On 24 Jun 2010 19:06:26 GMT, David <not@home.net> wrote:
>HMS Victor Victorian <victorvictorian@hushunomail.com> wrote in
>news:kpo626pvf0ljofebovnrfvqnk42vhgq84j@4ax.com:
>
>>
>> I think I mentioned to Grant in the other group that many of these
>> revelations make me quite melancholy, to think my boyhood experiences
>> were so outside the pale.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> V
>> God Save the Queen.
>> God Bless the Prince of Wales.
>> God Preserve the Windsors.
>> Rule Britannia!
>>
>
>Dear V,
>
>I think that many of differences of experience that I have noticed in
>this discussion may well be country and environment related plus, as Doc
>has pointed out, the differences between the fifties, sixties and
>seventies as society became less anally retentive, starting with the
>USA. There was a more open approach to discusion (other than in the
>bible belt) of these matters and a greater awareness that child sexual
>experimentation was a part of growing up and to be expected.
>
>It took a long time for this "openess" to cross the Atlantic but the
>environment, the mindset, to the west of the USA, took even longer to
>change. Remember, we resist change as it is uncomfortable to deal with.
>It was non-u to talk about these matters and Johnny could still catch a
>belting if caught playing with his johnny. Sex education was what you
>learnt from your friends at school and was often based on biological
>nonsense. Mums and Dads did not talk about these matters.
>
>I grew up in the Colonies - vuvuzela land - which was even further away
>from any enlightenment either biologically or politically. What had
>happened in the seventies in the America's only started happening here
>in the nineties. Even that was fraught with problems such as the use of
>garlic as a cure for HIV - maybe there is some slight truth in that as
>garlic on the breath would keep any lover away !
>
>
>I do believe that we have been the pupils of our various environments by
>the random chance of where and when we were born. The global lottery.
>That we are here and can talk about these matters is a blessing.
>
>I am aware that I have been generalising and if you had enlightened
>parents or school then you were indeed fortunate.
>
>My two cents worth.
>
>David
Hi David,
It's interesting how the Free Love 60's and the 70's sexual revolution
yo-yoed into a swing to the right in the 1980s. The Aids epidemic
caused a sexual hysteria in the states that hasn't subsided yet.
'Family values' became a watchword for anti-gay. Homosexuals became
the last group that bigots could openly persecute. Even that is
changing and the shift for persecution has become pedophiles. Gay
marriage may soon be legal in this country. And it only makes sense
that it should. In a country that declares all men to be equal,
singling out one group for exclusion makes the whole system a lie.
This brings to mind a question that might be of interest to debate.
Are boylovers homosexuals? Homosexual men would tell you no, we are
perverts. They don't want to acknowledge the fact they when they were
boys they had sex with men, or the fact that when they were young men
they had sex with younger boys and teens. I believe there is a
doublestandard. I believe gay men distance themselves from boylovers
because they are seeking legitimacy and they don't want to be painted
with the same brush. Let's face it, a lot of Americans (for example)
assume that boylovers and pedophiles are gay men seeking to corrupt
their sons. This was actual propaganda in the 1960s.
David, welcome! Have you made it to The Fort yet? Ping me there if you
want a Fort Badge!
Stay Safe,
Doc
NP-f31
|
|