The 'ethics' of casual 'bdsm'

[Keroin]

I would say as a parent you are not at liberty to risk your life for any reason.

Please note:

All firefighters, police officers, paramedics, peacekeepers/soldiers, stunt performers, adventure guides, etc, etc, etc, if you are parents, you must quit your jobs immediately.

The great one has spoken.

 

[BLoved]

I'm still not sure who "they" are. Okay, the pronoun "they" refers to the noun "casual players" but I still don't get what that is. How can people in 24/7 relationships, like some of those who have posted here, be "casual" about it?

This might explain that:

I'm going to depart from posting cats to ask you a question.

Do you think I have any idea what you are talking about? Really, do you?

I don't. I don't know what your essay is, I don't know what "casual bdsm" is, I don't know who you are, I don't know where you came from, I know nothing about you, I have read virtually nothing you've posted, I'm not a moderator for the BDSM section, and I really do not give a shit about you. I just like posting cats.

So stop flattering yourself, and get a clue.

As for me, I know for sure I'm not a "casual player" because my only relationship right now is vanilla. And I love it.

One need not be a casual player to be an advocate of casual play.

 

[BLoved]

Please note:

All firefighters, police officers, paramedics, peacekeepers/soldiers, stunt performers, adventure guides, etc, etc, etc, if you are parents, you must quit your jobs immediately.

The great one has spoken.

Laugh all you want. Children need their parents, both of them.

It is a symptom of our dysfunctional society that so many under-estimate this need.

 

[intothewoods]

~smile~

Acknowledging that the use of the term "Hot Pants" when referring to WriterDom might not be very respectful is hardly the same as the ongoing character assasination conducted by my adversaries that has filled the pages of this discussion.

You've thrown in some character assasination of your own.

If you are going to involve bdsm at some point the submissive is likely to be bound helpless.

Each time anyone is helpless they are risking their life. As WD put it: "Your online "beloved" could bury you in a 55 gallon drum just as easy as a causal player you met at a munch."

Bound helpless? I would not let someone I barely know - whether a potential love candidate, one night stand, potential friend, person off the internet, person from a munch, whatever -- tie me up.

I would say as a parent you are not at liberty to risk your life for any reason.

What? I risk my life every time I get in a car, but I have to go make a living to put food on the table and pick kidlet up from school.

So if a person is lured into an nsa one night stand through deception and/or misinformation it is the victim who needs therapy, not the victimizer?

I never said the victimizer doesn't need therapy. It's not deception and misinformation to say, do you want to screw, hey, this is totally casual. I think most grown women know whether or not such an encounter will be rewarding and enjoyable for them.

I think the behaviour of my adversaries is more than ample evidence of the kinds of dysfunctions I've described throughout this discussion.



And therein is the dysfunction.



It is a little late to avoid abuse if you have to wait to be abused first to realize the dysfunctional nature of casual 'bdsm'.

Nothing wrong with providing a heads up for those who would prefer not to be abused.

The problem is casual players and their advocates don't want novices to be warned ahead of time. They prefer to abuse their victims and then blame their victims for the abuse.

And as long as they control the media such that no one can explain to the victims what is really going on, they can continue to ambush victims as long as they wish.

Casual players are in control of the forums at collarme, bondage.com and mydungeonspace. They control all of the major groups at fetlife, and it is obvious from this discussion what they are capable of here.

How people behave in this thread has nothing to do with the "damage" caused by casual relationships. Who is stopping you from warning anyone of anything?

 

[Keroin]

Life is either a daring adventure or nothing. Security does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than exposure.

- Helen Keller

 

[Etoile]

This might explain that:

Right, because quoting something I said three weeks ago makes SO much sense. Believe it or not, I have been reading your diatribes, and I still don't understand what you think "casual players" are or how the 24/7 dynamic can be called "casual".

In other words, it don't explain shit.

One need not be a casual player to be an advocate of casual play.

Maybe so, but one does need to know what something is in order to advocate it. I'm not advocating anything, because I still don't think you're making any sense.

THANK YOU DRIVE THROUGH

 

[FloggingMolly]

Can I ask a question to those who play 'casually' or have in the past?

Did any of you go and play the first time _without_ the idea of 'they could be liars, I could be raped, my safeword could be ignored, I could be kidnapped, I could get killed' ?

Or were you all sensible and life-smart enough to understand that there were these risks?

 

[intothewoods]

Can I ask a question to those who play 'casually' or have in the past?

Did any of you go and play the first time _without_ the idea of 'they could be liars, I could be raped, my safeword could be ignored, I could be kidnapped, I could get killed' ?

Or were you all sensible and life-smart enough to understand that there were these risks?

I had that idea prior to attending my first munch. By the time I first played with someone, I had come to know her pretty well. Over time, I had more requirements about play, because certain encounters weren't that rewarding for me. I also felt more comfortable playing at parties, because there's safety in numbers. I did not have the experience that complaints would be ignored. If somebody didn't respect my safeword, the shit would hit the fan. It's important to trust your instincts about people. If someone rubs you the wrong way, don't play with them.

 

[chy_girl]

Not surprising, I suppose, to see how many who advocate casual 'bdsm' also link "Love" with "Abuse".
*snip*

BDSM, love, and abuse are three separate and individual things that can over and do overlap. It does not, however, mean that they are synonymous.

And as for love being a cure all, it's an absolute load of shit. Love doesn't do jack to help flashbacks, PTSD, trauma anxiety, nightmares, or moving past the abuse and into life as a functional and somewhat well rounded individual. Mental health professionals help people with flashbacks, PTSD, trauma anxiety, nightmares, and moving past the abuse and into life as a functional and somewhat well rounded individual. I've seen abuse survivors who depended only on the love of someone else to fix their problems and frankly I wouldn't wish the end of that particular path on anyone.

When one person's ability to be ok with their self and their life is tied to the presence and opinion of another it can be seriously damaging. What happens when the person the abused person's well being is tied too gets tired of making life ok for the abused? What happens when the person that the abused person's well being is tied to has to go away for an extended period of time due to work or illness or family obligation? What happens when the person that the abused person's well being is tied to dies?

Keeping some from moving through their abuse into a self-sufficient, independent, autonomous individual because they should depend on another's love to "save them" is abusive.

What you are preaching is not only erroneously misplaced in relation to BDSMers but flat dangerous, irresponsible, and immoral to preach to anyone who is a survivor of abuse and mentally in a place to actually believe your ignorant, sophomoric, and self-serving line of bullshit.

 

[satindesire]

I hope you know that you just shot yourself in the foot, mister.

People risk their lives just by living.

Driving is statistically one of the MOST DANGEROUS things a person can do. In 2006, 42,636 people were killed in car accidents.

Do you own a car? I bet you do. I bet you drive it pretty much on a daily basis.

I'm a parent. I own a car. I -have- to own a car and I have to use cars because my town is small with a virtually nonexistent public transport system that stops nowhere NEAR my house. I have to grocery shop, take my daughter to doctor's appointments, and my husband has to work. I have to pay bills.

I put my life at risk every time I get in the car, but if I had a more viable option, I'd take it.

So don't act like people doing normal everyday things isn't dangerous. You don't have to be doing something intentionally known as risky to be in danger.

 

[chy_girl]

I would say as a parent you are not at liberty to risk your life for any reason.

And I would say that, as a general rule, a parent is morally obligated to risk their life in the attempt to ensure the physical safety of one's child.

In other words, if you're child is stuck in a burning building you damned well better be trying to get them out instead of standing there wringing your hands or waiting patiently. But that's just me.

 

[chy_girl]

Can I ask a question to those who play 'casually' or have in the past?

Did any of you go and play the first time _without_ the idea of 'they could be liars, I could be raped, my safeword could be ignored, I could be kidnapped, I could get killed' ?

Or were you all sensible and life-smart enough to understand that there were these risks?

I was exceptionally stupid when I first started IRL, but I knew damned well that my actions could get me hurt. Just like I know that picking the wrong blind date in the vanilla world can get me hurt. Ironically enough it was the people here and at the munch I attended that lectured me on safety and etiquette. The munch group also told me that if I were ever interested in trying something or playing with someone to ask around about their reputations.

To drive the irony even further, the first play party I attended everyone was very nice and willing to explain the different kinds of play and reiterate the safety parts. I asked if anyone would let me feel what a flogger was like and the Dom who volunteered ended up bailing because he hit sub-space. Another Dom offered since he was waiting for his partner to finish preforming her cupping. I asked after him, got all ok's and he flogged me. Slowly. Slowly enough that I had to tell him repeatedly that he really could hit harder.

He never demanded I disrobe any further than I was comfortable with and when it started to get into a heavier flogging he had another Dom stand in front to monitor me. Afterward, I met his partner who introduced me to two delightful rubber floggers (since named Gog and Magog).

We played chatted online afterward, played another time or two, talked some more. And talked some more. Here it is 5 months later and I'm now collared and under contract with the same two very kind individuals who lectured me strongly on submissive doesn't equal doormat and who understand that my personal growth is closely tied to my growth as a submissive.

So, I made a couple of friends and we're building a BDSM relationship based on respect and mutual needs and I'm expanding and growing in directions I choose with their support and guidance and the support and guidance of the local community. Yup. There's the evils of "casual" play at work.

 

[FloggingMolly]

thank you for sharing that hon

 

[BLoved]

I hope you know that you just shot yourself in the foot, mister.

People risk their lives just by living.

Driving is statistically one of the MOST DANGEROUS things a person can do. In 2006, 42,636 people were killed in car accidents.

That's right.

Despite government testing of vehicles and drivers, despite speed limits and highway patrols, despite breathalyzers and aggressive ad campagins stressing the dangers of driving, still thousands are killed each year.

So what can we expect from the casual community, whose activities are unsupervised by any independant third-party, where there are no warnings, let alone aggressive ad campaigns stressing safety?

 

[Etoile]

Well that was a deflection.

 

[chy_girl]

Well that was a deflection.

Well, you know, when you can't debate on the topic at hand just skew the topic enough to muddy the waters.

 

[Homburg]

Considering I not only started this thread, but I am also the only advocate for Love in this discussion, I find the number quite understandable.

Patently silly. Many, if not most, of the participants in this thread are in long-term committed love-based relationships.

 

[Keroin]

http://www.dvo.com/newsletter/monthly/2009/july/images/pineapple.jpg

+

http://socsdteacher.org/bfox/files/2010/01/typewriter.jpg

=

http://kottkegae.appspot.com/images/donknotts.jpg


Yeah, I think you all know what I mean.

 

[Stella_Omega]

That's right.

Despite government testing of vehicles and drivers, despite speed limits and highway patrols, despite breathalyzers and aggressive ad campagins stressing the dangers of driving, still thousands are killed each year.

So what can we expect from the casual community, whose activities are unsupervised by any independant third-party, where there are no warnings, let alone aggressive ad campaigns stressing safety?

You have ignored every instance of safety education anyone here has referenced-- I do not trust you with the safety of the woman you may be turning into a complete dependent. I don't know what your intentions are towards her, no matter what you say about it-- we all know how easy it is to lie on the internet after all.

I think we need an independent third party come to your house to monitor your BDSM activities.

 

[BLoved]

I never said the victimizer doesn't need therapy. It's not deception and misinformation to say, do you want to screw, hey, this is totally casual. I think most grown women know whether or not such an encounter will be rewarding and enjoyable for them.

Life is either a daring adventure or nothing. Security does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than exposure.

- Helen Keller

Can I ask a question to those who play 'casually' or have in the past?

Did any of you go and play the first time _without_ the idea of 'they could be liars, I could be raped, my safeword could be ignored, I could be kidnapped, I could get killed' ?

Or were you all sensible and life-smart enough to understand that there were these risks?

I had that idea prior to attending my first munch. By the time I first played with someone, I had come to know her pretty well. Over time, I had more requirements about play, because certain encounters weren't that rewarding for me. I also felt more comfortable playing at parties, because there's safety in numbers. I did not have the experience that complaints would be ignored. If somebody didn't respect my safeword, the shit would hit the fan. It's important to trust your instincts about people. If someone rubs you the wrong way, don't play with them.

I was exceptionally stupid when I first started IRL, but I knew damned well that my actions could get me hurt.

Note the common theme: only stupid people get victimized, rape victims have only themselves to blame.

"What were you doing wearing that dress in that part of town?" asks the rapist's defense lawyer.

In other words, it is not the obligation of casual players to be ethical, it is the responsibility of the victim to be paranoid. Anything bad that happens is the victim's fault, or so say the advocates of casual 'bdsm'.

 

[BLoved]

Patently silly. Many, if not most, of the participants in this thread are in long-term committed love-based relationships.

So you would have us believe people in committed love-based relationships have chosen to humiliate themselves with assorted forms of immaturity to defend a form of abuse they don't practice?

Wouldn't that be a statement, then, on the cowardice of casual players that they cannot speak for themselves?

 

[Keroin]

Note the common theme: only stupid people get victimized, rape victims have only themselves to blame.

"What were you doing wearing that dress in that part of town?" asks the rapist's defense lawyer.

In other words, it is not the obligation of casual players to be ethical, it is the responsibility of the victim to be paranoid. Anything bad that happens is the victim's fault, or so say the advocates of casual 'bdsm'.

Helen Keller was an advocate of casual BDSM. That is common knowledge.

 

[BLoved]

You have ignored every instance of safety education anyone here has referenced-- I do not trust you with the safety of the woman you may be turning into a complete dependent. I don't know what your intentions are towards her, no matter what you say about it-- we all know how easy it is to lie on the internet after all.

I think we need an independent third party come to your house to monitor your BDSM activities.

~smile~

And who do you have in mind?

 

[satindesire]

In other words, it is not the obligation of casual players to be ethical, it is the responsibility of the victim to be paranoid. Anything bad that happens is the victim's fault, or so say the advocates of casual 'bdsm'.

Really? You've spoken to EVERY advocate of casual BDSM IN THE WORLD?!

Wow.

That must have taken you years and millions of dollars worth of travel to achieve. I'm singularly impressed by your dedication to talking to the no-doubt hundreds of thousands of people who advocate casual BDSM all over the world.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Note the common theme: only stupid people get victimized, rape victims have only themselves to blame.

That is exactly the opposite of what she said.

In other words, it is not the obligation of casual players to be ethical, it is the responsibility of the victim to be paranoid. Anything bad that happens is the victim's fault, or so say the advocates of casual 'bdsm'.

Only if you read standing upside down with your reading glasses on your asscheeks will you get that message.

.

And who do you have in mind?

One of those independent third party supervisors that should , according to you, be supervising BDSM.