Being gay isn't the problem -- preying on teens is
Being gay isn't the problem -- preying on teens is
BY MARY MITCHELL Sun-Times Columnist
October 10, 2006
Copyright by The Chicago Sun Times
There's something seriously wrong with us if we think it is all right for a 52-year-old man to troll the congressional page directory looking for a sex partner.
It doesn't matter if the man is straight or gay.
But I've heard from several people who seem to think it's natural for a gay man to seek sex with boys. In their minds, what more can you expect.
For instance, Charles Glomski wrote:
"I believe there should be no Foley-like people in Congress to be protected from. How can you cry foul on the Republicans, who force the resignation of the offender, and not yet say ANYTHING about the Democrats who either give false testimony about sexual impropriety (Clinton) or outright admit they promote homosexual "rights" (Frank) and refuse to leave office?
For the record: This is what I wrote in 1998 about the Clinton/Lewinsky affair.
"After Clinton's confession, it will be difficult for him to lead. As a wife and a mother, I just wish Clinton would wrap up this garbage and go. I'm afraid that he will be forever distracted from the presidential duties he was elected to perform. And that will be a tragedy for us all."
But let's be clear.
Whatever the sex act that went on between Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, it was indeed between consenting adults.
While the age of consent in Washington, D.C., may be 16, what parents wouldn't go berserk if they knew a man Foley's age was making sexual advances toward their teenage daughter?
And who among us would make excuses for a 52-year-old man who visits high schools looking to hook up with 16-year-old girls?
Long list of sexual improprieties
Unfortunately, many of us have been hoodwinked into believing we have an obligation to defend our political party no matter what transpires.
For instance, Paul Forehlich writes:
"You express a heap of outrage over the non-sex sex scandal. At least Foley immediately resigned. I wonder if you felt similar outrage over Congressman Gerry Studds (D. Mass.) who not only HAD sex with a male intern, but who refused to apologize and who was regularly re-elected by his Democrat constituents. He remained a respected member of his party's caucus until 1997."
I wasn't in the news business in 1983 when Studds was censured after an ethics panel found he had a sexual relationship with a male page.
I can only guess that the male was 17 years old or older, and the sexual contact was consensual -- or Studds would likely have been prosecuted as a pedophile.
(I'll get back to pedophiles in a moment.)
In 1994, Lynn Sweet, now the Sun-Times Washington Bureau chief, chronicled a long list of sexual improprieties committed by elected officials, including the 1989 conviction of U.S. Rep. Donald "Buzz" Lukens (R-Ohio), who drew a 30-day jail sentence for having sex with a 16-year-old girl.
Sweet also noted former U.S. Rep. Daniel B. Crane, a Downstate Republican, was censured by the House Ethics Committee for a relationship he had with a 17-year-old female page -- at the same time Studds was censured.
So, let's not confuse pedophilia with homosexuality, or use Foley's disgusting behavior to bash gays, as Jeannette Slamb did in her e-mail:
"Foley is gay. Gay people suffer from a perversion. The media always slides over the gay perversion. Just as with the Catholic priests. They were gay but that was never emphasized in the media. America has to come to grips with Gay America. Hastert is a good family man with integrity. I believe he did what he thought he should do at the time."
Well, that "good family man" should have spoken up a lot sooner.
And if an aging straight man gets his sexual gratification by making sexually explicit comments to teenagers, in my book, the man's a pedophile.
Only pedophilia explains this scandal
The comments attributed to Mark Foley clearly show he was getting sexual pleasure from his instant e-mails to teen pages.
But don't blame the Internet.
If this were 20 years earlier, Foley would likely have been one of those guys making obscene late-night phone calls to underage boys.
And why? Certainly not because he couldn't find anyone willing to sleep with him. Foley is a handsome guy. He probably could have gotten all the sexual attention he wanted from gay adult men.
The only thing that adequately explains this scandal is pedophilia.
Finally, for those who claim, this scandal isn't about sex, let me point out an old sales adage: The more calls made, the more likely a sale.
Foley was that salesman -- only he preyed on teenage pages, and party leaders failed to stop him.
That's horribly wrong, regardless of the political label.
BY MARY MITCHELL Sun-Times Columnist
October 10, 2006
Copyright by The Chicago Sun Times
There's something seriously wrong with us if we think it is all right for a 52-year-old man to troll the congressional page directory looking for a sex partner.
It doesn't matter if the man is straight or gay.
But I've heard from several people who seem to think it's natural for a gay man to seek sex with boys. In their minds, what more can you expect.
For instance, Charles Glomski wrote:
"I believe there should be no Foley-like people in Congress to be protected from. How can you cry foul on the Republicans, who force the resignation of the offender, and not yet say ANYTHING about the Democrats who either give false testimony about sexual impropriety (Clinton) or outright admit they promote homosexual "rights" (Frank) and refuse to leave office?
For the record: This is what I wrote in 1998 about the Clinton/Lewinsky affair.
"After Clinton's confession, it will be difficult for him to lead. As a wife and a mother, I just wish Clinton would wrap up this garbage and go. I'm afraid that he will be forever distracted from the presidential duties he was elected to perform. And that will be a tragedy for us all."
But let's be clear.
Whatever the sex act that went on between Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, it was indeed between consenting adults.
While the age of consent in Washington, D.C., may be 16, what parents wouldn't go berserk if they knew a man Foley's age was making sexual advances toward their teenage daughter?
And who among us would make excuses for a 52-year-old man who visits high schools looking to hook up with 16-year-old girls?
Long list of sexual improprieties
Unfortunately, many of us have been hoodwinked into believing we have an obligation to defend our political party no matter what transpires.
For instance, Paul Forehlich writes:
"You express a heap of outrage over the non-sex sex scandal. At least Foley immediately resigned. I wonder if you felt similar outrage over Congressman Gerry Studds (D. Mass.) who not only HAD sex with a male intern, but who refused to apologize and who was regularly re-elected by his Democrat constituents. He remained a respected member of his party's caucus until 1997."
I wasn't in the news business in 1983 when Studds was censured after an ethics panel found he had a sexual relationship with a male page.
I can only guess that the male was 17 years old or older, and the sexual contact was consensual -- or Studds would likely have been prosecuted as a pedophile.
(I'll get back to pedophiles in a moment.)
In 1994, Lynn Sweet, now the Sun-Times Washington Bureau chief, chronicled a long list of sexual improprieties committed by elected officials, including the 1989 conviction of U.S. Rep. Donald "Buzz" Lukens (R-Ohio), who drew a 30-day jail sentence for having sex with a 16-year-old girl.
Sweet also noted former U.S. Rep. Daniel B. Crane, a Downstate Republican, was censured by the House Ethics Committee for a relationship he had with a 17-year-old female page -- at the same time Studds was censured.
So, let's not confuse pedophilia with homosexuality, or use Foley's disgusting behavior to bash gays, as Jeannette Slamb did in her e-mail:
"Foley is gay. Gay people suffer from a perversion. The media always slides over the gay perversion. Just as with the Catholic priests. They were gay but that was never emphasized in the media. America has to come to grips with Gay America. Hastert is a good family man with integrity. I believe he did what he thought he should do at the time."
Well, that "good family man" should have spoken up a lot sooner.
And if an aging straight man gets his sexual gratification by making sexually explicit comments to teenagers, in my book, the man's a pedophile.
Only pedophilia explains this scandal
The comments attributed to Mark Foley clearly show he was getting sexual pleasure from his instant e-mails to teen pages.
But don't blame the Internet.
If this were 20 years earlier, Foley would likely have been one of those guys making obscene late-night phone calls to underage boys.
And why? Certainly not because he couldn't find anyone willing to sleep with him. Foley is a handsome guy. He probably could have gotten all the sexual attention he wanted from gay adult men.
The only thing that adequately explains this scandal is pedophilia.
Finally, for those who claim, this scandal isn't about sex, let me point out an old sales adage: The more calls made, the more likely a sale.
Foley was that salesman -- only he preyed on teenage pages, and party leaders failed to stop him.
That's horribly wrong, regardless of the political label.
posted by Carlos T Mock @ 7:10 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home