Lion of the Blogosphere

Milo Yiannopoulos vs. Roman Polanski

Milo Yiannopoulos, who was a victim of statutory rape but never an adult perpetrator, is now persona non grata, but Roman Polanski, who pled guilty to statutory rape and was charged with worse, is still lauded by the mainstream media which distributes and promotes his movies and was even given an Academy Award in absentia.

Double standard applies to Trump supporters?

(Credit to Dystopic for bringing this comparison to my attention.)

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

February 22, 2017 at 10:53 AM

Posted in Crime, News

73 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. “Double standard applies to Trump supporters?”

    You have to even ask that? Double standard applies to Republicans in general over any sex matters. Or any matters at all, really. But it’s extra super-duper double standard now in the Age of Trump.

    The really disgusting thing about the SJWs is that were Milo on their side, he would be lauded as a hero, as “brave,” as “speaking truth to power” or whatever the heck else. The stupid thing about our side is that we throw out someone immediately for this kind of thing. Weak, weak, weak. The response should be, “yeah? so what?” You protect your own.


    February 22, 2017 at 11:46 AM

    • Rather, I would say that mainstream liberals would be afraid to say anything negative about Milo because he’s gay, while edgy hipster types would love him for his flamboyant verbal pugnaciousness in flouting conventional standards.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      February 22, 2017 at 11:52 AM

    • “The stupid thing about our side is that we throw out someone immediately for this kind of thing. Weak, weak, weak.”

      I had no intention of reading Milo’s book, but now I’m going to read it and purchase it twice. I’m also going to leave a glowing, 5-star review on Amazon no matter what I think of it.

      Horace Pinker

      February 22, 2017 at 12:28 PM

    • “The stupid thing about our side is that we throw out someone immediately for this kind of thing. Weak, weak, weak. The response should be, “yeah? so what?” You protect your own.”

      Oh man, I am so proud not to be on YOUR team.

      Milo is a degenerate libertine. He’s not on my team.

      The fact that my team doesn’t excuse pederasty is a point in our favor, not a reason to defend Milo.


      Of course there’s a double standard but please stop talking about gay rights as if it’s a leftist thing. It’s mainstream, and don’t bother telling me that most people don’t believe it, they just go along with the path of least resistance, because that doesn’t matter. You are always preaching about how elites set the tone, so they’ve done that on this.

      On ABC there is going to be a mini-series about gay rights, written by, among others, Dustin Lance Black, who started a relationship with a lover when he was 17. Not HBO, not Netflix. ABC. This is mainstream.

      People who oppose gay rights are the deviants now.

      Back to the double standard, many big gay rights advocates, such as Larry Kramer, have written the same thing as he said. Peter Tatchell, big gay kahuna in UK, advocates lowering the age of consent to 14.

      Our task is to tell the truth about this, not to defend Milo or score debating points about hypocrisy. This is actually a golden opportunity to do this.


      February 22, 2017 at 1:54 PM

      • gothamette, you and I don’t know milo personally. He’s something of a showman and exhibitionist, that much is obvious. I guess you and I share similarly conservative lifestyles. So I have nothing in common with milo in that sense. I understand you hate the libertine personality he portrays but I think you judge him too harshly when he has done nothing seriously wrong but talk dirty. And gays are never going to be a threat to civilisation. His supporters (which includes myself) realise there are much larger existential threats to worry about.

        The lioncub

        February 22, 2017 at 2:26 PM

      • gothamette,

        I do find Milo a useful weapon against the Left and I hope he continue his career in some fashion.

        But his statements do make themselves very difficult for his supporters to come up with a plausible excuse:

        It is a fact Technocracy scored a goal left open by Milo.

        Is it a fault of the Progressives they kicked it in? It was an open goal, afterall, and he knew they were an opposition on the field 24/7. An open goal is a beautifully written invitation to the other side to aim for it. That is why soccer teams don’t leave goals open as standard practice.

        Soccer has its duh standards too.

        Because – as you can tell from this blog’s ambitious subject matter – we deal with theory with as much enthusiasm as we do practicality, theoretically what is the best light we could put his statements in?

        About the best that can be done is to say that Milo’s suggestion might have been that in his early teens he desired a relationship with older men, but that he was not making a broader point about the desirability of this relationship working for other teenagers.

        This hypothetical attempt still falls short of credulity; therefore we cannot endorse this experimental defense.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        February 22, 2017 at 7:29 PM

      • Nope, sorry. This should be a lesson to you. Milo was fun for a while, I admit. Given the degraded state of our culture, anyone who said a few truths (fat girls are ugly, duh) sounded iconoclastic. In the country of the blind. etc.

        But he was never a conservative, and his remarks are indefensible. I repeat: because the left shrugs at Larry Kramer saying the exact same thing as Milo doesn’t mean we should tolerate it.

        When something like this happens, you move on.

        The only proper response (yes, the only) is to hammer the left about their softening on pedophilia and pederasty. Which they have. Smack them in the face with this every chance we get.

        In that sense, Milo may have done us a favor. The only way he can resuscitate his “career” is to do this. “I didn’t say anything that isn’t common discourse in the gay rights movement. Dustin Lance Black, who is the writer of the ABC mini-series on the gay rights movement, took up with his current boyfriend when he (the BF) was 17.”

        But what Milo said was simply out of bounds, full stop.


        February 23, 2017 at 6:34 AM

      • Nope, sorry. This should be a lesson to you. Milo was fun for a while, I admit. Given the degraded state of our culture, anyone who said a few truths (fat girls are ugly, duh) sounded iconoclastic. In the country of the blind. etc.

        Perhaps you are right. Or not.

        But beware regardless – the culture is more than degraded enough for Milo to make a comeback.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        February 23, 2017 at 6:20 PM

      • I agree with that but as what? I don’t think he’s the type to reinvent himself as a leftist.

        Tell you this: if Milo had the guts to out the pederasts in Hollywood, I’d change my view of him. I’d give him A for courage. But nothing he’s done so far has taken much guts. He’s said so himself. He’s said repeatedly that internet bullying is BS. He was rewarded lavishly for his “iconoclasm.” Then he tripped. He can go in two directions. He can’t continue doing the old act. He can either go left – or start telling the truth.


        February 23, 2017 at 7:35 PM

      • Gothamette, you and MaryK did the same nuckle dragging bullshit on Trump and it nearly cost us the election. You are hanging on to dear life and one of your ideological enemies offers you a hand up you still take it.

        What, you think colonial America was thrilled to be allied with France against Great Britain?

        You take who you can get.

        Paul Ryan's Sickly Old Lapdog

        February 24, 2017 at 11:15 AM

  2. What’s even weirder is that progressives had been floating up trial balloons for nomalizing pedophilia (like the columnist in Salon). But taking out a political enemy is more important in the short run I guess. The Salon columns were scrubbed, I don’t know if there was an explanation/acknowledgement or anything (I would doubt it).

    Before long I expect the slow push for pedophilia to resume though.

    cliff arroyo

    February 22, 2017 at 11:48 AM

    • I will repeat my view that the left won’t push for acceptance of actual adult-child sex because, while they love to shatter traditional taboos, they hate power differentials. Remember, these are the people who claim that traditional marriage, before no-fault divorce, laws against marital rape, and the like, was inherently prone to abuse. They may push for an “orientation” view of pedophilia as in those Salon articles, though, just because they like to gross people out and subvert traditional morality. They can spin that as actually reducing harm, by saying “maybe if this subject weren’t so taboo, some of the people who experience sexual attraction to children would reach out and get therapy before they actually molest one,” a view there might be some truth to.


      February 22, 2017 at 1:45 PM

      • I agree the left won’t actually push for a Western bacha bazi, but I don’t see much evidence that the left hates power differentials. They just prefer different ones. Ezra Klein’s argument in favor of California’s Yes Means Yes law is a good example: “everyday sexual practices on college campuses need to be upended, and men need to feel a cold spike of fear when they begin a sexual encounter.” That sort of attitude permeates liberal policymaking, in all kinds of areas.


        February 22, 2017 at 2:26 PM

      • “the left… hate power differentials”

        If by “hate” you mean “revel in,” then I agree. It’s all about who/whom with the Left, and who/whom is the very essence of power differentials.


        February 22, 2017 at 4:16 PM

    • I think they may have been scrubbed because the author was accused of sexually abusing his adopted daughter by his adopted daughter. But I am uncertain.


      February 23, 2017 at 11:16 AM

  3. The left is still sorting this out. Salon just purged from their archive two or three articles by an admitted pedophile that was testing the waters for acceptance of pedophilia as a sexual orientation, which they published only two years ago.

    If the right was smart they’d play this episode into a purging of Lena Dunham and Sarah Silverman, who said some stuff that Milo would get hanged for, and maybe even get Roman Polanski extradited (the American left and European establishment seem to be symbiotic now in response to the Trump Right, so this sea change is probably operating there too). If the left’s social morality is going to change on a dime based on what would be the most effective weapon to use against their opponents then let’s make sure that axe is double-sided.


    February 22, 2017 at 11:57 AM

    • The left needs to be burned to the ground the way General Sherman burned the south. It doesn’t mater who or which weapon we use to achieve this.

      We can sort out our own ideological differences later. Doesn’t anybody understand the concept of “for the greater good” anymore? The left sure as heck seems to.

      Paul Ryan's Sickly Old Lapdog

      February 24, 2017 at 11:19 AM

  4. Hopefully Milo is not done. He stumbled because he is from England. England is like Afghanistan in that it is apparently normal for older men to bugger and mentor younger boys.

    England is the farthest-fallen place on Earth, where a town called Rotherham gave over all its young girls to barbarians.


    February 22, 2017 at 12:01 PM

    • I can’t understand. If it’s always your genes that determine your behaviour, how can a great empire sink so low? Why aren’t the genes doing their thing?


      February 22, 2017 at 1:01 PM

      • You’re being too harsh on my compatriots, Dan and Yakov. Rotherham (and some other similar cases) are a tragedy, it’s true, but we are still a great nation, with the majority of citizens still patriots and socially conservative. Sometimes we rise up and fight for our beliefs, as we did in the EU referendum. And we will never fall as low as Germany, France and Sweden, in terms of sacrificing our values. Also, we still produce many great people, cities and businesses, and have some of the world’s best schools and universities. Which is impressive for such a small nation. I love the United States, but there are places in the UK which can’t be beaten for living contentedly and bringing up a family.

        The lioncub

        February 22, 2017 at 1:48 PM

      • I dunno. The gypsies box bare knuckle and are pretty impessive, but the natives seem to have capitulated to Muslims and Africans. Also, you guys don’t reproduce enough. This is no way for a nation to prosper. I think you are in deep trouble.


        February 22, 2017 at 2:54 PM

      • @The lioncub —

        The UK seems to have rejected religion utterly, has a really bad culture of economic dependency and white out-of-wedlock births, a really bad drug culture, no guns or effective personal defense, and prosecution for offensive speech. Young women ride the carousel way more than women here. There are tons of Sharia courts enforced by the state. All that is pathetic and depressing.

        Am I wrong?

        This says most births to UK mothers are illigitmate:

        Apparently the immigrants behave much better than the natives. I know a reverse Rotherham could never occur. That is, Pakistani fathers would not allow that stuff to happen to their daughters.


        February 22, 2017 at 5:00 PM

      • England is perhaps the 1st piece of the Anglo Prole Sphere-jigsaw puzzle to drift away and die off. It is culturally bland, yet culturally degenerate like all English Speaking domains.


        February 22, 2017 at 10:03 PM

      • Even the best genes in the world can’t help much when they’re spent charging artillery before reproduction (between the Empire and today were the Crimean War, Boer War, World War I and World War II killing off too many K selected genes and leaving too many r selected genes).


        February 23, 2017 at 11:13 AM

  5. Yakov

    February 22, 2017 at 12:59 PM

    • I’m so sorry, wrong clip.


      February 22, 2017 at 1:51 PM

  6. I’ve never understood the fact that Roman Polanski is lauded. I mean, not only did he rape-rape a 13 yr old, but he then fled the United States rather than accept what would have been a minor jail sentence. I get that he made a few good movies, but c’mon. Trump should vigorously pursue his extradition.


    February 22, 2017 at 2:35 PM

    • Well, not exactly. That minor appears to have been a slut and he had settled with her family. She wasn’t pressing charges. So the case isn’t that clear. I mean statutory rape is ballony. Most kids have sex before they reach the age of consent. Like is there a big problem for a boy to be involved with his female teacher? I don’t think so. I think most boys have had a crush on teachers, I had. What about a girl? Sure, lynch that animal pedophile! I realize that I say this as a patriarchal male and that plenty of sluts think differently. So if you want to have it discussed openly it’s not that simple. Say it was Trump instead of Polanski, would it be a big problem for us? I don’t think so.


      February 22, 2017 at 3:19 PM

  7. Roman Polanski was arrested and charged with sexual assault and statutory rape of a 13-year model. His attorney arranged a plea bargain in which he would plead guilty to “Unlawful Sexual Intercourse with a minor” and the other charges would be dropped. The sentence as part of the plea bargain was to be time served (42 days) plus probation. Polanski heard that the judge in the case was not going to accept the plea bargain and instead sentence Polanski to 50 years, telling friends that Polanski would never get out of jail. This was when Polanski decided to flee the US for France.

    This was not the first time Polanski had relations with young women. In 1976 he had an affair with Nastassja Kinski who was 16-17 at the time. This was while they were shooting the film Tess in France. I’m not sure what the law was in France at that time, but I suspect this was not unlawful.

    I think there are a number of reasons many people in Hollywood are sympathetic with Polanski. Polanski pregnant second wife, Sharon Tate, was murdered in 1969 by the Manson gang. Polanski had agreed to plead guilty and accept responsibility. Many people also believe the behavior of the judge in his case was highly irregular.

    Although California is suppose to be a liberal state, prosecutors are still trying to get Polanski extradited to US. In 2009 Polanski was arrested in Switzerland, held in jail for 2 months, then under house arrest for more than a year. The extradition request was rejected and Polanski was set free. In 2015 Courts in Poland where Polanski now lives turned down an extradition request.


    February 22, 2017 at 3:39 PM

    • Polanski drugged and raped a 13-year old girl. That deserves the death sentence. The judge was going easy on Roman.

      Andrew E.

      February 22, 2017 at 6:45 PM

      • Yes, we as a society need to execute people like this. However, it’s quite possible that the girl knew what she was doing. This shouldn’t matter though, because we want our women to be virtuous virgins. And anyone who tries to ruin them should be dealt with harshly. A strong family is a foundation of a strong nation. Polanski with his ‘art’ can only undermine our civilization and should have been executed. All I’m saying is that while going after the wicked, we should know that reality is more complex and that he may not be that guilty in this particular case. Our interest of exterminating him is more important then his actual guilt.


        February 22, 2017 at 8:04 PM

      • Yakov, the only counterargument is that women should not be allowed to be sexually autonomous as they are incapable of making proper choices for themselves when it comes to sex and should be placed under the authority of a father, then a husband.

        I won’t argue that. But I doubt mikeca wants to go there.

        Andrew E.

        February 22, 2017 at 9:27 PM

      • Yakov — “All I’m saying is that while going after the wicked, we should know that reality is more complex and that he may not be that guilty in this particular case. Our interest of exterminating him is more important then his actual guilt.”

        I strongly agree and once made a similar point in an essay about capital punishment. Someone had argued that innocent people are sometimes wrongly convicted, I replied that while we certainly don’t want to execute an innocent person, it’s better that a few innocent people are wrongly executed if it sends the message to other would-be murderers, rapists, etc that it won’t be tolerated. In the long run, many more innocent lives are saved.


        February 22, 2017 at 11:59 PM

    • I’ve never understood why we would bother extraditing him. He’s never been a US citizen. Just continue not letting him come back here, and Let Poland or France have him. We should be celebrating that another useless immigrant self-deported.


      February 22, 2017 at 7:35 PM

      • He is wanted in the US, but desired in France.


        February 22, 2017 at 8:09 PM

  8. Another point to consider is that intellectual space accorded journalists and writers in the UK is just a little bit wider than that in the US, and not to put too fine a point on it, the British (like the French) just have a more mature outlook on sexual proclivities. Milo’s remarks wouldn’t likely have ever caused outrage in his homeland, because Brits understand that an abstract discussion is only just an abstract discussion and not a policy prescription. Americans are weird when it comes to sexual quirks, take something like homosexuality, for the longest time gays were considered so distasteful that they were almost non-existent on TV, and then suddenly in a short space of time not only were they ubiquitous in all facets of popular culture but even the slightest criticism against them was considered heresy. Appreciation for subtleties isn’t an American forte, I guess.


    February 22, 2017 at 4:29 PM

    • Dennis Miller had one of his “rants” on HBO’s Dennis Miller Live back in the 90s that made EXACTLY this point. You’re a lush or you’re an annoying ex-alcoholic. You’re a prude or you’re a total slut. And so on and so on…


      February 22, 2017 at 7:24 PM

    • Scott Adams didn’t even want to discuss Milo on his live youtube program because he could easily be taken out of context on this subject.


      February 22, 2017 at 9:05 PM

    • This wasn’t about which culture has a more mature outlook on sex, this was a coordinated hit job between Evan McMullin’s never-trumper group and some groups on the left.

      Mike Street Station

      February 23, 2017 at 6:23 AM

      • So what? He said what he said, and it wasn’t an abstract discussion. He admitted he’s been to parties where, likely, underage boys were present.

        Disappointed to see you taking the side that Milo is a poor little victim. He’s not. He’s a ringleader who got karma.


        February 23, 2017 at 9:07 AM

      • Well the Milo story seems to hold different lessons for everyone. To me, this is a story about nevertrumpers coordinating with leftists to destroy someone on the right. This won’t end with Milo.

        Mike Street Station

        February 23, 2017 at 12:34 PM

      • What’s happened to that little creep Evan McMullin? Please don’t tell me he got his old job back at the House Republican Caucus?


        February 24, 2017 at 4:46 AM

      • “What’s happened to that little creep Evan McMullin?”

        Besides coordinating with the PAC “Reagan Battalion” to target Milo, he now runs his own PAC, Stand Up Republic, which is an anti-Trumper outfit.

        Mike Street Station

        February 24, 2017 at 10:23 AM

  9. Am I allowed to link to this article here? I want everybody to see it because it provides an analysis of Trump’s popularity and a lot of people have been asking questions about that:

    Otis the Sweaty

    February 22, 2017 at 5:13 PM

  10. I don’t see any publishers dropping out of publishing Gore Vidal’s novels.

    John C

    February 22, 2017 at 6:47 PM

    • what did Gore Vidal do?

      Otis the Sweaty

      February 22, 2017 at 6:57 PM

    • “I don’t see any publishers dropping out of publishing Gore Vidal’s novels.”

      It hasn’t been possible to do that since 2012.


      February 23, 2017 at 12:34 AM

  11. My last comment on this. Anyone who defends Milo by saying, “The liberals are just as bad” is as bad as a liberal.

    It’s unfair that Milo is shattered while Larry Kramer and Harvey Milk are idolized. But defending Milo is defending the indefensible.

    Peace out.


    February 22, 2017 at 6:49 PM

    • Is it defending Milo, or just pointing out double standards? In fact not even that. Milk actually engaged in sex with a minor. There’s no evidence Milo has.

      Unfortunately in the gritty world of politics, orienting your side in response to what’s happening with the other side makes sense. Orienting it to an ideal makes you a chump if your opponent is a realist. It’s about which side is overall, at the end of the day, the better side. Not which side never engages in hypocrisy or evades principle now and again to stick up for one of their own. It’s a rough calculus, but then politics is an art not a science.

      An article that has stuck me in recent years, written for the left but with lessons for the right:


      February 22, 2017 at 7:35 PM

      • You’re forgetting a very important point that Larry Auster made several years ago: the Left does not have double standards. There is only a single standard: the Left does not regard anyone who is not one of them to be a person deserving of any consideration. They are not being hypocritical: they simply do not see you as people.

        You need to treat them the same way they treat you. Nothing coming out of their mouths is worthy of consideration, argument, reason, or debate. Nothing. Ignore them; use their words against them; destroy them and their allies wherever possible, until you can finally go after them the way Franco did his own leftists. They are still digging up mass graves in Spain.

        Understand that this is the reality we are living in and this is how you treat and look at Milo: he is in the foxhole shooting in the right direction. Everything else is irrelevant.

        What I seriously do enjoy is how this how pedophile/pederasty thing is bubbling to the surface. Oh, I am so looking forward to the witchhunts Jess Sessions is going to instigate.


        February 22, 2017 at 9:42 PM

      • Where is the double standard in this case? Liberals have not been defending Polanski, inviting him to speak at events or lionizing him as a hero. Feminist groups have been after Polanski for a long time and still are.

        Hollywood, and only Hollywood, defends Polanski. Not because he is liberal, but because he is one of their own. The same way Penn State alum defend Paterno.

        Peter Akuleyev

        February 23, 2017 at 5:00 AM

      • “Is it defending Milo, or just pointing out double standards?”

        Answer your own question. I’ve already said repeatedly that pointing out double standards is OK. Defending Milo isn’t.

        “Milk actually engaged in sex with a minor. There’s no evidence Milo has.”

        Yes there is. He talked about attending parties where underage boys were commonplace.

        I haven’t listened to the whole video. I’m basing this on 2nd hand accounts, but I trust them because I know how Hollywood works and parties with minors and drugs are commonplace.

        Open your eyes.


        February 23, 2017 at 6:37 AM

      • I’ll grant that American liberals outside Hollywood generally weren’t stupid enough to demand that Polanski be let off, but your article is about France and Polanski had a lot of support from French liberals back in 2009, although maybe that’s changed.


        February 23, 2017 at 9:54 AM

    • I agree.

      Being gay isn’t the worst thing in the world. Defending the practice of (a minority of) gay men having sex with thirteen year old boys is pretty bad. And by “pretty bad,” I mean REALLY messed up.


      February 22, 2017 at 10:23 PM

      • It’s a bright red line. Having anything to do with it, even to the point of defending Milo himself because he is the victim of double standards is unacceptable to me, and will completely doom any movement that has anything to do with it.


        February 23, 2017 at 6:40 AM

  12. I dunno. Not black and white here. When I was in the hospital after appendectomy two older girls though I was cute and came to kiss me at night. Now what? Charge with what now? I wouldn’t press any charges.


    February 22, 2017 at 7:22 PM

  13. Ross Douthat’s column offers a more sophisticated take on the Milo situation than this. Suggest those interested read it.

    David Pinsen

    February 23, 2017 at 12:15 AM

  14. Sensitive, nuanced, adult treatment of the whole Milo affair by Stefan Molyneux.

    (46 minutes)

    Richard Bicker

    February 23, 2017 at 1:36 AM

    • S-Mol makes a hell of a good point. Instead of apologies and clarifications/evasions, Milo could prove his heart is in the right place by naming names and helping the authories go after the predators, actually do something to stop kids from being traumatised in the future.

      Greg Pandatshang

      February 23, 2017 at 2:17 PM

      • Except he’s ALREADY DONE THIS, according to his resignation speech. Three times in fact, “which is three more times than most of my critics have.”


        February 23, 2017 at 3:49 PM

      • Shows what I know I guess. I do kind of a poor impression of a Milo expert.

        Greg Pandatshang

        February 23, 2017 at 11:35 PM

    • But 46 minutes? I don’t need that much nuance.

      Peter Akuleyev

      February 24, 2017 at 7:56 AM

  15. Milo should be defended on the grounds of freedom of speech, but not in any other way.


    February 23, 2017 at 10:36 AM

  16. Talk about the DNC debate and the war between Ellison and Perez

    Otis the Sweaty

    February 23, 2017 at 11:28 AM

  17. “You’re forgetting a very important point that Larry Auster made several years ago: the Left does not have double standards.”

    Sure we can play rhetorical games and say there’s only one standard: whatever it takes to win. But that’s not how most people use these terms.


    February 23, 2017 at 11:43 AM

  18. A bit late in the discussion to bring this up, but as regards the point made by Lion and other commenters about gays having distasteful sexual practices they don’t want the wider society to know about, like extreme promiscuity, pederasty, ephebophilia, etc., I just remembered something I have seen liberals say about that. They say that to the extent that those things are more common among homosexuals, it’s because homosexuality was forced into the closet and therefore manifested itself in unhealthy ways. They think that if we just totally mainstreamed homosexuality, homosexuals would spend their lives in loving, committed, monogamous, life-long relationships just like the rest of us. (This is also the argument of pro same sex marriage “conservatives” like David Brooks: that getting gays into bourgeois ways of life will “tame” them.) I suppose it’s a bit like the liberal argument that all of these undesirable traits that we see in non-western, third world peoples, like female genital mutilation, or tribal warfare, or the belief that having sex with a virgin cures AIDS, are actually the product of Western colonialism.


    February 24, 2017 at 8:25 AM

    • “ephebophilia”

      That’s one that I had to Google.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      February 24, 2017 at 9:36 AM

    • Ephebophilia is the new pederasty. Too many people know the latter so they needed to invent a new word.


      February 27, 2017 at 11:13 AM

  19. Lion,

    I am adhering to your new rules about not going all off topic so I’m putting this in a post that is already down blog. I want to ask a question about the legal aspects of Simon & Schuster dropping Milo’s book. If they signed a contract, what’s the legality of this? Was there some kind of adverse publicity clause in the contract? Is this the equivalent of a morals clause?

    I’m asking because in the future, what happens if a writer, any writer, who is being published by Big Publishing decides to wander off the reservation and start telling the truth?

    Not defending Milo’s actual comments but his right to say things, and not be blacklisted by a publishing firm with which he had a legally binding contract.


    February 25, 2017 at 4:33 PM

    • I don’t know the details of any contracts that Milo had.

      By the way, I disagree with your harsh criticism of Milo. He’s an ally of Trumpism, which needs to be a big tent in order to defeat the establishment. We can’t kick people out just because they say some ickys stuff about gay sex that liberals would certainly overlook if it came from a liberal gay.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      February 25, 2017 at 8:40 PM

      • I know you disagree with me. I wanted to make myself loud and clear for the day I get famous & they dox. Milo and I can’t be in the same tent, nope, no how. Of course liberals overlook sick stuff from their own. That’s why they are liberal and I’m not.


        February 25, 2017 at 8:50 PM

  20. See also the treatment of Milo compared to the treatment Bill Maher, who is also on record condoning adult sex with children:,amp.html


    February 26, 2017 at 2:38 AM

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: