"For
I know not any greater blessing to a young man who is beginning in life than a
virtuous lover, or to a lover than a beloved youth. For the principle, I say,
neither kindred, nor honor, nor wealth, nor any motive is able to implant so
well as love. Of what am I speaking? Of the sense of honor and dishonor, without
which neither states nor individuals ever do any good or great work… And if
there were only some way of contriving that a state or an army should be made up
of lovers and their loves, they would be the very best governors of their own
city, abstaining from all dishonor and emulating one another in honor; and it is
scarcely an exaggeration to say that when fighting at each other’s side,
although a mere
handful, they
would overcome the world." - Phaedrus
Pederasty
today has been grossly misrepresented by groups of people afraid that
two young men may honorably love each other with a smoldering set of
passions, --or groups that wish to misrepresent it to imply sex with
children. In fact, Pederasty was the practice of one group of
young men, --befriending, training & loving the next generation
shortly after
the latter entered puberty. It was consensual, noble, loving,
educational & was a great benefit to society. And like any
society, there were also unethical people who exploited others via
prostitution, slavery & other forms of inhumanity. But those bad
examples are not by any means representative of the practice of
pederasty, -any more than a rapist or pimp represent nurturing love
today.
One
letter communicated a series of accounts written by a man about his
relationships as a teen at a religious camp. In addition to
highlighting a number of close friendships that developed & grew physical
when in private (such as campouts while in the same tent); --one account was
particularly on point: It was between the camper and a counselor.
According to the account - the camper (16 at the time) experienced a
powerful attraction for a counselor 9 years his senior -and detailed the
steps that the camper took over the course of the camp-season to befriend (&
ultimately seduce) the counselor. As read about in other accounts of
similar behavior: There was no desire for AnalSex whatsoever, and the bond
was consummated in the nude, -face-to-face & groin-to-groin. The
writer described his disappointment with his older 'conquest' when the
counselor initially expressed regret at having experienced a mutual orgasm
with the teen (very soon after the deed had been done) on supposed religious
principles. However, the counselor had a difficult time resisting
"temptation" for the rest of the camping season as the younger was able to
sway him to take a naked tent-tour several more times. The counselor
did not return the following season -despite the camper's return (in hopes
of deepening the friendship even further).
The
writer's point was - that in his mind -- sexual climax was the shared event of
the very best friendships -especially where a handsome counselor was involved;
-- And that he could not have possibly have been anyone's "victim" because
nothing was ever forced onto him. He wanted the physical contact &
shared sexual intimacy with a man he admired, respected & had grown to love
deeply. From his perspective: That's simply what best friends did with
each other. And his beliefs have +3000 years of precedent! How about
your's?
But can you imagine what would
have happened to the counselor in this day & age -- had he been discovered
with the camper who had seduced him? The only tragedy would have been
the situation created by the legal-system itself! From a victim-count
of ZER0, --the state would make (2) -- maybe more! And what would
become of the camp itself (a place smeared by the state & rumored to allow
counselors and campers of the same-sex to seductively-socialize)!
The Scriptures define immoral
men as such that: INVENT WAYS OF SINNING. I would suggest that to turn
something into a SIN, that for thousands of years has not been considered to
be one -- is INVENTING A WAY OF SINNING. And ironically, --such an
"invention" comes by way of the exact type of people whom Jesus himself had
criticized as being hypocrites in both religious & matters of governance!
Imagine that!
And so, religious hypocrites who
preach a message of generic hatred against mere same gender affections are
constantly being caught in situations that are actual abusive torts.

(I.E:
ASS-FUCKING PROSTITUTES while INTOXICATED on HARD DRUGS); -And then obtuse
idiots attempt to paint all same-gender affectionate relationships with the same
broad brush in their attempt to ride the moral shockwave toward their own
agendas. Never in my lifetime have I yet heard any of them raise the point
that "Some men who love men feel NO-compulsion to AssFuck nor use hard drugs."
... & so their sheeple-followers remain clueless & without discernment between
moral & the immoral distinctions - having lost touch with the simple principle
that "Love works no ill".
Of course, there are still
places where the insane don't have jurisdiction in such matters; --where
people who love each other can enjoy the physical dimensions in safety, love
& respect without worrying about the penis-police making baseless, arbitrary
pronouncements. Maybe, someday - the rest of the world will gain
wisdom & the only matters the state will concern itself with are those
outcomes birthed by malice, & gross disregard for safety.
Perhaps someday, the likes of
the "Church-Lady" won't be able to "raise up victims from these stones"...
so easily by shaming young guys with
a lie that tells them that their feelings of natural-affection are actually
"grievously-sinful". God-damn her & her political whores (& I
believe with all my heart that: That prayer will come to pass)!
Hey! Teens ARE Adults!
Q: What
do you call a person who goes about telling teenage guys that they
shouldn't be sexually active? A:
"PRUDE", "PURITANICAL",
"DIVISIVE",
"ABUSIVE", Etc.

And the vast majority of guys who grew up with
such messages being broadcast -often
eventually found ways to disregard them on as many occasions as
possible. Why do so many teenagers "despise authority"? Because the
"Church Lady", "Betty
Bowers" or the like have perverted the authorities with irrational
dogmas- & now have a telescope aimed at the genitals of young adults (&/
teens) with a set of abstract, age-based prohibitions that are
completely contrary to nature! And in advocating what simply
IS; --I'm not implying an attitude of carelessness nor suggesting
irresponsibility for a moment. As a "G0Y", -I was raised in a
"Christian" home with those same unrealistic messages all around --from
Sunday-School to Public-School. But, because of my intellect, I
managed to plan, & cultivate g0y relationships through those years &
beyond. I've since discovered that many men have had similar experiences
& navigated what is an invisible minefield of shifting attitudes,
unclear social messages, wavering friendships controlled by
dogmatic-religious-fears & laws that are as inconsistent across borders
as they are across age-ranges & gender compositions!
Ironically, what the Scriptures
really teach actually expose the LIES told by many religious sects about
sexuality. As I dug into them, - I became aware that the deceptions I
had previously believed -- had negatively affected my internal ethos in
ways that few could have generally anticipated. The mind-job of
living in such a state of internal
compromise between reality itself, - clashing with the lies that
extolled the statistically impossible - WTF! And it is inevitable
that many guys reading these very words know exactly what I am talking
about! One account from a former navy service-member summed this
enigma-set up as he explained: "On ship, -after a few months, -lots of
guys gradually became more openly relaxed in each other's company & open
to casual extended physical contact -until the CO openly expressed
concern that his crew might be becoming "gay". Once voiced, -this
'assertion' poisoned the closeness of these friendships with the
implication that: "What gays do ( )
is coming onboard via these closer friendships". Ship-board
tension increased as men suddenly needed to reaffirm their "masculinity"
by NOT
being affectionate with other guys that they'd learned to relax in the
company of. The guy you were wrapped up with on the bunk last week
was suddenly calling you a "fag" for sitting too close at meal time.
And variations of this story are continuously retold in many contexts,
-usually military but often single gender boarding schools, etc.
Natural-affection becomes smeared & shamed with allegations of
"flamboyant-gay-excesses, perils &
". The
douches who shame natural male affection this way should have their
genitals welded to an anchor & cast overboard!
Having my eyes opened to one
simple legal principle and understanding that the Scripture teaches the
same thing in different words: "No Victim; --No Crime" and in the words
of the latter: "Love works no ill."; --That understanding
fixed my falsely accused - conscience & the internal compromises stopped
- because my value set changed to embrace a realistic world-view &
reject the abusive, religious accusations of unrealistic expectations
that were contrary to natural affection & a man's need to have sexual
release regularly once puberty sets in. Teenage guys think about sex
constantly because they're built for it - lots of it. This is why the
median age for marriage was 15-17 prior to the 20th century (in the
west). A society that places a taboo on male/male sexual intimacy, -
causes the rates of teen pregnancy to rise because teen-men will find an
outlet for this powerful need if not with each other.

Because
being "G0Y" is the natural & common state to being a man,
-the guys who extended their empathy, affection & respectful-sexuality
to their best friends --are/were also among the best balanced
emotionally (-minus the psychological impact of negative mantras that
condemn same-gender-affection & teen sexuality in general). Of,
course -the g0ys movement now counters foolish negatives with over 3000
years of history and a revised view of morality based on OUTCOMES of
actions rather than abstract irrational taboos. And those of us who have
a faith in God, -have discovered that the Scriptures support the
honesty of this viewpoint and actually condemn religious leaders who
make rules for the sake of having rules! Scriptural-quotes
like "They tie up heavy burdens on the backs of
men, but won't lift a finger to help!" are about those
religious leaders who promote impossible rules based on obtuse (unbound)
readings of the Scriptures! Most people are astonished when they
learn that Yeshua (Jesus) was the ADVERSARY of those who promoted a
false God-view based on endless rules (Why do you think the religious
leaders of His day conspired with the Romans to kill Him?)!
|
Understand:
Raping Boys is Bad...
Some cultures are
better than others!
Bacha bāzī is a
middle-east practice in which men (sometimes called bacha baz) buy and
keep adolescent boys, or dancing boys, for entertainment and sex. That's
correct. Boys (as young as 10) are being forced to dress up as women
before they are handed around groups of middle-aged men for sexual
pleasure (anally raped). These boys were passed around after parties
among powerful men for the older men's sexual gratification. Bacha Bazi
has long existed as a sexual companionship between powerful men and
their conscripts (boys aged 10-18). The power imbalance between boys and
powerful men put these boys in a very vulnerable position.
When these boys reach at the age of nineteen or when their beard
begins to show, they are released by their owners and are simply
expected to carry on with their lives. However, the psychological damage
caused by years of sexual abuse and social isolation often makes it
difficult to reintegrate with society.
Notice that these boys are
released when post-secondary sex characteristics such as facial hair
begins to show up. Also notice that they are forced to dress as women.
So then, Bacha bazi is clearly a form of sex-trafficking, &
pedophilia-based sexual-abuse in which the boy is not allowed to appear
as a male, but as a faux-proxy for a woman. Please check out this:
<Link> & realize that the EXACT SAME FORCES in law, religion &
politics that protect the very worst of such abusers are factors that
heavily affect the situation in the west regarding child trafficking.
Bacha
bazi is also completely contrary to practices such as
historical pederasty.
It's important to be aware of the stark differences because the former (Bacha
bazi) is based on coercion, abuse & genderfuck. One Islamic leader
defended the practice by reasoning: "Since they are not in love with
these boys, it (their religious prohibitions against same-sex
relationships) doesn’t apply." This twist-fuck logic is exactly the same
as used by prison inmates to justify raping other men! Notice how LOVE
is the enemy of such debased behavior! Traditional pederasty on
the other hand is based on the celebration of masculinity, love,
friendship & free will. So, while Bacha bazi encourages anal-rape, hates
masculinity, & shuns the very notion of love; - Historical
pederasty is the exact opposite! And because pederasty does not tolerate
AnalSex, it was readily accepted by cultures that had outlawed the
dangerous act of anal- -sex
under threat of death! Learn the differences because in some parts of
the world, you may likely encounter both practices & they are as morally
opposite from each other as night is from day. Pederasty produces no
victims. Bacha bazi produces nothing but victims & criminals.
Modern
society has a tendency to confuse the (2) terms and this has lead to a
global, societal disaster.
Case
in Point:
"At a speech in Chicago this past June Hersh was quoted as saying: “You
haven’t begun to see evil… horrible things done to children of women prisoners,
as the cameras run.”
Other stories at the London Guardian also talked
of young Iraqi detainees getting violently raped by US soldiers. Ten years ago
when the initial Abu Ghraib scandal was in the news, the Guardian published the
testimony of an Abu Ghraib detainee who allegedly witnessed one of these brutal
attacks. Former detainee Kasim Hilas said in their testimony that: “I saw [name
blacked out] fucking a kid, his age would be about 15-18 years. The kid was
hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets. Then when I heard
the screaming I climbed the door because on top it wasn’t covered and I saw
[blacked out], who was wearing the military uniform putting his dick in the
little kid’s ass, I couldn’t see the face of the kid because his face wasn’t in
front of the door. And the female soldier was taking pictures.”
Now, over a decade later the evidence of these events are beginning to
surface, but the Department of Defense is still doing their best to keep it
under the radar. That is why now more than ever, it is important to keep the
pressure on and force the release of this evidence, while the torture report is
fresh in the minds of the general population. According to a number of
global mainstream media sources, the Pentagon is covering up a disturbing video
that was never made public with the rest of the recent torture report. According
to various well respected journalists, including Seymour Hersh, the appalling
video was recorded at Abu Ghraib, the notorious US torture dungeon in Iraq that
made headlines roughly a decade ago, when the inhumane tactics being used at the
prison were exposed. Sadly, it seems that the evidence released years ago was
only scratching the surface. -- Hersh says it is only a matter of time before it
comes out. Giving a speech at the ACLU last week after the senate torture
report was initially released, Hersh gave some insight into what was on the
Pentagon’s secret tape. In the most revealing portion of his speech he
said that:
“Debating about it, ummm … Some of the worst things that happened you
don’t know about, okay? Videos, um, there are women there. Some of you may have
read that they were passing letters out, communications out to their men. This
is at Abu Ghraib … The women were passing messages out saying ‘Please come and
kill me, because of what’s happened’ and basically what happened is that those
women who were arrested with young boys, children in cases that have been
recorded. The boys were sodomized with the cameras rolling. And the worst
above all of that is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking that your
government has. They are in total terror. It’s going to come out.”
These events occurred during
the U.S. presidency of George Bush, - a man (& family)
so connected with evil schemes & scandals
that it will likely take history the better part of a century to adequately
identify the bulk of his/their crimes against humanity!
Are your legislators, judges & law-enforcers that fucking callous?
Yes they are! |
I wrote the
paragraphs on the lower right over a decade ago. Currently, in 2024, we
are watching a cultural & political phenomenon called "WOKE" create a
wave of gender insanity that is causing children a great deal of
confusion as to their own genders & even species! "WOKE" is pushing an
unnatural transgender agenda onto prepubescent children that is
magnitudes above what normal statistics would be for gender reassignment
procedures. Remember this fact: The "WOKE" movement arose from the GLB
community (that took on new "letters" such a T&Q over the last decade).
And what is woke'ism currently doing to the Americas? To quote from
what I wrote to the right: "It's self-evident that tolerating the
appetites of the arse-fuck-minority eventually debased the thinking in the
entire region!" Hello! |
Although some may consider this topic "controversial"; -I must remind
the reader that this is a website with an international audience, and
regardless of the ages discussed in the following; -g0ys only
advocate sexual relationships involving people who are sexually mature
(physically capable of procreation). I.E: Contrast our position
against that of Islam; -Where Muhammad is recorded as having taken his
youngest "bride" when she was only 9! Anyone who believes our
common-sense position regarding sexually mature parties to be
controversial, should perhaps better engage their energies in grappling
with the sanctioned pedophilia & female mutilation & servitude actively
promoted by the likes of Islam, etc. What g0ys advocate is
consensual intimate contact with +3000 years of precedent & numerous
records left by an astonishingly well-educated & philosophical culture:
The Greeks! |
As
a G0Y man, and former teenager, -I wanted to provide some commentary &
clarity with a dose of common-sense to the subject matter of pederasty and
what people often incorrectly presume about the term as opposed to the
reality. When spoken today, people often visualize an image of a 'dirty
old man' in pursuit of a prepubescent-boy. Words like 'NAMBLA &
'pedophile' spring to mind. However, the modern slur has little
to do with the original meaning; --And some historical analysis will show
how time & misuse of language's gray-areas can drastically alter
definitions.
I want to first draw your
attention to the Wikipedia articles at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty_in_ancient_Greece
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenian_pederasty
As
of the time of this article, there is discussion of merging the content of
the latter into the former -so at some time in the future, -the links above
may not be accurate, but a search of the subject matter in Wikipedia should
bring up the main subject. Also, because Wikipedia is an open
encyclopedia, -it is possible that the content of the articles will change
over time. My commentary will be on the content at this time, in
March-July of 2010. Please start by reading the articles link above.
My 1st comment is about what the article
writer said about current knowledge about the subject matter: "A great deal
of modern knowledge about Athenian pederastic practices has been derived
from
ceramic paintings on vases depicting various forms and aspects of the
relationship." That art may be a great place to reference, but: God
save us from the historic revisions made via Mapplethorpe unearthings!
The article/s above do contain enough
information to form a clearer idea of the practice if you can circumnavigate
the commentary of simpletons.
Here is a great reference.
Hint
#1: "It was also integral to Greek military training, and at
times a factor in the deployment of troops." The "BOYS" weren't
"boys". They were sexually maturing teens.
"PAIS" (A Greek term that sounds oddly like a Latin word for
"fish") is a word that doesn't necessarily relay the very crucial fact
that the younger "boy" had actually attained puberty. But,
common sense does. The
"PAIS" was trained for military -because once
puberty hits -- muscles & body can masculinize/grow rapidly as circumstances
dictate. Armor & weapons are heavy. Training is hard. Prior to
puberty, a "boy" doesn't have a chance of acquiring the physique necessary
to be a soldier. While the exact age would vary based on the
individual, the median entry age would be 14. This is borne out in
other comments made in the article/s. Pederasty was NOT
sexual contact with a pre-pubescent boy.
Facts & Details Expose Bad-Faith Arguments!
As one writer reasoned: "I'm genuinely puzzled by the
suggestion that without the blanket prohibition of certain consensual acts
via the age of consent, little boys will be legally diddled. When I was an
actual boy, I was aware of my penis but not in a sexual way. It was not
until puberty that I desired sex or had the functioning equipment.
I can't imagine why children would give consent to
something they are not capable of. Are there hordes of prepubescent children
who want sex anyways? Could they be coerced? Sure, but that's called rape.
And what about Plato's "young boys," those early into pubescence? Don't
older people get "fooled"? Why should the state
be matchmaker? Why do we assume all young adults are clueless idiots? Is
this a confession that the eight years of state-funded education for a
fourteen-year-old have been wasted because it cannot provide even the most
rudimentary interpersonal skills? Or is this a
confession that parents are worthless and cannot instill virtue in their
children since they lack it themselves? Given
that rape is rape and there is no desire on the part of prepubescent
children to have sex, the age of consent is a solution to a problem that
simply does not exist.
It's one more control in the busybody toolbox to break the emergent
independence of young adults. If those teens get used to this freedom thing,
they will be hard to rein in as adults! If they can bully you into
submission now, they break you into accepting other coercive situations like
[imaginary]-taxes, mandatory school, state-approved licensing,
the draft and a plethora of hidden
controls.
NAMBLA has not helped the matters, to say the least.
The pedophiles at the North American Man/Boy Love Association make the case
that consent is all that matters, ignoring the question of how sexually
immature children can give consent to something they are biologically not
ready for!
Upon closer inspection, we see what their agenda is. Just as the current
system conflates many unrelated types of same-sex sex under homosexuality,
NAMBLA conflates liking seven-year-olds with
seventeen-year-olds. To them, "minor" is really
anyone under 18 without any distinctions. Their
goal is to confuse the attraction to young adults in full bloom with
attraction to children obviously incapable of sex.
For example, the picture on top of their "15 Famous Men Who Had Boy Lovers"
shows Oscar Wilde with Lord Alfred Douglas. The picture dates from 1893 when
Wilde was 39 and Douglas, 23. So NAMBLA's poster "boy" is in reality a man
over the American legal drinking age. Where's the boy? Are they counting in
dog years perhaps? NAMBLA wants to ride the
coattails of the defensible only to sneak in the indefensible. They fail at
the latter; just endanger the former. They hide their true intent of kiddy
diddling behind a parade of consensual relationships
with young and often unambiguously fully-grown men.
All in all, NAMBLA is reprehensible." Repeat that until
you're completely in lock-step with g0ys' position on the subject: "All
in all, NAMBLA is reprehensible."
Hint
#2:
The average life-expectancy globally up until the early 1900's with the advent
of modern medicine (I.E: antibiotics) - was 18. 18! Assuming it
TRIPLE: 54 being the end of the statistical age line, --Pederasty was NOT
sex with dirty old men, either. It was a CONSENSUAL, INTENSE
MALE BONDING MENTORSHIP between the "youth" and the mentor - Median mentor age
range from 18 to 27. And again, it was consensual: "boys (pais)
usually had to be courted and were free to choose their mate."
This is obvious. These guys were training to become WARRIORS. Anyone under the
notion that they could abuse the "PAIS" was at risk of being disemboweled by
that same PAIS. DUH!
Hint
#3: AnalSex was considered grossly immoral (&
illegal) and it was referred to generically
as "SEX" based on the concept of PENETRATION (penetration
being the sex-model with a woman). This simple cultural
perception is lost in the present day because society has lost the healthy
notion that AnalSex should be criminalized due to
how incredibly
dangerous it is. Ancient, PREantibiotic cultures generally
realized
how helpful having your health & a functional asshole was.
Ergo: Getting/giving diseases & ripping out your arse
during AnalSex was seen in the light of the destructive act it is. The
presumption - that only AnalSex was considered "SEX" in M2M contexts
- explains the seeming contradictions in citations such as: "Socrates' love of
Alcibiades, which was more than reciprocated, is held as an example of
chaste pederasty." Reading other statements makes it clear:
Pederasty
was "chaste" because AnalSex was illegal (ILLEGAL) and only IT
was considered "Sex" between men.
Hint #4:
It was the stuff that intense friendships were made of: "Typically, after
their relationship had ended
and the young man had married (a woman), -the older man and his protégé would
remain on close terms throughout their life. For those lovers who continued
their lovemaking after their beloveds had matured, the Greeks made
allowances, saying, You can lift the bull, if you carried the calf."
"Lovers" shared physical intimacy without AnalSex...because...
Hint
#5:
"Homosexuality" was considered BAAAAAD. Is this a
contradiction of terms? Again: Not when you understand the context that
ANALSEX ("SEX") between men was the "disgrace". In other
terms: Two guys could share a bed all night, --share orgasms & make all
sorts of sheet-staining messes, -but as far as anyone was concerned: They
did NOT have "SEX"
as long as they steered clear of the ButtNasty. Hence the
quote from the article: "Only very rarely is
anal-sex suggested or shown, and then it is depicted as eliciting
surprise from the bystanders. A number of other sources also suggest
it was seen as shameful." Shameful. And
ILLEGAL - considered a violent act. And it IS.
Which is why the writer of the article notes: "Likewise, the Cretans
required the boy to declare whether the relationship had been to his liking,
thus giving him an opportunity to break it off if any violence had
been done to him.". What "violence" do you suppose was being discussed
as a tort when the relationship was presumed to be intimate from the onset?
Once you understand this vital distinction, -observations like the following
don't seem confusing: "Plutarch
and Xenophon,
in their descriptions of
Spartan
pederasty, state that even though it is the beautiful boys (pais) who are
sought above all others (contrary to the Cretan traditions), nevertheless
the pederastic couple remains chaste."
Hint
#6: Cutting thru the seeming confusion. Statements
such as: "K. J. Dover states that the eromenos was not "supposed" to feel
desire for the erastes, as that would be unmanly", - seem outright
schizophrenic - until you realize that the model-relationship was
based on civility and the gigantic sexual taboo was AnalSex. Those
principles reframe the meaning of the term "desire" --implying that the
specific unmanly desire was a "desire to penetrate or be penetrated".
The conflicted language has arisen because the CONTEXT of the Greek is not
fully delivered due to the scarcity of texts to more fully explain.
However, interpolating the meaning from what we do know is fairly
straightforward. Otherwise, the articles seem to describe a
schizophrenic society that BOTH idolized young men & physical intimacy while
shunning sexual climax with the same. Once the issue is framed- as
AnalSex rightfully put in its historical place of criminal & shameful
behavior ... THEN the proper context is easily derived and
suddenly it all makes sense.
Hint
#7: Contrary to what proponents of ButtSex may ASSert, --AnalSex
was NOT & could NOT have been a wide-spread practice in ancient Greek
culture. This FACT is so self evident that only a moron can't
see why. When the practice of AnalSex began to gain momentum in modern
"GAY" culture - it was accompanied by a simultaneous EXPLOSION of sexually
transmitted diseases! This is no small point. According to the
CDC & World Health Organization (WHO), -the practice of
AnalSex spreads disease some +5000% better than even oral-sex. Or
in other terms: (1) unprotected AssFuck = (50) FIFTY unprotected blow-jobs
(& OralSex doesn't cause physical trauma to the mouth - unlike what AnalSex
does to the lower GI tract - which always
injures the recipient)! Even with the advent of modern antibiotics,
antifungals, antivirals, antiparasite medications (NONE of which existed in
Greece 3000 years ago) -- the "GAY MALE" demographic has the highest margins
(by far) of sexually transmitted diseases of any demographic
(+4300% higher than the general population according to the American Red
Cross [stats 2012]). Compare that with Lesbians -- which are among the
lowest. The difference? Lesbians lack a penis (They're not fucking
anyone)! AnalSex kills societies dead! Now, can
you imagine what would have happened in ancient Grecian culture if the
ButtFuck had been accepted as part of pederasty? There would have been
a metaphorical mushroom-cloud of diseases & ruptured arse-holes within a
generation's time span - over the entire culture! Plato - among
others - saw this danger on the horizon.
 Hint
#8: Consider the various reasoning's in the following quote: "The
state benefited from these relationships, according to the statements of
ancient writers. The friendship functioned as a restraint on the youth,
since if he committed a crime it was not he but his lover who was punished.
In the military the lovers fought side by side, with each vying to shine
before the other. Thus, it was said that an army of lovers would be
invincible, as was the case until the battle of
Chaeronea
with the
Sacred Band of Thebes, a battalion of one hundred and fifty warriors
pairs (300), each lover fighting beside his beloved.
Athenaeus
states that "Hieronymus the Aristotelian says that love with boys (PAIS) was
fashionable because several tyrannies had been overturned by young
men in their prime, joined together as comrades in mutual sympathy." He
gives as examples of such pederastic couples the Athenians
Harmodius and Aristogeiton, who were credited (perhaps symbolically)
with the overthrow of the tyrant
Hippias
-- and also Chariton and Melanippus. Others, such as Aristotle, claimed: 'And
the lawgiver has devised many wise measures to secure the benefit of
moderation at table, and the segregation of the women in order that they may
not bear many children, for which purpose he instituted association with the
male sex.'"
Soldiers. Lovers. Heroes. And Aristotle
himself confirms the sexuality aspect of pederasty.
Pederasty (the Greek model) produced
some of the greatest male friendships in history: Alexander the Great w. General Hephaestion, King David & Prince Jonathan. And
Baron Friedrich von
Steuben (military consultant to the
Revolutionary Army under hire of George Washington). Baron von Steuben sticks
out as a historical enigma. Modern commentary tries to paint him as "gay".
However SODOMY (AnalSex) was highly illegal in the military. The prohibition is
no barrier to a traditional pederast - as their inclinations do NOT involve AnalSex!
Coming from Prussia, he had a different perspective on social norms. He is also
credited with creating America's professional army! Tough as nails - he
also made it openly clear that he had great affection for men. And the troops
adored him! HOW could these seeming incongruence's be! He was a military
pederast in the truest sense of the word! In the military from the age of 17;
-He combined strength of character with love, tenderness, discipline, affection,
humility & a visible empathy for people - especially MEN. When the
war ended, Baron von Steuben was granted U.S. citizenship and moved to New York
with William North and Benjamin Walker (both former aides-de-camp). “We
love him,” North wrote, “and he deserves it for he loves us tenderly.” (Baron
Friedrich von Steuben Monument in Washington DC shown to left).
And why do I mention all of this? Why
the need for clarification? Because human nature does not change. But
societies often driven by rumor & fear of the 'boogie-man' often formulate
so-called "cures" for normal behaviors misclassified as "social ills".
It's become "snake-oil by statute".
For example, -Tremblay
in his research on same-gender attracted youth, -describes phenomena which are
echoes of pederasty in a our current culture -now incompatible with the open
practice because of laws antagonistic to it. The "cure" is now worse than
the so-called "disease" (which is no disease at all).
 Tremblay
writes: "Dorais (1997) supplies an example of what may happen to a boy
who is discovered to be having sexual relationships with men. Boys who end
up experiencing "unwanted sexual acts" (sexual abuse, as defined by these
boys) vary with respect to their experiences, but they have one problem in
common: They are growing up in a world where they know that same-sex
relationships with males of one's own age is not what they would want others
to know, and they would certainly not want their activities be become
public knowledge in something like a courtroom situation -w ith respect to
their sexual / love desires for adult men (the "revelation" fear is
even greater because any revelation of their desires and related activities
would be a major confirmation of their "fag" status).
Therefore, when sexual abuse
(I.E: Rape) is inflicted on these boys, they find themselves in a
socially constructed double bind that only benefits the abuser(s), almost
like society was the abusers' best friend given that the abused boys
will likely not report such abuse to social authorities.
(Because the society that abandons the pederastic-model names innate adolescent male
love & affections as a vice -
instead of the social-virtue it is!
And then, who abuses these young men? Pedophile priests, caustic
clergy and politician Penile-Colony)!
In
the given case, for example, the boy's thoughts would have been
something like: "If I tell anyone (about this physical or sexual abuse,
rape, etc.), he will certainly tell on me - tell everyone what I have been
doing with men - then everyone will know about me!"
The following life
events reported to me in Calgary during the 1990s illustrate how society,
its professionals,
and even
gay communities contribute to the double bind. Their refusal to
acknowledge the reality of
teens having sex with men
(often well known to gay community leaders) are, in the final analysis, the
ally and best friends of men who sexually-abuse boys."
Recently, high profile abuse cases have come into the news. One recounts how
an athletic director was seen "sodomizing" a child in the shower.
Such an act is NOT pederasty as defined by history. It's simple child
abuse. However, having left the "just weights & measures" of
legitimate expressions of affection between mentor & pais; --society in
general now reels in a pandemic of 'gray allegations' that it is unable to
rationally sort because the very simple axiom that "Love works no ill." -has
been discarded & replaced by all sorts of baseless, statutory guidelines
that seem to consider every factor other than biology & natural law as their
statute making guide!
Ironically & tragically - the dynamic that Tremblay's research exposes is that
of a society that has enabled great social ills because it
has
REJECTED the Pederasty model! A
legitimate same-sex loving relationship is a moot notion
when the laws of many places draw arbitrary lines around age -instead of letting
individual biology & willingness, indicate the lines.
Furthermore,
the insane tolerance toward analsex's well documented perils has created an
incredibly dangerous environment for youths who desire to interact sexually and
end up being arse-fukk'd instead. So what happens is that those adults
predisposed to break the law (criminal mentalities) end up promoting &
sustaining an environment of youth-prostitution & endless cycles of abuse for
disadvantaged teens & young men (who merely happen to want masculine love & the
accompanying virtues in their lives).
Meanwhile, -those who would like to be loving caregivers
(paramours) & mentors to such young men are tyrannized by laws that
criminalize & stigmatize the very relationships that the Greeks considered
virtuous & the very highest call of being a man! Furthermore,
such laws tyrannize men who merely want to help others -- constantly
representing the threat of having to "prove a negative" if somebody (politically
motivated perhaps) -points a finger while shouting "Hebephile!", etc.
And
the so-called modern "GAY" community; --What help are they?
NONE! They're a 'tolerated', enabling, open gathering of self-deluded,
analsex-promoting, disease-spreading sociopaths who have made the scarab (dung
beetle) their unofficial sh!tplay mascot! Am I exaggerating?
Gabe Kruks, former director of public
policy and planning for the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Community Services
Center, was quoted on the subject: "Boys and straight girls who are having
sex for money, shelter, love - they are at risk. And our community,
the gay and lesbian community - and
I particularly fault gay men here - has done nothing to try to help
our youth. Gay men view these boys as recreational toys to be used. I
have heard many stories of HIV-positive men having unprotected (anal)sex
with boys. They don’t think it matters.
If there is a single reason why so little is being done in this country
about adolescent AIDS, it is that as a nation
we are terribly afraid of the sexuality
of our teens. These kids, no matter how they identify, gay or
straight, need more than condoms and instructions on how to use them.
They need someone to talk to, a support network, a place where they can feel
safe and secure and where their confidentiality and personal histories are
going to be protected and respected." (Brownworth, 1992: 41)
[Interjection of Commentary: Brownworth wrote that in 1992! And how much
progress has been made since then? What have the politicians in I.E:
San Francisco, Los Angeles, Baltimore, Seattle, Paris, London, etc; - been
up to? The precise
OPPOSITE of what common-sense would have them be doing!
Ineffective politicians? Should we be surprised?
One
of the most obvious facts gathered from such reports -as well as those by Al
Kinsey & Greek historians is that human nature is a constant and that social
tendencies that are thousands of years old are also the tendencies of
today --even if unrecognized because of concealment, misinformation,
peer-pressure or general ignorance propagated via the media. And the
fact is that guys often tend toward pederastic relationships, - and the
outcomes of these voluntary associations are not harmful when
wrapped in love & respect. Quite the contrary; --they are beneficial &
society-building. And they are also quite commonplace & generally (in
these modern times) -kept secretive because of insane laws that punish
people based on unsubstantiated fears & old-wives-tales, - instead of when
actual harm is done!
I recall one experience where an 18
year old "girl" married a 42 year-old man and most in their religious group
who knew of the event had no difficulty with it. However, that same
religious group also had no qualms about disassociating itself from a 19
year-old guy who had a number of younger male friends (mid teens) when it
was discovered that the 19 year old often slept w. his guests in the same
bed during stay-overs -often in close physical contact. None of the
teens were "gay" identified & none objected to the affections of the older
-nor were any sexual improprieties ever reported by those younger. The
shunning was based purely on the mere suggestions of "the homosexual
potential" -- as if mere same gender affections are innately evil (an
irrational prejudice that many 'religious' people harbor).

The man who was the aforementioned 19
year-old disclosed that the friendships sometimes had an intimacy &
sometimes sexual component involving wrestling, massage, frottage, JO, etc.
These activities were done in private, 1-on-1, & generally after the end of
a day of traditionally 'male' activities. The bonding effect created
was extreme by facilitating a respectable sexual outlet to hormone-raging
teen guys in an atmosphere of trust & deep friendship. Anal-sex was
NOT ever considered an acceptable component (-never even suggested) &
was discussed only in the negative. The only impediment to these male
friendships was the extreme positions of contempt & guilt projected from the
religious component of their socialization & what any stigmas from that
might mean to the guys participating. The
threat did nothing to stop the bonding, --but only drove it underground &
made such loving-friendships a deep secret among the participants. This
pattern is extremely common. The concern voiced by the man who had
been the 19 year-old & shunned, - was that guys who had these experiences
-without a framework of masculinity & respect for the sexual component of
friendship - might have been otherwise swayed by the "gay" movement (which
treats it's members as an odd minority instead of the normalcy) to engage in
perilous, disrespectful behaviors such as analsex, promiscuity, & drug-use.
The man who had been the shunned-19 year-old pointed out that one of the
things he did was guide the guys who were younger (but sexually mature) in
affirmative directions & helped navigate the issues of life & push back
against hedonism. He pointed out that the sexual component of their
friendships had not been part of some rebellious mindset, --but a natural
progression of deep, intimate friendship. He also pointed out that
truly destructive behaviors are self evident from the fruit they produce:
Drug abuse & rebellion morph into addictions & crime - for example.
Promiscuity too easily leads to disrespect & a prostitute's mindset.
Such things hardly echo in comparison with a couple of guys who tenderly
share a bed & physical affections after the mid-week Scripture-study!
Context, context, context!
Pederasty in the Scriptures? Jesus Blessed the
Practice!
This
is, of course -an area that is going to shock some readers; --But the
Scriptural evidence shows that Yeshua (Jesus) himself understood the
practice & far from being morally neutral on the subject matter - he is
recorded as blessing it on at least one occasion. The account is in
plain sight in the text & obvious for anyone with an understanding of
historical context who reads the original Greek wording. In Luke 7,
the account is recorded as: "
"In that town an army
officer's
servant was sick and near death. The officer loved this servant
very much.
And when he heard about Jesus, he sent some Jewish leaders to ask him to
come and heal the servant. The leaders went to Jesus and begged him to do
something. They said, "This man deserves your help! He loves our
nation and even built us a meeting place." So Jesus went with them.
When Jesus wasn't far from the house, the officer sent some friends to tell
him, "Lord, don't go to any trouble for me! I am not good enough for you to
come into my house. And I am certainly not worthy to come to you. Just
say the word, and my servant will get well. I have officers who
give orders to me, and I have soldiers who take orders from me. I can say to
one of them, 'Go!' and he goes. I can say to another, 'Come!' and he comes.
I can say to my servant, 'Do this!' and he will do it." When Jesus
heard this, he was so surprised that he turned and said to the crowd
following him, "In all of Israel I've never found anyone with this much
faith!"
The officer's friends returned and found
the
servant well."
- Lk 7:2-10
(See also Mt 8:5-13)
In the account, Luke's word usage for
"servant" is "doulos"
in the Greek. It generally means "slave" or "servant". Considering we
are discussing the Roman Military occupation of Israel -- the term "doulos"
obviously caries the connotation "CONSCRIPTED".
Also, Luke records that this "doulos" was "dear
unto" the officer. How dear? Well, Matthew who also recorded the same
event, -in the place of the term
"doulos" substituted the term
"PAIS".
Hello! Yeah - the same term -"PAIS",
used when Greeks discussed the younger person in a Pederastic bond!
There is another account that can be used as a cross reference that
involves a Roman officer who had a great respect for Israel's God. The
fullness of God's blessing came to that house too. It's found in Acts
chapters 10-11. See how Peter sums up the reason for God's favor:
"Truly I
understand that God shows no partiality,
but in every nation anyone who reverences Him and
does what is
right is acceptable to Him." -
Acts 10:34-35
The second account of God's life-changing
blessing - entering the house of Roman goy'im paints a fuller picture
about the first. In order for the manifestation of healing in the
account recorded in Luke 7 to have occurred; --The summary of WHY (given
by Peter in Acts 10) must have also been true in order for
Scriptural-harmony to exist. Jesus healed the Roman's doulos/pais ("servant")
despite the fact the relationship was pederastic. Why? Because
Pederasty is not a mala-inse' condition of "sin". Quite the contrary!
According to Peter's reasoning, --it's a moral form of living because he
said that God accepts WITHOUT PARTIALITY those "who
reverence Him and do what is right".
How do we
know that AnalSex wasn't a component in this Roman officer's relationship
with his doulos/pais? Because the "servant" was gravely ill & the centurion
wasn't. Whereas it is often reported that in relationships where there
is no
AnalSex, -that even years of intimacy -even an HIV+ partner will
generally not sero-convert the other! Conclusion: The "pais" was ill,
but because the Soldier was not, ergo --there was no AnalSex involved!
Consider: With obesity being a leading
cause of death, --many people still don't have the common sense to realize
that it's the ways in which a real need it met that leads to social success
or failure. Only a fool would suggest that in order to prevent obesity
that people simply not eat; --But that is precisely what religion
(& the laws such hell-spawn influence) suggests to men when they hit puberty:
"Don't have an orgasm -until you're 'married' in 5-10 years."! That
posturing is simply INSANE -- but an effective approach if you wish to
control people through the guilt of having 'failed'. Tell
"Sister-Mary Fucktard" to go to hell. She will eventually oblige.
And, of course -- with
the "ages of consent" dropping globally: The message to sexually mature
young people is that they can fuck like rabbits among peers of similar age -- just
not with somebody who may be outside of the "acceptable age-range"
-regardless of how mutually beneficial or how much love, & affection are
actually involved! This same insanity being brought to you by the fucktards who are criminally prosecuting teens
for possessing "child porn" (who take selfies of their own genitals and then
send the images to their boy/girl friend)! It may be sophomoric of him to do so - but are we
going to send the 17 year old guy to prison for sexting his girlfriend (a
prison where he stands a substantial chance of being raped!)? Are your
legislators, judges & law-enforcers that fucking callous?
Yes they are!
You can tell who the fucktards are because they expect people to vote for
them after having merely seen their name on a campaign sign placed beside
the public way! Probably not
you - but certainly
ALL of your neighbors,
are indeed, - just that fucking stupid!
Paranoid fear of 'potential abuse' has resulted in outlawing legitimate,
harmless (even beneficial) expression!
And this pattern has
repeated itself! Did you know that under US federal law, possessing
pictures of a child getting a bath by an "adult" now constitutes statutory
"child pornography"; and that people have actually been charged & jailed!
Fear of child pornographers has outlawed the legitimate expression!
There goes the 'baby' - out with the proverbial bathwater! Are your
legislators, judges & law-enforcers that fucking callous?
Yes they are!
What has become of the
principle of "Mens rea"? State of Mind - MATTERS!
There really should be a basic IQ minimum
requirement to be a legislator (I suggest 135) & the applicant should also
test negative in a psychopathy screening battery.
Which
is a sentiment that leads me to the very next part of this commentary.
Why did the culture of Pederasty come to
an eventual "end" in the old world and why does the term evoke such
controversy today when discussed? Once again, the historical records
lead us to the reasons -- the things that Plato had feared might eventually
come about.
Who was responsible for the demise of a
mindset that had worked well for millennia? It was the ASS-FUKKERS! A
social tolerance/acceptance of Anal Sex destroyed ancient civilization. It
sounds extreme until you examine the bigger psychological profile of those who
promote the
practice: COMPLICIT CRIMINAL SOCIOPATHS...AND WHEN THEY
RISE TO POWER...
The practice seems to have taken off in
Rome & once it spread --coloring politics & weakening law-making; --The rest
of the Mediterranean soon followed. I can almost hear their political
speeches now: "We must 'be tolerant'..." Are
your legislators, judges & law-enforcers that fucking callous?
Yes they are!
You see, although it's unclear as to
which dynasty decided to die-nasty; --Roman culture somehow slowly got the
notion that it was OK to butt-fuck certain persons. The practice
likely started with "slaves" as the targets of the act (men deemed to have
very few rights in the eyes of the law). It's interesting how once
a culture decides that
certain groups are OK to abuse because of imagined status -- how that
same culture soon hardens it's conscience & the abuse grows & spreads.
Well, why did some Romans get the notion
that it was OK to rape a male slave --in the 1st place? It was because
so many male slaves were also made eunuchs & eunuchs were considered
NON-MEN. Once Roman men began to think along the lines that
butt-fucking eunuch-slaves didn't make the butt-fucker any "less of a man"
(a mind-set very similar to male prisoners who rape other men in prisons
today);--The only question remaining for those who wanted to expand the
butt-fuck practice was "Who else?". Their twisted answer: Anyone
who's not a "man", but not a woman, either. To be with another woman
was seen as cheating on the wife...but since being with a eunuch had never
been seen that way and since eunuchs were considered "non-men", --Roman
culture --in a twist of morality in keeping with the increasing amount of
lead in their "royal" brain-damaging-diets, -reached a cultural consensus
(evidenced by the sheer amount of documentation of the practice) -- & began
the increasing practice of castrating young (pais) men in ever-growing
numbers - in order to make them 'eunuchs' & endlessly arse-fuckable!
Mix in the drug induced insanity of the large number of Roman fertility-cult
religions & you've got a real hell-bent movement!
Immoral? If you judge morality by the
outcome of an act, - such was absolutely, fucking immoral! But under
Roman law -- astonishingly ... eventually "bread & circuses" -LEGAL!
A senate full of complicit cowards; --& Caesar-Nero ('Mr. 666' himself)
was emperor during the pinnacle of these barbaric abuses. And
history records Nero's bizarre 'marriage' with a 12 year old boy! And
what do you suppose Nero did to the "boy" as soon as pits & pubes threatened
to sprout hair?
Malik states
in his paper:
Born Eunuchs:
Suetonius said of the
emperor Titus that "he was suspected of excess; and likewise of lust because
of his crowds of catamites
(kept boys)
and eunuchs."
Apuleius, in the
picaresque novel The Golden Ass, tells of a band of "half-men" [semiviri],
who call each other "girls" [puellae] and have sex with young men, both
as active and as passive partners
(tops/bottoms).
They also act as cultic priests of the Mother Goddess, a traditional
role for eunuchs.
The next piece of
evidence is a bit complicated. It consists of some comments by Clement of
Alexandria about the followers of Basilides, a Christian Gnostic. Clement
said they lived "lewder lives than the most uncontrolled heathen."
It was that sort of behavior & those
abuses against people that the Apostle Paul was highlighting when he penned
this in Romans chapter 1:
"And just as
they did not think it was worthwhile to be having [or, keeping] God in
[their] true knowledge [or, consciousness], God gave them over to a
disapproved [fig., debased] mind to be doing the [things] not proper, -
having been filled with all unrighteousness, sexual sin, wickedness,
covetous desire [or, greed], malice; full of envy, murder, bitter conflict,
deceit [or, treachery], maliciousness; gossips, -back-biters, God-haters,
insolent persons, arrogant boasters, schemers of evil [things], disobedient
to parents, - foolish, untrustworthy, without natural affection,
unforgiving, unmerciful; - who having known the righteous judgment of God,
that the ones practicing such things are deserving of death, not only are
doing them, _but_ they are also approving of the ones practicing." - Rom
1:28-32 (How's your insight coming?)
Have "Tolerance"? Not a fuck'n chance!
History already shows us where this all leads!
Taking captive (by
whatever means) a handsome young man to cut his nuts off & make an
artificial eunuch out of him so that rich elitists can fuck the "non-man" in
perpetuity without giving their own wives 'legal' grounds for divorce;
--That gross-evil is a far, far cry from the Greek
warrior/mentor who loves his Pais with a committed passion that would
protect him from such a tyranny with the mentor's very own life!
The former set of acts is cruel beyond
adequate-words; --While the latter
is the very definition of love itself: "Greater love has
no one than this, that he lays down his life on behalf of his friends."
- Yeshua
Pederasty was defamed because the
arse-fuck became 'tolerated' & the physical abuse & diseases brought by
cultists & tyrants against the youth of the day brought the very term into
disrespect. Love -which works no ill & which had been the
foundation for pederasty for generations, --was effectively locked out by
the act of the arse-fuck (which is the very definition of working of 'ill')
& the sick-ticket personalities that promoted the vile practice. Society
turned a blind eye to butt-fucking and the associated practices
eventually spread like gangrene via those predisposed to politics
& state-religion
(Show me a person who wants to dominate other's & I'll show you an abusive
orifice invader)! Trust was destroyed and young men
were treated with ever increasing contempt. And government -- which is
instituted to protect lives & property, --became the primary instrument of
those bent on abusing lives & stealing their property; --All by mere edict &
turning the very military itself into a tool against the lawful purposes.
That culture was destroyed from the
inside out! Why? Because men became "tolerant" of things that never
should have been tolerated! True morality is known by observing the
resulting outcomes of actions. A tree is known of its fruit. Apply labels
accordingly!
It's self-evident that tolerating the
appetites of the arse-fuck-minority eventually debased the thinking in the
entire region! And keep in mind -- this was the approved & legal
practice of Rome: The very 1st recorded butt-fuck dictatorship in history!
And Rome fell; - Debased from within. Surprised?
|