A Genuine Question about the S/M Life

[Stella_Omega]

...So they're under the great 'sub' umbrella.

I'm sure a lot of it is the same for submissive women.

Yep

I like to say; "Bottoms top once they find out they can; tops bottom whenever they get the chance (I.E., find a top they can trust)

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Posers. If any of you ran into a real dom or sadist you'd squeal.

ROB the DOM; I'm still laughing at that wad of fantasy. Its like a midget playing Maximus in Gladiator.

 

[bflagsst]

Posers. If any of you ran into a real dom or sadist you'd squeal.

ROB the DOM; I'm still laughing at that wad of fantasy. Its like a midget playing Maximus in Gladiator.

Is a 'real' Dom a sadist? If a real Sub is a masochist, you'd expect a real Dom to be a sadist to have that nice binary. Binaries don't hold up well in real scenarios though. A real sadist would destroy a real masochist...the masochist would be eaten alive if they're the ultimate masochist:
..................................
Willing victim was eaten while still alive

Self-confessed cannibal advertised online for a victim and a man showed up, ready to be mutilated and eaten before death

BERLIN - The advertisement on the Internet read: 'Seeking well-built man, 18-30 years old for slaughter.'

The man who answered it was killed and eaten by German computer expert Armin Meiwes, 42, described by his lawyer as a 'gentleman of the old school'.

Yesterday, Meiwes went on trial in a case of sexually inspired cannibalism so perplexing it could make legal history. He has confessed to the gruesome episode, and is charged with 'murder for sexual satisfaction'.
.......................................
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armin_Meiwes

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

bflagsst

All sadists are doms but NOT vice versa.

 

[where]

bflagsst

All sadists are doms but NOT vice versa.

Posers. If any of you ran into a real dom or sadist you'd squeal.

ROB the DOM; I'm still laughing at that wad of fantasy. Its like a midget playing Maximus in Gladiator.

and I suppose you are a real Dom huh?

Is a 'real' Dom a sadist? If a real Sub is a masochist, you'd expect a real Dom to be a sadist to have that nice binary. Binaries don't hold up well in real scenarios though. A real sadist would destroy a real masochist...the masochist would be eaten alive if they're the ultimate masochist:
..................................
Willing victim was eaten while still alive

Self-confessed cannibal advertised online for a victim and a man showed up, ready to be mutilated and eaten before death

BERLIN - The advertisement on the Internet read: 'Seeking well-built man, 18-30 years old for slaughter.'

The man who answered it was killed and eaten by German computer expert Armin Meiwes, 42, described by his lawyer as a 'gentleman of the old school'.

Yesterday, Meiwes went on trial in a case of sexually inspired cannibalism so perplexing it could make legal history. He has confessed to the gruesome episode, and is charged with 'murder for sexual satisfaction'.
.......................................
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armin_Meiwes

if a real sadist met a real masochist maybe they would do nothing, thus denying the masochist of what they most desire.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

and I suppose you are a real Dom huh?

I dont need an impoverished cripple to boss, if thats what you mean by dom. Its a lot more fun to play with stallions than Ganny's old mare.

 

[bflagsst]

if a real sadist met a real masochist maybe they would do nothing, thus denying the masochist of what they most desire.

I like thinking about it almost as a game of Dilemma, where each participant wants to maximize pleasure and minimize the consequences of their pursuit of pleasure.

a. The sadist can impose his will on the masochist past the point that the masochist will agree to and take all of the pleasure.
b. The masochist can let the sadist believe they've crossed the threshold, that the sadist has become sadistic and both parties can experience the pleasure they desire.
c. The sadist will only go as far as the masochist desires and in turn not get the pleasure they desire.

In scenario a. the sadist derives maximum pleasure, as much pleasure as in scenario b., but in scenario c. the sadist should derive no pleasure.

In scenario a. the masochist should derive no pleasure, but maximize pleasure in b. and c.

The dilemma is, the sadist derives pleasure where the masochist ceases deriving pleasure, so the sadist is on the look out for scenario b. where the masochist may be deceiving the sadist. It's pretty complicated, but I think the end result would be the sadist would have to avoid the masochist, because the masochist is a good actor compared to the person who doesn't derive pleasure from an amount of pain. While the masochist would have to avoid the sadist as a way of deriving pleasure without actually being forced into real danger. Then it's a question of, does a real masochist need the aspect of real danger to get off? The same as a real sadist needs to inflict real danger upon someone?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

bflagsst

You dont understand S/M at all. Its not a game with real S/M. The crap that goes on over at the BDSM board is bullshit. ROB is a bullshit buccaroo.

 

[3113]

The Original Question Implies Limits

a. The sadist can impose his will on the masochist past the point that the masochist will agree to and take all of the pleasure.
b. The masochist can let the sadist believe they've crossed the threshold, that the sadist has become sadistic and both parties can experience the pleasure they desire.
c. The sadist will only go as far as the masochist desires and in turn not get the pleasure they desire.

You bring up an important point. The question asked here wasn't about masochist and sadist without limits. A Sadist enjoys inflicting pain, and Masochist enjoys pain. But when you come down to people, not ideas, then you end up with limits. How much pain and what kind of pain is the sadist into inflicting? He/she might only enjoy it if the victim was unwilling (certainly the gent who gave his name to the moniker, Marquis De Sade, usually went for unwilling victims who were shocked, scared and didn't enjoy his acts). And how much pain does he want to inflict? Of what sort? Real sadists have limits. They might not like the sight of blood, or only be interested in a certain type of torture.

Likewise, as you point out, a masochist may have their limits as well. They might not even be interested in being hurt by a professional sadist, as we often describe self-destructive folk who ruin their own lives as "masochists."

I think our definitions here are floating into fiction and the extremes we can imagine, rather than what is likely and real (cannibals notwithstanding). Which takes us off topic. What's being asked about here is S/M in the bedroom, with real but "normal" people aiming to get some kind of mutual pleasure or gratification from it, not extreme sadism/masochism that would lead the sadist to jail or prison for the criminally insane (likely for inflicting torture on unwilling victims) or the masochist to death because they're self-destructive.

While it creates an interesting mental exercise to discuss such extremes, the reality is, a truly sadistic person is going to want an unwilling victim who doesn't take pleasure in what they're doing. And the extreme masochist is on the road to self-distruction. This hardly fits with the question: "explain the appeal of S/M"--meaning the relationship of two people using pain [in limited fashion] to achieve mutual pleasure.

 

[3113]

Is a 'real' Dom a sadist? If a real Sub is a masochist, you'd expect a real Dom to be a sadist to have that nice binary. Binaries don't hold up well in real scenarios though. A real sadist would destroy a real masochist...the masochist would be eaten alive if they're the ultimate masochist

A horrific example, but was the cannibal a sadist? He wasn't into pain as he gave the victim alcohol and pain killers (not saying they did the job, but he seemed to want to dull the pain, not intensify it). I don't think he even meant to horrify his victim with what he did to them, as he was looking for a willing victim who would not be horrified, who would go along with it.

To my way of thinking, if he was a true sadist, he would have wanted to keep the lover alive and around to torture, to hear screams of pain, crying and seeing the fear in his/her victim. That is what sadists usually get off on. All this guy seemed to want (grotesquely done, we'll grant) is to have someone literally give themselves to him to be consumed.

On the other side, however, I would label guy who agreed to be consumed a masochist.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

3113

You mean the posers with their masks and capes and ripped bodices.

But you miss the mark getting what sadism and masochism is all about. Sadists inflict tissue damage because its what they do and because they can. Masochists walk into the snare like rabbits.

A real sadist sends you home without your nipples or testicles. All this other Happy Horseshit is just THAT.

 

[where]

I dont need an impoverished cripple to boss, if thats what you mean by dom. Its a lot more fun to play with stallions than Ganny's old mare.

poor old man. I really think you have very little idea, do you?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

poor old man. I really think you have very little idea, do you?

Its okay with me if you guys wanna pretend and play dress-up, your wholes lives are organized around pretend, but real S/M isnt pretend.

 

[MichaelWest]

While discussion of "real" sadists and masochists might illustrate the dangers that lie out there, the insane and the criminal labeled as either are not the folks who engage in BDSM as play. I do not call it play to dismiss or lessen it, rather it is play, it is pleasure, just as sport is taken seriously, but it is to entertain our love of play. Like sport it has rules, and thus a criminal may beat you down, but because he has fists to use does not a boxer of him make. So the exploration of BDSM is like that of any sport, it has rules and limits, and it is fun.

And I will add that there is a lot of individual expression in BDSM, even if it is a mostly team sport where a lot of general rules apply. Stereotypes may find examples but don't always rule, for example, I have known a deeply masochistic top who instructed his bottoms in the manner and method of his torments. I suppose there is a sadist bottom at play somewhere. BDSM is a community of people, similar and dissimilar, noble and pathetic, strong and petty, you will find them all, just as you find them at most every gathering of men and women.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Its okay with me if you guys wanna pretend and play dress-up, your wholes lives are organized around pretend, but real S/M isnt pretend.

You need help.

 

[PoppingTom]

Its okay with me if you guys wanna pretend and play dress-up, your wholes lives are organized around pretend, but real S/M isnt pretend.

All I read about your posts is that you got such less idea of S/M as you got about love anyway.

 

[xssve]

Lizzie is on the right track here, BD and SM aren't even remotely the same thing, they are in fact, two completely different things, even though they're often found in tandem: i.e., it's entirely possible, even common to find BD, more commonly referred to as PE, or Power Exchange, without SM and vice versa.

In fact, both can be found without even having sex involved, although typically, you're more likely to find S/M without sex, whereas PE will mroe often revolve around it - but there are service sluts too, who serve in a non-sexual capacity.

It's true that S/M is usually found embedded in the trappings of P/E, i.e., the submissive or bottom may be tied up, humiliated, etc., which seems like power exchange, but the real difference is what sort of emotions are being evoked: masochism isn't necessarily about being Submissive, even if it has all the overtones and trappings of it, and submissiveness doesn't have anything to do with masochism, there are approval sluts as well as pain sluts.

By the same token, a sadist may not require submission, other than for the purposes and duration of the scene, and the Dominant may not require pain.

Essentially, the Submissive provides a service, whereas the Masochist is in reality, the one being serviced - notwithstanding some Submissives will endure the attentions of a Sadist in order to serve and some Masochists will serve in order to secure the attentions of a Sadist, and there are plenty of people who hover somewhere in between.

Don't repeat that without expecting an argument however; while it's objectively and empirically true, i.e., there are dominant Masochists, and submissive Sadists - but subjective ambiance plays a significant role in almost all BDSM, and people can be very touchy about it.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Ah! The Great Pretender has entered the building.

 

[jomar]

bflagsst

You dont understand S/M at all. Its not a game with real S/M. The crap that goes on over at the BDSM board is bullshit. ROB is a bullshit buccaroo.

I once met a masochist who said it was hard to find guys mean enough for her tastes.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I once met a masochist who said it was hard to find guys mean enough for her tastes.

That's true; and another difference between the psychosis and abuse that jbj is talking about, and real BDSM, is the recognition that we each have limits-- tops as well as bottoms. Not every top actually wants to dish out pain to the extent that some bottoms want; and they are encouraged to learn to say so.

In fact, there are times when a bottom is so obviously self-destructive in scenes that concerned people in the community have done interventions. There are also many cases where newcomers to a bar or club get warned off of an individual who has been seen to disrespect a bottom's limits. There is a lot of gossip, a lot of people poking their noses into each other's sex lives, in the name of safety and sanity.

When I was younger there was no community. There were no "101" books, no internet information, no way to learn what could be done about my desires and needs. I kept it all to myself mostly, because, as jbj points out, there are huge dangers in letting a stranger tie you up. That's one of the reasons why BDSM practitioners call themselves a community, in ways that vanilla sex practitioners do not-- they don't need to. It's hard to describe the sense of sheer relief that I felt the first time I walked into a play party at a dungeon-- at age thirty five. Untill then it had been me, trying to reinvent the wheel.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I once met a masochist who said it was hard to find guys mean enough for her tastes.

I assure you theyre plenty enough out there. They'll send you home minus some pieces of your anatomy and think nuthin of it.

 

[xssve]

I assure you theyre plenty enough out there. They'll send you home minus some pieces of your anatomy and think nuthin of it.

Geez, I bet nobody ever thought of that.

 

[Stella_Omega]

You should really stay away from convos that trigger your stress disorder this way, jimmy.Your job requires you to know about some horrible things that psychotic people have done, and you seem to have lost the boundaries of normal versus loony. You're like someone who screams in terror every time they see a car drive by, because car accidents have been known to be lethal.

You might decide that your own sanity is pretty important to you. Take a lesson from the BDSM community; learn your limits and respect them.

 

[3113]

Lizzie is on the right track here, BD and SM aren't even remotely the same thing, they are in fact, two completely different things, even though they're often found in tandem: i.e., it's entirely possible, even common to find BD, more commonly referred to as PE, or Power Exchange, without SM and vice versa.

In fact, both can be found without even having sex involved, although typically, you're more likely to find S/M without sex, whereas PE will mroe often revolve around it - but there are service sluts too, who serve in a non-sexual capacity.

It's true that S/M is usually found embedded in the trappings of P/E, i.e., the submissive or bottom may be tied up, humiliated, etc., which seems like power exchange, but the real difference is what sort of emotions are being evoked: masochism isn't necessarily about being Submissive, even if it has all the overtones and trappings of it, and submissiveness doesn't have anything to do with masochism, there are approval sluts as well as pain sluts.

By the same token, a sadist may not require submission, other than for the purposes and duration of the scene, and the Dominant may not require pain.

Essentially, the Submissive provides a service, whereas the Masochist is in reality, the one being serviced - notwithstanding some Submissives will endure the attentions of a Sadist in order to serve and some Masochists will serve in order to secure the attentions of a Sadist, and there are plenty of people who hover somewhere in between.

Don't repeat that without expecting an argument however; while it's objectively and empirically true, i.e., there are dominant Masochists, and submissive Sadists - but subjective ambiance plays a significant role in almost all BDSM, and people can be very touchy about it.

No argument from me. Not that I'm in the BDSM community so maybe it don't matter--but everything you said rings true to me.

 

[LaRocha]

James is just saying BDSM is more about showmanship than sadism. I agree. I know sadism doesn't have any real place in the BDSM 'community'. "How would you know about our community, LAROCHA?!" Well you claim you have a community on this site, I can read your posts, troubles, and conversations too.