Your Political Affiliation

[BogartSlap]

indeed!

well I'll be a monkeys uncle.....

Shank - I'm impressed that you got the reference (not everyone round here will), but please, for the love of God, let's not get into Darwinism...

 

[BogartSlap]

not really

Gee you're a bigger twit then I thought!

Catalina

Actually, I'm only about 5'10", 165 lbs - not that big a twit at all.
love,
Jack

 

[BogartSlap]

This I've gotta hear

"

Directly to the "Gee, I don't get it." comments:

Simply because one thing has been lumped in with other things in the past, does not make a connection between them logical or even reasonable. I also fail to understand the connection being made in some people's minds, especially since we now have far more, and far better, data that no longer support such connections."

This I can't resist asking: Okay, what is the "data" that supports the notion that homosexuality is not a perversion?

"Tradition is no excuse for closed-minded ignorace, IMO."

If there was some argument over that notion, I must have missed it.

"I also made a direct statement to you regarding homosexual marriage that went without rebuttal, and was not ranting, screaming or frothing. Slightly elevated blood pressure, sure. I get that way when dealing with a completely closed mind - which, based on the content of your posts - yours appears to be."

I apologize if I offended you with the comment about "screaming" - it wasn't meant to be directed at anyone in particular, and was certainly aimed at myself as much as anyone else.
It's been my experience that when someone throws out the accusation that someone else is "close minded", it's generally just a high-handed way of complaining, "Why won't you agree with my opinion?!".

cheers,
Jack

 

[BogartSlap]

Positive

Are you sure you're not Bill O'Reilly?

Bill's much taller than I am.
On the other hand, I'm cuter.

 

[Shankara20]

Shank - I'm impressed that you got the reference (not everyone round here will), but please, for the love of God, let's not get into Darwinism...

not another ism, please

I just spank my monkey....

 

[Shankara20]

There's plenty of stuff I say that I don't agree with either.

I know it, I just knew it... hee hee

"busted"

 

[Netzach]

I know it, I just knew it... hee hee

"busted"

Duh.

Law student.

They'll prosecute their own mothers if the buck is right. Let not "personal sob stories" affect you in life.

Fortunately I also have nothing to do but sink my teeth in and piss on the tree too. And really, one doesn't look like a brilliant advocate of free speech and enlightenment arguing against "sexual perversion" amongst people into SM. We're not exactly a dangerous and powerful groundswell and if you have half a freaking brain you'll see that we're on the same side of the "dangerous deviant" fence if we happen to like blackening a girl's ass with a spoon. Who also likes it.

Which was my point about 100 pages back. Read David Rakoff on "Log Cabin Republicans" for a really closely related analysis. "Polishing the knife handle sticking out of your side" I believe is a snippet.

 

[O'Mac]

I can't remember if I already posted on this thread (too lazy to search), but in the last federal election I voted for the NDP (our Socialist party). However, I'm actually quite content with the work Prime Minister Harper and his Conservatives have been doing thus far.

Politically, I tend to lean towards Socialist policies. Economcially, I'm a Fiscal Conservative. Socially, I tend to be Liberal.

These sort of affiliations are rarely black-and-white, in my opinion.

 

[BogartSlap]

Dangerous assumptions

"

Duh.
...and if you have half a freaking brain....

Let's not be making rash assumptions.

 

[BogartSlap]

True

Actually, "Christmas" trees are a holdover from pagan celebrations around the winter solstice. It wasn't until the 1400's or thereabouts that The Church (as if it were the only one) moved the celebration of Christ's birth to coincide with that holiday.

All right - you got me - I admit it. Christmas trees were a bad example, because, as your comment so clearly points out, there is not nearly as universal and long-standing an association between Christmas trees and Christmas as there is between homosexuality and perversion.
I stand corrected. Happy now?

 

[BogartSlap]

Cherry red

...you'll see that we're on the same side of the "dangerous deviant" fence if we happen to like blackening a girl's ass with a spoon. Who also likes it.

Just for the record, I prefer a girl's bottom to be a nice, bright "cherry red", as opposed to "midnight blue".

 

[Netzach]

Just for the record, I prefer a girl's bottom to be a nice, bright "cherry red", as opposed to "midnight blue".

Ah. So since you like the feather rather than the whole chicken, who cares about the real freaks. I totally get where you are coming from.

When they are coming *for* you, I hope it's some consolation.

 

[JMohegan]

I have a question about the premise underlying this theory and I am addressing my question not just to Amadaun and Bisexplicit, but to anyone who would like to respond.

I am wondering how many people feel that their Dom, sub, or other orientation has any influence at all on their own personal political views.

The government is like an authority figure of sorts, one that has power over all of us. So maybe a slightly different but related question is, how many people react to all or most of the authority figures in their lives in a similar way?

I noticed on another thread that one Dom said he enthusiastically submitted to his college football coach in a non-sexual way. On a different thread, he said something that wasn't as clear but made me think he was the quarterback when he played. Taken together, I think this is one example of how a person could be a leader (like a quarterback) but also allow himself to be controlled (and even appreciate the way in which he is being controlled) at the very same time.

The closer you get to my bedroom, the less likely I am to appreciate or even tolerate a reduction of personal control.

I am also kinky, in both a D/s and an SM sense.

Therefore, socially conservative politicians who support the codification of traditional morality & social mores, and openly denounce those who deviate from the alleged time-honored ideal, are candidates with an agenda that is directly opposed to my personal well-being.

Yes, my kink influences my political views.

Do all forms of government control and regulation bother me? Nope. Definitely not. For example, I am a big fan of clean air, clean water, and the preservation of national parks. I'll take mandatory recycling in my office building and mandatory emissions testing on my car.... along with the regulations designed to keep big factories, loggers, etc. in check.

As for submitting to individual authority figures in my life, yes. I can, and have, done this (in a non-sexual way) many times.

I'm gonna make a distinction, though, between heartfelt submission and submission to obtain a particular goal. In order to succeed, everyone must obey or defer to a teacher, boss, or other authority figure at some point.

However, my submission to the coach to whom you are referring was different. I let him control, guide, influence, and direct me in areas far beyond the specific role of QB.

It has been more than 25 years since I played for the man. But I still use the lessons he taught me in many parts of my life. I still keep in touch with him. And I still call him Sir.

 

[BogartSlap]

I met a guy once that fucked a chicken

Ah. So since you like the feather rather than the whole chicken, who cares about the real freaks. I totally get where you are coming from.

Actually, I kind of doubt that you do - although it's reasonable for you to think that. The difference is that (unlike some people we know - hint, hint) I don't attempt to legitimize my "kink" as "natural" or morally legit. Rather, if asked, I freely 'fess up, "Yep - I'm a perv". But, hey, could be worse - I could be a chicken-fucker.

 

[rosco rathbone]

I took the political compass test, and was surprised to find myself relegated to that sparsely populated region in the southwest quadrant where are found only saints and such: Mandela, Ghandi, the Dalai Lama. I'm a cunthair to the left of the LEft/Right line and a hop skip and a jump south of the AUthoritarian/Libertarian line. (Interesting how "Authority" is represented as being on "top" in that diagram).

Of course, I had issues with the phrasing of at least half the questions. If there's one thing I believe strongly, it's that simple black and white thinking is almost always wrong, misguided and stupid.

In my own home, I'm chauvinistic, dominant, and traditional. I don't presume to know better for anyone else, though.

 

[Netzach]

Actually, I kind of doubt that you do - although it's reasonable for you to think that. The difference is that (unlike some people we know - hint, hint) I don't attempt to legitimize my "kink" as "natural" or morally legit. Rather, if asked, I freely 'fess up, "Yep - I'm a perv". But, hey, could be worse - I could be a chicken-fucker.

Then you are as wrong as I am.

I am a raging unnatural pervert, but I believe I should be left in peace to do so and to live my life and have my family without having to look over my shoulder or hide out in a closet. Idiotic, I know. I don't think that someone should have to be safe, normal, natural, healthy, or "useful" by someone else's standards to have a clean and reasonable shot at things. Living in a family structure that is precariously balanced among legal precedents that would tear it apart is not that.

 

[Netzach]

I took the political compass test, and was surprised to find myself relegated to that sparsely populated region in the southwest quadrant where are found only saints and such: Mandela, Ghandi, the Dalai Lama. I'm a cunthair to the left of the LEft/Right line and a hop skip and a jump south of the AUthoritarian/Libertarian line. (Interesting how "Authority" is represented as being on "top" in that diagram).

Of course, I had issues with the phrasing of at least half the questions. If there's one thing I believe strongly, it's that simple black and white thinking is almost always wrong, misguided and stupid.

In my own home, I'm chauvinistic, dominant, and traditional. I don't presume to know better for anyone else, though.

I scored even more libertarian than left. Who knew.

And I am even guiltily staring down Naomi Klein's "No Logo" on my bedstand. Damn you, you got me to have to take an online quiz thing.

 

[BogartSlap]

and

...but I believe I should be left in peace to do so and to live my life and have my family without having to look over my shoulder or hide out in a closet.

Pray tell, what is that you have to look over your shoulder for, or hide in a closet about? I haven't seen the Gestapo kicking down any doors of kinky people lately, dragging them out into the street, and loading them onto the concentration camp express buses. Now, if you're looking for a guarantee that your chosen lifestyle will be perfectly safe from either public or private excoriation, that's just an unrealistic expectation - this ain't Utopia, and we're not in Kansas anymore, Toto. One makes one's choices, and accepts the consequences thereof, and any rational person ought to know that if some of their choices are a significant departure from "the norm" (in any arena, not just sexual), then that's likely to complicate their existence.

 

[Blushing Bottom]

Most all paranoia is unfounded in the average individual but try and recall that though feelings are not always fact...they are valid.

You would do well to embrase the thoughts of others as well as your own.

d

Pray tell, what is that you have to look over your shoulder for, or hide in a closet about? I haven't seen the Gestapo kicking down any doors of kinky people lately, dragging them out into the street, and loading them onto the concentration camp express buses. Now, if you're looking for a guarantee that your chosen lifestyle will be perfectly safe from either public or private excoriation, that's just an unrealistic expectation - this ain't Utopia, and we're not in Kansas anymore, Toto. One makes one's choices, and accepts the consequences thereof, and any rational person ought to know that if some of their choices are a significant departure from "the norm" (in any arena, not just sexual), then that's likely to complicate their existence.

 

[Marquis]

Pray tell, what is that you have to look over your shoulder for, or hide in a closet about? I haven't seen the Gestapo kicking down any doors of kinky people lately, dragging them out into the street, and loading them onto the concentration camp express buses. Now, if you're looking for a guarantee that your chosen lifestyle will be perfectly safe from either public or private excoriation, that's just an unrealistic expectation - this ain't Utopia, and we're not in Kansas anymore, Toto. One makes one's choices, and accepts the consequences thereof, and any rational person ought to know that if some of their choices are a significant departure from "the norm" (in any arena, not just sexual), then that's likely to complicate their existence.

I'm sorry, what year was Lawrence v. Texas?

 

[BogartSlap]

most likely

Then you are as wrong as I am.

No doubt. Generally speaking, I'm probably at least as wrong as anyone else, across the board.
A theology professor once told me that he always began the semester by telling his students, "Roughly half of what I say here will be absolutely correct...and half will be completely mistaken. Unfortunately, at any given time, I'm unable to tell you which of my opinions falls into which half." Now that's a wise man with a heightened level of self-awareness.

 

[Alistunut]

I think my politics are actually a good mirror of my style.

............

The closer you get to my bedroom, the less likely I am to appreciate or even tolerate a reduction of personal control.

...........

Thank you both very much for answering my questions.

 

[Shankara20]

I'm sorry, what year was Lawrence v. Texas?

it was 2003

 

[Shankara20]

this ain't Utopia, and we're not in Kansas anymore, Toto.

I, for one, do live in Kansas. Wichita, Kansas - one of the states changed by Lawrence v. Texas in 2003....

but not all the state laws here have been struck down - yet!

 

[Marquis]

it was 2003

It was a rhetorical question.