Re: Ok, I see your point

Hi again, BB,

I understand the point that any anti reading this site probably copy/pastes Furby's posts to pur on their on websites to show how sick we are. I had not considered how his posts might look from an outsiders point-of-view because, really, I stopped caring what they think of us quite some time ago. The reason for this is simple. Yeah, it's easy for them (and some of us apparently) to look at Furby's panty-watching posts and call them sleaze. However, when you or I or anyone else here posts a beautiful loving GM about just being with a YF and holding her in our arms, well the antis are gonna copy/paste THAT and call it sleaze too! To them, anything we do is sleaze. Doesn't matter that we make children happy and it also doesn't matter that we love them and would never hurt them. The very fact that we are capable of loving LGs & AGs on a level of equality is completely foreign to the antis and there's no way that most of them can wrap their minds around the concept. So, as is par with human nature, we are unknown and therefore scary and therefore dangerous. I guess what I'm basically saying is, why limit our self to "pure" GMs with no romantic content (or panty content :) whatsoever when to the antis it's all the same. A loving GM and a "sleazy" GM are no different in their eyes. It's all sleaze to them, so if we're gonna worry about our public image then we should just forget that the internet exists and all go back into the trapped and lonely existance that most of us had before the net and boards like this one came along.

I've responded to this particular reasoning numerous times before, and this is what I said each of those times: yes, it's true that to most anti's, CA's, and other "haters" out there, there is no difference between a respectfully sexy and an outright "sleaze" post. Nevertheless, the difference is still significant. With the usual type of respectful posts, even though we can indeed count on our legions of detractors to take most of them way out of context, the point is, in such a case we at least have a defensible position when the time finally comes (and mark my words, it WILL come) that we get to take some of these ignorant jerks to court on libel charges, and we have the original copy to prove that our words were twisted like a pretzel until they were completely far removed from their original meaning and context. Also, readers with a more open mind (and with the thousands of visitors reading the posts here every day we can surmise that there are indeed several open-minded peeps here every day), they will know from personal experience that the "haters" who twisted our words are full of shit, even if they initially admit this to nobody. However, you take an outright sleaze post, like Furby is famous for composing, and the anti's and CA's, for the most part, will have no need to twist and lie about the content of the post to provide ammunition against us, not to mention the more open-minded lurkers among the thousands of visitors to this forum every day having almost every stereotypical line of bull they've been fed about MAA's confirmed to them in their own minds ("I guess those CA's were right all along...I need to call John Walsh and report this to him!"). Suddenly, our position (which is totally justifiable, IMO) becomes that much less defensible when the time for us to have our voices heard becomes both possible and viable. By always insisting that it's "never gonna happen in my lifetime," we are digging our own graves, especially if the liberal backlash I'm predicting occurs within the next few years, and we will have killed our golden opportunity simply because we assumed that none of us would ever live to see that opportunity anyway, so "what the hell?"

Now we get to the public image concern. We shouldn't worry about our public image to the extent that we deny the sexual aspects of our AttB, or imply that we are ashamed that we find LG's and/or AG's sexy, and I totally agree, and have often said, that lying or back pedalling to assuage the opposition does nothing but bolster their strength and position over us, as what's left (pun intended) of the liberals learned the hard way over the past 25 years. On the same token, however, if we have absolutely no concern whatsoever for our image on a public message board, and we allow every dark thought we have, and every sleazy desire that goes through our minds, to be freely displayed on a public message board in a completely sleazy manner, rather than in the relative privacy of the chat room among our "drinking buddies" (though our mutually shared drink is 'cyber beer,' of course) we are accomplishing nothing save feeding a constant stream of ammunition to those who would have GC investigated, shut down, and wish to "prove" that we are the imminent "danger" to youths that they always claim, tirelessly and relentlessly, in every single media venue who is more than happy to accomodate their incessant bitching.

Now, this leads to a few very important questions that I suggest we all ask ourselves. Do we want to present an image of ourselves on a frequently visited public message board that is in no way defensible when the time comes that the general public, the media, and (yes!) Congress is finally willing to listen to us? Are we absolutely sure that our time won't come within the next 60 years, or whatever our projected life spans may be? And even if the latter does turn out to be the case, do we feel no need to be concerned about future generations of MAA's, whose time to be heard will indeed occur during their lifetimes (unless some louses from previous decades messed it all up for them, and set back their progress for a few more decades)? I think we need to ask ourselves these questions individually, and then act accordingly. I'm not suggesting deletion or banning except in the most extreme FAQ-violating instances, or where the security of the board is legitimately threatened. Barring that, we all need to make the decision we feel is right based upon the answers to the above questions that we all come to individually.

I do have to disagree with one thing you said though.

Furby's posts usually consist of nothing save for his desire to look up a girl's skirt, and he seems to have no interest in them as attractive people.

Please read HPNY's post below. This is untrue. Furby expresses what the majority of men feel (whether they're hetero or pedo). A hot female who's a total stranger is nice to look at and try to catch glimpses of her cute ass and, if possible, her panties. If you get to know that girl and she begins to hold some meaning for you on a personal level, then she's more than just eye candy.

That's how MEN think about WOMEN, is it not? We may be GLers, but we are still MEN (most of us). I don't understand why some people seem to have this idea that we as GLers should be taking some moral high-ground over our heterosexual counterparts in society. We're not better than them any more than they're better than us.

As I have also said before, I do not think that we, as MAA's, are on a higher moral plane than the typical SAA adults, nor should we pretend to be. However, as I have likewise pointed out before, SAA men are generally tolerated when they make "sleaze" statements about adult women. They are usually not considered "dangerous," "sick," or "criminal" for doing so; for the most part, they can be themselves without fearing anything other than a large degree of eye rolling, some biased "male chuvanist pig" remarks, and a few nasty articles written about them by the femi-nazis. It's not the same with us at this point in time, however. We are not permitted by society to lay all of our very human foibles and "dark side" out on a public forum like this, and NOT be subject to potentially serious censuring by the government, led into entrapment schemes by misguided CA's that could result in our future arrest, giving greater impetus to LEA's finding "probable cause" to infiltrate our community and gain personal information about us for their databases, or have more versions of Megan's Law passed the next time some probably non-MAA sociopathic kidnaps and murders a LG or an AG. As the saying often goes in her home state, "Megan's Law wouldn't have saved Megan," but though such laws wouldn't save a single youth from a horrible fate, they do go a long way towards persecuting mostly innocent MAA's who have never harmed a youth in their respective AOA, and never would, and making our lives a total nightmare simply because we were born with the "wrong" AttB.

I may have been a bit out of line for judging Furby as harshly as I did, and on that score I apologize both to him and to you. Nevertheless, my above stance stands for all of the reasons that I mentioned, and I hope that some people who read it will indeed ask themselves the questions I outlined above, and to consider the points that I made. Then the decision as to what to do next is up to them, as well it should be. I'm not suggesting censorship here, but just a bit of forethought the next time any of us posts a GM, and does so in a manner that would be better suited for convos among "the crew" in the chat room.

Thank you for taking the time to listen,

Your friend,

--Dissident