A very subtle distinction
Submitted by Heather on May 10 1999 at 04:19:01
In reply to Not sure it's a distinction Submitted by Mark on May 08 1999 at 23:54:30
|
Boylovers can't mention in the forums that they have boylove attractions, which, yes, amounts to saying that they can't mention that they're boylovers. Technically, though, only the discussion topics are being regulated, not the orientation of the members. You could mention in private e-mail to every member of the steering committee that you were a boylover, and you'd still be welcome at BA. Look, I'm not going to argue at length with you about this, because, as Maggie has been saying, it's a rule passed out of necessity, not because it's a good rule. You know that's why I left BA. All I can say is that there is a recovering offender at BA right now who can't talk about his pedophilic attractions, and he has no interest in leaving (nor would anyone think to ask him to leave). I think different people are likely to react to this rule in different ways; I prefer to take the stronger view on this (being the idealist that I am). I think that an organization such as BA, with the goals and practices that it holds, is wrong to require any of its forum participants to stay in the closet, but this isn't one of those horror situations where the very fact of being a boylover will get you thrown out. Heather |