Quantcast

«

»

Feb 15 2012

CPAC: Kevin Jackson accuses left of “normalizing pedophilia”

This is ridiculous. Kevin Jackson, a Tea Party activist invited to speak at the Conservative Political Action Conference, claims that the political Left is not only successful, but they’re successful because they’re uncivil, and they’ve done things like redefine pedophilia.

Right Wing Watch suggests they’re trying to conflate the gay rights movement with pedophilia, and that this blatant falsehood is another salvo in that conflation. I’d personally love to know where exactly this guy got his “facts”, so we could fact-check them. And I’d love to know where they think the left is anything but wishy-washy, letting the rampant ideologues on the political right control the dialog and how every single fight is framed.

Besides, we’re not the ones trying to redefine pedophilia, especially not to protect those pedophile priests.

14 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    Crys

    I think they’ve been hanging out on NAMBLA’s homepage a little too much

  2. 2
    leftwingfox

    Yeah, I somehow doubt the MRAs justifying their ogling nude kids at Reddit are radical leftists:

    http://manboobz.com/2012/02/13/reddits-post-pedogeddon-backlash-part-one-rbeatingwomen-weighs-in-on-the-pedo-ban/

  3. 3
    Aratina Cage

    Yeah, I was going to say that Bill Donohue is not normally considered part of the left.

  4. 4
    Jason Thibeault

    Oi, holy hell, I haven’t read Manboobz in a few days. Like I needed that blood pressure spike with work being what it is.

    I knew r/beatingwomen existed, but to see their proponents laud the idea of pedophilia because it’s a way that men can impose their will on others — “hello privilege! Hello patriarchy! I’ll do whatever I can to keep you going. Including beat women and jack to children.”

  5. 5
    MikeMa

    Jackson says this shit (as do others) because their audience is either to stupid or too power mad to refute it. Or both.

  6. 6
    Chiroptera

    …but they’re successful because they’re uncivil….

    OW! I just lost an eye from my exploding irony meter!

  7. 7
    Marshall

    @6

    You aren’t alone.

    The right has used tricky redefinitions and wording for years; Patriot Act, Death Tax, hell at this very CPAC there was a panel that suggested they start calling the contraception mandate an ‘abortion mandate’. It’s been a part of their toolkit for decades, so I’m going to call this a terrible combination of projection and… What’s that other thing they do a lot? Oh yeah, LYING.

  8. 8
    Marshall

    @2

    Holy shit. I suppose I should have seen enough of this crap to not be shocked anymore, but I am. I HOPE I never reach the point where I’m not shocked by this kind of thing, that it shocks me is good. Means I still have empathy, means I still have motivation to fight against this kind of thing.

    But wow, that’s some terrible stuff.

  9. 9
    leftwingfox

    Yeah, it really is shocking. And here’s what gets me, even with the evidence falling so clearly on one side of the debate and the vile rhetoric piled so high on the other, the rhetoric is winning. After all, It’s the Republican presidential candidates go running to the CPAC group to suck up to sexists, racists, bigots and theocrats, while most of the Dems avoid even moderate groups like the Netroot Nation or Yearly Kos.

    There’s a clear moral high ground people… take it for crying out loud!

  10. 10
    Marshall

    Because everything has shifted to the right such that Democrats are going out of their way not to appear too ‘liberal’. The Tea Party, marginal as it has now become, is largely responsible for that. Two predictions:

    1: Things will shift back to the left (we can already see this happening), but not as quickly as they shifted to the right, and probably not by the same amount. The Tea Party has lost a lot of brand power after the 2010 takeover of the House didn’t work out the way people expected or wanted.

    2: The Republican party will, as a result of this, find themselves on the wrong side of enough issues that even the Republican base won’t be able to get behind them. I think this to be the case because they seem to be COMMITTED to pushing even farther to the right on things like birth control, even when they KNOW that the public is against them.

    But maybe I’m being too optimistic; after all, the Republicans have a pretty substantial propaganda apparatus and aren’t at all afraid to lie. At the same time, Democrats have shown themselves to be, by and large, WAY too fucking polite in dealing with lying assholes. This needs to change, because I’m tired of seeing the Dems constantly bending over backwards to appease their opponents. All that does is grant legitimacy to the rhetoric they’ve been employing, which as you correctly noted is winning this fight.

  11. 11
    carolw

    “That’s nutty!” He doesn’t sound that upset. Nutty? I’d use much stronger language if I were truly shocked and offended and not just blowing a dog-whistle. Oh wait…
    He got his facts out of thin air.

  12. 12
    Francisco Bacopa

    WTF is going on here? Liberals are all about meaningful consent. That’s why liberals are uncool with pedophilia, and also almost entirely uncool with hebephilia, though we don’t want 15 year olds who sext 18 year olds to both be put on a sexual offender register.

    These people simply don’t understand consent, only acquiesence or submission. Things are made right and wrong by our supposed asskicking God. They are less clear than we are on issues of right and wrong.

    And did God ever way that underage sex was wrong? Where is this. I reckon the captured virgins and rapable slaves in the OT might have been quite young.

  13. 13
    Chiroptera

    Francisco Bacopa, #12: Liberals are all about meaningful consent.

    You are correct, conservatives don’t understand meaningful consent. That requires maturity, and the conservatives threw out their last grown up a couple of years ago.

  14. 14
    John Horstman

    He’s talking about the phrase “intergenerational sex/sexuality/sexual relationships”, which describes sexual relationships between people of a great enough age difference to belong to different generations. It’s primarily used in the context of adult sexual relationships with a large age gap between the partners (something that’s still not normalized, though it’s far less normal for much older women to be dating younger men than the opposite), though it could accurately be applied to a sexual relationship between a young child and an adult. That doesn’t make that relationship not rape, as the inherent power differentials still make the child unable to given any sort of meaningful consent, and I’m not really sure how having multiple words that can describe something (for example “wet” and “liquid” both used to describe water) means that one is “redefining” anything, but whatever. Maybe he thinks a 40-year-old having sex with an 18-year-old counts as “pedophilia”, in which case he’s the one redefining the terms. :-/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite="" class=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>