Celibacy, Clubs and Lust
Submitted by J on March 24 2002 18:39:56
In reply to OK why the title boylovers? submitted by sally on March 24 2002 12:43:20
|
Dear sally, Why call yourselves boylovers? What are you trying to convey? It must be that you are trying to convey a sexual attraction to boys. I suppose that assessment would be correct. Personally, I have no problem with calling myself a ‘homosexual pedophile’ – it is a descriptor similar to saying that you are a ‘heterosexual’. If I call myself a ‘boylover’ I’m conveying no further information than what my sexual orientation is. I am married to a quadriplegic and I have been celibate from the age of 24 to the present… Thank you for sharing this. I bought a book some time ago entitled ‘A History of Celibacy’ by Elizabeth Abbott in order to read about others who are celibate, on the one hand to possibly glean out ways to cope, and on the other to empathize with those with a similar struggle, though for completely different reasons. Myself, I have been celibate for four years and will be so for the rest of my life. My only sexual experience was four years ago with a young boy and I went to prison for this crime. I am deeply remorseful for my actions and while a day never goes by that I don’t feel guilty for what I did, I trust in my Lord that He has forgiven me of my sin (Psalm 51; 103:8-14). Now what would you think of me if I started a club and I made a symbol and I called myself a manlover? Such a ‘club’ would hardly be necessary since adult heterosexuality is the societal norm. Your analogy falls apart at this point. The reason this place and others similar to it exist is because we cannot simply live out our lives in society without condemnation or worse. We cannot be open with our family and friends (though incidentally I am with most of mine, most pedophiles are not). You want to say that your desires aren’t wrong, only your actions are wrong. But that is not true… I suppose you can say that if you are not married it is not wrong to desire a boy. Your first statement about desires being okay, actions wrong is a rather thorny theological issue that is far beyond the scope of this particular thread. I am currently reassessing my previous viewpoint on this issue, which was that both the desires and actions were not wrong so long as they conformed to a monogamous and consensual relationship. As for desiring when one is not married, there is nothing wrong with that – it is normal and healthy – how else would people ever get married if they didn’t first have attraction and desire for a mate/companion? While too lengthy to quote, I admit that I’m having serious problems with your views that women should not be alone with men lest they be tempted to have an affair with them. One can flee such a temptation in their mind; there is no need to flee the area to avoid it. The same would apply to those people here who have boys in their lives, yet are sexually attracted to boys. Your solution to the problem of lust seems to be a gigantic case of overkill, in my opinion. Respectfully, J P.S. – When you do get back from church, I’d much rather have a discussion, not a ‘lecture’... |
Follow ups: