Thursday, April 9, 2015

Exhibit B

In which Muti O'Reilly is becomes ever more overt in his propaganda campaign to get the public to believe that PP has attempted to out him.

Exhibit B

"I made a point to alert people to a serial sex offender and abuser that was engaged in hurting people in an ongoing way. The phony priest told me to shut up because he just wants to get laid. Since then, he's tried to make my life a living hell, making fun of everything I do or say with all his followers. He texts people telling them he's getting ready to "blast" me. He messages people to jump on threads to insult me. He messages people to stay away from me. He went on a long campaign to try and get my wife to leave me. During all this, someone,using the same language, called my work to get me fired, called my kids's school to tell them I'm an abuser. It goes on.”

This is just a blatant accusation thinly veiled as an inference. We are expected to believe that PP did this, even though there was clearly *at least* one other individual (the sex offender in question, and who knows what others) had a reason to have a beef with Muti O'Reilly.  

Wednesday, March 11, 2015

Exhibit A

muti o'reilly:  2 days ago | report
I don't have any illusions that the people who follow PP around will one day get up and publicly call him on it when he crosses a line [in which he establishes this paragraph to be ABOUT PP]. When he publicly accuses people of abuse with no evidence, publicly accuses them of transphobia, racism, etc. while messaging people's wives with lies and encouraging other people to seduce people under false pretenses, etc. No one is going to stand up and publicly tell him he crossed the line. Remember, he wrote a long diatribe about how I was excommunicated, while he was texting me convincing me that it was a bad idea for he or I to come out publicly against WB, because we are polarizing. [here he connects the ideas of "excommunication" and PP together]

muti o'reilly:  about 19 hours ago | report
the thing is, I didn't out anyone, I didn't write long screeds 'excommunicating' anyone, didn't go on a rampage blocking people, deleting comments, insulting or demeaning people... [In which he clearly, using rather deft and ambiguous transfer, associates the terms "excommunicated" and "outing." Since from above "excommunicated" = "PP" then "outing" must also = "PP"]

Reporter: about 13 hours ago | report
Serious, non-trolling question: who has PP outed to the vanilla world? What is the story behind that?
(I'm serious in asking it-- I'm not intending to or interested in rebutting or challenging it. I honestly want to know.)

o'reilly:  about 12 hours ago | report
@Reporter, at my last reckoning, exactly as many as we have. [Unclear, ambiguously worded answer]

Reporter: about 11 hours ago | report
@o'reilly I'm not aware of you having "outed" anybody to the vanilla world (yourself excepted-- but you openly link your Fet identity to your real identity). Is that to say you don't think PP has outed anybody to the vanilla world?

o'reilly:  about 11 hours ago | report
@Reporter: I don't know the context of what was said, but i was told by PP in a really nasty private message to never defend him so I really have no idea what to say. [avoidance; changing the subject]

Reporter: about 11 hours ago | report
@o'reilly I'm...not sure what that means.

Let me be clear: I'm not telling anyone to shut up about P. As I wrote in my recent post, if anyone has a problem with anyone, loudly share that information from the highest rooftop. It just often seems that implications get thrown around in these threads as if the stories behind them are common knowledge-- and with an accusation as serious as "outing," I feel the stories are really important.

Maybe I've misunderstood or missed something when it comes to the "outing" thing-- and if so, I stand corrected. But if anyone actually thinks PP has outed any FetLifer to the vanilla world without their consent, I really do want to know that story. It should be public knowledge.

o'reilly:  about 11 hours ago | report
@Reporter Yes, I understand where you stand on the issue. I'm glad that we at least all agree that people have the right to tell their stories here. As for the rest, I'm sure other people can discuss PP with you. [changing the subject]

Reporter: about 11 hours ago | report
@o'reilly're unwilling to discuss whether it is your belief/understanding that PP has outed people.

o'reilly:  about 11 hours ago | report
@reporter, I'm really really tired of having words put in my mouth. [redirecting aggression onto the question asker] If anyone else has susbstance behind an accusation that he has outed anyone, they are free to discuss it with you. I told you what I knew about it, that, as far as i know, he has outed as many people as i have. [repetition of original unclear answer]

I have accused exactly one person in the Chicago fetish scene, of being an abuser, based on a preponderance of evidence and an ongoing campaign of abuse he engaged in, in support of the people he hurt. I don't have very much to say about PP except that I would love him to leave me alone. [changing the subject again - PP has commented exactly zero times on this thread]

Reporter: about 11 hours ago | report
@o'reilly, for Christ's sake, I only asked you to clarify your answer. I asked you if you thought he'd outed anyone; you replied he's outed only as many people as you have. I asked you what that meant. That's not an unreasonable question.

What I'm understanding you to say is that you haven't outed anyone-- you accused WB, who outed himself on a thread. If you're saying PP outed "as many people" as you have, and you've outed no one, that means you don't think PP outed anyone. That's all I was asking.

Not everything's a trap, man. I think "he's outed as many people as I have" is a sufficiently vague answer that a reasonable person would ask a followup.

o'reilly:  about 11 hours ago | report
@Reporter, I'm sorry, I thought that was more clear. No, I don't think he's outed anyone that i know of. Beyond that, I don't have much to say about him. [finally and ultimately a redaction]

Please note that at no time does O'Reilly "make it clear" that he has "never accused PP of outing anyone." He simply admits that he doesn't think PP has done so. Admit =/= make clear.

Monday, January 5, 2015

Miss Manners

"Freedom without rules doesn’t work" – Judith Martin (Miss Manners)

"Etiquette is the science of living." – Emily Post

I am a timid person.

It’s difficult to explain this to people who often see me in front of a group of strangers, smiling, loud, sometimes naked, even. But an audience is a different animal than an individual; when speaking to an audience, I can be relatively certain that they *want* to appreciate what I have to offer (or else they wouldn’t be there). Crowds can be fickle, but it’s not that difficult to lead a crew which has come to you looking for a captain. I know my role in a crowd.

Individuals, on the other hand, present a much more intimidating prospect. There are so many opportunities with unfamiliar people! And so few assumptions one can make about the outcome of a conversation with one! Few things make me feel more timid than needing to speak to a stranger in a social situation – particularly if I want to make a nice impression. Walking up to a stranger and talking to them feels to me like a combination of stepping out onto a tightrope and cold calling. I don’t know my role in a situation like this.

Not knowing my role in a given situation – and therefore not knowing the rules of engagement in a given situation – gives me the howling fantods. When given a chance to learn the rules of engagement, I learn them, and I thrive.

BDSM should be a fantastic place for someone with such a requirement. Is not protocol a huge thing in the D/s community? It is, but protocol can be so formal, and I don’t want all that pomp. Does not every dungeon, munch, and social gathering have its code of conduct? They do, but while those rules are useful and necessary, they don’t provide much help in simply navigating the social waters of a conversation with someone new.

What’s missing in my life, I think, is good, solid etiquette. That bag of pretty tricks to pull from when you and the person opposite you try to speak at the exact same time, or when that cute girl’s got broccoli in her smile, or when that one guy is making everyone else uncomfortable. The WD-40 that makes the social gears run smoothly.

I’m not talking about some sort of fetishized etiquette, necessarily; I don’t have a lot of interest in Victorian households, or D/s protocols, or how to use which fork properly, or in delving deeply into someone else’s idea relationship etiquette. The active etiquette groups here on FetLife are (understandably) focused on lifestyle etiquette. None of these are what I’m looking for.

I am interested in the kind of etiquette that begins simply with the intention of being nice and not awkward to people, which I have and which makes me want to learn to be more polite. I want to learn good manners, and I want to arm myself with the etiquette which governs how those manners are to be properly used. But where can I learn? I was (figuratively) raised in something of a barn with regards to manners, and since nobody stands on ceremony anymore, I’ve found it difficult to learn them through observation.  I need a Mrs. Higgins to my Eliza Doolittle!*

Am I the only one who feels this way? Do we need a finishing school for kinksters? I welcome your (kind) thoughts!

*Don’t any of you dare correct me and say Henry Higgins was the one who taught Eliza the rules of etiquette, I will cut you.