Milo Yiannopoulos; who is he? An Editor with Breitbart. A provocateur against the radical fascisti of the political left. A free speech activist. An anti-radical feminist. A screaming queen and an absolute hoot. He’s a gay who has a predilection for males of an African heritage and doesn’t give a shit who knows it. Having watched quite a few of his YouTube videos I actually quite like the man, he’s funny. Anyone who annoys the pantywaisters of the radical far left (or right) is okay with me. He’s a welcome antidote to the fascist on campus PC culture currently poisoning academia and spilling out into the greater online world.
Who he isn’t; he’s not an advocate of paedophilia. Which is what a lot of people are using to throw him under the bus at the moment. What we have here is one of those accidents of imprecise language. His use of the word ‘boys’ is being taken out of context and inflated past the point of explosion. He’s even said so himself. His use of the word ‘boys’ I took to mean young men over the age of consent but still finding their adulthood. Like an eighteen or nineteen year old ‘girl’ who marries a man in his forties or even fifties. He was referring to what are known as “May to December” relationships which span a wider age range than is usual. The ‘girl’ benefits from her spouses life experience, and the man benefits from her untrammelled soul. Love, both hetero and homosexual is a funny beast, and what trips our triggers sexually speaking, is as diverse and intensely personal as it gets. Sexual preference is a bell curve, not a series of absolute positions. Not even if you’re working your way through the illustrated edition of ‘The Joy of sex‘.
Now as a boring old heterosexual I’m fairly ambivalent about gays. Not totally comfortable being in close proximity with them, but they are what they are and that is an end of it. However, if they leave me alone sexually I’m okay with them. I am not they, and they are not I. Quite frankly I find overt camp homosexuals like Milo modestly entertaining. A performer on a stage without whom life would be a lot less varied and colourful. My reaction to him is usually an amused “Oh what’s the little tinker up to now?” Because he does no harm, indeed he brings joy with his antics, unlike those from both the political left and right who would shut him up and enforce their vile, narrow minded little groupthinks upon the rest of us.
To me, Milo is a bright spot in a sea of earnest mental and political constipation. A dose of cayenne pepper in a bland tofu fricassee. An electric pink umbrella on a rainy day. Without that sparkle, that highlight, all else would be grey depressing dullness.
So yes, on this occasion I’m inclined to forgive Milo for his imprecise speech. Anyone with two working brain cells to bang together understands that Gay and Paedophile are not synonymous. Besides, he annoys the narrow minded net curtain twitchers of the Interweb, and that is a good thing, or else what would they have to give their worthless lives meaning?