Report: Mike McQueary in protective custody, won’t coach again

posted at 8:28 pm on November 11, 2011 by Allahpundit

There aren’t many bad decisions in life that are so bad you can never walk away from them. But there are a few.

According to PennLive.com, one of the PSU coaches gathered several players in a room on campus and allowed McQueary to speak to the team via speaker phone.

McQueary reportedly told the team, “I wanted to let you guys know I’m not your coach anymore. I’m done.”

McQueary also told the team he’s not at the University, but in protective custody after receiving several threats … and “double fisting” booze.

Penn State placed him on administrative leave today but it sounds from that passage like he’s done for good, likely for his own safety. Some of the bloodlust for this guy, I think, is simply hatred for Sandusky being redirected towards one of his more accessible enablers. If/when Sandusky is tried, convicted, and then thrown to the sharks in some state prison where he’ll be the lowest, most widely despised perp in the pecking order, some of the anger towards McQueary will cool. Not all of it, but some.

Meanwhile, via Red State’s Jeff Emanuel, here’s what Paterno was allegedly told by McQueary at the time about what happened in the showers:

In 2002, McQueary, then a graduate assistant, went to Paterno and reported seeing Sandusky assaulting a young boy in the Penn State football team’s showers. Paterno notified the athletic director, Tim Curley, and a vice president, Gary Schultz, who in turn notified president Graham Spanier.

A source told ESPN that Paterno recalls McQueary “vaguely” referencing “fondling” or “touching” or “horsing around” by Sandusky and a youth. But Paterno never had the understanding that McQueary had witnessed a “sodomy” or “rape.”

I’m not sure how him knowing there was “fondling” going on as opposed to actual sodomy is some hugely exculpating detail for the wrist slap Sandusky got from the program in the aftermath. In fact, read this long, harrowing piece from the Patriot-News about the endless red flags that various people in Sandusky’s orbit missed dating back to 1995. Evidently, McQueary’s account of what he saw was progressively watered down among the PSU brass in some sort of pedophile-themed version of “telephone.” Fancy that:

Even though Paterno himself had told the grand jury that McQueary saw “something of a sexual nature,” Paterno said this week that he had stopped the conversation before it got too graphic. Instead, he told McQueary he would need to speak with his superior, Athletic Director Tim Curley, and with Schultz.

That meeting did not happen for 10 days.

What was said at that meeting is in dispute.

McQueary testified he told the men in specific detail exactly what he’d seen, and what he testified to before the grand jury.

Curley and Schultz say nothing criminal was described. Instead, Curley says, it was characterized as “inappropriate conduct” or “horsing around.

Schultz said it seemed like “not that serious.”…

According to the grand jury, then, here is how McQueary’s eyewitness account became watered down at each stage:

McQueary: anal rape.
Paterno: something of a sexual nature.
Schultz: inappropriately grabbing of the young boy’s genitals.
Curley: inappropriate conduct or horsing around.
Spanier: conduct that made someone uncomfortable.
Raykovitz: a ban on bringing kids to the locker room.

You can hate McQueary for not intervening to stop Sandusky in the act, but are we sure he’s the main enabler here? Paterno, by his own admission, apparently knew “something of a sexual nature” was happening between Sandusky and a 10-year-old. If he wanted to raise hell about it, Curley and Spanier were in no position to stop him. They’re top administrators but Paterno is a god on campus. Blame McQueary for leaving that 10-year-old for the wolf, but who should be blamed for all the kids who came afterward?

In fact, Paterno’s divine status continues even now, and even among people allied with Sandusky’s alleged victims. Read this surreal NYT story about how a lawyer who’s advising some of the boys is angry at Penn State for … firing Paterno. The ferocious backlash, he says, could end up intimidating some of the boys and making it less likely that they’ll speak out. Good point, but why he’s blaming PSU for that instead of the amoral savages who actually caused the backlash by rioting on Paterno’s behalf a few days ago, I have no idea. Two clips for you while you try to figure that out: The first is GMA’s exclusive with the mother of one of Sandusky’s victims and the second is today’s message from PSU’s new president, who’s inherited the happy task of restoring the school’s reputation. It’ll get worse before it gets better.

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7

john1schn on November 12, 2011 at 11:04 PM

Except for the fact that Sandusky was being groomed for the Head Coaching position. He was the hottest property in all of sports in the late 90s.
So maybe Paterno decides he is having too much fun coaching and just doesn’t want to lay down his whistle, I get that. But Jerry is in his coaching prime, he could have gone anywhere when Paterno tells him that he will not be the next Head Coach at Penn State. Instead Jerry retires and never coaches again.
I am sorry, that dog don’t hunt.
No way the University Police don’t tell Paterno they are investigating his number one assistant and what the allegations they were investigating were.
So I give Paterno a pass for not doing much about it until 2002. When he heard then and did next to nothing, then I am sorry, he did not do all he morally should have done.
Hell, no one tried to find out who the boy was!

armygirl on November 12, 2011 at 11:22 PM

Or information was kept from him.

john1schn on November 12, 2011 at 10:42 PM

Seriously this is getting tiring. The people who know a lot more about this PSU and Joe himself said he did not do enough. You apologists are a joke.

CW on November 12, 2011 at 11:23 PM

No way the University Police don’t tell Paterno they are investigating his number one assistant and what the allegations they were investigating were.

armygirl on November 12, 2011 at 11:22 PM

Only the naive would think so.

CW on November 12, 2011 at 11:25 PM

Oh, and there’s another reason that defensive coordinators don’t get promoted to the HC job. By and large, they know defense only, and not the whole picture.

Nonsense. They are the ones who get promoted the most to the HC position.

Pablo Honey on November 12, 2011 at 11:31 PM

After seeing the news that the students at PSU are rioting because
the coach was turned in? Makes me wonder if PSU stands for
Pedophilis Stand United.
There was a 10 yo boy RAPED ? and those turds are mad because the coaches did NOTHING ?
Personally if I had the power I would close down that school. its just a hot bed of people that advocate child rape as long as their ball team is good!
Morally corrupt.

ColdWarrior57 on November 13, 2011 at 12:18 AM

According to Drudge JS was still recruiting HS players this spring.
Hmmmm.

a capella on November 13, 2011 at 12:20 AM

This doesn’t excuse McQueary, but let’s put in some context here. Perhaps if McQueary had gone to the police, Sandusky would have been arrested. Perhaps (and more likely) the school would have covered it up and gave the victim a settlement. The more honorable thing would have been to fight the losing cause. But McQueary would have lost his job and probably not been able to get a new one (shunned in college football). He probably had the calculation that nothing would happen and that he’d be the one screwed over. As bad as that calculation seems, most of us would make the same calculation. I think that most people would like to think that they’d throw the pedophile up against the wall. But most people wouldn’t. (See the Milgram experiments, Kitty Genovese, etc.) That is something that everyone should think on.. There’s lots of people talking tough now, but when push comes to shove, would you be willing to be the lone voice going up against a huge university?

Illinidiva on November 11, 2011 at 9:56 PM

Yes, I would indeed be the lone voice to save a child. And I wouldn’t have just used my voice on that disgusting animal, but probaly my fists as well as I dragged him away from his 10 yr old victim. McQueary should be ashamed, as should every single apologist for all of the scum involved in this.

Siren46 on November 13, 2011 at 1:47 AM

Gotta love the legal fraternity – who would defend these scum?

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/7226363/lawyer-says-joe-paterno-law-team-try-use-potential-legal-loophole

Siren46 on November 13, 2011 at 1:49 AM

CW on November 12, 2011 at 11:25 PM

What do you think the function of these cops was? I’m not sure but it could be a brush and whitewash.

IlikedAUH2O on November 13, 2011 at 2:20 AM

Hmm. Well in my job as a HS teacher, I lawfully have to report suspicious behavior concerning children, whether I think they’re being abused in any way or might be in danger in any way. And I must report this to the principal & then HE deals with it.
If I fail to report such things, I could be held legally liable.
Now if I actually witness a crime in progress, then I must CALL THE POLICE IMMEDIATELY.
I will then inform the principal of that call.
That’s how it works when you work with kids.
McQueary’s actions, & that janitor, & anyone else actually witnessing a crime like that in action should be held liable for doing NOTHING.
Bcs reporting to anyone other than a law enforcement official should be criminal.
McQueary & PAterno are getting everything they deserve.

Badger40 on November 13, 2011 at 10:36 AM

And I will add that these men who witnessed & knew of this criminal activity are just as evil as the perp.
I don’t care if you are a pu$$y who is scared you’ll lose your job with 5 mouths to feed at home, in debt up to your eyeballs, protecting your wife & kids etc from harm, you do the right thing if you are a good person.
I ‘lost’ a job (nonrenewed) bcs I stood up for what was right. And no one supported me over it bcs they didn’t want to get involved.
That’s how it usually is.
You do the right thing & get punished for it.
But I will tell you one thing.
I can sleep like a baby at night & look myself in the mirror & know I am right.
That’s all that matters to me.
God’ll take care of me.
And I’ll keep on doing the right thing, no matter.

Badger40 on November 13, 2011 at 10:40 AM

I love all these Monday moring quarterbacks who just “know” that Joe knew something. You don’t know squat. All you have is speculation. McQueary should be pilloried, I agree, but we know his role in this. Penn jumped too quickly, and if it all shakes out that Paterno was wrongfully terminated, will they give him back his good name? This is what witch hunts look like, people. Let the investigation finish before you damn Paterno.

john1schn on November 13, 2011 at 11:05 AM

This is what witch hunts look like, people. Let the investigation finish before you damn Paterno.

john1schn on November 13, 2011 at 11:05 AM

IDK myself. But why would Paterno say he didn’t want to hear about the abuse? Why would anyone say that? Why would you want to remain ignorant of possible criminal activity in your organization if you indeed were not part of a coverup?

Badger40 on November 13, 2011 at 11:11 AM

john1schn on November 13, 2011 at 11:05 AM

Yep, hard to have an intelligent discussion with the torches and pitchforks. Welcome to KOS.

hawkdriver on November 13, 2011 at 12:33 PM

john1schn on November 13, 2011 at 11:05 AM

Read the Grand Jury report.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/11/06/sports/ncaafootball/20111106-pennstate-document.html

INC on November 13, 2011 at 12:47 PM

This is what witch hunts look like, people. Let the investigation finish before you damn Paterno.

john1schn on November 13, 2011 at 11:05 AM

I’ll repost this from earlier in the thread. Perhaps you missed it, and would like to shed light on what Paterno meant.

Then again, maybe you would rather pass on a discussion of what he meant?

==================================================

When all the chips are on the table I tend to focus intently on what a person says, and how they say it.

Paterno did not say “I wish I could have done more”.

Paterno did say “I wish I had done more”.

There is a world of difference between *could have* and *had*.

Poor wording on his part, or a realization of a tragic error?

Yoop on November 12, 2011 at 3:08 PM

===================================================================

Yoop on November 13, 2011 at 1:06 PM

Franco Harris was interviewd on Fox New Sunday. It became more clear why the Second Mile Honorary BOD appears clueless, if he is an example. He insisted because the GJ excused JoeP, he hadn’t done anything wrong. When Wallace asked him about the moral obligations he said “moral” was subject to individual interpetation. OTOH, there is a good piece on Real Clear Sports from a Penn State graduate who is a successful CEO who seems very clear on the definition of moral responsiblity in this case.

a capella on November 13, 2011 at 1:07 PM

I was wrong. The Real Clear Sports piece was quoting a pro basketball player whose alma mater was PS and was talking to a roomful of CEOs. Apologies for the error.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/11/13/v-fullstory/2499947/we-are-penn-state-evokes-a-range.html

a capella on November 13, 2011 at 1:37 PM

When you damn a guy for not doing what is your interpretation is “more,” then you set yourself up as a judge. Be sure you have all the facts first. I think I read something about this in an Arthur Miller book once.

john1schn on November 13, 2011 at 1:56 PM

When you damn a guy for not doing what is your interpretation is “more,” then you set yourself up as a judge. Be sure you have all the facts first. I think I read something about this in an Arthur Miller book once.

john1schn on November 13, 2011 at 1:56 PM

It was my impression that child molestation is immoral. Anyone allowing it to continue who says he wishes he had done more, after he is exposed, has judged and condemned himself.

a capella on November 13, 2011 at 2:34 PM

It was my impression that child molestation is immoral. Anyone allowing it to continue who says he wishes he had done more, after he is exposed, has judged and condemned himself.

a capella on November 13, 2011 at 2:34 PM

Of course it’s immoral. This is not in dispute. I’m not defending the molester or the witness. The entire argument here is that Paterno was informed, and he informed his superior. He did what he was supposed to do, especially not having been a witness to any of the attacks. If he was a witness to any of the assaults and did not report them to the authorities, THEN he would have been in violation of the law, as well as an immoral coward. Are you sure that Paterno “allowed” it to continue? Do you have the facts? After a horrific car accident that I was a witness to, and working for 15 minutes to save the life of one of the victims, I left wishing I had done more. This is how most normal humans are, after a tragedy such as this. Damning them for words spoken that provide no evidence is jumping to a conclusion that has the potential to be flawed. My whole point, which I’m a little tire of making, is that too many on this board are jumping to the conclusion that Paterno “must have known.” Boys and girls, it ain’t necessarily so, just because YOU have the benefit of having the information spoon-fed to you by the same media you so gleefully accuse of bias.

john1schn on November 13, 2011 at 2:57 PM

john1schn on November 13, 2011 at 2:57 PM

Did he say he wished he had done more? Why did he say it if he was ignorant of the details? Do you think McCreary went to him and said,”Uh, Coach, I saw JS in the showers with a 10 year old kid doing something of a sexual nature, but I’m not going to go into more detail on it, and Joe said “O.K, that’s all I need to know.?”

a capella on November 13, 2011 at 3:13 PM

john1schn on November 13, 2011 at 2:57 PM

Here’s the bottom line: Joe Paterno was told by a former player and then graduate assistant in his program that he saw Coach “S” raping a kid. Joe told his superiors…something less than that, apparently, but still that Coach “S” was doing something bad with a kid. Then, Paterno continued to socialize with, attend events with, and as early as THIS YEAR, allow that coach to recruit on his behalf. Now, there are only two explanations for this: 1)Paterno didn’t believe his graduate assistant, or 2) he believed him, and didn’t care, it didn’t bother him, it didn’t change his “friendship” with Coach “S” in any way. Since Paterno has already said he wishes he had done more, we can assume he did believe the graduate assistant. Therefore, we’re left only with the second explanation: he didn’t care. For that, Joe Paterno deserves every bit of vitriol on this thread and much, much more. That makes him a man completely without character. A monster. Do you understand that?

Rational Thought on November 13, 2011 at 3:15 PM

There is a tremendous discrepancy between what McCreary told the GJ and what JoeP says McCreary told him.

a capella on November 13, 2011 at 3:19 PM

There is a tremendous discrepancy between what McCreary told the GJ and what JoeP says McCreary told him.

a capella on November 13, 2011 at 3:19 PM

Sorry, but this sounds like a “it wasn’t rape rape” rationalization. How much information did he need? Grown-ass man. 10-year-old child. Both naked in a shower late at night on the PSU campus. Good God Almighty! You really can’t fill in the blanks around that? You really believe Joe Paterno couldn’t? Come on. Stop. Just stop. Joe knew exactly what was going on — and it clearly didn’t make him lose any sleep.

Rational Thought on November 13, 2011 at 3:29 PM

Sorry, but this sounds like a “it wasn’t rape rape” rationalization. How much information did he need? Grown-ass man. 10-year-old child. Both naked in a shower late at night on the PSU campus. Good God Almighty! You really can’t fill in the blanks around that? You really believe Joe Paterno couldn’t? Come on. Stop. Just stop. Joe knew exactly what was going on — and it clearly didn’t make him lose any sleep.

Rational Thought on November 13, 2011 at 3:29 PM

I’m not rationalizing anything. I find it impossible to believe that McCreary didn’t go into vivid detail the day he reported this to JoeP. That is not what Joe testified to the GJ. He fogged it. That’s when the description dilution process and CYA started.

a capella on November 13, 2011 at 3:41 PM

Rational Thought on November 13, 2011 at 3:15 PM

And yet you use the moniker of “rational thought.” Jumping to conclusions is not “rational” thought. None of you know what goes through Paterno’s mind, and if you claim to, you are not thinking rationally. I’ll just thank you very much and do this the American way, which is to say, I’ll wait to reserve judgement until the investigation and trials are complete, and then come to my own conclusions. Doing anything else is not…rational.

john1schn on November 13, 2011 at 3:52 PM

OK, I want to make myself clear here. I have no torch or pitchfork. I do not want to drive to State College and throw a brick through someone’s window. What I do want to do is examine the facts, use my innate intelligence, and draw conclusions based on those facts.
Let me lay this out.
In 1998 the University Police investigate a complaint from the mother of a Second Mile kid. While we don’t know from the Grand Jury Presentment, one can surmise that the University Police told Coach Paterno of the complaint against his First Assistant. I arrive at this conclusion based on the stature of Paterno at Penn State and the fact that the University Police would have an obligation to notify a superior of a complaint against an employee.
In 1999 Sandusky tells Victim #4 that he is upset over Paterno telling him that he will have to make a coaching change. In football speak that means he will not be the Head Coach of the Nittany Lions and so he negotiates his retirement.
In 2002, McQueary informs Paterno about what he witnessed in the shower. Paterno stops him from getting more graphic and summons the AD to report the incident.
Up to this point, I am willing to give Paterno a pass. The 1998 investigation involved hugging a kid in the shower, and no charges were filed. However, once he heard McQueary’s account in 2002, he had to know what Sandusky was.
Paterno did what he had to do from a legal standpoint. However, his moral obligation did not stop. The Grand Jury Presentment states that no one tried to find out the identity of the boy in the shower in 2002.
The individuals involved had a moral obligation that went beyond their legal obligations.
In my opinion, the entire system closed in on itself to protect itself at the expense of innocent boys.
Do I want to see Paterno in jail? No. Do I want to see McQueary in jail? No.
I want to see Penn State become a better place and I want all institutions to use this as a Lessons Learned in order to train people to go beyond what is legally required to what is moral.
Penn State failed the moral test from the President to Paterno.

armygirl on November 13, 2011 at 3:58 PM

Let me also state that I will likely change my opinion as more facts are revealed.
It is not illogical to form an opinion based on what we know from the Grand Jury Presentment, understanding that the witnesses were asked questions only by the prosecutor and not cross examined.
The facts, as we know them now, are damning for Penn State and the people with the power to stop Sandusky in 2002.
I understand the desire to support and believe in Paterno. I have stated that I am/was a huge fan of him and his program. Like all heros Paterno has feet of clay and I believe that this investigation has revealed those clay feet.
It makes me sad for Penn State, for Paterno, for the players that he coached and mentored.
I hope that the entire Unversity is using this entire sordid mess for good.

armygirl on November 13, 2011 at 4:08 PM

And yet you use the moniker of “rational thought.” Jumping to conclusions is not “rational” thought. None of you know what goes through Paterno’s mind, and if you claim to, you are not thinking rationally. I’ll just thank you very much and do this the American way, which is to say, I’ll wait to reserve judgement until the investigation and trials are complete, and then come to my own conclusions. Doing anything else is not…rational.

john1schn on November 13, 2011 at 3:52 PM

Oh, bullsh!t. Every act of reason does not require a trial to be deemed reasonable. What is entirely irrational is having the information we have right now, and arguing that we need to know a little bit more before we can judge Paterno’s actions here as cold, calculating, and deeply immoral. That is irrational. He learned of a child rape — or, if it makes you feel better, a vague “child sex thingy” — by a member of his staff and not only did he never call law enforcement or child protective services, but he kept that guy around in various official and unofficial positions for another decade. If it’s testimony you like, Paterno TOLD that exact story to the grand jury. I’ll judge him by his words and actions. I like to call that rational thinking.

Rational Thought on November 13, 2011 at 4:13 PM

armygirl on November 13, 2011 at 3:58 PM

You must know my last comment was not referring or directed at you. Our exchange ended with a good understanding and I would not say anything to stoke further misunderstandings of our opinions.

hawkdriver on November 13, 2011 at 4:23 PM

hawkdriver on November 13, 2011 at 4:23 PM

No, Hawk, I knew it wasn’t. I just wanted to make sure that I was not misunderstood by anyone else on the thread.

armygirl on November 13, 2011 at 4:27 PM

Rational Thought on November 13, 2011 at 4:13 PM

And yet, he did what was expected of him, based on the rules of the institution and state law. He never stated that he witnessed such behavior, only that he was told of such behavior. If I ran to the cops every time someone tells me of a crime, I’d have no time to kick women and children our of their homes. Legally.

john1schn on November 13, 2011 at 8:26 PM

let’s do a “Let’s suppose” for a moment. Let’s suppose that Paterno was told of the incident, and ignored the strange acting McQueary’s lack of calling the proper authorities(after all, McQueary did eyeball-witness a sex crime in the offing). He calls the police, who question the perp, who says, “nah, I was in my room the whole time.” And further, because now the perp knows that McQueary ratted him out, files defamation charges against McQueary, Paterno, the school, and the state of Pennsylvania. Paterno might have suspected, but without being sure, is opening himself up for an unbelievable civil court nightmare.

And we haven’t even begun to dig into why McQueary didn’t report Sandusky to the cops himself.

Joe ain’t no saint; nobody is. But if the coverup was at the AD level or higher, then those people should be gone.

john1schn on November 13, 2011 at 8:35 PM

Let’s do a “let’s imagine” for a moment.

Let’s imagine what it would be like to live in a world where people didn’t craft batsh!t crazy scenarios to rationalize the bad behavior of their heroes.

Rational Thought on November 13, 2011 at 10:03 PM

Let’s imagine what it would be like to live in a world where people didn’t craft batsh!t crazy scenarios to rationalize the bad behavior of their heroes.
Rational Thought on November 13, 2011 at 10:03 PM

Yup. I’d hope a fella could come up with fantasies involving babelicious cheerleaders instead of disgraced ex-coaches.

whatcat on November 13, 2011 at 10:24 PM

Rational Thought on November 13, 2011 at 10:03 PM

As if I’m a fan of anything in the Big 10. Paterno is just another coach and PSU is just another school to me. I’m looking at this from several angles, and you know that there’s more to it than what the media is feeding you. There’s plenty of questions to answer, and all I am saying is that the university didn’t need to take the risky stance of termination. They could have easily suspended him pending a complete investigation. The school is opening themselves up for a huge lawsuit.

Analyzing risk is what I do all day long. These scenarios happen more often than you would think.

john1schn on November 13, 2011 at 10:32 PM

john1schn on November 13, 2011 at 8:35 PM

I might give your let’s suppose scenario credence in 1998 for the first investigation. But when McQueary goes to Paterno in 2002, he should have had no doubt what Sandusky was. Yet he did the minimum required under Pennsylvania law to protect himself.
I don’t buy your let’s suppose scenario in 2002. The facts from the Grand Jury Presentment don’t support that.

armygirl on November 13, 2011 at 11:10 PM


Wow, the plot thickens.

armygirl on November 13, 2011 at 11:31 PM

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/report_judge_in_jerry_sandusky.html

The link I should have put in the previous comment.

armygirl on November 13, 2011 at 11:32 PM

Wow, the plot thickens.

armygirl on November 13, 2011 at 11:31 PM

A well wired power structure. I wonder who all serve on the GJ.

a capella on November 14, 2011 at 12:01 AM

armygirl on November 13, 2011 at 11:10 PM

Grand jury rarely means anything. Defense doesn’t present an argument and the defendant isn’t entitled to have any “witnesses” crossed. Like I’ve been saying, I’ll wait until the trial to see what shakes out of this tree.

john1schn on November 14, 2011 at 5:47 AM

blink on November 14, 2011 at 1:12 AM

I don’t remember discussing Libya on this blog.

john1schn on November 14, 2011 at 5:49 AM

Why should taxpayer money be spent to protect McQueery? It would have cost McQueery nothing to protect a child, but he ran away rather than standing up for what is right. Let him now protect himself. After all, it’s what he’s good at.

SilentWatcher on November 14, 2011 at 8:42 AM

I’m going to post part of one of the comments from my link. Read it and then Google Graham Spanier’s academic areas of interest. He was the chancellor at UNL while my kids were attending. They remember him for his fascination with students who supported the fledgling GLT groups cropping up on campus. Emphasis is mine.

It sounds vaguely crazy to you, but child-rape is quickly becoming the last taboo.

I mean, I was recently reading about a BDSM convention in Texas where one woman who got off on being cannibalized held a seminar on “safe” cannibalization. There was mild controversy, but the end result was a shrug of “If it feels good, do it” indifference.

It is not inconceivable that, a couple of decades from now, a victim of child sexual abuse will come forward and assert that he or she was raped with “love”, it felt good, and it was generally a wonderful experience.

A couple of “edgy” academics will note that there is a socio-biological basis for pedophilia. Perhaps biologists will unearth a gene that’s associated with pedophilia.
At that point, child-rape will go from a dark taboo to an openly discussed question of sexual freedom. “How can it be wrong if it felt good?” “Well, if there’s a biological/genetic basis for it, then it’s perfectly natural, right?” “If nobody gets hurt and everybody enjoys it, what’s the problem?”

a capella on November 14, 2011 at 10:34 AM

blink on November 14, 2011 at 10:43 AM

Spanier’s background make you a little uncomfortable, does it? Say, did you catch what the new president said about no one having to be afraid to report something like this because his door would always be open?

a capella on November 14, 2011 at 11:06 AM

Why does this matter?

Nobody was afraid to report Sandusky – they chose not to report it because they wanted to enable Sandusky because he had been a good football coach or something.

blink on November 14, 2011 at 11:19 AM

I’m not seeing any facts here. We can only form opinions based on absolute known facts. I read that somewhere.

a capella on November 14, 2011 at 11:25 AM

(Btw, in case you didn’t realize it, I’m arguing on behalf of CW and Pablo Honey since they’re not around – and I’m using their logic.)

blink on November 14, 2011 at 11:32 AM

You all look the same to me. NTTIAWWT

a capella on November 14, 2011 at 11:35 AM

Another dirty ginger.

BHO Jonestown on November 15, 2011 at 6:45 AM

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7