This is G o o g l e's cache of as retrieved on Apr 5, 2006 22:14:57 GMT.
G o o g l e's cache is the snapshot that we took of the page as we crawled the web.
The page may have changed since that time. Click here for the current page without highlighting.
This cached page may reference images which are no longer available. Click here for the cached text only.
To link to or bookmark this page, use the following url:

Google is neither affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its content.

"Paiderastia" The Boy Love Revival
Send via SMS

"Paiderastia" The Boy Love Revival

Pederasty, as idealized by the ancient Greeks, was a relationship and bond between an adolescent boy and an adult man outside of HIS immediate family. This is modernized in today's culture as gender neutral by a relationship and bond between an adolescent child and an adult outside of their immediate family. In a wider sense this refers to erotic/mentor/spiritual love between adolescents and adults. Building Bridges!

Tuesday, March 21, 2006

Pedologues: Episode 18

Pedologues: Episode 18

This episode is an intimate interview with Technea, a long-standing boylover in the community. He's an extraordinary person with a resounding understanding of life. We hear about his life, hardships, accomplishments and philosophies.

Show Notes:
  • 001:20 -- Introducing Technea... and Aqua, I guess. :p (j/k)
  • 002:00 -- Rookiee's geekage shared by another soul.
  • 007:30 -- Technea's childhood, illness, and boylover.
  • 020:00 -- Technea's marriage, family, and caretaking.
  • 032:00 -- A startling revelation.
  • 040:00 -- Technea's thoughts about sexual labeling.
  • 043:00 -- Technea's deflection.
  • 049:25 -- Aqua is being stalked by Shadowpeople.
  • 052:30 -- A brief Intermission. Go pee or something.
  • 056:20 -- "I am a human being." Thoughts of boylove.
  • 065:20 -- Technea's theological background and beliefs.
  • 073:50 -- The sole reason the bible(s) was/were created.
  • 079:00 -- The bible on being homosexual.
  • 084:30 -- Technea's empathy and capacity for love.
  • 093:40 -- People's spirituality. Spirit vs. soul.
  • 100:00 -- The etymology of a Technea.
  • 107:30 -- Pedophile priests. Figures of authority.
  • 114:00 -- Differences between Boylove and Girllove.
  • 120:00 -- Non-sexual childlove. All dogs go to heaven.
  • 126:30 -- Some final thoughts.

Friday, March 10, 2006

The True Abuser of Justin Berry

This is a response to someone's comment to me on BoyChat regarding the current debacle of Justin Berry. I thought since I ended up turning it into an essay once again, I might as well post it here.


Actually, yes I do. Justin, himself, told us, in his own words, from day one, what exactly happened. Have you seen the interview with Kurt Eichenwald? It's still available on the New York Times website. It's available for anyone to watch and listen.

Justin began appearing on webcam within weeks of having installed it. He got the idea when someone offered him $50 to take off his shirt. He openly admitted that he "thought nothing of it".

One thing leads to another: His shirt, his pants, his underwear, then eventually begins to jack off and do various things. He still says he did not care. He thought it was "creepy", but he continued to do it.

He raised his prices up into the hundreds. He developed a website, networked with other websites. If you know anything about these websites that sprang up in the year 2000/2001, you will know that these websites were non-discriminate and NOT geared toward "minors". The fact is, these websites were open and available to all ages, and no pressure was ever used. All webcams were made at will of the individual.

Within 2-3 years, his webcam site had expanded. He was making lots of dough. Still living in his parents' home, doing this from his own bedroom, and hiding the equipment he used to make these videos, he continued on his own free will. He advertised. He polled. He put his website up for votes to see if it was the "hottest" cam. He was a young, teenaged entrepreneur; and a successful one at that. He was willing, consentual, and did not object to using his body as he saw fit.

With this evidence which he himself presented, plus the unrefutable evidence that's archived on "" archived on The Wayback Machine (, he has unmasked himself and shown that he is simply full of it.

By the time he hit 16, he had been found out by his peers. They mocked and made fun of him. They pushed moral judgement on him, outcasted him, and he most likely turned to depression because of it.

Because of the lack of information that Justin has provided, this is where it gets hazy. For some reason he decided to move to Mexico to be reunited with his father. Justin and others say that until this point he had a troubled relationship with his dad. Either before or after arrival in Mexico, he told his father about what he'd been doing in his bedroom all this time, and his father apparently encouraged him to not only continue with the business, but expand it.

He began having sex with real life prostitutes. From what I understand, men, women, boys, girls, whoever. On his website, he mentions "mexican women" and there is one remaining screenshot on of him actually having vaginal intercourse with a woman. No one's faces are shown, but both are post-pubescent.

At some point during this time is when he began to smoke and take drugs. I'm going to venture that he spent the money he earned on these drugs. I'm also going to venture to say that his father probably was acting as pimp and pusher. Justin never has revealed how much his father played a part in this. This is where I personally feel things became truly abusive and not mere moralistic opinion. However, by the age of 16, I would have to say he is no longer a "child", as how MANY purport to suggest.

This was NOT "child molestation".

In any other country, most likely he not only would have been in the legal age to consent, but he would be viewed as personally being able to make such choices. By the time he actually DID take that trip to Vegas and DID engage in sexual acts with Gregory Mitchel, he had MORE than enough background knowledge about the environment he was involving himself in, what type of aggressive behavior was being used against him to continue with his sex workings, and moreover, there's no logical way that he could possibly suggest (in any sane world) that he could not have said no. He had tons of money. He could've gotten on a plane, shipped off somewhere safer, and said goodbye to the whole thing. The entire case comes back to the original reason why it began in the first place. He wanted money, he wanted things, and he wanted fame and success. He consented.

No one in their right mind, unless falling back on mere legal terms could anyone call Justin a "child" at 16, 17, and 18. Lost? Most likely. Scarred? I'd have to say so. I did see what appeared to be genuine pain in his eyes when talking with Kurt about his later happenings. As I've said before on many occasions, I can have compassion for Justin. I can have compassion for any human being, whether or not they're a boy. But in any other traditional culture, society, country, state of mind, whatever... people would see him as being able to fully fend for himself at this point, and it's my position as well. He was a man. He had chosen his destiny; albeit a sordid and undignified one, but he did choose it himself. Because of the common lack of self-responsibility in today's world, he is seen as a victim. In my opinion, because of all that I have seen and heard regarding this case, the only true culprit; the only true betrayal; the only true abuser; was Justin's sense of materialism. He betrayed his own sense of pride, dignity, self-worth, and he fell into his own trap; his own downward spiral.

We self-respecting pedophiles have become the scapegoats for America's sense of shallow materialism which plagues the rest of the world each time we pay $200.00 for a pair of sneakers with "lights in them" which were made for 5 bucks in some poor backwater country at slave labor.

Justin offered his body, and people paid to see it. Now, because of Justin's self-serving attitude, shame, guilt, conflict and lack of self-responsibility, over 1,500 people who had never abused Justin are going to pay the price for something which they merely were desperate to quench because of our society's taboo.

Sunday, March 05, 2006

SQR: Interview with Lindsay Ashford

SQR: Interview with Lindsay Ashford

This episode is a republish of a broadcast I made last night on Sure Quality Radio, interviewing Lindsay Ashford, a Pedophile who has decided to step out of the closet and present himself to the world. Running time: 2.5 hours

Songs utilized from Podsafe Music:

Nothing But Sorrow
Gayer than God
Tornadic Activity (radio mix) - Pitch Union

Show Notes:
  • 00:00 -- Introducing Lindsay Ashford.
  • 04:00 -- Lindsay's treatment by the media.
  • 11:50 -- Consentual "crimes".
  • 14:00 -- The new Jim Crow. Oppressive Legislation.
  • 21:00 -- The Boy Crisis. Resctriction of Free Expression.
  • 27:00 -- Alejandro Levis' research on Childhood Sexuality in varying societies.
  • 32:30 -- The problem of sexual perception.
  • 33:50 -- KFI's show on the dangers of
  • 37:00 -- Perverted Justice.
  • 41:40 -- Protections for all humans, not just kids.
  • 45:00 -- Perry Aftab.
  • 49:00 -- Justin Berry.
  • 60:00 -- Complacency in the Childlove Community.
  • 76:00 -- D'oh!!!
  • 80:00 -- Taking a lil breather.
  • 86:00 -- Trying to reach the wider world.
  • 90:00 -- Activists' use of psudonyms.
  • 93:50 -- BL Charity.
  • 98:00 -- Having to put aside personal desires for the cause.
  • 101:00 -- BL/GL Seperatists.
  • 107:00 -- Child poverty in the 3rd world. World of war and materialism.
  • 115:00 -- "Exclusive" Sexual orientation vs. ~FLUID~.. Sexual Labels.
  • 125:00 -- Young people coming to terms with their sexuality.
  • 136:00 -- Rikij0's blind war against pedophiles.
  • 140:00 -- Quick Plug!

Wednesday, February 15, 2006

Just a reminder

I just now got around to reading the post that included the Boylove Code of Ethics, and I really really like this Code of Ethics. These things are very important, and more of us need to remember them. We have to remember that sex is not an entitlement. In other words, just because we have a sexual attraction to boys (that we did not choose to have) does not mean that we have the right to pursue a sexual relationship with a boy. That isn't to say that the sexual relationship in itself is wrong. I'm just reiterating what several of these numbered ethics state, and especially numbers 5 & 6;

5 - Intimacy with a boy should never develop into a sexual relationship without the boy fully consenting and understanding the social, legal, and health implications of the relationship.

6 - Boys should not be treated as sexual objects to be enjoyed at the whim of a boylover.

As sexual beings, sex may be vital to our physical, mental and emotional selves, indeed. Important, but not necessary. That is, not necessary to live and function. Sex is not oxygen. Once we realize that, then we'll have a better perspective when we are seeking a relationship with a boy, and we won't end up forcing or unduly coercing a boy into a sexual situation in which he is not comfortable. And we'll be more free to concentrate on the more important aspects of a man/boy relationship, i.e. the boy's best interests, his well being, his growth into manhood.

Friday, February 10, 2006

Rick Roberts Poll

Rick Robert's radio website currently has a rather biased poll that is taunting the user to vote in favor of Jessica's law, and present to the listeners that this will not be effecting individuals who are worth protecting; namely convicted sex offenders.

The three options for the poll are as follows:

Should liberal Assemblyman Mark Leno consider debating Jessica's Law with Rick Roberts?

  • No, because Rick would wipe the floor with him. -- 7%
  • No, I agree with Mark that child molester's rights are very important, and Rick would never listen. -- 2%
  • Yes, Mark Leno is a public servant and by definition should answer to the public for his views on Jessica’s Law. -- 91%

I'm urging everyone on our side to vote in this little stupid poll and just show that there are people out there who are on the underdog side of this issue. The link is at the bottom of this post.

As stated on Wikipedia:

The Jessica Lunsford Act (H.R. 1505 of the 109th Congress), better known as Jessica's Law, is a proposed law in the United States which would, if adopted, mandate more stringent tracking of released sex offenders.

The bill is named for Jessica Lunsford, the nine-year-old Florida girl believed to have been abducted and killed in February of 2005 by convicted sex offender John Evander Couey.

The bill, if passed, would:

  • Set a mandatory sentence of 25 years to life in prison for a defendant convicted of molesting a child younger than 12 years of age.
  • Require all convicts whose sentence for a sex crime has ended to wear, for five years following their release, global positioning system devices on their ankles to better enable law enforcement personnel to track their whereabouts.
  • Require the wearing of GPS units be doubled to ten years by offenders which have been deemed sexual predators.
  • Impose a fine of up to $100,000 for failing to properly register as a sex offender.

The bill has been promoted most notably by U.S. Congresswoman Ginny Brown-Waite R-Florida and promoted recently on Bill O'Reilly's radio and his O'Reilly Factor show.

Thursday, February 09, 2006

Boylove Code of Ethics

Hi everyone. It's been awhile since I posted, and I'm sorry. I would like to Welcome the new posters with The Boy Love Revival! "Sandman, Jayden, Tobey H., delusion, and Colton Alexander" and Thankyou Rookiee, for keeping with me and being my partner.

Great articles! I hope you will post more and give encouragement to all the boylovers and hopefully all the childlovers out there. Plus, to explain to the other people in the world out there that we are not the monsters or molesters that they say we are.

Even IF/when some of us are sexually attracted to children, I've never met a more empowered group of people with self-control then that of pedophiles/ pederasts /boylovers /pedosexuals what ever you/we want to call us. Can you say the same for Heterosexuals I.E. Straight and/or Homosexuals I.E. Gay/Lesbien? and YES! Some Pedosuxuals give in to they're own desires, after ALL, we are ALL HUMAN and in so, a SEXUAL BEING.

Below is the guide to which a Boylover needs/should TRY strive for! Ty Rookiee, I couldn't think what else to write.


Every man who has an innate love of boys is not necessarily qualified to be a boylover. The role of a boylover in a young boy's life is one of immense responsibility, very much akin to that of a father. The boy's best interest, and his future as well as present well being, must always be of paramount importance to the boylover.

Even in Ancient Greece, where boylove was the norm for several centuries, the boylover was expected to be a man of high moral character. Indeed, it brought shame on the boy and his family if his erastes (lover) was anything less.

Because a man/boy relationship involves two people who love one another, boylove encompasses the entire spectrum of human emotion. Therefore, the sexual aspect is a part of most man/boy relationships, even if that aspect is never consumated. It follows, then, that any boylove code of ethics will deal with the issue of sex in the relationship in a mature and responsible way.

The following code of ethics is my own edited version of one found in the book, Sexual Experience Between Men and Boys, by Parker Rossman.

1 - A boylover should do everything possible to protect his young friend from any harm, including exposure or embarrassment from arrest. This could mean abstaining from fully consensual sexual relations if such is illegal in the state or country where the boylover lives.

2 - A boylover should protect his own reputation, so that his young friends will not be hurt or suffer as a result of association with him.

3 - A boylover must be truthful and honest, and never lie to his young friends.

4 - A boylover should not seek intimate contact with a boy, without knowing and understanding the boy's interests and feelings.

5 - Intimacy with a boy should never develop into a sexual relationship without the boy fully consenting and understanding the social, legal, and health implications of the relationship.

6 - Boys should not be treated as sexual objects to be enjoyed at the whim of a boylover.

7 - A boylover must respect the role and authority of a boy's parents and not seek to undermine that role.

8 - A boylover should not provide his young friends with alcohol or drugs, and certainly will never use drugs to weaken a boy's sexual inhibitions, or "to get him into the mood" for sexual intimacy.

9 - A boylover has the responsibility of encouraging and helping a boy to develop his normal heterosexual tendencies, unless the boy confirms that he has an innate homosexual orientation.

10 - A boylover should guide and encourage his young friends to stay in school, avoid crime, and do all he can do to help them to develop a successful career.

11 - A boylover should not "cruise" to pick up strange boys for sexual encounters, because that encourages boys to "hustle" or prostitute themselves.

Markie's Story

I don't plan on making this an everyday occurance, but I thought this was important and relevant enough to repost here.

It's a bit early for the next podcast, but I have something worth listening to in the meantime. My good friend, Boystory, made something for his show on Sure Quality Radio, and after previewing it, I asked him if I could post it here, and he agreed. So, I'd like everyone to hang a few and listen to my friend share part of his life that hit home with me in more ways than one.

Markie's Story

Saturday, February 04, 2006

Meditation on the Boylove MOVEMENT

This is my first of what I hope will be many articles on Paiderastia.

First, I want to do something that many people out there reading this will not think of as a big thing, but being a boylover I can say it is huge “considering”, considering every day for a boylover is a struggle for survival in a culture that is hostilely apposed to him, or her. I wish to acknowledge that, simply, I am honored to be writing in this space, Paiderastia. That is a statement you might hear from a new journalist at the New York Times or a new scholar at a think-tank or institution, but coming from a boylover it means infinitely more than a job or a title—it means that the movement of civil rights for those sexually and/or emotionally attracted to boys is indeed a legitimate factor in our society. I am an American, and for Americans this means that we boylovers are taking full advantage of our human and Constitutional rights to freedom of speech and free association.

It is the power of voice, the power of communication that will set us free.

Recently we in America celebrated MLK day, and no matter the age of a citizen, ten or fifty, we all remember a few words of the great leader of equality, “I have dream” and that the “content of character” is the benchmark on which each person should be judged. If only we could remember that when we are called to judge others, or when others come to judge us.

There are perhaps a handful of people in the world who have confronted absolute injustice and not wavered from fear or shame, twin brothers in the forces of oppression. I think of Buddha, Jesus, Gandhi, and Dr. King when I ponder the question of what it means to love justice and freedom—and I think it’s safe to say that these types of people are the ones who set the measure to which we should strive. Forgive me if I wax philosophical, but aren’t we talking about love when we speak of the one, Golden Rule of justice, “Love thy neighbor as thyself”? And wasn’t it one of the four singing Beatles who reminded us in that Liverpool accent, “All ya need is love.”

Don’t get me wrong. I get angry; I get damn angry when I hear some vigilante is threatening the life of another boylover, or that some guy is making phone calls to the house of a fourteen-year-old boy telling his parents that their son is a pervert and ought to kill himself. I would like to think I’m a pacifist, but in reality I’m not that good of
a person; still, I’ve been around the block a time or two, I’ve read a few things, talked to a few people, and if I’ve learned one lesson it is that it’s important to have perspective. In the landscape of history boylove has been the ideal of the civilized world. Yet time passes, countries rise and fall, and humanity shows us that it is capable of the ultimate evil as well as the ultimate good.

And here we are: 2006.

Not much has changed since Plato, the greatest philosopher to ever live, wrote of the ultimate love between a man and a boy in the “Phaedrus”. Back then it was Socrates who was forced to drink poison for the crime of corrupting the youth of the state. Not much has changed since Shakespeare wrote a poem to a boy asking, “Shall I compare thee to a
summer’s day? / Thou art more lovely…” Boylove has existed forever. And wherever there is man and boy, the two will fall in love. I like to think of it as constant as the sun rising in the east. It’s a fact, a beautiful fact.

Still, today we are suffering and I have compassion for that. Our culture has constructed a narrative of fear regarding the boylover. Why? I’m not exactly sure; though I’m sure I will ponder it on this blog in the months to come. The way of the world is mysterious, but not above our understanding. The boylover’s lament is a cry for understanding, for
love, for touch, for sexuality; we want to dream that dream that everyone is talking about. The Russian author Dostoevsky, when posed with the question of why there is suffering in the world, said that we suffer so the poets have something to write about. Well, here’s a poem about man and boy, and it’s full of suffering. I recall again Shakespeare’s great character Shylock the Jew, suffused with hate for his Christian tormentors cried, “hath not a Jew eyes? / …if you prick us, do we not bleed?” This is perhaps the great call for common compassion, in just a few words a thousand years of religious animosity was called into question.

We boylovers are Shylock. Have we not eyes? Do we not bleed?

Normally I’m not so universal in my essays, but now and then I need some sort of perspective. Today is 2006; there are millennia of history containing both good and evil behind us. We have this magical thing called the Internet brining a diverse group of thinkers together under the auspice of one thing, our sexual orientation. It is both interesting and wonderful how something so carnal drives us all to search for that chimera called Justice.

America and much of the Western world is a dangerous place for BLs these days. Society is not always a progression towards absolute justice; sometimes it takes a turn down a dark alley. Here we are. In the days of Plato we’d openly love our young protégés. In the days of NAMBLA we’d have riotous meetings about what was appearing to be a sub-category of the gay movement. In 2006 we are all mostly anonymous, scared, under-funded, and passionate about the desire to have freedom. We argue more about definitions of words and titles than we do about which boy is prettier. But never before have we been more on the same page. The revolution for us will be digital, opening many more windows than doors; maybe not conducive to movement, but windows have always been easier to see through.

We blog. We podcast. We chat. We are connected. We are a movement.