Thread: S.F. gay rights advocate arrested over child porn

Originally Posted by SFJEFF

Sandusky has been married to his wife for 46 years thus heterosexual.

Then all bisexuals are really heterosexuals. Have I got that about right?

Originally Posted by Perriquine

What basis do you have for saying he enjoys gay sex?
.

Excellent points.

Let me go further- to call what Sandusky did "gay sex" is the equivelent of calling a man raping a 10 year old girl 'heterosexual sex".

Let me ask all of you heterosexuals out there- are you sexually attracted to 10 year old girls? If not- how can that be heterosexual sex?

Pedophiles are sexually attracted to children- non-pedophiles are not. It is not that hard of a concept. If you are confused, look at who you are attracted to, go from there.

Originally Posted by yguy

Then all bisexuals are really heterosexuals. Have I got that about right?

I was actually being somewhat ironic- I actually realize that saying Sandusky is heterosexual just because he was married is as absurd as calling him gay because he raped 10 year old boys.

In actuality, how pedophiles identify themselves when they aren't raping children is immaterial- straight husband, gay activist- they are all pedophiles and I hope they are convicted and locked away

Perriquine: "What basis do you have for saying he (Sandusky) enjoys gay sex?"

You're joking, right? He criminally assaults, at obviously great risk, young boys and has sex with them as a gay person would and you are under the impression he didn't like it. How strange. Are you going to now take the position that Geoffrey Dahlmer was repulsed at eating human flesh?

Originally Posted by Perriquine

No, he was perpetrating sexual abuse on children who were male, thus: a child molester and likely a pedophile..

Revealing how that only works when a pedophile is labeled as gay, but they dont have any problem with labeling him a heterosexual. Pedophillia becomes a sexual orientation unto itself whenever its men diddling boys.

Originally Posted by dixon76710

Revealing how that only works when a pedophile is labeled as gay, but they dont have any problem with labeling him a heterosexual. Pedophillia becomes a sexual orientation unto itself whenever its men diddling boys.

Because of people with AGENDAS such as your own, it is practically necessary to emphasize or point out directly... that pedophilia isn't a "gay" thing per se.

Certain women out here are molesting little boys; I wonder how much that happens? And we don't even have to talk about the grown-up nasty, evil men who rape little girls.

I think it is DISGUSTING that people with views like yours, actually allow more of the abuse and molestations to occur undetected... because you DISTORT reality with your views and cause others to look in the wrong places.

NO ONE should tolerate this BS you keep putting up here. It's so destructive.

Originally Posted by Johnny-C

Because of people with AGENDAS such as your own, it is practically necessary to emphasize or point out directly... that pedophilia isn't a "gay" thing per se.

No one claimed it was a gay thing. Revealing that still, you felt the need to point that out. The lady doth protest too much, me thinks.

Originally Posted by Johnny-C

I think it is DISGUSTING that people with views like yours,.

What views would that be? My opposition to pedophillia?

Originally Posted by SFJEFF

Excellent points.

Let me go further- to call what Sandusky did "gay sex" is the equivelent of calling a man raping a 10 year old girl 'heterosexual sex".

Let me ask all of you heterosexuals out there- are you sexually attracted to 10 year old girls? If not- how can that be heterosexual sex?

Pedophiles are sexually attracted to children- non-pedophiles are not. It is not that hard of a concept. If you are confused, look at who you are attracted to, go from there.

Replace "heterosexual" with "straight" and I would be in agreement; heterosexual and homosexual can be validly used without specifically referencing orientation/identify, whereas "gay" and "straight" really shouldn't be.

To me, "gay sex" is kind of like the phrase "gay marriage", in that both are misnomers. The kind of sex a person has may be driven by their sexual orientation, but not necessarily. Likewise, one's sexual orientation isn't an absolute driver in who one choses to marry. There are straight men who have derived pleasure from homosexual sex without it meaning they are primarily attracted to other men or are even bisexual in orientation, and there are gay men who have married a person of the opposite sex in a marriage of convenience because of the law's previous criminalization of same-sex behavior and the lack of legal recognition of same-sex marriages.

Originally Posted by Johnny-C

Because of people with AGENDAS such as your own, it is practically necessary to emphasize or point out directly... that pedophilia isn't a "gay" thing per se.

Certain women out here are molesting little boys; I wonder how much that happens? And we don't even have to talk about the grown-up nasty, evil men who rape little girls.

I think it is DISGUSTING that people with views like yours, actually allow more of the abuse and molestations to occur undetected... because you DISTORT reality with your views and cause others to look in the wrong places.

NO ONE should tolerate this BS you keep putting up here. It's so destructive.

no kidding pedophiles are not all gay nor are they all hetero

In this case, all of the abused were boys; thus gay sex. if they were girls it would be hetero sex. It does not change that it was rape and pedophilia. The sex just happened to be gay. Why does that bother your group so much? It doesn't make the guy any more or less a sick mofo. Not one of the insulted few within this thread has even IMPLIED that being gay makes you a pedophile. I have never seen people get their bowels in such an uproar over factually correct statments like I've seen those in this thread have done.

Originally Posted by Perriquine

Replace "heterosexual" with "straight" and I would be in agreement; heterosexual and homosexual can be validly used without specifically referencing orientation/identify, whereas "gay" and "straight" really shouldn't be.

To me, "gay sex" is kind of like the phrase "gay marriage", in that both are misnomers. The kind of sex a person has may be driven by their sexual orientation, but not necessarily. Likewise, one's sexual orientation isn't an absolute driver in who one choses to marry. There are straight men who have derived pleasure from homosexual sex without it meaning they are primarily attracted to other men or are even bisexual in orientation, and there are gay men who have married a person of the opposite sex in a marriage of convenience because of the law's previous criminalization of same-sex behavior and the lack of legal recognition of same-sex marriages.

ahhhhh, light shine upon me. The issue here is semantics. When 2 males are engaged in sex, be it forcefully or consentual what is it called? If it is not gay sex then is it homosexual sex? Sandusky chose boys vs girls for a reason.