|
Proprietrix -> RE: 18+ versus 21+ (6/23/2006 12:47:29 PM)
|
I think we’re simply operating under two different umbrellas of thought.
I believe that someone who starts a group has absolutely no obligations other than the ones they choose.
You are operating under the belief that someone who starts a group has an obligation to the public at large.
Compare the scenario to any other social group. Not BDSM.
Take a Dungeons and Dragons role-play group.
A few friends decide they want to play D&D. They put up announcements (in public) that they’re looking for friends to play with. They invite people (often times strangers) to come and get involved. They post on a D&D website that they’re forming a group. In addition, they prefer to play with people 20-25 years old, so they include that tidbit in their ad as well.
Are they being selfish and denying people friendships?
Were they expected to be a resource and community for everyone who has an interest in D&D?
No. They were simply a few people looking for others with similar interests.
It’s ridiculous to delegate to them the responsibility of anything more than what they chose to set out to accomplish.
Perhaps they have families, and serve as a volunteer for XYZ, and have kids, and work 2 jobs, or (insert any other life obligation).
D&D is what they do for fun in their spare time. Why should they be expected to make it more than that?
Now, take a town that has ZERO BDSM groups.
One person who is kinky decides they want to have a social outlet for their kinks. They find a kinky friend. The two friends want more friends, so they decide "Let’s start a group."
They are basically operating on one single motive: friendships.
They aren’t operating under the obligation to serve as the educational/social/support center of the community. They are simply wanting to build a group of friends.
They do not have an obligation to educate everyone who has an interest.
They have no obligation to be a support group for folks who have hang-ups or are in the closet.
They have no obligation to network folks, or set up demos, or this that and the other.
If they want to do those things, and they choose to do those things, then great, have at, but their original purpose was to expand a social circle and make friends.
The people who start BDSM groups should have no more obligations than the people who start the D&D group. It’s what they do for fun in their spare time. Why should they be expected to make it more than that?
This was my point when I said: quote:
If I, as a 30something lady want to have a group of 30something friends get together to chit-chat about kinky sex, then more power to me. I don’t see many (if any?) other social clubs who take on this mentality that their social circles are there for any other purpose other than simply being social circles. There’s a prevailing thought in the BDSM community that everyone has this unspoken responsibility to take up the torch of a social cause. And I just don't get it.
My local Dungeons and Dragons club isn’t on a mission to "educate the newcomers to role-play with a d10." My local swing club isn’t the "central network referral for horny couples". The Tuesday night book-club isn’t "there to serve the greater needs of people who read."
I don’t think of them as selfish. I think of them as nice little groups of friends who get together to do things they enjoy.
They are social clubs, designed for social interaction, and friendship based around a common interest.
Why should a munch group be anything more than any other social group?
The more I think about this, the more I understand why munch groups are dwindling so quickly in my area. (And by "my area" I’m referring to about 6 states in the US.) Time and time again I see a simple group of people trying to get together to make some friends and have some conversation and fun. Next thing they know they’re being expected to write bylaws and have all inclusive policies, and network for state-wide events, and set up committees, and have sub-divisions, and charge dues, and educate the newcomers, and render themselves out to "the community" to serve as the educational/social/support center. And quickly, the group falls apart. Or there is so much politics and bickering that the turnover rate increases and it’s just a new group of people, with the old name, doing the same thing. Rinse. Repeat.
Please understand… I am not knocking groups who want and choose to be an educational group, or a resource for people, or a referral service, or whatever. I think they are very nice and they do nice things for people.
My problem here is in the assumption that BDSM groups have an obligation or responsibility to be anything more than what their founders wanted them to be in the first place, and many times all the founder was looking for was a place where like-minded people could make friends.
Most people in this lifestyle aren’t looking for a committee to serve on. They aren’t looking for a position as safety network coordinator, or to become a contributing paid member. They are simply folks who want to get their kink on with other folks who are getting their kink on.
I simply don’t understand the mentality that sets up expectations that a group of kinky people getting together to make friends, has an inherent obligation and responsibility to become anything more than a group of kinky people getting together to make friends.
We don’t do it in our other social circles. Why do it here?
|
|
|
|
