Do Foes of Gay Marriages Simply Fear Joy?

Correction:

I would like to delete the following sentence from my last post (not that I am suggesting that you are one).

PM# 212

I did not approve of your ``expressing your opinion`` as a personal favor but as a matter of principle. The principle being that everybody has a right to express his opinion. However, it does not mean that I approve of your opinion too.

Free speech is a wonderful thing. It lets us reach into the mind of a sexual predator (not that I am suggesting that you are one). It helps us understand the nature of the beast. A sexual predator who keeps quite and does his deed secretively is more dangerous than the one who claims to do it openly.

You might have not realized it but your posts have slipped the rug from under the feet of two kinds of people:

1. Secular Humanists

2. Naturalists.

Your posts prove that a set of moral values cannot be based on these two so called ideals. These ideals after a process of reiteration and redefinition eventually lead to animalism, where human beings live without any moral values. Human Beings, on the other hand have struggled for the past 10,000 years to escape from that animalism. Only that struggle has helped us evolve from being animals and continue living as such. Isn`t it clear as sunlight that both naturalism and secular humanism are regressive processes that will eventually lead us being animals again.

This is turning into an inerteresting debate.

So far, we have had some ladies admit that they see nothing wrong with polygamy. And one individual admit that they see nothing wrong with sex with children of the same gender (and apparently/maybe even a different religion). And a lot of people admit there is nothing wrong with gay marriages.

Then, there are people like me, who consider all of the above to be wrong (though polygamy should be allowed under special conditions, with the written consent of all parties, in my opinion), though they feel secular societies have to support two out of the above three.

Without getting into the details of the individuals involved, even at the purest philosophical levels, the only way sex with an 11 year old, of the same or different gender, can be justified is if the gaurdians of the child are involved in the process, and are there to guide the child.

If that is not occuring, then this is nothing more than the exploitation on a child (even at the purest philosophical levels). Philosophical ideas are based on the fact that all decisions are being made by individuals who fully understand the consequences. There is no endevour, much less a complicated one like sex and love, in which an 11 year old can undertand all the involved issues, without the guidance of a gaurdian. In situations like this, the important issue is the vulnerability of the child, not the desires of the adult.

Anyone who feels their 11 year old can make sound judgements on sex and love relationships could (not should, but could) support this. Anyone who does not feel that way, has to on principle, oppose this. Or they need to give up the right to complain, if they find their own child in such a relationship. They cannot have one rule for other people`s children and another rule for their own children, i.e. if their 11 year old son makes a decision to have a relationship with the author, they have to allow him to go ahead with it.

PM: Two questions, purely from a technical point of view:

- Were you ever abused as a child, either sexually or physically or emotionally?
- You seem to have convinced yourself that there is nothing wrong with your actions. This is quite easy to do for anyone. Did you ever consider the possibility that maybe there is something wrong with your actions? Have you taken the time to discuss it with psychiatrists etc., before convincing yourself of the correctness of your actions? If you have not done so, then don`t you think you are making a one-sided decision, based only on your own logic?

P.S. Where is Shankar when he is needed......................

re. dost-mittar #222:
``I disapprove PM`s affair with the boy but ...``
So, dost sahib, it is okay to discuss the merits and demerits of this matter philosophically, but not okay to put the theory to it`s ultimate test: practice? Seems to me that that is the position you are taking.
If time permits, now that you have read the essay, I would like to hear from you what you found worthy of your disapproval.
rgds,
PM

PM #225 #226 #227 #230: You will note that my posts were not addressed to you. one was to roohi, supporting her condemnation of your pedophilia, and one to dost-mittar, expressing disappointment at what i consider to be his equivocation. As such, I am not interested in your responses.

I had already raised the question of the affect your sexual behavior with the 11 year old student, and you have not been able to answer it. Instead you have chosen to hide behind a torrent of pious statements. You have thus demonstrated that you are nothing but a self-indulgent pedophiliac and a statutory rapist under US law. If the boy`s father brought charges against you in court, you would be put away for 20-30 years, and in many states your neighbors would be permitted to put up a sign-post in front of your house warning parents and children that a ``convicted pedophiliac lives here``. And this is the justice that individuals like you who sacrifice a child`s life for a few moments of self-gratification deserve.

You can come back with a torrent of posts in reply, or whatever. I dont care. This is my last post to you.

dost mittar #233 this your specific quote i had commented on: ````admire his courage and honesty in narrating it in an open forum``

you have ignored that quote of yours, ignored the questions i raised about the ``courage`` and ``honesty`` in talking in an anonymous forum, and chosen to provide some other quote and to tell me to improve my reading skills. I had expected something more responsible and mature from you.

nor was the quote i had commented on an isolated one from you. earlier you had written: ``And values too are time and society specific. Take the example of adultery and paedophilia. The society from where we come considers adultery to be a lot more unacceptable than this society....``

If this is not moral equivocation, I dont know what is. So excuse me, but i will have to beg off further discussion on this topic since I have nothing more to add.

dost -

PM has not admitted any (legal) wrong doing but he has argued endlessly that sex with a minor boy is NOT wrong.

Given that he

1. admits to being an unapologetic pedophile (his words)

2. admits to boys ages 10-15 being his primary erotic focus

3. admits to mutual fondeling of a boy of 11 he had charge of

4. admits abusing the trust of his students parents in his position as a teacher

5. has argued endlessly that sex with a minor boy over 12 and an adult man is NOT wrong

Given these facts ... do you believe he should be trusted with boys in this age group as a teacher ? What is to stop him from trying to seduce some boy he ``falls in love with`` ?

Do the parents of his students and the Principle and Faculty of his School have no right to any warning/knowledge about his background ?

Assertions like sheltered middle-class (I assume) subcontinental children as young as 11 or 12 are mature enough for the age of consent and know abuse and ``will not take it`` are RUBBISH in my experience as a student and as a teacher in New Delhi. Unless something in the Hawa-Pani changes more drastically than I ever imagined at Wagah - the average middle-class Pakistani 11 year old is not any more mature.

---

tahmed32 - I`m glad I make sense to some one ...

dost saab - I did not see your last posts ... you and others are far more capable than I of discussing this issue in a productive way ... for me at this stage in life it is very personal ... so I leave you to it

PM:
I had mistakenly believed that your discussion was philosophicla in nature. Now that I know that it is personal I have a few questions to ask of you. I am sorry if you have already answered them since I have not been reading all your posts.
-Do you tell your prospective clients (parents) of your sexual orientation? If not, dont you think you should so that they may assess the risks themselves?
-Do you realise the hurt that you may have caused the boy`s parents and the potential ridicule to himself if the story of his tryst got around, as these things ususually do in our societies?
-Do you realise that the very nature of your orientation means that you cannot have a permanent involvement with anyone? As soon as a boy turns adult, you would lose interest in him.

tahmed32
[I AM disappointed at dost-mittar`s equivocation (when he says that such behavior is acceptable in desi society - as if that makes it understandable)]

You really must improve your reading skills. Here is what I said:

``I disapprove PM`s affair with the boy``

``at the same time a Masterji having a relationship with a boy is considered bad behaviour and may evoke some smirks or jokes but does not create the same kind of trauma that it does over here. ``

Where does it say that I approve such activity or that it is acceptable in desi society? All I said was that it causes less trauma in the society there than it does here. And that, sir, is a statement of fact.

roohi:
I take back my remark about PM`s courage and honesty if he did not inform the boy`s parents.

re. AlephNull:
``I would add that sex involves many more dimensions of one’s being than common addictive substances. It crucially involves one’s ideas of personal identity, self-respect and general outlook on life.``
At 12? At 15? Aren`t you over-intellectualizing the whole deal a little? Granted, all of the above may attend the sexual experience, but what pasrt ofthat is a certain civilization`s discontent, and what paert natural, normal, or een healthy, is a question I think needs further exploration.
(But I guess you really havta be there to know how silly this sounds in the context of adoloscent sex-play. I mean, have you completely forgotten what it was like when you were 12? 15?)
``The essence of my position is that sex is an activity, fraught with consequences, in which mature adults can engage responsibly (i.e. without harm to themselves or other party involved) – although many obviously do not. The same assumption simply cannot be made for children and early adolescents.``
With all due respect, your contention has no real cross-cultural validity, and frankly, seems to me more bias than basis.
``From my recollections of my own process of growing up, 12 was simply far too young. Ditto with 14, though at that age I would have made my disapproval plain in no uncertain terms. Sorry.
That`s fine. No need to be sorry. To each his own. Now, surely you would not derprive others the right, at 14, to show their approval-- to be able to say ``Yes` as well as `No`.
``You may notice that I have made no reference to any so-called absolute moral code enshrined in some musty Revealed Book allegedly handed down from on high.``
Yes, but I`m aure you;er aware of what Russel says about the true motivations of even some of the otherwise most clear-headed phiosophers when it cam to the question of God`s existence. ;-)
``A sexual relationship between an adult and a juvenile would in most cases massively violate my assumption (I admit it’s just that) of broad power equality as the desirable ideal in sexual relationships.``
hmmm... waht if the sexual was jsut one of many components i na relationsip that is necessaily defined and enriched by the power inequality? Does `calculated rsk` and `necessary evil` apply here?
Thanks for your considered thoughts.. Been great interacting with you.
rgds,
PM

for AlephNull:
This link even more `resourceful`

For TAhmed:
Who Owns Hate on the Net?

for AlephNull: (the Morally Unassaible need not bother with these trifling science issues)
Click here

This one of particular interest to you perhaps:
Pedophilia, Science and Self-Deception
Author Arne Frederiksen argues that the mental health community routinely mis-diagnose pedophiles as having cognitive distortion because they are unable to accept that children can enjoy sexual activity. Furthermore, they base their diagnoses on insufficient and poorly conducted research into pedophilia and child sexuality.
rgds,
PM

AlephNull:
Damn! Too much to answer here, and a plane to catch in 12 hours!
Here`s the rub: You write: ``There is good reason to believe that some extensive rewiring of the brain occurs during these episodes. They are stressful enough for an adult with all the resources of a developed intelligence, a bookish prior ‘knowledge’ of the phenomena involved, and a certain cynicism to boot. I would not assume that a twelve- or fourteen-year old had anywhere near the same resources available.``
has it occured to you that the stress is related to the resources of ``developed intelligence, the bookish prior knowledge, of the phenomena involved etc (all sometimes called ``baggage``. and/or the discontent of civilization.
Let me relate an anecdote I read about a guy who writes of his sexual experience with a 15-yo, with whom he later started to fall in love. When he started buying him gifts, taking him out and ingratuating himself to the `boy`, the latter told him to lay off. All he was in it for were the blow jobs. Simple as that!
Will post some material here about why the dynamics of adult relations don`t apply here.
later...
PM

TAhmed:
The pontification index is usually a pretty good indicator of how well you`re doing in a debate.
You write: ``what courage do you see here? all i see is brazen self-indulgent moralizing of a criminal.
You still haven`t old me what it is in what I wrote that consitutes criminal behaviour.
`` in courts in any civilized country (not India and Pakistan, i would agree)...``
hmmm.. I knew you were a Bush-lover, Ahmed, but c`mon, even he didn`t term the Europeans uncivilized, just irrelevant. Reality check bro: Average Age-of-consent in European nations is 13.8.
``... his brazen boasting about his sexual attack on his student... ``
hmmm... did read the same easy I wrote?? Which internet are you on?!?
This is precious, coming from you! Oh, now I get it... throw in words like ``attack`` and `brazen boasting`, and you somehow feel you have a stronger case, eh? No? WEll, I`m sure it at least maks you feel all righteous inside. Only problem, your words are not backed up by substance. You need that little detail in a court of law, you know?-- or even to make a credible point here.
``...would be regarded as unrepentent behavior and would probably earn him another few years of jail time...``
Yaar.. why this countinued ranting on jail? I`ve already told you, I`m well aware of the moral climate there on this issue. Not so long ago, witches and then homosexuals (they kind you know approve of) were being meted out the same kinda treatment. learn some history, if nothing else, yaar.
``...Where he would probably get all the gay sex he can handle at the hands of fellow criminals.``
Ahhhh,, now I get it... the old anal fixation rearing its ugly head again. It`s cool, TAhemed, even understandable, given the problems you have ``getting some``, as related to us earlier.
``In the US, sexual activity with a minor (under 18 years, and this boy was only 11) is considered statutory rape.``
In Georgia, sexual activity with another man is considered a felony. Your point is...? echo... you wanna help him out here, maybe?
``...and what honesty are you commending him for?``
Ok, I`ll agree with you here. I don;t see what the deal was with honesty.
`` if he was honest, he would have told the boy`s father his gay and pedophiliac tendencies.``
Duh, if you read the article without your pontifical gown on, you might have noticed my claim that, prior to that experience, I had no knowledge/experience of that side of me.
But to answer you concern... I`m sure that, growing up, being the morally upright person you are you divluged every detail of your every action and motivation to your parents, i nthe spirit of honesty. And yes, its the same difference!!
In any case, I don`t care too much for your seeking to characterize my relationships as ``sexual``-- though I suppose for the sex-starved-and-repressed, and the prurient, that would be the natural thing to do.
But it ain`t the reality!
So grab yourself a six pack, slouch on the EZboy (no pun intended) and read the interacts. No, first re-read the passage roohi psoted. This time dispensing of the preconceived notions.