Sticky please: Pedophilia is NOT teenage attraction!

[Just_Believe18]

Pedophilia - is the paraphilia of being sexually attracted primarily or exclusively to prepubescent children. Persons with this attraction are called pedophiles.

Ephebophilia has been defined as a sexual preference in which an adult is primarily or exclusively sexually attracted to postpubescent adolescents.

Ever since Foley's scandal has broken out everyone, including news, people, and forumers have been calling him a pedophile. Foley is not a pedophile. He would have had to solicite sexual favors to a 12-13 year-old or below.

This does not detract from the wrongs he did, but for Pete's sake its driving me nuts!

Ephebophilia has historically and presently is a wide-range sexual preference that encompasses a majority of the world's population. Yes, what Foley has done is no different than the "barely 18" porn links every forumer here has looked at. In the middle-ages, European men married 13-14 year-old girls and had children with them. Ancient Greece had a social system of "mentoring" between older men and teenage boys. This has been going on for as long as human existence.

This is a crime of age-of-consent and an abuse of power. This is not about pedophilia. Foley is just as much as a pervert as anyone else here who's oogled over Brent Corrigan and Sammy.

[kevin7620]

I agree. See my earlier post: http://www.justusboys.com/forum/show...04#post1841404

[Just_Believe18]

Oh good you posted it too.

Its like ultra-conservatives blending homosexuality with pedophilia. There is a distinct difference! By calling Foley a pedophile, we are in essence, calling most of us pedophiles.

[General_Alfie]

Oh good you posted it too.

Its like ultra-conservatives blending homosexuality with pedophilia. There is a distinct difference! By calling Foley a pedophile, we are in essence, calling most of us pedophiles.

How's that?

[CTF]

Oh good you posted it too.

Its like ultra-conservatives blending homosexuality with pedophilia. There is a distinct difference! By calling Foley a pedophile, we are in essence, calling most of us pedophiles.

Does it really matter?

Try explaining the differenct to a Wal*Mart shopper in Foley's district.

How about to the American Family Association?

We're different. They hate anything that isn't normal.

To them the grammatical difference between "gay," "pedophile," and "Ephebophilia" makes about as much sense as Clinton saying "It depend upon what your defination of "is" is.

Or Kerry saying, "I voted for the War, before I voted against it."



The rest of this country aren't as grammatically astute as you are.

I get what you're saying though.

[Roland00]

How's that?

What in high school, you never had a crush on a boy your age

[OrionNorthFL]

I agree, really, that the scandal isn't the age of the page. At 16, I knew what I wanted and if Foley were cute/hot (which he is not) I probably woulda had sex with him if I were a page, lol

The REAL scandal, in my opinion, is the hypocricy and irony. Hypocricy for being a member of the "morals and values" party (and subsequent poo pooing and sweeping of the issue under the rug by our "moral and values party") AND for being a member of the COmmittee for Missing and Exploited Children.

Oh yeah... and for condemming Clinton for "throwing it all away" for consensual sex acts with a 22 year old and then doing THIS!!!


Sometimes, you just gotta laugh in that "I can't fucking believe the world we live in" kinda way.

[kevin7620]

Unfortunately, centexfarmer is totally right.

[HazeMaster]

Sometimes, you just gotta laugh in that "I can't fucking believe the world we live in" kinda way.

Or cry

[General_Alfie]

What in high school, you never had a crush on a boy your age

Um, yes, but what's that got to do with JB18's statement? Besides, "ephebophilia" is defined as "a condition in which an adult, usually male, is sexually attracted to young people about the age of puberty. It is sometimes used as a synonym for "hebephilia." As high schoolers are typically roughly the same age, I fail to see your point.

I agree, really, that the scandal isn't the age of the page. At 16, I knew what I wanted and if Foley were cute/hot (which he is not) I probably woulda had sex with him if I were a page, lol

The REAL scandal, in my opinion, is the hypocricy and irony. Hypocricy for being a member of the "morals and values" party (and subsequent poo pooing and sweeping of the issue under the rug by our "moral and values party") AND for being a member of the COmmittee for Missing and Exploited Children.

That, and more, even. The only one's who want to make this a ped thing are the right wingers, and the reason they want to make a ped thing is to muddy the waters and to blame "the homos."

As with Watergate and with Clinton's blow job, the really big story isn't the original crime, it's how the crime was handled once discovered by the media. The GOP and its right wing noise machine has once again shown that they will do and say anything, they will savage anyone, they will thrash around and try to obscure the real truth, all in service of staying in power. Rather than taking it like men, they get all girlie, all queenie and start blaming others. Really, they all need a good old American bitch slap.

[JayHew]

That, and more, even. The only one's who want to make this a ped thing are the right wingers, and the reason they want to make a ped thing is to muddy the waters and to blame "the homos."

As with Watergate and with Clinton's blow job, the really big story isn't the original crime, it's how the crime was handled once discovered by the media. The GOP and its right wing noise machine has once again shown that they will do and say anything, they will savage anyone, they will thrash around and try to obscure the real truth, all in service of staying in power. Rather than taking it like men, they get all girlie, all queenie and start blaming others. Really, they all need a good old American bitch slap.[/QUOTE]

For once I have to agree with the General. But I don't see it totally as a Repub thing as the Dems do it too. I have a problem with something like this coming up all the time and we concentrate on the BS and not what is really going on. We should really be looking at all politicians and start working towards a means of taking the money out of it all. Yes each group wants to stay in power, but who or what is the power behind them? BIG money influence, we need to figure out a way to have it removed, perhaps a different thread. Overall the above is well stated and I couldn't agree more.

[tonyboy]

Pedophilia - is the paraphilia of being sexually attracted primarily or exclusively to prepubescent children. Persons with this attraction are called pedophiles.

Ephebophilia has been defined as a sexual preference in which an adult is primarily or exclusively sexually attracted to postpubescent adolescents.

Ever since Foley's scandal has broken out everyone, including news, people, and forumers have been calling him a pedophile. Foley is not a pedophile. He would have had to solicite sexual favors to a 12-13 year-old or below.

This does not detract from the wrongs he did, but for Pete's sake its driving me nuts!

Ephebophilia has historically and presently is a wide-range sexual preference that encompasses a majority of the world's population. Yes, what Foley has done is no different than the "barely 18" porn links every forumer here has looked at. In the middle-ages, European men married 13-14 year-old girls and had children with them. Ancient Greece had a social system of "mentoring" between older men and teenage boys. This has been going on for as long as human existence.

This is a crime of age-of-consent and an abuse of power. This is not about pedophilia. Foley is just as much as a pervert as anyone else here who's oogled over Brent Corrigan and Sammy.

Thank you and to Kevin too. It would be great if the sensationalistic news media could get this point. Probably won't happen though.
I'm not defending Foley here but he is not a pedophile.

[jackoroe]

Now we have information that one of the more famous IM's with Foley involved someone over the age of 18. http://www.drudgereport.com/flashmfa.htm .Now we have a dilemma. Should we be supportive of consensual sex between adults as open minded gay people?

[turtle]

For once I have to agree with the General. But I don't see it totally as a Repub thing as the Dems do it too. I have a problem with something like this coming up all the time and we concentrate on the BS and not what is really going on. We should really be looking at all politicians and start working towards a means of taking the money out of it all. Yes each group wants to stay in power, but who or what is the power behind them? BIG money influence, we need to figure out a way to have it removed, perhaps a different thread. Overall the above is well stated and I couldn't agree more.

The money is all our own fault.

What is the money for? Why is it needed? What does it do?

The money is to buy commercials during campaigns.

If we were not led around by the nose by those commercials, the money would not buy elections.

If we don't like the influence of money in Washington, it is our own fault for not doing our homework before voting.

If we know what candidates stand for, and what we stand for ourselves, commercials make little difference.

If money buys elections, it is the electorate's fault.

-D

[turtle]

And it doesn't matter what you call what Congressman Foley was doing.

It was worse than wrong, it was stupid.

-D

[andysayshi]

And just to demonstrate that the media allow the anti-gay spin of this whole mess to blossom:

Tony Perkins on Hardball

In recent days, Family Research Council (FRC) president Tony Perkins has used the emerging scandal surrounding former Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) to promote a falsehood about gay men -- that they are more likely than straight men to sexually abuse children, based on the claim that homosexuals are overrepresented in child sex abuse cases. In fact, a 1995 study released by the American Psychological Association found that "gay men are no more likely than heterosexual men to perpetrate child sexual abuse"; the argument that homosexuals are overrepresented in such cases is based on what John Hopkins University psychiatrist Frederick Berlin has described as the "flawed assumption" that men who abuse young boys are also attracted to grown men.

On October 2, Perkins issued a statement on what he claimed was "the real issue" in the Foley scandal -- the purported "link between homosexuality and child sexual abuse"; the statement was uncritically reported by the San Francisco Chronicle in an October 3 report on the scandal. Similarly, on the October 3 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, host Chris Matthews failed to challenge the claim by Perkins that "there's clear research that shows that homosexual men are more likely to abuse children than straight men." Perkins's claim appears to be based on an article on the Family Research Council's website by Timothy J. Dailey, a senior research fellow at the FRC's Center for Marriage and Family Studies, which asserts that there is a "disturbing connection" between homosexuality and pedophilia because "homosexual pedophiles commit about one-third of the total number of child sex offenses" whereas homosexuals make up only "1 to 3 percent of the population."

[CTF]

Now we have information that one of the more famous IM's with Foley involved someone over the age of 18. http://www.drudgereport.com/flashmfa.htm .Now we have a dilemma. Should we be supportive of consensual sex between adults as open minded gay people?

No.

Not when that person has aligned himself with the "moralists" in this country, got his hypocritical hand stuck in the cookie jar, and blemished the reputation of millions of Americans (who up until the time he got caught) didn't associate himself with.

I believe the topic of the thread was to discuss the differences between "philias," not "consensual sex."

Now if you want to discuss hypocrisies, start the thread and I'll join in!

[smelter]

Now we have information that one of the more famous IM's with Foley involved someone over the age of 18. http://www.drudgereport.com/flashmfa.htm .Now we have a dilemma. Should we be supportive of consensual sex between adults as open minded gay people?

Well, you've convinced me Jack ..... the pure truthiness to everything published in drudgery reports needs no further explanation or investigation. Case closed!

[Toriko]

And it doesn't matter what you call what Congressman Foley was doing.

It was worse than wrong, it was stupid.

-D

I assume you are ignoring the possibility that jackoroe's post might be true.

[turtle]

I assume you are ignoring the possibility that jackoroe's post might be true.

No, it was stupid either way.

Where was the man's dignity? His political savvy? His common sense?

Clinton was stupid to screw around with an intern, and then compounded that stupidity by lying about it. It cost Al Gore the election, and in a very real way, Clinton's lie led us into Iraq.

Stupid, any way you look at it.

[tmb1]

This is a crime of age-of-consent and an abuse of power. This is not about pedophilia. Foley is just as much as a pervert as anyone else here who's oogled over Brent Corrigan and Sammy.

While I totally agree with your statements about pedophilia, your last statement contradicts itself. If it is about abuse of power and age of consent you cannot compare what he did to guys "oogling" over Corrigan and Sammy. He knowingly broke the law(some which he helped to write himself) by having sexually explicit online encounters where he made a point of wanting to meet up with them(and these online laws are for all under 18, not by age of consent). He was being a predator over boys that even if they wanted it are not mentally prepared for that kind of stuff. Otherwise why have the laws. Also, as I understand it, age of consent laws are different from state to state and just because it may be 16 in one state doesn't mean that a 52 year old man can have sex with him...I think some states have laws where the other person must be 24 or younger.

Anyhow, I understand when people say guys are no different because some of these guys look younger(Sammy) or even were younger(Corrigan). But the difference is they were said to be of age. It is a small difference but for the sake of laws and where to have a legal cutoff, it makes a huge difference(otherwise any age descript law wouldnt make sense) Foley was a man of power over these boys so it makes it even worse. If he has a desire for younger looking men then seek LEGAL younger looking men. So too say others looking at Sammy or Corrigan are on the same level of perversion is simply ludicrous. It IS about abuse of power and age(which we should simply stick with 18 and leave it at that)

[Andreus]

I dont care how old the guy is and how old the Congressman is.

he used his political and professional authority to further his sexual agenda in the workplace.

this thread seems in poor taste to me and really reeks of apologism ... nibbling around the edges to candy coat the ugly truth.

He was a congressman in charge of stopping sexual predators.

he was a sexual predator.

he had to go.

Hastert knew it and didnt do anything to stop it.

Now hastert needs to go.

[Mr.BiGuy]

I dont care how old the guy is and how old the Congressman is.

he used his political and professional authority to further his sexual agenda in the workplace.

this thread seems in poor taste to me and really reeks of apologism ... nibbling around the edges to candy coat the ugly truth.

He was a congressman in charge of stopping sexual predators.

he was a sexual predator.

he had to go.

Hastert knew it and didnt do anything to stop it.

Now hastert needs to go.

Thank You! Could'nt have said it better myself.

[Just_Believe18]

Perhaps I didn't clarify the nature of this discussion. This isn't just discussing politics, but I am addressing human nature and I hope you join in constructively. It matters, because if we, as homosexuals (who Foley has self-identified as an EXCUSE) fail to understand the implications of what we are saying (aka Foley is a Pedophile) then what hope have we to the heterosexual who generalizes us all as pedophiles?

Yes, I am saying Foley "Erect" violated age-of-consent laws, and yes, he abused his position of power in the most hypocritical way. However, I am not apologizing for what he has done; instead I am stressing the importance of why his sexual preference should not be labeled as a "pedophile" because his behavior encompasses a majority of the human population.

Whether Foley is 30, 40, or 50 is irrelevant in the discussion for the sake of "age preference" being a very subjective, if not prejudice opinion, for almost everyone here.

The point of this discussion is to educate and inform. A lot of people have confused, if not blended pedophilia to a sexual preference many in this community (and most people in general) share.

tmb1, take the discussion to a deeper level. Currently, you see a number. 18. Brent Corrigan and Sammy are looked at and eroticized in this community based on an age-of-consent standard. But do they look 18? If you looked at a hot boy on the street, could you tell their age exactly? Of course not. In fact, a lot of people would think Sammy looks younger than 18. Porn sites particularly like to stress the "barely 18" model who shaves and look as close to teenage as possible. There is an entire section of porn within the Twink medium which focuses on a "high school" setting.

Therefore, when I say so many of us are just as much as perverts as Foley are, its technically true. His sexual desire is a reflection of every straight man who gets a hardon over that homecoming game cheerleader, or every gay man who fantasizes over that young quarterback. Our society propagates this kind of behavior. Look at Abercrombie & Fitch. Look at the advertising of what defines "beauty." Its young 16-21 boys and girls. You know this. I know this. So by generalizing Foley as a pedophile, rather than the criminal he is in abusing power, are we not condemning ourselves? And by condemning ourselves, are we not devolving our identity back to..

this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeIVl__8F5c

Think about it.

Then reply.

[Andreus]

This isn't just discussing politics, but I am addressing human nature and I hope you join in constructively.

It is the political forum, and as such, I feel that my comment is dead on point and quite constructive. You may not think it's constructive to your point of view, and that is certainly what I intended when I posted.

I simply disagree. Constructive disagreement happens all over america.

look, its time we all cut to the chase. This would not be a topic of discussion if the guy hadn't done the deed. So trying to separate these things out for the sake of arguement is legalistic parsing designed to lessen the impact of the crime.

We have to draw the line somewhere and this has to be a non issue.

I understand that there are times when this discussion could be relevant, but within the context of current events, it implies that his actions are not as bad as if he had used his power and position to prey on someone else. This makes me feel like the discussion invalidates the victims' pain and right to take action and seek legal aid for what was done.

Yes, I am saying Foley "Erect" violated age-of-consent laws, and yes, he abused his position of power in the most hypocritical way.

good

we agree

The point of this discussion is to educate and inform

or

to express an opinion and devolve the impact of the crime based on legal definitions and scientific terms

that would be my estimation.

. A lot of people have confused, if not blended pedophilia to a sexual preference many in this community (and most people in general) share.

just because straight men like little girls doesnt mean that its ok for gay men to like little boys.

this works in both directions... if that is what you mean, then we agree again.

If you mean that its important to define pedophilia so that we can lessen the impact of the charge, then that is a no go.

I believe that we will be better understood by the general population when we better define who we are as people, not by defining pedophilia so that we can duck the bullet more easily.

Our society propagates this kind of behavior. Look at Abercrombie & Fitch. Look at the advertising of what defines "beauty." Its young 16-21 boys and girls. You know this. I know this. So by generalizing Foley as a pedophile, rather than the criminal he is in abusing power, are we not condemning ourselves? And by condemning ourselves, are we not devolving our identity back to..

no

by condemning his behavior we are condemning his behavior. I don't want to understand the nature of a sexual predator, I just want the children of the nation protected from them, due to the fact that statistically it is proven that they are next to imposible to rehabilitate.

he is a criminal abusing power. His behavior defines his inability to be trusted as a man sworn to uphold the laws of the land. this is not a fly by night accident. it seems silly to me to even consider a small chance that the guy in charge of the horse stall likes hoof stew by accident.

Firefighters examine videos of the crowd at arson fires, because the arsons like to watch the fire they start. Criminals stay attached to the world they secretly desire.

So I feel that its likely that the guy jockeyed himself into this position on purpose. That casts a further dark cloud on his entire career and what it took for him to attain his seat on that committee.

Foleys choices and my dislike of them have nothing to do with condemning the gay community or anything like that. If gay men cannot call him a pedophile because there are young people in advertisements or we cant because straight people are just like us, then we are hobbling ourselves just as the far right would like us to be.

the guy committed a felonious act and he used his power to acheive it. The degree of the felony and the legal definition of his actions are irrelevant.

If we are to serve our community, we need to strongly send the message to everyone out there that we do not support endorse or wish to understand the nature and perspective of a sexual predator.

[Random dude]

If we are to serve our community, we need to strongly send the message to everyone out there that we do not support endorse or wish to understand the nature and perspective of a sexual predator.

I would tend to agree with that statement. However, I think I'll save my judgment of this guy until he's actually convicted of something in a real court of law. I think it would serve all of us (gay, straight, Democrat, Republican) well to reserve passing judgment for the legal system and remember innocent until proven guilty.

[Andreus]

i would normally agree with you except for the one fact that he resigned preemptively

politicians always wait out the storm to see how it is going to play out

this guy?

his resignation seems tantamount to a confession

if he's not guilty then he has to be one of the most politically inept congressmen ever

he is not technically guilty of a crime yet, but there is no denying that he is a sexual predator

but

you have a point

his crimes are alleged and need to be referred to as such

[Kulindahr]

Unfortunately, centexfarmer is totally right.

I've had a fair amount of success explaining the difference to most people. I just tell them that those are medical terms, and explain the difference according to doctors. I guess maybe it works because doctors are authority figures.

But then you hit the "Christian" Right... who listen, agree to the difference, and then say, "But it's all an abomination...."

I sometimes think the only proper respoinse is to kick the dude in the nuts and say, "No THIS is an abomination!"

I also ask them if they know how old Mary was when she and Joseph went to Bethlehem in Judea for the birth of her firstborn son....

[Kulindahr]

look, its time we all cut to the chase. This would not be a topic of discussion if the guy hadn't done the deed. So trying to separate these things out for the sake of arguement is legalistic parsing designed to lessen the impact of the crime.

Actually, it's quite the reverse.
Lumping what Foley did in with pedophilia is an effort to appeal to the emotions and enrage, to blow the alleged crime into something it wasn't. Letting the media and others get away with it is mental laziness at the least, and submission to a moralistic agenda at worst.

his resignation seems tantamount to a confession

That depends on whether one has ever heard of a thing called "honor". One upon it a time, it was considered proper for a politician to resign if he became the cause or focus of scandal -- that they don't do it any more is one of my dad's constant complaints; he was raised in that tradition. I tend to agree with it: if your presence has become a distraction to the business you and your colleagues have been charged with, it is your duty to step aside so they can get on with their work.
But I forgot; these days, duty is as neglected a concept as honor.

[Just_Believe18]

Andreus, you need to clarify what you arguing about, because you are writing more out of emotion than making a point.

Explain to me why pedophilia is just as offensive as having sex with a 16 year-old? How are you defining Foley as a "sexual predator" and pedophile? Is it because JUB doesn't allow anyone under 18 to this site? Is it because of a state law? That, in itself, can be ambiguous, because many states in the U.S. have a lower age-of-consent law than 18. Is it to the world? The U.S. has actually one of the highest age-of-consent laws in the world. Does that make every other adult in Europe, Africa, and Asia a "sexual predator" as you would put it? Is it because of Foley's age in comparison to the boy? How are you defining all this?

If gay men cannot call him a pedophile because there are young people in advertisements or we cant because straight people are just like us, then we are hobbling ourselves just as the far right would like us to be.

This statement does not make sense. So gay men should incorrectly label a majority of the world's population (including themselves) as pedophiles because by not doing so makes us weak?

If we are to serve our community, we need to strongly send the message to everyone out there that we do not support endorse or wish to understand the nature and perspective of a sexual predator.

To me, this is a statement of ignorance. The point of this discussion is to communicate to one another, but if you "do not wish to understand" or at least listen to contrasting arguments, then you aren't really serving the purpose of participating in a discussion. Again, you need to define "sexual predator" and be very careful in the language you choose.

Once more I must stress, this discussion is not centered on "lessening" or "apologizing" to what Rep. Foley has done. He has clearly abused his power, and who knows what will turn up in the investigation. If he has been proven to have solicited sex in an offending age-of-consent law to that area, then he will have to meet justice. As of now, he has clearly abused his power, disgraced the position of Congress, and others have fostered his unhealthy behavior for years and must face justice as well.

But he is NOT a pedophile.

[gazzax2]

i'm 18 and i'm so attracted to younger boys, like 15, 16, 17. and my friends always say i'm a paetophile!

[kevin7620]

This editorial from the right makes some good points:

1. For the umpteenth time, Foley is not a pedophile.
2. The suddenly explicit morality of the left may come to bite the left (and gays) in the ass - what the hell was Bob Beckel thinking?

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/...ome-commentary

[Andreus]

a sexual predator is someone who uses his posiyion of authority or power, be it age, OR power and position at work to coerse someone into engaging in sexual acts or behaviors that they did not want to engage in.

As i said before, and i will say again...

consicely and clearly so that the apologists will get the point that i am trying to make.

the age is irrelevant. the discussion of age distracts from the larger point.

Using your authority to sexually harrass someone is not appropriate or legal, and we are only trying to lessen the impact of this scubbags' actions by making it purely an age issue.

Foley is a predator, and IMO it doesnt matter what the age of the parties nvolved are.

what matters is that he stalked and preyed on people who could not say no. That is not only an abuse of power, it is an abuse of a human being.

we are getting bogged down in the rellevance of this issue because we are parsing out this terminology.

i am not an explicit thinker, I am an implicit thinker. It is how i was trained.

Foley is a predator.

you are not understanding that Idont care about the exact term, because the exact term doesnt matter inre the age of his victims. I am pretty sure I am not in the minority on this issue.

Clinton was just as much a predator by coercing sex out of several women while in office and then using his position to cover up the act.

this is not partisan or ageism on my part....it is acnowledging that no one has the right to do this, and when a public servant does,its imperative that we don't get lost in the political talking points and get dragged off the real issue. We, as the public have the responsibility to those they preyed upon to insure that they dont ever take a postion of service that would make it posible for them to prey upon people again.

this thread is topical in that it relates to foleys personal issues with sexual predation, and the age issue is a distraction from the real current event that it comments on, IMO.

[Just_Believe18]

Ok, so you are defining sexual predator as someone with an position of authority abusing their powers to seek sexual gratification from someone below them. Thats fine, I've been agreeing with that the whole time.

You just had me confused with your insistance on labeling him as a pedophile. Which he is not.

[Kulindahr]

That's not a bad definition of a predator at all. Unfortunately, the sloppy way the laws are written in quite a number of states yields an outcome where a person with one "victim", who had ID that passed police inspection and showed the "victim" to be 21 or older, can be considered a predator, while someone with scores of victims may not be. Maybe if our legislators would sit down and THINK instead of letting other people write the laws and then never read them, we'd get useful definitions such as Andreus advanced.
I'm not sure I entirely agree with this, though:

what matters is that he stalked and preyed on people who could not say no. That is not only an abuse of power, it is an abuse of a human being.

I don't think the evidence shows that he "stalked", nor do I think it indicates that those he communicated with on the internet couldn't say no. Pages in the halls of the capitol, though are very much in that position.

[mike_n_herrin]

I rarely pop into this forum, however i thought i'd comment on this thread.

I do not see what difference it makes whether Foley is a Pedophile or a Ephebophile. If he interacted with someone under the age of legal concent then it was wrong. Whether that just means legally wrong or ethically wrong doesn't make any difference either. Nor does it make any difference if lots of men (straight or otherwise) fantasize about high school cheerleaders or quarterbacks. Thinking about something and doing it are not the same thing. That's the difference between the ID and the EGO portion of our psyche.

Not only did Foley act illegally in having these conversations with minors, he also abused his position. I suspect if he were straight and it was a female page "we" would still be calling him a pedophile, even if by definition that isn't exactly correct.

[Kulindahr]

It matters insofaras it's a matter of accuracy in language. For gays to be careful of the proper use of words shows us to be careful of who we're thinking about, who we consider legitimate partners for sex, and shows that we can distinguish, not get sloppy. It also avoids the trap of hopping on the emotional bandwagon.
Personally, I use the words accurately. If a female page is old enough to have pubic hair, then whatever a congresscritter has done to her, it isn't pedophilia.
And the main point we should be making is the abuse of position -- go back and see my post comparing this situation with lifeguarding.

[Just_Believe18]

Thank you Kulindahr. You assess the situation most accurately.

[mike_n_herrin]

... And the main point we should be making is the abuse of position -- go back and see my post comparing this situation with lifeguarding.

why should that be the "main point." For me the main point is that he committed a criminal sexual action. Secondary is that he is gay and his actions have resulted in many people painting "us" with the same brush. Tertiary is the fact that he abused his position in order to carry out that criminal act.

[Just_Believe18]

I do not see what difference it makes whether Foley is a Pedophile or a Ephebophile.

Secondary is that he is gay and his actions have resulted in many people painting "us" with the same brush.

You just contradicted yourself, mike. You are using the very same brush to broadstroke "us" as the "many people" who are blending homosexuals with pedophiles. In fact, you are agreeing with them. Since Ephebophilia is so clearly apparent on this site, with Twinks (aka teenage boys) being the focus of a majority of porn content, you are essentially labeling a majority of people on this site as pedophiles.

And if you are only dividing that "difference" because of a magic number of 18, then you've narrowed your perspective to a subjective human figure, rather than the blatant truth standing in your face that if you label Foley as a "Homosexual & Pedophile" you are agreeing with the most backward of fundamentalist beliefs that a "Homosexual is indeed, a Pedophile."

[Andreus]

actually just believe

you are labelling the people here that

what makes you think people come to jub to look at little boys? we have a bear section, a story section, a no porn section, a health section...

all gay men are not motivated by images of barely legals... some are, but they are far from being a majority.

i am a bit offended by the belief that they are

trying to tell people that what foley did aint so bad because we are just like him is kind of what the republicans have been doing, but in reverse,... they say that we are as bad as him.

i think that clear thinking people can easily see the difference.

you and kulindahr are muddying the water on this issue by lightening the impact of the charges against foley.

most people are not going to go for that.

[Croynan]

I dont care how old the guy is and how old the Congressman is.

he used his political and professional authority to further his sexual agenda in the workplace.

this thread seems in poor taste to me and really reeks of apologism ... nibbling around the edges to candy coat the ugly truth.

He was a congressman in charge of stopping sexual predators.

he was a sexual predator.

he had to go.

Hastert knew it and didnt do anything to stop it.

Now hastert needs to go.

I totally agree with your comments.

eM.

[mike_n_herrin]

You just contradicted yourself, mike. You are using the very same brush to broadstroke "us" as the "many people" who are blending homosexuals with pedophiles. In fact, you are agreeing with them. Since Ephebophilia is so clearly apparent on this site, with Twinks (aka teenage boys) being the focus of a majority of porn content, you are essentially labeling a majority of people on this site as pedophiles.

And if you are only dividing that "difference" because of a magic number of 18, then you've narrowed your perspective to a subjective human figure, rather than the blatant truth standing in your face that if you label Foley as a "Homosexual & Pedophile" you are agreeing with the most backward of fundamentalist beliefs that a "Homosexual is indeed, a Pedophile."

i did not contradict myself. the point i was making is that it does not make any practical difference whether he is a pedophile or your ephebophile. He did something with a minor that is illegal. it is the ACT that is damning him, not what he thought. LOOKING and doing are two completely different issues. one is not illegal and the other is.

And how is saying foley is a homosexual and a pedophile (not that i said that mind you) but how is that the same as saying all homosexuals are pedophiles? We know that is no more true than describing a female teacher who messes around with her high school students as "straight and a pediphile" equates to all straight people are pediphiles. However, that may very well be what a lot of people are thinking. But what difference would occur if everyone were refering to foley as a "homosexual and ephebophile" make?

[Andreus]

what difference would occur if everyone were refering to foley as a "homosexual and ephebophile" make?

Exactly Mikey!!

this one question is the crux of the issue

The term changes nothing

therefore the term and the discussion's only relevance is in lessening the impact of the crime he committed, when examined within this context.

The mainstream commiunity is waiting for us to make excuses. The republicans are doing that and it looks really ugly.

We owe it to Foley's victims to not allow that to happen

[Just_Believe18]

Andreus, you have only to look at the Naughty Section of the forum. Whats the biggest of them all?

"Young Men, Twinks, Jocks & Hunks" stands at 47,000+ posts

"Daddies, Bears, Chubs, Chasers" stands at 8,300+ posts.

With the exception of the Requests Forum, the "Young Men, Twinks..." forum outnumbers all the other porn forums combined. A majority of the advertisements that display on this website is "8teenboy.com" "boyfun" "cum swapping twinks" etc.

So yes, it is accurate for me to say a majority of this community has an ephebophile sexual preference.

I think we are all disagreeing for very silly reasons. Please let me outline my reasoning very simply once more:

Pedophile - a person who is attracted to pre-pubescent children. (12-13 & under)

Ephebophile - a person who is attracted to pubescent or teenaged boys or girls. (14-19ish)

Foley is being accused of having sexual misconduct with 16-18 year-old Congressional Pages.

The Crime - Congressional abuse of power, exploitation and embarrassing misconduct in a man of his position. Possible age-of-consent violations.

The Label - The corruption aspect (that is the true crime) is being overlooked by sensational titling of "Pedophile Foley and the 16 year-old page." Its all about the "52 year-old man and the 16 year-old Page" to the public's general perception. "Pedophile Foley"

The Reality - Foley is not a Pedophile. A Pedophile is not attracted to a 16 year-old boy (we've had pedophiles post on this forum before and they do not gravitate towards teenagers). Foley is an Ephebophile.

Historical - Ephebophilia has existed for all of human history. Ancient Greek men mentored teenage boys in sexual relationships. Medieval European men married 13-14 year-old girls and had children with them because they were prime for childbirth.

Presently - 18 does not define the difference between legal and a pedophile. Many U.S. states have an age-of-consent law at 16 years-old. Most of the world has lower age-of-consent laws than 18 years of age. Therefore, U.S. states and most of the world are not pedophiles. The Advertising world defines ideal "beauty" as between the ages of 16-21+. Ephebophilia is a part of human nature.

The Importance of Clarity - By labeling Foley (who is gay) as a pedophile, it is the same as Fundamentalists labeling all homosexuals as pedophiles. By blurring the distinctions of two very different sexual preferences, one being a rare attraction for pre-pubescent children while the other is generally shared by the human populace towards teenagers, you are not only making a technical error of grammar, but jumping on "an emotional bandwagon" from which you are pointing fingers at fellow homosexuals and unfairly calling them "Perverts! Predators! Pedophiles!"

Common Ground - We agree on wanting to preserve our image as homosexuals. But we need to do it correctly. Joining the Fundamentalists in denouncing gay Foley as a "Pedophile" is unethical to our self-esteem and image. What we need to do is educate others, and make clear the distinctions of what Foley and what he isn't. He is a criminal yes, but we will not join Fred Phelps and Pat Robertson to say Foley is "one of those homosexual pedophiles like all the rest of 'em."

[Andreus]

thanks for your opinion

mine is different. I do not believe that the general polulation has a predilection for sleeping with teenagers, neither on JUb nor in the real world outside, and i would invite you to rethink that idea.

thats the basic difference we are having. I will not go down that path with you

i have considered your opinion, though

i disagree with it

i dont think we're doing anything new here but keeping this thread alive, and since i think it is not relevant to the charges against Foley, i will ponder our common ground and check out on this one.

[Green_Man_007]

This is a crime of age-of-consent and an abuse of power. This is not about pedophilia. Foley is just as much as a pervert as anyone else here who's oogled over Brent Corrigan and Sammy.

Actually, legal experts have not yet found an actual "crime" in Foley's communications.

He's not accused of ever touching an underage person inappropriately, or enticing one into meeting for that purpose.

So far, his IM's with former pages have been "ethically questionable," but there's no case yet for their being illegal.

Raise all the moral outrage you want, but the law draws a line that Foley has not been seen to have crossed.

[Just_Believe18]

Its not an opinion But you're welcome to think the dictionary, the historical past, this site's demographics, and model image standards in the advertising world are.

[Green_Man_007]

a sexual predator is someone who uses his posiyion of authority or power, be it age, OR power and position at work to coerse someone into engaging in sexual acts or behaviors that they did not want to engage in.

As i said before, and i will say again...

consicely and clearly so that the apologists will get the point that i am trying to make.

the age is irrelevant. the discussion of age distracts from the larger point.

Using your authority to sexually harrass someone is not appropriate or legal, and we are only trying to lessen the impact of this scubbags' actions by making it purely an age issue.

Foley is a predator, and IMO it doesnt matter what the age of the parties nvolved are.

what matters is that he stalked and preyed on people who could not say no. That is not only an abuse of power, it is an abuse of a human being.

Did Foley have inappropriately-sexual communications with pages WHILE they were in the page program, or after they had left and went home?

[Andreus]

Its not an opinion But you're welcome to think the dictionary, the historical past, this site's demographics, and model image standards in the advertising world are.

your interpretation of the facts is an opinion, and you are smart enough to know that.

Did Foley have inappropriately-sexual communications with pages WHILE they were in the page program, or after they had left and went home?

i dont think it matters.

as we are about to see during the investigations that follow, i am not alone in my beliefs.