On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 21:53:28 -0600, victorvictorian@hushmail.com
wrote:
>On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 21:13:46 -0400, NP-f31 wrote:
>
>>A BL friend wrote to me the other day about a date he recently had
>>with a woman who is a nurse. She worked in palliative care and was
>>talking about the death of one of her patients that had just occurred.
>>As it turns out this patient had been a 12 year old terminally ill
>>boy. The date had imbibed a few drinks and her tongue was loosened.
>>She began to explain to my friend that she had granted the dying wish
>>of this boy. He had, over a series of days, told her that the one
>>thing he didn't want to do was die a virgin and that she was his only
>>hope. She is an attractive woman, by the way. One day not long before
>>he died she was assisting him in the shower and he implored her to
>>touch him. She said she felt sorry for him, and she ended up making
>>love to the boy and added that it was an enjoyable experience for the
>>both of them. This really got the attention of my BL friend, it
>>intrigued him to say the least. He told her that he wasn't judging her
>>and that what she did was an unselfish act. Armed with that knowledge
>>she admitted to my friend that this wasn't the first terminally ill
>>adolescent she'd sent to heaven a man. Then she told him that she knew
>>of many hospice nurses who had done the same thing. How many? She
>>didn't say. This absolutely blew my friend's mind. He wondered what my
>>feelings were on the subject and I told him. I'll share them with you
>>too and I hope you'll share your feelings on the subject as well.
>>
>>Here is what I think:
>>
>>I think that nurses who have sex with terminally ill boys are
>>fulfilling their own fantasies, not some boy's dying wish. Put the
>>shoe on the other foot, if a male nurse had been asked the same
>>question by a terminally ill 12 year old girl, the male nurse would
>>be seen as a rapist, especially by the drunken nurse. She
>>wanted those 12 year old boys for the same reason we, as BLs, would.
>>She has convinced herself that she was fulfilling his final wish. What
>>she really did was seduce and rape him. That's how it would be seen if
>>we did it. I won't allow her to live in a double standard world. What
>>if the boy had been gay? Would she have sought out a male nurse to
>>service him? No, she was living out her fantasies and she's justified
>>it in her mind because the kids were dying. What if either boy had
>>made a miraculous recovery? What would she be then? A statutory
>>rapist. Just because the boy dies doesn't make it okay. If you and I,
>>as boylovers, have to go to jail for making love to a boy who wants us
>>to, then she has to also. Otherwise, when is rape not a rape? When a
>>woman does it? Tell that to Mary Kay Laterno. If the boy is dying?
>>Well, that would lead to a rash of rape-murders, wouldn't it?
>>
>>I think this scenario shows the whole ingrained bias against man/boy
>>relationships. I guarantee you if it were the other way around, man
>>and girl, she would be horrified and so would her hospice boy rapist
>>friends.
>>
>>Your thoughts solicited...
>>
>>Doc
>>NP-f31
>
>My Dear Doc,
>
>I feel sorry for the young fellow. When one reaches that age, one
>becomes acutely aware of being on the doorstep of manhood, with all of
>the expectations one has heard from friends and family as to what
>makes a "real man." If indeed the story was true, the lad had learned
>he would be unfulfilled if he were to die a virgin. How preposterous,
>of course, but very sad, don't you think?
>
>If the nurse felt she were "doing the lad a favour" by sending him to
>heaven as a "real man," that is equally preposterous and equally
>tragic.
>
>But if she acted to satisfy and confort him, then she is as an angel.
>
>To your argument. You state that nurses (presumably both men and
>women) are fulfilling their own fantasies rather than the desire of
>their younger partners. First, what should be so surprising or
>objectionable about that? Second, if the younger partner makes such a
>request and enjoys the experience, what should be so objectionable
>about that? That a male nurse would be "seen as a rapist" is
>precisely that ... SEEN ... by OTHERS, as a rapist ... completely
>irrespective of the feelings of the younger partner. We are so
>constrained by society, to such a great extent by gender roles. Men
>are seen as predatory ... women as sympathetic and nurturing. There
>have been cases, several of which I am certain you are familiar, where
>a woman, most particularly a teacher, had been accused and convicted
>of "rape" of a male student. Yet I hazard that these women do not
>suffer near the punishment NOR the ostricisation that men do, because
>of society's view of the nature of men and women.
>
>We are also constrained, perhaps unfairly and inaccurately, by
>society's view of sex ... what the sexual feeling really is, who is
>capable of feeling it and what it signifies, how a sexual act is
>defined, and who may or may NOT engage in sexual acts. These rules
>are less fundamental or, for that matter natural, than they are
>arbitrary ... rules simply created by any society--groups of people
>adhering to a traditional code of behaviour-- to organize and control
>members of that society. So the idea that a grown woman and a young
>boy or girl, or a grown man and the same, could not mutually enjoy
>sexual contact, and that the younger partner would be fundamentally
>scarred from the experience in all cases, is only substantiated in a
>society that upholds that idea.
>
>Thus you state that the nurse "raped" him. Did she? How are you
>defining rape, and from whence do you get the inspiration for that
>definition, sir? You also state that, because a man engaging in a
>similar act with a girl (or, for that matter, a boy) will invariably
>be judged a rapist and sent to jail ... therefore so should the woman
>be punished in like.
>
>I recall Ted's signature line here ... "An Unjust Law is Not Law."
>Boylovers are subjected to the most heinous and draconian laws and
>punishments for loving a boy. You would therefore subject women who
>love boys or girls to the same injustice?
>
>And should this be overturned (which, of course, it will not) would
>that lead to a rash of rape-murders? I think you overstate
>considerably here, for emotion-stirring purposes. Of course not. It
>is the law itself that has oft led to this terrible end. For Love
>does not Murder the object of its desire. Hatred does.
>
>Lastly, you state that the scenario shows an ingrained bias against
>man/boy relationships. Yes, in a sense, I suppose. But you know, all
>our biases are learned ...
>
>A very wise doctor once told me, "Any LOVE is GOOD love." Let the two
>of them be.
>
>With all due respect,
>
>VV
>God Save the Queen!
>God Bless the House of Windsor!
>Rule Britannia!
Hey Double V!
A GREAT post! I took a narrow view on purpose from the perspective
that if a man did the same thing to a boy like the ones mentioned that
he would be severely punished.
Your idealistic view is a beautiful one. And your post is exactly the
sort of discussion I had hoped to create.
Much love,
Doc
NP-f31
|
|