Comments on: and we will make oyu successful...as long as you don't mind me grabbing your dick once in a while

and we will make oyu successful...as long as you don't mind me grabbing your dick once in a while

jasper411 — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 20:57:00 -0800

Mark Foley's ... ewwwww Now that the House Ethics committee has finished its investigation of Mark Foley, we can look through the report itself, or at the Exhibit List and discover...Exhibit 13, 104 pages of Maf54's IM conversations (.pdf).

Reading the IMs and the emails is a bit like a train wreck, horrible to watch, but difficult to look away. It's just beyond pathetic to watch Foley attempt to "seduce" the pages while they're doing their best to keep thing at the "lol" level (see page 36 of the pdf for the title quote source). Does anyone know where the IM texts came from? Did Foley IM from his office in the House?

By: anthill

anthill — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:01:50 -0800

Scandalfilter! I like it, jasper beat the smoking gun to the draw...

By: mullingitover

mullingitover — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:02:04 -0800

That's really inappropriate. I hope he gets in big trouble over this.

By: Blazecock Pileon

Blazecock Pileon — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:04:54 -0800

It's sad that the House Ethics Committee is considered to have carried out a legitimate investigation, but then leaving it to the House Ethics Committee was a joke to begin with. I'm not surprised the press hasn't called on the outgoing Republicans for conspiring to keep their own pedophile in office. It's truly disappointing these people get away with it, but it's not surprising.

By: incongruity

incongruity — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:18:35 -0800

@Blazecock If by "these people" you mean "our elected officials" -- by no means is what Foley did okay, right or in any way excusable, but c'mon, enough with the partisan b.s., -- unless your argument can account for Gerry Studds and Mel Reynolds and the way their conduct was or wasn't dealt with by the powers that be until much much worse happened than what is alleged (and proven IMHO) in the Foley case. Don't make this partisan. It makes it too easy to get away from how awful Foley's actions were because you'll get people misguidedly defending him because you're not looking at the Democrats wit the same criticality. The facts are that elected officials get away with stuff that we little people would serve hard time for with a sadly high frequency and in the rare cases that they do serve time, it's only after many people have tried to cover for them. This is true on all sides. It's an us vs. them thing, right, but you got the wrong 'us' and the wrong 'them'.

By: iloveit

iloveit — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:25:57 -0800

Shitty redacting in the emails. Eagle eyes will be able to spot the first name of the page that broke this thing open.

By: Baby_Balrog

Baby_Balrog — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:31:08 -0800

incongruity Mark Foley is a Republican. I don't know if you're "up" on current party platforms - but they tend toward homophobic.

By: Powerful Religious Baby

Powerful Religious Baby — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:32:11 -0800

Did that kid really say he had a plaster cast fetish? This story grows more intriguing by the day.

By: papakwanz

papakwanz — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:35:19 -0800

I am totally slappin the salami right now.

By: ibmcginty

ibmcginty — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:35:39 -0800

Gerry Studds?!? That's rather, well, incongruous. He's dead, and the scandal youre talking about happened what, 25 years ago? Some Democrats have done bad; doubtless some will do bad in the future. But the departing Republican leadership has discovered some brand new ways to do bad. They deserve criticism. To criticize the Republican leadership that declined to act on the information surrounding it in order to protect pages because Foley was a big fundraiser does not mean implying that no Democrat has ever done anything wrong in the past three decades. Along with being so old as to be irrelevant, neither of the scandals you mention (correct me if I'm wrong) involve a cover-up, attempt at siliencing, or wilful blindness on the part of party leadership.

By: kirkaracha

kirkaracha — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:38:55 -0800

Whoa. Is this the same House Ethics Committee that changed their ethics rules to protect congressman-cum-blogger Tom Delay?

By: Effigy2000

Effigy2000 — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:45:39 -0800

Reading that is totally gross. The real question now is which is worse? Being seduced online by your mum or being seduced by Foley?

By: duffell

duffell — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:47:47 -0800

Wow... kirkaracha, for a moment there I thought you were calling Tom Delay a "cum blogger," and I thought - JESUS, what did I miss?

By: Powerful Religious Baby

Powerful Religious Baby — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:48:44 -0800

papawankz: are you bonered too? i would at least pul it out to say hello to the big boy, and the give it some happiness. wuld you let me drink all of your cum? i owuld have taken all of it, and drank every last drop.

By: landedjentry

landedjentry — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 22:03:54 -0800

Guh. Not that this could be made better by any means, but seeing a representative use e-grammar just sends chills up my spine.

By: peeping_Thomist

peeping_Thomist — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 22:10:22 -0800

Effigy2000: "The real question now is which is worse? Being seduced online by your mum or being seduced by Foley?" Back in the days before the APA took homosexuality out of the DSM, a wag might have suggested that the former was the sort of thing likely to lead to the latter.

By: bukharin

bukharin — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 22:12:08 -0800

Oh, God, the "cast fetish" part is the worst. "ya like.. plaster cast." kid: "ya but now im hard" maf: "cast got you going" Burroughs wrote some of this

By: Effigy2000

Effigy2000 — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 22:14:08 -0800

No the worst part by far is when Foley offers a BJ and tells him he would swallow his cum. And the dude says he has no preference for psitting or swallowing. I am thoroughly, thoroughly grossed out by this.

By: Effigy2000

Effigy2000 — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 22:14:27 -0800

*spitting

By: mijuta

mijuta — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 22:17:21 -0800

Peeping_Thomist: Back in the days before the APA took homosexuality out of the DSM, a wag might have suggested that the former was the sort of thing likely to lead to the latter. Really? That's so cool that in the olden days being seduced online by your mom led to being seduced by Foley!

By: bonheur

bonheur — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 22:18:22 -0800

What is at the top of Exhibit 8 (emails), page 21?

By: kid ichorous

kid ichorous — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 22:20:30 -0800

With all that's happened to this country over the last 6 years, it's frustrating to me that it takes tabloid sentimentalities and gross-out chat logs to move some voters. We're losing lives, rights, and money. Do these things not resonate enough? But perhaps I don't understand the level of malfeasance involved here. Hadn't all of those pages reached the age of consent for DC? If not, why isn't he being prosecuted? If so, what makes this so different from the political dogging of Clinton?

By: 2sheets

2sheets — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 22:22:36 -0800

You jackin' it?

By: mijuta

mijuta — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 22:26:02 -0800

Kid Ichorous: it's frustrating to me that it takes tabloid sentimentalities and gross-out chat logs to move some voters. We're losing lives, rights, and money. Do these things not resonate enough? When it comes to the evangelical wackos, teh gay is the biggest evil and hence the biggest motivator. Wouldn't now be a good time for the APA to put "religious wackery" in the DSM?

By: SisterHavana

SisterHavana — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 22:35:11 -0800

Metafilter: You jackin' it? (Had to say it!) Seriously, ewww. this is very disturbing.

By: kid ichorous

kid ichorous — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 22:38:10 -0800

mijuta, aren't Democrats appealing to religious wackery by playing up sex scandals? Do we really want them to try to win evangelicals?

By: Pollomacho

Pollomacho — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:15:51 -0800

Well, at least they are trying to win for once. Sarcasm aside, no, we don't.

By: django_z

django_z — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:20:12 -0800

More than being gross this is just extremely pathetic. An older gay man who can't tell the world he is gay, preying upon young male pages and being as stupid and phenomenally unattractive and sad as possible while doing it. It makes my eyes bleed. Thank god people in their late teens are alot more savvy nowawadays. The main page clearly knew what was up and was just stringing Foley along. But is it worse than Clinton? I don't think so. Though it looks like Foley harrassed more people, perhaps that makes it worse. But any authority position using their power to seduce or prey sexually upon people beneath them in the org chart makes me pissed off. Clinton was just as much of a wanker as Foley and I was embarrased he was our President even though I voted for him.

By: Astro Zombie

Astro Zombie — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:31:59 -0800

This is why, after a certain age, you should be arrested if you type LOL.

By: Pollomacho

Pollomacho — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:32:19 -0800

But is it worse than Clinton? Of course it is! Clinton did not do this to underaged children! Clinton=creep Foley=pedophile Big difference.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:37:15 -0800

Where is the 'plaster cast' fetish mentioned? I don't want to read through 104 pages of bad cybersex.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:38:06 -0800

Of course it is! Clinton did not do this to underaged children! As opposed to over-aged children? Really though, 16 year olds are not 'children'.

By: bruce

bruce — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:44:11 -0800

the kid is as bad as the congressman. his words, overall demeanor, school activities and stated goals reflect the same free-floating lust for power, unmoored to any sense of integrity or desire for specific change common to so many republican officials. the kid is a school officer in something called the "governor's program for abstinence" and the congressman was chairman of the committee against child sexual abuse. no irony there! i suspect that the medium of instant messaging actually impairs the reasoning faculties of long-term communicants, leaving folks with nothing more challenging to formulate than "u r hot, c ya." this is the evil of banality.

By: Blazecock Pileon

Blazecock Pileon — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:48:29 -0800

Really though, 16 year olds are not 'children'. A judge might disagree with you.

By: Pollomacho

Pollomacho — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 23:52:41 -0800

Really though, 16 year olds are not 'children'. In the US, I'm afraid they are. They are also certainly not adults and are not fair game for people in their 40's and 50's. A 24 year old college graduate is a far cry from a 16 year old high school student any way you cut it. As opposed to over-aged children? Yes, over-aged children such as congressmen that can't keep their hormones in check.

By: EatTheWeak

EatTheWeak — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 00:00:17 -0800

I knew Foley was a dirtbag. But what a sweaty, desperate, grasping dirtbag he turned out to be! I only meant to read a couple pages of the report. But jasper was right - I'm totally watching the train wreck in slow motion. My favorite bits? The one where Foley asks just a little too much about the kid's boner and the kid says "well, time to go!"

By: bonheur

bonheur — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 00:16:34 -0800

delmoi: The cast fetish conversation happens in the middle of page 22 in the chatlogs, exhibit 13. Foley confesses to a steam room fetish (?!) and the page confesses his cast fetish ("I've never had one, but people who have them turn me on.")

By: peeping_Thomist

peeping_Thomist — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 07:21:14 -0800

Pollomacho: "Foley=pedophile" Pederast, yes. Pedophile, no.

By: Burhanistan

Burhanistan — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 07:29:49 -0800

Pederast, yes. Pedophile, no. posted by peeping_Thomist Thank you for pointing that out. People need to get their definitions for sexual afflictions straight, er, correct.

By: davy

davy — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 07:33:50 -0800

"Gettin a boner is good." I ought try that line sometime. lol.

By: ob

ob — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 07:39:15 -0800

Wow, I'm really pretty grossed out. It's not some much the sexual content (although some of it is pretty gross) but it's the lol!-I-can-talk-like-a-teenager stuff that's really creepy.

By: fenriq

fenriq — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 07:40:15 -0800

I'm pretty any transcript of pedophilic seduction is going to give normal people the heebie-jeebies. This guy is as sick as the rest and far more corrupt because of his position of power and influence. Sorry, pederast. Is there such a word as pedernasty? Because that's what Foley is.

By: craven_morhead

craven_morhead — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 07:52:14 -0800

*squick squick squick*

By: pardonyou?

pardonyou? — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 07:57:25 -0800

ya that writing is bad. lol. but its way hot, to. im gonna spank it hahahha. i am hard as a rock. tell me when your reaches rock. im gonna spurt in a towel then go vote on this stoopid trade appropriation bill. lol! like ya lots! c ya!

By: JWright

JWright — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 07:58:01 -0800

Pederast maybe, but do we know that he never actually had physical contact with any of these kids? As long as he's been doing this, and as much power as he wielded, it's hard to believe he never found an opportunity to go all the way with it.

By: pax digita

pax digita — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 07:58:30 -0800

Thank G*d for this thread, though; it's keeping me from feeling the need to read the actual links.

By: StarForce5

StarForce5 — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 07:59:03 -0800

Youi lost me at "i'm all fleshy"

By: kalessin

kalessin — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:04:49 -0800

Actually, it would appear that Foley is neither a pedophile nor a pederast, but an ephebophile.

By: ZenMasterThis

ZenMasterThis — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:07:39 -0800

Along with being so old as to be irrelevant, neither of the scandals you mention (correct me if I'm wrong) involve a cover-up, attempt at siliencing, or wilful blindness on the part of party leadership. Alright, then, Monica Lewinsky.

By: kalessin

kalessin — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:07:41 -0800

P.S. There are, I believe, Federal telecommunications laws that deal with interestate "harassment", but it should also be noted that the age of consent (in general) in D.C. appears to be 16.

By: hattifattener

hattifattener — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:08:02 -0800

Wait, I thought "pedophile" = "attracted to children" and "pederast" = "actually has sex with children". Which would make Foley a (statutory) pedophile but not pederast, yes?

By: fire&wings

fire&wings — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:24:46 -0800

me 2 hard as a brick

By: dr_dank

dr_dank — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:37:04 -0800

Effigy2000:I am thoroughly, thoroughly grossed out by this. Me too, kids today don't appreciate shit. Guy hooks you up with a job in the corridors of national power and even sucks your dick. Ingrates!

By: davy

davy — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:39:13 -0800

"[I]t's hard to believe he never found an opportunity to go all the way with it." From reading what little of those logs I did I'd be amazed if his "seduction" thing ever worked. He sounds like a totally dorky loser trying to sound "hip, now and with it." It's ridiculous, the opposite of sexy. I used to laugh at such older men; now that I'm an Older Man I feel embarrassed for him and a little sorry for him too. Couldn't he just go to Cruisy Area and pick up a hustler? Men from D.C. used to go up to Does that sound rigBaltimore and circle Patterson Park for guys who Play For Pay (while those young guys who stood around under the Confederate Memorial across town were giving it away for FREE). And hattifattener, no. Do some reading. From Wikipedia: pedophilia as opposed to pederasty. The short course is basically this: pedophiles are attracted to kids BEFORE puberty, pederasts want them AFTER puberty -- if the page could have impregnated his girlfriend it was pederasty not pedophilia. (Those who still don't understand the difference have no business having daughters.) Speaking of daughters: kalessin, I usually think of "ephebophila" as the female counterpart to pederasty, like "lesbian" as opposed to "gay male". But yeah, there's really no difference, like "dykes" and "fags" are both "homos". (Except powerful dykes will seldom pay to suck your dick.)

By: fungible

fungible — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:39:29 -0800

Don't forget to mention as often as possible that not only was he a hypocritically anti-gay, he served as chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children. Heckuva job, Foley. And hey, if you don't mind this old dude hitting on your 16-year-old son, then you're a lot more open-minded than me.

By: leftcoastbob

leftcoastbob — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:50:31 -0800

This is why, after a certain age, you should be arrested if you type LOL. posted by Astro Zombie And exactly what age is that, young man? (Be careful--I've passed the half-century mark and can get legions of AARPers who are all hopped up on AllBran to kick your Depend-less ass!)

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:50:53 -0800

Did anyone else notice the page say that he had to go to "cotillion classes" on page 8 of the pdf? Is it 1884? What the hell is a cotillion class?

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 08:59:26 -0800

Ok, I am now ignoring all the sex crap and focusing exclusively on the cotillion angle. Page 18:" I was at cotillion...and then the night before I went to a ball." Was it on the Danube? Was Strauss there? It's like there's this bizarre subculture where people aspire to be bourgeois. Bizarre sex stuff is pedestrain. Cotillion is the new hardcore underground.

By: ROU_Xenophobe

ROU_Xenophobe — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:06:27 -0800

It's a class about cotillions. A cotillion is a debutante ball. Presumably yon wee bairn is taking classes in ballroom or other formal dancing.

By: ZenMasterThis

ZenMasterThis — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:07:12 -0800

I always thought a cotillion was a stinging desert arthropod.

By: Blazecock Pileon

Blazecock Pileon — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:07:45 -0800

Pederast, yes. Pedophile, no. I suppose that lets the Republicans off the hook.

By: davy

davy — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:10:31 -0800

"Presumably yon wee bairn is taking classes in ballroom or other formal dancing." Child or not that's still abusive. Can't he learn a dance of today, like the Frugg or the Swim?

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:11:59 -0800

Debutantes? It's 2006. Do they wear powdered wigs and those absurd puffy dresses? Ugh. We can only hope. It'll only make that particular raid of the revolution more interesting. Seriously, this society these guys are in is all so affected and phony. Ugh. BTW, page 34 of the PDF: Maf54: call me 202-544-6369 I called it. It rings half a dozen times, then there's a voicemail mesage repeating the number and asking you to leave a message. The voice sounds like Foley's. Have fun.

By: kalessin

kalessin — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:15:29 -0800

kalessin, I usually think of "ephebophila" as the female counterpart to pederasty, like "lesbian" as opposed to "gay male". It's true the pederasty seems to be descriptive of male-male attraction. I don't think that ephibophilia is gender-specific, but I can definitely understand the impulse to pair pederasty with a similar word that's only for attraction to female post-pubescent minors.

By: davy

davy — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:17:50 -0800

Actually Blazecock, no, it's got nothing to do with Republicans or even that pathetic hypocritical fascist goofball Foley per se. I'm thinking of the desperate pederasts who'd circle public places looking for company, and of those Righteous Wankers who think it's just fine when they lust for a 16 year old FEMALE but call their gay counterparts "child molesters". (I'm trying hard to be clear here, I understand I have a problem with being hard to understand.)

By: davy

davy — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:20:20 -0800

"I understand I have a problem with being hard to understand." Or better yet, 'I understand that I have a hard time putting things so people have an easy time understanding me.'

By: jfuller

jfuller — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:21:23 -0800

> And exactly what age is that, young man? Eleven.

By: Burhanistan

Burhanistan — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:27:41 -0800

"I tend to obfuscate"

By: kid ichorous

kid ichorous — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:28:00 -0800

16 is the age of consent in DC. It's also old enough to get behind the wheel of a car and endanger yourself and society. It's also old enough to get tried as an adult in any state in the country. And it's the age of consent throughout much of the civilized world. I guess all those lawyers, legislators, and Europeans are pederasts too? Or maybe this is just another overhyped sex scandal?

By: davy

davy — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:34:10 -0800

Burhanistan, I eschew obfuscation. And Nietzsche is pietzsche. And what kid ichorous said.

By: joseph_elmhurst

joseph_elmhurst — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:50:47 -0800

Yes, 16 is the age of consent in DC (and some other places). It's also the age at which an American can drive a car without a guardian in the passenger seat. Some kids younger than 16 get charged and tried as adults, too. On the other hand, a 16-year-old cannot vote, join the military (either voluntarily or otherwise), see an NC17 movie, drink an alcoholic beverage, or go to a 21-and-over rock concert (again with the drinking thing). What may be viewed as okay or even pedestrian in Europe or elsewhere has nothing to do with American cultural standards, which are what informs this particular overhyped sex scandal. That, and the fact that this was a member of Congress, and a member of the party that supports "family values," asking a teenager who was not yet emancipated from his parents about his boner.

By: dhartung

dhartung — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:58:27 -0800

Does anyone know where the IM texts came from? Did Foley IM from his office in the House? I'm pretty sure that there was a Congressional subpoena to AOL. On the other hand, with printout filenames like file://C:\temp\01-11-13.htm, they were probably saved to hard drive by the page(s). Or maybe this is just another overhyped sex scandal? You do realize that what he was doing was, possibly, illegal under the very laws that he helped pass? Hoist by his own petard, I say, and I'll sleep fine tonight.

By: Milkman Dan

Milkman Dan — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 10:00:11 -0800

Jasper, you got it right: "It's just beyond pathetic to watch Foley attempt to "seduce" the pages while they're doing their best to keep thing at the "lol" level". These transcripts feel like "Closer" meets "The Parlour." I feel highly uncomfortable. But hey, check this out...Foley's personal email address is in this; on page 93. Foley wants the kids to send him a photo of himself: maf54@aol.com Hmmm... (Granted, any dork could have deduced his email address from his IM handle, but anyway...)

By: Alvy Ampersand

Alvy Ampersand — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 10:08:08 -0800

Beat me to the punch, kid ichorous, thanks for pointing that out. I can understand the satisfaction and glee people feel when the massive hypocrisy of the Religious Right is exposed, but labelling Foley a pedophile ("Pederast", "ephebophile" - Classy ways of saying "child molester") when as far as I can tell all of the young men involved were at or over the age of consent reeks of the homophobic bogeyman "Won't someone please think of the children?" smear tactics that the Right and their supporters engage in. No denying the dude's a sleazy hypocrite fuckhead, though.

By: davy

davy — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 10:14:37 -0800

Well said, Alvy.

By: Blazecock Pileon

Blazecock Pileon — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 10:18:37 -0800

Being gay myself, I think it's pretty pathetic that Foley is not considered the pedophile/pederast (insert whatever hair you'd like to split here) that he is, and instead is being allowed to walk away as a "gay Democrat" courtesy of the Republicans, once again reinforcing tired stereotypes of homosexuals as pedophiles. What is worse is when I see folks here playing along with that Republican scam, by not calling Foley what he is, because that too reinforces the usual bigotry (even if unintended).

By: kid ichorous

kid ichorous — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 10:25:06 -0800

Maybe I should start calling people who drive the speed limit "speederasts?" Cause you know, driving 65 is only a stone's throw away from driving 85, you nasty little speeder.

By: Blazecock Pileon

Blazecock Pileon — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 10:30:19 -0800

If you really want to, but we're really talking about child molesters here, not people with lead feet.

By: sonofsamiam

sonofsamiam — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 10:33:40 -0800

Everyone can get behind "hypocritical lecherous sleaze", right?

By: nickmark

nickmark — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 10:42:01 -0800

Well, in a manner of speaking.

By: Sassenach

Sassenach — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 11:05:34 -0800

Pathetic loser closet case doesn't even begin to describe Foley.

By: exogenous

exogenous — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 11:31:27 -0800

Pastabagel, if you google the number it appears to be Foley's actual listed number. See also this article about deposed politicos on his block.

By: peeping_Thomist

peeping_Thomist — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 12:32:35 -0800

Alvy Ampersand: ""Pederast", "ephebophile" - Classy ways of saying "child molester"" Maybe, but there may be more to it. I was referring to pederasty, the nasty institution that was a mainstay of the pagan world and that you have us Christians to thank for suppressing. Foley clearly saw himself serving as a kind of mentor for these lads. Note how often he gives them advice. He's helping them get ahead in the world, giving them the benefit of his experience. It's all just an extension of the page program! As our Christian heritage recedes more and more into the background, I expect institutions like the page program will become more and more explicitly pederastic.

By: chance

chance — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 12:45:03 -0800

I think it's pretty pathetic that Foley is not considered the pedophile/pederast (insert whatever hair you'd like to split here) that he is, and instead is being allowed to walk away as a "gay Democrat" courtesy of the Republicans, once again reinforcing tired stereotypes of homosexuals as pedophiles. Good point. Gay or straight is completely irrelevant where Foley is concerned. This guy is a sexual predator and in the same general category as any other molester, rapist, pedophile, incester, date rapist, whatever. He belongs behind bars.

By: GuyZero

GuyZero — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 12:59:30 -0800

i'm in ur msgs seducing ur d00dz

By: sonofsamiam

sonofsamiam — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 13:16:18 -0800

I was referring to pederasty, the nasty institution that was a mainstay of the pagan world and that you have us Christians to thank for suppressing. Us Christians aren't those Christians. And those Christians didn't do the suppression in a very Christian way, did they. As our Christian heritage recedes more and more into the background, I expect institutions like the page program will become more and more explicitly pederastic. Considering the main decadent state of the Catholic church which also has systematically protected pedophiles, the decadent and heretical ~~Christ~~Rapture-anity full of closet cases, and the near-complete lack of any public Christian leader who is also a decent human, I think that ship has sailed. Don't blame the secularists, they're just trying to be honest with themselves about what they can rationally believe. Blame the servants of TWO masters, who are the true idolators these days.

By: jasper411

jasper411 — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 13:44:08 -0800

I think the consent issue is clouded by the tremendous power differential. Foley was in a position to help these guys out careerwise, and didn't let them forget it (e.g., we will make oyu successful as long as you don't mind me grabbing your dick once in a while, and these guys, whether they're interested in him sexually or not, are in a position to have to "suck up" to him. Certainly it's a clear case of sexual harrassment, at the very least.

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 14:21:01 -0800

I think we need to focus a lot less on the gay/pedophile sex and a lot more on the fact that at the dawn of the 21st century in the most technologically advanced civilization on Earth, there are still people who aspire to attend cotillions.

By: bardic

bardic — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 15:31:50 -0800

peeping_Thomist writes the nasty institution that was a mainstay of the pagan world and that you have us Christians to thank for suppressing Actually, the Catholic Church has been doing its darndest to keep it alive. Just ask a priest. Wow, you're a complete joke.

By: Flunkie

Flunkie — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 16:27:07 -0800

Page 26: Maf54: you need a good massage and a long nights rest Maf54: a hot tub would work (redacted): lol that would be nice Maf54: I give good massages (redacted):ya practic is killing me.....its hell week so thats why ive been going to bed so early Maf54: i bet (redacted): brb (redacted): ok im back...sorry my mom walked in

By: me & my monkey

me & my monkey — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 16:29:36 -0800

I was referring to pederasty, the nasty institution that was a mainstay of the pagan world and that you have us Christians to thank for suppressing. Why do you say that it's a nasty institution? Is it the age differential, or the homosexual element, or the confluence of both? And, frankly, I think that pederasty is no worse than the hatred of eros that Christianity has fostered (among other awful things). This guy is a sexual predator and in the same general category as any other molester, rapist, pedophile, incester, date rapist, whatever. He belongs behind bars. As far as I can tell, all he did was chat and email and IM. While I think he's a creep, and should not be in office, what he did isn't in the same league as any of the other things you mentioned. Wow, you're a complete joke. bardic, p_T has enough problems without you blaming him for the recent behavior of priests violating the tenets of their own religion. Pederasty is no longer considered virtuous or acceptable behavior by society, and this is largely the doing of the Catholic church.

By: rmm

rmm — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 16:32:11 -0800

What I can't get over - aside from the eww factor - is how much Foley seemed to be hounding this guy (guys? don't know, don't much care), even after the kid was telling him he had homework to do, or had to clean up, do chores, etc. Quite shocking, in a way.

By: bardic

bardic — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 16:37:21 -0800

Pederasty is no longer considered virtuous or acceptable behavior by society, and this is largely the doing of the Catholic church. And we can thank Hitler for popularizing the notion that genocide is wrong? Thank you Hitler, we owe you so much. Wow, the stupid is strong with metafilter today.

By: adipocere

adipocere — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 16:39:55 -0800

Are the pages all sixteen years of age or older? I can only think of the Wondermark comic ... Such hateful words! "Pedophile, pedophile!" — I can still hear it stinging in my ears.

By: me & my monkey

me & my monkey — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 17:16:33 -0800

Wow, the stupid is strong with metafilter today. Apparently, your keyboard is leaking it. Better have that checked. Look, this isn't difficult to understand. Pederasty was accepted by many societies, prior to the advent of Catholicism in those societies. It was considered right and proper, it had formal support, etc. Catholicism was a major cause of the rejection of this acceptance and support, because it rejected the morality of pederasty. Not because priests buggered altar boys. While that's happened enough times, I'm sure, it's not acceptable behavior within Catholic theology.

By: peeping_Thomist

peeping_Thomist — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 17:32:14 -0800

me & my monkey: "I think that pederasty is no worse than the hatred of eros that Christianity has fostered" Not in themselves, no, but better to have the problem of teaching Christians how to properly value eros in relation to agape than a culture sunk in the worship of beautiful bodies.

By: bukharin

bukharin — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 17:39:22 -0800

We are so, so, so grossed out about this and completely disgusted and it is just SO awful that we have to talk about it and read all these logs and quote from them and talk about how horrible it is, really, and when I turn on Headline News there's that blonde bitch with the big eyes talking about how nasty and disgusting being attracted to younger people is, and then I change the channel and some 17 year old pop idol is in a tiny skirt and undulating her midriff and we are just all so disgusted by this, really. If Foley and Haggard aren't enough of a case for a healthier approach to sexuality in this society I don't know what is. Youth is beguiling, it's meant to be. But besides the problem with repressing homosexuality there is also the problem of repressing intergenerational contact - not sexual, but pedagogic and otherwise. There is a strangely false social barrier between younger and older people spending time together and being friends, when in fact these are among the most valuable and instructive relationships you can have. The fact that we do not support them might be one of the reasons why many young adults do not behave like adults but seem suspended in a permanent adolescence. (I myself am 22, and have benefited greatly from being raised by my grandmother and having friends older than myself.)

By: MrLint

MrLint — Wed, 13 Dec 2006 19:08:09 -0800

Oh come on.. Foley is an ok guy.. ann coulter says so!

By: bardic

bardic — Thu, 14 Dec 2006 00:09:47 -0800

More gay Colorado preachers/homophobes. To address Catholicism specifically, an institution that is known for aiding and abetting pederasty and has ruined the lives of many, many children is to be seen as the bright light that has prevented pederasty? Orwell had a word for this.

By: Blazecock Pileon

Blazecock Pileon — Thu, 14 Dec 2006 00:23:15 -0800

And that word is "Gigli".

By: Pollomacho

Pollomacho — Thu, 14 Dec 2006 00:33:16 -0800

Thanks for the clarification on pedophile and pedarast folks, learn something new every day.

By: peeping_Thomist

peeping_Thomist — Thu, 14 Dec 2006 07:28:58 -0800

bardic: "To address Catholicism specifically, an institution that is known for aiding and abetting pederasty and has ruined the lives of many, many children is to be seen as the bright light that has prevented pederasty? Orwell had a word for this." Yes, he did. The word is "memory hole," and apparently your knowledge of history has gone down it.

By: me & my monkey

me & my monkey — Thu, 14 Dec 2006 15:10:36 -0800

better to have the problem of teaching Christians how to properly value eros in relation to agape than a culture sunk in the worship of beautiful bodies. I don't think that Christianity has ever provided the right answer to that. Lots of societies have done a much better job with this balance than any more-than-nominal Christian society, in my opinion. To address Catholicism specifically, an institution that is known for aiding and abetting pederasty and has ruined the lives of many, many children is to be seen as the bright light that has prevented pederasty? I really don't know why you're being so obstinate on this. No matter how you feel about the Catholic church - I personally feel that it is the cause of boundless evil, which far outweighs the good it does here and there - there is no argument against the fact that, because of Catholicism, pederasty is no longer acceptable in most societies. I should probably note that I don't have a problem with pederasty, specifically. I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with it. Of course, pederasty is not equivalent to child molestation - the younger partner in a pederastic relationship is generally considered to be an adult, although young, according to my understanding.