Shame and Humiliation

[Corylea]

Yes, the wondering if I can take it. I thought the same thing BEFORE I had kids, four of them, and my body survived very well even with 11 total years of breastfeeding. The body is quite resilient, indeed.

Oh, your body can take all kinds of things; it's the psyche that's interesting. What will your mind do if you're tied to a massage table being flogged? Purr? Freak out? Something in between?

Only one way to find out. *grin* *tease*

 

[Stella_Omega]

Ah. Yes, I can see how it could make their bottom nervous, especially if s/he was a relative newcomer.

Knowing what I know now, of course, I would, if I were the DM, reply that it's up to the top to reassure that bottom. maybe I'd offer my services to that end, but-- if a scene needs to be that enclosed and intense, it's probably better it be in some private place, wouldn't you agree?

I forget in which book Pat Califia said something like, "We keep running around telling people about 'Safe, Sane, and Consensual,' and while that's all very well, the biggest appeal of BDSM isn't that it's safe."

Risk-Aware Consensual Kink seems to be catching on around here, which makes a lot more sense to me. I'm a big fan of cuttings -- both pitching and catching -- and any time you open the skin, someone is sure to tell you that this isn't safe. "Have you ever cut yourself shaving?" shuts most of these people up, though.

When I first knew what i wanted there was no such thing as safe or consensual. I did not talk about my desires much. I got lucky, for a while though simply because i found a "sadist"-- and there was no term like "top" yet-- who's personal limits more or less matched mine. But we "broke up." as in "not my boyfriend any more", and i wasn't willing to risk my safety very often-- nor was it fun to have to talk someone into flogging one and realise they didn't know what they were doing, either boring one to pieces or cutting one's skin open before the endorphins got started. No one knew about negotiating, or safewords, or safe calls, and it never occurred to me to teach by topping!

 

[Stella_Omega]

And this is one of my pet peeves. It seems as if Someone Somewhere decided that bottom = submissive, and it just doesn't. I've heard people refer to all bottoms as "subs" or claim that a bottom who didn't want to fetch drinks was a "bad sub." Um, maybe that person isn't a sub at all? Nah, can't be.

I've also seen people assume that if a sub is a sub, then any dom has a right to order them to do stuff. Um, no. I usually bottom (well, actually, I usually top, but I mean when I'm on that end of things), I rarely sub, but even when I do, it's a very, very personal thing -- I've decided to sub to THIS specific person who I like or love or who brings out that side of me; I'm not subbing to any asshole who wants to call himself/herself a dom.

Yo, remember consent, folks?

It reminds me of the whole thing from decades ago, when real lesbians did X, Y, or Z or refrained from doing A, B, or C. If I hate softball, I hate softball. And if I want to wear pink, I'll fucking wear pink. I'm amazed at how many non-mainstream folks want to enforce a new mainstream on their people.

(And Stella, this isn't directed at you; it's just that something you said reminded me of how OTHER people have been annoying around this issue.)

I hear you, girl!

 

[xssve]

Re: cutting.

Now that one that does nothing for me, for reasons having nothing to do with safety, it just isn't erotic to me, and inflicting pain in general is not my thing, I can do it, and I'm cognizant of endorphin responses, etc., and I'm cool with spanking and flogging, light torture, clamping, stress, etc., but if you're into real pain I'm just not that sadistic, it really doesn't do anything for me.

I'd be far more inclined to play with shame/humiliation, which if anything can be more dangerous, at least psychologically speaking, but it is all in your head. Compensation perhaps, but my own personal experiences with transformative experiences were all about the psychological payoff of physical and mental stress, and the physical pain part of it, though significant, mostly just made me (and make me) snappish and irritable, more of a sense of relief when it's over.

I do also realize that cutting isn't necessarily about pain, but it still doesn't attract me.

I'm just sort of phobic about hurting people - has to do with objectification perhaps, i.e., there's too much of it in this world already with people treated like commodities, or obstacles to capital formation/resource depletion.

There I go cerebrating it, but it's a lot harder to get away from that one for me for some reason - I can't even begin to explain the gulf of distinction that separates Max Hardcore on his worst day from the photos of Abu Ghraib in the commentary I linked to above (and forgot to warn you about).

Shit happens, but such smugly gratuitous political expedience pisses me off to the point of madness.

I don't fault anybody for their fetishes, and there are extremes of consensual cutting that raise valid ethical and legal questions, but it's much healthier to work your kinks out in a social environment, the two things are not even comparable, it's just harder for me to dissociate myself to that degree.

 

[AllardChardon]

Cory and Stella, you are both a wealth of information about a subject I know little. And Cory, you experess my hang-ups with BDSM so well. I could never sub to someone I felt was below me and that is just about ever one I meet. I sub only when truly infatuated. Then it is as easy as pie. But to get me to that place of infatuation requires sexual saturation, complete and utter satisfaction from my lover, so much so that I MUST return the favor.

 

[xssve]

It reminds me of the whole thing from decades ago, when real lesbians did X, Y, or Z or refrained from doing A, B, or C. If I hate softball, I hate softball. And if I want to wear pink, I'll fucking wear pink. I'm amazed at how many non-mainstream folks want to enforce a new mainstream on their people.

Every movement, social or political, sooner or later attracts the fashion nazis.

When somebody starts trying to institutionalize the thing (Goreans), I tell them I got into this because I don't like rules, not because I want more of them.

It's whatever spins your propeller baby.

 

[Corylea]

Knowing what I know now, of course, I would, if I were the DM, reply that it's up to the top to reassure that bottom. maybe I'd offer my services to that end, but-- if a scene needs to be that enclosed and intense, it's probably better it be in some private place, wouldn't you agree?

Oh, I didn't mean that the DM should have stopped the scene, I just meant that when you first told this story, I thought the people were complaining just because NMK; I think better of them if they're trying to protect their bottom. Reassurance seems like the first step, and if that doesn't work, well, maybe postponing the scene until later or doing it somewhere else would be better.

My own parties have two play areas, one that's specifically for more intense or noisy scenes and one that's specifically for quiet scenes, so that the screamers get the basement, and anybody who'd be weirded out by that can play in the living room.

When I first knew what i wanted there was no such thing as safe or consensual. I did not talk about my desires much. I got lucky, for a while though simply because i found a "sadist"-- and there was no term like "top" yet-- who's personal limits more or less matched mine. But we "broke up." as in "not my boyfriend any more", and i wasn't willing to risk my safety very often-- nor was it fun to have to talk someone into flogging one and realise they didn't know what they were doing, either boring one to pieces or cutting one's skin open before the endorphins got started.

*hug* That sounds like a frustrating and difficult journey. I was lucky -- I'd been thinking about this stuff since I was around seven (don't remember much of my life before seven) -- but I was so naive that it wasn't until I was in grad school that it occurred to me that anyone else felt this way or that I could do anything about it. My apartmentmate left a copy of Coming to Power on the coffee table in the living room, and I read it whenever she was out. Eventually, I bought a copy of my own, and one day my apartmentmate said, "Cory, don't you think we should talk about the fact that we're a two-Coming to Power household?

We talked, but since we weren't into each other at ALL, we didn't start playing; we started a support group.

No one knew about negotiating, or safewords, or safe calls,

People say, "Why do you have to talk about this stuff in public," and this is why. This is why.

and it never occurred to me to teach by topping!

*hug* I feel sorry for our younger selves, wanting so much and not knowing what to do about it. Today's eighteen-year-olds have no idea how lucky they are!

Interesting. I know you're a switch, but I'd gotten the impression you were more like 70% top, 30% bottom. Have I misread you, or have you changed over the years?

 

[Stella_Omega]

Cory and Stella, you are both a wealth of information about a subject I know little. And Cory, you experess my hang-ups with BDSM so well. I could never sub to someone I felt was below me and that is just about ever one I meet. I sub only when truly infatuated. Then it is as easy as pie. But to get me to that place of infatuation requires sexual saturation, complete and utter satisfaction from my lover, so much so that I MUST return the favor.

FUCK yes!

Some of the most romantic BDSM fiction I've read recently, comes from a Buffy fanfic writer. She's taken up the concept of Vampire lifestyle, family, and need for hierarchy, fleshed it out in an excellent and cohesive way, and stirred in copious amounts of demonstrative kink.

Her vampires explain this; Vamps are social and don't survive well alone. They are hierarchal, and must either be owned by, or own their companions. They can be content either way, as long as the relationship is established and maintained, via whips, chains and frequent fucking thankyouverymuch.

For a vamp to want to own another is a helluva compliment-- the stronger a vamp's underlings are, the more powerful that vamp is. So being a vamp's sub is in no way a weakness, and when other vamps catch your master's scent on you they back off. And the more powerful your master is, of course, the more power you have.

I'm a total sucker for this stuff!

 

[xssve]

*hug* That sounds like a frustrating and difficult journey. I was lucky -- I'd been thinking about this stuff since I was around seven (don't remember much of my life before seven) -- but I was so naive that it wasn't until I was in grad school that it occurred to me that anyone else felt this way or that I could do anything about it. My apartmentmate left a copy of Coming to Power on the coffee table in the living room, and I read it whenever she was out. Eventually, I bought a copy of my own, and one day my apartmentmate said, "Cory, don't you think we should talk about the fact that we're a two-Coming to Power household?

Weird how that works - I never actively try to recruit, almost everybody I know that's into it has had these fantasies almost since they could remember, it's completely alien to almost everyone else - they practice it on a subliminal level, and call it politics.

But you're right, it needs to be talked about, understood, but it's never easy.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Oh, I didn't mean that the DM should have stopped the scene, I just meant that when you first told this story, I thought the people were complaining just because NMK; I think better of them if they're trying to protect their bottom. Reassurance seems like the first step, and if that doesn't work, well, maybe postponing the scene until later or doing it somewhere else would be better.

My own parties have two play areas, one that's specifically for more intense or noisy scenes and one that's specifically for quiet scenes, so that the screamers get the basement, and anybody who'd be weirded out by that can play in the living room.

What a hostess with the mostest!

*hug* That sounds like a frustrating and difficult journey. I was lucky -- I'd been thinking about this stuff since I was around seven (don't remember much of my life before seven) -- but I was so naive that it wasn't until I was in grad school that it occurred to me that anyone else felt this way or that I could do anything about it. My apartmentmate left a copy of Coming to Power on the coffee table in the living room, and I read it whenever she was out. Eventually, I bought a copy of my own, and one day my apartmentmate said, "Cory, don't you think we should talk about the fact that we're a two-Coming to Power household?

We talked, but since we weren't into each other at ALL, we didn't start playing; we started a support group.

YES! And you had copies of the book! And what a difference it makes!

People say, "Why do you have to talk about this stuff in public," and this is why. This is why.




*hug* I feel sorry for our younger selves, wanting so much and not knowing what to do about it. Today's eighteen-year-olds have no idea how lucky they are!

haha, I asked one woman; "How did you get into BDSM?" and she said; "Oh, my girlfriend and I took some classes at Michigan Woman's fest..."

Interesting. I know you're a switch, but I'd gotten the impression you were more like 70% top, 30% bottom. Have I misread you, or have you changed over the years?

Oh yes, I have changed muchly. I began topping out of frustration at not finding the top I needed... now, I top out of preference, and a desire to... own.

Life changes....

 

[Corylea]

Now that one that does nothing for me, for reasons having nothing to do with safety, it just isn't erotic to me, and inflicting pain in general is not my thing, I can do it, and I'm cognizant of endorphin responses, etc., and I'm cool with spanking and flogging, light torture, clamping, stress, etc., but if you're into real pain I'm just not that sadistic, it really doesn't do anything for me.

I do also realize that cutting isn't necessarily about pain, but it still doesn't attract me.

Well, it's not required.

When I do cuttings or when they're done to me, the top uses a single-edged razor blade and makes very shallow cuts. I actually enjoy the scratchy feeling if it's done on the upper half of my torso; it doesn't feel like pain to me then.

But more than the scratchy feeling is the primal nature of blood. Opening someone's skin or having my skin opened by them feels very intimate, very primal, very vulnerable. Intellectually, I know that if someone makes a shallow two-inch cut on my left breast, it'll be healed by the end of the week. But emotionally, it feels as if my partner and I have done something big together. Feellng the skin part, watching the blood well up under their hand, seeing the blood lust in their eyes, that feels like we're playing on a level that's very deep and connected, deeper than words, for all that the actual damage is less than the bruises one would get from a hard flogging.

I think this is one of those "either you get it or you don't" things. But I tried it because M was into it and had no idea that I would love it. The getting it or not isn't on the level you can explore with your mind.

I'm just sort of phobic about hurting people - has to do with objectification perhaps, i.e., there's too much of it in this world already with people treated like commodities, or obstacles to capital formation/resource depletion.

I've counseled survivors of physical, sexual, and emotional abuse, and I can tell you that bruises fade but the words used to justify the bruises live on forever. My clients are usually more affected by the emotional abuse that surrounded the physical abuse than they were by the physical abuse itself. So if I were you, I'd be careful about thinking that humiliation is safer or lesser, just because it leaves no visible marks. A few shallow cuttings are WAY safer than humiliation, in my opinion. That doesn't mean don't play with it, but be very careful -- someone's self-esteem is in your hands.

 

[xssve]

I've counseled survivors of physical, sexual, and emotional abuse, and I can tell you that bruises fade but the words used to justify the bruises live on forever. My clients are usually more affected by the emotional abuse that surrounded the physical abuse than they were by the physical abuse itself. So if I were you, I'd be careful about thinking that humiliation is safer or lesser, just because it leaves no visible marks. A few shallow cuttings are WAY safer than humiliation, in my opinion. That doesn't mean don't play with it, but be very careful -- someone's self-esteem is in your hands.

Excellent advice, psychological torment is often more permenent than physical, I don't do it at all except by explicit request, and it really isn't my thing either. In fact it took me a while to get over my phobias about that - but I needed something in my arsenal, and it intrigues me far more than physical pain.

I'm not sure if not being a sadist is a good thing or a bad thing: on one side, it's relatively easy to remain detached about it, while on the other, it's relatively easy to remain detached about it.

 

[Corylea]

FUCK yes!

For a vamp to want to own another is a helluva compliment-- the stronger a vamp's underlings are, the more powerful that vamp is. So being a vamp's sub is in no way a weakness, and when other vamps catch your master's scent on you they back off. And the more powerful your master is, of course, the more power you have.

I'm a total sucker for this stuff!

Have you read Laurell K. Hamilton? And Kim Harrison?

haha, I asked one woman; "How did you get into BDSM?" and she said; "Oh, my girlfriend and I took some classes at Michigan Woman's fest...

God. How times have changed. Whenever I think the world's going to hell in a handbasket, I need to remember stuff like this.

now, I top out of preference, and a desire to... own.

*shiver* Ah. Well. Um...Pity you're on the Left Coast.

 

[xssve]

Funny story I heard: guy is out with this woman and she tells him: "be mean to me baby", so he starts berating her, calling her stupid, dumb, fat, lazy, etc., and she reacts in horror - "naht lahck they-at"! Lol.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Have you read Laurell K. Hamilton? And Kim Harrison?

No... I got totally turned off vamps as a genre-- I just like this particular writer.

Hamilton writes Anita Blake, right? I've been hearing a new term; "Snappy Sue" for heroines that are abrasive but infallible. ( "Mary Sue" is a term for the perfect heroine in amateur writing-- she usually has Violet Eyes, Silver hair, and a pet kitty with butterfly wings. )

*shiver* Ah. Well. Um...Pity you're on the Left Coast.

Uh... yeah...

Funny story I heard: guy is out with this woman and she tells him: "be mean to me baby", so he starts berating her, calling her stupid, dumb, fat, lazy, etc., and she reacts in horror - "naht lahck they-at"! Lol.

One woman I know had a sub grovelling before her and saying; "Anything for you, Mistress, anything!" and she said; "Fine, write me a check."

 

[Guest]

Cory and Stella, you are both a wealth of information about a subject I know little. And Cory, you experess my hang-ups with BDSM so well. I could never sub to someone I felt was below me and that is just about ever one I meet. I sub only when truly infatuated. Then it is as easy as pie. . . .

Um, yes.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Um, yes.

Um, yes indeed.

 

[Guest]

Um, yes indeed.

 

[Corylea]

And here's the latest in shame and humiliation: http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=623283

 

[xssve]

How fun, I wish I could go.

Regarding Stella's and my previous dispute over castration fears, just came across this:

"Oh yes indeed!" said the Duc, "unnumbered are they who absolutely cannot bear the instant when the illusion is shattered. It seems as if one’s pride suffers when one lets a woman see one in such a state of feebleness, and disgust would appear to be the result of the discomfiture one experiences at such moments."

"No," said Curval, (deleted, xs.), "no, my friend, pride has nothing to do with it, but the object which is in the profoundest sense devoid of all value save the one our lust endows it with, that object, I say, shows itself for what in truth it is once our lubricity has subsided. The more violent has been the irritation the more this object is stripped of its attraction when this irritation ceases to sustain it, just as we are more or less fatigued after greater or lesser exertion, and this aversion we thereupon sense is nothing but the sentiment of a glutted soul whereunto happiness is displeasing because happiness has just wearied it."

"But from this aversion, all the same," spoke up Durcet, "is often born a plan for revenge, whose fatal consequences have often been observed."

Donatien Alphonse François, Marquis de Sade: 120 Days of Sodom

Is this any more authoritative?

 

[Selena_Kitt]

How fun, I wish I could go.

Me too! *sigh*

 

[xssve]

And this is one of my pet peeves. It seems as if Someone Somewhere decided that bottom = submissive, and it just doesn't. I've heard people refer to all bottoms as "subs" or claim that a bottom who didn't want to fetch drinks was a "bad sub." Um, maybe that person isn't a sub at all? Nah, can't be.

I've also seen people assume that if a sub is a sub, then any dom has a right to order them to do stuff. Um, no. I usually bottom (well, actually, I usually top, but I mean when I'm on that end of things), I rarely sub, but even when I do, it's a very, very personal thing -- I've decided to sub to THIS specific person who I like or love or who brings out that side of me; I'm not subbing to any asshole who wants to call himself/herself a dom.

Yo, remember consent, folks?

It reminds me of the whole thing from decades ago, when real lesbians did X, Y, or Z or refrained from doing A, B, or C. If I hate softball, I hate softball. And if I want to wear pink, I'll fucking wear pink. I'm amazed at how many non-mainstream folks want to enforce a new mainstream on their people.

(And Stella, this isn't directed at you; it's just that something you said reminded me of how OTHER people have been annoying around this issue.)

Sheesh, De Sade is not for weak stomachs, even a strong one must resist the urge to vomit occasionally.

Anyway, I'd like to see more stories dealing with consent issues, it's an entire subject in itself, and a subject complicated by issues of ambiance; i.e., implicit consent, vs. explicit, the possibility of coercion, i.e., informed vs. uninformed, etc., etc.

One school believes in exhaustive formal explicit consent, while for another this is thought to interfere with the dynamic, even the first time out, and there is an entire range in between; humiliation for example can be incorporated into the consensual process, i.e., begging for example, and can be way of bridging the gap between implicit and explicit consent.

It's a fascinating topic, and not the least because it forms the basis of any kind of legal defense of the sort of practices common in BDSM, where non-consent is often feigned, or at least it is attempted to be forgotten once granted.

It's not necessarily as fine a line as one might expect, or appears from outside; the act of negotiation itself is often opaque, and has occurred "offscreen" so to speak, and it tends to be a much finer line in vanilla relationships IMO, where negotiations are more ad hoc, and informal, with schools ranging from implicit consent (marriage as blanket formal consent), to formal complaints over perceived affronts to ones dignity (litigation), at minimum, subject to informal contextual power games within the relationship, and it can come from either side.

I don't want to get too deep into it, but it is part of the dance, and it introduces the element of conflict, which while we might wish to avoid it in the real world as much as possible, is de rigeur to a large extent in literature.

In other words, it seems a natural device to me to introduce conflict into a story, with a relatively easy route to a satisfactory resolution.

 

[AllardChardon]

XssVe, I am not sure what you mean by your last post in regards to fear of castration, but I found the quote and the link very informative. It reminds me of a pair of etchings done by Hogarth called "Before" and "After".

The scene is the same in both, a woman's boudoir. In the first, the man is ardent, grasping and groping. The women is resisting and feigning lack of interest.

The second etching shows us the aftermath. He is pulling up his pants, no longer interested in her, at all. She is now clinging and pleading for his attention.

It was done is the middle 1600s, I think. I can look it up if you want, I bought the book for research into the depravity of England in the early days.

Anyway, I found this to be strikingly true in my life and laughed at how sex can still be like that, even after all these centuries. We, as humans, have not changed that much in this respect.

Allard

 

[xssve]

It was in reference to a post of the Doc's that was briefly in dispute, but I thought it interesting that De Sade covered the same question from a couple of different angles.

And yes, I would love to come up and see your etchings... http://images.adultmatchdoctor.com/image/forums/emoticons/5.gif

 

[Stella_Omega]

How fun, I wish I could go.

Regarding Stella's and my previous dispute over castration fears, just came across this:
...

Donatien Alphonse François, Marquis de Sade: 120 Days of Sodom

Is this any more authoritative?

De Sade, authoritative?

No. He was a miserable nutcase who had access to paper and a pen.

De Sade is not an authority. He's just a guy who wrote some books while fighting political battles.

Sacher Masoch is not an authority. He's just a guy who wrote some books. (And damn, if you want a lesson on how NOT to do it, Masoch is the saddest and most pathetic of object lessons!)

Desclos is not an authority. She's just a dame who wrote a book.

All of these people were inventing the wheel all by themselves with no input, no idea if that wheel had been invented already. They were fighting the huge influence of the Catholic church, which is a good way to make small problems look like Mount Everest, and totally distorts your understanding of your own issues.

There's a shitload of current literature on BDSM, in all of the ways it's currently being played, that takes into account historic usages as well.

Just cause some fool wrote a hundred years ago doesn't make him an authority.


If you want an authoritative fiction writer, try Pat Califia, you will have a much better understanding of the many variations of BDSM.