don’t know.
(And you’re being dishonest by implying I’d regard that as innocent. So, since you’re bereft of facts to make your point and have chosen instead to go for a cheap dishonest appeal to the rest of your lynch mob, I think I’ll consider myself as having won the point.)
Holy shit. This entire post. Is the most fucked up thing. I have ever read.
No dear, just a layman’s understanding of physics. 
Then it wasn’t rape.
I’m not. I’m defending truth and due process, and fighting against willfully and stupidly jumping to erroneous conclusions in order to satisfy an outraged and unthinking blood lust.
Why? Is there something about it that doesn’t make sense?
You know, people don’t only have a legal and moral obligation to report “rape”. Any sexual contact with a child goes into the same category. Stop trying to pretend like “rape or not rape”, the world’s most-loved semantic trivia game, makes a damn bit of difference as to whether or not he had an obligation to the child (who was by the way being raped).
Rhythmic slapping sounds between two naked people, one of whom is an adult and one of whom is a ten year old boy, at night in an empty gym, are totally innocent, you guys! Anyone that believes differently is totally a pervert themselves!
Yea. Stop. Enough.
It was not Paterno’s role to investigate the veracity of “rape vs. not rape”, it was his legal obligation to report the claim to his superiors, and his moral responsibility to report the claim to the police.
Just a hint: due process is for the law enforcement and legal system. And stop trying to paint people who think reporting possible child rape to the police as “outraged and unthinking blood lust”. It makes you look like a fucking retard.
You’re the one who brought up the “slapping sounds,” as if that were proof Sandusky was anally raping the boy. I don’t believe it was and I explained why, an explanation which you all seem to see the validity of since you’re now claiming, in effect…“Oh, yeah? Oh, yeah? Well…he did something, and since it sounds suspicious the only logical conclusion is that it was the worst other thing we can think of, which is just as bad except that it isn’t, and if you weren’t such a pedophile-enabling asshole you’d jump to the same unsupported conclusions we are and the fact you aren’t proves you’re a Sandusky-defending pedophile asshole!”
Is that about right?
You know what would have helped to sort out whether or not a rape or other type of assault had happened?
A full police investigation.
Just sayin’.
:rolleyes:
SA, did you have an uncle who would make naked-shower-slapping-sounds with you back in the '50s?
In the mud??!!!
Wait, what? Are you claiming that it’s physically impossible for a rather tall man to anally rape a child?
Because – and I’ll cheerfully admit I’ve done absolutely no research on this – I’m pretty sure people (some probably even taller than Sandusky!) have been incarcerated for this very crime. Have you reported your findings to the FBI to get these unfortunates out of prison?
(And, on a more serious note, not a single person is buying your lame attempt to conflate “anal rape” with “sexual assault.” I don’t know precisely what happened in that shower, but based on McQueary’s “highly credible” grand jury testimony, I do know it was sexual assualt, which – news flash – is not legal. Or moral. Or physically impossible.)
At this point I’m not even sure you are defending Paterno. It seems more likely that you are stubbornly defending your own ridiculous argument, even at the cost of committing a character assassination on Paterno. Because make no mistake: your version of Paterno, which you are not basing on facts, is a monster.
As has been said over and over, Sandusky, McQueary, and the administrators were in front of Paterno’s face all the time after Paterno was told of the abuse. Sandusky was around the team and Paterno and his players were supporting Second Mile while Sandusky used it to ensnare and abuse more children. That is a betrayal of both the kids and the players. McQueary was working with Paterno. The administrators were at his beck and call.
It isn’t just that Paterno never reported to the police. He never spoke to all these people to find out what was going on, even though he was tripping over them in the hallways. He kept silent while Sandusky took full advantage of Paterno’s name and reputation to abuse more kids. He kept silent while Sandusky used Second Mile with Paterno’s support. He kept silent while Sandusky ran overnight camps for 9 year olds (advertised by his Penn State connections) and brought kids to practice.
Not only are you claiming Paterno’s reason for not reporting to the police and not speaking to anyone is that he thought “not my problem”, but you also claim that Paterno never, all the way to his death, felt that morally he should have done more, but rather only regretted that he lost his job over it.
Seriously, you are attacking Paterno far more than anyone in this thread. I think it is very likely he was a man with a moral compass who made a mistake… not the monster you believe him to be.
I believe it’s also a perfectly valid term for general discussion as well. Of course if you have a definitive cite otherwise…
I’m not about to let you get away with that. The outraged and unthinking blood lust pertains to your attitude that even if the slapping sounds likely were’t from rape, it must have been something sexual which is practically just as bad. How do you know how many of those sounds McQueary heard, or over how long a period of time? IIRC, he said his experience in the shower room lasted only a few seconds. This tells me he only heard a few slaps, and that tells me the slapping sounds could just as easily have come from one of the other scenarios I described. What is your reason for discounting them and seizing only upon the worst, sexual one?
You know what I also brought up which you cleverly didn’t quote? “Something of a sexual nature” with a “ten-year-old boy”. Those are pretty important parts actually. More important than the slapping sounds, really. But you’re cherrypicking everything to downplay the severity of what McQueary reported and absolving Paterno of having not reported it to the police. Sexual. Nature. Ten year old. Boy. Locker room. Slapping sounds. These are all key words here.
Nobody needed to prove or even believe at that moment it was rape. McQueary didn’t need to flip on the lights and ask if Sandusky was raping a kid, merely engaging in sexual horseplay, or playing a game of “don’t drop the soap or you’ll end up with a dick in your ass”. It was witnessed. It was reportedly sexual. It was with a ten year old. It should have been reported to the police. The fact that you continue to perpetuate this nonsense, despite the fact that you are factually and demonstrably wrong is utterly astounding.
The guy made an error of judgment, a terrible one, one that he admitted to making. One that he wished he had done more, in retrospect. Yet somehow even though he wished he had done more, you find no fault with his admitted error of judgment at the time. Because it maybe wasn’t rape.
:rolleyes:
Just so we’re clear - rhythmic slapping sounds in a deserted shower in a darkened gym locker room on a weekend night, between two naked people, one of whom is an adult and one of whom is a child, are evidence of absolutely nothing suspicious. Unless investigated by the police. Who were not informed. And anyone who wants more investigation is by definition perverted. Because they are suspicious of those sounds.
Look, Starving Artist, I understand that your upbringing might have taught you that child molestation was normal, but please understand that at this point in time, sexual rape of a child is no longer expected, tolerated, or considered normal. I understand that this might be a shock and might cause you to have to question your assumptions about appropriate behavior between a child and an adult. However, child rape is not acceptable. Child rape is not to be tolerated. And sometimes, that means that uncomfortable situations have to be faced.
Don’t be stupid. I said no such thing, and you perfectly well know it or you wouldn’t have to rephrase it into something else in order to make your faux claim.
I’m sorry, but you don’t get to play this revisionist bullshit game when we have grand jury testimony saying exactly what McQueary believed he saw and exactly what he told Paterno about what he saw and what he heard. That he saw Sandusky doing something of a sexual nature with a child, and that he heard rhythmic slapping sounds coming from the shower. Why are you insisting on presenting these two things as though one was witnessed and one was speculated on the part of McQueary?
How long do you have to see rape to know that it is happening? How long do you have to hear sex to know what it is? You are painting this entire tale in your head about what you believe happened, “this tells me”, “this tells me” “could have easily come”. At the same time you are accusing everyone here of making things out of whole cloth. Where is your fucking disconnect here?