BDSM and feminism.

[Nicomorphinist]

It's cause it's acceptable. As soon as someone starts a pegging thread all hell will break loose. Until then, enjoy the mediocre.

ta-ta

What do people think about pegging, by the way? I have heard of schools of thought which do not see it as a big deal, another which sees it at or near the bottom of the S & M continuum, or BDSM continuum (which may very well be a set of Cartesian co-ordinates instead of a single line for a continuum), others that anal sex, vanilla and otherwise, is what it is and the cylinder being used to do the deed could be any number of things. Pegging and related adventures, appear to be quite popular in the ostensibly straight, bi, and lesbian communities. Perhaps because there are zero to one Towers of Power involved, whereas gay men generally have one Cotto Salami ICBM a piece to bring to the party.

Others find anal sex objectionable ipso facto and categorically, and there would be different opinions as to how pegging and dildoes impact on the health matters -- some think this kind of thing is a big problem from a public/pubic health standpoint . . . I would think that the ability to put a dildo in an autoclave and/or use concentrated bleach and other disinfectants on it is a positive from the health standpoint.

Alternatively, there are folks who say that pegging and other such things known collectively and somewhat jocularly by all manner of folks as buttcrime, are good for everybody since the whole thing leads to more understanding amongst the various communities of people and that, at least in some cultures, 5 to 33 per cent of men are, to some extent, Wild For Weenie, something like 1.5-2.25 on the Kinsey Scale . . . a counterpoint is that driving down the Hershey highway has a limited appeal to people of all orientations for various reasons, and it actually looks like people from all groups (with the probable exception of non-strap-on-wearing lesbians) have experimented with it, even if it just trying out anal beads or improvised erotic devices, that a similar percentage of members thereof experimented with the whole thing. . . .

I honestly don't know -- that particular hobby and subcategory of recreation do not really turn my crank, and unlike with drugs, I have no desire to do something of that type as a box-ticking exercise like when I have tried out dimethylthiambutene, diampromide and other uncommon drugs, nor have any the ladies over the years been interested, ostensibly, as it never even came up . . . I am not sure if pegging is a useful Miners' Canary for LGBT+ civil & human rights -- as were sodomy laws in the United States when they were challenged and went down in the 1980s -- in a locale or amongst a given group of people . . . for one thing, it may be too specific a measure, sort of hairsplitting, and also statistically it would seem that, given the size of each community, the absolute numeric majority of people who do it could be ostensible and public straight men (or WfW folks who don't know it yet) , any number of whom could be Men [who have] Sex [with] Men after all. Then there is a conundrum which to my knowledge was not been formally studied: how many lesbian couples does one think may do pegging all the time or often?

It just takes a minute
And you won't feel any pain
The feeling's indescribable
Much more so than draining the main vein
You won't have to see the doctor
If you do it right
Everybody says they like it
Though it makes some couples fight

A back door man for the ladies
Saddlebacking is family planning cubed
Nobody ever got pregnant that way
So it's 5000 times as cool
And if you're a fellow Wild For Weenie
Then you're in like Flynn for sure
You'll be the life of the party always
For stress, the blues, exhaustion it's a old time cure

I know you won't refuse
Because there are so many folks to do
So take this Craigslist posting and welcome to . . .

Refrain:
Operation Buttcrime
A motley crew rising and working overtime
Operatiion Buttcrime
Piss off the fundy fruitbats
We'll see who wins the debate this time

Look on the Internet
And cipher out
Just exactly what to do
If you have a Butt Harp
You're already halfway there
Don't do just one if you can handle two
Wait by the phone
Someone is coming
To bring you the Foaming Beef Probe that you need
Just keep your Fucksaw on medium
Or your rectum will always bleed

Refrain
Refrain

UPDATE: Northwestern President Condemns Sex Toy Demo

UPDATE: Northwestern President Condemns Sex Toy Demo

www.huffpost.com

 

[w01fg4ng]

I am not sure if pegging is a useful Miners' Canary for LGBT+ civil & human rights

It's not. You and OP are the only ones poorly attempting to tie sexuality (or sex acts) and politics together.

No one else here really gives a shit to even attempt to entertain this argument of BDSM and feminism.

 

[Meth novice 79]

The feminists I know would knock some c*^t out if he tried anything remotely like BDSM on them

Feminists annoy me.
What if I didn’t want to work, raise the kids AND take care of the house as well.
What if I WANTED to stay home, bake cookies and shave my legs and stuff?
And I happen to like it when guys open the door for me.

Feminism’s a rort to make us girls work harder

And BDSM. That shits just weird.

 

[Olivia Nicole]

Secretary is equally as poor as 50 Shades of Grey.

I suggest you watch Un chant d'amour (The Song of Love) or Salò: 120 Days of Sodom.

This is my favourite

 

[Nicomorphinist]

It's not. You and OP are the only ones poorly attempting to tie sexuality (or sex acts) and politics together.

No one else here really gives a shit to even attempt to entertain this argument of BDSM and feminism.

That was my point

I think that the noise from some factions of the movement about anything and everything having to do with sex is a waste of energy, a diversion, divisive within the movement, and makes it hard to appeal to sympathisers . . . who knows if it is done on purpose and by whom.

 

[w01fg4ng]

the noise from some factions of the movement

When I have a bowel movement sometimes it makes a lot of noise. Is this what you mean?

 

[Nicomorphinist]

The feminists I know would knock some c*^t out if he tried anything remotely like BDSM on them

Feminists annoy me.
What if I didn’t want to work, raise the kids AND take care of the house as well.
What if I WANTED to stay home, bake cookies and shave my legs and stuff?
And I happen to like it when guys open the door for me.

Feminism’s a rort to make us girls work harder

And BDSM. That shits just weird.

There are factions of the movement which are not all about antagonising people nor aiming to change the situation by picking up and emulating, arguably, all the worst things men do . . . whether women do or should know better and it makes it worse is another debate . . .

It is almost comparing apples and lemons -- there are at least a half dozen feminist critiques of the whole thing, some of them diametrically opposed to the others . . empowerment, degradation & control, free choice, lack of free choice, patriarchy, a Marxist view or two, various quasi-Focauldian interpretations . . .

But I suppose BDSM in all its permutations is just like anything else in that there are probably a lot people who give the power dynamics, para-political and philosophical angles little to no thought -- they just want to get off. Yes, I suppose a few people who use this hobby as a cover for anything ranging from redirecting aggression which their spouse or whomever would not tolerate at any level, all the way to building a strongly vetted group of people able to assist in any number of clandestine or semi-clandestine activities, as has been suggested about various other counter-culture folks since the beginning of time it seems. It makes sense in some cases like the Juggalos vis-à-vis small-scale freelance pharmacists plying their trade, though Utah designating the whole Juggalo movement as a Racketeer Influenced & Corrupt Organisation at the state level seems a bit over the top. At the other end, the Satanic Ritual Abuse moral panic of the 1980s seems to have been almost completely illusory and contrived. To what end I never understood.

And in the final analysis, I think the answer to the original question may be something along the lines there being no intersectionality involved because there just is no real ideological content -- after all, is there really a Marxian socialist, anarchist, classical conservative, neo-liberal, Green, Christian Democrat, Social Democrat, agrarian, reactionary, radical, regionalist, Thatcherite, Communist, National Bolshevik, anarchist, anarcho-syndicalist, or far Right or Left way to use electrodes or a Cat-O-Nine-Tails? I think not, but then again, I have never knowingly been within 50 metres of a Cat-O-Nine-Tails and other such things, so I admit I could be incorrect

 

[Nicomorphinist]

When I have a bowel movement sometimes it makes a lot of noise. Is this what you mean?

That is entirely possible, yes . . . it depends upon whom one asks who exactly most closely resembles the Polterscheiße, of course. Like the Dworkin faction and the Paglia crowd don't really like each other . . .

 

[w01fg4ng]

all the worst things men do

Flatulence is normal bro, don't beat yourself up.

 

[Meth novice 79]

There are factions of the movement which are not all about antagonising people nor aiming to change the situation by picking up and emulating, arguably, all the worst things men do . . . whether women do or should know better and it makes it worse is another debate . . .

It is almost comparing apples and lemons -- there are at least a half dozen feminist critiques of the whole thing, some of them diametrically opposed to the others . . empowerment, degradation & control, free choice, lack of free choice, patriarchy, a Marxist view or two, various quasi-Focauldian interpretations . . .

But I suppose BDSM in all its permutations is just like anything else in that there are probably a lot people who give the power dynamics, para-political and philosophical angles little to no thought -- they just want to get off. Yes, I suppose a few people who use this hobby as a cover for anything ranging from redirecting aggression which their spouse or whomever would not tolerate at any level, all the way to building a strongly vetted group of people able to assist in any number of clandestine or semi-clandestine activities, as has been suggested about various other counter-culture folks since the beginning of time it seems. It makes sense in some cases like the Juggalos vis-à-vis small-scale freelance pharmacists plying their trade, though Utah designating the whole Juggalo movement as a Racketeer Influenced & Corrupt Organisation at the state level seems a bit over the top. At the other end, the Satanic Ritual Abuse moral panic of the 1980s seems to have been almost completely illusory and contrived. To what end I never understood.

And in the final analysis, I think the answer to the original question may be something along the lines there being no intersectionality involved because there just is no real ideological content -- after all, is there really a Marxian socialist, anarchist, classical conservative, neo-liberal, Green, Christian Democrat, Social Democrat, agrarian, reactionary, radical, regionalist, Thatcherite, Communist, National Bolshevik, anarchist, anarcho-syndicalist, or far Right or Left way to use electrodes or a Cat-O-Nine-Tails? I think not, but then again, I have never knowingly been within 50 metres of a Cat-O-Nine-Tails and other such things, so I admit I could be incorrect

People just instinctively like to stick others into neat little categorical boxes so they can better define (or is the word judge) them.

I read about 5 pages of that shades of gray book and thought ‘how the hell did this become so famous? My 8 year old could have written it better) then I learned the authors husband is a movie director
There is NO way that book became so popular on its own merit.
Buggered if I know what happened there but it really doesn’t belong in modern society.

And I think you are right about feminism being a counter balance. The world had been dominated by men for such a long time, we were long overdue to stand again. (I still don’t wanna go to fn work tho lol)

Though that’s come around before too if you think ancient paganistic religions who worshipped Goddesses in all their womanly glory like ‘venus’
It’s all quite circular and mundane in the end.

We argue back and forth over this ‘right’ and that ‘movement’ pointlessly getting nowhere while there are others in the world who can’t even feed their children, or who’s wives were blown up in a war yesterday.

We Finally got around to legalising gay marriage in Aus this year (now before anyone tries to eat my face, I AGREE LOVE IS LOVE AND KNOWS NO GENDER) we all celebrated, partied for a few days then went back to work.
I think I know maybe 2 couples who have chosen to marry now they can.
The rest say why do we need our relationship validated by a church that condemns us (so true) So WHY DID WE JUST SPEND 8 years and 40 million dollars on a referendum for it then?

 

[Nicomorphinist]

Flatulence is normal bro, don't beat yourself up.

It is a renewable resource too, with all the methane, some ethane, and up to 7 per cent hydrogen -- one of these days, people will have a hose which they can stick up their arsehole to power their car, probably by some variant of the Wanker engine

 

[w01fg4ng]

ok boomer

 

[Nicomorphinist]

People just instinctively like to stick others into neat little categorical boxes so they can better define (or is the word judge) them.

I read about 5 pages of that shades of gray book and thought ‘how the hell did this become so famous? My 8 year old could have written it better) then I learned the authors husband is a movie director
There is NO way that book became so popular on its own merit.
Buggered if I know what happened there but it really doesn’t belong in modern society.

And I think you are right about feminism being a counter balance. The world had been dominated by men for such a long time, we were long overdue to stand again. (I still don’t wanna go to fn work tho lol)

Though that’s come around before too if you think ancient paganistic religions who worshipped Goddesses in all their womanly glory like ‘venus’
It’s all quite circular and mundane in the end.

We argue back and forth over this ‘right’ and that ‘movement’ pointlessly getting nowhere while there are others in the world who can’t even feed their children, or who’s wives were blown up in a war yesterday.

We Finally got around to legalising gay marriage in Aus this year (now before anyone tries to eat my face, I AGREE LOVE IS LOVE AND KNOWS NO GENDER) we all celebrated, partied for a few days then went back to work.
I think I know maybe 2 couples who have chosen to marry now they can.
The rest say why do we need our relationship validated by a church that condemns us (so true) So WHY DID WE JUST SPEND 8 years and 40 million dollars on a referendum for it then?

From, if nothing else, a technical proficiency standpoint, I cannot imagine how the book got past the editors and so forth. It is barely readable, and just poorly done. And it is not like the general subject matter cannot be made into readable and hard-hitting prose . . . for example, one could write a roman à clef in the manner of E L Doctorow's Ragtime about the Fox News Channel situation in the US with Bill O'Reilly and many others including the founder of the operation . . . they could call it The Contract, The Camera & The Cock of the Lord or something like that.

I can remember the earlier (the first same-sex nuptials I think were performed by the pastor of a Metropolitan Community Church in the Bay Area of California somewhere in 1970, this may have also been the first attempt at working through the courts on it; the case was summarily thrown out by a judge if I am not mistaken) discussions about same-sex marriage which made it sound like there were, from the beginning in the 1920s, at least three different positions on it within the politically active LG&B community and its civil rights movement as it was called a bit later (I believe there were separate gay rights and lesbian rights movements which largely fused in the early 1980s) with the big one in the 1960s, 1970s, and much of the 1980s being essentially a New Left grouping which, along with the anarchists and fellow travellers argued that marriage was something that was a relic of the not-so-good old days whilst a more conservative faction was interested in integrating into mainstream society so marriage was large part of it for economic, political. cultural, and other reasons.

I was always of the opinion that marriage is a matter for religious or fraternal organisations, and for those who are not affiliated with one for whatever reason, there is the County Clerk or magistrate. When I first heard of the issue in 1991 I figured that it was already legal under the XIV. Amendment and it sounds like that is what the Supreme Court said to some extent in their ruling on this, and at any case this would be a good stopping off point for the government to get out of the marriage business already.

The rhetoric about marriage being weakened by, well, all of those people who colour outside of lines, as a lot of Religious Right people had been saying since the 1970s is not really all that logical. Weakened how? I would think that ostensibly vanilla heterosexual couples and others have been doing a pretty good job of that for who knows how long. Is there anything that would rejuvenate and strengthen anything more than people who cannot do it trying very hard to be able to do it?

I don't know if anyone knows what exactly it means that both men and women get some or more on the side well over half the time, or the divorce rate has on the institution of marriage in general, and there is variance from country to country and culture to culture, but most assuredly what really weakens any institution is to not take it seriously and people going into it with the wrong attitude and the wrong reasons, like getting married to prove that one is not gay, because all of their siblings are married, or proving that they are not a loser . . . and worst of all cases where the intention is not about true love and building society but rather power and exclusion and stasis -- essentially jealousy and coercion, which reminds one of the line from The Rubiyat of Omar Khayyam "Marriage is an institution, and who wants to be put in an institution?" Then on top this there is gold-digging, revenge, oneuppersonship and other reasons for getting hitched . . . also including going to Las Vegas and getting blackout drunk and/or smashed on benzodiazepines and trundling down to the wedding chapel . . .

Nation’s Sexual Degenerates Impatient For Gay Marriage Slippery Slope To Kick In

WASHINGTON—Assuming they’d be stripping away the moral fabric of society almost immediately after the Supreme Court’s 2015 decision to legalize same-sex marriage, the nation’s degenerates reported Monday that they have grown impatient for the gay marriage slippery slope to kick in. “We were...

www.theonion.com

The Gay Marriage Debate

Last week, Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act, which permits states not to recognize the legality of gay marriages performed in other states, and clearly defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman. What do you think of same-sex marriage?

politics.theonion.com

Vermont OKs Gay Marriage

Last week, Vermont became the first state to legally recognize same-sex marriages. What do you think about this historic legislation?

politics.theonion.com