The 'ethics' of casual 'bdsm'

[Etoile]

This thread is still going??

 

[00Syd]

~smile~

There is no consensus that ignoring the link will not result in damage, yet your casual community sees fit to teach casual 'bdsm' anyway.

As I said: "self-serving".

Indeed, there is neither a consensus that it will or that it will not, and -- like I previously explained -- either way, it is not a BDSM specific issue and therefore not the job of a BDSM education group to include the issue in their general rules.

I'm not sure exactly how a BDSM education group can "teach" what you label as "casual 'bdsm,'" anyway, but I'm sure that TES would love to hear your suggestions. You've also yet again ignored the links I've posted that show meetings devoted to discussing love and commitment within relationships. You've also now ignored my post explaining that while it is not TES's job to include any possible issues one might have with BDSM in their meeting rules, TES hosts a number of classes and meetings that both relate directly and indirectly to BDSM, and there is nothing stopping one of the special interest groups from hosting a class on the very issues you hold so near and dear.


Just in case you somehow missed that portion of my post, I will re-quote it here.

TES hosts classes on a myriad of subjects related directly or indirectly to BDSM, and there is absolutely nothing stopping one of the special interest groups from hosting a class on this very subject. In fact, you could easily get in touch with one of the Facilitators of one of the special interest groups (perhaps the Novice group? The Relationships group? The Dominant Men, Submissive Women group? ), and suggest this as a topic for a future meeting. To take it one step further, you could suggest that you would be willing to go to NYC and teach the class/host the meeting.

I highly recommend it.

I'll even give you the link on the TES website that clearly lays out all of the many people you could get in touch with about hosting a class, with their contact information, in case it is too difficult for you to find on your own.

http://www.tes.org/main/contact.php

 

[Daddy2mylilgirl]

If you and your friends weren't so busy trying to diagnosis the reason why I won't validate casual 'bdsm' this thread would be a good deal less boring

They are just trying to show that just because you state your opinion as fact does not mean it is fact. They are just stating that their opinions/views/experiences have shown them a different view their yours.

You have thrown out logic, personal experience, and observations that the other side has countered with to show you that your opinion is just "your opinion".

So, why bother starting a thread where you know that no argument/point/view/opinion from the other side will even be recognized by you as having some merit?

I'm not saying you must agree with it. I'm not saying you shouldn't have started this thread so that naive subs will never know of the abuses in the "casual" community.

But if people make a reasonable attempt to show you a different point of view or belief and you can't even recognize that, even though you 100% disagree with them, then how is this a productive discussion/debate?

Part of discussing/debating is the ability to recognize the other side's point without outright dismissing it because you don't agree with it.

 

[Stella_Omega]

A tribe is nothing more than an extended family, and intimate emotional bonding is what is required to form that family.

All aspects of any "community" are based upon the family model. Eliminate the possibility for intimate emotional bonding (as in "No Strings Attached") and you eliminate the model upon which a healthy "community" functions.

At best casual communities are dysfunctional by definition, as they exclude intimate emotional bonding (otherwise "no strings attached" is meaningless).

You are arguing by definitions. If we all agree to your definitions, if there are no other possible definitions, than you are absolutely correct on all counts. And if anyone does not agree with you it's because they have the wrong definition for your terms.

So, yeah-- a dysfunctional relationship is dysfunctional. An abusive casual relationship is absuive and casual. Any casual abusive relationship that has BDSM elements is casual, abusive, and has BDSM elements. Elephants have big ears and long trunks, and anything that does not have big ears and a long trunk is not an elephant.


~smile~

Considering the source, I take that as a compliment.

Since you are the source, you might as well compliment yourself.


~smile~

 

[CutieMouse]

~smile~

There is no consensus that ignoring the link will not result in damage, yet your casual community sees fit to teach casual 'bdsm' anyway.

As I said: "self-serving".

The only person swearing on all that is holy that the link is being "ignored" is you.

I work in a very intimate, emotional field; my clients are standing half naked in front of me within 5 minutes of first shaking my hand. I am often the first person who has ever seen them in this position. I am often the person who has to assist them in working through emotional issues that arise. They only get me for about 30 minutes (maybe 45); my best [most frequent] repeat clients only come in once every few months. It can be a raw, intense, emotional, connected, intimate situation... and is usually one of the most casual "intimate" experiences of their lifetime.

... and I get thank you notes. Letters. Hugs. Phone calls. Emails. Referrals of friends and family, etc. I have clients who will wait or book an appointment several weeks in advance rather than work with anyone else. Why do my clients love me so much? Because I believe they are worth the time and energy it takes to form an intimate emotional connection - even though I only have 30 minutes to give them.

Emotional, intimate connections do not always happen within the confines of a monogamous lifelong committed relationship.

Emotional, intimate connections do not always result in a negative experience.

 

[BLoved]

This thread is still going??

~smile~

 

[BLoved]

Indeed, there is neither a consensus that it will or that it will not, and -- like I previously explained -- either way, it is not a BDSM specific issue and therefore not the job of a BDSM education group to include the issue in their general rules.

TES hosts a number of classes and meetings that both relate directly and indirectly to BDSM

So even the possibility that casual 'bdsm' is emotionally damaging cannot be taught by a so-called "BDSM education group" because the issue isn't even "indirectly" related to BDSM?

~smile~

 

[LaRocha]

We disagree on how to categorize relationships.

I view relationships where intimate behaviour and intimate emotional bonding can occur as emotionally healthy. Such relationships may or may not include bdsm.

Just because an intimate relationship occurs and there's emotional bonding doesn't mean the relationship's healthy. There are various unhealthy attachment issues that come up in most intimate human relationships. Some intimate relationships are dominated by codependency and dependency.

Relationships where intimate behaviour occurs but there is no chance for intimate emotional bonding (ie No Strings Attached) are emotionally unhealthy for reasons I've provided throughout this thread.

Intimate behaviour doesn't exist without intimate emotional bonding. 'Intimacy' means: emotional bonding, there's no such thing as intimacy without an emotive exchange. Including one night stands, sometimes fuck buddies etc.

I do not consider such relationships representative of bdsm for the same reason I do not consider spousal abuse or rape as bdsm: all of the above cause emotional damage, if not physical damage as well.

Intimate BDSM can't be the archetype of BDSM, same as intimate sex can't be the archetype of sex. It's almost tautological. BDSM contains sex, sex contains intimacy, intimacy contains emotional bonding. When you're talking about intimacy you're not talking about BDSM, BDSM is only a second order operator on human to human intimacy.

Any relationship where two people are intimate, that is consensually intimate, because rape does not contain 'intimacy', and in some cases rape doesn't contain 'sex', you have by definition emotional bonding. Your argument should really only be about physical damage. Does casual BDSM cause more physical damage than a BLoved style BDSM relationship?

As pair bond intimacy and casual exchange intimacy have nothing to do with the garb of BDSM or any kind of style or lifestyle of sex practices.

If we are to claim that bdsm is healthy then casual 'bdsm' doesn't fit the definition any better than spousal abuse or rape.

Rape has nothing to do with BDSM, same as rape has nothing to do with any consensual act.

If you wish to define bdsm as not necessarily healthy then you've opened the door for abusive spouses and rapists to claim they are nothing more that bdsm practitioners.

I wouldn't define BDSM as anything other than a set of poorly defined sex practices. Instead I would define human to human relationship as either emotionally unhealthy or healthy well before anyone put on the cloak of Bondage, Sub/Dom, Masochist/Sadist.

 

[BLoved]

They are just trying to show that just because you state your opinion as fact does not mean it is fact. They are just stating that their opinions/views/experiences have shown them a different view their yours.

You have thrown out logic, personal experience, and observations that the other side has countered with to show you that your opinion is just "your opinion".

So, why bother starting a thread where you know that no argument/point/view/opinion from the other side will even be recognized by you as having some merit?

I'm not saying you must agree with it. I'm not saying you shouldn't have started this thread so that naive subs will never know of the abuses in the "casual" community.

But if people make a reasonable attempt to show you a different point of view or belief and you can't even recognize that, even though you 100% disagree with them, then how is this a productive discussion/debate?

Part of discussing/debating is the ability to recognize the other side's point without outright dismissing it because you don't agree with it.

http://www.answers.com/topic/nazi-propaganda-1

I know one book that's sitting on Bloved's shelf.

Let me point out you are doing a fine job of giving this literotica BDSM tribe, at least, a common cause-- united in derision of you.

~smile~

 

[CutieMouse]

So even the possibility that casual 'bdsm' is emotionally damaging cannot be taught by a so-called "BDSM education group" because the issue isn't even "indirectly" related to BDSM?

~smile~

You are the only person insisting that the only way to have a healthy intimate emotional connection is by making a lifetime commitment to one person [sometimes after only 3 weeks].

Multiple posters have linked workshops, lectures and resources for recognizing and/or forming healthy BDSM relationships - all of which you have chosen to ignore, belittle, dismiss, etc because in your opinion they are "self serving".

So by your argument, if these workshops aren't held, it's proof the community is ignoring the issue. If they are held, it's proof the community is ignoring the issue. You can't have it both ways...

 

[BLoved]

The only person swearing on all that is holy that the link is being "ignored" is you.

And considering the reception I bet you're wondering why more don't step forward?

~smile~

I've said it before, wherever casual players dominate a forum they chase out anyone who disagrees with casual 'bdsm'.

http://www.answers.com/topic/nazi-propaganda-1

I know one book that's sitting on Bloved's shelf.

Let me point out you are doing a fine job of giving this literotica BDSM tribe, at least, a common cause-- united in derision of you.

Congratulations you fucking useless piece of human trash. You are officially the second person in 6 years to offend me badly enough to use foul language.

You are a pretentious, ignorant, arrogant prick. I pity any woman who is so brainwashed and weak willed as to suffer your imbicilic version if "dominance", much less "love". Because through your words and actions you show your true colors. You are one manipulative fuck; no wonder other communities "silenced" you - your twisting of words and callous indifference towards others is nothing short of evil.

I take it back. I don't wish you well at all.

 

[00Syd]

So even the possibility that casual 'bdsm' is emotionally damaging cannot be taught by a so-called "BDSM education group" because the issue isn't even "indirectly" related to BDSM?

~smile~

As I have repeatedly stated, and you have continually ignored, it is not the job of a BDSM education group to include any possible issues one might have with BDSM, or the BDSM community, in their general meeting rules (In case you are confused, "general meeting rules" means, the rules one follows at a meeting or class hosted by this group).

However (as I have repeatedly stated, and you have continually ignored), it is the job of the Special Interest Groups to host meetings and classes related to that special interest. There is absolutely nothing stopping any of these groups from presenting a meeting or class on "the possibility that casual 'bdsm' is emotionally damaging." While I know for a fact that classes have been given in the past all about the possible links between BDSM and Abuse, and the various ways to prevent/avoid abuse within the BDSM community, that does not preclude the possibility of there never being a class on these topics ever again. If that is a class you want to see, you only have to suggest it to the organizers. TES's goal, as an organization, is to provide relevant education to the BDSM community of NYC, and is always open to suggestions.

I'll re-quote the post where I go into detail on this (again) in case you somehow missed it (again).

TES hosts classes on a myriad of subjects related directly or indirectly to BDSM, and there is absolutely nothing stopping one of the special interest groups from hosting a class on this very subject. In fact, you could easily get in touch with one of the Facilitators of one of the special interest groups (perhaps the Novice group? The Relationships group? The Dominant Men, Submissive Women group? ), and suggest this as a topic for a future meeting. To take it one step further, you could suggest that you would be willing to go to NYC and teach the class/host the meeting.

I highly recommend it.

I'll even give you the link on the TES website that clearly lays out all of the many people you could get in touch with about hosting a class, with their contact information, in case it is too difficult for you to find on your own.

http://www.tes.org/main/contact.php

 

[BLoved]

~smile~

And let's not forget this 'Grace-full' contribution to thoughtful discussion:

Please, people, if you can't keep yourself from responding to this idiot, IGNORE HIM. Every time you reply it makes it that much longer until he GOES AWAY.

http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h284/graceanne1978/lit%20images/trolls/Do-not-feed-the-troll.png

http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h284/graceanne1978/lit%20images/trolls/troll.jpg

http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h284/graceanne1978/lit%20images/trolls/troll_2.jpg

 

[CutieMouse]

And considering the reception I bet you're wondering why more don't step forward?

~smile~

I've said it before, wherever casual players dominate a forum they chase out anyone who disagrees with casual 'bdsm'.

Lets reconstruct the time line, shall we?

You started mucking up a thread with your statements about Love/BDSM/"casual BDSM".

People were finding it disruptive.

I suggested you start a thread on the subject.

You refused.

Not understanding your philosophies, I started one for you utilizing your own writings (since you initially refused to participate there, either).

You threw a hissy fit and removed your writings and started claiming everyone was out to get you.

You started a thread labeling me as a "Book Burner".

You eventually started your own thread (this one).

It took me TWENTY EIGHT PAGES of this mess to lose my temper. Twenty eight pages in which you labeled my relationship as abusive, dysfunctional, wrong, etc. Twenty eight pages in which you commented that I have a lack of self esteem, that I am simply repeating past abuse, incapable of understanding, showing, or expressing love, and that I encourage others to engage in abuse. Oh and I almost forgot the post in which you denigrated my decision to divorce, and then insulted the father of my children. Twenty eight pages of insults directed at anyone who doesn't agree with you 100%.

And ya know what did it?

Taking a sarcastic comment I made (I was actually mirroring the sorts of things your current partner had stated in the thread, BTW), and condescendingly implying that I am actually that damaged of a person.

After watching you operate for the last several days, I believe you to be a destructive, risky, dangerous sort of "Dominant". I believe it is emotionally unhealthy and potentially abusive for anyone to enter a lifelong commitment after knowing one another a grand total of 3 weeks. I believe that men like you prey on weak, abused, insecure, ignorant women who are so desperate for structure and attention that they buy into the grand fairy tale you create. You are one of those "charming" sorts who keeps women weak and emotionally dependent, protecting them for "those people".

 

[graceanne]

~smile~

Yet you see fit to feed them.

How good is your advice when you yourself ignore it?

I'd explain again what feeding a troll and playing with a troll are, and their differences, but you aren't bright enough to understand so I'll just make silly faces at you.

*pbth*

~smile~

And let's not forget this 'Grace-full' contribution to thoughtful discussion:

See, y'all? The idiot WANTS to be ignored, so why not?

 

[Daddy2mylilgirl]

And considering the reception I bet you're wondering why more don't step forward?

~smile~

I've said it before, wherever casual players dominate a forum they chase out anyone who disagrees with casual 'bdsm'.

I actually don't completely disagree with you. In fact, I would say I agree with a lot of your points about "True Love" and "causal" BDSM.

But the way you carried yourself is the reason I was messing (attacking/insulting you may use whatever word you want) with you.

You have no tact.

You acted as a martyr and attacked others instead of just stating your point. You went on the defensive way too early and lashed out at others in an attempt to make yourself look like the victim and you used that to bolster your point instead of just letting it speak for itself.

You're too quick to say, "See! They are trying to censor/shut me up/derail/cover up/end any discussion about "causal" BDSM." instead of just realizing that they may just not agree with you.

You never recognized that others are entitled to their own point of view as much as you are and that you might even learn from theirs as much as you believe they can learn from yours.

You have acted condescending, self-righteous, arrogant, mean, and close minded. None of those things are conducive to a discussion or debate.

Just look at how you responded to me:

They are just trying to show that just because you state your opinion as fact does not mean it is fact. They are just stating that their opinions/views/experiences have shown them a different view their yours.

You have thrown out logic, personal experience, and observations that the other side has countered with to show you that your opinion is just "your opinion".

So, why bother starting a thread where you know that no argument/point/view/opinion from the other side will even be recognized by you as having some merit?

I'm not saying you must agree with it. I'm not saying you shouldn't have started this thread so that naive subs will never know of the abuses in the "casual" community.

But if people make a reasonable attempt to show you a different point of view or belief and you can't even recognize that, even though you 100% disagree with them, then how is this a productive discussion/debate?

Part of discussing/debating is the ability to recognize the other side's point without outright dismissing it because you don't agree with it.

And your response:

~smile~

Now for someone who claims to want a discussion, how is that an appropriate response to get one or even further this one?

If anyone did that to you, then you would claim immaturity and another attempt to derail/end the discussion.

If you feel like I have been an asshole to you in the past then I would agree. But the internet is full of assholes. That shouldn't stop a discussion just because someone acts out.

People bounce back and forth between being an asshole and actually engaging in the discussion all the time. Some people you will hate at the beginning of a thread and by the end will at least respect them. Some will act out in the beginning and then calm down to have an in-depth discussion.

You must have tact. (And yes, I'm sure you will say I have none, but I have already admitted to being an asshole. What's your excuse? )

So if you had come at this whole discussion from the beginning in a more peaceful, respectful (of other people's opinions and not respectful of the "causal" community), and tactful way then I would probably be right there agreeing with you.

As it stands, I will let you go it alone.

 

[Etoile]

Jeez people. C'mon, nothing new is being said, right? Is it? Admittedly I have not read much the past couple of days, but I can't imagine anything new is going on in here. Everybody STFU, okay?

 

[graceanne]

Jeez people. C'mon, nothing new is being said, right? Is it? Admittedly I have not read much the past couple of days, but I can't imagine anything new is going on in here. Everybody STFU, okay?

What she said!

Don't make me start a 'conversation' about labels to distract everyone. *stern finger shake*

 

[DeepGreenEyes]

I actually don't completely disagree with you. In fact, I would say I agree with a lot of your points about "True Love" and "causal" BDSM.

But the way you carried yourself is the reason I was messing (attacking/insulting you may use whatever word you want) with you.

<snip>

You never recognized that others are entitled to their own point of view as much as you are and that you might even learn from theirs as much as you believe they can learn from yours.

This.

I'm your target demographic, ~smilie boy~!

I'm as fucking idealistic, true love, Merchant-Ivory watching, bind-her-wrists-and-skullfuck-her-and-then-let's-talk-about-how-amazing-we-are-together PYL-type out there.

And yet, BLoved, I think you're full of shit.

Because even when you make a reasonable point, it is followed by these words, in actuality or implied: "THIS IS TRUE FOR ALL PEOPLE IN ALL SITUATIONS."

Anyone who tells me that something is TRUE FOR ALL PEOPLE IN ALL SITUATIONS goes in my fiction section. This is a required part of the fundamentalist credo, and it's the greatest bullshit indicator out there.

The only thing TRUE FOR ALL PEOPLE IN ALL SITUATIONS that I can think of is something the Buddha said: "All beings everywhere want to be happy." And of course, this can mean infinite things, depending on the person. Even finding happiness with "unhappiness."

If you'd shown up, as D2MLG said, with just the tiniest whiff of respect for the opinions, particular situations and experiences of others, then things would have been far more productive. Maybe not holding hands and singing Kumbaya productive. But perhaps you could've gotten your ideas across instead of driving people berserk.

Although, hell, I have to say I've enjoyed the complete realm of absurdity that you've provoked. There is value in pushing nonsense way too far.

 

[Etoile]

This.

I'm your target demographic, ~smilie boy~!

I'm as fucking idealistic, true love, Merchant-Ivory watching, bind-her-wrists-and-skullfuck-her-and-then-let's-talk-about-how-amazing-we-are-together PYL-type out there.

And yet, BLoved, I think you're full of shit.

Because even when you make a reasonable point, it is followed by these words, in actuality or implied: "THIS IS TRUE FOR ALL PEOPLE IN ALL SITUATIONS."

Anyone who tells me that something is TRUE FOR ALL PEOPLE IN ALL SITUATIONS goes in my fiction section. This is a required part of the fundamentalist credo, and it's the greatest bullshit indicator out there.

The only thing TRUE FOR ALL PEOPLE IN ALL SITUATIONS that I can think of is something the Buddha said: "All beings everywhere want to be happy." And of course, this can mean infinite things, depending on the person. Even finding happiness with "unhappiness."

If you'd shown up, as D2MLG said, with just the tiniest whiff of respect for the opinions, particular situations and experiences of others, then things would have been far more productive. Maybe not holding hands and singing Kumbaya productive. But perhaps you could've gotten your ideas across instead of driving people berserk.

Although, hell, I have to say I've enjoyed the complete realm of absurdity that you've provoked. There is value in pushing nonsense way too far.

QFWin

 

[BLoved]

Lets reconstruct the time line, shall we?

You started mucking up a thread with your statements about Love/BDSM/"casual BDSM".

People were finding it disruptive.

I suggested you start a thread on the subject.

[hijack]

This is a whole thread topic in and of itself... actually we haven't had a good meaty discussion of this sort of thing (without derailing another thread) in a while.

I won't post my views of the opinions expressed here, and am off to work out before going into the shop, but 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.

(Posted publicly as BL apparently has PMs turned off.)

[/hijack]

---

You refused.

~smile~

I'm in.

So start the thread and begin debating your position on the matter.

~smile~

Being the newcomer, and considering the response I've received so far, I'd rather not start up a thread where the primary focus will be the slinging of mud in my direction.

As it was your idea, I think it only fitting you start the thread.

---

Not understanding your philosophies, I started one for you utilizing your own writings (since you initially refused to participate there, either).

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.)

---

You threw a hissy fit and removed your writings and started claiming everyone was out to get you.

"Love and Respect"
4.25 8 votes

"Love, Part I: Endings"
4.22 46 votes

"Love, Part 2: Introductions"
4.60 45 votes

"Love, Part 3: Winter Interlude"
4.25 32 votes

"Questing for a Beloved"
4.33 12 votes

"The Little Things"
4.40 15 votes

I seriously doubt I'd have obtained these ratings if my point of view was not shared by many others.

That I am the only one with the courage to voice my point of view in public and thus subject myself to the ridicule of casual advocates in no way demonstrates that I am the only one to challenge the lack of ethics of casual 'bdsm'.

"Love and Respect"
3.80 10 votes

"Love, Part I: Endings"
4.15 47 votes

"Love, Part 2: Introductions"
4.52 46 votes

"Love, Part 3: Winter Interlude"
4.15 33 votes

"Questing for a Beloved"
4.08 13 votes

"The Little Things"
4.19 16 votes

Considering how long it actually takes to read all of the above, how likely is it anyone actually read the material they just down-rated in the last 30 minutes?

~smile~

I see the fanatics of the casual community are not above using the rating system to express their own personal animosity towards a writer, regardless of what he writes or how well he writes.

"Love and Respect"
3.55 11 votes

"Love, Part I: Endings"
4.08 48 votes

"Love, Part 2: Introductions"
4.52 46 votes

"Love, Part 3: Winter Interlude"
4.15 33 votes

"Questing for a Beloved"
4.08 13 votes

"The Little Things"
4.19 16 votes

The casual community continues to demonstrate their idea of 'ethical' use of the ratings system.

~smile~

When public character assasination, ridicule, and vote-rigging are considered 'ethical' by a community, what do they consider 'ethical' when it comes to bdsm?

When they are willing to display their lack of ethics in public, what kind of 'ethics' do they practice in private, where there are no witnesses?

And how do they treat their victims when their victims object to being abused?

"Casual 'BDSM' and Emotional Abuse: The Case for Love"

Ironically, from an outsider's perspective, the more you persist in attacking him the more you strengthen his argument. I urge you all to step back and re-read your own posts.

His actions speak for themselves. But, so do yours.

A little too late for that.

I'll be submitting delete requests for all of my material, given the degree of vote-rigging by the casual community and the effect a low rating has on material being read.

I can always re-submit when they're not looking.

I'll cite this thread as my reason for deleting the material, not that it will make a difference.

Obviously the rating system exists for this purpose: vote-rigging by the mob.

---

You started a thread labeling me as a "Book Burner".

You eventually started your own thread (this one).

It took me TWENTY EIGHT PAGES of this mess to lose my temper. Twenty eight pages in which you labeled my relationship as abusive, dysfunctional, wrong, etc. Twenty eight pages in which you commented that I have a lack of self esteem, that I am simply repeating past abuse, incapable of understanding, showing, or expressing love, and that I encourage others to engage in abuse.

So from that description, could you please tell me what is unethical about my non-love based D/s relationship?

And since you ignored my previous request -

I would sincerely appreciate it if you could please help me understand what is unethical about the relationship below:

For the third time - "So from that description, could you please tell me what is unethical about my non-love based D/s relationship?"

"these guys" didn't "convince" the man to delete his writings; he threw a fit and chose to delete them because not everyone shares his point of view.

For example, he believes my relationship to be abusive because I don't believe in the concept of "True Love"/"The One"/etc.

---

Oh and I almost forgot the post in which you denigrated my decision to divorce, and then insulted the father of my children.

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.

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.

My marriage wasn't a healthy relationship, but it taught me a lot; every attempt I've made at relationships since then (healthy or not) has taught me something.

And all of those lessons got squished together into life-skills I've used to date, meet people, and learn to invite wonderful people into my life - and un-invite the not so wonderful ones.

So thinking about it, I'm not totally convinced that it's all that fabulous to only have perfect "abuse free" relationships...

The Romantic paradigm didn't exist until 1200, and in most of the world doesn't still. They don't seem to have any problem reproducing in cultures where women are pretty much property along with land and goats.

The paradigm you're talking about is an experiment not even 1000 years old.

All cultures link intimate behaviour with intimate emotional bonding.

Only dysfunctional cultures have a surplus of single mothers.

Awesome.

Now I'm extra dysfunctional because I divorced my husband of 12 years.
You know, the one that asked me to marry him on our second date, because he just KNEW I was his True Love. The one I married 6 months after meeting. When I was 20.

The thing neither of us knew was that he had an issue with falling in love. Repeatedly. He did it 2-3 times a year [with other women].

I'll be sure to inform our therapist (we saw her individually and as a couple for about a year... he fell in love with her at one point too) that she was wrong to support our decision to divorce as being emotionally and psychologically healthy, offering our children a much better opportunity to witness healthier relationship dynamics than our marriage offered them.

Only dysfunctional societies produce men who are emotionally incapable of raising their children.

---

Twenty eight pages of insults directed at anyone who doesn't agree with you 100%.

And ya know what did it?

Taking a sarcastic comment I made (I was actually mirroring the sorts of things your current partner had stated in the thread, BTW), and condescendingly implying that I am actually that damaged of a person.

Actually I've walked away from familial and intimate relationships I once thought loving, because I came to realize they were not. The only thing I would wish anyone to emulate re: that concept, is a sense of strength and self-preservation.

I've repeatedly tried explaining my views of love are similar to BL's, simply couched in different words... but you know, I'm just a poor broken shell of a human being, raised by abusive people, repeating the same abuses overandoverandover, submissive due to my horrible history, incapable of any true connection, independent thought, or ability to overcome the past.

Until I learn my lesson and commit the next 40+ years of my life to a guy off CollarMe.... a true [white knight] dominant, well, *sigh*... I must accept that I am just doomed to a life of emptiness.

[/sarcasm]

Surprising how we hide the truth from ourselves, even when we desperately want to see it.

---

After watching you operate for the last several days, I believe you to be a destructive, risky, dangerous sort of "Dominant". I believe it is emotionally unhealthy and potentially abusive for anyone to enter a lifelong commitment after knowing one another a grand total of 3 weeks. I believe that men like you prey on weak, abused, insecure, ignorant women who are so desperate for structure and attention that they buy into the grand fairy tale you create. You are one of those "charming" sorts who keeps women weak and emotionally dependent, protecting them for "those people".

I trust by now a few things will be obvious to the unbiased reader:

1. CM requested a discussion on ethics without reference to my writings, yet started a discussion specifically to discuss my writing.

2. CM complains about my opinion regarding her relationship, ignoring the fact that she requested my opinion about her relationship no less than three times.

3. CM accuses me of insulting her marriage, ignoring the fact she insulted it repeatedly, calling it abusive, and further ignoring my statement was a general principle, not a specific indictment of her husband.

4. CM complains about me noticing her passive/aggressive insult ("[/sarcasm]") and uses this an excuse for her attacks:

Congratulations you fucking useless piece of human trash. You are officially the second person in 6 years to offend me badly enough to use foul language.

You are a pretentious, ignorant, arrogant prick. I pity any woman who is so brainwashed and weak willed as to suffer your imbicilic version if "dominance", much less "love". Because through your words and actions you show your true colors. You are one manipulative fuck; no wonder other communities "silenced" you - your twisting of words and callous indifference towards others is nothing short of evil.

I take it back. I don't wish you well at all.

As I said a while back:

Thou dost protest too much.

This is not the first time you needed to insist you are 'happy happy happy', while insisting love plays no part in your relationship.

Considering the lengths you've taken to silence one who doesn't validate your choice because he does believe in "True Love", your need to tightly control your reality so that it can only reinforce your point of view is revealing.

Your need for denial is so great you are incapable of handling opposing points of view in a mature manner.

You've failed to attract even one individual with an opposing point of view to contribute to your 'debate' about Debating a Few Philosophies of BDSM - Love, Kink, Lust, Etc, thus proving that any forum dominated by advocates of casual 'bdsm' chase off all opposing views.

Only those who cannot love are welcome. Anyone else makes you feel threatened because you may have to face the demons you continue to run from.

Love-less 'BDSM' is the "One True (Casual) Way".

Dysfunctional individuals twist the truth to suit their purpose. Anyone wishing to test this statement need only review the discussions from which the above quotes were drawn to see the truth of it.

 

[graceanne]

-
Dysfunctional individuals twist the truth to suit their purpose.

*snort*

You'd know, wouldn't you.

 

[00Syd]

tl;dr

 

[BLoved]

Another distortion of the truth:

Just look at how you responded to me:

They are just trying to show that just because you state your opinion as fact does not mean it is fact. They are just stating that their opinions/views/experiences have shown them a different view their yours.

You have thrown out logic, personal experience, and observations that the other side has countered with to show you that your opinion is just "your opinion".

So, why bother starting a thread where you know that no argument/point/view/opinion from the other side will even be recognized by you as having some merit?

I'm not saying you must agree with it. I'm not saying you shouldn't have started this thread so that naive subs will never know of the abuses in the "casual" community.

But if people make a reasonable attempt to show you a different point of view or belief and you can't even recognize that, even though you 100% disagree with them, then how is this a productive discussion/debate?

Part of discussing/debating is the ability to recognize the other side's point without outright dismissing it because you don't agree with it.

And your response:

~smile~

Anyone reviewing the link to my response will notice a couple of quotes missing which directly address his statements:

Let me point out you are doing a fine job of giving this literotica BDSM tribe, at least, a common cause-- united in derision of you.

http://www.answers.com/topic/nazi-propaganda-1

I know one book that's sitting on Bloved's shelf.

~smile~

You will find that taking their word for anything is a risky proposition.

 

[BLoved]

This.

I'm your target demographic, ~smilie boy~!

~smile~

I seriously doubt it.