I came across an article where writer Mo Kelly of "The Mo Kelly Report" stated the following:
If you check those same Black media outlets decrying the mistreatment of Black children in Pennsylvania, you will likely find write-ups celebrating the impending release of the forthcoming R. Kelly CD…Black Panties.
It’s ok to promote the alleged Black pedophile and his project Black Panties, while simultaneously assail[ing] Penn State and Jerry Sandusky?
Are we more willing to accept abusers who look like “us?”
So is that true? While I am not sure I fully agree with that statement I don't see this as race thing, but more of a sex thing. It appears that a lot of society may be more disturbed about a grown man introducing homosexuality to an under aged boy than they are disturbed by a grown man engaging in sex with an under aged girl.
Often times, when an under aged girl is violated, there is a side of society that feels that these under aged girls are "fast" and partially responsible. I must say that I have heard a lot of people quick to condemn the girl in R.Kelly's situation for being a young slut despite the fact R. Kelly has a history of being attracted to under aged girls (Aaliyah and child pornography charges).
Let me state my issues with Mo' Kelly's statement...
1. Not EVERYONE Black Still Supports R. Kelly:
I am black and I do not support R. Kelly. That statement does not apply to me. Whether a man has sex with and under aged or barely of age boy or girl the fact of the matter is still the same. That grown adult man STILL took advantage of an under aged person and it is against the law and disgusting.
Since the human port-a-potty situation, R. Kelly has lost a great deal of his fan base and will always be known as Mr. Piss on You. He is the butt of many jokes (think Dave Chapelle's parody on R. Kelly) and can not live that down.
2. Both Men Are Disgusting:
I feel that both men are disgusting. In one case a man violated children who came to him from and underprivileged situation who needed a male role model and he took advantage of that situation by using them for his own sick sexual fantasies. In the other situation, a man took advantage of a girl who was probably star struck like many teenage girls and used her face as a toilet for his own sick sexual fantasies.
Do you agree with Mo' Kelly's statement? Is this a race thing or a sex of the violated party thing? Is one predator given more forgiveness by society than the other?
To me Sandusky's acts were more heinous because he was abusing young boys & messing up their senses of sexual identity. Now that I've written that, I realize that had it been a young girl, she too may have been messed up mentally but not to the same extent.ReplyDelete
Either way, abuse of children is very wrong.