Some people emphasize on the man/boy part as if this was somehow worse than if it was man/girl. Why? Are some people trying to suggest that it is somehow less abusive for a girl to be raped, than for a boy?
Since I asked the question, I assume you mean me. No, quite the opposite. I am saying that American society has a tendency to turn a blind eye or even make jokes when underage boys are abused or taken advantage of: Michael Jackson case(s) is a prime example. Even Jay Leno made jokes about that. Have you heard Leno make any jokes about Jaycee Duggard? No, and he shouldn't. How about the rash of Catholic priests who were abusing boys? Lots and lots of jokes about that, eh? If they'd been little girls, would the same jokes have been made? Hell no!
Let me say this plainly and be
very clear about it. I don't know anything about this Jennings character. If I had kids, I don't think I'd want him around them. Not because he's gay or whatever. But because he and his group seem to have more of an interest in indoctrinating and/or socializing children in a particular way, than they do in pure academic education, just from what little I have read of him this evening.
But here's the part that I want to be most clear about.
ANY adult (and I don't care if it's male or female adult vs. a male or female child) who engages in sexual relations with a minor child is, in my humble opinion, a total and complete piece of predatory shit. And teachers or trusted authority figures who do it are lower than total and complete pieces of shit.
"But Debra Lafave is so hot, man. That kid was so lucky to git with her, man." See, it's generally over-sexed guys with pimples and small brains who perpetuate that sort of retarded thinking.
The far right most certainly has its fair share of whack jobs. But let no one make excuses for the ones that are on the far left - they don't get a pass either (from me anyway).