Wunderlich

Rock Climbing began as a man's sport. This has changed in recent years as ever increasing numbers of women have become involved.

The first women climbers were involved in mountain climbing and rock climbing was a part of that. The major difference in mountain climbing and rock climbing is that the mountain climber is seeking the easy way to ascend to the top of the mountain while the rock climber is looking for the hardest way. However, sometimes rock climbing is the only way on certain sections of the climb. So, when women began to climb mountains, they naturally began to climb rocks as well.

The first written record of a female mountain climber was a Miss Pinter who climbed Mt. Blanc in 1799. This feat was recorded by a fellow climber and established the lady as the rock climbing woman pioneer. Although there were other female mountain climbers that followed Miss Pinter, they were mostly the wives or girlfriends of male climbers. These male climbers usually omitted the names of their female partners when writing of their adventures.

This was because climbing was not seen as a very "seemly" activity for women. In fact, it wasn't until almost one hundred years after Miss Pinter's ground breaking ascent that a woman by the name of Meta Brevoot actually got around giving up her dress for trousers when on a climb. This makes you imagine young ladies climbing to the top of alpine peaks in their long flowing dresses with parasols open.

It was not until the more liberated times in the latter part of the 20th century that women in rock climbing began to come into their own. There were a large number of women's rock climbing clubs formed during this period and also rock climbing became a part of many of the outdoor programs that were being developed to increase the confidence of females by exposing them to outdoor challenges.

The large numbers of women in rock climbing that have excelled and conquered some of the most difficult and highly rated climbs in the world prove that this sport is not for men only. Although on the whole, men have greater strength than women, they do not always have more stamina. The increase in indoor rock climbing facilities has opened the door to even more women. It increases confidence and is fun. That is a good combination and the relative safety of the indoor climbing has contributed to a wider acceptance.

Rick Chapo is with NomadJournals.com - makers of writing journals.

Occasionally the erotic power exchange (BDSM) community looks at the gay community with a certain amount of envy, as a result of the fact that the latter has achieved quite a bit when it comes to general understanding for and acceptance of different lifestyles. One of the questions, asked in this respect, is the one about being a culture yes or no. Although that as such is a question that can be debated endlessly, fact of the matter is that the narrow - sexual only - approach does not seem to cover all aspects of erotic power exchange. So, are "we" a culture? Below is at least one answer to that question.

First of all: what is a culture? There are of course various definitions, but personally I like to use the one given by anthropologist Ruth Benedict (which is the more or less generally accepted one in the scientific community): "culture is a more or less consistant pattern of thought and action with a characteristic purpose that pervades the forms of behavior and institutions of a society." Hence, a culture is defined by a set of patterns.

Are "we" a "culture" (as in a religious culture, a national culture for example)? If culture is defined as being that total and all-embracing the answer to that question is NO, unless of course you would argue that BDSM-views and opinions have any specific relevance to and influence on social structures, general behavior patterns or institutions (which I personally consider quite unlikely). However, if you take the definition but add the words "limited" and "some", the answer is: yes, we are.

The opposite of the above definition, by the way, is true for the BDSM-community: i.e., the world around us (society) has a direct influence on us (general perceptions, legislation, prejudice, political and religious views, to only name a few) and not in the way they have as a general factor in everyone's life, but directly in (and as a result of) the ideals the community as well as individuals within that community strive(s) and stand(s) for. There are other methods to find out whether or not BDSM is a culture. One of them is to try and establish if there are concepts, views and behavior patterns within a "group" that seem to be more or less generally accepted and are at the root of the group behavior (chaos-theory).

Behavior patterns

Thus the question is: are there such concepts, views and behavior patterns? The answer here - in my view - is yes, there are: there is a more or less generally accepted lingo (that at least is generally recognized), there are concepts (voluntary, imformed consentual, safe and sane for example, negotiation for example, safewords for example). We may not be to good at exactly describing them, but there are norms and values: in general the community has a pretty good general idea about what is acceptable behavior in the group and what is not. In the same way there are (again not specifically written down) certain more or less generally accepted ethics.

And next to that there even is a more or less "creative process" based on the group's ideas (design, clothing, art, photography, writing and more) that usually is recognized as "belonging to or within the group".

Finally, do we have specific and more or less general behavior patterns? The answer again is yes. Coming out for example, finding information, communication and even some negative ones, like taking things personal and concentrating on personal ideas and interpretations as opposed to more general ones.

So, this method also seems to proof there at least is something indicating a culture, albeit not a very well studied and described one (but then again many cultures are not very well, or not at all described, such as many tribal cultures and the entire Maya culture for example).

Is all this enough to claim "we" are/have a culture. With sufficient modesty to say that we will probably not make a difference in changing the world's general ethics my answer to that question is yes.

Are we a sub-culture? A sub-culture is a derivate from something else. Personally, I can not see where we are a derivate of something else, so no, I wouldn't say we are a subculture. And this is where I think we first meet some arguments of the "outside world" that tries to narrow BDSM down to a form of sexual behavior (and to many preferably a sexual deviation). Why would the outside world do that? The answer in my mind is obvious: fear. Sexuality in many (especially Western) societies is something that has always been looked at with double standards. Religions for example (and they have a traditionally strong influence on sexual behavior) have a very double standard here. On one end for example they praise the phenomena of life and giving birth, while at the same time they will condemn women the moment they show physical signs of their ability to give life (like menstruation, pregnancy and such) and call them impure. They will endorse big families with many children but at the same time condemn the act that is at the very root of reproduction.

Fear on one end and narrow minded political views about controlling people's lives on the other are what brings about this element of fear and hence the well-known rhethorical trick of creating a "common enemy" (the evil). "We" are "an evil" in that sense and this evil is described in very simple, one dimensional straight forward terms that usually have little to do with the truth. Which is only one reason to stay away from a purely sexual/psychological approach and try to put things in a somewhat broader perspective.

What is this culture made of?

So, if we are a culture, what is that culture made off? That is where it becomes very hard. There is little research to rely on or find answers in and unfortunately any debate about trying to describe the culture will almost automatically turn into a debate about personal preferences. The reasons for this happening are actually quite simple. Most of "us" live in a very narrow, closed environment when it comes to BDSM (which is not a negative connotation but merely an observation and in itself a direct result of the general social stigmatism and prejudice) and as a result many people only have their personal ideas and feelings to go by, while on the other hand the subject itself directly hits home with almost all of us and brings out - understandable - fierce and intense emotions.

The Internet - even though a blessing in some ways - is not exactly helpful either, since the "net-community" seems to go through exactly the same growing pains the "real life community" (at least in Europe) has gone through some 15 to 20 years ago. Hence, for the moment on the Internet history is only repeating itself, which is not bad as such, since it helps the vast numbers of newcomers, but is of little or no help when it comes to try and debate, research more abstract issues like this one.

Different cultures

As for example Weinberg and Falk ("Studies in Sadomasochism", 1983) conclude, there is very little methodical and theoretical research from the sociological field available when it comes to BDSM. If any work has been done in this area, most of that is journalistic research and not scientific. Still, one fact is generally accepted in the scientific field (and in other areas): there are huge differences between the gay/lesbian and heterosexual BDSM-cultures.

Coming out (which to gay/lesbians is a "second coming out") for one thing is totally different, primerily because coming out as a concept is alien to the heterosexual world since it has never been a real issue. Hence there is little experience with the phenomena and whereas coming out is recognized as probably the most important stage in the life of a homosexual (and treated and respected as such), in the heterosexual world it is predominantly still ignored or undervalued.

Other main differences are in the social behavior patterns. Especially gay men - within their community - are not only more open to different forms of sexuality, it is also very common to act out preferences in a more or less public environment such as gay bars and meeting places. Try acting out your heterosexual BDSM preferences in a public bar or in the local community center and you'll have huge problems. Also, there is a much more integrated process of accepting different preferences within the gay/lesbian community and hence there is a lot more openess and willingness to investigate, whether for personal use or just for better understanding. So yes, there ARE at least two different BDSM-cultures with their own patterns, behavior and general dynamics.

BDSM influence in other social areas

To ascertain if BDSM as such is a culture one method is to identify if the phenomena as such has any inlfuence in other social areas. This is an incomplete list of such influences.

* BDSM has a (sometimes even quite substantial) influence in areas like fashion, pop music, movie industry and art. In European countries it even has an influence on advertizing.

* BDSM has its own literature, art and fashion.

* BDSM has its own media (print and Internet)

* BDSM has its own places for gatherings (clubs, the above facilities, groups, gatherings, munches)

* BDSM has its own organisations (local, national and some - like the NLA - even internationally)

* BDSM has its own lingo, different form others, some of which influences other areas

* BDSM has its own concepts, some of which have also been accepted in or adopted by other areas

* BDSM is an economical factor, in the forms of products like videos, toys, gear, more or less dedicated shops, media and art galleries, clothing and such and - wether we like it or not - prostitution.

* BDSM is scientifically recognized as a phenomena of its own.

* BDSM is the subject of research in different scientific areas (psychology, psychiatry, sociology).

* BDSM is condemned by other groups, including some very influential ones.

* BDSM has lead to specific legislation to try an ban it in various countries and regions.

* BDSM is the subject of political debates and decisionmaking.

Different cultures within the community

Are there different cultures within hetero BDSM? I tend to think there are at least two: Maledom/femsub and Femdom/malesub. First of all, of course they have a lot in common. Probably eighty to ninety percent of their basic cultural patterns are exactly the same (albeit maybe slightly different in their format and presentation). However, there are a few basic differences that in my opinion make them different (mind you, I am not advocating one is better than the other, just different). So where are these differences?

First of all there is a difference in social acceptance. For example, the more or less general assumption is that men can take better care of themselves when it comes to security risks. Hence, a submissive male is generally seen as "less vulnerable" when compared to female submissives. To a certain extent that is true. Male sexuality in general is more open and men are much more used to share their sexual experiences and thoughts with others than women. Men are - more than women and again generally speaking - more used to things like masturbating, exploring their sex organ and the sex organs of others and are more likely to talk about this to others and experiment. Hence they have an advantage when it comes to taking risks and coping with vulnerability. This, by the way, should not be taken as a statement that the male submissive actually is or feels less vulnerable, because this is probably not true.

Another main difference is in the difference in sexual experience. The male experience simply is a more physical one, whereas the female experience is much more mental. This brings about differences in attitude, play forms, safety issues and interaction as well as a couple of cultural differences such as the fact that female submissives are much more receptive - and have a different attitude towards - fantasy.

Female submissives have other cultural differences, such as the conflict of roles (mother, career person, central function in the household/relationship and submissive) which is much more dominant to them then it is to male submissives (and usually much more of a problem). And to many there is the female (social) masochism and role-stereotyping in general (that is not good, but still very much "there").

By the way, here a nice example of similarities as well since this is something the lesbian world also has substantial problems with.

Male dominants - as opposed to their female counterparts - also have many differences, such as their own role conflicts (men aren't supposed to beat women and are brought up that way - in many cultures men still aren't supposed to show their softer sides, hence many have never learned how to do that). And, simply because the subs are different, the dominants are different.

There probably is a long list of other differences, one that should for example be considered is the fact that as a result of the widespread commercialization of the Femdom world, it is a lot easier for male subs to at least find a format to live out their fantasies than it is for female subs.

Is it functional to recognize such differences? I think it is. Not in an effort to conveniently cut up the cake in very tiny pieces in order to find sufficent similarities to determine one specific group, but in an effort to try and identify the differences and address them. Like brothers and sisters are part of the same family, they have their own specifics wants, needs, dynamics and interactions and understanding each other better starts with identifying and understanding the specifics of the other, identifying where differences and where similarities are. Just as it often is very counterproductive to address certain problems by only using either male or female logic (ultimately the combination of both is what usually produces result) it is not very productive to try and push everyone "into the same corset" when it comes to defining cultures. Understanding that there are similarities AND differences is what will eventually establish a better understanding of the entire group.

General significance

Finally, does all this have a relevance when it comes to educating and informing the outside world? Again my opinion here is a positive one. Why? Because the outside world is constantly mixing up different aspects of the different cultures, which does not help the debate nor the education. For example, whenever I am asked to participate in a television program, talkshow, do an interview or whatever on BDSM my first question for the journalist/producer will be "what BDSM?" That usually - apart from it being a very effective way to delay the entire production for a considerable period - leads to a fundamental discussion during the production phase about what the show/interview/documentary is supposed to achieve. That will automatically - usually - lead to a better understanding by the journalist(s)/producer(s) involved and will improve the quality of the end product as well as well the quality of future products by the same producer/journalist. I will do exactly the same when preparing a presentation in any other format and - for example when it comes to informing law enforcement people - one simply has to identify and explain the different cultures because the officier involved will have to be able to judge individual situations in real life and a gay scene is something that is usually totally different from a hetero scene in the first place (not to mention the cases where a male is in fact an abuse victim).

Bottom line: if we want to inform and educate others (which is I think what most of us - latent or not - want or would like to see happen) the first question to ask is: what do we want to inform and educate them about?

Former Dutch journalist Hans Meijer is currently chairman of the Powerotics Foundation, an organisation dedicated to providing quality information about alternative lifestyles.

Traditionally, fiction authors have found it very difficult to get publicity outside of media that reviews books. That's because they've been focusing on their book, rather than the topic. The way novelists can get publicity is to highlight their expertise on a topic related to their book that will interest the media.

For instance, one novelist I know wrote a book about a young woman who was raped and faced the dilemma of should she abort, even though it went against her beliefs? The author had done a lot of research on post-traumatic stress syndrome as it relates to abortion. One of the things she discovered is that abortion affects not just the woman who chooses it, but everyone else involved: the father of the child, the woman's family, even the doctor and nurses who might be involved in the abortion. While her novel graphically portrayed how all this plays out, the publicity angle is based on her expertise as someone who not only had an abortion, but did extensive research on it.

Another novelist I know wrote a fast-paced adventure story concerning, among other things, world hunger. Publicity angles could include how organizations do or do not hinder relief efforts, how corporations fit into the picture (something her novel portrayed), what one person can do to fight world hunger, etc.

Publicity offers some of the best exposure for your book, as I've said over and over again. If you're a novelist, don't overlook this outlet. Brainstorm all the issues that relate to whatever goes on in your book. Keep abreast of news and trends and how you can fit in. See yourself not just as a novelist, but as an expert in some area related to your novel.

When you get publicity for your expertise on your topic, of course your book will get mentioned. You can talk about how your research played into the formation of your characters, etc., but remember to keep the focus on the angle that interests the media.

If you need help in implementing these suggestions, Diane Eble is a book publishing coach with 28 years experience in the publishing industry as an editor (magazines, fiction and nonfiction books), author (11 published books, more than 400 articles), and copywriter. She helps people to write, publish, and make money with books and other information products. Find more articles like these when you visit http://www.wordstoprofit.com and subscribe to her newsletter. If you feel you have a book inside you, check out the new resource, "Jump Start Your Book: 12 Questions You Must Answer Before You Write Your First Word" at http://snipurl.com/jumnpstartbook

Dental implants are used to replace both the form and the function of missing teeth. In the case of existing teeth, the tooth root holds the tooth in place. When a tooth has been lost due to infection, gum disease, an accident, or injury, a dental implant can be used in order to replace the tooth root and secure an artificial replacement for the tooth.

The actual dental implant is a metal screw designed to thread into the jawbone and allow for the attachment of a variety of prosthetic dental replacements. Most of the time, the implant is made of medical grade titanium or a titanium alloy. Titanium is used due to its excellent compatibility with human biology. Tens of thousands of dental implant procedures are performed every year.

History of Dental Implants

Forms of dental implant procedures have been performed for thousands of years. Egyptian mummies have been discovered with gold wire implants in their jawbones, and pre-Columbian skeletal remains have even shown dental implants made of semi-precious stones.

In Europe, ancient Roman soldiers have been found with iron dental implants. In the Middle East, remains have been unearthed exhibiting ivory dental implants dating back to the Middle Ages.

Modern dental implant logy was established in the United States at the beginning of the twentieth century, although the procedures popularity did not grow until the 1980s with the introduction of the titanium cylinder.

Uses of Modern Dental Implants

Dental implants can be used for a variety of replacement situations. The implants may be used to replace one single tooth, eliminating the need to grind down and alter adjacent teeth. On the other hand, they can be used to support replacement teeth for mouths which are entirely toothless.

Dental implants can be used as anchors to provide support for a fixed bridge, or to provide stability for a complete denture set, eliminating unsightly and bothersome moving and/or clicking associated with dentures.

The implants can even be used to support existing, yet loose teeth by being splinted with the dental implants.

Common Reasons for Tooth Loss

A few of the most common causes of tooth loss are infection, gum disease, injury, or accidents. When teeth are missing, it causes the remaining teeth to shift, rotate, and may cause them to become crooked. Spaces and gaps in the teeth can cause embarrassment, speech problems, and loss of self-esteem and confidence. An improper bite may also develop, making it difficult to chew food properly. Dental implants can help prevent or correct these problems.

Mr. Oliver is a marketing agent for Richmond Dental Health. The cosmetic dentist office provides cosmetic procedures throughout the Richmond Virginia area. For more information on cosmetic dentist in Richmond Virginia please visit their website.