wdoherty@bbncca.ARPA (Will Doherty) (01/16/84)
This may be of interest: RESOLUTION ON THE LIBERATION OF CHILDREN AND YOUTH Adopted at the Seventh Conference of the North American Man/Boy Love Association Boston, December 4, 1983 Young people in our society are denied nearly all the human rights adults possess, and are presumed to be irrational and incapable. The policy of protection toward children growing out of this philosophy assumes that parents or their state-appointed substitutes can only relate to children from the standpoint of benevolent domination. Children are subject to abuse as a result of this hierarchical relationship. Their humanity is demeaned and their growth stunted. Since children possess rights because they are human beings, and since these rights are being denied largely for the convenience and economic advantage of adults, NAMBLA subscribes to the following resolution to empower young people: I. Self-Determination Children should have the right to conclusively decide all matters that affect them. II. Equal Civil Rights Civil rights are inalienable. Young people are necessary participants in democracy, entitled to the full benefits of self-governance and to full protection from both the government's and parents' abuse of power. Children must have equal Constitutional rights with adults, including, but not limited to, complete freedom of speech, press, assembly, religion, and privacy; equal protection against discrimination; freedom from involuntary servitude (such as forfeiting wages to parents, forced attendance at school, and military registration and conscription); the right to due process; protection from illegal search and seizure; the right of equal participation in the political process; and the right to serve on juries. III. Alternate Home Environments Children should be able to choose from a variety of arrangements, e.g.: residences operated by children, child-exchange programs, twenty-four hour child care centers, and other schools and employment opportunities. IV. Self-Education Children should be free to design their own education, choosing from among many options the learning experiences they want, including the option not to attend school. Compulsory education and tracking must end. Schools must be run democratically, with curricula, personnel, and disciplinary procedures decided collectively. V. Freedom from Corporal Punishment Children have the right to be free from corporal punishment. VI. Economic Power Children should have the right to work, to acquire and manage money, to receive equal pay for equal work, to gain promotion to leadership positions, to own property, to obtain guaranteed support apart from the family, and to achieve economic independence. VII. Responsive Design Society must accommodate itself to children's size and to their need for safe space. VIII. The Right to Information A child must have the right to all information ordinarily available to adults. IX. An End to Racism and Sexism X. Sexual Self-Determination Children should have the right to conduct their sexual lives with no more restriction than adults. At a minimum, they must have the unhindered right to have sex with members of any age of the same or opposite sex, and to identify themselves as homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual, transexual, or any other sexual preference or orientation. --END-- Will Doherty decvax!bbncca!wdoherty
sdyer@bbncca.ARPA (Steve Dyer) (01/16/84)
Will, I really have got to hear your own opinions about the NAMBLA resolution you posted. I have a hard time taking it seriously because it seems so incredibly naive about the nature of children and their place in our society. If one accepts the implicit assumption buried within the NAMBLA resolution, namely, that children are simply smaller adults, then all of the assumptions in the document logically follow. But, if one cannot (as I cannot) accept this, the statements read as simply bizarre. Perhaps this is because we haven't defined what a "child" is for the purposes of this resolution. If you talk about self-determination for 16 or 17 year olds, I am less likely to gasp than if we are discussing food co-ops run by 4 year olds. Marty's flame, though it had more emotion than substance, did bring up a few good points. Children (notwithstanding the fact that we don't have a definition here) are "weaker" than adults, both physically and emotionally, and as such deserve some kind of protection against exploitation. Society and the family have structures set up which attempt to provide this. (Whether they succeed is another issue, certainly not one which arises out of this NAMBLA resolution.) The resolution presented here looks surprisingly like the typical USENET reductio-ad-absurdum argument, but with a large amount of self-interest added: 1.) As a self-determining being, I can choose to have sex with others capable of self-determination who agree to have sex with me. 2.) Children are self-determining beings. 3.) Therefore, I can have sex with children who agree to have sex with me. Where does NAMBLA get off assuming proposition #2 is true? I think a little explanation is in order. -- /Steve Dyer decvax!bbncca!sdyer sdyer@bbncca
rh@mit-eddie.UUCP (Randy Haskins) (01/16/84)
Not meaning to offend anyone, but I find I have to express my initial reaction as it came to me: THIS RESOLUTION IS BOGUS! I CAN'T BELIEVE ANYONE CAN BE SO STUPID!!! Sorry, but that's my initial reaction. To say that a child is able to make an informed (?!!) decision about having sex!!! I'm sorry, but the formal presentation of such a collection of stupidity really got to me. What do these people think is the purpose of childhood? How do they come off thinking that a child is a "small adult?" First of all, the fact that children are smaller makes the concept of sex frightening. And all this shit about voting and deciding where they want to live and how to go to school!!! I'll be honest with you all, though: back when I was about 15, I indeed had all the answers. No, really, I did. I didn't need my parents (except, of course, to provide financial support, but that doesn't count). I realized that people my age should be allowed to make all their own decisions, and I was constantly getting upset by the fact that my parents didn't let me. Of course, it was my fault that I took that; I should have told them to screw themselves and left home, except for the fact that no one in this mixed up society would hire me, so I couldn't support myself. It's strange, but I find that in the last 7 years, the world has gotten so complicated that I no longer have all the answers. I know the world has gotten more complicated, because I don't have all the answers now, and I know that I had them then. It seems that the world has changed right out from under me, and that people at age 15 aren't really capable of making all of their own decisions like we were when I was 15. It's really strange, too, because I've learned SO much in the last 7 years, but the world just got more complex faster than I could learn. I suppose the NAMBL people may find this out in a few years. But despite the fact that I don't have all the answers, I have learned this: you never know as much as you think you do (or need to know), and you're never really able to make your own decisions properly, but you have to anyway. But making your own decisions is an incredible burden, and it shouldn't be forced on children. Another thing that I take exception to is the thing about children surrendering their wages to their parents. What, don't you think the "self-sufficient small adult" should have to pay rent? I think I'd better punt here, because I find I'm getting madder the longer I write. I do want to go on record for the first time ever in my life saying, "I'm really glad that I'm not gay." If I were gay, I would feel compelled to hunt down and kill all of the members of NAMBL for giving people of my persuasion a bad name. -- Randwulf (Randy Haskins); Path= genrad!mit-eddie!rh
dave@utcsrgv.UUCP (Dave Sherman) (01/17/84)
It's quite clear that the NAMBLA resolution is simply aimed
at redefining the age of adulthood. All this "children should
have rights" stuff is rather meaningless, since they don't define
at what age the rights should start. Surely they don't want to
give two-year-olds the right to vote, and day-old babies the
right to move out of the house.
The object of NAMBLA appears to be (for their own purposes, of
course) to redefine the age of adulthood to something lower than
18. What, I don't know. 16? 12? 8? At least if they came out and
picked, say 14 or 16, their arguments would make sense. (I would
still disagree with the arguments, however.)
Dave Sherman
--
{allegra,cornell,decvax,ihnp4,linus,utzoo}!utcsrgv!davefeatures@ihuxf.UUCP (q) (01/18/84)
And where is it mentioned that celibacy may be an explicitly chosen option? I think kids should have the right to not be bothered with adult concerns until they're adult! Then they'll have to deal with them for the rest of their lives. M.A. Zeszutko
laura@utcsstat.UUCP (Laura Creighton) (01/18/84)
Personally, I think that the idea of an age requirement for citizenship is remarkably short-sighted. I know some very deep 12 year olds who are much deeper than some 24 year olds I know. I wouldn't mind extending the vote to one of those 12 year olds. I figure that we ought to be able to come up with something that is better than an age for determining what is an adult. Especially when it comes to things like voting -- these days any fool can vote, but i would rather if the people who voted had some indication of the responsibility involved. I wish people knew what they were getting into when they became parents, as well. These days you seem to do it by default. There are an awful lot of miserable kids out there, and it would be nice if the parents who now regret having kids (or so many kids) could have demonstrated the foresight not to get into the predicament. the school system seems intent on treating children as their parents property around here. Are you people any better off? if not, though I have my doubts that 5 year olds can actually decide on what to study at school, I am not entirely sure that the adults are actually doing all that much better. Mostly all I see is evidence that the adults can politic like crazy -- at such times the children seem to be lost in the scramble. Laura Creighton (no I don't think that NAMBLA has the right idea, but at least they have brought up certain things which are broken.) utzoo!utcsstat!laura
rh@mit-eddie.UUCP (Randy Haskins) (01/21/84)
The problem with allowing a few deep 12-year-olds to vote is very obvious: How the %$^%&^$ are you going to decide which 12-year-olds are deep and which 24-year-olds are shallow? Is the state going to administer a test? If so, will people "cheat?" Think of the overhead involved of having to evaluate (in any way, shape or form) everyone who wanted to vote. At least age is something that is reasonably easy to verify and has some sort of subjective relation to the person's ability to be responsible. Or, what of a system like in Heinlein's "Starship Troopers?" The only earth people who were allowed to be "Galactic Citizens" were the ones who had done military service (I think this is a bad idea, but I use it to show how bad things could be). Sorry, Laura, I just can't even consider an alternate scheme to age unless someone can show how it can be implemented with any degree of success. "Cooled down somewhat from my initial reaction to this article..." -- Randwulf (Randy Haskins); Path= genrad!mit-eddie!rh
tims@shark.UUCP (Tim Stoehr) (01/26/84)
I just got through reading NAMBLA's "RESOLUTION ON THE LIBERATION OF CHILDREN AND YOUTH," and the following came to mind. Articles I-IX talk about self-determination, end to racism etc, only the last one refers specifically to sexuality. Although the previous articles certainly encompass and imply sexual freedom. The tenth article then comes out and specifically mentions sexual freedom. Why? It's obvious by reading the list that the last article summarize and focuses the intent of the entire resolution; that NAMBLA desires the freedom and acceptance of man/boy "love". The rest is just a cloud screen. After all, they're not the "North American Child Freedom Association." Their organization is aimed at man/boy relationships, child self-determination is just a convenient means to that end. Now, for the important part, do any of you folks out there have any daughters you could introduce me to? The age group 9-12 is preferred, an interest in oral sex is also desirable. You see, I want these girls to become self-determining, my personal pleasure has nothing to do with it. I just want to help these girls to become free-thinking individuals, a noble cause, you must agree. (I'm such a saint)