In The News Today...

That's upselling. Not a conspiracy.

Quote: Gandler

It was pretty clear for the GA case he was fired for being gay.

Shortly after his employer discovered he was a member of a gay softball club he was fired.

Very highly awarded and praised worker, until he joined a public group where people saw his orientation. From everything I can find, he never brought it up in work, and until people saw him join the softball team (outside of work hours) most assumed he was straight..... So no, nothing to do with talking about sex or behaving flamboyantly at work.

Many people here seem to have the Hollywood perception of gay people (flamboyant, loud, pitched-voices dramatic, etc...). The majority of gay men, you would never know unless you knew them personally.... You probably have been working with some gay men your whole life and never noticed.... Its a false stereotype...

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/15/us/gay-transgender-workers-supreme-court.html
"The first case was filed by Gerald Bostock, a gay man who was fired from a government program that helped neglected and abused children in Clayton County, Ga., just south of Atlanta, after he joined a gay softball league."

"a gay man who was fired from a government program that helped neglected and abused children"

I won't defend his being fired just for being gay, but I can't help but notice the situation. A straight man in a program to help neglected and abused girls would be able to get himself in trouble pretty quick. If an organization had a rule that they only wanted women in the latter situation, it'd get no objection from me, although abuse would still be possible. I had an acquaintance with a lesbian who volunteered to help rape victims, and I went from admiring that to wondering if I should when I realized she was cruising for partners there.

No, you can't fire people for just being gay, but I would say something might be wrong with your background checks if you are hiring gays without knowing it for an organization like that. Sorry.

Quote: odiousgambit

"a gay man who was fired from a government program that helped neglected and abused children"

I won't defend his being fired just for being gay, but I can't help but notice the situation. A straight man in a program to help neglected and abused girls would be able to get himself in trouble pretty quick. If an organization had a rule that they only wanted women in the latter situation, it'd get no objection from me, although abuse would still be possible. I had an acquaintance with a lesbian who volunteered to help rape victims, and I went from admiring that to wondering if I should when I realized she was cruising for partners there.

No, you can't fire people for just being gay, but I would say something might be wrong with your background checks if you are hiring gays without knowing it for an organization like that. Sorry.

That is an insane thing to say, essentially you sare saying that he was fired for being suspected of abusing kids. Zero evidence or even allegations of anything like that...

Also, the majority of pedophiles are straight.


This is another dog whistle the far right uses to imply that gay people are more likley to abuse kids, also commonly used when talking about Boy Scout leaders....

Quote: Gandler

Also, the majority of pedophiles are straight.

Nope. If a male goes for sex with another male he is GAY. Age of the other male does not matter.

Quote:

This is another dog whistle the far right uses to imply that gay people are more likley to abuse kids, also commonly used when talking about Boy Scout leaders....

Gay scout leaders abused kids. Major settlement going on now with it. It is why the BSA for years banned gay scoutmasters.

You would not see straight males being a scoutmaster for the Girl Scouts for the simple reason that you do not want the chance of a mature guy taking advantage of a young woman. So why does this not apply to gays when they will be around young men? (e.g.: Sandusky.)

Simple common sense.

Quote: Gandler

That is an insane thing to say, essentially you sare saying that he was fired for being suspected of abusing kids. Zero evidence or even allegations of anything like that...

Also, the majority of pedophiles are straight.


This is another dog whistle the far right uses to imply that gay people are more likley to abuse kids, also commonly used when talking about Boy Scout leaders....

Duffman has this fringe belief that straight men can’t be pedophiles. Only gay men can be.

Seriously.

Try to get him to call Jeffrey Epstein a pedophile, he won’t do it.

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: Gandler

Also, the majority of pedophiles are straight.

Nope. If a male goes for sex with another male he is GAY. Age of the other male does not matter.

Gay scout leaders abused kids. Major settlement going on now with it. It is why the BSA for years banned gay scoutmasters.

You would not see straight males being a scoutmaster for the Girl Scouts for the simple reason that you do not want the chance of a mature guy taking advantage of a young woman. So why does this not apply to gays when they will be around young men? (e.g.: Sandusky.)

Simple common sense.

I am an Eagle Scout and well aware of the incidents.

The vast majority were straight they were married with kids (hence why they were scoutmasters)......

Random gay men with no children don't randomly apply to be Scoutmasters.... Generally Scoutmasters in a troop have kids in that troop.... There are some exceptions where people stay after their kids leave and just continue to do it, but generally that is the case....

Also, all of these historic incidents occurred when BSA has a No-Gay policy.... So even if your hypothesis was correct (its not) a No-Gay policy does nothing to decrease the level of pedophiles. It goes back to what I said, most pedophiles are straight, and opportunistic, they took advantage of boys because they were easy targets when they were alone....

Quote: Gandler

I am an Eagle Scout and well aware of the incidents.

The vast majority were straight they were married with kids (hence why they were scoutmasters)......

Gays often have wives and even kids. Called a "Beard." That they abused males makes them gay by definition.

Quote:

Random gay men with no children don't randomly apply to be Scoutmasters.... Generally Scoutmasters in a troop have kids in that troop.... There are some exceptions where people stay after their kids leave and just continue to do it, but generally that is the case....

Then why were gays so against the ban? They would not be becoming scoutmasters anyhow by that logic.

Quote:

Also, all of these historic incidents occurred when BSA has a No-Gay policy.... So even if your hypothesis was correct (its not) a No-Gay policy does nothing to decrease the level of pedophiles. It goes back to what I said, most pedophiles are straight, and opportunistic, they took advantage of boys because they were easy targets when they were alone....

You claim they are straight. But a guy going with another male is by definition homosexual/gay. It is science! Why do you deny science?

Rock Hudson had many love scenes with females. He was still gay. Gays will go with women when it suits their needs.

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: Gandler

I am an Eagle Scout and well aware of the incidents.

The vast majority were straight they were married with kids (hence why they were scoutmasters)......

Gays often have wives and even kids. Called a "Beard." That they abused males makes them gay by definition.



Then why were gays so against the ban? They would not be becoming scoutmasters anyhow by that logic.



You claim they are straight. But a guy going with another male is by definition homosexual/gay. It is science! Why do you deny science?

Rock Hudson had many love scenes with females. He was still gay. Gays will go with women when it suits their needs.

That's not how it works. Pedophiles are gender neutral in their victims. Abusing a boy does not make somebody "gay" it makes them a sex offender. Again, they tend to be opportunistic.


Abuse rates are way down. Practically zero, AFTER the gay ban was lifted. So yes, correlation does not prove causation, but more gays = less abuse.

We are against the ban because gay couples can have adopted kids and if they are married they should have a right to be Scoutmasters.



Again molesting somebody does not make you gay or straight, that is just an absurd statement and not grounded in any science.

Here is a hard stat: Repeal of gay ban= decrease in abuse.


The conspiracy that gay men get married just to join BSA is absurd...

Quote: Gandler

That's not how it works. Pedophiles are gender neutral in their victims. Abusing a boy does not make somebody "gay" it makes them a sex offender. Again, they tend to be opportunistic.

Yeah, no. How many females have been involved in the Catholic Priest abuse scandal? How many Girl Scouts abused?

They are not "gender neutral." They generally go after boys/youths and go after ones that are easy targets. If you want to call them a "gay sex offender" then fine. But they are gay. Quit thinking gays are incapable of this. They are. EB has pointed out more than once they would joke about turning teenage boys out.

Quote: Gandler

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: Gandler

I am an Eagle Scout and well aware of the incidents.

The vast majority were straight they were married with kids (hence why they were scoutmasters)......

Gays often have wives and even kids. Called a "Beard." That they abused males makes them gay by definition.



Then why were gays so against the ban? They would not be becoming scoutmasters anyhow by that logic.



You claim they are straight. But a guy going with another male is by definition homosexual/gay. It is science! Why do you deny science?

Rock Hudson had many love scenes with females. He was still gay. Gays will go with women when it suits their needs.

That's not how it works. Pedophiles are gender neutral in their victims. Abusing a boy does not make somebody "gay" it makes them a sex offender. Again, they tend to be opportunistic.


Abuse rates are way down. Practically zero, AFTER the gay ban was lifted. So yes, correlation does not prove causation, but more gays = less abuse.

We are against the ban because gay couples can have adopted kids and if they are married they should have a right to be Scoutmasters.



Again molesting somebody does not make you gay or straight, that is just an absurd statement and not grounded in any science.

Here is a hard stat: Repeal of gay ban= decrease in abuse.


The conspiracy that gay men get married just to join BSA is absurd...

Happily, I never did research on this subject... but.... when you say "Pedophiles are gender neutral", I find that hard to believe! I would have thought there would be 3 types... those that molest boys, those that molest girls, and those that molest both. Kind of how there are straights, gays, and bi-sexuals? Are you trying to say that ALL pedophiles will molest whatever is available to them?

As far as 'the majority are straight', what about the growing number of men and women who 'come out as gay' after spending the first 4 or 5 decades of their life in a stright relationship, with no gay activity ? So were they gay the whole time? Meaning that once the 'straight' man molests the 8 year old boy, he is no longer straight? I think that is what AZ is referring to.

The silliest thing you write is trying to attach a causal relationship to the BSA allowing gays and molestation rates being down. How about the honest answer, in that now parents and their kids are much more aware of the possibility of bad scoutmasters, priests, teachers, etc.., and the kids are actively taught what to look for and report?

Also, I have no idea if this is true.... but can anyone be a scoutmaster? Do you have to have a child of yours in the group? Can you have had a DUI conviction and still be a scoutmaster?