Analecto

18 de outubro de 2018

Evangelicals and Bolsonaro.

Filed under: Livros, Notícias e política, Organizações — Tags:, — Yure @ 12:37

With the connection between Bolsonaro and the military dictatorship, I’m a bit surprised that evangelicals want to vote for him, when there are biblical reasons not to do so. Most of these reasons gravitate to the principle of loveing your neighbor, which first appears in Leviticus and is developed throughout the New Testament from Matthew. Those who watched Haddad’s electoral segment on television saw recordings of Bolsonaro praising Ustra and lamenting that the military dictatorship did not kill “some thirty thousand” people of whom some would be innocent. The following text is aimed at those evangelicals who want to vote for Bolsonaro. If you aren’t Brazilian or religious, you may want to do something else.

Before going any further, Haddad really wants to legalize marijuana and abortion. However, neither can be done without the will of the doer. You do not have to abort or use marijuana. Besides, although abortion might become a legal possibility, I would be very happy if you did not abort. After all, according to the Statute of the Child and Adolescent , the mother who can not raise the child can place the kid for adoption without major problems. She does not need to keep the child, so in theory, abortion would be unnecessary: ​​if you can not raise your child, someone else will. Thus, you would only abort, for example, if you wanted to. The evangelical church-goer does not have to abort. The evangelical does not need to smoke anything either. If others do so, it’s not your business.

Suppose Bolsonaro decides to govern with the military dictatorship as a government model (remembering that there is a possibility of a military coup under his government), would that be a biblically acceptable situation? The return of torture? Removal of rights? Censorship? Above all, hate?

It is understandable that, in the face of such insecurity, we turn to hatred and defend drastic measures, but human wrath does not equate divine justice (James 1:20). Whoever hates is in darkness (1 John 2:11) and does not know God, because God is love (1 John 4: 8). That means I can’t hate homosexuals, for example? You can not: there is no person who does not sin and that is why we can receive forgiveness. For example, Rahab was a prostitute, but by working with the spies of Joshua, she was justified (James 2: 24-25). When a certain woman was caught in adultery and taken to Jesus, he said that only those without sin could throw a stone at her. There is no one who does not sin, so we are unfit to punish others for their sins (John 8: 1-11). Why do you want guns? Why does the removal of the Disarmament Statute looks attractive to you? Do you want to do justice with your own hands? Have you not heard that revenge belongs to God (Romans 12:19)? If you hate murder, do not become a murderer.

The commandment in which the whole law is summed up is “thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself” or, put another way, “do to others what you would like to have done to you” (Matthew 7:12). He who does not love his brother (and God is the father of us all) does not walk with God (1 John 3: 10-11). Thus, the homosexual who does not hate is more likely to be saved than the liar or murderer who accuses him for being homosexual, because the accuser sins three times: once for being a liar or a murderer, twice for nurturing hatred towards another person and a third time for being a sinner who judges another sinner, casting himself as hypocrite. If God only looked at our mistakes, no one would be saved. But that would be unfair. In not God also a God of justice? The homosexual who has done many good deeds is more likely to be saved than the murderer who accuses him and then goes to church. And that’s because the first is more worth being forgiven. I do not even have to touch the subject of racism.

Do you think you can save yourself by going to church and listening to the words? That’s is self-deception: faith alone does not save, because not even Abraham was saved by faith alone (James 1:22). Had Abraham heard and believed, but not acted, would he not have been rejected? In fact, what kind of faith does not bear fruit (James 2:14)? If faith was enough to save, the devil would be saved, because the demons also believe in God (James 2:19). True religion is charity toward the oppressed, as orphans and widows (James 1:27). Bolsonaro wants to take the rights of the working classes, many of whom have children and a wife, and who, in spite of their work, sometimes need help from the government to stay alive. One may say that the worker is worthy of his wages and that those who do not work should not eat (2 Thessalonians 3:10), but the problem here is to take minimum working conditions from those who work. So, despite working, sometimes the worker lacks resources to buy food. We could also argue that receiving government help is like receiving “alms.” So what? Is it a sin to give alms? The prayers and alms of Cornelius Italian were accepted before God as a memorial offering (Acts 10: 1-4). So what does it matter if this is the case?

Finally, a word to those who intend to not vote: not doing a good deed when you can do it is sinning by omission (James 4:17). If you are, for example, a Jehovah’s Witness and can not vote for religious reasons, at least spread this text to others. A hate government is an anti-Christian government and the hatred has begun even before the elections are over. Evangelicals should be ashamed of supporting an overtly aggressive person with their vote.

Anúncios

Evangélicos e Bolsonaro.

Filed under: Livros, Notícias e política, Saúde e bem-estar — Tags:, — Yure @ 12:15

Com a conexão entre Bolsonaro e a ditadura militar, fico um pouco surpreso que os evangélicos queiram votar nele, quando há razões bíblicas para não fazer isso. A maioria dessas razões gravitam o princípio de amor ao próximo, que aparece pela primeira vez em Levítico e é desenvolvido ao longo do Novo Testamento a partir de Mateus. Quem assistiu o programa eleitoral do Haddad viu que há gravações do Bolsonaro exaltando Ustra e censurando a ditadura militar por não ter matado “uns trinta mil” dentre os quais alguns seriam inocentes.

Antes de ir adiante, Haddad quer mesmo legalizar a maconha e o aborto. No entanto, nenhuma das duas coisas pode ser feita sem a vontade de quem faz. Você não precisa abortar nem usar maconha. Além do mais, apesar de o aborto poder se tornar uma possibilidade legal, eu ficaria muito feliz se você não abortasse. Afinal, de acordo com o Estatuto da Criança e do Adolescente, a mãe que não tem condições de criar o filho pode dá-lo à adoção sem maiores problemas. Ela não precisa ficar com o filho, então, em teoria, o aborto seria desnecessário: se você não tem condições de criar seu filho, outro fará isso. Assim, você só abortaria, por exemplo, se você quisesse. A evangélica não precisa abortar. O evangélico não precisa fumar nada também. Deixe que os outros façam e se entendam com Deus depois.

Suponhamos que Bolsonaro resolva governar nos moldes da ditadura militar (lembrando que há a possibilidade de um golpe militar acontecer sob seu governo caso ele mude de ideia quanto a isso), essa seria uma situação biblicamente aceitável? A volta da tortura? Remoção de direitos? Censura? Sobretudo, ódio?

É compreensível que, diante de tanta insegurança, nos voltemos ao ódio e defendamos medidas drásticas, mas a ira humana não opera justiça divina (Tiago 1:20). Quem odeia está em trevas (1 João 2:11) e não conhece a Deus, porque Deus é amor (1 João 4:8). E se o ódio for aos homossexuais? Também não se justifica: não há uma pessoa que não peque e é por isso que podemos receber perdão. Por exemplo: Raabe era prostituta, mas, por colaborar com os espiões de Josué, foi justificada (Tiago 2:24-25). Quando uma determinada mulher foi apanhada em adultério e levada a Jesus, o mesmo disse que lhe atirasse a primeira pedra quem estava sem pecado. Ora, não há ninguém que não peque, então não cabe a nós punirmos os outros pelos pecados deles (João 8:1-11). Ora, para quê você quer armas? Por que a revogação do Estatuto do Desarmamento te atrai? Você quer fazer justiçacom as próprias mãos? Não ouviste dizer que a vingança a Deus pertence (Romanos 12:19)? Se você odeia o assassinato, não se faça assassino.

O mandamento no qual toda a lei se resume é “amarás ao próximo como a ti mesmo” ou, colocado de outro modo, “faça ao próximo o que gostaria que lhe fosse feito” (Mateus 7:12). Quem não ama a seu irmão (e Deus é pai de nós todos) não anda com Deus (1 João 3:10-11). Assim, o homossexual que não odeia tem mais chances de ser salvo do que o mentiroso, embriagado ou assassino que o acusa, porquanto este peca três vezes: uma vez por ser mentiroso, assassino ou beberrão, outra vez por praticar o ódio contra outra pessoa e ainda outra vez por, sendo pecador, fazer-se juiz de outro pecador. Se Deus olhasse somente para nossos erros, ninguém se salvaria. Mas isso seria injusto. Ora, nosso Deus é Deus de justiça. O homossexual que tem muitas boas obras tem mais chances de ser salvo do que o assassino que o acusa e depois vai pra igreja, porquanto é mais digno de perdão. Nem preciso tocar no assunto do racismo.

Você acha que pode se salvar somente indo pra igreja e ouvindo as palavras? Isso é autoengano: a fé sozinha não salva, porquanto nem Abraão foi salvo somente pela fé que ele tinha (Tiago 1:22). Se Abraão tivesse ouvido e crido, mas não feito, não teria sido rejeitado? Aliás, que tipo de fé não dá frutos (Tiago 2:14)? Se a fé bastasse pra salvar, o diabo seria salvo, porquanto também os demônios acreditam em Deus (Tiago 2:19). A verdadeira religião é a caridade para com os oprimidos, como órfãos e viúvas (Tiago 1:27). Ora, Bolsonaro pretende tirar direitos das classes trabalhadoras, dentre as quais estão muitos que têm filhos e esposa e que, às vezes apesar de trabalharem, precisam de ajuda do governo, como o bolsa-família, pra se manterem vivos. Alguém pode dizer que o trabalhador é digno de seu salário e que quem não trabalha não deve comer (2 Tessalonicenses 3:10), mas o problema aqui é tirar condições mínimas de trabalho daqueles que trabalham. Assim, apesar de trabalhar, às vezes falta pão ao trabalhador. Trabalhando, não pode se sustentar. Poderíamos também argumentar que o bolsa-família é “esmola”. Seja; por acaso dar esmola é pecado? As orações e as esmolas de Cornélio Italiano foram aceitas diante de Deus como oferta memorial (Atos 10:1-4). Então, que importa se esse for o caso?

Por último, uma palavra aos que intencionam votar em branco ou nulo: não fazer o bem quando se pode fazê-lo é pecar por omissão (Tiago 4:17). Se você for, por exemplo, uma testemunha de Jeová e não puder votar por razões religiosas, ao menos passe este texto a outras pessoas. Um governo de ódio é um governo anticristão e esse é um ódio que começa antes mesmo das eleições acabarem. Os evangélicos deveriam se envergonhar de dar apoio a alguém abertamente agressivo, especialmente se tal pessoa se edifica na mentira. Não perca a sua chance de se arrepender e se redimir. Deus está vendo. Essa é a igreja de Cristo.

5 de outubro de 2018

It would be good if single men adopted children.

Filed under: Notícias e política, Saúde e bem-estar — Tags:, , — Yure @ 23:47

I was thinking these days about the fact that fewer and fewer men are marrying or dating, because of the disadvantages of such behavior and the implicit risks. The idea of ​​moving away from relationships is sound and I believe that it is the right choice to take so that the risk decreases over time. Our capitalist system needs children who can be trained and young adults who can work. So the government will sooner or later have to act to reduce the social risk of heterosexual relationships. So, I really think that getting away from relationships is good for men. But what about the boys?

People speak of a “boy crisis”: boys are doing poorly at school, are turning more to crime, are developing more mental problems and need more treatment, specially because they are committing suicide more often, compared to girls. For many, this is due to the fact that fathers are leaving families and boys, because they have a different biology, can not be perfectly educated by a single mother. Others suggest that it’s the environment in which the boy is growing, as it’s oppressive towards males. I do not know if those are the real reasons for the so-called boy crisis, but if it is, the success of boys needs to become something to pursue, because being male is becoming risky. The problem of the man is solved, but the problem of the boy remains. Avoiding relationships is solving just one half of the problem. The other half can be solved by preparing the next generation to be more informed, just and stronger overall.

I think the problem can be mitigated in the short term and solved in the long run if every single man adopts a child or at least keeps one child from the previous marriage. After all, living alone, you have more resources and could take care of a kid. There are other benefits inherent in adoption, such as not needing to adopt a baby, but an older child or even a teenager. Children and adolescents in shelters grow with even less emotional support and will be disadvantaged adults if they are not adopted by someone who can give them close guidance. So whether the problem is caused by the above reasons or not, developing the boy’s physical, mental and social capacity is a means of allowing him to adapt to the hostile environment so that change can be made possible.

If you adopt a child or keep the children from your previous marriage, the risk of living without a partner is solved, because the child, after gaining financial independence, can support you when you become an elder. In addition, if boys grow up to become confused and scared men, the solution to the male crisis will be slower or perhaps regress, as boys may seek guidance from the opposing team.

The boy must be able to explore and develop his physical and intellectual potentialities, but he does not find an environment that allows that: there are no public policies aimed at the boy who is having trouble while learning to read, people don’t pay attention to the fact that the male population is distancing itself from university, among other forms of negligence. The only person who could help a promising boy would be a good father, but where is such father? That father could be you.

So, I think that declining relationships is solving only part of the problem. The second half can be solved by the adopting children and preparing them for the future, allowing the full development of their physical, mental and social abilities, so that they are not led to employ themselves in the perpetuation of a perverse system.

Seria bom se homens solteiros adotassem filhos.

Eu estava pensando esses dias sobre o fato de cada vez menos homens estarem casando ou namorando, por causa das desvantagens desse comportamento e dos riscos implícitos. A ideia de se afastar de relacionamentos é sã e acredito que seja a opção correta a ser tomada para que o risco passe a diminuir, porquanto nosso sistema capitalista precisa de crianças para capacitar e de adultos novos os quais possam trabalhar. Então, o governo cedo ou tarde terá que agir para reduzir o risco social de relacionamentos heterossexuais. Assim, eu realmente penso que se afastar de relacionamentos é bom para o homem. Mas e quanto aos meninos?

Fala-se que existe uma “crise do menino”: meninos estão indo mal na escola, estão se voltando mais ao crime, estão desenvolvendo mais problemas mentais e precisando mais de tratamento, inclusive porque estão se suicidando mais, comparados às meninas. Para muitos, isso se deve ao fato de que os pais estão deixando as famílias e meninos, por terem uma biologia diferente, não podem ser plenamente educados pela mãe somente, além de que o ambiente no qual o menino está crescendo é um ambiente que lhe oprime em detrimento da menina. Eu não sei se essa é a verdadeira razão, mas, se for, evitar relacionamentos é apenas uma metade da solução para o problema do risco social inerente a ser homem no século vinte e um. Resolve-se o problema do homem, mas o do menino permanece.

Acho que o problema pode ser amenizado a curto prazo e resolvido a longo prazo se cada homem solteiro adotasse um filho ou ficasse com pelo menos um filho do casamento anterior. Afinal, vivendo sozinho, você tem mais recursos e poderia cuidar de um pequeno. Há outros benefícios inerentes à adoção, como o de não precisar adotar um bebê, mas uma criança já mais velha ou mesmo um adolescente. Crianças e adolescentes em abrigos crescem com ainda menos suporte emocional e serão adultos em desvantagem se não forem adotados por alguém que possa lhes dar orientação de perto. Então, quer o problema seja ocasionado pelas razões supracitadas ou não, desenvolver a capacidade física, mental e social do menino é um meio de permitir sua adaptação ao ambiente hostil, para que seja possível mudar tal ambiente.

Se você adotar um filho ou ficar com filhos do casamento anterior, o risco de viver sem parceiro é resolvido, porquanto o filho, ao conquistar independência financeira, pode apoiar você na velhice. Além disso, se os meninos crescerem para tornarem-se homens confusos e assustados, a solução da crise masculina será mais lenta ou talvez retroceda, porquanto os meninos poderão procurar orientação do time oposto.

É preciso que o menino seja capaz de explorar e desenvolver suas potencialidades físicas e intelectuais, mas ele não encontra ambiente que permita isso: não existem políticas públicas voltadas para o menino que aprende a ler devagar, não se atenta ao fato de que a população masculina está se afastando das universidades, nem nada disso. A única pessoa que poderia ser de ajuda para um menino promissor seria um bom pai, mas onde está esse pai? Por que não pode ser você?

Assim, eu acho que recusar relacionamentos é resolver apenas parte do problema. A segunda metade poderá ser resolvida com a adoção de filhos e a preparação deles para a vida futura, permitindo o desenvolvimento pleno de suas faculdades físicas e mentais, mas também sociais, para que eles não sejam levados a empregar suas habilidades na perpetuação de um sistema perverso.

27 de setembro de 2018

What I learned from “Nicomachean Ethics”.

Filed under: Livros, Notícias e política, Saúde e bem-estar — Tags:, , , — Yure @ 00:14

“Nicomachean ethics” was written by Aristotle. Below are some things I learned about his text.

  1. All actions have a benefit as goal.
  2. The end achieved by the state is more beautiful, for benefiting the subjects as well.
  3. But politics is not an exact science and the search for the city’s best interest is a proximal study.
  4. Politics is action, practice.
  5. Acting in a good manner and living in a good way coincide with happiness.
  6. For most people, a person who lives well and acts well is the person who seeks and finds pleasure, in a way that happiness is often equaled to pleasure.
  7. The search for honor is a difficult pursuit, because honor is something that depends more on who recognizes the other as honorable and not so much on those who seek honor (implying you can be honored by evil deeds, if the person who is giving you honor benefits from such).
  8. Virtuous life does not necessarily bring happiness.
  9. Money isn’t a goal in itself, as it’s used to buy things that could bring us happiness, if we see in those things such possibility.
  10. If there were no individual good things, a concept such as “good itself” or “supreme good” wouldn’t be able to explain anything.
  11. The sciences try to achieve good, but the concept of good isn’t provided by them.
  12. This is because the sciences aim for specific goals.
  13. The good of each science is the goal that it aims to achieve.
  14. Money is used to get something else that may bring you happiness, it isn’t happiness in itself.
  15. Aristotle begins his reflections using current opinions because, if one of the opinions turns out to be true, it will help a great deal.
  16. Whoever wants to attain happiness by virtue must practice virtue.
  17. Happiness is a state of the soul attained by those who are in possession of what they love.
  18. Being happy may also depend on luck.
  19. Virtue is teachable.
  20. Happiness obtained with one’s effort is more stable than happiness obtained with luck.
  21. If happiness is a type of activity, no one is happy after being killed.
  22. But there are those who maintain that there is no happiness, but “happy moments,” in the sense that happiness has no stable character because the human beings aren’t stable themselves.
  23. But the happiness obtained by virtue is stable, because virtuous actions have long-lasting results.
  24. The happy person is not immune to chance, but the way he deals with bad luck makes his happiness stay with him or not.
  25. Virtue allows you to deal better with misfortunes.
  26. If happiness is action, then the virtuous person will be happy if he practices good deeds.
  27. The happiness of the virtuous is stable because there will be little accidents that will make him unhappy.
  28. Personal happiness also depends on the happiness of friends and relatives.
  29. Virtue is taught by habit.
  30. All virtues, like the arts, are acquired by practice.
  31. The way one acts in certain circumstances is what makes them good or bad at something.
  32. Good action is a measured, balanced action: if you run away from everything, you are a coward, but if you never run away, you are reckless.
  33. Noble and advantageous things also present themselves as pleasant, pleasurable, while vile and harmful things present themselves as painful.
  34. It is not possible to be good without practice.
  35. The theory that virtue is not teachable makes us lazy.
  36. Virtues have to do with choices.
  37. Virtue is disposition of character, but dispositions of character are not innate.
  38. Human virtue is what makes us good or enables us to do a good job (in this case, you could speak of “talent”).
  39. Virtue is the middle ground between two vices: a vice of excess and a vice of lack.
  40. If the middle ground isn’t the best, then we aren’t discussing moral virtues (for example: the middle ground between intelligence and stupidity is never preferable to intelligence).
  41. Driving your emotions correctly is virtuous, but that must not be confused with letting go of emotions completely.
  42. This applies not only to emotions, but also to actions.
  43. But that means that being virtuous is difficult: there are several ways to make a mistake.
  44. Virtue: disposition of character present in those who make choices that are wisely moderated between two vices (choices taken in a case-by-case basis, requiring practical wisdom), and that can be learned with practice.
  45. General propositions need to be in harmony with particular cases .
  46. Vicious people accuse virtuous people of vice, while also judging themselves virtuous.
  47. Virtue is the middle ground between two vices, one by lack and the other by excess.
  48. To find the right measure or approach it, we must go towards the extreme that seems to be the least damaging.
  49. A person who sins because of ignorance deserves correction, not condemnation.
  50. If you do something because you were forced or uninformed, you didn’t do it “voluntarily”.
  51. Some voluntary actions may be involuntary depending on the point of view.
  52. Actions done out of ignorance deserve forgiveness.
  53. If you do something bad, don’t blame your emotions.
  54. Desire and choice are different things.
  55. Choices can not be based on opinions, but on solid judgments of good or bad.
  56. But the judgment of good or bad varies from person to person.
  57. It can be said that choice is the decision based on rational principles between two or more options.
  58. Deliberations are made on things that are within our reach and that are feasible.
  59. It is not possible to deliberate about our job when exercising such job: a scientist, during his research, should not stop what he is doing to wonder if he was supposed to be doing that in the first place.
  60. Even if the goal of an action is certain, we can still debate about what is the best course towards it.
  61. When all available means to attain a goal fail, we have to evaluate if there’s another way or if the goal should be pursued.
  62. Sometimes we incurr in bad actions due to conditions that could have been avoided.
  63. Fear is the anticipation of something bad.
  64. There are things we must fear.
  65. There are things that should only be feared in certain situations.
  66. There are things that should not be feared more than necessary.
  67. There are things we should not fear.
  68. Some “brave” men are moved by fear of embarrassment.
  69. True courage is uncoerced.
  70. Passion (emotion) assists courage.
  71. The brave is aware of the danger, but the optimist assumes that there is no danger.
  72. There’s no courage when there’s nothing to fear.
  73. It is easier to abstain from something pleasant than to endure something painful.
  74. Intemperance is “more voluntary” than cowardice.
  75. The prodigal is ruined because he does not judge his goods with due measure, over-spending and donating in excess.
  76. Liberality is to donate in the right measure, without being prodigal, nor miser.
  77. No one can be rich without effort: even if he is born rich, he will become poor if he doesn’t spend effort in maintaining his wealth.
  78. The prodigal is still more useful than the miser.
  79. Magnanimity is the “crown of virtues”: it emphasizes the virtues we already have and does not exist without a set of other virtues.
  80. Magnanimity is like self-esteem: you are able to see your value as person as sees that it’s decent value.
  81. Those who sin by the excess of anger, counterattack immediately, so that their anger does not stay for long.
  82. Desire to please can also be a vice.
  83. While modesty is the refusal a coming compliment, false modesty is the refusal to acknowledge one’s own strengths.
  84. There is also a middle ground in jokes.
  85. It is possible to know something from the study of its opposite: when we study healthy habits, we soon discover which habits are not healthy, although we were not studying unhealthy habits specifically.
  86. The righteous is honest and obedient to the laws.
  87. Justice is a writer.
  88. Justice is the complete virtue, in which all virtues are grouped.
  89. The unjust profits from vile acts.
  90. The judge’s job is, through penalty, to equalize losses and gains between offender and offended.
  91. The Pythagoreans defined justice as reciprocity.
  92. Justice must take into account several factors to determine losses and gains.
  93. The money was made to facilitate the transaction of objects and services.
  94. What makes money valuable is the value attributed to it; money has no intrinsic value.
  95. What makes prices rise or fall is demand.
  96. The value of money is inconstant, but more stable than the value of the objects themselves.
  97. When a ruler starts to arrogate to himself what he does not deserve, and so he begins to act unjustly, he becomes a tyrant.
  98. Human laws are changeable, while natural laws do not change.
  99. If a person willingly did an unjust act, aware of his unrighteousness, he is unjust, because he purposely did what he knew to be wrong.
  100. It is not possible to suffer injustice voluntarily.
  101. You can be unfair to yourself.
  102. There are things that can not be universally explained.
  103. When exceptions to the rule are discovered, the individual can allow himself to adjust the rule.
  104. If the universality of a law is contested, it needs adjustments.
  105. There are three guides to action: sensation, reason and desire.
  106. The origin of action is choice, motivated by desire and made by reason.
  107. There are five manifestations of truth: technique, science, practical wisdom, philosophy, and intuitive reason.
  108. Aristotle already distinguished induction of deduction (syllogism).
  109. The assumptions used in the syllogism must come from induction.
  110. The first principles are first apprehended by intuitive reason.
  111. Wisdom is the most perfect knowledge.
  112. If mankind is not the best thing in the world, any study that deals with people is not the most useful in the world either.
  113. General wisdom and practical wisdom do not necessarily coincide.
  114. Philosophical wisdom deals with the more general things (what is “right”), while practical wisdom deals with particular things (what is “advantageous”).
  115. Philosophical wisdom is scientific knowledge combined with intuitive reason.
  116. Practical wisdom is preferable to philosophical wisdom, because it assists in solving the most imminent problems: it is not very wise to be concerned with more intellectual things without having solved matters such as food, work, and shelter before.
  117. Practical wisdom is not just about universals.
  118. Good deliberation does not necessarily produce good methods or goals, because one can deliberate murder.
  119. Reason seems to turn predispositions to courage, temperance, and others into factual virtues.
  120. Virtues involve practical wisdom.
  121. The exercise of practical wisdom leads one to collect all the virtues.
  122. There are three types of morale that should be avoided: vice, incontinence, and rudeness.
  123. The opposite of vice is virtue, and that of incontinence is continence.
  124. Continence (the curbing of present desires) is not the same as temperance (not desiring what is bad).
  125. Knowledge does not necessarily prevent someone from practicing what is wrong: we may know that it is wrong to kill someone and still do so during an outburst of anger.
  126. There may be excess even in good things.
  127. The name “incontinent” does not apply to people who suffer from any congenital illness or who are under morbid conditions, because control would be completely beyond their strength.
  128. Incontinence over anger is less shameful because anger only comes up in response to offense.
  129. Incontinence over appetites is more shameful because it is spontaneous: anger only happens due to external stimuli, but you do not need an external stimulus to want to eat a pudding when you are not supposed to, you do not even have to be hungry, you just have to remember that it is tasty and the desire would come.
  130. In addition, anger is something that affects everyone, while the desire for things like glory, fame, specific types of food does not affect everyone.
  131. Anger is more justifiable because it’s an attempt to heal a pain, while other excesses are not intended to heal any pain, but are only geared towards pleasure.
  132. Reason is also a source of evil.
  133. It is necessary to repent in order to change.
  134. The intemperant does not resist the drives that most resist, whereas the incontinent gives in to the drives that most would not resist.
  135. The incontinent has a desire that is hard to dominate.
  136. Intemperance is “incurable” because a person with such vice prefers to listen to the body and not the reason.
  137. The incontinent knows that he must listen to reason, but he can not avoid transgressing it.
  138. Contemplation is a pleasure that does not involve appetite or pain.
  139. Pleasure is not a process, but a goal.
  140. Something is not bad just because it is sought by fools.
  141. Kindness does not necessarily bring happiness.
  142. Friendship seems to justify life: life is not worth living without friends.
  143. The rich and powerful are the ones who need their friends the most, because spending money only with yourself is boring.
  144. The rich also needs friends because it is more difficult to defend a great wealth alone.
  145. The human being is not the only creature capable of friendship.
  146. Friendship is productive because it multiplies the capacity for action and thought.
  147. We love what seems good to us .
  148. Friends love each other.
  149. Friendship is reciprocal benevolence among people who know each other’s feelings.
  150. There are people who love the other for their practical utility: when the person ceases to be useful, the love also ceases.
  151. There are people who love each other for the pleasure they provide, but that love is not necessarily durable either.
  152. True friendship requires a person to like the other, encouraging mutual support.
  153. This kind of friendship continues as long as the two parties are good to each other.
  154. True friendship is rare as the good people themselves and requires time to establish themselves.
  155. Distance interrupts the activities of a friendship, but not necessarily kills the friendships.
  156. We seek nice friends, that’s why some people pretend to be nice.
  157. It is possible to love without being loved back.
  158. Friendship is based on love.
  159. To love someone because they have a quality that we recognize as good and that we do not have is a type of interest.
  160. Different communities seem to have different types of friendship.
  161. Three types of government: monarchy, aristocracy, the way of Sparta .
  162. The types of government can be found in the family: the brothers are democratic among themselves, but submissive to the control of the father, who forms an aristocracy with the mother.
  163. In a system of government, friendship is possible when there is justice.
  164. Couples with children do not get divorced easily.
  165. Friendship based on utility is fertile ground for complaints.
  166. Friendship is not a trade.
  167. When we can not settle a debt with a friend, we should still pay as much as we can to minimize the debt.
  168. Proportion preserves friendship.
  169. Allowing the consumer to choose the price of the merchandise avoids complaints.
  170. The buyer judges something according to the value he thinks that thing has, not its value after it is bought.
  171. It is only possible to love what looks good.
  172. It is not possible to love what looks bad.
  173. When our friend becomes evil, we should not leave him immediately, but try to bring him to kindness again.
  174. Old friends can still be treated with more respect than strangers.
  175. If you hate yourself, you can’t see your redeeming qualities.
  176. The best friendship begins with benevolence.
  177. The benevolent loves to do good to others.
  178. There are two forms of self-love: one oriented to self-pleasure and other oriented to self-improvement.
  179. To realize that we are alive is to “perceive that we perceive” or that we think .
  180. “Right measure” is not something fixed, but something that stays between two fixed extremes.
  181. We should not have a large number of friends, because doing so impairs intimacy.
  182. Pleasure is good in itself.
  183. Pleasure varies from person to person.
  184. Since we can not continually dedicate ourselves to an activity with the same intensity, we can not always be content.
  185. It seems that there are different types of pleasure that attract different types of people differently.
  186. If you like what you do, you will be productive in that field.
  187. When we try to pay attention to two things, the one that is most pleasurable gets more attention.
  188. If happiness were not activity, you could be happy without leaving your bed.
  189. Happiness is an end in itself: nobody asks “why do I want to be happy?”
  190. The function of recreation and fun is to refresh us before we return to our responsibilities.
  191. Life according to reason is the happiest.
  192. Virtuous acts seem to depend on opportunities to happen.
  193. It is not necessary to have many possessions to be happy.
  194. You can’t learn a profession with study alone; you need practice as well.

26 de setembro de 2018

Is social justice a legitimate movement?

So these days, the Linux Foundation decided to adopt the Contributor Covenant , which caused great anger in the developer community. The news seem optimistic about it, while the community itself is furious. As the news seem to offer only one side of the story, I would like to offer a Brazilian insight into what is happening in a country that is not my own but that produces a lot of software that I use.

For developers, the code of conduct adopted by the foundation, based on a document produced elsewhere, represents a political intrusion into fully objective and functionality-driven business, in this case programming. The code would, a priori, be unnecessary, since many of its policies are already adopted without its presence. Finally, the code is highly relative and vague, allowing virtually anyone to expel another person from the Linux project with allegations of harassment or discrimination, which may have hurt only feelings. This is aggravated by the fact that the people who contribute most to the code are not minorities, so that people who contribute less can eliminate those who contribute the most. The community argues that this has happened in other large projects that have adopted similar policies, which they summarize as “diversity over skill”, causing deterioration of services provided. The response from the most active developers was threatening to remove the parts of the Linux code that were contributed by them from the project, which would hurt both clients (like me, as I use Manjaro, and Android users) and servers (since most of the popular sites today, even pornographic ones, are powered by Linux).

That is an extreme attitude, but, in my opinion, understandable. I have been thinking about this for some time and I published a short comment elsewhere in English about what is happening and I decided to put these ideas here for my six or so readers. But before going into detail, I have three trans friends and I go as far as referring to them using desired pronouns (although they themselves do not mind being referred to by their biological sex), and although I do not consider myself left, I am not right-leaning either. In fact, still lean left. And that is why I worry about social justice, but not because I think it is good: social justice does not cease to shame the left.

Let me explain: Contributor Covenant allows minority groups to attack major groups for small or even hypocritical reasons, which actually increases the majority’s hatred towards the minorities. This is because social justice has an original sin inherited from feminism, which is the quest for equality by the consideration of just one side of the scale. That is why it is called “feminism”: only women’s problems are taken into account. Everything for feminism is a women’s issue. Men and boys only enter these discourses as oppressive entities, even if real men and boys you meet on the streets are not oppressors. But to make an analogy, can we balance a scale without knowing the contents in the other side, especially when all we do is put more and more weight on the side we priorize? No, the tendency is that the side we pay attention to will become increasingly heavy, eventually tipping the scale to it’s side, rather than balancing it. Social justice is, perhaps inadvertently, the application of the same principle to all minorities. That is why there is no social justice for men, for example.

The point I want to make is that the social justice movement is ruining more and more things because it is not assessing the costs of its actions. Evergreen University lost three teachers, had a 40 percent drop in enrollment, and lost millions of dollars in funds because enraged students expelled a white teacher from the classroom during a special protest day in which no white people could enter the campus. This, of course, is just an example. But does not it seem strange that a movement that preaches equality and justice has approved and perhaps suggested a “special day” in the academic calendar in which no white person, whether student or teacher, could enter the campus? For me, this is hypocrisy, but it is also injustice . Thus, a movement that speaks of social justice gains hypocritical outlines. This legitimizes the reaction of the majority groups. But now comes the key question: How many people who are against these attitudes blame the movement as a political entity and how many people blame the minorities that such a movement claims to protect?

Again, the example of feminism: this movement claims to represent the best interest of all women, although most women are not feminist. Thus, an attack on feminism can be interpreted as an attack on women and is readily labeled as misogyny. The problem is that the use of such language and meanings reinforces the connection between feminism and women in general, giving rise to the emergence of true misogyny. The same is true for social justice. With a movement that behaves this way, the tendency is for more and more people to blame blacks, women, immigrants, trangenders and other minority groups for all the bad things that happen. They do not blame the movement or ideology, but their visible material causes, which are the ones that make up the movement, whose attitudes are generalized, because they claim to act in the best interest of the groups they represent. To check my theory, just look at voting intentions surveys in Brazil: Bolsonaro, leader of the far right, has a serious chance of winning. Thus, the social justice movement strengthens the right wing, because, by acting in a fundamentally unjust and hypocritical way, it feeds reactionary attitudes. And yes, the social justice movement was imported by the Brazilian media and inoculated into the general population, so much so that citizens in a nation where everyone is mixed are able to point out who is “black” and who is “white” when our very genes, which descend from Europeans, Africans and indigenous people, betray these labels. There are no “pure races” in Brazil. Yet, there has never been so much racism here.

Suppose that the protest of the developers takes place and a lot of lines of code are removed from the Linux kernel, we can prepare ourselves for the falency of the Internet. Linux is the safest kernel today, which is why many servers use it. Removing Linux code represents the removal of security from various sectors of the Internet. To illustrate how serious this is, do you remember shellshock ? Well, shellshock was a bug in the GNU Bourne Again Shell , better known as bash , which allowed arbitrary code execution from remote sources by using environment variables. In layman’s language, this means that anyone who discovers a way to pass environment variables to a server would take control of it. This would not have caused the panic it caused if most Internet servers did not run Linux, after all bash is shipped in distributions of that kernel. Imagine if the developers who solved this problem took back the solution they implemented. The vulnerability would return. Thus, with the damage caused by social justice and the rage accumulated against this movement, the population would stand on the side of developers. I would stand by their side, because one should not mix politics and science, politics and programming: that the most skilled be able to contribute, this does not harm diversity, but prioritizing diversity may exclude the skilled. This is meritocracy, but I am forced to admit that it is the meritocracy that made Linux suitable to power Tumblr.

To sum up: social justice as a radical movement acts against the interests of minorities that it claims to represent and, by claiming to act in the best interest of all these minorities, it increases hatred against those minorities at every clearly unjust or hypocritical act, fueling reactionary discourses and giving power to right wing, all because its fundamental premise, of considering only one side without assessing the costs of its actions, harms everyone. So the question I wanted to ask is: Is social justice a legitimate movement? I don’t think so. The social justice movement is likely to be a “false flag” operation. I know this sounds like a conspiracy theory, but just imagine: what if key people in social justice movements are actually proponents of the right, who instrumentalize people from the left to achieve their goals? Maybe I am wrong, but the fact is that social justice has been the right wing’s greatest ally in this decade.

I urge that minorities who stand against the extreme acts of the social justice movement to vocalize their displeasure at these actions, to publicly repudiate what is happening. Again, the example of feminism: more and more women and girls are leaving feminism upon realizing that it is unfair to men and boys, as well as harmful for their desires to build relationships (as more and more men are avoiding women ) . After all, if the public sees that not all minorities are in favor of extremism, the tendency to attack the ideology, not those that are “protected” by such ideology, will be greater, and there will be bilateral pressure against such ideology. It doesn’t mean that minorities should abandon hopes of acceptance, but that no attitude in that direction should be taken without regard to the other side of the scale or without considering the social damage that could be caused as consequence of such attitude (in this case, the implementation of Contributor Covenant by the Linux Foundation may put Linux users at risk with or without the developers’ protest). Second, I humbly ask to the Linux Foundation to create its own code of conduct, rather than adopting one that comes from outside, and that the creation of the code itself should be done in a democratic way, with the voices of the developers being heard in the process, aiming at the best interests of those who use the kernel. In the worst case scenario, fork the kernel. Finally, we all should appraise the consequences of our acts and also of the acts of others, so that we know which brands of activism are worth supporting and which are not. After all, if the consequence of an attitude is harmful even to the one who proposes the attitude, the person is either a fool… or a troll.

É a justiça social um movimento legítimo?

Então, esses dias, a Fundação Linux resolveu adotar o Contributor Covenant, o que causou grande ira na comunidade de desenvolvedores. As notícias parecem otimistas em relação a isso, enquanto que a comunidade em si parece furiosa. Como as notícias parecem oferecer apenas um lado da história, eu gostaria de oferecer uma visão brasileira sobre o que está acontecendo num país que não é o meu, mas que produz um monte de software que eu uso.

Para os desenvolvedores, o código de conduta adotado pela fundação, baseado num documento produzido fora de seu âmbito, representa uma intrusão política em negócios totalmente objetivos e orientados por funcionalidade, no caso, a programação. O código seria, a priori, desnecessário, porquanto muitas de suas políticas já são adotadas sem sua presença. Por último, o código é altamente relativo e vago, permitindo que virtualmente qualquer pessoa possa expulsar outra do projeto com alegações de assédio ou discriminação, as quais podem ter ferido apenas sentimentos. Isso é agravado pelo fato de que as pessoas que mais contribuem com o código não são minorias, de forma que pessoas que contribuem menos poderão eliminar do projeto aqueles que contribuem mais. A comunidade argumenta que isso aconteceu em outros grandes projetos que adotaram políticas parecidas, as quais eles sumarizam como “diversidade sobre habilidade”, causando deterioramento dos serviços prestados e retardamento no andar do desenvolvimento. A resposta dos desenvolvedores mais ativos foi ameaçar remover as partes do código Linux que foram contribuídas por eles do projeto, o que prejudicaria tanto clientes (como eu, que uso Manjaro, e usuários de Android) e servidores (porquanto a maioria dos sites mais usados hoje, mesmo os pornográficos, são hospedados em máquinas com Linux).

Essa é uma atitude extrema, mas, na minha opinião, compreensível. Eu venho pensando nisso faz algum tempo e eu publiquei um pequeno comentário em outro lugar, em inglês, sobre o que está acontecendo e resolvi colocar essas ideias aqui para leitores brasileiros. Mas antes de entrar em detalhes, tenho três amigos trans aos quais eu me refiro com os pronomes que eles desejam (embora eles mesmos não se importem em ser referidos por seu sexo biológico) e, embora eu não me considere mais esquerda, não sou direita também. De fato, ainda tendo à esquerda. E é por isso que me preocupo com a justiça social, mas não porque acho que ela é boa: a justiça social não cessa de envergonhar a esquerda.

Deixa eu explicar: o Contributor Covenant permite que grupos minoritários ataquem grupos majoritários por razões pequenas, ou mesmo hipócritas, o que, na verdade, aumenta o ódio que a maioria tem da minoria. Isso acontece porque a justiça social tem um pecado original herdado do feminismo, que é a busca pela igualdade pela consideração de apenas de um lado da balança. É por isso que se chama “feminismo”: somente os problemas da mulher são levados em consideração. Tudo para o feminismo é problema da mulher. O homem e o menino só entram nesses discursos como entidades opressoras, mesmo que homens e meninos particulares não sejam opressores. Mas, para fazer uma analogia, podemos equilibrar uma balança sem saber o conteúdo do outro lado, especialmente quando tudo o que fazemos é colocar cada vez mais peso no lado para o qual olhamos? Não, a tendência é que o lado sobre o qual prestamos atenção fique cada vez mais pesado. A justiça social é, talvez inadvertidamente, a aplicação do mesmo princípio para todas as minorias. É por isso que não existe (ou parece não existir) justiça social para homens, por exemplo.

O ponto em que quero chegar é que o movimento da justiça social está arruinando cada vez mais coisas, porque ele não está avaliando os custos de seus atos. A universidade Evergreen perdeu três professores, teve uma queda de 40% no número de matrículas e perdeu milhões de dólares em fundos porque alunos enfurecidos expulsaram um professor branco da sala, durante um dia especial, aprovado pela direção, em que brancos não poderiam entrar no campus. Esse, claro, é apenas um exemplo. Mas não parece estranho que um movimento que pregue a igualdade e a justiça tenha aprovado e talvez sugerido um “dia especial” no calendário acadêmico no qual nenhum branco, seja aluno ou professor, poderia entrar no campus? Para mim, isso é hipocrisia, mas também é injustiça. Assim, um movimento que fala de justiça social ganha contornos hipócritas. Isso legitima a reação dos grupos majoritários. Mas agora vem a pergunta-chave: quantas pessoas que são contra essas atitudes culpam o movimento como entidade política e quantas pessoas culpam as minorias que tal movimento afirma proteger?

Novamente, o exemplo do feminismo: esse movimento afirma representar o melhor interesse de todas as mulheres, apesar a maioria das mulheres não ser feminista. Assim, um ataque ao feminismo pode ser interpretado como um ataque à mulher e é prontamente rotulado como misoginia. O problema é que o uso dessa linguagem e desse significado reforça a ligação entre feminismo e mulheres em geral, dando oportunidade ao surgimento de misoginia verdadeira. O mesmo ocorre com a justiça social. Com um movimento que se comporta dessa forma, a tendência é que cada vez mais pessoas culpem negros, mulheres, imigrantes, trangêneros e outros grupos minoritários por tudo de ruim que acontece. Não culpam o movimento ou a ideologia, mas suas causa materiais visíveis, que são os que compõem o movimento, cujas atitudes são generalizadas por estes afirmarem agir no melhor interesse dos grupos que representam. Para verificar minha teoria, basta olhar para as pesquisas de intenção de voto no Brasil: Bolsonaro, líder da extrema direita, tem chances sérias de ganhar. Assim, o movimento da justiça social fortalece a direita, porquanto, ao agir de forma fundamentalmente injusta e hipócrita, fomenta atitudes reacionárias. E sim, o movimento da justiça social foi importado pela mídia brasileira e inoculado na população geral, a ponto de uma nação de mestiços ser capaz de apontar quem é “negro” e quem é “branco”, quando nossos genes descendentes de europeus, africanos e indígenas traem essas denições. Nunca houve tanto racismo aqui.

Suponhamos que o protesto dos desenvolvedores se efetue e um monte de linhas de código sejam removidas do núcleo Linux, podemos nos preparar para a falência da Internet. Linux é o núcleo mais seguro da atualidade, razão pela qual vários servidores o usam. Remover código do Linux representa a remoção da segurança de vários setores da Internet. Para ilustrar como isso é grave, você lembra do shellshock? Bom, o shellshock foi uma falha no GNU Bourne Again Shell, mais conhecido como bash, que permitia a execução de código arbitrário de fonte remota utilizando variáveis de ambiente. Em língua de leigos, isso significa que qualquer pessoa que descobrisse um meio de passar variáveis de ambiente para um servidor tomaria controle dele. Isso não teria causado o pânico que causou se a maioria dos servidores da Internet não executasse Linux, afinal o bash é incorporado em distribuições desse núcleo. Imagine se os desenvolvedores que resolveram esse problema tirassem dali a solução que eles implementaram. A vulnerabilidade voltaria. Assim, com os danos causados pela justiça social e a raiva acumulada contra esse movimento, a população que soubesse do ocorrido daria razão ao desenvolvedor. Eu daria razão ao desenvolvedor, porquanto não se deve misturar política e ciência, política e programação: que o mais habilidoso seja capaz de contribuir, isso não prejudica a diversidade, mas priorizar a diversidade pode excluir o habilidoso. Isso é meritocracia, mas sou forçado a admitir que é a meritocracia que sustenta o núcleo sobre o qual se assenta o Tumblr.

Resumindo: a justiça social como movimento radical age contra os interesses das minorias que afirma representar e, por afirmar agir no melhor interesse de todas essas minorias, aumenta o ódio por essas minorias a cada ato claramente injusto ou hipócrita, alimentando discursos reacionários e favorecendo a direita, tudo isso porque sua premissa fundamental, de considerar apenas um lado sem avaliar custos de suas ações, prejudica a todos. Assim, a pergunta à qual eu queria chegar: a justiça social é um movimento legítimo? Cuido que não. É provável que o movimento da justiça social seja uma operação de “bandeira falsa”. Eu sei que isso soa como uma teoria da conspiração, mas imagine só: e se pessoas-chave da justiça social forem, na verdade, proponentes da direita, que instrumentalizam pessoas da esquerda para agir contra seus interesses? Talvez eu esteja errado, mas o fato é que a justiça social tem sido o maior aliado da direita nesta década.

Para encerrar, peço que as minorias que se posicionam contra os atos extremos do movimento da justiça social se juntem e vocalizem seu desgosto por essas ações, que publicamente repudiem o que está acontecendo. Novamente, o exemplo do feminismo: cada vez mais mulheres e meninas estão deixando o feminismo ao perceber que ele é injusto com os homens e com os meninos, além de impedi-las de construir relacionamentos desejados (já que cada vez mais homens evitam mulheres). Afinal, se o público ver que não são todas as minorias a favor do extremismo, a tendência a atacar a ideologia, não aqueles a quem a ideologia afirma proteger, será maior, e haverá pressão bilateral contra a ideologia. Isso não quer dizer abandonar as esperanças de aceitação ou de igualdade, mas que nenhuma atitude nessas direções pode ser tomada sem considerar o outro lado da balança ou sem considerar os danos sociais causados pela atitude (no caso, a implementação do Contributor Covenant pela Fundação Linux pode colocar usuários de Linux em risco com ou sem o protesto dos desenvolvedores). Segundo, peço que a Fundação Linux crie seu próprio código de conduta, em vez de adotar um que venha de fora, e que a criação do código próprio seja democrática, com as vozes dos desenvolvedores sendo ouvidas no processo, visando o melhor interesse daqueles que usam o núcleo. Se isso não for acatado, que se derive (fork) o núcleo. Por último, que todos verifiquem as consequências de seus atos e também dos atos dos outros, para que saibamos quais ativismos são lícitos e quais não são. Afinal, se a consequência de uma atitude é prejudicial até mesmo para aquele que toma a atitude, essa é uma atitude tola… ou trollagem.

24 de setembro de 2018

Para bem ou para mal, o “MAP Starting Guide” foi reescrito.

Um ano depois de sua publicação original, o MAP Starting Guide foi reescrito. A mensagem do texto é a mesma, mas agora está escrita com palavras diferentes. Antes, a mensagem explícita era “você não é um monstro, apesar de a sociedade ver você como tal”. Agora, a mesma mensagem está escrita como “você nasceu na sociedade errada”. No texto original, eu fazia vários apelos emocionais e o texto tinha uma carga muito pessoal. Eu estava falando com você e consolando você como eu faria a um amigo. Agora o texto está mais acadêmico, se bem que ainda bastante pessoal. A versão original foi mantida em português e os russos traduziram o texto original também, que pode ser lido no Right to Love. Como eu estou em dúvida sobre o texto novo ser ou não melhor que o antigo, eu acautelei o dono do Right to Love para que ele não traduzisse a nova versão, porquanto a versão original é “fofa” o bastante para que os mais jovens a compreendam melhor.

A revisão foi necessária porque um número de críticas não foram adereçadas como deviam, notavelmente no que diz respeito às definições. Além disso, eu não estava sendo completamente imparcial e eu queria que o texto pudesse ser apreciado a despeito da orientação política do leitor (se pró-contato ou anti-contato). O texto tentava não soar pró-contato, mas falhava aqui e ali. Se o texto tem finalidade “terapêutica”, ele deveria atingir tantos quanto fosse possível e professar um alinhamento específico prejudicaria esse objetivo. No texto atual, onde foi necessário dizer algo que soasse pró-contanto, eu tinha que prontamente oferecer contra-argumentos em voga, principalmente no que diz respeito à questão do consentimento informado. Mas por que falar algo pró-contato seria necessário? Bom, eu precisava, para reiterar meu ponto de que a culpa e a vergonha sentidas pelo público-alvo eram oriundas de uma dissonância entre o sentimento e a orientação sociopolítica do Ocidente, mostrar que há locais ou houve tempos em que tais relacionamentos eram ou são normais e desejáveis, bem como eles podem ser engajados de forma saudável para ambas as partes. Foi estranho que, logo após a seção statistics and anecdotes eu enfiasse um “criança não consente”, mas mesmo essa expressão veio a ser reduzida a termos essenciais e desmistificada.

Por último, essa versão do MAP Starting Guide será atualizada conforme eu aprendo mais sobre esse assunto. Diferente da primeira versão, esta não é um trabalho fechado. Qualquer informação que auxilie no bem-estar do público-alvo será revista e incluída, de forma neutra.

Para aqueles que estão preocupados, não me tornei anti-contato. Eu estou preparando uma aberração textual de grandes proporções afetuosamente chamada lolipill. Claro que esse é o nome de trabalho, não o nome definitivo. Eu fui aconselhado a não traduzir esse texto pro inglês e também aconselhado a publicá-lo como livro, mas eu não sei se eu seguirei ambos os conselhos. É que, se esse texto tiver ressonância no Brasil, a ressonância será mitigada com a reação internacional. Então, é preciso que o texto encontre ouvintes em outros países para que haja resistência coletiva. Se os países de terceiro mundo ouvirem, bem como os países de primeiro mundo com mentalidade mais aberta, os países mais conservadores poderão ser “sitiados” por essa pressão, que talvez seja exercida por grupos islâmicos, imigrantes e de jovens nesses territórios conservadores. Além disso, publicando como livro, a velocidade de propagação do texto será menor e seu alcance seria muito baixo, uma vez que pouca gente lê livros regularmente no Brasil.

Mas quando o texto for solto, eu farei uma versão mais polida dele para publicar como livro. Essa versão mais polida não será traduzida, ao menos não num primeiro momento.

4 de agosto de 2018

Notes on “Girls, Boys and Junior Sexualities”, by Emma Renold.

“Girls, Boys and Junior Sexualities” was written by Emma Renold. Here are some notes I made about her book. These notes do not necessarily reflect my opinion on a given subject. Also, none of these notes are quotations, to avoid problems regarding copyright. You are encouraged to read the book itself.

  1. If this is not obvious enough, the book is about child sexuality.
  2. More specifically, how this sexuality is linked to school behavior and gender identity.
  3. Sexuality also has a role in forming friendships.
  4. The use of sex-based insults serves to pin down the gender role of the one who insults as well.
  5. The method of the book is the interview and the observation: the author talked to children and adolescents about their experiences with their own sexuality.
  6. Other topics discussed in the book are the pressure to be heterosexual, the culture of boyfriends/girlfriends and sexual harassment.
  7. “What existing book would you like to have written?” Is an interview question.
  8. The child does not always accept gender roles and can resist them.
  9. Where there is strength, there is resistance.
  10. Sex education has to be helpful.
  11. The child can teach adults in their own way.
  12. Sexual identity may already be formed at the age of three .
  13. However, there is pressure to conform to the stereotype imposed by society before that, so there may be dissonance between what you want to be and what society expects you to be.
  14. There are children who are not interested in relationships with the opposite sex, preferring to play football with friends.
  15. However, there are girls interested in boys because the company of the other girls is tiring.
  16. The boy who does not behave like the other boys can be labeled gay.
  17. Primary school is incapable of maintaining the “innocence” of the child or adolescent: sometimes, primary school is subverted into an arena for the exercise of sexual identity and sexual behavior.
  18. Sex is treated as a “special” area of ​​human behavior, as if it were something different from everything else, but sexuality is exercised daily, in varying degrees of intensity, without we even realizing it.
  19. This type of judgment, which says that sexuality is special, is one of the foundations of the concept of “innocence”, so that when one realizes that sexuality is intrinsic to us, including children , the concept of innocence is questioned.
  20. Gender roles vary according to time and place.
  21. Children learn to be “boy” or “girl”, not as biological categories, but as social categories, that is, how society expects you to behave.
  22. There is not just one type of masculinity or one kind of femininity.
  23. It is naive to think that the child accepts these roles passively.
  24. The child has the capacity to accept, reject and modify the social role imposed on them, even if adults do not perceive this capacity.
  25. Although biological sex is not something that can be erased, gender, that is, the social role around sex, is an illusion that is only maintained by repetition.
  26. Not being able to “act like a boy” or “act like a girl” can cause despair to the child.
  27. If gender roles were so real, it would not be possible to transgress them (at least, not so often).
  28. But taking on the role of the opposite sex may end up reinforcing these roles rather than questioning them, depending on the social context and the audience.
  29. There are children who challenge gender roles in group, with other children doing the same.
  30. Gender roles are a manifestation of the fear we have of our children growing up homosexual .
  31. The “illusion of gender” is reinforced by the rejection of sexual minorities .
  32. If one point of view needs to attack another to maintain itself, it is a fragile point of view.
  33. There is not only one form of heterosexuality.
  34. “Childhood” is a fabricated social concept .
  35. Children make sex jokes and other children laugh, but if they laugh, it’s because they understand those dirty jokes.
  36. Making sex jokes can serve to distract others from the fact that you do not have a girlfriend .
  37. If you can not express your heterosexuality in one way, you will express it in another.
  38. The employed of sexual speech by a child may serve to irritate authority figures.
  39. Researching children and researching with children are different things.
  40. Ignoring children’s experienced is a sign of biased thought.
  41. The adults’ perception of children often does not coincide with what the child is, so development theories validate assumptions that the child is incompetent (assuming that the child is incompetent from start, the child is treated as incompetent throughout the research process, and then the research concludes that the child is incompetent).
  42. Some researchers say that studying children as people rather than as objects of study is “unethical” and “improper.”
  43. But neglecting the child’s experience shows that we do not even care about them, that we are more interested in validating what we already think of them.
  44. If you study the quality of teaching and the quality of the facilities, but you don’t talk to the students, you will not know how to train the teacher nor how to organize the school.
  45. Before we listened to women, we made a wrong idea of them, so maybe it’s time to listen to the children .
  46. This requires the abandonement of our child-related biases .
  47. Child sexual experience is a hidden curriculum.
  48. There are girls who seek a sensual, deliberately attractive femininity, and girls who seek a different femininity.
  49. The boy who does not conform to the stereotype of “macho” receives more criticism than the girl who is less feminine.
  50. There is a rush to act older.
  51. It is not always the boy who does sexual advances: there are girls who advance upon boys.
  52. In a sexually charged environment, a boy and a girl who are just friends, rather than a couple, are viewed with suspicion.
  53. Most boys experience dating culture as a risky experience: there is a certain fear of being close to the girl, but if you fail, you might be seen as a failure.
  54. Thus, few male kids achieve and maintain relationships.
  55. This is especially bad if you pass the image of someone who is secure of himself, but fails when your masculine image is put to test.
  56. This stress caused by the dating culture leads some boys to seek a sexual identity of power, while others others seek a sexual identity of innocence (or distance from sexual things).
  57. Of the twenty-six boys studied by the author, only three had girlfriends.
  58. One-third of the interviewed children attempted to challenge the sexual roles that were imposed on them.
  59. Because of rejection, these children come together and resist together.
  60. Innocence ” is a prejudiced concept, that is, an age-based prejudice.
  61. Sex education can not ignore this data.
  62. Sexual innocence is presumed.
  63. The discourse of innocence is maintened thanks to society; innocence is not a natural phenomenon.
  64. The moral panic over the “loss of innocence” is caused by the very laws and policies built around this concept.
  65. “Childhood” is not a natural concept: it does not exist in an essential or universal way, that is, it is useless to say that all children act in the same way all the time and everywhere in the world.
  66. The behavior we expect from our children changes according to time and place, so that we have to teach our children to act as children, which shows the social volatility of the concept of childhood.
  67. Childhood is invented by adults and pushed upon children.
  68. “Innocence” was invented by Rousseau .
  69. Before 1870, children were not barred from adult spaces in Britain.
  70. Innocence would be what separates children from adults.
  71. Innocence is propagated by the school.
  72. For some, childhood is declining as children and adults are made more equal, but for others, childhood is being extended .
  73. The school produces innocence.
  74. Children what to know what adults know.
  75. It is because we are still working with the innocent child paradigm that studies on child sexuality are so rare .
  76. If children are innocent and innocence is sexual ignorance, then, by the logic of the system, the sexual child need not be considered a “child”.
  77. The child exhibiting sexual behavior is considered to be “corrupted.”
  78. If child sexuality is a fact, it ends up being seen as a challenge: it must be preserved, but also controlled.
  79. The means of control is censorship: you can only talk about child sexuality to talk about abuse or exploitation.
  80. A child who has a sexual encounter with someone, whether voluntarily or by force, is seen as someone who “lost their childhood.”
  81. However, if childhood is a fabricated social concept and if innocence is denied by the presence of an innate sexuality to the child, then the discourse of “losing childhood” is a rhetorical device.
  82. The concept of innocence can harm the child.
  83. An “authentic” concept of childhood should not include the fabricated notion of innocence, which is external to it.
  84. For the more conservative, the sexual child does not need to be protected (it’s no longer a child).
  85. This contact with sexuality stigmatizes the child in a society that expects the child to be innocent: the child will be treated differently.
  86. For many, the sexual child is only sexual because the child has been sexually abused, but that is not always true.
  87. The precocious child is punished for being ahead of the others, with some “experts” even saying that the precocious child should receive treatment “to behave according to his or her age.”
  88. In the popular opinion, precocious sexuality is abuse, because the sexual child is no longer a child.
  89. Nobody thinks that the sexual experience can have a formative aspect or be natural and desired.
  90. All ignorance is bad and this includes sexual ignorance, or will you just teach contraception to your daughter when she is already pregnant?
  91. In some places, kissing before the age of consent is a crime.
  92. This type of law places teenagers and children in an illegal situation , because many of these little ones already date or have had their first experiences (they can not seek support if something goes wrong, such as a sexually transmitted disease or accidental pregnancy , without pretty much disclosing the crime and reporting themselves).
  93. The age of consent law harms children and adolescents more than it prevents adults from attacking those minors.
  94. The child, viewed as asexual, is seen as “immune” to the sexualized media, to the novels, to the songs, but the child is not: the child’s sexuality is teased with that media.
  95. If the child is a sexual being, the sexuality of the entire world in which the child lives in affects the child’s particular sexuality, and even though the child knows that acting on those urges may be illegal, they would still feel tempted to try.
  96. The child draws their conclusions from observed adult sexual behavior.
  97. The problem is not whether the child is sexual or not, but how adults should deal with child sexuality since they are dealing in the wrong way.
  98. The childhood is so erotic, that women try to seduce men by assuming childish behaviors mannerisms.
  99. On the other hand, if a girl adopts the behavior of an adult woman, people might think it’s unhealthy.
  100. In the case of boys, people are more concerned with demonstrations of violence than with manifestations of “manly” behavior.
  101. The discourse of concern falls upon boys when they mix sexuality and violence or when they show signs homosexuality.
  102. Some parents worry when their children act more mature than expected for their age, some even thinking their children are sick.
  103. But slow maturing leads the child to assume a false maturity, which is also not ideal.
  104. Therefore, “behavior according to age” is a problematic concept, perhaps causing more harm than good.
  105. “Age” is a fabricated social concept: it has no meaning besides measuring the amount of timed lived up to that point.
  106. Each person matures at his own pace, which must be respected, be it fast or slow.
  107. All institutions are sexualized by their members and primary school is no exception.
  108. Because heterosexuality is more common, it is natural for students to organize heterosexually in primary school.
  109. At school, useful things are not always learned.
  110. Male teachers are viewed with suspicion, since primary school is a more feminine work environment.
  111. However, the teacher still does not want to be seen as a feminine man, so he feels the need to prove to his students that he, despite being in a “female” profession, is still a man.
  112. When one wants to signal gender identity, both man and woman might begin to act as stereotypes, even inside the classroom.
  113. Homosexual teachers are commented on by students or even other teachers, so some prefer to avoid this embarrassment and try to adapt to the heterosexual stereotype, even though they are not heterosexual.
  114. As there is not enough study on homosexual teachers, media feels entitled to say absurds about gay teachers (calling it “aberrant”, for example).
  115. The reason for media’s behavior is that we assume that children are not only “innocent” but also latent heterosexuals, so that contact with homosexuals in a position of authority would pervert the child (or so conservatives think).
  116. Society wants to increase the boy’s chance of identifying himself as heterosexual by making him ignorant of homosexuality (that’s why many people would think that he can not interact daily with a homosexual in the classroom), which reveals that society is still homophobic, even within of the educational system.
  117. The teachers’ room can be a worse place than the classroom.
  118. One way of asserting their heterosexuality in a homophobic educational system is by hinting on students of the opposite sex.
  119. An act can be both seduction and harassment, so that the person feels gratified for receiving sexual attention, but also alarmed by the way he received such attention.
  120. The school is not the only entity that monitors sexuality: the students also monitor the sexuality of teachers and other employees.
  121. The use of sexual language may be an attempt to gain control.
  122. There are students who fall in love with teachers, but nobody wants to study that phenomenon because it is taboo .
  123. Girls also whistle when they see someone deemed “hot”.
  124. Some students want to marry their teacher (“I want to marry you when I grow up”).
  125. One teacher asked the students to draw themselves in the future: half of the girls drew themselves married, but none of the boys did the same.
  126. The sex education curriculum that is constructed with a heterosexual bias is betraying itself.
  127. Sex education says that sex can be safe, but doesn’t say that sex can be pleasurable.
  128. This is because the girl “is” innocent, when, in fact, this is an attempt to push innocence upon her.
  129. Our reluctance to admit that children are sexual beings and the desire to make the child an innocent being through ignorance prevents us, as adults, from properly dealing with childish issues that have a sexual facet.
  130. The current sex education curriculum is inadequate and is challenged by the child’s own sexual experience.
  131. Of the three school curricula (official, gender roles and sexual experience), only one is learned with a teacher.
  132. Children feel that adults want to remain ignorant of child sexuality, so they have their sexual experiences in secret.
  133. It is not possible to watch over the child at all times, especially outside the home, at school.
  134. They kiss, date, undress and touch.
  135. While the sexuality of children is shocking, adolescent sexuality is taken for granted, as if the person suddenly becomes sexual by their twelth birthday.
  136. Intimate interaction has a role in the formation of gender identity: the boy is trying to act as a boy and the girl is trying to act as a girl.
  137. Sex games are influenced by gender identity and, in turn, influence that identity, bringing one thing closer to the other.
  138. Some children choose a place in the school to do some things that many would call “harassment.”
  139. Children as young as four can participate in the local, informal dating culture.
  140. There are studies about six-year-olds who date.
  141. Thus, it can not be said that the entrance into adolescence is marked by romantic interest, if that interest occurs among children.
  142. The lustful gaze is not exclusive to boys: girls also look at boys with that lustful gaze.
  143. It seems that the students who are most desired by colleagues are the ones who best fit the heterosexual stereotype (the masculine boy and the feminine girl).
  144. Sexual innuendo helps to establish dominant heterosexual social roles among children (if a boy is very close to a girl, they are likely dating).
  145. The same goes for homophobic comments (“you sissy”).
  146. For some children, it is not possible to maintain romance and friendship at the same time, as if they were different levels of affection that do not coexist.
  147. For others, romance and sexuality are something that only adults should do or have.
  148. The frequent conclusion in many studies on child sexuality is that boys’ sexual curiosity is greater, whereas the girl is more interested in feelings of romance.
  149. Even less researched is child homosexuality.
  150. There are sexually confident and sexually informed children.
  151. If you work on the topic of child sexuality but do not consider children’s sexual practices to be “play” or “games”, that is, if you point out that the kids are seriously going for pleasure, you will be viewed with suspicion.
  152. Because child sexuality worries parents.
  153. Not all childhood sexual practices are peaceful; there is sexual harassment in primary school.
  154. If we ignore child sexuality, we will continue to deal with it in the wrong way.
  155. We must stop thinking that children are innocent.
  156. Children are curious about sex and most likely already have sexual knowledge, but knowing that adults do not approve of it, child sexuality is kept hidden from parents by the children themselves.
  157. Sexuality is not given to the child, but is made by the child.
  158. The girl can accept femininity, criticize femininity (creating her own version of what would be “feminine”) or totally reject femininity, which may or may not involve behaving as a boy (assuming masculinity).
  159. Depending on the girl, the traditional image of the female child may give her benefit, limit her freedom or punish her.
  160. The girl’s identity is built when she compares herself to boys and other girls.
  161. When the child creates their own version of what what is considered “feminine” or “masculine,” they are forced to think about how to act in front of the opposite sex.
  162. But whatever the version of femininity adopted by the girl, she usually thinks about how to make her identity attractive to boys.
  163. There are several ways to create a non-stereotypical femininity.
  164. “Ex-girlfriend” is privileged position.
  165. Girls can internalize fashion speech (which is not just clothing but also attitude), which is used as a reference both by girls who accept stereotyped femininity, and by girls who want to move away from “girly” femininity or create their own femininity.
  166. The girls put themselves on attraction ranks.
  167. This makes them overly concerned with their bodies and what they wear, the more they value this type of competition (attraction ranks).
  168. More than that, girls who are higher in the rank of beauty do not want to associate with girls of lower ranks, causing exclusion of the “ugly” girls (even if they are not really ugly, it’s just that there are girls who are way more attractive).
  169. Even if this is not explicitly stated, the girls infer that the girls who are deemed more attractive wouldn’t want association with the less attractive ones.
  170. There is no consensus on how fat you have to be to be called “fat”, so you can be fat for one person and not for another.
  171. The beauty of the body is like a coin, used to buy status and attention from the boys.
  172. When someone says “you’re too thin”, this can be perceived as compliment: it means you do not need to lose more weight than that.
  173. Some girls are envied by adult women, because of their attractiveness.
  174. Every girl has plans for her body, but they are almost always aimed at attracting and drawing attention from boys.
  175. They want to be desired.
  176. If culture presents the female body as a heterosexual object, girls will also treat their bodies as heterosexual objects.
  177. The body is good enough when both boys and girls say you look beautiful.
  178. Being attractive to the boy is more important than being fashionable, at least for the girls interviewed.
  179. Even the fact that you already have a boyfriend can make you more or less attractive depending on who looks at you.
  180. It seems that acting “as a woman”, not as a girl, is considered attractive.
  181. This kind of concern leads some girls to dress in a deliberately provocative way.
  182. But knowing that the clothes show the type of femininity chosen, girls judge themselves by the clothes.
  183. This is not an exclusive behavior of working-class girls; elite girls also employ such efforts.
  184. The exchange of cosmetics among girls is a type of economy.
  185. To put firewood on fire, there are stores that sell cosmetics for children.
  186. Putting makeup on gives these girls a good feel, even if the application is so soft that no one can notice the makeup at all.
  187. In their minds: being fashionable = being beautiful.
  188. You do not have to like fashion, you just have to wear it.
  189. Being fashionable can be an attempt to belong to a group, to feel intimate, even if you do not like what is fashionable.
  190. If the skirt is not short enough, it is folded up.
  191. Being in or out of fashion can have heterosexual motivation: the girl does not want the boy she likes to see and tell her that she is ugly.
  192. Customize the school uniform.
  193. It is normal for children to think that acting like older people is sensual, as all people depicted by media as “attractive” are adult men and adult women.
  194. To keep up with fashion and, therefore, the stereotype of reference, girls consume popular teen culture magazines.
  195. To get the attention of the desired boys, some girls with whom the researcher came into contact with went to the bathroom, dressed up, applied makeup and invaded the field where the boys played football, so that boys would notice them.
  196. Older girls, who were free to practice erotic dance moves, learned these movements and employed them in school (before anyone asks, this study was done in the UK, not in Brazil).
  197. The girl’s appearance is adjusted according to the male demographic of a certain area.
  198. But what is interesting is that all this preoccupation with appearance, a concern that begins and is maintained with boys in mind, empowers boys and men to control female behavior if such concern persists into adulthood, because the woman is adjusting to what men find attractive.
  199. But that varies: girls can use looks to exercise power over boys.
  200. If girls want to look and act sexy it is because they reject the imposition of innocence.
  201. Excessive preoccupation with appearance may not compensate, if aesthetical overcare enslaves you.
  202. This is aggravated when you feel you will be rejected or laughed at by boys and girls if your appearance is not perfect.
  203. These girls, to be accepted, sacrifice their personal taste in the name of collective taste, but this collective taste is dictated by the media, since it is through the media that they learn about fashion, for example, and other popular things.
  204. Children are not concerned with innocence or the loss of it.
  205. Usually only adults care about innocence.
  206. Although the girl is interested in keeping her appearance desirable, she can not achieve this aim with exaggeration, so she is also concerned about the amount of artifacts she will wear (clothing dimensions, makeup level, among others), so that she uses the perfect amount, neither too much nor too little of anything.
  207. There was a girl who wore a skirt short enough to make her tush visible whenever she bent over to get something on the floor.
  208. There is no consensus as to how short a skirt has to be to be considered “too short”.
  209. A too-short skirt raises negative comments among girls.
  210. So worrying about too much makeup or a too-short skirt has no heterosexual purpose, but social purpose: the girl wants to look desirable to the boy without looking ridiculous to other girls.
  211. And there’s the problem of the parents, who complain about the overly provocative look.
  212. The fact that the girl is not innocent does not imply that she has no sense of decency: giving excessive displays of sexuality is something she does not want.
  213. There is a skirt length for school, there is a skirt length for the party …
  214. Among children, it seems that showing sexuality is expected, but giving excessive displays of sexuality is weird, because, girls think, no child would act that way.
  215. That leads them to stipulate what is sexually appropriate to their age and what is reserved for the adult world.
  216. If the girl allows herself to be “excessively” sexual, she runs the risk of looking aberrant , which plays against her heterosexual intentions.
  217. However, these excessive displays exert temptation on girls.
  218. The toughest fashion critic for a girl is the other girls, who have far stricter criteria than boys.
  219. They look at you and judge your appearance.
  220. When a group of girls dress provocatively, the school ends up tolerating, but when a normally behaved girl starts dressing like that too, the school becomes alarmed.
  221. One explanation could be that the behaved girl usually comes from a better family and, by dressing provocatively, she would be adopting a working class behavior.
  222. Another explanation might be that the school is interested in “saving the innocence” of the girl who is starting to dress like that, at same time that the same school isn’t interested in “saving” the girls who already lost it.
  223. The girls copy the look of each other, but can not copy the look of a girls who are much older than them (for reasons discussed in the notes 218-220).
  224. The unwritten rule among girls is that provocation is excessive when it becomes ridiculous.
  225. Now, the book is about girls who reject the popular female stereotype.
  226. Girls who reject the popular stereotype (by struggling in studies and avoiding concerns over boys) are excluded altogether, but form friendships with each other.
  227. Some of these groups of non-stereotypical girls end up gaining a higher status than those whose lives are centered on looks.
  228. While stereotyped girls want to belong, girls who reject the stereotype want individuality.
  229. Because they care less about their appearance, they are less concerned with the appearance of others and less influenced by media control.
  230. “I wear what I want.”
  231. Those girls want to be different.
  232. Because they are less interested in boys, they can afford to wear comfortable rather than provocative clothes.
  233. They want boys who like them for what they are, so if they are heterosexual they will not invest in looks because they do not want a boy who judges them by appearance.
  234. And there is the case of the girl who rejects femininity and assumes masculinity: she will build her aesthetics taking inspiration from boys.
  235. The less sensual look also serves as a way for the girl to signal that she is not like the others.
  236. This type of girl sees that the girls who use their bodies as a means of seduction are subjugated to men (boys, in this case).
  237. The body shouldn’t be treated only as a commodity for the opposite sex.
  238. For these girls, the provocative girls are immature, as they want to feel older than they actually are.
  239. But this is a biased stance: they assume that there is behavior for every age and that you have to conform to it.
  240. Instead of being like everyone, why not seek change?
  241. Because this discourse is minoritary, “different” girls can only survive in a group.
  242. Friendship keeps minorities together and allows them to organize appropriate resistance.
  243. If there are only two identities to choose from, everyone will go for whatever option they think is best, so it’s harder to come up with a third option.
  244. However, perhaps the “excessive” sensualization that the girl imposes on herself is a discourse of nonconformity as well, rejecting of the expectations of others (again, a rejection of innocence).
  245. The “I do not care about boys” speech is not easy to maintain when you’re in love, that’s where the more “progressive” girl ends up in agreeing to practices that she herself considers superficial.
  246. Even among these girls, the aesthetic has some importance, even if it does not take advantage over comfortable clothing.
  247. A girl can jump from very sensual femininity to individualistic femininity depending on the situation and then jump back to where she was in another situation.
  248. This leap is easier to give when the girl is popular, while less popular girls invest only in one form of femininity.
  249. Individualistic girls realize that seductive girls only do two things: nothing and gossiping.
  250. So they try to differentiate themselves in these aspects as well, taking a more active stance.
  251. Something progressive, like playing football in with the boys.
  252. The problem is not so much not being able to play with the boys, but never being able to play at all, because the boys always take the playing space first, as if they had “priority” in places where people practice sports.
  253. The only “masculine” girl who participated in the study said that the boys treated her like a boy and did not object to having her in the teams.
  254. But girls who, even rejecting stereotypical femininity, had not adopted a masculine identity were excluded from the games and spaces in which the boys were already playing.
  255. To subvert this would be another way for these girls to show that they are “not like the others”: invading the boys’ game would be the perfect affirmation of individual femininity over the collective one.
  256. For individualistic girls, there should be no sexual distinction at all: boys and girls should be treated equally.
  257. These girls are able to identify sexual discrimination when they hear it.
  258. Even so, they do not say that there are things that only girls should do.
  259. A girl can be a feminist without even realizing that her position is feminist.
  260. The girls interviewed know that it is easier for a non-masculine girl to be included in boys’ groups if she is dating a boy in that group.
  261. For some, it felt like boys would only accept you around them if you were a girlfriend or assumed a masculine identity.
  262. The girls quickly realized that trying to enter masculine space using feminist discourses was not working.
  263. Girls are bad at football, but how will they improve if you do not let them play?
  264. Even if the girl participates in the game, no one passes the ball to her, so what is made of her feminist speech, employed to participate in the game in the first place?
  265. What is the use of participating in a game if you do not effectively play it?
  266. That caused a reaction of revenge: the girls entered the football field to lay in front of the goal, disrupting the game as a form of protest.
  267. That had a reverse effect, because it validated the boys’ belief that girls did not take football seriously.
  268. You may not want to join a group that hates your behavior.
  269. The only way to belong to the boys’ group, and therefore to get equal status, was to be friends with the boys, but it seemed that boys just wanted to chat with you if you were a girlfriend or ex.
  270. Girls realize that boys give girls access ranks: the more they like you, the more you belong.
  271. Although there are girls who find soccer to be boring and not a right worth fighting for.
  272. When you become part of groups of boys, they treat you better and even talk to you.
  273. But this is not possible without befriending boys.
  274. Girls who have built up their feminine identity as opposed to boys (“against boys”), refusing to get along with boys, can not achieve the same level of equality as those seeking equality through friendship (“with boys” without being “for the boys” or “a boy”).
  275. Deliberately irritating girls give up on equality by seeing that it does not work out, at least not the way they are doing.
  276. Of all the girls studied, about two-thirds adopted a standardized femininity (media-led).
  277. Those who rejected boys-oriented femininity have reached extremes, which have led to both a reduction of femininity and a reduction in levels of sexuality.
  278. The individualistic girls also developed among themselves a discourse of superiority, judging themselves better than other girls and also better than boys.
  279. Compared to girls who accepted boys without neglecting equality and without sexual repression, girls “who hate boys” did less in terms of equality, since the only thing they achieved was the hatred of boys.
  280. It seems that achieving equality requires one of three: boy seduction, participation in boys’ activities or acceptance of male identity over female.
  281. In other words: equality is not possible without considering the boy.
  282. Sometimes it seems like boys loathe girls, so the only way to win their appreciation would be to make their femininity pleasant.
  283. Just as there is not just one kind of femininity, there is not just one kind of masculinity.
  284. The concept of “hegemonic masculinity” was developed to be applied to adult males and its application in the interpretation of the masculinity of the small boy is questionable.
  285. Boys are encouraged to stay away from the girls, so we think the boy is doubly innocent: not only is there supposedly childish innocence, but he is simply away from the ones that might interest him.
  286. The boys studied by the author manifest a desire to be “hegemonic” boys, that is, to adhere to the masculine stereotype.
  287. But how to be a man in a context as childish as primary school?
  288. Most boys fail to pursue this ideal.
  289. But they can get close, for example, by being good at sports.
  290. Sport, in this case, football.
  291. If you divide the yard into a “soccer zone” and “zone of everything else”, it is inevitable that boys, identifying in sport a form of masculine expression, would stay (almost) all on one side only.
  292. So you have a school that, perhaps by accident, sanctioned the cultural separation between boys and girls.
  293. It also pushes boys who do not like football to the other half of the yard, equalling them to girls, who are almost all on the other side.
  294. If playing soccer makes you look more masculine, while there are girls who build their femininity to be attractive to masculine boys, then playing football attracts the chicks.
  295. If that’s the case, even the less masculine boys will consider playing.
  296. Despite this, a third of the boys studied do not want anything with football.
  297. Those who chose football as a means of masculine expression almost breathe football: it’s all that they talk about, it’s everything they consume…
  298. Being better at soccer than others may cause you to feel more “manly” than others.
  299. If boys are kept from playing football, they will choose another “masculine” sport to play.
  300. Or maybe they will play fighting.
  301. In fact, playing fight is the only time when the boy feels completely within the stereotype he desires, but since this type of practice is rarely allowed in school, the quest for stereotyped masculinity is practically impossible there.
  302. Play fighting meets no barriers of age, rank, or social class: all boys in the school come into contact with these games and many will participate.
  303. You do not have to be poor to be a bully.
  304. You can be a bully and Daddy’s little boy.
  305. True, the stereotype of masculinity includes men as family providers or men as big and strong, but since these things are forbidden to children, they can only be athletic or violent (or reject the stereotype, but that’s often regarded as gay).
  306. Violence can be turned to objects.
  307. Injury marks become a reason for pride.
  308. As well as being great ways to start a conversation.
  309. The strong personality of the boy can hide someone who strives not to show emotions, despite being in pain.
  310. The strong boy’s speech is the speech of physical and mental endurance, the discourse of enduring pain and suffering.
  311. Your masculinity is put to test when you hurt yourself.
  312. The problem is that the girl, seeing that the boy is in extreme pain, but resists tears, quickly realizes that he is struggling to maintain the image of “fortitude”.
  313. They see that it is false, that any child in that condition would cry.
  314. To avoid crying, boys laugh.
  315. For these boys studied, crying is ridiculous.
  316. “Showing emotion is gay, they think.
  317. For the stereotyped boy, crying puts his sexual identity into question.
  318. But it seems that showing emotion is only unacceptable if the reason can not be clearly pointed out by others.
  319. If a boy suddenly cries and no one knows the reason, the other boys think it must be a very serious reason and comfort him.
  320. Thus, physical injury or insult is no reason to cry, but there are licit reasons to cry, even among wannabe macho boys.
  321. These reasons can be family problems, loss of friends or romantic disappointment.
  322. How to know if a certain act of violence is just a joke?
  323. For the stronger boy, a certain act may be perceived as joke, but, for the weakest boy, the same joke can be a torment.
  324. We can’t tell for sure when two boys are playing or fighting for real.
  325. It is possible for one child to pick on another as a joke, even though the other does not like it, and then, when someone complains, the stronger child says “I was just kidding.”
  326. In fact, the “macho” boy should endure these jokes, so he feels that he can not complain.
  327. No, he feels like he has to laugh at it.
  328. Since we have the stereotype of a “violent boy,” the adults expect boys to be violent, so that their violence does not shock and can pass as something not worth correction.
  329. The staff intervenes when they see power disparity: if a big boy is picking on a small one, only then the staff intervene.
  330. The staff also intervenes when the fight is good enough to attract audience.
  331. The boys are good at disguising the fights, so that even the teachers do not know when the boys are fighting and when they are playing.
  332. Another technique is to fight with a third boy standing guard, to warn when the teacher is coming.
  333. The researcher herself had to break a fight in which a boy was on the ground, with another boy kicking him in the head and belly (all this while a teacher was in that area, but looking the other way).
  334. Violence as self-defense, as play and as a joke are tolerated among boys, but not violence for sake of violence.
  335. Thus, the “bully,” who attacks to derive pleasure from the pain of others, loses status.
  336. That is because it is also masculine not to fight without reason.
  337. Being strong without being a bully, showing emotion without being effeminate.
  338. Some boys can hit you a thousand times without taking you down, which is frustrating for them.
  339. These weaker boys who try to look strong can never be seem as strong.
  340. On the contrary, they are seen as jokes.
  341. They can even try to hit girls.
  342. They may even fail to hit girls.
  343. To hide the lack of muscles, some prepubescent boys wear loose clothing (with a belt, if necessary).
  344. Plus, this kind of outfit makes you look older, hiding the fact that puberty has not arrived yet.
  345. Having to wear clothes made for older boys is a reason of pride for these boys.
  346. Boys often fail to adhere to the stereotype (built as an adult ideal), but they try anyway.
  347. Male fashion also exists, but there is a problem: if being fashionable can be important, it is also important to give the impression of not caring about fashion.
  348. That is, if you use a haircut that is fashionable, you can not show that you got that haircut because it is fashionable.
  349. That’s because, for the boys in the study, vanity is gay .
  350. The researcher identified two types of pathways to stereotyped masculinity: “macho” (preoccupied with force) and “cool” (preoccupied with appearance).
  351. Two-thirds of the boys studied confess that they are incapable of acting as stereotyped men, but that’s because the male stereotype ( strong, big, family provider and other things) is an adult stereotype , which the boy can not completely imitate for both physical reasons and social reasons, so that they can only imitate what is within reach (good in sports and tough).
  352. Moreover, the failures to adhere to the stereotype frustrate boys who feel that, if they do not conform to the stereotype, they will be regarded as less masculine than the others.
  353. In order to “complete” their masculinity, boys adopt opposite behaviors to girls (“I am a boy, I may not be a man yet, but at least I am not a girl”).
  354. So that nobody thinks that the boy is involved in feminine activities, he moves away from the girls.
  355. As the male stereotype places itself above the female, the boys also try to position themselves as superior.
  356. With limited means of showing superiority, the preferred way for those boys to assert superiority is by giving an unfarily negative treatment to girls “because they are girls”.
  357. If the girl is emotional, the macho boy feels that he can not be emotional, but then what would be the appropriate response to conflict?
  358. Violence.
  359. However, the discourse that “boys are better” is difficult to maintain when a girl outperforms a boy, although that is considered a failure of that particular boy, not of boys in general.
  360. Not that all boys are that way, since there are boys who do not want to follow the masculine stereotype (the researcher uses the term geek to refer to these different boys, but in that term it includes all kinds of boy who do not want to or can not be neither macho nor cool).
  361. The reason why boys want so much to pursue the stereotype is the feeling that they will be less masculine if they do not, since they are pressured from all sides to be heterosexual or at least have a heterosexual image.
  362. To be called gay , for these boys, is the worst insult possible.
  363. So boys who do not adhere to the stereotype and do not try hard to do so are routinely victims of insults and jokes, as if to say “I may not be a complete man, but at least I am not you!”
  364. Different boys are seen as abnormal by the “hegemonic” ones.
  365. If the girl studies, the boy can be regarded as feminine by other boys if he decides to study as well.
  366. If studying is necessary, it is necessary not to be seem studying or to study only when one is obliged to do so.
  367. Messing around in the classroom is not always a masculine reaction to femininity, but it can be a masculine reaction against routine, because classes are just boring.
  368. You do not need bad grades to disrupt lessons.
  369. Disrupting lessons disguises the “effeminate” tendency that some boys have to enjoy studying.
  370. That’s why unruly boys sometimes seem to get good grades “without studying”: they hide the fact that they study, so they are not compared to nerds or girls.
  371. One of the ways to do that is to make fun of the lesson while actually paying attention to it, making it seem like you are not taking the lesson seriously.
  372. Since no one can perfectly mimic the adult male stereotype, boys give a truce to boys who practice other aspects of the stereotype, for example: if they have a girlfriend, it’s okay not to play football.
  373. Other: It’s okay to be studious, if you’re athletic too.
  374. Offering to pick up the ball when it leaves the field is an attempt to belong to that group that uses football as way to exercise masculinity.
  375. “If you can not beat them, join them” is the boy’s motto when he feels that he has to become hegemonic so that the hegemonic boys stop picking on him.
  376. The studious boy who ends up needing to give sports a chance does not necessarily neglect his studies, being able to reconcile both.
  377. Even though you may not yet belong to the hegemonic group, your effort is admired.
  378. One of the boys, tired of being attacked for being studious, began to invest effort in learning to play football, without neglecting his grades, and he managed both to keep grades stable and to be admired for his ability as a goalkeeper.
  379. Girls sometimes wonder what life with the boy they love would be like.
  380. They also have desires for older people, notably male media stars (actors and singers).
  381. There is no fixed age when you start feeling attraction to the opposite sex.
  382. It is possible to date in childhood, although it is a “preparatory” date.
  383. Children kiss.
  384. You can dump a person giving them a letter explaining that the person is dumped if you do not want to say face to face.
  385. The girls in the study created a kind of love support network that worked through cell phones.
  386. Sexuality becomes omnipresent when you are a girl, so you have to stand in favor or against it, but it is impossible to be impartial.
  387. Proof of this is that the girls labeled themselves as “someone’s girlfriend” or “available.”
  388. Without being able to date under the parents’ nose, these minors date at school.
  389. Although they are dating, the dating doesn’t generally include more than holding hands and kissing.
  390. Generally, you can only date one at time.
  391. The child or adolescent who has a girlfriend or boyfriend, enjoys status among other children or adolescents.
  392. The dating has to be visible to have an effect on status.
  393. Unless they are dating, it is unlikely that boy and girl would play together on primary school.
  394. Dating is signaling your sexual orientation.
  395. The pressure to date is greater on girls.
  396. If the dating pratices are more “childish” or more “adolescent,” it depends on the environment.
  397. Although there is pressure to date, it’s not an easy thing to do: of the girls studied, only seven were regularly involved in the dating culture.
  398. Those who did not participate regularly ended up participating intermittently as helpers (for example, delivering love or dumping letters).
  399. Other non-active participants served as “match makers”.
  400. In primary school, some dates can last twenty minutes.
  401. Mediation is a manifestation of friendship between the messenger and the person who sends the message, who may be embarrased to give the message in person.
  402. All the girls studied desired someone .
  403. The desire for the opposite sex was often manifested by girls, but rarely by boys.
  404. Yes, some girls admit to desiring grown men .
  405. There was one who commented that her neighbor (who is twenty-eight) had a “good bum”.
  406. Some girls, when they think of their romantic futures, think of divorce.
  407. Although they all desired someone, one of the girls said that despite this she would not date before she was older.
  408. She seemed to be disgusted by kissing.
  409. The desired man or boy may be someone from the school, some celebrity or an acquaitance.
  410. When the girl feels that she is a failure at dating, she tries to turn the attention of the conversation to a boyfriend she once had, to distract from the fact that she does not have a boyfriend at the moment.
  411. There was a girl who loved her boyfriend so much that she skipped potty breaks just to be around him.
  412. One day, she wet herself.
  413. Because having a boyfriend is something valued by friends, some girls go out with boys they do not like, just to participate in the dating culture.
  414. Desperation can lead them seek boys who may even treat them badly.
  415. But dating someone who treats you badly can also happen because you like that person regardless of their difficult personality.
  416. And when the breakup occurs, you still like him “a little.”
  417. After the breakup, the girl sometimes feels like coming back, even if the ex-boyfriend treats her like trash.
  418. Because getting dumped is a painful experience, girls comfort each other, often in the girls’ bathroom.
  419. Being dumped causes feelings of unhappiness and insecurity.
  420. You suffer more from a dumping the more you think that romance is important.
  421. If the boy ends the relationship, the girl may be devastated, but she feels powerful and in control when she is the one dumping.
  422. The boy may not even care, but the girl has the feeling that “he’s probably crying himself in private right now” and delights in that feeling.
  423. Some girls can only exert power over boys through these relationships.
  424. This is because, in a heterosexual relationship, their femininity is never at risk, so it is safe to break the female stereotype in that condition.
  425. Boyfriend rotation is a great way to play with boys’ feelings.
  426. This haste to date does not invalidate friendships (boys and girls who aren’t ina  relationship, but are close friends).
  427. The problem is that the other girls find it difficult to see how a girl and a boy can be friends, looking at it as an “undeclared relationship.”
  428. Despite this, in an intimate friendship, it is almost impossible not to consider the possibility of dating your friend.
  429. However, there is a factual risk of dating dissolving the friendship that will not be there when the relationship is over.
  430. Dating the friend can be a bad idea and can alienate that friend.
  431. You are his friend, then you start to desire him, then you date him, then the relationship ends, you stay away from each other, then you become friends again, and then … you start to desire him again …
  432. Suspicion about friendships between boy and girl is promoted even by parents who, seeing their son being friends with a girl, say that it is puppy love, even if they don’t mean to be serious when they say that.
  433. This is annoying to the child: she can not make friends with someone of the opposite sex without being subjected to this kind of embarrassing comment.
  434. The reason girls look for friendship with boys is that boys are different, allowing them to get out of the sameness of their feminine circles of friendship.
  435. A girl prioritizes different aspects in different friendships: with the girls, her friendship serves more to speak intimate things and, with the boys, her friendship serves more to have fun.
  436. Boys who make friends with girls are those who do not treat them as socially different.
  437. The boy’s point of view on an issue can teach the girl to deal with a problem in a way that other girls could not.
  438. Although the girl can date someone she does not like, she does not make friends with people she does not like.
  439. If the girls looks for friendships with boys because she is tired of the sameness of girl friendship circles, it follows that she would rather befriend a boy who is more masculine.
  440. If you date for status, it’s not any boy that does the job.
  441. For example, even though the girl likes a younger boy, she can not date him if what she wants is status (it has to be a same-age peer).
  442. If status comes from the visibility of the relationship, the ideal boy needs to be around the girl’s age and needs to be as masculine as possible (“Chad”).
  443. Popular matchmaker can take advantage of their status as matchmakers to bring together two people they do not like or to create deliberately disfunctional couples in order to disadvantage people who are down in the heterosexual school hierarchy.
  444. Sadistic matchmakers find it funny to bring the wrong people together, but only do so when they themselves have a high rank on the heterosexual scale (“Stacy“).
  445. Girls who are high on the heterosexual rank sometimes humiliate boys whom they consider to be failed males.
  446. They get together and pick on that boy (female-promoted group bullying) for being a romantic failure.
  447. Although boys do not like those who attack others for the pleasure of hurting them, there does not seem to be the same rule among girls, who derive pleasure from injuring boys verbally as long as these boys are below them on the heterosexual scale.
  448. A form of attack used by those girls is sneaking on the boy from behind and pulling his pants down (sometimes even with his underwear).
  449. This shows that the girl is not sexually passive by nature: she advances on boys, for good and for bad.
  450. At least inside school, sexual activity among children usually does not go beyond kissing.
  451. Emphasis on “generally”: the researcher noticed children lying together under a tree and the boy sat on the girl and squeezed her waist with his legs before bending forward and kissing her.
  452. You can not do much in school, so the “rest” has to be done elsewhere.
  453. Children feel powerful in doing questionable things because they are breaking the rules of adults and getting away with it.
  454. Outside the school, in the child’s room, the girls come together to play truth or dare .
  455. They take their boyfriends with them.
  456. The girls interviewed said that during a birthday party, some children stayed after the party to play truth or dare in the dark.
  457. When it wasn’t their turn, the inactive children in the game took advantage of the darkness to be naughty.
  458. A boy lifted someone’s skirt.
  459. That kind of thing is a reason for shame if done at school, because teachers can see and shame you.
  460. One of the teachers did just that when she found two couples of students in one of the dormitory rooms, the four brats (two boys and two girls) half-naked, two in each bed.
  461. The girls were warned about the “dangers” of early sexual activity and that students should persevere in maintaining a “good reputation” rather than entering the dormitory of the opposite sex.
  462. Strangely, the schools studied never blame the boy for these occurrences: responsibility falls upon the girl.
  463. That’s because there’s a belief that the boy’s sexual curiosity is hard to control, so it’s the girls fault for provoking his feelings.
  464. The sexually active girl is treated by the teachers as a shame to all girls, although she probably will not accept that as truth.
  465. If a richer girl exhibited the same behavior, she would be more easily forgiven.
  466. Where does childhood end and where does adolescence begins?
  467. There are children who aren’t 12 yet and, nonetheless, look like they are 14 (age of consent in Brazil ).
  468. When questioned by an older boy about oral sex, one of the girls laughed and talked to him about orgasms, showing sexual knowledge.
  469. But when one of the boys tried to persuade the girl to abandon her boyfriend in favor of him, the researcher came to realize that the girl’s smile was likely forced…
  470. It was as if she wanted the conversation to stop, but she was ashamed or perhaps afraid to stop it.
  471. The boy was trying to arrange a meeting with her, even though they did not know each other for more than an hour and had already talked about sex.
  472. When the contact progresses too fast, the girls get scared.
  473. The difference between the game of truth or dare in the birthday party and these sudden advances is the familiarity and the limit: everyone in the game of truth or dare knew each other from the same school and used the game to know the limits of each other, which does not happen with the girl who, sighted by a strange boy, hears an “I want your body”.
  474. Girls say that this sudden behavior is typical of older boys who think that the girls are older than they actually are (they would not act that way if they knew that those girls were children).
  475. In addition, sudden advances make the girl feel that she is about to be raped.
  476. Fortunately, girls know that in situations like those, they can run, call for help or kick the boy’s nuts.
  477. The researcher now documents abusive sexual experiences, which will be, for reporting purposes, defined as negative , that is, the researcher does not include in the category of abuse the sexual interactions that the girls considered positive .
  478. Thus, the researcher uses the child’s judgment to identify which acts have been abusive or not , rather than using her judgment: the child will say whether the act was abusive or whether it was funny or gratifying.
  479. When a girl abuses a boy (making an undesired sexual advance), he may well reciprocate, so that the boys who occupy the worst places on the heterosexual scale, who are the target of the girls’ humiliations, are the ones who also humiliate girls the most, as revenge.
  480. Example: punching the girl’s breasts or pulling her bra.
  481. But, at least in the cases studied, the girls did not report what happened to the staff, because they:
    1. Didn’t think it was big deal.
    2. Feared adult reaction.
    3. Felt shame.
    4. Felt that the staff would not consider what happened as worthy of correction.
    5. Were already “used to it”.
  482. In such a situation, they cover their breasts, say they do not want to be touched and leave.
  483. That means that not all sexual experiences in primary school are positive.
  484. They pull boys’ pants, but the boys then lift girls’ skirts.
  485. The maintenance of the dating culture is promoted exclusively by the girls.
  486. The findings of this study validate the findings of other studies done in other populations.
  487. Thus, the ” sexual child ” is not an isolated phenomenon and to say that children are innocent is to lie to oneself.
  488. Pretending that the child is asexual prevents us from giving due importance to certain things that happen in front of us, such as child sexual harassment, sexual curiosity, and the first good experiences, things that children do not reveal to adults because they know it would upset them .
  489. If the adults expect the girl to be innocent , she will not speak of any possible sexual harm she has received, which could result in harm to herself .
  490. When a man dates a woman, man traditionally goes into the role of superior, but when a boy dates a girl, he does not go into the same role.
  491. If dating is masculine, the boy better take care not to be manipulated and maybe controlled by his girlfriend.
  492. Although dating is masculine, this is an optional practice for the boy with aspirations of being a man, that is, you are more masculine if you are dating, but not less masculine for not dating (not dating is not gay or effeminate).
  493. This is because boys, by complementing their incomplete stereotyped masculinity by opposing femininity, feel that moving away from girls is not detrimental to pursued masculinity.
  494. The boy who wants to declare love for a girl finds more barriers to do so, such as embarrassment.
  495. Being in love can be reason for anxiety to the shy boy.
  496. When the subject rises in a circle of conversation, the boy may denigrate the person he likes, in order to deny the fact that he does like her.
  497. If the boy likes the girl, he has to get close to her, that is, betting part of his already stablished amounts of masculinity to see if he gets the double amount afterwards.
  498. The implicit risks are receiving comments from friends, both for trying to get close and for failing if it happens.
  499. But these risks diminish in subsequent attempts.
  500. It seems that, in the judgment of these boys, playing footbal and not having a girlfriend is more masculine than having a girlfriend and not playing football.
  501. It is more preferable to be in the first group because the more “masculine” boys end up being wanted by the girls (who may also be interested in the status of dating a “real man”), so that less athletic boys end up with girls considered less attractive.
  502. Although dating is a great experience for the girl, most boys who have had girlfriends say that the experience was not the best.
  503. That’s because girls make demands that boys do not always want to keep, like kissing them whenever they want.
  504. They expect the boy to change for them, including his policy of physical contact.
  505. In addition, they can hold the affection hostage (“do this, or I’ll break up with you”).
  506. Girls are more likely to dump a partner than boys, suggesting that they are more often interested in changing partners.
  507. When the girl disappoints the boy or quarrels with him, she pretends that everything is fine minutes later, although, deep down, the boy did not forgive her.
  508. The opinion of one of the boys studied is that the girls often use you: after having gathered the courage to declare love to a person you like, she makes demands on you, does not respect your feelings, expects you to respect her feelings and still threat to dump if you “rebel”.
  509. She might break up with you because they have found someone better, so nevermind your efforts to maintain the relationship.
  510. Others dump you without saying why.
  511. Last, there are girls who admit to have just used you when they dump you (implying the relationship never existed in the first place).
  512. For the boy, dating is usually difficult and may not be worth it.
  513. He feels incapable of dating, because, after all, he does not have the privileges that the grown man has to balance that kind of relationship.
  514. The reason a boy seeks dating, then, is social: there is pressure for this, although dating is an often degrading experience.
  515. That’s why boys prefer soccer over girls; it’s not that girls are not attractive and it’s not that they can not be cool, it’s just that getting involved with them is boring and complicated.
  516. If they can look for their masculinity elsewhere, boys will not want a date.
  517. Dating, then, can wait until the conditions are more favorable.
  518. Some boys like older women, but understand that those older women would not want kids as partners.
  519. You at least have your fantasies.
  520. It’s not dating if you just hold hands and chat.
  521. There was a boy who confessed, during the interviews, that he wants to have sex .
  522. But the boys feel that their sexual information is incomplete and that sex education classes are not enough for them to perform well, if sex had to happen immediately.
  523. For these boys, sex has to happen sooner or later, but with the information they have, the boys prefer it to be later.
  524. They want sexual information because they want to try sex out and feel that they can not do it if they do not know how have sex in the first place.
  525. Without that information, they are too insecure to do anything beyond kissing.
  526. Sex education classes, the boys say, are insufficient because they do not teach how to have sex.
  527. In practice, they are anatomy classes: they explain the genitals and their function without explaining how to use them.
  528. One of the boys found an image of three women embracing shirtless in an old newspaper they would use in art class.
  529. He loved the image, called the others, and soon a lot of boys were gathered around the newspaper wiht that image.
  530. The teacher picked up the newspaper and said, “it almost looks like you guys have never seen a naked woman! “(Remembering, this was observed in primary school).
  531. There was a boy who had an erection during sex education class.
  532. Of course he told that to the boy sitting next to him (so much for the anti-gay speech).
  533. This shows that male sexual curiosity is not fully satisfied by sex education classes.
  534. The use of sexual language and sexual humor is a way of validating stereotyped masculinity too, a constant way of saying “I’m macho!”.
  535. If boys are curious about sex, we can infer that they aren’t inherently appalled by sexual knowledge.
  536. Sexual harassment promoted by boys is more often seen in the form of sexual cursing, like “bitch.”
  537. Girls usually do not report this, obviously, as it’s a small offense.
  538. The pubescent girl can be target of cursing directed at her puberty (“big-titted cow”).
  539. Usually, this is done as a joke, but not always.
  540. The girls are offended, but not always.
  541. Sexual gestures and sexual words can also be used to intimidate.
  542. They can also be response to the “use” that girls make of their boyfriends.
  543. Sexual cursing can be a response to frustrating things, so even teachers are cursed at when they abuse of their authority.
  544. If they can be responses to frustrations, it is natural that those who are lowest on the heterosexual rank (those who are most rejected) are the ones who curse the most.
  545. Sexual curses as well as sexual misconduct (raising the girl’s skirt) are not seen as harmful by boys, although they may be recognized as offensive.
  546. However, beating the girl is something reprehensible among boys, just as girls find it wrong to beat boys up.
  547. Boys who hit girls may be frustrated that they can not claim their masculinity in face of other boys, through sports or fighting games.
  548. They then try to show masculinity by beating girls, but that has a reverse effect: beating girls is not masculine, it’s cowardice.
  549. The term ” gay” is not always understood in the same way.
  550. Often, gay is not even used in the sexual sense.
  551. The boys in the study, however, use the term gay as a derogatory, designating the boy who does not want to be a stereotyped man, the boy who is physically close to other boys or the boy who only spends time with girls.
  552. Boys are not the only ones who put the masculinity of other boys in question: even girls and even teachers tease the more effeminate boys.
  553. Saying that someone is gay serves the same purpose of telling that person to “man up.”
  554. Also serves to position boys in ranks of masculinity.
  555. Thus, primary school can be a highly homophobic environment, literally because boys are afraid of being called gay by others, that is, of having their masculinity offended.
  556. These boys, because of their appreciation of their own masculinity and the fear of having their masculinity attacked, end up looking at homosexuals as aberrant, that is, they become homophobic for real.
  557. It is especially frustrating when you are a male primary student and your voice is feminine.
  558. Boys can judge adults as gay too, not reserving this insult (because they use it as an insult) only to other boys.
  559. However, this childlike homophobia is meant to ward off accusations directed at the boy’s own masculinity (“How can you call me gay, if you see how much I hate them?”).
  560. If stereotyped masculinity can not be completely attained by boys, they must defend this incomplete masculinity with misogynist or homophobic discourses, in order to dispel accusations of homosexuality or femininity, which are opposed to the masculinity that the boy wants to attain.
  561. This gets even more confusing when a person regarded by boys as gay can date a girl when they themselves can not (“is gay or not?”).
  562. For those who see masculinity as a static concept, which must be totally accepted or totally rejected, the boy who is both heterosexual and effeminate is a living enigma.
  563. The study now focuses on three prototypical “Chads”.
  564. For these three boys, dating is not at all negative.
  565. They spend time and effort improving their dating skills .
  566. These few boys who have good relationships are taken as a reference for others who want to do the same.
  567. This success guarantees them the desire of other girls and also an increase in their popularity .
  568. The heterosexual identity of these boys was established by relationships of long duration or by multiple relationships (one of the boys already had two girlfriends at the same time).
  569. If girls can use boys as a status symbol , so can boys, picking the girl by her looks alone and dating her, maybe just to show they can date whoever they want.
  570. One of the relationships described by the boys and observed by the researcher lasted three years (and you thought that children do not date).
  571. This long-lasting relationship, with intense physical manifestation, worried teachers who realized that those two children were dating seriously, which challenged adults’ idea that children are incapable of feelings of love, other than the love they have for their parents.
  572. The staff then broke the relationship by putting them in different classrooms, stopping the behavior seen as dangerously precocious.
  573. The school saw that relationship, which would be acceptable among adults, as “sick.”
  574. But the boy had achieved a reputation thanks to that three-year-long relationship in primary school, which allowed him to date other girls more easily.
  575. The school’s attempt to discourage physical contact by breaking the three-year-long relationship had the opposite effect: the boy was now interested in “casual” relationships, which prioritize physical contact over emotional attachment.
  576. The school aggravated the “problem” because he once focused his feelings on one girl and now he kept going from girl to girl.
  577. The problem is that the girl who stayed with him for three years did not recover from the breakup.
  578. She persisted in trying to get him to like her again, to no avail.
  579. The school, thinking that short-term relationships are not “real” relationships (therefore appropriate for “innocent children”) and that monogamy would be a sign of an “adult” relationship, accidentally taught the boy to be Chad, ironically to save his “innocence.”
  580. A person can enjoy dating (for adventure, pleasure or status) without liking the partners as persons.
  581. However, the partner sometimes continues to love even after being discarded.
  582. The boy can try to seduce the girl by adopting a more mature behavior than what would be normal for his age, through a look inspired by the high school boys or teachers.
  583. One of the boys had such adolescent-inspired look and was rather misogynistic.
  584. The girls generally hated his attitude of acting as someone older and hated the way they were treated by him, but despite this he was never single, something that the researcher thought was disturbing.
  585. The second lover boy found his true love in the sixth relationship.
  586. Unlike the first “professional boyfriend” (from notes 570 to 584), the second lover boy is not misogynist and likes to spend time befriending girls.
  587. Knowing that having girls as friends hurt his male image, he also played football (and played well).
  588. He was romantic and liked to dream of a future in which he and his beloved would form a family.
  589. For him, dating is feeling the taste of marriage without consuming it.
  590. The second lover boy, despite being in love with his sweetheart, did not feel less of a friend of her, suggesting that friendship and love can be coexist in the same couple.
  591. The second boy’s popularity with the girls seemed to lie in the fact that he did not treat the girls as different from each other, talking to all girls and listening to all girls, without privileging any.
  592. Because of this, even when his relationship with his sweetheard came to an end, there was a line of girls openly interested in him.
  593. When he received love letters from four girls at once, he needed a week to decide who to stay with.
  594. Unfortunately, he never carried a relationship for too long, except that one time with his sweetheart (that relationship lasted six months).
  595. Thus, he was regarded as a Chad, because, with the other girls, he could only keep the relationship for a few weeks before dumping the girl.
  596. For the other boys, that was because all girls in the classroom wanted to be around him, making it a painful choice.
  597. The second boy says he does not have to do anything to get girls’ attention, it’s just the way he is.
  598. This causes jealousy in other boys, who have to work hard to get unsatisfying relationships.
  599. Interested in girls and knowing that sex education is practically useless to satisfy his curiosity, the second boy complements his knowledge on the opposite sex by reading his sister’s teen magazines.
  600. This sister sees the boy’s attitude as a sign of maturity and supports him when he needs it, because she too had gone through that “stage”.
  601. The boys interviewed would like to learn about contraception.
  602. One of the interviewed boys said that, if he were to rely solely on the sex education he has at school, he will reach age nineteen just as uninformed as then (at the time of the interview, he was eleven).
  603. He wants to know how to have sex, and he wants to know that now .
  604. As the second boy is a success with girls and also plays soccer, he does not need misogynistic speech nor anti-gay talk to “complete” his masculinity.
  605. The strategy of being nice to the girls also worked with the third “professional boyfriend” (though he seemed to lean more to friendship).
  606. To sum up: although most boys believe that a “real” sexuality is something for when they are older and better informed, while others had disastrous experiences with love, there is an precocious minority that lives the sexuality as far as they can, invading the terrain socially reserved for adolescents.
  607. However, it should be noted that all boys have a sexual curiosity that is not fully satisfied by school sex education and are also afraid that the absence of such information will turn them into sexually incompetent adults, which would be embarrassing.
  608. The study now turns again, and more deeply, to boys and girls who reject the stereotype or fail to follow it satisfactorily.
  609. First, not conforming to the expectation does not guarantee that you will always be subjugated.
  610. Second, you do not have to reject the stereotype altogether, but you can reject parts of it, and if you’re good at other aspects of the stereotype, you can get away with it.
  611. To be sexually marginalized, you need to invest in a sexuality that is different from that of others and at the same time make others see you and treat you differently because of it.
  612. Majority sees itself as “normal” because there’s a minority that they can label as “sick“.
  613. One third of the interviewed boys and a quarter of the girls did not strive to follow the stereotype all the time (as we have seen, some boys traded aspects of the stereotype, while there were girls who rejected the female stereotype completely).
  614. You may also be discriminated for violating the boundaries of the “age-appropriate” behavior.
  615. Although the boy who invests in “feminine” behavior is called gay by the others, the girl who invests in “masculine” behavior, at least in the cases observed, is not called a lesbian because of that.
  616. Although the more feminine boy always receives the same forms of discrimination (such as name-calling), the more masculine girl is discriminated in a range of different ways by other girls.
  617. The boys who were the most discriminated, according to the researcher, were those who did not play football, because, as we saw, this was the main way to show masculinity in the primary school.
  618. The girls who were most discriminated against, according to the researcher, were those who did not participate in the “girlie” culture, constructed “for the boy” (being attractive to the boys and trying to get involved with the boys for romance).
  619. One of the interviewed girls likes to beat the boys she likes, which is both embarrassing and uncomfortable for the boy, who starts to avoid her.
  620. There are also girls who threaten to hit the boy who dumps them.
  621. Some kids play “pretend”, with a sexual twist.
  622. In such fantasy games (reported by the boys), the participants are usually of the same sex, so, to “eliminate” traces of homosexuality, one or more of the boys who are playing has to assume the role of a girl or woman.
  623. However, playing this kind of game is not indicative of homosexuality, neither present nor future.
  624. The boys did not return to this subject (sexual playing pretend) in later interviews and only discussed it once.
  625. The researcher also thought, however, that it would be better not to touch the subject again …
  626. This type of game does not take place in public (obviously), where the boys try hard to be masculine, but at home or in empty classrooms.
  627. It is also in situations like those that boys show physical affection among each other (caressing the hair of each other, for example), which would be considered gay , but nobody is watching.
  628. When a child is discriminated against because they can not or do not wish to participate in the expected behavior for their sex (the boy who does not play football or the girl who does not diet), the school staff is unable to provide any constructive advice to the discriminated child.
  629. Because the girl feels that talking to teachers and staff about discrimnation does not work, she stops reporting that behavior.
  630. The child can tell parents that they are being discriminated against, causing parents to talk to the school’s staff and, onetheless, the situation can remain the same.
  631. The peaceful boy who suffers physical violence at school can be encouraged by his parents to take revenge … but he does not want revenge, he does not want conflict in the first place.
  632. If the peaceful boy has to receive that kind of advice from his parents, it follows that he can’t count on his parents to change the situation.
  633. Because there are many children, it is not possible to intervene in all conflicts, so the staff and teachers only intervene when the situation is already very bad.
  634. Just as the female stereotype limits the girl’s freedom, the male stereotype limits the boy’s freedom, so adhering to the stereotype brings security at the expense of freedom.
  635. You, for example, can not be free to discuss your musical tastes if they are not compatible with the stereotype.
  636. It seems like you have to stop liking what you like, just because of your sex.
  637. It is easier for the girl to engage in male behavior and get away with it, compared to the boy who tries out stereotypically feminine behavior.
  638. Knowing that “boys do not hit girls”, the girls regularly beat boys without suffering retaliation.
  639. When she is beaten back, she rushes to the first teacher she sees, cries and then, you guessed it, the boy is the one to blame (where is feminism to speak of equal rights and equal treatment now?).
  640. At least, the girl who beats boys is regarded as less feminine by normal girls, so retaliation may come from girls themselves.
  641. If marginalized boys and marginalized girls join forces to challenge gender roles together, they would have a chance to turn the tables.
  642. However, all the marginalized boys and girls were in same-sex friendship groups, mitigating that potential.
  643. This is because, for the boy who can not or does not want to play football or date, the only thing he can do to be masculine is to avoid company with girls.
  644. Although there were friendship groups among these discriminated boys, eventually group members caved to the pressure and struggled to embrace the stereotype at the cost of the little freedom they still had to be who they really were, so that groups of rejected boys became smaller and smaller.
  645. The better your grades, the richer you are, the less gender role matters.
  646. How to get good grades, lose weight, have a boyfriend and read those magazines at the same time?
  647. It is difficult to reconcile the female gender role with academic success.
  648. But if the real man is expected to be intelligent, then the studious boy, if he is discriminated against in primary school for not playing football, might have better status in high school.
  649. It’s interesting how discrimination sometimes depends on the environment: the person who is your friend outdoors may not want to be seen with you in school.
  650. Strangely, the child can behave in a certain way when he / she is in school and in a totally different way when the class is dismissed.
  651. The study concludes by saying that heterosexuality is a regulatory force that permeates primary school, giving power to some and weakening others in their ways of living their own gender identity.
  652. That’s because the whole society expects the child to grow heterosexual, so that the kid is constantly under pressure.
  653. Child sexuality exists.
  654. The child himself can contribute to this policy of compulsory heterosexuality through discrimination.
  655. Children who resist the stereotype resist better when they are together.
  656. Considering all that has been seen, it is concluded that sexual education, as it is, is insufficient.
  657. The girl has more need to project heterosexuality through the relationship than the boy.
  658. The girl seeks her femininity in accepting or rejecting sexual behavior “for the boy”, while the boy seeks his masculinity in football, fighting games, having girlfriends, sexual or homophobic speech and withdrawing from girls’ company.
  659. For the girl, a girl who does not want to date is less feminine.
  660. Gender roles differ: what is masculine or feminine here may not be elsewhere.
  661. Sexual education must cease to be strictly biological and enter into the field of sexual orientation and the construction of sexual identity, that is, to participate in the complete reality of the child.
  662. Public policy encourages adults to view child sexuality always from the point of view of abuse .
  663. Adults do not want to admit that child sexuality exists, let alone admit it’s positive potential.
  664. This fear of child sexuality is more common among parents .
  665. Thus, school sex education is doomed to redundancy: new generations are more sexually informed, then a sex education concerned with what to teach and at what age end up always falling behind the knowledge that the child already has.
  666. That makes sex education unable to answer the questions that modern children have.
  667. Sex education is afraid to talk about sexual pleasure, which children often feel, desire, and seek.
  668. It is not the teacher’s fault; the person doing the curriculum guidelines is the one to blame.
  669. If the boy does not find his answers in sex education, he will look for them somewhere else .
  670. Why not apply the Paulo Freire method to sex education and use the child’s own experiences as starting points for lessons?
  671. The fact that sex education is not compulsory makes things worse.
  672. Prejudice against child sexuality must be abandoned and the phenomenon must be studied objectively.
  673. The opinion of the child on their own experiences should be taken into consideration by policy makers.
  674. Doing so means defying the moral panic in the media and in government.
  675. Gender roles are hurting children by dictating a “normal” behavior.
  676. When two eight-year-old boys had been seen kissing and the others began to attack them, one of the girls who saw the incident defended the boys, asking “how would you feel if people thought that it’s wrong when a boy and a girl date?”, trying to invoke empathy in the heterosexual crowd.
  677. “If that’s what they want,” she said, “it’s not our problem.”

14 de julho de 2018

An e-mail that I sent to Gay Star News.

So, since everyone is talking about the so called “pedophile pride flag” these days, I decided, as a good student on the subject, to clarify things to the tykes at Gay Star News. Since it’s unlikely that they would post my e-mail, I decided to paste it here for the public.

Regarding “minor-attracted people”.

I read your post on the flag thing and I have some thoughts on that story. First of all, “minor-attracted person” is a term pushed by B4U-ACT, a therapeutic circle that aims to help pedophiles and hebephiles to stay law-abiding despite having feelings for minors. The idea behind the term isn’t to normalize pedophilia, but to make pedophiles feel more at an ease with their therapists, as the word “pedophile” has become an insult. It’s an euphemism at most.

Second, MAPs in general want nothing to do with LGBT. It’s futile to attach yourself to a movement that doesn’t want your presence and rejects you. Saying that you are part of it doesn’t change anything. Both groups are separated. Worth noting is that, while there are MAPs interested in legalization, there are also MAPs who just are not. So, MAPs can not make any efforts towards any big societal change because there’s no consensus in the MAP communities regarding legalization. In fact, that’s an issue that divides that minority into smaller minorities, thus reducing their political potential for pretty much anything.

Third, you can be diagnosed with pedophilia at the age of sixteen, if you have feelings for minors for at least six months and said minors are under the age of thirteen. That being said, you can be a MAP and a minor at same time. So, it’s confusing that the article says that “minors should steer away from MAPs” because there are minors who identify as MAPs (again, that doesn’t imply that they act illegally and doesn’t even imply interest in legalization).

Finally, considering all those things, one is reminded of the Heart Progress scam. The consensus among the MAP communities around the Internet, both for legalization and against legalization, is that Heart Progress was a huge troll. The idea was to attach the stigma of pedophilia to leftist ideology. I came across MAPs saying that Heart Progress was founded by the alt-right, in an attempt to discredit the left. So, if MAPs don’t want association with LGBT (nor LGBT wants association with MAPs), all attempts at bringing the two together, at least in the West, should be seen as trollish behavior. Another incident that comes to mind was those five or so people carrying a NAMBLA banner during a leftist march. Turns out they weren’t really left, but were there to sabotage the march.

Understand that, in times of conservativism, the left in general and gays in particular are under a storm. They will try all sorts of extreme things to discredit leftist ideology and reduce liberals in number. I also think you should look deeper into the issue of attraction to minors, because, from the text that I read, you are very ill-informed.

I wrote a text on attraction to minors and it can be read in this site, here.

Older Posts »

Crie um website ou blog gratuito no WordPress.com.

%d blogueiros gostam disto: