TimeIsUp wrote:
Duffy wrote:
TimeIsUp wrote:
Duffy wrote:
Slowman wrote:
"What you read has apparently been heavily edited." i didn't read it. i watched it. and it wasn't edited at all. it was 6+ minutes, straight through. want me to show you a link? i'm happy to see the part before, where he says, "everything that comes after this is what i really do not believe."
If it's the same six minute video I saw it is one that, according to Milo, has been heavily edited.
I don't know if it was or not.
Without much doubt Milo is saying that, in some cases, it's ok (or even good) for a 13 year old boy to have a sexual relationship with a "grown man".
And I think this is a perfectly good discussion to have. I also think that people can believe what it appears that Milo does without being a pedophile, or someone who is excusing pedophilia.
All that said, I can see where someone might get the impression that Milo is excusing pedophila (even though I disagree with that opinion).
After working in a middle school for almost a decade with five years of coaching MS track and XC after that, I disagree that it is a perfectly good discussion to have.
That's nice to know that your teaching experience has made you the arbiter of what can and can't be talked about.
Here's an idea, if you don't want to talk about something then don't. Just stay out of the way of those that do.
You are right. You are much better suited using your N=1 to justify talking about whether adults should be having sex with 13 year olds. What the fuck is wrong with you?
I don't know what N=1 example you're referring to but I'm if the mindset that no subject is off limits for discussion. So again, if you don't want to discuss the subject of this thread then feel free to excuse yourself and please stay out of the way of those who do want to discuss it.
But if you do want to have this discussion I like for you to point out where you think I said it's ok for adults to have sex with 13 year olds.
Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.
- Chinese proverb