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-b07!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!fe06.news.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Tedn'Alice@notellin.com
Newsgroups: alt.fan.utb.naughty-boy
Subject: Re: re. Do boylovers hurt boys?
Organization: BLDL
Message-ID: <d633a31u584iku9tu9nflkklvfsheqhdi2@4ax.com>
References: <Xns996ACE484943876636mxcom@216.40.28.70> <46a185f5$0$299$bb4e3ad8@newscene.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: 171
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: Sat, 21 Jul 2007 04:50:37 GMT
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.fan.utb.naughty-boy:265
X-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:57:22 UTC (s02-b07)
On 20 Jul 2007 23:07:02 -0500, "::F. Lipschitz::" <Lips@schitz.org>
wrote:
>unkn <76636@m.xcom>let his fingers dance across the keyboard and
>saidnews:Xns996ACE484943876636mxcom@216.40.28.70:
>
>> I rescued a couple of questions you made in one of your earlier posts
>> and over which I want to make some blood.
>>
>> you asked
>>
>> "Knowing the attitude of Western society regarding boylove and the
>> potential harm that may come to the boy from that attitude, does a
>> boylover then injure the child by the very act of intimacy?"
>>
>> And unfortunatelly, the answer, or at least my answer, is yes. The
>> direct responsability of this society that you call (well called
>> tyrannic, make indirect responsibles of us. Fucking unfair, isn't it.
>> Grotesquely unfair, considering how society talk about us. So I want to
>> focus over another of your questions:
>>
>> "What responsibility does the boylover have towards his society and its
>> moral values, if any?"
>>
>> Cause I obviously don't know the answer to this one, I'll just try to
>> comment what seem to have been the different positions in the groups
>> during the last months.
>>
>> One person who left the groups not many time ago defended that our duty
>> as boylovers was to hit fiercely the pillars of this society and its
>> conceived moral. And he defended that it was necessary that we and our
>> children take certain risks to get all the rights that Occident, or
>> modern society, or Judeo-Christian society if you prefer, denied us. The
>> fact that this point of view was actively offensive and to a great
>> extent dangerous doesn't mean that I didn't understand it, or even share
>> it a little. Nop, I suppose I'll never be brave enought to take on a
>> idea like that, but it's true that somedays i think 'come, come, nuclear
>> bomb', and that this world is so desperating that we should take the
>> weapons one of these days... and things like that.
>>
>> You also watched Dudewiththehair to wave that sentence that seems to
>> have become his flag. "The boys first" he said. I admit that this is a
>> nice reflection. But I wonder, is the same nice than right? I mean, is
>> not maybe a triumph of the 'common moral' if we set the boys necessities
>> above ours? Is not a way to yield to the outside pressure? Don't
>> misunderstand me, i know that boys are often more helpless and
>> necessitous than we are but "If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you
>> tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die?". Can't we
>> be equal than boys? Or is this a crazy idea? I don't know. Anyway, it
>> seems that this resolution is the more similar to the truce (or future
>> truce) we can pursue. And for this reason it's my favourite.
>>
>> The poster called lipschitz seems to be very happy feeling atraction to
>> minors but not taking any action about it. He forgot to say, I guess,
>> that he probably think that the relationships between adults and minors
>> are nasty, or outrageous or impure. I'm sorry to say, and maybe disquiet
>> some lea, that this is the only point of view that make me wanna throw
>> up. It's so sensible, and loyal, and coward all at the same place... I
>> really don't want to bend my arm in such a way.
>>
>> Anyway, as a epilogue, I have to say that society and LEA have now
>> exactly what they want of us. We are in the 2007 no more than a bunch of
>> disorganized people, many of us lurkers who will hide forever, and
>> others, the self-proclaimed aristocracy of the bl usenet society (you
>> know, the people with -lol- badges) who seem a little snob for my taste.
>> I really don't see much hope. But well, this is just my opinion :P
>>
>>
>> best regards
>
>Hello, unkn,
>First of all, please don't put words into my posts. I did not say I thought
>adult/minor relationships were inherently bad, immoral or anything else. I
>only said that I choose not to become sexually involved, choosing fantasy
>and masturbation over contact and the risk of prison.
>That being said, I personally know several men (formerly boys, but aren't
>we all) that, as boys, had intergenerational relationships lasting, in two
>cases, several years. These men are well adjusted; only one leads a "gay"
>lifestyle. Another of the men considered it a "phase" (his word, not mine)
>and today is married with children of his own. Yet another of the men has
>become a mentor (coaches his son's ball team), but is not sexually
>attracted to boys. About all these guys have in common is their pasts and
>the fact that they all know me.
>Although they are acquainted, none of the men know anything about the
>other's past, and I don't have any reason to divulge anything that has been
>said to me.
>Getting to the issue of harm, my personal opinion is that much more "harm"
>is done by society's reaction if the relationship is dicscovered than
>anything the adult would do. Note, I am speaking about a man who loves boys
>and has no desire to hurt a boy.
>Remembering that, when the time comes that the boy wants to stop, it is the
>adult's responsibility to STOP! The hardest part of the relationship, then,
>would be ending the sexual part. Nothing says that the adult has to stop
>seeing the boy, or especially being a friend to said boy. God knows, most
>boys have so little positive adult influence in their lives today anyway.
>I admire the men who coach and mentor boys. I would love to do that, but I
>have doubts about my resistance.
>Therefore, I choose not to put myself in a position that could even
>possibly lead to anything more than passing contact. You see, it is a self-
>preservation thing, as well as a concern for boys. I am all too aware of
>the signs of a boy that could use a friend.
>I'm not sure I could be just a friend, and if I couldn't keep a "safe"
>distance, and someone found out, then what did I do to that boy? Even if
>the boy starts things, it is up to me to watch out for the boy's well-
>being. I don't think it is the relationship itself that is harmful, it's
>the stigma that would follow the boy, and that's a risk I am not willing to
>take, for me or for any boy. Recently there was a story in the news about a
>boy (18, I think) that jumped from a cruise ship while on vacation because
>he had been beaten then raped by his peers. His suicide note said it was
>that everybody knew what had happened. How much worse would it have been
>for him had he been a willing participant?
>So. no, it's not fair for anyone. Not for the BL, not for the boy. But that
>is the way things are, and signs are things will get much worse before they
>get better. Today, you'll get a longer sentence if you sleep with a 16-
>year-old than if you shoot and kill him. Where is the sanity?
>So, I sit here at the computer, and write these silly long-winded
>explanations about why I'm sitting here writing these silly long-winded
>explanations...
>I'll get up in the morning, go out, and maybe go to the mall and check out
>the eye candy, then come home and fantasize about things. But no, I won't
>be picking up any boys tomorrow, unless I see one that has fallen and needs
>a hand getting back on his feet...
>Maybe this is a 'cowardly' way to deal with reality. But it is the way I
>deal with reality.
>I'm not sorry that this makes you want to "throw up". This has been a
>sucessful way of self-preservation for a long time, and hopefully it will
>continue to be sucessful for some time to come.
>I do, however, wish you luck in changing the world.
>Take care.
Please excuse me for taking the liberty of replying to your comments,
directed at unkn.
I know of several men, once boys, who had relationships similar to
what you describe. They are or were [for some have passed on]
heterosexually oriented but still keep close and, dare I say, somewhat
affectionate contact with their "mentors." You see, these men and
boys are afraid of not the boylover and the relationship itself, but
of the mainstream people that represent society, so great is the
threat of implicit and explicit humiliation and degradation, if the
relationship was discovered.
Society has a way of keeping you in line. Fear is an important tool,
particularly as societies get larger and more complex. If you are a
"coward" then you are for good reasons. I would tell you that much of
what is represented as a general truth is, indeed, not. As far as the
threat of going to prison, I believe that those boylovers who have
been careless, or cruel, or unlucky or just dirt down stupid are the
ones who go. Bad things happen in prison, certainly, but many
boylovers who are encarcerated survive. Most inmates, at least to my
knowledge, and I do have some, work hard to mind their own business,
not fuck things up, and get out of there as soon as possible. They
are not looking for trouble. Inmates do not generally tell why they
were incarcerated, either, as it could be used against them by either
fellow inmates or by the guards. You just keep your mouth shut.
I know one boylover who was incarcerated ... after several years, word
got out that he had been convicted of masturbating a young teenaged
boy. He simply mentioned to me that he had lost some friends once the
story went around. He was not "jumped" or "pummeled" or "raped by
Bubba." Even more surprisingly, he ended up becoming influential
among the inmates for his open personality and common sense and
sincere concern for their troubles.
He died in prison ... no, not by some twisted revenge murder. He
keeled over from a heart attack. I suppose it was the prison food that
actually got him in the end!
All society, you see, is tyranny.
I wish you happiness and peace.
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
|