I write these words burning with indignation in light of the truly sick, pro-pederasty comments that have surfaced in recent days. Will the left discipline two of its beloved stars, George Takei of Star Trek fame and Bill Maher of HBO renown, for their horrifying comments the same way the right disciplined Milo Yannappoulis for his?
As a result of some of Milo’s past comments getting more exposure, he was disinvited from speaking at CPAC, his book contract with Simon & Schuster was cancelled, and he resigned from being a senior editor at Breitbart (by his own choice, but obviously under duress). And all this happened despite Milo having a track record of exposing pedophiles and denouncing pedophilia, as he emphasized in his press conference on Tuesday.
Still, his lighthearted comments about being abused by a priest at the age of 13, along with other inappropriate remarks, were inexcusable and harmful, as he himself acknowledged, and it is right that he has suffered these penalties.
As for CPAC and Simon & Schuster and Breitbart, had they not responded decisively to Milo’s comments, their reputations would have been tarnished. (It was the conservative imprint of Simon & Schuster that had contracted Milo’s book.)
What will the left do now that George Takei’s pro-pederast comments on the Howard Stern show have surfaced, comments perhaps far worse than Milo’s? And how will the left respond to Bill Maher’s pro-pederast comments, certainly the worst of all?
This is the relevant text of Takei’s 2006 interview on Howard Stern as he described what happened to him at a summer camp when he was just 13:
Howard Stern: How were you alone? It’s summer camp.
George Takei: We were in the cabin.
Stern: And where were the other boys?
Takei: They were off hiking or something.
Robin Quivers: Doing little boy things.
Stern: Do you think subconsciously you stayed behind because you wanted to be alone with him [the 19-year-old-camp counselor]?
Takei: No, there was some kind of reason why I had to be there.
[…]
Stern: And he sat down and he touched you… Were you molested in a sense, because you were 13?
Takei: No, no. Cause I was kind of, you know—well, I thought he was pretty attractive.
Quivers: And you wanted to know why you felt this way.
Takei: Yes.
[…]
Quivers: Now wait a moment. He starts touching you how?
Stern: I don’t know if I need to hear all this.
Quivers: Does he put a hand on your knee? Or does he put his arm around your shoulder?
Takei: He puts his arm around my shoulders.
Stern: Oh yeah.
Takei: Then he started, you know, touching the private parts.
Robin Quivers: Ahh! Was he gazing into your eyes the whole time? Was he saying anything?
Takei: Oh, he was telling me about, you know, how life works.
[Takei then explains in detail what took place sexually between them.]
Takei: It was both wonderful and scary and kind of intimidating, and delightful. I mean, all those opposites.
To every parent and grandparent reading these words, think about a 19-year-old camp counselor, supposedly a trustworthy figure, doing this to your 13-year-old child. Is your blood boiling like mine is? And how do you feel about Takei’s positive description of it all?
Despite this interview, which was certainly not done in the closet (no pun intended), Takei has become a major voice in LGBT activism, and to my knowledge, there was no uproar after the interview aired. And how common are events like this in the gay community, providing an entry way into an active homosexual lifestyle? (More on this subject shortly in a forthcoming article; for now, see here and here.) Milo has every right to call-out the double standards.
As for Bill Maher, Joe Concha reports on The Hill that, “A video surfaced Wednesday showing HBO ‘Real Time’ host Bill Maher condoning a sexual relationship between a 35-year-old female teacher and a 12-year-old male student that resulted in the woman getting pregnant twice before eventually being jailed.”
What makes this all the more ironic is that Maher has taken credit for the fall of Milo, and now the accuser finds himself accused, and rightly so.
As Concha notes, in the 1998 clip from his ABC show “Politically Incorrect,” Maher “was referring to the story of a woman named Mary Kay Letourneau who was impregnated twice by student Vili Fualaau, starting when he was 12.”
Of this abusive relationship he said, “The teacher from Seattle is in jail because she is in love. That’s how I view it.”
He continued, “I admit that it’s unorthodox. She’s 35, the boy is 14. He was younger when they started. But she is pregnant again. That was the story this week. This is the second child by this boy. They are keeping the mother in jail because she won’t conform to what society feels should be the perfect American family.”
These are sick, sick comments reflecting sick, sick morals, and if there are not substantial penalties for these comments – even 19 years later – then Milo would be completely vindicated in claiming that the attacks against him (as an openly gay conservative) were nothing more than “a cynical media witch hunt from people who don’t care about children.”
So, what will the media do now, the same media that wanted to crucify Milo for his inexcusable comments?
If it fails to act in a clear and concerted way, it will only expose its own moral bankruptcy. Or perhaps, even more revealingly, it will demonstrate that strong morals are only expected from the right, not the left.
We shall see.
