In GN No 8 we asked for your comments and opinions on Pederasty. We print below a selection of your letters, along with a few comments from us.
I read with interest Peter Kelsey’s article on pederasts, or in the language of the gay scene, chicken lovers. Although I don’t agree with his sentiments to quote ‘Pederasts must be reconciled on leaving their twenties to paying heavily for their sexual satisfaction for the rest of their lives.’ If he thinks that a change in the law will change this, then I’m afraid he’ll be sadly disappointed. Young chickens (boys of 15-20) will always prefer bedfellows of their own age ie other teenagers. Even people in their twenties like myself have difficulty in persuading chickens to bed. In Glasgow the majority of chickens I have had have been rent, in London without exception I have had to pay.
In fact I defy any stranger in his twenties or older to go into a London gay bar or club and get a one night stand with a chicken. I have tried and it’s impossible. Glasgow is the same, although I know a few chickens. One night stands with them are not on, they stick with their own age group.
In my opinion, whether or not the law changes, Peter Kelsey and the rest of us will have to pay for our pleasures.
ED: It seems that there is a wide usage for the term pederast – but not everyone means the same by it. As this extract from a letter from one of our Surrey readers shows.
The article on pederasty … was of interest and certainly touches on a very important problem. However, some clarification is needed: sex with a child of nine or ten is quite a different thing to a similar relationship with a young person of eighteen and I would like to ask Peter Kelsey if he would classify people in the 15-19 age group as children. If not, then pederasty is hardly the term applicable. I suppose that the vast majority of adult males, whether straight or gay, have experienced strong feelings of physical attraction towards youths of this age group, and it is fairly well accepted that a boy of this age has a more attractive body than at any other time. The problem is to establish the age to which consent, and consequently legal sex, should be reduced to. Whilst we would wish to disabuse people of the idea that sex is something evil from which children need to be ‘protected’, most of us, if not all, would agree that immature children do need to be protected from a relationship which in any way exploits them which seems to imply that pederasty (which means sexual relationship with a child of either sex) must remain illegal.
ED: That’s one definition of pederasty – but most people seem to mean that very 15-19 age group. The same points about paying for it, and its illegality came up more than once. And the consequences of breaking that law.
Dear Gay News,
Re the letter about pederasty in GN8 – all that is said is only too true.
In my own case, when much younger (I am now in my 40’s) I had many boyfriends from about 13 upwards. The ‘games’ with the boys consisted of nothing more than mutual wanking — never ‘going all the way’, till I got arrested and did a spell ‘inside’.
Since my release – many years ago now -though I like to see pretty boys and I like to see porn magazines with chickens in them, I have been too frightened to touch them, but have managed to overcome the problem somewhat by taking the (mainly) passive part in encounters, usually with men about my own age or older.
Nearly all of my former boyfriends are now married and have children, so I don’t think it can be said that they were corrupted in any way by me.
My own earliest experience was when a soldier played around with me during the war, when I was 14, but I’m sure that if I had not already been ‘that way’ I would have rejected his advances, so I doubt if I was corrupted either.
… Love and kisses,
ED: Finally, a letter from Cornwall – which makes certain points which we could not subscribe to, as we have pointed out at the end of the letter.
You have a brief mention of pederasty by Peter Kelsey in the latest GN and seek for more. In case these thoughts are any use to you, I am sending them in.
Pederasty is easily the most rewarding form of love that anyone can experience and generally does great good for the younger partner as well as the older. A boy’s love is the most tender and sincere thing possible to appreciate. What the older partner gives in return is not only love, which is for him too often transient, but also a wide education in the ways of the world, intellectual and sexual.
It needs to be emphasised that pederasty is by no means always sexual, though it is usually physical; and for the benefit of anti-gay prudes it needs to be emphasised that there are few, if any indications that the junior partner gets ‘fixated’ homosexually, let alone as a prostitute: indeed, properly understood, pederasty is not homosexual, insofar as sex comes into it at all, other than the mutual attraction of two people of the same sex but different ages – thus it does not lead to the junior partner being ‘corrupted’ sexually or in any other way. On the contrary, the junior partner usually leads a ‘normal’ heterosexual life after his early encounters, enriched indeed by those experiences. Nor is the senior partner necessarily homosexual either, for he too often leads a heterosexual existence, enlivened by his encounters with the young. It is rare for the older partner to, as it were, take advantage of the younger. Those interested would learn much from J.Z. Eglinton’s exhaustive study ‘Greek Love’ and T.C. Worsley’s ‘Flannelled Fools’ for interesting personal details.
There is no doubt that the public, and the gay public needs education on the subject, but whether it will ever be possible to get the public at large to tolerate pederasty with so many long-standing irrational and usually baseless phobias against it, is very doubtful. Is there one country in the world at present which does? It is no good citing Ancient Greece – that was another world, philosophically and socially, and it cannot be brought back.
No doubt the lot of would-be senior partners is difficult, but there is, maybe, a way out; they indeed may not advertise for those under 21, but the reverse is not true* and your columns this week carry an advertisement from one under 21; there would be nothing as I see it to stop others, not only from outside Britain, from advertising. Anyone replying would need to keep his eyes very wide open of course and his head firmly on his shoulders.
One wonders to what extent Gay News is sold to the under-21’s** and more especially, those at school still: one hopes it is, for it is a good sane soundly based paper, and if they see it, perhaps they may start advertising. You would have to be careful though!
*ED: Sorry to disappoint you – but we would be in breach of the law if we knowingly allowed boys under 21 to advertise in our personal columns, whether they were English or not. There is, so far as we are aware, however, no restriction placed on anyone, whatever their sexual orientation, under 21 seeking accomodation or a pen-pal ‘legitimately’, whatever that means.
**ED: We are not a porn mag by any means; therefore we are openly on sale like any other newspaper. Ergo it follows that our readership is probably as wide as any other paper. There is no reason to restrict its sale in any way.