While it is great that the Liberal paper is exposing it now, don’t forget that they excused man-boy rape less than a decade ago.
It was great that a paper with wide readership reported on the man-boy rape that soldiers are punished for opposing—even if the wide readership is undeserved, and a sign of national intellectual bankruptcy that the paper still has such a wide readership. I refer, of course, to the New York Times and their story, “U.S. Soldiers Told to Ignore Sexual Abuse of Boys by Afghan Allies.”
While I am very happy that the New York Times published the story, you should know that the paper could have investigated the facts many years ago. Instead, they seemed more intent on parroting the military leadership’s line that “it is their culture.”
Thanks go to Mollie Hemmingway at The Federalist for pointing this out: “Flashback: In 2007, NYT Published Op-Ed Saying Afghan Child Rape Was No Big Deal.”
It’s somewhat odd for The New York Times to publish this expose of our toleration of the practice considering that in 2007 they published an op-ed critical of the military for not being more culturally relativist. As the 2007 op-ed notes, approvingly, if you can believe it, we turn a blind eye to child rape because our military bought into ideas from academic elites that it would be the right thing to do.
The point of the piece by Richard A. Shweder, an anthropologist and professor of comparative human development at the University of Chicago, was that we weren’t going far enough. The piece criticizes one anthropologist for wearing a uniform and being armed and worries about anthropologists being co-opted by the military to advance military missions.
She then quotes from the 2007 editorial:
Nevertheless the military voices on the show had their winning moments, sounding like old-fashioned relativists, whose basic mission in life was to counter ethnocentrism and disarm those possessed by a strident sense of group superiority. Ms. McFate stressed her success at getting American soldiers to stop making moral judgments about a local Afghan cultural practice in which older men go off with younger boys on “love Thursdays” and do some “hanky-panky.” “Stop imposing your values on others,” was the message for the American soldiers. She was way beyond “don’t ask, don’t tell,” and I found it heartwarming.
So there you have Liberal tolerance: approving of child sexual abuse.
Again: The editorial is from 2007—before Barack Obama won the White House. If you think that the problem is only the Democrats, you don’t understand the problem.
And notice that the editorial pretends that this is all consensual. Anyone who gives it any thought at all knows that boys have no equality with adult men. They are raised by men and they are weaker than men. This was man-boy rape from the beginning and the New York Times didn’t care.
In fact, the more recent New York Times story includes the question if recent homicides of our soldiers might have been carried out by a raped boy who considered the U.S. military responsible for empowering his rapist. Tell that boy that sex with a man is “part of his culture.” The mother who tried to protect her son did not think it was part of their culture. The village elders complaining to U.S. military about their decision to give males who rape children guns and authority did not think it was part of their culture.
But it is part of the culture of Liberalism.