[quote="mlp, post: 86963, member: 90"
From the reviews of her work that I read yesterday evening, I gather that her how to manuals include little stories that describe in some detail how she puts those techniques into practice. Maybe you could tell us how writing a book whose primary effect (based on the reviews) is to give people good wanking off material is substantively different from doing a lap dance?[/quote]
I haven't read any of her books as I only heard of her from this thread but I'm sure some people read her books because they want to improve their sexual technique. I can read about sex or talk with my friends about sex without becoming sexually aroused, as I'm sure most adults can. If people were purely looking for material to masturbate to I'm sure they could find more explicit stuff than that.
I think that PJ was talking about Blue's little self serving, publicity seeking postings after her talk was cancelled.
But to your question - let's say a NAMBLA member is scheduled to speak at a conference, and objections are raised because some of the attendees were molested as children. Is the NAMBLA member's willingness to move the talk to a smaller room, one with closed doors, a compromise, or is it a a dismissal of the concerns of the survivors of childhood rape?
I think it depends on what segment of society you're talking about, and what segment of sex workers. There are segments of society which glorify or romanticize sex workers, segments which consider them scum, etc. High priced call girls tend to be romanticized even by people who look down on prostitutes who ply their trade in alleys. Likewise, there are varying views of people who utilize sex workers - a high priced call girl is a status symbol for aman who uses her, a man who uses a street prostitute may be considered a stud or pathetic, depending largely on his own looks and circumstances, and a woman who uses a gigolo is almost universally considered pathetic. Money and/or looks determines status on both sides of the sex market.
This thread is completely ridiculous. I am absolutely appalled by some of the crap coming out here. Since when is trying to talk sensibly about sex a bad thing? Since when is writing frank sexual manuals equated with writing erotica (which in itself is no bad thing)?
Also apparently Violet Blue is her given name.
What the hell is going on here? I see a knee jerk reaction to Dasnut talking about women. I get the feeling if someone else had posted this, the reaction to Violet Blue would have been very different.
See the first comment in my post. From the reviews of her work that I read yesterday evening, I gather that her how to manuals include little stories that describe in some detail how she puts those techniques into practice. Maybe you could tell us how writing a book whose primary effect (based on the reviews) is to give people good wanking off material is substantively different from doing a lap dance?
(Putting this into spoilers because of the topic matter)
I put the name "Violet Blue" into Amazon, and the first result was: "The Ultimate Guide to Cunnilingus: How to Go Down on a Woman and Give Her Exquisite Pleasure".
Here's the first review:
"This was an easy read that broke the topic down really well. I feel like that made it easier to apply"
Here's the second:
"I haven't finished reading this book yet but what I have read thus far is extremely enlightening and would reccomend it to any one that would appreciate the finer art of eating pussy."
Here's the third:
"i considered myself well versed, but now realize i was just an amteurenthusiast. cant wait to put some of the things i learnedinto play. the writing was approachable with plenty of specifics without seeming overly scientific. ill definitely pass it along to my girlfriend as well..."
I'm seeing that people are using the book to have better sex. I'm not seeing where they are using the book to wank off.
But she has written at least one article I've found about porn (the one that appeared in Oprah's magazine). Even that being the case, does that mean it negates her ability as a sex educator? Do we hold men up to the same standard - for example, is Dan Savage a sex worker because he's promoted porn?
I know that this question is not directed at me, but my reaction to someone who chooses a stripper name to *educate* about sex is that their real purpose is not education. I would have the same reaction to someone with an teaching degree who changes her name to "Juicy Pink" before getting a job at the local high school to teach sex ed.
A former coworker of mine shared the unusual first name with someone who appeared in such magazines as Playboy and Maxim.
I had no problems judging her based on her work, and not on her name.
Do you think people with names like "Violet Blue" should be judged based on their name, and not their acts?
But to your question - let's say a NAMBLA member is scheduled to speak at a conference, and objections are raised because some of the attendees were molested as children. Is the NAMBLA member's willingness to move the talk to a smaller room, one with closed doors, a compromise, or is it a a dismissal of the concerns of the survivors of childhood rape?
Ms. Blue's talk was about harm reduction, and judging by her past talks, it would involve harm reduction among consenting adults.
I don't consider adult sexual activity to be the same as pedophilia. Thus I don't think the situation is the same.
Clearly marking the talk as being about sex did give the rape survivor enough information to avoid it. The offer of moving it to another location, behind closed doors, was polite and compromising.
But the pressure (real or perceived) to cancel the talk, and the advocacy against no harm-reduction outreach to such audiences, goes too far. Such a policy, as advocated by the Ada Initiative, does far more harm than good.
You have no sense of the facetious I guess, or of exaggeration for comic effect. I've gotten more laughter out of this whole thread than anything else.
What's the funny part? Where the rape survivor was worried that a talk about sex could be triggering? Or when a sex educator wanted to spread harm reduction information but couldn't? Or maybe the idea of a woman wanting to talk in front of an audience that was majority male about harm reduction is funny.
Help me see the humor in this. Because I'm not.
Maybe your posts were supposed to be humorous. But again, I'm not seeing the humor. Was your post where you compared Ms. Blue to a woman at a stag party supposed to be funny? How about you implying that any sexual information must be designed to titillate the audience? Do you think it's humorous to attack a woman based on her sexual character when she's trying to give a serious talk, even if that (in this case) the topic included sex?
Maybe you find this funny. I see it as an attack against a person who was trying to give a serious talk about harm reduction.
I really hate that. Sure, I understand in this day and age, using sex in advertising is very typical, but seriously? If I'm going to a tech show, I want to see something cool. That's what would attract me to a booth, not some busty scantily clad woman. Show me a big screen with some amazing graphics. Show me some amazing hardware.
But if you're technique to selling your product is a sexy lady, then I'm going to assume that whatever you are trying to promote isn't interesting enough to stand on its own.
This thread is completely ridiculous. I am absolutely appalled by some of the crap coming out here. Since when is trying to talk sensibly about sex a bad thing? Since when is writing frank sexual manuals equated with writing erotica (which in itself is no bad thing)?
Also apparently Violet Blue is her given name.
What the hell is going on here? I see a knee jerk reaction to Dasnut talking about women. I get the feeling if someone else had posted this, the reaction to Violet Blue would have been very different.
Talking sensibly about sex is not a bad thing - I don't think that anyone has insinuated that. But there's a time and a place for it.
As I said earlier, I don't think that seminars about sex have a place at a professional conference, unless the conference is one for sex workers, therapists, or some other profession to which it is directly applicable. It's especially problematic at a conference in a field that is heavily male dominated and even more so that has historically been antagonostic to women in a variety of ways.
Violet Blue is her legal name; that's not the same as being her given name. Kind of like if Kevorkian had legally changed his name to "Dr. Death" - it might give one pause as to what his motivations were.
I don't think a thread would have been started about someone's seminar presentation being cancelled if the subject of the presentation were something other than sex. I've asked several times why this situation is so problematic as far as das_nut is concerned, and so far the only (sort of) answer that I've gotten is that the populace in general is badly informed about sexual matters. And, as I've said in response, hackers certainly are especially ill equipped to find relevant information about personal matters on their own personal time.
The point is that certain things are triggering, whether they occur behind closed doors or not. For example, I wouldn't feel better about attending a conference where rabbits were being killed, skinned and dissected, even if it were being done behind closed doors and I didn't have to watch/listen.
As I said earlier, I don't think that seminars about sex have a place at a professional conference, unless the conference is one for sex workers, therapists, or some other profession to which it is directly applicable. It's especially problematic at a conference in a field that is heavily male dominated and even more so that has historically been antagonostic to women in a variety of ways.
How many of the men (and women!) at B-Sides SF are likely to attend a professional conference on sex and thus hear the same harm reduction information?
Actually a really good point. Men ( broad sweeping statement to follow I'm afraid) don't seem to spend nearly enough time considering sex beyond well, the obvious. They seem to me a lot less like to seek out information that may be useful to them and those around them.
I have a book in my shop right now called the Ultimate Guide to Cunnilingus and while I'm not sure if it's Violet Blue's or not, it's aimed at women and only men as an afterthought.
Doesn't seem like such a terrible idea to promote sex education in places where you find these undereducated menfolk.
Das_nut, no, I don't differentiate between males and females. If Dan Savage writes porn/erotica (where is the line drawn there anyway?) then I don't see that as substantively different than if he were talking dirty on a phone sex line - he's getting paid to elicit a sexual response.
A hacker con is an ideal place for Violet Blue's harm reduction talk, as hackers are an at-risk population. Drug users, sex workers and hackers are all at-risk populations. The 'Just Say No' approach to such risky behaviors do not work. Education and harm reduction does work.
Actually a really good point. Men ( broad sweeping statement to follow I'm afraid) don't seem to spend nearly enough time considering sex beyond well, the obvious. They seem to me a lot less like to seek out information that may be useful to them and those around them.
I have a book in my shop right now called the Ultimate Guide to Cunnilingus and while I'm not sure if it's Violet Blue's or not, it's aimed at women and only men as an afterthought.
Doesn't seem like such a terrible idea to promote sex education in places where you find these undereducated menfolk.
Women too actually. For me to hear a women speaking about sex with no intention to turn people on is really quite empowering because it's unfortunately something I rarely come across.
How many of the men (and women!) at B-Sides SF are likely to attend a professional conference on sex and thus hear the same harm reduction information?
Is it possible these poor guys might be able to borrow a computer from someone, or go to the library, and have someone show them how to use Google so they could get information about sex? Since they're so cut off from the rest of society, I see how they've never been exposed to information about sex and drugs, and have no clue how to get that information, or even that it exists.
What I find funny about this thread is the great concern with having these educated, relatively affluent tech guys get a sex ed lecture.
Why do you think you know so much more about "harm reduction" than these guys?
The point is that certain things are triggering, whether they occur behind closed doors or not. For example, I wouldn't feel better about attending a conference where rabbits were being killed, skinned and dissected, even if it were being done behind closed doors and I didn't have to watch/listen.
As I said earlier, I don't think that seminars about sex have a place at a professional conference, unless the conference is one for sex workers, therapists, or some other profession to which it is directly applicable. It's especially problematic at a conference in a field that is heavily male dominated and even more so that has historically been antagonostic to women in a variety of ways.
How many of the men (and women!) at B-Sides SF are likely to attend a professional conference on sex and thus hear the same harm reduction information?
So their only opportunity to learn any of this information is at a professional conference? Wow, and here I thought these people were internet savy, at least internet savy enough to log onto Amazon and order a book. Even I can do that.
Tell me, would you be equally up in arms if the talk that had been cancelled had been about eating right and exercising, or would your response have been - "That's really not what professional conferences are about, and anyone who has managed to remain oblivious about the risks associated with mixing a sedentary lifestyle with a bad diet can find the info in plenty of places?"
The reason for scheduling, at a hackers' conference, a seminar about sex and drugs rather than a seminar about diet and exercise is because the former draws interest, in much the same way that the buxom girls manning booths at the tech fair draw interest.
Das_nut, no, I don't differentiate between males and females. If Dan Savage writes porn/erotica (where is the line drawn there anyway?) then I don't see that as substantively different than if he were talking dirty on a phone sex line - he's getting paid to elicit a sexual response.
The point is that certain things are triggering, whether they occur behind closed doors or not. For example, I wouldn't feel better about attending a conference where rabbits were being killed, skinned and dissected, even if it were being done behind closed doors and I didn't have to watch/listen.
If a talk is cancelled because of schedule changes, fair enough. But then I think if a talk is cancelled because of its content, then it is equally fair to ask if this was an appropriate action.
Education outreach is important because believe it or not, not everyone does spend time googling what they ought to know.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
