Hi, DS,

For one thing, the same organizations who insist that NAMBLA offers "advice" on how to rape, kidnap, and murder youths are the same who constantly accuse GC of doing the same thing. So how seriously can we take the validity of these people? Personally, I have met many BLer's who are or have been members of NAMBLA, and I do not think any of them are people who would be capable of such vile acts, nor would they associate with an organization that seriously promoted such horrific advice. I fully believe that such accusations against NAMBLA are full of more shit than the Augean Stables before Hercules cleansed them. Those "how to kidnap, rape, and murder kids" pamphlets that are always alleged to be out there are about as authentic as the existence of the Satanic ritual craze of the 80's, the McMartin day care center accusations, the "suppressed memory" syndrome nonsense used by illicit social workers to drum up the 'sex abuse industry,' and the existence of the multi-billion dollar international "pedophile sex rings." Do these people also believe in the valdity of the Boogeyman, too?

Secondly, I would tell ANY MAA of ANY sub-community within to NEVER give any pamphlet they publish an ironic title along the lines of the one O'Reilly described, because such an attempt at making a sarcastic jab at society's ignorant attitudes could easily be turned against the greater MAA community in the worst way possible. This is the EXACT same reason why I've criticized some of the GC posters who do not seem to care what words they use to describe their GM's.

Thirdly, if NAMBLA was truly offering serious pamphlets on this subject, they would have been smashed by the various LEA's and media moguls who have been trying to smash them for the past 25 years...and NAMBLA members have almost always turned up squeeky clean in regards to matters outside of minority incidences of statuatory rape charges, parking infractions, DWI, etc. I heard there was some legal nicities in terms of how the organization set itself up in terms of registering as an organization in certain states, but that this was done simply to protect the anonymity of its various members in regards to their home addresses and phone numbers for very obvious reasons. But this is unsubstantiated.

Moreover, if the public has to grab at such flimsy straws as the Jaynes and Sicari case to try to destroy NAMBLA, it makes you wonder how much real evidence could possibly be available to prosecute or condemn the organization...the answer: NONE at all. Many of us have developed a more positive attitude towards adult/youth sexuality since discovering GC, but does that make the majority of us become psychopaths like Jaynes or Sicari, and attempt to kidnap, rape, and murder girls in our respective AOA, let alone break the AOC laws at all? Of course not! Like NAMBLA, the pro-choicers among our community challenge the validity of the AOC laws in a legal and democratic manner, but we DO NOT advocate that anyone actually break these laws. There is a BIG difference there! The attitude of the author and the people he quotes are clearly morally opposed to such activity, and that is their right, but they need to start presenting them as popular opinions rather than as incontravertible facts. Moreover, they need to stop categorizing pro-choice MAA's with the likes of sociopaths like Jaynes and Sicari, who may not even have been BLer's at all, and were more justly categorized, as Judith Levine noted in her book Harmful To Minors, as "aberrations of humanity." She also aptly pointed out that incidental cases like that involving the death of Jeffery Curly, as horrific and tragic as it was, are nevertheless blown out of proportion by the media to further the "pedophile" hysteria, whose main purpose is to curtail the very topic of youth sexuality.

Lastly, take a look at the less than objective manner the author of the article addresses NAMBLA members...how he says their ideas are abhorrant (stating his own opinion as if it's a fact), that it's "rightly so" that the general public condemns them, etc. Of course, he mentions nothing about the duplicitous nature of most of NAMBLA's opponents, including John Walsh and the entrapment-crazy Julie Posey.

Abraxas can clear much of this up, but I wish I can find out where the hell Mvanhouten has been lately, get him to register with GC, and to give his take on this matter. I need to e-mail him soon.