Would you predict that kinksters are more likely to be reactionary, Bushies, Republicans, etc., than the average person? I don't know any studies of this burning question, but my anecdotal experience points in the opposite direction. In fact, the kinkier the person, the lefter her or his politics. By and large. That's not true of everyone, of course. If it's any indication, in stores in Chicago's Boystown that cater to (among others) the kinky crowd, they sell bumper stickers that say things like, I'd Rather Be Smashing Imperialism.
I find the idea of politically correct sex amusing. Please explain it more fully. Is it revolutionary to give head? Or is it counterrevolutionary? Does it depend on whether it's a guy or girl who's going down? Is revolutionary for a guy to give head and counterreevolutionary for a girl? What about head and gay sex -- does it make a diff if both participants are same-sex? What about sex with the girl on the bottom -- is that reactionary? Which is more likely to promote socialist revolution -- having sex with or without removing all your clothes? Is liking sex with someone who is wearing nice underwear OK? What about interracial sesx -- is that more correct than same-race sex? Inquiring minds want to know.
Btw, Mike, I certainly appreciate your wanting to liberate me from wage labor. I mean, in away that doesn't involve unemployment. Please hurry up, though.
It is also good to know that however poltically incorrect people's preferences may be, you don't advocate banning them or re-educating them after the Revo. I do want to know, though, whether the Socialist Planning Commission is going to regulate the sale of sex toys.
--- Mike Ballard <swillsqueal at yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> Mike writes:
>
> > For the record, I'm not interested in throwing
> people
> into jail because they choose to practice pretend
> sadism and masochism.
>
> One important point: what I practice is not pretend
> sm.
> The welts I raise are real. The difference is that
> my
> partners have given informed consent to engage in
> these practices.
> > I'm for stopping real torture, real harm to other
> human beings.
>
> The problem is that consensual sm involves real
> harm.
> The distinction has to be drawn along the line of
> consent/non-consent. I (and many, if not most,
> sm'ers)
> reinforce it further with the concept of informed
> consent. Not only is a yes sought, but a yes given
> as
> free from coercion as any human action can be.
>
> > I think that one of the reasons that we're still
> living in a class society is the way we are
> socialized
> to accept dominance and submission rituals.
>
> I would argue that there are genetic markers for
> dominance and submission which are exploited by
> capitalists for their own advantage. Capitalists
> didn't invent D/s rituals; they just figured out how
> to turn them to their advantage.
>
*******************************************************
> Mike B) responds:
>
> If I could be convinced that humans were genetically
> predisposed to dominance and submission, I'd give up
> on the socialist project. For now my opinion is
> that
> people are socialized to accept dominance by
> existing
> authority and have been since at least the dawn of
> class society. I have become convinced of this view
> through a critical reading of the reasearch done by
> Reich, Fromm, Horney and others. Joel Kovel wrote
> in
> his review of Chancer's "Sadomasochism in Everyday
> Life: The Dynamics of Power and Powerlessness" that:
>
> "She sees sadomasochism as a fundamental principle
> of
> everyday life, including work and family
> relationships; and she sees it, more important
> still,
> not primarily as a sexual matter at all, but as
> integral to power, dependence, and unfreedom.
> Sadomasochism happens whenever people are bound
> together unfreely, in relations of domination and
> submission; where they ritualize their interaction;
> where the relationship is dialectical and dynamic;
> and
> finally, where the position of power is buttressed
> materially, so that the submissive, masochistic
> person
> experiences severe sanctions against breaking loose
> from bondage."
>
> Further Kovel writes that Chancer
> roots,"sadomasochism
> in the dynamics of power rather than instinct."
>
> I would agree with you that many, many people are
> favourably disposed to dominance and submission
> rituals from their religious practices (gods make
> great sadists for their flocks) to obediance to the
> State and lap dog like obeisance to the employing
> class by the more conservative sections of the
> producing class. I think they are brought up to be
> that way. And yes, many play at d/s to varying
> degrees in their boudoirs. And no, I'm not for
> arresting these people and placing them in
> re-education camps. And yes, I do think that this
> dynamic puts and has put in the past hundred or so
> years an internal mind brake on any revolution which
> would have to be made by the class conscious workers
> themselves i.e. the communist revolution.
>
> Best,
> Mike B)
>
>
> =====
> "Philosophy, which once seemed
> obsolete, lives on because the
> moment to realize it was missed."
>
> Theodor Adorno, NEGATIVE DIALECTICS
> http://profiles.yahoo.com/swillsqueal
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We
> finish.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
_______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com