THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Lane3 who wrote (1376)	3/5/2002 6:36:12 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (2) of 21057

But it walks like a duck. "...perceived to be heterosexual because they are in a sexual relationship with the female relative and are therefore perceived to be safe around boys, are not safe at all." I agree that this would be a fair conclusion to draw if the article was clearly focusing our attention in that direction. The article is used primarily to take the spot light off of gay men, and dispell any idea that men who like boys are gay. It appears that this was the intent of the study from the beginning. You are right we know little esle about the men except that they were bedding the mother. They may have been involved in other relationships or simply acting as predators tend to act according to a heinous plan. They may have been drug abusers, mass murderers, thieves, or pimps. We don't know because the article focuses us only on how they are involved in a "heterosexual" relationship with the mom. The article was used here to imply that it is more likely for a "heterosexual" man to molest young boys than any one else. If we are all willing to take a second look at what the article/research actually reveals, I am on board. The implied meaning was far different (by design) when it was posted.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next