"The Costume Party"
Anonymous Posting Service
|> "The Costume Party"
|>
|> My friend Rod calls me one day and asks if I would like to join
|> him at a costume party that night. I tell him that I don't have
How about next time a warning for people who do not
enjoy gay literature? This is not a flame, I just
would rather be forewarned than not. Thanks.
roger
--
To post an article through the anonymous posting service, MAIL your article
to post-...@n7kbt.WA.COM. Mailed replies will also be posted anonymously.
Anonymous Posting Service
|>
|> "The Costume Party"
|>
|> My friend Rod calls me one day and asks if I would like to join
|> him at a costume party that night. I tell him that I don't have
.
.
.
.
.
|> len. I look up at him and say, "Fuck my ass, Rod. Please."
|> The guys untie me from the sofa and remove my handcuffs before
|> they leave. I remain in drag for the rest of the evening, alt-
|> ernately kneeling between Rod's legs and riding his hot, hard
|> cock.
|>--
I really got off on your story, I got a great big erection as I read it,
if I was some place more private I would have pulled out my boner and
jerked it off right there.
I have always wanted to be dominated like that by a couple of guys, it sounds
really hot, but I would not care for the "drag" stuff. But the idea of being
used by 4 hot, hung and horny men (as long as they were reasonably attractive
and real masculine studs) really gets me going. If it weren't for
safe sex I would love to be fucked while I suck off some big stud.
I feel better just writing about it. I think I'll go home and play with my
big thick dick for a couple of hours.
I would also like to dominate a really hot young dude, I like to see real good
looking studs like my self getting fucked real good. I would really like to
do a scene like that with some handsome pretty boy. But still I wouldn't want
him to be in drag.
If I wanted to have a fantasy about a woman, it would be a woman, But I like
men and I don't want them dressed up like a woman.
Steve.
Harry Ugol
>
> How about next time a warning for people who do not
> enjoy gay literature? This is not a flame, I just
> would rather be forewarned than not. Thanks.
>
> roger
Clay must be taking the day off, otherwise my video screen would
already be showing scorch marks...
On soc.motss, where such things are discussed *ad infinitum*, this
counts as an example of heterocentrism, a term just coming into its
own. Unlike homophobia, where a person does not like homosexuals,
heterocentric people do not recognize our existence. It turns out to
be a less violent/deadly problem - very few gay men have physically
died from heterocentrism, with the possible exception of the case of
the U.S. Government's response to AIDS - but it's possible to die
emotionally and spiritually, too, and heterocentrism has the souls of
millions on it hands.
In this instance, a start at a cure would be to ask "roger" to put
himself in my shoes (don't worry, you can't catch it that way :-).
I'm at least 95% gay; male/female sex stories don't turn me on (unless
the guys' descriptions are really hot, which doesn't often occur), but
how would roger and others here feel if I asked that the myriad of
such stories which appear here, along with the stories on the rest of
the net, and the billboards and the magazine ads and the movies and...
be appropriately labelled, just to spare my too-tender sensibilities?
Burdened with an unreasonable request? Made into a second-class
citizen? Hmmmm....
I think: 1) people here, even more than most places, need tolerance
and appreciation of all the wonderful ways the work of Creation is
furthered, even if we don't relate to them personally. I personally
don't appreciate drag (either I'm still uptight or am not
visually-oriented enough to get into it), and have too much
appreciation of good psychology and drama to enjoy the (IMVNSHO)
wooden characterizations in the story in question, but I still found
elements to enjoy, and think I came out with an experience that will
enrich me, even if only to a minor extent. 2) this discussion, which
I admit I am responsible for propogating (although I suspect Clay's
flame is winging over the wires even now, and other motss people may
also have something to say), is in danger of rapidly degenerating into
the standard PC-person-versus-blind-person discussion I have seen far
too often on motss and am heartily sick of. Unless people feel they
have a real contribution to make, *please* either sit on your hands or
take it into email. 3) (obligatory SM - after all, this is a.s.b :-)
what we have here is a request by a bottom for consideration of his
limits. As a (momentary) Top, manifesting the Creative and the Will
of Heaven (*I Ching* terms; don't jump to conclusions about what I
mean unless you're familiar with the Ching), my response: No. This is
a situation where you have to grow, for your own good and that of the
Universe. I'll treat you gently - I've already done so - but you're
standing in the way of the Light, BOY, and for your own good, your
eyes have to be opened.
Harry Ugol
UUCP: {backbone}!sun!warpten!harryu
ARPA: har...@Ebay.sun.com
"Rivendell household rule #6: It's only a *little* apple - go on,
take a bite."
Mary (Not J.Nienart) Rodes
>|>
>|> My friend Rod calls me one day and asks if I would like to join
>|> him at a costume party that night. I tell him that I don't have
>
>
> How about next time a warning for people who do not
> enjoy gay literature? This is not a flame, I just
> would rather be forewarned than not. Thanks.
And should posters also flag "straight" postings to warn those who do
not enjoy non-gay lit? And how would you deal with bisexual erotica?
Or threesomes? Or masturbation stories--should the writer state the
protagonist's orientation in the subject line? "Re: whacking off at the
office (straight, with some latent gay tendencies)"
And why on earth do you automatically expect erotic literature to be
"straight" anyway?
And can't you just quit reading when you realize it's not?
> roger
>--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mary"Dusty"Rodes nie...@silver.bacs.indiana.edu
This shaking keeps me steady. I should know.
What falls away is always. And is near.
I wake to sleep, and take my waking slow.
I learn by going where I have to go.
--Theodore Roethke
allopinionshereexpressedareMINEnotjohns.hejustletsmeusehisacountcuzhesaniceguy.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asmodeus
> How about next time a warning for people who do not
> enjoy gay literature?
Naw, not unless there are warnings for people who
do not enjoy straight literature.
> This is not a flame
Nor is this. You're not worth the effort.
> Thanks.
Don't mention it. BTW, suck my dick, geek.
--
"I am not criticizing you -- I am making fun of you, little geek.
I am doing it out of sheer malice."
-- Oleg Kiselev
Asmodeus
>Clay must be taking the day off, otherwise my video screen would
>already be showing scorch marks...
No, Harry, actually Tuesday and Thursday I spend
five hours (each) teaching. Away from the net,
yes; off, no.
>counts as an example of heterocentrism, a term just coming into its
With which I have no patience. Nor will I ever
develop any patience for it. Since roger [sic]
prefers to be forewarned, he can think of it as
a favor -- and one which IMDO he does not deserve.
>(although I suspect Clay's
>flame is winging over the wires even now
|-: Response, yes. Flame? I have better things
to do with my time than remedial education of the
young.
Bowie Bailey
on homosexual stories so I don't have to read them, sure. But I will just
as happily put a header on any heterosexual stories I write so you won't have
to read them. As for herterocentrism, I recognize homosexualism. I have even
had a few gay friends. As long as they leave me alone, I can get along fine.
To each his own.
The Garm
Harry Ugol
>
>> On soc.motss, where such things are discussed *ad infinitum*, this
>> counts as an example of heterocentrism, a term just coming into its
>> own. Unlike homophobia, where a person does not like homosexuals,
>> heterocentric people do not recognize our existence.
>
>how Roger feels about homosexuals), but from what I've seen in the
>message, I'd have to say that you're putting words into his mouth.
>
I didn't express myself 100% precisely. In my experience, there's a
big difference between the intellectual knowledge of a fact and the
emotional-or-whatever *realization* of it. In my own life, for
instance, there have been innumerable cases of my learning something I
had intellectually known for years, but which had never worked for me
until it became vivid and real instead of intellectual and impersonal.
That's what I call realization (the word does, after all, mean "to
make real"). Heterocentric people, unless they're illiterate or
otherwise totally isolated from the modern world, know intellectually
that gay people exist, but to them gay people are an abstraction;
they're not *real*.
> I suppose that I
>would have *preferred* that the poster made apparent in the summary
>that it was essentially a gay fantasy (?) story. It would have saved
>me a little time, I suppose, but still, it was easy enough to just hit
>'n'. Still, I don't understand why people have to publically flame
>Roger for his request.
>
If my response was a flame, what do you call the stuff on the alt
group of that name? Personally I thought I was being courteous and
restrained; I don't like flames myself.
Now, as for why roger's request merited discussion and rebuttal, roger
was asking to be protected from having to experience gay
sensibilities. You, btw, were not; your request would have been made
on the grounds of efficiency, not censorship (which isn't quite the
right term, but close enough), and it wasn't important enough to you
to be worth a formal post and request (and in that I entirely agree).
I don't care how you or roger feel about gay people, so long as your
feelings don't hurt me - but someone expecting me to censor myself or
otherwise take special measures when I participate in this forum
*does* hurt me. It might not seem like that much to you, but you
haven't experienced it like I have; in this case, I'm the expert, with
more than 25 years' experience in how society *really* treats gay
people as credentials.
>
>Back to this 'hetercentrism' thing. I wouldn't say that either Roger or
>I belong to this group you're talking about. He (we) would simply prefer
>that the genre goes into the summary or keywords line.
>
Here we have a perfect case in point. Adam, in my article I was
careful to point out that I and other gay people encounter the
situation roger was complaining about, i.e. experiencing a mindset we
don't relate to or participate in, ALL THE TIME, and that, unless
roger's request for "warnings" about story content applied equally to
homosexual and heterosexual stories, he was denying my equality and my
existence. Your response to my article does not include this section;
I conclude it has no reality or importance for you. Heterocentrism.
See? Admittedly, you might argue that you simply agreed with my
point, and did not need to state your agreement, or that you agree
that all stories should be labelled, gay and straight alike. If this
is so, however, you did not make yourself clear (and btw I disagree
with you - I think people's sensibilities must be awfully tender if
they can't take a dose of the unexpected and the unknown, and that
they're going to get awfully bruised by life until they toughen up a
little). If you do choose to argue along these lines anyway, my
response is that in my experience people fool themselves, and their
intellectual world and their physical reality don't match up, and that
I experience and have been hurt by and care about their physical
actions, not their intellectual assumptions. It's so easy to say
heterocentrism is the other person's problem, that *you*'re not one of
*those* people - but the sad truth is often that "those people" aren't
really what you intellectually envision them as, either; instead
they're just like *you*.
>Have mercy, folks. No flames, please.
>
It's been my personal experience that courtesy and consideration and a
willingness to listen are what avert flames. I'm not into them, but
if I put myself into the mindset of someone who is, I somehow don't
think a request like that will carry much weight. If, on the other
hand, you're requesting the privelege of stating your views and having
them accepted without argument, I must decline with as much respect as
the request merits (not much, IMNSHO).
Harry Ugol
UUCP: {backbone}!sun!warpten!harryu
ARPA: har...@Ebay.sun.com
"Rivendell household rule #2: If you can't laugh at yourself, someone
else is going to do it for you, and you're not going to enjoy it
nearly as much."
Roger B.A. Klorese
> enjoy gay literature? This is not a flame, I just
> would rather be forewarned than not. Thanks.
>
> roger
I didn't realize that permanent damage would result. Did your eyeballs
melt? Did you suffer a spontaneous conversion, as some preachers would
suggest?
There's no need for a "warning": I don't get a warning every time there is
something, for example, heterosexual porn, that I might not be interested in.
As soon as you determine that you're not interested, stop reading. There,
wasn't that simple?!
--
ROGER B.A. KLORESE MIPS Computer Systems, Inc. phone: +1 408 720-2939
928 E. Arques Ave. Sunnyvale, CA 94086 rog...@mips.COM
{ames,decwrl,pyramid}!mips!rogerk
"I want to live where it's always Saturday." -- Guadalcanal Diary
Roger B.A. Klorese
>Don't mention it. BTW, suck my dick, geek.
Naaaaah... too good for him.
Asmodeus
>had a few gay friends. As long as they leave me alone, I can get along fine.
Yeah, y'know, some of my best friend have been
negroes. I like 'em just fine as long as they
leave me alone.
>To each his own.
I guess that leaves you in the sewer, eh? You
can get away with this bullshit elsewhere, but
not here, where a large part of the (original)
readership is NOT heterosexual. It would seem
that several long, hard whippings with Diana's
strap, possibly with a big dildo up your bigoted
ass would be an invaluable lesson.
Now can the shit, or spout it in an exclusively
heterosexual forum, asshole.
--SeebS--
Our mailer hates you.
could you try to get email through to me? I can't seem to find your site...
Also, could you post a complete list of Rivendell rules, so I don't have
to collect them? I feel lazy...
--SeebS--
Michael E. Lee
% |> "The Costume Party"
%
% How about next time a warning for people who do not
% enjoy gay literature? This is not a flame, I just
% would rather be forewarned than not. Thanks.
"The Costume Party" was one of the few stories that worked nearly as well
told from either gender's point of view. Read it again, but this time
skip the first six paragraphs and pretend it's a woman.
As for being forewarned, the very fact that it was posted to
alt.sex.bondage fairly conclusively indicates that somebody is going to be
offended, so there's no point in putting a warning in each article.
Disclaimers and rot13 are for rec.humor.
The Krill are aroused.
_ K_ r_ i_ l_ l-_ M_ a_ n (tm)
mi...@ontek.com
Thomas F. Mandel
I am not at all interested in homosexual bondage material but I
agree with remarks here that there is no reason to label such in
this newsgroup. The name of the newsgroup is alt.sex.bondage,
not alt.sex.bondage.het or something like that.
As far as I'm concerned, some of the postings here are interesting
and some are not. It is easy enough to skip through stuff that
isn't one's cup of tea without going through elaborate headers or
labels about whatever subgenre of sexuality the posting involves.
--Tom Mandel wet!mandel
These are my opinions but other people are welcome to agree with me.
Solar Powered Sex Machine
> enjoy gay literature? This is not a flame, I just
> would rather be forewarned than not. Thanks.
>
> roger
How about a warning next time for people who do not enjoy
het literature? This is not a flame, I would just rather
be forewarned.
How about a warning next time for people who do not enjoy
whining complaints from people who assume that their particular
perversion is NORMAL while everyone else's is WEIRD SHIT that
they should be WARNED ABOUT lest they READ IT BY ACCIDENT?
This is not a flame, just I would rather forewarned be.
Forewarned is Four Armed,
-arthur(hephetpervert)e
Asmodeus
> If you want to be *absolutely* fair to everyone, we could
>institute an unwritten rule that you put a very brief comment at the
Absolutely not. I have no interest in staying
within some little shell by not being exposed to
anything outside it. That's not being fair in
any sense of the word -- it's being petty.
> Secondly, I'd like to point out that hetrosexual fantasies are
>more common than homosexual. Just like there are more right handed
Not here. Yes, this is undoubtedly a heterosexual
dominated society. SM is most decidedly not, if
anything the reverse. Now perhaps it has never
occurred to you what it might be like to live within
a society where every damn thing every damn time you
look is what you are not, a society which in everything
from shit like 'please say this is a gay fantasy [so
I don't have to deal with it]' to movies, commercials,
TV, books, everything. No, this has probably not
occurred to you.
What you will understand is that we have been a major
presence on this newsgroup since day one. The best
thing about this newsgroup is that it is *NOT* a hetero-
sexual dominated environment, that we have all -- gay,
bi and straight -- coexisted quite happily and productively
here and that we will continue to do so.
This also means that neither you, nor roger, nor the
'some of my best friends are queer' jerk is ever going
to turn this into a heterosexual dominated group. You
can either decide to give up your dominance and grow
with us, or get the fuck out.
The choice is completely up to you. In a newsgroup
which exists for sexual outcasts -- equally so, regardless
of orientation -- you, nor anyone else has any business
talking about 'statistical normality.' That takes no
more than an IQ of 40 to figure out.
> It's the same in alt.sex(.bondage). People expect
Alt.sex and alt.sex.bondage are two very different
places, for two very different groups of people.
You apparently haven't been here very long. Alt.sex
is, and always has been, dominated by small-minded
childish geeks. Alt.sex.bondage never has been, nor
ever will be. Stick around and get a clue.
>heterosexual fantasies. If someone was posting in soc.motss, people
Soc.motss is not a forum for fantasies, period.
>would expect it to be homosexual. If someone posted in ca.driving,
>you'd expect references to be about cars... a motorcycle posting would
>be unexpected. But a posting in rec.motorcycles would be assumed to
>be about motorcycles.
Your point is meaningless, as this is not alt.sex.bondage.het.
> Lastly, some reactions to this mild request bordered on
>paranoia! He wasn't attacking homosexualism... He was asking that
You are totally out of line. You have no authority,
particularly when your view of the world is so naive,
to tell me or Harry or Rob or Wendy when we are being
'paranoid', no more than you would telling blacks they
had no business being offended by Amos and Andy.
This is not a heterosexual forum. You'll just have to
accept that if you want to stay because that's the way
it is. Period. Finis.
Tim Maroney
This is not a flame, just next time I would rather be forewarned than
not. Also, I have very strong objections to couches and to the number
"four", so if we could have warnings when these elements appear in a
story, I would certainly appreciate it.
--
Tim Maroney, Mac Software Consultant, sun!hoptoad!tim, t...@toad.com
"This signature is not to be quoted." -- Erland Sommarskog
Beverly T Block
been met. There have been numerous requests for comments before stories
to summarize genders of dominant and submissive characters; I just took
this as another of those. I'll read almost anything, but I can
understand someone not wanting to. It's quite a way into the Costume
Party story before it's clear that it's stricly homosexual -- after all,
the buddy could've invited couples over, or actually taken him to a party.
I hope that if Roger had requested a summary instead of a warning that
he wouldn't have been jumped all over. A poor choice of words, perhaps,
but I don't think that it proves that he's a homophobe, or even
heterocentric (great word, BTW). I spent one summer in college going
out with a bisexual guy; since he was mostly gay, and several of our
mutual friends were gay, we often went dancing at the gay clubs, since
that's where a lot of his friends hung out. At that time, I would've
had no interest in male-male stories, even though I was quite aware of
(and sympathetic to) the issues of the gay community.
If you jump to conclusions about other people's attitudes based on one
sentence, you run the risk of doing the same injustice to them which you
so detest being subjected to. Being the target of prejudice doesn't
justify its practice (I'm not being holier-than-anybody. I fight this
battle within myself, too).
Beverly
PS: I find it rather interesting that no one seems to object to the male
rapee being turned on, and going from vehement objection to enthusiastic
enjoyment during the rape. The same arguments apply, of course; this is
pretty clearly just a fantasy. It's sad that men who are raped get even
less sympathy from society than women...
--
*******************************************************************************
* * *
* Sweet dreams are made of this * Does my employer know? *
* Who am I to disagree? * I don't care! *
* I've travelled the world * *
* and the seven seas * Does my employer care? *
* Everybody's looking for something * I don't know... *
* * *
*******************************************************************************
David R. Preston
In article <70...@viscous.sco.COM> dav...@sco.COM (Le Chevalier Blanc) writes:
>
>
> It's the same in alt.sex(.bondage). People expect
>heterosexual fantasies.
No, "people" expect bondage fantasies. Hence the name.
>If someone posted in ca.driving,
>you'd expect references to be about cars... a motorcycle posting would
>be unexpected.
Totally bogus analogy. Even if you had had the intelligence to write
"rec.autos...cars...motorcycle", it would still be stupid. It would be
more like someone posting a car review on rec.autos and someone from out
of the blue complaining about not being warned that it was a review about
a five-cylinder car instead of a car with an even number of cylinders.
This isn't a flame, but could morons please include a warning that their
posting includes stupidity?
pre...@lll-crg.llnl.gov Kohana i ka la a me kai
D. R. Preston P.O. Box 1125, Livermore CA 94551 USA
Le Chevalier Blanc
And so post-...@n7kbt.WA.COM spake:
->
-> How about next time a warning for people who do not
-> enjoy gay literature? This is not a flame, I just
-> would rather be forewarned than not. Thanks.
->
-> roger
->--
OK... I'd like to put in my $.02 in defense of roger's
sentiments:
First of all, I think all of you are reading much to much into
his request. Sounds to me like all he was asking was a simple line
at the beginning of the posting saying "Here's a gay fantasy for you;
Hope you like it".
If you want to be *absolutely* fair to everyone, we could
institute an unwritten rule that you put a very brief comment at the
beginning of fantasies stating the general plot of the story. Such
things as "This is a fantasy about Water Sports", "Here's one about
spanking", "I wrote this right after my boyfriend untied me from the
rafters.", etc.
Secondly, I'd like to point out that hetrosexual fantasies are
more common than homosexual. Just like there are more right handed
people than left handed people. Neither is better, just different.
So should everything in the world be made for both left handers and
right handers? Yes it should, but if you picked up a pair of unmarked
scissors, you could probably bet that they would be right handed.
You'd be pretty surprised if they were left-handers...
It's the same in alt.sex(.bondage). People expect
heterosexual fantasies. If someone was posting in soc.motss, people
would expect it to be homosexual. If someone posted in ca.driving,
you'd expect references to be about cars... a motorcycle posting would
be unexpected. But a posting in rec.motorcycles would be assumed to
be about motorcycles.
Lastly, some reactions to this mild request bordered on
paranoia! He wasn't attacking homosexualism... He was asking that
homosexual fantasies give some hint of their content. If you
disagreed with him, you could have said (politely) "Why don't we put a
forewarning in all fantasies to be fair?" and continued the
converstation politely from that point.
My opinions, not roger's.
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
David J. Easter Disclaimer: Mine! Mine! Mine! "Chivalry is not dead;
dav...@sco.COM Get! Get! Get! It's just paralyzed from
...!uunet!sco!davidje Mine! Mine! Mine! the neck up..."
(I'm rich! I'm rich! I'm a happy miser...)
Harry Ugol
>Harry:
>Our mailer hates you.
>could you try to get email through to me? I can't seem to find your site...
>
Actually you succeeded once (more on this in a moment). My email
address is at the end of all my postings; it's "har...@Ebay.sun.com".
The "Ebay" is important; Sun has recently split the corporate net into
mail domains, and one of these days (now?) the main Internet gateway
node (== sun.com) is going to lose knowledge of who's in what domain.
Everyone out there should start using domains to talk to your favorite
Sun people. Karl and I are in Ebay; most everyone else I've seen on
the net is in Eng. The Sun Usenet guru is in Central; for a while
after the last rebuild all my postings were coming out as
"har...@Central.sun.com" - never trust software.
If the address above doesn't work, ask a.s.b people for whom it does
work (Clay, Diana, Paul Traina, Roger Klorese, David Preston, Mike...
oops, wrong association path :-) to forward a message.
>Also, could you post a complete list of Rivendell rules, so I don't have
>to collect them? I feel lazy...
The reason I didn't respond to your letter immediately (aside from the
fact that I have to strictly ration my social correspondence; I've got
deliverables and schedules to meet) is that I don't like to release
the house rules as a set; if I were to do so publicly, no one would
have anything to look forward to when reading my postings :-).
Ordinarily I ask people to be patient and let me dollop them out in
the postings; since you've specifically told me you're impatient and
lazy, a copy will be written up and emailed to you asap ("p" =
"practical"), probably later today (along with an apology for taking
so long to decide what to do and respond to your letter, and some
public muttering about pushy bottoms... :-).
Harry Ugol
UUCP: {backbone}!sun!warpten!harryu
ARPA: har...@Ebay.sun.com
"Rivendell household rule #3: A mindfuck is a terrible thing to waste."
Sharon Fisher
By "recognize," do you mean "I know it when I see it"? Or do you
mean, "I admit to its existence"? I am sure that we are all relieved.
>I have even had a few gay friends.
Why, how benevolent and broad-minded of you.
>As long as they leave me alone, I can get along fine.
Gee, how can they be your friends if they're leaving you alone? I
like spending time with my friends. Or do you mean, "As long as they
don't make sexual advances to me"? Gosh, I have all sorts of friends
with whom I don't have sex. That's why I call them friends.
Otherwise I'd call them lovers.
Asmodeus
>>As for herterocentrism, I recognize homosexualism.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Just curious, Sharon, but di you have any idea
to what this word is supposed to refer?
>>As long as they leave me alone, I can get along fine.
>
>Gee, how can they be your friends if they're leaving you alone? I
Apparently he doesn't like being flattered. Or he's
not man enough to say, "no thanks." Or both.
I wonder if he leaves women alone?
STella Calvert
> How about next time a warning for people who do not
> enjoy gay literature? This is not a flame, I just
> would rather be forewarned than not. Thanks.
How about next time a warning for people who do not
enjoy straight literature? This is not a flame, I just
would rather be forewarned than not. Thanks.
---
Warning: This posting includes consensual violence between male and
female adults, non-consensual violence between female children and
male adults, human-animal contact, the use of irreverent language, and
gratuitous use of the word "dork". However, now that I've told you
all the twists in my plot, all out front, without any concealment, I
cannot build the tension as I desired. Therefore, instead of writing
that story, I am going to go play with myself.
---
Is this the future of the net? I hope not. Sometimes when I post, I
spend a lot of thought on making sure that the last paragraph is not
foreshadowed in the first, because I want to build my point slowly in
order to communicate better; at other times, I make sure that the
first narrative hook is echoed by a final restatement; sometimes I do
neither, but circle around the topic until I've looked at it in
several ways. When I attempt to write stories, I may or may not want
to start out by saying:
Heidi Rosybuns, our heroine, experiences non-consensual sex with her
lover, and does not realize that it was the person she had asked to
rape her until after he had pulled out.
In general, however, if I were attempting to tell such a story, I
PROBABLY would NOT let you, submissive readers, know that it was "only
a game" until after you had experienced the "reality" of that rape. I
call you all submissive, in this case, because if you wish to read the
best writing I can produce, you are forced to submit to my judgement
in how to produce it. You are free to refuse to read my politically
incorrect trash (Yeah, she wrote a pro-rape fantasy....) or to take it
as another pixel in your picture of me. In that, you are dominant.
The only way in which I can force you to read what I have to say is to
work on your fear that you'll miss it, on those all too rare occasions
when I say something that hits you just perfectly on the button.
I do sympathize with Constant Reader, who finds dominant het females
unappealing; with Occasional Lurker, who finds any story that even
fantasizes about rape to be porn (I take "porn" as a pure pejorative);
with Homosexual Panic, who is sure that reading a story by and for
lesbians would diminish her pronouns or something; with Vanilla Ice,
who considers any mention of spanking, or verbal abuse, or even of ear
piercing, to be degrading self-mutilation. I don't have an answer for
you, but as I have written and read on this net, I've become convinced
that it's best to distribute everything, and to leave it to the
individual news reader, or hir kill file, to sort it out. (It wasn't
just the net that gave me that conclusion, but watching our digital
anarchy in action has confirmed me in my opinion.)
I think it might be helpful if people who post via the anonymous
service were to use the same net.name at the head of each posting --
that would give someone who found that your first post pushed positive
buttons a shot at finding your next one; it would also enable people
who found your posts unpalatable to avoid them. Is it possible for
the anonymous program to insert a header-line something like
Written-by: Vanilla Ice? If not, perhaps putting that name at the
head of your post would give both your fans and nonfans a break.
This problem can't be solved, but I think this might alleviate it.
What do you think?
Love is the law, love under will!
STe...@xanadu.com 1016 E. El Camino Real, #302, Sunnyvale, CA 94087
Robert J. Kudla
know before I start reading a story if it's going to involve
non-consensual stuff or female rape scenes (in fact, I don't really
want to see about 80% of the MD/FS stuff and about 99% of the FD/MS
stuff), but let's face it, this isn't my net or your net and you can't
expect everyone to cater to your every whim.
To whatshisface the geek up there who actually has some gay friends
and doesn't even MIND them as long as they don't bother him: Does that
mean you're a seperatist het? I feel rather alienated, myself. Some of
my best friends (Hi Diana, Don, Matt, Mike, Ron, Stephen, Martha, and
the dozen or so other straight or mostly straight people I know who
read this) are het, and if a woman starts to flirt with me when I'm in
one of my rather violently faggy moods, somehow I'm still not
bothered. At least, not enough to tell the world that I'm man enough
to condescend to friendship with them as long as they don't hit on me.
Get it? Good, now get a life.
(To Crusty and the eighteen people who will send me anonymous mail of
one sort of another after reading this: No, I'm not trying to act
butch anymore than a woman stating her mind is trying to act butch.
Shit, I can't even grow facial hair.)
*sigh*.... If only I could get my killfile to work so I wouldn't see
these anonymous posts to begin with....
--
Robert Jude Kudla <ku...@pawl.rpi.edu> <ku...@acm.rpi.edu> <fw3s@RPITSMTS>
What noisy cats are we.
Harry Ugol
>presence on this newsgroup since day one. The best
>thing about this newsgroup is that it is *NOT* a hetero-
>sexual dominated environment, that we have all -- gay,
>bi and straight -- coexisted quite happily and productively
>here and that we will continue to do so.
>
That, btw, reminds me of one of the things I really appreciate about
my experiences in the SM world in general: SM is the one arena I've
been in where the body's plumbing really doesn't matter. True,
there's an erotic component to some interactions (another thing I
appreciate about SM is that, for me at least, it was the key to
unlocking my piggish side), but the important, essential quality for
me and mine is the spiritual, the inter*person*al interaction. When I
play with my friend Cleo, the fact that she's a she and I'm not and I
don't usually turn on to shes doesn't matter; what matters is that
both of us are human beings and we can create wonderful music
together. The fact that Carla doesn't relate erotically to women (I
think that's true; haven't asked her) didn't prevent Widow from giving
her one of the best sessions she received in a long and very piggish
night (well after all, it *was* her birthday, and Widow was also
feeling energetic that night - earlier on she had Dr. Tech screaming,
which is the first time I've heard him lose his composure like that
(Widow may be a woman, but she apparently knows a lot about male
plumbing :-)). All this gender-free play is apparently going to freak
out some of the non-leather Radical Fairies next summer; we ("we" in
this case being the Leather Fairy organization called Black Leather
Wings) want to hold a gathering at the Wolf Creek fairy sanctuary and
open it to Leather Fairies of all genders, as well as Radical Fairies
of all persuasions, and some R.F.s haven't been that close to women in
years. Ah well, house rule #3...
Anonymous Posting Service
--
To post an article through the anonymous posting service, MAIL your article
to post-...@n7kbt.WA.COM. Mailed replies will also be posted anonymously.
Robert J. Kudla
It's the same in alt.sex(.bondage). People expect
heterosexual fantasies. If someone was posting in soc.motss, people
would expect it to be homosexual. If someone posted in ca.driving,
you'd expect references to be about cars... a motorcycle posting would
be unexpected. But a posting in rec.motorcycles would be assumed to
be about motorcycles.
Bzzzzt. Wrong answer, that assumes this group is alt.sex.hets.bondage
or something. I'd think it would be obvious even to Mr. Blank (was
that his name? this thing won't give me a stupid attribution line....)
that since there *was* such a vehement response, people do *not*
expect heterosexual fantasies. I won't even take into account that
there are proportionally far more gay people involved in the sexual
frontier than hets.
I'd also like to point out that posting gay sexual fantasies to
soc.motss would be about the same level of net.stupidity as posting
Oriental rape fantasies to soc.culture.far-east or whatever it is.
soc.motss is a group to discuss issues pertinent to gay living, not to
trade masturbations. alt.sex.* on the other hand was certainly not
meant to be a playground for the het population alone.
Lastly, some reactions to this mild request bordered on
paranoia! He wasn't attacking homosexualism... He was asking that
homosexual fantasies give some hint of their content. If you
disagreed with him, you could have said (politely) "Why don't we put a
forewarning in all fantasies to be fair?" and continued the
converstation politely from that point.
Homosexualism? Is that a new word? Hmmm...
At any rate, I believe the complaints may have come about because he
phrased it as if gay fantasies were weird enough that they deserved a
special warning or something. "Summary" might have been a nicer term;
I've asked for the same myself several times (and, of course, gotten
nowhere).
Salit
> How about next time a warning for people who do not
> enjoy gay literature? This is not a flame, I just
> would rather be forewarned than not. Thanks.
How about writing your name in the header so I'll be able to
put you in my KILL file?
> roger
Hillel ga...@cs.duke.edu
"Re-think it; retract it; go home; get laid -- heterosexually, of course."
-- Diane Holt
John Munsch
>how would roger and others here feel if I asked that the myriad of
>such stories which appear here, along with the stories on the rest of
>the net, and the billboards and the magazine ads and the movies and...
>be appropriately labelled, just to spare my too-tender sensibilities?
>Burdened with an unreasonable request? Made into a second-class
>citizen? Hmmmm....
>
[Lots Deleted]>"Rivendell household rule #6: It's only a *little* apple - go on,
>take a bite."
OK, maybe the original request was made for all the wrong reasons but I would
like to make much the same request for a different reason...
As a longtime avid reader of the net I have to contend with an enormous
amount of text in an average day. I read about 15 groups and among those
are some of the MOST active groups on the net: comp.sys.amiga, rec.arts.comics,
and rec.arts.startrek. If I end up wasting even 15 seconds on each of the
articles I don't read in a day then I spend 30 minutes (or more) on stuff that
I don't want to read. I'm sure that you've encountered volumes of this
yourself:
1) Discussions of the "old days" of computers that spring up in
places like rec.humor or comp.os.minix and go on for weeks...
2) Articles that are labeled Re: blah blah... that have zip to
do with the original blah blah... article.
3) Dom or sub fiction where you couldn't even tell the sex of the
writer until a page or more into the story.
4) Even test articles require me to read the 10+ line headers over
a serial connection.
The reason we have a zillion groups on Usenet is so that we can separate
what really interests us from what doesn't to get the most from our valuable
time. What I'm suggested is just a kindness to the other readers. I would
like labeling to go on all the fiction to try to catagorize it so that I can
save what I want to read for later and skip the rest. For that reason I would
like to see EVERYONE label their fiction so that I can tell what the target
audience is to some degree. If that makes me a bigot then at least I'll be
a bigot with more free time :-).
Pocket Philosophy:
The reason we are all here is because we share a common interest in b&d&s&m. I
don't think we all share common fantasies.
John Munsch
Harry Ugol
>
>Homosexualism? Is that a new word? Hmmm...
>
Actually it's a very old word, vintage
Victorian/Edwardian/Freudian/someplace in there. When used in the
classic sense (I'm still not sure if the original user knows its
history, or if its use was a coincidence - then again, in my view of
the Universe(s?), there is not, and never has been, and never will be,
any such thing as "a coincidence"), it implies an acceptance of
homosexual culture somewhat above that of the Massachusetts Criminal
Code (where the sodomy law does not mention homosexuality by name but
instead refers to it as "that abominable Crime against Nature" - usage
c. 1620), but not much. When I see the word, I always envision
butterflies pinned down on cork boards in somebody's musty old
collection.
Harry Ugol
UUCP: {backbone}!sun!warpten!harryu
ARPA: har...@Ebay.sun.com
"Rivendell household rule #3: A mindfuck is a terrible thing to
waste."
Ken Burgess RCD
>>
>>What you will understand is that we have been a major
>>presence on this newsgroup since day one. The best
>>thing about this newsgroup is that it is *NOT* a hetero-
>>sexual dominated environment, that we have all -- gay,
>>bi and straight -- coexisted quite happily and productively
>>here and that we will continue to do so.
>>
>
>That, btw, reminds me of one of the things I really appreciate about
>my experiences in the SM world in general: SM is the one arena I've
>been in where the body's plumbing really doesn't matter. True,
>there's an erotic component to some interactions (another thing I
>appreciate about SM is that, for me at least, it was the key to
>unlocking my piggish side), but the important, essential quality for
>me and mine is the spiritual, the inter*person*al interaction.
I totally agree with this view of sexuality. I think that its
great to break beyond the gender classifications, and be able to
really see people from the element of what they can show you
within yourself, and to be able to share very closely with
physical pleasure. Im not saying that we all have to run around
preaching love and compassion, but not to get hung up on shoving
people into classifications which limit our ability to clearly see
who they are.
I would also be interested in getting a resopnse to anyone else on
the net who agrees with these ideas. I always like to know about
other people who I can talk and share with.
By the way I really enjoyed The Costume Party, and thought that it
was really well done.
Lots of new Ideas- Ken.
Ken Burgess
kbur...@ames.arc.nasa.gov
Nasa-Ames Research Center
(415)-694-6347
Sharon Fisher
>more common than homosexual. Just like there are more right handed
>people than left handed people. Neither is better, just different.
>heterosexual fantasies. If someone was posting in soc.motss, people
>would expect it to be homosexual. If someone posted in ca.driving,
How do you know that heterosexual fantasies are more common than
homosexual? Do you mean that fantasies of heterosexual people are more
common than fantasies of homosexual people? That I could agree with,
since it seems fairly certain that there are more straight people than
gay people. However, straights often fantasize about gay sex.
Alt.sex and alt.sex.bondage are not limited to heterosexual fantasies.
Maybe *you* "expect" that. And no, homosexual fantasies do not belong
in soc.motss. Soc.motss is for discussion of gay issues. Sex -- gay,
straight, whatever -- goes here.
Asmodeus
>I feel better just writing about it. I think I'll go home and play with my
>big thick dick for a couple of hours.
Well, now, you're what I would call a straightforward
type ... no beating around the bush at all.
Planning any trips to Indiana? Just curious ...
Rick Rutledge
>|> My friend Rod calls me one day and asks if I would like to join
>|> him at a costume party that night. I tell him that I don't have
> How about next time a warning for people who do not
> enjoy gay literature? This is not a flame, I just
> would rather be forewarned than not. Thanks.
>--
I've observed, very casually, that this group is probably half-and-half
gay/straight. None of the straight stories are prefaced with a 'straight'
warning, and I'm often two or three screens into it before I realize it's
not for me (especially when, as is common, it's written from the female
perspective). However, I dont' complain.
Perhaps the authors could do us the courtesy of a notation in the keywords
if the story has an overwhelming `bent' one way or the other?
Also, this newsgroup is *THE WORST* for posting under outdated and
irrelevant SUBJECT headers. This makes it hard to kill subjects you don't
want because the conversatrion has usually wandered to something totally
different, but still carries the same header.
I go crazy when I see "Re: Mail and Other Stuff (long)" and then nothing
that the article contains 5 whopping lines, and is in fact a "Hey, that was
great" response to a 138-line story or some such.
OK, done flaming now.
-Rick
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rick Rutledge {ucsfcca|claris}!wet!rick ri...@wet.UUCP
"Voici le secret." dit le renard. "On ne voit bien qu'avec le coeur.
L'essentiel est invisible aux yeux." -Antoine de St. Exupery, _le Petit Prince_
Anonymous Posting Service
|In article <5...@n7kbt.WA.COM> post-...@n7kbt.WA.COM (Steve) writes:
|
|>I feel better just writing about it. I think I'll go home and play with my
|>big thick dick for a couple of hours.
|
|Well, now, you're what I would call a straightforward
|type ... no beating around the bush at all.
Oh, I dunno. On the other hand, he certainly *is* beating around
his bush...
Never mind...early in the morning!
Kerrel
<drum roll>