The Sandusky Principle

As the Boy Scouts ponders its policy toward gays, many of our opponents are clamoring about pedophilia, some of them even invoking the strange, self-negating example of Jerry Sandusky, the heterosexually-married child molester.

Others are shying away from the pedophilia connection. Instead they ask whether you’d let a straight man take a troop of girl into the woods for an overnight stay. That sounds so reasonable it’s enough to give you a moment’s pause.

But just a short moment. Because if you’re trying to be reasonable you have to remember this fact:

You’re safer leaving your son in the care of  a man who says that he’s gay than with a man who says that he’s not.

This seems like a good time to repost a video I made three years ago on that topic:

Call it the Sandusky Principle. If we known about this criminal back when I made the video I’d have offered him up as an example.

One last thing, something I pointed out the clip: When our opponents demonize openly gay men and falsely shine the spotlight on us, they’re letting the real abusers hide in the darkness. And continue their abuse.

Share:
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • email
  • Reddit

7 comments to The Sandusky Principle

  • 1
    John Kusters says:

    Of course, the anti-gay crowds do not believe there is a difference between orienation and behavior. Any non-straight behavior is called “gay” and is used to attack all gay people. That divide, between those who understand orientation and those who fixate only on behavior, is what is going to prevent us from beign able to effectively argue against our opponents.

  • 2
    Regan DuCasse says:

      Actually John, the anti gay contradict themselves on that very thing all the time. On the one hand they’ll say they accept gay people, as long as gays don’t have a sex life and no romantic relationships. They are fine with a neutered, celibate gay.
    Then contradict themselves AGAIN, when discrimination occurs with a wholesale ban whether a sex life is in evidence or not and doesn’t have to be to be denied a job or contact in places that are gender segregated.
      It’s infuriated me no end how difficult it’s been to school the anti gay on pedophilia and ephebophilia. Or the diffentiation of philias and pathologies in the first place from sexual orientation.
    I’ve given my SCIENCE division law enforcement education and credentials and STILL they refuse to defer that I know what I’m talking about.
    Females, are ignored in this conversation altogether. And it’s no wonder that the abuse of females of whatever age goes on, if this is the response a person committed to the protection of youngsters gets.
      The leadership in every anti gay org. not only won’t engage the reality of that, they won’t even ACKNOWLEDGE the difference and don’t care to.
    Which would lead one to think that their assertions of caring about children, is absolute bullshit. And calling them out on it, is something WE should be doing.
    They don’t care about the children of gay parents. They just want to say those parents shouldn’t have those children.
    They don’t care about the safety of FEMALE children from pedophiles, they just want to maintain the fear of gay men as such.
     And this is leadership who themselves, by and large haven’t adopted any of the children hardest to place, as gay parents have. Children of color, children with HIV, or those who are older.
    We need to call them out on it. Every time.
     

  • 3
    Chris M says:

    Thank you for this Rob.

  • 4
    Marcus says:

    Why are so many people unable to understand that rape isn’t about sex (usually)? Most men who rape other men are straight.

  • 5
    TomTallis says:

    Did “Heteroseparatist” ever respond to your excellent video?

  • 6
    Bilstr says:

    Thanks again Rob for a thoughtful piece and for the video repeat.  Back in the 50s gay men in government service had to be deeply closeted because they were considered security risks for blackmail.  The stupid irony was of course that they were at risk of blackmail because they had to be closeted.  Had they been able to be open they would have held no security risk.  Today the same principle can be applied to the pedophilia scares.  Open gay men are rarely a danger to children or others.  Those with pedophilic predilections who are in some kind of a straight or gay or married closet are the dangers, Sandusky merely being the most famous recent one.

  • 7
    Regan DuCasse says:

     I’m certain, that had Sandusky’s victims all been girls, it wouldn’t have rated a national scandal on the scale that it did.
    Just because it’s same sex abuse, and feeds the puerile prejudices of the anti gay,  it’s used time and time again as an example that sex segregated institutions should ban gay men.
    As if THAT is going to change anything to do with the abuse of boys. And it won’t.
    But it’s absolutely true: it’s the closet that’s caused more problems, and irony and hypocrisy are the inevitable results of anti gay sentiment and discrimination.

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>