| Re: The Persecution Delusion |
EasyNews, UseNet made Ea .. |
| HMS Victor Victorian (VictorVictorian@NBG.com) |
2008/05/22 07:38 |
Path: news.nzbot.com!spool1.sonic-news.com!news-out.sonic-news.com!not.news-service.com!not.alt.net!not.highwinds-media.com!s02-b22!textbe01-phx!hwmnpeer02.phx!hw-filter.phx!hwmnpeer01.phx!news.highwinds-media.com!newsfeed.news2me.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!easynews-local!fe02.news.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: HMS Victor Victorian <VictorVictorian@NBG.com>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.utb.naughty-boy
Subject: Re: The Persecution Delusion
Message-ID: <9qta34dahn0gjb9af6ms6ff9kfgs1vq2ok@4ax.com>
References: <21p3341saohs9r299epopjg7u6qtog5vph@4ax.com> <Xns9AA4A867C82E1utb@207.14.116.130> <tuj5345t52rcostdbssi6sjcm7jgb1ptj3@4ax.com> <74pa345fk1usckgi064le59p3ql9hl8f12@4ax.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 129
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy!
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 13:38:24 GMT
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.fan.utb.naughty-boy:1540
X-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 01:36:36 UTC (s02-b22)
On Thu, 22 May 2008 08:31:19 -0400, 4s00th <4s00th@hushmail.com>
wrote:
>On Tue, 20 May 2008 13:26:36 GMT, HMS Victor Victorian
><VictorVictorian@NBG.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 20 May 2008 06:29:28 +0000 (UTC), Naughty Boy <naughtynaughty>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>HMS Victor Victorian <VictorVictorian@NBG.com> wrote in
>>>news:21p3341saohs9r299epopjg7u6qtog5vph@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> Are Boylovers deluded into believing their are persecuted? If so, and
>>>> if it can ever be demonstrated that persecution is justifiable, is
>>>> such persecution justified?
>>>>
>>>> The premise of the Persecution Delusion camp is that Boylovers seek
>>>> acceptance for loving boys from other historically-persecuted groups,
>>>> all of whom certain individuals of the American colour would claim are
>>>> no longer persecuted, that Boylovers depend on the acceptance of these
>>>> groups as a cover to "allow them to have sex with children."
>>>>
>>>> That is a patent lie. Boylovers require no such support from anyone,
>>>> and the social climate is such that no support would be given.
>>>> Mainstream gay organizations have disavowed any support of Boylove
>>>> organisations--not so much because they are categorically opposed to
>>>> young relationships, but to protect themselves lend legitimacy to
>>>> their own agenda by embracing a popular issue in the general society.
>>>> Again, given the present social climate in Anglo-Protestant societies,
>>>> this is completely understandable. I do not condemn them.
>>>>
>>>> Persecution is defined as the condition of being harassed or annoyed,
>>>> to insure, grieve or afflict with intent to cause harm based on a
>>>> belief or beliefs, so with reflection it is very clear that Boylovers
>>>> are persecuted. Some would say, yes, they are but for justifiable
>>>> reasons. Usually these reasons hinge on citation of heinous acts by a
>>>> very small number of individuals who are labeled Boylovers by the
>>>> persecutors.
>>>>
>>>> But aside from that observation, which has been statistically show to
>>>> be accurate, in terms of wreaking abuse, I would gladly compare the
>>>> population of Boylovers to any American population of male
>>>> heterosexuals. You will find the incidences of violence and abuse
>>>> towards both women and children far higher in the heterosexual male
>>>> population across the boards than among a similar population of
>>>> Boylovers.
>>>>
>>>> I regret that I cannot produce this equitable population of Boylovers,
>>>> for they shall not step forward in order to be identified, and I do
>>>> not blame them. Why could this possibly be? Again, society so
>>>> stigmatises Boylove that all Boylovers understand their well-being,
>>>> physical, financial, domestic and mental, would be severely
>>>> compromised if their preferences were made know. Contrary to
>>>> evidence, popular society clings (yes, even perhaps bitterly) to their
>>>> belief that merely being sexually attracted to boys constitutes a real
>>>> danger to children. Yet they are shunned, badgered, harassed, their
>>>> property destroyed and even physically assaulted when their desires
>>>> are simply suspected. They are "a danger to the children."
>>>>
>>>> There is no persuasive evidence for this position. The overwhelming
>>>> majority of Boylovers fantasize, but never pursue the object of their
>>>> desires, for a variety of reasons. Of those who have had emotional
>>>> and sexual relationships with boys, the overwhelming number of them
>>>> would never do anything to truly hurt their little friends. I think
>>>> you will find comparable numbers among the heterosexual population,
>>>> but probably not as laudable.
>>>>
>>>> Additionally, anyone who might appear to voice understanding or
>>>> sympathy for the Boylover is equally hazardous. They run a real risk
>>>> of being labeled by "society" as "paedophile enablers." Even the
>>>> debate about Boylove and paedophilia has been suppressed by
>>>> Judeo-Christian value-based NGOs, such as the Internet Watch
>>>> Foundation.
>>>>
>>>> So, there will not be a statistically viable, comprehensive study
>>>> simply because, in this time of hysteria, Boylovers will remain
>>>> anonymous.
>>>>
>>>> I completely encourage them to do so, as I do, for however you wish to
>>>> window-dress it, it is persecution of the most odious kind.
>>>
>>>All you have proven is that "boylovers" are a bunch of chickenshit wimps
>>>who are too scared to stand up for their beliefs. I refer you to Rosa
>>>Parks, Miss Ruth Brown et al.
>>
>>And you have proven that you are neither capable of engaging in
>>thoughtful intercourse or supporting your initial assertion regarding
>>persecution. Individuals of your ilk typically disengage from the
>>demands of debate by reverting to hyperbole and insults. In a sense,
>>however, your behaviour strengthens my assertion regarding the
>>comparative merits of Boylovers over people such as yourself.
>>
>>I shall say no more to you directly until you eschew the inflamatory
>>rhetoric.
>>
>>HMS Victor Victorian NP-g18
>>God Save the Queen!
>>God Preserve the Prince of Wales!
>>Rule Britannia!
>
>Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen. While Naziboi was
>pretending to be rational, I patiently engaged him in discussion for a
>sustained period -- but he couldn't keep it up. Eventually, my
>patience resulted in him showing his true colors -- a rabid, bigoted
>hater so rooted in prejudice that he cannot see beyond his own nose
>unless he can turn a profit on it or so he claims. No one should ever
>mistake him for anything else again. His long absence from these
>forums has not improved his temperament nor his rhetoric.
>
>What truly disturbs me is that these idiots are so rooted in prejudice
>that they cannot even conceive of a boy-lover who understands that one
>should not become sexually involved with boys. They have this idea
>that once one knows he is attracted to boys, that he just runs amok
>plundering them. That particular thought process tells us much about
>their reasoning.
>
>-- 4s00th@hushmail.com
>
>If you send email, I will reply to it here at asbl
>(without showing your email addy)
>unless you ask me not to.
Very good to see you again, 4s00th.
Cheers,
VV
God Save the Queen!
God Preserve the Prince of Wales!
Rule Britannia!
|
|
|