I just have a few moments.

I tend to support Cat about 'lust' not signifying sexual desire per se. I did the basic amateur workup on the verb 'epithumeo' that is most often translated as 'lust' and to me it involves some active effort or at least a formulated plan to capture the object of desire. In fact, I cheekily proposed that BLs who are actively working on the idea of having sex with boys should be called paedepithumetes, restoring the mild and gentle word paedophile to its proper use. For the true sense of "phile," see the word Philadelphia, which does not mean the city of brother-rapists or even the city of those who get stiffies for their male sibs.

Cat's point of view is fundamentalist and I am not; perhaps I'll say more about that in an independent thread. People who've read some of my other posts know that I believe the scripture passages often interpreted as against homosexuality are actually against same-sex surrogacy, in other words, straight men participating in "rough trade." I would rate the multi-year monogamous gay relationship phenomenon as highly satisfying. That's of course the viewpoint of someone whose aoa extends far enough to make that possible.

As for masturbation about boys, I am permitted to quote my friend "Christiaan" who has a YF he's very fond of, "I sometimes vaguely think about sex with my YF but I find it hard because I am sure that he wouldn't want it. What turns me on the most, and this surprised me totally, is the knowledge that he trusts me completely. I can have an orgasm about that any time. It's very intimate. But of course, that trust is partly based on my never becoming sexual with him. So I wouldn't want to ruin my big turn-on lol!"