Miles Long
Fuck victoriously!
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2005
- Posts
- 21,358
(Apologies in advance if this is rehashing a thread that's already been done, but I was too lazy to search hard.)
I've observed something over the years that I find really fascinating: namely, a bit of what I consider to be a double standard in how people tend to react to themes of physical sadomasochism vs emotional sadomasochism. In general it seems people are much more accepting and supportive of physical sadomasochism than of emotional sadomasochism. This doesn't surprise me in society at large, but I do find it a little bit surprising that I observe it just as much within the kink community.
When someone openly criticizes or judges physical sadomasochism - "How can she hit him? How can he want those bruises on his body?" - everyone jumps in with the standard defense of how BDSM is about alternative forms of sexual expression and YKINMK, etc. etc. It's not until the physical acts get really severe that you see large swathes of the kinky population start to tap out on defending the acts as being valid for consenting adults.
Yet when the sadomasochism in question is emotional or psychological in nature, it feels like even in the kink community everyone is far quicker to default to a position of, "This is abuse and no self-respecting kinkster - nay, human being! - could or should want to do this to someone else or have it done to them. They are fucked up and need help."
And I find myself wondering, what's truly the big difference between physical and emotional sadomasochism? Why do we react so differently to the two and defend one as valid longer than the other? We say physical bruises will heal, and that's part of why it's okay to beat on a lover. But emotional bruises heal too, so why is it less okay to fuck with their emotions?
For physical acts, people often draw the line at highly visible physical limits - things like drawing blood, large and long-lasting bruises, etc. Is our tendency to be uncomfortable with emotional pain related to the fact that there is less in the way of visible effects, which somehow make it harder to draw a line in the sand and thus leading us to an overabundance of caution?
I've heard the argument, "Because you can really fuck someone up permanently that way," but it doesn't really work for me. I could really fuck someone up permanently physically, too. In fact, that might be easier to do physically than emotionally. Yet we don't bat an eyelash about physical play, laying out limits that allow for some pain that the bottom works their way through in some short amount of time, anywhere from minutes to days. But we don't look at emotional play the same way, and I find that curious.
Has anyone else observed this phenomenon? What thoughts do you all have?
I've observed something over the years that I find really fascinating: namely, a bit of what I consider to be a double standard in how people tend to react to themes of physical sadomasochism vs emotional sadomasochism. In general it seems people are much more accepting and supportive of physical sadomasochism than of emotional sadomasochism. This doesn't surprise me in society at large, but I do find it a little bit surprising that I observe it just as much within the kink community.
When someone openly criticizes or judges physical sadomasochism - "How can she hit him? How can he want those bruises on his body?" - everyone jumps in with the standard defense of how BDSM is about alternative forms of sexual expression and YKINMK, etc. etc. It's not until the physical acts get really severe that you see large swathes of the kinky population start to tap out on defending the acts as being valid for consenting adults.
Yet when the sadomasochism in question is emotional or psychological in nature, it feels like even in the kink community everyone is far quicker to default to a position of, "This is abuse and no self-respecting kinkster - nay, human being! - could or should want to do this to someone else or have it done to them. They are fucked up and need help."
And I find myself wondering, what's truly the big difference between physical and emotional sadomasochism? Why do we react so differently to the two and defend one as valid longer than the other? We say physical bruises will heal, and that's part of why it's okay to beat on a lover. But emotional bruises heal too, so why is it less okay to fuck with their emotions?
For physical acts, people often draw the line at highly visible physical limits - things like drawing blood, large and long-lasting bruises, etc. Is our tendency to be uncomfortable with emotional pain related to the fact that there is less in the way of visible effects, which somehow make it harder to draw a line in the sand and thus leading us to an overabundance of caution?
I've heard the argument, "Because you can really fuck someone up permanently that way," but it doesn't really work for me. I could really fuck someone up permanently physically, too. In fact, that might be easier to do physically than emotionally. Yet we don't bat an eyelash about physical play, laying out limits that allow for some pain that the bottom works their way through in some short amount of time, anywhere from minutes to days. But we don't look at emotional play the same way, and I find that curious.
Has anyone else observed this phenomenon? What thoughts do you all have?