| Re: Do boylovers hurt boys? Yes, no, maybe ? |
Her Majesty's Service |
| HMS Victor Victorian (VV@19thCent.net) |
2007/06/28 07:40 |
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-b01.iad!textbe01-phx!hwmnpeer02.phx!hw-filter.phx!hwmnpeer01.phx!hwmnpeer01.lga!news.highwinds-media.com!news.glorb.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!easynews-local!fe04.news.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: HMS Victor Victorian <VV@19thCent.net>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.utb.naughty-boy
Subject: Re: Do boylovers hurt boys? Yes, no, maybe ?
Organization: Her Majesty's Service
Reply-To: PrinceAlbert@RuleBritannia
Message-ID: <age783t2te62h11hf1cnm4i90ggvua3t4k@4ax.com>
References: <myaddress-2FD609.21114316062007@news.easynews.com> <4nl083p4hhstv7dlobtmdhr1kfa904ci6n@4ax.com> <84u083dpdp55ts39tgbac21q1q69qjg3fe@4ax.com> <a5e383dkld3d9r8dgkhctlmiblao1o1dkd@4ax.com> <t9j383h4c7knmv2rdiirbsje6392975400@4ax.com> <2k1683pmt89asncgj10mgv3oefv08839ia@4ax.com> <s57683h1r6gn8211jlkbvd88idilpocp2g@4ax.com> <myaddress-99A876.07492328062007@news.easynews.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: 144
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
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, 28 Jun 2007 13:40:50 GMT
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.fan.utb.naughty-boy:169
X-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:07:55 UTC (s02-b01.iad)
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 05:49:37 GMT, the non <myaddress@server.co> wrote:
>In article <s57683h1r6gn8211jlkbvd88idilpocp2g@4ax.com>,
> HMS Victor Victorian <VV@19thCent.net> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 01:02:35 GMT, Dude With the Hair
>> <DudeWiththe(REMOVE)Hair@hushmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 02:49:40 GMT, HMS Victor Victorian
>> ><VV@19thCent.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >>On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 01:33:59 GMT, Dude With the Hair
>> >><DudeWiththe(REMOVE)Hair@hushmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 02:34:57 GMT, HMS Victor Victorian
>> >>><VV@19thCent.net> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>*Saving bandwidth*
>> >>>
>> >>>>>As for guidelines for intergenerational relationships, I can distill
>> >>>>>the right path down to one simple mantra:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>If we put our boys first in all things, then we will succeed in all of
>> >>>>>our goals for them.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>Thanks again The Non, for the thoughtful informative post.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>Doc
>> >>>>>NP-f31
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>Boys First, Last and Always
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Taking your mantra to a logical extension ...
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Given the nature of Western Judeo-Christian society, a boylover who
>> >>>>has a consensual intimate relations with a young friend, however that
>> >>>>might be expressed, harms the boy through his own irresponsibility,
>> >>>>knowing that if the relationship is exposed, the boy could be
>> >>>>stigmatized by the very society that claims to protect his interests.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>This, then, is 4s00th's position.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Is it yours?
>> >>>>Is it The Non's?
>> >>>
>> >>>In my practice and world view that scenario will have been thoroughly
>> >>>disscussed, debated and decided upon by both parties before any
>> >>>consenual act ever takes place. Given your example, you can see why I
>> >>>believe intergenerational sexual relationships should only be acted
>> >>>upon after months of eduation, thought and heartfelt discussion
>> >>>between partners who condider each other equals.
>> >>>
>> >>>Doc
>> >>>NP-f31
>> >>>
>> >>>>Most respectfully,
>> >>>>VV
>> >>>>God Save Her Majesty the Queen.
>> >>>>God Preserve the Prince of Wales.
>> >>>>Rule Britannia!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Yet, you must concede, my dear friend, that although a man and a boy
>> >>may have serious discussions regarding intimacy, and that the boy may
>> >>eagerly desire such intimacy, there is a real danger that should the
>> >>relationship "come out" in public, the boy will be stigmatized,
>> >>perhaps feel humiliation and suffer degredation--in other words, be
>> >>harmed.
>> >>
>> >>Let me tell you a story. I know of a boy, who was "involved" with a
>> >>man much older than he. Once an investigation was completed, the
>> >>older man went to prison for twenty years. The boy at the time of the
>> >>man's arrest was twelve or thirteen years old. By the time the trial
>> >>ended and the whole scenario became public, he was just entering
>> >>secondary.
>> >>
>> >>One morning, a passerby found him in a deep ravine, upon the rocks
>> >>below a highway bridge, dead. He had thrown himself off in an
>> >>attempt, tragically successful, to commit suicide. It was explained
>> >>to me that he had been so unmercifully taunted and degraded by his
>> >>school mates for being "so-and-so's wife" etc. that he had been driven
>> >>to self destruction.
>> >>
>> >>Is this outcome substantially the fault, then, of the man who loved
>> >>the boy and got caught?
>> >>
>> >>Respectfully submitted.
>> >
>> >No, that outcome was the results of kids being tough on other kids.
>> >And the real blame lies on the media who would publish the name of a
>> >minor in such a case. That should never have happened.
>> >
>> >Doc
>> >NP-f31
>>
>> It seems peculiar to me that, during the course of this thread, I have
>> been alternating responses between you and The Non ... a tag team
>> endeavor, I suppose.
>>
>> Let me address your second statement first. This event occurred in a
>> small, rural community, so to my knowledge the name of the minor was
>> never published. Don't delude yourself. Everyone at school knew.
>> Every kid knew who the older man was and which boys spent considerable
>> time with him. Many of those boys, among them the tragic suicide,
>> suffered the slings and arrows of their classmates being "tough" on
>> them. One boy, who was known as quite the tough, responded by beating
>> up his accuser. That ended his torment. The more sensitive and less
>> aggressive lads weren't so lucky and they certainly weren't spared.
>>
>> Which brings me to your first statement. Why is it that makes "kids
>> being tough on other kids?" Although The Non has accused, and
>> rightfully so, the adult moral "authorities" of stigmatizing a boy, is
>> not the telling damage done not by them but by the boy's very
>> classmates, his peers and acquaintances? What is it that predisposes
>> kids to act in such an unsympathetic way as to drive a boy to suicide?
>> I can assure you it is a trait that many cultures do not share.
>>
>> Is it not a deeper and broader malaise than merely the LEA, the
>> so-called psychologists, and the Media?
>>
>> Thank you again, Doc, for your thought-provoking insight into these
>> matters.
>
>You are right (and I hope this thread will end about now!) in that kids
>in all cultures do not react in the manner described - many kids around
>the world would be jealous if anything. I can remember in my own youth,
>back when boys delivered newspapers on daily routes, that fights could
>erupt at the "paper shack" when a route became available with a client
>who was known to diddle boys on request, and that was in Spokane WA!
Oh, no.
I believe we're just getting started,
But 'twould be best to clip this one ...
As for Spokane, Washington,
I shall have to go there someday!
LOL.
My very best to you,
VV
God Save Her Majesty the Queen.
God Preserve the Prince of Wales.
Rule Britannia!
|
|
|