"Nevertheless the military voices on the show had their winning moments, sounding like old-fashioned relativists, whose basic mission in life was to counter ethnocentrism and disarm those possessed by a strident sense of group superiority. Ms. McFate stressed her success at getting American soldiers to stop making moral judgments about a local Afghan cultural practice in which older men go off with younger boys on 'love Thursdays' and do some 'hanky-panky.' 'Stop imposing your values on others,' was the message for the American soldiers. She was way beyond 'don't ask, don't tell,' and I found it heartwarming."
I read about the supposed preference for young boys before, but I just found it amusing the military had according to the article employed an anthropolgist to preach moral relativism to the troops. Good job U.S. military. :)
It also explains perhaps why Afghanistan doesn't have any stripclubs listed at TUSCL. ;) IOWs, who needs hot young women when young boys who probably don't get paid are available? ;)
Yeah, just think. When the Taliban was in charge in Afghanistan, they couldn't have sex with anyone unless they were married because they preached such militant fundamentalist religious extremism, but now they can go off and have sex with any little boy they want, and STILL preach fundamentalist militant religious extremism. We make their world free to be more hypocritical than it was before: preach fundamentalist militant religious extremism and yet still live a profligate irresponsible abusive lifestyle. Just spreading around the American way.
I thought the Taliban approved of young boys (at least those with facial hair). :) Of course, I could be mistaken or this the following link may just be phony baloney American anti-Taliban propaganda:
Boys of the Taliban
By Jamie Glazov
"But there is a curious rule that the Western media has typically ignored. Rule No. 19 instructs that Taliban fighters must not take young boys without facial hair into their private quarters."
Actually, I think the Taliban approved of young boys as long as the boys DID NOT have facial hair. IOWs, there has been a serious misinterpretation of the all important Rule No. 19. Actually, I think it is Rule No. 3 depending on the particular governing Taliban authority. ;)
"Indeed, if a Muslim male dies in the cause of jihad, he will enjoy a blissful union with virgins in paradise (Suras 78:31, 37:40-48, 44:51-55). And for those Muslim warriors for whom women are not of interest, there will be young pre-pubescent boys at their service -- and they will be like 'scattered pearls' of 'perpetual freshness' (Suras 52:24, 56:17, 76:19)."
Like I said, I don't know if there is any truth to this in the least. A true truism is about repeating a lie often enough it becomes accepted as the truth.
It's not like it's uncommon in the non-Western world. Heck, even the ancient Greek's liked a little boy every now and then. Plato for example, father of all Western philosophy (if you take one view), spent his fair share of time with a "pipe boy."
I don't really find it disgusting that others might partake in that manner -- plenty of folks are just grossed out right at the outset, by the IDEA of having sex with a pre-pubescent boy, as though the ADULT is doing something gross. I do find it kind of weird that a young person would be taken advantage of. A little guy who's not old enough to figure out adults or fend for himself, who then is expected to acquiesce to an adult interest in an adult liason? Sounds to me like he's being taken advantage of. Kind of like a school principal demanding that his students make money for him. Weird. What kind of adult is into that sort of thing?
For me, the "natural" instinct is for young-looking women. I don't really enjoy the company of 15-year-old girls, they're kind of boring. Talk about Britney Spears can only go so far. And I don't really enjoy the bodies of 45-year-old women, they're kind of saggy. Somewhere in between is the ideal. Either way, it's the females I'm interested in. I don't get how a heterosexual male would be interested in a partner who's not female.
Perhaps an adult who thinks the child is having a good time? A gay friend said he loved being sexually used by male relatives, but he did have problems in that he thought the experience might have made him gay. I said, but you say you're happy being gay. He said yes, he is happy, but he'd love to have children in a traditional family--he had almost zero interest in women. Interestingly, he didn't want the child to be having any sex. It made NO difference that he enjoyed the sex he received as a child. Pleasure wasn't the issue nor was guilt. He didn't think a child knew enough to make an important decision like. He felt the child, male or female, should at least be developed somewhat physically and even then he thought more traditional fun was better at least at first. If the child is gay, then don't rush it he will learn on his own.
Also interesting, gay is not accepted at all in his family if it involves adult males. That is a major problem. His father told him it would have been better if he (the son) had just killed him rather than destroy the family honor. You want a boy? No problem. You want another adult male? Huge problem. I also seem to recall there was some religious angle to all of this, but they were supposedly Christians.
Seems weird in the extreme. One positive is that there was a lot of love in his family----too much actually in that I think they definitely could have done without having sex with young boys.
Interesting how we're now investigating potential links between pederasty (is that the right word) and a development of homosexuality. I had thought the two were essentially unrelated. For example, there's a prevalent myth in western urban society, among the less educated, that a gay man wants to sexually abuse little boys. Most of the gay men whom I know aren't interested in little boys, and if there IS a guy in this conversation who IS, then it's a straight guy. Yet some people persist in thinking that a homosexual adult male is a child-abuser. Weird, again.
The key word is *most*. I don't know what most gay men are really after concerning sex. I do know that some gay men, or at least they think or claim to be gay, not only like other adult males, but like young boys as well.
Heck, I even knew a gay male, deceased, who started out liking females. But, he developed an extreme fear of females. Anyway, almost all of his lovers were male. He was attracted to females more than males, but didn't think they could be trusted. He had developed a "close" relationship with his secretary and she was sweet and hot. He wanted marriage and a family with her, but was just too afraid. He knew males would treat him right. It was the females who weren't trust worthy. He even thought about paying a woman to have his children, but again fear ruled. He thought she'd use the courts to deprive him of seeing his children or that he end up in a financially draining legal battles. He told me bottom line he would rather have a traditional family and that maybe that meant he wasn't really gay even though he thought he was gay.
Oh, he liked stripclubs! :) But, he didn't want the women getting close to him. Of course, he liked gay porn as well. I guess he just liked naked adult bodies. To the best of my knowledge he had NO interest in children.
"I do know that some gay men, or at least they think or claim to be gay, not only like other adult males, but like young boys as well."
Yeah, but the likelihood of a gay man wanting to screw an under-age person (and being willing to actually take action to bring this crime to fruition) is probably about equal to the equivalent likelihood of a STRAIGHT man wanting to screw an under-age person.
Gay-ness doesn't correlate with pedophilia. That was my point.
12 comments
Latest
I thought the Taliban approved of young boys (at least those with facial hair). :) Of course, I could be mistaken or this the following link may just be phony baloney American anti-Taliban propaganda:
Boys of the Taliban
By Jamie Glazov
"But there is a curious rule that the Western media has typically ignored. Rule No. 19 instructs that Taliban fighters must not take young boys without facial hair into their private quarters."
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Rea…
Actually, I think the Taliban approved of young boys as long as the boys DID NOT have facial hair. IOWs, there has been a serious misinterpretation of the all important Rule No. 19. Actually, I think it is Rule No. 3 depending on the particular governing Taliban authority. ;)
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Rea…
Like I said, I don't know if there is any truth to this in the least. A true truism is about repeating a lie often enough it becomes accepted as the truth.
A boy for pleasure.
A melon for ecstacy.
I am not making this up.
Yes, they even made a novel out of the proverb. http://www.trashfiction.co.uk/melon_ecst… YIKES!!! :)
I guess maybe there is a way for me to be free of stripclubs. It sounds so weird. It probably provides better pillow talk, as well.
I don't really find it disgusting that others might partake in that manner -- plenty of folks are just grossed out right at the outset, by the IDEA of having sex with a pre-pubescent boy, as though the ADULT is doing something gross. I do find it kind of weird that a young person would be taken advantage of. A little guy who's not old enough to figure out adults or fend for himself, who then is expected to acquiesce to an adult interest in an adult liason? Sounds to me like he's being taken advantage of. Kind of like a school principal demanding that his students make money for him. Weird. What kind of adult is into that sort of thing?
For me, the "natural" instinct is for young-looking women. I don't really enjoy the company of 15-year-old girls, they're kind of boring. Talk about Britney Spears can only go so far. And I don't really enjoy the bodies of 45-year-old women, they're kind of saggy. Somewhere in between is the ideal. Either way, it's the females I'm interested in. I don't get how a heterosexual male would be interested in a partner who's not female.
Can someone explain that to me?
Seems weird in the extreme. One positive is that there was a lot of love in his family----too much actually in that I think they definitely could have done without having sex with young boys.
The key word is *most*. I don't know what most gay men are really after concerning sex. I do know that some gay men, or at least they think or claim to be gay, not only like other adult males, but like young boys as well.
Heck, I even knew a gay male, deceased, who started out liking females. But, he developed an extreme fear of females. Anyway, almost all of his lovers were male. He was attracted to females more than males, but didn't think they could be trusted. He had developed a "close" relationship with his secretary and she was sweet and hot. He wanted marriage and a family with her, but was just too afraid. He knew males would treat him right. It was the females who weren't trust worthy. He even thought about paying a woman to have his children, but again fear ruled. He thought she'd use the courts to deprive him of seeing his children or that he end up in a financially draining legal battles. He told me bottom line he would rather have a traditional family and that maybe that meant he wasn't really gay even though he thought he was gay.
Yeah, but the likelihood of a gay man wanting to screw an under-age person (and being willing to actually take action to bring this crime to fruition) is probably about equal to the equivalent likelihood of a STRAIGHT man wanting to screw an under-age person.
Gay-ness doesn't correlate with pedophilia. That was my point.