U*U BDSM Dom Desmond Ravenstone Gets A Tongue Lashing For His Pro-BDSM U*U BS Courtesy Of The Emerson Avenger

The following TEA blog post was submitted as a follow-up comment responding to the dU*Ubious response of Mr. U*U BDSM, aka the ravishing Desmond Ravenstone, to my comment taking him to task for his rather hypocritical response to Rev. Albert Mohler's alleged call for women to "submit graciously" to their husbands. Apparently it was a bit *too* "hot" for U*U sexuality expert Rev. Debra Haffner to handle. . . I will add some (im)pertinment hyperlinks to this version of my comment.

:Shows how little you know about BDSM...

Not at all Desmond. I know quite a bit more about BDSM than you might think. Amongst other things I once tried to help a bipolar "submissive" get back on her feet after a suicide attempt. For the record I only found out that she was a "submissive" *after* noticing her suicidal thoughts and seeking to protect her from actually committing suicide. I kept a "suicide watch" on her and called her family and appropriate emergency services when it appeared that she was about to commit suicide.

:Dominance and submission is not focused on gender; there are female dominants, not to mention same-gender D/s couples.

I am perfectly aware of that Desmond, but I was responding specifically to your hypocritical criticism of Rev. Albert Mohler's alleged -

major role in drafting the 2000 revision of the Baptist Faith and Message, which calls for women to "submit graciously" to their husbands.

Heck I once got into a spot of trouble with militant feminists who were blaming "patriarchy" for all the woes of the world by asking them how "patriarchy" explained lesbian S&M. . . Did I forget to mention that the suicidal "submissive" in question considered herself to be a Christian submissive and referenced the very same Biblical doctrine(s) about wives being submissive to their husbands as Rev. Albert Mohler in her justification and rationalization of her chosen fate of being a "submissive"?

:There is also no single paradigm for D/s relationships,

I couldn't agree more Desmond, but unfortunately for you and your questionable efforts to promote BDSM as being compatible with "The U*U Movement" aka Unitarian*Universalism, that includes the "safe, sane, consensual" paradigm for D/s relationships and BDSM more generally. . . BTW I have not forgotten how you have tried to cover up and hide a certain unmentionable UU minister's illegal, indeed criminal, "less than right" relations with teenage Tibetan refugees who he had lured to his UU parish which involved "less than safe" "less than sane" and "less than consensual" bondage, domination, sadism, and forced sexual submission. So please spare me your pro-BDSM propaganda about how "safe, sane, and consensual" BDSM is.

:nor do we claim that any such paradigm is commanded by any deity or religious authority.

Oh really Desmond? Am I too take it that you as something of a self-proclaimed U*U "authority" in BDSM are quite ignorant of "Christian" BDSM? Or are you just conveniently turning a blind eye to the fact that both Christian "doms" and Christian "submissives" use the very same Biblical scriptures that cause Rev. Albert Mohler and other conservative Christians to call upon women to be *submissive* to their husbands to justify and rationalize their BDSM "lifestyle"? Don't tell me you didn't know that Desmond. . .

:Above all else, BDSM is rooted in the ethics of consent. Partners come together as equals, and negotiate the terms of their relationship.

Don't worry Desmond I have heard that pro-BDSM propaganda aka BDSM BS before. This may be true for a subset of the people involved in BDSM aka Bondage and Discipline *Sadism* and Masochism but by no means all of them. Far from it. . . I mean you did just suggest that there is "no single paradigm" for BDSM didn't you?

:We don't expect everyone to "do what we do", but we would hope that more couples took the time to talk about what each person wanted, needed and expected of one another.

Who's "We" Desmond? Each and every person who engages in Bondage & Discipline *Sadism* and Masochism? I think not. . . In any case don't you think that Rev. Albert Mohler and other conservative Christians "hope that more couples took the time to talk about what each person wanted, needed and expected of one another" when it comes to wives being *submissive* to their husbands Desmond?



Here is my comment that responded to Rev. Debra W. Haffner's comment about her refusal to post mybrebuttal of Desmond Ravenstome's BDSM BS -

You didn't read three sentences, only two of them mine. . . "all the way" through Rev. Haffner? Whatever happened to a free and *responsible* search for truth and meaning? I stand 100% behind what I said in my initial comment, as well as my point-by-point rebuttal of Desmond Ravenstone's rather dubious, if not disingenuous, respose to my critical comment. I have posted my rebuttal to my own blog for those who care to read it and so that Desmond Ravenstone can respond to it if he cares to.