||[Nov. 22nd, 2012|11:48 am]
When- in the previous post- I talk about hot boy sex I mean sex with a power differential built in. Schools- public schools in particular- are intensely hierarchical- and an age difference of a year or two- imperceptible to an outsider- can feel enormous. The sexual relationships I was aware of at my school were all between older and younger boys and had a whiff of abuse about them. A young, pretty boy who was known to be available was called a "ding"- dunno why- and was an object of universal obsession and contempt. Relationships between boys of the same age and at the same level in the hierarchy (if they even existed) were kept very secret because the culture of the school was against them. Such relationships were "queer"- and anyone suspected of being "queer"- unless very big and frightening- was tormented for it.|
Wow, that's...very Greek!
Plato was one sick paedo. He should'a been hung!
Or- on reflection- perhaps not...
Have you read Stephen Fry's "Moab is my Washpot"? Described exactly as you said. Single sex environments, whether schools, armed forces, or prisons, will deflect even straight men to focus their sexuality on whatever objects are available. I guess that's why single sex schools are better for girls - their tormentors are elsewhere, tormenting each other.
It's one of my beefs against J.K. Rowling that she romanticizes the public schools. What we need- as in every sphere- is some truth.
Having taught in all-girls' schools, all boys' and co-ed, I can say that in all-girls, girls thrive. They're more confident, outspoken, and take far less shit from people.
Single sex works for girls. I don't think it does for boys.
Have you read Montherlant's the Prince of the City is a Child (I can't remember the original French title)?
It gives quite a bit of insight into this world, written by someone who was quite obsessed with it. Montherlant, like Gide and Wilde, was an aggressive, sexually active pederast. He seems to actually have had a sexual addiction.
I've heard of the book but I haven't read it.
That must have been horrible.
Rowling isn't talking about a same-sex school, though. Hogwart's has boys and girls together. I am sure that there is a certain amount of romanticizing going on. She seems to focus on abuse in the home more. Harry's relationships with his aunt, uncle and cousin are so abusive that I had time getting through the first book because I was so disturbed by them. I don't know anything about her life. Maybe she, herself, escaped an abusive home life by being sent off to school. Anyway, that is what her writing seems to indicate.
I know nothing about Rowling's background. Perhaps she'll write an autobiography some day. I understand her latest book- the adult fiction about small town life- is pretty grim.
The aunt & uncle keep young Harry locked in a closet where he has no access to food, water, or a bathroom. They frequently punish him with starvation, and demand that he work for them as a slave. In the mean time, the son is spoiled, over fed, indulged in every way, and constantly bullies the smaller, younger Harry. Yes, that is the stuff of fairy tales, but, in America, that is also the stuff of child abuse, and those relatives would be subject to criminal prosecution, not just for the way that Harry was treated, but the way the other boy was treated as well.