Go Back   Literotica Discussion Board > Main Literotica Forums > BDSM Talk

Reply
 
Thread Tools

Old 11-30-2008, 11:51 PM   #251
Homburg
Daring greatly
 
Homburg's Avatar
 
Homburg is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SE VA
Posts: 13,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by CutieMouse View Post
Gentlemen, the pissing contest is amusing as hell (seriously - I grabbed wine and popcorn ages ago ), but at this point may I respectfully suggest the poor horse is getting a wee bit tired?
For the record, it was not me. This time.
__________________
"more than an awesome talking Cock."
-myinnerslut, from the Ropework Photos thread...


I am not usually one for titles. In my world, titles are reserved for relationships.
Millificent (aka "viv") and myinnerslut both call me "Master".
You can call me "Homburg". Still accepting Rope Bunny applications, of course.

Disclaimer: Live your life how you want to live. Be secure enough in what you do that _my_ words won't affect you. Because my opinion has no material meaning in your life beyond what you let it have.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2008, 08:27 AM   #252
Netzach
>semiotics?
 
Netzach's Avatar
 
Netzach is offline
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 21,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Homburg View Post
Considerably longer, if my quickie research is correct.

Latin "Magister" (great/large magus) > Old English "Magister" > Middle English "Master"

This is a VERY basic etymology. VERY.

Anyway, Middle English is what was spoken after the Norman Invasion, so 1066 to the mid-to-late 1400's, roughly.
It's also been shortened to "Mister" in the states as well as elsewhere for well around a century. Unless I've been dragged screaming to a renfaire I'm "Ms. mylsastname" or "Ma'am."

Not to piss on the tree, but honestly, what other titles are natural and normal outside the scope of your own little world? Doctor. Your Honor. Congressman.

Master and Mistress? Is there a board certification?

Irony as well, any f-wit can be "slave suzy" - we don't police that claim whatsoever as a community and don't care to. The fact that nine tenths of people who want to be slaves have no concept of what that actually could mean doesn't seem to bother us as much as the "fake master" phenomenon.

In an imaginary garden insisting on real toads. Mistress is not an organic descriptor of me to anyone not in a PE relationship with me or desiring to be in one. Why it should be I can't begin to fathom.

Maybe some of H's old school rubbed off on me. I'm a relative kid but my property was learning to iron pleats in a pro's house before there were recreational het clubs at all. It was *certainly* your little world and no one else's at that time.
__________________
In the spirit of equal time, sites like Huffington Post should have sections for male anatomy hanging out instead of just the idiotic celebrity “side boob” and “nip slip” camera ops. I have no idea what that would be like to have a camera in my face at every turn, looking for “the” shot. I know what some of you are saying. “Then why do they wear clothes like that unless they want those photos taken?” I don’t know what to tell ya. Perhaps just don’t take the fuckin picture? Evolve? I don’t know. - Henry Rollins

Last edited by Netzach : 12-01-2008 at 08:39 AM.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2008, 11:37 AM   #253
intothewoods
Truth seeker
 
intothewoods's Avatar
 
intothewoods is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 10,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Homburg View Post
Considerably longer, if my quickie research is correct.

Latin "Magister" (great/large magus) > Old English "Magister" > Middle English "Master"

This is a VERY basic etymology. VERY.

Anyway, Middle English is what was spoken after the Norman Invasion, so 1066 to the mid-to-late 1400's, roughly.
Now I have Renfaire speak in my head!


Quote:
Originally Posted by catalina_francisco View Post
I don't agree that we all want to be noticed. I for one am happiest when I am left to believe I am invisible, not dragged into the spotlight in the belief I might feel left out if not, and basically could happily live a hermit existence...this was also how I was in mainstream life. LOL, I do that hermit thing pretty well as it is, but to be honest, whenever I think of my dream location in the world geographically, it is far from people, somewhere where I do not have to deal with people basically except for the basics of food etc...probably why I have found internet a dream come true.

Just the same, there is nothing wrong with those who do need and crave attention, though sometimes I may think there are better ways of achieving that than some choose, but once again that comes down to personal opinion and subjectiveness. My previous statement was more about all those in a particular relationship, more so than an individual. It also was about my observation over the years of those who seem to place more importance in what others think, being noticed, being thought well of in the community, being seen etc., than they do in just being. For some, if they did not interact with others, did not get that recognition in whatever form, did not have others who knew the dynamics of their relationship and what they do, the relationship would lose its charm.

For us, we do not mix with others in the community, but even if we did, it would not be an important part of us and our relationship, nor define it...it manages to do fine without the approval of others, interaction with others even in a social sense, and comes back to us always as a couple, not part of a community. IOW, if no-one in the world knew we lived this lifestyle, it would not make any difference to how we experience each other, how much we get out of our relationship and the dynamics, who we are.

Catalina
The universal need to be "noticed" or heard, really heard (what I would emphasize), isn't necessarily fulfilled by a random stranger or friends or people in the bdsm scene. My PYL would also love to be a hermit, I think, but he still wants his pyl and the people important to him to hear him, his thoughts, needs and desires. I think that's a pretty basic human need.

I hear you identifying different types of people in reference to exhibitionism or a need to be seen. I don't think there is one thing going on. If we're just talking about people who need to parade their relationship through the community for validation...well, someone who really can't live without that validation is probably very lonely.

Most people in my bdsm community are pretty private about their relationships. The most extreme sexual exhibitionists among them get off on that "public" whatever - humiliation, sadism, degradation, etc. - but their private relationships are something sacred.

I don't think all discussion of a relationship need be dismissed. I am someone who has to talk things out, think it out, write it out, etc., to understand something. My PYL knows this and accepts this about me, and I have certain boundaries I respect when I discuss something that relates to him. There are things about him I will not talk about. In other words, one can be an extrovert, a person who enjoys gabbing with girlfriends, or whatever it is, and be respectful of one's relationship.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2008, 04:31 PM   #254
Zoots_owner
Really Experienced
 
Zoots_owner is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMohegan View Post
I lol'd at "a large number of rules governing both parties." Misconceptions abound, clearly.
From an article, "6 Questions Every Submissive Needs To Ask Her Potential Dominant" (http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...age=3&cat=41):
Quote:
Will the dominant require the submissive to sign a contract? A contract is a document that is drawn up by the dominant, stating the terms and conditions of the relationship. It may include such things as responsibilities of both dom and submissive, rules, infractions, punishments for infractions, reasons for dismissal, duties, expectations, and length of time the submissive will serve. Not all dominants desire contracts, believing that they serve little purpose in a true D/s relationship. Other dominants do want contracts, believing it will make the submissive feel safe to know exactly what her boundaries and limitations are...and also to know that the dominant has responsibilities he must adhere to as well.

Regardless of whether there is a written contract or not, it is important for the submissive to discuss these things with the dominant. That way she is entering into the relationship with her eyes wide open to all of the possibilities.
Agreements like that are very common, they even have their own Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_(BDSM)). I've used them myself, and sometimes had them run into several pages. I think they're a very good idea when a PYL and pyl are getting their D/s relationship started, as it ensures that there is agreement about the rules they're playing by, and the most common sorts of misunderstandings will have been avoided.

And, while they're sometimes used in M/s relationships, I don't think that anyone should consider a M/s relationship unless they're well past the stage of learning about each other, unless it's strictly temporary (i.e., training). In established D/s relationships, agreements like that (if they exist at all) are often limited to philosophical statements, since both parties have reached levels of trust and understanding where nothing more is needed.

But, misconceptions abound...

Last edited by Zoots_owner : 12-01-2008 at 04:34 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2008, 05:59 PM   #255
JMohegan
.
 
JMohegan's Avatar
 
JMohegan is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 8,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoots_owner View Post
From an article, "6 Questions Every Submissive Needs To Ask Her Potential Dominant" (http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...age=3&cat=41):


Agreements like that are very common, they even have their own Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_(BDSM)). I've used them myself, and sometimes had them run into several pages. I think they're a very good idea when a PYL and pyl are getting their D/s relationship started, as it ensures that there is agreement about the rules they're playing by, and the most common sorts of misunderstandings will have been avoided.

And, while they're sometimes used in M/s relationships, I don't think that anyone should consider a M/s relationship unless they're well past the stage of learning about each other, unless it's strictly temporary (i.e., training). In established D/s relationships, agreements like that (if they exist at all) are often limited to philosophical statements, since both parties have reached levels of trust and understanding where nothing more is needed.

But, misconceptions abound...
If you're modeling your personal relationships off of Internet research, the chances are very high that you and I aren't even remotely talking about the same thing.

Not right vs. wrong, just a totally different perspective.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2008, 06:31 PM   #256
Homburg
Daring greatly
 
Homburg's Avatar
 
Homburg is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SE VA
Posts: 13,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMohegan View Post
If you're modeling your personal relationships off of Internet research, the chances are very high that you and I aren't even remotely talking about the same thing.

Not right vs. wrong, just a totally different perspective.
I think it is more a matter that pseudo-legalised, complex structures in D/s dynamics are not so uncommon. It is likely offered as a counterpoint to your "misconceptions abound" refutation earlier.

Anecdotally, I would have to agree. Contracts, complicated rulessets, and the like are common enough in BDSM to not be a misconception at all, and no one said that it was a rule. The initial comment made along those lines was discussing the difference between M/s and D/s, not stating that most D/s relationships are set up that way.

Honestly, I'd agree with him. From own experience in D/s and M/s, as well as discussions with others, reading here, etc, most M/s relationships have much simpler rulessets. The core difference is still TPE, but M/s, due to it's lack of limits, safewords, etc, just doesn't generally need as much set down beforehand as D/s tends to.

And, to emphasise the point, these are generalisations. The fact that there will be exceptions to the rule in no way invalidates the broad strokes painted here, especially when those broad strokes are likely accurate, at least anecdotally.
__________________
"more than an awesome talking Cock."
-myinnerslut, from the Ropework Photos thread...


I am not usually one for titles. In my world, titles are reserved for relationships.
Millificent (aka "viv") and myinnerslut both call me "Master".
You can call me "Homburg". Still accepting Rope Bunny applications, of course.

Disclaimer: Live your life how you want to live. Be secure enough in what you do that _my_ words won't affect you. Because my opinion has no material meaning in your life beyond what you let it have.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2008, 08:36 PM   #257
JMohegan
.
 
JMohegan's Avatar
 
JMohegan is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 8,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Homburg View Post
The initial comment made along those lines was discussing the difference between M/s and D/s, not stating that most D/s relationships are set up that way.
Actually, he did state that most D/s relationships are set up that way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoots_owner View Post
I think that something that's missed in drawing the distinction between most D/s relationships and M/s is that D/s are based almost entirely on the agreements between the two people. It may be bedroom only, or be bound by a large number of rules governing both parties.
Hopefully that clears up the misunderstanding.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Homburg View Post
Honestly, I'd agree with him. From own experience in D/s and M/s, as well as discussions with others, reading here, etc, most M/s relationships have much simpler rulessets. The core difference is still TPE, but M/s, due to it's lack of limits, safewords, etc, just doesn't generally need as much set down beforehand as D/s tends to.

And, to emphasise the point, these are generalisations. The fact that there will be exceptions to the rule in no way invalidates the broad strokes painted here, especially when those broad strokes are likely accurate, at least anecdotally.
Your experiences and observations are as valid as anyone else's. I'm just saying that's not what the real world looks like to me.

I would expand upon control-based, non-ownership relationships in my world, but I don't want to hijack Sun's thread.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2008, 09:14 PM   #258
Homburg
Daring greatly
 
Homburg's Avatar
 
Homburg is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SE VA
Posts: 13,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMohegan View Post
Actually, he did state that most D/s relationships are set up that way.



Hopefully that clears up the misunderstanding.
Hmm, well, I guess I read it differently. I wasn't particularly trying to argue with you there, just trying to identify what appeared to be a miscommunication.

Quote:
Your experiences and observations are as valid as anyone else's. I'm just saying that's not what the real world looks like to me.
I can dig that. That said, if you are discussing your own experience as a unique entity, and it differs from what he said, would not "most" still be potentially valid? Any time an individual's experience differs from the presented majority's experience, two scenarios are possible - the majority presentation is false, or the individual is an exception.

And, honestly, the internet model becomes a self-fulfilling definition. If you enter into BDSM with the internet as your source of info and inspiration, contracts become more plausible simply because they are discussed so commonly here. Is it reality? After a certain point, yes, it does become it. This does not argue that the concept has merit, but, well, we've certainly seen anedotal evidence that the internet has empowered a lot of folks that would otherwise not know where to go for this information.
__________________
"more than an awesome talking Cock."
-myinnerslut, from the Ropework Photos thread...


I am not usually one for titles. In my world, titles are reserved for relationships.
Millificent (aka "viv") and myinnerslut both call me "Master".
You can call me "Homburg". Still accepting Rope Bunny applications, of course.

Disclaimer: Live your life how you want to live. Be secure enough in what you do that _my_ words won't affect you. Because my opinion has no material meaning in your life beyond what you let it have.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2008, 09:42 PM   #259
JMohegan
.
 
JMohegan's Avatar
 
JMohegan is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 8,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Homburg View Post
Hmm, well, I guess I read it differently. I wasn't particularly trying to argue with you there, just trying to identify what appeared to be a miscommunication.



I can dig that. That said, if you are discussing your own experience as a unique entity, and it differs from what he said, would not "most" still be potentially valid? Any time an individual's experience differs from the presented majority's experience, two scenarios are possible - the majority presentation is false, or the individual is an exception.

And, honestly, the internet model becomes a self-fulfilling definition. If you enter into BDSM with the internet as your source of info and inspiration, contracts become more plausible simply because they are discussed so commonly here. Is it reality? After a certain point, yes, it does become it. This does not argue that the concept has merit, but, well, we've certainly seen anedotal evidence that the internet has empowered a lot of folks that would otherwise not know where to go for this information.
There's a big, wide world of people in power-based relationships that have nothing to do with clubs, kink-based organizations, and Internet models for intimate interaction.

Perhaps because this is the world in which I came of age and expanded my social network, this world seems far more populous to me than the pockets of stylized, contract-based or culturally-focused exchanges on which you seem to be focused.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2008, 10:19 PM   #260
Homburg
Daring greatly
 
Homburg's Avatar
 
Homburg is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SE VA
Posts: 13,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMohegan View Post
There's a big, wide world of people in power-based relationships that have nothing to do with clubs, kink-based organizations, and Internet models for intimate interaction.

Perhaps because this is the world in which I came of age and expanded my social network, this world seems far more populous to me than the pockets of stylized, contract-based or culturally-focused exchanges on which you seem to be focused.
Perhaps you can explain. I'm trying to figure out how a "big, wide world" would come together and socialise sans clubs, organisations, or the internet. Are these mass informal exchanges, letter chains, or some other structure, er non-structure?

Admittedly, I've only been involved in BDSM for about seven years or so, and have only been social about it for a couple of those years, so my model is limited. I understand the Leather Family concept, but they would strike me as a kink-based organisation, and that is the only larger scale social structure I can think of off the top of my head. I'm honestly confused.
__________________
"more than an awesome talking Cock."
-myinnerslut, from the Ropework Photos thread...


I am not usually one for titles. In my world, titles are reserved for relationships.
Millificent (aka "viv") and myinnerslut both call me "Master".
You can call me "Homburg". Still accepting Rope Bunny applications, of course.

Disclaimer: Live your life how you want to live. Be secure enough in what you do that _my_ words won't affect you. Because my opinion has no material meaning in your life beyond what you let it have.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2008, 10:44 PM   #261
JMohegan
.
 
JMohegan's Avatar
 
JMohegan is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 8,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Homburg View Post
Perhaps you can explain. I'm trying to figure out how a "big, wide world" would come together and socialise sans clubs, organisations, or the internet. Are these mass informal exchanges, letter chains, or some other structure, er non-structure?

Admittedly, I've only been involved in BDSM for about seven years or so, and have only been social about it for a couple of those years, so my model is limited. I understand the Leather Family concept, but they would strike me as a kink-based organisation, and that is the only larger scale social structure I can think of off the top of my head. I'm honestly confused.
Big, wide world = people whom I've met at college, graduate school, multiple athletic venues, homes of friends, homes of friends of my friends, homes of friends of my partners, homes of my neighbors, even political and charity groups! You know, life. Living.

You don't need a kink club to talk kink, you don't need the Internet to tell you what to do in your personal life, and you don't need stylized BDSM to have a relationship that is power-based, kinky, or some combination of both.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2008, 11:15 PM   #262
Zoots_owner
Really Experienced
 
Zoots_owner is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMohegan View Post
If you're modeling your personal relationships off of Internet research, the chances are very high that you and I aren't even remotely talking about the same thing.
Naah, just finding Internet references to show that it's common. I have a contract in place now which dates, in is oldest form, to before there were web browsers for the Windows platform. People tell each other about such things, or they find out about them in classes from the Society of Janus (soj.org, but distinctly pre-Internet, founded 1974) or local equivalent. Like on their page, "Rules for Dominants/Submissives,"
Quote:
(1.) Be patient! Until you enter into a contract with a submissive, you have no more right to order him/her around than does anyone else.
(http://www.soj.org/rules.html)
Not an uncommon idea, nor an Internet idea.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2008, 11:57 PM   #263
JMohegan
.
 
JMohegan's Avatar
 
JMohegan is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 8,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoots_owner View Post
Naah, just finding Internet references to show that it's common. I have a contract in place now which dates, in is oldest form, to before there were web browsers for the Windows platform. People tell each other about such things, or they find out about them in classes from the Society of Janus (soj.org, but distinctly pre-Internet, founded 1974) or local equivalent. Like on their page, "Rules for Dominants/Submissives,"

Not an uncommon idea, nor an Internet idea.
I believe you when you say that contracts are common *in stylized BDSM*. I am also aware that stylized BDSM pre-dates the Internet.

Again, I say, you and I are not even remotely talking about the same thing. You are a practitioner of one type of power-based relationship. I am a practitioner of another.

There are kinky people, and people in power-based relationships, who have no interest in structuring their interactions based on stylized BDSM - i.e., relationships based on a cultural model involving titles (Sir or Ma'am), collars, checklists, labels (Dominant, submissive, Master, slave), fetishwear, and so on.

Stylized, cultural BDSM is a subset of the kinky, power-based world. Whether it is a majority or minority of that world depends on one's perspective. But cultural BDSM does not comprise the entirety.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2008, 12:13 AM   #264
Homburg
Daring greatly
 
Homburg's Avatar
 
Homburg is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SE VA
Posts: 13,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMohegan View Post
Big, wide world = people whom I've met at college, graduate school, multiple athletic venues, homes of friends, homes of friends of my friends, homes of friends of my partners, homes of my neighbors, even political and charity groups! You know, life. Living.

You don't need a kink club to talk kink, you don't need the Internet to tell you what to do in your personal life, and you don't need stylized BDSM to have a relationship that is power-based, kinky, or some combination of both.
Okay, gotcha. When you, Mr Literal Thinker, say "Big, wide world", I immediately assume something large. You are talking about a slice of your life, and reoccurring bisecter is power/kink.

Sorry, if I sounded dense there. I just tend to take what you write at face value.
__________________
"more than an awesome talking Cock."
-myinnerslut, from the Ropework Photos thread...


I am not usually one for titles. In my world, titles are reserved for relationships.
Millificent (aka "viv") and myinnerslut both call me "Master".
You can call me "Homburg". Still accepting Rope Bunny applications, of course.

Disclaimer: Live your life how you want to live. Be secure enough in what you do that _my_ words won't affect you. Because my opinion has no material meaning in your life beyond what you let it have.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2008, 12:15 AM   #265
Zoots_owner
Really Experienced
 
Zoots_owner is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMohegan View Post
But cultural BDSM does not comprise the entirety.
Well, since you're contesting my statement that contractual agreements tend to dominate D/s relationships, what older authority are you relying on? Certainly marriage would not be it, since it is a contract, complicated by several centuries of Common Law legal rulings on top of thousands of years of cultural and religious traditions.

Something from the Homo Erectus period, mayhaps?
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2008, 12:23 AM   #266
Netzach
>semiotics?
 
Netzach's Avatar
 
Netzach is offline
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 21,191
I was gonna say, there's a kind of unforced D/s where the sub has the right of some limits, but these things are just dealt with as they're discovered, instead of checklisted and prediscussed ad infinitum. It's not the blanket consent of M/s by a long shot, but it's also not contractual or mapped out or even thought about much, just "how things are".
__________________
In the spirit of equal time, sites like Huffington Post should have sections for male anatomy hanging out instead of just the idiotic celebrity “side boob” and “nip slip” camera ops. I have no idea what that would be like to have a camera in my face at every turn, looking for “the” shot. I know what some of you are saying. “Then why do they wear clothes like that unless they want those photos taken?” I don’t know what to tell ya. Perhaps just don’t take the fuckin picture? Evolve? I don’t know. - Henry Rollins
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2008, 12:28 AM   #267
Homburg
Daring greatly
 
Homburg's Avatar
 
Homburg is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SE VA
Posts: 13,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Netzach View Post
I was gonna say, there's a kind of unforced D/s where the sub has the right of some limits, but these things are just dealt with as they're discovered, instead of checklisted and prediscussed ad infinitum. It's not the blanket consent of M/s by a long shot, but it's also not contractual or mapped out or even thought about much, just "how things are".
*nod* I've done that a couple of times now. Liked it a helluva lot better than the early contract stage.

I like blanket consent even better though
__________________
"more than an awesome talking Cock."
-myinnerslut, from the Ropework Photos thread...


I am not usually one for titles. In my world, titles are reserved for relationships.
Millificent (aka "viv") and myinnerslut both call me "Master".
You can call me "Homburg". Still accepting Rope Bunny applications, of course.

Disclaimer: Live your life how you want to live. Be secure enough in what you do that _my_ words won't affect you. Because my opinion has no material meaning in your life beyond what you let it have.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2008, 12:51 AM   #268
Zoots_owner
Really Experienced
 
Zoots_owner is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Netzach View Post
I was gonna say, there's a kind of unforced D/s where the sub has the right of some limits, but these things are just dealt with as they're discovered, instead of checklisted and prediscussed ad infinitum. It's not the blanket consent of M/s by a long shot, but it's also not contractual or mapped out or even thought about much, just "how things are".
Okay. See, I'm looking back to Proudhon, and Plato before him (Crito), in saying that all human interactions are governed by social contracts. They may be unwritten, confusing contracts riddled with contradictions and grey areas, but they exist in some form or another. In which case this becomes little more than a debate about whether informal agreements differ in important respects from more formalized ones.

Last edited by Zoots_owner : 12-02-2008 at 01:01 AM.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2008, 12:54 AM   #269
JMohegan
.
 
JMohegan's Avatar
 
JMohegan is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 8,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Homburg View Post
Okay, gotcha. When you, Mr Literal Thinker, say "Big, wide world", I immediately assume something large. You are talking about a slice of your life, and reoccurring bisecter is power/kink.

Sorry, if I sounded dense there. I just tend to take what you write at face value.
It *is* a "big, wide world". Literally.

Extrapolating from the kinky/power-based percentage of people I know, and applying that to society in general, we *are* talking about something large.

I don't understand why you find it so hard to believe that there are people with control issues, sadists, and masochists, who just aren't into the cultural thing. I am in no way saying you sound dense. I'm just surprised that it's never occurred to you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2008, 01:22 AM   #270
JMohegan
.
 
JMohegan's Avatar
 
JMohegan is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 8,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoots_owner View Post
Well, since you're contesting my statement that contractual agreements tend to dominate D/s relationships, what older authority are you relying on? Certainly marriage would not be it, since it is a contract, complicated by several centuries of Common Law legal rulings on top of thousands of years of cultural and religious traditions.

Something from the Homo Erectus period, mayhaps?
Dude. Get over yourself.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2008, 02:15 AM   #271
Homburg
Daring greatly
 
Homburg's Avatar
 
Homburg is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SE VA
Posts: 13,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMohegan View Post
It *is* a "big, wide world". Literally.

Extrapolating from the kinky/power-based percentage of people I know, and applying that to society in general, we *are* talking about something large.

I don't understand why you find it so hard to believe that there are people with control issues, sadists, and masochists, who just aren't into the cultural thing. I am in no way saying you sound dense. I'm just surprised that it's never occurred to you.
JM, I didn't say it was hard to believe such people existed. I just doubt that it is some vast silent majority. While I can accept that your life has shown you many of these sorts of people, I can honestly say that mine has not. I'm not jumping around telling everyone I know that I'm kinky, but my good friends know. Of those, one has a long-standing interest, and just has had no luck in finding someone that will help him express it. So he found a basically vanilla girl that is happy to boss him around and he takes what little kink he can get. While she wears the pants in the family on most issues, they have no formal power exchange, or any of the trappings. Is this the sort of thing you're talking about?

ETA: This may be more of a generational difference. Your involvement preceded the internet, and the commonality of het clubs, right? At which point, the only interaction you were statistically likely to have was of the sort you describe. In my case, the landscape is different.
__________________
"more than an awesome talking Cock."
-myinnerslut, from the Ropework Photos thread...


I am not usually one for titles. In my world, titles are reserved for relationships.
Millificent (aka "viv") and myinnerslut both call me "Master".
You can call me "Homburg". Still accepting Rope Bunny applications, of course.

Disclaimer: Live your life how you want to live. Be secure enough in what you do that _my_ words won't affect you. Because my opinion has no material meaning in your life beyond what you let it have.

Last edited by Homburg : 12-02-2008 at 02:24 AM.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2008, 04:19 AM   #272
eastern sun
hungry little creature
 
eastern sun's Avatar
 
eastern sun is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New York
Posts: 2,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by intothewoods View Post
Hate cleaning the toilet. Try that blue stuff. Ten thousand flushes?
I don't like the chemicals. What if I have to drink it?
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2008, 04:26 AM   #273
eastern sun
hungry little creature
 
eastern sun's Avatar
 
eastern sun is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New York
Posts: 2,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by SinfulSailor View Post
P.S. We all seem to get turned on by it, so it works in my life. Seems like a pretty good reason on top of some pretty good reasons.
Hear. Hear. Isn't that the bottom line?

I would never choose to be someone's "slave" if it didn't deep down turn me on. It would lose it's charm in a heartbeat.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2008, 04:49 AM   #274
eastern sun
hungry little creature
 
eastern sun's Avatar
 
eastern sun is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New York
Posts: 2,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by SinfulSailor View Post
The fact of the illegality of slavery is unfortunate in some ways. One of those ways is that there is not a ready market for slaves. I have heard some guys say they have no responsibility to comfort a slave or consider a slave's feelings. She is after all, just a slave. I have sometimes said, "Would you say that about your car?" Well, of course not. A car is usually considered important - just because of its monetary value (or the monetary cost to replace it) if for no other reason. If there were a ready market for slaves, I think you would not find owners thinking of a slave as worthless or ignoring a slave's maintenance. Hmmmm... Well, at least not as much or as often.
There are many types of masters. Some would comfort their slaves. Some would not. It reveals the nature of the man's thinking.

And that's why I made that rather flippant comment earlier - that "it's all in our heads." My thinking these days is influenced by Buddhist philosophies that suggest that all our experience is colored by our thinking.

Regardless of the laws of the country, if I think it's possible to own, another human being, I will act as though I do. If I don't, I will act as though I don't. My actions may or may not conform to the law, and I may have to suffer the consequences.

But that is, in my opinion, the best indicator of one's "rightness" or "wrongness" - I focus on the consequences of my actions because it's the only way I can truly judge whether I'm on the right track or not.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-02-2008, 05:14 AM   #275
eastern sun
hungry little creature
 
eastern sun's Avatar
 
eastern sun is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New York
Posts: 2,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by intothewoods View Post
The universal need to be "noticed" or heard, really heard (what I would emphasize), isn't necessarily fulfilled by a random stranger or friends or people in the bdsm scene. My PYL would also love to be a hermit, I think, but he still wants his pyl and the people important to him to hear him, his thoughts, needs and desires. I think that's a pretty basic human need.

I hear you identifying different types of people in reference to exhibitionism or a need to be seen. I don't think there is one thing going on. If we're just talking about people who need to parade their relationship through the community for validation...well, someone who really can't live without that validation is probably very lonely.

Most people in my bdsm community are pretty private about their relationships. The most extreme sexual exhibitionists among them get off on that "public" whatever - humiliation, sadism, degradation, etc. - but their private relationships are something sacred.

I don't think all discussion of a relationship need be dismissed. I am someone who has to talk things out, think it out, write it out, etc., to understand something. My PYL knows this and accepts this about me, and I have certain boundaries I respect when I discuss something that relates to him. There are things about him I will not talk about. In other words, one can be an extrovert, a person who enjoys gabbing with girlfriends, or whatever it is, and be respectful of one's relationship.
I agree with you, itw. And want to add . . .

I have a long history of using stories from my life to illustrate and explore more general trends in human behavior. I find stories of real events highly entertaining and very informative, mostly because they point out the inconsistencies in our behavior, the ways we delude ourselves, the shape these theoretical arguments actually take in the stuff of our lives. Like poetry, the minute details of an event can capture the emotional experience and hold it in glass for people to see.

Since these stories are all connected to my sexuality, it can feel exhibitionistic. But I don't have many opportunities to speak so freely about my experience, and find tremendous release in being able to do so.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:22 AM.

Copyright 1998-2013 Literotica Online. Literotica is a registered trademark.