Path: news.nzbot.com!spool1.sonic-news.com!pull-news.sonic-news.com!s05-b40.iad!npeersf02.iad.highwinds-media.com!npeer03.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news-in-01.newsfeed.easynews.com!easynews!core-easynews-01!easynews.com!en-nntp-04.dc1.easynews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: HMS Victor Victorian <victorvictorian@hushunomail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.utb.naughty-boy
Subject: Re: What happens when the content goes away?
Message-ID: <ahnj275k1rsf3ff2lt0b4rqdqkb95gr6v6@4ax.com>
References: <ea5h27ps87igsrb0v9smm6edhui1494lvj@4ax.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 167
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: EasyNews, UseNet made Easy!
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:21:26 -0600
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.fan.utb.naughty-boy:4547
X-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 21:21:24 UTC (s05-b40.iad)
On Thu, 21 Jul 2011 17:10:05 -0400, Doc NP-f31 wrote:
>Thank you all for your comments in the previous thread. This post also
>went unnoticed in The Fort. Perhaps it will raise an eyebrow here...
>
>I got a very impressive e-mail from a friend in the groups. He raised
>some very valid points that have been on my mind. I asked if I might
>share his thoughts with those here and he agreed. I will present his
>thoughts and then add my own later.
>
>Dear Doc,
>
>In the list you provide for people, you bind an unenforceable
>agreement that the reciever will not touch boys by accepting access to
>the material in the groups. While I have ascribed to this doctrine
>long before I knew of your existence, your statement reenforced the
>concept within my moral framework. A lot of people would argue that
>the aformentioned material in itself is extremely harmful to boys (as
>is reflected in the law), but the arguments to support that case are
>very dubious. Hhaving access to such materialcan make relationships
>with young friends pressure free and peaceful. Of course, like any man
>I have sexual desire, and like any BL I have desire specifically for
>the boys I know, but knowing that I have an outlet for that desire
>elsewhere has allowed me to explore and fulfill emotional and
>intellectual aspects of our relationships without the constant looming
>threat of emotional trauma and destruction. I know I am not alone in
>this situation, but this is something that the authorities will never
>seem to understand, that having freely available access to this
>material helps prevent abuse. Whatever mental gymnastics law makers
>use to condemn posession one fact remains undisputable, looking at a
>picture is not the same as actual touching. The real potential harm
>from one totally eclipses the metaphysical harm waves that come from
>the other. But enough preaching to the choir.
>
>This leads me to the current state of the groups. Fortunately, during
>the last few years, retention has exploded to over a thousand days.
>This means that material that at one time vanished within 3 months now
>remains for years, and it means newcomers and old timers alike have
>access to a much larger pool than ever before. And even though the
>posters began to start using encryption, their passwords and keys were
>freely propogated by generous people and accessible by any lurker
>willing to put in the minimum amount of effort in discovery. It seems
>to me that this era is coming to an end. For whatever reason, groups
>of posters have closed up shop to outsiders and no longer find it
>worthwile to share what they are posting. I cannot blame them for that
>decision whatsoever, as posters risk great personal safety in order to
>provide material, so any security measures they take are de facto very
>reasonable and perhaps necessary.
>
>My fear is that the push underground is going to not only increase the
>danger to users but to the boys they are around as well. This
>manifests itself in a couple of ways. One, this drying up of material
>may push people to much more dangerous modes of transfer like p2p or
>irc, which increases their likelihood of being caught and their and
>their young friend's lives destroyed. Two, in desperation to gain
>access to groups BL's will start self-producing material and trading
>it. These are activities that I have never even considered
>participating in, but I have evidence that this is
>exactly the measures many take to fulfill their desires. None of these
>circumstances are good. It results in more people in prison, more boys
>abused, more lives destroyed.
>
>*********************
>
>Your opinions are solicited,
>
>Stay Safe,
>
>Doc
A few notes regarding the above:
First, your correspondent makes a convincing argument as to the effect
the availability of images has in deterring a Boylover from 'acting
out' by redirecting his/her sexual desires in a harmless or abuse-free
way. There are several assumptions at play here. First and foremost,
for whatever arguable reason, the assumption is that indulging in
sexual behaviour with a boy is defacto abuse ... emotional trauma and
destruction, I believe your correspondent says. His position either
rests on the belief that invariably, a sexual- paedophilic
relationship fundamentally scars a boy psychologically, or it scars
him socially, or both. I reject that assumption.
The second assumption is that the availability of these materials
actually redirects a paedophile's sexual drive away from the boy,
thereby preserving him. I realise there have been studies ...
Denmark, if I remember correctly ... that seem to show incidences of
child sexual assault dropped once these materials became easily
available. However, there are other studies of older and newer times
that directly or indirectly seem to show that such materials enflame
the desires of the paedophile, as it were, and make such assaults more
likely. That not withstanding, the common BELIEF is that such
materials do. Time and again, we have seen LEAs make the connection:
Paedophiles who are arrested for assault of whatever manner invariably
possess child pornography ... and by extention, any paedophile who
posses child pornography will, eventually, assault a child. So, laws
have been enacted to criminalise the production and possession of
such.
I am a Boylover, and I know there are such of us who are so consumed
with a sexual desire that they indeed must use these materials to
relieve that desire. I, for one, do not feel that way. I have a
longing to be with a young friend ... sexually, sentimentally,
lovingly ... dare I say philosphically. I enjoy looking at pictures
of boys, certainly, but they can never take the place of having a true
Boylover relationship. So, why haven't I simply attacked a boy? I
have the desire! There are a variety of reasons ... some rooted
firmly in fear ... others in affection ... but let me emphasise that
being a Boylover is not simply a sexual desire. It is much, much
more. If I can make a perhaps crude analogy ... for me, a Boylover
relationship is not like taking a whore ... it is more like marriage
and fatherhood, and all that such entails.
Do these materials constitute abuse? Your correspondent seems to say
no. I disagree. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Unfortunately, we have
all come across materials of the most (in my judgemental mind, anyway)
heinous nature, in which boys are fundamentally injured physically or
psychologically ... and one cannot help but fear permenantly injured.
People who create these materials do great harm ... and their
continued circulation perpetuates that harm, for I do believe that the
basest of our Boylover community are inspired to create similar.
Thankfully, in the bulk of materials I've seen, the subjects seem to
be having a grand old time. Has the boy been abused? I think not. He
certainly did not seem abused. Is the viewing of the images abuse?
Probably not. Most the boys knew there was a camera about, and
consented (now don't get me started on 'informed consent'!). So where
does the abuse come? Simply, from society. After all, how could the
hapless boy, once the whole thing is out, NOT be shamed, and
humiliated, and psychologically tortured, knowing all sorts of people
woud see his nudity forever, and that he must know normal people would
see him as deserving of pity, or as simply tainted.
Do I lament the decline of our groups due to the increased legal and
financial pressure LEAs and NGOs are putting on providers. Of course!
I love boys. I love looking at boys and, if they are nude and
naughty, so much the better!
But let me state clearly ... I am not a laboratory animal. I am a
thinking individual. I do not respond to my desires as Pavlov's dog
responds to the feeding bell. Do I have lust? Who does not? But as
a human being, I have reason and will, and I have decided that I shall
be the master of my feelings, not the other way around. And I think,
having conversed with many a Boylover, that generally we are all that
way. There is an odious belief in society, reflected in the argument
here to some extent, that paedophiles are incapable of controlling
their urges, and will succumb to the first temptation. That is a lie,
and I resent the implication of it anywhere I find it.
Are there Boylovers who cannot control themselves? Of course. Why
should we not find instances of that among us, when we clearly find it
among heterosexuals, and homosexuals, and soldiers at war ... need I
go on?
Well, looks as if I've done it again. I am very sorry for this
lengthy response, and if along the way I've managed to put you to
sleep, you may awake now!
Sincerely,
HMSVV
God Save the Queen.
God Bless the Prince of Wales.
God Preserve the Windsors.
Rule Britannia!
|
|