Normalization

Notice the “willing children” part. Of course, the article has been scrubbed since the original publication but it tells us a lot about the mentality behind this initiative. That it’s now OK to say this kind of thing is disturbing on a really terrifying level.

After seeing this sort of thing, the Q people don’t look as weird anymore.

8 thoughts on “Normalization”

  1. I read about this bill a while ago. It is real and its stated intended purpose is to bring gay sex into parity with heterosexual sex. So I guess if it was vaginal sex under the same circumstances, the penalty could have been lighter than if oral/anal sex. Supposedly it covers from age 15 and up (the older party could be up to 25 and escape “sex offender” status at judges discretion). However, age of consent is 18, so no such thing as “willing” partner. The next step is to lower age of consent to about 14. I suspect the real purpose is continuing the sexualization of children at earlier ages.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. There are definitely forces on the left pushing for the sexualization of children. However, at the same time there are forces there pushing to, if anything, raise the age of consent (see all the dumb sex panics about adults having sex with younger adults.) I wonder why this is and how these forces will ever be reconciled. What the forces converge towards is protecting children (and young adults) of a certain social class while allowing and condoning the exploitation of lower class children (moreso than is already the case), but I can’t imagine what this would look like.

      Like

  2. “Under current law — which Wiener, who is gay, describes as “horrific homophobia” — a straight 24-year-old male who has sex with a 15-year-old girl can avoid being put on the sex-offender list if the judge feels the situation does not deserve it, but a gay man in the same scenario with a similar-aged boy would not be given the same option.”

    I’m all for making the laws the same for gay and straight sex. I’m even in favor of close in age exemptions (an 18 year old should not be in trouble for having sex with a 17 year old.) But two wrongs don’t make a right; adults in their 20s who have sex with 14 year olds should be on the sex offender registry! Tighten up the laws there, don’t extend this leniency to gay sex. Gay adolescent boys are already very vulnerable to being sexually abused. Anyone who loves gay people should want to protect gay teenagers, not coddle the predators who abuse them.

    https://thefederalist.com/2020/08/12/no-california-shouldnt-decriminalize-adult-sex-with-14-year-olds/

    Like

    1. “The bill would not shield anyone from the requirement to register as a sex offender. Rather, it would leave that decision, in eligible cases, to the discretion of the presiding judge.” So it would, in eligible cases where the judge thinks it’s appropriate…shield some people from the requirement to register as a sex offender. I fail to see how the claim was proven “mostly false.”

      Like

Leave a Reply to David Gendron Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.