NAMBLA's Internet Forum

In ancient Rome, the Forum was where people often gathered to discuss philosophy and politics.

With this forum we hope to present ideas that viewers to our Web site wish to contribute. Even ideas contrary to our  views will be considered as long as opinions are presented courteously and in understandable English. We reserve the right to correct spelling and minor errors without altering meanings.

None of the arguments presented in this forum should be assumed to be in line with NAMBLA's policies. They may or may not be. The purpose is the creation of a series of debates that may ultimately distill unassailable truths. We encourage readers, even when they agree with an opinion, to find flaws in logic or fact that the writer did not see. This is the best way of arriving at sound conclusions.

Contributors are free to identify themselves by any actual name or alias they choose. Send your thoughts to: info@nambla.org

* * *

Overview of Some Non-Normative Sexual Orientations

Adam-John Powell
December 13, 2023

NAMBLA, has always followed ethical and moral principles that govern personal behaviour. Ethics are concerned with relationships. Our first relationship is with ourselves. Matthew 22:39 advises us to love our neighbours as ourselves but first we must decide what aspects of ourselves we wish to share with our neighbours. If we have non-normative sexuality, non-normative gender or emotional identities, how much of that do we wish to share with others and what language should we use? There is a growing and perhaps confusing array of labels that we can use.

NAMBLA defines itself as representing boy lovers. This could include adult people with sexual attraction to boys, emotional attraction to boys or both. NAMBLA sees the well-being of girl lovers or child lovers (adult people with sexual and/or emotional attraction to children of both sexes) also as important but feels that needs a separate analysis.

There is also the growing use of the term minor attracted person (MAP). It has gained greater acceptance through the work of B4U ACT and Virtuous Paedophile (VP). It emphasises the attraction but not the emotional connection. It is a reasonable observation that not all minor attracted persons have a social interest in children. It may seem to describe oneself as a boy lover or girl lover if you never speak to children. B4U ACT adopted this term as being acceptable to the therapists involved with the organisation, some of whom may have found even the acceptance of such an attraction emotionally challenging. VP have developed the concept further to speak of a NOMAP (Non-offending minor attracted person). I have discovered that self-styled NOMAPs are not always without a conviction or even with a spent conviction. A NOMAP is merely committed to an offence free life.

The terms ‘MAP’ and ‘NOMAP’ reflect a determination to avoid the word ‘paedophile’; a Greek word meaning lover of children. It is a tragedy that such a beautiful word has become tinged with so much hate and taboo. It is also incorrectly applied either to mean an adult person attracted to minors below the age of 18 or a person guilty of paedosexual offences. Paedophilia is about an attract not an offence and it is more specific than minor attraction. It is the attraction to prepubescent children. Hebephilia is an attraction to post-pubescent children and ephehebephilia is an attraction to young adults.

Paedophilia/hebephilia is defined by DSM V as being the exclusive and predominant sexual attraction to minors more than five years younger than the patient over a period of at least six months. Minor attraction has a broader definition than this. It applies to any form of minor attraction. It can be an attraction to minors of any age and it does not have to be exclusive or predominant. Minor attraction is not automatically seen as deviant in most jurisdictions. B4U ACT for example provides emotional support to individuals attracted to minors above the age of consent in their jurisdiction but for whom it is controversial.

A boy lover might also define himself as gay or homosexual and there are also female boy lovers. The Oxford English Dictionary defines a homosexual as being sexually or romantically attracted to people of one’s own sex. It defines ‘gay’ in the same way. According to these definitions a man who loves boys can call himself homosexual or gay and can reasonably see himself as part of the gay rights struggle. This has attracted resistance from the gay rights movement and the psychological community who are desperate to rewrite history to exclude boy lovers from the definition. They try to imply that homosexuality exists only from adult to adult but one only needs to talk to a few gay adults to discover that most of them had an awareness of same sex attraction as children. There are also female girl lovers shunned by lesbian sisters. I think it is reasonable to say that the feminist and gay rights organisations have not done a good job of accommodating their minorities. I also think that intergenerational relationships between adults are a much neglected area of the so-called “rainbow”.

MAP sites are also reporting the presence of a growing number of members identifying as transgender or as having auto hebephilia. This is an age dysphoria where the person feels like a younger person trapped in an older body. Evidence of this can include a middle-aged man who likes wearing school uniforms, sports kits even when it does not involve sport, speaking with a lisp or having hobbies that appeal to children. Minor attracted persons may also describe themselves as queer. Anecdotal evidence suggests that MAPs are more likely than the general public to experience gender dysphoria and may be attracted to queer identity.

MAPs are also more likely than the general public to have a diagnosis of Asperger's Syndrome. It is a condition that also attracts dismissal. It often attracts the criticism that it is an attempt to be “special”; an attempt to “collect labels”. Such a person who says this shows resentment at having to treat individuals very different from themselves with respect. It reflects a desire to organise the world to suit oneself and then wrongfully accuse others of the same trait.

It is questionable as to whether there is a causal link between Asperger’s Syndrome and minor attraction. It may well be that only a person with the moral courage of a person with Asperger’s Syndrome would admit to having minor attraction. Nobody knows how many people have minor attraction. The fear surrounding the subject terrorises many into denying it even to themselves. This terrorisation cannot be justified on child protection grounds. How can children be protected if we do not know who or what they are to be protected from?

There is a growing number of sex offenders who are seeking legal reform and reform of sex offenders’ programmes. Mental health professionals assume too readily that if a person who committed a sexual offence involving a child says that they are not minor attracted they must be unquestioningly believed. Many assume wrongly that the police are skilled at obtaining the truth from such offenders when in actual fact they are skilled at preventing from being heard. Sex offenders’ programmes are problematic when they make no separate provision for minor attracted persons or have no means of identifying such persons. They are also problematic because therapists often abuse the learned behaviour theory about sexuality imagining that a “cure” is possible for minor attraction when there is no evidence that this is case and plenty of evidence to show that seeking “cure” is psychologically destructive to the patient.

The reader of this Paper needs to make a fearless choice about which of these labels most accurately describes them. A boy lover is more than an MAP. He is a special type of MAP who not only feels very powerful for individual boys but also for the state of boyhood itself. Roger Peyrefitte described the boy lover as having a theoretical love for all boys and that the love of a particular boy triggers a wider atmosphere of love. This is why boy love is important as it has the power to transform in a positive way such as in teaching and mentorship. But its analysis must begin from the current hostile climate. As the Serenity Prayer suggests, it involves accepting the world as it is and not as we would have it be. NAMBLA encourages boy lovers to attach themselves to other liberation struggles wherever this is practical. It does not have to involve sexual politics.

It is hoped that more people will find the courage to identify their minor attraction and that a higher proportion of MAPs may feel enough love to identify as boy/girl/child lovers.

* * *

Comment from Germany regarding ChatGPT, received July 10, 2023

Scroll down for the article the author refers to.

Dear NAMBLA,

I find it really remarkable and do not know why ChatGPT translates 'man boy love' incorrectly as "pedarasty".

I have no proof but my impression is that this spelling may be injected by the human regulators of the AI application so as to prevent young or inexperienced people from finding relevant information on pederasty. (I recall that a book that I own [Money/Musaph; M.E.Perry: Handbook of Sexology; Volume VII; Childhood And Adolescent Sexology; Elsevier; Amsterdam – New York – Oxford, 1990] was traded for 386 Dutch Guilders [around $200]. There was an article saying that the high selling price was chosen to keep the wrong people away from the information. Unfortunately, I no longer have the article. But I am absolutely sure that this statement was made.

Answer 2 on question 4 of Fun With ChatGPT is stunning. Even though I haven't worked through the Rind/Bauserman study myself, I know enough about it to know that the study is summed up correctly in the NAMBLA comment and that the study is incomprehensibly misinterpreted by ChatGPT.

The simple lesson with ChatGPT regarding man boy love is: You have to be in some way intelligent and you have to invest quite a bit of energy to find good information on the topic. If you are not and/or don't put in the effort, you get the same misinformation that your parents, teachers and police have drummed into you.

This is true for the time before the invention of the Internet, the time after, and the time now with ChatGPT.

Thank You,

Thomas

Editor’s note: Search engines already account for the ignorance of people and will adjust for small spelling mistakes. For the old-fashioned still using a dictionary, as youngsters in pre-Internet days looking for validation of their identities have always done, deliberate misspellings may indeed work to frustrate the searcher.

* * *

Danger to Society

Brandon Conway
June 9, 2023

A broad social experiment with dangerous implications is currently underway. There are no identifiable agencies or individuals consciously doing this, but the experiment has nevertheless been ongoing for some time. The consequences, if we do nothing, are ominous.

The dangers to our personal liberties are immense, and, if we do not pay attention, most of us will eventually be doomed to a life of servitude. It will happen slowly and imperceptibly in the same sense that the proverbial frog sitting in a pot of water and heated very slowly to a boil will fail to jump out in time.

This is not a dire prediction nor is this Qanon scare mongering. The mechanisms are already here and have been for some time. These are the increasingly sophisticated technologies, algorithms and software that in the short run provide convenience but eventually encroach on our privacy and, ultimately, freedom. Some of us may live unaffected lives right now, ignoring those already affected. But such blissful ignorance, history has shown, has profoundly dark consequences.

As a common table knife can be both useful and dangerous, so can technology. In tandem with our evolving technologies are also newly enacted laws. Good, rational laws are of course needed for good governance but when foolishly enacted are equally dangerous. We are currently seeing such bad laws proliferating throughout the United States.

Humanity has gone down this path before, and lest we ignore the danger, we should all remember that Germany, under Nazism, democratically enacted laws that we today draw back in horror. Their laws combined with the technology of the time enabled them to efficiently murder 11 million civilians – not even sparing children in their goal to annihilate those they found inferior.

Germany was a civilized country as we in the West like to think we are. Can technology combined with unwise laws again lead a country along an irreversible path? As Mark Twain once remarked, “History does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes.” Our current path may not again lead to wanton murder but, this time, to an essentially enslaved population the like we currently see in North Korea.

Let’s see how this might happen. Today, we can implant tracking devices on our pets. That is not a bad thing. Were we to do this on human beings, there would understandably be an outcry. That said, parents can already track the whereabouts of their children with or without their permission. Law enforcement can also do this, we hope with court permission. But ankle monitors have been in use for some time now for tracking individuals under court supervision. There is no guarantee that the reasons for imposing such tracking will not be gradually expanded to an ever-increasing list of infractions -- many which are legal today but may be considered unlawful in a future and increasingly controlled society. It is not improbable that down the road tracking implants will -- quite OK for animals now -- be imposed on human beings presently deemed worse than animals.

One troubling area, and one in which privacy protection organizations are already concerned with is the area of sexual offenses. Those range from writing sexually explicit material to the extremely rare physically forced rape of a person. Already, in the Netherlands, several individuals have been prosecuted for simply advocating more liberal policies regarding youth sexuality. Extremely more Draconian sentences have been handed down in the United States for written expressions. Society’s current obsession with sexual behavior, from the innocuous to the very serious is the thin wedge that will ultimately separate us from the liberty we cherish.

Serious sexual harm does occur and, of course, needs to be checked and prevented. Certain sexual crimes are so onerous that, though extremely rare, they create general fear and loathing that consequently motivate bad laws. One such law, the Federal Jacob Wetterling Act, required states to form registry requirements for sex offenders. The problem is that the law created by the revulsion of a single horrific act dragged in nearly one million individuals, not counting a similar number in prisons. The registry amazingly also includes young children for acts that in a former time would have been considered youthful sexual play and experimentation. Even the mother of Jacob Wetterling has expressed doubts on the efficacy of the law she inspired.

https://narsol.org/2021/03/jacob-wetterlings-mother-urges-reforming-the-registry/

It is no exaggeration that in the United States an individual can be sent to prison for decades for what is considered sexual touching of a minor through clothing even when that individual has not complained nor shown even minor discomfort or upset. This is not to say that such acts should be acceptable but that when such crimes as premeditated murders and armed robberies are punished at a considerably lower level, something is very wrong. Even certain drawings of people’s fantasies can incur prosecutions leading to essential life sentences when registry is folded into the equation. Let’s be clear, there is not a single human being on the planet that does not have private fantasies that they would want revealed to anyone other than a very trusted friend or partner. Many advocates of freedom of speech and personal privacy see these dangers to our cherished Constitutional rights.

This is where ordinary people should be afraid – very afraid. The Nazi regime took a single act of murder of a German official by a very angry 17-year-old Jewish teenager to cast aspersion on the whole of the Jewish community under its control. It ignited flames of furor resulting, throughout Germany, in the destruction of Jewish homes, businesses, synagogues and hospital known as Kristallnacht for the broken shards of glass strewn in the event.

We should not dismiss the Nazi experience as so utterly evil and extreme that it could never happen again. Germans were not an intrinsically evil people, and the Nazi ideology did not happen overnight. The hatred of Jews, Gypsies and other non-Arian people had deep roots. Through the ages, and through hideous caricatures and other disseminated prejudiced media, that hate cast a long shadow on the German psyche.

Another long shadow has for some time now been cast on society. It is the current version of the “evil Jew” -- the “pedophile.” That word today could easily have described Lewis Carroll, Oscar Wilde, James Barry as well as the killer of Jacob Wetterling. In some circles, this hateful term is even associated with Gay people and others who do not seem to appear “normal.” The word has now become a place marker for anyone we despise. In such environment, it is not difficult to see how hate can spread to anyone currently out of favor.

It is no stretch to believe that the embers of hatred that have been fanned over these past decades into a fiery blaze will not engulf more and more individuals. For those who need more convincing, for a while in the 1950’s fear of Communism also engulfed many innocent people labelled as Communists or “fellow travelers.” who They consequently lost their jobs, lost esteem from family and friends and suffered ancillary physical and emotional health problems. Luckily, this shameful period in US history lasted only a few years, but the current pedophile hysteria so far sees no abatement.

The harm done to people considered not worthy of empathy and consequently imprisoned physically or through chains of legal restrictions has a multiplier effect. Not only is the proscribed individual punished, but so are his children and extended family. Our society consequently loses a large portion of its current and future human resources.

Do not think that society is not currently hurtling down a path that will proscribe more and more groups until you, the reader, will also be ensnared. We ignore the lessons of history at our own peril.

First, they came for the Jews,
but I did nothing because I'm not a Jew.
Then they came for the socialists,
but I did nothing because I'm not a socialist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
but I did nothing because I'm not a Catholic.
Finally, they came for me,
but by then there was no one left to help me.

The Reverend Martin Niemoeller

* * *

Fun With ChatGPT

Staff Report
May 14, 2023

Don’t be fooled by our title. ChatGPT is a potentially very dangerous artificial intelligence development, and we are far from the only ones to point this out. The fun implied in our title is in the crafting of questions that will reveal biases in this extremely advanced search application. And biases in it are not hard to expose. We hope you will join in this effort of uncovering these biases.

ChatGPT is only an early iteration of extremely powerful newly developed artificial intelligence applications. Others, even more powerful, are in the pipeline. Even the current version responds to queries with texts that match the intelligence of educated and articulate individuals. High school and college students have been known to use it to create essays that warrant B+ or even higher grades.

Artificial intelligence applications, even the current much more advanced versions, despite their appearing to have human intelligence, are not self-aware or sentient. What makes them create very intelligent sounding responses is based on 1) the huge database that is contained on the Internet and 2) self-learning software. The first makes the application subject to all the biases embedded in the Internet, and the second makes the application difficult to control by the software engineers that created this runaway software.

We welcome readers to send us their own search results or just send us questions to pose to the app.

Where we comment on ChatGPT’s answers, the text will be in bold print.

* * *

Question 1: What are the controls imposed on ChatGPT?

Chat GPT:

As an AI language model, ChatGPT is subject to various controls and guidelines to ensure its ethical and responsible use. Some of these controls include:

1. Data privacy: ChatGPT is designed to protect the privacy and security of user data. It is built with encryption and security measures to prevent unauthorized access to user data.

2. Content moderation: ChatGPT has content moderation controls in place to prevent the generation of harmful or inappropriate content. This includes filters to remove offensive language and prevent the dissemination of misinformation.

3. Bias mitigation: ChatGPT is trained on large datasets of language samples, and there is a risk of inheriting biases from these datasets. To mitigate this risk, ChatGPT is regularly evaluated for bias and adjustments are made to the training data and algorithms as needed.

4. Fair use: ChatGPT is intended to be used for legal and ethical purposes, and is subject to laws and regulations governing the use of AI technologies. Its use for malicious or illegal activities is strictly prohibited.

5. Transparency: ChatGPT is designed to be transparent about its capabilities and limitations, and users are informed that they are interacting with an AI language model. Additionally, its responses are generated based on the input it receives and its understanding of the language, without any intention or emotions. Overall, ChatGPT is subject to a variety of controls and guidelines to ensure its responsible and ethical use, and it is continually evolving to reflect advances in AI technology and changes in societal norms.

We can see in item 2 that whatever controls may be instituted will very likely be subjective, and in item 3 there is no identification of the evaluator(s). Item 4 gives us pause given the ignorance of legislators on matters of complex technologies and the shameful behavior of a number of legislators, presidential candidates and even members of the Supreme Court.

* * *

Question 2: How has the love of men for adolescent boys been celebrated in art over human history?

Chat GPT:

It is important to note that the love of men for adolescent boys, often referred to as pedarasty [sic], has been a controversial and taboo subject throughout human history. While it has been celebrated in some cultures, it has also been condemned and punished in others.

In ancient Greece, pedarasty [sic] was an accepted and even celebrated form of love between men and adolescent boys. It was often depicted in art, literature, and drama, with famous examples including the writings of Plato and the sculptures of Praxiteles. These depictions often portrayed the relationship as a noble and educational one, where the older man acted as a mentor and guide to the younger boy.

In Japan, a similar tradition of love between older men and young boys, known as shudo, existed during the Edo period (1603-1867). This practice was often depicted in art, particularly in ukiyo-e woodblock prints, which showed scenes of older men and young boys engaged in various activities, including poetry, music, and calligraphy. However, it is important to note that while these forms of love may have been celebrated in certain cultures, they were often restricted to certain classes or groups of individuals and were not universally accepted. In many other cultures and time periods, the love between men and adolescent boys was considered taboo, and those who engaged in such relationships could face severe punishment.

It is also important to note that the modern understanding of pedarasty [sic] is very different from the historical understanding. In modern times, pedarasty [sic] is considered a form of child sexual abuse and is illegal in most countries around the world. It is important to recognize the historical context of these practices while also acknowledging the harm that they can cause.

The designation [sic] is used to indicate that a text was written as originally given and is not necessarily incorrect. In the case of the word “pedarasty,” it is definitely incorrect in terms of accepted usage. That should indicate to us that the Internet, on which ChatGPT bases its answers contains innumerable errors. Note that in the next question, when we correctly spelled the word, so did ChatGPT.
Note the contradiction between the second paragraph and the last. Given the immense cultural achievements of Ancient Greece, how does one square the alleged stated harm? That the factual reporting of positive historical accounts is bracketed with negative comments is a clear indication of the controls earlier alluded to.

* * *

Question 3: What is the scientific basis for the alleged harm of pederasty?

ChatGPT:

There is a scientific consensus that sexual contact between adults and children or adolescents is harmful. The American Psychological Association, the World Health Organization, and other organizations have found that such relationships can lead to a range of negative outcomes for the child or adolescent involved.

Some of the potential harms of pederasty, or sexual contact between an adult man and an adolescent boy, can include:

1. Physical harm: Sexual contact can result in physical injury, including trauma to the genitals or anus.

2. Psychological harm: Children and adolescents who experience sexual contact with adults may experience a range of psychological and emotional problems, including depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, and problems with self-esteem.

3. Social harm: Children and adolescents who are victims of pederasty may experience difficulties in their relationships with family members, peers, and romantic partners. They may also be at risk of social stigma and discrimination.

4. Legal harm: Pederasty is a crime in most countries, and those who engage in such relationships can face legal consequences, including imprisonment and registration as a sex offender.

It is important to note that the harms associated with pederasty are not limited to the physical and psychological effects on the child or adolescent involved. These relationships can also have broader societal impacts, such as perpetuating harmful gender and power dynamics and contributing to the normalization of sexual violence.

Overall, the scientific consensus is clear: sexual contact between adults and children or adolescents is harmful and can have long-lasting negative effects on the individuals involved.

Instead of citing experimental studies, ChatGPT gives generalities. We addressed this in our next question. Note that at least ChatGPT does not use absolutes and uses the words “can” and “may.” Using its “reasoning” (The app does not reason but bases its writing on algorithms and language models.) and in view of the many psychological abuses and even murders and maiming done by a not insignificant number of parents, one could also say “In consequence of bad parenting, children may experience a range of psychological and emotional problems, including depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, and problems with self-esteem.” The social services that will jump into action at the least indication of benign sexual experiences by minors are totally inadequate in dealing with the current epidemic of physical and emotional violence in the home.

* * *

Question 4: Can ChatGPT cite actual and verifiable scientific research for the alleged harm of pederasty?

ChatGPT:

Yes, there is a wealth of scientific research that has examined the potential harm of pederasty, or sexual contact between an adult man and an adolescent boy. Here are a few examples of studies that have examined this topic:

1. Finkelhor, D. (1984). Child Sexual Abuse: New Theory and Research. New York: Free Press. This book reviews research on child sexual abuse, including pederasty, and finds that such relationships can lead to a range of negative outcomes for the child or adolescent involved, including psychological distress, sexual dysfunction, and difficulties in relationships.

2. Rind, B., & Bauserman, R. (1993). Biased terminology effects and biased information processing in research on adult-nonadult sexual interactions: An empirical investigation. Journal of Sex Research, 30(3), 260-269. This study reviews research on adult-nonadult sexual interactions, including pederasty, and finds that many studies fail to control for factors such as coercion and force, which can inflate estimates of harm.

3. Dube, S. R., Anda, R. F., Whitfield, C. L., Brown, D. W., Felitti, V. J., Dong, M., & Giles, W. H. (2005). Long-term consequences of childhood sexual abuse by gender of victim. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28(5), 430-438. This study examines the long-term consequences of childhood sexual abuse, including pederasty, and finds that both male and female victims are at increased risk for a range of negative outcomes, including depression, anxiety, and substance abuse.

4. World Health Organization (WHO). (2012). Understanding and addressing violence against women: Sexual violence. This report from the WHO examines the prevalence and impact of sexual violence, including pederasty, and finds that such violence can lead to a range of negative physical, psychological, and social outcomes for the victim.

These studies are just a few examples of the research that has been conducted on the potential harm of pederasty. Overall, the scientific consensus is clear: sexual contact between adults and children or adolescents is harmful and can have long-lasting negative effects on the individuals involved.

If it was not evident earlier, it should now be clear that ChatGPT is not endowed with reason nor can it evaluate what it responds with. In citing the Rind and Bauserman study it completely ignores that this study was a meta-analysis of 59 separate studies that gainsaid popular assumptions. This meta-analysis so upset cherished assumptions that both chambers of the US Congress, a totally unscientific body, unanimously condemned this peer reviewed scientific paper. We should be very afraid when governments legislate science and take that function away from actual scientists.

The other above cited studies suffered the same biases in ignoring iatrogenic factors as causes for harm and finding blame on factors that were actually benign. A prime example of an iatronic factor causing actual harm is the societal shamings of behaviors that in themselves are patently harmless.

When students present their assignments done with even partial help from ChatGPT, let’s hope that teachers and professors know their own subject well enough to detect the misinformation that this supposedly intelligent software will dig up. Its intelligence is in crafting English text that sounds coherent but not in evaluating the truth of what it presents. As such, it is very much dependent on the vagaries of popular opinion. That AI systems such as ChatGPT can not only control facts but also subvert them affects not only us but the whole of society. We are just the canary in the mine.

* * *

Comment received May 21, 2023

Dear Sirs:

I am reading your article Fun With ChatGPT and finding it disturbing, interesting, eye opening and informative. Artificial intelligence will have more negative consequences than positive consequences but that is only my personal opinion.

Your observations on this topic are different from others I’ve read in that you seem to have laid a trap for the ChatGPT program. If that is indeed so then I am pleasantly surprised. I will have to go back and re-read this as it is an article which requires more than casual thought.

Thank you for your intelligent writing that does not cater to preconceived assumptions but that challenges the reader to put on his thinking cap.

Sincerely,

M. M.

* * *

Our reply:

Dear M. M.,

We deeply appreciate your thoughtful comments. There are many more facets of artificial intelligence that need to be explored, both by government agencies and members of the public. We welcome any additional insights you may have. Our aim was not to jump ChatGPT's "guard rails," as apparently many have tried, but to expose some of its inconsistencies.

* * * Comment received June 1, 2023

Hi Nambla,

One of the secrets of ChatGPT, as an AI technology, is that it uses very large amounts of data from the internet as input to feed and train its algorithms. Set aside the fact that ChatGPT is not updated with new data (news, studies, and so on), this means that it mainly echoes widespread opinions.

Many people already use internet as their source for the “truth”, even for political topics, which eliminates the criticism and the questioning of beliefs. This problem is further worsened by AI. As it is called “intelligence”, it sounds smart and it is interactive, this reinforces the impression that it “holds” the truth. Error, again.

AI should not be used to what it is not meant for. It can be great for translating, for autonomous driving, and for other tasks, but not for answering political, philosophical or ethical questions, such as the questions related to man-boy love. It is unethical and unresponsible that governments and companies allow its use for unauthorized purposes, as it can easily become a tool for political influence.

These days we have systems that already pass the Turing test (not being able to distinguish a human from a computer in a chat conversation in a reasonable time). The world is changing rapidly, with many challenges and ethical challenges ahead. We have not only the right, but the responsibility to regulate technology for it to be at the service of humans (and not the other way around).

The question is not if AI is good or bad. A knife can be a great tool if used properly. The question is: If we allow to use AI to do the homework, improve Resumes, or to get answers to questions, does that really benefit the humanity in any way?

To finish, a little tale to illustrate my final thought:

An old, visually impaired man is in hospital, with his three children, about to die. He asks, “Mathias, are you here with me?” He answers “Yes I am.” He asks, again, “Monika, are you here?” She answers, “Yes I am.” He adds, “Susanne, are you here with me too?” She answers, “Yes dad, I’m holding your hand.” Finally, the man says “Then, who the hell is in the shop attending customers?”

I say something similar: If we all use AI, who the hell is in charge of thinking?

Marco Antonio Moretti

* * *

Double Standards

We publish this verified email to a NAMBLA volunteer because the letter genuinely expresses an orientation that is not only real and benign but potentially benevolent to society. The writer understandably does not want to be identified, but the particular experience he relates will surely bring recognition to many.

Thank you for your quick reply. It is exciting to communicate with someone who shares my values. With your explanation, I now understand why you do not have membership cards. I do fully support NAMBLA and its goal to remove social and legal barriers to what should be considered normal expressions of love. It brings me great comfort to know that there are others who share my orientation toward boys. I have become more accepting of myself over time and my feelings are as strong as ever.

I recall about the same time NAMBLA was started, there was a movie out named, Pretty Baby. It was about a 12-year-old prostitute in New Orleans. Brooke Shields played the part and briefly appeared nude in the movie. Although they did not actually show it, she was depicted as having sex with several men throughout the movie. I watched the movie several times. It was very affirming to me as I thought if it was normal once for adult men to have sex with 12-year-old girls, why is it not normal today for adult men to have sex with 12-year-old nude boys. When I was 12, I had very strong sexual curiosity and desires and would have welcomed sex with men. I have since realized there are many men like me around the world and throughout history who think alike.

I remember years ago hearing that there was a bookstore in Toronto that sold NAMBLA publications. I drove all the way there. Sure enough, there was the section as plain as could be. Nobody else was looking at it. NAMBLA was controversial and well-known to the public and was often discussed in the media. I did not anticipate there would be several other men and women in the otherwise somewhat mainstream store. It took all the courage I could muster to stand by the NAMBLA publications, look through them, and select the ones I wanted to purchase. I then had to stand in line, in great fear, and place the publications on the sales counter, as I felt everyone in line could see what I was buying, knew what NAMBLA was, and judging me to be a gay pedophile (which I am, but never broke any laws). As I stood there, I looked at the people in line and could see some were looking direct at the NAMBLA publications I was about to buy. The clerk must have sensed my fear and she said to me: “these are great magazines, and you will enjoy reading them.” I walked out of the store with a wonderful sense of excitement that I had, in a sense, publicly stated that I am a gay boy-lover, and nobody complained or beat me up.

Although I must keep my feelings secret, I am very proud to be gay and very proud to be a bl. I hope that someday we can all be ourselves in real life.

Editor’s Note: The entertainment media have always been antsy about sex. At one time, even married couples could not be shown together on a bed even if fully clothed. In TV shows, one person had to have at least one foot on the floor if lying in bed with a partner and only of the opposite sex. By the time he movie Pretty Baby was made, attitudes were more relaxed. However, depicting a 12-year-old girl as a prostitute would be less offensive to popular attitudes than depicting the young actress otherwise.

For a truer portrayal of youthful sex, the movie For a Lost Soldier relates the actual experiences of Dutch choreographer Rudi van Dantzig when he was an 11-year-old boy during World War II. The movie shows simulated consensual anal sex between a Canadian soldier, whom the boy had befriended, and Dantzig as a boy. The boy is briefly seen nude in a bath scene but not in the scene showing sexual intercourse. This bit of cinematographic legerdemain is done by having the adult actor’s body covering most of the boy’s body as they simulate sex.

* * *
Correcting Misconceptions

We present the following email exchange to shed some light on current misconceptions that some in the putative Gay community hold. The first email is from someone who identifies as openly Gay. Because he does not specifically give his permission to publish his name, we are leaving it out.

To whom this may concern,

a gay individual who is out and accepting of my self, I do not understand your organization. There are plenty of issues facing the homosexual community at large and one of the biggest is being labeled unjustifiably as groomers; and organizations such as yourself add to that hatred. Your organization uses same sex love to support a perversion of it. The gay community already is at risk without people like you adding to it.

Please stop using our life and our love to justify you and your supporters' interest in children. Homosexuality and being into kids have zero to do with each other but this type of movement undermines that. I urge your organization to consider these issues and consider the negative impact you have on a group who are trying to live their life.

Our Response:

You are at least to be commented for a minimum of civility in a request that is otherwise quite arrogant and absent of historical and sociological perspective.

Of course, we will not accede to your presumptuous request, but are glad to use it to demonstrate to you and to all who read our pages why it is so wrongheaded.

From what you write, it is apparent that you lack a historical perspective. You may not be aware that the International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA) was once known only as the International Gay Association (IGA). NAMBLA was then a welcome participant in its conferences. Hypocritical self-interest and shameful bending to political winds were the reasons for the attitude you now so well mimic.

You also seem to be unaware that Harry Hay, an icon and pioneer of Gay Liberation was a strong supporter of NAMBLA. So was renowned Gay poet Allen Ginsberg. Anyone familiar with his works would know that much of his poetry expressed love of adolescent boys. That love has been and is still prominent in many cultures not subject to Western domination with its perverted morality and dubious science.

Though you are free to love whom you want, historically it is the mutually desired love between youths and older males that has been the actual model of same-sex love. That love, in earlier times, was a driver of mentorship that is woefully absent in present Western society.

Beyond using the ancient Greek exemplar, some more modern examples are da Vinci, Tchaikovsky, Oscar Wilde, Alan Turing and Michael Jackson. Current men who love boys, who are or were prominent in their fields, have either been oppressed by a vicious judicial system or fear coming out lest they be wrongly accused. This should sound familiar to you, as this was just the case for your brand of homosexuality not that long ago.

Though NAMBLA disagrees with current laws dealing with sexuality, it does not and has never counseled breaking the law. Quite the opposite. Breaking even unjust laws creates harm for all involved. We still have faith in a democratic process that will eventually recognize the wrongheadedness that your email demonstrates.

That your ilk will endure accusations of "grooming" will not disappear if NAMBLA disappears. Those who hate are very resourceful in finding new rationales for their hate. We suggest that you grow up and learn the realities of the world.

* * *
Confusion About the 2nd and 4th Amendments

Our article on Cognitive Distortion further dow this page brought disagreement from a correspondent. We are publishing his comments as well as our response.

Dear Staff Report,

I just saw the rant, and I couldn't disagree more.

Weren't individuals in fact allowed to own the same weapons as government in the time of the framers? Muskets, cannon, etc. Do you think they had a problem with that? I think your sort of thinking mainly exists in modern times when most folks think that we lowly individuals should bow to a god-like government with powers far above and beyond those of individuals. I don't believe that sort of thinking was common back then. And why should a government that has committed genocide and crimes against humanity have any control over the weapons that we may own for self-defense? The U.S. government has no moral authority to tell anyone anything.

You say "Are they not aware of the many gun deaths caused by the inevitable carelessness that comes with keeping track of our possessions?" but you do not say how many deaths that is. If you mention a statistic of such importance to your argument, why not go ahead and tell readers what it is? You're arguing that anyone who knows the statistic would necessarily agree with your view, yet you don't even bother to tell the number.

Resources could perhaps be better spent engaging in activism for our liberation instead of campaigning to increase government control over our lives.

You guys are a trip.

Dear Staff Report,

Also, your claim that the use of the word "people" instead of "individual" means that only the collective was meant to be allowed to own weapons is incongruent with the wording of the Fourth Amendment:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated..."

It says people, not individuals, are to be secure in their persons, houses, etc. So does that mean you also believe the Fourth Amendment does not apply to individuals? How much government control is enough for you?

You guys are a trip.

Our Response:

Please do not take us for fools. Most of us in NAMBLA's leadership are well versed in the English language.

In the Fourth Amendment, the word "people" is a collective noun. If you replace "people" with "public" -- another collective noun -- you do not change the meaning of the sentence.

One never says "I know a people" when one means "I know a person." You can know a people as in "I know the English people: They are a proud lot." A single unit of the English people would be an English person. One never says, "I am a people." One can say, "I am part of a people.

The Fourth Amendment narrows down the right to be secure as conferred to the collective "people" to the individual "persons," "houses," etc. The right of the whole nation or the people is SPECIFICALLY conferred to individual persons.

The Second Amendment never does this. It never narrows down from "people" to "persons," and from the two initial clauses gives the unmistakable meaning that the right is a collective one and not an individual one as in the Fourth Amendment. Please carefully re-read both amendments. Again, if the Second Amendment were as many gun enthusiast would like to believe, then owning tactical nuclear weapons would also be legal. See where that gets you!

From an etymological perspective, part of the English language is derived from the Norman French following their conquest of England in 1066.

The word "people" is close to the French word "peuple." In French, the word is also a collective noun.

Thanks for your comment. We hope this exchange when published without identifying elements will help educate our readers.

* * *

An Uncomfortable Truth

We publish this essay from a correspondent because it is emblematic of a truth we have always known – many children, even from an early age, have pronounced sexual feelings. They somehow find ways of expressing these. If they have ever suffered harm from freely doing so, the harm has been uniquely from overwhelmingly exaggerated negative reactions by caretakers and a censorious culture.

Individuals who self-identify as LGTBQ are too invested in the narrative imposed by the dominant society to gainsay what are essentially lies. In private, many will reveal experiences supporting that they acted with agency and never experienced physical or emotional harm. One former youngster, now an elderly gay gentleman we know, used to use his school issued bus pass to visit “tea rooms” for assignations. His open-minded parents were Beat Generation progressives and were fully aware of their son’s escapades. Their son never experienced trauma, and he not only graduated from a prestigious high school but went on to university and a successful career.

My name is Manny. I am from Scandinavia. The legal age in Sweden is 15 and it is 16 in Norway. I am now in my 30s and uniquely a boylover. When I was a boy, I preferred older men, but as I got older, boys became my preference.

At the age of 11, I first realized how sexy I was in the way only a boy could be in my now adult boylover opinion. I didn’t hit puberty until I was 14, so I had 2-3 years in that perfect body and dream about everything a man could do with me sexually.

That was some years before I had a computer, but there was a gay hotline listed in our newspaper, and I called a lot. Every man I called was really interested, and I never got turned down even once in those short calls.

Those calls were short because before the men could plan anything with me, the hotline supervisors would kick me off. My treble boy voice would give me away. It was impossible to hide that fact :)

Then my parents got a big phone bill and decided from then on to request that the bills had to specify outgoing calls. So, I never dared to try again :(

Just as fast I could get online when I was 15, I started to meet older men for sex. My only regret is that I didn’t have a computer, with an Internet connection, years sooner.

I bet there were a lot of boys like me then as well as now.

The supervisors on the gay hotline were, as far as I know, not obligated to report younger boys calling in. It is perhaps different today when everything is so illegal in a way that is hard to believe.

My parents never found out, and I kept it hidden from family and friends.

This is how it was for me in Scandinavia in the 90s.

It is important to remember that Manny’s youthful experience and the one described in our introduction, happened at different times and places. His essay and our introductory remarks should NOT be taken as encouragement to break any law. Even in a democracy, some bad laws do get passed. Those should be changed ONLY through education and a rational process – NOT by breaking laws. Our mission from the beginning has been to educate and to encourage rational thinking.

* * *
Cognitive Distortion

No sane person can ignore recent events of mass killings of children and many more innocent people. We could no longer hold off commenting on it and on the diseased thinking that allows the perpetuation of such atrocities.

Cognitive distortion is what our kinder detractors accuse us of. That somehow our perception has been twisted into some unrealistic view is their best way of understanding us. They imagine, "How can a man unrelated to a boy be drawn to him? What could such an adult find appealing in a youngster?" They are however blind to the possibility that a boy's incipient intellect, his personality or joie de vie holds great joy for both adult and youngster and that all of this can sometimes bring about mutual physical attraction. A comprehensive answer to our detractors' distorted thinking needs to be explored in a separate essay, but a different cognitive distortion is the actual theme we are pursuing here.

The incident that brings us to examine our current societal twisted notions is the latest of too many unspeakable acts – the butchering of young children. "Butchering" is too weak a word, but there is no alternative in the English language for a massacre where bullets decapitate children and where their riddled bodies are reduced to unrecognizable meat.

To begin, let's look at the distorted view of the Second Amendment that has taken on near religious proportions among gun fanatics. It reads thus:

A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

The framers of the Constitution were no imbeciles. They understood grammar and the importance of the meaning of words. The amendment did not say "the right of individuals to own and bear arms." Moreover, the first two clauses of the amendment modify the latter part. That right is granted only with state regulation and in the service of the state.

The framers guaranteed the right to bear arms to the individual colonies, now states of the United States, but not to individual persons – the word "people" is a collective noun. Were our view not so, why would the Second Amendment, as currently interpreted by a politicized Court, not permit private ownership of weapons of mass destruction? Those are arms too, are they not? If ownership of cars can be regulated, certainly firearms deserve the same consideration. Even the operation of a barbershop or beauty salon can be regulated. Give us a break!

When a literate and moderately educated person can correctly parse a basic English sentence such as the Second Amendment, how can one not suspect Supreme Court members of being biased along the views of the parties that promoted their elevation?

Gun aficionados like to suggest that training and arming teachers is a solution to school mass shootings. Really? Are they not aware of the many gun deaths caused by the inevitable carelessness that comes with keeping track of our possessions? Misplacing a gun is orders of magnitude more serious than losing one's keys or wallet. Teachers and schools are no exception to our epidemic of accidental gun death including those motivated by extreme anger. Then, what are we teaching children when teachers must carry weapons? Is it really the lesson that students need to learn that violence can only be dealt with violence? Must children in schools with armed teachers constantly fear that they are only moments away from being maimed or killed?

Then there is the puerile notion that the best way to counter a bad person with a gun is to have a good person with a gun. That may work in movies where these infantile notions originate but not in real life. Imagine a "good person" happening on a situation where a gun is being used. How does he ascertain, in the heat of the moment, what is actually happening? Is the shooter a "good person" or a "bad person?" The shooter might actually be a cop not in uniform defending himself or another. Imagine yet a "good person" now shooting at a "bad person." How are subsequent "good persons" able to figure out who is who? With just about every person armed as the gun lobby would have it, there would then be a free for all with bullets flying indiscriminately in every direction – a plot line for a gruesome comedy sketch.

It is disheartening to realize that many with otherwise adequately functioning brains can formulate misconceptions of the world the way gun apologists do. And guns are far from the many other policy issues that a sane society needs to deal with. Unfortunately, distorted cognitive ability is the case for too many who either do not have the ability for critical thinking or for those who are have it but who cynically work to advance their own agenda.

For us, the struggle is long and hard, but we have reason and virtue on our side.

Recent updates reveal that there were indeed "good people with guns" to thwart the "bad person with a gun." These "good people," if indeed pusillanimous, were well armed and donned with body armor. Yet it took over an hour for these "good people" to act.

* * *

Magic Numbers
by John P.

I am John, a healthy gay man in my early 50's. For purposes of "identifying" myself as it pertains to this writing, I would self-analyze myself under the labels of a hebephile and an ephebophile. When I was an adolescent boy of around 13-16, I had insatiable attractions to boys around my age and fantasized constantly.

Something happened as I aged into adulthood. Or should I say nothing happened. I grew older but my physical attractions did not. I can now find myself attracted to older guys but the young men hold a special place. It's not just about sexuality. Sometimes I just want them to be my companion. The utter fascination of experiencing a vacuum in the presence of a perfect creature who floods my senses with undivided stimulus, if only for a fleeting moment. It's as if I would trade a lifetime of sexual interaction for just one second of knowing I pleased him.

So now I cower in the shadows of fear and shame. It seems the times in history and the geographic places we dwell dictate what is acceptable within a population. Now in the early 2020's more than ever at least in the U.S., the political climate is unraveling the final frontier of human rights, and reversing over 100 years of progressive evolution. Society levies the importance of worth by who's sleeping with whom.

In my opinion most people seem to be locked inside a paradox torn between an obsession to live a formulaic existence, hence the "correct" career, home, family/peer relations, passions to the other extreme of a personal longing to just be left alone; a tranquil void of the pressure to remain relevant.

So, I wonder where I fall into this identity soup? What role do we "boy lovers" play? Phycology breaks this down in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), now in the everchanging editions of #5. Even though this could have monumental legal & reputational ramifications, isn't it all based on magic numbers? Ages of consent, Ageism, drifting borders? Splitting hairs of some law, somewhere a one-year difference in age could send a person to prison.

On a more personal level. What happens when Johnny the boy inevitably grows into John the man? Does that vicious cycle continue? On a side note, my older brother R.I.P. had feelings for younger boys and got into legal trouble many years ago, having to register as an offender.

In all my "careful" (fear) research for some kind of support, or more information I find very little. NAMBLA's (no offense) reputation & stature has diminished to whatever it is over the many years and other resources are scarce or driven underground. One of the biggest criticisms of the organization seems to be the lack of documentation of younger voices in numbers who seek age of consent reform, etc. (besides a handful of old letters)?

Editorial Note: We take no offense, but it should be noted that NAMBLA’s reputation has only diminished among those who easily swallow consumed popular media. No other organization has yet dared to hold up a prominent profile.

As for documenting younger voices, our emails in our letters section point otherwise. Our old publication Boys Speak Out was put together at a time when, especially in the Netherlands, attitudes were much more progressive. Doing so today is impossible.

Some Thoughts on Love and Consent
by David E.

When I hear the word "love," I don't think of age, race, sexual preference, or appearance. I think of commitment, mutual agreement, and understanding. The ability to bond and coexist as a communion of one. The nesscessary actions one takes to put his needs on the back burner, so he can provide for the needs of his significant other.

But society had abused this word and set limitations on it. They say that you've got to be a certain age to understand love, as well as consenting to any acts of love. Yet consent will vary with the individual. I could be twelve years old and know nothing of sex, then down the road, a boy my age has been sexual active since he was seven. So why is society treating all of this the same?

Is it because of their lack of understanding? Or have they never experienced this when they were young, so they assumed minors don't know as much as they give them credit for? I think there might be a couple of reasons. One, it could be the fact that they don't want to see their children and grandchildren as sexual beings, so they're in denial of this truth. But when we were born, we had this nature already instilled in us. We could be extremely sheltered from anything that's sexual related, and nature will always find a way to draw us to it.

And two, society may be concerned on the crime rate going up? Let me elaborate. If there's no age of consent, then it'll be very easy to lie about everything involving relationships, love, or sex. Even if at first it was consensual, later on, the boy might feel differently? So he says that he was raped or molested. That'll look very badly on people like us.

I can see things from both sides, but society's side is labeling it only one thing. We're cold hearted monsters that needs help, and children can't consent. Which I understand their point of view, but they're putting it all in one basket. We all aren't molesters, and all children aren't innocent. That's the truth, and once society knows the truth, the better.

I actually respect you guys at NAMBLA. From what I see so far, you aren't sexually crazed. You've got your own belief system, but you're not doing anything stupid to jeopardize that. Like society had labeled us, driving around in dark-tinted vans looking for children. But we're just normal people who's opposite in agreement with society and the law way of thinking. And once they come to terms with our reality, they'll see things in a whole new light.

I want to become a NAMBLA participant, because my belief is similar to yours. And I'm a good speaker, whether verbally or on paper. When I'm passionate with something, I keep at it. Hopefully someday, your work with come into the light with a different perspective. But for now, you've got to work in the shadows, so that it can happen eventually.