Congressman Foley Thing -- Am I Missing Something?

[kinkikiki]

I'm a Democrat (Yes, I'm American) , and I dont think this man is a pedophile.....

 

[Mr.BiGuy]

Fags like Drudge deserve our scorn and repudiation. He works overtime to place gays in the worse possible light, and if that means lying, distorting or perverting, no problem. Homosexuality, as we know, isn't a sickness, but it is a ugly and dark place when it involves scum like Drudge. Log Cabinettes aren't all that far behind, what with their "beat me, whip me, call me a fag" routine. At the risk of offending our dear homocons, I'll say it again: as a gay man, you have no bidness affiliating with the gay-hating GOP.

Oh I know that the Log Cabinites are'nt better. But you'd at least think that a group like that would weigh in on this issue, but then again they don't do jackshit anyway so I guess it does'nt matter.

I agree that the gay community should totally ignore the LCRs, fuck those closet cases. Did'nt know about the NAMBLA thing though lol

 

[kevin7620]

I'm a Democrat (Yes, I'm American) , and I dont think this man is a pedophile.....

Well, since that's the first such comment on here that I've seen, I'm tempted to respond.

I actually agree. I think that there is quite a bit of confusion that arises between the legal and social meanings of the terms "pedophile" and "pedophilia". Legally, it relates to sexual activity between an adult and someone younger than the age of 18. For example, any hanky panky between an adult and an individual aged 17 years and 364 days would qualify.

However, I think that in a more social/societal (I can't quite think of the right word) context, "pedophilia" is far too strong for this case. I tend to associate "pedophilia" with sexual activity with prepubescent children, i.e. the creepy uncle that's diddling his 7 year old niece, etc. Because "pedophilia" is such a dirty word, we gleefully throw it out in the Foley case as well, essentially on a technicality.

I think Mr. Foley would best be labeled as an ephebophile (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephebophile). I say that he is NOT a "pedophile", and that there is a HUGE difference between pedophilia and ephebophilia. One might even argue that a preference for legal twinks (versus daddies, for example) is a form of ephebophilia. Obviously, in the US, ephebophilia focused on teens younger than 18 falls under the same laws as pedophilia.

 

[1RadPony]

Poor behavior for anyone, the worst for an elected offical who was an advocate against this problem on behalf of children. Now he is wiping his feet off all of us who are proud to be Gay and not interested in children.

 

[Kulindahr]

Something I have a hard time understanding is that with all the dirt digging and mudslinging in elections; how did Foley get so far up the political ladder without being outed?

Maybe he's one of those types who never acted on anything until he had such a position of power that it went to his head and he felt he could do anything.

 

[JayHew]

Here is more gasoline I just read:


Radar Exclusive

The Bogus Blog Behind Foley's Fall
ABCNews.com brought Mark Foley's boy-chasing to national attention, but it wasn't the first website to flog the story. That dubious honor belongs to StopSexPredators, a pseudo-vigilante blog filled with plagiarized, hastily-assembled posts, which no one seems to have heard of, visited, or linked to before last week—and whose operator has a suspiciously savvy grasp of the news cycle.
In other words, a blog whose sole raison d'etre seems to have been to get the Foley ball rolling.
If its time/date stamps are to be trusted (like most free blogware, Blogger allows its users to backdate posts), the pervert-outing anony-site was set up on July 28 as a "clearing house for the public to report sex predators and as a resource for concerned citizens."
One early post, headlined The Sickening Six, naming and shaming the "kinds of sick people who hunt minors for their own sick purposes," is basically an amalgam of plagiarized entries from Crimelibrary, Wikipedia, and Answers.com. (Click here, here, and here, for examples.)
After running just six posts over the summer, the site picked up steam on September 21 when its author wrote, "the blog has been noticed and some shocking emails have been received!!!!" and posted four emails purportedly from "interns" outraged by the heretofore unmentioned Foley and his penchant for teenage boys.
(Of course, if these emails are legit, it means the "interns" somehow stumbled upon the blog, despite the fact that it had not yet been linked to by any other sites, and was virtually indetectible to Google, which ranks sites according to the number of incoming links.)
One "intern" wrote:
"...I came to Washington because I care about the future of America. I wanted to be around good and decent men like President George Bush. Instead, I feel like a piece of meat. The worst part of it for me is there appear to be plenty of my fellow interns who don't mind Foley's particular 'path to power.'"
Three days later, the blogger posted the now infamous "Emails from Congressman Foley to 16 Year Old Page!!!!", claiming they'd been sent in by a reader (despite the fact that they appeared to be scans of faxed printouts). Persons unknown then seeded the link to various political sites—including Wonkette, which initially dismissed them as fakes. ABC, of course, took them more seriously.
Whoever promoted the story on DailyKos did so only 12 minutes after the fateful post went live at 11:06 a.m.:

Six minutes later, the same person, again writing under the handle WHinternNOW posted the following:

Back on Sept. 5, however, that very same WHinternNOW posted a suspiciously more informed-sounding take on the congressman:

Whoever is behind the blog hasn't responded to emails from Radar or any other outlets, and seems to have lost interest in the site.
"I'm thrilled that so many folks are looking at this simple blog...." the author wrote on October 2, the last day the site was updated. "If you have any ideas that I should post, please let me know. I'm happy to pass along information about the current situation, but would much prefer to keep marching toward the large goal or stopping sex predators. I don't think we'll see it in the Congress anytime soon, so let's focus our energy elsewhere."
What, leaving the party so soon?

 

[JayHew]

And some more gasoline: DrudgeReport

ABC ONLINE GLITCH LEADS TO IDENTITY OF FOLEY ACCUSER

FAMOUS IM EXCHANGE WAS WITH 18 YEAR OLD

Wed Oct 04 2006 20:32:06 ET

A posting on ABCNEWS.COM of an unredacted instant message sessions between Rep. Mark Foley and a former congressional page has exposed the identity of the now 21 year-old accuser.

The website PASSIONATE AMERICA detailed the startling exposure late Wednesday.

ABCNEWS said in a statement: "We go to great lengths to prevent the names of alleged sex crime victims from being revealed. On Friday there was a very brief technical glitch on our site which was overridden immediately. It is possible that during that very brief interval a screen name could have been captured. Reviews of the site since then show no unredacted screen names."

SEX CHAT WAS WITH 18 YEAR OLD

On Tuesday ABC news released a high-impact instant message exchange between Foley and, as ABC explained, a young man "under the age of 18."

ABC headlined the story: "New Foley Instant Messages; Had Internet Sex While Awaiting House Vote"

But upon reviewing the records, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned, the young man was in fact over the age of 18 at the time of the exchange.

A network source explains, messages with the young man and disgraced former Congressman Foley took place before and after the 18th birthday.

Developing...

 

[Lostlover]

Well, since that's the first such comment on here that I've seen, I'm tempted to respond.

I actually agree. I think that there is quite a bit of confusion that arises between the legal and social meanings of the terms "pedophile" and "pedophilia". Legally, it relates to sexual activity between an adult and someone younger than the age of 18. For example, any hanky panky between an adult and an individual aged 17 years and 364 days would qualify.

However, I think that in a more social/societal (I can't quite think of the right word) context, "pedophilia" is far too strong for this case. I tend to associate "pedophilia" with sexual activity with prepubescent children, i.e. the creepy uncle that's diddling his 7 year old niece, etc. Because "pedophilia" is such a dirty word, we gleefully throw it out in the Foley case as well, essentially on a technicality.

I think Mr. Foley would best be labeled as an ephebophile (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephebophile). I say that he is NOT a "pedophile", and that there is a HUGE difference between pedophilia and ephebophilia. One might even argue that a preference for legal twinks (versus daddies, for example) is a form of ephebophilia. Obviously, in the US, ephebophilia focused on teens younger than 18 falls under the same laws as pedophilia.

I think you're trying to make a line in the sand between a pedophile and a ephebophile... splitting hairs.

I think this case of butchering the English language is fine.

The law doesn't draw lines in the sand here... you mess with someone underage, pre-teen or post-teen or pedophilia or ephebophile... you're going to jail.

The way these laws were written was to protect underaged children (zero to 17 years and 364 days old). Adults can't have sex with these individuals. And any adult that has sex with them is called a pedophile. The state of the underaged person's progression in puberty is meaningless... so splitting hairs between the naming of pedophiles is useless because both classifications are illegal.

 

[Kulindahr]

I think you're trying to make a line in the sand between a pedophile and a ephebophile... splitting hairs.

I think this case of butchering the English language is fine.

The law doesn't draw lines in the sand here... you mess with someone underage, pre-teen or post-teen or pedophilia or ephebophile... you're going to jail.

The way these laws were written was to protect underaged children (zero to 17 years and 364 days old). Adults can't have sex with these individuals. And any adult that has sex with them is called a pedophile. The state of the underaged person's progression in puberty is meaningless... so splitting hairs between the naming of pedophiles is useless because both classifications are illegal.

Politicians love to redefine the language in order to achieve emotional effects for the purpose of getting votes -- you've bought into that, with your attack on a well-written defense of the proper use of words.

There IS a vast difference between an actual pedophile (correct, medical, psychological meaning) and an ephebophile, and the legal obfuscation -- let's be honest, butchering, as you said -- only serves to confuse, for political purposes. We used to call teens, especially older teens, "young adults", and that is not just a euphemism; the differences in their body chemistries alone make them closer to adulthood than to childhood. It also served to remind them that they were in the process of becoming responsible to the world in a different way than before, and expected to be growing into that.
But now we call them all "children", and not surprisingly, many of them decide to behave that way. This label does them a disservice.

As an illustration: consider two people who are fans of corn. One loves the young, tender ears that are coming to full bloom, the other passionately desires the tassles. Does that sound like foolishness? Of course it does -- but it illustrates the difference between a pedophile and an ephebophile quite accurately: the latter at least likes actual corn, but the former is hungry for... what? something which will become corn, in due time? In sexual terms, the ephebophile is at least attracted to people with some sexual development, but the pedophile is after those whose bodies hold no clue of sexual possibilities. As a youth pastor I once knew put it on a certain occasion, "Just because the plumbing's there doesn't mean things should be attached." The pedophile's desire is to put together finished plumbing with parts truly not even ready for the finishing process. The ephebophile at least waits until they're out of the mold!

Politicians love to ride roughshod over language, and love to pass legislation that is seriously flawed, just to show they're "doing something" -- as an example, I point you to the "USA PATRIOT Act".
Please don't buy into that agenda.

 

[Kulindahr]

I see someone is playing dirty politics.
Were the e-mails mere fiction?
If the age was lied about, what else was?
Perhaps Foley didn't commit any crimes at all -- but whoever put the information out falsely on the internet likely did; it's called fraud, and since it was perpetrated using communications in the U.S. of A., it's a federal felony.

 

[Mr.BiGuy]

Those pansies? Say something deliterious about their crime syndicate? NEVER! Those ladies are like the rest of the traitorious GOP -- they cannot wait, they simply cannot wait to betray America! No, they'll act like the pink, cowardly worms they are and debate whether Foley is a ped or a perv, as if it fucking matters. Fact is, when America most needs the truth, the bottom-friendly Cabinettes throw their Pug legs into the air and then stare off into space (those dizzy, uptight queens).

Oh you don't have to tell me twice about those Cabinites. I almost dated one.

Speaking of which (and sorry this was posted somewhere else):

Statement from Log Cabin Republicans About Mark Foley

(Washington, DC) – Log Cabin Executive Vice President Patrick Sammon issued the following statement regarding Mark Foley:

"Mark Foley's shameful actions were reprehensible. He abused the power of his office, violated the trust of the voters, and exploited young people.

"There should be a thorough criminal investigation by appropriate law enforcement agencies. If Mark Foley broke the law, he should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

"Additionally, there should be a full investigation to see if Congressional leaders responded appropriately to Foley's behavior. This unfortunate and inappropriate situation shouldn't be unduly politicized.

"Preying on young people is shameful, immoral, unethical and illegal, regardless of sexual orientation."

http://online.logcabin.org/news_views/reading-room-back-up/statement-from-log-cabin.html

I like to take what they said seriously, but at the same time, I can't help but think that their statement is more manufactured than legit. hmmm

 

[JackFTwist]

The impeachment was because he was guilty of obstructing justice, not because of the sex.
He should have been impeached just for that business about "what the definition of the word 'is' is" -- at least Bush knows the meanings of the words he uses, and doesn't fudge on them... apart from how badly he uses them.

First sentence: he was not guilty of anything. Neither article of impeachment received a majority vote in the Senate. And obstruction of justice - that's over board. The man did not equate "sex" with a blow job and a lot of folks feel that way.

But the give me a break is on your comment on Bush - he knows the meanings of words? Like "torture?" The immorality of parsing the word "torture" is there on its face. And this whol administration, from the top, has twisted the meanings of words.

Adults don't fuck with kids. It is wrong by whatever term one wants to label it, and that is just more parsing. That the House leadership covered it up so they could retain a safe seat is a greater wrong.

 

[kinkikiki]

Well, since that's the first such comment on here that I've seen, I'm tempted to respond.

I actually agree. I think that there is quite a bit of confusion that arises between the legal and social meanings of the terms "pedophile" and "pedophilia". Legally, it relates to sexual activity between an adult and someone younger than the age of 18. For example, any hanky panky between an adult and an individual aged 17 years and 364 days would qualify.

However, I think that in a more social/societal (I can't quite think of the right word) context, "pedophilia" is far too strong for this case. I tend to associate "pedophilia" with sexual activity with prepubescent children, i.e. the creepy uncle that's diddling his 7 year old niece, etc. Because "pedophilia" is such a dirty word, we gleefully throw it out in the Foley case as well, essentially on a technicality.

I think Mr. Foley would best be labeled as an ephebophile (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephebophile). I say that he is NOT a "pedophile", and that there is a HUGE difference between pedophilia and ephebophilia. One might even argue that a preference for legal twinks (versus daddies, for example) is a form of ephebophilia. Obviously, in the US, ephebophilia focused on teens younger than 18 falls under the same laws as pedophilia.

I just label him a gay man who didnt have the guts to come out hence he trolls the internet for young men....

Come on at 16 I was doing Older guys too...