On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 01:13:07 GMT, Dude With the Hair
<DudeWiththe(REMOVE)Hair@hushmail.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 19:11:51 GMT, the non <myaddress@server.co> wrote:
>
>Hey The Non,
>
>Sorry it took me so long to respond. This is an excellent post.
>
>>Chid Development & Intergenerational Relationships
>>
>> Some people think sex is a straightforward issue, an adult man and an
>>happens within an individual is the result of a complex interplay of
>>sex, gender and sexuality. For most people, sex and gender are the
>>same, i.e. male/masculine, female/feminine. Obviously, for a few people
>>this relationship is not just reversed, but tangled. Add to that
>>we know all about it, even now?).
>> Sex, gender and sexuality of male children and adolescents is even
>>more complex, because (as the horniest creatures on the planet,
>>exception perhaps mating lions) they also have a highly variable natural
>>interest, or drive, pushing their sexuality. Fundamentally, boys are
>>explorers, investigating and learning by trying one thing, then another.
>>practice. With sex, this is an informal, self guided study in our
>>culture. Here are some simple facts and children and sex:
>>
>> 1. children are sexual creatures from birth
>> 2. sexuality of infants (0-3) is reflexive and entirely
>>self-centered, masturbation by frottage
>> 3. sexuality of pre-school children (4-6) is still self-centered, but
>>with curiosity about others, masturbation remains mainly by
>>frottage (humping a pillow or blanket)
>> 4. sexuality of early primary-age children (6-8) diminishes, but
>>curiosity does not: masturbation less frequent
>> 5. puberty begins for middle primary-age children (9-12); sexuality
>>becomes active in seeking simple experiments with age-mates;
>>masturbation actively resumes
>> 6. sexuality of early teens (13-15) seeks broader experience, more
>>variation and more frequent repetition, experimentation with
>>lubricants, condoms, and more partners
>> 7. The relationship between a child and his parents changes, in pace
>>with the above points, from the total dependance of infants to various manifestations of
>>independence and separation as the child matures. Those begin to
>>interest/receptivity to an external, non-parental relationship. Whether
>>a child trusts his parents or not has much to do with his interest in
>>forming an independent pseudo-parental alliance.
>>
>> Having said that, the age brackets are flexible. Some stages are
>>skipped, others are extended. Satisfactory sexual experience is
>>reinforcing, unsatisfactory experience is not. All sexual experience
>>has positive value, even unsatisfactory experience. Individual
>>differences show up boldly, with some children far more sexual than
>>others. It is not only possible, but common for children by age 12 to
>>(child or adult) capability to understand and accept their sexual
>>sexuality compared to the average for his age group.
>>Parallel, and perhaps related, is the variability in how a child reacts
>>to experience. Some individuals affect trauma from the same experience
>>others regard as a mere misfortune, or perhaps a learning opportunity.
>>In other words, some children have the ability to shrug off an
>>internalize that same experience and allow it to haunt or rule them
>>permanently.
>> It is this SQ that conservatives and religious moralists try
>>unsuccessfully to suppress. We are not all the same. It cannot be
>>governed by laws. People learn to express their sexual interests in
>>private, not in public, valuing consenting relationships. Morality is a
>>associate him/herself with; it is based upon tribal belief and
>>superstition. Intelligent people, regardless of cultural affiliation,
>>guide themselves ethically, as ethics are based upon kindness and fair
>>play, not narrow superstitious faiths.
>>As for intergenerational sexual liaisons, the above definitions and
>>concepts should serve as a guide to any responsible person. The
>>pathology of relationships between boys and adults, and girls and
>>adults, is different and cannot be directly compared. This discussion
>>is about boys.
>> It is possible, although rare, for a child as young as seven to form
>>an intergenerational sexual interest. It is much more likely from age
>>eleven on, when those with high SQ seek a more rewarding, more
>>sophisticated encounter than can be provided by an age mate. It is
>>common for boys (but rarely girls) to be the aggressor when seeking an
>>adult sex companion. Some children that age may be more likely to look
>>for a younger friend for a sexual liaison, a different motivation
>>children whose sole resource is a trusted friend.
>>interest, different from adult love in that it is based upon infinite
>>trust. Adults, in contrast, have learned that trust, in love, can be
>>which is missing in his life, the trust and companionship he should have
>>and comparatively short lived, lasting a few months to a few years,
>>compared to an adult mateship, usually changing to a long term
>>friendship.
>> Most boys who make liaisons with adults have a discordant or
>>dysfunctional relationship with the parent (or parents) and seek a
>>establishing trust where none previously existed. Boys who are
>>susceptible to the care and love of an unrelated adult typically
>>distrust or fear their parents, so a caring adult becomes very
>>development of trust and friendship, is regarded as a criminal act,
>>while a similar process, indoctrination of people too young to make
>>rational decisions, is looked upon favorably when religions apply them.
>>
>> HARM. This is not as simple an issue as it is commonly portrayed.
>>Can a boy be harmed by a sexual relationship with an adult? Yes. With
>>another boy? Yes. Can some boys be harmed in this manner? Yes. But,
>>and this is the most important part, can ANY boy be harmed? No. Can
>>EVERY boy be harmed? Definitely not. Harm is simply a factor of the
>>If aggravated rape is being discussed, the probability of harm broadens
>>considerably. If abuse of authority is the issue (i.e. a Roman Catholic
>>priest offering special dispensation in exchange for sexual favors, or a
>>teacher offering a better grade, etc.), then again the prospect of harm
>>is amplified.
>> If the relationship is the outcome of a trusting, mutually gratifying
>>friendship, then the possibility of harm diminishes radically. Do some
>>boys willingly (enthusiastically) engage in an asymmetrical
>>relationship? Yes. Do they ever change their minds about the
>>Many young people make choices they later regret and cannot undo, vulgar
>>tattoos and body piercing come to mind as an example. Small children go
>>through a phase of petty theft, and later feel embarrassed by the
>>the temptation that was the cause?
>> An aspect of harm to children and adolescents which no one ever
>>considers is the harm done by imposing unrealistic values and hollow
>>achievements upon young impressionable people, particularly those who
>>to sell as many suggestive pictures as possible, posing the kids in
>>lordotic postures that look more like a young cat in her first heat.
>>and talent, and when the youthful blush goes away and the facial hair
>>comes in, what do they have? Generally, nothing. They are lured into
>>the studio with the hope, perhaps the expectation, of a highly paid
>>career as a professional model, and although they may be registered as
>>such, their chances of modelling even ill-fitting badly designed
>>clothing for K-Mart is remote.
>> In this same category, and for much the same reasons, children and
>>adolescents who are employed in film or television production face the
>>same problem. Very few make a career transition when they become
>>adults, and many go completely off the rails when their phantom
>>expectations are not met. In this category, at least, they usually earn
>>a substantial salary, but that in itself is a double edged sword; most
>>of them can never expect to achieve the same earnings level as adults,
>>and the transition can be devastating. Typically studio kids, both in
>>the modelling and entertainment industries, are deprived of normal
>>adolescent experience and contact, failing to develop many basic
>>physical and social skills necessary to interact with others. Drug
>> No discussion of Harm is complete without pointing out that
>>procedures of police and social workers involving children detected as
>>having participated in a sexual relationship with an adult are more
>>harmful than the relationship itself, excluding those rare cases of
>>aggravated rape. Even then the police are often the source of more
>>trauma than the original perpetrator.
>> The whole issue is a matter for science, reason and logic, not
>
>
>This is amazing The Non, because as considerations or questions arose
>in my mind, you immediately addressed them with the exact point or
>comment I was about to make.
>
>I agree wholeheartedly with everything you have posted. I wish to
>re-emphasize a few points. Children, and ALL human beings, are sexual
>creatures. The sexual stages you mentioned at the beginning are indeed
>on a sliding scale and sometimes blend well into adulthood.
>
>The question of harm or long term emotional damage coming to a boy
>after an intergenerational love affair depends in great part upon the
>quality of the relationship pre and post sexual encounter. If the
>relationship was based on love and trust and the loving, trustful
>nature of the relationship continues after the sex goes away, then in
>a majority of the cases the 'loved boy' will suffer no ill effects and
>indeed may regard the relationship as an imporant milestone in his
>life. These have been my observations. A contributing factor is
>whether the boy felt that he was an equal consensual partner in the
>relationship. If the boy later feels that he was manipulated, of
>course he's going to be pissed. Assymetrical relationships, in my
>opinion, should be avoided with boys. We, as boylovers, are here to
>care for and about our boys, not sweet talk them into bed.
>
>Finally I want to underscore the point about the police sometimes
>doing more harm than the so-called perps. This is absolutely true. I
>have seen it happen. And not just the police, but psychologists,
>psychiatric social workers and clerics have all done mind jobs on
>boys. One case in point is our own SpencerDude (np-f30), whose dear
>mother tried to have the queerness 'Bibled out' of him and subjected
>him to humiliating group psychothe'raping' sessions where he was made
>to feel like an outcast because he would not play their mind games. To
>my knowledge he stayed strong. He will be 18 soon and free to move
>back in with his Dad and hopefully go on to college. It couldn't have
>been much worse for him.
>
>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?
Most respectfully,
VV
God Save Her Majesty the Queen.
God Preserve the Prince of Wales.
Rule Britannia!
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
|