Ok so forgive the rather tabloid feel of this articles title. I found a question posted recently on the Bootblack Forum at Yahoo.com. This question started out simply enough:

hi all,
have a fabric question....
i like to buff with flannel fabric, but it 'beads' up after several washes ( ie gives off lint)
i been told there is flannel that is treated to be flame resistant. is that dangerous to the boots or to anyone who wants to lick the boots afterward?
any help would be grateful
boy matt

To me this is a two part question, the beading up or pilling...is a rather simple solution.  To remove the initial lint from new flannel, you want to wash new flannel in one cup of white vinegar without any detergents, softener or dryer sheets in cool or warm water.  (Do not use hot water on new flannel you wish to use again, like sheets or shirts. Hot water is fine for older flannel rags that have been used for blacking. Just keep in mind flannel shrinks with hot water). Do not forget to clean your dryers lint trap after each use, especially with new flannel. The best way to get flannel rags that will not pill are to use well worn flannels.  Be they sheets or shirts, well worn flannel will have minimum amount of excess lint, which will keep the fabric out of your shine and keep the fabric from "beading" or "pilling" up.

However friends, the links that followed have raised some rather serious questions in my own inquisitive head.  Here is the link from the yahoo group as posted on CBSNEWS.COM

The article speaks about PBDEs (polybrominated diphenyl ethers) and how they can affect the developing brain and they can affect the reproductive system.

Roughly two years ago, my friend Mischievous posted a blog that spoke about fetish and bdsm undertones in the mainstream media and in advertising. Remarking how she had begun to notice black steel heel stilettos on a mannequin in a pencil skirt that would be better defined as a hobble skirt...or perhaps a window  display utilizing crops...

Diesel is continuing in its use of surreal Warhol-esque cinematic quality ads on their site. However, one ad scheduled for a spring release (Feb. 2009) in GQ and in a billboard campaign in major cities around the U.S. using b/w photos shot by John Scarisbrick featuring a foot fetishist worshiping his partners (at least for the shoot) sneakers.

The short film will undoubtedly be released on Diesel.com in February along with the rest of the campaign.

Diesel's CD (creative director where's your mind?) Wilbert Das states "There are no messages, themes or commentary to understand. Our objective is to ... provoke thought". The site features other "Thought Provoking" shorts include "Hair Bath" in which a beautiful ivory skinned long legged babe bathes in Diesel.com viewers hair.  The hair and letters featured during the film shorts was petitioned by Diesel during a previous campaign titled (creatively ...) "Cut your hair".

But wait...Do you think that the Vodka Manager is done with us yet???  What about the Lavender tint and purple lacing?  Long has lavender been the color of the gay rights movement.  In this particular ad it is difficult to tell if the corseted individual is a man or woman. Of course their stocking ad also gave no clues as to the wearers gender beyond feminine clothing.

 I guess my question, or "thought provoking" statement would be...are you more apt to make a purchase or do you feel the general public is more apt to make a purchase as mainstream advertising campaigns begin to use fetish imagery in their bids for your hard earned coin?

you really didnt think I would leave this one out did you?

A bill outlawing the possession of "extreme pornography" is set to become law next week. But many fear it has been rushed through and will criminalize innocent people with a harmless taste for unconventional sex.

Under the new rules, criminal responsibility shifts from the producer - who is responsible under the OPA - to the consumer.

But campaigners say the new law risks criminalizing thousands of people who use violent pornographic images as part of consensual sexual relationships.

"Do you ban alcohol just because some people are alcoholics?"

As found on Alternet.org

By Stacey May Fowles, Seal Press. Posted December 29, 2008.

The following excerpt is from the book Yes Means Yes: Visions of Female Sexual Power and a World Without Rape, edited by Jaclyn Friedman and Jessica Valenti. Excerpted by arrangement with Seal Press, a member of the Perseus Books Group. Copyright (c) January 2009.

Because I'm a feminist who enjoys domination, bondage and pain in the bedroom, it should be pretty obvious why I often remain mute and, well, pretty closeted about my sexuality. While it's easy for me to write an impassioned diatribe on the vital importance of "conventional" women's pleasure, or to talk publicly and explicitly about sexual desire in general, I often shy away from conversations about my personal sexual choices. Despite the fact that I've been on a long, intentional path to finally feel empowered by, and open about, my decision to be a sexual submissive, the reception I receive regarding this decision is not always all that warm.

BDSM (for my purposes, bondage, discipline, dominance and submission, sadism and masochism) makes a lot of people uncomfortable, and the concept of female submission makes feminists really uncomfortable. I can certainly understand why, but I also believe that safe, sane and consensual BDSM exists as a polar opposite of a reality in which women constantly face the threat of sexual violence.

1. Introduction - BDSM and Kink Community PSA

 
This is a public service announcement for the BDSM and kink community. It is especially directed at anyone relatively new, and extra especially at anyone who ever bottoms. For the benefit of everyone's mental health and safety, I would like to discuss the widespread phenomenon known as Creepy Dom.
 
Creepy Dom has many faces. He is almost always male, although I have encountered his rarer cousin, Creepy Domme, from time to time. Sometimes he seems only mildly annoying, at other times outright dangerous, but in general, he just gets scarier as you spend more time around him.
 
You all know this guy, or have at least heard of him. He's the one who got banned from the local S&M club. He's the asshole who just sent you a rude 'Submit to me now' message on Bondage.com' even though you're listed as a femdom. He's the guy who seriously abused your friend under the guise of 'D/s.' He might've even made the national news, but more likely, his victims have never reported him to the police.
 
Who am I to speak of Creepy Dom? Not an expert, by any means. I have, however, extensively observed this creature in all of its natural habitats, from internet message boards, to the dark corners of the local dungeon, to sleazy hotel rooms. My encounters with Creepy Dom have been many and varied, and started long before I was legally of age to enter the real life BDSM scene.
 
I found him first on the interwebs, preying on fourteen year old nymphets. Though I was young at the time (sixteen) I had a sense of responsibility for my community that not all of my fellow underage kinksters shared, and I was concerned by what I saw going on. In an attempt to counteract the onslaught of Creepy Doms that plagued us wherever we attempted to gather in solidarity, I founded YouthKink, a small online forum that eventually drew about thirty members, specifically for those of us who were desperately kinky and too young to do anything about it. There, I and my co-moderators tried to disseminate information gleaned mostly from SM 101 and a few good websites.
 
The teens who frequented YouthKink were generally responsible sorts, determined not to do anything unsafe or illegal. But once in a while, we encountered this girl: 'my master says if ur a real slave u cant have ne limits!!!!!!!

The poor thing was usually in an online or IRL relationship with a man old enough to be her father. This individual was her sole source of information on BDSM, and he fed her nothing but lies. My co-moderator and I would do our best to set her straight, sometimes with modest success. But all too often, the damage had been done.
 

The purpose of this essay is not to tell you, for I am not the play police, which is better or right for you and your relationships.  It is not my goal simply to define SSC and RACK, but ultimately to illustrate the perceived differences between the two.  Nor do I think that I could any more define for you what would be safe or sane as anyone could define them.  The term safe, sane, and consensual, as we use it today, was first termed "in 1983 [when] the men of GMSMA (Gay Male SM Activists) of New York asked David Stein, Martin Berkenwald, and Bob Gillespie to fashion their statement of purpose, which was revised to begin, "GMSMA is a not-for-profit organization of gay males in the New York City area who are seriously interested in safe, sane, and consensual S/M" ¹.  As a term in a club charter, SSC was not initially intended to become the chief term for community safety standards that it is today.

In his 2003 book "Partners in Power", author and community leader Jack Rinella quotes one of the authors of the GMSMA Charter David Stein² "in the beginning... "safe, sane, and consensual S/M wasn't a slogan but simply the preamble to a statement of purpose that goes on to talk about such things as community, responsibility, tradition, education and gay liberation.  [It] was originally intended neither as an ideal to live up to nor as a way of defining S/M in general.  But it was definitely intended to draw lines between S/M behavior we wanted to encourage and other behavior we wanted to distance ourselves from." ²