Why is it that those the least capable of enjoying sex obsess on it?

Discuss.

Syncro

Y'all want freedom of expression--ya got 'er!!

"What do you call a left wing columnist who makes "grown up jokes" calling for the rape of an 11 year old girl ?"

Well according to her bio, 'an obscene nihilistic pedophile' would be apropos.

My favourite line "Only this week did Ramadge conclude that in setting fire to herself, Deveny was now scorching his paper as well"

Free speech in action - you can say it, but that does not mean approval or even an influencing of the masses as this incident proves.

Deveny is simply suffering the consequences of her words and to her shock, people were actually shocked and rid themselves of her. If she were not free to say those words, we would not know the depths of Deveny's depravity and utter lack of class, not to mention, a seemingly low level of intelligence.

"people were actually shocked and rid themselves of her. If she were not free to say those words, we would not know the depths of Deveny's depravity and utter lack of class, not to mention, a seemingly low level of intelligence.

Posted by: No-One at May 7, 2010 4:08 AM

Hear she's coming to Canada...to head up the student unions.

Said tongue firmly in cheek, irony flirting with sarcasm:

"...The Age may now lose the support of barbarians and a certain kind of resentful arts graduate, almost inevitably female and poor, who mistakes rage for truth, abuse for integrity, and unreason for mystic insight."

Unfortunately, he is more right than he knows. There is an entire business model focusing on this, and similar, demographics.

The morbidly interesting part of this story is how or why a female adult would wish an 11-year-old girl get laid, which would be rape if the "layer" is above the age of 16. Seems to me Ms. Deveny may have a tragic past herself.

I'll have to ask my psychologist and psychiatrist friends what they think.

syncro, because as the left all knows, REAL art begins and ends with sexual devaincy.

Well joe, maybe we should take a hint from the peaceful citizens of Mecca and publicly chop off her hands?

dipshit.

The Left is obsessed with the sexualization and forced "maturity" of children. Look at Roman Polanski, enforced sex ed, this incident, "using the right words for body parts," calling moms and dads by their given names, etc.

My theory is that the females want as many of their gender to be as miserable as they are, the sooner the better, and the males want to ensure a steady stream of fresh tail.

actually, i thought the joke was kind of funny. don't know who bindi irwin is, so maybe thats why i'm not as shocked and appalled as others. totally tasteless can be very funny.

most commenters here were very supportive of south park making funny but tasteless jokes just last week.

wouldn't it be more useful to concentrate on the people who mean it?

Interesting how much Catherine Deveny looks like Heather Mallick

glasnost, it is a cultivated look. Think it goes by the name "sour".

"subversible at May 7, 2010 9:05 AM

most commenters here were very supportive of south park making funny but tasteless jokes just last week."

Which tasteless joke would that be...that Mo was a pedophile!?

If that weren't so despicable and sickening to have a married man being attrachted to a pre-pubescent child and desiring to "marry" her, then doing it, I guess it could be funny...but only to the progressives!!! Correct me if I'm wrong, sub-buddy!!!

"Fresh tail" and "kathy shaidle" in the same sentence...

There go my corn flakes...

Subversible (actually, i thought the joke was kind of funny. don't know who bindi irwin is, so maybe thats why i'm not as shocked and appalled as others. totally tasteless can be very funny.) I'm trying very hard to get inside the head of anyone who would find it funny to talk about an 11 year old girl getting laid. It's not that it's tasteless. It goes beyond that. Tasteless is South Park--which I haven't followed for a while but which I recall includes a lot of jokes based on fecal matter, Eric's mom having loose morals and the recurring demises of Kenny. And yes, it can be funny and South Park can even be surprisingly poignant at times. However, these also happen to involve CARTOON characters which are not people. Those who objected to the violence in Bugs Bunny and wanted to bowdlerize them, extracting all the coyote mishaps and Yosemite Sam expostulations, seemed unable to distinguish the cartoon from the real--something that normal kids were perfectly able to do. However, when someone twits (seems more appropriate than "tweets") about a real 11 year old girl getting laid...doesn't that cross some sort of boundary--even if you can't exactly define it? Do we have to relegate everything to the category of "tasteless" in our effort to seems to blase and sophisticated? I don't think so. It's not merely tasteless. It shows a vacancy of the soul that should be challenged. There are many more things being said that should be similarly challenged. The writer of this column did it magnificently.

my point is, last week, we're supposed to be upset that south park is being censored from making fun of something.

this week, we're supposed to be upset that some australian woman wasn't censored for making fun of something.

i understand that we are supposed to say, yes, the south park guys are actually funny and intelligent and pointed with there jokes, while this aussie tweeter is rude and horrible.

i'm just trying to say we should focus on the serious stories. like the girl in saudi arabia who was not allowed to DIVORCE until she reached 12 years of age, the thinking being only then would she be able to make a proper rational decision. That kind of story is much more worthy of our anger and wrath than an off-the-cuff tweet that was clearly intended as a joke.

Submersible--one could argue that there is always something worse and that we should save our anger for the more worthy causes. But I don't see how objecting to one thing prevents a person from feeling very deeply about another. If we reserve our indignation for only the very worst things, how long will it be before they really don't seem so very bad? Because it's always possible to find yet another atrocity or horror to diminish and neutralize the first. It's a kind of obfuscation very familiar to politicians--take the heat off by sending the hounds to chase another rabbit.

lets get a couple of things clear here:

the joke made was something along the lines of "i hope bindi irwin gets laid tonight"

so the joke is about statutory rape rather than rape. this detail is probably not enough to get most of you to take a step down from the moral high ground, but i'll tell you why i think it is significant. it means that the joke (crass as it was) was more a comment on why this young girl was at the award show at all. the girl was being thrust into an adult situation, and this aussie woman decided to use sex as the extreme situation to serve as background for her joke.

does that make the joke funnier? of course not. but i can't turn around and get all indignant and angry at this woman because she made a bad joke in poor taste.

Joe and subversible -

I haven't seen anybody here arguing that Catherine Deveny should have been prevented from saying the things that she did. Just as Ms. Deveny was exercising her right of free speech, others here are exercising theirs. Criticizing somebody is also speech.

On a completely unrelated note, I'll be posting as Iowa Jim from now on. The moving van left yesterday, and I leave California this afternoon. I expect that watching California's state and local governments melt down over the next few years will be far less unpleasant from 1,800 or so miles away.

Must be a friend of David Letterman (remember his comments about Sarah Palin's daughter)

Is this why the 'loose-left Devenys of the world' and the 'latte liberal media' went so ballistic when Sarah Palin walked on stage? Perhaps they saw her as a threat to their 'fresh tail' freedoms? Am I wrong?

(Iowa Jim, my "Kids" are loading the moving van in San Francisco as we type.)

Andrew Bolt - an amazing artilleryman/wordsmith whose barrage of accurately aimed, properly fuzed, words land unerringly and devastatingly, without respite, on hapless, totally uncomprehending, leftist targets.

Say there, In-Transit Jim, did you remember to turn off the light or are you leaving that for the last one out?

Nathan
[....Must be a friend of David Letterman (remember his comments about Sarah Palin's daughter)]

Exactely my thoughts. I had to google to learn just who Bindi is....not that that is terribly relevant.

I felt a bit dirty just having this kid's image and somebody proposing her sexual assault in my consciousness simultaneously....And I consider myself somewhat broad-minded....

This remark by this Leftist floozy is a form of kiddy-porn.....not kool, clever or acceptable....nuf said.

My conclusions mirror kath Shaidle's and Rita's. Both expressed my thoughts more adroitly than I likely could have.

As others posted this pervert's thoughts were not censored but were censured/criticised which is a vast difference.

Much, much bigger threats to free speech are abroad....

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/mowing-down-the-grassroots/

"actually, i thought the joke was kind of funny. don't know who bindi irwin is, so maybe thats why i'm not as shocked and appalled as others. totally tasteless can be very funny." ---- I didn't know who Bindi Irwin was either(I do now),but I do know that those who can sluff off "jokes" about raping children should never be allowed near children. You are in that category.

Bindi is Steve (Crocodile Hunter) Irwin's daughter and she's has her own kiddie nature show in Oz. She's a doll.

Noone is suggesting threatening this icky woman with beheading, or even taking away her freedom to tweet things. Her paper had every right to fire her when they decided she was too horrible for them (although, really, her union must suck. I thought nobody was ever allowed to be fired anymore, especially lefties). I think the point of the post was just to illustrate how depraved these people are.

thank you wally.

if you read further in the comments, you may understand why i do not think the intent of the joke is about raping children at all. even if you choose to take the joke in its worst possible context, it indicates statutory rape, not rape, but of course it makes a bigger splash to just call it rape.

obviously, you feel the need to segregate me from society based on the quality of my arguments. do you think young tweens should be segregated from each other solely because they can and sometimes do engage in sexual acts with each other? because that is the very worst of what the joke in question implies.

getting into a raging moral fervour over a poorly thought out joke is not worthwhile. i urge you to direct your anger towards more important matters.

subversible - I don't know what you've been watching, but psychologically healthy 11-year-old girls do not "engage in sexual acts" with anyone. Trust me on this one.

(BTW - Rape which is not or not "merely" statutory is now referred to as "rape-rape". Whoopi Goldberg has added this expression to the English lexicon.)

Subversible, I will not debate you on this subject. One question though,Do you understand that the expression "getting laid" requires penetration?

black mamba, i concede your point. i am still of the mind that the joke was not about rape at all, but was a misguided attempt to use sex as a backdrop for a poorly informed social comment. ie, a bad joke.

wally, removing yourself from the debate is not a good opener for asking silly questions. or any questions at all, really.

Black Mamba

Yup. Well said. I watched 48 hours last night. These 15 year olds,one of which where killed trying to rob someone. Speak about taking the bus down town, to rob someone for shoes. Like you decide to go to an arcade or shopping mall. Now that was chilling.
JMO

La Shaidle is right, as usual.

Eroticizing children is a new frontier. Remember, for the sickest elements of the intellectual class, nothing must be forbidden, and the only evil is constraint.

I'm an agnostic; however, it is clear to me that the anathematization of the sexualization of the very young was something Judaio-Christianity imposed on Greco-Roman culture, much to everyone's benefit.

In the "you might be a Liberal" category: What to make of a mindset which insists that gender differences (to use a loaded terminology) are socially constructed, but sexual orientation is hardwired? Bearing in mind that the notion of "sexual orientation" is hardly going to be confined to hetero-and -homosexuality, which in and of itself is a pretty innocuous dichotomy, IMO.

Ah, so that's who Bindi is...ok

Facts are: this woman ( herself in media business ) 'exercised her right to free speech' in wishing publicly that this child 'gets laid' on a twitter post?
This posted while the child is on a tv show about nature?

See no new problem here, except that the left is as vile as ever.
Dumbass exercised her right to free speech;
-as did her capitalistic employer by firing her butt;
-and now the public does as well, in expressing their views about this vile woman's 'humor' of child rape.
This is not funny and not about free speech.
Maybe only those who can view 11 yr olds as sexual equals can joke as if they're adult equals or find humor in that kind of crap... know that I sure don't.