This “isolation of Rubberists” has two aspects.
One refers to the seclusion and lack of community of some Rubberists resulting from geographical isolation — the distance from each other. To socially interact with each other Rubberists must travel long distances or interact through online venues such as Rubberist.net or 2nd Life which tend to result in only fleeting, superficial human contact.
The other aspect relates to social rejection of Rubberists by vanillas — usually the result of the notion that some people regard those who like to wear rubber (or latex) clothing as somehow “perverted”, “disgusting” or “dangerous” and thereby seemingly pose a threat to them personally or society in general. Rubberists are “alien” or “other” to their worldview and, therefore, to be feared or rejected.
There is a broad spectrum of social acceptability of rubber fetish ranging from those who fully accept it in others and are not intimidated by it to those who see the fetish as a real threat to themselves and society. There are many reasons for this. At one end of the scale they embrace Rubberists as lawful, decent people who may be a bit odd or eccentric but are otherwise completely harmless and pose no threat to anyone. At the other end of this scale there are those who attach unfavourable stigmas to Rubberists, viewing them as socially unfit and even dangerous. These stigmas are more prevalent in the more puritanical countries such as the U.S. and are usually based in ignorance and misunderstanding, such as erroneously equating Rubberists with predatory sex criminals such as pedophiles. People fear what they do not understand.
How one thinks of the scope and depth of the social rejection of Rubberists is often largely a cultural function of the population density of the area he or she has been a resident of. A logical corollary to this is might be that the more people there are in a region, the more Rubberists there are likely to be and, therefore, the greater the opportunities for social interaction. Note that this is not a value judgement –it’s just a statement of logic based on numbers.
Here are some interesting numbers which may help you understand this. (All numbers here indicate people per square kilometer)
In the entire world there are an average of 53 people per square kilometer.
England is very near the top of the list at 406. (England has 84% of the people in the United Kingdom, which, as a whole, has a density of 262. Scotland is at 67.)
New York City has an astounding 11,642 people per square kilometer.
Germany has 226
Japan has 336
The US (all 50 states) has 32.
Canada has 3.57
Australia has a bit over 3 people per square kilometer! (It has, roughly, the same land area as the continental U.S.)
My point is that what you think of “social isolation” is probably based on where you have lived. For example, people who have lived in densely populated England or New York City for most of their lives cannot possibly have the same understanding of it as a (rural) Australian or Canadian would. However, someone who has lived in both places might have a better sense of the possible ranges.
Of course, there is a lot of variation within these countries relative to large cities. They all have both rural and urban areas in varying degrees. For example, while the US has only 32 people per square mile, the density of New York City is well over 11,000. Also, the vast majority of Australia’s people reside in the southeast corner of their continent in Sydney, Melbourne, etc. I could not find a density figure for London, but we can assume that is is also very high, perhaps similar to NYC.
In addition to population density, another factor in Rubberist social isolation is the cultural acceptance of “alternative sexuality”. Generally speaking, people who live in high density population areas tend to be a bit more liberal in their thinking, probably because they are continually exposed to more diverse ideas and subcultures with which they must coexist. In contrast, those who live in rural areas tend to be more conservative and less accepting of divergent attitudes.
So, if you live in a large city, you are, logically, in a place which is more likely to exhibit degrees of cultural and social receptivity to your fetish and may, possibly, spawn some sort of Rubberist community. Conversely, the more rural your location, the more likely you may encounter more hostility toward your fetish and the less likely you will find others like you or any sort of localized community of Rubberists.
If you are one of the more isolated Rubberists, what can you do to overcome this? What are your ideas?
Here, again, these are not judgements of “good” or “bad” but merely observations.