We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
So says local MP Robert Brokenshire. It is a moot point, actually. I am not convinced the social fabric in Adelaide is really under that much pressure. There is nothing wrong with Australia that making us responsible for ourselves again will not fix.
That is by the by. Mr Brokenshire is a local MP who is angered by this website, which is a sperm donor registry. The problem with the site is that it is run by, and aimed at, lesbian couples.
Mr Brokenshire has introduced a private Member’s bill in the South Australian Parliament to prohibit such websites.
At present, homosexual couples are not permitted to use publicly funded fertility centres in SA.
The Australian Sperm Donor Registry bypasses these laws because it only connects the donors with recipients – forcing potential mothers to arrange insemination themselves.
Ms Thompson, who started the registry with Ms Ryan almost a year ago, said they had ‘matched up’ about 70 recipients.
My first instinct is to ask why the State is funding any fertility clinics- but the notion that the taxpayer should pay for all health in Australia is one of those assumptions that is just not questioned out here.
Be that as it may, if the State decides to discriminate against certain people on the grounds of their sexuality, people, being free, try to work around such restrictions, in the way Ms Thompson and Ms Ryan have. But you cannot keep a good Statist down, and Mr Brokenshire and his Parliamentry thugs, who know what is best for this couple, and me as well, are on the case.
After all, there is a social fabric to protect.
I recall, quite a few years ago now, watching one of those terribly serious TV documentaries that purported delve into the psychology of sexuality. The only part of the programme that I can actually recount was an examination of a gas-mask and uniform sexual fetish that appears to be almost entirely a British phenomenon.
The impressively qualified talking-head that they employed to interpret all of this, speculated that this particular fetish had its roots in World War II when the images of gas masks and uniforms (in the context of great national emergency and danger) left its imprimatur on a lot of impressionable pre-adolescent boys.
This was also shortly after Gulf War I when Israelis were all issued with gas-masks for fear of some chemical attack from Saddam. Hence said talking-head predicted the emergence of a similar sexual phenomenon in Israel in years to come.
It all sounded quite plausible at the time but its very difficult to judge whether or not they hold any objective truth. I was reminded of this, though, by a recent conversation with Dr.Chris Tame of the Libertarian Alliance on this subject and what (if anything) lies at the root of sexual fetish. The object we were discussing was not gas-maks though, but cigarettes.
In short, has smoking become eroticised?
I think there is quite a lot of evidence to suggest that it has. If websites like Smoking Models are anything to go by then some people are clearly getting their kicks from photographs like this:
And this:
 → Continue reading: C’mon baby light my cigarette
Today I received the following email:
Brian,
Brian has started a webring of Brians with blogs. If you would like to join us, go and sign up here.
Brian
What is a webring? If I signed up to it, would the rest of my life be ruined? The Brian who sent me this email seems to be gay. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, consenting adults, some of my best friends…, I’m personally in favour of gay marriage, blah blah blah. But if I sign up, will I be bombarded with gay porn for the rest of my days?
In general, I feel that it is good that we Brians are getting together, and if a webring is what I think it may be, we can perhaps sit on one, in a circle, perhaps somewhere in the countryside, and discuss the Brian Issue. That is, we can discuss why cuckolded husbands, send-up substitutes for Jesus Christ, etc. etc., in the movies, all seem to be called Brian. Brian is not a cool name, is my point. Maybe we Brians can get together and change that. (The danger, of course, is that by getting together in such ways as these, we might merely confirm all the existing anti-Brian stereotypes, and cause Brianphobia to become even more deeply entrenched.)
Meanwhile, how many indisputably cool Brians can be assembled? I offer two outstanding contemporary sportsman: the West Indian cricket captain and ace batsman Brian Lara, and the Irish rugby captain and ace centre threequarter Brian O’Driscoll.
Having already done most of my schoolboy sniggering in private (although I reserve the right to indulge it again at a later date) I think I can now bring myself to say a few (semi) serious things about this:
Belgian legislators are hoping to bring that to a close with a parliamentary bill that would draw prostitutes into the legal fold and bring the industry under state control, providing sex workers with labour rights and greater health protection.
But for a fee.
The sex workers themselves would be expected to pay up when the tax man calls – boosting state coffers to the tune of an estimated 50 million euros a year.
It represents an attractive option for a country currently struggling to balance its budget deficit – a means of generating money while affording prostitutes better protection.
Not so much legalisation then as part-nationalisation and while it would be nice to imagine that Belgium’s lawmakers have been driven by a genuinely liberal impulse it is more likely that they have been prompted by the desire to get their sticky mitts on all that revenue.
However, I think complaints would be out of order. The trade in (ahem) ‘personal’ services between adults is not a crime and should not be treated as one, so although they may have to hand over a chunk of their earnings to the state at least the prostitutes (and their clients) will have been freed from the constant threat of arrest and prosecution. That is a good thing.
Aside from the fact that we can now justifiably and factually regard them as pimps, the Belgian government would undoubtedly argue that they cannot legitimise the sex industry without subjecting it to the same taxes that every other legitimate industry is forced to stump up. Nor should it be overlooked that gangster protection may prove cheaper than the Belgian state but tax-inspectors generally do not use razors as a means of enforcement.
I sincerely hope that HMG decides to follow the Belgian example on this issue but I don’t expect they will do so anytime soon. Even in this day and age there is still a deeply-ingrained Sabbatarian disapproval of ‘bawdiness’ in this country that manifests itself as a very noisy and effective ‘no’ lobby at the merest mention of relaxing the laws on prostitution. I wish it were not so because even a taxed-and-regulated sex industry would be an improvement on the current arrangements.
Cultural commentator – from a generally conservative vantage point – David Brooks has some interesting things to note about the popularity of men’s magazines like Maxim, and about what this says about our culture. In a nutshell, he suggests that this shows that the advance of feminism and even political correctness (however you want to define that) may not have produced the results some commentators may have wanted.
He also makes the point, which to my mind rang true, that ‘reactionary’ attitudes are often not the preserve of the upper classes, but often most deeply held elsewhere, such as among America’s rap music artists. Here’s a nice quote:
We have a dynamic urban culture that treats women like whores and that regards owning a Mercedes as the highest possible human aspiration, and the leading articulators of progressive opinion have nothing to say about it. They can’t seem to bring themselves to admit out loud that their most effective ideological enemies have turned out to be the same underprivileged people they wanted to rescue from oblivion.
This observation is hardly new. Yet even someone like yours truly, who likes to watch action movies, dreams of fast cars and feels no shame in enjoying pictures of lovely women, can feel a bit troubled about where things can be headed. I don’t know if the kind of things Brooks frets about are problems that have to be ‘fixed’ in some way.
There definitely has been something of a backlash in parts of our culture against the dictates of political correctness. It doesn’t surprise me all that much that the kind of mindless dreck published by the Maxim mags of this world is so popular. Maybe we are just observing the cultural equivalent of Newton’s law at work – every action has an equal and opposite reaction. It applies to space rockets and it applies to culture as well, maybe.
Student Amy Keel in the Harvard Crimson explains why she destroyed a phallic sculpture:
“As a student of Harvard University, neither I, nor any other woman, should have to see this obscene and grossly inappropriate thing on my way to class. No one should have to be subjected to an erect penis without his or her express permission or consent.
Many women and men, including myself, are the victims of sexual assault, child sexual abuse and rape. The unwanted image of an erect penis is an implied threat; it means that we, as women, must be subject to erect penises whether we like it or not. There was nothing “challenging” or “subversive” about the penis. The only thing it did was create an uncomfortable environment for the women of Harvard University.”
Presumably she would not have enjoyed the parties at the very countercultural communal flat of my CMU grad school days. We had wild ones. If you are a true conservative rather than a libertarian, they were everything you feared was going on some where… and more.
There was one Halloween party where a large chunk of the Fine Arts department ended up in our flat. It was a night Fellini could have been proud of.
Some of the costumes were so creative I remember them to this day. There was a gay friend of the household from Globe Players, our Shakespeare company, who came as “The Dope Fairy”. He wore a pink tutu, ballet tights and a Santa’s bag. He moved about the party spreading happiness where ever he went… and then there were the four fellows from Painting and Sculpture. They really put effort into it. It must have taken days to build the chicken wire frames, paper mache them and do the painting. They came as organs. Male and Female.
Have you ever had a 6 foot breast bump into you at the punch bowl? Or seen a face staring out at you from the middle of a hairy…
Perhaps I’ll skip that one.
It seems some of the conservative media are getting all hot and bothered over sex on the campus. If the allegation that tax payer funds were used were true, I would agree on that very limited issue. Universities should not be State funded. Period and full stop. In any case, the University of Arizona event in question apparently wasn’t campus funded:
The university insists none of their money went toward promoting the controversial festival. It was underwritten by a public-funded arts council and held both off- and on-campus.
Another even less objectionable event occured in Indiana:
Other universities have also lately had trouble maintaining the line between sex and education. At Indiana University, officials are probing whether any laws were broken when pornographic filmmakers from Shane’s World entertainment, based in Van Nuys, Calif., used a campus dorm to make an adult movie last month.
It’s hard to see what laws could be broken. I don’t think any force was used by the filmmakers. Hell, if you were an undergrad and a porn starlet hopped into YOUR bed, which of the following would you say?
- Help, Police! I’m being attacked by a sex goddess!
- Thank you God!
Why does sex seem to be such a hangup for so many of the conservative orientation?
David Blunkett, Britain’s blind Home Secretary proved his blindness extends far beyond mere eyes.
New sex offence laws to be unveiled by the Government next month could include a crackdown on date rape.
Under the proposed law, reportedly being introduced by Home Secretary David Blunkett, men accused of rape will have to prove they made efforts to ensure their sexual partners gave agreement.
They will no longer be able to rely on the defence of “honest belief”, a legal loophole where suspects can be acquitted if they genuinely believed the alleged victim wanted sex.
What happened to the presumption of innocence? This is utter madness. Rape is an appalling crime, but how exactly can a guy who “genuinely believed the alleged victim wanted sex” somehow prove it to be a justified believe? Is he expected to get a second opinion from some third party before continuing at each stage? Perhaps lawyers like David Carr will find an new lucrative source of business as ‘dating lawyers’, sitting at the bottom of the bed and witnessing each declaration of consent.
Him: May I touch you there, my dear?
Her: Oooo, yes please!
Lawyer: Consent recorded.
Him: Oh yeah, baby…
Her: Ahhhhhh….
Lawyer: Umm, is that ‘Ahhhh yes’ or ‘Ahhhhh no’?
Her: Yes! Yes!
Lawyer: Consent recorded.
Him: Lean back a bit…Oooooo!
Her: Mmmmm… a little lower darling.
Lawyer: Hold it! As your lawyer I must advise you that if you proceed, it could be construed as potentially non-consensual as she has clearly stated you are not touching her exactly where she wishes to be touched! Whilst not admitting anything to the generality of the foregoing on behalf of my client, I must advise my client to, er, withdrawn and seek written confirmation before continuing…
The PC anti-sex brigade has claimed another victim. Chicago Tribune columnist Bob Greene has been forced to resign – I would call it fired – for sleeping with an of-age teenage girl over ten years ago.
Whatever happened to sexual liberation? The Berkeley Free Sex (and Speech) Movement? Is the Anglosphere being taken over by prudes? And if so, where did they come from? They sure as hell weren’t in the left when I was, back 30 years ago when everyone was bonking away like an Austin Powers at the Plato’s Cave nightclub.
Adriana and Perry have discussed Leah McLaren’s articles but the problem isn’t that English men are all closet poofs. The problem is that Ms McLaren’s sampling method was unscientific. “Old Etonian skinny boys make poor lovers” is hardly news. As I pointed out some weeks ago, she should have followed expert opinion: larger men have more sensitive mouths, lips and tongues. This makes us heartier eaters and no doubt better kissers. Typical of a North American health-freak snob to get it wrong.
I knew it wouldn’t take long for someone to respond to Leah McLaren’s criticism of the English male. By the way, Perry, I was not merely amused by her remarks, I also agreed with them. 
The gentleman defending Englishmen’s pride and amorous skills sounds nice and perfectly serviceable. Nevertheless, Leah based the conclusions in her article on about a dozen ‘dates’. Perhaps not enough to make sweeping statements about the entire male population of the British Isles, especially as there are always exceptions, but sufficient to get some insight into their ‘mating habits’.
Instead of discrediting Ms McLaren’s motives, one should ask – does any woman agree with her? To me her rather unkind analysis of an English male rang true not as an old adage about the reserve and reticence of the quintessential English gentleman, usually so painfully and embarrassingly at odds with his own emotions that only ‘tragic’ and ‘desperate’ situations a là Jane Austin novels force him to articulate them.
Leah may have been harsh in her judgement but yet… harsh. It all depends on what you are after. If she expected to be overtly fussed over, adored and ultimately made feel above all women, well she was probably not going to get that on the first or even the fifth date with an Englishman. In that sense, English men are perhaps slower but more solid once they sort out their sometimes convoluted emotions. (And I am talking about the kind of gentleman who wrote the article, I would not want to presume an emotional dimension in the laddish section of the population.)
Leah says she prefers a straightforward North American male who looks her in the eye telling her whatever she wants to hear. Good trick, if you can manage it. This is where the grain of truth in what she says is hidden. The English man does not understand women. Leah may have even been right about why that is. Separation from maternal affection at an early age, exclusively male company during the crucial formative stage, etc,..blah blah. None of this necessarily means that he cannot understand a particular woman once he decides to make the effort. What it does mean though is that he is indeed no match for the more romantically skilled nationalities, such as Italians for example. And believe you me this is not just another cliche. 
To be fair though I’d much rather have a date with an English gentleman than an oily Don Juan.
Canadian Leah McLaren‘s remarks about the sexuality of English males amused Adriana but a gentleman who actually dated the winsome Ms. McLaren has a rather less charitable view on why she wrote the things she did.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
