Debating a Few Philosophies of BDSM - Love, Kink, Lust, Etc

[BLoved]

Reference BLoved's writings for the anti-"casual BDSM" view -

Casual BDSM and Emotional Abuse

... and his other writings for the "True Love" view -

Love and Respect

So... debate away my dears... debate away.

(And full disclaimer - I've only briefly skimmed the writings above. I might eventually read them for the sake of debate, or I might not. I haven't decided yet.)

~smile~

I must be one hell of a threat to warrant an entire thread to attack me.

At least now I know why the rating for "Love and Respect" dropped.

For those of you who wish to demonstrate your immaturity at the polls, I offer the links which CM failed to provide:

The "Love" trilogy ("1", "2", "3"), "The Little Things" and "Questing for a Beloved".

And now I'll leave you to your little festival celebrating your mutual immaturity. Once again you've made the forums safe from those who disagree with the lack of ethics practiced by casual players.

Safe, that is, from everyone but lil ol' me.

~smile~

PS: I trust Eastern Guru will find my answers to his/her questions on Page 1 of this thread.

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

"Questing for a Beloved"

Ok, I'm going to have an *actual* immature moment, and say that everytime I read this title... all I can think of is this combined with this


As for the rest, well... I think I've stated elsewhere that I believe most of these 'theories' are alarmist claptrap.

No, I'm not part of the casual community. No, I haven't been to any public parties, but I know people who have.

Yes, I believe that the OP thinks we're attacking him personally when we're simply disagreeing with his ideas, which he's repeating ad neauseum without providing much substantial extra argument, because we simply wouldn't understand because we're all part of the propoganda machine.

Yes, I'm high on lavender Pine O Cleen.

No, I don't really care.

*wanders away, humming the Zelda theme to myself*

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

But as to love, lust, kink, casual play, etc.

I love my man, I lust for him. I have no desire to have any kind of D/s interaction with anybody else. I selfishly wish for him to not have any D/s interaction with others as well.

Yes, we casually fuck other people. We both enjoy it, for some differeing reasons, and some matching. Yes, we're considering meeting with a Dom/me for a casual instructional/practical session because some things you really should get spotted for, your first time round the park.

Is that dangerous? Am I being emotionally abused because he wants to make sure the things we do aren't going to physically harm me?

Or is that love? And taking care of ones things?

How does anyone actually *learn* any practical aspects without some involvement with 'the casual community'? Unless y'all are born with mad skillz, and I've just been jibbed when they were handing out the pervy genes in the baby making factory? Trial and error really doesn't cut it for me. Regardless of trust, and love, and morals, and bloody ethics, I don't want to get harmed just because 'we're gonna see how this goes, ok cos all those people who know what they're doing are predators, mmmkay?'

Bah

 

[rida]

Kink, Casual BDSM, Emotional Abuse, Public Play: what's love got to do with it?

WOW! This is going to be a very broad spectrum topic. Perhaps my not being a native English speaker prevents me from picking up on the subtilities of the writings linked in the OP so I'm not going to read them. Instead I'm going to make my own questions and asnwer them.

Public Play and Casual BDSM play: breading ground for Emotional Abuse?

When I used the expression Casual BDSM with my Sadist, during our preliminary e-mail exchange, he pointed out that "casual" in relation to BDSM relationships is somewhat a misnomer. When we are talking "relationship", whether it is vanilla or BDSM, same sex, monogamous, poly or open, the point is that they are relationship and they all need the same things to success: communication, honesty and the balls to take responsibilities for your own actions and emotions.

Emotional abuse can happen in any relationship. I personally do not see BDSM as a factor that automatically increases the odds of it.

So I'm going to focus on causal play, or what can be called bottoming or Topping outside of an established relationship.

I'm sure there are plenty of Doms and wannabes that are dieing to put their hands on any willing female body. But at the same times, there plenty of subs and wannabes that are eager to be that willing body. Personally, I do not see any problem in it. It is the same as in any vanilla situation where you have men looking to hook up with any willing woman and woman ready for it.
The risk of emotional abuse come, in both situation from misplaced expectations and deceit, not at all prerogative of the BDSM world.

As for physical safety, I'd think that public play in a well run public space is going to be safer than going off for a one night stand with a guy that picked you up in a bar. I confess I've not been in any US dungeon or play space, but if my local experiences are any indication, I'm sure they are.

However nobody can prevent a sub from falling for the wrong Dom/Top/Wannabe due to the endorphins released from play. Same as nobody can prevent a woman to develop a chemical bonding and a crush on a man that fucks her (disclaimer: it does not happen to each and every woman, but it can happen, and it did happen to me). And if the Dom/Top is indeed a wannabe, the sub is going to end up emotionally hurt.

Predators, the dangerous kind (highly verbal, charismatic, able to discuss and dissect and easily confuse people, often the first to insist on all the right buzz-words that lowers a sub's defenses) are a risk whether vanilla or kinky.
Personally I believe that they would go for a relationship rather then casual BDSM play. In that way they can groom their victim, make her trust them, before closing on on her with the most devastating consequences.

So what about Love?

If there was an asnwer, the music industry and many other entertaining one will go out of business.
Smart assed answer aside, where does love fit in BDSM seems to be a question that many a novices ask themselves.

For ease of discussion, there seems to be two broad group of people: the one that view BDSM relationship as impossible in case of Love as they view love as reciprocal and PYL/pyl as not, and the ones that without love cannot have any relationship and as such Love is a must in their PYL/pyl arrangement.

It is a question of personal needs, boundaries and choices. There is no inherent "better" or "true". It is what works for each individual. Problem arises when the two sides of the relationship have different views and goals. But this is true for any human interaction, not specific to PYL/pyl.



Personally, I thought I could not do casual/sport fucks, instead I can and rather enjoy them, but more in a groups situation than one on one (in group, you are not stuck talking with them if you don't want to).
Casual BDSM play, I have only experience as a rope bunny outside of my BDSM relationships, and I have to say I enjoyed it a lot. Other type of play? I've no idea but have no desire to find out.
I love my PYL(s), deeply and in different ways. The Sadist once claimed not to be able to really hurt his pyl if he loved her ... but I think he is changing his mind. Hubby on the other hand, could explore his Dom side only because of the love we share.
The only experience that left me with a bitter aftertaste was actually a vanilla hook-up. It does not go to the level of emotional or any kind of abuse, but I did not meet the guy ever again.

 

[CutieMouse]

My first exposure to casual 'bdsm' was through conversations with the victims, of which there were quite a few. Their stories were remarkably similar and always involved casual players taking advantage of their naivete.

My wife was one of those victimized, as was my current beloved.

I am very sorry that those you love have been abused. Women (and men) face abusive relationships every single day - D/s based and not. "Casual" and not.

Through participation on forums such as this I witnessed the players in action first-hand. It did not take long to determine their disinterest in ethical considerations of any kind, and their willingess to victimize anyone to get what they want.

Their immaturity and disregard for the well-being of others is obvious.

Yes. Around here we call them Horny Net Geeks (HNGs) or Asshats. Discussions of how to spot them, avoid them, blow them off, etc are sprinkled throughout the forum and its archives. Similar discussions have been/are held on every online forum I've ever participated in.

Their inability to tolerate those with opposing views, their insistence that everyone must condone their practice, their need to silence opposition and the manner in which they achieved this have been demonstrated to my satisfaction far too often. This thread itself is essentially an effort to demonize me, hidden under the guise of a 'debate'.

I want to understand your point of view. I disagree with it because it is vastly opposite of my own experience, but I want to understand it. I am not trying to silence you. I am not trying to demonize you. I am going point by point through the only examples I have of your "side" of the debate at hand - casual BDSM vs. a BDSM relationship based on True Love. If I see something that does not add up I analyze it. I dissect it. I evaluate it. I assess it. It's called analytical thinking.

~shrug~

Casual players are intent on portraying casual 'bdsm' as the "One True Way" and anyone who disagrees with casual 'bdsm' should be publicly eviscerated as an example to anyone with similar views.

And yet your writings read as fearful, alarmist, and "One True Way-ish" [to me, at least]. Very "Lets protect the poor little subbie... lets hide her away from the big bad world... nothing abusive or bad every happens under the shelter of LOVE!" Where is the strength? Where is the brilliance? Where is the resourcefulness that every submissive has within themselves to deal with the situations you wrote about?

Your points perpetuate the image that submissives are incapable of protecting themselves. Or making wise decisions. Or standing up. Its like you view submissives as so incredibly compliant that they aren't even responsible for their own decisions [should they get in a bad situation].

You will note, for example, this thread is not properly labelled, nor does it occur in BDSM Cafe where CM made the suggestion of starting a "discussion"

Ahem.

I invited you to start a thread to discuss the subject, as (IMO) it could be an interesting and educational discussion. You were perfectly happy to toss little bits and pieces of your views into other threads, and I waited about 24 hours before starting this thread... Actually I believe you declined to start the thread yourself. So sorry that my title isn't what you would have used, but you abdicated on that one. It was the best description I could think of at the time.

As to Cafe vs Talk -

From the BDSM Talk Welcome thread pinned at the top of the forum:

We do not encourage off topic material (excessive flirting or personal conversation that interrupts serious topics) in BDSM Talk threads. Light conversation, flirting, off topic type threads, and funtimes are appreciated and to be had in the BDSM Cafe .

I felt the discussion was more of a Talk (serious) one than Cafe (lighthearted) one. I also hoped posting the discussion in the Talk section would limit the amount of off topic banter that is simply a part of Lit. In other words, I was attempting to keep this thing somewhat on track, and offer you a place to seriously discuss your views.

Obviously what CM had in mind was a 'let's bash BLoved because he doesn't agree with us' and those whose immaturity has already been noted in threads in BDSM Cafe have demonstrated their eagerness to participate.

~shrug~

No. This was CM seeing a lot of misinformation being thrown around, and wanting to either understand how there might be some grain of truth buried in there, or dispel some flat out (IMO) dangerous bullshit. Or throw the cold clean light of day on all of it so people can decide for themselves what reality is.

No.

When my wife and I first met she wanted me to accompany her to a public party, so as to obtain my reaction from a first-hand experience. We attended a munch (where everyone was quite aloof) and a public party in Toronto which was the basis for the claims made in my essay on casual 'bdsm'.

See I went to a Dallas munch and decided I didn't have much in common with anyone there... I declined the invitation to the play party (there I go, making my own decisions and shit). Of course I might have had it easier than some women, as I refuse to go to a social event as a "submissive" - I go to social events as a person. Funny thing about that - 90% of the people I encountered assumed I was a Domme.

I've witnessed the consequences of abuse in far too many people to ignore it. The emotional damage has crippled more than a few.

And what really set me off is the emotional abuse I suffered in the name of True Love crippled and damaged me. There wasn't ever any sort of public events/play/blahblahblah, and none of it was "casual" in the least... just a lot of beautiful words very similar to your own re: Love and BDSM. He even capitalized things like "True Love" or "Love" to bring it to a higher plain of consciousness. I was discouraged from seeking out information or advice on forums such as this, because it was full of players and wannabes who didn't understand REAL Love based BDSM. I shouldn't go to munches or play parties because they were meat markets and I'd be disrespected and abused. It didn't matter that the things he asked of me often didn't feel loving, or that I was experiencing the slow destruction of my submissive sexuality. He Loved me. He was doing everything out of Love.

I have found that a lengthy interview process is required before determining whether someone is capable of sustaining a bdsm relationship. Such processes do not occur in casual 'bdsm', and thus the potential for damage is much greater. The ethics of players in public venues such as discussion forums demonstrates their disregard for others and their inability to tolerate dissent.

I find that I don't do well in casual relationships, so I don't have them. However, my longest lasting (complicated) BDSM relationship was the one above, and it wasn't a quick learning process... formulated over a period of several years, actually. I can not express strongly enough how much damage that non-casual relationship caused. I have a list a mile long of things I refuse to bother with anymore. It's been a year since I ended things, and in my darker moments I still hate myself for being submissive. I still feel anxious. I still worry that I'm not good enough. I still question my worth. Yet that relationship was anything but casual... (Side note - I'm currently quite happily involved with a spectacularly wonderful man; I think it's safe to say both of us would categorize our relationship as D/s, although not of the whips, chains and leather variety.)

If they are so unconcerned in public, it is not difficult to imagine how unconcerned they are for others in private where there are no witnesses to their abusive behaviour.

And long term "Loving" BDSM relationships can't be abusive? Slowly developed BDSM relationships can't be abusive?

If they are in such need to stamp out any and all opposing views such that they rely on censorship to achieve a situation where their point of view is the only point of view heard, they are aware of how weak their position is.

You are not being censored.

I invited you to start the thread, you refused. I invited you to start the thread to set the tone. I suggested the thread to make it a more serious topic of discussion. I suggested the thread to bring light to an interesting and educational subject - because just as I see holes in your argument there will be people who see holes in mine. And throwing the whole messy ginormous big picture out into the open allows people reading the thread to make their own decisions.

It won't stand up to scrutiny, which is why they do not argue the ethics but rather resort to character assasination as their weapon of choice to convince others and silence anyone who would object.

This 'discussion' is a fine example.

I am not assassinating your character. I am pointing out the cracks and flaws I see in your argument. I really really realy wish you had started the discussion or at least joined in earlier so this could have been more of a discussion. I had hoped there would be more back and forth, rather than this exhaustive vacuum... but you wouldn't start the thread. You wouldn't take charge of the direction. So I started with my vacuum, and did the best I could with how I perceived your views.

IMO your arguments do not stand up to scrutiny. I've offered a personal opposing viewpoint (which I rarely do, BTW - the personal information bit) to show the flaw in your argument that True Love is somehow less abusive than casual BDSM. And don't pussy out by telling me if there was abuse it wasn't "True Love" - he'll tell you to this very day he loved (and loves) me more than any man on the planet.

~smile~

I must be one hell of a threat to warrant an entire thread to attack me.

I.Am.Not.Attacking.You.

At least now I know why the rating for "Love and Respect" dropped.

I am terribly sorry to hear your rating dropped; that was never my intention.

For those of you who wish to demonstrate your immaturity at the polls, I offer the links which CM failed to provide:

The "Love" trilogy ("1", "2", "3"), "The Little Things" and "Questing for a Beloved".

I didn't read those, as I didn't feel they were relevant to the discussion at hand. Again... you had the opportunity to start the thread.

And now I'll leave you to your little festival celebrating your mutual immaturity. Once again you've made the forums safe from those who disagree with the lack of ethics practiced by casual players.

Safe, that is, from everyone but lil ol' me.

~smile~

PS: I trust Eastern Guru will find my answers to his/her questions on Page 1 of this thread.

For the love of God. Bring your ethical arguments. I want to discuss this from an ethical standpoint - and by discuss I mean black up what you are bloody saying here. Don't act like you're better or above everyone else and snoot off into the sunset with some vague comment about ethics. Defend your position. F*ck man stand up for this if you believe it so much! Again - I suggested you start the threads and you refused. I cannot speak for you. I cannot make your decisions as to what is and isn't relevant re: the topic at hand. If it was THAT important to you - own it.

 

[Soumis]

I'm sorry to hear that those you love were abused, but to judge the casual bdsm community due to those instances is narrow minded and faulty.

You are working with a extremely narrow portion of the community in terms of statistics. If we were to judge dating by a couple of date-rape victims or parenting by child abuse victims, etc. of course dating, parenting, what have you, would look bad. We cannot make the leap assumption from there though that all dating is bad. All parenting is bad. That's just silly. There are unfortunately always going to be cases of abuse in every kind of human relationship. It doesn't mean there is a flaw in the relationship, merely in those who abuse it.

I'm curious about something else as well. How did you and your submissives' relationships start if not casually? Because every relationship has to start somewhere, and particularly in bdsm one should not begin on a serious, collar me, I'm your one and only submissive level. That can lead to the dangerous behavior you're talking about when the submissive gets in over their head.

I might not be making much sense. I had to get up ungodly early today on not nearly enough sleep.

 

[BLoved]

I.Am.Not.Attacking.You.

CM: "I for one would be willing to discuss "casual BDSM/predators/True Love/etc" in a separate thread. And by separate thread I do not mean a posting of links of BL's writings. I mean a discussion."

Reference BLoved's writings for the anti-"casual BDSM" view -

Casual BDSM and Emotional Abuse

... and his other writings for the "True Love" view -

Love and Respect

So... debate away my dears... debate away.

(And full disclaimer - I've only briefly skimmed the writings above. I might eventually read them for the sake of debate, or I might not. I haven't decided yet.)

~smile~

I want to discuss this from an ethical standpoint

~smile~

"Fool me once, shame on you ... fool me twice, shame on me"

 

[intothewoods]

I don't understand how everyone here has been lumped into the "casual BDSM" world. It sounds like BLoved is referring to the public scene, and not the world of casual bdsm hook ups. There are many people who have flings after meeting on craig's list or collar me or at a play party. But the play parties themselves are not limited to "casual" players. Couples go all the time.

The public scene is just a place for people to socialize and play in public. For some people, the public scene is a place to play that is separate and apart from their living space (e.g., away from the kids, roommates, etc.). There are also a lot of people who are open to some degree or other, but they typically have a circle of playmates. No giant conspiracy to recruit new members is needed. There are plenty of people who go and want to play and aren't looking for love or a protector.

As for me, I have been to play parties and still occasionally attend. I am in a committed 24/7 D/s relationship, and so my D/s activities are not casual.

 

[Netzach]

I am very sorry that those you love have been abused. Women (and men) face abusive relationships every single day - D/s based and not. "Casual" and not.



Yes. Around here we call them Horny Net Geeks (HNGs) or Asshats. Discussions of how to spot them, avoid them, blow them off, etc are sprinkled throughout the forum and its archives. Similar discussions have been/are held on every online forum I've ever participated in.



I want to understand your point of view. I disagree with it because it is vastly opposite of my own experience, but I want to understand it. I am not trying to silence you. I am not trying to demonize you. I am going point by point through the only examples I have of your "side" of the debate at hand - casual BDSM vs. a BDSM relationship based on True Love. If I see something that does not add up I analyze it. I dissect it. I evaluate it. I assess it. It's called analytical thinking.



And yet your writings read as fearful, alarmist, and "One True Way-ish" [to me, at least]. Very "Lets protect the poor little subbie... lets hide her away from the big bad world... nothing abusive or bad every happens under the shelter of LOVE!" Where is the strength? Where is the brilliance? Where is the resourcefulness that every submissive has within themselves to deal with the situations you wrote about?

Your points perpetuate the image that submissives are incapable of protecting themselves. Or making wise decisions. Or standing up. Its like you view submissives as so incredibly compliant that they aren't even responsible for their own decisions [should they get in a bad situation].



Ahem.

I invited you to start a thread to discuss the subject, as (IMO) it could be an interesting and educational discussion. You were perfectly happy to toss little bits and pieces of your views into other threads, and I waited about 24 hours before starting this thread... Actually I believe you declined to start the thread yourself. So sorry that my title isn't what you would have used, but you abdicated on that one. It was the best description I could think of at the time.

As to Cafe vs Talk -

From the BDSM Talk Welcome thread pinned at the top of the forum:



I felt the discussion was more of a Talk (serious) one than Cafe (lighthearted) one. I also hoped posting the discussion in the Talk section would limit the amount of off topic banter that is simply a part of Lit. In other words, I was attempting to keep this thing somewhat on track, and offer you a place to seriously discuss your views.



No. This was CM seeing a lot of misinformation being thrown around, and wanting to either understand how there might be some grain of truth buried in there, or dispel some flat out (IMO) dangerous bullshit. Or throw the cold clean light of day on all of it so people can decide for themselves what reality is.



See I went to a Dallas munch and decided I didn't have much in common with anyone there... I declined the invitation to the play party (there I go, making my own decisions and shit). Of course I might have had it easier than some women, as I refuse to go to a social event as a "submissive" - I go to social events as a person. Funny thing about that - 90% of the people I encountered assumed I was a Domme.



And what really set me off is the emotional abuse I suffered in the name of True Love crippled and damaged me. There wasn't ever any sort of public events/play/blahblahblah, and none of it was "casual" in the least... just a lot of beautiful words very similar to your own re: Love and BDSM. He even capitalized things like "True Love" or "Love" to bring it to a higher plain of consciousness. I was discouraged from seeking out information or advice on forums such as this, because it was full of players and wannabes who didn't understand REAL Love based BDSM. I shouldn't go to munches or play parties because they were meat markets and I'd be disrespected and abused. It didn't matter that the things he asked of me often didn't feel loving, or that I was experiencing the slow destruction of my submissive sexuality. He Loved me. He was doing everything out of Love.



I find that I don't do well in casual relationships, so I don't have them. However, my longest lasting (complicated) BDSM relationship was the one above, and it wasn't a quick learning process... formulated over a period of several years, actually. I can not express strongly enough how much damage that non-casual relationship caused. I have a list a mile long of things I refuse to bother with anymore. It's been a year since I ended things, and in my darker moments I still hate myself for being submissive. I still feel anxious. I still worry that I'm not good enough. I still question my worth. Yet that relationship was anything but casual... (Side note - I'm currently quite happily involved with a spectacularly wonderful man; I think it's safe to say both of us would categorize our relationship as D/s, although not of the whips, chains and leather variety.)



And long term "Loving" BDSM relationships can't be abusive? Slowly developed BDSM relationships can't be abusive?



You are not being censored.

I invited you to start the thread, you refused. I invited you to start the thread to set the tone. I suggested the thread to make it a more serious topic of discussion. I suggested the thread to bring light to an interesting and educational subject - because just as I see holes in your argument there will be people who see holes in mine. And throwing the whole messy ginormous big picture out into the open allows people reading the thread to make their own decisions.



I am not assassinating your character. I am pointing out the cracks and flaws I see in your argument. I really really realy wish you had started the discussion or at least joined in earlier so this could have been more of a discussion. I had hoped there would be more back and forth, rather than this exhaustive vacuum... but you wouldn't start the thread. You wouldn't take charge of the direction. So I started with my vacuum, and did the best I could with how I perceived your views.

IMO your arguments do not stand up to scrutiny. I've offered a personal opposing viewpoint (which I rarely do, BTW - the personal information bit) to show the flaw in your argument that True Love is somehow less abusive than casual BDSM. And don't pussy out by telling me if there was abuse it wasn't "True Love" - he'll tell you to this very day he loved (and loves) me more than any man on the planet.



I.Am.Not.Attacking.You.



I am terribly sorry to hear your rating dropped; that was never my intention.



I didn't read those, as I didn't feel they were relevant to the discussion at hand. Again... you had the opportunity to start the thread.



For the love of God. Bring your ethical arguments. I want to discuss this from an ethical standpoint - and by discuss I mean black up what you are bloody saying here. Don't act like you're better or above everyone else and snoot off into the sunset with some vague comment about ethics. Defend your position. F*ck man stand up for this if you believe it so much! Again - I suggested you start the threads and you refused. I cannot speak for you. I cannot make your decisions as to what is and isn't relevant re: the topic at hand. If it was THAT important to you - own it.

I don't think I've ever seen a more valiant waste of breath.

 

[Netzach]

If it wasn't such a damn dangerous bit of lying I'd just ignore it. As it is it seems a lot of people are making a good case for common sense:

generally that first time being tied up is best done in yelling distance and sight distance of other people.

No moral argument needed. Common fucking sense. For some reason we like to make it more complicated than it has to be.

As for LOOOOOVE, Dude. I think it's a crime to have steak and not have a glass of Medoc, but that's ME. Some people are fine with diet coke, beer, or cabernet - It doesn't mean the rest of the world has to do as I do or they're just unenlightened dangerous heathen. Get over yourself and get laid however YOU like more often. Contrary to your position no one is telling YOU how to run YOUR sex life or love life.

 

[Netzach]

I don't understand how everyone here has been lumped into the "casual BDSM" world. It sounds like BLoved is referring to the public scene, and not the world of casual bdsm hook ups. There are many people who have flings after meeting on craig's list or collar me or at a play party. But the play parties themselves are not limited to "casual" players. Couples go all the time.

The public scene is just a place for people to socialize and play in public. For some people, the public scene is a place to play that is separate and apart from their living space (e.g., away from the kids, roommates, etc.). There are also a lot of people who are open to some degree or other, but they typically have a circle of playmates. No giant conspiracy to recruit new members is needed. There are plenty of people who go and want to play and aren't looking for love or a protector.

As for me, I have been to play parties and still occasionally attend. I am in a committed 24/7 D/s relationship, and so my D/s activities are not casual.

This is true. However why are we even bringing this up? If it *was* just a giant loveless fuck-orgy no one is forcing anyone to go. If it's not your idea of a good time, don't show up. Duh.

If I'm playing with M, light of my life, or the chick I just saw across the room and we decide to play with house safewords and I never even get her name - there is nothing inherently "better" about the former except in my own emotional estimation.

If someone wants to get onto the soapbox about the superiority of monogamous twue wuv (obviously M/f and het, of course) then the GOP is looking for website traffic for its lame site.

 

[JMohegan]

If someone wants to get onto the soapbox about the superiority of monogamous twue wuv (obviously M/f and het, of course) then the GOP is looking for website traffic for its lame site.

Funny how the ones who blather on most vociferously about family values always seem to end up in airport bathrooms, or the Appalachian Trail.

 

[00Syd]

Ahem.

ETA: It's easy (and annoying) to talk about how everyone wants to "stomp out your opposing views" and difficult (and admirable) to actually try and make an argument for your case.

Waiting.

 

[Soumis]

Okay, I've had some coffee.

If it wasn't such a damn dangerous bit of lying I'd just ignore it. As it is it seems a lot of people are making a good case for common sense:

generally that first time being tied up is best done in yelling distance and sight distance of other people.

No moral argument needed. Common fucking sense. For some reason we like to make it more complicated than it has to be.

This was one of the main reasons I turned to the public scene when I started in the lifestyle. I wanted a community, a safety net, people who are held accountable. Abuse in public, in a community that cares for it's members, is more difficult. I know that if I use a safeword at a play party it WILL be honored. If not by who I'm scening with, then by every other person present.

I don't like the use of casual in this context. Much of my experience is in public play, "casual play," as BLoved describes it. There has rarely been anything casual about it though. Casual to me implies a level of comfort with what you're doing and who you're doing it with. Casual to me means you don't have to stress all the little details and possibilities, that you don't need extensive negotiation before a scene because you know your partner well enough to play at whim.

What BLoved describes as casual play should be taken anything but casually. When playing in public with someone you don't know well it is more important that you negotiate for your safety. It is more important that you stress the details; that you don't lose yourself completely to the sensation. That you do not treat this play, casually. For to do so is to put yourself in a position where your well being can be treated casually.

I feel like I've done everything you deride. I play in public, I go to parties, I've had a mentor. I have never witnessed or been subjected to the environment you've discerned after one visit.

 

[intothewoods]

This is true. However why are we even bringing this up? If it *was* just a giant loveless fuck-orgy no one is forcing anyone to go. If it's not your idea of a good time, don't show up. Duh.

If I'm playing with M, light of my life, or the chick I just saw across the room and we decide to play with house safewords and I never even get her name - there is nothing inherently "better" about the former except in my own emotional estimation.

If someone wants to get onto the soapbox about the superiority of monogamous twue wuv (obviously M/f and het, of course) then the GOP is looking for website traffic for its lame site.

Oh, yeah, I suppose I unintentionally made that point. Oops. I guess I was just confused by the characterization of the scene as filled with predators that are all in cahoots with each other. There are plenty of predators in the world, but they aren't the people who are really really active in the scene. Sure, a good deal of those people are into casual sex, but the thing is that they don't have to really recruit.

Honestly, for some reason, I am having an OCD moment about his use of the word "casual." I have no idea why.

The other thing is -- it's not like there aren't plenty of legit criticisms to be made about the scene, but this just isn't one of them.

 

[00Syd]

The other thing is -- it's not like there aren't plenty of legit criticisms to be made about the scene, but this just isn't one of them.

Yes, exactly. It's just so off the mark.

 

[Netzach]

Agreed. It strikes me heavily as the mark of someone who has no experience with it hoping to cut a young one away from the herd.

 

[Primalex]

Waiting.

Just don't hold your breath.

 

[00Syd]

Agreed. It strikes me heavily as the mark of someone who has no experience with it hoping to cut a young one away from the herd.

*Ding ding ding ding ding*

What new, young, defenseless, helpless submissive wouldn't be attracted to such an obviously caring, loving, experienced, and wise older man.

 

[Cattypuss]

Cutiemouse, your forbearance astounds me.

I'm with Netz: one heckuva valiant, but total, waste of breath.

 

[Primalex]

CM: "I for one would be willing to discuss "casual BDSM/predators/True Love/etc" in a separate thread. And by separate thread I do not mean a posting of links of BL's writings. I mean a discussion."

Funny. The very first thing you did in my thread was to quote your writings.

 

[eastern sun]

Agreed. It strikes me heavily as the mark of someone who has no experience with it hoping to cut a young one away from the herd.

*Ding ding ding ding ding*

What new, young, defenseless, helpless submissive wouldn't be attracted to such an obviously caring, loving, experienced, and wise older man.

Don't forget, though, the agency of the submissive.

It's intoxicating to feed oneself to the tiger.

I have a genuine question for the submissives on the forum. How naive are we? At what age, or with what experience, do we stop being naive?

I know I was pretty naive as a young child. But by the time I was 13, I knew when I was in danger. I didn't always listen to my own warning bells, but they always went off in time. And sometimes I liked acting in spite of them. At what age do I become responsible for my own actions?

 

[rida]

Agreed. It strikes me heavily as the mark of someone who has no experience with it hoping to cut a young one away from the herd.

Or worse.

Somehow I'm weary of the "I'll save you from the cruel and dangerous world" guys. The "who will save me from my saviour" comes to mind.
I prefer someone that tells me: "I'm a selfish asshole".

 

[CutieMouse]

Don't forget, though, the agency of the submissive.

It's intoxicating to feed oneself to the tiger.

I have a genuine question for the submissives on the forum. How naive are we? At what age, or with what experience, do we stop being naive?

I know I was pretty naive as a young child. But by the time I was 13, I knew when I was in danger. I didn't always listen to my own warning bells, but they always went off in time. And sometimes I liked acting in spite of them. At what age do I become responsible for my own actions?

There are ways in which I'm still terribly naive. I still tend to trust quickly, and believe most things I'm told. It's something I'm aware of and work on/with every single day...

"Warning Bells" made me smile. The Man suggested a book last week to help me remember to pay attention (and follow) those little voices telling me when danger's ahead.

 

[rida]

Don't forget, though, the agency of the submissive.

It's intoxicating to feed oneself to the tiger.

I have a genuine question for the submissives on the forum. How naive are we? At what age, or with what experience, do we stop being naive?

I know I was pretty naive as a young child. But by the time I was 13, I knew when I was in danger. I didn't always listen to my own warning bells, but they always went off in time. And sometimes I liked acting in spite of them. At what age do I become responsible for my own actions?

A very good question and one that I remember asking myself in highschool.

There was this girl in my class: blond, thin, pretty, often dressed in mini-skirts and cute tops. Boys were always falling all over her, no matter where she was going. One day, while wearing a very short and very see through white mini-skirt she honestly asked me why all the boys just wanted one thing from her ... For a moment I had to look at her in amazement at her own naivete.

Somehow I learned early on (and not due to negative experiences) to read people and keep myself from danger. And that you are responsible for your own actions. The above incident made me wonder if I was already so jaded and cynical at 16/17 ... what would I be when I grew up?

I'm cautious. Sometime I wish I was less risk adverse when younger. But all in all at my age I'm now glad I've not had scary/dangerous experiences.

As for "feed oneself to the tiger": I have to confess it is one of the thing I love about being submissive. But never for a moment I fool myself that it is a little cat and not a dangerous tiger.