Captain Obvious: Sorting Out Sandusky

This post shouldn't have to be written. But the truth is, posts like it aren't written often enough. On Friday, Jerry Sandusky, the assistant coach at Penn State, was found guilty on 45 of 48 charges for sexually assaulting many, many boys over the years. His guilty verdict was cheered by many on the scene, and my immediate response to the news was, "good."

So, why a Captain Obvious post? Because though 99.999% of sentient humans take this news as a good thing, a goodly portion of those people equate Jerry Sandusky with ordinary gay people. He's not. Sexual orientation is a continuum of sexual attraction from heterosexual to bisexual to homosexual, with shades of grey in-between (and of course, the rare asexual, outside the scale). Pedophilia and pederasty describe a psychiatric disorder wherein a person is sexually aroused by under aged--and unable to consent--children. There are straight pedophiles and pederasts, and there are gay ones. Oddly enough, many child abusers often pick targets that are the opposite sex from their adult relationships. This is the case with Sandusky. Or perhaps not. Many predators just need prey, and Sandusky had access to boys. Who knows what his other predilections might be.

Good luck, short eyes. Image from LA Times.

So, calling Sandusky "gay," or trying to make him representative of all gay people isn't just wrong, it's hideously, unfairly and maliciously wrong. It is also dangerous, and I don't just mean to the gay people you're slandering. If you're got it in your head that it's the gays you've got to watch out for; if you're keeping your kids away from their favorite gay uncle because you can't separate concepts adequately. . .you may be letting your guard down to the actual predators. Married, family men, respected in the community like Sandusky.

Meanwhile, the idiots at FreeRepublic, the tea baggin', Palin-lovin' outpost of the interwebs, can be depended upon to take this wrong-headed thinking to its zenith (or nadir, depending upon your point of view). They run every pederast/pedophile/kiddie porn/you name it fetish under the badly named "homosexual agenda" portion of their stomach-churning site. When my conservative mother assures me that Republicans aren't homophobic, by-and-large, I think of FreeRepublic, and realize that Mom is hopelessly naive. Here are just a few of their comments. The asterisks mask a few words that they actually feel free to type out.

[Excerpts]

"Isn’t men liking men considered normal now? S/"

Editor: Boys, idiot.

"Jerry, Jerry, you're a fairy, A fan of banana and cherry, Go to jail, For a century! A little trick with Dick."
 
Ed.: And that, ladies and gentlemen, is an example of "conservative humor."


"FNS and CNN anchors, both sex perverts, talking about another sex pervert committing anal rape of boys is too much."

Ed.: See what he did there? Anderson Cooper and Shepard Smith are somehow equivalent to Sandusky. Nice. Now, for a doozy:

"Great. Now if they can just quit promoting in schools the idea that “sodomy is good” to the children, so they are less likely to be victims. Sodomites are twisted and have a sick reality, which knows no sexual morality. They misuse their body parts in debasing ways. There is no logic or morality—so age makes no difference. Pederasty and homosexuality has been intrinsically linked since Ancient Greece and the Samurai. It is a learned behavior. Schools intentionally promote Sodomy in Sex Ed (they teach anal sex) and by having “Day of Silence” and putting the word gay with “Pride”. Sodomy is a Vice and children need to learn Good and Evil by the Standard of the Bible—since our Natural Rights come from God, so they do not fall victim to these people who have no sexual boundaries and will use them. The homosexual reality is that debasing acts are “love”, which is the slippery slope to any debasing act-—even that with children—since “self pleasure” is their only criteria for “good”.

Get perverts out of the schools. -—like Kevin Jennings. Better yet, get your children OUT of public schools. They are promoting evil to children—to normalize the debasing and dysfunctional lifestyles which lead to a socialist state."

Ed.: The stupid. It burns! No, jackass, you're wrong about almost everything you've said. But the key chink in your screed is your "slippery slope" comment. You're not even smart enough to know that it is the name of a logical fallacy. One of the main ones.

"Wait a fews years as this nation sinks further into immorality....this behavior will become legal and protected."

Ed.: No. It won't. Rape and molestation are crimes on people against their will. The only time I've seen any otherwise rational person argue against protections against rape, it was Republicans trying to change it to just "forcible" rape, whatever that means.

"Just more proof that homosexual fa**ots have no business in leadership positions."

Ed.: See? Told you there'd be asterisks! Offensive, wrong and redundant. The FReeper trifecta!


"Or be able to adopt!"

Ed.: Okay, moron, Sandusky was a married heterosexual, as far as we know. How exactly would your knee-jerk reaction have stopped him?

And on that note, we have the lone, sane FReeper, who answered that last bit better than me. Credit where it's due:

"The problem with your statement as it pertains to this case was that there was no evidence that Sanusky ever lived an openly “homosexual” or “fa**ot” lifestyle outside of molesting young boys which was done in secret and not openly. Sandusky was never, as I understand ever interested in having sex with other adult men, only in having sex with children who happened to be male. A male pedophile who prefers having sex with female children is none the less still a pedophile and just as sick, twisted and evil.
Barring openly homosexuals from leadership positions would not have prevented someone like Sandusky from doing what he did as he was not an openly homosexual man who had sex with other adult men. He lived as a straight man, a pillar of his community, someone well respected in his community and someone that even his neighbors and close friends, some who are deeply religious, had no idea of his perversions, yet he was someone who secretly preyed on vulnerable children for years." --by MD Expat in PA

There is much, much more. But for once, I'm going to give a FReeper the last word.  Source.

UPDATE: For Dan, my friend at the conservative LasVegasBadger, I do not think that FreeRepublic represents all or most Republicans. But they are a very vocal, and unfortunately these days, heeded force, the core of the tea party. Dan, you keep me on my toes.