Path: news.nzbot.com!spool1.sonic-news.com!news-out.sonic-news.com!not.news-service.com!not.alt.net!not.highwinds-media.com!s03-b27.iad!npeersf01.iad.highwinds-media.com!npeer03.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.glorb.com!news2.glorb.com!news-xfer.nntp.sonic.net!news.astraweb.com!border1.newsrouter.astraweb.com!not-for-mail
From: HMS Victor Victorian <victorvictorian@hushunomail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.utb.naughty-boy
Subject: Re: Alexei Romanov (0/1)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 13:27:55 -0600
Message-ID: <3vc216pi5g5g385uagb7rlb8ogkia5e9fj@4ax.com>
References: <lt7t06tq27kh5jb2rrec931qfe3gqi68cb@4ax.com> <ffrt06dvl7pfj9hjm2bmi4fie1ji52m8nq@4ax.com> <02ut06hdqaa0cb7tsk60euu6hv7hi7tdki@4ax.com> <0fb0161fo105ppst9o8t3v965aapua85a5@4ax.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186 trialware
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 193
Organization: Unlimited download news at news.astraweb.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: c75722e1.news.astraweb.com
X-Trace: DXC=NBX8YOlO>3Bc_WgCkn9MLEL?0kYOcDh@JXn@0BEc4eiLhOLYXDilS1GfhoNP[?YSJLX[DPFd=EAHCL6=\Fl@WJMD
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.fan.utb.naughty-boy:2422
X-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 12:28:50 MST (s03-b27.iad)
On Wed, 09 Jun 2010 20:37:59 -0400, NP-f31 wrote:
>On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 20:22:09 -0600, HMS Victor Victorian
><victorvictorian@hushunomail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 21:30:02 -0400, NP-f31 wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:57:39 -0600, HMS Victor Victorian
>>><victorvictorian@hushunomail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>To wit:
>>>>
>>>>One reflects that much horror is done in the world for the good of
>>>>some exhaulted cause ... but I say
>>>>It is the essence of Evil.
>>>>That there are many Bad people in this world,
>>>>Who don the mantle of Good.
>>>>
>>>>For all the evil in the world is done by Good men.
>>>>
>>>>VV
>>>
>>>What a beautiful, beautiful boy. And related to your young princes
>>>today. One can see the family resemblance. I wish I could have saved
>>>him....He would have had a rough time of it anyway with his
>>>hemophilia.
>>>
>>>Thanks for the beauty,
>>>
>>>Doc
>>>NP-f31
>>
>>Dear Doc,
>>
>>It is always a great pleasure to hear from you.
>>If I may, I should like to propose that you pose yet
>>Another question for discussion.
>>
>>Much has been said regarding today's stricte sexual prohibitions
>>regarding sexual activity between adults and children. Right or
>>wrong, good or bad, it must be admitted that these prohibitions will
>>remain, as will remain the consequences for those adults and
>>youngsters who engage in such activity--right or wrong, good or bad.
>>It has been said that a true Boylover would not risk exposing his
>>young friend to such negative consequences by seducing him ... rather
>>to admire him from "afar" as to actually engage with him.
>
>>During the discussion about the actions of the nurse, this aspect of
>>the problem hovered above the discourse, but was never directly
>>addressed ... not to be morbid ... but perhaps because the assumption
>>that the boy would soon die precluded any concern over any long term
>>ramifications of the act.
>
>>Pray tell, what say ye?
>>
>>V
>>
>>God Save the Queen.
>>God Bless the Prince of Wales.
>>God Preserve the Windsors.
>>Rule Britannia!
>
>Hey Double V,
>
>Thanks for the challenging question. I understand the need to protect
>children from rape and molestation. It happens and it is an
>abomination. Those who do such things should be punished severely.
>
>There is a difference though between rape, molestation and children
>who willingly and willfully engage in sexual acts with adults and
>older children.
>
>Much of western society (and Australian) go insane with the thought of
>children and sex in the same sentence. Many of the laws you're
>referring to are reactionary and the penalities are WAAAAAY out of
>line in comparison to the acts being prosecuted. They don't take into
>account the natural sexuality and sexual curiosity of children. You
>and I (and Zackie) know that a 13 year old adolescent boy will stick
>his penis into anything. They are sexual opportunists. They have a
>natural curiosity and a biological imperative to spread their seed.
>How can you legislate against nature? It won't work. Boys will have
>sex with men or older boys, it's going to happen. 9 out of every 10
>adolescent boys will have some sort of homosexual experience (Masters
>and Johnson, 1966). In my opinion that 10th boy is either lying or
>molesting farm animals. So what happens if peers are caught? In some
>cases they can both be prosecuted as adults and be considered sex
>offenders. If there is even a slight age mismatch the older partner
>will be prosecuted. Obviously any man that touches a child will be
>punished severely. It demonizes sex, it ruins lives, it makes man/boy
>sex taboo and as a result even more desirable in some cases.
>
>No one wins, everyone loses and no one is protected. The laws make no
>sense. Forcible rape and unwanted touching should be prosecuted
>severely. Blatant seduction should be prosecuted to a lesser extent,
>but still severely. Mutually consensual sex between peers or near
>peers should be decriminalized. Loving man/boy sexual relationships? A
>policy should be established where a boy can seek permission to engage
>in lovemaking with an adult partner with parental/guardian permission.
>For example, there have been many cases in which a man was prosecuted
>even when the boy and his family didn't want to press charges. Who
>wins in that scenario? Those type of convictions should be banned.
>
>No law will be perfect, but the current laws are insane. Protections
>are needed, but extreme punishments of the type that are currently
>sought go too far.
>
>It's not a perfect world. There will be no perfect solutions.
>
>Great topic. We can save the concept of emotional damage to a child
>for next time.
>
>Doc
>NP-f31
Dear Doc,
Ha! Indeed! Dear young Trevor is about in the fields, diddling Daisy
the Dairy Cow!
Of course. Rape and molestation, as I signify the terms, is an
abomination, the perpetrators of which deserve an equally painful
experience as provided by law ... for I signify these acts as causing
pain, rather than pleasure .. immediately experienced by the child as
such. In my mind, both these involve force, physical coercion, and/or
intimidation.
Unfotunately, society does not signify the terms rape and molestation,
as well as a host of others, in the same way. They are applied in
such a way as to render what the child actually felt at the time
completely irrelevant. Hence, by so-called modern social morays, your
nurse was guilty of rape and molestation, and had traumatised the
child irrespective of whether the poor boy realised it or not! Not to
worry. There are many lay and professionals who will inform the lad
in great detail how he has been traumatised, and that he'd best
acknowledge the fact if he is to heal.
I think it is precisely for this reason that you accurately observe
the destruction of both man and boy.
Addressing the concept of seduction requires a definition. In terms
of sex, seduction is to engage in immoral, illicit or unlawful sexual
intercourse without the use of intimidation, but with persuasion. More
generally, it is seen as one partner attempting to convince another to
engage in sex. In other words, it is the "dating-game" so prevelant
among men and women. Men ply women's desires with gifts and
compliments, and vice-versa today ... most usually to a singular goal
of landing in the sack. I believe that Boylovers, for good or bad,
play the same strategies as heterosexuals, don't you? Certainly
heterosexuals have their violent rapists and sexual predators by the
score, but conversely, the majority engage in persuasion to hook their
catch, do they not? So, one must consider the defintion one wishes
to embrace. Should Boylovers be punished by society for engaging in
persuasion (plying their amor's affection with icecreams and Ipods,
for instance?) as do heterosexuals, or should they be punished because
they are Boylovers who have engaged in such behaviour?
Do I understand you correctly in suggesting that a boy could get a
permission slip from his parents to sleep with a man? You drew
chuckle from me. "Dear Mrs. Jones. Should you consent to have Trevor,
who has been diddling Daisy the Dairy Cow lately, consort with me so
that we might diddle one another, please sign and date this form and
dusclaimer, giving your permission. Sincerely ... "
All in jest, I assure you!
I must note that there are many parents who are so self-consummed and
irresponsible, that they put their children in danger. Many boys who
become "victims" of so-called child molesters come from these types of
families and, in truth, could have never found a more loyal and loving
protector than the Boylover who fell due to love.
I do agree that t'would be better if, barring the use of coercion or
intimidation by the Boylover, that a child's parents, if so offended,
could pursue compensation through the civil courts--something that is
commonly done already, but usually only after a criminal conviction.
Still, in the end, there is what I want, and what you want, and what
they all desire ... and then there is the reality as you have noted.
Still the question then lingers. Considering reality, would a true
Boylover forego contact for the sake of the boy?
Most Respectfully Submitted,
HMSVV
God Save the Queen.
God Bless the Prince of Wales.
God Preserve the Windsors.
Rule Britannia!
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
|