[Vision2020] NAMBLA does not speak for me.

[Carl Westberg]

I don't have extensive knowledge of this subject, but I do know Joan, and 
I'm delighted to say that, probably thanks to being a godless liberal, I've 
made friendships with others in the gay/lesbian community over the years.  A 
couple of thoughts from my admittedly not very deep mind.  The gay friends I 
have are not all about being gay.  That is not the end all and be all of 
their existence, anymore than my astoundingly virile heterosexuality is the 
end all and be all of my existence.  I notice a very curious obsession with 
other people's sexual leanings among some, though certainly not all, on the 
religious right.  Regarding NAMBLA, I don't know squat about it, beyond what 
has been written on this forum.  It seems to my meager sense that to 
continually try to link the entire gay community with a group like NAMBLA 
would not be dissimilar to linking the entire religious right with Fred 
Phelps.  And I know that the vast majority of the religious right 
resoundingly reject Fred Phelps.  I have every confidence the same is true 
with NAMBLA and the larger gay community.  Carl Westberg Jr.


>From: "Taro Tanaka" <taro_tanaka at hotmail.com>
>To: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] NAMBLA does not speak for me.
>Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 15:27:40 +0000
>
>"NAMBLA does not speak for me."
>
>Even if NAMBLA did speak for someone, he or she could hardly admit that 
>fact publicly in modern America, especially in Idaho. Joan compares NAMBLA 
>to the Army of God, which is a good turn of phrase for public relations 
>purposes, but it is not really an apt comparison. The Army of God has never 
>been allowed to march in the St. Patrick's Day Parade, but NAMBLA has 
>participated in San Francisco's Gay Freedom Day March along with Dykes on 
>Bikes and the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence. Admittedly, that was a few 
>years ago, and NAMBLA is increasingly "persona non grata" now. Even years 
>back, they were barely tolerated and were opposed by many if not a majority 
>of homosexuals. I think -- and at least some "mainstream" GLBT commentators 
>admit -- that this has a dimension of genuine disapproval of pederasty 
>along with a dimension of pure political pragmatism.
>
>Without pretending to be neutral, I shall try to speak about this as 
>dispassionately as I am able.
>
>In our culture, full-blown pedophilia is absolutely forbidden, but 
>idolaization of youth is "in." Youth sells, sex sells, and "edgy" youthful 
>sex sells. This is true for both homosexuals and heterosexuals. Perceptions 
>-- and the reality -- of perverseness deepen precipitously as the boundary 
>of puberty is crossed. Pre-pubescent flesh is the Unholy of Unholies to 
>anyone who has passed the point of puberty, especially to adults. The 
>overwhelming consensus is that anyone who treats pre-pubescent children as 
>sexual objects is depraved in the extreme.
>
>But from the onset of puberty up to the age of legal adulthood, there is a 
>gray zone continuum. (I'm not talking about my personal morality, but 
>rather about what our society generally tolerates in varying degrees.) This 
>zone is the realm of many an adult fantasy, exploited by advertisers and 
>Hollywood to titillate us. And it is true for both heteros and homos. In 
>ancient Greece, it was boys in this age zone that were wooed by adult men 
>for pederastic relationships. Homosexuality in ancient Greece was 
>predominantly pederasy, so when people talk approvingly of the ancient 
>Greeks' tolerance for homosexuality, they are actually talking approvingly 
>of the ancient Greeks' tolerance for pederasty. (Although not everyone is 
>well-informed about the historical facts.)
>
>However, it needs to be noted that ancient Greek pederasty had nothing to 
>do with molestation of two-year-old boys. Part of the reason why NAMBLA is 
>such a huge liability for homosexuals in general is that is isn't clear 
>whether they are advocatiing the wooing of boys past the age of puberty or 
>advocating the molestation of two-year-olds. So even in quarters where 
>there is some sympathy for the idea of pederasty along the lines of that 
>practiced by the ancient Greeks, there is a fear among homosexuals that 
>they are all going to be painted as a bunch of perverts who can't wait to 
>get their hands on somebody's two-year-old. And even though I think 
>homosexuality is immoral, I also think we need to acknowledge big 
>differences among adult consensual sex, "classical pederasty," and 
>molestation of two-year-olds.
>>From the gay rights perspective, the last thing they want to be saddled 
>>with
>is the image of being a bunch of child molesters.
>
>The article on pederasty at GLBTQ.com 
>(http://www.glbtq.com/social-sciences/pederasty.html) is very frank:
>
>"In the West, the relationship between the predominantly androphilic 
>homophile movement and the pederasts has been contentious. Though some in 
>the American gay community welcomed what they called boy lovers, most 
>excluded them for political if no other reasons."
>
>This last point is very important. 1990 saw the publication of what is 
>arguably the single most influential book in the history of the modern gay 
>rights movement, "After the Ball : How America Will Conquer Its Fear and 
>Hatred of Gays in the 90's," by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen. Basically, 
>it was a strategy manual on how to manipulate public opinion in modern 
>American society in order to win acceptance for homosexuality. I no longer 
>own this book, but I did read it from cover to cover a few years ago. One 
>reviewer at Amazon says it well: "This book pioneered the movement's shift 
>toward pragmatism. Although its tone is sometimes too harsh and its 
>generalizations too sweeping, AFTER THE BALL remains a prescient landmark 
>in the American gay rights movement. The book recast the debate about 
>effective tactics among gay activists, and laid the foundation stone for 
>organizations such as GLAAD. The book's logic for gays is compelling, if 
>uncomfortable: either face the unvarnished realities of American bigotry, 
>and attack them aggressively at their psychological roots, or else fail to 
>win a secure place in society. Ever since it made waves inside and outside 
>the gay community, this polemic has been condemned by both the gay left 
>wing and the religious right wing -- so it must be doing something right 
>for the rest of us."
>
>One of the core points stressed by the above book is that homosexuals as a 
>group must jettison NAMBLA -- NAMBLA must be airbrushed out of the picture, 
>so to speak. And since that book's argument was persuasive and carried the 
>day, that is exactly what has happened. So while there was a time in the 
>past when NAMBLA was accepted, that is now ancient history, long flushed 
>down the memory hole.
>
>But the ideological underpinnings of homosexuality, or at least of the gay 
>rights movement, retain a high view of the ancient Greeks and their 
>tolerance of pederasty (homosexuality). If you go to the online 
>encyclopedia GLBTQ.com and do a search on "Dahmer," "Gacy," or "Meiwes," 
>you won't find them listed among the various famous homosexuals discussed 
>by that site, even though all three of them were most definitely 
>homosexuals, and most definitely famous. (And no, I am NOT saying that 
>anybody is more prone to murder or cannibalism simply because he or she is 
>a homosexual.) But the reason those people are not discussed is because 
>there is no way on earth they can be held up as heroes or martyrs for the 
>cause of gay rights. However, the pederasts mentioned at the New West 
>article by "Camille Saint-Saens" (a far from exhaustive list, by the way) 
>were taken from GLBTQ.com, where articles can be found mentioning, but 
>never condemning, their pederasty. That is because these men -- these 
>pederasts -- are held up as heroes and martyrs for the cause of gay rights.
>
>Village Voice editor Richard Goldstein wrote a very interesting article 
>pertinent to this subject in The Advocate, titled "The Double Standard" 
>(Aug. 20, 2002). Near the end of his article he asks, "if we eroticize the 
>nymphet, why not the lascivious lad? And if we trust straight men to enjoy 
>such reveries without committing child abuse, why compel gay men to deny 
>them? What’s at stake is more than some abstract issue of equality: A 
>libido that is too heavily policed is an incubator of pathology . . . 
>Generations of young people have benefited from the great capacity for 
>mentoring that many gay men have. Who knows how many boys will now be 
>deprived of this nurturing in the name of safety. Talk about throwing the 
>baby out with the bathwater."
>
>That sort of language bothers me, and it ought to bother you too. But 
>remember that it appeared in The Advocate, the most "mainstream" of gay 
>publications.
>
>So maybe NAMBLA doesn't speak for Joan Opyr. But pederasty nevertheless 
>remains a thriving undercurrent in homosexuality even today, and the main 
>reason it has to stay in the closet -- for now, at least -- is largely, if 
>not primarily, a matter of political expediency. Christ Chruch vehemently 
>rejects the actions of not only Steven Sitler but also of Jamin Wight, and 
>not because of political expediency but rather because such things are 
>prohibited by God. Yet the GLBT community has many of its own Jamin Wights. 
>The GLBT community cannot openly embrace them, partly because some people 
>think it is just plain wrong and partly becasue it is politically 
>inexpedient. Nevertheless, the GLBT community cannot sever itself off from 
>such practices, because it would mean severing its own roots. And that, I 
>believe, accounts for the ambivalence on the part of the community. At any 
>rate, if Joan Opyr wants to wage battle against such problems, I'm all for 
>it. The facts discussed above should help to point her in the right 
>direction, and it's not in the direction of Christ Church.
>
>-- Princess Sushitushi
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
>http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
>
>=====================================================
>List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the 
>communities of the Palouse since 1994.                 http://www.fsr.net   
>                              mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>====================================================