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
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
|