Post a response:
|
Most of the dissonance is coming from me looking at what there was, prior to the mid 1900s. It seems as though, historically, pederasty specifically was very strongly idealised, and usually aimed at teen boys. I think the only author I find to be in completely poor taste before the mid 1900s is Gide, his supposed most important book Corydon being so dull certainly doesn't help much either. Post mid 1900s, I struggle to find any authors who have taste on this subject. I think I'm starting to realise that these "MAP" and "boylover" chats have far more in common with the sexual liberation movement of the 1960s than with Aestheticism, Decadence, Romanticism, etc, with the latter being where my real interest lies. Sexual liberation, talks of rights, I think these have run their course. I also feel that labels like "MAP" and "boylover" are far too clinical to ever really catch on beyond a tiny niche, hence all are branded as "pedophiles" instead. It feels very odd to me. There is certainly a hunger for something with real edge that isn't just hollow politics, and pederasty seems to fit perfectly in that slot. A movement of art that played with that edge seems, to me, to have a good shot of catching on, especially if it embraced transgression and passion a la Nietzsche and Pater. It is perhaps one of the few taboos we have left, that has some merit and is not just baseless barbarism. Though, such a thing would require other allies with youth-inclined minds, and I predict that's lacking here. Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of users here lived through, were born in, or were raised shortly after the effects of said liberation movement, given things like their 'sigpics', political views, the aesthetics of the website, etc. |