Thursday, October 05, 2006

Excuses, Excuses...

Back when sex was actually exciting

GETTING CAUGHT. It's true we haven't been posting this week, but we have our reasons. Leave it to the Republicans to come up with the ultimate oxymoron, a boring sex scandal. Let's count the ways.

First, it's a homosexual scandal. Yawn. The real dirty secret about homosexuality is that it's just plain dull. How unfascinating is it to want to see and play with private parts that are -- ta da! -- just like your own? That's why Oscar Wilde employed his considerable talents to fabricate a personality that simulates exotic charm. The fact that gay men have been (badly) play-acting the Wilde One ever since is merely confirmation of just how drab and pointless male homosexuality really is underneath the stage makeup.

Second, there doesn't seem to have been any actual sex involved, which, given that it's a gay thing, is actually a plus for most of us, but a sex scandal without sex is like a non-alcoholic beer -- a total waste of time.

And that's another thing. People like Foley and Bob Ney (remember him?) are giving alcoholism a bad name. Running off to rehab because you got caught with your fingers in the wrong cookie jar is trite and disingenuous. It doesn't fool anybody. Getting sober isn't going to make Bob Ney honest, and it's not going to make Mark Foley a happily married heterosexual.

Third (or is it fourth?), any scandal that gets the moms going in their "I have two children of my own" vein should be scotched before it ever gets passed on to typesetting. Every female TV pundit, lawyer, journalist, and politician who comments on this mess can't resist the temptation to publicize the dates of her own instances of parturition. The problem is, WE DON'T CARE. It's not a credential. Moms are not automatic experts about the ethics or morality of questions concerning teenagers. In fact, they should be disqualified from commenting at all, because moms as a group are the most hysterical, irrational, and extremist dunderheads on the planet whenever there's a newsmaker who can technically be classified as a "child." Which, frankly, is another huge problem with this scandal. Boys who are 16, 17, and 18 years old are not children, particularly in matters sexual.

There isn't any human demographic that thinks about sex more than 16 to 18 year-old boys, unless it's 13 to15 year old boys. As a culture, we have gone to ridiculous lengths to forget this primal fact because feminists have been so determined in their quest to make the sexes seem interchangeable. But all the men who haven't been figuratively castrated by politically correct gender propaganda know very well that males and females are, in many ways, opposites. (When's the last time you heard or read that obviously true statement? You see?) An adult male who seduces a 15-year old girl is a criminal. An adult female who seduces a 15-year old boy is every boy's fantasy come true. But now we're jailing all those gorgeous blonde schoolteachers that most men only wish they'd had the good fortune to study under when they were 15. Maybe we should issue a warrant to arrest Jennifer O'Neill for solicitation to pedophilia, which is the accurate contemporary terminology for describing the plot of Summer of '42. Maybe the summer knows, but 21st century America doesn't seem to have a clue. The boys Foley was after are in more danger of being harmed by the publicity they're getting now than they were by the clumsy electronic advances of a nerd congressman.

Finally, there's the annoying matter of the Democrats and their dudgeon about this sorry escapade. Yeah, those of us of Christian orientation know that Foley's behavior was immoral on a couple of counts, including the sins of lust and homosexuality. But let's get secular for a minute. What in the liberal universe is actually wrong about what Foley did? For them, it's fine, even laudable, to be gay. It's also one of their chief pleasures to talk a lot about gay sexuality, which is now incorporated in children's books and elementary school sex education, so speaking sexually to boys on the cusp of the age of consent can't be a problem.  The fact is, liberals don't even have a problem with minors having sex, or they wouldn't be so protective of the rights of 13-year old girls to get abortions without notifying their parents. So why is it more wrong for adults to have sex with minors than for minors to have sex with each other? Many prior pagan cultures specifically arranged for adults to introduce adolescents to sexuality, seeing it as preferable to kids miseducating one another. The liberal outrage about this particular story seems oddly reminiscent of the Magic Doorway argument they invented as cover for their abortion views. The day before his 18th birthday, a boy is as innocent and helpless as a newborn. The day after, he can post videos of himself having sex with midgets on the internet. We don't get the whole Democrat act. They certainly weren't  this upset about Jim McGreevey hiring his boyfriend as his homeland security chief or Barney Frank's boyfriend running a male prostitution ring out of his Beacon Hill mansion. It must be that the real crime here is for a Republican politician to be a gay horse's ass. Still another yawn.

So, those are the reasons we won't be posting anything about the Foley scandal. We're going to wait for a real scandal, something juicy and titillating. If Nancy Pelosi wants our attention, she should quit fuming about Republican immoraility and get it on with 40 or so congressional pages in the House chamber on C-Span. That would be worth blogging about.

Until then, mum's the word.

TBB Home Page
Home Page
TBB and 9-11
TBB & 9-11
TBB Stuff for YOU
TBB Shop

Amazon Honor System Contribute to Learn More