Sex with a 16 or 17 might be illegal, but it is not child molestation.
You don’t get to make up your own definition of words. You are wrong about what the word means, as indicated by actual scientific articles that use the term, as well as just the basic etymology. Stop spreading ignorance.
And I honestly find it offensive that a moderator is defending your inaccuracies on a message board that’s supposed to be about fighting ignorance.
If some people hear the term “homosexual pedophile” and think it means that homosexuals are pedophiles, they were already bigots to begin with, and we sure as hell should not coddle them. The word homosexual means “same sex” and contains absolutely nothing would indicate it applies to adults.
Again, you are factually wrong.
::Tiny violin::
You know what? The problem is not the technical accuracy of the terms “homosexual paedophile” or “gay child molester”. The problem is that they are regularly used in cases like this one, whereas the terms “heterosexual paedophile” or “straight child molester” are not regularly used at all. That’s what connects it to the still-common belief that gay men are more likely to be paedophiles.
The fact that the alleged victim and the alleged criminal are of the same gender will appear naturally from the details of the story. There is no need to draw special attention to it in a way that would not be done if they were of opposite genders.
I like Annie’s definition.
Maybe because he’s not a child molester? For someone who is getting so upset about people referring to child molesters by what you deem to be the correct terms, you sure aren’t using it correctly yourself.
I know you have this weird thing about Woody Allen, but last I checked, having sex with a 20 year old ain’t child molestation.
The question is not what the literal meaning of the word “homosexual” is. It’s the question of when it’s appropriate to identify a particular characteristic.
In 2007, the National League’s most valuable player was Jimmy Rollins, Philadelphia’s black shortstop.
There are some circumstances in which the above sentence would be appropriate. But there are many circumstances in which the identification “black shortstop” should raise eyebrows.
My ex’s parents live in the same neighborhood in Pittsburgh as Fred and his wife. They would dine together, attend concerts, etc. not best pals but friendly and social.
Fred Rogers was exactly what you saw on t.v. A kind loving intelligent fellow who related to kids and to whom kids related.
Sometimes is really is that easy.
That’s actually a fairly common usage among people who are interested in queer theory and identity politics, where there’s a good deal of debate over whether labels like “homosexual” and “heterosexual” have an objective significance, or are entirely self-selected and not subject to outside validation. In that context, the distinction Annie raised (and which MPB mangled) is significant in that the overwhelming majority of child molesters self identify as heterosexual. Even if you insist on an objective definition of sexuality, defining child molesters as “heterosexual” or “homosexual” is still problematic, because those same predators also, almost overwhelmingly, are exclusively heterosexual in their adult relationships.
It has been argued that sexual attraction to prepubescents is, effectively, gender blind, and a pedophiles choice of targets is largely shaped by opportunity: men are more likely to be placed in situations where they have access to young boys as opposed to young girls, but given the chance, do not generally scruple as to their victims’ gender. This is not as unlikely as it may seem at first blush. Attraction is usually driven by secondary sexual traits: breasts, biceps, hips, beard stubble, etc. Children of either gender are equally lacking in those traits, which is apparently what draws pedophiles to them. When approached from this perspective, pedophilia is arguably a third and distint orientation from both hetero- and homosexuality.
Anyway, regardless of that, it is unarguable that men who identify as homosexual are vastly less likely to be child molesters than men who identify as heterosexual. While Annie’s post may have been lacking in some nuance, the central thrust of her argument remains valid and important.
Well, at least some good has come out of all this, then.
Still creepy for him to go after his girlfriend’s daughter, especially if he was dating Mom during the daughter’s childhood (which would have possibly put him in a parental role at some point in the daughter’s life), but assuming he DID wait until she was legal, not molestation. Just creepy.
I’m not surprised. That retraction came so suddenly that I figured there was a payoff. Clash also made certain the accuser won’t be giving interviews.
Money talks. It saved Michael Jackson from prison after the first pedo case in the mid 90’s. But eventually went to trial years later on a 2nd case.
Like no word in the whole history of the human race has ever changed meaning.
My definition of homosexual comes from Andrew Vachss, who has spent three decades shielding childing from molesters and is reconized as the leading expert on the subject.
]
The problem with that definition, is that it would imply there are no homosexual teens, or that homosexual teens are after a relationship with an ADULT of the same sex. It just doesn’t work.
Only to people intent on being obstructionary.
14 minutes and 45 seconds?
Just saw where the accuser is now recanting his recantation, saying he took the $125,000 in settlement money under duress, (which in order to receive he had to say that he had initially lied about the age when he became involved with Mr. Clash) and is now back to his original claim, that is, saying that he and Kevin Clash indeed first had sex when he was just 16 years old…
So much for his credibility, whichever version is the actual truth.
A second accuser has come forward, and Clash has resigned from Sesame Street. Understudies will replace Clash as Elmo, and Jon Stewart will continue to voice Gitmo.
Okay, I understand that the producers of Sesame Street don’t want to be part of the inevitable avalanche of scurrilous newspaper stories, but seriously. The new accuser is “claiming he had only recently become aware of ‘adverse psychological and emotional effects’”? I’m no expert, and I thankfully don’t have that level of trauma in my life, so maybe it’s possible, but c’mon, that at least SOUNDS like a blatant money grab.
Sesame Street has a puppet cuban prison?! The show’s changed since I was a toddler.
Another article on the new allegations.
Apparently, the original accuser is recanting his recanting of the allegations, saying he was pressured into withdrawing the claim.
Looks like Sesame Steet has decided to throw Clash under the bus.