“I read the NAMBLA [Bulletin] fairly regularly and I think it is one of the most intelligent discussions of sexuality I’ve ever found. I think before you start judging what NAMBLA is about, expose yourself to it and see what it is really about. What the issues they are really talking about, and deal with what’s really there rather than this demonized notion of guys running about trying to screw little boys. I would have been so much happier as an adolescent if NAMBLA had been around when I was 9, 10, 11, 12, 13.” — Samuel R. Delany, June 25, 1994.
There's certainly more to be found, and it gets considerably worse. He's not the only one in that era's sci fi author peer group either. Moira Greyland's account of her childhood with Marion Zimmer Bradley, her mother, is harrowing.A lot of sci-fi authors have 'weird sex' stories. Not only was it the sixties, they are sci-fi authors in the sixties, writing about alien sex and all kinds of out of the box thinking.
I could just as easily say, don't vote Republican, they have a large percentage of sex abusers in office. Or, don't be Catholic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Man/Boy_Love_As...
Allen Ginsberg was a member as well.
Reading this article, it makes me recall all the pop songs from the 80s which had lyrics like "...she's only seventeen!" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventeen_(Winger_song)). I don't think Winger was a member of NAMBLA.
To read and enjoy a book by him necessarily means I'm "supporting" everything he has ever supported, including in the past?
Why would it work that way?
(This is not meant to say anything either way on whether Delany "supports the sexual abuse of children". I suppose that's another transitive property of support... if I 'support' Delany who 'supports' NAMBLA which 'supports'... )
He has not changed that opinion, nor is he ever going to. And yes, if you support his work then I'm going to look at you funny, just like if you had a painting by a certain German politician on your wall - and that goes double when you try to dissemble what his beliefs actually are.
I hypothesize that the negative response of a surprising number of readers is due to tripping some kind of pro-LGBTQ+ support mental programming rather than their taking a principled stand in favor of advocating the rape of little boys. Nevertheless whether it’s a principled stand or a knee jerk reaction, anyone who experiences a negative emotional response to opposing child rape, same sex or otherwise, has a serious problem and should get help.
I find that overall hard to fully condemn the person for, vs to separate out those views from his work, as I've never seen anything about him personally acting that way himself with any boys. (Though you say there's more to be found,so... what is it?) I'm no doctor, but the "standard" media-presented look at a situation like that would probably be something like manifestations of trauma from those encounters at young ages combined with the other traumas of growing up gay in America at the time, which I largely file in the "bad but understandable and not actively harming others" bucket.