The ultimate 'How do we define Boylove' Thread

(Originally posted at BLnet, but due to its importance also posted here) Dear folks, we talk much about "Boylove", don't we? Well, that's only natural, since this is a board for a species called "Boylovers". But what exactly is a "Boylover"? How do we want to define it? I've read many attempts of a definition on private homepages, but they all fail from my point of view. From my educational background I'm used to clear definitions. They make life easier. Let me clarify the importance of unequivocal definitions to you. Image the following situation: A Briton is ordering one gallon of a very expensive Whiskey from an American. To make sure he hasn't been fooled with the volume (cost him a fortune), the Briton is re-measuring it. When finished, he claims that he has been betrayed: the content was not enough! The American says that this is not true and they start a fight. Who is right? Both are right, because both have a different definition of a gallon: for the Briton it's 4.55 liters, for the American it's 3.78 liters. What trouble they could have avoided if they have had a common definition of a gallon! Now that you're aware of the importance of definitions, let me present you three possible definitions of the term "Boylover": (1) The first possibility could be to go strictly by the words - "Boy" and "Lover": a boylover is a person who loves boys. Therefore we would have to define these two words. How do we define "Boy"? My suggestion would be: a male person that hasn't gone through puberty yet. How about "Love"? Now it gets a bit more complicated. We all know that love is not related to Sex (otherwise our sexual attraction to a person wouldn't cease with a certain age while still loving him/her), but most of us are sexually attracted to boys. So how do we deal with this? We will have to find rules for sexual contacts between boys (or children in common) and men (or adults in common): when do we speak of sexual abuse? If we have an answer to this, we can derive the reverse from it: love is where abuse does not exist. Here's what our lowest common denominator should be: a physical or mental initiative towards sexual contact must never come from the adult! We all know that such an initiative can be very subtle, very clever, with the adult saying "what did I do? - it was nothing". So what we need is a rather rigorous interpretation of "taking the initiative". Let me give you two examples: - Subtle mental abuse: boy has learned about the birds and the bees; he has also learned about an adhesive white liquid coming out of the xxx at a specific moment; now he asks his adult friend how long it takes for this liquid to appear. Adult says: "I don't know, but we could find out together..." ==> not a boylover - Subtle physical abuse: boy comes crying from school; his classmates beat him up; the boy lies in the arms of the adult, trying to get relief from his pain. The adult first kisses him softly on his head for a while (which is thankfully accepted by the boy), but then makes his way down the neck to the boy's chest... ==> not a boylover Don't get me wrong: if the child really takes the initiative, I don't clap my hands and say "go for it!" to the adult (there are still many reasons against it; I will not discuss them in this thread though), but including this case to the "child molestation case" would lead too far in my eyes. Another thing: of course there are all kinds of abuse, not only of sexual nature. But naturally this is the form our species has to be afraid of most. Advantage of this definition: a so defined boylover cannot be a child molestor. Disadvantage of this definition: it doesn't say anything about the sexual orientation of a boylover. (2) The second possibility could be to define boylove as a sexual orientation: a boylover is a person who is sexually attracted to boys, where a boy is defined like in (1). This seems to make sense: almost all of us share this orientation. Broad parts of our feelings towards boys are based upon this sexual attraction. If this was not the case: what would differ us from all the millions of people who "just love" children? What would be the big deal about boylove? Why would we hide, why feel haunted? Advantage of this definition: it would accommodate the sexuality of most of us. Disadvantage of this definition: a so defined boylover can be a child molestor. (3) A third possibility could be a combination of (1) and (2): a boylover is a person who loves boys and is sexually attracted to them. Definitions of "Boy" and "Love" see (1). Alternatively, we could speak of a boy"lThe ultimate 'How do we define Boylove' Threadover" if we want to emphasize the abusive nature of a boy/man relationship. Advantage of this definition: it would accommodate the sexuality of most of us and a so defined boylover cannot be a child molestor. Disadvantage of this definition: none. I don't have to mention that I would prefer definition (3), do I? ;) The bottom line is: I really would like to see a statement on this board, clearly visible to every visitor, that defines the term "boylover". In future discussions we could always refer to this definition to avoid misunderstandings. I'm willing to work together with the board Admins on an acceptable verbalization. Thanks for your time, Huckleberry (http site) Visit my homepage [Anonymizer] [NetHUSH] [Megaproxy] [subDIMENSION Anonymizit] [Linkbeat] [freeProxy] [@nonymouse] [BlackCode]