Techno-tethering globalises oppression

David Kennerly, who debuted last year for Heretic TOC  writing about his childhood in the American Midwest, now makes a welcome return. This time his theme journeys to far horizons – places that may soon be closed to us for actual travel if restrictions envisaged by governments worldwide have their way. Yes, it’s a very alarming thought and one that has accordingly prompted David to document in considerable detail what the securocrats and fear-peddling politicians are up to and why we need to wake up to it. In his guest blog today he outlines two essays specially written for Heretic TOC but which he intends also to use as a basis for lobbying more widely. Links are given to these articles.
 

The thin wedge to immobilize citizens

An introduction to two essays exploring the unfolding war on freedom of movement

Over the last several months, I have been researching a series of legal assertions now being advanced by governments worldwide. While being enacted piecemeal in individual countries, they can only be fully understood in aggregate and in the recognition that these governments are clearly working jointly towards achieving their aspirations for tracking people’s movements and restricting our freedom of travel.
Developments in this area are very dynamic and so my findings are a work in progress. Nevertheless, enough is now known to perceive a clear and ominous trajectory in governmental ambitions to regulate the movement of all people, both within and between countries.
It is nothing new that government has always had such ambitions. What is new, and fundamentally different from any other moment in the past, is the unprecedented ability of the state to realize its dreams by means of an immensely powerful digital infrastructure. Its far-reaching ambitions for total control now lie fully within its grasp. The limits of technology that once held its desire for omniscience in check have been effectively removed, granting it an extraordinary level of power over the lives of its citizens.
So far, my writing in this area consists of two pieces:
1) A report on “The International Megan’s Law”, both as a bill recently passed in the U.S. House of Representatives (to be considered now in the Senate) and as a global concept which extends to all other nations through both international agreements and international bodies, such as Interpol (a previously backwater agency revived through the opportunities afforded by Islamic terrorism), who coordinate and implement its sweeping and dangerous policies. The openly hoped-for result of the U.S. bill is to prevent American child sex offenders from ever leaving the U.S. But it is also clear that this goal is being at least partially attained with, or without, the help of Megan. The title is: “DEAD END: The International Megan’s Law Assault on Everyone’s Freedom of Travel– The free movement of the individual is increasingly seen as a revocable privilege – not an inalienable right”.
2) A report on the current treatment of American sex offenders who return from travel abroad (from any country) by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency. Those who have traveled over many years likely noticed some dramatic changes in the way they were welcomed back home by that agency soon after September 11, 2001. That treatment has only escalated in severity since then: it is ever more intrusive, more threatening and more violative. So much so that many have decided travel is simply no longer worth the degradation they will experience upon their return. And that is, after all, the point of such harassment, isn’t it? The title is: “HOMELAND SECURITY’S ASSAULT ON TRAVEL: How America’s sex laws endanger your, your children’s and everyone’s freedom of movement as travelers are routinely detained, interrogated, searched and harassed by the Department of Homeland Security”.
I identify this trend, that of limiting the movement of people through the imposition of regimes of extreme pretextual scrutiny, as one which is running counter to another trend now emerging as a reaction: the demand to restore freedom of movement as an essential principle of freedom itself.
This counter-trend is up against powerful adversaries, as governments have always been in their dealings with a citizenry grown complacent and unsuspicious of their motives.
But, of course, there are also those who believe the government message that there are real perils requiring the movement of people between countries to be as constrained as technology allows. They fail to appreciate that the historical porosity of borders has been a bulwark against the denial of the rights of the individual and has helped to propagate free societies; they also fail to appreciate the near-limitless effects that present and future technology will have upon their autonomy and upon their future array of choices. Systems now being devised will forever limit their opportunities and constrain their interactions with others but in ways which they cannot foresee.
It would be a terrible shame to see our civilization succumb to tyranny through the incuriosity and untroubled indifference that is so characteristic of so many of its members.
Men used to go to war and die for the rights that so many now eagerly volunteer to relinquish, identifying them as, somehow, quaintly anachronistic and no longer affordable or even terribly worthwhile.
Those of us who know these rights are not just worthwhile but vital have an obligation to say so, to bear witness to the unfolding destruction of our liberties and to do all in our power to stop a dangerous movement fundamentally inimical to freedom.
Tom has graciously (and patiently, I might add) invited me to share my findings and observations on his wonderful site and, for that as well as his critical and discerning eye and valuable suggestions, I am grateful.
When I first became aware of his work through a fortuitous discovery of Paedophilia: The Radical Case more than thirty years ago (can it be?) I was immediately impressed.
Neither of us knew, or could have known, the depths to which society might submerge itself in the decades to follow. While our optimism for society’s near-term future may have since undergone a dramatic reassessment, we both (it would appear) continue to assert what we believe to be true, a fact which must – by itself – betray some indication of hope.
I also hope you will read both of my current works on freedom of movement. They are, I believe, essential reading in order to understand some of the implications of the authoritarian shift that has taken hold in society and which threatens to repay us – for our complacency – by doing its very worst.

 

TOC adds:
As regular readers will recall, I travelled to Brazil in February and was allowed entry without challenge despite being on the UK register of sex offenders. However, on the eve of the World Cup Brazil announced the start of a crackdown. A reader has alerted me to a news item in the press there from earlier this month saying that an American “convicted for pedophilia” has been deported after trying to enter the country.
The same reader also spotted a news story from 17 February. This reported that 51 “paedophiles” had been denied entry to Mexico. The text says these refusals had been “since last year” (“desde el año pasado”) but I guess what is meant is over the course of the previous year rather than just the first six or seven weeks of this one. Could be wrong, though.
 

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

54 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

[…] of infants, but simultaneously prosecuting, imprisoning, civilly-committing, scarlet-lettering, techno-tethering, and ostracising ‘irredeemable pervert paedophiles’ for life for having in their possession […]

[…] Kennerly today updates the theme of his June 2014 guest blog Techno-tethering globalises oppression. The news is not good. International Megan’s Law, a nightmare piece of legislation, was […]

Don’t links appear here? Relevant links from our blog: Child Porn Witch Hunt (60), Teenage Sexuality (91), Site Map

I do have multiple first hand witness accounts about US immigration harassment. Two legal aliens arrived at a US airport on a non-business trip. A man close to 60 years old and his 22 year old younger looking secretary.
They were taken into secondary inspection and asked multiple times if they were “boinking” each other, because “we don’t want that”.
Had they admitted to such perfectly legal misdeeds, they would have been evicted and sent back.
They even asked the adult woman if her mother knew about her travels! If he was abusing her.
Visit teenage sexuality and our child porn witch hunt section.

cheers sometimes I don’t double check,no offence,sometimes I like to add a personal story to the blog,To add a more human element to it.

true i heard it was her 16th birthday when i plucked up the courage
to go up there and ask her out.
But remember i was over 18 so heaven forbid i should have a naked
photo of her.
there i could risk the sex fascist state getting involved smashing my
door in,And fucking things up for everybody!

REBEL,I was talking about consent in general,I already sent a reply,cant see it!
Once i got her going, there was no complaints,apart from hiding her under the duvet when my father wanted to get into the airing cupboard,that was mighty funny for us both,I’m sure the old bastard (RIP)did that on purpose!
but yeah sometimes she would play lazy,and i had to get enthusiastic,she was still consenting, don’t see what your problem is. By then we had sex 1000 times. There was lots of oral before i penetrated her, I wanted to on the first day. She would say no I’m only 16! but give it a month or so i was quids in.
She was my first and my world was devastated when she broke it off,I hardly ate for a week. As far as turning someone on to get what you want,that is seduction plain and simple.
Now to LINCA sorry about the name before,fucked if i know where i left my head half the time!The way you describe yourself when younger, maybe you would’ve been to my taste.
[SNIPPED. TOC: You’re getting a bit incoherent from here on, Mr P. Also, I’ve had to tidy up your spelling and grammar at least minimally above to make it an easier read. Please edit yourself as much as you can before sending.]

mr p, I liked how you messed up my name. Keep it up.
Mr. Ginsberg came and visited me when we were both old men. Mac died and so did my shower mate before I could tell them how much I appreciated them. They probably knew, don’t you think?
Linca

p,
Nice thought: Being to your taste. Thank you for that. I would have come if invited. And, how about those boy scouts in the NY Gay Pride Parade stopping and Saluting the Stonewall Inn. Isn’t there some biblical quote “… children shall lead them”?
Linca

Boy scouts saluting,Bet that was a few years back,good sentiment though.
Also there must’v been some consensual relations in the catholic Church
among all the horror stories of rape you hear?

LINKA how did you know your teachers were pedosexual men,just to play devil’s advocate?TOC mentions the kinsey and the kinsey scale comes to my mind regarding ancient and modern concepts of sexuality,just like the high functioning autistic spectrum were all on a sliding scale.also is there such thing as adolescent sexual confusion?most seem to know what they are after puberty,maybe their bi sexual’s conforming to the more accepted hegemonic order?

Mr p,
I like your misspelling of my name. Makes me feel like a 20-year-old Czech or Russian porn star. Oh, for that slim fit body I had back then. Linc hold the brakes while I throw the prop. The air rushes in the window, the instrument panel comes alive, Mac gets in alongside me placing his hand over on my thigh. I push the throttle forward, we begin to taxi to the grass runway, green after the rains we have had.
Linc press the button and talk into the mike. We are talking to a man in Omaha where they keep the B-36’s to H-Bomb Moscow. Mr. Ginsberg I am so glad you came home. Drive me out to Nichols Lake.
Linc are you coming to the shower? This weekend we caravan to Wewoka and Checotah. You can ride with me. Sure!
mr p, I was available. And, so enjoyed the attention of these men. I want to see them again.
I’ve been reading the writings of Jeremy Bentham that Tom recommended. OMG do they punish us way out of proportion to our acts that disgust those who have control of our laws. And, OMG in 15th Century Florence everyone was doing it: Lucky Boys!
As for adolescent confusion. Walt Whitman said, “Yes I contradict myself. I am an ocean of Contradictions.” Actually he said, “Do I contradict myself? Very well then . . . . I contradict myself; I am large . . . . I contain multitudes.” Page 66 First Edition of “Leaves of Grass” 1855.
How do I know they were pedosexual? Answer: We all contain multitudes. We just have to make it available. We have to vote out of office people who are easily disgusted. Maybe just laugh them out of office. They make laws that kill us innocents and our lovers.
Linka

Just a few quick words regarding consent,when i was 21 to 22 I had a 16 to 17yo girlfriend,In terms of consent i really had to work at it to get her to do what i want(is that not seduction in a nutshell) she would lie there like a sack of spuds,I think if i had to negotiate consent the way these feminists are pushing it
I don’t think i’d have got anywhere!To me consent is just being able to read into what your partner is feeling and thinking,so what’s the point of any age of consent? most sex with pre-pubescents is oral,there’s a big enough stigma in terms of sodomy for adults let alone kids.
Will they be devastated when they cant fulfill the child fantasy?
not all pedos are exclusively pedos,some like myself are also hebephiles as well as heterosexual.I’m hetro but i like boys and girls in equal measure.so some relationships could go into adulthood.
as mentioned what you mean by “sex” is a gay man that’s just performed his
first fellatio still a virgin etc,as for will they feel bad when older,On spiked there was a brilliant exchange between two MAP’s one playing devil’s advocate,It was between lensman and carl i think,worthy of a book! the guy mentions the time he spent with a tribe somewhere,the fact that he had to keep kids from climbing into his bed etc,after some moved into the city,the question was asked,what do they think of it now,will they resent their parents for not protection them,will their parents understand the narrative?it’s on the p.i.e vs NSPCC article.
As for all this historic abuse,sorry to be crude but is the grab of an ass when unwanted in the say 1970s worse then a slap in the face,ones sexual the other physical?

You’re not making a very good case here. “She would lie there like a sack of spuds” “You had to work hard to get her to do what you want” “If you had to negotiate consent you’d never have got anywhere” Gee, it almost sounds like she didn’t really want to have sex with you.
In my opinion the “feminist” standard of Enthusiastic Consent offers much better position to challenge AoC laws from.

I thought the first essay very good and very necessary. The second irked me somewhat. Whatever.
We are so far away from being able to express not only our feelings but our genuine wisdom with and in the wider world. The first essay might, were it to be published in a mainstream media outlet, manage to start something. I think also that T. O’C (thank you!) has been an amazing advocate for real examination of what is simply all around us. [TOC adds: Much appreciated, Otto!]
But many of us are most effectively silenced. I would love to ‘share’ the insights I have stumbled upon on this blog and others but currently, for a variety of reasons, I am simply unable to. Some reasons have been pinpointed above, but there are others also. The total shutdown of open-mindedness and open communication in this arena is terrifying.
It was interesting seeing The News earlier this morning with the BBC’s Head of News, James Harding, stating that it is vitally important that journalists (even those who haven’t been imprisoned in Egypt) attempt to discover and report Every Side to a Story as Free Speech Must At All Costs Be Protected.
As if.
We must try and find mainstream outlets to carry these heretic views.

Thank you Otto! Your reasons for finding the 2nd piece irksome would be greatly appreciated, in the interest of being “less irksome” in the future. Thanks again!

Hello David,
I was probably a little too tough on your second essay; I read both pieces in one sitting and maybe it all proved a bit too much to take in in one go – making me perhaps more liable to be irked by the second! I read the second essay again after reading your comment and thought it basically good – though I still had problems from the bottom of page 2 into page 3. I wouldn’t normally choose to criticise something that I felt was important – and that I respected and appreciated – on a public forum like this but, for what it’s worth (and only as you asked…)
I felt that you hopped too easily from the general to the specific (at the bottom of p.2) and you seem, suddenly, to be talking about one particular SO without really having introduced him to the reader (I don’t mean by name!) as a particular example. Also I wonder whether ‘One need not advocate’ [harassment of Muslims] suggests that you actually do advocate it. Might ‘One need not, by any means, be an advocate of the random…. etc’ be better?
I think that was what irked me and I then failed to pay proper attention to the rest of the article which, on second reading, I certainly did think was sound. Many thanks for both pieces.

Thank you Otto! I am grateful for the feedback. I had wondered if the “Muslim” statement might find a way of getting misinterpreted and had wondered how it might be phrased with even less ambiguity. I am, in fact, very sensitive to not deflecting attention from one hated minority to another, as we have all experienced that ourselves. As this piece is likely to be revised and “reissued” as I learn more about the issues and as it makes its way through the “sausage factory” of the Senate (and propagates worldwide) I will make a change to that as well as the poorly established specific anecdote and transition. Good advice! Thanks again.

just a quick one,have to get off to work,nice day for a walk,I think the real problem is if you’v been done for downloading CP or had a relationship with
someone society deems inappropriate(kids are learning that word fast at school) you cant really argue because you risk the judge waking another 2 years on your sentence,you cant really challenge the dominant BS like you
can on a blog.

One obvious, even glaring, vulnerability that this miserable juggernaut has is that it now treats children, themselves, as “sex offenders”. This appalling trend will, I believe, be its (eventual) undoing. When people’s children are targeted for systematic destruction by the obsessive and emotionally distorted then we can expect there to be some serious pushback. And something more, we can hope.
Another opportunity, or “opening wedge” is the emergence of a men’s (and boy’s) rights movement. While it is, itself, a disparate group, with sometimes contradictory messages and goals (many are adorning THEMSELVES with the ceremonial “victimist” garb and actually feeding into the growing abuse narrative) many are making some very compelling arguments. This is a real and growing problem for feminism (in its present, dominant form).
Another is the diminution of religion as a power to captivate and enslave, especially within the U.S. (where the “faithless” movement has lagged far behind Europe) but also worldwide, to varying extents.
Because of religion’s subjugation of the individual and its use of sexuality to enslave minds and bodies, this erosion of religion’s stranglehold also represents an opportunity for change. But we only need look to Europe to see that this hasn’t been enough, by itself, to halt the progression of the witch hunt (which is why feminism must also be challenged).
Where I am less confident is in the capacity of those in our community to challenge and to influence this dynamic transition in society.
Lacking powerful and influential opinion leaders from within our own community we may well be forced to trust in the kindness of strangers. In this way, we seem always to be solitary travelers.
So, at the very least, we must do what we can to speak directly to as many of those (influential and influential-able) strangers as possible, and make them real friends.
Some people are still reasonable and rational, after all.

The Europeans put children in the gas chambers.
A system cannot change itself. Change can only come from outside the system.
Linca

Convicted for pedophilia? Enough is enough.
I don’t particularly like the idea of making our enemies fight each other – I’d much rather just bring it to them.
I set up a rather straight-forward group on Facebook: Pedophile Does Not Mean Abuser.
https://www.facebook.com/doesnotmeanabuser
I have recently been focusing more on the wider problem with perspectives on criminality but this seems like the best first step.
-Joshua Bizley (The Nonviolent Communist/Rehuman)

Thanks so much 🙂
I have been a bit disheartened about the level of response from my community regarding the facebook group but it has just meant coming down to earth and facing just how far there still is to go.

I would also suggest staking out a Twitter “post”. They do allow more now in terms of adding content to your “about” page so that you can establish a mission statement (if not all of the glitter and baubles of Facebook). It’s enforced message size limit means you can scan through hundreds of messages fairly quickly and you can reach more people, in my experience. It has real power if you can attract sufficient numbers (and quality of followers). It also sucks time resources, like everything else on the web.

I’ll give some thought to how I would do that – my experience on twitter so far has been draining – I once got into a brief conversation with Boy George and it is just too easy for an unprecedented number to join in an attack on you with little to no understanding of what you are saying. Blogs force more context and Facebook forces a degree of accountability for what you say.

If you reenter the Twitter fray, be sure to “follow” me and I shall do the same. By the way, to my tin Yank ear you seem to have a somewhat “posh” accent. Am I way off there?

Joshua Bizley,
You are in an intellectual circle you can’t get out of. You assume sex between a kid and a man is sex abuse if I read your blog posts right. Sex with a threat of or actual physical coercion between a kid and a man is sex abuse .. nothing else.
Do not let the cannibal feminists who want to eat us make definitions for us. Do not budge one inch toward them. It’s a trap.
Linca

I try to keep the issue as simple as possible. My working definition of pedophilia is attraction to prepubescents, and while I steer clear of the notion that there could be a universal age where sex can suddenly be consensual, I do believe the physical signs of readiness should be respected.
And there is indeed a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy regarding the treating of underage postpubescents as children – they act as such, and can often be manipulated as such. I would always advocate adhering to the age rule of whatever country you are in for both your sakes, but of course that is easy for me to say.
But that is a little off-topic for me because I exclusively engage pedophilia as those who want sexual contact with prepubescents, and that I cannot endorse.

You inspired me to write a post detailing my exact stance on ‘consent’ – http://rehuman.wordpress.com/2014/06/26/consent/

My quickest response (as I really must attend to other things) but am writing (have been writing) on this at further length (as time allows) and will make sure it gets into your hands.
1) Free Will: I’ve read Sam Harris and Dan Dennett on the subject and I’m much more aligned with Dan on this. But, frankly, I don’t much care about the issue. I don’t mean that to insult you as I do recognize that it is a legitimate line of inquiry it’s just that I’m sick to death of the “free will” debate, considering it to be largely irrelevant to most or all of the difficult issues with which I now contend in my writing (and in my life). My own, private, theory holds that there is a kind of “virtual” free-will (if you will) in which it may not really exist but is operationally useful and expressible. Or, at least, we think it is and the results flowing from that assumption seem to actually make a difference. For me, and at the moment, that is enough.
2) Since pedophilia is a term not rooted in antiquity, but is, as I recall, a neologism of Kraft-Ebbing from the 19th Century and since it is a term used as an aspersion (in a pseudo-scientific pathological sense I don’t find it useful or unladen with nonsensical baggage.
However, when the term became used in a very different way, by Tom and others at P.I.E., then I found it useful and benign and positive (and used it myself).
Since then, however, in the very dark decades that have followed, it has reverted back to its previous usage and, actually, gone much further back than it had ever been before.
For me, the term “boylover” is infinitely more useful and applicable and that is the term I prefer. I have nothing against girllovers, by any means, although I do think that there are very significant differences between the two groups, and between same-sex relationships and hetero-sex relationships, as well as advantages and disadvantages, enjoyed by both wide (in their own right) groups. This makes things far more complicated as well as difficult and not given to simplistic equivalencies. One of the many difficult challenges when approaching this, quite broad, subject.
3) You state that you don’t believe that children can consent to sex, believing them incapable of doing so. Fine, depending on what EXACTLY we’re talking about, I might even agree with you. However, what do you (in this context) think “SEX” means? And are you SURE that’s what it means?
The reason I ask is because there is an extraordinarily WIDE spectrum of behaviors which have been swept into one pile and labeled as “sex” for the purposes of putting people in prison. This includes (and I’m not exaggerating) people who have: given back rubs, kissed on the cheek, “tousled” hair, put an arm on a shoulder and patted on the rear. It also includes the sort of behavior which more closely resembles most people’s conception of sex such as masturbation, fellatio, anal penetration all of which, critically, can be performed by either the younger or older party on the other. I say “critically” because, unknown to most people, the majority of men arrested for these crimes PERFORMED fellatio, GAVE masturbation, WERE penetrated (although this is far rarer in any case) rather than the other way around in which the younger partner “performs” those roles.
It’s all very well and good to take a stand and denounce ranges of behaviors so wide that they bear no resemblance to one another but, given that few people have access to such information (especially now) you can understand perhaps when those of us who do have extensive knowledge remain unpersuaded by simplistic condemnations which fail utterly to make critical distinctions in behavior.
I’m all for making distinctions. In fact, I propose that any restraints on human behavior must possess those distinctions, and in far greater abundance than now.
The problem, as I see it, is quite the reverse: we are effectively (well, not me, but I’m QUITE unusual) UNABLE to discuss this broad issue with anything like the level of specificity necessary to do it – and certainly, kids – JUSTICE (in every sense of the word).
Oh, one last thing: DO read the International Megan’s Law article. While it appears to relate (on the surface) to those of us in the States, it actually is a big, global juggernaut which demands everyone’s attentions.
Thank you!

It has become very difficult to read the comments on this thread :S Just to quickly ask regarding this though:
‘You state that you don’t believe that children can consent to sex, believing them incapable of doing so.’
Did you misread my post on consent?

I have watched several of your YouTube videos, as well, and was struck by your obvious intelligence, articulateness and energy. I am concerned with the recent movement in defining as “acceptable” or “good” or “virtuous” only those pedophiles (and I use the term as one of convenience for reasons of its ubiquity rather than out of my own preference) as those who have never had a sexual encounter with kids (with the extraordinary range of behaviors that “sex” now encompasses). That it is a position which many now gravitate towards I believe to be down to several different factors: discouragement and victimist acculturation, on the one hand and increasing generational isolation (in which intergenerational contact has become an entirely unattainable abstraction [with an unavoidably attendant experiential poverty]), on the other. Yes, it IS a minefield, but truth is not always what is most convenient or expeditious. It just is what it is.

We must come up with new strategies to combat these cannibals. Their numbers and their ways are growing. We are completely restricting the hundreds of thousands of years of instincts of égalité, gentleness, cooperativeness and sexuality that live in each of us. We are creating an unnatural zoo that will only make us more warlike and murderous.
New strategies; we must come up with strategies that will turn cannibal on cannibal and away from us. Let it be their blood in the water not ours. I am thinking of the cannibal bankers and cannibal feminists. There must be a way to get them to focus on each other and not on us. Anyone have any ideas?
Fishing!
Linca

I recall in Shawshank Redemption, a film set in the fictitious Shawshank State Penitentiary, the young banker, Andy, wrongly convicted for murdering his wife and serving two jail terms, being regularly assaulted by the “bull queer” gang “the Sisters” and their leader, Boggs. Andy’s buddy Red, was surprised at Andy’s naivety. Red: “The Sisters have taken quite a likin’ to you, especially Boggs.” Andy: “I don’t suppose it would help if I told them that I’m not homosexual.” Red: “Neither are they. You have to be human first. They don’t qualify.” Red again: “I wish I could tell you that Andy fought the good fight, and the Sisters let him be. I wish I could tell you that, but prison is no fairy-tale world. He never said who did it, but we all knew. Things went on like that for awhile – prison life consists of routine, and then more routine. Every so often, Andy would show up with fresh bruises. The Sisters kept at him – sometimes he was able to fight ’em off, sometimes not. And that’s how it went for Andy; that was his routine. I do believe those first two years were the worst for him, and I also believe that if things had gone on that way, this place would have got the best of him.”
When faced with ongoing oppression several years ago, I decided, like Andy, to dig that tunnel, to run away from the Sisters and their routine, to leave the UK and much of that which defined me, for good.
Techno-tethering is yet more bricks in that wall, the wall that is being built to imprison me yet again – to commit me in the most uncivil way imaginable.
Frankly, ‘this place’, planet earth, has got the best of me. I have no ideas left Linca, just nervous acquiescence. The Sisters appear to have won.

TOC mentions never-ending story,anybody seen the film,Is that boy hot or what-)))he later became a martial artist.

But, there are people here who have ideas, especially if we can get them out of the box of thinking we can negotiate with our enemies.
I noticed that The Shawshank Redemption is a Stephen King story put to film. And, there is a copy for free online. Think I will watch it to see the stress/abuse Andy recovered from. Have to watch the other videos offered up in this string and another video offered to me by one of our correspondents here. Many Videos.
Darn . Darn . Darn you situation is dire. I am facing something like that too .. facing being gentrified out of my neighborhood. In the process of putting together a group of neighbors to fight this. I could just move to a more appropriate place in public housing built for seniors. My inclination is to fight. Guess I could do both.
Doesn’t look like you have any choices … the bricks in the wall surrounding you are being put in place as we speak. After reading Tom’s post I am glad I did not choose to go expat several years ago. But you did. I did enough international travel during my 40’s making iron castings in India, Brazil and Mexico and importing them into the US. Got to go to Japan and see the porn offered in the Drug Stores and the pedo publications offered in the book stores of London. More human ways when intellectuals of NAMBLA were Catholic Priests. At least one of them was I think.
Catholic priests who knew the emphasis Jeremy Bentham gave to the underage boy prostitute and his relationship to Jesus: St. Mark, v 51 when combined with no condemnation of homosexuality by Jesus. This is what the Pope is now ignoring. I am thinking of converting to Catholicism to get standing reminding the Church of its pedosexual history, even if I just do this privately with myself. My mom and her father were Catholic and I was raised real close to my hometown church, even went to our Catholic High School for my Junior year when I was learning to fly an airplane and avoid an autocratic American English Literature teacher in my public High School .. not too far out for me.
Sh.t feinmann0 there have got to be ways out of the situation you are in, the situations all of us are in. But, negotiating with cannibals as most of us seem to think is not one of them. Maybe getting out of their sights will work. Directing The Cannibal Feminists’ to another tribe of cannibals; the bankers who have privileges way beyond what their station in our society should be: Servants. They have the ability to create money out of thin air, loan it to us to cover all of the national debt guaranteed by us tax payers at interest. What the heck is that all about when we can simply create the money ourselves within our Federal Government and spend it into the economy without borrowing it from banks? There are 23 Primary Dealer Banks @ The NYFed that do this. These are the bank names of which we all know. Just Google “Primary Dealer Banks”. The same thing is done in England, France, Germany and on and on and on.
Just make them aware, make them aware of how this affects women. How many women are chair persons of the Primary Dealer Banks. They are locked out of these men’s clubs. Maybe that woman hollering at the NAMBLA group trying to demonstrate in the film “Chicken Hawk” will begin hollering at the high up bankers of The NYFed.
Hang on feinmann0: Things could get fun.
Thinking,
Linca

Too many words Tom. Write like Mozart. Write like Pasolini whom it is said had to be killed to keep the world fascist. Dance like Michael. Be like Jesus who showed us. Hanging out with nice intellectuals is a dirt road.
Pasolini didn’t hang out with them, neither did Jesus.
Why not go right to what Bentham wrote: “Not Paul, but Jesus Vol. III” http://blogs.ucl.ac.uk/bentham-project/2013/04/30/not-paul-but-jesus-vol-iii/
We are exercising too much self control (Asceticism). I am as guilty as you. Maybe we have to to stay out of prison but let Asceticism not control our minds.
MJ, Pasolini and us are alike. We can be like Mozart and write music that we can march with from here to the new world or as I heard a wise old queer say as a young man who brings his grand piano to Union Square in NYC was playing classical music, “He is performing music we could march to from here to Albany.”
feinmann0 I thought of that last night when in the middle of watching the scene in the middle of “The Shawshank Redemption” where Andy played the opera singer over the prison intercom. The sound of that woman’s voice in a language that no one could understand brought the whole body of prisoners to a standstill. That is what we need to do. We need to bring the whole body of prisoners on planet earth to a stand still for a few moments.
“Hope”,
Linca

Hey Linca, I am crap at singing; seems like you will have to do the solo.

Tom,
I actually reversed the Salieri and Mozart’s confrontation. Been remembering this wrong for years and years and years.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_UsmvtyxEI
Here is what Salieri actually thought:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxgZcMGmkkI
As for us being peaceable creatures I refer you to Fry. “War, Peace, and Human Nature: The Convergence of Evolutionary and Cultural Views” Edited by: Douglas P. Fry a big black book.
http://www.amazon.com/War-Peace-Human-Nature-Evolutionary/dp/0199858993/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1403730476&sr=1-1&keywords=%22War%2C+Peace%2C+and+Human+Nature%3A+The+Convergence+of+Evolutionary+and+Cultural+Views%22
You might add to that: “Pandora’s Seed: The Unforeseen Cost of Civilization” by Spencer Wells.
Who are we?
Linca

It is worth noting that Jeffrey Jones, the actor who played Emperor Joseph II in that movie is on California’s sex offender registry for photographing a 14 year old boy in the nude (and allegedly for “lewd poses”) back in 2003 or 4. So, he will also find it difficult, if not impossible, to ever go to Europe again to play a role in another movie.

Jeffrey Duncan Jones, I will watch some of his movies just to develop my empathy for him. So many good men have been cut down by the ignorance we let continue in our lands. We sexually love the boys. It is completely within our species to do that with plenty of scientific proof even though our Tom refuses to look and refuses ask questions of the resource available to us. It could be our resource is refusing to talk to Tom. I will see our resource face to face in October and see if I can get to the bottom of this. Too many victims of this ignorance.
Back to Jeffery Jones, I thought I had “Amadeus” but can’t find it. Reserved it at my public library just now. He played Principal Ed Rooney in “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off” and a character in “Ed Wood”. I happened to meet a niece and nephew of Ed Wood when Francis Coppola was filming “Rumble Fish” in Tulsa. They came to my house to swim and relax. They represented one of the producers of “Rumble Fish”. And, I have a copy of “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off”. Did you know they play it in Wriggle Field every year on big screens and invite families to picnic? We should be able to go with our boyfriends: FUN!!!
We will be able to go with our boyfriends! And to the beach and the mountains. And, as Macaulay Culkin said about his relationship with Michael Jackson, “It was a grand old time.”
Linca

This is a very misleading way of approaching the sexuality of either Jesus or James I, at its worst in your simplistic characterization of the latter as “gay.” I challenge this on three grounds:
1. Overstatement, which I am getting out of the way first, as it is the least important. Yes, James I certainly loved his favourites and there is abundant evidence of horseplay that, especially in our frigid era, would be thought strongly indicative, but there is no evidence of actual homosex, and his authorship as an honest intellectual of a tract against sodomy must cast some doubt on it.
2. Anachronism. Even if it were true (which it is not) that the homosexual inclinations he is suspected of were typical of those who have in the last half-century described themselves as gay, it would still be quite unnecessarily misleading to use a word for him that carries cultural assumptions and connotations that didn’t exist in the 17th century.
3. Gross misrepresentation. It would be impossible for me to prove here what it has taken whole books to demonstrate, but in Europe until at least 1700 “there was only a single male sexual culture with a prominent homoerotic character. … In Florence, and probably elsewhere as well, sodomy between males assumed a hierarchical form that would now be called ‘pederasty’. … Normally men over the age of eighteen took the so-called active role in sex with a passive teenage adolescent. Relations in which roles were exchanged or reversed were rare and occurred almost solely between adolescents, while sex between mature men was, with very few exceptions, unknown.” (Michael Rocke, Forbidden Friendships, 1998, an exhaustive study of 15th century Florence, where no less than two thirds of all males were implicated in sodomy before the authorities). Rocke’s findings have been shown to be applicable in gist to 17th century England in numerous works by Randolph Trumbach.
Everything known about James I suggests he conformed to this expectation of men’s sexual feelings. Though the two favourites or “sweet boys” as he called them he had as a man were exactly or about 21 when he fell in love with them, and this was nearing the upper end of boyhood as perceived then, it was well within it in an age when boys voices’ broke around 18 and full beards did not grow until 24. Remember too that he was respectively 41 and 47 when he fell in love, and the King, hardly making for egalitarian relationships. Then too the King kept his wife, of whom he was apparently more fond than most Kings were, busily pregnant with seven live births besides several miscarriages.
This does not effect the relevance of James I’s feelings to what he thought about Jesus. His speech before the Privy Council comparing his love for his George to Jesus’s for John is unsurprisingly famous. But then in the countless early modern paintings of The Last Supper, the beloved St. John is invariably depicted as an adolescent, sometimes around 14, sometimes around 20. In so far as some artists of the time may have thought their love was carnal, they were anyway only being historically realistic depicting it as pederastic rather than androphile since all the available evidence suggests men in the ancient world were also expected to be attracted to boys and not men.
Edmund, author of Alexander’s Choice, a novel.

I suggest there are some misunderstandings here. I am quite familiar with Norton’s writings, and I would suggest that rather than being a case of Trumbach trying dishonestly to assimilate pre-modern homosexuality into general male sexuality it is Norton who is indulging in special pleading to invent a pre-modern gay history. To try to be brief as to what I see as the main misunderstandings here:
1. Trumbach (and more importantly Rocke) readily acknowledge that starting quite suddenly in northern Europe around 1700, the pre-modern attitudes I’ve described gave way to the modern one where a strictly heterosexual majority has been seen in opposition to a homosexual minority increasingly more interested in men than boys, so the 18th and 19th century Old Bailey Proceedings are beside the point here.
2. Trumbach readily acknowledges that what we know about homosexuality in late mediaeval and early modern England is too little to do more than suggest strongly that it was reasonably similar to what Rocke has shown about Florence. It is Rocke who matters most here, as by drawing on what I think must be the most detailed statistical evidence on homosexual behaviour to exist for anywhere in the world before the 20th century has consigned the “essentialist” position to the rubbish bin by proving that most Florentine men were sexually active with boys. I believe his book, Forbidden Friendships may be the most important book yet on human sexuality. As to why, I think I had better refer anyone interested to an Amazon review http://www.amazon.com/Forbidden-Friendships-Homosexuality-Renaissance-Sexuality/product-reviews/0195122925/ I’ve written exactly to this effect rather than ask to burden your blog with it.
3. As far as I know, neither Trumbach, Rocke, nor any historian of the ancient world would for a moment dispute the evidence that there have always been men sexually attracted to men, whether in ancient Greece or Rome or Renaissance Florence. It is incontestable. What they have however clearly demonstrated is that such men were rare and looked on as aberrant, while there was a general expectation that men were attracted to boys as well as women, whether or not they gave in to that attraction. Nor have I encountered a historian who doubts that some men had particular preferences. This is quite different from claiming that all men have an immutable orientation from birth unaffected by cultural considerations.
4. I was not suggesting it was impossible for any 17th century King or 1st century messiah to prefer men sexually, just that it is countered by the evidence in James I’s case, and in Jesus’s that it is far less likely than that he liked boys (not that it is my personal contention that he liked either).
Edmund, author of Alexander’s Choice

Thank you Tom and Edmund for a good introduction to “Forbidden Friendships:…..”
This looks like one of those books I must own in print and Kindle. Wonder how 15th Century Florence ties into Caravaggio who was born in the 16th Century in Caravaggio and spent most of his life astraddle the 16th and 17th Century in Rome?
He was run off the docks in Malta for watching the boys swim and we all know the relationships he had with his models and we know his paintings. Have you ever watched Derek Jarman’s “Caravaggio”? The boys come to life. The love is profound.
I have associated homo pedosexual men with greatness for man, i.e., Michael Jackson and in my own state a master architect professor who in spite of being run out of town for “Contributing to the delinquency of a minor” remains worshiped by his students and is buried in the “Cemetery of Architects” in Chicago. I visit his grave every year and have thought of moving into the senior center across the street to live out my life in a good neighborhood. The “Center on Hastings” where a conference titled “Are Sex Offenders the New Queers” was held not long ago.
We homo pedosexuals are good men. I sure fondly remember the ones who paid attention to me when I was a youth, bringing me news of the world with pictures, inspiring me to go to the university, teaching me to fly an airplane, washing my back in the foundry shower room. Bless them. I will see them soon on the other side and we will have “A grand old time.”
Linca
PS: I never thought I would think about “The other side” but the older I get and the quicker life seems to be going the more I like that idea: Especially since thinking about Jesus and St. John and the Underage Stripling of St. Mark 14 51-52. The Pope has fallen off the wagon of centuries and centuries in the part of the world he lives in now. L
PSS: I just ordered “Forbidden Friendships: Homosexuality and Male Culture in Renaissance Florence (Studies in the History of Sexuality)” in both print and Kindle. L

I hope and believe you will find Rocke very well worth reading and enjoyable. Rice’s review of his book is an excellent summary. Thanks for that.
To suggest that our individual sexual preferences could have been significantly different if we had had a radically different cultural bringing affecting our tastes and ideals in everything (not just sex) is not for a moment to suggest that we as mature men can change those preferences on a whim. I think there are such things as acquired tastes and distastes for adults, but their role is limited.

Coincidentally, I just re-watched that film last Saturday (for the umpteenth time). It is a really great film with several unforgettable moments, at least two of which are:
Elmo Blatch, played by a character actor Bill Bolender who is astoundingly good in that role. And available here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtnDFS0RhuY
The other is the (final) pardon board hearing for the prisoner played by Morgan Freeman. Fantastic!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtwXlIwozog

54
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
Scroll to Top