On 10 Dec 2010 18:13:01 -0600, Prince William <queen@elisabeth.com>
wrote:
>Doc NP-f31 wrote in news:k5gkf65m3s9b8h8o1dgvj1qp82ln6djthb@4ax.com:
>
>> On 04 Dec 2010 02:12:40 GMT, insane4boyz <nevermind@notsaying.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Damn, I know what L just wrote was directed at No Pubes, but reading
>>>how it messed him and his younger friend up brought tears to my eyes.
>>
>> Hey IFB,
>>
>> That's the whole point of these posts. People like 'Sir Charles'
>
>
>"People like this one...!!, people like this other...." echoes the
>priest (with his unmistakable instructive tone): how tragic, the
>civilization is left in the hands of the most obstinate and noisy
>people, the charlatans. We can't escape our FATE, can we?
And your point is....?
>You know, my obtuse Dog, there is a problem when a person like you
>arrives to the assumption that there are priority lessons to learn from
>him. Vanitas vanitatis... says the poet. Well ok, let's play the game.
Clearly, my dear Prince, my e-mail is not directed to you. You sir,
are beyond the pale. I write for those who are in the process of
forming their opinions on what to do about their sexuality. I also, as
a person who was abused as a child, speak for myself and other boys
who found themselves on the receiving end of some man's prick,
sometimes against their will.
>There are a lot of things to be said, but then again the main problem is
>my intermittent interest in you. I beg your pardon, and if you don't
>mind I will structure my discourse in little answers to your tiresome
>assertions. I know it is a lesser form of composition, but then again,
>who cares! Time is precious!
In asking me questions, you present no argument. So you are saying
nothing. Again.
>But before we can continue the show, a couple of questions you'll be so
>kind to reply, oh superior father:
>
>Why a 17yo british boy talks as an old cockroach from Maine?
If you bother to read either of his e-mails, you will see why. Duh.
>Is a 17yo recently-abused presumptuous boy the most indicated person to
>judge about man-boy sex?
Who better to judge the merits of man-boy sex than a boy who has
experienced it himself? L was abused from 8-12 years old. He is five
years beyond his abuse and has completed his counseling. I would say
that he is better qualified to discuss it than most people. Should you
ask his abuser to comment? Well, he can't, he's in jail for thirty
years.
>If a terrorism victim is called to participate in a talk show about
>terrorism, how do you call it, democratic exercise or cheap demagogy?
I would call it neither, what an absurd choice. Is your implication
that L should not comment on child sexual abuse because he was a
so-called 'victim' of it? Is his opinion any less valid because he was
abused?
Honestly, what rational point are you trying to make?
>As a 'boylover confessor', do you absolve at will, or are you subjected
>to ulterior authorities?
I neither judge nor absolve. I am not without sin. I have a view and I
espouse it. If you have a view you have yet to state it.
>Is the DHM-LL affair a paradigm of boy-adult relations?
God, I hope not.
>Do you agree that every lurker in the groups is a potential abuser?
No. I know for a fact that some aren't.
>Does every boy in the world opine in your favor?
What a ridiculous, pointless question. I love boys, does that suffice?
In an argument between boy's rights and boylover's rights I will come
down on the side of the boy every time.
>At what point in your
>life did you believe that childhood had to speak through your voice?
When I figured out that I was a boylover, I had to decide what I was
going to do with that knowledge. I knew I wasn't going to spend my
life taking advantage of boys for my own sexual gratification. I
discovered, in The Fort, a soapbox to advocate for boys and to
influence the decisions of emerging boylovers as people like Ninja and
Priest@TheOldTemple did for me. I have had a good measure of success
and those who attempt to take a contradictory stand, for example to
advocate for having sex with boys whenever possible tend, to look bad
in an argument with me because they cannot make a rational argument
for sexually dominating a young boy. I suspect that's why you don't
attempt to engage me in a dialogue, you simply insult me and hurl
questions at me. Neither tactic seems to be very effective.
>Are these assimilated oppinions supposed to be more relevant than any other
>person here?
Well, that depends on your perspective, doesn't it? Aleka gave me an
opportunity to let boys speak for themselves about the experience of
sexual abuse and rape. What they said apparently doesn't sit well with
you. So you use the only tactics available to you: 1) Attempt to
discredit the boys (not smart) and 2) Attempt to redirect the
conversation (unsuccessful) with questions and trying to make the
discussion about me, which it isn't. My 'opinion' is no more or less
important than anyone else's. However, you are here in The Fort where
I am known quantity and you are a question mark. Those who know me
will not be surprised by what I say. People love me or they hate me,
but I am pretty consistent. You, on the other hand, are rude and seems
to have no real point to your posts. Eventually they will ignore you.
If you have a point to make, my advice is to make it clearly and
directly. Let people judge you on the merit of your argument, not on
your ability to hurl invectives or be condescending.
>Please, my loving Dog, include into your fate-time a moment to reply all
>these questions.
>I will by doubly pleased if you take your time, I usually do it myself
If you have a point to make, I'd be pleased if you would make it....
Doc
NP-f31
|
|