RE: Openness

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Openness

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Openness

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Openness - 1/13/2008 10:56:37 AM

Rover

Posts: 2634
Joined: 6/28/2004
Status: offline

First, I would suggest to you that your experiences and county are unique (you even said it's unique within your state). So perhaps the problem is less social/religious conservatives than it is the local society in which you live.

Second, I would not call these people social/religious conservatives. I am a conservative that travels the country, and they are not anything like the people I know and meet. They are, however, quite a bit like the small, isolated (like your little garden spot) social/religious zealots that I see on television and read about in the papers. They're extremists.

I don't think it's fair to equate extremist zealots with all social/religious conservatives, any more than it's fair to equate extremist zealots with Islam, gays, athiests, etc.

John

_____________________________

"Man's mind stretched to a new idea never goes back to its original dimensions."

Sri da Avabhas

(in reply to Amaros)

Profile

Post #: 41

RE: Openness - 1/13/2008 11:10:11 AM

KindLadyGrey

Posts: 358
Joined: 11/6/2007
Status: offline

quote:

Oh, and I fail to see how one is living a life of pretense simply because they choose to keep an air of privacy around important things, like their sexual preference. Please, give me a break. I find it more pretentious to be shoving your preferences in people's faces who have not asked.

First, thanks to LuckyAlbatross for saying most of what I was going to say in reply to this already.

Second, for me, and for many, Polamory/BDSM are not just about sex. "Coming out" is not about saying "Hey mom, last night I bent this boy over and whipped him with a riding crop, then I fucked him with a strapon, tied him to a bed, and dribbled hot wax all over his chest!" It's more about saying "This is [insert boy's name here], I love him, and if you see me slapping him around a little, it's because he likes it, not because I'm abusive!"

It's not about the sex at all. It's about having relationships that are obviously different and not having to hide the nature of those relationships. Animus Rex's hilarious reply to the OP above illustrates why this is important: nobody says "Hey, I need to tell you all that I am straight and have normal sex!" If your buddy flirts with a girl at a bar, and the next day all his buddies ask him if he hooked up, there is nothing strange there at all, it is A-OKAY. If I flirt with someone at a bar, and manage to hook up, most 'nilla folk are going to shy away from talking about it because I'm married and it's WRONG. Why shouldn't I be able to celebrate my sexuality too? I'm openly poly, my husband knows everything I do.

I just want the right to talk about my relationships the same way everyone else does. Silence is oppression. If you let them convince you to shut up and hide then you are only tacitly accepting their judgement that your lifestyle is somehow less valid than theirs.

(in reply to Amaros)

Profile

Post #: 42

RE: Openness - 1/13/2008 11:10:43 AM

Amaros

Posts: 1363
Joined: 7/25/2005
Status: offline

Perhaps not, I don't paint everybody with the same brush, and yet the the Justice department prosecutes alternative bussinesses, people lose their jobs and are verbally abused, people are beaten and even killed, constitutional ammendments are proposed, certain sexual practices are outlawed, etc. There is a distinct undercurrent here, and the Dominionist/Reconstructionist movement is very real, and has a lot more political influence than you might imagine - it's very hush hush, since if they get explicit about it, as you say, even many religious conservatives are taken aback, people who, like your average libertarian, I have no deep issues with.

I do have an issue with these people and they bear watching, as their stated intent is to replace the constitutional republic with a biblical theocracy, they are in fact, on the terrorist watch list: they're the people who bomb family planning clinics and assassinate physicians.

Google reconstructionism, domininism, predispensationalism, and Joels army, it's part of the neo-con power base, and the neo-con's pander to them for votes.

< Message edited by Amaros -- 1/13/2008 11:12:30 AM >

(in reply to Rover)

Profile

Post #: 43

RE: Openness - 1/13/2008 11:27:02 AM

Amaros

Posts: 1363
Joined: 7/25/2005
Status: offline

"Christians have an obligation, a mandate, a commission, a holy responsibility to reclaim the land for Jesus Christ -- to have dominion in civil structures, just as in every other aspect of life and godliness. But it is dominion we are after. Not just a voice. It is dominion we are after. Not just influence. It is dominion we are after. Not just equal time. It is dominion we are after. World conquest. That's what Christ has commissioned us to accomplish. We must win the world with the power of the Gospel. And we must never settle for anything less... Thus, Christian politics has as its primary intent the conquest of the land -- of men, families, institutions, bureaucracies, courts, and governments for the Kingdom of Christ." (From The Changing of the Guard: Biblical Principles for Political Action by George Grant, published in 1987 by Dominion Press)

http://www.brucegourley.com/christiannation/theocracy.htm

Seems pretty explicit to me - are you aware of how popular the "Left Behind" series is? It might be a delusional fantasy, a tempest in a teapot, then again, these things have been known to boil over with the right trigger - nobody really expected Khomeini to succeed as wildly as he did - I suspect it would be harder to pull off here, but that doesn't mean they won't try, no?

< Message edited by Amaros -- 1/13/2008 11:28:45 AM >

(in reply to Amaros)

Profile

Post #: 44

RE: Openness - 1/13/2008 12:36:52 PM

batshalom

Posts: 1990
Joined: 9/17/2007
Status: offline

--Fast Reply

I've never really hidden it but neither do I initiate conversation about it. If someone asks, I answer if the person is close enough to me and isn't just a stranger being nosey, but I never talk about my private kink / sexual life with curious vanillas (unless it's "the girls" and we've had a couple of cocktails).

< Message edited by batshalom -- 1/13/2008 12:37:40 PM >

(in reply to Amaros)

Profile

Post #: 45

RE: Openness - 1/13/2008 2:17:03 PM

DesFIP

Posts: 25191
Joined: 11/25/2007
From: Apple County NY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: fluffyswitch

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

By being open to your mother and not your father, you are putting a wedge in their relationship. Either she is open to her partner, or she has to lie to him. And you did this why?

being in that position, i came out only to my mom because she may not like it but wouldn't necessarily disown me. my father on the other hand, has some very strong views on the other queers/kinks/kinky queers like me in my family and since i started questioning/came out in college i would have preferred not to be disowned when i still needed parental support. and my mom actually told me not to tell my father because my father also has a huge mouth and everyone in my family would find out including the people controlling my tuition money.

there are reasons for doing this, and not to flame, but unless you've actually had to deal with it, it's not your place to judge. again not trying to flame, but it's a lot more complicated than it may seem.

By no means. In order for you to feel better about yourself you deliberately chose to make your mother feel conflicted. You could have not told her and she wouldn't have been put in the position she is. You chose to be selfish at her expense.

What was so important about this that you couldn't have simply presented your relationship as one in which neither partner did things, or decided things, arbitrarily but instead were so respectful of each other that you don't make decisions unless you've consulted him first.

_____________________________

Slave to laundry

Cynical and proud of it!

(in reply to fluffyswitch)

Profile

Post #: 46

RE: Openness - 1/13/2008 2:21:26 PM

sexyred1

Posts: 8998
Joined: 8/9/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KindLadyGrey

quote:

Oh, and I fail to see how one is living a life of pretense simply because they choose to keep an air of privacy around important things, like their sexual preference. Please, give me a break. I find it more pretentious to be shoving your preferences in people's faces who have not asked.

First, thanks to LuckyAlbatross for saying most of what I was going to say in reply to this already.

Second, for me, and for many, Polamory/BDSM are not just about sex. "Coming out" is not about saying "Hey mom, last night I bent this boy over and whipped him with a riding crop, then I fucked him with a strapon, tied him to a bed, and dribbled hot wax all over his chest!" It's more about saying "This is [insert boy's name here], I love him, and if you see me slapping him around a little, it's because he likes it, not because I'm abusive!"

It's not about the sex at all. It's about having relationships that are obviously different and not having to hide the nature of those relationships. Animus Rex's hilarious reply to the OP above illustrates why this is important: nobody says "Hey, I need to tell you all that I am straight and have normal sex!" If your buddy flirts with a girl at a bar, and the next day all his buddies ask him if he hooked up, there is nothing strange there at all, it is A-OKAY. If I flirt with someone at a bar, and manage to hook up, most 'nilla folk are going to shy away from talking about it because I'm married and it's WRONG. Why shouldn't I be able to celebrate my sexuality too? I'm openly poly, my husband knows everything I do.

I just want the right to talk about my relationships the same way everyone else does. Silence is oppression. If you let them convince you to shut up and hide then you are only tacitly accepting their judgement that your lifestyle is somehow less valid than theirs.

Sorry; I don't care how you are painting it; whether it is about sex or not, it is still incredibly intrusive to other people to thrust your intimate behavior on them. This "silence is oppression" crap may be politically correct for you, but for me, I don't feel the least bit oppressed by society or judged by anyone. I simply feel like valuing my privacy and intimate life.

(in reply to KindLadyGrey)

Profile

Post #: 47

RE: Openness - 1/13/2008 2:48:24 PM

LadyLolly

Posts: 140
Joined: 5/21/2005
Status: offline

Still, another poster had a point - consent is a big corner stone to this lifestyle. A person's personal rights usually terminates at another's nose. If we can insist on our right to courtesy and tolerance we also have to be willing to extend it. If the origional poster's intent is to shock his father, force a confrontation and shove an alternative lifestyle down the family's throat, effectively staging a dramatic scene (and literally showing his arse)  to disrupt what is supposed to be a close family time - there are other issues going on here than simply "wanting to be open and honest" about a lifestyle choice.

I agree it sucks that people that don't fit into the narrow chute of what some self appointed watchdogs of "morality" choose to define (and often don't follow themselves) risk thier jobs, thier families, thier futures, sometimes even thier lives. People fought and died for freedoms that WE are allowing, through apathy and fear, to steadily be eroded.

I choose to, and can afford the luxury of living my life openly. A disgruntled X outed me to my family years ago, and it was no big whoops - because it was consentual between adults. By the same token, intimate details are just that - intimate, and some people are privy, but the majority are not. There are appropriate times, places and audiences for things. I'm sure little johnny who suffers from chronic constapation is thrilled to death when he enjoys a good bowl movment - I don't necessarily want to be subjected to a 25 minute blow by blow account of how it went nor would I appreciate being forced to view the result in all it's glory. If some one is not comfortable, does not consent, is not interested - why would some one think they have a right to force the issue?. The 'nilla's who don't get it, don't approve, think it's wrong have just as much right to thier opinions and the validity of thier own chosen lifestyle choices (for themselves) - but if I don't want thier opinions thrust back at me...Poke a sleeping dog in the butt, liable to get bit.

Don't get me wrong. Not in the least slamming a lifestyle choice.   Just saying others have just as much right to not share an interest and if the folks you're insisting on sharing details with don't want it shared - why would you?   If you're asked about something, that's a different story - then it's your perogative to disclose however much you choose to - or not. Yes, we have every right to be accepted/tolerated how we are, have the consentual adult relationships we choose with whom we choose, dress how we choose, color our hair how we choose, etc, etc. but we cannot insist that we have our rights and yet deny others thier own or we are just as "bad" as "they" are.  Simple good manners go a long way in helping us all get along in spite of our differences.

(in reply to Amaros)

Profile

Post #: 48

RE: Openness - 1/13/2008 3:29:46 PM

KindLadyGrey

Posts: 358
Joined: 11/6/2007
Status: offline

sexyred, do you feel it is intrusive when a girlfriend talks about going out on a date with her boyfriend? Do you find it intrusive when a male friend of yours tells you about the hot chick he hooked up with last weekend? Do you find it intrusive when you see two people kissing in public? Do you find it intrusive when a man grabs a woman's ass on the dancefloor at a club?

Perhaps you want to argue that YOU do in fact find all of these things distasteful and intrusive, but the fact still remains that generally speaking they are all acceptable ways to express intimacy and sexuality in a public setting.

These are all vanilla expressions of sexuality that are perfectly commonplace and normal. What makes them any less intrusive than any expressions of poly/kink sexuality?

(in reply to sexyred1)

Profile

Post #: 49

RE: Openness - 1/13/2008 3:35:01 PM

EponasChylde

Posts: 65
Joined: 12/31/2007
Status: offline

I am open about just about every aspect of my life, and to just about everyone. I don't keep things secret from friends, family, or coworkers. I am me,and I'm proud of every thing about me, even my faults.

I always vowed to have no skeletons in my closet...My skeletons walk hand-in-hand with me down the street, and anyone who doesn't like them doesn't have to associate with me.

Anything worth doing is worth being proud of, IMO.

< Message edited by EponasChylde -- 1/13/2008 3:41:47 PM >

_____________________________

*aka geekygirl*

(in reply to fluffyswitch)

Profile

Post #: 50

RE: Openness - 1/13/2008 3:42:16 PM

Amaros

Posts: 1363
Joined: 7/25/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1

quote:

ORIGINAL: KindLadyGrey

quote:

Oh, and I fail to see how one is living a life of pretense simply because they choose to keep an air of privacy around important things, like their sexual preference. Please, give me a break. I find it more pretentious to be shoving your preferences in people's faces who have not asked.

First, thanks to LuckyAlbatross for saying most of what I was going to say in reply to this already.

Second, for me, and for many, Polamory/BDSM are not just about sex. "Coming out" is not about saying "Hey mom, last night I bent this boy over and whipped him with a riding crop, then I fucked him with a strapon, tied him to a bed, and dribbled hot wax all over his chest!" It's more about saying "This is [insert boy's name here], I love him, and if you see me slapping him around a little, it's because he likes it, not because I'm abusive!"

It's not about the sex at all. It's about having relationships that are obviously different and not having to hide the nature of those relationships. Animus Rex's hilarious reply to the OP above illustrates why this is important: nobody says "Hey, I need to tell you all that I am straight and have normal sex!" If your buddy flirts with a girl at a bar, and the next day all his buddies ask him if he hooked up, there is nothing strange there at all, it is A-OKAY. If I flirt with someone at a bar, and manage to hook up, most 'nilla folk are going to shy away from talking about it because I'm married and it's WRONG. Why shouldn't I be able to celebrate my sexuality too? I'm openly poly, my husband knows everything I do.

I just want the right to talk about my relationships the same way everyone else does. Silence is oppression. If you let them convince you to shut up and hide then you are only tacitly accepting their judgement that your lifestyle is somehow less valid than theirs.

Sorry; I don't care how you are painting it; whether it is about sex or not, it is still incredibly intrusive to other people to thrust your intimate behavior on them. This "silence is oppression" crap may be politically correct for you, but for me, I don't feel the least bit oppressed by society or judged by anyone. I simply feel like valuing my privacy and intimate life.

I agree, and I don't wear it on my sleeve, and I'm pretty much in the "don't ask, don't tell camp" - at the same time there is an issue if being outed for what is otherwise, perfectly legitimate and ethical social behavior is going to have genuine reprecussions for you: i.e., there may come a time when you are forced to defend yourself, and I don't see this as quite the same thing as flouting it - I have kids for instance, and I'd hate to see them discriminated against for my choices.

It would seem to be common sense to simply not pry if it's something you'd rather not be exposed to, but there is a distinct voyeuristic facet to protestant moral scrutiny, i.e., it's easier to discuss someone else's sexuality than it is to discuss your own, all while strongly dissaproving of it of course - I have to laugh, I mean you're really just talking dirty, your just doing it in a chickenshit kind of way, social conditioning can really make some people neurotic.

I find this to be an effective technique, I mean they don't actually know, right? It's just rumors and neither do I know them, and for all I know they could just be trying to deflect attention from what they're doing - this will often stop them in their tracks, or at the very least you can slip away while they are suffering their screaming psychotic break - technically, it's harrasment and you can get a restraining order if they go all Spanish Inquisition on you.

The real kicker here is that I'm typically forced to defend slutty vanilla practices, things as simple as birth control and sex education.

< Message edited by Amaros -- 1/13/2008 3:47:03 PM >

(in reply to sexyred1)

Profile

Post #: 51