X-From-Line: nobody Tue Jan 4 12:25:55 2000 Newsgroups: uk.people.bdsm Subject: Re: "Fetishes" Video alert References: <87aemnmh5w.fsf@hedonism.demon.co.uk> From: Paul Crowley Date: 04 Jan 2000 12:25:55 +0000 Message-ID: <87n1qmuip8.fsf@hedonism.demon.co.uk> X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.5/XEmacs 20.4 - "Emerald" Lines: 64 Xref: hedonism.demon.co.uk misc-news:897 X-Gnus-Article-Number: 897 Tue Jan 4 12:25:55 2000 mrbond@netcomuk.co.uk (Steve Cassidy) writes: > I thought that the way bethnick found such a strategy somehow too > personally demeaning to consider, was very revealing - of > him/her. Rahter be thought of as jolly smart but hiding something, > instead of dumb and not worth looking into? Interesting set of > priorities, that. You seem to think that being polite is someone else's job. In fact, it's everyone's job to be polite if intelligent debate is to be furthered. It's not hard to work out that this was uncalled for. > because like I say, nobody who reads quality press wants to read about > sex. The MistressL story about being eaten alive by the Cosmo set might be > newsworthy somewhere like the Spectator, but they won't come this way. Sex > is associated with the NotW and Sky: this puts it out of the reach of the > quality press. The Scotsman covered a Scottish fetish club a while ago, and I know the Guardian has covered bisexuality quite a few times. What I'd really like to see is an article with a better spin than "these fantastically wacky people are perfectly prosaic really". I know that if I were to appear in such an article, it would be "By day, Paul Crowley is a computer programmer, but by night, he dresses up in women's clothing and enters the fantasy world of the fetish club". None of this would be untrue, but the impression it leaves is wholly inaccurate. I can't stand the "SM=fantasy dreamland, computers=prosaic real world" attitude: computers are the biggest fantasy dreamland ever imagined, housing extraordinary virtual constructs with only tenuous links to physical reality, while SM sex is something I really do, in real life, with people who are physically present. I'm not leading any kind of dual life: both my enjoyment of SM sex and my fascination with making computers do interesting stuff are real, integrated parts of who I am all the time, day and night. Unfortunately, that's generally the spin the *quality* press want to put on us; worse, they think it's tolerant. (irrelevant thinks: I wonder if you could work out a scene based on the world of "Tron"? They all wear skintight outfits...) > > It doesn't seem completely unreasonable to hope that we could use > > resources like this newsgroup to band together to force good standards > > on them; for many of the things they want, there aren't so many of us > > that they can keep just moving on to another sucker each time the > > previous one gets a clue. > > Umm, I beg to differ. Andy Link (Mostly Harmless) got a prize kicking out > of his media contacts, who *specifically* targeted him *because they knew > he was the new kid on the block*... How many new fetish clubs a year are there? It wouldn't be impractical for us to send a press advice pack to every single one, especially since it won't be long before they're all online. > I leave it up to the less hotheaded to achieve a synthesis. I'm no more > Kissinger than Kissinger is Alice Cooper, if you see what I mean. No, I don't see what you mean. And keeping the debate reasonable and useful is everyone's job, including yours. -- __ \/ o\ paul@hedonism.demon.co.uk Got a Linux strategy? \ / /\__/ Paul Crowley http://www.hedonism.demon.co.uk/paul/ /~\