It has now been a month since Milo Yiannopoulos’ spectacular fall from grace after it was revealed that he had defended the homosexual practice of pederasty along with hebephilia on a podcast with the Drunken Peasants. The revelation happened almost immediately after he was announced as the keynote speaker at the 2017 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). The backlash was swift and scathing, Milo was disinvited from CPAC lost his book publishing deal with Simon and Schuster and was most likely forced to resign from his position at Breitbart.
For the left and the social justice warriors Milo’s provocative views triggered them to their core. They were interested in tearing him down by any means necessary. It was quite ironic that they tore him down because of his belief that it was acceptable to have sexual relations with young teenagers, given that the left has done more than anyone to promote the early sexualisation of young people. The teenage girl who found the podcast episode described herself as ‘socially liberal’. I asked many people who were celebrating Milo’s downfall what their personal feelings were to what he said and they did not really object the comments in isloation.
The reaction of the right was more mixed, those conservative outlets who had always been hostile to Milo and the alt-right such as The Blaze and National Review said that the movement should wash its hands of Milo. Infowars, and podcasters Stefan Molyneux and Christopher Cantwell put somewhat of a defense up for Milo. The defense was that Milo did say the current age of consent laws are about right and concluded that what he said was influenced by his own sexual abuse. The Rebel Media took a much more cautious wait and see approach but did conced that Milo stuffed up. Hardcore alt-right groups disavowed Milo stating he was just another degnerate. However even some social conservatives such as Cory Bernardi offered a somewhat forgiving spin on what he said.
We discussed the scandal after it first broke but now after the dust has settled on it and all the hysteria has disappeared I have come to the conclusion that I can no longer support Milo and will no longer promote his work. It’s not just this recent controversy, there are aspects of Milo’s presentation that have been troubling me. Even though Milo raged against identity politics he himself was actually a representation of identity politics. The fact that he sold himself as gay conservative and others promoted him as such was a concession by the right to the left, the right was trying to prove we are not homophobic as we have gays in our movement as well.
It wasn’t just label of a gay conservative that was a problem, it was the fact that he shoved his gay lifestyle down everyone’s throats. If you listened to a lot of his talks like I did he made disgusting references to his gay sex life at various times, behavior that is unfitting for a person from the right. He was the very thing that we in the right were meant to oppose, because he said some things we liked didn’t make his behavior okay.
It is okay for homosexuals to be conservatives or from the right, but they should keep their sex lives to themselves. Most people are heterosexual and are naturally repulsed by homosexual relations, they can do what they want in private of course but the key word is private, not public. Milo’s flamboyancy was a stain on a movement that is supposed to stand up for sexual morality and public decency.
His promotion of pederasty was the last straw in my opinion. We are a movement that is supposed be against the sexualisation of children and other forms of degenerate behavior. We have often highlighted the disturbing trends in the left of them trying to normalize adults having sex with children. We cannot in good conscience continue to support Milo’s work and hold this position. Just because somebody is on our side on a lot of things does not mean we have to defend them to the point of absurdity. Yes, the leftie lynch mob likes to go after those high up on the right side of politics, but looking rationally at Milo’s behavior he is not worth defending.
It is time for us as a right-wing movement to disavow any further association with Milo if we want to be able to defend a moral and decent society. It is also worth noting it was probably a mistake to promote such a flaming homosexual as the voice of the right-wing resurgence. We at the Unshackled have removed Milo’s media from our resources page and will not be giving his activities any more coverage. It’s time to concede we were wrong and find more wholesome voices to promote our message to wider audiences.