New York politicians and parents are up in arms over new sex-ed curriculum required for sixth- and seventh-graders at city public schools starting next spring. The curriculum pushes for abstinence but also teaches condom use and alternative ways of having sex.
At the focus of their furor is Columbia University's Go Ask Alice Web site, a sex-education site named after the controversial 1971 book that tells the life story of a troubled teenage girl. The site is on the new curriculum’s recommended resources list.
The New York Post reports that some think the site tackles topics too mature for middle-schoolers, including sadomasochism, sexual positions, fetishes, pornography and more. The site has been praised in the past for offering information about sex to students in a safe, academic online forum.
Leading the charge against New York’s new curriculum and the Go Ask Alice Web site are the NYC Parents’ Choice Coalition and three Republican elected officials, including State Island Assemblywoman Nicole Malliotakis (R-East Shore/Brooklyn).
Malliotakis calls the new curriculum “explicit and graphic.”
The assemblywoman cites as especially troubling the inclusion of the “Go Ask Alice” Web site on the recommended resources list, because it touches on topics like pornography, “swing clubs” and foot fetishes.
Salon.com’s J. Bryan Lowder acknowledges that the site may be geared for a college-age person. But he is one of many people now speaking out to say the site shouldn’t be dismissed altogether. Lowder writes:
The main mission of Alice is to provide a forum for solid, professionally moderated health advice on any sexual issue, from the most vanilla encounter to the deepest dungeons of kink (not to mention its wide-ranging coverage of non-sexual issues like nutrition, exercise, and stress management). In other words, your kid could do a great deal worse on Google. ...
Update from Reese McCranie, spokesperson for Mayor Kasim Reed:
"The new lawsuit claims that every named plaintiff was subjected to improper treatment, including persons the City cannot confirm were actually present at the Eagle during the time of the operation. At this preliminary stage of the lawsuit, the City has not had an opportunity to interview these new plaintiffs and confirm their presence, so the City had no choice but to deny those allegations at this point. Had these new plaintiffs joined in the original Calhoun lawsuit instead of waiting for the outcome of that case before coming forward, the City would have been able to confirm their presence and include them in the previous settlement."
The city of Atlanta denies police officers violated the constitutional rights of patrons when the Vice Unit and the now disbanded Red Dog Unit raided the gay Midtown bar the Atlanta Eagle two years ago. The denial comes in the form of a response to the second lawsuit filed over the botched raid bar on Sept. 10, 2009.
"City defendants assert that they took no action to deprive plaintiff's of any right, privilege, freedom or immunity secured by the Constitution" and the laws of Georgia and Atlanta, reads the response filed in U.S. District Court on Thursday, Oct. 6 — the day before Atlanta Pride kicks off.
The city's answer also states, "Insofar as Plaintiffs have been affected by the conduct of City Defendants, their actions were reasonable, proper, and necessary" and that the plaintiff's allegations "do not establish a constitutional violation."
While the second lawsuit by the 10 men who were in the bar the night it was raided was filed in Fulton County Superior Court, the city filed a motion to remove the lawsuit from that court and have it moved to federal court where the response was filed.
"I'm stunned" by the response, said attorney Dan Grossman, who is representing the 10 Eagle plaintiffs along with Gerry Weber. Grossman was the lead attorney in the first Eagle lawsuit that resulted in the city settling with 28 plaintiffs in December 2010 for more than $1 million.
And while the first settlement signed by U.S. District Judge Timothy Batten states, "Plaintiffs [were] unlawfully searched, detained, and/or arrested on September 10-11, 2009, at the Atlanta Eagle in Atlanta, Georgia, and that none of the Plaintiffs [were] personally suspected of any criminal activity," Batten did add, "This finding has no preclusive effect as to any other person or entity not a party to this litigation." Read Judge Batten's ruling in the original lawsuit here.
Mayor Kasim Reed, a defendant in the second Eagle lawsuit, said in July after the two investigations were released that he was "shocked" by their findings.
"My reaction [to the reports] is that this is terrible and I'm going to take whatever steps necessary to make sure this never happens in the city of Atlanta again," Reed said. ...
Just in time for Pride: Yesterday, the City filed its response to a lawsuit recently filed by ten men who were present at the Atlanta Eagle the night it was improperly raided by the Atlanta Police Department. See, I say "improperly" because it's been established several times over — in a previous settlement, an outside investigation commissioned by the city, as well as an investigation report prepared by the APD itself — that officers involved in the raid did NOT follow procedure. And certain APD procedures that were followed were later deemed unconstitutional by a federal judge.
In its response to this most recent lawsuit, the City basically says that the raid was not improper. Here's the dumb-or-brilliant part: They've phrased it so they're not necessarily arguing that NO ONE'S rights were violated or that the police didn't act inappropriately toward SOME PEOPLE — just not these particular plaintiffs.
Here are some highlights from the response (just to clarify, "City Defendants" includes the officers who conducted the raid, several of whom have already been fired for their role in the raid and the subsequent coverup): ...
Attorney Dan Grossman told CL today that he expected the City would argue damages — yeah, we were wrong, but how much is that hour spent lying on a filthy barroom floor really worth? — but didn't expect they'd argue the raid itself was acceptable.
In an emailed statement he said, "These statements directly contradict the conclusions of the city's two formal investigation reports, which found widespread violations of the patrons' constitutional rights."
Grossman describes the argument as "frivolous," and says bringing it before a judge could expose the City to sanctions — and paying the plaintiff's legal fees.
UPDATE: City spokesperson Sonji Dade acknowledges that the city's answer to the new lawsuit may sound incongruous with the court settlements it has previously made, but says it reflects standard legal practice.
"There are plaintiffs named in this new suit that the city hasn't yet confirmed were present in the Eagle that night," she says. "The legal strategy at this point has to be to deny the allegations and go from there."
If that sounds to you like the city will eventually settle most of these cases, too, we'd agree.
She’ll beat you. She’ll bite you. And she can get you locked up for 15 to life.
Former state prosecutor Alisha Smith, a k a the feared dominatrix Alisha Spark, looked ultra-demure in a black pants suit accented by a coquettish pink blouse yesterday as she and her bad-ass lawyer, Gloria Allred, complained that, for the first time in pursuing her dual passions -- doling out justice while beating willing butts -- she’d been manhandled.
Smith abruptly quit her $78,825-a-year job battling securities fraud for the state Attorney General’s Office, she announced at a press conference at the Friars Club.
This after being suspended without pay last month when her bosses learned from The Post about her frisky nocturnal ministrations.
Famous in the S&M world for her skillful spandex-clad spankings, Smith, while not denying her freaky ways, says she did not make money trolling the dungeons while working for the state’s top law-enforcement official, a job she’s held since 2002.
A standing executive order prohibits AG’s office employees from taking in $1,000 from any other source.
As if to show she has not a whit of shame about her extracurricular high-jinks, Smith brought two photos of herself to the press conference in which she’s dressed as her alter ego -- in a low-cut pink spandex get-up for Valentine’s Day, black spandex for Halloween.
“It’s very fashionable for young women to wear latex,’’ Allred said, bungling the name of the material for one that’s even more kinky. “Marc Jacobs has shown latex on the runway for fall and winter 2011. Katy Perry also wore it.’’
Even these pix are tame compared with the skin-tight, see-through dress and heart-shaped pasties in which Smith was photographed at a recent fetish event.
Yesterday, Smith was righteously angry about her career malfunction.
“All of [the AG’s] actions towards me have been extremely disturbing because I have never accepted any money or payment from any outside source for anything while I have been employed by the New York Attorney General’s Office,’’ Smith said.
Allred also took a swipe at her bosses. “Very quickly, and without checking with Ms. Smith to determine if the story about to run was true or false, and without providing any hearing to Ms. Smith, the New York Attorney General’s Office suspended her without pay.’’...
In a press conference yesterday with high-powered attorney Gloria Allred at her side, Assistant State Attorney General and accused money-for-lashings dominatrix Alisha Smith resigned her post, but not before criticizing her employer for a breach of public decency. "All of [the AG's] actions towards me have been deeply disturbing because I have never accepted any money or payment from any outside source for anything," Smith said.
According to ABC, she later displayed two photos of her in spandex outfits, and Allred suggested that "Employers do not have the right to go on fishing expeditions into an employee private sexual activities and an employee should not have to sacrifice their privacy about their sex life in order to keep a job," except when people are dumb enough to share on Facebook.
Smith, who is allegedly known as "Alisha Spark" in the BDSM community, was praised by then-Attorney General Cuomo back in 2009 for helping to win a $5 billion settlement from Bank of America and others for securities fraud. Allred said Attorney General Schneiderman's office was investigating Smith because of a "source" in a New York Post article that told the paper she received payment for her services, which is illegal unless first cleared with her employers.
"The AG…called her in and asked her numerous questions about her private sexual activities, inquiring about whether or not she only brought boyfriends into her bedroom and what she did with them," Allred said. Smith, 36, has been suspended without pay from her $78K/year job for a month, and she and Allred haven't yet decided whether to sue the AG's office or the Post. Shneiderman's press secretary released a one-sentence statement on the matter: "Prior to the conclusion of the investigation, this office received the employee’s letter of resignation. The resignation was voluntary and accepted.” The AG's office also insists that the claims against Smith were serious and warranted investigation.
The Post's Andrea Peyser writes in typical fashion, "…she’s unemployed. Considering the bruising the kinky one inflicted on the reputation of the state, it’s for the best." Judging other (highly professional and effective!) people for their BDSM activities in New York in 2011? Oh, that's a paddlin'.
@WickedGrounds is closed today. We are very sorry for any inconvenience.
That tweet went out two Wednesdays ago. It was at once cryptic and unsurprising. On the one hand, it might just mean what it said: Wicked Grounds was closed for the day. On the other, it could mean something more, because the city's only kink-oriented coffeehouse had suffered financially since its opening. The fact that it was still open at all was because of an enormous effort by regular clientele to raise funds. (The owners had announced it would close at the end of April.) When the tweet went out, everyone froze for a minute, wondering whether the axe had finally dropped.
Once the baristas started posting on Twitter and Fetlife about finding new jobs, it seemed very clear: Wicked Grounds was closed for good -- and with it an important hub of San Francisco's BDSM community.
I can't pretend to have journalistic objectivity on this subject. For the past two years, Wicked Grounds has been central to my social life in the city. When it opened, I wrote it up for CarnalNation, the website where I worked at the time, and when it looked like it would close, I participated in the fundraisers to keep it open. A lot of my writing has been done sitting at one of its tables while people openly practiced bondage knots a few feet away. My main response to its closing is a profound sense of grief and loss.
Those feelings are even more acute because the story of Wicked Grounds says so much about the state of San Francisco's sexual subculture. Just getting the café's doors open in 2009 was a community effort. Before the first coffee was poured, people volunteered their help to get the space into shape. Co-owner Ryan Galiotto (who was joined by his wife Rose White) acknowledges that they probably wouldn't have been able to open without that assistance.
But as much as that says something about the fundamental decency of our local pervs, the closing of Wicked Grounds also shows a real problem: Kinksters are fighting tooth and nail to keep community spaces. It's not just one coffeehouse. ...
I believe most modern Americans have a very low capacity for pleasure. I don't just mean sex. I mean being tactile, receiving touch, feeling the wind rush past your body, swimming, getting in bed at night and rolling around in your clean sheets for a few minutes. Tactile pleasure makes us more whole. I believe we all need sensual touch every day.
It's highly important for me to tune into the subtleties of sensation in my body. It's transformational, and I can bring it into my life 24/7, from writing an article to having a business meeting. I can be present and involved, wanting to expand everything I do to its most delicate and exquisite place -- because that's what I practice during sex. As I just suggested, there are other ways to find that capacity, but sex works for me.
Unfortunately though, as a society, it appears we're going virtual. There are so many ways to communicate these days via electronics that I believe we're going to see a rise in very sophisticated teledildonics -- people remotely controlling devices to stimulate a partner somewhere far away. Stuff like that is already starting to happen.
Also, S and M practices are popular, because people in this culture are constantly craving the next level of excitement, a bigger dopamine rush in the brain. That neural reward circuit is addictive, which is why so many westerners are into compulsive cycles of smoking, drinking, drug taking, internet surfing, multitasking, fast driving, and just pushing the edges all the time, looking for sharper highs. So people's sexuality gravitates to harder faster stronger. "Give me something edgier, more out there."
Neo-Tantric practices are edgy in a different way. When you move backwards into subtle areas of breath, softer presence, sensual touch, those kinds of practices are expandable for a lifetime. You can get more and more detailed and minute with what you're exploring. You can look for a new erogenous zone under the eye or on the neck, or it suddenly dawns on you to try using both your hands in some different way when you're touching your partner, or to get your partner to move energy by brushing energy away from their genitals up to their chest. And then they get the idea, "Oh that feels different! I've got to breathe deeper and expand into this . . ." So you're always in new territory!
Now someone who's really into BDSM might say you can always find more territory there as well. Well, fine, but at some point, doing that, you're going to be playing with seriously dangerous edges. Whereas with tantra, the scary edges are more likely to move you into kundalini experiences, or profound states of consciousness, or super-deep intimacy where you don't know where your body went, where you've gotten so involved in the lovemaking that your boundaries have dissolved and you don't know whether it's you or your partner who's having the orgasm....
Every once in a while, someone will ask me a question about something BDSM-related that I feel “done with”; I feel like I did all my thinking about those topics, years ago. But it’s still useful to get those questions today, because it forces me to try and understand where my head was at, three to seven years ago. It forces me to calibrate my inner processes. I often think of these questions as the “simple” ones, or the “101? questions, because they are so often addressed in typical conversation among BDSMers. Then again, lots of people don’t have access to a BDSM community, or aren’t interested in their local BDSM community for whatever reason. Therefore, it’s useful for me to cover those “simple” questions on my blog anyway.
Plus, just because a question is simple doesn’t mean the question is not interesting.
One such question is the “BDSM versus sex” question. Is BDSM always sex? Is it always sexual? A lot of people see BDSM as something that “always” includes sex, or is “always sexual in some way”. In the documentary “BDSM: It’s Not What You Think!“, one famous BDSM writer is quoted saying something like: “I would say that eros is always involved in BDSM, even if the participants aren’t doing anything that would look sexual to non-BDSMers.”
But a lot of other people see BDSM, and the BDSM urge, as something that doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with sex — that is separate from sex.
I see two sides to this question: the political side, and the “how does it feel?” side. Both sides are intertwined; when it comes to sex, politics can’t help shaping our experiences (and vice versa). I acknowledge this. And yet even when I try to account for that, there is still something deeply different about the way my body feels my BDSM urges, as opposed to how my body feels sexual urges. I don’t think that those bodily differences could ever quite go away, no matter how my mental angle on those processes changed. ...