Possible letter to the British Psychological Society

Nigel Meek, 01 Jun 2006 17:59:38

I’ve posted to the files section further correspondence from the pages of The Psychologist. This time a letter from one Michael Beattie opposing S&M porn. It’s a “think of the children” plea which (a) implies that those involved in S&M were abused as children and (b) confuses consensual adult S&M with child abuse and child porn.

I’m minded to write a letter to The Psychologist for the next issue along the following lines and any suggestions/comments would be most appreciated.

Thanks,

Nigel Meek



Dear Sir,

As both a member of the BPS and a libertarian activist who has had some involvement with the campaign to oppose moves to outlaw sado-masochistic pornography, I was saddened to read the letter from Michael Beattie in the June 2006 issue of The Psychologist.

Firstly, he uses the emotive “think of the children” tactic so often deployed by our moral guardians and which often indicates that the “argument” has no real substance. Secondly, he makes the patronising claim that those involved in S&M were often - otherwise why bother to say this? - abused as children rather than being able to accept that this it what some people enjoy doing (rather like train spotting or morris dancing). Thirdly and most outrageously, he confuses consensual adult sexual activity including the production of pornography with the abuse of children and the production of images which are in truth nothing other than evidence of a crime in much the same manner as CCTV footage of a street robbery would be.

Although I am sufficiently wordy-wise to have a genuine knowledge of what is involved, S&M is not my own cup of tea. However, as a libertarian I strongly support the right of people to engage in whatever consensual activities they choose and oppose those who think that they know better.

Yours faithfully,

Nigel Meek BSc MA
Editorial Director, Libertarian Alliance
Etc.


Teddy, 01 Jun 2006 21:06:56

Hi Nigel,

This is a very good response to a particularly fatuous and unsubstantiated contribution from Mr Beattie. Surely the nanny-state must save our souls from the child-abusing evils of extreme porn; otherwise, it might lead to the wearing of brightly-coloured clothes and to dancing?!

The only point I might have is that the comment about the evidence of real crimes and the comparison with CCTV footage might confuse the uninitiated reader? After all, we are still awaiting news of any website featuring real non-consensual activities from the supporters of this legislation.

T.

Author wrote:
> I’ve posted to the files section further correspondence from the pages of The Psychologist. This time a letter from one Michael Beattie opposing S&M porn. It’s a “think of the children” plea which (a) implies that those involved in S&M were abused as children and (b) confuses consensual adult S&M with child abuse and child porn.
> I’m minded to write a letter to The Psychologist for the next issue along the following lines and any suggestions/comments would be most appreciated.
> Thanks,
> Nigel Meek
> Dear Sir,
> As both a member of the BPS and a libertarian activist who has had some involvement with the campaign to oppose moves to outlaw sado-masochistic pornography, I was saddened to read the letter from Michael Beattie in the June 2006 issue of The Psychologist.
> Firstly, he uses the emotive “think of the children” tactic so often deployed by our moral guardians and which often indicates that the “argument” has no real substance. Secondly, he makes the patronising claim that those involved in S&M were often - otherwise why bother to say this? - abused as children rather than being able to accept that this it what some people enjoy doing (rather like train spotting or morris dancing). Thirdly and most outrageously, he confuses consensual adult sexual activity including the production of pornography with the abuse of children and the production of images which are in truth nothing other than evidence of a crime in much the same manner as CCTV footage of a street robbery would be.
> Although I am sufficiently wordy-wise to have a genuine knowledge of what is involved, S&M is not my own cup of tea. However, as a libertarian I strongly support the right of people to engage in whatever consensual activities they choose and oppose those who think that they know better.
> Yours faithfully,
> Nigel Meek BSc MA
> Editorial Director, Libertarian Alliance
> Etc.
>
>


*** This message has been edited by Teddy on 02 Jun 2006 01:38:32 ***


demolitionred, 04 Jun 2006 01:41:28

There are some views from other psychologists on www.backalsh-uk.org.uk if you want to add further evidence to your letter.

and I know of others working in this field you could contact...
that said the letter is fine as it is...


rosalee, 05 Jun 2006 17:11:08

Yes, some people in the BDSM community were abused as children and some
weren't. A bit like the rest of the population.

Ginny


-----Original Message-----
nigel@libertarian.co.uk [mailto:nigel@libertarian.co.uk], 05 Jun 2006 17:11:08
Sent: 01 June 2006 16:18

I've posted to the files section further correspondence from the pages of
The Psychologist. This time a letter from one Michael Beattie opposing S&M
porn. It's a "think of the children" plea which (a) implies that those
involved in S&M were abused as children and (b) confuses consensual adult
S&M with child abuse and child porn.

I'm minded to write a letter to The Psychologist for the next issue along
the following lines and any suggestions/comments would be most appreciated.

Thanks,

Nigel Meek









--
If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash

To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com

Report abuse
http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D4932


Nigel Meek, 06 Jun 2006 13:45:02

Thanks for the responses. I'll try and get something "in the post" to The Psychologist for the next issue. Whether they'll publish it we'll have to see!

Nigel Meek



Author wrote:
> Yes, some people in the BDSM community were abused as children and some
> weren't. A bit like the rest of the population.
> Ginny
> -----Original Message-----
: nigel@libertarian.co.uk [mailto:nigel@libertarian.co.uk], 06 Jun 2006 13:45:02
> Sent: 01 June 2006 16:18
> Subject: [backlash] Possible letter to the British Psychological Society
> I've posted to the files section further correspondence from the pages of
> The Psychologist. This time a letter from one Michael Beattie opposing S&M
> porn. It's a "think of the children" plea which (a) implies that those
> involved in S&M were abused as children and (b) confuses consensual adult
> S&M with child abuse and child porn.
> I'm minded to write a letter to The Psychologist for the next issue along
> the following lines and any suggestions/comments would be most appreciated.
> Thanks,
> Nigel Meek
> --
> If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
> To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
> Report abuse
> http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D4932


Teddy, 07 Jun 2006 00:53:57

Excellent. Reasoned debate isn't something they've been so big on lately!

T.

Author wrote:
> Thanks for the responses. I'll try and get something "in the post" to The Psychologist for the next issue. Whether they'll publish it we'll have to see!


Graham Marsden, 07 Jun 2006 13:02:27

Hi there,

rosalee1@btopenworld.com wrote:
>
> Yes, some people in the BDSM community were abused as children and some
> weren't. A bit like the rest of the population.

Or, more accurately, a very few people in the BDSM community were abused
as children and the vast majority were not. Just like the rest of the
population :-)

Cheers,
Graham.


Teddy, 21 Jun 2006 02:02:39

Hi Nigel,

Any news on this, or is the previous rant from Beattie the final word of "The Psychologist" on the subject?

T.

Author wrote:
> Thanks for the responses. I'll try and get something "in the post" to The Psychologist for the next issue. Whether they'll publish it we'll have to see!
> Nigel Meek
> Author wrote:
> > Yes, some people in the BDSM community were abused as children and some
> > weren't. A bit like the rest of the population.
> > Ginny
> > -----Original Message-----
om: nigel@libertarian.co.uk [mailto:nigel@libertarian.co.uk], 21 Jun 2006 02:02:39
> > Sent: 01 June 2006 16:18
> > Subject: [backlash] Possible letter to the British Psychological Society
> > I've posted to the files section further correspondence from the pages of
> > The Psychologist. This time a letter from one Michael Beattie opposing S&M
> > porn. It's a "think of the children" plea which (a) implies that those
> > involved in S&M were abused as children and (b) confuses consensual adult
> > S&M with child abuse and child porn.
> > I'm minded to write a letter to The Psychologist for the next issue along
> > the following lines and any suggestions/comments would be most appreciated.
> > Thanks,
> > Nigel Meek
> > --
> > If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> > visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
> > To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
> > Report abuse
> > http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D4932


Nigel Meek, 21 Jun 2006 07:24:40

I submitted my letter some time ago. Other than an autoresponder email I've heard nothing. I don't know what their policy is regarding contacting correspondents. It may just be a case of waiting for the next issue.

Nigel

Author wrote:
> Hi Nigel,
> Any news on this, or is the previous rant from Beattie the final word of "The Psychologist" on the subject?
> T.
> Author wrote:
> > Thanks for the responses. I'll try and get something "in the post" to The Psychologist for the next issue. Whether they'll publish it we'll have to see!
> > Nigel Meek
> > Author wrote:
> > > Yes, some people in the BDSM community were abused as children and some
> > > weren't. A bit like the rest of the population.
> > > Ginny
> > > -----Original Message-----
From: nigel@libertarian.co.uk [mailto:nigel@libertarian.co.uk], 21 Jun 2006 07:24:40
> > > Sent: 01 June 2006 16:18
> > > Subject: [backlash] Possible letter to the British Psychological Society
> > > I've posted to the files section further correspondence from the pages of
> > > The Psychologist. This time a letter from one Michael Beattie opposing S&M
> > > porn. It's a "think of the children" plea which (a) implies that those
> > > involved in S&M were abused as children and (b) confuses consensual adult
> > > S&M with child abuse and child porn.
> > > I'm minded to write a letter to The Psychologist for the next issue along
> > > the following lines and any suggestions/comments would be most appreciated.
> > > Thanks,
> > > Nigel Meek
> > > --
> > > If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> > > visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
> > > To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
> > > Report abuse
> > > http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D4932


demolitionred, 22 Jun 2006 07:28:52

Phone and ask. A follow up call is always a good idea. It reminds them opf the existence of your letter and begins contact.

Author wrote:
> I submitted my letter some time ago. Other than an autoresponder email I've heard nothing. I don't know what their policy is regarding contacting correspondents. It may just be a case of waiting for the next issue.
> Nigel
> Author wrote:
> > Hi Nigel,
> > Any news on this, or is the previous rant from Beattie the final word of "The Psychologist" on the subject?
> > T.
> > Author wrote:
> > > Thanks for the responses. I'll try and get something "in the post" to The Psychologist for the next issue. Whether they'll publish it we'll have to see!
> > > Nigel Meek
> > > Author wrote:
> > > > Yes, some people in the BDSM community were abused as children and some
> > > > weren't. A bit like the rest of the population.
> > > > Ginny
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> From: nigel@libertarian.co.uk [mailto:nigel@libertarian.co.uk], 22 Jun 2006 07:28:52
> > > > Sent: 01 June 2006 16:18
> > > > Subject: [backlash] Possible letter to the British Psychological Society
> > > > I've posted to the files section further correspondence from the pages of
> > > > The Psychologist. This time a letter from one Michael Beattie opposing S&M
> > > > porn. It's a "think of the children" plea which (a) implies that those
> > > > involved in S&M were abused as children and (b) confuses consensual adult
> > > > S&M with child abuse and child porn.
> > > > I'm minded to write a letter to The Psychologist for the next issue along
> > > > the following lines and any suggestions/comments would be most appreciated.
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Nigel Meek
> > > > --
> > > > If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> > > > visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
> > > > To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
> > > > Report abuse
> > > > http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D4932