Jim: My home is Boy Chat. I have been around for ten years doing various projects, the main one is Free Spirits. (00:44 to 01:04)

Jim: Boy Chat since 1995, was one of the first chat boards and an early web-chat board on the internet. It was developed as pro script by Matt Wright as a teen. From the outside it looks the same as always, but inside it is custom-coded and bullet-proof. It was an informal project on Kasper’s site, but it got too big for him to manage. After several iterations, I took on associate web-master role. Hosted on a Digiweb server, my site FPC hosted on the same server w Boy Links, Boy Right, Freedom Board + assorted other BL resources. (01:05 to 04:49)

Jim: in 1997, admin said we had 14 days to find a new server. Their policy changed, no longer hosting boy content. Panic. The Web was new, few servers existed. I had my own computer business, took time off to pursue those who could fund plus those with solutions. I rallied the community via Boy Chat. Free Spirits was formed and I chaired the committee. We pulled all boy lover resources together, and paid for them. Our goal: to have our own internet service provider, our own server, and our own independence. For the next year, we jumped from server to server, each time being kicked off. Once our goals were met, I was burnt out. I passed my webmaster role on to others. FPC.net was originally my own website, but this too was incorporated into Free Spirits. It is now run by Kalos. (04:50 to 11:39)

My lover Lenny was older than me and ill. I had been webmaster for a year. A new poster arrived in the Boy Chat community. He asked to meet in New York City where I was based. I agreed. I met him, took him out for drinks and dinner, and we talked. He seemed a reasonable boy lover. I returned to my apartment, and found Lenny was having problems. I took him to hospital, and finally checked him in to a room some hours later. I hadn’t eaten, shaved, or changed. I rang the guy and agreed to meet at his hotel. I phoned him from reception, but it took forever for him to come down. This was an expensive plush hotel, and I looked distinctly scummy. At last the elevator doors opened, and there he is in suit and tie, trailed by a camera crew. The nice guy from Boy Chat was not a boy lover at all, but a TV reporter from Florida. With camera in my face, he asked challenging questions with negative spin. I answered as positively as I could, then left. By the way, whilst together the previous evening, he had a hidden camera plus microphone in his lapel, recording all we discussed. (11:40 to 16:28)

Jim: I was contacted by a major news organisation, maybe ’20 20 tv’, sometime after the Florida TV experience. Wanted to do a story on BC and FS. I spent an hour on the phone with the producer, but nothing came of it. The only other experience was the Bill Moyers show. They did an hour long piece ‘paedophiles on the internet’. The focused on Free Spirits, and made false statements which were libellous. I contacted the producers, and offered to come on the show to debate the things they had said, but they declined. Clearly, they didn’t want anyone pointing out the blatant falsehoods. (16:29 to 19:59)

Jim: ‘child advocates’ is a misnomer; they are really in it for self-glory. Rookiee: an advocate should have professional credentials. Rookiee then raises the Wikipedia editing topic discussed in episode 7, and the political bias creeping into the content of Wikipedia entries. (20:00 to 23:59)

Rookiee: vigilante case regarding the site rikijo.blogspot.com with title ‘alt.hackers.malicious the war against NAMBLA’. The site began by outing NAMBLA members, but expanded its operation to include any boy lover. They targeted a 14yo boy attracted to his peers and younger. Jim: just devastating that it happens, and so often. Important for young boy lovers to be outspoken and to communicate, but we must watch out for them and inform them of the dangers. This kid was outed from the personal details on his website. Youngsters can be vocal, but they also have to be careful. Rookiee: agree completely. The boy was attracted to a 12yo, and for that he was outed as a predator. Who is the predator here? (24:00 to 28:26)

Jim: I recall a case ten years ago when a young teen boy lover on Boy Chat was outed in a similar way. His web page was up, and links led to links. It was easy to figure out his identity. The police got involved and the kid was sentenced to youth detention and mandatory therapy. His teen years turned into a nightmare. That is just one example of so many I know. There are dozens more vigilantes out there reveling in the ruination of others. (28:27 to 34:15)

Jim: it is really important to bring gay youth together, people who love love, but we have to do it responsibly. If we just get burnt, no progress will be made. All we will have done is screwed up a bunch of lives. We have to strategize, plan and know what we are doing. Rookiee: the more gay youth get involved, the bigger the hole punched into the stereotype: ‘paedophilia is the domain of a bunch of old male predators’. Jim: we must educate gay youth to keep their boy love life separate from all other stuff. (34:16 to 38:59)

Jim: in the case of the 14yo, it would be ironic if the vigilante got the wrong kid. Rookiee: what this vigilante was doing was not criminal. However, he could be sued for libel as he is defaming people for what they say, not what they do. Jim: I read my local paper and a child molestation story is reported: ‘so and so admitted to a specific action, so and so admitted to the crime of paedophilia’, as if having those feelings was itself a crime. (39:00 to 40:14)

Jim: hot topic on Boy Chat of late: maybe it is not a good idea to categorise sexual identity. Isn’t it better to live in a world and just love people for what they are? Rookiee: but we need to self-identify as a community. Jim: it’s only when you add the construction that a dilemma arises. How would we find support, plus a sense of community, without self-identity. Yet, the very construction of an identity creates problems. If the concept of boy love didn’t exist, would the hysteria be nearly as high? Some would say no. When I was a young gay teen, the concept of boy love wasn’t a category. I was termed chicken hawk as part of the gay construct. (40:15 to 43:19)

Jim: I have been struck chatting with younger boy lovers, how attraction changes over time. No-one stays the same. Rookiee: the community should refrain from claiming their own age of attraction trumps everyone else’s. If that happens, fractures will develop, and the mainstream will jump on that weakness. Jim: my ideal society, perhaps not perfect, would be one where sexual orientation really didn’t matter. If that were to happen, many of us would not be so focused on age of attractions. (43:20 to 46:31)

Jim: on Boy Chat, many express concern that they will never be able to attain fulfilment. In the absence of romantic love, they overtly focus on this fear, and ignore the myriad other aspects of life to be enjoyed. Someone who does not suffer societal condemnation, is free to appreciate everything around him. Rookiee: by discriminating, society has managed to create a whole group of inward-looking suppressed individuals who have ceased to function effectively. The way sexuality is dealt with in Western societies is quite flawed. (46:32 to 49:04)

Jim: have you ever read Arabic poetry from the Middle Ages? Absolutely gorgeous. There was a time in certain parts of the Muslim world, when love of boys was considered a very high ideal. Even though homosexuality is frowned upon by Islam, there have been epochs when it was celebrated. Rookiee: I am intrigued. (49:05 to 50:04)

Rookiee speaks about online syndication, and the need for a single portal providing a central reference point for boy lovers. Jim: what is syndication? I can’t see how this concept differs from what is already available, for example Boy Lover Links and Boy Links. What is more important, is concentrating on content, and improve the things we fail to do well, like presenting information. (50:05 to 56:12)

Boy Story: what makes a boy lover a boy lover? Jim: of all the definitions I have come across, the one put forward by Alexis is probably the best. ‘A boy lover is a person who tends to fall in love with boys.’ Rookiee: what is your definition of a boy? Jim: I prefer not to limit myself to definitions. Rookiee: Kinsey said it best, we are all different. Boy Story: I am chatting to a new boy lover, and I tried to define what boy love is. In my mind, boy love is having such a love of younger males whereby you place their needs for love, companionship and nurturing, ahead of your own. Jim: to an extent I would agree, but I wouldn’t restrict such a definition to selfless love, because sometimes one makes mistakes, so it doesn’t always work out that way. (56:13 to 59:34)

Rookiee: Boy love is an ideal we need to work up to. Jim: no, I don’t agree. Rookiee: Well, a boy lover is not a child molester. To educate the general public, we need to define what a boy lover isn’t. Jim: by who’s definition? I reject the notion that an ideal boy lover exists with boundaries beyond which someone is not a boy lover. If a boundary is something he did wrong, then that doesn’t mean he loses his boy lover status. Love is important, beauty is important, and should be celebrated. Does it really matter what gender a person is, or what age a person is? No. (59:35 to 01:06:39)