From BoyWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Boylove has it origins in antiquity and is the term that has been chosen by boylovers themselves to describe the strong feelings of affection and attraction (usually including a sexual component) that many adults (especially males) feel towards boys.

Until modern times, boylove was not usually criminalized in most cultures, especially outside of the axis of evil countries. Boylove was usually accepted as a somewhat unusual, though harmless, form of emotional and sexual interaction between men and boys. Boys were seen as often actively seeking out the attention of men for the emotional satisfactions that this provided to the boys (and often the associated economic benefits, as well) in order for the boys to better their own lives, which included the boylover providing a source of relief from sexual tensions which boys were denied other outlets to [1] Until modern times, boys were usually granted sexual agency.

It has been suggested that the Western (as well as Near Eastern and Far Easterns) origins of "boylove" may have been Indo-European tribal customs.[2]

"Boylove" supplants the pejorative term "pedophilia" as well as includes the concepts of "hebephilia"/pederasty. The term dissociates itself from the negative connotations of the modern-day clinical term "pedophilia," and more accurately defines the exclusive focus of the attraction, which is to male children and adolescents.

There has been a fierce debate (a "cultural war") between antisexuals (including homophobes) and sexual liberals regarding the possible (actually, the proven) benefits and the potential (in fact, mostly disproved) drawbacks of boylove to boys in modern times.

Boylovers (along with many other serious researchers in the field of sexology) commonly assert that boylove is a natural phenomenon which has existed throughout all of human history, and is similar in nature to other sexual orientations. [3] Many other serious researchers have agreed as well.[4] While boylove usually includes feelings of physical/sexual attraction to boys, many virped boylovers claim that boylove itself may not require, or even imply, sexual activity with boys. Boylove can be, to some, thought of as purely platonic, as the main concern of many or most boylovers includes providing love and guidance to boys[Citation needed], though some have claimed that without the sexual element, "boylove" would simply be a description of the normal protective feelings which male adults usually feel towards younger prepubescent and post-pubescent males.

There are some who assert that boylove is simply a descriptive term for adults who are emotionally and physically attracted to boys, and that there should be no particular guidelines or requirements necessary for classifying a person as a boylover, aside from a person feeling a strong physical and emotional attraction to (and usually a very strong aversion to hurting) boys.

Others believe boylove, in addition to the physical attraction, should include a set of ethical beliefs and values related to the treatment of boys, and that one must adhere to these expectations to be considered a "proper" boylover.[5]

These proposed ethical values may include a number of prescriptions, such as boylovers never exposing boys to alcohol or drugs, boylovers never initiating sexual activities with boys, and even that boylovers should always refrain from sexual contact with boys due to the potential legal risks (especially in Western countries) to the boylover, and the (alleged, though mostly disproved) [6] "psychological harms" which the boy is (mistakenly) said to usually be subject to.

Generally accepted, however, is the idea that boylovers generally are highly respectful towards boys, are kind to boys, and seek to avoid harming boys.[7] Therefore it is a very serious error to assert that boylove is simply another form of child abuse.

Foreign-language terms for "boylove

  • (more to be added)
  • Albanian: Ashik
  • Japanese: Shounen'ai (少年愛)


  1. See Parker Rossman's book, and his The Pederast (magazine article).
  2. "Indo-European Pederasty -"
  3. Seto recently wrote about pedophilia as an orientation. The complete reference is necessary here. The DSM once defined pedophilia as a sexual orientation, too, but quickly backtracked when attacked by radical third-wave feminists. Reference needed here to the controversy.
  4. Could they ALL have been WRONG? (2005) David L. Riegel, SafeHaven Foundation Press: Philadelphia, ISBN 0-9676997-2-X
  5. The Philosophy of Responsible Boylove
  6. Rind, et al.
  7. Lautman and Sandfort references necessary here

See also

External links