Heroes & Villains

[rosco rathbone]

[r j masters mode on]

All this talk of Captain Save-A-Hos got me thinking about a way to divide BDSM. It seems to me that on one hand, we have those who identify themselves with the idea of the Hero, and on the other hand, the Villain.

The Hero: The invincible white knight, the Father figure, the all-knowing BDSM therapist who can heal your kinky psychic wounds. Dragon-slayer and protector. The Lone Ranger. (John Wayne, all-American hero, Indian-killer, ranch saviour, was kind of problematic. He had an evil side).Represents the nurturing and protective side of BDSM. Places the female on a pedestal. Not associated with "perversion" as such. Writes the BDSM rulebook.

The Villain: The pimp, the rapist, the sadist,the marauding Injuns, the slave-auctioneer, the "online predator", the pervert. Associated with "the other". Represents the animalistic or forbidden side of BDSM. Seeks to topple the female from her pedestal. Is the dark factor in all of us whitewashed by the BDSM rulebook.

I identify with the Villain; always have. When I watch movies, I get frustrated when the evil plans are foiled. At the same time, I've got plenty of Hero in me, I just don't accentuate that side. Everyone has both, light and dark, but which side do you identify with?

Ok, that's it for the cut-rate Joseph Cambell stuff.

 

[Netzach]

I have this theory that if your evil twin Mr. Hyde does not get as big and expansive as your squeaky clean justice fighting side, you get into serious issues and trouble.

So I don't pick, really. I think Ms. Hyde gets good rein in my private life and it keeps me on the straight and narrow in the larger society.

 

[rosco rathbone]

You don't feel any kind of natural affinity?

 

[intothewoods]

<snip>

The Hero: The invincible white knight, the Father figure, the all-knowing BDSM therapist who can heal your kinky psychic wounds. Dragon-slayer and protector. The Lone Ranger. (John Wayne, all-American hero, Indian-killer, ranch saviour, was kind of problematic. He had an evil side).Represents the nurturing and protective side of BDSM. Places the female on a pedestal. Not associated with "perversion" as such. Writes the BDSM rulebook.

The Villain: The pimp, the rapist, the sadist,the marauding Injuns, the slave-auctioneer, the "online predator", the pervert. Associated with "the other". Represents the animalistic or forbidden side of BDSM. Seeks to topple the female from her pedestal. Is the dark factor in all of us whitewashed by the BDSM rulebook. <snip>

Nice descriptions. So many things to say.

First of all, the people I know in real life aren't like either of these. The Hero is definitely not glorified. Come to think of it, perhaps the Villian is sort of glorified, or at least pimps get a lot of good talk, as well as, of course, pervert. I hang out with a lot of people who like edgeplay. Most of the women I know are more Toppy than Domme, and I think the ideal is something of a headmistress or diva. Lots of divas.

I come across a lot of guys, mostly online, who sell themselves as the Hero. Gag. Sorry, there's still a bit of a bad taste in my mouth from all of that. There is no white knight, or rough knight in shining armour. And the reality is that I don't want one anyway. I've come to view the Hero as a submissive in disguise, frankly. He's as needy as the neediest sub.

My man sometimes thinks of himself as "just a guy who likes rough sex." As far as good and evil go, he sometimes talks fondly of becoming an evil world dictator, but he also is very protective and territorial.

 

[HottieMama]

i agree with a lot of what ITW said above. i also think there is a third type of "person," and that is one that effortlessly blends both the Hero and the Villian together.

 

[intothewoods]

i agree with a lot of what ITW said above. i also think there is a third type of "person," and that is one that effortlessly blends both the Hero and the Villian together.

I think I fucked him.

Kidding.

 

[rosco rathbone]

Nice descriptions. So many things to say.

First of all, the people I know in real life aren't like either of these.

Well, those are archetypal exaggerations, of course. Still, maybe it's just my way of seeing the world, but I usually get a pretty strong "Hero" or "Villain" (or "Hero-Groupie" or "Villain-Groupie") vibe from people right away.

 

[intothewoods]

Well, those are archetypal exaggerations, of course. Still, maybe it's just my way of seeing the world, but I usually get a pretty strong "Hero" or "Villain" (or "Hero-Groupie" or "Villain-Groupie") vibe from people right away.

Okay, what am I?

 

[CheekyBoots]

Wow, great descriptions! Well my subbiness doesn't identify with these of course. But I am most certainly attracted to the "villain" over the "hero." No doubt about it. I think I value myself enough to where I resent being put on that pedestal-- as if I can't handle reality or my 'real' self. I don't need to be saved, I don't want to be saved. And as intothewoods insightfully pointed out, there is an off-putting submissive side to the hero, no matter what. Too much need for appreciation to legitimize his actions, ya know?

But with that said, with the hero there is a self-control and ability to focus that can be disturbingly lacking in the villain. "The pimp, the rapist, the sadist,the marauding Injuns, the slave-auctioneer, the 'online predator', the pervert" etc. might be too frivolous and utterly selfish. I can't quite describe it, but there is a sort of heroic villain type that really gets my heart racing. The kind who realizes that often, true heroism requires villainy. He's not a combination of both, but a "bad guy" with the passion and sense of purpose as a hero.

If I keep going I'll confuse myself. Anyway, lovely thread; can't wait to see what everyone has to say!

 

[Homburg]

There was a rich conversation through the centuries in Chinese philosophy regarding whether the nature of man was Good or Evil. Two particular pieces stand out, and damned if I can remember the names of the worthies that wrote them. One of the central images was that of a child sitting on the edge of a well, and beginning to tip in. The author arguing that man's nature was inherently good said that any man would leap to save the child if he could. It is the nature of man to do so. His antagonist wrote that man would save the child to avoid the negative social repercussions of not saving the child.

I put myself on the Captain Save-a-Ho side in the post referred to. Does this mean I'm the white knight? Sometimes, sure. I'm also the villain. And sometimes I am just a fucking gorilla.

The Beast is an archetype of its' own, though it was lumped in with the villain. Mister Man self-description falls under that heading. Primal, animalistic, and rough.

I don't identify with any of these. I fall under whatever description suits me at the time. Most people probably see me as the hero. Some see me as a villain. Others see me as a monster. It depends on how they set me off.

There was a thread that had a sideline conversation in it that seperated the BDSM world into those with a constructive impulse and those with a destructive impulse. I want to say that Netz was in on that conversation.

 

[00Syd]

And sometimes I am just a fucking gorilla.

The Beast is an archetype of its' own, though it was lumped in with the villain. Mister Man self-description falls under that heading. Primal, animalistic, and rough.

Yeah! Animalism! Screw the hero and villain thing, lets all throw off our clothes and go at it!

Meet me in the jungle

 

[madetotakeit]

I'm with CheekyBoots. I resent the maybe unintentional implication that I need someone to come in and rescue me. I've rescued myself so I know I don't need anyone to rush in protect me. I know myself pretty well and even though I may not always be able to articulate it, I know what I can handle. Fastest way to irritate me is to discount my ability to know what I am drawn to. I'm drawn to it for a reason.

That being said, I'm big on balance. My ideal would have a bit of all three. I agree with Homburg as that the beast is a separate character aspect. I have to say though that I am drawn to those who have more of the villain and beast in them. Knowing those sides are there stirs my blood.

 

[Homburg]

Yeah! Animalism! Screw the hero and villain thing, lets all throw off our clothes and go at it!

Meet me in the jungle

*grunt*

*flex*

You Jane

 

[Kajira Callista]

*grunt*

*flex*

You Jane

MEOW!

 

[00Syd]

*grunt*

*flex*

You Jane

*purr*

*stretch*

*grab*

 

[Homburg]

MEOW!

*purr*

*stretch*

*grab*

Hmm, looks like there are a couple of possible Janes here.

 

[catalina_francisco]

LOL, have to say F would identify as villain. Playing hero doesn't interest him, being a sadistic bastard as he puts it, does. Despite that, he abhors people who get into brawling type situations and has little time for them or their ways. I think there is a huge misconception that being into sadism and walking your own path means you are moody, often loud, and ready to swing a fist at the first opportunity to prove your masculinity and brute force...my experience is that is not customary of sadism and sadists, but maybe a trait of a bully or someone lacking self control, or feeling some personal insecurity. I also notice most sadists who are into moving beyond the recommended SSC rulebook and generally accepted practices are somewhat introverted, or at least comfortable in their own company more so than feeling a desire to socialise, and comfortable making decisions which might not be widely accepted, nor needing approval from others...sort of comes back to the old saying which my mother used to repeatedly quote, 'it's the quiet ones you have to watch'.

Catalina

 

[BiBunny]

I identify as the villain, I suppose. And a villain-groupie. That came as no surprise, did it?

Oh, wait, I just saw this.

I also notice most sadists who are into moving beyond the recommended SSC rulebook and generally accepted practices are somewhat introverted, or at least comfortable in their own company more so than feeling a desire to socialise, and comfortable making decisions which might not be widely accepted, nor needing approval from others...sort of comes back to the old saying which my mother used to repeatedly quote, 'it's the quiet ones you have to watch'.

Yeah, I've noticed this, too. Which might explain my relative disdain for people who babble just to hear themselves talk.

 

[HottieMama]

I also notice most sadists who are into moving beyond the recommended SSC rulebook and generally accepted practices are somewhat introverted, or at least comfortable in their own company more so than feeling a desire to socialise, and comfortable making decisions which might not be widely accepted, nor needing approval from others...sort of comes back to the old saying which my mother used to repeatedly quote, 'it's the quiet ones you have to watch'.

Totally agree.

 

[intothewoods]

LOL, have to say F would identify as villain. Playing hero doesn't interest him, being a sadistic bastard as he puts it, does. Despite that, he abhors people who get into brawling type situations and has little time for them or their ways. I think there is a huge misconception that being into sadism and walking your own path means you are moody, often loud, and ready to swing a fist at the first opportunity to prove your masculinity and brute force...my experience is that is not customary of sadism and sadists, but maybe a trait of a bully or someone lacking self control, or feeling some personal insecurity.

I vote lack of control. I really don't like this type of personality.

Funny, Mister Man will ocasionally make comments like, "I'd kill him" in reference to someone who has done something to me, but in reality, when we've been in situations where I can tell he feels I've been insulted or something like that, he'll usuually let me handle it (though I can feel him tense up), or maybe he'll say something quick and to the point. He's very calm under pressure, and not easily baited.

I also notice most sadists who are into moving beyond the recommended SSC rulebook and generally accepted practices are somewhat introverted, or at least comfortable in their own company more so than feeling a desire to socialise, and comfortable making decisions which might not be widely accepted, nor needing approval from others...sort of comes back to the old saying which my mother used to repeatedly quote, 'it's the quiet ones you have to watch'.

Catalina

Ok, this is making me consider every sadist I've known! I know a few extrovert sadists, but they all do have a certain quietness about them at the same time.

 

[Evil_Geoff]

In D&D terms... Consider me "Lawful Evil"

I'm a sadistic bastard. But I have standards, rules and ethics. Even friends.

I'll hurt you. Really bad. And enjoy it. And do so very politely.

 

[madetotakeit]

In D&D terms... Consider me "Lawful Evil"

I'm a sadistic bastard. But I have standards, rules and ethics. Even friends.

I'll hurt you. Really bad. And enjoy it. And do so very politely.

I knew I should have made it to Atlanta!

 

[Homburg]

I think I fail at quiet. I must not be a sadist.

 

[twysted73]

Yeah! Animalism! Screw the hero and villain thing, lets all throw off our clothes and go at it!

Meet me in the jungle

You rock.

 

[00Syd]

You rock.

Haha thanks