(deleted) (97)

In your last couple of posts you've come up with some very good points. You mention that politicians will say "I'm not ...phobic I just don't think you can consent to *these* activities". Of course we all know that safe sane consent is the most fundamental difference between BDSM and abuse. You're spot on though, some politicians will say that. But some won't. Some will find themselves questioning whether they have the "phobia" we have suggested to them deep down and will want to go about proving that they don't. It will make them more inclined to listen and once that has started it will eventually snowball accross the board. Backlash and other organisations will gain a stronger foothold to try and help educate people on SSC, to recognise we are not dangerous, that we are intelligent and that we are a morally upright bunch that people don't need to be afraid of.

This isn't a quick fix, it's not going to stop the violent porn laws and it's not going to change perceptions overnight. But in the long run it is a positive path to walk.

You mentioned that books, documentaries and other media are the way forward. I totally agree 100%. I tell you what though, call a couple of figureheads Fetiphobic or talk to a few radio producers and they will pounce on the oppourtunity to potentially be the first to cover a new "rights movement".

Finally on a sort of side note, at Imperial Freshers Fare this year they were handing out fliers on how to have gay sex. The fliers contained all the standard information on oral, anal and mutual masturbation but it also showed safe use of nipple clamps, gags, dildos, restraints and asphixiation etc. An asphixiation case, remember was what started this entire "violent porn" thing rolling. Yet clearly it's acceptable for homosexuals. Nobody batted an eyelid. Why? Because to say it's unacceptable for homosexuals would be homophobic. I thought that was quite interesting.

Tuam matrem feci,
Patrick
IndelibleMarker

Slightly off topic this, but this isn't a positive thing. People do have different feelings about these extremely emotive words but getting "cross" because someones feelings differ from yours and because they consider their last "boyfriend" their last "Dom" certainly can't be regarded as tollerant.

I am both a Dom and a boyfriend. They don't have to be mutually exclusive. In fact I would go as far to say that I think a Dom has even more responsibility to support, protect and care for his "sub".

Tuam matrem feci,
Patrick
IndelibleMarker

It's a bit like someone saying "I'm not a racist, but-" and then making a racist comment. Or people who are homophobic will always deny they are homophobic. That's still better than when people say those views without having to fear it may make them look racist or homophobic. The trick I think is to push people onto the defence, until they are shown up as being x-phobic after all.

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/extreme-images/

Edited 7 Oct 07, 8:45 PM by emark

My feelings are this. If someone calls their ex "their old Dom" I do feel cross. I think "oh ffs" and roll my eyes internally. I do not tell them off, I do not SAY anything. I just merely think less of them. And no, it ISN'T very tolerant. And that's my point. I'm very kink positive but intolerant of things that aren't my bag.

And that makes me x-aphobic by your definition. And that's ridiculous because I'm a massive pervert.

So your word is a bad idea.

And let's do a thought exp. You try to make people careful and (sorry for bringing this up) "PC" when talking about bdsm, you invent a word, you make people feel bad for their feelings about kinky activities, you make radio producers and politicians feel actual GUILT for their policies.... and then someone like me comes along and stuffs it all up by piping up "BUT I DON"T LIKE THAT WORD/PRACTICE!" and then all the onside vanilla people think "what was I feeling guilty for? They're all a bunch of loonies"

BUT this isn't the way to do it!

Edited 7 Oct 07, 8:52 PM by z12345

Heh no, I wouldn't call you "x-aphobic" because it wouldn't progress my cause to label you as one.

Many gay men don't like giving/taking, or don't like lesbians, or don't like girly/butch gay guys. They don't call each other homophobic because it wouldn't aid their case, they just have different preferences within their scene.

They call other people outside the gay scene homophobic if they speak out against them in order to create a reaction which will help them further their argument more effectively.

Tuam matrem feci,
Patrick
IndelibleMarker

I don't think that's an argument against the idea - we have the same issue of people who say they feel certain things about homosexuality, but don't act on it, therefore they shouldn't be considered homophobic.

We also have divisions with other things - for example, gay people getting annoyed at people who go on "gay pride" marches, claiming they give a bad image to gay people. Is it homophobic if a gay person complains about gay pride people? Is it homophobic if a straight person does so? I don't know, but I don't think these complications make the word "homophobic" useless or pointless.

I've already seen problems on these forums where some ppl seem to support the violent porn law. But I don't think that means the violent porn law is okay! I still argue against anyone who supports such a law, whether they're on these forums, or someone completely vanilla.

The point is I wouldn't accuse such a person as being fetiphobic, because obviously that's not helpful. The word is just a tool - something to use to make people less willing to oppose BDSM.

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/extreme-images/

Edited 7 Oct 07, 9:00 PM by emark

You chose to call me "not very tolerant" because of my like/dislike of certain words but not of other contributers for theirs. Because yours and ours are different.

And you'll chose to call vanilla people an invented cuss for having the same views as me. But not me because we have "the same" sexuality.

I'm sorry to piss on your chips and all. But PLEASE don't do this. Raise bdsmjoy by showing positive examples, don't create bdsmguilt by telling people off for their feelings.

i agree with this. there are many people within bdsm who have problems with accepting fellow bdsmers kinks. i contributed to a thread the other day on scat where a few ic members referred to this activity as revolting, stomach turning etc. that's just amongst our own.

i personally don't feel my rights are affected in anyway by how i choose to get my kicks and can't see this changing anytime soon. it's true that there is a need to make people aware that bdsm is a healthy activity which has many positives side, but where do we start. what about the women who thinks doggy style is perverted?

"you dont ride a boat, you row a boat" "oh boat, i thought you said goat?"

The vanilla people we'd be talking to don't have the same views as you. Most don't even know what a Dom or sub are. They think it's all S&M. You say you're not into S&M. Neither am I, I'm into the BD and D/s aspects but politicians don't currently know or care about the difference. An x-phobia word would make them sit up, take notice and learn the differences so they could make more rational decitions based on fact rather than perception.

Showing BDSMjoy is a lovely ideology, but unfortunately people don't listen to positive things very much. They put them to one side and ignore them for someone else to worry about.

Tuam matrem feci,
Patrick
IndelibleMarker

Edited 7 Oct 07, 9:10 PM by IndelibleMarker