A cui bono perspective on society's hatred of BLs


Well-known member
I was gonna post this to BoyChat, but I'm banned :ROFLMAO:

Women decry pornography as degrading to women, but really the main issue is, it takes away some of women's control over men's resources if men can just rub one out to some porn instead of needing to pay a woman (whether on long-term or short-term contract) to have sex with them.

Women hate that straight men are attracted to women younger than them, so they've banned men from having sex with young females. Child porn, though, is viewed as the ultimate evil, because it is much more threatening to the sexual wage structure of females than actual physical contact with females (child or not), given that it can be viewed over and over without even the need for the man to hold a job or interact with women. If there were an ongoing man-girl relationship, he'd at least need to keep giving her lollipops or whatever, but if he's just looking at porn, maybe she's not even getting that on an ongoing basis.

This is why women say that every time a man looks at child porn, he's committing a revictimization; it's because each time he rubs one out instead of having sex with a real live woman, it represents a lost sale of heterosexual sex. It pushes the price down, lowering women's quality of life. It's even worse if the imagery is reminding men of how much they prefer younger sex partners.

One might ask, what does this have to do with boys; how are women negatively affected if a man who was gay anyway chooses to have sex with boys, or look at porn of boys? Why are women so offended that a man would do this?

Well, those too represent lost sales of sex. If a man is happily having sex with boys or looking at imagery of such, then he's probably less focused on other issues, such as a need to please society by pretending to be heterosexual and getting into a Tchaikovsky-esque marriage with a female. The purpose of such marriages is to remove beautiful young Antonina Miliukova-esque women from the mate market so that they're not competing with ugly hags for the eligible straight bachelors.

Even if you have no interest in females, the fact that you're focused on boys instead of removing these pesky young female competitors from the mate market so that the uglier chicks can have a better chance at getting the men who ARE interested in women, means that you're interfering with their sexual strategy.

What, then, explains why straight men are so hostile to boylovers? They're worried that maybe they actually aren't all that great of a dad, and that therefore their son is going to run off to this boylover who will serve as essentially a substitute dad. And, they worry that relationships with women actually aren't good enough to entice their son to come to the straight side one day and perpetuate the family line, once they've had a taste of a BL/gay relationship.

So basically it all just comes down to greed, envy, jealousy, and other negative emotions/characteristics. People can't fight the competition on equal terms, so they have to find some way to kneecap it using disingenuous arguments that hide their true motives and interests.


The actual reasons are sex-neuroticism and paternalistic childcentrism. People are afraid boys will get "exploited" if it's legal to have sex with them, people are worried they may catch an STD or get traumatized.

People are less selfish when it comes to promoting policies than when it comes to their decisions that more directly affect them.


People simply believe it would be harmful for people below the AoC to have sex, in addition we have the issue of knot knowing if the individual actually consented to the sex and this is part of the reason why we ended up with problematic Age of Consent laws.