Re: Yes, very possible

I must now thank you for your very thoughtful contribution to this discussion, Spike. I agree with all you said.

One of the most interesting things you said in the above post, I think, is that you disagree with Stahn's statement that using the term "GLer" will have even more negative effects for us in society than using the term "pedophile." In contrast, I agree with you (and have argued this previously) that there is nothing "bad" about using the term "GLer" to describe ourselves, because as you said, a word that includes "love" in it and thus alludes to the aspects of our attraction base other than just the raw sexual connotation (as prominent as that is for us) is important to make clear to society. Though I was too harsh with Stahn in my argument with him the other day (yes, I can be a hot-headed prick sometimes when I lose my temper, which is why I asked 28 and Mes to step in and describe my points in place of me, since I knew I would end up getting out of hand if I continued the convesation myself and sure enough, like a fool, I did) I nevertheless stand behind much of what I said in essence, particularly that I disagree with the contention that we should avoid adopting terms that allude to or emphasize the aspects of our attraction base that exist in addition to, and just as prominently as, the sexual component because of the thought that society at large will not believe us due to the fact that the idea that pedophiles (and hebephiles) are distinguished by a sexual attraction to kids alone has been cemented into the general public's collective mindset by an irresponsible and sensationalistic media, along with a corrupt and status-quo pandering mental health industry. I think it's important to work hard to change people's minds, not pander to what they currently believe if what they now believe is patently wrong. And as I said in my other response to Stahn in this thread (after I had forced myself to cool down) entitled "Let's take it from the top," my activist field work over the years, especially that which I have conducted recently, has suggested exactly the opposite of Stahn's contention.

Many reasonably open-minded people in society who are not rabid antis (such as the MHP's I conferenced with in the most recent B4U-Act workshop and the highly liberal professor of the collge class I "came out" in a decade ago) are very interested in hearing about the non-sexual aspects of our attraction bases in addition to the sexual aspect, as the social sciences put as much emphasis on these other aspects as they do on the realm of human sexuality and the great diversity that can exists within that realm. Such open-minded individuals, which we often refer to as as "seekers" on this board (i.e., seekers of knowledge and the truth), or even individuals who are simply "on the fence" about this issue and would like to know more and make their own assessment of the issue rather than simply mindlessly trusting the media and the other insitutions of our society do their thinking for them, can easily find our attraction base in its entirety utterly fascinating from the standpoint of the paradigms they have been brought up to believe in by our modern society as opposed to simply finding adult attraction to minors as repulsive and stomach-churning. At the last B4U-Act workshop (and to some degree during that fateful presentation of mine in the college course on Censorship I took during the late 1990's) the MHPs there displayed an avid interest in all aspects of our attraction base and one of them in particular mentioned to me during the conference itself that she was totally fascinated and intrigued by the idea that a man my age could find a 14 year old girl to be wonderful in a general sense (as opposed to just finding her youthful appearance appealing on a purely sexual level). Her fascination included the idea that a man my age could see a young teen girl as someone who had a lot to offer a guy my age on all levels, and that a guy my age could be so enamored of the subculture that young teen girls participate in rather than looking down on it and considering it beneath me in a sneering fashion, or to consider their personality traits, interests, and subculture to be anything other than "annoying," as adults are supposed to view all aspects of teen sociology and psychology according to our culture.

Moreover, the common societal belief that our attraction base is based on nothing other than a raw sexual desire, and that we cannot possibly convince them otherwise, is NOT supported by basic common sense. If teliophiles with a natural orientation towards people in the same general age group could have an attraction to their fellow adults that was multi-faceted and to have heavy emotional, social, and even spiritual aspects to it (including the ability to fall in love with and form close emotional bonds with their fellow teliophiles) then why is it utterly impossible to believe that adults who are erotically oriented towards younger people cannot likewise have an attraction base that includes much more than a simple physical sexual desire, including the capacity to fall in love with kids, to sincerely care about them on an emotional level, the ability to find kids in our respective AoAs to be interesting individuals in a purely social sense that we enjoy spending time with outside of the bedroom, that the interests and general personality traits of our preferred partners may be very endearing to us and cause us to take great personal joy in simply spending platonic time with them as well as sexual, and to see terrific qualities in them that perhaps the average telio adult who views them in a much less respectful way may totally miss and never see themselves? I think it's entirely logical for us to argue that our attraction base is more than a mere sexual desire, and refusing to discuss this with society in our dialogue with them based on the contention that the typical Non will not believe us due to what the media constantly tells them about us is not a good strategic move on our parts IMO, and arguing the truth of the matter is not only more ethical due to its honesty, it's also completely backed up by logic and, as I said, simple common sense.

Hence, based on my personal experience, I do not believe that it's a good thing for us to avoid terms that make the aspects of our attraction base other than the sexual aspects clear, nor do I believe that it's unlikely, let alone outright impossible, for us to convince anyone in the general public that our attraction base is more than a simple desire to have sexual contact with minors in our respective AoAs and nothing more. It may take us some time to do so, but I think it's worth taking that approach in the long run.