Sunday 25 May 2008

Brief But Necessary Statement



Sadly, it has become necessary to clarify Blog Policy.

I have no remote intention of ever meeting any of you for sex.

Sadly, it has become necessary to clarify this point.

Being a reader of this blog disqualifies you from physical intimacy in that way.

If we ever met, we WOULDN'T have sex.

And that is blog policy.

Sorry this had to be stated.

Postscript for female friends: This wasn't aimed at any of you. This is written for the benefit of people I DON'T like so much :(

More Postscript: I decided July last year that you have to have a boundary: Don't fuck your readers. Just a bad idea. Bad for the blog. Don't do it. Never be tempted to fuck a reader. Sorry, that is- and has basically been- blog policy since July 2007. So sorry if anyone thought otherwise.

Thankyou.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

I can't imagine meeting up with somebody who reads my blog and would STILL want to have sex with me. It's like washing somebody's dirty laundry - their smelly knickers - and then pretending it's the first time you've ever seen them in their best outfit with their best behaviour. :)

Anonymous said...

You should never apologise for stating your wishes. If some can't accept this is how it is, they then have the problem not you Crushed :-)

Anonymous said...

Aw shucks. I had my heart set on it.

Be that as it may, I don't know much about sexual relationships that begin via the Internet, because I haven't had any. After all, pixels don't have the same type of allure as, say, perfume. I have, however, made many good meatspace friends from online, especially blogging. I also have a few meatspace friends who have consumated relationships with people they met over the net. As far as that goes, it really's the same type of deal as standard dating goes--same issues, same range of histories and successes, etc..

I understand that you're not writing this up to pick up gals, but rather to express somethings that are important to you. But I hope that you have the flexibility to rescind this policy if you need to do it.

Actually, I don't say that for my own benefit, you understand:-)

Anonymous said...

Kate- I'm sure that's not true at all. As I've said before, writing has erotic qualities sometimes and I think precisely BECAUSE we see INSIDE the minds of people, we really find people we like as people.

And that's important, certainly to me. I value theb online friendships I have with people- fascinating discussions we have, profoundly intellectually stimulating.

But sex isn't on the agends in any of the cases.

Nunyaa- This is how it is. Yes, I would agree they have major problems. Problems from getting away from their own sexual inadequecies and assuming everyone else's lives are dominated by sex.

Sex plays a very important role in my worldview. I think humanity coming to terms with sex, is fundamentally important to the social paradigm shift that I hope will come with the revolution that I passionately believe in. I believe in free love, completefemale sexual liberation, the busting of family values, an end to monogamr and sexual exclusivity.

Because on a theoretical level, I think it would work better.

But on a personal level? It's really not something important to me as an individual. Rihanna could be lieing there naked in my bed, but if I was in the middle of writing a post, she'd have to wait.

X-dell- I think there always remains in my mind the idea that ultimately it remains kind of a conflict of interests.

Problem is, there is a theory which keeps rearing its head about my supposed online harem.
So to clarify; it doesn't exist and it would be against Blog Policy fir it to exist.

I value my readers TOO MUCH, to sleep with them.

The only way this policy would change is in the following circumstances;

The online friendship had developed into a Real Life friendship, in the flesh, where it became clear that there were mutually reciprocated sentiments that transcended a pure platonic friendship.
This in itself would not amount to a policy change. It would result in DISCUSSION of the policy and whether or not, it really was something worth risking- and if that was so, than the Policy would STILL remain unchanged, because by definition, we have now reached territory which suggests someone very special indeed.

They'd no longer BE a reader. They'd have admin powers.

Anonymous said...

Heeheehee! This made my laugh! :-) Always good to be clear, I guess ;-) Although, if the object was sex, I do think it'd be more practical to just open up a sex blog - wouldn't fit this blog... cos after all, there are many aspects of a person... and I'm not sure whether philosophy and that stuff are mutually exclusive ;-)

Anonymous said...

Maybe you ought to run for office. That would be a first. A politician who seriously intended not to F*#k the electorate;-)

Maybe it might even catch on. Nahhh!

Anonymous said...

Sorry to be flippant CBI, but I wouldn't make such a rule. You need to understand that some of us are in fact neither attractive nor forward, so we spend increasingly futile lives hoping for sex, any kind of sex, with people we fancy. To make such arbitrary rules, smacks, if i might make so bold, of someone with too much choice...

Anonymous said...

Eve- Even MORE practical is this;
http://adultfriendfinder.com

If anyone needs sex within hours with a total stranger, this is the link to click. Why bother wasting your time blogging? Get on adult friend finder!

Here's what to expect;
SABBY618
32 year old woman from MANCHESTER, Lancashire.
"SEXY SUSAN SEEKING FUN AND FRIENDSHIP WITH SINGLE MALES OR COUPLE WITH BI FEMALE"
[View More]

See? Much simpler!

Moggs- No, I can't see it taking off. Nor, sadly can I see any future political career of mine having much mileage...
There's having skeletons in the closet and there's having a graveyard in there...

TD- The policy has been worded in such a way as to allow for all possibilities. I'm not PARTICULARLY happy about having to issue such a policy for a variety of reasons, but still, probably best in the long term, at least so the policy can be referred to if need be.

I guess it's a bit like work colleagues. After a while you learn, really it's best avoided- unless it really is someone really special.

TD, you should visit a couple of the pubs round here, that's all I shall say...

Anonymous said...

Thanx for the clarification. I assume you have received many indecent proposals huh? Who knows, maybe some of the bloggers wanted to make an honourable man out of you?:p