John Galaor

Ok, Aaron. That is a very good story. It exudes a lot of tenderness and passion. That many readers loved this story it is shown on the full stars it has. So, I have to congratulate you. I can not give any advice, for you will develop farther your own narrative ability are you will keep writing more. Keep writing.

There is the possibility to get some immunization to disappointments. To achieve a a difficult career in science, engineering, or even in becoming a writer, we need to develop an immunization with disappointments. Life is full of disappointments, and we have continue living. John Galaor

I have said a few times, this story needs a revision of the writing, because I thought they needed. And I told that because I loved the story. If the story would had been a bore, I would not had tell anything. Then, due that I thought it was mostly a careless work, I did not enter into details. Other question is that he would had asked me, or something. Other question is that there quite a lot of stories. Too many for the time and energy I have at present. On the other hand, the most time I devote to read other people's stories the less time I have to devote to my own. This another problem. Then, I started with a lot of energy reviewing the works of other people, while at the same time, I began to realized that I am redundant here. I feel a sort of alien here. It was a wrong move on my part to come here. But in life one is constantly making wrong decisions.

Well, I thoroughly assume the rap. I accept most of what you say in your post. And well, I was really exaggerating. I really was. I had found that some stories, or styles of writing, that I dislike are most popular; while other stories that I like are mostly orphans. Of course, I had read so far only about 60 or 80 stories out of perhaps more than a thousand ten thousand stories that are here. Nevertheless I had read some three hundred stories in nifty. Well, in a time span of some years. I also understand the need of encouraging new writers and praise them, even if they are not very good at the present stage. To arrive to a point of being a good writer you have to begin by being not a good one. It is like a process of training. Nevertheless, I think I had praised so far more than 30 stories. In most cases, I did not say a word about some obvious defects of the story. In the few cases I said something critical, but my comments sent in PM were not welcomed. I understand this reaction, for I do not remember but just a case in which I accepted some critics. Then, our egos are sort of impermeable to criticisms. I am also involved in this. An hour ago, I was watching a video on the British novel and I heard some authors criticizing more or less harshly their colleagues. I had read also about disqualifications among the Spanish writers of the first part of 20 Century. So, to reject criticism is a part of being a writer and of rejecting the works of your competitors. I had become very fastidious with my perfectionism, but this is mostly a defect, I suppose. Most professional writers are not very good either, even if many of them have an with an editor or two, and also have helpers to develop some plots. In other cases, but also in books shops, I had found stories so badly written that I would not dare to say a word. Then it would not be a miracle if with some stories here I cannot read more than a few lines and get tired. I mean... if I have not reasons to tell something nice top an author, I must shut up. And to end all this, I can be rather frustrated anyway. This embitters anyone.

Ok, James. You have a truck full of reasons. I was talking from the perspective of my own experience. I do not know a a word about others. I had a experience both ways; one as a receptor of critics from my stories, and as a transmitter of critics to other writers. Well, in both cases, the experience had been a total disappointment. Well, except with just one person that made perfect critics to my stories. He was a sort of magician. I was disappointed on the receiving end of criticism. For they rarely understood well the story, or put wrong criticism to things that were right. On a few other cases, some ladies were complaining that my stories were too clear. As a lady put it, "if you said it all, what do you let for the readers to discover? They should make an effort to understand the story, coming and going back and for, to understand what the author was trying to say." She said this was one of pleasures of literature to find out why the author was saying this or that absurd thing. I could not be less in accord with this idea. To me, a story should be written with such a care that the reader would not stump on any obstacle in his pleasure of reading. About giving out criticism to others, I had found the same problem as here in GA. Very few authors have any sensibility over such a trifle as if their stories are understandable or not. They assume they are clear enough and do not not need any corrections. I remember a story a lady had started telling about someone who was walking slowly by a steep street, and the author expended like a page and a half describing the scene without stating "who was" the creature that was acting. In Spanish the verbs do not need the help of a pronoun to work properly. So, I told her, how do you write a story without telling "who is" walking on this street? I do not know if it was a dog, or human male, a female, a boy, a girl, an old man, an old woman, a hobo, or what. She did not apparently realize this was a problem for a reader. I suppose she new perfectly what she was writing about, she who the character was. But she was unable to realize that the reader have not the ability to read the mind of the writer. As a reader, how could I picture in my mind the agent that was acting in this story? I cannot read a story if I could not see it like in a sort of movie. There is not any need to explain too much in detail how people is clothed. If the author do not tell this I assume the characters are clad in a standard way for the natural setting of the story. It is like with the faces, there is not any obligation to paint a portrait of the character's faces. If the author does not explain this point I can figure any face I would fancy. But in general, the problem of the story is that it has to be readable without much effort. On a second front, the story has to be exciting or interesting or pleasant to read. Then, summing up my experience, there is like a chasm, an abyss between some authors and the readers. As a reader you can tell some author some problems you have with their stories but they do not understand, or would not accept your commentaries. He thinks are... "preposterous". i borrow your word, James. Then, it seems to me, that reviews had became some sort of social event to tell niceties to the authors. Nothing more.

I take the rap gladly. The pending question is to agree about what is to write a good or a bad story. This must be the "holy grail" of literature. Underneath my words are several layers of meaning. One is the meaning of what good literature is, or what is an acceptable prose, or an excellent prose, if such a thing exists, and what is a story badly written. Unless we have some sort of accord on the meaning of these concepts, we are wasting the time with arguments. I am not an expert in literature, and I suppose no one is either an expert here. Nevertheless, I would not call either an expert into these arguments, for I had observed a discrepancy between the value given to their master works of literature and my experience as a reader. The same case happens here. I had seen many popular stories that I cannot bear to read more than a few lines. And I had seen other excellent written stories that are total orphans, with a nearly total lack of popularity. I had been reading some mainstream novels. I learned my English by reading novels. Then, the so called bestsellers had a quality of being easy to read as well as pleasant at reading. I am in favor of that; that a novel would be pleasant to read. And to be pleasant, I suppose the story has to have some quality of being easy to understand. From this perspective, I am in the same flock as many contemporary readers that cannot read Ulysses, Hamlet, or In Search of Lost Time. I don't want to make a list too long. Then, if we come back here. I am confronted with the same problem. What is a good story? What is a story well written? Why I cannot not stand reading more than five lines of some popular authors here? What is really the problem? I am naive enough to think that a good prose, as different from the whole story, has to have the quality of "being easy to read". It cannot be a sort of torture, like when you are reading the first page of Ulysses, or some nineteen century novels. Then, I am not at this moment contemplating the whole novel as good or bad in itself, as a finished unit. I am considering the problem, that a good novel has to be good, even if sampled in small parts. I open a novel at random and start to read a paragraph. Well, this paragraph has to have enough consistence to take care of itself. Just imagine a paragraph of only five lines. What can be the problem if you cannot read even five lines? You cannot complain that the story is too long, or too short. You cannot expect this small paragraph taken as a random sample would be very funny, or very sad, or otherwise extraordinary. The least that we can expected from such a small sample of three or five lines is... "not to being rebuffed and stop reading". Sadly, I have to confess that many stories I tried to read here show this problem from the very first paragraph. And this is very sad. I can understand that when a novel is too long we are tired sometimes and commit an error here and there, or a little chain of errors. It is difficult to spot these errors for some studies had proved that the eye reads by jumping. It makes about two or three jumps on each line. Then, the brain put the words that go in between those points on each jump. Then, if an error is between those two points, you cannot see it. There is another problem, the story can be very clear in the mind of the writer, but is is not so clear when put into written words. Then, the reader has to have the capacity of reconstructing the same story the writer intended to put in the story. For the eye of the reader does not stops in the same places as the eye of the writer. Then, most times, the author has many more ideas in a concrete scene that he puts into writing. Then, the reader has to have power of divination to figure it what the writer has in his mind. With these words I do not mean that an author has to put excessive detail into their stories. I do not like Proust at all, that tired readers with an unending description of irrelevant details of the innumerable decorative elements in a lounge. He could expend like two or three pages describing the elements of the damned lounge. This is an abomination to any contemporary reader. Anyway, I think I am wasting my time telling all this trash. I think all you know well this problem. I am not going to tell you that exists something huge that is called the Pacific Ocean.

You have written a sort of "critic of the pure reason" in a sort of Kantian style. I was only doing a light rant on human relations as a reflection on my own experience in life. If I had a different experience, I would be painting a different portrait. Then, my words do not pretend to paint a true image of reality, for I am not any sure of how objective reality is. I am only trying to figure it. Then, do not worry for any of the silly things I am saying. I am a lonely nerd with very little social experience. That's all.

As I have less social intelligence than a sea turtle, I dare to add a few more words. This post is not meant as a reply to AnytaSunday commentary, but to the former three or four posts. 1) To criticize openly is like to show some form of superiority, either real or imaginary. Then, nobody wants to treat with superiors, except to praise them for they are rich, or are just authors that died hundred years ago or more. 2) To criticize faintly or discreetly is equivalent to portrait oneself as an equal. And most people do not want to be the equal of someone we had not been dinning and drinking with. If you had not any special friendship with him, you would not accept even a veiled criticism. This is only tolerable for friends or lovers. I mean, faint criticisms. 3) If you are fanatic enough to write very well, or have a fetish for a perfect prose, is advisable not to post it in GA, or in any other place whatever. Summing up, do not post it. Why? To write well is equivalent to brag of a superiority over the readers. This would be enough reason to hate you. Everybody has already his case full of heroes, gods of sports, movies, punk music and even gods of literature. Then the case is so full that one has barely enough room for his own ego; that since our timid adolescence has grown very big. 4) To write badly does not offend anyone. I would dare to say it is a good thing, for it sort of enhances the talent of the reader. So, he can see a badly written story as a divine revelation of his own superiority as a writer. So, I think there is not any reason to hate or despise a bad writer, for it does not belittle in the least our ago. The worse that could happen to us is boredom. And the cure for this boredom is to stop reading. In fact, is very difficult to appraise how many stories we had petitioned and had been read entirely. A five percent does not look an exaggeration to me. I would be very glad if one out of forty people who had download any of my stories would had read it till the end. That would be great, a 2.5% of people arriving to the end of one of my stories. The most probably figure would be less than 0.25%

Thank you Tet. I will have a look.

It is very difficult to criticize honestly, for even the slightest hint of criticism can wound the ego of the author. Unless an author has asked you directly for some help, I would not dare to criticize anyone, not even slightly. I had done this precisely a few times, a veiled criticism, and I have regretted. The only criticism most authors accept gladly are full praises. It is difficult for an author, myself included, to think the praises are exaggerated or undeserved. Not that I had received any praises here in GA, for I do not. But I have had a lot for my stories in NIFTY. Then, I do not remember any case in which I thought the praises were exaggerated. You can find the prove of this assertion by reading some twenty of thirty samples of praises on different stories here GA. Many popular stories here are full of visits with a lot of flattery reviews. Then, some of the most popular stories are rather shoddy written. It has been a sort of discovery for me. You never end your learning. Then, I think a rule of thumb of social intelligence is to praise everybody. To praise his stories, the clothes he wear, you should praise his intelligence when he opens his mouth, their hairdo, his new haircut, his shoes, etc. The most you praise others, the most intelligent you would look in the eyes of other people. So, the golden rule must be, praise always; do it generously, and never tell anything that you would guess other people would not understand, or ignore, or never had heard off. If you present a low profile, people would not had a serious reason to hate you. Specially if you are prone to praise often your peers, and most of all to the alpha males or females on the site you are staying. Then, forget about telling anyone any short of slight criticism whatever. Not any word about this.

we have a fetish with explanations, in the same way we had invented myths. So, we have myths for heroes, saints and gods. It is a part of human folklore. Then, we still have a need for "human sacrifices". So we have disguise human sacrifices with the concept of responsibility. In other times we would had said "we kill them to placate the wrath of the gods". Now we kill them for "they are responsible of their deeds". It is about the same thing. We kill them to instill fear in the common average soul. For they could easily become criminals if the circumstances change enough. I some circumstances any of us can become criminal if we are not killed previously by more aggressive agents. Those that kill first have a greater chance to win. That is the reason we have a police force and an army. To prevent or destroy the sudden appearance of armed thugs vandalizing the country. Those more prone to violence are always at the ready to destroy society. So, it is a work that never ends. For in some countries there more criminality than in others. In Europe by example, criminality is lower than in the US. For in Europe society is less savage, and care more for the poor classes. Then, the social circumstances play a role in the amount of violence of a country. By far, the most violence comes from people that were raises in poor circumstances, with single mothers that have to enslave themselves for long hours to survive and feed their breed. This conditions are a breeding ground of criminality. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_gun_vio_hom_ove_hom_rat_per_100_pop-rate-per-100-000-pop

Ok. Good grades are quite elastic. Then, to be the son of a wealthy family, not only opens you the doors to Universities of five stars in the US. If you are a star in any sport you can also enter. That elemental facts of life can award you good grades. In general, I have never read about outstanding lawyers, engineers or scientists that were athletic stars, or were of rich families. Perhaps I am quite wrong, but I never read about this fact. I have some reasons to believe this. Our brain does not perform miracles. Either you are a good athlete or you are a good student. You can be a very good chess player, or you can be a good pianist, or a great swimmer, or a student with great capacity to learn sciences, but you cannot be the whole lot. The main reason is probably that to learn something very difficult you need a lot of time, a lot of training. Then, the time is limited, as it is also limited our brain capacity. We have a proverb for this in my language, "we cannot be doing the mass and tolling the bells at the same time". Then, we can run or swim a little well, we can play some easy pieces on a piano, we play a chess and win the children playing chess, we can make some studies on this or that, but you would not be outstanding in the whole lot of these abilities. So, if you are poor, you have to be a real great star in sports or in sciences, soaring up higher than the highest flayers, for a good university to open their doors to you. For minor universities you have not to be as good, except in sports. Then, there are some options to enter a high class university, either you are of a very wealthy family, you are a great in sports, or you are great in sciences or laws. In general you have to pay, except in the case of great sport stars. For universities use their sport teams to make publicity. Then, the best athletes are often filthy poor, often are black guys, and the university has to buy them to play in their team. If you need them, you can buy them, for they are poor.

Hi! I am very glad to tell you that this chapter has been a very pleasant read also. I cannot believe yet how nice it is to read something so fluid and so... so crisp and so... pretty understandable. Besides, as I was reading this story I felt like an adolescent again or something. I am feeling as I read all the insecurities I would have had in the unknown environment a this high school. Well, it can seem a little weird that I had said "pretty understandable". Well, it is not so weird. There is a common language for all people... for most people, that post stories here, but it is not that easy to write in a plain understandable and clear way. That it why to write is said to be "an art". If were not, everybody would be doing it nicely. In my condition of alien to this language, I am very sensible on this precise topic. I most than others need to read a clear text to feel good. When, I do not understand a story I feel like... you know one says in a phrase like this. I personally feel like of malodorous trash as I read a story that I do not understand. Have you ever tried to read Ulysses of Joyce? If you are one of those lucky one that can read this novel, you are one a few. If don't you can perhaps understand how bad I feel sometimes reading. Some people write stories in a way that it seems I am reading Shakespeare or Chaucer, not a piece of contemporary literature. Well, you are not Shakespeare, don't be sad, man. Not any publisher would print you any story if were writing like Shakespeare. If you were that big, I would not be so enthusiastically praising this second chapter of this story. So, far only a girl from Perth has written as well as you here. Then it amazes me at how alone seems your story here. That I do not see any enthusiastic review.

So you meant "a pair" of balls. Perhaps it was not such a bad thing after all to shut up for a time. You cannot imagine how difficult is to fend off by himself when you are under 18. To have a work and to earn enough to pay the rent for a small flat or trailer room, and all that. Even going to live under the roof of someone older than you could be also a risky business. Then it was not such bad thing you did, considering how many things could go wrong. To leave home early in life, a thing I did, could be comparable to buying an old car and hoping you could go very far on it. In the end, all your social status depends much on the money you have, or you can earn. The rest in life is mostly secondary. We are slaves to feed our bodies, for they need food almost daily. That means money. Then, to feed yourself you had to sell yourself to others. That could be a job, or that could be "other services" you have to perform to please others. Then to live with the parents means to be enslaved to their rules. Then, one never is a true master of himself. Not even as an adult. We are never free. We have to be slaves to others as a mean to take care of your own body. Even if we are living as hunter gatherers, we depend much on the help of others to survive. For sometimes you can pass four or five days in a row without hunting any thing at all. I put myself again in a philosophical pose. Well, I beg your pardon.

Oh! I was amazed reading this story! I know this phrase is a little wore, for I had used not less than six times before. Then, to give more credibility to my words, I had to confessed that I had never been fan of this sort of fantasies. I never had read any novel about mutants, vampires, magicians, lord of the rings, and so on. I never read any of them, for I suppose it was childish stuff. I remember of being bored watching Superman movies in the TV. Even, if Harry Potter looked a lot better than Superman, and the Lord of the Rings, I never watched entirely any of those movies. In my defense for not liking these fantasies, I have to confess that I am too old to read this stories. Then, when I was very young this were stories printed in comics for children. Then, as I grew up I was becoming more and more of a boring intellectual. So, that I liked your story is a sort of miracle, boy. I loved specially for it gave way to the psychological problems of a mutant when he realizes that he is not normal as everybody else. This first chapter promises that the following parts would be even much better. Thanks a lot, boy. You had done a great job.

Very good, Frostina. It seems you are writing quite a bestseller. Good luck, girl.

I think that to fall in love is a different condition to feeling lust. One can feel lust many times in his life, with many different people, but we rarely fall in love that often. For to fall in love is a more rare condition than feeling lust. I suppose many of us, had felt lust for many different persons, either male or female.

In any case, I find him or her attractive. I can find as attractive some girls, as well as some boys. But I do not find attracted all types of faces. I can find that some faces or some bodies are not sexy to me. I suppose this must be general. But some actors and actresses of Hollywood look sexy for huge crowds. I do not find sexy all of them, either male or female.

Considering all the shit a gay had to endure socially in a high School, or in a college, "it can not be a choice". It is an inner drive the person feel to watch or to like another person of same sex. The person feels attracted to another of the same sex in spite of the social stigma attached to such feeling. Everybody know what a lot of shit social peers are pouring over gays. So to become gay is not something one decides with the aim of being popular among its peers. The same can be said of the manners. Gay manners cannot be controlled either, or you would not see any gay showing his manners. Most of the harassment a gay has to endure is due mainly to his manners that are very visible. A gay is rarely harassed for his deeds, for in general sex acts are done in private. So, only a few light gays are able to hide their manners for they are weakly determined by nature.

in this story there is not only a bad guy. All those that spread the notion that you were a slut were probably other girls. For females are ready to punish any others girls that do not behave as the social conventions determine. Boys are also similarly nasty bullying the boys that become suspicious of not behaving as the official stereotype for boys. There is also the probability that the sexually frustrated boy said another female that he had intercourse with you "as a vengeance" being feeling sexually frustrated. In this case there are more culprits than one, the frustrated boy on a hand and the girls that spread the rumor on the other. A sexually rejected boy can become a nasty beast. This is another fact of life.

we are lucky for we learn from own mistakes. So this `"endless line of crap" you said, impressed me. So young you are and you had learned all this so fast.

Being so young, as you were, you could not figure it out yet how difficult is to live day by day with another person. It is quite different to go with a friend a couple of times a week, or a few hours a day. Being with someone on a daily bases can be quite taxing. We can not imagine how much shit can we cause each other, if we had not been there for a time to know it.

I do not understand what you mean by "I'd have grown a pair". Is it "i had been go to live with my bf" or something?

I had been wondering, do I have a regret of something I did not do, or had I done? Then, I had been several days remembering, and could not retrieve any memory of a regret in my life. So, I asked me next, how is it? I have done many silly things in my life as anybody else. I am very far from being a winner on anything. Then, I had the idea that I was always reacting to my own circumstances, within the state of my mind in each moment. I never had plans to do this or that, or to follow a determined path towards a goal. Put it in other words, I was doing what it pleased me at each precise moment in my life. I never had plans. I was living by the circumstances of each day. Then I was sort of impulsive. A few times I had been forced to... I was submitted to the will and lust of others. And I had to do something others ordered me to do. But I have avoided most occasions of being trapped and enslaved to the will or lust of others. In other cases, I could not avoid it, for I was like trapped. In these cases I had take it with calm and endured anything as well as I could. I suppose I was not different to others in this way. Then, the weird thing was that "it was not such a bad thing" being abused. It triggered some unknown switch in my brain that made me feel well. Perhaps, being subjected to a sexual pounding, my mind reacted by showering my brain with endorphines and other pleasant neurotransmitters. In general, I had been lucky, later in life. I had not to endure as much shit as in childhood. My infancy was sort of Dickensian one, but it was not a choice I had made. As a young man and as an adult I was mostly reacting to the circumstances I met. I was trying to find a balance between my inner urges and what others wanted around me. If I had been living through different circumstances, I would had been acting different. So, I do not see any reason to regret anything. I had never been choosing my own path in life. Whenever I saw an opportunity, I grabbed it. Perhaps, I can say this because I was a docile boy or more precisely a totally tamed one and adolescent. Even as an adult I was mostly a tamed one. At least on the outside. Even if I was often a rebel, this attitude most mostly hidden within myself. So, I was a few times punished as a boy. Once I was slapped for I had being writing a novel. The none, a "sister of Mercy", was sure I had been copying this story from a novel I have hidden anywhere. And novels were forbidden in that religious school, for novels were suspicious of being obscene or heretical. She was sure I got a forbidden novel hidden and started like crazy to looked for it in my desk and in the desk of the other boys. She asked other boys where was the novel, and nobody knew it for there was not any novel. Then, she asked me with a severe face where I hid the novel. I told her, there was not any novel. That all was and had come out of head. Then she slapped me hard for not confessing where the novel was hidden. In other occasion, I was slapped twice for telling her that she had done wrong a math's problem of geometry. She was really wrong and find it offensive that I had told her so. She was trying to find out why we had different solutions for the same problem. I was the number one in school at doing maths problems. She knew it. Most of the boys in the classroom were copying the problems after me. Then, the none supposed that I had made some mistakes in the operations of the problem. She check that out, and I had not made any mistakes. Then, she called me to check this problem and I saw the way she did it. I saw at once she was wrong and I told her, this way to solve the problem is wrong. I felt sort of proud as I told her and I had a faint sneer in my face. That made her mad at me and ordered all children to get out of the classroom. Then she made me to kneel down and she slapped me hard twice. Some boy was hearing on the key hole and told the other boys, "she has slapped him twice". Since that day I was a sort of hero with the boys, and had an aura of being a crazy sort of clever boy. Since that day boys called me Doc Sivana, from the comic books of Superman. Wicked Doc Sivana invented crazy machines of massive destruction to conquer the world and Superman came swiftly flying to destroy those powerful machines.

This is a book of 635 pages over the Greek Love, and what really meant, as seen by the light of last analysis over this matter. The book is very rich not only on information but also on analysis. It give the reader a massive information, over the topic of homosexual love in Ancient Greece. Here is the Index. Part I: The Greeks Had Words for It 1. Eros in Love 2. Grace, sex and Favours 3. Age-classes, Love Rules and `Corrupting the Young Part II: Sodomonia 4. Sexing up the Greeks 5. Sex Versus Homosexuality 6. Language as a Mirror of the World Part III: Greek Love and Greek Religions 7. Ganymede Rising 8. Noonday Phaedrus. Cephalus at Dawn 9. Pelops and Hyacinthus at New Year Part IV: Men of War 10. Achilles and Heracles 11. Crete and Sparta 12 The Secrets of Elis, the Sacred Band and Alexander: Regional Variations 13 Syzygies Part V: Eros Off-Duty 14. Sappho, Samos and the Tomb of the Diver: Lyrics of Greek Love 15. Words ad Pictures: The Athenian System 16. Fourth Century: Politics and the Professionals Conclusion: A Map of Greek Love My comments: I have trouble to give a cold appraisal of this book, for it has resulted a like a treasure of information for me. I have had read half a dozen books about ancient Greeks, and many of the classics like Plato, Aeschines, Plutarch, Xenophon, Herodotus, and others. But one feels a little like lost in those books, if have not enough knowledge about the context. I mean, we do not know well the implications, or the deep meaning of what are reading. One get something of the meaning, but one risk also to understand wrongly some passages, or some commentaries. Then, we need to have calm and start reasoning the meaning of some part, or some phrases. Then, there is something contradictory between what some authors are saying and what is the hidden essence of the question beneath the words written. In this case, this book of David is a great book over this important question. Perhaps it is not such important, but I was very interested in this topic. I was going to copy some paragraphs on the first part of the book over the different words that can be translated as "love", such as "erós", "agapé", "pothos" and "himeros". But to copy this, I need see if there is a minimal interest for this book. In case that someone would show interest for this book by making questions or doing comments I would react by posting more information over this book. This post is meant only for people that is interested in increasing their knowledge on this topic. In the book is solved a common misunderstood concept about the love of boys being underage boys. It is not the case. The problem with the word "pais", that has been translated as a boy is the same as in English, a boy has not a determined age. It can be a boy from 10 or 12 years of age till twenty-something. Other problems with age, till very recently, were that the Greeks had not calendar, and their age was computed as the age of their graduation in the gymnasium, when he started his life as a young soldier at age like 17 or 18. And this year of graduation was named by one of the 42 heroes of Ancient History. Then, the age in years were never expressed. Then, each Greek City state had their own ways of computing time, by means of Kings or rulers. It was quite a puzzle to determine Greek historical times according to the Roman Calendar.