So am not going to say anything! Ha ha!
I have been writing all day, so don't feel like it.
So there.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Video vs. Real Sessions
I really hope that no one here expects that by becoming someone's "videoslave", that they are actually going to get an actual session-like experience out of it.
First of all- it's going to be a performance. In most situations. Which means, that the Domme might not be how she would normally act in a session. Depending on who is directing the action-
First of all- it's going to be a performance. In most situations. Which means, that the Domme might not be how she would normally act in a session. Depending on who is directing the action-
Saturday, August 15, 2009
This is some bullshit...
I love it when people turn sex into a morality issue. It's also really funny when people make all kinds of unfounded presumptions about prostitutes and their experiences, with out ever actually having talked to one single prostitute. Is there exploitation in the sex industry? Absolutely. Is that a serious fucking problem? Yes. However, arresting the women who are being exploited is a crime in itself. Putting someone in jail does not rehabilitate them, it does not empower them or distance them from their pimps- just like putting people in jail for drugs does not "cure" them- in fact, it does the exact opposite.
A group, called Citizens Against Trafficking (CAT), are seeking to make in-door prostitution in Rhode Island illegal. There is, in fact, a bill before the Rhode Island legislature which they are preparing to vote on. CAT is the creation of two so-called feminists- one of whom lives in Massachusetts, and the other who is a professor of Women's Studies. They claim to be experts on the issue of sex work, but have never heard (until recently) of any of the organizations which actually research sex workers and their experiences. These groups are, in no particular order of importance: SWOP (Sex Worker Outreach Project), SWP (Sex Worker Project of the Urban Justice Center, who have actually published two studies on sex workers and their demographics), and $pread Magazine (an all sex worker run and written publication). In fact, in a statement made by one of the ladies, she claims that an editor of $pread is a professor at a local university (Wha? No one on the staff seemed to know what she was talking about).
These "feminists" think (just like the Prohibitionists) that by making something illegal, you will eradicate it. Of course, it is really a transparent attempt to impose their own sense of morality on the rest of the population- as most of these "feminists" also see sex work as detrimental to women, and a blight on society as a whole. This is not true, and based on their own second-wave feminist bullshit ethics that have been thrown away by most people in the field of women's studies. But, by using scare tactics, and appealing to soccer moms who think there's going to be a brothel in every schoolyard, these bitches might actually get their way!
You know what's morally and ethically unjust? Using a marginalized population as a platform for your own fucked up, misinformed crusade. It pisses me off when people who are the loudest get their way in the face of reason and compassion.
Make it so that doesn't happen, by adding your support here:
Sex In The Public Square
Also, see what actual research reveals about sex work and trafficking here:
Sex Worker Project of The Urban Justice Center
Subcribe, or make a donation to $pread Magazine. They need it, trust me.
See what some ignorant bitch has to say about an industry she knows nothing about here:
Open Letter To Sex Radicals
BTW- What the hell is a "sex radical", and where do I sign up?
xoxo.
A group, called Citizens Against Trafficking (CAT), are seeking to make in-door prostitution in Rhode Island illegal. There is, in fact, a bill before the Rhode Island legislature which they are preparing to vote on. CAT is the creation of two so-called feminists- one of whom lives in Massachusetts, and the other who is a professor of Women's Studies. They claim to be experts on the issue of sex work, but have never heard (until recently) of any of the organizations which actually research sex workers and their experiences. These groups are, in no particular order of importance: SWOP (Sex Worker Outreach Project), SWP (Sex Worker Project of the Urban Justice Center, who have actually published two studies on sex workers and their demographics), and $pread Magazine (an all sex worker run and written publication). In fact, in a statement made by one of the ladies, she claims that an editor of $pread is a professor at a local university (Wha? No one on the staff seemed to know what she was talking about).
These "feminists" think (just like the Prohibitionists) that by making something illegal, you will eradicate it. Of course, it is really a transparent attempt to impose their own sense of morality on the rest of the population- as most of these "feminists" also see sex work as detrimental to women, and a blight on society as a whole. This is not true, and based on their own second-wave feminist bullshit ethics that have been thrown away by most people in the field of women's studies. But, by using scare tactics, and appealing to soccer moms who think there's going to be a brothel in every schoolyard, these bitches might actually get their way!
You know what's morally and ethically unjust? Using a marginalized population as a platform for your own fucked up, misinformed crusade. It pisses me off when people who are the loudest get their way in the face of reason and compassion.
Make it so that doesn't happen, by adding your support here:
Sex In The Public Square
Also, see what actual research reveals about sex work and trafficking here:
Sex Worker Project of The Urban Justice Center
Subcribe, or make a donation to $pread Magazine. They need it, trust me.
See what some ignorant bitch has to say about an industry she knows nothing about here:
Open Letter To Sex Radicals
BTW- What the hell is a "sex radical", and where do I sign up?
xoxo.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Rules for the jukebox (and a lament on their collective demise)...
I was going to write something titillating about a recent session I had, but fuck you assholes and your dicks. This is what I feel like writing:
Of course I know this is silly and completely subjective, but I think that my rules for the jukebox are pretty universal and should be abided by no matter what situation with a jukebox you might find yourself in. I'm not a music nerd, I just value my ears.
The biggest mistake people make when selecting from the jukebox (I love that word!) is to make decisions on what is familiar, rather than on what others who are listening to the jukebox might like. Look around the bar. Is it a dive? Are there a bunch of crotchety old men sitting around in their legionaire's uniforms? Or are there a bunch of NYU students? (if yes to the latter, I suggest you forget the music and leave) I have a tendency to enjoy an atmosphere of infirmity and drowned sorrows- and inevitably these places will have the better jukebox. A bunch of crotchety old men are not going to want to listen to the Dead Milkmen (although they rule). Obviously. Find stuff that was made before 1967. Who knows, you might even get a free drink out of it.
Secondly, do not play anything that you could hear as soon as you turn on a classic rock station. This is a huge, unforgivable blunder that most people make when choosing songs. Don't choose Zeppelin if it's not a B-side off of CO/DA, do not, under any circumstances, choose Journey or Air Supply or Chicago EVER, do not play the Stones, the Beatles, Black Sabbath, or any other popular yet ground-breaking band unless it's obscure (Gimme Shelter and Beast of Burden are the only exceptions- I told you these rules were subjective). Do not play Janis Joplin, The Doors, or Jimi Hendrix- unless you have no other option.
Thirdly, do not choose hip hop or rap unless the bar is completely packed full of yuppies. Hip hop can be a huge crowd-pleaser. Unfortunately, in most instances, it is the most insipidly common mainstream bullshit that gets the best reaction. I'll leave it up to you to decide whether it is more important to make people happy, or for your ears to bleed.
Fourthly, do not play goth music. Just don't. Yes, The Cure falls under this category. That said, do not play Tori Amos (ugh!).
Fifthly (is that a word?), scratch the Jimi Hendrix rule. I'm listening to him now, and I change my mind.
Sixthly (hee), if you're over forty-five, don't try to choose something contemporary that you think "the kids" will like. Jukeboxes are never kept up to date, and you're not impressing anyone. Contemporary popular music by it's very nature is faddish and banal. Just don't go there. I implore you.
Seventhly, do not play show tunes or Billy Joel. Hopefully this goes with out saying. This is a bigger problem with karaoke than jukeboxes, granted. Also, no Metallica or heavy metal or punk made after 1983. This falls under the same category as show tunes, because I said so. And because you shouldn't play anything that makes people feel like they might go mad listening to it. Whether it's completely atonal or completely insipidly treacly and trite.
Sometimes you may come in contact with one of those internet "choose your own adventure" (nightmare), look-and-you-will-find-it sort of jobs. Originally only to be found in places that one should actively avoid anyway, they seem to be making themselves into halfway decent bars. This is unfortunate, because inevitably people will always pick something right out of their own CD collection. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but face it, most people own like 12 CD's (thanks for that observation, Billy). I hate these jukeboxes, because while seeming to foster the idea that you can go crazy and use your imagination, they in fact encourage people to do just the opposite. I can, however, appreciate them for things like Desmond Dekker (why can't I find that shit anywhere?) or the Melodians, or bad British ska music.
Essentially, when faced with a jukebox that is old-fashioned and has a static list of choices, one is forced to spend some money on songs/artists/albums that perhaps they aren't familiar with. This is trial by error, but that's part of the fun! Sometimes you win, sometimes not. Can one really put a price on something they played randomly and ended up really enjoying?
ADDENDUM: This also should go without saying, but country music made within the last 30 years is bad, unless you're in like, a saloon, or there's line-dancing happening in front of you. This rule does not apply to Dolly Parton or Willie Nelson.
xoxo.
Of course I know this is silly and completely subjective, but I think that my rules for the jukebox are pretty universal and should be abided by no matter what situation with a jukebox you might find yourself in. I'm not a music nerd, I just value my ears.
The biggest mistake people make when selecting from the jukebox (I love that word!) is to make decisions on what is familiar, rather than on what others who are listening to the jukebox might like. Look around the bar. Is it a dive? Are there a bunch of crotchety old men sitting around in their legionaire's uniforms? Or are there a bunch of NYU students? (if yes to the latter, I suggest you forget the music and leave) I have a tendency to enjoy an atmosphere of infirmity and drowned sorrows- and inevitably these places will have the better jukebox. A bunch of crotchety old men are not going to want to listen to the Dead Milkmen (although they rule). Obviously. Find stuff that was made before 1967. Who knows, you might even get a free drink out of it.
Secondly, do not play anything that you could hear as soon as you turn on a classic rock station. This is a huge, unforgivable blunder that most people make when choosing songs. Don't choose Zeppelin if it's not a B-side off of CO/DA, do not, under any circumstances, choose Journey or Air Supply or Chicago EVER, do not play the Stones, the Beatles, Black Sabbath, or any other popular yet ground-breaking band unless it's obscure (Gimme Shelter and Beast of Burden are the only exceptions- I told you these rules were subjective). Do not play Janis Joplin, The Doors, or Jimi Hendrix- unless you have no other option.
Thirdly, do not choose hip hop or rap unless the bar is completely packed full of yuppies. Hip hop can be a huge crowd-pleaser. Unfortunately, in most instances, it is the most insipidly common mainstream bullshit that gets the best reaction. I'll leave it up to you to decide whether it is more important to make people happy, or for your ears to bleed.
Fourthly, do not play goth music. Just don't. Yes, The Cure falls under this category. That said, do not play Tori Amos (ugh!).
Fifthly (is that a word?), scratch the Jimi Hendrix rule. I'm listening to him now, and I change my mind.
Sixthly (hee), if you're over forty-five, don't try to choose something contemporary that you think "the kids" will like. Jukeboxes are never kept up to date, and you're not impressing anyone. Contemporary popular music by it's very nature is faddish and banal. Just don't go there. I implore you.
Seventhly, do not play show tunes or Billy Joel. Hopefully this goes with out saying. This is a bigger problem with karaoke than jukeboxes, granted. Also, no Metallica or heavy metal or punk made after 1983. This falls under the same category as show tunes, because I said so. And because you shouldn't play anything that makes people feel like they might go mad listening to it. Whether it's completely atonal or completely insipidly treacly and trite.
Sometimes you may come in contact with one of those internet "choose your own adventure" (nightmare), look-and-you-will-find-it sort of jobs. Originally only to be found in places that one should actively avoid anyway, they seem to be making themselves into halfway decent bars. This is unfortunate, because inevitably people will always pick something right out of their own CD collection. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but face it, most people own like 12 CD's (thanks for that observation, Billy). I hate these jukeboxes, because while seeming to foster the idea that you can go crazy and use your imagination, they in fact encourage people to do just the opposite. I can, however, appreciate them for things like Desmond Dekker (why can't I find that shit anywhere?) or the Melodians, or bad British ska music.
Essentially, when faced with a jukebox that is old-fashioned and has a static list of choices, one is forced to spend some money on songs/artists/albums that perhaps they aren't familiar with. This is trial by error, but that's part of the fun! Sometimes you win, sometimes not. Can one really put a price on something they played randomly and ended up really enjoying?
ADDENDUM: This also should go without saying, but country music made within the last 30 years is bad, unless you're in like, a saloon, or there's line-dancing happening in front of you. This rule does not apply to Dolly Parton or Willie Nelson.
xoxo.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
It's Your Lucky Day...
How nice am I to keep putting up new pictures of myself? Surely, none of you deserve this level of generosity! These are from the same photoshoot as below. Check my new outfit!
xoxo.
xoxo.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Website Weeeiiiiirrrdddness!
For some reason, when you go to look for Mistress Veronica in Los Angeles (http://www.missveronica.com), my website pops up. I am unsure how this came to be, but it is surely very odd.
xoxo.
xoxo.
Saturday, August 1, 2009
New Pics...
These are from a photoshoot I did about two weeks ago. I don't think I will use this photographer again, but these are a few that I think aren't too bad. The photographer was really big on Photoshop (so the flaws abound, yes?)- which I do not like to use except to fix the tiniest of details. Suffice to say, we had our differences, but I got a few that I'm obviously not embarrassed to post here. Anyway, here they are- with no touching up at all.
Special Thanks to Mikey T for lending me his tux. xoxo.
V
Special Thanks to Mikey T for lending me his tux. xoxo.
V
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)