There are many arguments out there regarding which group’s beginnings in BDSM are true, and to whether a person's claimed background is true if they are unable to provide proof, witnesses, public timelines, etc. I've read some of these articles, visited the mythbusting web sites, and tried to figure out how they feel they can be so blanketed in righteousness. I've watched and been the victim of some of these chest-beating apes as they tried to drive me into the ground with claims that if I could not prove my history with names, places, dates, etc., then I must be a liar. Despite the fact I did offer dates and locations, but withheld the names, seemed to secure with them that I was a liar. Almost everything these myth busters claim is based solely on their own unique portion of the people joining the lifestyle (like gay males or male leather), their own unproven wordage, and their claim that since they attended one meeting or event which they could name others at, then they were righteous and real. These myth busters tend to deny all others who come into the lifestyle based on their own histories and facts they have picked up or been told. Simply said, the myth busters feel their account is the only account that is real or true. So, if you are not gay male leather and you did not belong to a motorcycle group, then you did not have any BDSM-type of group history prior to 1970s.

I believe this is another instance of "don't believe everything you are told or read" and "don't believe it just because it's posted on a web page." The myth busters are almost exclusively self-proclaimed "Old Guard" historians who seem to think a few loose facts and a web site or two prove their claim. I, and many others, do not claim "Old Guard" does not exist or that "Old Guard" histories are fake. Yet, the myth busters do not hesitate to tear down anyone claiming a history other than theirs, or who claim to have been part of it. The myth busters make no consideration for anyone who might have joined a "straight" BDSM group. The myth busters make no consideration for the possibility a "straight" group may have copied something they heard or learned from another group or stories about leather groups. They make no consideration for possibilities of copied titles or hierarchy, or for groups that told their members a history that may or may not have been true.

Point in fact: BDSM Myths and other web sites are opinion only! Most are based on 1950s-1970s male leather group histories which are gay males only. Most are unable to prove anything related to their own claims other than touting a name here or there, or personal unproven writings they have come across. Most do not take into account copycats or BDSM straight social groups that may have tried to copy some of their hierarchy or any variance at all. In deed, some tout being the only BDSM actively practicing in the USA during that time period. They admit that groups like TES, Janus, PEP and NLA came along in the 1970s-1980s in a public manner, but prior to that they seem to believe there were no organized groups except the leather groups, not even the possibility of small underground straight groups.

It is clearly unreasonable and illogical to think there was no equivalent straight BDSM play or groups among straights, and that gay leather or Old Guard was all there ever was to the BDSM history prior to the 1970s. Case in point: Betty Page was exploring BDSM in film, magazines, and photos in the 1950s. This proves there were straight men seeking BDSM materials and play at the same time Old Guard history was supposedly being created. However, as you know, this type of interest among straight men was guarded and private and has remained so over all these years. Only lately, has the interest of straight men and women for BDSM been exposed. The only proof being the magazines and films, but at least that is real proof that straight men enjoyed BDSM activities in those days. Do you really think no one shared these activities in small groups?

So, how does one prove what is true when it comes to a history in BDSM? Histories tend to be mostly oral with some minuet written materials. Most of BDSM history among straight groups is oral, because no one wants illegal activities in writing. Most groups (sexual, non-sexual, gun fanatics, patriots, etc.) did not want their names listed on subscriptions after the Communist scares, let alone a membership list or minutes showing their affiliation to BDSM. Plus, most people tend to believe histories that are told to them or that they read, without any definitive proof. Even written histories are doubted, the Bible being a prime example.

In the 1960s, quite a few "straight" households joined the hippies "free sex" attitudes in the country by holding "swinger" parties. The new series "Swingtown" shows a warped presentation of this "hidden" sub-culture, but it does present an interesting premise that backs the line of thought here. Until recently, hardly anyone knew about the "key" parties or subtle "swinging" of the 1960s where a husband and housewife would attend a party, throw their keys into a bowl, and the housewife would go home with whoever picked their keys. If this "swinging" culture among "straights" was kept so hush-hush, can you imagine how hushed BDSM was kept?

When you think about it, gay leather histories have very little in the way of written "proof," because even written documentation is not solid proof. Anyone could provide a written set of minutes with unknown names that maybe include their own and a date from the 1950s, and then claim it was gospel truth. But is it? Anyone can create such a paper these days. Oral histories are passed down, but what if the oral history you received was not accurate, or was fanciful? You always believed it, you believed it as it was told to you without question because you were not there when it originated, you had no reason to doubt the person providing the information, and there is no proof that the information was not accurate except for the lone word of another person (a). The myth buster is not your friend, acquaintance or known to you in any way. Who do you believe? Do you let this lone "myth buster" person discount what you learned and what you believed?

You have to ask yourself, what is the motive behind the myth buster who jumps on your every word demanding proof, while touting his own unverified proof as the gospel? What is the purpose of the myth buster’s attack? Glory for himself? Misguided domination over others? Just being an ass? Trying to discredit anyone who doesn't agree with him? I'm sure we've all met that type before. Does the myth buster need to justify his own existence and experience over anyone else's? Why? The only reason I can fathom is "ego" - and we meet a lot of ego-driven people in this lifestyle. Are we going to let the ego of a myth buster destroy any histories that do not coincide with the myth buster’s own beliefs? This reeks of the days of Christian crusades and slaughtering anyone who does not agree with one idea or belief. I wonder, during the crusades, how many religions that were alike but not exactly the same disappeared and will never be able to prove their histories?

I think we can all form a logic deduction here and assume:
(1) There had to be other groups practicing BDSM that were not gay or leather; and
(2) There had to be straight BDSM groups with no connection to gay groups, since gay lifestyles were still frowned upon in those days by many; and
(3) Undoubtedly, if there were straight groups then chances are there was little-to-no connection or carryover of participation between straight and gay groups at that time; and
(4) The BDSM lifestyle was considered illegal or prostitution at that time, so straight groups, just like many gay groups, were underground and not known well to outsiders; and
(5) In the 1950s-1970s, gay groups were pretty much underground and hardly anyone outside of gays knew about gay bath houses or gay BDSM play. All that information came out later when the internet became more active - therefore it is not illogical to concede that "straight" BDSM groups were also underground rather than non-existent; and
(6) Straight people have no reason to "come out" and declare their kinks publicly, whereas some gays like to flame and brag about their eccentricities as part of their "coming out" which may lead to leather groups being more willing to tout their participation than straight groups; and
(7) It is not unreasonable to think there were probably some copycat carryovers from the Old Guard stories to the straight BDSM groups that formed in that time or later; and
(8) It is not unreasonable to think straight BDSM groups may have based their hierarchy along the same equivalency as anything they heard about in connection to gay BDSM groups, or may even have based hierarchy on lodge affiliation titles like HighMaster and GrandMaster or Grandpoopa, for all it matters; and
(9) Considering how small many straight BDSM groups are today and how they quickly dissolve and fade away, it is not unreasonable to believe it was even harder in the 1970s for a straight group to thrive and gather members. Most groups probably did not last very long which makes proven histories very unlikely ...

If someone joined a straight BDSM group prior to the 1970s or 1980s, it's not unreasonable to think someone within the straight group may have had a brother or relative who was connected to a gay leather group, and it is not unreasonable to believe they might steal some tidbits, titles or hierarchy information from a gay group or fraternal lodge for identification and organizing within a straight BDSM group. Many groups today are based on stolen ideas, such as Black Hat ladies (from Red Hats) or the many diet groups who have taken ideas from Weight Watchers and Jenny Craig. It is also reasonable to believe titles from lodges or other groups may have been used within these groups, especially with the popularity of Masons, Elks and other private men's groups who used such titles.

In conclusion, I'm not saying that "Old Guard" or gay leather histories do not exist or that they are false. I am not trying to bust the Old Guard or leather histories. I'm asking, "Why are these self-proclaimed myth busters holding these histories out like Bibles while trashing the straight BDSM histories?" Are they just stroking their egos at someone else's expense? And, are we going to allow it to continue? Or are we going to challenge these “myth busters " and expose their grand egos?