rigorousintuition.ca

There's lots of bizarre lore surrounding the legend of Walt Disney. Just off the top of our heads, we've heard he's a Communist (despite him being a founding member of the anti-communist Motion Picture Alliance for the Preservation of American Ideals), a Nazi, a fascist, a racist, a homosexual, a cryogenically frozen head--and now, thanks to a new book by Darwin Porter, Hollywood Babylon Strikes Again, we can add pedophile to that list.

Reports GaySexBlog.net, the book alleges that Disney was "fond of trying on his mother's make-up, clothes and high heels" as a child and that he could uh, "never get an erection for women."

​Hollywood Babylon Strikes Again! further alleges that Disney owned a Los Angeles apartment in order to meet up with various rentboys, including a man named Ralph Ferguson who has gone on the record stating that he received $100 for sex with Disney.

And here's the real eyebrow-raiser: Author Porter also writes that Disney fell in love with young star Bobby Driscoll, of Song of the South (1946) who also voiced Peter Pan.

Which might be another reason the Walt Disney Company wants you to forget Song of the South ever existed:

Anyway, GaySexBlog.net further states:

Driscoll says he was "dropped like garbage when I was no longer a cute little kid and I didn't appeal to [Walt] anymore."


Ew? Either way, keeping in mind the perpetual smoke and mirrors surrounding Disney, take it all with a grain of salt--the same book, according to an Amazon.com review, also alleges:

Charlton Heston was a bi-sexual lover of the young, Marlon Brando had sex with his son Christian and daughter Cheyenne, and innumerable Hollywood celebrities were gay prostitutes or bi-sexual prostitutes.

I wouldn't mind the term, "gay pedophile," nearly so much if "straight pedophile" were used more commonly -- but most of the time, it's just "pedophile" in those cases.

And I do wonder how the common juxtaposition of those two words, "gay pedophile," affects perception. Verbal guilt by association? As if "gay" and "pedophile" somehow belong together?

They don't.

brekin, I edited the title.

Yes, the term "straight pedophile" is not as common, or used at all, but probably because we assume statistically that is what it is when you just hear "pedophile".

If someone posts "An African-American male rapist" they've got an agenda.

I have to concur that the term "gay pedophile" is slightly offensive. And if you are familiar with my posts you would know that I am hardly a militant faggot that gets upset every time a gay person is maligned.

The phrase may originate from the book itself, but one has to wonder why the authors felt the need to reinforce the association between "gay" and "pedophile".

This is demonstrably untrue:

Quote:

Yes, the term "straight pedophile" is not as common, or used at all, but probably because we assume statistically that is what it is when you just hear "pedophile".

A non-negligible fraction of the US population believes, actually, that gay = pedophile.

It goes against my personal groove to force others to revise their words just because I find them offensive (I'm not that breakable) but it doesn't stop me from pointing out the offense itself.

slomo wrote:A non-negligible fraction of the US population believes, actually, that gay = pedophile.

brekin wrote:I'm sure those previous two words can affect perception, but then I assume intelligent readers
are aware of how they are being affected and can adjust accordingly.

I personally found it offensive and I removed it. This is not a hypothetical conversation.

Why didn't you specify that he was a white pedophile? Etc.

Wombacticus Rex wrote:

Quote:
If someone posts "An African-American male rapist" they've got an agenda.

Like what? Sure I understand the media likes to skew things against certain ethnic minorities,
and some people have racist agendas, but we all belong to groups.
If someone is on the run and you need to get out their description,
how would you suggest you describe to the public someone who fits the above description?

brekin wrote:I'm not going to the wall over this...

brekin wrote:
I'm sure those previous two words can affect perception, but then I assume intelligent readers
are aware of how they are being affected and can adjust accordingly.

If you're "sure" the term "gay pedophile" can "affect perception," then why use it?

Gay people already have enough crazy prejudice to deal with without having a term like that further "affecting perception" where we are concerned.

brekin wrote:
I'm not going to the wall over this...

Really?

brekin wrote:I'm sure those previous two words can affect perception, but then I assume intelligent readers
are aware of how they are being affected and can adjust accordingly.