|
hausboy -> RE: what fucking community? (8/13/2011 8:56:35 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather
ok, lets take them one by one.
1: : a unified body of individuals: this clearly doesn't apply as we are not in any way unified, so it really discounts all the subdefinitions of 1, but fuck it, lets look at them anyway
a : state, commonwealth clearly has nothing to do with our discussion
b : the people with common interests living in a particular area; broadly : the area itself this is probably the one most of you will latch onto. well what's the common interest? bdsm? well what is bdsm? we recently argued for pages about just what the fuck bdsm meant, we've argued endlessly over whether it is sexual or not, to some it doesn't even include kinky sex. so clearly bdsm isn't our common interest because we don't even agree what bdsm is. so i ask again, what is the common interest?
c : an interacting population of various kinds of individuals (as species) in a common location no common location, unless you're going to claim the whole fucking planet is the common location <which would exclude one or two down in p&r> and that's just stretching the meaning stupidly to try be right.
d : a group of people with a common characteristic or interest living together within a larger society again, what is the common interest or characteristic?
e : a group linked by a common policy no common policy
f : a body of persons or nations having a common history or common social, economic, and political interests clearly inapplicable.
g : a body of persons of common and especially professional interests scattered through a larger society again, not applicable, no common interests
2 : society at large well, no, that one doesn't fit. [:D]
3a : joint ownership or participation clearly inapplicable
b : common character : likeness clearly inapplicable
c : social activity : fellowship applies to some but not all of us, so no, doesn't make us a community
d : a social state or condition and again, clearly inapplicable.
so where is this bdsm community?
and hausboy, even the "community" you were talking about was a gay bdsm community that didn't include all gay bdsmers, so it's a nice example of a small community that fits under the umbrella of bdsm, but it isn't, and never was a community of all bdsmers.
Hi Hannah
I understand your points--and many of them are valid. I can only speak to my experience of what I was talking about so here goes:
b. people with common interests living in a particular area
Ok. You're right--I'll latch onto that first. Obviously--the common area need not be explained.
We did have common interests--the BDSM social clubs--and I'm not talking about clubs as a place--clubs as a group, The Outcasts, The Exiles, The Trusted Servants, The Crusaders, etc. (modeled after motorcyle clubs--and some of them were MCs) Many just held monthly meetings and did everything from fundraisers for local charities to play technique classes to just general discussion groups. Here was the common interest: to be a member, you had to be interested in Leather/BDSM with whatever that particular group was (Christian gay men, Lesbian or Bi women, Boys/Bois/TG boys, you get the picture. There was even a BDSM knitting circle.
I belonged to several groups--one called "The Pervert Scouts"--we were a uniform fetishist and BDSM group that had a common thread of all being non-bio boys who were into performing different types of service to gay/bi men and women as well as serving at Titleholder events, etc.
You didn't need to be a member of any group to be a part of the community at large--S.F. was unique--probably only parts of NYC come close to it-- there were 1000's of queer leatherfolk who did not go to parties, belong to a group etc. BUT they would patronize leather owned businesses, eat in leather owned restaurants, etc. When I saw the leather flag flying at an establishment, I *DID* feel the sense of community. (first time I saw a gay flag flying in public, it brought me to tears.)
This could apply to c and d.
e. common policy: alright, maybe it's a stretch, but some might be able to argue that Safe Sane & Consentual could fit that description. I'm sure it's a matter of semantics.
f. common history: Hannah- I could not disagree more. We DO have a history. Maybe you don't identify with it, but please check out the National Leather Archives & Museum project in Chicago. Art, writing, sashes, club colors, flags, you name it.
http://www.leatherarchives.org/home.htm
You can certainly say "That's not my history." To me, that is a dishonor to the memories of those that faced tremendous adversity and obstacles because of their BDSM/Leather lives. (I remember the Spanner trial vividly.)
c : social activity : fellowship
A fellowship does not necessarily include EVERYONE for it to exist, any more so than a community has to include everyone to be a community. It's a community--not a society. Leather and BDSM absolute does (well, did) have a fellowship. I still see examples of this fellowship in local leather clubs and bigger organizations such as American Brotherhood.
Lastly--I do believe we have a common interest even here--we may not all like the same things, may not agree on many things, but there is a reason why we are all on CM, and that is the common interest we all have in meeting others into BDSM, talking to others about BDSM or learning about BDSM.
In any case, I really appreciated this thread and am finding the dialogue really engaging. (Hannah, you always start such good threads!!!)
|
|
|
|
