In article <joh624hbfoeurctuh7kn5ceegkj9nvfqbq@4ax.com>,
HMS Victor Victorian <VictorVictorian@NBG.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 7 May 2008 23:26:08 +0000 (UTC), floppy@flop.com wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 05 May 2008 20:00:01 +0000, HMS Victor Victorian wrote:
> >
> >I'd assumed that guy had already been caught - apparently not. They took
> >a long time to get on his case, those images have been around a while I
> >believe. And yes, the kids appeared to be having a ball by all accounts.
> >
> >As I understand it, sexual contact between men and boys in certain parts
> >of the Asia was traditionally considered more a matter for a joke than
> >a lynching, or so I have read. Silly old men chasing little boys.
> >
> >Boys couldn't get pregant, and different standards of what constitutes
> >"impurity" were/are applied to boy than the much more serious standards
> >applied to girls. Or it was institutionalized and sactioned in some
> >other places, such as those dancing boys in parts of Java.
> >
> >Then the NGOs arrived in Asia chasing overseas aid funding. First they
> >said: "you pedos say this culture tolerates and even understands your
> >desire to do stuff with little boys. Wrong! They do not tolerate it at
> >all, it is frowned upon!". There was something very like this on the
> >ECPAT website in the late 1990s. Yet at the same time, they conceded
> >that child prostitution was always driven and sustained by local demand;
> >sex tourism had and has a very small part to play economically in
> >thay business. But catching sex tourists gets a lot more headlines,
> >more headlines mean more beat up, more beat up means more funding
> >for NGOs. NGOs are businesses, not charities. Hence the claims on
> >the Inquisition website that NGOs in Cambodia are actively paying
> >taxi drivers and others to turn in customers interested in minors.
> >They have also bribed witnesses to otain convictions in that country
> >(some false withnesses have recanted and told about this).
> >
> >By the early 2000s. ECPAT had given up saying it wasn't really tolerated.
> >Instead, they publically berated and *chastized* the people of Cambodia
> >for their "apathy" concerning sex with minors. In other words, it
> >seemed they actually didn't care very much after all! Many Cambodians
> >tolerated a certain amount of this activity, always had, in fact it
> >has been embedded throughout much of Asia in one form or another for
> >thousands of years. Then there's large parts of South Asia where men
> >have been loving boys for countless thousands of years.
> >
> >Thus ends another rant. Probably no-one except VV, the trolls and the
> >police are reading it.
>
> Quite correct. Please feel free to "rant on." It appears our
> honorary troll mascot for the Galleries has neglected to read your
> essay, which is understandable considering his cognitive preference
> for single syllable words.
>
> I find it curious that there is very little discussion regarding the
> history and ubiquitousness of Boy Love among western English speaking
> countries. Aside from certain references to Lewis Carroll, for
> example, there appears to be very little to be found regarding it.
> That Boy Lovers might, however lacking in discretion, may seek
> companionship on shores less radicalised is perfectly predictable, but
> I will state my deep suspicion that if Boy Lovers from western
> societies that so repress Boy Love, not to mention sexual expression
> in general, were NOT seeking this companionship abroad, these agencies
> would have considerably less concern as to what was going on in
> Bangkok [no pun intended]. There are paedophiles throughout the
> world, probably in every culture. So, pray tell, has anyone seen a
> desperate INTERPOL request to hunt down an individual from some
> non-western society? Yet no expense is apparently spared in dragging
> some bloody Brit or American before the bar.
>
> Damnable hypocrites, for they care less for the welfare of children
> than they do for restraining members of their own society.
>
> My best regards,
>
> Victor
>
> God Save the Queen!
> God Preserve the Prince of Wales!
> Rule Britannia!
They also have no knowledge of their own history. In the 1850s there
were "peg houses" openly operating in San Francisco. In the 17th
century, most families in England were too poor to support their
children so out they went at about age ten, girls to indentured domestic
servitude, boys to apprenticeships. However, many were simply chucked
out as there were alleged to be fewer than 40,000 families in all of
England who could support their children. Of those sold into servitude
(and yes, they were sold), many had bad masters and ran away. Those
children gravitated into child/juvenile gangs that lived by theft for
the most part. Do people today think that Dickens made up the plot of
"Oliver Twist"? He was more of a reporter than a novelist.
As for other cultures from which we draw out roots, the ancient Jews
were notorious paederasts, crossing over to the Temple of Baal at night
to frolic with the priest/catamites that infested the temple for small
fees. Moses was most pissed off by that, because those Jews weren't
making little Jews.
The pirates of the 17th and 18th centuries were also notorious
paederasts -- what do you thing the duties of the cabin boys were? In
feudal Japan the samurais preferred boys to anything else, and that
tradition continued in Japan into the modern era, particularly at
travelers' inns.
Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos as well as mainland China have had
centuries of traditions mixing men, boys and lubrication. In primitive
cultures of the south seas, Africa and South America, some cultures were
wide open to childhood sexuality, and even had formalized annual
paederastic traditions (the long houses where the young initiates lived
were a "window" for adults to fornicate with the boys for that one time
each year). It is interesting that primitive cultures that did not
conceal adult sexuality from children, and did not suppress childhood
sexuality, produced adult cultures in which fidelity prevailed, without
theft, aggression or other violence -- but primitive cultures that
concealed adult sexuality and prevented children from sexual play and
expression, developed adult societies much like our own -- rife with
violence, infidelity and crime. Too bad we have missed the message.
As for CP on the Internet, in whatever form, people are interested for a
variety of reasons. But it should be clear even to a child of tender
age that of the hundreds of thousands of people (both men and women) who
collect and view images, almost none of them are child molesters or ever
will be. In part, because of the benign outlet passive imagery
provides. The scary thing is that if LEA is successful in totally
suppressing CP, at least some of those people who are happily looking at
the computer screens will hit the streets actively looking for scores
that they would not normally consider, fantasy and looking at pictures
being disease, blackmail or other forms of personal endangerment. As
for the subjects of the photos, claims that they are "damaged" are
vastly overstated. A child MIGHT be, SOME children might be, but ANY
child is definitely not, nor are MOST children so harmed. They are
simply having a great time with someone they like and trust.
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
|