Boylove Manifesto

Here is a copy of the Boylove Manifesto that was written by jay_h in 1997. This is posted on Boywiki and I have decided to post it here as jay_h did an excellent job. The re-post of this manifesto is encouraged by the Boylove Community.
The Boylove Manifesto
Who Are We?

Boylove is a worldwide phenomenon that does not recognise the boundaries of gender, race, nationality, age, religious beliefs or philosophy. Boylove describes a special kind of relationship between human males. Boylove has always been with us, exists among us today and will always continue to exist.

A boylover is commonly referred to as a “pedophile”. Since boylovers can only speak for themselves, the feminists viewpoint cannot be expressed as part of this document. For the same reason you will not find a treatment about the love of women to boys, nor the love of men to girls as part of this discussion. The aim of this document is to explain the love between human males.

As boylovers we distance ourselves from the current discussion about “child sexual abuse”. We are not willing to participate in a confrontational discussion that does not even take into account the variety of sexual relationships between various age groups.

This document represents the views of the author. The stereotype boylover does not exist. There are as many different opinions among boylovers, as there are men who love and admire boys.
Who Should Read This Document?

This document was written for all boylovers, their friends, their boyfriends and their girlfriends. Further, it was conceived for those children who have been, or may someday be confronted with this subject. It is aimed at parents, counselors, teachers and everyone whose life is touched, privately or professionally, by children. Hopefully, it will be read by some who deal with children, youths and boylovers as part of a therapy program. Finally, this document is a resource for those who may have kept an open mind and are genuinely interested in learning more about the difficult subject of “boylove”.

This document hopes to assist the reader in shaping his or her own opinion. While we are not hoping to gain any supporters for our opinions, we would like to be afforded the opportunity to submit our point-of-view to the current debate.
Why Was This Document Published?

The discourse about sexual contacts between different age groups, particularly those that take place between children and adults, has reached a dead-end. The parties on either side of the argument are no longer on speaking terms. Those who have taken it upon themselves to protect every boy from every boylover place the blame squarely on the boylover. To further their cause, these people do not bother to separate fiction and hearsay from the alleged facts. Their doctrine still nourishes from several centuries filled with repressive sexual standards. When child sexuality became taboo, the thought spread through our collective conscience that a child is simply not a sexual being. Sigmund Freud ventured past this taboo. Since that time, the attempt has been made to restrict the newly discovered sexuality of children by means of legislation. The imbalance of power which governs the relationship between adults and children was swiftly expanded to include the subject of sexuality. The adult members of our society mandate how a child is to cope with his or her own sexuality. The attempt to employ restrictions and punishment as a means of child rearing often causes the child to experience serious conflicts. While may traumatise the child, it will certainly do nothing to further his or her natural development in the future. The discrepancy between the desire a child may experience and the restrictions placed upon these desires by society harms the natural and healthy development of his or her own sexuality. As a result, these children will suffer from some psychological damage even as adults.

This document presents the opposing point of view. At the same time, it attempts to liberate children and adults from many false premises which govern our relationships and our sexuality. In view of the social and cultural position of a boylover, an attempt will be made to present his fundamental ethics – particularly the rights of the boy and the boylover’s responsibilities.
What Is Boylove?

It is not possible to reduce or limit boylove by focusing only on the sexual aspects of an intergenerational relationship. Human sexuality plays the same part in a boylove relationship as it undoubtedly does in any relationship between human beings. Therefore it may not not be present, only slightly present, or explicitly present in any given relationship. A relationship that is based on sexual contact alone is not really part of boylove, because this term includes far more than that.

A boylover desires a friendly and close relationship with a boy. This relationship will not necessarily include any sexual intimacy, nor will it necessarily exclude it. A boylover’s fascination focuses primarily on the “boyish” and “childish” traits that are particular to any boy. The physical traits of the boy and the boylover’s sexual desires, which may or may not be present, are quite secondary to that fascination. A boylover will go to great lengths to protect a boy from negative influences, or any physical and emotional harm. Further, a boylover will not resort to threats nor will he show any signs of aggressive or even violent behavior as part of a relationship.
The Boylove Relationship

In most cases is the attraction between the boylover and the boy is mutual. The boy is drawn to an adult who takes him seriously and treats him respectfully. The boylove relationship is void of the demeaning power struggles and restrictions which are customarily are part of any child/adult relationship. In a boylove relationship, the boy is afforded the chance to experience himself as a person. A person who may have and express his own opinion, without running the risk of having it cast aside as unqualified, or even “childish”. His spirit, as well as his body, are seen as a whole. Not as something that is still in the process – a developmental stage on the way to adulthood.

A child is commonly viewed as someone who needs to grow up in order to become a person. Society applies adult standards in order to shape and mould the child. Personality traits that may be considered undesirable or inconvenient, are often removed in the process of child rearing and education.

As part of a boylove relationship the older partner accepts and nourishes the spirit of the child. The boylover doesn’t try to apply adult standards of behaviour in order force the boy’s spirit to fit the mould. The boy experiences this acceptance of his own unique character as something very special and pleasant. He feels free to develop and grow, because his partner treasures his personality and takes it seriously.

Although the adult partner is always in a position to exercise power over the child, the boylover tries to avoid any power struggles within the relationship. However, the boylover must be aware of the fact that an imbalance of power is present in any adult/child relationship. Therefore a situation may arise where he may need to raise this topic with his partner.
What Are The Rights Of The Boy?

First and foremost it is the right of the boy to develop his personality and his sexuality freely. This rule must govern every boylove relationship and it does. Any physical or psychological pressure inherently infringes upon this precious right. Further, any restrictions that may interfere with the development of his personality, or those that may prohibit him from experiencing his sexuality without restraints, may also be considered an infringement of his rights. It is the boylovers responsibility to shape the relationship in order to comply to the wishes and needs of the boy. It is also his responsibility to ask questions and listen carefully. Most importantly, the boylover must not interfere with the autonomous development of the boy.

The boy has the right to be protected against physical or psychological abuse. It should also be considered a form of abuse when a boy is prohibited from exercising his rights to experience a loving relationship, or if he is not allowed to experience and develop his own sexuality. The rights of the boy should be respected in this regard, too.
What Are Our Demands?

We demand the freedom of individual sexuality for boys and for boylovers.

We demand that current standards of sexuality are reconsidered. These standards infringe upon basic human rights, because they prohibit children and those who love them from even thinking about engaging in any sexual intimacy.

We demand that any medical, psychological or religious notions which are preconceived against child sexuality, be exempted from a discussion about new sexual standards.

We demand that children as well as boylovers be included in the current debate concerning sexuality between children and adults. At this point, the “experts” are people who have gained their knowledge about intergenerational relationships from books and statistics. It sounds incredible: there are people who are defending the best interests of an age group and they haven’t even bothered to ask members of this age group if this representation is desirable, or in their best interests.

We demand our freedom of speech in the media. The internet is being targeted as the forum for boylovers. We demand to be held to the same standards as every other participant in the internet: if there is nothing illegal being published on a “boylove site” then this site may not be shut down, or censored at will.

We demand a forum for open communication between boylovers. A forum that is entirely free from repression. This discourse, support and a sense of community is important. It is a place to discuss sexual ethics and a forum that will be reached by boylovers from around the globe.

We demand that society reconsiders the status of the child. This is our most important demand. Since children are not granted their own personality, and since they are not being taken seriously, there are “experts” who may represent their “best interests”. And as long as we allow this representation to take place, children will be denied their right to develop their own personality, as well as their own sexuality.

1997 by jay_h thanks to ahs/green/ a lot of boylovers where i found inspiration. Translated by Red Baron. Thank you! You’re great!

This document may and should be distributed freely. Links and references to this document in your page are welcome. Please don’t forget to credit the author.


Boy-lover Coming Out Pamphlet


Project Freedom Canada: Is being hidden from the people by the governments of Canada?

There have been several cases already in Canada of innocent victims of this highly illegal age of sexual consent increase being advised by lawyers to plead guilty instead of relying on Project Freedom Canada to have all illegal amendments that rely upon the age of sexual consent at age 16 years old to be stripped permanently from the Criminal Code of Canada. Two disturbing cases can be seen here.
Jail likely for Calgary restaurant boss who impregnated 14-year-old

August 17, 2010 – 2:34 pm
By Daryl Slade, Postmedia News

CALGARY — A former restaurant manager is expected to be jailed for sexually exploiting a 14-year-old employee he made pregnant three times.

Provincial court Judge Mark Tyndale raised the spectre of a four-year jail term Monday for the 35-year-old Calgarian, who earlier pleaded guilty to the charge.

“I’m cognizant of the fact this young woman ostensibly consented to all of the activities. However, I am instructed by the courts above me that her consent and her actions of consent are absolutely irrelevant in the circumstances,” said the judge. “She is incapable of consent.”

According to an agreed statement of facts, the restaurant manager and the girl began a friendly relationship in January 2007 that turned sexual by April. They continued to have sex on a weekly basis at his home. She got pregnant twice within a year, first having an abortion and then suffering a miscarriage.

After the abortion, according to court documents, she attempted suicide by cutting her wrists and trying to overdose on ibuprofen, landing her in hospital. She then abused drugs, ran away from home and stopped going to school.

Before the third pregnancy, which the girl brought to term, she had an argument with her mother and police were called in to investigate.

The boss was charged in June 2008 and released with a provision he not have any contact with the girl. He breached the condition by visiting the hospital the day his baby was born. He has pleaded guilty to that charge.

A court order prevents the release of details, including naming the accused or the restaurant, that would identify the girl.

Crown prosecutor Melissa Bond pitched a nine-month sentence while defence lawyer Tonii Roulston sought a 90-day intermittent term.

Tyndale asked the lawyers to provide more information on why the offender shouldn’t face the four-year minimum, as specified in case law.

The judge said sexual intercourse constitutes a major sexual assault under case law, and the Court of Appeal has indicated major sexual assault of a child has a four-year starting point.
According to this article the man was instructed by his lawyer to plead guilty. This is a lie. There has been no crime committed here. The legal age of sexual consent increase is illegal and it must be thrown out immediately. Many will recall that Octaevius Altair on behalf of Project Freedom Canada had already taken the Attorney General of Canada to the Supreme Court in March 2009 to have these illegal amendments stripped from the Criminal Code but was denied standing on behalf of public interest. I have contacted the defense team for this individual urging that the plea be changed to “Not Guilty” as there is no grounds since law and order must be restored to Canada through the defense of our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Another disturbing case.


Abbotsford man charged with sex offence on 14-year-old boy

By Staff reporter, The Province May 26, 2010

Read more:

A 20-year-old Abbotsford man has been charged with fostering an illegal sexual relationship with a 14-year-old Abbotsford boy.

Jeffrey Goddard was arrested on May 20, and has been charged with invitation to sexual touching. Police say Goddard groomed the victim through face to face encounters, phone conversations and through a social networking website.

Police are asking anyone with information about this incident to phone the Major Crime Unit of the Abbotsford Police Department at 604-859-5225

© Copyright (c) The Province
Again we see innocent people being charged through an illegal amendment that must be challenged and struck down.
There is nothing wrong with harmless and fun recreational sex for youth and/or adults. I personally have engaged in recreational sex with boys as young as 14 years old and there never has nor will there ever be police involvement because there is no reason for there to be. Let us hope that we can now get ourselves a test case and overturn this sick religious agenda by the Federal Government of Canada and restore law and order to our country. I will be providing more information as I am in contact with the defense team.

Foolish Gay Assimilationist Parade In Toronto This Weekend: Never forget 1994

Friday, July 2, 2010

The Foolish Gay Assimilationists have their Pride Parade this weekend in Toronto. It is good that they did not get any Tax Payer Funds for this worthless event -they deserve nothing-. Remember that before 1994 there was a single, same-gender-oriented community that was united in the belief of the Liberation of all sexual minorities. It was our same-gender preference that kept us united. In 1994 this united Community was destroyed by a new faction from within the same-gender-oriented community that changed the agenda from the liberation of all sexual minorities to the assimilation of certain sexual minority archetypes and the exclusion of all others. They betrayed their own kind during the Clinton Era within the United States because they had hoped it would gain them a seat on the vapid United Nations (Canada should not be a member of the United Nations). Fortunately they never did get anything for all their trouble apart from the destruction of the united community. Now there are 2 distinct same-gender-oriented communities. Those who believe in Liberation and then there are those who preach assimilation. The Assimilationists took the word GAY to describe themselves and banned it’s use for the rest of us as well as banning many organizations from any participation within this new community or any parades.

” I was a member of 2 organizations that were banned. Both the North American Man/Boy Love Association and Project Truth. I had a friend within the Gay Anarchists and they were also banned.” Octaevius Altair
Thousands of same-gender-oriented liberation groups were banned all over the world. We still exist. We have the same mandate and it is still Liberation.

” Liberation not Assimilation.” This is our mantra.

NAMBLA Archives are a good source for some information about this time. A time that is never discussed now among these Gay Assimilationists. Many Gay Youth do not even know that the same-gender-oriented community was fragmented without purpose. This is due to the fact that it gained the Assimilationists nothing – they have no shame -.

NAMBLA Website NAMBLA Archives

Remember those who believe in Liberation should not participate in any events organized by this new Gay Community. They do not deserve our support.
Minor-Attracted-Adults (M.A.A.) please stop hiding. Based on the absurd numbers of sex offenders globally, it is obvious that we are not such a small minority. We have nothing to fear.
“There is no good rape or bad rape. All rape is the same. There are no good victims and bad victims, all victims are the same. There is no good consensual sex and bad consensual sex. All consensual sex is the same and all must be legal. Without consent there is only rape. There are already laws to deal with rape.”
Sex is nothing more than a recreational activity without any morality apart from that which we choose to personally impart it. Sexual pleasure is enjoyed by Human Beings of all sex, sexuality, race and age. It is no different than going to the toilet. There is no reason for it to be subjected to legislation. Sexual pleasure is something that must be enjoyed by all sexes, sexualities and ages. This is beacasue we are all capable of this arousal and pleasure – even Children -. We have truth upon our side and study after study that proves this.
Come out of the closet. Read this.
Create as many profiles on online dating sites and social networking sites as honest and open M.A.A.’s. As long as you do not post illegal material or encourage illegal acts, you cannot be banned. If any attempt to ban you for being and open Child-lover you must continue to re-create and maintain your presence.
Remember that there is only one truth, regardless of the popularity of it. We must organize a backlash against the Assimilationist Agenda and educate our youth that it is time to merge again into a single Global same-gender-oriented community.
Some Potential Boy-lovers you might have heard of: From Sex and Sexuality, 1640-1940 Literary, Medical and Sociological Perspectives
Part 5: Gay Literature from Anacreon to John Addington Symonds from the British Library, London
Anacreon (c570-c485 BC)
Born in Asia Minor he spent most of his life in Samos, Athens and Thessalia. He was known for his satires and poems featuring love and infatuation. Included in this collection are translations of his poems published in 1815.
Aristophanes (c460/450-c386 BC)
Aristophanes was a Greek Old Comic dramatist and his writing covers the period from Athen’s political and moral decline to a return to prosperity shortly before his death. His plays, full of social and political observations, concentrate on Athenian sexual mores and include a good deal of slapstick humour concerning parts of the body which appealed to the lower classes. The Knights is reported to be a criticism of Cleon, one of the most important men in Athens.
John Atherton (1598-1640)
He was born in Bridgewater, Somerset and educated at Oxford. He moved to Ireland eventually rising from prebendary in Dublin to Lord Bishop of Waterford and Lismore. In 1640 he was accused of sodomy with his steward and tithe proctor, John Childe and both men were convicted and hanged. They were only the second pair of men executed for sodomy in UK history and numerous pamphlets were written about the notorious case including the one included in this collection The Life and Death of John Atherton, 1641. It contains lurid illustrations of the men on the gallows.
Thomas Artus
We include his work Les Hermaphrodites, 1610.
Richard Barnfield (1574-1620)
He was born in Staffordshire, spent his youth in Shropshire, studied at Oxford and became a lawyer. While at Oxford he became friends with the poets Thomas Watson and Michael Drayton and possibly Edmund Spenser. The Affectionate Shepherd, 1594, his first poem, was based on the second eclogue of Virgil and Cynthia, with Certaine Sonnets, 1595 is written in the Spenserian stanza and would appear to be a panegyric on Queen Elizabeth. Both of the poems describe a shepherd’s longing for a younger man using pastoral homoerotic similes.
Thomas Lovell Beddoes (1803-1849)
Born near Bristol and educated at Oxford he went to Germany to study medicine and practised in Zurich. Throughout his life he suffered with depression, committing suicide with poison in Basel and much of his work is preoccupied with death. We include his poem Dream Pedlary, 1910.
Sir Richard Francis Burton (1821-1890)
An explorer and orientalist who spoke around 30 languages, he translated most famously The Kama Sutra,1883 and The Arabian Nights – a plain and literal translation, 1885. We include the Terminal Essay from the latter which describes a wide range of sexual practices, including a frank discussion of homosexuality.
Samuel Butler (1835-1902)
He was born in Nottinghamshire, educated at Cambridge and emigrated to New Zealand where he became a sheep farmer. Although his most famous novel is The Way of all Flesh he was the author of several satirical novels, books on controversial scientific subjects and the translator of Greek and Latin works. We include his homoerotic work Shakespeare’s Sonnets Reconsidered, 1927.
Lord George Gordon Noel Byron (1788-1824)
Byron was brought up in Scotland and educated at Harrow and Cambridge. He became famous with the publication of Childe Harold in 1812 and went on to write some of England’s best loved Romantic poetry. Although his sexuality was in doubt he married and had affairs. He left England for ever in 1816 travelling to Switzerland and Italy where he wrote Don Juan, 1866 and finally to Greece where he took part in the war of independence against the Turks.
John Crowne (c1641-1712)
He was born in England and accompanied his father to the New World in 1657 where he studied at Harvard. He returned to England without graduating in 1660. He produced numerous plays most of which were based on heroic love. We include his play The Married Beau, 1694.
Richard Henry Dana (1815-1882)
Born in Cambridge Massachusetts, he attended Harvard. Suffering from ill health he enlisted as a common sailor on a voyage round Cape Horn to California, visiting settlements there including Monterey, San Diego, Santa Barbara and San Francisco. He kept a diary during his trip and his experiences formed the basis for his book Two Years Before the Mast, 1841 included in this collection. The book is one of America’s most famous accounts of life at sea and provides a detailed account of life on the California coast before the Gold Rush. He later became a lawyer, an advocate for the rights of seamen, an expert on maritime law and a prominent abolitionist playing a prominent part in the politics of the American Civil War.
Goldsworthy Lowes Dickinson (1862-1932)
He was born in London, studied medicine at Cambridge and had an intense platonic love affair there with Roger Fry. Together with other well known figures he drafted schemes for the League of Nations and he played a leading role in the founding of a group of international pacifists known as the Bryce Group.
He believed that the study of the Greeks was very important to the contemporary world and his book The Greek View of Life, 1896 which was published in several dozen editions was recommended as an excellent overview of ancient Athenian attitudes to religion, the state, art and the individual. We also include Poems, 1896.
John Dryden (1631-1700)
He was a poet, translator and playwright, born in Northamptonshire who became the dominant literary figure of his age and famous for his satiric poetry and comedies. His play Don Sebastian, King of Portugal, 1690 tells the story of a king who abdicates because of an act of incest.
George Etherege (1636-1689)
Born in Berkshire he studied law in London . His plays introduced a style of wit previously unknown on the British stage and he vividly portrays gay young gentlemen enjoying their amorous adventures. After writing two very successful plays, The Man of Mode, or Sir Fopling Flutter, 1676 is recognised as the best comedy of intrigue written in England before the days of Congreve. It had a witty plot and satirised persons who were well known in London at the time.
Ronald Firbank (1886-1926)
Born in London he left Cambridge without completing his degree. Author of several books, we include here Valmouth, 1919, Santal, 1921 and the play The Princess Zoubaroh, 1920. Valmouth is set on the west coast of England and describes the activities of elderly people at a health spa. He was a great admirer of Oscar Wilde who appears thinly disguised in The Princess of Zoubaroh.
Theophile Gautier (1811-1872)
He was born in Tarbes, France, educated in Paris and became a poet, dramatist, novelist, journalist and literary critic. His early poetry written in the 1830s was written in the style of the Romantic Movement but he later took up the idea of “art for art’s sake”. He became the leader of the Parnassian school of poetry which believed that poetry should be concerned with artistic effect rather than life.
His most important novel was Mademoiselle de Maupin, 1883, a historical romance telling the story of a love triangle – a man and his mistress who both fall in love with Madelaine de Maupin who is disguised as a man.
Robert Greene (1558-1592)
He was born in Norwich, attended Cambridge and Oxford and then moved to London. He became a well-known personality publishing pamphlets, plays and romances and became one of the first authors to fully support himself by his writing. He lived a rather scandalous life, mixing with the seamier side of life in Elizabethan London. He is well known to Shakespeare scholars as one of his pamphlets makes one of the very first references to Shakespeare as a writer. Menaphon, 1589 written in imitation of Arcadia by Sir Philip Sidney is an example of one of his better romances and the short poems and songs included are considered his finest.
Robert Smythe Hitchen
We include his work The Green Carnation, 1894.
Joris-Karl Huysmans (1848-1907) pseudonym of Charles Marie Georges Huysmans
A French novelist living in Paris, he wrote semi-autobiographical novels which depict the seamy side of Paris life while working as a civil servant for the Ministry of the Interior. His style is known for its breadth of vocabulary, very detailed description and satirical wit. His early novel Marthe Histoire d’une fille, 1876, the story of a young prostitute, depicting how physical or spiritual escape is morally wrong, shows the influence of Emile Zola’s work. His most famous novel Against the Grain (A Rébours), 1922 is the story of an aesthete and his homosexual encounters in Paris. The novel was to influence Oscar Wilde and his writing and formed a key exhibit as an example of a sodomitical book at Wilde’s trial in 1895.
William J Ibbett
We include his work A Greek Garland of Amorous Trifles, 1925.
William Jackson
We include his work Sodom and Onan, 1776.
Henry James (1843-1916)
Regarded as one of America’s greatest writers he was born in New York and lived most of his adult life in Britain. He studied law at Harvard but was drawn to writing and contributed articles to American periodicals. He is regarded as one of the founders and leaders of the school of realism in fiction and is best known for his novels such as The Portrait of a Lady, The Wings of a Dove, The Ambassadors and The Golden Bowl which had as their central themes the meeting of the American and European way of life. Many of his friends in Britain belonged to an artistic circle which was considered to be homosexual and research carried out on his correspondence in recent years raises questions about his sexuality.
Jocelyn Percy (1764-1843)
He was Anglican Bishop of Clogher in the Church of Ireland from 1820-1822. The pamphlet A Correct Account of the Horrible Occurrence which took place at a public-house in St James, 1822 tells the story of how he was caught in an compromising position with a Grenadier guardsman in a public house in London. He was the most senior British churchman to be involved in a public homosexual scandal in the 19th century and the case became the subject of many cartoons, pamphlets and limericks. He was removed from his position as bishop for “the crimes of immorality, incontinence, Sodomitical practices, habits, and propensities, and neglect of his spiritual, judicial, and ministerial duties”.
William Johnson (1823-1892) also known as William Cory
Born in Devon, England he was educated at Eton where he later became a master. Despite being a great educator he was forced to resign in middle age for supposed homosexual activity. He is best known for his Uranian poem Ionica, 1858 which was a collection of homoerotic and pederastic poems dedicated to one of his pupils, later Lord Halifax. He is the author of the well known Eton Boating Song.
Nathaniel Lee (c1653-1692)
Educated at Cambridge, he wanted to act but turned to writing plays. The Rival Queens, or the Death of Alexander the Great, 1677 which has jealousy as its theme was a favourite on the English stage for many years. His associates in London belonged to the John Wilmot, Earl of Rochester circle and he lived their profligate way of life. We include three more of his plays in this collection.
Vernon Lee (1856-1935) pseudonym of Violet Paget
Born in France to British parents she spent most of her life in Italy. She is known mostly for her supernatural fiction but wrote also essays and poetry and contributed to the “Yellow Book”. Her circle included many famous male writers but she preferred close friendships with women. She was responsible for introducing the concept of empathy into the English language and her writings were influenced by Walter Pater, the pioneer of the English Aesthetic Movement. Ariadne in Mantua, 1903, a romance is recognised as her most self-revealing work. The Beautiful, 1913, also included in this collection, is a study of aesthetics.
John Henry Mackay (1864-1933)
Born in Scotland of German and Scottish parents, he returned to Germany with his German mother when his father died. He wrote in German and initially gained recognition as a lyric poet writing novellas. His novel Der Schwimmer, 1901 was one of the first literary sports novels ever written. He achieved fame with two books about anarchy Die Anarchisten and Der Freiheitsucher and also wrote books about homosexual love under the pseudonym Sagitta.
Christopher Marlowe (1564-1593)
Born in Canterbury and educated at Cambridge he is famous for tragedies such as Tamburlaine, The Jew of Malta and The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus in the years preceding Shakespeare. Edward II which is included in the collection is one of the very few Renaissance plays to deal with the subject of homosexuality. It tells the story of the dethronement of the homosexual Edward II by his barons and French queen.
Ovid (43BC-AD17)
Born near Rome, Publius Ovidius Naso was educated in Athens and travelled widely in Asia and Europe. We include his poem Ars amatoria (Art of Love) which gives details on lovemaking. It caused a scandal in Rome and led to his banishment.
Walter Pater (1839-1894)
As an essayist and critic, born in London who lived most of his life in Oxford, he is remembered primarily as an innovator in aesthetics – “art for art’s sake”. His writings aimed to introduce to his age the art and literature of the Renaissance and his hedonistic life was a great influence on his younger contemporaries, Symons, Edmund Gosse, Gerald Manley Hopkins and Oscar Wilde. His novel Marius the Epicurean, 1892 is a study of the thoughts and feelings of a young second century Roman.
Arthur Rimbaud (1854-1891)
A French poet and father of French symbolism, he produced his best work while still in his teens. His relationship with the French poet Paul Verlaine was to end violently and it was during this period he wrote Une Saison en Enfer, 1873 examining his spiritual state in poetry and prose. The work is regarded as a pre-cursor to modern Symbolist writing.
Antonio Rocco (1586-1653)
This Italian writer is famous for a single book which was condemned as filthy and obscene but was finally published in 1652 twenty years after it was written. It is called L’Alcibiade Fanciullo a Scola (The Boy Alcybiades at School) and tells the story of a teacher trying to persuade a pupil to have sexual relationships with him.
Frederick Rolfe ( Pseudonym Baron Corvo) (1860-1913)
He was born in London and after converting to Roman Catholicism wished to become a priest, an ambition which was never realised and he became a freelance writer and photographer, mostly of nude men. Most of his writings concern homosexuality. He was a regular contributor to the Yellow Book for which the series Stories Toto Told Me, 1897 was written. These are retellings of Italian peasant legends about the saints, later collected into book form with a sequel and entitled In his Own Image, 1901.
Marquis de Sade (1740-1814)
A French writer infamous for his licentious and scandalous life and for the pornography he wrote, his works have been the subject of much argument and discussion. We include his play La Philosophie dans le Boudoir, 1795 which is a pornographic tale concerning a young woman and her corruption by a woman, her brother and a homosexual. The characters are all bisexual and prefer the act of sodomy.
Simeon Solomon (1840-1905)
Born in London to a prominent Jewish family he became a well known painter of the Pre-Raphaelite circle. He was open about his sexuality and was sentenced to hard labour for openly attempting to procure men in London. He spent his last years suffering from alcoholism in a London workhouse.
Thomas Southerne (1660-1746)
Born in Dublin, he became a lawyer and a soldier before turning to writing plays. He wrote numerous plays, both comedies and drama, The Maid’s Last Prayer, 1693 being one of them. His plays were regularly revived and remained popular over the succeeding years.
Philip Stubbes (1550?-1593?)
As an English poet and pamphleteer, in his famous work Anatomie of Abuses, 1583, he addressed the controversy concerning certain aspects of the Catholic doctrine which had been carried over into the Church of England. His ridicule of dancing, theatre and other activities deemed immoral gave him the reputation of being a Puritan.
Howard Overing Sturgis (1855-1920)
He was born in London to a rich and well-connected family who mixed with well known figures such as Henry Adams and William Makepeace Thackeray. His novel Tim: A Story of Eton, 1891 recounts the unhappy time he spent at Eton. After attending Cambridge he lived with his lover “The Babe” for many years.
Algernon Charles Swinburne (1837-1909)
He was born in London and after attending Oxford became famous for his verse dramas. Poems and Ballads, 1866 caused one of the most famous literary scandals of the period as it attempted to shock the reader with a celebration of physical love in the spirit of the ancient Greek lyric poets and French contemporaries. He enjoyed a hedonistic life style and counted Dante Gabriel Rossetti and William Morris as his friends.
John Addington Symonds (1840-1893)
Born in Bristol and educated at Harrow he married but had several homosexual lovers. It was while he was in Europe with one of his male pupils that he wrote some of his best poetry New and Old: A Volume of Verse, 1880. He eventually settled at Davos in Switzerland and it was here that he wrote most of his books. A volume of essays In the Key of Blue, 1893 and Walt Whitman, A Study, 1893 were published in the year of his death.
Symonds could not speak openly about his homosexuality but he privately published a large number of poems on the subject and in 1883 wrote one of the first essays in defence of homosexuality A Problem in Greek Ethics followed in 1896 by A Problem in Modern Ethics which included proposals for the reform of anti-homosexual legislation. These essays continued to be read widely by homosexual writers for many decades after and in the late twentieth century more of his personal writings and letters were finally published.
Albius Tibullus (c 54-19 BC)
Tibullus was a Latin poet and writer of elegies. His book of love elegies included in this collection contains details of his love affairs with men as well as women.
Paul Verlaine (1844-1896)
French poet and leader of the Symbolist movement, he was born in Metz and educated in Paris. He was briefly married but left his wife to live with the French poet Arthur Rimbaud. After a drunken quarrel with him, during which Rimbaud was injured, he spent two years in prison and converted to Roman Catholicism. Many of his poems reflect on his life with Rimbaud. He taught in England and in France and his infatuation with one of his pupils, Lucien Létinois produced more poetry. In his later years he was addicted to drink and drugs and lived in poverty in Paris. We include his poem Hombres, 1903.
Walt Whitman (1819-1892)
The famous American poet, essayist, journalist and humanist is regarded as the most influential poet in American literature. He was born on Long Island and worked as a journalist, teacher, clerk and as a volunteer nurse during the American Civil War, at the same time producing memorable poetry. He is believed to be homosexual.
Leaves of Grass, a collection of poetry which he would continue editing and revising until his death is recognised as his greatest work. The first edition published in 1855 caused considerable interest but was also criticised for its obscenity. Further editions appeared throughout his lifetime and we include that for 1856.
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)
Educated at Trinity College Dublin and Oxford, he was famous for his bohemian life style. At the beginning of his career he published poetry and novels such as The Picture of Dorian Gray, 1890 but it was as a playwright he enjoyed most success. Accused and convicted of homosexual conduct with Lord Alfred Douglas at the peak of his career in 1895 he served hard labour in Reading prison before moving to France where he died a few years later.
John Wilmot, 2nd Earl of Rochester (1647-1680)
An English libertine and writer of satirical and bawdy poetry, he was born in Oxfordshire and attended Oxford University. Although he married and had a mistress his poetry suggests he was bi-sexual. He led a very dissolute life and by his early thirties was dead from alcoholism and possibly syphilis. His poems and dramas deal with scandals in the court of Charles II and are influenced by his reading of French and Latin poets. His poem A Satyr Against Mankind, 1675 was admired but was infamous for its denunciation of rationalism and optimism.
Theodore Winthrop (1828-1861)
A writer, lawyer and traveller, he was born in New Haven, Connecticut. After graduating from Yale he travelled in Great Britain, Europe and USA. He wrote and contributed various articles to periodicals before the Civil War but it was not till after his death that his books were published. John Brent, 1876 was based on his experiences in the West and Cecil Dreeme, 1876 his most important work, discussed morality and gender at New York University.
Let us not forget Allen Ginsberg and William S. Burroughs.


Let us hope that the economic issues in Greece lead to greater economic destabilization across Europe. If this spreads we can only hope to see Communist Revolutionary principles flourish. In Greece, Nepal, India and in South and Central America’s, may Communism conquer all. A nucleus in the making. All Nation States are internment camps and all forms of currency are worthless and are a form of slavery. Greece must leave Europe and close all banks and kick the Currency Slavers out of their country.

A story by Graeme Wearden at The Guardian

Greece debt crisis: timeline

Greece’s economy has been in the balance for months, but the seeds of the crisis were sown a decade ago

1 January 2001: Greece joins the euro
Having been left out when the single European currency began at the beginning of 1999, Greece becomes the 12th member two years later after dramatically cutting inflation and interest rates, and bringing the drachma smoothly into line with the euro. The Greek government hails the achievement, saying it promised greater stability and prosperity. But the then president of the European Central Bank, Wim Duisenberg, warns that the country must keep working hard to improve its economy, and some analysts fret that the euro could suffer from the inclusion of weaker European nations.

15 November 2004: Greece admits fudging euro entry
Close scrutiny of Greece’s budget figures shows that the country has not actually met the conditions to join the eurozone. Greek government admits that its deficit has never been below 3% since 1999, as EU rules demand.

29 March 2005: Austerity measures
Having ousted the Greece’s socialist government a year earlier, the right-wing New Democracy party imposes an austerity budget to try to slash Greece’s deficit and get the public finances back on track after the cost of hosting the 2004 Olympics. It includes tax hikes on alcohol and tobacco, and an increase in VAT from 18% to 19%.

Spring 2006: Bouncing back?
A year after the austerity budget, Greece’s economy appears to be growing strongly again, with GDP up 4.1% in the first three months of 2006.

4 October 2009: George Papandreou becomes Greece’s prime minister
Papandreou’s Panhellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK) party wins power after New Democracy calls a snap general election, asking the Greek people for a new mandate to tackle the looming financial crisis. The Greek economy has contracted by 0.3%, and the national debt has risen to €262bn, from €168bn in 2004. At this stage, the government expects the 2009 deficit to reach 6% of GDP.

30 November 2009: Debt fears mount
Papandreou admits that the Greek economy is in “intensive care”, as European finance ministers express concern about the size of the country’s debt.

8 December 2009: Fitch downgrades Greece’s credit rating
The crisis escalates and shares fall around the world after ratings agency Fitch cuts Greece’s long-term debt to BBB+, from A-. This is the first time in a decade that Greece does not have an A-rating, and pushes up the cost of borrowing.

14 December 2009: Papandreou unveils radical reforms
The Greek government announces an ambitious plan to cut the deficit by four percentage points, as a proportion of GDP, in 2010-2011.

17 December 2009: Strikes hit Greece as debt crisis grows
Thousands of workers take to the streets in protest at Papandreou’s cutbacks, hours after Standard & Poor’s follows Fitch by cutting Greece’s credit rating.

28 January 2010: Greece promises to ‘put house in order’
The spread between the interest charged on Greek and German debt widens to 4% as investors fret that Greece may default.

2 February 2010: Papandreou makes TV appeal for unity over financial crisis
Greece announces a wider austerity package, including a freeze on public sector pay and higher taxes for low and middle-income households.

10 February 2010: Greek public sector workers strike as spectre of bailout looms
Riot police fire tear gas on demonstrators in Athens, protesting at the austerity measures. Meanwhile European leaders consider a rescue package for Greece at an economic summit.

11 February 2010: Angela Merkel dashes Greek hopes of rescue bid
Germany opposes a quick bailout of Greece, saying the country must tackle its debt problems itself.

26 February 2010: Goldman Sachs faces Fed inquiry over Greek crisis
Investment bank is accused of helping to cause the crisis by using derivatives contracts to disguise how much Greece was borrowing.

3 March 2010: Greece unveils radical austerity package
Greek population told to accept lower bonuses and higher taxes or risk bankruptcy.

4 March 2010: Greece breathes a sigh of relief as 10-year bonds sale proves popular
… and the financial markets welcome the move by bidding for €16bn of government debt.

9 March 2010: Papandreou asks Obama for help
Greek prime minister calls for a crackdown on financial speculators during a whirlwind world tour.

29 March 2010: Greece struggles on after weak response to bond sale
Financial markets start to lose faith in Greece’s ability to service its debts.

11 April 2010: EU ministers agree Greek bailout terms
Finally, after weeks of haggling the eurozone agrees a €30bn rescue package for its weakest member.

16 April 2010: Fury in Greece over IMF intervention
Greek government admits that it may need help from the International Monetary Fund, pushing its bailout up to €45bn.

19 April 2010: Greek borrowing reaches record high
The spread between the yield on Greek and German bonds shoots up to 469 basis points, as Greek workers fear the IMF’s arrival.

23 April 2010: Greece activates €45bn EU/IMF loans
With €16bn of debt maturing in May, Papandreou bows to the inevitable and officially requests a bailout.

27 April 2010: Standard & Poor’s downgrade Greek credit rating to junk status
S&P loses patience with Greece and slashes its credit rating to BB+, sending stock markets plunging worldwide. Analysts and politicians warn that €45bn simply won’t be enough to sort out the Greek crisis, with Goldman Sachs predicting that the country may need a €150bn rescue package.

28 April 2010: All eyes are Berlin
EU and IMF officials hold crunch talks with German leaders. Rumours of a €120bn package calm the markets, as Angela Merkel admits that admitting Greece into the euro may have been a mistake.

2 May 2010: EU debt crisis: Greece granted €110bn aid to avert meltdown
After days of frantic negotiations, the IMF, the EC and the European central bank hammer out a three-year package to rescue Greece.

4 May 2010: Greek protesters storm the Acropolis as markets lose faith
As anger erupts across Athens at the scale of the cutbacks that Greece must now implement, stock markets fall sharply and gold hits a record high as investors start to doubt whether the €110bn bailout will actually solve Greece problems.

The Human Collective on Earth requires Planetary Resources (shared by all) and Human Labour for all things and currency for nothing.

Lunatics In Uganda

Uganda’s parliament is preparing to pass a law that would impose brutal sentences? A homosexual persons faces sentences of life imprisonment? Even death.

An international outcry is required ? The President ordered a revision of current law, But after a ruthless campaign by those who hate gay people?

The lobbyists orchestrated by extremists, the possibility exists that the bill is approved, opening the door to persecution and generalized violence.

The opposition to the change in Law grows, but the Anglican Church favours the clampdown of gay people. The gay rights activist Frank Mugisha writes: “This bill puts us in serious danger. Please sign the online petition and ask others to support us, if we got a huge global response to our governments brutal clampdown on people just for being gay !

Realize that Uganda would be isolated internationally by the proposed law.

Pending a decision, an irresistible wave of pressure would save the lives of Frank and many others who would be placed on death row. We need to Build a huge petition to join this action.

While homophobia is widespread in Uganda, as in much of the world, so is a belief in basic human rights — and this bill is, at heart, an assault on human rights.

Sex Offender Classification: Amusing story

Here is a sad but true and somewhat amusing story about what makes a Sex Offender. It shouldn’t take too long before the majority of the population will be classified as Sex Offenders.

By Marsha Burns

Or read it below


Look Who’s a Sex Offender Now!
It’s easy to be complacent about sex offender laws — until one of them comes crashing down out of the blue on top of you or someone in your family. Unfortunately, it’s becoming easier and easier all the time for that to happen — with behaviors that most people consider perfectly healthy and acceptable, like breastfeeding or taking innocent pictures of their own babies in the buff. Here are some heartbreaking examples.


• If you allow your teenager to have sex.
• If you discipline an unruly child.
• If you kiss your naked baby.
• If you breastfeed your baby.
• If you take pictures of your children naked.
• If you’re a teenager taking naked pictures of yourself or your sweetheart.
• If you win custody in a nasty divorce.
• If you get caught taking a pee.
• If you have consensual sex in prison.
• If you kiss a student on the cheek.
• If you take pictures of children in public.
• If you look at children in public.
• If you have consensual sex with a teenager.

Okay for your teenager to have sex? You’re a sex offender.

Detroit, 2004. Michael Schrake was arrested, jailed, registered as a sex offender, and forbidden to see his three children because he allowed his 15-year-old daughter to sleep with her boyfriend. He at first believed that the boy was only 18, but when he found out he was 20, he went to the police to complain. But the police arrested both the boyfriend and the father, charging the latter as an accomplice. As far as the police were concerned, the age of the boyfriend didn’t matter because it is a crime to allow a minor to have sex at all.

See Father Faces Charges For Allowing Teen Daughter To Have Sex: Report — Man Apparently Provided Condoms To Daughter, Boyfriend — WDIV-TV (Detroit, Michigan), January 7, 2004 and Local Dad Shocked By Sex Charges Against Him — Man must register as sex offender — WDIV-TV (Detroit, Michigan), February 18, 2004. His name is not in the registry as of December 2007. This might mean that his case was overturned. Still, according to the news reports, he spent time in jail for this and was for at least some period of time not allowed to see his own children!

Georgia, 2002. When Janet Allison’s 15-year-old daughter got pregnant, she allowed her 17-year-old boyfriend to move in with the family. For this, she was convicted of being a party to child molestation. Even though the couple later married, she remains a registered sex offender for enabling their relationship. Because of this, she has had to move out of her four-bedroom home, which was too close to a church, and now lives in a trailer.

See Absurdity Breakout: Laws end up targeting not-so-dangerous ’sex offenders’, GateHouse News Service, August 20, 2007.

Discipline an unruly child? You’re a sex offender.

Chicago, 2005. Fitzroy Barnaby had to swerve to avoid hitting a 14-year-old girl who walked in front of his car. He got out and grabbed her arm to lecture her on safety. The girl complained and the man was convicted of unlawful restraint of a minor — officially making him a sex offender.

See He grabbed girl’s arm — now he’s a sex offender, Chicago Sun-Times, July 1, 2005. His name is not in the registry as of December 2007. In a phone call, his lawyer explained he is not yet on, pending a ruling from the US Supreme Court. The Illinois Supreme Court declined to hear the case, saying that the issue was decided in another case, in which a kidnapper was determined to be subject to SO registration even though there was no sexual activity with the victim. It seems astounding that the court was willing to take a kidnapping as analogous to this case!

Kiss your naked baby? You’re a sex offender.

North Carolina, 2005. Charbel Hamaty spent six months in prison for kissing his naked baby on the belly button. His wife was also arrested and she was denied contact with their children for several months for taking a picture of the “abuse.”

See Parents Cleared of Child Abuse in Photo Flap, Associated Press, July 27, 2005.

Breastfeed your baby? You’re a sex offender.

Dallas, Texas, 2003. Jacqueline Mercado and her boyfriend were arrested on felony charges for a photograph of her breastfeeding her child.

See 1-Hour Arrest, Dallas Observer, April 17, 2003.

Take pictures of your children naked? You’re a sex offender.

Georgia, 2006. Jody Jenkins “took some photos of my kids naked on a camping trip. A drugstore employee called the police — and my family’s life became a living hell.”

See They called me a child pornographer — I took some photos of my kids naked on a camping trip. A drugstore employee called the police — and my family’s life became a living hell. — Salon, July 18, 2006.

Canada, 2006. Paramjit Singh was charged with attempting to smuggle child pornography into Canada and was denied entry into the country to join his wife and son because he had a naked baby picture of the boy on his cell phone.

See Nude photo labelled porn, Toronto Star (Toronto, Canada), April 14, 2006.

USA, 1990s. There was, throughout the 1990s, an average of about one case per year that made it into the news of photo lab customers being arrested for taking innocent naked photographs of their children.

See Is this child pornography? — American photo labs are arresting parents as child pornographers for taking pictures of their kids in the bath. — by James Kincaid, Salon, January 31, 2000. Five example cases are briefly described in the article.

Boston, 1996. Toni Angeli was confronted and arrested by police in front of her four-year-old son when they went together to the photo lab to pick up photographs that included some innocent pictures of the child naked.

See No Excuse: Zona Labs and its legal allies should have known better, Boston Phoenix, February 9, 1996 (More on the case).

Teenager taking naked pictures of yourself or your sweetheart? You’re a sex offender.

Tallahassee, Florida, 2004. A 16-year-old girl and her 17-year-old boyfriend took pictures of themselves naked and engaging in unspecified “sexual behavior.” One of them e-mailed the photos to the other. They were arrested on child pornography charges. Florida law allows teenagers of that age to be sexual with each other, but recording it is still illegal.

See Police blotter: Teens prosecuted for racy photos, CNet News, February 9, 2007 and A.H., a child v Florida, First District Court of Appeal, Florida, January 19, 2007.

Pennsylvania. A 13-year-old girl is on the sex offender registry for life because she took pictures of herself naked.

See Absurdity Breakout: Laws end up targeting not-so-dangerous ’sex offenders’, GateHouse News Service, August 20, 2007.

Virginia. Two teenage girls are on the sex offender registry for life because they took topless photographs of each other.

See Absurdity Breakout: Laws end up targeting not-so-dangerous ’sex offenders’, GateHouse News Service, August 20, 2007.

Win custody in a nasty divorce? Watch out! You might be a sex offender.

Charleston, W.Va., 2007. Melissa Hicks did not mention any sexual improprieties during the divorce proceedings against her husband, David. But after she was not granted custody of their two daughters, he became the pariah of the neighborhood and was sentenced to 30 years in prison for alleged misdeeds with various little girls.

See West Virginia Man Sentenced To 30 Years In Prison On Child Pornography Charges, US Department of Justice, November 2, 2007 and Letters in support of David Hicks, US District Court (Charleston, West Virginia), April 12, 2007.

Got caught taking a pee? You’re a sex offender.

Florida, 2007. Juan Matamoros’s charge for public urination was in Massachusetts in 1986. But it makes him a sex offender to this day, which means he has to move his family because he’s not allowed to live within 2500 feet of a park, and the house they’ve been living in is near three of them.

See Florida Banishes Man for Public Urination, MSNBC, March 2007.

Chicago. A construction worker who relieved himself behind a garbage can in an alley was spotted by a police officer, arrested, and convicted of public urination and indecent exposure. As a Mexican immigrant, he was later rounded up for deportation by Homeland Security’s “Operation Predator.”

See Immigrant sex offenders targeted, Chicago Tribune, February 24, 2005.

See more examples of people on the sex offender registry for public urination and other types of “indecent exposure” in Q&A # 6

Have consensual sex in prison? You’re a sex offender.

Ohio, 2001. Tammy Welton used to work at a state prison, where sex is illegal for inmates or with inmates. Consent being irrelevant, she was convicted of sexual battery and spent six month back in prison on the other side of the bars. That conviction now makes her a Tier III (highest risk level) sex offender for the rest of her life.

See Next Comes Burning at the Stake: Is Ohio getting too tough on sex offenders?, City Beat (Cincinnati, Ohio), August 15, 2007.

Kiss a student on the cheek? You’re a sex offender.

England, 2006. Alan Barrett resigned from the school’s board of governors after he gave a 10-year-old girl a kiss on the cheek in the course of publicly congratulating her for improving her performance in arithmetic.

See Vicar steps down for cheek kiss — A vicar has stepped down as a school governor after kissing a primary pupil on the cheek to congratulate her. / A police inquiry found the Rev Alan Barrett had no case to answer. — BBC News (United Kingdom), July 13, 2006, Kiss goodbye to innocence, Times (London, England), July 16, 2006, and You must remember this . . ., Times (London, England), July 18, 2006.

Take pictures of children in public? You’re a sex offender.

Troy, New York, 2006. Jean Hetman was forbidden to take pictures of her daughter figure-skating because of a new policy instituted by the arena to protect children from pedophiles.

See NYCLU threatens to sue city over new photo policy, The Record (Troy, New York), May 9, 2006.

England, 2005. Alastair Macaulay went for a walk on the beach on a beautiful summer day. He had his camera with him and photographed a group of children making sandcastles. An hour later, he was reported to the police and arrested.

See ‘The CCTV recorded me taking two photographs: one of a group of children’ — On an idyllic summer’s day, a theatre critic goes for a walk on Scarborough beach. He has a camera with him and photographs a group of children making sandcastles. An hour later, he is reported to the police and arrested. Here, Alastair Macaulay relives the horror of that moment and of the years of pain and paranoia that followed — Telegraph (United Kingdom), March 19, 2005.

Look at children in public? You’re a sex offender.

Florida, 2007. An unidentified man was questioned by police after he spent more than an hour watching a children’s karate class.

See Creepy incidents at Collier karate class – not so creepy, WBBH-TV (Fort Myers, Florida), July 17, 2007.

New York City, 2005. Sandra Catena took a break from her dance lessons and sat down in the park. She was given a ticket by police for violating a law designed to keep out pedophiles — that adults are not allowed in the park without children.

See Ticketed For Sitting on a Park Bench?: Law Designed to Keep Pedophiles Out of City Parks, WABC-TV (New York, New York), September 27, 2005.

New York City, 2005. Nicholas Stix was walking in his neighborhood when he found that a schoolgirl was eyeing him suspiciously for looking at her. When he smiled to try to assure her he was friendly, she seemed even more afraid.

See Child Molester Hysteria in New York, Men’s News Daily, February 1, 2005.

And, of course, the big taboo:
Have consensual sex with a teenager? Obviously, you’re a sex offender.

Maine, 2002. Nineteen-year-old Bill Elliott had sex with his girlfriend days before she turned 16, and he served four months in jail for it. Five years later, his and another man’s names were pulled at random from the sex offender registry by a Canadian vigilante, who shot them to death in their homes before taking his own life.

See Sex Offender Registries: Putting Lives At Risk? — Double Murder of Maine Men Sparks Debate About Online Sex Registries — ABC News, April 18, 2006.

Illinois, 1998. Kristin Perk was just shy of 15 when she “came on” to her 35-year-old guitar teacher, Mark Perk, whom she married five years later in 2003. They now have two children, whose father is a registered sex offender because he had sex with their mother when she was too young.

See The witch-hunt continues: House Bill 5523 by Mark Zorn, Chicago Tribune blog, March 27, 2006 and Murders Put Focus on Sex-Offender Registry Policies, NPR News, April 21, 2006 (Audio report).

For more examples

For a similar list of cases, most of them different from the ones given here, see You Might Be a Sex Offender If … by Derek Logue.


Soon enough there should be more people in prison than out of it here in Canada if the Conservatives and their sick Christian Fundamentalist (Council of National Policy backers), get it their way.

To Defend Canada

Canada is currently facing a crisis of extreme proportions in terms of a MAJOR violation of human rights to be enacted soon by a single political party. This political party is the Federal Conservative Party. This party is intending to RAISE the age of sexual consent from the current age of 14 to the age of 16. This will result in a loss of constitutional rights to all citizens of Canada that are the age of 14 and 15 years old – a substantial portion of the population -. This party believes they have the right and authority to do this for several reasons:
– the general political ignorance of that affected age group
– the apathy of the majority of citizens who feel that this issue does not affect them and is therefore unworthy of challenge
– the unwillingness of those who are aware to defend those incapable of defending themselves
Project Freedom Canada will not permit this gross violation of the CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS to go unchallenged. See excerpts of the Charter below:
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
a) freedom of conscience and religion;
b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
d) freedom of association.
7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.
12. Everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.
15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.
24. (1) Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances.
The MANDATE of Project Freedom Canada
– That it is not within the power or authority of any one political party to rescind the basic constitutional rights of any group of citizens.
– The Federal Conservative Party in Canada is by passing of the proposed legislation to RAISE the age of sexual consent guilty of violating the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
– To defend the integrity of the Charter by preventing the rescinding of rights granted to citizens. A right given is protected by the Charter. To defend those citizens affected by this law not only directly – as all those aged 14 and 15 – but indirectly as all those sexual minorities defined as Ephebephile who suddenly find themselves outside the law in their sexual relations.
– To prove that the Federal Conservative Party in Canada has no legal grounds for this violation of the Charter. Their arguments are not based on fact but instead on general apathy towards this act and hysteria in regards to consensual adolescent sexual activity.
– To challenge this violation according to section 24 of the CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS.

Project Freedom Canada

Read all about the Charter Challenge Transcripts


Court Transcripts

Below are the transcripts. I was unable to obtain standing on behalf of public interest so it is now the Criminal Lawyers Association that has been contacted to aid in this endeavour.


Court File No. CV-08-00355544-0000


B E T W E E N:









on Monday, March 30th, 2009, at TORONTO, Ontario



O. Altair, Mr. Applicant (Unrepresented)

R.W.Y. Lee, Esq. Counsel for Respondent

N. Dennison, Ms. Counsel for Respondent

THE COURT: Good morning. Okay, good, so we can now start with the only matter that is before us today. Ms. Dennison, you are here?


THE COURT: Mr. Lee, good morning to you.

MR. LEE: Yes.

THE COURT: Mr. Altair?


THE COURT: Good morning to you. And this is, to say the least, an interesting application or proceeding that has been brought by Mr. Altair to challenge the constitutionality of the recent amendment to the Criminal Code that raised the age of consent for having sex from 14 to 16 and Mr. Altair has not been charged with any offence under the new legislation, but you are simply, from your point of view…

MR. ALTAIR: To prevent anyone from being charged.

THE COURT: …to prevent anyone from being charged. You are here to vindicate the public interest, as you see it, and to try to bring this application or action, because it’s not clear what it is…

MR. ALTAIR: We could talk about that later, yes.

THE COURT: …to bring this to see if a Judge would, indeed, agree with you and find that the law is in some way and for some reason unconstitutional, right?


THE COURT: Okay. So, Ms. Dennison, you are bringing the motion to dismiss the proceeding in the altogether, aren’t you?

MS. DENNISON: Yes, that’s correct.

THE COURT: And as an alternative claim, you are also looking to strike it out as non-disclosing a reasonable cause of action?

MS. DENNISON: That is correct.

THE COURT: All right.

MS. DENNISON: I just wanted to ensure that the Court had all the material before them, which would include a copy of the Attorney General’s factum, motion record, three books of authorities. Mr. Altair has also provided written submissions, as well as material in support of his written submissions and I hope you have received all of that.

THE COURT: I am looking for the written submissions of Mr. Altair. I don’t think I have that.

MR. ALTAIR: Oh, dear. I delivered it to your secretary last week on the 20th, or 19th, Friday. Oh, do I have to speak into that?

THE COURT: Yes, you really should stand up when you speak to me.

MR. ALTAIR: Oh. It would have been — oh, that’s it. You’ve got it right there. Right, that’s it. Sorry, I didn’t bind it.

THE COURT: Let me just take a few minutes to look at this, okay.

MS. DENNISON: Certainly.

THE COURT: I have your factum here, Mr. Altair.

MR. ALTAIR: There should be the factum, as well as the statement of claim and the notice of constitutional question.

THE COURT: No, I have all of that. Just the factum, though, has a bunch of appendices, right, of various press releases and things of that sort, right. Okay, let me just look at the factum quickly.

Where is the container for this? I don’t want to lose — okay, yes, we will just put this over here.

Okay, Ms. Dennison, I have gone through your factum — your factum, along with your colleague, Mr. Lee’s written argument and I really just need to hear argument on one point. In fact, I need Mr. Altair to respond to just one point.

MR. ALTAIR: Oh, all right.

THE COURT: And you have read the factum of the Attorney General of Canada?

MR. ALTAIR: Oh, yes. That’s why I brought it. I thought we would have a chat and follow along. I don’t know how these things…

THE COURT: Sir, you should stand up — stand up when you address the Court.

MR. ALTAIR: Oh, dear, I am sorry. Yes.

THE COURT: Okay, this is something that clearly concerns you and I don’t deny you the right, at least as you see it, to be concerned about it. It is something that may end up being litigated by you or by someone else where these constitutional issues and arguments may well be deployed, but the first hurdle you have and the hurdle that you have not cleared is that you don’t have standing to bring this lawsuit.

MR. ALTAIR: I thought that’s what we were here for.

THE COURT: No, I know, but…

MR. ALTAIR: Sorry.

THE COURT: …I am just saying to you — I am saying to you, sir, that the law could not be clearer on this and I want you to look at paragraph 39 of the Attorney General’s factum, because it’s set out in that paragraph.

MR. ALTAIR: Which book would that be in?

THE COURT: That’s called the factum of the Attorney General.

MR. ALTAIR: Oh, this one here. Oh, okay. I was under the impression that the reason why they were challenging was because I didn’t have standing.

THE COURT: Yes, you don’t have standing.

MR. ALTAIR: And, yeah, the purpose was to obtain standing. That’s what I thought.

THE COURT: No, you — the point is, you are claiming as a public interest litigant. You are not charged and before the Criminal Courts of our land.

MR. ALTAIR: And we don’t want anyone to be. That’s why I am here.

THE COURT: Right and you are simply someone who is interested in seeing that a certain law be tested constitutionally…

MR. ALTAIR: Correct, yes.

THE COURT: …and ideally, from your point of view, be set aside, all right. The Canadian Law, in fact, most laws in western society, don’t allow a public interest litigant to just come forward and as officious interveners start to challenge laws at whim to clear the public interest standing hurdle and that has been done in a very narrow category of cases. You have to satisfy two or three very critical tests. Failing any one of them means you cannot be a public interest litigant and this is set out in paragraph 39 of the factum — well, actually, it starts sooner than that. It starts on paragraph 33:

“No standing to claim violation of the rights of others.”

And the Attorney General sets out the law on this point and by the time they get to paragraph 39, this is the point that catches my attention, Mr. Altair and this is where it’s clear that this is not a case where any Court would allow you to proceed simply out of the public interest and let me read this out.

“The claim for public standing most clearly fails the third part of the test. Mr. Altair has not shown that there is no other reasonable and effective way for the issue to be brought before the Court.”

In other words, the test says you have got to show to the Judge there is no other effective way for this issue to be brought before the Court, unless I, Mr. Altair, get standing to litigate this on behalf of concerned citizens. Here, you are in the Criminal Code. Here, everyday across our fair land, sadly, people are being charged with criminal offences and sadly, especially under the sexual offence category, there are dozens, if not hundreds, of men and women that are being arrested everyday for various transgressions, various violations of the Criminal Code and that’s why they say in paragraph 39:

“The prosecutions under many of the offences in question occur on a regular basis. The validity of the provisions, as amended in 2008, will no doubt be questioned in the course of future prosecutions and Courts hearing these Charter challenges in future prosecutions will have the benefit of actual factual disputes featuring specific circumstances of actions accused persons and victims.”

MR. ALTAIR: Well, when I mentioned in my factum the violation of Charter — of s.15, I am speaking about what we have almost here, really, is a conflict of values, because there is simply no reason for these laws to be invented. I mean, we’re talking about a portion of the population that have been adults in this country that is currently in Canada for hundreds of years. Raising the age of sexual consent one year, is the same as raising it ten. It’s like raising the voting age.


MR. ALTAIR: It’s like — it’s like…

THE COURT: But those are Charter arguments. I am not there yet.


THE COURT: I am not even talking about the other arguments that the Attorney General is making about s.15 or the other Charter claims. I am not even at the constitutional issue.


THE COURT: I am simply at the very first, what’s called the threshold, the doorway issue.

MR. ALTAIR: Say, yeah, I thought that’s what we were here for.

THE COURT: Can you — can you be in this courtroom, in any courtroom in Canada, as a public interest litigant challenging these Criminal Code provisions in these circumstances and the answer, I think, is unequivocally, no, you cannot.

MR. ALTAIR: Oh, that’s a shame.


MR. ALTAIR: I was looking forward to it, you know.

THE COURT: Why, Mr. Altair? Because there are other reasonable and effective ways for the issue to be brought before the Court and that’s right from the Supreme Court of Canada, a line of cases that have said, basically, Mr. Altair, if there is no other way, if there is no other way for this matter to be heard by a court of law, then the public interest litigant should be given standing to voice the concerns on behalf of everyone or on behalf of his group of concerned individuals. But here, again, to repeat what I have said, the Criminal Code is active every day, from your point of view, unhappily arresting and prosecuting people in circumstances where they have allegedly violated the age of consent. In this case it would be having sex with boys and girls under the age of 16, if they are not within that five year, I think, age proportionality provision. So, everyday, literally, there are other men and women who are being arrested that will have the opportunity to test the validity of this law in the context…

MR. ALTAIR: Yeah, see, I was hoping I could do that before that happened, before anyone was tried, but no, eh? That’s a shame.

THE COURT: No, not with the Criminal Code where you have such a ready and active avenue of prosecutions where the Court will have the benefit of having John Doe or Jane Smith stand up and say I am in jail, I am charged, my liberty is at stake, I am entitled to bring and mount all these constitutional arguments to prove to you, Your Honour, that the law is unjust, unfair, unconstitutional. Here are — here is the evidence, here is what my lifestyle is like, what my interests are like and the Court then has the ability, with a very strong evidentiary foundation, to look at the person who is charged voicing a constitutional grievance or complaint and test against the Attorney General’s defence of the law whether or not the law is valid or invalid and to that extent, this massive undertaking on your part, which is documented extensively, to say the least, is to no avail. I mean, my advice to you — my advice to you is to be on the lookout for cases where people are charged and then come to their assistance with this additional line of argument…

MR. ALTAIR: I am prepared to do that.

THE COURT: …or, and I am not advising this at all, yourself…

MR. ALTAIR: Well, you know, I don’t…

THE COURT: You know, but there is no other…

MR. ALTAIR: …I don’t break the law.

THE COURT: …choice, sir, and that’s why, frankly, with respect to you, for what I think is still a very much misguided — a misguided action on your part, but that’s your right to bring a lawsuit as you deem appropriate. I found that in reading the materials, once I came across and reviewed the issue of the law on standing, which I did diligently, there was just simply no way in the world that this case could go forward…

MR. ALTAIR: Well, that was quick, then. I thought we would be here a lot longer than that.

THE COURT: …unless — unless you are, in fact, charged with this offence.

MR. ALTAIR: Oh. All right, I guess there is nothing we can do about that.

THE COURT: Now, so, I don’t have to hear from you, Ms. Dennison or you, Mr. Lee. Thank you both for the materials you have submitted. I will endorse the record accordingly. I will not say anything about the Charter issues, Mr. Altair, because I don’t need to get there.


THE COURT: What I am saying is that the threshold has not been crossed…

MR. ALTAIR: Oh, I’m sorry, you are still talking. I am sorry about that.

THE COURT: You don’t — you have not established standing in this kind of a case where, typically, the argument is and should be made by people who are charged with the offence.

MR. ALTAIR: You see, I was a bit confused. I thought that’s what we were here to do today, to prove standing. I thought that’s what this was about. I guess not.

THE COURT: Well, no, you are, in a sense, to prove standing, but what I am saying to you, sir, is that there is no legal authority that I am aware of or that you could find, nor have you found any, that would provide you, as a public interest litigant, with the ability to challenge this law outside of a reality of being charged with the offence. It’s just not the way the system works. Otherwise — well, no need to explain the policy behind it. I think you understand.

MR. ALTAIR: Hm-hmm. No, I think I understand, yeah. That’s fine.


MS. DENNISON: Your Honour, we took the liberty of drafting a draft order. We would like to…

THE COURT: Okay. Show it to Mr. Altair, though, would you?

MS. DENNISON: Yes, certainly.


MS. DENNISON: It doesn’t say on what basis, so your endorsement would still be…

THE COURT: Yes, the endorsement is simply on the base of standing, not on the basis of the Charter challenge.

MR. ALTAIR: Well, I guess there is nothing we can do about that. I will have to — I agree, you know, if that’s the case.

MS. DENNISON: It says the basis of it is — this just says, “This Court orders that the proceeding be dismissed.”


MS. DENNISON: So, I think that’s fair, in the circumstance and you can certainly endorse the record to reflect Your Honour’s opinion that there is no standing in this case. I apologize for it not being stapled.

THE COURT: Okay, so, I have signed one order, Mr. Altair and counsel. I will read the endorsement out to you.


Belobaba, J. (Orally):

On March 30, 2009, Ms. Dennison and Mr. Lee for the Attorney General of Canada, Mr. Altair in person; motion by AG Canada to dismiss the proceeding brought by Mr. Altair.

The proceeding appears to be a combined application and statement of claim. I will refer to it as an action. The motion is granted. The action is dismissed primarily on the ground that Mr. Altair has no standing to bring this lawsuit. He has not shown that there is no other reasonable and effective way for the issue to be brought before the Court. Indeed, the more appropriate avenue is via a defendant who has been charged with the relevant criminal offence.

Order to go as per the order signed today and the order signed today, again, makes clear that this proceeding is dismissed.

Counsel, anything further?

MS. DENNISON: Thank you, Your Honour. Not that I am aware of.


MS DENNISON: It’s my first civil case, so, thank you.

THE COURT: Okay, there is no request for costs, then?

MS. DENNISON: I don’t think so, in the circumstances.

THE COURT: Very good.

MS. DENNISON: Thank you.

MR. ALTAIR: Do I sign a piece of paper?


MR. ALTAIR: Oh, okay.

THE COURT: No, you will get a copy of the endorsement, sir and a copy of the order…

MR. ALTAIR: Oh, okay.

THE COURT: …and that will be that. Thank you both — all three of you very much.

MS. DENNISON: Thank you.



This is to certify that

the foregoing is a true

and accurate transcript

of my recordings to the

best of my ability and



Jacqueline M. Johnston-Fierro

Official Court Monitor

March 30,2009


We have all documentation ready to restore law and order to Canada. Do feel free to contact the criminal lawyers association and impress upon them the urgency in this matter to obtain standing on behalf on any client charged for this gross violation of the Canadian people by the sick, Federal Government.

Criminal Lawyers Association


Read some of the Factum


Factum Introduction

I will not present the entire factum as it is over 450 pages. I have decided to provide the introduction for those interested. This is a factum that will be used as soon as another is charged with violating the illegal age of sexual consent increase and other illegal amendments that were made to the Criminal Code of Canada (I am unable to pursue the Attorney General of Canada directly as I have not been awarded Standing from the Supreme Court).
FACTUM :introduction only

It is not by choice that I am serving as legal counsel for those I represent but a matter of circumstance. There are many others in this country that are far more apt and skilled to deal with this gross violation of our constitution but they sadly do not have the inclination to do so. I serve here as a result of these changes that force me to choose between political imprisonment verses the alternative of being a political exile, while at the same time directly divesting my lovers of their status as adults. This same status as adults –sexually-, that has been granted to them and enjoyed by them in this territory that is currently known as Canada, for hundreds of years-this cannot be stressed enough-. Not since the Victorian era has there been such an outrageous divestment of rights, when the legal age of sexual consent was unjustly increased from age 12 to age 14. Canada lacked a Charter of Human rights to defend the citizens from the perverted zeal of sectarian interests at that time. It is the act itself that is a violation of our Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. Increasing the age of sexual consent 1 year is the same act as increasing it by 10 years. It is a classificationist targeting of a percentage of the population to suddenly label them as “children”, and strip them of their personal liberty. It is an act that will only result in an overburdened criminal justice system due to the tens of thousands of suddenly new Canadians that have been labelled sex offenders that will result –this cannot be stressed enough-. There is nothing complicated here in respect to the reason for our being here. This is an “open and shut case”. There is no mystery and no amount of prestidigitation will alter the fact that it is a result of an action. There is no true reason for us to be discussing the sexual minorities who are defined as paedophiles, since paedophilia is currently illegal in Canada. In fact the only reason why we are here is a result of a government that has selected to target a portion of the population that are currently adults and divest them of their right to continue to live as the adults they are and have been for hundreds of years. Teenagers aged 14 and 15 year-olds are not children. The fact that they are held culpable as adults and treated accordingly for violent crimes is confirmation of the fact that they are not children. The sexual relations between 14 and 15 year-olds and their lovers are relations amongst consenting adults and have no place being targeted by a Federal Government that has no justification for doing such a trivial thing, especially when there are so many more important and pressing issues in Canada.

It is simply not acceptable to allow an atmosphere to exist in Canada that will permit an individual’s socio-economic class to pose as a barrier to justice. In September 2006, the Government of Canada cancelled the Court Challenges Program once more, despite an independent evaluation done in 2003 that endorsed the Program’s purpose and operation, and despite the renewal of the contribution agreement with Heritage Canada until March 2009. I serve as the legal council for my clients as it is not possible for me to afford to pay for a lawyer, nor is it possible to apply for Legal Aid to cover this Direct Constitutional Challenge. The fact that private, unlearned and oft ill-prepared citizens must represent themselves in the Supreme Court to defend their Constitutional rights is a construct of the Federal Government of Canada. To strike my action as a result of procedural error will do nothing to terminate this conflict that was caused directly through the misdeeds of the Federal Government of Canada. It will not alter the facts of this matter, nor will it end this matter but only prolong it. To strike this action is to interfere in the completion of the “full circle of justice”. It is a misdeed that has served as the catalyst to cause this conflict without purpose. A misdeed committed by a servant of the people and now it is the just indignation of the people that must be faced. To allow otherwise is to permit a shelter to exist from the “full circle of justice” that must not be permitted. We demand that the Attorney General of Canada be held accountable to the people and stand and defend the misdeeds that have caused this conflict.

It is important to take note that we are presently in Canada. Not the U.K. nor Australia, nor the United States of America but in Canada. In Canada we must be proud that we have our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as a part of our Constitution to protect citizens. It is what makes Canada better than most other country’s and that is why it is the duty of every citizen within Canada to defend our Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that it is a part of. We have it as our great responsibility to serve as leaders in the World and not be followers. While they attempt, we shall accomplish, while they think, we shall know. Canada must remain true to form as a beacon that lights the path of reason and leads away from the darkness of superstition.

There are some within Canada that believe that our country would be better without this Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms within the Constitution as they feel it is too litigious. They would like to re-write the Constitution without the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as well as limit the Judges within the Supreme Court of Justice to ten-year terms. They would like the Supreme Court to be just a rubber stamp of approval for the deeds or misdeeds of the State and to have no power over the actions of such a State. They do not believe that the government is elected by the people to serve the people but rather to dominate and control the actions and even the very thoughts of the people within Canada -not unlike the oppressive sectarian regime of the country of Iran– that’s not Canada. They behave in such a manner as to pretend that in Canada, we have no such Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but we do. By increasing the age of sexual consent they are attempting to set a precedent that will not be permitted. It has never been set and it shall not be set. It is their actions that display their utter contempt felt towards this Constitution within Canada. It is deeds and misdeeds by which we are judged. Not by empty threats, nor by unfulfilled promises, nay, but by our actions. An object at rest – if it may be said to hold desire – will desire to remain at rest. It takes a catalyst to provoke a conflict where there is none and this is an action.

This conflict currently before us is a result of a misdeed by this Federal Government. It is our responsibility to now correct this misdeed through action. The legal age of sexual consent will be restored to age 14 and all amendments made to the criminal code of Canada that rely on the legal age of sexual consent to be at age 16 will be deemed vapid and therefore will be struck permanently from the code. This will be the end result of all court proceedings, regardless of the time it will take to restore law and order to Canada. Within this country there will be no rise in Classificationist thought above the truth of Universalist thought. There will be no further targeting of minorities and no imposing upon the free Canadian people a foreign “Values System”, that will result in no change, apart from an excessively larger Sex Offenders Registry. This is a deliberate confiscation of personal liberty not seen within this Canada since the internment of the Japanese during WWII. The act of increasing the age of sexual consent is a despicable act itself and raising it 1 year is the same act as raising it 10 years –this cannot be stressed enough-It is the act itself that will not be tolerated. Increasing the age of sexual consent to age 24 will not prevent individuals below the age of 24 from rapists because rapists do not respect the law. A rapist is a rapist because that is what they are and what they do regardless of their age, sex, sexuality, race, socio-economic class etc. We have laws in Canada that deal with rape. To increase the age of sexual consent is to only result in an increase of the numbers of innocent Canadians who can be imprisoned as sexual offenders and result in an additional burden on an already overburdened criminal justice system. There is no good rape and bad rape, there is only rape and all rape is the same. There are no good victims and bad victims but only victims and all victims are the same. There is no good consensual sex or bad consensual sex. All consensual sex is the same for without consent there is only rape.

About me

Communication is very important. In order for us to comprehend a matter we must appreciate the source of this information and so we will discuss here the facts of what we are. Oftentimes an action can only be understood when the motivation behind the action is viewed as a leaning based on the actual point of reference from whence it came.

I am a sexually active Hebephile/Ephebephile (teen lover) and engage in recreational sex exclusively with boys aged 14 to 18 years old. I admit that most of my lovers have been 16 and 17 but there is no reason to refuse the attentions of 14 and 15 year-old boys and I have had numerous lovers who were that age. I do not have relationships with boys. I only engage in recreational sex with them. I am a Humanist/Atheist and a member of The Brights. I regard Human sexuality and expression as a need in terms of Human emotional and mental stability. I regard sex and orgasms as a healthy (when practiced safely), form of recreation and encourage many to pursue their passions and desires without fear or shame but with courage and pride. Since moving to Toronto I’d say that I have had roughly 30 to 40 different lovers over the past 8 years. This is the reason why I will be regarded by the court as an authority on teen sexuality, I am not a rapist nor am I a predator. I am an adult who selects to engage in recreational sex with teenaged boys who are sexually attracted to older men and find me sexually attractive. Harmless, consensual, recreational sexual activity requires 2 or more willing participants. The fact that the present Federal Government within Canada openly chooses to publicly identify itself as a part of the Christian Fundamentalist movement and target all 14 and 15 year-olds for the divestment of their rights and to confiscate the personal liberties of tens of thousands of more Canadians through imprisonment, is disgraceful.

I am a published author and have made a significant contribution to Canadian boylove culture through my book entitled Viamund the Boylove Vampyre Says… Poetry & Haiku’s. I have included the webpage that contains the story of the book as well as a copy of the book – the one that was made through the 3-year contract with iUniverse- until my contract was cancelled as a result of too many complaints from Christian Fundamentalist targeting campaigns. This type of boycotting is trivial compared to hate sites created through Christian Fundamentalist organizations that stalk individuals and encourage illegal behavior against those who do not have the same values as these Christian Fundamentalist organizations. This is something that must not be permitted in Canada.

The Federal Government of Canada has openly allied itself with the Christian Fundamentalist movement and organizations that are not based on nationality but rather on sectarian agendas that extend beyond our borders. Such organizations like the Council for National Policy, Focus on the Family, Family Action Coalition, Wikisposure and other miscellaneous Christian Fundamentalist groups are classificationist and encourage their members to violate laws. The age of sexual consent increase will not “protect” adults from their own Human sexuality and expression. It is a conflict of values whereby we have a government that has abused the power it was granted by the people in order to impose it’s values on Canada. Humanists know that young adults old enough to be persecuted as adults for a violent crime are therefore old enough to consent to harmless consensual recreational sexual activity. Sex is healthy and a need in terms of human emotional and mental stability – this cannot be stressed enough -. Youth must learn about sex safe, contraceptive use, pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, the difference between consent verses non-consent in an unbiased manner in order to “protect” themselves. Patterned-power-differentials exist within all relationships to a degree and are not a negative factor in human relationships. Canada must continue to represent pride, courage and truth. Not fear, shame and lies. There is only one truth regardless of the popularity of it. If 8000000000 people claim that the world is flat and only 8000 people claim that the world is round, the world will still be round. The Federal government is guilty of forcing Canadians to change their values or to abandon Canada and flee elsewhere or to face imprisonment. There is nothing petty or frivolous about the need to strike these amendments that were made to the Criminal Code of Canada and restore law and order to our country. There is nothing harmful about consensual sex that has been enjoyed by adults in Canada for hundreds of years but there is something very harmful about a Fundamentalist government being permitted to violate our constitution for no purpose apart from a lie. It is time for truth.

Tags: Canadá, criminal code, factum, law