The gay lifestyle is legitimised pederasty, of the most exploitative and abusive kind.
For decades now, we have been force-fed the idea that the gay lifestyle is all about sweet young boys loving each other. And what could be so wrong with that? But that is not what the Western ‘gay lifestyle’ is about at all.
Most males in the gay lifestyle are not actually homosexuals. I used the ‘s’ there deliberately, because ‘homosexual’ does not describe a behaviour, it describes a personality type. In previous eras these might have been known as ‘catamites’ and even ‘eunuchs’ — even, as Philo of Alexandria tells us, when they retained male genitalia. This was because the term ‘eunuch’ actually meant ‘impotent with women’.
That was the way it was. When Károly Mária Kertbeny (1824-1882) coined the term ‘homosexual’ in 1868 he was very clear to define it exactly as ‘catamite’ had been defined. This understanding, that homosexuality is a personality type and not a set of behaviours, was current in the West until 1948, when Alfred Kinsey invented a new definition which was based only on behaviours and took no account of personality. However, even though homosexuals do tend to favour a particular set, especially in their preference for being feminine, receptive partners to masculine men, they remain a distinct type.
Kinsey’s new definition was based on sexual practice. To him male sexual relations with other males defined homosexuality. This despite the fact that Freud and others had observed that many homosexuals do not actually have sex, or spend long periods of their lives voluntarily celibate. Quentin Crisp wrote about this. Kinsey would count these males — unquestionably homosexuals — as non-homosexual. His work is, basically, invalid because of this fundamental misunderstanding.
So who are the homosexuals and how can we identify them? The latter is easy: yes, we can. Since the time of Ulrichs and again, until Kinsey buggered things up with his braindead notions, homosexuality had been associated with a phenomenon called Sexual Inversion.
In effect, this said that homosexuals were somehow changed, prior to birth, so that they closely resembled females across a range of parameters. They tended to be small, slight, light for height, often had female digit ratios, were frequently talented in the arts and loved performance, but most of all, identified as girls from a very early age, typically beginning about forty-eight months, though sometimes before. They disliked rough-and-tumble, field sports, typical boy toys and so on. Instead they preferred the games girls played and the toys they liked. They would often either grow out their hair, if permitted. or wear a towel on their heads to mimic long hair. They would begin having crushes on men at the same time as other boys began crushing on girls and when they hit puberty this would develop into a powerful erotic desire for men’s bodies and to be penetrated by them.
Until Kinsey there was no challenge to this understanding, which had been described in literally hundreds of papers. Ironically, just as the Kinseyan view was taking over, largely because of his organisation, the Kinsey Institute and its relentless Public Relations campaigns, researchers began to discover new evidence. This suggested that Sexual Inversion was real and caused by anomalies in hormone delivery while the foetus was in utero. This vindicated Urichs, Ellis et alii, who had basically been saying so for decades. Today, this understanding is substantially unchallenged.
Unfortunately, a bastardisation of the Kinseyan view became popular. Kinsey made it clear that he believed that only acts could be homosexual; in other words, there was no such thing as ‘a homosexual’ it was just a matter of how an individual behaved. Nevertheless, on the basis of his claims, the media view and the popular impression became that any male who had sex with another male was ‘homosexual.’ (This despite, again, the fact that many homosexuals don’t even have sex.)
Pederasty in the gay lifestyle
Now there is another personality type which involves males having sex with other males. This is called pederasty. In the classic Greek form — it was unlikely to have been the first, but we do have a lot of information about it — pederasty was a kind of apprenticeship in manhood. Adolescent boys would be partnered with older males, who would teach them how to be men; this might have been in the arts of the warrior, as in the Japanese Wakashudo, or in other areas, including even manual skills like smithing or painting.
In fact the apprenticeship system looks very much like an extension of pederasty, without quite so much anal tomfoolery.
Ah, the Romans
The Romans, our old friends, developed a variation on this. Here, the focus was on pleasure — of the penetrating male. While the Greeks did have slaves — in fact the Spartans enslaved an entire nation, the Helots — pederasty as described above always occurred between males of the same social class. The same is true of the Japanese wakashudo. But in Rome, recipient males were usually slaves.
In fact there were as many male prostitutes — most of them slaves — in Rome as there were female ones. There were specific markets for boy-slaves who could be purchased and then used either for the master’s pleasure or pimped out. Roman legionaries were notorious for buying boys to take on campaign with them — because they were not allowed to marry. This was presumably because the generals did not want to see their armies turned into ambulatory crèches; boys present no such issues.
(One often reads of the ‘camp followers’ who were in the train of an army. Indeed, in some battles, these were thrown in as a last-ditch attempt to defeat the enemy. This allegedly happened — and was successful — at the Battle of Bannockburn in 1314, for example. I have to ask myself, ‘Just how many of them were the boy concubines of the regular soldiers?’)
Roman public bath-houses, of which there were a great many, were staffed by ‘towel boys’ whose job was to attend to the patrons in any way asked of them. At feasts and orgies, boy slaves would serve the guests food and drink as well as more intimate delicacies. They were frequently completely naked and would dance provocatively for the guests. (This practice was reported in southern Italy, where Roman traditions still persisted, as late as the 1940s and 50s.)
Although there is evidence that some Romans did indeed exploit their slaves, fortunately the great lacuna within the law and tradition, together with the emergence of more humane values regarding slavery and sexual relations, allowed genuine love-relationships (both heterosexual and homosexual) to receive a large measure of social action as a form of concubinage. Roman culture, however, unlike classical Greek civilization, made little contribution to an informed acceptance of homosexual relation grounded in an understanding of human ethics and psychology.
Pederasts are not homosexuals.
Pederasts do indeed seek to penetrate other males but they are not homosexuals. Pederasty is usually a cyclical affair. In the Greek model, a youth would be ‘apprenticed’ to an older male, usually in his mid-twenties and when the youth himself became mature and masculine, his teacher, the erastes, would move on, while the youth now a man, would take an apprentice of his own. In this model, the erastes, having discharged his duty towards the apprentice or eromenos, would then marry and begin his family life.
This model was applicant in Japan, China, and in English Public Schools, where it was an institution until about fifty years ago. Homosexuals in this system might have been delighted to have the sexual attention of an older boy, or even a master, but they would refuse to take a ‘fag’ or younger boy to penetrate and would continue to seek to be penetrated by men. These individuals were, sadly, reviled by the others and constituted, according to reports, only about four percent of boys.
Pederasty is therefore different from homosexuality, in part because pederasty is conditioned, while homosexuality is innate. There is no suggestion that pederasts are Sexually Inverted; they very clearly are not. And they are not, therefore, homosexuals themselves.
How could this be?
So what was happening? Why were non-homosexual boys, who would grow up to be ordinary men with families, (though perhaps retaining a taste for the sensual orbs of a boy’s arse) quite prepared to allow themselves to be penetrated, to play the girl and indeed, to enjoy doing so?
There seem to be two main factors. Firstly, there is a well-observed tendency for adolescent boys to form bonds with older males. These need not be sexualised and in modern Western culture such behaviour would be condemned, but until relatively recently, it was not. In some cultures this is still, while more covert than before, commonplace.
This tendency may come from group bonding in our distant, hunter-gatherer past. It is unclear whether men actually knew whom their sons were in that time and so a social form evolved in which the men became ‘uncles’ to the boys. It is highly likely that in this, some sexual contact would have been normal. This is borne out by modern tribal societies, such as the Etoro, where this carried on today. Possibly, then, adolescent boys are less resistant to being penetrated than adult males.
Secondly, in all the cultures wherein pederasty flourishes, adolescent girls are not available for sex. Many are the accounts of former Public Schoolboys saying, basically, that ‘If there had been girls available, we would have chased them, but since there weren’t we had fun with each other instead.’ In Islamic cultures, where women are untouchable, pederasty has always been endemic. Note, again, these men are not homosexuals. They exhibit none of the personality or morphological traits that do identify the male Sexual Invert, the homosexual. They use the boys as girls.
Situational Homosexuality, the foundation of the gay lifestyle.
So this gives us a clue to what is going on: a phenomenon known as Situational Homosexuality. Basically, in a single-sex community — of either sex — individuals will take sexual pleasure in each other’s bodies. This is so commonplace that it is surprising anyone is surprised.
Within a male Situational Homosexual community, the percentage of real homosexuals, that is, Sexual Inverts, is no higher than in the broader society. Typically this is around three percent, plus or minus a couple of points. Yet all the people within this community, who are of the same sex, are still having sex with each other. So they are certainly indulging in acts which our man Kinsey would have described as homosexual, but the overwhelming majority are not themselves homosexuals.
Alfred Kinsey may now roll in his grave.
In the West
So let’s return now to the present and the absolute disaster area of the gay lifestyle in the West. Essentially, this is Situational Homosexuality. Many — perhaps most — of the males involved are not actually homosexual at all.
The most important thing to remember about any Situationally Homosexual community is that if the conditions that brought the situation into being cease to prevail, then typically those who had been in it, will revert to more conventional sexual practices.
So in what way is modern Western gay lifestyle Situational? Well to begin with, let’s look at how it came about. The modern gay lifestyle actually evolved in the military, especially during WW2. There are many reports of behaviours that confirm this and the armed forces are well known as breeding grounds for it. But also remember that most of the members of any Situationally Homosexual community are not actually homosexual. In fact the numbers of real homosexuals in conscripted armed forces are essentially the same as the general population.
‘Prison Sex’ is one of the better-known examples of Situational Homosexuality today. Professor J Michael Bailey recently asked the question ‘In prison sex, whom are the dominant males most likely to penetrate?’ And the answer is, the most feminine ones, because most men in this community are not homosexual themselves. They are not attracted to masculinity and they are not usually prepared to be penetrated. They use the less masculine males as women, sexually.
In the prison context, the trade-off is usually protection; in exchange for sexual favours, the submissive partner is protected from all the other beasts in the prison, by the one he is sexually bonded to. But while these men are less dominant and probably less masculine, that, emphatically, does not mean they are homosexuals. There behaviour is the product of the context they find themselves in. Nearly all are ‘gay for the stay’ and will revert to heterosexual behaviour on release.
It’s noteworthy here that those who are actually homosexual are sought after by the beasts and preferred to the ‘gay for the stay’ men, according to several reports. This appears to be because they are more feminine.
A propos of this, the 1981 film Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior, featured the Golden Youth (Jerry O’Sullivan) and a character called Wez (Vernon Wells.) This is situational homosexuality almost perfectly portrayed. Inside the outlaw gang, there were no women, or those there were, were already the property of the dominant male, Lord Humongous (Kjell Nilsson). Wez was clearly not a homosexual but had an intimate relationship with the Golden Youth, brought about by the situation they were in.
When the laughing stops
In the modern Western context, this loses much of its humour. The modern gay lifestyle, New Gay Man culture, which is the dominant one today, is viciously hostile to femininity, in any form. Members reject feminine males much as they did in the English Public Schools and in Rome. But how can this be? Surely, since they are not homosexual, they should be attracted to femininity?
It’s more complicated than that. I wrote above that pederasty is cyclical. Homosexuals are born, pederasts are made and what makes a pederast is that first pedication. When he is turned into a woman for the first time, as a young boy. Perhaps he enjoys the sensation of a penis in his rectum; many sing its praises. But the psychological effect is far greater than the physical pleasure.
Perhaps most importantly, while this is still Situational Homosexuality, it is of a somewhat voluntary nature. These people are not in prison or in the military. They are Western males and over the last fifty years, as the gay lifestyle has grown, so has the availability of women, notionally at least. Where once most men had to wait till they were married to become acquainted with the act, now they apparently demand it as of right. Why then are men developing Situationally Homosexual communities?
Interestingly, alongside the development of this gay lifestyle, there has been a rise in the level of conflict between men and women, largely provoked by feminism. Men are actively discouraged from pursuing women and the consequences can be seen everywhere. It is possible that an increase in pederasty — which, remember is not innate but acquired — is one of those.
An insecure teenager might be persuaded that he is a ‘gay boy’ and be drawn into the gay lifestyle. But he is not a homosexual. He had no history of childhood sex non-conformity, he didn’t identify as a girl. He was always a boy. But he was confused about sex and his own sexuality. Perhaps he couldn’t pursue the girls for cultural reasons; perhaps they rejected him. Perhaps he was told that to look at girls was creepy or offensive; that his natural interest and arousal was the ‘male gaze’ and should be suppressed. For one reason or another, he sought out others like himself, curious, confused boys like himself. And in doing so he threw himself into the path of the pederasts.
There are always pederasts
There are always pederasts and they are attracted to boys like this like flies to dung. Sam Cowie, a young Scot now in his twenties and a student, describes how he was, at the age of fifteen, ‘groomed by older men…who would provide him with special privileges, cigarettes, and alcohol.’
In an interview with Reduxx, Cowie recounts.
‘being taken by charity staff to gay clubs in Edinburgh while underage. He was exposed to a much older group of men who began offering (him) money in exchange for sex.’
“I was plied with alcohol free of charge, encouraged to sleep with older men and given money to perform sexual acts,” he said.
Another young man, Daniel Nechtan, said that ‘he and other underaged boys who were vulnerable and struggling financially were encouraged by the older men … to accept payment in exchange for sexual acts.’
This story, which broke over Christmas, has been largely ignored by the mainstream media, except for the UK’s Daily Telegraph. But in fact it is the tip of a huge, ugly iceberg. The ‘gay’ lifestyle in the West, the New Gay Man, exists specifically to attract, groom and subvert young boys.
But why is it that pederasts pursue boys? Again, they are not homosexuals and many are actually married fathers. It is because the pederast is auto-erotically attracted to the image of himself when he was first pedicated.
That searing pain, that feeling of total surrender…it has been described as being ‘like a horse being broken’…he wants nothing more than to watch a boy experience that same intensity. He feeds on it, as if he were sucking the life out of the boy. He wants to hear the boy scream as he once did — why?: For payback. And this becomes a vicious cycle that repeats over and over again.
Pederasts are indeed ‘same-sex attracted’ but they are not homosexuals. They have done with being penetrated; now they want young boy-meat to penetrate in their turn. This is not the formal arrangement of Greece, with its many quid pro quos and social rules; this is pederasty of Rome, where boys were bought and buggered till their arses bled.
This conflation, of pederast and homosexual, has done massive harm to real homosexuals, and effectively denies their very existence. No real homosexual would ever behave like this; she wants to be a woman in sex. She has no interest in making another suffer, in dominating, in penetrating; she wants, above all else, to be dominated and penetrated.
As one gloriously gorgeous little ladyboy said to me ‘I don’t care if it hurts, I just want to feel it.’
The true nature of the Western gay lifestyle
This is the true nature of the Western ‘gay lifestyle’ that you have been led to believe is so sweet and innocent. It is anything but. It is a gaping Hell’s maw that consumes young bodies and minds, makes confused boys think they’re gay when they just need some decent sex and spits them out when they grow older, either to ‘turn top’ or find themselves abandoned by the very community that groomed them.
Pederasts are made by their own sexual experiences, which they then perpetrate on others. Homosexuals are born that way. It is very hard to avoid the view that the best thing a homosexual boy could do would be to become a girl and avoid the ghastly pederastic meat market of the ‘gay lifestyle’. After all, he’ll never be a man.