Foley-Folly
Was just reading about the Mark Foley scandal. I read through all of the available transcripts of the supposedly sexually explicit emails and SMSs. Uh, where is the gross delinquency here? Has anyone actually read this stuff? It is totally vanilla and not, in any way, shocking. There is one correspondence between Foley and a “teenager” where they discuss maybe having dinner together sometime, but that, in order to drink, they may have to do it at Foley’s place. Ok. That means the guy is under 21. And where is the scandal there?
I know, I know. The legal age for consent is 18. That means that, because the law has told us that this is normal and right, we believe it to be so. But, how many straight guys have married 16-year-old brides in the past? In some African tribes, 16 may seem a bit old to be joined with a man and working on a family. The law of consent is 16 in Germany, whether you’re straight or gay. In Holland, it is 14, I believe, as long as the family knows about it.
Of course, Foley was wrong if he was trying to pursue these people when there was any kind of professional relationship involved. Sexual harassment is a serious crime because it always has to do with someone trying to use his professional standing to get what he/she wants. In other words, it has to do with abuse of hierarchy.
And, if Foley was knowingly pursuing guys on the Internet that were legally under the age of consent, that is, also, obviously illegal. Whether that sort of thing needs to be brought before the public’s attention, though, I am not sure. I do not think that because a guy pursues someone who is 16, he should automatically be considered a “sex predator” as the blogosphere has labeled him.
Let’s be frank with each other here, ok? Some people are sexually mature at the age of 16. Some aren’t. We all know what the legal cut-off is. But, if a man pursues something with someone who is 16 and sexually mature for his or her age, we cannot and should not compare that with someone who pursues pre-pubescent kids. One is a bit out of the ordinary and unusual, one is simply sick and wrong.
posted by He sings @ 9:44 AM
6 Comments:
The can of worms is now open. Logic and experience play a minimal role in the debate regarding former Congressman Foley. The media (and as a result the public) views this as a sick pervert trying to get down the pants of a young man, even if he is able to consent legally. While I feel Foley's actions are at the minimum an arrogant abuse of hierarchy (which you addressed and which runs rampant in D.C. by all accounts), the public court of opinion will crucify him not because of the age of the man (or boy as some would have you believe), but because of the gender of the page. Because Foley was pursuing a male, he will be demonized by his own district and across the nation, even by the overwhelmingly liberal media here in the U.S. Like it or not, the fact that the page was a male plays more of a role than his age or maturity. The States have a long way to go before the homophobia is exterminated.
I
Joining the dialogue:
It's not fair to conflate homophpobia with the notion that making oevertures to a younger (underage) person is somehow morally reprehensible. Would the reaction have been very different if he had been courting underage females instead?
I think that relationships between older and perhaps much younger people can be non-exploitative, however we are talking about a Republican in a very conservative milieu who was obviously not "out" to his colleagues, or perhaps anyone else. I can't help but see a tinge of victimization/ exploitation about his actions. In other words, if he weren't (presumably) frustrated about his sexuality and engaged in adult relationships, would he feel compelled to connect with teens?
Joining the dialogue:
It's not fair to conflate homophpobia with the notion that making oevertures to a younger (underage) person is somehow morally reprehensible. Would the reaction have been very different if he had been courting underage females instead?
I think that relationships between older and perhaps much younger people can be non-exploitative, however we are talking about a Republican in a very conservative milieu who was obviously not "out" to his colleagues, or perhaps anyone else. I can't help but see a tinge of victimization/ exploitation about his actions. In other words, if he weren't (presumably) frustrated about his sexuality and engaged in adult relationships, would he feel compelled to connect with teens?
Joining the dialogue:
It's not fair to conflate homophpobia with the notion that making oevertures to a younger (underage) person is somehow morally reprehensible. Would the reaction have been very different if he had been courting underage females instead?
I think that relationships between older and perhaps much younger people can be non-exploitative, however we are talking about a Republican in a very conservative milieu who was obviously not "out" to his colleagues, or perhaps anyone else. I can't help but see a tinge of victimization/ exploitation about his actions. In other words, if he weren't (presumably) frustrated about his sexuality and engaged in adult relationships, would he feel compelled to connect with teens?
We deny adults sexual access to those under the age of 16 (or 18, depending on where you are) because it protects the majority of teenagers, who would be adversely affected by such a relationship, without inconveniencing the majority of adults. To cry about not being allowed to have sex with a 15 year old is like complaining about the lack of chopped nuts on your icecream sundae. You still have the rest of the sundae (and anyone over the age of 16 or 18) to enjoy. Act your age and get over it, people.
And let's face it - no adult, despite what they may say, wants to have sex with a teenager because it's a natural expression of their deep and complex relationship. It's either an unhealthy relationship or simple lust, neither of which should be encouraged at the best of times.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home