Jun 17 08 11:32 PM

Tags : :

To say the least, and if you haven't noticed the lengthiness of my posts, I like to write things. In liking to write things, I have produced a few blogs - one of which, Uncle Lewis has had the chance to see. Per his suggestion, I'm going to present a few bits of it here.

I have a series that is long overdue for another installment called, "Sex, Control and the Sex Industry. Here's a few excerpts:

Part 1:
Human sexuality itself poses a situation where the question of domination and submission often comes up naturally. We talk about it in many aspects of life and often mistakenly confuse the concepts of dominance and submission with the concepts of feminimity and masculinity. Consider, for example, the woman who is very assertive and controlling in business situations whom her co-workers refer to as 'butch,' even though she may not be masculine in appearance and may have very stereotypically feminine tastes. We also talk about stereotypically male and female roles as if the male is traditionally 'dominant' and the female is traditionally 'submissive.'It has only been within approximately the last 150 years that this has been openly and commonly questioned. This is just a side point, of course, to the over all question of dominance and submission in the sex industry, but it does play an important role that I will have to discuss more in-depth in another post.

See the entire post here.

Part 2:
At the 13th World congress of Sexology, the Valencia Declaration of Sexual Rights was created. This declaration has been a kind of root document regarding sexual rights over the years. It is used as basis for arguments regarding many sexual rights issues. However, when dealing with some aspects of sexuality and the sex industry, some of this document might seem difficult to apply.

The purchase of Erotic Services is as old as humankind, if not older. Recent studies have suggested that monkeys pay for sex as well. Yet, with such a large history, rights of those within the sex industry are still not being addressed openly in most countries. This declaration, if clarified some, may offer us a stepping stone into discussion over sex industry rights and safety.

See the entire post here.

Part 3:
Published in 1848, The Communist Manifesto fast became one of the most famous publications on social constructs ever written. It became both an outline of communist ideas and (by the 1950s) one of the most loathed works by Western society. Even as recently as 2005, a panel of scholars deemed The Communist Manifesto the most harmful book of the 19th and 20th centuries.

Still, in the realm of social sciences and academia, Karl Marx is one of the first names mentioned. Why? Because his ideas opened ways for new views into social constructs and some of his social theories were not entirely off.

So, what does Karl Marx have to do with the sex trade? Well, the sex trade exemplifies some elements of why Marx was wrong and Marx's ideas are tied into part of why the sex industry is demonized and considered oppressive.

See the entire post here.

A kind of side note to the series also exists regarding contracts:
Sometimes in domination sex play individuals want to do what I call 'consent play.' This involves a sexual interaction where an individual pretends to not want something that is being done to them. It is for this reason that 'safe words' and 'contracts' exist within the domination subculture. A safe word is a word that is not usually associated with sex play which can be used to tell others when the individual has reached their limit.

Entire post is here.

There are also posts regarding the history of the sex industry here, here and here. I'm also prone to the occasional satirical writing like this and bouts of rambling like this.

Actually, while that latter link seems like a lot of rambling, there is some important information in it, as well, that pertains to the sex industry. I noticed one of the other threads in this forum discussing the relationships between performers in a studio. Performers who are forced to compete for clients actually sometimes face their own version of The Prisoner's Dilemma:

The Prisoner's Dilemma, for those who don't know, is a concept that is considered as a part of Game Theory in which two prisoners have a chance at negotiation. In their negotiations, the prisoners have the option of either betraying the other while getting a reduction in their own punishment and increasing punishment to the other significantly or remaining silent regarding the other, but keeping the greater punishment. The prisoners, meanwhile, don't get to interact or learn anything about if the other prisoner will betray them or not and each prisoner is facing similar punishment. In other words, while they may have been facing imprisonment of two years if they each remained silent on the other's behalf, they might be offered a reduction in punishment of one year for cooperation while the other might face another seven years with cooperation. The other individual is faced with the same problem and neither individual can know what the other is going to decide. This means that if each prisoner cooperates with authorities, they might both face eight years total when lack of cooperation by both could have meant only two years.

You can read the full post here. I will clarify something in that post, though. Where it mentions that the two women were faced with the prisoner's dilemma - that is a reference to the possibility that one of the women may have led the authorities to additional information regarding the other woman and that the other woman may have had the opportunity to incriminate her accomplice, but didn't. This was mentioned in the newscasts, but I failed to articulate what had happened as well as I should have in my post.

If life was a breeze, I'd be a Hurricane Catastrophe.