Thursday, June 9, 2005

Comments (0) | Permalink

Comments (0) | Permalink

News
Gay History Books Cause Debate in Oklahoma Public Schools
06.08.05

By Ross von Metzke

O(klahoma City, OK) — The Oklahoma City public school district is facing a potential battle over a pair of books, and the subject for debate is familiar to city residents.
Members of the Oklahoma City gay community prepared to offer two books at a scheduled school board meeting Monday night, but a planned public forum on the matter was canceled. The books are intended for high school libraries and focus on major events in American history.

Stonewall: The Riots That Sparked The Gay Revolution, a book by David Carter, focuses on the Stonewall riots, widely believed to the the start of the LGBT rights movement.

The second book, Lost Prophet: The Life And Times of Bayard Rustin by John D'emilio, is a biography of a gay man who was an important leader in the black civil rights movement of the 1960s.

The proposal comes just weeks after a major controversy at the Oklahoma City Library Commission meeting, where the placement of gay themed books in the children’s section sparked widespread debate. A recent resolution passed by the Oklahoma House of Representatives asked state libraries to move the books to an adult section.

One of the books' supporters, Joe Quigley, said he doesn't think the focus should be on the sexual orientation of the subjects. Instead, he said, the books should be considered for their educational value.

“If somebody's in a relationship, whether it's a heterosexual or a homosexual relationship, it's mentioned — but that's not what (the books) are about,” Quigley said. “It's about the people who are involved in these historic events.”

Members of Oklahoma City's gay community purchased the books on their own and bought enough to distribute to all Oklahoma City high school libraries. Board members were expected to consider the proposal with public input on Monday night, but the forum was unexpectedly postponed.

Now, supporters of the book will have to campaign for its approval at the board's June 20 meeting. They said they hope to get the books placed in libraries by summer so that students will have access to them in the fall.

© 2005 GayWired.com, All Rights Reserved


Comments (0) | Permalink

Fetishes 2
Many people are (rightly) fearful of "The Cane". At school I was subjected to its full potential as an instrument of punishment. The Internet carries many images of badly welted buttocks, whose owners will be wearing parallel bruises as medals for many days if not weeks. Not for me, thank you very much!! And, I suspect, not for many of you either.

HOWEVER! A light cane can be used to great effect in a play-scene. Firstly, and of crucial importance, it carries that mystical quality which fills the potential recipient with awe and makes them decide to be "very good indeed". To stand a girl in front of a desk, and to lean back in a chair, slowly flexing a whippy cane while delivering "the lecture of all lectures", is a powerful scene. In fact one does not even need to wield the cane in anger, to produce the desired effect. To threaten its future use is often enough to get the juices flowing.

Local sex shops often carry a stock of 'play canes'. These are both light, and very bendy. Serious caners will dismiss these articles immediately, but to novices, they present an ideal starter.

The length of a cane requires that it's recipient must be positioned at least an arm's length away, and in a variety of positions. I know that many spanking recipients prefer the 'secure' feeling of being placed across a knee for punishment, however, there is an added eroticism in being positioned to receive the cane. A heightened sense of vulnerability, which increases exponentially as she feels her chastiser moving around behind, and the eerie swish as a practise stroke slices the air.

Make no mistake, to apply a cane correctly requires rehearsal! Do not expect to be able to step in and vigorously whack away at the proffered bottom. Begin with air strokes. Get a feel for the balance of your wand. Use a soft cushion or pillow and test your strength and accuracy, the depth of impact will give a good indication of the equivalent sting which will be experienced.

When you are finally ready to try your hand at real live flesh, I suggest you lay your sub down on a bed, with a pillow or two under her hips to raise them slightly. This position helps with accuracy, and you can move on to the traditional "touching toes" position later. I find that I prefer not to stretch the bottom skin too tightly with a severe bend, my preference is to position the submissive across the edge of a bed or chair arm, with her feet on the floor, with something like a 45 - 90 degree angle between trunk and legs.

Begin with taps, give your sub a chance to become accustomed to the feel of a cane on her rump. Make no mistake, the sting is quite intense and very different from a hand-spank. Very gradually, and very carefully, increase the length of your swing. Concentrate on your timing, not your strength, and be very careful with your accuracy. As any racquet player will know, power and therefore sting comes from the wrist.

When you are ready to apply some real sting, DO NOT try a full-arm swing as depicted in photos, this will almost certainly result in a badly aimed welt on back or thighs, and you will likely put your lady off the idea for life. An unerotic, but reasonable safety precaution is to cover those areas with folded towels. But a turned up skirt and thick knickers bunched around mid-thigh work quite well, and that this arrangement is visually appealing comes as a bonus.

Try a few strokes, perhaps up to half a dozen, spaced at least half a minute apart, and leave it at that for the moment. Give your submissive time to absorb the sensations over several hours or even days. The initial sensation of pain is quite intense, and it takes practise and experience to accept and absorb the sting, and then prepare for the next stroke. Different bottoms respond differently too. Some will recover very quickly, leaving no visible marks in the morning. Others will welt and bruise easily.

In the early days concentrate on the cerebral effects with role-play, careful and specific positioning, and with plenty of verbal communication. With care and above all, patience, you will both discover a whole new world of erotic discipline.

From: http://members.freespeech.org/saxon/main/non-fiction/caning.htm
Comments (0) | Permalink

   Fetishes
The Rise and Fall of the Strap
or
A History of the Scottish Tawse
by John Duncan

Those who have not enjoyed a Scottish education probably do not know much about the tawse. Imagination and misleading articles compound the confusion.

In Scottish schools the old fashioned word 'tawse' was practically unknown, or at any rate unused. The instrument was referred to, by pupils and teachers alike, as the strap or the belt. The strap has long been associated with Scottish schools and parents, whereas the cane is the most favoured weapon in England and Wales. There are exceptions to the general rule of course; the strap is not unknown in England, particularly in some schools in the Northeast and in Nottingham. Some Scottish institutions modelled on the English public schools always employed the cane; and the cane was certainly used in some state schools in Scotland, apparently at the discretion of the teacher, although this was some time ago.

Scottish teachers had much more freedom in the use of corporal punishment than their English colleagues. Whereas in most English schools caning was generally administered by the headmaster / mistress or their deputy (also housemaster and prefects in Public schools). In Scotland every teacher, as soon as he or she was fully qualified, had the right to wield the strap and perhaps about 90% of them exercised that right.

Far fewer disciplinary cases were referred to the headmaster / mistress, therefore, and belting was usually administered in the classroom immediately after the offence has been committed or discovered, rather than in the privacy of the headmaster’s office, after some delay. (Belting sometimes happened just outside the classroom door, in the corridor. This was sometimes the case with women teachers who were afraid of missing their aim and perhaps hitting their own leg in front of the class.) On the other hand, the average Scottish strapping was probably much less severe than the average English caning, not because the tawse is any less severe a weapon, but because it was used more moderately for relatively trivial offences which would not attract corporal punishment at all in English schools. In my opinion, the most significant difference was that, teachers in Scotland were not required to keep a record of punishment. A practice almost universal South of the border. This meant that if a pupil was either unlucky or badly behaved, he / she could receive the strap several times in the one day from different teachers. It was also not uncommon to experience ‘mass belting’, where for one reason or another a teacher would have a whole class lined up to be belted.

The only occasion that I know of where a record of punishment was kept, happened in 1972. Teachers in Edinburgh schools, primary and secondary, were required to record all corporal punishments for a survey. The total number of beatings in one term topped the 10,000 mark, and record keeping was discontinued.

The strap was definitely seen by some as a teaching aid, rather than an instrument of punishment and was often kept on top of the teacher’s desk for all to see. Most straps are made with a hole in the handle for hanging on a hook, but this was rare as I saw only one teacher in the 60’s who sat at the old-fashioned type of high desk and kept her strap on a hook screwed into the side. During the school day, when out of the classroom, most teachers carried their strap with them, women using their handbag and men carrying it over their shoulder, under their jacket, some had a pocket in the sleeve of their academic gown, which they used.

To the best of my knowledge teachers in Scotland, in modern times, were not officially allowed to punish anywhere else but on the hands. Over the years I have heard various accounts from people who claim to have been strapped on the backside. In my time at school I only ever saw this happen once, and so, consider it a rare occurrence. When I was in my last year of primary school (aged 11 or 12), five boys were caught stealing crisps from a store cupboard. They were all summoned to the head teacher’s (a woman in her early forties) classroom. In front of the whole class they admitted their crime. Four of the boys (aged 10) were then given six strokes each (six strokes were rare in a primary school) and told that they would be given a letter to take home to their parents informing them of the misdeeds of their offspring. The teacher then pulled her chair to the side of her desk and called the fifth boy to her. He was a younger brother of one of the other four (aged 8 or 9) She then pulled him over her knee, and holding her two-tail Lochgelly about the middle, she proceeded to leather his backside at some length before letting him up. Although a mixed class witnessed this, and I have no doubt that some parents got to hear of it, I heard of no complaints or irate parents.

Originally every local saddler turned out a tawse when requested to do so by a parent or teacher. Gradually the prowess of certain saddlers at making these instruments of correction became well known among the teaching fraternity until, at one time, practically all straps were specially ordered from John dick in Lochgelly. (At the start of term, there were always price lists / order forms from John Dick in the staff room). Straps were produced in a large scale in Lochgelly for over one hundred years with George Dick making an identical item before his son John. the town and its product became so linked that its name is often used as a nickname for the strap.

All the Lochgellys were carefully hand-cut from top quality leather and expertly finished, for while dealing out the required amount of stinging discomfort they were to on no account leave any lasting mark on the recipient. Apart from the care, which went into their production, all the Lochgelly straps were graded so that teachers could select the strap most suitable for the age and size of their pupils. Over a dozen different models were available from the Dick ‘stable’, ranging from a lightweight, two tailed strap to punish the youngest children in the primary school, to extra-heavy, three-tailed versions for use on the toughest of teenage boys.

While most teachers had to buy their own strap, those working in Glasgow schools were supplied with a standard strap approved by the local education authority. These straps were made by ‘Leckie & Graham’ or ‘J.G. Stevenson’ both of Glasgow. These straps were three-tailed, about 610mm long, 40mm wide, 6-8mm thick with the tails being cut to a length of 250mm, this being the average length for tails on a school strap. These straps also had an unusual ‘handle’ shape cut into the leather at the non-business end.

During its long history the design of the tawse changed little except that after perhaps the 1930’s, it tended to be slightly shorter and was divided into fewer tails, most teacher being content with two or three. Whether two or three thongs were more effective was, in fact, a matter of long dispute among teachers, but most agreed that while the broad thick tawse made most noise, it was the long narrow one which pupils feared most. It was also common knowledge among both staff and pupils that it was not the teacher who used most force when strapping who produced the maximum effect, but the one who knew exactly when to flick her wrist so that the tails struck home with that added sting.

But while administering the strap was an art, avoiding its full effects was an even greater one. Few modern pupils will have heard of their grandfather’s ideas. Such as placing a horsehair across the palm or rubbing the palm with a raw onion to cut down the pain. Other boys and girls placed their faith in spitting on their hands, or, if lucky enough, heating their fingers and palms on a radiator before receiving their punishment. While pulling the hand away, so that it appears to have been well smacked but is in actual fact almost unscathed, was a skill of which not a few boys were very proud; being caught at this would usually bring forth, "Keep still, take that stroke again."

As I mentioned earlier, although J.J. Dick was probably the best known, there were other fine makers, of which I have many examples. These include ‘R. Philp & Son’, also of Lochgelly although I am unsure of when they were in production. Their straps were longer than average at about 660mm, 30mm wide, 6-8mm thick, (I have seen heavier) with two tails cut to a length of 250mm. These straps also differed from others in that instead of a small round or oval shaped hole for hanging up, they had a slot 40mm long, cut out at the end.

Another Glasgow maker is ‘P. McRostie & Co.’ who I am led to believe will still make a strap to any design if asked. I have two three-tail versions of their own design. Both are fairly light at 4 and 5mm thick, 45mm wide, 560mm long with tails cut unusually long at 325mm. Mr. Borak, a shoe-repairer of St. Stevens Street in Edinburgh is still producing straps of various designs and sizes, some with as many as six tails. (There is usually a selection in the shop window). Unfortunately these are all around 5mm thick as it is difficult to obtain heavy hides now. At one time makers used very dense hide from a cow’s belly, but in modern times these animals are slaughtered younger, giving a softer, thinner hide.

I have been told that at one time J.J. Dick imported buffalo hide from the United States. This appears to be true, as there is a marked difference in the leather used for their straps after about 1970. In fact after the raising of the school leaving age (R.O.S.L.A.) from 15 years to 16 years in about 1970, some teachers felt that their straps would not be heavy enough. (Surveys show those pupils opting to stay until 18 were seldom in need of Punishment). John Dick obliged by producing a strap at the top of his price range, which was double thickness, presumably because he could not obtain thick enough leather for a heavier strap. This strap became known as a ‘R.O.S.L.A. strap’ and was in fact two medium weight straps bonded together so that it had finished leather on both sides. This fearsome strap was up to about 15mm in thickness. Fortunately I was never on the receiving end of one of these straps.

At the other end of the scale on the John Dick price list, was a miniature strap. These were two tail, 315mm long, 25mm wide, 5mm thick with the tails cut to a length of 130mm. I can only guess that these were for use on small children. Although the original Lochgellys were stamped ‘M’, ‘H’, or ‘XH’ on the handle, this did not guarantee a specific thickness or weight, as no two hides are the same.

John Dick’s clients were advised to store their new strap as flat as possible, and if it had to be stored in a confined space, coil it rather than fold it over. In the 70’s he went as far as rubber stamping in red ink, ‘Important: Do not bend or roll Straps’.

Occasionally when I find an old strap it will have the owner’s name and perhaps a school written on the underside. The best example of this, that I have seen, was an extremely old three-tail of unknown maker, on which was inscribed in beautiful copperplate handwriting, ‘A tonic for ailing and wayward scholars’, above the tails, with the teacher’s name on the underside. One of the wittier ones was inscribed ‘OMO’ by the teacher, who told the class, it puts brightness into little boys.

Straps made for parents by local saddlers and shoe repairers tended to be thinner, shorter and broader, although school types were used by some. As a guide they were usually 400mm to 500mm long, 50mm to 80mm wide with four, five or even six tails and perhaps 4mm to 5mm thick. This was entirely suitable for six on each hand and / or a trouser down thrashing.

I have often been asked about the weight of straps, which I find hard to determine. When buying a hide you are told the weight of the leather in ounces, (usually not more than 15oz), which is related directly to the thickness of the leather. (i.e. 12 oz is 5mm thick). However, this information is of no use once a tawse has been crafted, as size and thickness do not only determine the weight of a finished strap but also by the density of the leather. The weight stamps further compound this: (‘M’, ‘H’, ‘XH’,). I have seen straps by John Dick stamped ‘M’ which were as thick as others stamped ‘H’ and vice versa.

It is unusual to find a strap which has no tails cut into it. I have only come across two examples, both of which were used in schools. One was by an unknown maker, but the name Lochgelly could just be made out on the stamp, the other was made by Hunter of Falkirk. I have only once seen a strap that has been altered to suit another purpose. This came from a woman primary school teacher who had two straps which I think were produced by an Airdrie maker. One strap was 640mm long, 40mm wide, (which is broad for a two-tail), and tails cut to a length of 285mm. Apart from the size, this strap was unusual because of the amount of tooling on the handle. The word ‘TAWSE’ was stamped in large letters perhaps 20mm high, a stamp closer to the tails read ‘Genuine Cowhide Made in Scotland’, with a small thistle design between the words. The altered strap had originally been identical to the strap I have just described, but this woman had cut the tail end off, leaving her with a small strap or paddle 270mm in length. She said that this was what she had used for smaller children, but did not say whether it was used on the hands or the bottom.

There seems to be a reluctance to ‘warm the hands’ because of the dangers. I think this is mistaken. Vigorous application of the cane across the hands can clearly cause damage, but Scottish style strapping does not. The essential difference is that the cane has to be applied at right angles to the fingers to be effective, while a strap is correctly applied along the length of the hand, i.e. parallel to the fingers.

A standard classroom punishment was a minimum of two strokes on the left (or non-writing hand) with a two or three tailed strap. The fiercely exquisite pain started to subside after about ten minutes and after an hour, only slight warmth remained. A severe punishment tended to be rather different. The instruction ‘cross your hands’ or ‘both hands’ usually preceded it, and was a sure indication that six or even eight strokes were on the way. Both hands were held out, one on top of the other with palms facing up and thumbs tucked in. After each stroke the hands were changed so that the strokes landed alternately on both hands. Also, with the hands both out, the sleeves were drawn back exposing the wrists. The last one or two strokes could be applied a couple of inches up them, so that the evidence of a disciplining could be seen by parents, (wrist marks did not fade before the day was out as did the reddening of the hands) perhaps bringing another dose. Another advantage of the ‘crossed hands’ method is that there was a lessening of the tendency to pull the hands away while the strap descended, and therefore punishment could be completed more quickly and with less embarrassment to both teacher and pupil.

Although I said earlier that perhaps 90% of teachers used the strap, when I think back on all the teachers that I had in both primary and secondary school, I can only remember one teacher who did not have a strap. She preferred to give out punishment essays, although it was not unknown for her to borrow a strap from another teacher, so she was obviously not totally against corporal punishment. I can remember that in 1972 or 1973 that everyone at the school was given a form for their parents asking if they had any objection to the use of the strap. The answer must have been a resounding ‘NO’ as it continued to be used.

In the early 1980’s a disgruntled mother took her case to the European Court of Human Rights, as she could not get an assurance that her son would not be belted at school. By this time the Society of Teachers Opposed to Physical Punishment, (STOPP), seemed to be gaining some support. Eventually in 1982 the European Court outlawed the use of the strap. But it was not until 1987 that the Secretary of State for Scotland abolished it.

Since then teachers at some schools have complained of in-discipline as a result of the ban. In actual fact most regions in Scotland had abolished the belt in 1982 and 1983 without a ‘phase out’ which caused massive discipline problems, so much so that in 1983 the BBC screened a current account programme titled ‘Rebel Without a Tawse’ with Sally Magnusson as the presenter. The programme started by showing a young woman teacher explaining how the belt was used. Using a heavy three tail Lochgelly she said. "You make sure that their cuff is pulled up to the edge of the wrist so that you don’t injure their wrist when you belt them. Then you put the belt over your shoulder, you line yourself up in front of the kid, you make sure your leg is out of the way because it’s very painful and you look pretty stupid if you hit your leg. You don’t use and enormous movement from the shoulder, you just let the length of the belt follow through and you hit them." She then brings the belt down with some force on a table. "It was barbaric but it did work, and we don’t have it now, and we’re having enormous problems in the classroom. Problems sufficient to drive me out of teaching."

The programme went on to talk to teachers, pupils, parents and politicians and the only people who seemed to be pleased that it had been abolished were the politicians and certainly not the pupils who said they would rather have the belt than punishment exercises or suspensions. The programme ends with Sally Magnusson summing up by saying whether we like it or not, the belt is gone, which she emphasises by dropping a strap into a playground litterbin.

from: http://members.freespeech.org/saxon/main/index.htm
Comments (0) | Permalink

   The Pope sucks
ratzinger a fundamentalist pope
Source: Outrage

April, 19, 2005, London: The election of Cardinal Ratzinger as the new Pope is a disaster for women, gay people and liberal humanitarian values, according to human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell of the gay rights group OutRage!.

He represents the hardline, fundamentalist strand of Catholicism; opposing condoms to prevent the spread of HIV, rejecting women's rights, denouncing fertility treatment for childless couples, and endorsing state-sanctioned discrimination against gay people, added Mr Tatchell.

Cardinal Ratzinger has always put church dogma before the Christian values of love and compassion. He symbolises the patriarchy and homophobia of orthodox Catholicism.

The new Pope wants to maintain a centralised, authoritarian church, crushing dissent and autonomy.

As chief doctrinal advisor to the late Pope, his opposition to the use of condoms has contributed to the death of millions from HIV.

Ratzinger could have authorised a Vatican declaration that if people cannot abstain from sex, they have a moral duty to use a condom to prevent the spread of HIV. His endorsement of condoms, even if only as the lesser of two evils, would have saved lives. The Cardinal's opposition to condom use colluded with the greatest health crisis the
world has ever known.

Despite over 40 million people being infected worldwide with HIV, Ratzinger turned his back on a proven method of stopping virus transmission.

The Cardinal sanctioned Vatican efforts in March 2005 that successfully blocked recognition of gay human rights by the United Nations, effectively endorsing continued homophobic persecution in two-thirds of the world.

This persecution is condemning millions of lesbian and gay people to be rejected by their families, sacked from their jobs, evicted from their homes, and to be subjected to homophobic abuse, threats, arrest, imprisonment, rape, assault and murder either by vigilantes or by state agents such as the police and military.

Ratzinger not only refused to challenge this global war against gays, he succeeded in helping thwart UN attempts to protect lesbians and gay men from this avalanche of hatred and violence. He has queer blood on his holy hands, concluded Mr Tatchell.

Profile of Pope Benedict XVI (Cardinal Ratzinger)

Since 1981, Cardinal Ratzinger was head of the Vatican's Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith formerly known as The Inquisition. It is responsible for defining Roman Catholic doctrine and keeping Catholic clergy and theologians in line. It witch-hunted liberal and left-wing priests, and hounded proponents of liberation theology.

Cardinal Ratzinger is responsible for two of the most virulently anti-gay declarations ever made by the Vatican.

In 1986, Cardinal Ratzinger wrote the infamous Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons.

Acting on Papal authority, Ratzinger wrote that a homosexual orientation, even if the person is totally celibate, is a "tendency" toward an "intrinsic moral evil". Moreover, a homosexual inclination is both an "objective disorder" and a "moral disorder", which is
"contrary to the creative wisdom of God". "Special concern and pastoral attention should be directed towards those who have this condition, lest they be led to believe that the living out of this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable option. It
is not," he wrote.

Ratzinger's 1986 Letter concludes that pastoral care for homosexual persons should include "the assistance of the psychological, sociological and medical sciences", and that "all support should be withdrawn from any organisations which seek to undermine the teachings of the Church, which are ambiguous about it, or which ignore it entirely". This led to witch-hunts against gay Catholic organizations and against gay Catholic priests like Father Bernard Lynch.

In July 1992, the Vatican issued a further proclamation authorised by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and by Pope John Paul II, entitled "Some Considerations Concerning the Catholic Response to Legislative Proposals on the Non-Discrimination of Homosexual Persons".


This document was designed to mobilise Catholic opinion against equal rights legislation for lesbians and gay men. It describes homosexuality as an "objective disorder" and a "tendency ordered towards an intrinsic moral evil". Rejecting the concept of homosexual
"human rights", it asserts there is "no right" to homosexuality; adding that the civil liberties of lesbians and gay men can be "legitimately limited for objectively disordered external conduct".

While condemning "unjust" discrimination, the Vatican document says that some forms of antigay discrimination are "not unjust" and may even be "obligatory": especially with regard to "the consignment of children to adoption or foster care, in employment of teachers or coaches, and in military recruitment".

Most shocking of all, the 1992 document suggests that when lesbians and gay men demand civil rights, "neither the Church nor society should be surprised when ... irrational and violent reactions increase".

This implies that by asking for human rights, lesbians and gay men encourage homophobic prejudice and violence: we bring hatred upon ourselves, and are responsible for our own suffering. The Catholic Church, it seems, blames the victims of homophobia, not the perpetrators.

Born in 1927 in Bavaria, Ratzinger was already a professor of theology by the age of 31, holding prestigious positions in Freising, Bonn, M|nster, T|bingen, and Regensburg.

Throughout the 1960's he held influential positions on Vatican commissions dealing with church law and education, rising in 1977 to become the Archbishop of Munich and then appointed a cardinal.

In 1981, Ratzinger moved to the Vatican in his position as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, where he authored the two key homophobic Catholic declarations of 1986 and 1992, endorsing legal discrimination against lesbian and gay people.


Comments (0) | Permalink