Old Friends... and lots of booze

Yes, I’m still alive.

Haven’t been available to post much lately.  A few weeks back we were inundated w/ houseguests.  Then I had an assignment from my Owner that kept me busy for a week… then my seasonal job started up again last week, and getting re-adjusted to working for a living left me whipped out when I got home each day.

But now I have some time.  My Owner gave me permission to go to Dragon*Con w/ my amigos… but my motorcycle chain is having some kind of slippage issue (not a happy puppy!) and my car is older than cuneiform, so I’m kind of stuck at the Treehouse this weekend.  Oh, well…  Truth is, I haven’t enjoyed Dragon as much in recent years since it’s gotten so freaking big.  I think the first one I went to was summer of ’91, when it was in just one hotel.  Now it’s like 5 hotels and so crowded that it’s hard to enjoy… especially if you’re already not a big crowds person.

Let me go back a few weeks to the houseguest inundation.  I have a little group of very close friends (chosen family, really) w/ whom I go back to Jr. High School.  They’re sort of my vanilla pack (well… mostly vanilla b/c Max is part of it, and he describes himself as a closet sadist… to which I have replied, “Does this closet have a glass door!?”).  I kind of brought us together waaaaaaay back when I was 13 or 14… and my rather highly developed sense of loyalty has kept us together all these years.  I’m a pronounced introvert – INTJ – and don’t make lots of close friends… but the people I do bond w/ I have a tendency to be pretty devoted to.  It’s a puppy thing.

Now… among this little group would be one German.  I befriended him when he was over here as an exchange student – we got to be so close that I think he ended up spending more time at my place than w/ his host parents.  He now lives in Potsdam, but travels a lot on business b/c he works for the UN… so he gets over to the States about once a year or two.  Well, a few weeks back, he was here for a conference in DC, and he arranged to stay a few extra days to hang w/ us.  So my lovely Owner and I drove up to DC and stayed w/ him (free of charge… thank you United Nations) at a very posh hotel just a couple of blocks from Capitol Hill.  So while he spent his days in meetings, Ma’am and I took in some of the sights.  (This was an improvement over the last time he was in DC and Ma’am and I picked him up and we left DC as a huge, freaking snowstorm came in and buried the city.  We barley got out in time.)

We drove him back to our place and were joined by Max and his boy and another really old friend of ours.  One of my other best friends from since we were in the seventh grade is now in Naval Intelligence and has spent the last two years stationed at Pearl Harbor.  He has a month off at home before he ships out to Tokyo for the next two years to spy on the Chinese, and by a great stroke of luck he happened to be back home at the same time as the German’s conference… so we were able to assemble a part of our “pack” that hasn’t been together in over 10 years.

My Owner’s wife joined us from Atlanta, and we had a crazy great time at the Treehouse for three days and two nights talking, drinking, talking more… staying up until three or four AM… drinking more… and, oh yeah, we did a little hiking too w/ the bio dogs.  As usual, our conversations ranged over science, politics, philosophy, books, art, Shakespeare, role-playing games… and occasionally degenerate into some kind of techy computer talk that I lose interest in. (The German’s MS was in artificial intelligence.  His PhD was in neuroscience – I’m okay w/ the neuroscience; it’s the computer programming stuff that makes me want to go mow the grass…)

It really was an awesome few days… followed by moving the party from the Treehouse to Atlanta.  Max, Jake and I went out to the Eagle for their Black and Blue night.  (No, surprising as it may be, the German and the guy in the Navy are both straight… although from the way the German dresses, you would be fooled; he could be a contestant on “Gay or European?”)  

I said hey to a few people I knew, but mostly just enjoyed listening to Max and Jake be extreeeeemly catty about the other patrons.  LOL.

The next day was the Atlanta Dominion men-only play party.  Lots of fun.  I got tag-teamed by my Alpha Pup and his Handler, and had some great marks the next day.  :-)

And the Beagle tried on a sport-bike suit, which is such a fetish of mine!  *panting & drooling*  (Still having fantasies about that… er... I'll be in my bunk!)

Well, I know most of my peeps are at Dragon or on their way (except for the one who’s back in Germany now), and thus too busy to read any more of my ramblings.  Have a great weekend, and post some pictures for me!

Barry Schwartz: Our Loss of Wisdom

This TED Talk  is quite good...

Aristotle, Friendship, and M/s Relationships (repeat)

Sorry for neglecting you, readers.  This week has been occupied w/ a "project" and last week the Treehouse was invaded by five of my closest, chosen family.  I need to write about that... and a few other things in my brain...  but I'm still occupied w/ the previously mentioned "project."  But, so that you won't feel abandoned, allow me to cheat, and re-post something from my old blog.  This was originally written in August, 2007.  Enjoy.

*  *  *


Lately I’ve been thinking about Aristotle’s 3 forms of friendship… how I can see them at work in my life… and also how they apply in M/s relationships. Philosophical mutterings follow:

Aristotle’s first and lowest level of friendship is the “friendship of utility.” Both parties derive a practical benefit from one-another. When that benefit is no longer present, the basis for the friendship is gone, and the two people soon drift apart. Now, it’s important to point out that the friendship is mutually beneficial – this is not a case of one person using another. Examples are like business partners, work colleagues, or members of a band or sports team. What this brings to mind for me, personally, is any number of “gaming friends” I’ve had. What we primarily enjoyed was playing games together, and were “using” one-another for this (mutually beneficial) purpose.

The second, and higher, level is a “friendship of pleasure.” This relationship is founded on mutual enjoyment. Pleasure friends like hanging around one-another. Practical benefit doesn’t matter… and it’s not what they are doing, just that they are doing something (anything!) together.

I need to point out that Aristotle’s categories are not exclusive. A relationship can have elements of both pleasure and utility. But Aristotle argues that the core of the relationship will be primarily one or the other. You might think first of two business partners who get along very well, always laughing and joking, but after retirement they rarely ever contact one-another… and then think of partners/band members/teammates who, after retirement, still talk all the time, go fishing, go to dinner, and continue to just hang-out. While most friendships probably contain both elements of utility and pleasure, the core of the relationship will either focus around what they are doing together (utility) or just that they are together (pleasure). Gaming friends may be using one-another for pleasure… but the pleasure is being derived primarily from the game rather than the company. A second point is that, Aristotle classifies pleasure as a higher friendship b/c it’s harder to break. As we’ve said, a friendship of utility terminates fairly easily – as soon as the relationship stops being mutually useful. While friends of pleasure may drift apart (people change) it takes longer and is more difficult.

Before moving on, I want to make one more point. What about romantic relationships? Well, Aristotle classifies them as “friendships of pleasure.” Your mate may (one hopes) be thought of as the friend whose company you derive the most pleasure from… so much so that you feel compelled to live together, do most of your activities together, and spend the rest of your lives together.

The third, highest form of friendship is the “perfect friendship,” “friendship of virtue,” or “friendship of inspiration.” Remember Jack Nicholson’s line in As Good as it Gets? “You make me wish I was a better man.” That’s the idea. It is through knowing one-another that these two improve, not their lots or situation in life (utility), but their characters. They grow more virtuous together. (It needs to be quickly noted here that “virtue” for the Pagan Greeks meant something a little different from what it usually means today. Greek virtue means not just that a person is morally upright, but that he has excellence of character. Strength, courage, wisdom, will, honor, power, depth, vision…)

Aristotle believed perfect friendships lasted, essentially, forever. It can outlast any change in situation and even outlast a lack of pleasure w/ one-another. This relationship is, essentially, unbreakable, b/c it’s not a matter of mutual-benefit, but is completely self-less… b/c perfect friends cannot separate their individual fates from their mutual relationship. He described this relationship as “one soul in two bodies.”

He also believed that these friendships were extremely rare. One of his oft-quoted lines is, “A man is truly happy if he has known three true friends.” Part of the reason why this relationship was so rare is b/c, he felt only good and virtuous (we might say “noble”) people were capable of it. When I reflect on my own social life, I can see that I have a wide circle of utility friends. I have much fewer pleasure friends, but there certainly are several. And I would like to count myself among the “truly happy” b/c I think I maybe have 3 perfect friendships… but Aristotle also said it was impossible to say if a man led a happy life until he reached its end, so…

Aristotle also emphasizes that perfect friends must be equals. He explicitly denies that a master & slave, employer & employee, mentor & student, or husband & wife could be perfect friends. His reasoning is that, this form of friendship is so other-focused, that the master would instantly free his slave and the employer would make the employee his full partner. And if you look at the case of the mentor-student, while the mentor may derive certain utilities and pleasures from the relationship, it will always be uneven – by definition, the student is the primary receiver of benefit in such a relationship. In the last case, if you think about the traditional, pre-feminist view of the roles of husband & wife, this makes a little more sense and clarifies why he classified lovers as “friends of pleasure.”

Now, this set me to thinking. Here, as w/ so many other things, BDSM breaks all the rules. I agree that non-consensual Master-slaves cannot be perfect friends. And I agree that employer-employees can’t be such friends… b/c in both cases neither is able to "be all he could be." Of course the slave would rather be the master! Of course the employee would rather own the company! But in BDSM relationships the slave is consensually a slave… and feels that he can only “be all he can be” by being a slave!

Sure, most M/s and D/s couples are not perfect friends but friends of pleasure as most lovers are. But I think M/s and D/s couples are capable of being perfect friends despite the apparent inequality. In the perfect M/s relationship – one of “mutual inspiration” – the Master is inspired to be a better, more virtuous, more worthy Master… while the slave is inspired to become a better, more virtuous, more valuable slave… and both grow in strength, wisdom, courage and self-empowerment. Speaking for myself, I couldn’t be all I could be w/o being my Owner’s puppy.

(And, Ma’am… you make me wish I were a better puppy.)

Chicken w/o Hate

I like this:

And I like this too (Yea muppets!):

Batman, Superman, and Political Philosophy

My Owner took me to see Dark Knight Rises a couple of days ago.  It’s a fantastic movie.  And, since I have had a Catwoman fetish since I was 13 I have to say up-front that Ann Hathaway rocked!  Woof!!!  (But Michael Phiffer is still my favorite.)

Chris Nolan is one hell of a writer/director.  I love his take on the Batman character… even if it’s not a character I, personally can entirely get behind.  He definitely draws a lot from the Frank Miller Batman.  In the mid 1980s, during the middle of the Reagan-Thatcher era, Miller re-created Batman as a violent, gritty, neoconservative super-hero.  The elements were always there, but Miller brought them more to the foreground.  Miller overtly drew attention to the difference between Superman and Batman.  Superman was created in the Depression and spent his early years fighting against slum lords, greedy industrialists, and corrupt politicians.  Michael Chabon called him “FDR in a cape.”  What’s more, Superman was created by a couple of first generation Jewish-Americans as an allegory of the immigrant experience.  This was and era when you had lots of different European minorities (Jews, Poles, Irish…) arriving in America and living in urban ghettos.  Superman is an immigrant w/ a Jewish name (Kal’el is Hebrew) who comes to America… and assimilates, wrapping himself in the flag, the American dream, and mom, and apple pie.

Comics artist Dave McKean has said that he never liked Batman b/c of this whole idea of, “a billionaire who uses his wealth and power to beat-up on the urban underclass and the mentally ill.”  (And it could be noted that most of the crime victims Batman protects are upper-middle or upper-class socialites.)  Batman and Superman represent very different social philosophies… those of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke respectively.  Hobbes, who endured the English Civil War of 1642-1651, had a bleak view of how human beings would act if they were unrestrained by society and civilization.  He’s famous for his summation of the quality of life men would lead in an anarchist “state of nature” (i.e. without the constraints of civilization): “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”  (Think of Lord of the Flies here.)  He developed the notion that we sacrifice individual freedoms in order to guarantee the wellbeing of the whole community.  Now, Hobbes believed that human nature was so base, so greedy, and so vicious that only a totalitarian state ruled over by an iron-fisted monarch could keep us out of bedlam.  John Locke took a more sanguine view of human beings, and he made it the responsibility of the government to legislate for an uplifting environment for the improvement of its subjects… so his social contract was a two-way street, and he argues for the right of the governed to revolt if the government is not upholding its end of the deal (and we know what Thomas Jefferson and his buddies did with that notion).

In Chris Nolan’s second Batman film, he really introduced this neoconservative subtext by having Batman build a machine to illegally spy on every cell phone in Gotham.  This was an obvious parallel to the Patriot Act’s warrant-less wiretapping and domestic spying.  The film presents an authoritarian Batman trampling on people’s rights b/c it’s the only way he can protect them from the terrorist Joker.  Even the end w/ Batman slinking away hated and hunted by the people of Gotham (in favor of the hope-inspiring, change you can believe in, Harvey Dent), I thought it was a deliberate analogy of George W. Bush leaving office w/ the lower approval ratings than Nixon had when he was forced to resign… and smugly saying, “You might not like me, you might hate me and love Dent/Obama, but I protected your asses from terrorist by any means necessary.”

In Dark Knight Rises Chris Nolan continued to (I think correctly) portray Batman largely as a Hobbesian, authoritarian, neo-con.  The movie does an excellent job of drawing on imagery from the French Revolution – which was history’s classic example of liberalism run-amok… pushed too far the 99% rose up and overthrew the 1%... and then degraded into a tyrannical bloodbath.  (It’s interesting to note that one of the first masked superheroes was the Scarlet Pimpernel, an English aristocrat who helped protect French aristocrats from the murderous thugs of the French Revolution and reign of terror.)  It was in reaction against the French Revolution that Edmund Burke outlined the theory of conservatism Reflections on the War in France.  In the new film, Bruce Wayne even looses his house, and I feel like we’re supposed to feel bad for all those multi-billionaires who lost some of their vast wealth in the financial crisis.

One of the most troublesome questions raised in this film (particularly in light of the Colorado mass-shooting) is the question of guns.  Batman is famous for his hatred of guns.  Dennis O’Neil even did a well known pro-gun-control Batman story in the comics called “Seduction of the Gun.”  In Nolan’s film, Batman is still depicted as anti-gun but Catwoman is not, and there’s a little debate between them about “the no guns thing.”  Well, (w/o giving much away) at a climactic moment in film, Catwoman saves Batman’s life by using a gun, and she even says, “I’m not so sure about your whole no guns thing.”  (I couldn’t help but wonder if the line was specifically inserted to make NRA enthusiasts cheer.)  The film seems to want to say that Batman is wrong in his stand and w/o using guns then he would have failed to save the city.  Needless to say, I prefer my Catwoman with a whip...  ;)

Neil Gaiman said about Frank Miller’s neoconservative, authoritarian super-hero, “I don’t agree w/ those beliefs, and I don’t even know if Frank holds those beliefs, but it made for an interesting story.”  I don’t know about Chris Nolan’s political beliefs… but I do think he correctly captured the political/philosophical subtext behind the Dark Knight… and he told a damn good story!  I give his films an A+.  But I’m worried about the upcoming Superman film written and produced by Nolan and directed by Zach Snyder (300, and Watchmen).  It’s not the team I would have chosen for a Superman film.  I just don’t want to see a dark and gritty Superman.  I don’t want to see a bloody, violent Superman.  I don’t want to see a realistic Superman.  Superman isn’t realistic – he’s idealistic!  Superman is the stuff of fantasy.  And, while it worked appropriately for the Dark Knight, I certainly don’t want to see a neoconservative Superman.  Please, no!

Fifty Shades of Going Mainstream

NPR did a story the other day about the Fifty Shades trilogy.  Now let me say right here, I have not read these books and have no interest in reading these books.  I have heard them described as “This does to BDSM what Twilight did to vampires!”  *Ouch!!!*  And “mommy porn”  (which is very funny at first and then kind of gross the more you think about it).

However these books have (and this astounds me) sold faster than either The Girl w/ the Dragon Tattoo or the seventh Harry Potter book!

So… this got me thinking… Just how out in the open do we (the kink/leather/BDSM community) really want to be?

To some extent, this is a very generational split… and I (aged 37 and first started sniffing around the scene in the late-90’s) am pretty much right on the hinge.  On my left I see those older and more experienced than me who had to enter the community by having the balls to walk into a bar or club like the Eagle, the Woodshed, or the Sanctuary…  They had to earn their way in, and were (in general) accepted gradually.  You had to prove that (a) you were the real deal and not a “weekend warrior” and (b) you weren’t an asshole.  Reputation was gold, respect came gradually… and the members of this community (many of them still gun-shy from the pre-Stonewall days when the scene had to stay in the shadows) didn’t want any public attention.  If you were serious about it, then you’d find your way in… if you were just a weekend warrior, you weren’t welcome in.

Then I look to my right, and I see TNG.  The 20-somethings are hyper-connected and social networked.  They are out and open and have pictures of their tits and dicks online.  They probably first discovered the scene online.  They probably began by Google-ing (every time I say “Google-ing” an IP litigator loses his wings :) ) and made their way to social networks like FetLife.  I can tell you… I have felt the impact of Fet since it appeared about 5 years ago – it really has re-shaped the community.  We’re now in a flat-world (as per TomFreidman), and everybody is everybody’s business.

Now we have Fifty Shades… a mega-bestselling, mainstream, book that revolves around a BDSM relationship (that sparkles in sunlight!).  Awwww… how cute!

So, just how big, visible, and mainstream do we want to be, really?

On the one hand… as the gay community has learned, that is the path to acceptance.  Rosie, Ellen, and Will & Grace did more to move the gay-rights cause forward than every Pride parade ever.  Marvel & DC comics have both introduced gay superheroes.  (I think marvel actually had the first one back in the late-70’s w/ Northstar… but he was a minor character, and his homosexuality was only hinted at until the 90’s.)  Certainly, Fifty Shades will make the job of NCSF a lot easier I would think.

Also, the more open and inviting scene has advantages for bringing new people… and the expanded population is certainly a boon for those looking for partners.  When I first came in, it took me a year or two to build-up some regular play-partners… and it took a couple years more to find a 24/7, romantic partner.  I don’t thing TNG today faces quite the same level of obstacles.

On the other hand… When I think of the ComicCon messes or the hoards of housewives fantasizing over Fifty Shades and identifying themselves w/ us… I honestly feel a bit “cheapened.”  I’ve had the same issues since Fet took off 4-5 years ago.  Suddenly we had “experts” appearing and calling themselves “Lord God Master Hugedick,” who had NO realtime experience.  There was one kid (about 24 or 25 I think) up here in NC who started his own group who had NEVER been to a single, actual BDSM event – not a class, not a play-party, not a dungeon, a con, or anything!  I admit… I was a little bit disgusted.

While Fet has made it easier to bring new folks in… it’s also made it a lot harder to identify and remove the creeps and predators.  Things are too democratic now, and the genuine predators can hide in the noise of the internet “drama.”

It was as well, partly in-response to the rise of Fet that Shdwkitten and I started teaching out “Avoiding the Kink Ghetto” class… which we’re doing this weekend for Charlotte TNG, which is another reason why this is on my mind.  Fet certainly exploded the population of the kink ghetto – those so stuck in the (mostly online) kink community that the rest of their life becomes sadly neglected.

I know that for me – and I think also for a lot of the older BDSM/leather crowed – we really don’t particularly want to “go mainstream.”  I’ll admit, some of it might be childish, but, damn it, it feels “cool” to be in-the-know… to be one of the guys who know the secret handshake and all…  I think that now masses of people are Google-ing all about what we do, and it, again, feels somehow “cheapened.”  And mind you, I’m someone who’s made education the main focus of my activities in the community… but still…

It’s a question I don’t have an answer for: How mainstream do we want to grow?  And… it’s probably a moot point anyway since the flat-earth is here and we’re not going to be able to stay in the shadows much longer even if we want to.  Part of me thinks that’s good… and part of me thinks that’s bad…

Pet Pics

Not much going on over here other than spending a lot of time in my hamock reading.  (Not a bad thing.)  I can recomend a graphic novel by Grant Morrsion called Joe the Barbarian.  It has a bit of a dark tone to it... but it's still fun enough to make a good summer read.  It's described as "a cross between "Alice in Wonderland" and "Lord of the Rings," but with more steampunk."  But I think in order to fully enjoy it you probably had to be a boy in the early 1980s.  (The setting of the story is a bit ambiguous b/c the boy has a cell phone, but his toys and the decor of the house are circa 1980, so...)

Since I don't have much else to say, I will entertain you w/ photos of some of Shdwkitten's pets.  Here's the wolf (Thunder) and the wolfhound ridding in the back seat of the car:

And here's the kittens, Thing 1 and Thing 2, making a new friend.

See, we promote all kinds of tolerance and multiculturalism around here.  We have wolves and wolfhounds, cats and squirrels... all happily living together.  We're like a Disney cartoon...  :)