Don’t Hang up Man

Once again sadism shows that it has not lost its unique ability too entertain amuse and delight. Who could ever forget the situation the Israeli Ambassador to Chile managed to get himself in, discovered by Chilean police bound and trussed in the courtyard of his residence. Suffice to say not only is he no longer the ambassador to Chile; he is no longer a member of the Israeli diplomatic corps. I know we should not laugh at people’s misfortunes and wrecked careers, but you would have to have a heart of stone not to find the situation faced by Chilean police officers somewhat amusing.

For your further entertainment and amusement let me introduce you too Takahiro Fujinuma unsurprisingly from Japan, who has a taste for being told off by women. Well not just a taste it seems he lost all connection with reality, placing over 2000 calls to directory enquiries just to beg the operators not too hang up in the hope that they would tell him off (it has been described as a ‘scolding fetish’)

Can we have our word back please?

One of the things that irritates me about sadism is how it uses language. It might sound pedantic, but using language out of context is one of the tricks that groups use to control discussion. If they ‘own’ a word it gives them some form of authority even though they may be using the word in entirely the wrong context. One such word is ‘Fetish’

Now in sadism fetish means someone who has an unusual sexual preference, which can range from extreme sexual violence, to funny things such as a recent one I saw described as a subculture to ‘ass’ worship the ‘Powdered sugar fart fetish’. Honestly I am not joking. It’s got so bad with sadism diagnosing fetishes that people who for example enjoy seeing women wearing stockings are said to have a ‘stocking fetish’. So that’s a vast swathe of the male population dragged into the fetish camp then.

Maybe that’s why the word is used this way, if more people who are classified as having a fetish, then those that actually do have one will achieve some degree of acceptance due to the amount of people who find themselves categorised as ‘fetishists’ (sic).

Originally the word ‘fetish’ evolved within the psychiatric community to describe a sexual disorder where a person could ONLY be turned on by a sexual preference; or the presence of a non-animate object.

Note the use of the word only.

So does the powdered sugar fart fetishist actually have a fetish? Using sadism’s definition yes, but using the original psychiatric definition they would have a fetish if they could ONLY get turned on by powdered sugar farts.

Same goes for stockings, take these millions of men throughout the world who fall into sadism’s definition of fetishism because they enjoy the sight of women in stockings. In reality they don’t have a fetish at all, because like most men if stockings are not present they still enjoy the sight of a woman.

See how the meanings of words are important, and how this little nuance in definition changes immensely who should really be described as having a fetish.

Someone made this point perfectly by producing a web page about a man described as having a ‘Naked Lady Fetish’, charting his struggle to come to terms with his condition, how he imagines what women he meets would look like naked, or watching TV for hours on end in the hope of seeing a naked lady and how this fetish has caused him to be ostracised by Neighbours. Of course in reality every red-blooded male has these feelings at some time.

I couldn’t have made the point any better about how sadism gets so wrapped up in itself, how it comes up with concepts such as the powdered sugar fart fetish which is some kind of subculture of another fetish. It is so outlandish that it demands to be ridiculed.

Really this fetish about fetishism is just so ridiculous its funny, as the naked lady fetish shows.

Glenn Marcus gets 9 Years

Well it seems the courts have finally decided to deal with Glenn Marcus. In a highly charged courtroom, Marcus was sentenced last Friday to 9 years imprisonment for forced labour and false imprisonment. His family and some friends were present, still protesting his innocence. Other supporters were barred from court for fear that they would interrupt proceedings, or physically stop Marcus from being taken down.

So much for respect for the law, but other sadists have been quick to distance themselves from Marcus. When it has emerged just how brutal Marcus was with his slave, many in the sadistic lifestyle have been quick to dismiss him as an unfortunate ‘bad egg’, an abhorrence.

When you look at it properly though Marcus defence has a point. He used the Dogma of informed consent just like every other sadist, he had the slaves contract drawn up and signed. He followed the creed just as others do. This is yet another situation that exposes the flaws of informed consent. The defence used to excuse some sad sack spanking his wife, is also the defence used by another sad sack who sows a gag ball into his slave’s mouth, or tries to surgically sow up her vagina.

Marcus was not found guilty because of the abuse his slave suffered even though she changed her mind and said no. In parts of America, such is the influence of sadism, the right of a sadist to abuse overrides the rights of a slave to say no. Despite the horrific nature of the abuse, Marcus was only found guilty under forced labour laws having made his slave work for no reward on his web site.

Far from being a ‘bad egg’ Marcus and his like are sadly too prevalent in sadism, and are allowed to facilitate their abuses because of unquestioning tolerance by other sadists. The unwritten rule is not to question someone else’s abuse for fear that your own abuses will come under scrutiny. Thus informed consent becomes the tool where seriously disturbed individuals like Marcus are provided with unquestioning support from people who ordinarily would be sick to the stomach by his abuses.

I doubt that many but the most hard core involved in the lifestyle think that Marcus is anything but a unhinged and sick individual, but anyone who adheres to the creed of informed consent has to take a share of the burden of responsibility for generating a situation where Marcus and his ilk can practice their disturbed abuses with no fear of consequences.

Christian Domestic Discipline

Controversy has stirred recently when a group calling itself Christian Domestic Discipline launched its own web site. They did this because as fundamentalist Christians who believe in giving their wives a good slapping if they break the rules, they couldn’t find similar minded people on the net without being swamped by BDSM pornography.

Now I have no truck with Fundamentalists of any description, people who believe they know a special truth, and allow no one else to hold an opinion are always frightening.

From the site

‘A Christian Domestic Discipline marriage is one that is set up according to Biblical standards; that is, the husband is the authority in the household. The wife is submissive to her husband as is fit in the Lord and her husband loves her as himself. He has the ultimate authority in his household, but it is tempered with the knowledge that he must answer to God for his actions and decisions. He has the authority to spank his wife for punishment, but in real CDD marriages this is taken very seriously and usually happens only rarely. CDD is so much more than just spanking. It is the husband loving the wife enough to guide and teach her, and the wife loving the husband enough to follow his leadership. A Christian marriage embodies true romance and a Christian man a true hero.’

Now where have I read this before? Oh yes; have you ever read any explanation for a d/s relationship? Take out the ‘god’ bit and its almost word for word what appears thousands of times on BDSM sites, the nauseating rational for some master to abuse his sub for his fun.

They have even stolen the consent argument.

‘Though we believe the Bible gives a husband the authority to use spanking as one tool in enforcing his authority in the home with or without his wife's permission, in today's world we recognize the legality that mandates that all CDD must be consensual. Therefore we will do not condone non-consensual CDD as a rule.’

That’s big of them.

Feminists quite rightly have taken CDD to task, with predictably little success, but the most vehement reaction has come from BDSM. Sadists are pretty miffed that another group, Christian fundamentalist no less, has stolen its dogma and applied it to a the same process under a different guise.

I find it amusing that sadists can rule that consensual violence in a religious setting the province of extremists, and yet the same violence in a sexual setting the province of the enlightened and progressive.

Why is a sadist's Informed consent more legitimate than a Christian Fundamentalist’s?

My opinion is that sadists and Christian fundamentalists who practice CDD both do it for the same reason. It isn’t some path to kinky freedom, as BDSM would have, neither is it a way showing your devotion to god as CDD believe. It’s done because some people get sexually excited by dominating, humiliating and hitting other people. That’s the bare bones of it. At least someone who admits that they do it because it turns them on is being truthful. I would hate to live near someone like that but give credit where it is due. The hypocrisy of dressing abuse up as some kind of new agey spiritual fulfilment only achievable trough sadism, is as pathetic as a Christian fundamentalist using devotion to god to excuse the fact that he likes domineering, abusing and hitting his wife.

The most amusing part of the story though is the amount of loathing generated between the two groups. They both do the same thing for the same reason, but one group sells it as liberating whilst the other group sells it as part of control. ‘Abuse all you like, but you can only excuse abuse with my dogma, if you excuse abuse with your dogma you are wrong/secret sadists/ damned to hell for eternity’. This is par for the course with groups that have dogmatic beliefs.

“Noteworthy is the vehemence with which groups stress differences between each other. The more closely movements share an outlook, the more virulent the attacks on their rivals become, much more so than on other groups which follow completely different beliefs.”

ON THE PSYCHOLOGY OF SPIRITUAL MOVEMENTS, Michael Rogge

And the saddest thing? Neither group is even remotely aware of the irony. They castigate their opponents justification for abuse. They spend time and energy to distance themselves from each other. What they simply fail to understand is that it’s the abuse itself that irrevocably links them.

And it’s the same abuse that diminishes them as people, not the dogma they use to excuse it.

Graham Coutts

First of all an apology for not posting recently, but I have been waiting for the sentencing of Glenn Marcus, who as you may know, lost his appeal against his trial last month. Sentencing was due to take place early June but nothing has happened yet, so I guess further machinations are at work. We all know how long the legal process can take, but I will post when his sentence is passed down.

Some better news. Graham Coutts, who was convicted for murdering Jane Longhurst, was found guilty at his retrial of murder, and sentenced to life with a minimum tariff of 26 years. Coutts had won a retrial because the original trial judge had not allowed the jury to consider a verdict of manslaughter.

The jury convicted Coutts for murder again, despite him wheeling out the ‘consent’ defence without the slightest evidence that Jane Longhurst was anything more than an unwilling victim of this sadist who was obsessed with strangulation, necrophilia, and violent Internet pornography. Congratulations to Jane’s family, who have not flinched in the face of such contemptible slurs against her memory, and have campaigned to ensure her murderer was brought to justice.

As part of this campaign, and lobbying of the government by the Jane Longhurst trust, the British Government has just published a bill (Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill 2006-07) that will make it a criminal offence to own, distribute or download violent pornographic images. I have mentioned this previously. This is to address the problem that many of these images are easily accessible on the Internet, and will make it a criminal offence to access or download specific images that deal with torture. The full bill can be read here, and the proposed legislation has caused consternation within BDSM. Effectively only the most extreme material will be illegal, but that has not stopped them from invoking the anti censorship argument, and predicting that everything from artistic independence, to the watching of horror films will be made illegal. Nonsense of course but you can’t beat a good scare story to scare people into supporting you.

If the legislation goes through parliament as planned then this law will be on the statute books sometime next year, and I cannot think of anything that would stand as a more fitting monument to Jane’s memory.