Yuck! A 52 yr old MAN Having CyberSex with a 16 yr old BOY?

[leftchick]

Has anyone on TV mentioned he is a Pedophile? I wonder why the boys parents did not come forward a year ago when this happened. It makes me wonder how many children he has assaulted in his 52 years. He should be in fucking jail!

:puke:




WASHINGTON - In a scandal guaranteed to anger parents, a prominent House Republican has resigned after the revelation that he exchanged raunchy electronic messages with a teenage boy, a former congressional page.

<snip>

Foley, 52, had been a shoo-in for a new term until the e-mail correspondence surfaced in recent days. The page was 16 at the time of the correspondence.

[Demoiselle]

1. Um...you're not saying that it's ok for a 22 year old, are you? (eom)

[Schema Thing]

3. It would be legal, in Florida

[donco6]

7. Say more.

I'm curious where you're coming from with that.

[dkofos]

2. Well, he is a republicon. What did you expect??

[lpbk2713]

4. Jail? He's a rethuglican. They will give him a medal.

Remember Tom 'Bug Man' DeLay?

They will hold a banquet in honor of his 'retirement' and in recognition of his 'loyalty and dedication to his country'. They will be in denial the whole time.

[lumberjack_jeff]

6. You're doing a heck of a job Foley. n/t

[Kansas Wyatt]

5. Do You Know Where Your Children Are?

Republican pedophiles are trying to molest them.
Reject Republicans.
Do it for the children.

[rman]

8. Many cons are so immature,

they are afraid of adult sex.
Twisted souls they are.

[mike_c]

9. setting aside Foley for just a minute, what the hell is CYBERSEX...?

Is it better or worse than "phone sex?" Note-- I'm not defending Foley-- I've read the parts of his emails that were published (and I suspect that his resignation was more than simply correlated with the fact that news organizations had them) and it's clear to me that he is probably a pedophile of one sort or another.

But CYBERSEX? I mean, in my day one could choose from a wide variety of partners, but when it came time to do the nasty there was really only one way to do it and that involved exchanging body fluids, a certain amount of messiness, sweat, etc. Heavy breathing. Slap and tickle. Whatever.

Cybersex would seem to be a euphemism for "talking about sex," just like "phone sex." Maybe I'm not prudish enough for the twenty-first century, but it seems to me that "cybersex" is not much different from a hot scene in a bodice ripping novel-- somebody writing about sex, and somebody reading about it. The only thing that's different, and the part that makes folks uncomfortable, is that it's private and personal rather than public and paid for. Foley's case is more complicated of course, since it involves an adult and a boy, but nonetheless it was still writing and reading about sexual desires, not making a wet spot on the bed.

So what part of CYBERSEX is actually objectionable? What part actually has anything to do with, well, SEX?

[mongo]

10. Solicting a minor for sex

is the crime of "importuning" -- and is a felony in most states.

It is presumed that in engaging in cyber sex, the ultimate goal is to have a RL meeting.

[mike_c]

11. I just find the whole notion of "cybersex" a bit ridiculous....

I feel the same way about "phone sex," a misnomer if ever I've heard one. Like I say, maybe I'm just not prudish enough for the twenty-first century....

[mongo]

12. Well, to be honest

I find age of consent laws to be archaic and arbitrary in general.

A 16yo can have consentual sex with a 17yo but not a 19yo -- how does that make any sense?

That being said, a line has to be drawn somewhere. But all the folks who say that a 16yo can't give consent to sex are just blinded by their own prudishness.

[NV Whino]

13. you are missing the point

The point is an adult "soliciting" a minor, whether it be in person, over the phone or via e-mail is immaterial.

[mike_c]

17. no I'm not-- I made it clear that what Foley did was abhorent...

...if in fact he actually solicited a minor to have real sex. I was questioning the use of the term "cybersex" in the OP-- and I still question it. Have we become such prudes that we get upset about people-- including absolute strangers-- talking about sex, whether on the phone or the internet? Can we even define such behavior as "sex" so that we can apply standards of sexual morality to it? What does that say about our standards of morality? Is calling up a "phone sex" service equivalent to visiting prostitutes, or is it more akin to reading a racy story? Even discussing "cybersex" seems incredibly victorian, IMO.

[kestrel91316]

16. (pssssttttt, Mike C: in phone sex and cyber sex there is

often, if not most of the time, real live sex in the form of masturbation by both parties going on)

It's not just words. It's acts.

[mike_c]

18. so masturbation is "sex"? Or immoral?

Like I say, it's hard for me to extend the notion of "sex" to two people who are not even in the same state, let alone in the same room with one another. Clearly, soliciting sex-- real sex-- is another matter, and that's why I tried to make it clear that I'm not defending Foley. I'm just not sure that "cybersex" even exists, so it's doubly hard to get too lathered up about it. edit-- no pun intended. Really.

[kestrel91316]

19. Masturbation is a type of sexual activity. It is not sexual intercourse.

Neither is immoral on its face.

But for an adult, aged 52 and in a position of power, to engage in any sexual activity of a deliberately stimulating nature with a 16-yr-old CHILD, even on the phone or over the internet, is immoral IMHO. And I believe it's also illegal.

Foley is a sexual predator. He was either reinforcing a prior sexual relationship with the kid with ongoing online chat, or was grooming him in anticipation of a future sexual relationship.

I don't even HAVE kids and i can see that this is something he should not have been doing.

[Withywindle]

21. Same reason people under 18 aren't allowed to call phone sex lines...

I have trouble getting as lathered up about it too, honestly...when it comes right down to it, it's just typing and wanking. (and yes, I've done it.) Nobody ever got a disease or unwanted pregnancy from cybersex.

But the law is there to protect minors from exploitive and abusive sexual situations of all kinds. I don't agree with some people who think a 16-year-old is never capable of meaningful consent (it IS the age of consent in several states, and many other countries such as the UK) but I understand why the law exists to prevent this kind of psychological predation. It *can* lead to worse things, after all.

[NashVegas]

15. Speaking As Someone Who's Actually HAD Cybersex

My opinion on the chat transcript is that is it NOT cyber. It's a discussion on sexual matters, it's a flirty discussion on sexual matters, but no actual simulation took place.

[originalpckelly]

14. HUSH MONEY! No one keeps quiet without hush money.

That is why they felt confident enough to keep Foley, they had probably paid the parents off.

[Tansy_Gold]

20. Regarding the parents . . . .

I'm not sure when this little lightbulb went on in my head, but I **think** it's starting to make some sense.

In August 2005, Page XXX who worked for Rep. Rodney Alexander, exchanged some questionable emails with Rep. Mark Foley. When the emails made Page XXX uncomfortable, said page reported them to Alexander's office. Alexander notified the parents and the parents said they didn't want to pursue the matter.

If the material Alexander notified XXX's parents about was the emails about birthday gifts and photos, I can understand why the parents would not have wanted to pursue. These emails were a bit creepy, but not damning.

The IM exchanges, however, appear to have involved either another page -- Page YYY -- or other teens not even in the page program. So if Mr & Mrs XXX weren't apprised of the IMs, they would have little reason to be outraged.

So far, I haven't seen anything about when the IM transcripts were made available to Boehner, Hastert, Shimkus, et al, nor any details on whether the parents of the teen in those IMs were notified. In fact, Page XXX and his parents may not have known of the IMs until they were made public.

If all this is an accurate assessment, then I think it's time to back off any accusations leveled against the XXX family -- unless and until we learn how much they knew and when they knew it.

And if I've missed something, feel free to enlighten me.

Tansy Gold, who wishes there were some way to get rid of the pukes in AZ. . . .hayworth. . .kyl. . . . flake. . . . . so long as it doesn't involve putting children at risk. . . . .