There are many well intentioned discussions at the moment about professional associations for riggers and / or models. Many terrible people love to join professional associations because it lends them the seeming of legitimacy without much actual effort in contrast to those that build their own reputation by actually achieving something. Professional associations have their uses for concrete definable professions with real qualifications that can be subjectively determined. i.e. there's a reason why these exist commonly for trades. Also many associations exist to represent their members in some way. If so who runs it and how is it going to be paid for? Or do you want or the kind that only exist to provide information and a nexus of communication for members? Do people mean something like the General Medical Council that can strike of Doctors so they can't practice. If so how do you enforce this? Eventually associations with bad members are devalued and become worthless regardless of any good works due to bad members. People stop trusting it. So you just have to stop bad people joining right? Well how? This has sprung up in the wake of revelations about some well known presenters. So you wouldn't let them in your association right? Why not? Until recently they had as far as many were concerned good reputations. Their turning out to not be the kind of people you'd have wanted associated with your professional association wasn't necessarily predictable. So now you're going to expel them right? How? You're going to have a tribunal with witnesses and a trusted panel of adjudicators who are senior professionals. How do you determine who they should be? Even if you do this and it all works [...]
Recently I saw a post about Top drop or as they described it a 'Rigger's Melancholy' (which is a term I really liked btw.) It caught me at a wrong moment and I posted that yeh, everyone knows about it. I was expecting someone to take issue with the tone of my response or criticise me for ever being exasperated by the endless repetition of the same questions, any display of less than perfect temper or humanity. Something along those lines. I was pretty surprised therefore to see a reply that didn't make any of those reasonable complaints but instead insisted that not everyone had or was aware of this experience. I will quote the response exactly here so you can see that I'm not making this up. No, WykD_Dave, not everyone already knows about it. The great thing about this group is that we have a wide variety of experiences and skills. I would like to hear positive and constructive information from experts like you about how to recognize top drop coming on and how to deal with the feelings. What most struck me is the assumption that this is some unique experience or out of the ordinary emotion or feeling. You do something emotionally and or physically intense and you have a natural high from it, then you have a low to a greater or lesser extent afterwards. Yes we're all a bit different and have greter or lesser responses and some come down sooner or more steeply than others but surely this is a common human experience though to anyone who's ever done anything intense, euphoric, joyous. To anyone who's triumphed on the sports field, been in love, had great sex, strived [...]
You know I used to say I was a rigger because it was a nice neutral term. But... well people have kind of turned it into a title of sorts and now people start posts with "I'm a rigger!" and it makes me cringe. Not least because I think... You're a rigger (in the titled sense you now mean it) and I think NO you're not, you'd maybe like to think you are but you're someone who maybe once in a while uses rope and it's a far cry from that to someone who can really rig. See if you want to use it like that especially about yourself you'd damn well better be able to do it. And most of you that have latched on to the previously serviceable and unpretentious word and turned it into a title and use it that way are exactly the people that it shouldn't apply to in that way. People seem obsessed with creating titles for themselves. Shut up and do some good rope instead. If you were good you wouldn't need 'titles' for yourself no would you?
WARNING: This is going to be a bit of a personal ramble which may or may not prove useful to others! Now I want to say right at the beginning before anyone goes off the deep end that there are probably lots of people we'd really like to play and would have a great time with, it's just that we either don't know who they are, don't know them well enough, or just don't know them in that way. So to date there have been 3 people in the whole world that we've played with since we've been together, maybe 3 that we're open to the idea of playing with and a few scattered souls that we might become open to playing with if we get to know them in the right way. The people we do play with know who they are, the people we're open to the idea of playing with might not. As for people who'd like to play with us? Not a clue. The only reason that this comes up at all in a post is that recently a lot of people have said (not to us but to other people) that we don't play with anyone else. Generally we wouldn't care about this excepting when someone who does not know us or how we feel about playing with others, categorically tells someone interested in us that we never play with others. As you can imagine the wide spread impression being generated is a bit of an inconvenience. OK so we don't play randomly and so help us, we like to know people somewhat first. Not an issue I think and not anyone's business but ours and the people we play [...]
This post arose out of some on-line arguing about rope bondage ages ago. I thought there were some worthwhile points about the type of arguments used however so I'm rehashing it here. The main thrust was people trying to justify practices undertaken without full knowledge of the risks with arguments like... Bondage is dangerous anyway. That's besides the point. There's a difference between the danger of deliberately and knowingly engaging in a practice with knowledge of the risks and possible consequences and the danger caused by someone not knowing what they're doing. That whole argument is a red herring. The same applies to models peculiarities. There's a real difference between making an adjustment to a bondage for a specific model because an adjustment is being deliberately made and rope placement varying because the person just doesn't know where they might risk causing harm. Also the models likes and degree of masochism aren't arguments that apply to something that's done badly. A more masochistic model doesn't mean horrible rope work should pass without comment. Distinctions between fractional differences in ideas on construction or microscopic differences in placement aren't the issue. I have to believe that it is possible to spot the difference between something that might be subjective or even questionable and a total and monumental horror. The thing about bad bondage is that you have to be lucky every time in order not to harm someone. The better the bondage the more you have to be actually unlucky to harm someone. The notion of 'no harm no foul' isn't valid either. To suggest that simply because no one was hurt it wasn't bad is not in any way logical. Being lucky not to hurt someone [...]