You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘sexual harassment’ category.
I haven’t seen the garbage of people who think homosexuality is normal demand answers from Milo on this: Which pedophiles did Milo expose? What are their full names? And what is the full name of the priest he says abused him? Let’s hear the stories.
Here’s betting a hundred quid, as they say over the pond, that no names will ever be produced, nothing that could identify anyone. Just totally made-up claims.
BTW, The Federalist, of all people!, actually published a good article, “good” as far as today’s sick American society standard goes, about homosexuality and child/teen abuse.
“In the gay world,” Milo said later, “some of the most important, enriching and incredibly, you know, life-affirming, important, shaping relationships very often between younger boys and older men, they can be hugely positive experiences for those young boys.” “Provided they’re consensual,” he added, “provided they’re consensual.”
During a different interview, with Joe Rogan, Milo talked approvingly of an alleged sexual encounter he had with a priest when Milo was around 14 years old. Milo also described attending Hollywood “boat parties” and “house parties,” where he saw things that “beggar belief.” As Milo put it: “some of the boys at [these parties] were very young. Very young.” Later, he reiterated for the third time: “There were some very young boys around at that time.” In spite of Rogan’s prompting, Milo refused to name anyone at these parties.
But wait: the perversity does not stop there. In a 2006 audio clip that resurfaced in the midst of the Milo debacle, Star Trek alumnus and liberal activist George Takei, who, like Milo, is gay, spoke fondly with radio host Howard Stern (and co-host Robin Quivers) about his sexual experience as a 13-year-old boy with an “eighteen or nineteen” year-old camp counselor.
At one point Stern asked Takei: “Were you molested in a sense, because you were 13?” Takei replied: “No, no…I thought he was pretty attractive.” Stern and Quivers seem captivated and delighted by the story. Quivers prompts Takei for details—“Ahh! Was he gazing into your eyes the whole time? Was he saying anything?”—while Stern cracks wise: “Who wants a hand job without kissing?” Takei describes the experience: “It was both wonderful and scary and kind of intimidating, and delightful.”
Reflect on that for a moment: two adults were listening to a third adult describe an instance of genuine child sexual abuse, and were both happy and jocular about it.
There are two deeply appalling aspects to these sordid interviews. The first is the possibility that, as Milo put it, sexual relationships between young boys and adult gay men occur “very often.” At the Huffington Post last week, “gay conservative” Chad Felix Greene described his own experiences in this regard, having his first sexual encounters with adult men at age 14. As Greene put it, reflecting on the negative effect such behavior has had on his life and the need to stop this “generational pattern of abuse”: “As much as the LGBT world seems to ignore [older gay men having sex with young teenage boys], it seems fairly universal and unfortunately not time-bound to a period when young gay men had fewer options.”
Nevertheless, these revelations are unnerving and profoundly troubling, and the implications of these revelations are terrible, especially combined with many years of research showing disproportionately high rates of child sexual abuse against young gay males. Should we not consider the possibility that something both brutal and endemic is going on here, and that we’re simply ignoring it?
Yet there is another, even more troubling idea at work here: the possibility that these stories have been around for a long time, that many people have known about them for a long time, yet nobody has done anything about it, or even cared.
Consider: Milo’s interview with Rogan took place in September 2015, nearly 17 months ago. His statements on the livestream occurred more than a year ago, in January 2016. Yet his remarks and beliefs did not come to wide attention or constitute a scandal until very recently, when they were publicized by a conservative group opposed to his appearance at the Conservative Political Action Conference.
If a grown male celebrity had spoken approvingly of having sex with 13-year-old girls, including having attended a party where “very young girls” were being used for sex, the reaction would have been swift and ruthless. It would not have taken the man in question more than a year to suffer any consequences, as it did for Milo.
Takei’s own tacit approval of child sex, meanwhile, has been on record for more than a decade, and he has suffered no professional or personal fallout for it.
Author: Daniel Payne is a senior contributor at The Federalist. He currently runs the blog Trial of the Century, and lives in Virginia.
‘I cried all the way back’: sexual harassment on public transport
How does it feel to be subject to unwanted sexual attention on your morning commute? Or on your way to school? We asked readers to tell us their stories of sexual harassment on public transport
I thought this article in the British newspaper “The Guardian” was very well written. Really, it is a model for such approaching such topics. The article was helping a campaign against sexual harassment:
Transport for London launched a hard-hitting campaign against sexual assault and harassment on its services. Accompanied by a harrowing video of a woman experiencing sexual assault on the Tube, the campaign urged anyone who experienced unwanted sexual behaviour to report it to the police. A year on since its launch, with the video boasting more than 4m views, 36% more people have reported such incidents on the London underground.
More excerpts below:
We asked our readers to tell us about their experiences. Some told us about being followed off trains. Others told us about men trying to sneak a feel of their breasts between shopping bags. Then there were those who witnessed public masturbation, or were just teenagers when they were first subject to unwanted sexual attention.
Being glad to have found a seat amidst the full carriage after a stressful day at work, I took off my coat and acknowledged the people sitting around me with a smile. I was listening to music and reading a book in English for a while, when I felt the man sitting diagonally opposite of me looking over intensely. He was in his 40s.
I was listening to music and reading a book in English for a while, when I felt the man sitting diagonally opposite of me looking over intensely. He was in his 40s.
Although I was wearing a buttoned up shirt, showing no cleavage whatsoever, I loosely wrapped my scarf around my neck, also covering my chest. I kept reading, and he kept staring. At the next stop a lot of people got out and even more came in. In between he quickly came over and took the newly empty seat opposite of me.
Only inches away he started grinning at me. I felt very uncomfortable, my eyes glued to the page. One stop before mine I had to get my coat on again and got up to make my way through the packed carriage.
Waiting for the train door to open I saw in the corner of my eye the man was still sitting down. I jumped out of the train and walked quickly upstairs, almost running. I still had a bad feeling, so instead of walking the rest of the way home, as I usually did, I turned the corner and went downstairs to another line to catch a different train for one more stop.
On reaching the platform, the man suddenly turned up next to me, walking along with the same, fast pace.
“Hey, wait!” he shouted at me in English. I realised ignoring him would no longer work, so I took out one of my earphones. Without stopping I said to him: “You make me feel uncomfortable. I’m sure you are a nice person and mean well, but can you please stop following me?”
“Hey, you speak English? It’s not a bad thing. We can talk.” he said with a dirty grin.
“Sorry, but I do not want to talk to you. Please leave me alone!” I replied slowing down next to two ladies in their 50s chatting. He was stood in front of me.
“You take this train, too? What direction? We can meet some time.”. He touched my arm. I answered: “No, I do not want to meet or talk to you. Leave me alone now!”
The train came rattling in. With my heart pumping I firmly walked around the intrusive man, followed the two ladies into the carriage and sat down with them next to the window.
When the train left the station I couldn’t tell if the man was still on the platform. For a while I was afraid he might be in a different carriage. When I got out at the next stop, I stood next to a group of young punks and only then I was brave enough to wait and see if the man was still following me. He wasn’t – I was alone again. Shaky and sweaty I walked home.
The next day I told my mostly male co-workers about the incident. They all said: “You shouldn’t have smiled at him when you first took off your coat.”
I never reported it nor told anyone else about it. They made me feel like it was my fault and that I should be ashamed.
It was not my fault and I no longer feel ashamed.
=====end of excerpt=======
Good for you, Kira. Here’s the first problem – girls like Kira are brought to be polite and civilized – but they live in a violent world. You notice that Kira’s response is mostly very polite – when confronted with a harassing, potentially violent, man. Given his behavior, one can only guess at how deeply the turd goes in his head regarding sexuality. I’m sure his reading of her smile was she must be fishing for a sexual encounter with a stranger, or maybe he thought she was a prostitute. Or maybe he thought that there wasn’t anything meant by her smile, but he thought he might be able to exploit her sexually or to bully her someway into talking to him. In any case, he decided to target her.
Obviously, through no fault of her own, Kira has lived in a very sheltered world. We can see this by her reaction here:
“I’m sure you are a nice person and mean well, but can you please stop following me?”
What?! Was this her head going into denial or did she really think an older man who is harassing and following her with a dirty grin is a “nice person who means well”? Did she think this because she had never had an experience of a threat or harassment from someone? And the fact that she is so polite!
I’m glad, albeit she was overly polite, that she repeatedly told the guy to leave her alone.
Then, not surprisingly, she tells of her co-workers’ reaction, blaming her.
“The next day I told my mostly male co-workers about the incident. They all said: “You shouldn’t have smiled at him when you first took off your coat.”
Well, it’s true, she shouldn’t have – because she was in a public place full of strangers. However, it was not her fault that she did. Had she been living in a decent society, she could have smiled without worries. But when you live in a world where people let others live “as they want”, that’s what happens. All the predators, harassers, LGBTs, and perverts live “as they want”, doing whatever they want, as long as they get away with it.
What consequences will this guy ever face over what he did? None. Especially now that such a long time has passed and whatever security video there might be of the incident has long been erased. And even if there was a video, and she denounced the man to authorities, what would they do? And if she went on national TV with her story, what retaliation could she expect later in life?
The silver lining in this case is that the newspaper offered a space and an opportunity for people like Kira to tell and therefore re-examine their harassment experiences. Now she has broken her silence and, most importantly, she was able to realize that it was not her fault. She herlself did nothing bad, starting with her innocent smile. But it’s just not something you can do.
Now, as a post-examination exercise, let’s imagine for a second that this man is bisexual and goes after young men and women. He’s a member therefore of the LGBT community who cries over and over again about how mistreated and discriminated they are in society. Really, oppressed people, are they? Let’s suppose he is heterosexual, but his perversion extends from having a dirty mind about women to also endorsing homosexuality. So he is a gay-friendly sexual harasser, potentially a rapist. A gay-friendly rapist! Were he to present himself as a candidate for a job, and mention he was gay-friendly and compete for the job against a person who was against normalizing homosexuality, most liberals would hands down give him the job. See, “equality” for sexuality turds is like that!
NYC Coughs Up $300K To Settle Gay Cop Sex Harassment Case
A claim of on-the-job sexual harassment has netted two police officers $300,000. The purported harasser: an openly gay male colleague in the New York Police Department.
The alleged harassment took place in 2005. A department trial conduced in 2008 found Lt. Kieran Crowe guilty of sexually harassing Sgt. Dominic Coppola and Sgt. Sean Gallagher, who had filed a complaint alleging that Crowe had made sexually explicit gestures with his hands and his tongue at the male officers. One of the manual gestures the officers complained about was Crowe allegedly rubbing his crotch in front of them.
Crowe testified that if he had rubbed his crotch, it was due to “medical conditions.” Testimony from a dermatologist confirmed that Crowe had suffered from jock itch.
However, that defense did not convince John Grappone, who served as the trial commissioner in the case. The trial ended with a guilty verdict for Crowe and an opinion stating that a body rash did not excuse conduct of the sort about which the officers had complained, including “extensive staring at crotches, masturbation gestures, tongue gestures and sighing sounds.”
As to other gestures, Crowe said that miming of masturbation may have occurred while he was engaged in a telephone conversation and felt that he was being “jerked around.”
Crowe’s sentence was a two-month suspension and a year of probation during which any infraction would have resulted in his firing. Crowe retired right after the trial, stating, “I vehemently deny these charges and I’m confident that my name will be cleared.”
Gallagher and Coppola pursued a civil suit, and were rewarded with a sum total of $300,000 by the city, according to a July 13 article in the New York Daily News. Gallagher was awarded $125,000, while $175,000 went to Coppola, the article said.
“He paid nothing, he did nothing, he admitted nothing,” Rae Koshetz, Crowe’s attorney, told The New York Daily News, adding, “If the city wants to pay these people, that’s their choice.”
Eric Sanders, the lawyer for Gallagher and Coppola, said that the case was “further proof that the once-silent issue of same-sex harassment is on the rise.” Indeed, it does appear that more men are coming forward to report instances of sexual harassment by male colleagues; a March 4 Associated Press article related that over a 19-year period, from 1990 through 2009, men filing sexual harassment claims rose from 8% of all such claims to 16%, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission said. Some of those claims said that female colleagues were the harassers, but most identified the perpetrators as male.
EEOC lawyer Ernest Haffner told the AP that, “It’s certainly possible that there’s more sexual harassment of men going on, but it could just be that more men are coming forward and complaining about it.”
The article noted that claims of male-on-male sexual harassment had risen following a ruling from the Supreme Court in 1998 that men were also protected by federal laws barring such behavior.
The more homosexuality is normalized, the more cases of same-sex harassment there are (this is not only an increase in reporting, which is also obviously true). The sad part is that only one in a million cases ever get justice. At least there is a little media exposure every now and then.
How long do we have to wait for the little propaganda stereotype of homosexuals as “victims of intolerance” to be exposed for what it is: a pack of lies?
‘,’Further proof that the once-silent issue of same-sex harassment is on the rise’,’0′,”,’publish’,’open’,’closed’,”,’further-proof-that-the-once-silent-issue-of-same-sex-harassment-is-on-the-rise’,”,”,’2010-07-25 23:44:09′,’2010-07-25 23:44:09′,”,’0′,’http://socimages.blogsome.com/2010/07/25/further-proof-that-the-once-silent-issue-of-same-sex-harassment-is-on-the-rise/’,’0′) ***51′,’1′,’2010-07-26 11:27:00′,’2010-07-26 11:27:00′,’
Who’s doing the harassing and the threats of illegal retributions? Homosexuality fundamentalists, of course.
Steps are being taken again in Washington state to protect the 138,000 signers of a petition for R-71, a referendum in opposition to legalization of same-sex “marriage.”
The referendum petition was designed to give Washington voters a chance to take a stand for traditional marriage. But proponents of homosexual marriage have been fighting all the way to the Supreme Court to unveil names and other information of petition signers.
Larry Stickney, president of Washington Values Alliance (WVA), explains that the high court sent part of the case back to the lower court, in effect saying, “’We’re not going to strike every petition drive in America from being able to exempt them from public exposure. But you’ve got a good point…on the harassment issue, on hot-button issues.’ So they said, ‘Go back to federal court, and let’s start this thing over again and argue to narrowly focus on petition drives that are controversial.’”
Stickney notes there is ample evidence that in some cases, signers’ information ought to be kept secret, but the opposition complains they have been treated rudely by proponents of traditional marriage.
“There’s a big difference between being treated rudely and having your lives threatened,” the WVA president contends. “That’s what happened with myself and Gary Randall from the Faith and Freedom Network.”
He says activists also threatened others with job losses and boycotts on business owners who supported the petition drive. Meanwhile, no date has been set for a hearing.
Job losses, huh? Unequal protection, discrimination, bigotry and intolerance by homosexuality fundamentalists.
And should we bring up “hate” by any chance?
‘,’Should petitioners’ info be kept secret to protect same from harassment and other illegal actions?’,’0′,”,’publish’,’open’,’closed’,”,’should-petitioners-info-be-kept-secret-to-protect-same-from-harassment-and-other-illegal-actions’,”,’ http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=1098652′,’2010-07-26 11:27:00′,’2010-07-26 11:27:00′,”,’0′,’http://socimages.blogsome.com/2010/07/26/should-petitioners-info-be-kept-secret-to-protect-same-from-harassment-and-other-illegal-actions/’,’0′) ***52′,’1′,’2010-07-26 11:54:15′,’2010-07-26 11:54:15′,’