Is BDSM intrinsecally sexual?

[BLoved]

AIDS is a problem everywhere, in every community, and it's a problem that people involved in multiple relationships do a GREAT DEAL to combat.

"It is estimated that more than one million people are living with HIV in the USA and that more than half a million have died after developing AIDS."

"At the end of 2007, the CDC estimates that 468,578 people were living with AIDS in America, around 20,000 more than 2006."

"An estimated 3,792 children aged under 13 were living with AIDS at the end of 2007. The vast majority of these children acquired HIV from their mothers during pregnancy, labour, delivery or breastfeeding."

"In total, an estimated 1,051,875 people have been diagnosed with AIDS in America."

"Since the beginning of the epidemic, an estimated 583,298 people with AIDS have died in the USA."

-- All quotes from http://www.avert.org/usa-statistics.htm

And yes, I fuck. A lot. With lots of different people. People who I'm not in a relationship with, Oooooh. I even have gangbangs and I ENJOY them, ooooh! I'm practically the anti-love boogie-monster.

Be afraid, be very afraid.

Estimated AIDS diagnoses by race/ethnicity and year (50 states and D.C.) -- http://www.avert.org/usa-race-age.htm

Apparently, for casual players and their advocates, the risk of AIDs is a laughing matter.

 

[LaRocha]

~smile~

Perhaps none of your brand of 'bdsm', but it is the essence of mine.



You continue to focus on what, and ignore the why.

The why? You've already swam around my attempts to address the why.

BDSM is a community category. You can't define BDSM outside of a community. If the population of your community is two then you've no need for this board or this discussion. Obviously you're interested in larger communities, thereby you have to play by their rules and definitions. You described a greeting card, not a relationship, specifically not a dom/sub, s/m style of relationship.

Anytime you want to address how an emotionally healthy or unhealthy relationship deals with BDSM, I'm willing to entertain you. First you have to describe what an emotionally healthy relationship looks like aside from the Hallmark sentiment. What I've seen from your posts, you've no relationship to BDSM, just a passing interest in 19th Century Romanticism regurgitated in late 20th Century popcorn cinema.

 

[Stella_Omega]

And yes, I fuck. A lot. With lots of different people. People who I'm not in a relationship with, Oooooh. I even have gangbangs and I ENJOY them, ooooh! I'm practically the anti-love boogie-monster.

Be afraid, be very afraid.

/rant.

oh yeah, all over fearful

 

[fuckmeat]

While I could be wrong, somehow I doubt G is going to feel special knowing you're making love to someone you don't love.

I'd advise against it, but some folk need to learn things the hard way.

Could be wrong? Could be wrong?

What the ever loving FUCK do you know about my relationship?

You know precisely what I have chosen to share in a few posts on this forum. Do pardon me for flattering myself that I just might possibly know better.

I expressed a disagreement with your opinion, objectively and dispassionately, as is my right on a forum dedicated to free speech. Your response is a snarky personal attack on a relationship between two people you know nothing about? I don't think I've encountered anyone else on the forums here with your degree of wilful ignorance and self-satisfied arrogance. It's just incomprehensible.

I sincerely wish it were possible for you to learn some perspective the 'hard way' but you completely lack the capacity. If we're going to get personal, I wholeheartedly pity the poor deluded bitch who is 'bloved' by you, if in fact she exists at all. In fact, I'll lay money that she doesn't, given how much of your life you spend arguing with the 'hate mob' here who are all out to get you with their logic and reason. Smarts doesn't it, when people who don't know you make sweeping judgements about your life?

I said I didn't want this to be a hijack. Your opinions (not incontrovertible facts my love, but bigoted personal views) have already been argued ad fucking nauseum on the ethic thread. Since you have no clue when to shut the fuck up and crawl back under your rock, you're going on my ignore list too. Then perhaps this thread can go back on topic.

So long masterdangerfuckhead.
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:-4RrwrQMwwHmSM:http://www.dirtytease.net/resources/images/tees/fuck%2520you%2520you%2520fucking%2520fuck.png

 

[zarngash]

Summary of the above: Blah blah biddy blah, I'm so stupid get me a donut.

Did anybody define what "it" is in this thread. If so, please enlighten me!


Damn I was MIA from lurking for a week and all this happens - tl:dr

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

And yes, I fuck. A lot. With lots of different people. People who I'm not in a relationship with, Oooooh. I even have gangbangs and I ENJOY them, ooooh! I'm practically the anti-love boogie-monster.

Be afraid, be very afraid.

/rant.

Somehow, I do believe I wouldn't be scared to find *this* particular boogie monster under my bed!

 

[where]

why don't y all put the fool on ignore?

 

[Xelebes]

Bondage - 50/50. I do it sometimes for purposes other than to masturbate.
Discipline - Meh. Not big on this.
Sadism - Hm. 75/25 sexual. I don't really get a charge out of doing it in a non-sexual way unless I'm exacting out revenge - and if I'm doing that, it's not going to be towards someone I am pursuing to have a long-term relationship with.
Masochism - 50/50. Half the time I hit myself with implements just for the rush.
Dominance - 100 Sexual. I don't get off on it outside of a sexual relationship.
Submission - 50/50.
Fetish - 50/50 Sexual/sensual, always.

 

[RuReal]

BDSM is not always a sexual act. It can be, but it is not always. Think on this if you do a public display of flogging and you get a someone from the audience who wishes to feel it would you consider that sex? There are levels to everything next thing I will be hearing is that hugging is sex as well. Just like BDSM it can be both depends on the intent and what both parties are getting out of the exchange.

Bottom line I guess there are no black and white answers to this topic.

 

[LaRocha]

But it is pretty black and white by definition. So far no one's figured out a way to describe a categorical BDSM act as non-sexual. BDSM isn't an act, just a category of sexual acts. If we think really hard about it and get super convoluted I'm sure we'll come up with something. But, I don't know that anyone has given any reason for disagreeing with the general statement: BDSM is intrinsically sexual.

BDSM is a type of roleplay or lifestyle choice or between two or more individuals who use their experiences of pain and power to create sexual tension, pleasure, and release. The compound acronym, BDSM, is derived from the terms bondage and discipline (B&D, B/D, or BD), dominance and submission (D&s, D/s, or Ds), sadism and masochism (S&M, S/M, or SM). - Wikipedia

If you're describing a sex act, you're not performing a sex act. Why would someone want to learn what flogging looks like? So they may choose to practice the technique in their own sex play.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I am polymorphously perverse; getting into the car and turning the key? That's sexual to me. And there are times when flogging someone or recieving a flogging has been emphatically not sexual. Even for me.

So no, this is not a black-and-white area any more than any area of human activity ever can be.

 

[BLoved]

BDSM is a community category.

No.

BDSM is a method for expressing love, and is as unique as the lover.

You can't define BDSM outside of a community.

~smile~

Of course you can, and I have for over 25 years.

If the population of your community is two then you've no need for this board or this discussion.

Except to share insights with those who would be misled by those who practice casual 'bdsm'.

~smile~

Obviously you're interested in larger communities, thereby you have to play by their rules and definitions.

lol

"He don't know me very well, do he?" - Bugs Bunny

Try your peer pressure tactics on someone who doesn't know better.

You described a greeting card, not a relationship, specifically not a dom/sub, s/m style of relationship.

I describe the manner in which I've successfully conducted relationships involving bdsm for the past 25+ years.

Anytime you want to address how an emotionally healthy or unhealthy relationship deals with BDSM, I'm willing to entertain you. First you have to describe what an emotionally healthy relationship looks like aside from the Hallmark sentiment. What I've seen from your posts, you've no relationship to BDSM, just a passing interest in 19th Century Romanticism regurgitated in late 20th Century popcorn cinema.

~smile~

So you are happy to discuss the relationship as long as you get the authority to define all the terminology?

Domineer anyone lately?

 

[BLoved]

Do pardon me for flattering myself that I just might possibly know better.

I expressed a disagreement with your opinion, objectively and dispassionately, as is my right on a forum dedicated to free speech. Your response is a snarky personal attack on a relationship between two people you know nothing about? I don't think I've encountered anyone else on the forums here with your degree of wilful ignorance and self-satisfied arrogance. It's just incomprehensible.

I sincerely wish it were possible for you to learn some perspective the 'hard way' but you completely lack the capacity. If we're going to get personal, I wholeheartedly pity the poor deluded bitch who is 'bloved' by you, if in fact she exists at all. In fact, I'll lay money that she doesn't, given how much of your life you spend arguing with the 'hate mob' here who are all out to get you with their logic and reason. Smarts doesn't it, when people who don't know you make sweeping judgements about your life?

I said I didn't want this to be a hijack. Your opinions (not incontrovertible facts my love, but bigoted personal views) have already been argued ad fucking nauseum on the ethic thread. Since you have no clue when to shut the fuck up and crawl back under your rock, you're going on my ignore list too. Then perhaps this thread can go back on topic.

So long masterdangerfuckhead.
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:-4RrwrQMwwHmSM:http://www.dirtytease.net/resources/images/tees/fuck%2520you%2520you%2520fucking%2520fuck.png

Well now I'm certain that the only person whose feelings you are considering are your own.

My sympathy goes to G. You are much too touchy to discuss the subject reasonably, and that indicates a whole lot of denial and guilt.

 

[CeriseNin]

I see BLoved is still successfully yanking chains. Ugh.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I see BLoved is still successfully yanking chains. Ugh.

yeah, it's like smelling the month-old milk in the fridge-- people just can't stop themselves

 

[MisterSir]

yeah, it's like smelling the month-old milk in the fridge-- people just can't stop themselves

It's alright. We wait long enough, a bunch of drunk fratboys are going to use it for shooting.

 

[LaRocha]

I am polymorphously perverse; getting into the car and turning the key? That's sexual to me. And there are times when flogging someone or recieving a flogging has been emphatically not sexual. Even for me.

So no, this is not a black-and-white area any more than any area of human activity ever can be.

Would you be willing to describe a scenario where neither participant in an exchange experiences pleasure/pain not directly linked to their sex? If one person experiences sex and the other is a-sexual toward the exchange it's still a sex act. If there exists a mode within BDSM that is nonsexual it would really be interesting to me and probably most of the people in this thread who only experience BDSM within a sexual frame of mind.

 

[Netzach]

Would you be willing to describe a scenario where neither participant in an exchange experiences pleasure/pain not directly linked to their sex? If one person experiences sex and the other is a-sexual toward the exchange it's still a sex act. If there exists a mode within BDSM that is nonsexual it would really be interesting to me and probably most of the people in this thread who only experience BDSM within a sexual frame of mind.

Sure - there are scenes that are done for transcendental states, for a kind of catharsis or spiritual high or cleansing. It can be about that.

I guess I've done this kind of thing a bunch, I just don't particularly *care* whether BDSM is sexual or not. LOL.

 

[LaRocha]

No.

BDSM is a method for expressing love, and is as unique as the lover.

BDSM is a category of methods and practices for expressing sexuality. When interacting within any population you have to have rules and definitions which govern interactions. BDSM and sex itself isn't unique, the players and their choices are unique. If you were doing something that didn't fall under the category of BDSM then you wouldn't have a label for it and you wouldn't be here talking to me. Pedal Pumping was a fetish only given a label in the last decade or two, pedals and fetishes have existed for longer than the label. Message boards for pedal pumping have only popped up in the last decade.

~smile~

Of course you can, and I have for over 25 years.

If you only now discovered that you were a practitioner of BDSM, only know discovered the label, you'd still be abiding by a group definition of sex practices. "This is what I am, a-ha!" If your BDSM practices don't fall under categorical BDSM practices, likely you're practicing witchcraft or horseshoes and not BDSM.

Except to share insights with those who would be misled by those who practice casual 'bdsm'.

~smile~

You've already said you haven't participated in any group dynamic in BDSM and have your own rules and practices. How could you possibly set people to rights if you don't understand the category or the societal definitions? How do your labels work if they aren't agreed upon by those people you label as 'casual' practitioners of BDSM?

lol

"He don't know me very well, do he?" - Bugs Bunny

Try your peer pressure tactics on someone who doesn't know better.

You're right, communities include and exclude people and practices they deem unfit. There are many pressures weeding out the harmful ideas and people from every community. A community is only as good as the bad it excludes. If you were a part of any of my communities I'd try and exclude and marginalize you, because you're likely dangerous.

I describe the manner in which I've successfully conducted relationships involving bdsm for the past 25+ years.

A relationship includes another person. Thereby, you have to go back and accept my statement: "You can't describe BDSM outside of a community." Once you do that, you don't have to complain about my authority. I have no authority, only a figure to point the already accepted definitions and practices which fall under BDSM.


~smile~

So you are happy to discuss the relationship as long as you get the authority to define all the terminology?

Domineer anyone lately?

Logic is domineering. The terminology likely already exists for any type of relationship and/or sex practice you want to describe. I don't have to make up definitions, just find those already existing definitions which serve the argument. Wikipedia isn't a bad place to start, it's a definition of a community, likely of folks who make up many different BDSM communities in the English speaking world.

 

[LaRocha]

Sure - there are scenes that are done for transcendental states, for a kind of catharsis or spiritual high or cleansing. It can be about that.

I guess I've done this kind of thing a bunch, I just don't particularly *care* whether BDSM is sexual or not. LOL.

That is very interesting though. Asceticism has existed since before sapiens-sapiens. Shamanism and the search for the transcendental state. I'd like to learn about the relationship between classical asceticism and modern BDSM sex practices. As far as I know, asceticism, shamanism and sex have had a close relationship. The image of the Flagellants is strong, but I don't know that I'd link that transcendental fun with sex practices. Pain-pain vs. pain-pleasure.

 

[Soumis]

Sure - there are scenes that are done for transcendental states, for a kind of catharsis or spiritual high or cleansing. It can be about that.

I guess I've done this kind of thing a bunch, I just don't particularly *care* whether BDSM is sexual or not. LOL.

QFT. Lately it seems like heaven forbid I practice bdsm because I want to or because it feels good. I'm rarely seeking love or an orgasm. Not to be very eloquent, but it just feels right.

 

[fuckmeat]

This message is hidden because BLoved is on your ignore list.

Fantastic. As if I'm going to stand for an unadulterated cunt like that making judgemental comments about G & I.

Now if people could just stop quoting the moron, that would be wonderful. M'kay?

~smile~

I swear, the next time some smug, patronising asshole goes to the trouble of typing a condescending '~smile~' I am quite likely to punch my PC.

Sure - there are scenes that are done for transcendental states, for a kind of catharsis or spiritual high or cleansing. It can be about that.

I've experienced something like this, what you would call subspace I guess. It's an incredible feeling. For me though, it's still sexual and there remains a sexual undercurrent throughout. Also, when I come down from that kind of scene, I need the emotional closeness. There's no way I could just say thankyou, grab my coat and leave.

 

[BLoved]

You're right, communities include and exclude people and practices they deem unfit.

Semantics.

People include/exclude those they deem will contribute/interfere with whatever they wish to do.

Pedophiles include children and exclude police.

So those with dysfunctional attitudes will include those upon whom they can prey, and will exclude anyone who points out their dysfunctional attitudes.

If you were a part of any of my communities I'd try and exclude and marginalize you, because you're likely dangerous.

I am sure those who lure in unsuspecting novices would agree with you.

 

[FloggingMolly]

I swear, the next time some smug, patronising asshole goes to the trouble of typing a condescending '~smile~' I am quite likely to punch my PC.

Its no trouble. Every single overly-repeated yawn-worthy statement is put into a program that randomly selects a paragraph or phrase to copy. He just hits paste a few times and then submits

 

[intothewoods]

Semantics.

People include/exclude those they deem will contribute/interfere with whatever they wish to do.

Pedophiles include children and exclude police.

So those with dysfunctional attitudes will include those upon whom they can prey, and will exclude anyone who points out their dysfunctional attitudes.



I am sure those who lure in unsuspecting novices would agree with you.

If someone comes in to a community and does nothing but attack it and claim that it's purpose is wrong, of course that community will try and exclude or ignore that person. A raging liberal at a conservative Christian coalition meeting or a vegan at a convention of butchers. It makes no difference what the individual or group represents. Whether or not the people have "dysfunctional attitudes" is irrelevant. Eventually people get tired of listening to the endless repetition of a monologue.