RE: Communication does not create "Community" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message

Apocalypso -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/27/2010 7:05:48 PM)

I think the dictionary definition of "community" is something of a red herring.  The argument from etymology is weak, otherwise we'd not use the word "nice" unless we were also calling someone "ignorant".  Unfortunately, the argument outlined in the OP seems to base itself on precisely that fallacy.

Sociologists haven't agreed on a single definition of "community", so we're not going to here.  The idea it's to do with geographical proximity is highly controversial, to say the least.  One of the most common definitions used is "a group of people with shared interests", in which case this forum definitely qualifies.   How significant that is depends on whether you consider BDSM an important enough commonality to create a strong community.  I don't really, but that has nothing to do with the online vs meatspace argument.  There is at least the elements of a community here, but there are forums out there that I think have a stronger community feel.  (Bunch of trolls they might be.  But the SomethingAwful goons are definitely a community.  Ditto anonymous, who even worked cohesively in the fight with the Church of Scientology).

I suspect some of this may come down to fear of the future.  In my view, important technological changes tend to come in spurts as opposed to evolving slowly.  And we're in that kind of epoch at the moment.  (AI has already been developed.  I give it fifty years, at most, before we have an AI advanced enough that you genuinely can't tell it apart from interacting with a human being, at least not online).  As the old proverb goes, we live in interesting times.  And rapid shifts like this always leave some people behind.  And it's easier to dismiss the brave new future as silly, than it is to face the fact that the way you think the world works may be obsolete.  And that you may actually be a dinosaur.



LPslittleclip -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/27/2010 7:22:42 PM)

communicating in any relationship is very importaint. i have found that the modern tec gadgets have made it harder to have communication with otheres as ther is no face time and were constantly distracted by them even trained to respond to them much like pavlovs dogs were. just sending messages does not make comunicating it requires there to be intent behind the message transmitted and processing of it by the recipient andthen it needs to be discussed as to how the recipient understood it and how it relates to the dynamic at hand. otherwise all the messages are like blaring ads that make one want to ignore them.



Whiplashsmile4 -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/27/2010 9:34:07 PM)

BoiJen, I've only made it up to page two so far of this thread (will read through it some more after this post).

There are some big differences between a physical community and an online community, these differences should be apparent to anybody who sits and reflects for a moment about it.

I think the keyword here is "strangers" though. It's been mentioned hand and hand with the concept of online community. Just as we physically live in neighborhoods or communities of people, there are always strangers amoung us. There are strangers in real time communities. There are many strangers online as well. Hell, I actually know people like (DomiGuy, Lady Pact and others)better than some people living a few house up/down the street in the real time here. (sad ain't it?). None the less, I really don't know most of the people on here very well. To be honest, the number of people that I've met from CM and have gotten to know well is the number of fingers I have on my right hand. However, I've gotten to know them better through the phone, and even meeting in person.

None the less, Communication is key in getting to know somebody, along with interacting with them. How the hell can anybody get to know somebody without Communicating? without interaction?

A few years back, I push was coming to shove in a relationship. The proverbial partner with issues. Sweet as peach while sobber and crazy as hell when drinking. Needless to say, I had made some posts on here. Now, ironic is that I got an email from another Dom who read what I posted. He offered to talk voice and gave me his phone number. My point, is that it was something a little extraodinary for being all this online stuff. I called and we talked for awhile, was a good conversation. Now, normally he did not make it a practice to give out phone numbers to strangers, but he did to me. Why? Because he had read my posts for awhile and here and more less knew I was a real human being.

Taking a deep breath, I'm thinking about emails on the other side from people on here. Things with depth to it, human depth, very very human depth to it. In fact, the kind of stuff, you'd not expect to see posted out in the open on a message board. None the less, very real and extremely real.

To be honest with you, Collarme.com is community a bit like being in "High School". Just because we all are in the same building (website) does not mean there are not Clicks or Sub-Groups of people. These sub-groups is where people's true sense of community belongs. Being on Collarme, Myspace, Facebook or whatever does not mean you are part of any community. It's your small circle or group of people you interact with that's your "true social community". Some people go to such and such a Church every Sunday, and yet they only know a handful of people really well.

What I hate to say about groups of people, is that they are supportive in many good ways and also supportive in many bad ways. I'm sitting here pondering for a moment. Groups will find common enemys to attack, Groups will find common causes to support. However, and I sincerely hate to say this, most people involved in groups are afraid to Rock the Boat. Meaning they want to liked, accepted and valued by the other people in the group. The Group itself sort of becomes a bit of an authority figure. Groups of people can do great harm and can do some pretty amazing awesome great good.

As much as we (the mass human collective) like to think of us (us human beings as a whole) as being smart and intelligent, we (as species of living creatures) do some extremely mindless and dumb things. Groups and communities are only as good/bad as the people in the groups. Both the Social Group Dominants and the Social Group followers and yeah even those that want to be in the group. Many people like to think all us adults have left this kind of High Schoolish behavior behind us in a past life. The fact is, that this behavior is part of human behavior in general.

At times, Intelligence, knowledge, brain power, empathy or even common sense does not prevail. There are always heards of people, doing things that are pretty well.. just like a heard of cows. People following a heard. Mooooooo Mooooo Moooooo.. Perfectly fucked up idiots can become authority figures to these heards and some exceptionally great people can be leaders to these groups.

People generally tend to band together for a fight though. People when Band together attack and disband afterwards, and resume personal bickering between themselves.

Now, in regards to groups or communities of people, what is amazing are those groups or communities of people that actually do amazing things for one another, be it time of need or help build each other up. Extremely constructive Energy. I think this is where some fundamental differences are or lay. Because there are some exceptionally crappy real time groups or communities of people that exist.

It's not a matter of Online or Offline. It's a matter of what kind of engery, shape, life and function people fill in the group. There are some truely Amazing people online as there is offline. There are some extremely crappy people offline as there are online.

Strangers are stangers. Just because I can see somebody both above and below their neck, does not indicate anything about the quality of that person, regardless of what group of Collective people are together. Idiots and assholes can form perfectly evil functioning groups of people. Stupid people can band together and do some really stupid shit. However, some pretty amazing groups of people can band together as well.

This ain't an issue of online vs. online in my opinion. Communition and interaction combined is what makes things happen.



Andalusite -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/27/2010 9:40:50 PM)

VC, I guess I have the opposite definition of "community" that you use. Like Celeste, I think of the people who will do those things for me, and who I'll do those things for, as my *close* friends. They're the ones I can count on when I need help, cry on when I'm sad, make a point of spending time together in person "just the two of us" rather than just as part of a group. A community is a group of people with a shared interest, whether based on geography or hobbies or whatever.

BoiJen, I agree with LaT and Lally that I haven't seen anything to indicate that the people who come to the forums here, or particularly the ones who view this as one of the communities they are a part of, would turn people who are HIV positive into pariahs, much less advocate marking them and putting them in internment camps. I'd think that would be far more likely from people like the Westboro Baptist Church, for example. I have a lot of people I consider to be more friendly acquaintances online, who I still care about. If they are sick, or lose a loved one, I'm genuinely sad for them. If they get a new job, or have a kid, or win an award, I'm thrilled that they are happy.

I've had an overlap between online communities and face-to-face contact right from when I first got online. A friend of mine brought me along to an in-person get-together the night he first introduced me to an online game, so I was able to connect screen names to actual people with personalities and interests outside of the game. Since then, I've been involved in a number of online communities, both vanilla and kinky, and have met lots of people in person from each of them. Of course, there are some people I've met online who I don't *want* to encounter in person, but so far, almost all of my experiences with it have been very positive. I initially met my former submissive online, through one of the vanilla groups, but we didn't get interested in each other until we'd been around each other in person for a while.

I also consider the local BDSM scene to be one of the communities I'm a part of, though I'm not as active as I was a few years ago. I attend playparties, classes, and other events occasionally at the local dungeons/playspaces. I prefer the discussion group and playparty group which meet in private homes, with fewer people. I've known several of the people involved for 8 years or so now, but I don't know all of their legal names and addresses. Some I do, some I don't. I'm closer to some of the ones who I *don't* have ID for than some of the ones who I do - they're just more out/open about it.

I devote most of my free time to my Master and my close friends, and in-person events of various sorts that I'm into, but online communities are convenient for squeezing into a bit of time here and there, when it isn't practical to go out, or I'm sick, or whatever.



leadership527 -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/27/2010 10:08:14 PM)

In my mind, "community" is just a poorly defined term indicating a group of people who share some sense of commonality somehow. I don't actually form or participate in communities at all. I just have people I know. The ones I like I call friends.



crazyml -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/28/2010 12:20:52 AM)

You're right, communication doesn't make a community - But it's an essential ingredient. But to be a community you need something in commong - that could be, as others have said, an interest in a given sport (I'm a member of two sailing clubs), a political affiliation (I'm a member of a political party), or a particular sexual preference (I'm a member of Collarme).

My initial reaction was to think that the views expressed by Caro et all were elitist, and a little pathetic. They belong to a particular clique within their community and have risen within the (more or less artificial) hierarchy of that community and so perceive any alternative community as a threat to their status.

The discussion about the terrible impact of AIDs is a little bit of a red-herring - Though I did take mild umbrage at your assertion that the CM community would be more likely to insist that AIDs sufferers be branded/locked up etc -> I've absolutely no idea where you can have got that impression at all!

This is absolutely standard behaviour within competing communities, it's natural for one to try to justify itself as in some way better (more "true","authentic" etc etc) than another. Take the various flavours of Protestant Religion - The people who go to the high Anglican church tend to look down on the happy clappy charistmatic churches and vice versa.

I think LaTigresse started in the right place with the dictionary definition, but let's take that a little further - let's look at a range of qualities (good and bad) I've seen in the various communities

Communities -
  • Share common interests
  • Share common values
  • Create artificial / real hierarchies
  • Establish a history/culture/lore
  • Provide support to their members
  • Are long lived
  • Are organised, to one extent or another
  • Have cliques
  • Have entry requirements
  • They are often inward looking
It's not an exhaustive list but...

Looking at interests - I think both  the LC and CM both get a pretty unambiguous tick here. Yes, there'll be a lot of difference between specific interests but on the whole that's why we gravitate to CM or the LC.

Values - The LC has a much more coherent set of basic values than CM, but if you narrow down CM to the community of people that post regularly here, you'll find some common values - but the LC is much more coherent/cohesive than CM.

Hierarchies - The LC is much more hierarchical than CM.. we don't have "ranks" or elected leaders (Who the fuck would run against some of the posters on this thread!). Hierarchy isn't bad (it can be sometimes of course), hierarchy is a way of ensuring that core values etc are perpetuated (again - this can be good or bad).

Establish a history/culture/lore - While I strongly believe that much of the history/culture/lore of the LC is pure revisionist fantasy, it certainly has a more coherent set of traditions.

Providing support is something both communities do - The LC has the advantage of being in meatspace (with a nod to the person who used this awesome word) - so yeah, I'm going to struggle to instant message you a wrench if you need to borrow one whereas if you're in the tent (or trailer) next to mine I can easily hand you a 1/5 in wrench. But support comes in many forms - intellectual, emotional, spiritual etc. So you may be able to say that CM provides less support, or can only provide a narrower range of supporting things, but I'm not going to say that the support provided by the LC is "better" than CM - they're different.

By long lived I mean - do people come back more than once! Sure the LC predates the WWW so it's "longer lived" but that's not the point - do people continue to participate - and by and large I think both the LC and the CM are more or less the same in this regard

In terms of organisation - sure, the LC is way ahead of CM here - although, many online communities are active in the munch circuit and form part of that, but I doubt there's going to be a CM jamboree any time soon!

Cliques - Someone once said "if you have more than 1 person in a team, cliques will form". Both the LC and CM have cliques for sure.

Entry requirements - The LC has arguably, more stringent entry requirements, anyone can create a profile on CM after all - But I would argue that if you're simply creating a profile and scoping other profiles then you're not really participating in the community,. The community of people who post regularly on the forums are participating - and there's no formal entry requirement for posting (although there are moderators - I don't know how the mods are selected though) and there are posting rules. And, the paricipants on the forum do tend to self regulate - driving the reall buffoons out by giving them the hard time they deserve.

Inward looking - I think that older established cliques are very prone to becoming too inward looking (and I think the LC  is suffering from this).

There are other characteristics of course (I've got a train to catch).

But I think that it's fair to say the following...

  • To say that communication isn't community is absolutely true
  • To say that CM is just "communication" is absolutely false
  • CM is a community
  • The LC is a more coherent, organised, and mature community
That doesn't mean however that the LC is better, or that CM wont mature into something every bit as coherent and organised.

For my part - I would challenge anyone who says you can't develop intensely close friendships online, or that you can't find love online - Online relationships can be as real or as fake as any other. I'm lucky to have made a bunch of close friends as part of my participation in this hectic, chaos that is the CM community, and if some gray-bearded dude wants to tell me that those friendships are less valid than the ones he has with the guys he meets at the clubhouse then he can fuck off. Less valid - hell no, different -hell yes.





allthatjaz -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/28/2010 1:42:36 AM)

I am very much part of the London BDSM community and so when I go to the fet market on Sunday I will probably hug and be hugged by a hundred or so people. The UK scene is very touchy feely and it tends to give one the impression that we are all a warm and caring lot but when a very well liked and respected Mistress was recently struck down with a serious illness, all but a handful noticed she was missing. As word got out people didn't come flocking to offer help. All those that normally hugged her were nowhere to be seen and all but the dedicated handful of friends didn't give her a second thought.
Because we are a very small minority of the population, coming together in groups does give us the impression of closeness but its very superficial. In all the years I have been on the rl scene I have made 9 friends who I speak to regularly on the phone and 3 very good friends who I consider would be there for me if my life went topsy turvy.
The real life community isn't full of love and caring, its got far too many ladder climbers for that. Its got too many people trying to make a name for themselves and when they do make a name for themselves they suddenly have this following walking in their shadow and liking them, not for their personality qualities they are but who they are on the scene.
So the rl community is a great place to be if 1. you have made a name for yourself. 2. If you have managed to get in with someone who has made a name for themselves and 3. If you need a hug! but its not a good place to be if you come into it new but happen to be able to do something just as well or better than one of the Masters of this art!! and its not neccessarily a good place to be if you genuinely need help.

Online its much more about debate and subject matter. Its a place where people home in on others because of the way they write. I talk to a number of people on here in private from across the pond because over a period of time we have warmed towards each other. I have 3 people from here on my facebook and those people I hope to get to meet someday. Some of those people I already have met and so for me this place is a community because I can come here and talk to friends.
Just because they can't be there in person if everything in my world went topsy turvy, doesn't mean they don't care. If they write me a A4 letter they have given me just as much time as someone who walks into my kitchen and makes me soup!

I think the drawback of an online friendships is, people can just go missing. I could be run over by a bus today and a few people on here may try to make contact or wonder where I had gone over the coming months but would then probably just accept that I had left the community.



lally2 -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/28/2010 2:52:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: allthatjaz

.I think the drawback of an online friendships is, people can just go missing. I could be run over by a bus today and a few people on here may try to make contact or wonder where I had gone over the coming months but would then probably just accept that I had left the community.


actually that brings up an interesting point - not that long ago someone died suddenly and horribly young of a heart attack.  their partner felt it was appropriate to write to us and let us know.  genuine heart felt responses were made, even by people who had not been here long and others who had not interracted with him on his favourite board.  she was able to say 'goodbye' for him

there are times when 'we' as the collective come through for each other and when that happens i happen to think thats quite special.  in a way, the very fact that we wont meet the vast majority and yet we respond to peoples ups and downs and shitty shitty times shows that we share a commonality that means something more than just the usual dismissive 'its all anonymous and unreal'



allthatjaz -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/28/2010 4:16:36 AM)

I recall that lally and I agree but not all relatives or rl friends would think to let an online community know.

Sometimes you hear people saying that people on the internet are not real people and I believe that internet bullies are very much in that mindset.
I go on a UK site and most of the people I have talked to on there or shared forum debates with are the people I have got to meet in the rl community.
There is definately a cross over here in the UK. If you get talking to someone at a party, one of the things you will ask them or they will ask you is 'do you go on IC? and whats your name on there? On that site we have a lot of event forums and people post to say they are going along. People then say they will look out for you. I have met many a person that way and you often feel like you already know them well.



lally2 -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/28/2010 5:32:21 AM)

i tried IC and it seemed a bit drifty - maybe i didnt hang in there long enough - are you talking about the boards or is there another place to visit on IC

i dont really get how, when people post they assume that everyone else is a fraud.  i mean theyre real after all - its a bit arrogant to assume that everyone else is less than credible and total liars therefore.

i work on the premis that since im 'real' most everyone else is too - its far too arrogant to presume otherwise.  and yes, i agree internet bullies tend to think theyre the bees knees and generally get on my tits.  but ive often found in life its the barrel that booms the loudest that ends up being the emptiest - so theyre welcome to themselves and i hope it keeps them warm at night.



ResidentSadist -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/28/2010 7:51:40 AM)

I didn't get to attend Beyond Leather this year and I am glad you shared this. Thanx.



Apocalypso -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/28/2010 11:18:42 AM)

Excellent post crazyml.  To draw a few points out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml
My initial reaction was to think that the views expressed by Caro et all were elitist


Is elitism necessarily a bad thing?  There's an unwritten assumption in the mainstream BDSM community that it is, but I'm not convinced.  The whole 'welcome everybody' dogma is what leads to the BDSM scene being rife with predators, morons and the socially maladjusted.  Because everyone is so scared of looking like an 'elitist' they won't tell anybody to fuck off, even if that leads to people just avoiding events.

As well as that, I think the LC deserve credit for raising these kinds of discussions in the first place.  Often, a combination of not wanting to rock the boat and the kneejerk anti-intellectualism from some BDSMers leads to these kinds of issues just being pushed to one side.

I can understand where the LC are coming from here.  I'd be a hypocrite if I couldn't.  At best I have mixed feelings about the mainstreaming of the internet.  I don't have a personal problem with the newcomers, but in many ways it does feel a bit safer and a bit less fun then it used to.  I suspect that may be how some leatherfolk feel about developments in the BDSM community.  I don't agree with everything the LC says, but I still prefer them to those people who want to present us as 'harmless' so they can court mainstream acceptance.

quote:

They belong to a particular clique within their community and have risen within the (more or less artificial) hierarchy of that community and so perceive any alternative community as a threat to their status.


Technically, all hierachies are artificial, surely?  That aside, how much of an issue is this?  This may be because I'm looking at the issue from the other side of the pond, but from what I can see the LC really only have an influence on those who freely choose to be involved or feel they have something to learn from it.  Some of the most passsionate critics of the LC remind me of that Japanese soldier found in the jungle decades after the war had ended, because nobody had let him know the battle had ended.

quote:

The discussion about the terrible impact of AIDs is a little bit of a red-herring - Though I did take mild umbrage at your assertion that the CM community would be more likely to insist that AIDs sufferers be branded/locked up etc -> I've absolutely no idea where you can have got that impression at all!


Yeah, that did strike me as rather unsupported.  Particuarly as, when you look at the history, the LC were not largely a community of activists.  While some leatherfolk got involved in the gay liberation movement, it certainly didn't spring from there.  In fact, it was the opposite of the 'keep your head down and keep out of the public eye' tactic adopted by the LC as a whole.  While some leatherfolk have tried to claim Stonewall as part of their tradition, I'd argue strongly that the Stonewall riots were the negation of the old ways, not a continuation of them.

quote:

This is absolutely standard behaviour within competing communities, it's natural for one to try to justify itself as in some way better (more "true","authentic" etc etc) than another.


True.  But this is not as onesided as some people present it.  It's equally true of those who present themselves as "openminded" and "inclusive" as it is of the LC.

quote:

I think LaTigresse started in the right place with the dictionary definition, but let's take that a little further - let's look at a range of qualities (good and bad) I've seen in the various communities


Another useful way of looking at this for me, is to look at BDSM as a sociological subculture.  Gelder outlined six ways subcultures can be identifed which I think are helpful here (nicked from Wiki):

1. through their often negative relations to work (as 'idle', 'parasitic', at play or at leisure, etc.);
2. through their negative or ambivalent relation to class (since subcultures are not 'class-conscious' and don't conform to traditional class definitions);
3. through their association with territory (the 'street', the 'hood, the club, etc.), rather than property;
4. through their movement out of the home and into non-domestic forms of belonging (i.e. social groups other than the family);
5. through their stylistic ties to excess and exaggeration (with some exceptions);
6. through their refusal of the banalities of ordinary life and massification;

With both CM and the LC, I'd say that all of those factors are met.  The only one I think is even arguable is point 3. and I think a strong case can be made for virtual territory still qualifying.

One of the main schisms in the BDSM community I currently see is between those who want to move out of being a subculture and into the mainstream and those of us who lean more heavily towards the counterculture end of the spectrum.  And, as the latter, I largely see the LC as allies, even if they're uneasy ones at times.

quote:

Hierarchies - The LC is much more hierarchical than CM.. we don't have "ranks" or elected leaders (Who the fuck would run against some of the posters on this thread!). Hierarchy isn't bad (it can be sometimes of course), hierarchy is a way of ensuring that core values etc are perpetuated (again - this can be good or bad).


I'd question whether CM has less hierachies than the LC.  People have talked recently about whether new or unpopular posters are treated differently than the "cool kids".  The fact that hierachies are informal doesn't mean they are any less there.

There's a term commonly used in the Brit anarchist community which may have some resonance for BDSMers.  "Dictatorship of the big mouths".  While a bit lengthy, The Tyranny of Structurelessness is a very good look at how this works.  And it really does outline how a lot of informal BDSM groups work, at least in my view.

quote:

Establish a history/culture/lore - While I strongly believe that much of the history/culture/lore of the LC is pure revisionist fantasy, it certainly has a more coherent set of traditions.


It's myth I think.  And the point of myth is what it teaches, not the historical truth or otherwise it contains.  Tradition I'm more averse to.  Tradition easily turns into nostalgia which leads to stagnation.




BoiJen -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/28/2010 2:43:05 PM)

As an aside, did anyone who didn't know the names listed as part of the "fossil hour" panel research those individuals at all? Just asking if anyone attempted to gain an understanding of who these persons were/are and where they're coming from.

Favorite quotes from the weekend:

"What we do isn't for every body. Tell them to run and hide because what we do is *not* for every body!"

"If that makes me an elitist, oh well. Just don't blame my ass in 20 years when 'Leather' is synonymous with 'Star Trek' because I'll be dead."


What those quotes mean to me is that the veil of "inclusion" and this effort to be more "mainstream" is not what SM has ever been about. Trying to call an internet forum a "Community" is the equivalent of trying to make SM a fluffy, fun-filled, watered down happy place for the rest of the world's social outcasts to feel comfortable here no matter if they really are compatible with the values (yes, they're sexually oriented) of the established community. Not honoring that some people really don't belong on the inside of this community is not honoring who that person is and allowing them to do something stupid like fall into a black hole they never really bargained for. If pointing out the obviousness makes me an "elitist", I'm good with that--primarily because "elitist" is not an insult, no matter how anyone tries to make it as such.

boi



LaTigresse -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/28/2010 3:31:39 PM)

No Boi, elitist is not always an insult.

Today, I was actually thinking about this thread as I was hiking and I really can see both sides of the debate. However, the one thing that I kept coming back to is how many many 'communities' like you have portrayed your leather community, have far too many members that give an aura, as you have done here, of feeling somehow better than anyone that does not agree with your mindset. In doing so you will often exclude many that would fit your, and the other's in your community, criteria for belonging. And even more dangerous for your special little community, it gives people a reason to distrust and dislike, thereby possibly treating that community in a manner that threatens rights.

Be rude and elitist if if makes you happy.....but understand the potential consequences. Communities like to fight for their rights to be treated equally, all while behaving in a manner than actually makes them appear to believe they are above others and deserving of special treatment, rather than equal.



stella41b -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/28/2010 5:48:30 PM)

I disagree with the OP in terms of her definition of the community and also the value of the Internet and its role in holding various members of the community together.

I'm happy that the OP had a blast at Beyond Leather in Fort Lauderdale with figures such as Hardy Haberman, John Warren, Caro, Master Ces and others who could stand up in front of everyone and list their credentials and achievements and through this work to raise public awareness and attract people to the events.

But just spare a thought for those who don't. I rarely get to attend events in fact over the last month I have only managed to make it to two demonstrations in Central London and much of my work is online and spent partly at a computer and partly out there in public.

This is because I'm part of an international community which is both part of the LGBT community and also the BDSM community - I'm connected with both in London, both with the organizers of The London Alternative Market and people in the LGBT community such as Peter Tatchell, and this community extends westwards towards people such as the Archbishop of Toronto, various congress people, and also eastwards through to activists in Poland, Iran, Malawi, Uganda, and the Sudan.

AIDS is just one of the issues we are working against, we are working also for people who have been interrogated, imprisoned, tortured and even executed simply for being part of the LGBT or BDSM communities. But our work isn't just about working within the community, but actually going out there and working outside the community, out there on the front line and working to raise public awareness and try to gather support from different people in society and to somehow get them to become involved.

Just out of interest, I recently posted an OP directly from Peter Tatchell regarding the deteriorating health of Steven Monjeza who is being held in a Malawi prison for being homosexual and asked people to write to their elected representatives. How many people here actually did as I requested and wrote to their local politician?

Better still, how many of you are aware That Articles 118 and 119 of the Kodeks Karny (Polish Criminal Code) relating to 'sex with a threat of force or violence' is being used to prosecute people who are actively involved in BDSM, or that almost all pornography is now illegal in Poland? Are you also aware that you can be prosecuted for crimes motivated from prejudice against someone's religious or political beliefs, but not against their gender or sexual orientation?

The OP wrote the following:

quote:



I was reminded that communication and online friends aren't what took care of our dieing brothers on their death beds, these things didn't happen because we typed away behind a computer screen.



So okay, were there any important public figures who attended Beyond Leather, for example someone like former President Jimmy Carter? Any state politicians?

Anyone there directly responsible for changes in legislation?

I have no wish to belittle the role of anyone of these people who stood up at these events because you simply cannot put any sort of concrete value on the work that they do in raising public awareness and also helping to raise finance and funds which go towards useful causes such as AIDS research, financial help to AIDS victims, advocacy, and so on.

But I don't see how that can in any way justify belittling all the beneficial and necessary work which is done through the Internet from people 'typing away behind a computer screen' lobbying, campaigning, activism, working directly towards raising public awareness, using political pressure, and getting people released from prison, saving them from torture and from being executed simply for being themselves.

My activism is done alongside my work in the homeless community in London and my work with homeless charities and other charity work.

I have no wish to list all my achievements or promoting my 'LGBT/BDSM resume' because this isn't about me but about other people.

You don't have to even understand what I do, estimate how much time I spend or even comprehend my role in this 'international community'.

It's just enough to understand that you are free to share your interests with others, you are free to attend such events and you are free to express yourself without being condemned, beaten up, arrested, imprisoned, tortured, prosecuted and even put to death.

There's a lot of people in the world who don't have anywhere near that amount of freedom and who face all of the above for simply being who they are.



LadyPact -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/28/2010 5:51:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoiJen

As an aside, did anyone who didn't know the names listed as part of the "fossil hour" panel research those individuals at all?


In My case, that had better be some form of a rhetorical question.  LOL.  (Gee, now that I think of it, I haven't seen Ms Susan and Ed since I made My last trip to Atlanta nine months ago, but I was thinking of them just last week.)

Anyway, I have to say that I agree with Aileen in her comment.  I don't especially see CM as a community, but it has been a method to connect with people to bring them into My physical world at some point.  While I very much enjoy some of the folks on these boards, I tend to only think of those that I have met in the flesh to be a part of what I consider My community.  It's not that I see you as less valid, but for Me, the same bonds can't be made without knowing what it feels like to hug you or to listen when you laugh.  It means that I want to spend real time with you in the real world.  Sure, circumstances may warrant other means of communication when we can't be together, but until we share the same physical space, it just isn't the same.

Give My best to MsK.



domiguy -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/28/2010 6:09:43 PM)

Hardy Haberman, John Warren, Caro, Master Ces, Mark Frazier, and Ms. Susan......Never heard of them. I am sure that there are thousands of people who have been directly impacted by aids.

Your question should have been, "You all have 'Leather resumes' that go on for two days. They describe your accomplishments, achievements, and activities within this community. Have you ever felt that you have wasted a great deal of your life on this?"



Wolf2Bear -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/28/2010 6:40:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCdc

quote:

ORIGINAL: VaguelyCurious

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCdc

But you are making the assumption that people are romanticising it.  Could it be possible that it is actually you doing it though?

Well, ok, what I really meant by that is people romanticising *my* community-the 'oh, it must be so amazing to be Jewish/Iraqi-all that Community!' brigade. I wasn't talking about anyone here.

Sorry that was unclear.



I don't see anything inherently wrong or romantic about people being proud of their heritage or community, particularly if they have always had a positive vibe from it.  The danger is going to only come in when you get the whole my way is right for everyone extremists... but that's got zero to do with community, just like communication has nothing to do with it.

There is always a group who need to 'belong'... or even to get their voice heard.  Right here on this forum there are little individual communities going on - the ones in Polls and Random, the ones talking about politics... communities are everywhere.  But people don't have to talk to people to be part of it.  They don't have to act.  There doesn;t have to be friendships - you could loathe certain individuals!  All a person needs to do is have something in common with someone else and that's 'community'. 

the.dark.


Exactly.  The fact is community does not always mean a physical community one lives in everyday in their day to day circles. Community is also the friendships we form with people who are drawn together by a common interest and or belief, etc. I am part of the gay community yet my actual circle of gay friends are close by yet we are part of the larger community that inhabit this nation.



BoiJen -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/28/2010 7:00:37 PM)

Mr. Domi, if I did that, I would have essentially killed my chances at the South East Community Bootblack 2011 Title contest next year and I have aspirations far beyond how deeply I can get my foot in my mouth.

Stella, consider Hardy Haberman's film work with Out of the Darkness: The Reality of SM (2001), currently being used as educational material for health care professionals world wide, and Leather (1996) a documentary that aired on HBO in an effort to educate the "vanilla" world. Hardy works directly with several politicians in Dallas and, statewide, in Texas because of his connection with the Cathedral of Hope and the political impact of the Woodhull Freedom Foundation.

Mark Frazier, the man responsible for bringing us the South Plains Leather Fest and International Leather Sir/boy/community bootblack contests. SouthPlains is the largest educational and social BSM/Leather event in North America. Mark has also owned what was once, and may still be, the largest gay leather bar in Dallas, the Dallas Eagle. Mr. Frazier's influence, politically speaking, in Dallas and San Francisco is pretty far reaching solely based upon the amount of business the man commands. This doesn't touch his accomplishments in expanding the National Leather Association's role within the North American SM community when he was the president of the organization.

Caro actually posts her own profile at: http://fetlife.com/users/16620

This is only half of the panel. They are active and they do help change the world many individuals live in, primarily here in the United States. And I think you're likely overshooting my point here. You do wonderful work and you use the internet as a tool to communicate when you need to. To find support from groups you already associate and work with to bring about real change. You don't just fuck around here and there with this tool and not have a project result to show for it. Viewing the internet as a community instead of a communication tool is that same as saying "wow I built a car with this ratchet set". You're using a tool...communication is not the end project result...it's the tool. The internet is the tool.

LadyPact, I agree with exactly what you said. I've nothing to argue it at all. All I would have to say is that it's foolish to expect me (because of who I am and my own personality and experiences) to accept someone's version of "the internet forums are a community!" when my experience says that when I really need my community to stand up for my rights, the people who show up may keep in contact or use the tool the internet is but it's not the only basis of "involvement" of my community they have.

That's all...and Ma'am says "hi!" Hopefully, you'll be able to make it to BL next year! ;-) (ahem...title run support! lol...I fill out my contestant application May 1, the first day of registration for 2011) yes?

In Leather,

boi



domiguy -> RE: Communication does not create "Community" (4/28/2010 7:09:49 PM)

I am Miss Kitty.



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875