About those anti-aviatoin newsgroups

Jay Honeck wrote:

There were lots of women at the summer camp I went to when I was a Boy
Scout. For some reason, no funny business ever happened, nor was anyone
worried about mixed-gender leadership. Beyond that, as has been pointed
out
multiple times already, you are more likely to find a heterosexual male
willing to prey on a teenage boy than you are to find a homosexual male
willing to do the same.

I would say the odds of a woman "preying" upon a teenage boy are an order of
magnitude smaller than the reverse example (i.e.: A man preying on a teenage
girl.). According to my wife (a Girl Scout leader, BTW), most women just
ain't wired "that way". (I'll have to take her word for it.)

Didn't hear about that teacher out west then (the one who had a kid by her
middle school student). We had a PE teacher here in VA (female) busted for
fooling around with the boys.



Men, on the other hand, I understand. It would be sheer folly to assume
that a man, left alone with a teenage girl, overnight, wouldn't be tempted.
Would most men ACT on this temptation? No, of course not. But I'd bet you
a hundred bucks that a higher percentage of men than women would... This is
the model to follow when considering leaving a gay man in charge of a Boy
Scout troop, IMHO.

Gee, so men are inherently evil! I knew it, I knew it, I knew it!!!!!! (Yes,
I am joking!)



Finally, I'm totally baffled by your statement that "you are more likely to
find a heterosexual male willing to prey on a teenage boy than you are to
find a homosexual male willing to do the same." In what way would a
HETEROsexual male be likely to prey upon a teenage boy?
-

Because pedophilia isn't necessarily related to gender. Male pedophiles who
prey on little boys might be straight when it comes to normal sex.

Margy

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:wIt0b.201425$YN5.140717@sccrnsc01...
I would say the odds of a woman "preying" upon a teenage boy are an order
of
magnitude smaller than the reverse example (i.e.: A man preying on a
teenage
girl.). According to my wife (a Girl Scout leader, BTW), most women just
ain't wired "that way". (I'll have to take her word for it.)

Why would you have to take her word for it? Does she know most women? How
is her position as a Girl Scout leader relevant?

As far as wiring goes, most men aren't either. Most people in our society
are able to resist temptations that fall outside of socially acceptable
behavior. Beyond that, there are ample examples of women preying on teenage
boys (Mary Kay Letourneau being a recent high-profile case).

Of course, our society being what it is, the boys don't usually think of
themselves as "prey". As enlightened as we'd like to think we are, boys are
still encouraged to have sex while girls are told they are sluts for even
thinking about it. But that doesn't diminish the fact that it is, indeed,
preying.

Men, on the other hand, I understand. It would be sheer folly to assume
that a man, left alone with a teenage girl, overnight, wouldn't be
tempted.

Left alone? What kind of arrangements do they have in your Boy Scout troop?
If male leaders and scouts are pairing up and sleeping alone together, I'd
submit that you have bigger problems than the question of homosexuals on
your hands.

Further, I'm a bit curious why you think you understand gay men. Do you
understand what it feels like to be attracted to another man? To be
attracted ONLY to other men? If you cannot understand that, what makes you
think you can understand how a gay man would feel around a teenage boy?

Would most men ACT on this temptation? No, of course not. But I'd bet
you
a hundred bucks that a higher percentage of men than women would...

I'd take that bet. After all, the victim is much more likely to be
compliant in the case of a woman trying to act on her temptation (due to our
screwed up sexual double-standard, in which teenage boys are encouraged to
have sex while girls are discouraged). In any case, the question is not one
of "how many", but rather of "whether". If you are concerned about the
potential for abuse, you need to look at the individual.

Furthermore, there are far more women involved in Boy Scouts than there
would ever be gay men; if you feel that gay men are a risk, simply because
they would be "tempted", then you should be arguing to ban all female
involvement with the Scouts as well.

Finally, I'm totally baffled by your statement that "you are more likely
to
find a heterosexual male willing to prey on a teenage boy than you are to
find a homosexual male willing to do the same." In what way would a
HETEROsexual male be likely to prey upon a teenage boy?

Pedophilia is not about gender preference. It's about preying on children.
Most pedophiles are heterosexual. Furthermore, just as all but a very few
heterosexuals are pedophiles, so are just a very few homosexuals pedophiles.

If you think that just because a man is heterosexual, you can be assured he
won't want to have sex with your boy, you are dangerously ill-informed.
Your bafflement reveals a hazardous gap in your awareness of sexual deviance
and its risk to you and your family. It's the same as if you had the belief
that putting a second engine on an airplane ensures that it couldn't be
crashed.

Pete

"Gary L. Drescher" wrote in message
news:x2b0b.148123$Oz4.40213@rwcrnsc54...

No, we're trying to remove an arbitrary restriction that has been in place
for millennia.


Why don't you remove the "restriction" on division by zero while you're at
it, or the "restriction" on perpetual motion machines. Those are just as
arbitrary.

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

Allowing gays to marry a member of the opposite sex is not any better than
not
allowing them to marry at all.


You say that as if gays were prohibited from marrying a member of the
opposite sex. They're not.



There are numerous benefits, all of them regarding legal standing, to
marriage as acknowledged by the government. It is those rights that gays
want and deserve.


They have them now.



Same-sex "marriages" happen all the time already.


Same-sex marriage does not exist.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:wIt0b.201425$YN5.140717@sccrnsc01...



Finally, I'm totally baffled by your statement that "you are more likely to
find a heterosexual male willing to prey on a teenage boy than you are to
find a homosexual male willing to do the same." In what way would a
HETEROsexual male be likely to prey upon a teenage boy?

Because pedophilia is neither a homo or heterosexual act. Sexual preference
between consenting adults is not a good predictor as to whether they would
molest a child or vice versa.

Because pedophilia isn't necessarily related to gender. Male pedophiles
who
prey on little boys might be straight when it comes to normal sex.

Really?

I would submit that any male who is sexually aroused by the same sex -- no
matter what the age -- is NOT "straight". What your are describing, IMHO,
is a bisexual male.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:kVv0b.201928$YN5.141200@sccrnsc01...
Because pedophilia isn't necessarily related to gender. Male pedophiles
who
prey on little boys might be straight when it comes to normal sex.

Really?

I would submit that any male who is sexually aroused by the same sex -- no
matter what the age -- is NOT "straight". What your are describing, IMHO,
is a bisexual male.
Someone who is sexually aroused by small girls isn't "straight" either.
What part of molesting small children is an unnatural act (even for homosexuals)
do you have a hard time wrapping your more-rigtht-wing-than-Ronald-Reagan brain
around?

Jay Honeck wrote:

Because pedophilia isn't necessarily related to gender. Male pedophiles
who
prey on little boys might be straight when it comes to normal sex.

Really?

I would submit that any male who is sexually aroused by the same sex -- no
matter what the age -- is NOT "straight". What your are describing, IMHO,
is a bisexual male.


The pedophile is attracted to kids. I think to label a male as gay or bi they
need to be attracted to adult males.

Margy

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:bUp0b.200383$Ho3.26912@sccrnsc03...
....snip...

No, Peter, this has nothing to do with whether homosexuality is a
lifestyle
"choice" or not. (I personally don't believe anyone would choose such a
difficult path for themselves.)

This has EVERYTHING to do with the fact that skin color or religious
preference is patently and demonstrably harmless, while sexual attraction
is
potentially and demonstrably harmful -- especially in groups of pre-teen
boys (and girls).


Actually there is nothing demonstrably harmful in sexual attraction either.
Attraction, arousal, and even orgasms do not in and of themselves harm the
persons experiencing them, regardless of the source of the stimulation. I
suspect that the real reason for the sometimes violent opposition to
homosexual Scout leaders, teachers, clergy, etc is not a fear of sexual
assault but rather the fear that young people will be exposed to positive
role models who happen to be gay, thus reinforcing the idea that it's no big
deal whether one's sexual partners of the same or opposite genders. Assume
that they are not having sex with the kids in the group, what difference
could the kids knowing the leader has a sex life with a member of the
opposite sex or with a member of the same sex matter? I think the debate
between whether homosexuality is a lifestyle choice or somehow biologically
determined is moot, except from an academic bio/psychological research
viewpoint, as the entire debate is based on the notion that it should
somehow MATTER who someone has their orgasms with. If everyone involved is
consenting, what possible difference could it make? As a parent, I could
care less if my daughter turns out straight, gay, or bisexual. All that
matters is that she is happy.

What part of molesting small children is an unnatural act (even for
homosexuals)
do you have a hard time wrapping your more-rigtht-wing-than-Ronald-Reagan
brain
around?

Both straight and gay pedophiles are repugnant, and my statement stands.

But an adult male that is attracted to male children is just double-trouble.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"