The whole Milo Yiannopoulos thing popped up on FLG's radar not long before the riots at Berkeley, back when there was a shooting in Seattle. FLG watched some videos, read some writings. Thought he was a definitely a troll, maybe a misogynist, but didn't see evidence of white supremacist statements and was uncomfortable with people using such labels so blithely. And he certainly thought there were left-leaning reporters who were biased against Yiannopoulos, his supporters, and generally those who came to listen to him.
Next thing FLG knows, the man is on Bill Maher. And like five seconds later, he's accused of supporting pedophilia, loses his book deal, and resigns from Breitbart. Something about it didn't quite sit right with FLG. Were Yiannopoulos' statements portrayed correctly? Why did a year old interview all of a sudden get national attention? Seemed weird.
As part of FLG's research into this issue this evening, he came across this video, which has that crazy series of connections that one has trouble following, which is so common of conspiracy theories, but nevertheless did make FLG want to learn more about GamerGate. Because after a little more googling, FLG is actually a little bit concerned that there are a coordinating group of hardcore progressives in the media who were involved in GamerGate, who were burned and believe revenge is a dish best served cold. (Because despite what the media portrays, FLG things the gamers actually won GamerGate.) If if that's true, he'd like to at least be aware who they are. At the same time, he's only slightly less worried he's getting into tinfoil hat zone and overlooking intentionally hateful speech, rather than just extremely provocative jokes.
Anyway, FLG is very confused about the whole thing. A large reason why is that he simply doesn't trust journalists to report fairly and accurately on this topic, which means no sources a credible, and the it takes way more time than he really cares to put into it to figure out the truth. Milo seemed to have said that the legal age of consent was about right, but that his personal experience led him to believe it's an arbitrary age decided in law and that some individuals may be, in fact, be able to engage in sexual activity at a younger age without negative ramifications, perhaps even beneficially, but Yiannopoulos, as far as FLG can tell, didn't advocate changing the law, nor breaking the law.
By the way, you might be asking....FLG, he was a troll who said a variety of mean things, some consider the things he said to be the various -ists (sexist, racist, etc), now it appears he said something supportive of pedophilia, why are you even worried about it? He's not a sympathetic character and it's not worth the effort to find out. Agreed, he's not sympathetic, but FLG hates the outright mischaracterization and bias of reporting about Yianopoulos. Troll? Definitely. Misogynist? FLG thinks somethings he said could be considered misogynist. White supremacist / Neo-Nazi? Nope, didn't see that. And it matters to FLG a great deal to see people called something when there isn't evidence of it. (Though, in fairness, he did say some kinda nice things about some of the more white supremacist / Neo-Nazi wing of the Alt-Right, but FLG doesn't think that's the same thing.)
Similarly, FLG is also concerned about the people on the Left's increasing accusations of so-called dogwhistles. That's literally saying that the meaning of the word is different from the commonly understood meaning of the word, so they said one thing but mean another thing that is horrible, but they didn't actually say the horrible thing you have to take their political enemies word that they meant the horrible thing. It's dangerous allow frivolous claims of this type to become normalized.
To close out a meandering post, FLG is similarly concerned about the post-Truth Trump stuff, but he thinks that's being analyzed to the hilt. He doesn't need to add yet another post on how Trump's relationship with the truth is a threat to our republic.