Deleted Member Posted April 29, 2021 Posted April 29, 2021 It would seem that, like many other communities of varying cultures and subcultures, there remains a bit of a line drawn in the sand on our shores in the LS. The inevitable "us vs them" rears it's ugly head pretty frequently. Especially on certain topics. This will NOT be a short post. So if you're a TLDR type, skip this one. Simplicity cannot cover all of this information in a basic description. Sorry. To note: It's important we emphasize the definitions of both terms 'New Guard' and 'Old Guard' and how they are often misused, even by veteran lifestylers. What is Old Guard? The more accurate question is what was. A history lesson. Break out your notebooks. This is lifestyle history and facts that cannot be refuted presented by a psychotherapist and leather historian. Source : The Old Guard History, Origins and Traditions by Guy Baldwin M.S. Citation: This essay first appeared in Drummer Magazine in the late 1980's and is collected in Guy Baldwin's book of collected essays, TIES THAT BIND, The book is available directly from the publisher. Guy Baldwin has also written a follow-up essay on the Old Guard that was published in Issue # 20 of International Leatherman in the Fall of 1998. Guy Baldwin, M.S. a Los Angeles psychotherapist, served as International Mr. Leather and Mr. National Leather Association during 1989-90 First and foremost, 'Old Guard' is really a misnomer - a misapplied name - for the earliest set of habits that jelled by the mid- to late 1950s in the men's leather community here in the United States of America. It is very important to remember that the modern leather scene as we now know it first formalized itself out of the group of men who were soldiers returning home after World War ll (1939-1945). For many gay men of that era, their World War ll military service was their first homosocial experience (first time being thrown together mostly in the company of other men for significant lengths of time), their first time away from their growing up places, and their first experience of male bonding during periods of high stress. War was (and is) serious business; people died, soldiers depended on each other for their lives, and the chips were down. Discipline was the order of the day, and the nation believed that only discipline and dedication would win the war and champion freedom: (Ever notice the especially strong patriotic feelings that happen at leather events?) Anyway, these gay war veterans learned about the value and pleasure of discipline and hard work in the achievement of a noble purpose. They also learned how to play hard when they got the chance for leave time. Indeed, military life during wartime was (and is) a mix of emotional extremes born out of sure knowledge that one could literally be 'here today, and gone tomorrow. ' Lastly (for these purposes), the gay vets had the secret knowledge that they fought and served every bit as well as straight soldiers, and this information strengthened their self-esteem. All of these things came to be associated with the disciplined, military way of life as it existed during the wartime years. Although not all gay men of that time served in the military, those who didn't were exposed to the military attitudes through their contact with the vast numbers of military men who were everywhere to be seen and cruised both during and immediately after the war years. In any case, all these things greatly influenced the shape of masculine gay sexualities.Mars Upon their return to the States about 1946, many of the gay vets wanted to retain the most satisfying elements of their military experience and, at the same time, hang out socially and sexually with other masculine gay men. They found that only in the swashbuckling motorcycle culture did such opportunities exist and so the gay bike clubs were born. It was here that they found the combination of easy camaraderie, the stress and thrill of real risk taking (the riding), and the masculine sexuality that they had known during their military days. Since one can tell who is and is not in the military only when uniforms are worn, these gay men ***ly (in most cases) transferred their loyalties to their own uniform-the leather gear of bike riders with a few paramilitary touches thrown in. Club insignia often recalled hose insignia of special military units: Thunderbolts, Warriors, Blue Max, and Iron Cross to name only a few. Club members would exchange their insignia with members of other clubs in friendship; christening rituals were transferred from tanks, ships and airplanes to motorcycles and *** was substituted for champagne; the military dress uniform hats became the leather bike caps-all these elements were just as had been during military service. Incidentally, during the war, the soldiers would often put on skits for their own amusement. Since women were not allowed at the front, some of the men would play the parts of women by doing a kind of mock dress-up (as in one scene from 'South Pacific'). Later, this tradition would be expressed in 'drag' shows during bike runs. So, masculine men pretended to be pretending to be women-not truly 'drag' at all. (lt. still happens in a few places.) In any case, being in the military also meant following lots of rules. And just as in the military, there were (unspoken) rules about what you did and did not wear, how you handled your personal affairs, who you could and could not socialize with and more. All this was overlaid with a kind of ritual formalism just as in the military. Those men who were really into dominance and submission, SM, or leather sex tended to take these rules rather more seriously than those guys who simply thought of themselves as butch. The butch ones wore just enough leather to be practical when riding, and those into the exotic sexualities tended to wear more gear than necessary to signal this fact about themselves, but they all hung out together in the same settings. As you might guess, in some cases, any particular person might be into both riding and the exotic sexualities. Just as an aside here, before and during the war, kinky folks seeking to identify each other would sometimes defensively ask, 'Do you play the mandolin or the saxophone?' to discover which of them was the masochist or the sadist by the first letter of these instruments. All this while wearing street clothes! The creation of a butch subculture by the gay vets began to allow people to specialize their sexual interests in a way that had been impossible earlier. Prior to this development it was not apparent that there were very many ways to be gay. The bike clubs and the bars where they hung out became the magnets of their day which attracted those gay men who were interested in the masculine end of the gay spectrum, but it was the leather men who defined the masculine extreme at that time. (Nowadays, we know there are many ways to be masculine.) This meant that those who had an inclination to kinky action pretty much felt compelled to explore kink in the context of the leather SM scene since it was the only game in town. If motorcycle riding or black leather itself was not 'your thing', that meant one felt obligated to visit the hang outs and look and act the part as much as possible to find one's way into the inner circle of those who looked like they knew something about the exotic sexualities. This meant finding out what the rules of inclusion were (how can I be included?) in order to gain access. To some extent, all this is still true because the attitude still prevails that the 'uniform'' indicates experience and social access to the Knowledgeable People. And so, the Scene became EX-clusive rather than IN-clusive, meaning that the people in the Scene understood the rules and tried to keep outsiders out-to exclude them. An outsider became defined as anyone (butch or not) who did not have a primary interest in and experience with the exotic sexualities or at least an interest in motorcycles. (This excluding attitude was probably also rein***d by guilt about being kinky.) I know that this combination of kinky men mixed in with motorcycle riders may sound a bit odd now, but that's how the Scene worked and, to some slight extent, still does. All through the 80's, with the emergence of kinky organizations and specifically leather/SM events, the motorcycle riding community and the kinky leather community have grown apart such that now those in one group are pretty much ignorant of or indifferent to the events happening in the other. This growing separation is more true in larger cities which have the numbers of people that are necessary to support each of these two communities, each with separate needs and agendas. Consequently, many old and venerable bike clubs have experienced a drop in membership and some have disbanded altogether. But for the most part, kinky people have segregated themselves out from the riders as the process of erotic specialization has continued. Generally, the riding community seems not to have minded this development perhaps because many of the members of riding clubs are either turned off or embarrassed by the erotic visibility of the kinky crowd "Birds of a feather". But for this discussion, it is noteworthy that many of those kinky people retained the paramilitary trappings, manners and attitudes of that early, core group of returning World War ll. gay vets. Most importantly, these features of the military mind-set joined with inky interests and became erotic in and of themselves became fetishes. These men then were the original '0ld Guard', and so it will come as no surprise that their quasi-military rules of inclusion and exclusion still influence kinky society today. So what exactly were the (unspoken) "Old Guard' rules? Here are a few of the more important ones that had prevailed by 1970: About Attire Always wear boots, butch ones, and preferably black. Always wear a wide black leather belt plain, not fancy. Never mix brown leather with black leather. Never mix chrome or silver trim with gold or brass trim. Long pants only, Levi's or leather, and no shorts. Chaps indicate more commitment than Levi's, and leather pants more commitment than chaps, especially when worn consistently. Leather Jackets must have epaulets (bike riders excepted). Head gear is reserved for Tops or experienced or heavy bottoms only. Bottoms may not own collars unless a particular Top has allowed that bottom to be the custodian of the Top's collar. A bottom wearing a collar is a slave, and belongs to the owner of the collar who, presumably, has the keys. Other Tops are not to engage a collared bottom in conversation, but other bottoms may do so. Should such a relationship end, the collar must be returned to the Top. Never touch the bill of a bike cap, including your own. Never touch another man's cap (or head gear) unless you are very intimate friends or lovers. Keep studs and other decorations to a tasteful minimum unless they happen to be club insignia. Never wear another man's leather unless he puts it on you. Leather, other than boots and belt, must be 'earned' through the achievement of successively challenging 'scenes.' Wearing gloves is reserved for heavy players, glove fetishists or bike riders. Always indicate SM preference, only with keys left or right. If you are cruising seriously, wear the keys out; if not seriously, tuck them in a back pocket. Always indicate strictly leather sex or 'rough sex' interest by wearing no keys at all. Those who 'switch' are second class players and not to be taken as seriously because they haven't made their minds up. If you must switch, do so in another town. 'Full' leather is reserved for after 10:00 P.M. only and only with 'our own kind'. Respect the public by wearing less of it during the day--don't frighten old ladies (l did once by accident), or anyone else for that matter. About Socializing and Cruising: Experience in the Scene determines social seniority (Top or bottom) , not age, not size, not amount of leather worn, and not offices held in organizations, awards received or titles won. Tops and experienced bottoms should be accorded higher respect and deference unless and until they behave rudely--all are expected to observe rules of social courtesy-bad manners are inexcusable and can lower one's status in the Scene (thereby reducing access to the Knowledgeable People for information or play), Real Leathermen keep their word: they do not borrow or lend ***; they conduct their affairs with honor and integrity-they don't lie. Preliminary social contact should be on the formal side. 'Senior Persons' (Top or bottom) are not to be interrupted when in conversation. Experience being equal, Tops lead the conversation. Junior Tops defer to Senior Tops and Senior bottoms in social situations. Junior bottoms defer to all others in the Scene but not to outsiders. When walking together, bottoms walk half-a-step behind and to the left of Tops with whom they are involved or playing. It is up to the Top or the experienced bottom to extend a hand to invite a handshake. (All touching is highly restricted during initial contact between strangers.) NEVER over-indulge in *** or alcohol in public, or otherwise attract scornful attention to one's self--to do so brings dishonor on the men in the Scene, Tops should always have the first two opportunities to make verbal or physical contact, The more submissive one is, the less direct eye contact one makes-glance frequently at or stare at His boots only when cruising; less so in non-sexual conversation. The more dominant one is, the more direct the eye contact is unless there is no erotic interest (cruising only). Men in the Scene do not discuss (or write about) the Scene with outsiders. All men in the Scene must be able to spot outsiders with the 'right stuff' and be ready to facilitate them into the Scene after they indicate sincere interest. None of these rules are taught or explained to anyone except by innuendo, inference, or example. Erotic technical information is only shared among ***rs. Maintain formal and non-committal relationships with those outside the scene; avoid contact with feminine men. Women are not allowed although Senior People may occasionally have intellectual or brief social relationships with the occasional qualified kinky woman, but only in private. Very few men maintained full compliance with all these rules all the time, and some, flatly refused to follow rules they personally objected to. But, to be included one was expected to follow at least most of these rules most of the time. Also, confusingly, there was some variation in some of the rules depending on what city you happened to be in at the time. The list above is not complete although it conveys the sense of the style. Understandably, a certain stiffness surrounded the men who followed these rules, just as a certain stiffness surrounded the military men of the era. Those who sought inclusion had the challenge of finding a relaxed and easygoing way to follow rules. However, this required considerable social skill and many kinky people lacking those skills (or patience ) simply gave up and accepted a frustrated role on the fringe. As time passed, there were more and more guys in their twenties whose early sexual development had not been influenced strongly by contact with the military. Therefore, they lacked the early raw material with which to fetish-ize the military features of the '0ld Guard' leather/SM scene. Still, they needed information and experiences to help shape the urges of insistent kinky longings. These people were essentially without resources until the establishment of kinky organizations brought about new educational opportunities that were not bound by '0ld Guard' rules. Consequently, there is a lot more support now for new people coming into the leather/ SM scene who have other ideas (non- military) about what is hot. Long hair, rockers with wild designs on their jackets, road racing bikers with brightly colored leathers, leather faeries, skinheads, women and others now are found on turf once dominated by the '0ld Guard' system'. So, '0ld Early Guard' or perhaps thought of as 'Early Guard" or perhaps 'First Guard' because that style makes sense given the erotic influences that shaped the inner lives of the men who were coming of age sexually at that time. The Old Guard made some real contributions and made some real mistakes, and still does both. It is more useful to understand than to criticize. And, perhaps most importantly, what the Old Guard did for the development and expansion of kinky life and butch gay male sexuality can best be appreciated against the backdrop of what had existed earlier--not much of anything! But remember this, as long as we have a military, and a paramilitary police system, and as long as that military has traditions of initiation, ritual, inclusion/exclusion, honor and service, there will always be an '0ld Guard'. Its size and influence in the leather/SM scene will probably always be proportional to the role played by the military and other paramilitary organizations in society-larger following wartime and smaller during peace. I thought maybe you'd like to know. So, given this information we now know the term 'Old Guard' is a term coined by the gay community and in such unofficial coinage, a misnomer and descriptor for the protocols and behaviors during this era. We now know it's origins as well as it's inner workings as they once were. Now we push forward into part two of today's lesson : What is New Guard? New Guard leather culture evolved out of the changes in the 1980s. New Guard, or new leather, as it is also called, embraced switching and often combined spirituality with their play. An increasing number of pansexual clubs evolved as well. The leather community has been considered a subset of BDSM culture rather than a direct descendent of gay culture as a whole, despite the fact that in years past much of the organized SM community was in fact homosexual. Today, while some may still use the term strictly in the old fashioned sense (confusing it with old guard, the "leather community" or "leather culture" includes all BDSM practitioners, gay, lesbian, straight, bisexual, or pansexual whether high or low protocol). Old Guard, New Guard by Gayle Rubin Gayle Rubin is an anthropologist and author of numerous academic articles, including "The Traffic in Women: Notes on the 'Political Economy' of Sex," "Thinking Sex," "The Leather Menace," and "Misguided, Dangerous and Wrong: An Analysis of Anti-Pornography Politics." In the BDSM community she has been an activist, writer, historian, archivist, and educator. She is a founder of Samois, the first female SM organization in the world, and of The Outcasts. In 1988 she received the Woman of the Year award from the National Leather Association. But she is most well known for her ethnographic and historical research on the gay male leather community in San Francisco. Her 1994 dissertation in anthropology was The Valley of the Kings: Leathermen in San Francisco, 1960-1990 Slave david stein writes that "some day it will be the heart of an indispensable book." This article is excerpted from a s***ch given by Gayle Rubin at the graduation cere*** for the Journeyman II Academy on October 4, 1997. The article appeared in Issue 4.2 - Summer 1998 of the Cuir Underground -- a San Francisco-based magazine for the pansexual kink communities which published from Fall 1994 to Summer 1998. (The Cuir Underground is no longer published but there is an on-line archive of its articles) I have problems with the way in which the distinction between "Old Guard" and "New Guard" is sometimes deployed. While there are many differences between leather/SM as it was practiced in the 1950s and as it is practiced today, the shorthand terms can exagerrate and oversimplify our past and our present. Most of the alleged differences popularly thought to differentiate "Old Guard" and "New Guard" -- formality versus informality, strict etiquette versus a more casual style of social interaction, deliberate training versus less organized acquisition of skills and knowledge -- are more a matter of degree than absolute distinctions. In fact, if one looks at "Old Guard" leather and SM communities from the late 1940s through the early 1960s, one can see that both tendencies were already present. Louis Weingarden, who opened one of the first leather art galleries at his Stompers boot store in New York City 20 years ago, identified two stylistic poles of traditional gay male leather. One was the military, with its strict formality, heirarchy, order, and discipline. The other was the world of bikers, associated with the celebration of disorder, rebelliousness, and individualism. Both tendencies were important to leather imagery and SM practice. In the 1950s there were those who eroticized and engaged in very formal interactions based on strict codes of courtesy in the military model, and others who preferred the look of dirty bikers and a more orgiastic kind of buddy sexuality. Of course, there were spit and polish bikers too, and others who looked like greasy bikers but preferred formal SM sex. Similarly, while many people in those days underwent formal training and apprenticiships, others entered leather communities via the bars, social clubs or parties, and absorbed their socialization in a more haphazard fashion. Today, while the leather/SM community's dominant styles of public interaction have changed, all of the "Old Guard" practices and preferences are still with us. Even now, there are those for whom leather and SM are formal affairs with strict codes and etiquette, and those who seek and find training through apprenticeship types of relationships. At the same time, there are others for whom leather means freedom from certain conventions and a way to chart an individual path. Across the different eras, many have found freedom in formality, individualism through observance of custom, and a sublime order in things non-leatherfolk might consider completely chaotic. There have certainly been many changes in leather and SM social life since the late 1940s, but these are more complicated than the simple distinction between "Old Guard" and "New Guard" can express. Many people today regard just about everything before the 1980s as "Old Guard," but by then, leather/SM had already undergone several social revolutions and "Old Guard" had already had several "New Guards." In the mid-1960s, classic leather styles began to give way to a kind of "hippie leather." People grew their hair, took psychedelic ***, became less invested in 1950s formality and created new subgroups organized around different sexual styles, for example fistfucking. At one point, dope smoking leather guys and fistfuckers were in effect a kind of "New Guard," although that terminology was not yet commonly used. By the mid-1970s, there were several distinct leather styles and cultures, although individuals could move among them. After Stonewall, urban gay male populations grew, and by the late 1970s leather had become a kind of uniform for urban gay men -- most of whom would never experience the business end of a whip. This "clone" look included short haircuts, mustaches, tight 501 jeans, boots, leather jackets, and keys dangling from belts. The late 1970s are often seen as a kind of "golden age" of SM in San Francisco, but the large scale adoption of leather styles by non-leathermen diluted the signals and frustrated the hard core leather population. This situaton led to the founding of the 15 Association in 1980; the 15 intended to create a more reliable SM environment, in which people did not wear hankies or keys as fashion accessories. From a larger perspective, it is clear that many of the differences between "Old Guard" and "New Guard" are the differences between life in the US in the 1950s and life in the 1990s. These differences are common to many groups, not just leather/SM. For example, among surfers one hears laments about the loss of "serious" surfing as the activity has become popularized, styles have become commercialized, and communities have becomes more open. Much of what is described when people talk about changes in the the leather community comes down to more people, more ***, and more commercialization. Leather public social spaces are less cozy. Communities are now bigger and it's hard to know everyone. People often make judgements about others -- and about what is important -- based on what they see at a distance on a stage, not what they experience on a daily basis or within the intimacy of a dungeon. In earlier days, people still had to take risks to be involved in leather/SM, and there wasn't much to be gained apart from the experience itself. Today, some people seem to care more about *** and glory and their high profile than they do about the quality of their interactions. I began to notice some of these shifts in the mid-1980s, when the energy at public play parties seemed to change for the worse. Before then, many of the parties had been informal rituals of solidarity, pleasure, celebration, and connection. People cared most about having a good time. Even in casual or recreational play, the focus seemed to be on the quality of the connection between the players themselves and on building and sharing an energy that whole rooms could get high on together. At some time in the mid-1980s, it seems that many people began to care more about what the audience saw than what their partners experienced. Leather had become trendy and popular rather than despised and stigmatized. Others seemed to merely go through the motions -- SM too often became a mechanical exercise rather than an art form or a form of intimate communication. I'm not saying that there is no great public play today, but I often see a community that lacks some of its former style, grace, and values. Apart from increases in numbers, popularization, and commercialization, the gay leather community has had to deal with one unique factor that cannot be underestimated: the escalated rate of early mortality due to AIDS. The HIV/AIDS epidemic has damaged leather communities and social life in incalculable ways. Communities have experienced the loss, in a short period of time, of many of the men (and a few women) who made major contrinutions to creating and sustaining public leather life. Among these were Cynthia Slater, who did so much to build bridges between the genders and orientations; Mark Joplin whose spirit and soundtrack helped shape the great parties of yesteryear; Steve and Fred who made the Catacombs such a fabulous club; Kurt Woodhil whose brilliant dungeon design made the Hothouse and later the 15 Cedar Alley space so memorable; artists like Chuck Arnett, A. Jay, Cirby, Dirk Dykstra, and Robert Pruzan who decorated so many walls and lives; playwrights like Robert Chesley; producers and gallery owners like Peter Hartmann, Robert Opel, and Claude DuVall; doctors like Dick Hamilton who treated perverts and fistfuckers who couldn't take their injuries elsewhere; therapists like David Lourea who tended the same population for a different set of ills; club presidents and owners such as Louis Gaspar, Hal Slate, Jack Green, and Steve Maidhof; writers like Geoff Mains and John Preston; and hundreds of others. The collective absence of so many leather forebears is, I think, one of the main reasons why the social changes of the last decade seem to have produced so much more of a chasm than did previous ones. These people not only built and refined our institutions, but they also met and talked and played with innumerable others, all the while transmitting community values to newcomers. Their loss has damaged the social fabric of the leather community and has created huge gaps in the transmission of leather culture. Some of this culture has been irretrievably lost, and leather society has had to reinvent important pieces of itself as a result. Although much has been lost as leather/SM has evolved, new developments have brought positive changes as well as problems. I'm not proposing that we could or should go back to the 1950s. We should neither romanticize the past nor fail to value it. Today, there are many ways to acquire leather attitudes and leather knowledge, including open classes, books, structured programs such as the Journeyman II Academy, as well as more traditional apprentice relationships. We have only begun to systematically think about leather history. As more archival and historical material becomes available for study, the schema outlined here will undoubtedly be modified. But I suspect that as we learn more, the simple opposition of "Old Guard" and "New Guard" will be even more radically dislodged by increasingly nuanced and detailed accounts of different leather practices and populations. The early 1990s eruption of concern over "Old Guard" and "New Guard" will itself become a part of that history. Whew. A lot to soak in, I'm sure. But this is all part of the lifestyle we love and it's history regarding this topic. So where did the divide and conquer attitude seem to come in between all of this? Well, all history aside, it's merely a matter of opinion and personal preference that some feel passionate enough about to feel guarded over. The Old guard (or more amicably stated "Traditional Leather Folks") feel that the New Guard have abandoned and disregarded the foundations of leather culture and leather history. They do not understand or align with the views and practices of today's more nuanced versions of leather and kink. To add to this, kink itself has become a fully separate subculture rather than a descriptor and normally has a vastly informal structural set that involves more elements of role play and fetishism. Such as pet play, DDLG, ABDL, Littles, Bigs, Pony Play, Gearheads (people who enjoy aesthetic fetishism like motocross armor and such), and so forth. Now, that is not to say those who engage in kink do not engage in the LS. It is very fair to say that the two can and do mesh. However, not all lifestylers have embraced this and many of them feel threatened or put off by the existence of kinksters among lifestylers. The all inclusive mindset turns a lot of Traditional leather folks away. They do not particularly want to share space with kinksters and the reasons vary. Traditional leather folks feel that a lot of New Guard dynamics and identities make a mockery of the traditional protocols leather was and is founded on. Traditional leather folks feel disrespected due to the New Guard's attitude towards Traditional leather folks. ("The old fuddy duddies of leather theory" as I call it) Traditional leather folks do not share commonalities with New Guard folks that make co-existing comfortable for both sides. The list does truly go on. As for the New Guard folks, they are in a pretty consistent state of hyper-vigilence due to the growing ***s of Traditional Leather folks. The many I have met and engaged with tend to feel the following : New Guard folks feel like Traditional Leather folks cannot adapt to the nuances and changes within the subculture without a war or without engaging in various forms of kink shaming of bullying. To which traditionalists respond with (excuse my french) a very "fuck your feelings" attitude. New Guard folks feel like Traditional leather folks have hijacked gay leather culture and insist that it is their own. (Both forget they co-existed during that time period seemingly unaware of one another. They also forget it was purposely set up that way so both heterosexuals and homosexuals had their own respective safe spaces. It didn't have to be all inclusive and the social climate of that time ensured it was likely much safer for it not to be integrated versus today's social climate, which is much safer for integration of the two communities even with said differences) New Guard folks often wish to learn from Traditional leather folks but find themselves stalemated by their differing views and feel invalidated by their own desires due to the criticism Traditional Leather folks sometimes drive home. Again, the list goes on. So what do these two groups have in common? Is there a silver lining? Could we, at any point in time, hope to close this gap? That last question remains to be seen, but from my own perspective, this is what I see as commonalities we share with the New Guard that we should acknowledge and maybe learn to work with : A healthy desire to learn and grow within the LS Creative and innovative styles of play Craftsmanship that could not only be helpful to others but marketable and lucrative An actual passion for leather and kink that goes beyond the conventional bedroom vanilla-style dosage of BDSM. Passion for their own respected crafts and a focus to Master them Desire to relate and share with others within the lifestyle Desire to build foundations across varying organizations that serve the community and the lifestyle And again, the list goes on. But I feel like I am taking up too much space as it is already. The fact is, BDSM itself has been around way before leather as a subculture. That is a lesson for another day. But where this lesson now stands, we see that this divide is really a matter of preferences and semantics. To be crass to someone who is not necessarily leather and more kink oriented, is a choice. It's a choice that reflects onto one's moral character. A choice that some will make without guilt or remorse and that's okay. Everyone has their own prerogative as to how they handle these nuances and how they interact with others not of their own mindset or traditions. We equally have a choice as to how or IF we respond to it. Ultimately, the bottom of the barrel here shows us that times have changed. Like it or not. Leather and kink is evolving. Like it or not. Those of us who dislike it have options : Deal with it and move on in peace Or Bitterly reject and shame those who do not see our way as "the one twu way". I, myself, align with the ways of Traditional Leather folks. I believe in honor, formality, heavy protocols, hierarchy, and honorifics. That being said, I also heavily align with the ways of a gentleman. Dominant or not. I am a gentleman at my core and gentlemen do not have nor make use of unnecessary crass means of enlightening others, if you can call it that. In the words of Cecil B. Hartley : "One of the first rules for a guide in polite conversation, is to avoid political or religious discussions in general society. Such discussions lead almost invariably to irritating differences of opinion, often to open quarrels, and a coolness of feeling which might have been avoided by dropping the distasteful subject as soon as marked differences of opinion arose. It is but one out of many that can discuss either political or religious differences, with candor and judgment, and yet so far control his language and temper as to avoid either giving or taking offence. In their place, in circles which have met for such discussions, in a tete d tete conversation, in a small party of gentlemen where each is ready courteously to listen to the others, politics- may be discussed with perfect propriety, but in the drawing-room, at the dinner-table, or in the society of ladies, these topics are best avoided. If you are drawn into such a discussion without intending to be so, be careful that your individual opinion does not lead you into language and actions unbecoming a gentleman. Listen courteously to those whose opinions' do not agree with yours, and keep your temper. A man in a passion ceases to be a gentleman. Even if convinced that your opponent is utterly wrong, yield gracefully, decline further discussion, or dexterously turn the conversation, but do not obstinately defend your own opinion until you become angry, or more excited than is becoming to a gentleman. Many there are who, giving their opinion, not as an opinion but as a law, will defend their position by such phrases, as : " Well, if I were president, or governor, I would," —and while by the warmth of their argument they prove that they are utterly unable to govern their own temper, they will endeavor to persuade you that they are perfectly competent to take charge of the government of the nation. Retain, if you will, a fixed political opinion, yet do-not parade it upon all occasions, and, above all, do not endeavor to *** others to agree with you. Listen calmly to their ideas upon the same subjects, and if you cannot agree, differ politely, and while your opponent may set you down as a bad politician, let him be obliged to admit that you are a gentleman." I believe, in order to bridge gaps and properly educate, one must remain cordial and subjective. Once we cross into hostile territory, nobody is spared from even friendly fire. It's important to remain tactful, yet firm in your convictions. That is my own pattern, my own choice, my own way. How you choose to uphold your own values, is all your own. Just be mindful : all actions have consequences, first impressions matter greatly, and how you treat others always offers others a portrait of your character. Thank you. - Master Asmodeus aka FtmSirx
russelroberts Posted April 30, 2021 Posted April 30, 2021 Very good piece I enjoyed reading this well worth the time...john clark
Bo**** Posted April 30, 2021 Posted April 30, 2021 Thank you so much for such an insightful & educational post🙏 As one 'freefrom' labels , an anarchist responsible & accountable for my words & actions.........i applaud your sentiments........🙏🙏🙏
Deleted Member Posted April 30, 2021 Author Posted April 30, 2021 26 minutes ago, Boldbald said: Thank you so much for such an insightful & educational post🙏 As one 'freefrom' labels , an anarchist responsible & accountable for my words & actions.........i applaud your sentiments........🙏🙏🙏 You're quite welcome. With all credit given to the deserving authors, I was happy to give my insight in-between the noted references. I think it's interesting to see how the old guard functioned and how that compares to today's leather world. Thank you for reading!
Deleted Member Posted April 30, 2021 Author Posted April 30, 2021 37 minutes ago, russelroberts said: Very good piece I enjoyed reading this well worth the time...john clark Thank you! Once more, with all due credit given to the authors I have quoted, I'm happy to offer my own take in-between. I am glad you resonate with this information!
Deleted Member Posted May 4, 2021 Author Posted May 4, 2021 Oh man, all of that could have been boiled down A LOT for the internet and you would have reached a lot more audience that needs to learn from it.
Deleted Member Posted May 4, 2021 Author Posted May 4, 2021 4 hours ago, Walther said: Oh man, all of that could have been boiled down A LOT for the internet and you would have reached a lot more audience that needs to learn from it. I think that if they WANT to learn from it, they'll read the information in it's entirely. TDLR types limit themselves so much like that. I can't cater to those kinds of people. Too much information that's necessary to boil down. The internet will have to learn to be more expansive if they want a proper education!
ca**** Posted May 4, 2021 Posted May 4, 2021 6 hours ago, Walther said: Oh man, all of that could have been boiled down A LOT for the internet and you would have reached a lot more audience that needs to learn from it. I think the internet is waiting for your 'take' ............ looks like a job for you.
Recommended Posts