Shame and Humiliation

[xssve]

From a personal standpoint, that's what I like about BDSM: insofar as it is an institution, it is formed strictly on the basis of consent, SSC, which is why it's sort of an umbrella term for a wide range of kinks, some of which have little to do with B, D, S, or M - to some peoples disgruntlement - it does provide a framework for discussing these thing openly and apolitically - a relationship is a relationship, it's no different in BDSM than it is in vanilla, the only difference is that in BDSM you can talk about it.

 

[xssve]

Even Dominance/submission can be confusing - I for instance, as I mentioned way back in the gender bending thread, happen to like really mad sex where a woman becomes so sexually aggressive it becomes a question who exactly is fucking whom - this strains the whole definition of "submissive", even if I've trained/encouraged it as the ostensible dominant.

In this instance it's more of an interplay where you might be "topping" one minute, "bottoming" the next, and as I've said before, I never really thought about it in terms of dominance and submission, I always thought it was just sex, lol, let it all hang out baby.

My feeling is that it has to do more with the fact that women are historically under a great deal more social pressure to conform to socio-sexual "norms", the result of simple biology, which subsequently shapes it accordingly.

Maybe that makes me a switch, I dunno. What I do know is that I like reading, writing and drawing adult themed material, I like to think about, talk about, and have sex, and I don't to argue about it, or have my life to turned into a lifetime special over it - deal with it, period - I don't care who's in charge of what, I'm in charge of me, that's all, I don't have time for a lot of bullshit power games. That tends to cause problems in vanilla relationships, where expectations tend to revolve more around more materialist considerations and sex is more likely to be seen within a political/status framework.

So, politically, I'm in the BDSM camp, popular fashion is too facile, you never know from one day to the next what's going to acceptable or not.

Living, as I've described elsewhere, in a population where sexual politics can be very complicated, I think probably about it more than some people might, and it probably reflects in my storytelling themes as well: one dynamic I tend to play with is a sort of a "seduction into the dark side" theme, where one partner becomes sexually liberated and is forced to deal with the reluctance of the other - and this is where shame and humiliation tend to enter into it.

It seems to be a not uncommon dilemma in the real world.

 

[xssve]

In fact the whole BDSM turn this thread has taken is an example of how a kink-friendly framework provides a way of discussing complicated sexual issues like shame and humiliation in a (mostly) non-confrontational manner.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

In fact the whole BDSM turn this thread has taken is an example of how a kink-friendly framework provides a way of discussing complicated sexual issues like shame and humiliation in a (mostly) non-confrontational manner.

"Mostly" being the optimum word there....

 

[xssve]

Interesting post, Doc.

I think there can be interesting psychological stuff going on in consensual BDSM, though often the conflicts are within the top, rather than the bottom. I have known several real-life tops who had occasional crises of conscience about wanting what they wanted -- I think kind and moral people almost have to -- and how does the top handle that? Does s/he wrestle with it on their own? Do they ask their bottom for reassurance? Do they pretend -- just to themselves or to the bottom, too -- that the bottom "deserves" it for some reason? Do they do one of those elaborate role-plays (which I've heard about but never done) of prisoner/interrogator or teacher/student or priest/heretic?

How does the bottom handle the top's crisis of conscience? Do they provide reassurance? Do they think less of the top? Do they do things that they know will annoy the top to try to provide an excuse?

I think there's also an interesting story in a previously single-role person who becomes a switch, whether they're going from top to bottom or from bottom to top.

And I think that the scenario I've described as "sacrifice" can have interesting psychological stuff going on, for all that it's consensual, since it's intentionally going beyond what the bottom is comfortable with. Even though the bottom knows ahead of time that they'll be going beyond where they normally go and consents to go there, that doesn't mean that s/he will have no internal struggles about following through -- going there is difficult, almost by definition. How do they make it possible to go further than they find comfortable? Do they hang on to their love for the top? To the fact that they promised? To some macho/a internal self-image? Are they hoping that the top will only do a little more than usual, or are they hoping that s/he will do a lot more? Does the bottom think that the top will prove that s/he likes or loves them by going only a little way past the usual limits -- I care too much to really make you uncomfortable -- or does the bottom think that the top will prove that s/he likes or loves them by going far past the usual limts -- I care about you too much to throw your gift in your face and not really take what you're giving me. What happens if the bottom assumes that the path of caring is one of those things, and the top assumes the other?

And nearly everyone has things that scare them. I amuse and amaze people by being scared of bondage, which most people think of as the "lightest" of the various BDSM activities. (I've never been tied up; the very idea freaks me out.) I really like cutting, and some people want to fall over at the very thought. One person's mild and pleasant activity can be another person's bogeyman. Facing fears can be an interesting premise on which to hang a story, and it practically demands that one get inside the character's heads. Is the bottom facing a fear because s/he wants to, or because the top wants them to? How do they handle the fear? A scenario in which the top has the bottom's permission to do whatever the scary thing is, no matter how scared the bottom gets, may be officially consensual, but the emotions will be a lot more like the ones you like to write.

And I'm just scratching the surface, here.

Exactly, consent is really just like opening the door, it isn't stepping across the threshold.

Another complicating factor for a top is that just because you can do it, doesn't mean you should - one website was, for a while, doing extreme sex, bondage, fucking machines, etc., i.e., "we do them until they beg us to stop" sort of thing - trouble was, the sub/model/actresses didn't know when to say when, and they had to stop the whole thing before somebody got hurt, i.e., the top has to set limits because in subspace, the bottom may lose the ability to make judgment calls, even w/regards to her own health, and even with safewords, etc.

It get's freakier, one cannot legally consent to gross bodily harm for instance, but many common practices make that line difficult to place and it's more difficult in purely sexual matters as a legal thing - Paul Little's conviction demonstrates that.

To be sure, even pregnancy and childbirth entail significant risks, a factor that's often glossed over, more women probably die in childbirth every year, maybe every day, than total deaths from BDSM in all of history, including Gilles de Rais and Elizabeth Báthory's victims combined - in fact he leading cause of death among pregnent women in the US is domestic abuse, and I'm guessing it isn't BDSM related - the leading cause of death in BDSM related practices is autoerotic asphyxiation, and that is largely because it's autoerotic - i.e., there is no top monitoring the scene.

The fact is, you tend to do this with people you expect and hope to be doing it with a lot more, and if you're wearing people out, you aren't going to be very popular - it is self limiting in certain important respects even among the most dedicated of sadists.

Informed consent is a huge issue, the issue from a legal standpoint, and it's something that has to be dealt with by the community to avoid random and arbitrary persecution and prosecution - the only reason BDSM practices are allowed to be openly discussed is the result of the SSC legal distinction which emerged from the Old Guard, and I cannot stress enough how important it is to maintain the legal distinction.

Typical of the type of disputes this engenders however is this, chosen more or less at random:

There are reasons to applaud the broad acceptance of the credo "Safe Sane Consensual" by SM folks. I’ve sought out those reasons and pointed them out to others, perhaps as much to help myself settle into the use of the SSC terminology as anything. But, no matter how long the phrase hangs around—and it’s looking pretty permanent right now—I have problems with it.

I’m in no mood to turn the clock back, but I won’t mind if a few gung-ho SSC fans stop, look and listen up. What was getting hard to maintain with the leather population boom of the late 70s and early 80s was the excitement. Some of us treasured the sheer heart-pounding thrill of taking what we wanted from a bottom who was able to take what we were dishing out. Some thrilled to dark, but delicious, over-the-top ecstasy of being taken by a man who knew how to use us.

Too-loud cheering from the SSC fanatics could finally stamp out or drown the last surviving molecules of these ecstatic excitements that survive in SM today.

The SSC Mistake, by Joseph W. Bean

This more or less echos a common complaint, found in various forms in any BDSM forum you visit - I like the distinction made here between safe, and that includes legally safe, and the ecstatic dynamic of BDSM - it's a lot like an ecstatic religion in many respects, but snake handling is illegal too in a lot of places.

 

[xssve]

"Mostly" being the optimum word there....

It is, after all, an imperfect world.

 

[xssve]

A related dispute is the "no limits" dispute - technically, at some point it ceases to be BDSM and becomes abusive - it's just that no two people draw that line at exactly the same point, and in this case, the limits tend to be negotiated informally and on the fly, which is more like what Doc is talking about I think - but if it's a social act, they are there.

Legally, it's drawn at "gross bodily harm", danger to yourself and others, etc., but there's always somebody, somewhere, pushing the limit.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

Do y'all ever stop talking about sex long enough to have it?

 

[xssve]

Do y'all ever stop talking about sex long enough to have it?

It's a Freudian thing: the less sex you have, the more you talk about it.

 

[AllardChardon]

I am not ashamed to say, I want to be tied up and flogged.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

I am not ashamed to say, I want to be tied up and flogged.

And even though you truly want it and have publically said so, I couldn't bring myself to do it for you. Sigh, too much teddy and not enough bear, I guess! Imagine, me not being able to do what a woman friend wanted. That's a first!

 

[AllardChardon]

Volupt, that is one of the interesting revelations in this extended thread. Even if you want to do something for someone you love, you may not necessarily have the inclination to participate. It is a quandry. That is what I was saying about being a top. I bet I would feel guilty for my actions no matter how much the bottom enjoyed the experience. Maybe you are a bit of a sub, which is perfectly fine, under all the Teddy Bear Dom fur?

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Volupt, that is one of the interesting revelations in this extended thread. Even if you want to do something for someone you love, you may not necessarily have the inclination to participate. It is a quandry. That is what I was saying about being a top. I bet I would feel guilty for my actions no matter how much the bottom enjoyed the experience. Maybe you are a bit of a sub, which is perfectly fine, under all the Teddy Bear Dom fur?

Two obstacles:
1) claustrophobia, serious chaustrophobia! Tied up and blindfolded is my idea of Hell.
2) trust. Me, trust someone else with my physical well-being when helpless? Not likely!

No, I'm just not part of the scene at all. The whole thing makes me queasy. In no way would I ever maintain that those who enjoy it should be forbidden from doing so, I just can't get excited over even so minor a thing as being tethered to the headboard. I might be able to spank someone, so long as she didn't start to cry on me . . .

 

[Shwenn]

No, I'm just not part of the scene at all. The whole thing makes me queasy. In no way would I ever maintain that those who enjoy it should be forbidden from doing so, I just can't get excited over even so minor a thing as being tethered to the headboard. I might be able to spank someone, so long as she didn't start to cry on me . . .

Never say never.

Take it from me. I fell madly in love with a bdsm vanilla. After years of doing anything and everything he wanted and consitantly reminding him what I wanted, it got to the point where he felt bad not spanking me.

We subs with tons of love and patience can turn you out, brotha!

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Never say never.

Take it from me. I fell madly in love with a bdsm vanilla. After years of doing anything and everything he wanted and consitantly reminding him what I wanted, it got to the point where he felt bad not spanking me.

We subs with tons of love and patience can turn you out, brotha!

Snerk! Perhaps in the next life! After 40 years of being married to another contented vanilla this bear is unlikely to change his fur.

 

[AllardChardon]

Volupt,

I promise I won't cry. May I scream, please...

Allard

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Volupt,

I promise I won't cry. May I scream, please...

Allard

I could deal with that! Just don't expect to get much more than pink. I'd begin to worry if full-blown red handprints showed up. Bruises are so scary.

 

[AllardChardon]

Volupt, I don't want you to hurt your hands. No, there are paddles made especially for my enjoyment that save your digits for typing and other important matters at hand. LOL But it makes for a nice picture in my mind, you in your Teddy Bear suit and me wearing a baby doll dress and no panties...

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Volupt, I don't want you to hurt your hands. No, there are paddles made especially for my enjoyment that save your digits for typing and other important matters at hand. LOL But it makes for a nice picture in my mind, you in your Teddy Bear suit and me wearing a baby doll dress and no panties...

LOL I used to have a cartoon of a mean teddy spanking a dollie with her dress up and panties down but it's disappeared. Maybe I can find it again . . .

 

[Corylea]

VM, I notice that you comment frequently in BDSM threads, even though other vanilla people rarely do. It's enough to make a person wonder if you have a certain attraction to the topic, y'know?

As for freaking out at even so mild a thing as being tied to the headboard, I've never been tied to the headboard. I've been beaten black-and-blue, but I've never been tied up. So don't think that because bondage freaks you out, you have to be vanilla; I'm here to say it isn't necessarily so. If I were in an ongoing relationship with someone who loved bondage, I'd probably be willing to face this fear for them, IF they knew how much they were asking for. But none of my lovers has ever been interested in using their brownie points that way -- and I'm not complaining -- so I remain whips-yes, chains-no girl.

I hear that you're wiling to give spankings ... are you willing to receive them, as well? Ever tried it?

 

[Corylea]

Do y'all ever stop talking about sex long enough to have it?

Not with each other. At least, not yet.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

VM, I notice that you comment frequently in BDSM threads, even though other vanilla people rarely do. It's enough to make a person wonder if you have a certain attraction to the topic, y'know?

As for freaking out at even so mild a thing as being tied to the headboard, I've never been tied to the headboard. I've been beaten black-and-blue, but I've never been tied up. So don't think that because bondage freaks you out, you have to be vanilla; I'm here to say it isn't necessarily so. If I were in an ongoing relationship with someone who loved bondage, I'd probably be willing to face this fear for them, IF they knew how much they were asking for. But none of my lovers has ever been interested in using their brownie points that way -- and I'm not complaining -- so I remain whips-yes, chains-no girl.

I hear that you're wiling to give spankings ... are you willing to receive them, as well? Ever tried it?

I do know that I seem to not generate endorphins well. If I did, I'd be along distance runner and I hate running. So I haven't tried it and don't have any attraction for it.

 

[Corylea]

I am not ashamed to say, I want to be tied up and flogged.

Congratulations! Step One, check.

 

[Stella_Omega]

VM, I notice that you comment frequently in BDSM threads, even though other vanilla people rarely do. It's enough to make a person wonder if you have a certain attraction to the topic, y'know?

Voluptuary-Manque has to be one of the most apt self-monikers I've ever run across!

As for freaking out at even so mild a thing as being tied to the headboard, I've never been tied to the headboard. I've been beaten black-and-blue, but I've never been tied up. So don't think that because bondage freaks you out, you have to be vanilla; I'm here to say it isn't necessarily so. If I were in an ongoing relationship with someone who loved bondage, I'd probably be willing to face this fear for them, IF they knew how much they were asking for. But none of my lovers has ever been interested in using their brownie points that way -- and I'm not complaining -- so I remain whips-yes, chains-no girl.

I hear that you're wiling to give spankings ... are you willing to receive them, as well? Ever tried it?

And there are plenty of folks who are all about the chains and not so much for the whips. BDSM covers a huge acreage of preferences and 'unusualities'
I once met a guy who was into capsicum-- hot peppers. Bondage and hot peppers, and not even particularly genitally focussed. As a bottom, I hasten to say, he didn't want to smush them on other people. And he couldn't stand a flogger, he told me solemnly.

 

[AllardChardon]

Reminds me of Doris' description of one her johns to Felix in The Owl and the Pussycat. All the john wanted her to do was sit at the end of a long hallway in nothing but a raincaoat while he rolled hard boiled eggs at her. "That's it. 50 bucks." But Doris, asks Felix in horror, "What were you thinking while he rolled hard boiled eggs at you?" Doris quips, "I was thinking about the 50 bucks I was gonna get."