DOES OUR CONCEPT OF MANILINESS MATTER?

[DYB-Mike]

Thanks, Nessmuk, for the reference to Kiplings If. I was never much for poetry (maybe Im too manly, HA HA) but I looked up the poem and found it to be really moving and inspirational (pardon my unmanly emotions).

 

All kidding aside, I agree its something the boys would benefit from hearing or reading and Ill be passing it along.

 

Thanks again,

 

YIS

Mike

 

 

[packsaddle]

Ann Coulter is HOT! But I understand she maintains that slender, fit physique on a steady diet of her own bile.

Not sure about the others.

[Nessmuk]

Scoutmamma

 

Your comment about the homo-pedophelia connection being baseless is in fact BASELESS.

 

Please attempt to back up your statement. The connection is not just everyday reasonable but makes perfect sense to me and most any man I have ever talked to about it.. What personal experiences of yours and/or research back up the lack of a connection. It's been a little while since I read "Scout's Honor..." by Patrick Boyle, but I recall several real cases in that book that made a clear connection between the two.

 

Or are you going to reinforce my past experiences that when a female (esp. lib female) says "puuu leeese" like that, it means she has absolutely no foundation for her position?

[Nessmuk]

Oh yeah, and I too think Anne Coulter's commentary is 'on target' .and I agree about her attractiveness as well. (I.e. she's pretty hot).

 

Speaking of Anne, here's a recent article on Men - specifically her father..

 

http://anncoulter.com/cgi-local/article.cgi?article=229

 

A pre-Oprah world straight shooter..

 

Nessmuck

 

[scoutmomma]

Your comment about the homo-pedophelia connection being baseless is in fact BASELESS.

 

According to whom?

 

 

Please attempt to back up your statement. The connection is not just everyday reasonable but makes perfect sense to me and most any man I have ever talked to about it..

 

 

So, anecdotal evidence is the basis of your contention?

 

 

What personal experiences of yours and/or research back up the lack of a connection. It's been a little while since I read "Scout's Honor..." by Patrick Boyle, but I recall several real cases in that book that made a clear connection between the two.

 

 

So what personal experiences of yours and/or research back up your claim that there is a connection?

 

Meantime, not that I think you are likely to be swayed by any response on this subject, but here:

 

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

http://www.internationalorder.org/scandal_response.html

http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/features/explaining-pedophilia

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_chil.htm

http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/HOMOSEXUALITY_AND_PEDOPHILIA_The_False_link.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/2002-07-15-church-gay_x.htm

http://mediamatters.org/items/200610040014

 

 

Or are you going to reinforce my past experiences that when a female (esp. lib female) says "puuu leeese" like that, it means she has absolutely no foundation for her position?

 

 

Your disrespectful attitude does you no credit.

[Hiromi]

Scoutmamma,

 

Perversion is perversion. Most adult heterosexual males know that when they find themselves aroused by the gyrations of early or even preteen cheerleaders that they are going down a path that is wrong. He knows that his best course is to turn away and get the thought out of his head and to avoid those things that are temptations.

 

The idea of a healthy virulent heterosexual man being pu in charge of a traveling cheerleading squad (to my thinking) is just looking for trouble. A heterosexual man can be lead down this troubling path if it is made easy enough for him and his inner character is not formed enough.

 

Why wouldn't this be the case for a homosexual man? Surely everyone who knows gay men knows that they are as vain and superfiscial as the rest of us. They are looking for young fit men. The homosexual men I have met over the years typically preferred young high school aged boys. Young sailors were especially popular trolling grounds.

 

I think in this matter we should be magnanimous to both heterosexual and homosexual perverts, and say that kids are off limits.

 

But don't make up some cock and bull story that homosexuals, unlike heterosexuals, somehow lose their appetite for boys, but somehow heterosexuals switch gender preferences when the subject goes below a certain age. This may be a rear breed of perversion, but the broad norm would show that homosexuals and heterosexuals need to both know when to look away - and should not be put into situations that would antagonize their worst angels.

 

Pappy

 

 

(This message has been edited by Pappy)(This message has been edited by Pappy)

[packsaddle]

"Most adult heterosexual males know that when they find themselves aroused by the gyrations of early or even preteen cheerleaders that they are going down a path that is wrong."

 

Back when THIS guy was, say, 13 years old, there was not only nothing wrong about those thoughts, but those thoughts were evolutionarily unavoidable and strongly adapted to cause me to maximize my evolutionary fitness. What an idiotic idea that I should have just turned away...idiotic and totally unrealistic. You're saying I should have suppressed my heterosexual tendencies? Get real.

[Hiromi]

Packsaddle,

 

There is a big difference between perversion of the social order and a perversion on the natural order.

 

I didn't say it was unnatural for an adult man to fancy young girls, I said it was a troubling road - it only leads to criminality and sin. Young girls are off limits to you Packsaddle- and you know it. But yes- it is perfectly natural.

 

I agree with you that urges of our youth don't really change that much - but we agree to a social contract and we also modify our tastes to more socially appropriate groups of females.

 

Morally straight and our scout law have nothing to do with your evolutionary sized libido either. Are you saying that the oath and law are idiotic as well? Our Oath and law serve as social correctives to that instinct you refer to. Nature would have us rape, plunder, and murder as well.

 

Pappy

 

 

(This message has been edited by Pappy)

[packsaddle]

Heh, heh, I was just messin' with ya, Pappy.

[scoutmomma]

First of all, I am not "scoutmamma," I am "scoutmomma."

 

But don't make up some cock and bull story that homosexuals, unlike heterosexuals, somehow lose their appetite for boys, but somehow heterosexuals switch gender preferences when the subject goes below a certain age.

 

I'm not making up stories, I'm providing links to information and research. Homosexuality does not equal pedophilia. Homosexuals are no more likely than heterosexuals to be pedophiles. Homosexuality is not a mental illness; pedophilia is.

 

(This message has been edited by scoutmomma)

[DanKroh]

Bravo, Scoutmomma

 

Pappy says: "The homosexual men I have met over the years typically preferred young high school aged boys. Young sailors were especially popular trolling grounds."

 

Well, to get technical, that would be an ephebophile.

 

Again, Pappy, like Nessmuk, you are only relaying anecdotal evidence, and seem to have chosen to ignore the research that Scoutmomma linked to. Well, if you want to rely on anedoctal evidence, I can guarantee that my anecdotal evidence trumps yours, at least by sheer volume.

 

Current theories on pedophilia is that it is a separate and distinct orientation, that also happens to be a mental illness. To say that a pedophile is heterosexual or homosexual is technically incorrect. They are actually unable to have satisfying relationships with adults of any gender. And if I need to, I can get technical about what classifies something as a mental illness or not, but Scoutmomma is quite correct; homosexuality is not a mental illness, it does not display "disordered thinking" or any other characteristic of a mental illness.

 

Homosexuals are NOT "tempted" by young boys. Heterosexuals are NOT "tempted" by young girls. And of course, the notion that homosexuals are more susceptible to this non-existant temptation than heterosexuals is just pure and simple ignorance and/or bias.

 

 

[OldGreyEagle]

Pappy I disagree with your thought that Nature would have us murder, rape, steal and all other manner of shennanigans.

 

You have commented on studying Greek and Latin. What did the Ancients have to say about this topic? Is not the basis of western civilization founded in the Greek Dignity of Man, Rome's system of Laws and the Judeo-Christian work ethic? What was Athens idea of a pure man? Was he totally warlike? The Roman Citizen, what did he aspire to? Man is capable of all the evil that you describe, he is also capable of great art, thought and countless acts of self-sacrifice. Man's nobility and baseness both have equal opportunity to come to light

[scoutingagain]

"Back when THIS guy was, say, 13 years old, there was not only nothing wrong about those thoughts, but those thoughts were evolutionarily unavoidable"

 

But Pack, I thought at that point you "chose" to be heterosexual.

 

SA

[Nessmuk]

OK Scoutmomma, Sure there's arguments on both sides of this - admittedly , but I have been around enough and seen / lived enough to say despite any psych argument that the "good sense" rule has to be considered heavily - especially when dealing with psychologists and psychology websites AND authoritative references such as USA Today.. My 'disrespectful' attitude was not intended to be disrespectful, but to cut to the point that "puuulleease" means a-plenty to me when I hear it..

 

Would you follow the advice of USA today or a psychologist and let your hormone- pumped 12 YO son camp and sleep alone with a person you know to be an active homosexual .-- .

 

James Dobson is the only psychologist I would even begin to listen to on such matters.. and he could never convince me to let my son be alone with a homosexual.

 

Are we OT?

[packsaddle]

ScoutingAgain, I assume that waa tongue-in-cheek. Of course for me there was no choice to it whatsoever. And strongly reinforced, I might add, when I first saw Richard Boone. Man, that guy was UGLY!

So it's purely and strongly genetic for me. Dan, I agree, thanks to Scoutmomma for her observation.