Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!wuarchive!usc!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!gateway
From: turpin@cs.utexas.EDU (Russell Turpin)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: comments on violent porn, and violence in general
Summary: Danger is everywhere.
Message-ID: <19511@cs.utexas.edu>
Date: 28 Apr 91 23:46:08 GMT
References: <9104251548.aa18084@ics.uci.edu>
Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas
Lines: 56
Approved: tittle@ics.uci.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: zola.ics.uci.edu

-----
I thank Ms Tittle for her comments.

In article <9104251548.aa18084@ics.uci.edu> tittle@zola.ICS.UCI.EDU (Cindy Tittle Moore) writes:
> Back when a.s.b. first appeared on the net, there was this wonderful
> poster named [omitted] who detailed some of the sexual experiences
> she had with her boyfriend.  She was the submissive, he was the
> dominant.  She quit posting (may have actually changed her login)
> when some people started writing letters to her along the lines of
> "hey baby we know you like it, sit still and let me fuck you" ...

I think the concerned poster would easily have handled any unwanted
advances over the net without withdrawing from newsgroup.  I believe
that the event that triggered this poster's temporary absence was
something quite different: the delivery to the poster's parents of
some of the poster's articles by a self-appointed (and cowardly
anonymous) "moral" guardian.  There are all sorts of ways to invade
someone's life, and people might want to consider which is the more
violent: someone writing positively about their S&M experiences, or
an anonymous stranger intruding into the writer's family life in an
unwanted fashion.

[I had forgotten that; thanks for the correction.  --CTM]

A similar event has occurred since then, and these constitute, in
my opinion, the most tragic consequences of the alt.sex.bondage
newsgroup.  These sad events result from the misguided action of
those who oppose S&M.

> ... we have everything to fear from those who do not understand
> the consent part of S&M.

This is true, but not just of S&M.  There are many ideas and many
practices which, themselves not wrong, can lead to tragedy because
of people who twist them to wrong or misguided ends.

[Absolutely.  CTM]

-----

I would like to add, if the moderators permit it, that some of my
previous criticisms of Ms Panditji were too hasty.  I read broader
social purpose into what were essentially expressions of personal
like, and this misunderstanding may have stemmed from my failure to
make clear the limited intent of some of my own writings.

In these threads on pornography, it has not been my intent to
convince people of what they should like or not like.  This
neither I, nor anyone else, is qualified to do.  Rather, I am
trying to comment on how this society views pornography, and on
some of the moral criticisms that have been launched against it
and against those who enjoy certain forms of it.  I believe that
the political (which I address) can be separated from the
personal (which I do not) at least to this extent.

Russell