The 'ethics' of casual 'bdsm'

[BLoved]

And of course, multiple posters here over the years have made the point that there is nothing mystical about bdsm period. If anything, some people here try to demystify it and provide practical advice.

Which is no more than what I am doing.

 

[intothewoods]

Which is no more than what I am doing.

As I said:

If indeed casual 'bdsm' is a responsible and ethical brand of bdsm, why not recognize the risks?

Why all the hullabaloo when someone points out those risks?

Why misrepresent those risks?

Why not address those risks?

Why the perversely obvious effort to ignore those risks? To marginalize them? To mock them?

Perhaps because the casual community doesn't really care about safety?

Perhaps because casual 'bdsm' only appeals to those who lack the ethics and maturity to deal with these risks, to eliminate them altogether?

Perhaps because the 'community' prefers novices to be as ignorant and as misinformed as possible regarding the risks?

Otherwise, there might be no fresh meat for the next 'party'.

The objection is to misinformation. That's all. If you had posted - so I saw this at two play parties and this over time online and I find that type of behavior objectionable, then everyone would have said, gee, sorry you had a bad experience, that hasn't been my experience, but I dislike x, y and z about the public scene. And then everyone could share information and perspectives.

Instead you said the public scene =s x, y and z bad things and that is dysfunctional for everyone. Half misinformation, half my way is the only way.

 

[BLoved]

The objection is to misinformation. That's all. If you had posted - so I saw this at two play parties and this over time online and I find that type of behavior objectionable, then everyone would have said, gee, sorry you had a bad experience, that hasn't been my experience, but I dislike x, y and z about the public scene. And then everyone could share information and perspectives.

Instead you said the public scene =s x, y and z bad things and that is dysfunctional for everyone. Half misinformation, half my way is the only way.

So you object because I recognize a pattern of abuse that runs through all aspects of casual 'bdsm'.

You call it "misinformation" because you fail to recognize the pattern?

Your concern for "misinformation" would be admirable if evenly applied to all instances of misinformation.

But there is so much you obviously overlook, contributed by those who would also like to discredit me.

And therein is your bias demonstrated. Your blind side.

 

[intothewoods]

So you object because I recognize a pattern of abuse that runs through all aspects of casual 'bdsm'.

You call it "misinformation" because you fail to recognize the pattern?

Your concern for "misinformation" would be admirable if evenly applied to all instances of misinformation.

But there is so much you obviously overlook, contributed by those who would also like to discredit me.

And therein is your bias demonstrated. Your blind side.

Nope, that's not it. An example of misinformation is showing up =s consent for people in the scene. People in the scene conspire to rape subs. Etc., etc.

What misinformation from others am I overlooking? That Homburg called you a goat fucker? You aren't a goat fucker. That was bullshit. Ok?

You are the only person who swooped in to post a whole bunch of things that are not the norm and pretend that they are. You continue to lump everyone remotely connected to the internet bdsm world and the real life bdsm world together into one giant conglomerate of rape and addiction. Lots of people on the internet world don't ever make it out to play parties. There is no conspiracy.

 

[BLoved]

What misinformation from others am I overlooking? That Homburg called you a goat fucker? You aren't a goat fucker. That was bullshit. Ok?

Your concern for "misinformation" is touching, really.

Your inability to speak out against those who would also like to discredit me is obvious, and no more or less than that of all the others who wish to discredit me.

There is no conspiracy.

And this discussion is evidence of this?

 

[intothewoods]

Your concern for "misinformation" is touching, really.

Your inability to speak out against those who would also like to discredit me is obvious, and no more or less than that of all the others who wish to discredit me.



And this discussion is evidence of this?

There is nothing wrong with discrediting you with information and argument.

As to a conspiracy -- that people don't agree with you is not evidence of a conspiracy.

 

[BLoved]

There is nothing wrong with discrediting you with information and argument.

As to a conspiracy -- that people don't agree with you is not evidence of a conspiracy.

That they accuse me of transgressions while ignoring each other's is.

You are no less guilty of this than the others.

You want us to believe the casual community polices itself, and yet you cannot police each other on a public forum.

Yet you all presume to police me.

You don't think that is evidence of a conspiracy?

 

[intothewoods]

That they accuse me of transgressions while ignoring each other's is.

You are no less guilty of this than the others.

You want us to believe the casual community polices itself, and yet you cannot police each other on a public forum.

Yet you all presume to police me.

You don't think that is evidence of a conspiracy?

We are not the scene -- we are individuals on a porn forum. No one is policing you. You have been free to argue whatever you like. As is everyone else here. The only thing this conversation proves is that your posts are offensive to virtually everyone here, including folks in a monogamous relationship based on true love.

 

[BLoved]

We are not the scene -- we are individuals on a porn forum. No one is policing you. You have been free to argue whatever you like. As is everyone else here. The only thing this conversation proves is that your posts are offensive to virtually everyone here, including folks in a monogamous relationship based on true love.

All that has been proven is that the price of acceptance/popularity depends upon one paying lip-service to casual 'bdsm', regardless of the damage it causes.

 

[rida]

So is this, this and this.

So how likely is it a Dungeon Monitor will interfere with someone when he or she doesn't even conduct a weapons check for his or her own personal safety?

Considering that the world is full of indeed mentally unstable people, real rapist and murderer, that everybody with enough desire and money can get hold of a gun, that shooting have happened in almost every possible place where people gather, I'd have to conclude that the only safe way of life is to bunker down in a private property far from any other human being, protected by highly trained guard animals.

I fail to see why a BDSM Public play party are more dangerous, when it comes to shooting, than going to a restaurant. Or the movies.

*snip*

If indeed casual 'bdsm' is a responsible and ethical brand of bdsm, why not recognize the risks?

Why all the hullabaloo when someone points out those risks?

Why misrepresent those risks?

Why not address those risks?

Why the perversely obvious effort to ignore those risks? To marginalize them? To mock them?

Perhaps because the casual community doesn't really care about safety?

Perhaps because casual 'bdsm' only appeals to those who lack the ethics and maturity to deal with these risks, to eliminate them altogether?

Perhaps because the 'community' prefers novices to be as ignorant and as misinformed as possible regarding the risks?

Otherwise, there might be no fresh meat for the next 'party'.

Perhaps it's my lack of native speaker understanding of the English language, but I've yet to read a serious post (aka not written in jest) that claims that meeting strangers is 100% safe, that BDSM play of any type is 100% safe, that safe sex is 100% safe, that people are 100% trustworthy all the time. What I read are an overwhelming number of post advising caution, to be critic of any information, to research on your own and to trust your instincts. And when people have expressed a concern due to some past issue of abuse, the overwhelming consensus has been to seek professional help and not rely on a BDSM relationship to fix the wounds.

And the advice that "people are not 100% trustworthy all the time" also imply that the reader should question my words as well. Claiming that I'm the only trustworthy person and everybody else is dangerous is, as was pointed out already in the past, one of the strategies used by abuser to separate their victims from friends, family and other fellow human beings.

As for the "emotional dysfunction of engaging in intimate behaviors without an emotional connection or the possibility of one" (paraphrasing your believes), that is your personal opinion and it is true for you and for many others. But even without going to discuss what "intimate behaviors" cover, I can tell you that it is not an universal truth. Your evolutionary/anthropological/societal anecdotes not withstanding.

 

[intothewoods]

All that has been proven is that the price of acceptance/popularity depends upon one paying lip-service to casual 'bdsm', regardless of the damage it causes.

The funny thing is that there are posters on this board that have stated that they find bdsm within the context of a loving relationship to be far superior to play in a casual context. I can think of one person right off the bat, but I don't think he has posted in this thread.

 

[BLoved]

I fail to see why a BDSM Public play party are more dangerous, when it comes to shooting, than going to a restaurant. Or the movies.

You really want to compare the crowd that attends a movie with the crowd that attends a public 'play party'?

You really want to admit you don't see a difference between the crowd who attends a restaurant and those who attend a public 'bdsm' event?

Perhaps it's my lack of native speaker understanding of the English language, but I've yet to read a serious post (aka not written in jest) that claims that meeting strangers is 100% safe, that BDSM play of any type is 100% safe, that safe sex is 100% safe, that people are 100% trustworthy all the time. What I read are an overwhelming number of post advising caution, to be critic of any information, to research on your own and to trust your instincts. And when people have expressed a concern due to some past issue of abuse, the overwhelming consensus has been to seek professional help and not rely on a BDSM relationship to fix the wounds.

And letting 200+ strangers in off the street to witness/participate in a public 'bdsm play party' improves the odds?

And the advice that "people are not 100% trustworthy all the time" also imply that the reader should question my words as well. Claiming that I'm the only trustworthy person and everybody else is dangerous is, as was pointed out already in the past, one of the strategies used by abuser to separate their victims from friends, family and other fellow human beings.

And who, pray tell, is claiming to be the only trustworthy individual on the planet?

As for the "emotional dysfunction of engaging in intimate behaviors without an emotional connection or the possibility of one" (paraphrasing your believes), that is your personal opinion and it is true for you and for many others. But even without going to discuss what "intimate behaviors" cover, I can tell you that it is not an universal truth. Your evolutionary/anthropological/societal anecdotes not withstanding.

And there was a time when the tobacco companies claimed there was no evidence linking smoking with cancer.

And there was a time when anyone who thought the world was round was certifiable.

And there was a time when a refusal to say Jesus was the son of God earned you a one way ticket to the stake.

In what way will you bear the consequences for persuading others to engage in an emotionally abusive situation that erodes self-esteem?

Not at all?

Easy to put others at risk, isn't it?

 

[WriterDom]

I will let my beloved answer:

Robert and I are quite happy knowing that our hearts have found eachother in this crazy world of BDSM.
So for you question, 'do i know that i am bound to Robert forever and ever?'
Yes i do because i want to be, just as much as he wants to be bound to my love.

Forever is a long time.

Well, I guess you dumped his ass. And after a good night's sleep he's over you. And back on the attack against the boogie man of his own creation, Casual BDSM.

Perhaps if he had paid you a little more attention, you might have stuck around, huh? There is a debate as to if you actually exist or is this more of Robert's fantasy world. If you do exist, feel free to create your own screen name and give us your side of the story.

Yes, he could create you himself and continue this saga. Perhaps you see the error of your ways after another dangerous dip into casual bdsm. I suspect that is the plan all along. The reunion of Beloved and BLove. Coming to a thread near you soon.

 

[intothewoods]

You really want to compare the crowd that attends a movie with the crowd that attends a public 'play party'?

You really want to admit you don't see a difference between the crowd who attends a restaurant and those who attend a public 'bdsm' event?

When it comes to gun violence (which you brought up)? Yes.

 

[BLoved]

The funny thing is that there are posters on this board that have stated that they find bdsm within the context of a loving relationship to be far superior to play in a casual context. I can think of one person right off the bat, but I don't think he has posted in this thread.

All that has been proven is that the price of acceptance/popularity depends upon one paying lip-service to casual 'bdsm', regardless of the damage it causes.

And this proves I'm wrong how?

There is a difference between saying it is acceptable, and saying it is abusive.

 

[intothewoods]

And this proves I'm wrong how?

There is a difference between saying it is acceptable, and saying it is abusive.

Yes. There is a difference between saying it's not for me, and it's not for everyone. And I think we've all seen that in this thread.

 

[BLoved]

When it comes to gun violence (which you brought up)? Yes.

You would rather we believe that the 200+ strangers who walk in off the street to witness/participate in a public 'bdsm play party' are more likely to be akin to those who walk into a restaurant or a movie, and not like those who wandered into here, here or here.

 

[BLoved]

Yes. There is a difference between saying it's not for me, and it's not for everyone. And I think we've all seen that in this thread.

As I said earlier:

All that has been proven is that the price of acceptance/popularity depends upon one paying lip-service to casual 'bdsm', regardless of the damage it causes.

Even if you recognize a pattern of abuse inherent in casual 'bdsm', you cannot speak of it without paying the price so obvious in this discussion.

And how does that promote tolerance for those who don't believe casual 'bdsm' is healthy?

 

[intothewoods]

You would rather we believe that the 200+ strangers who walk in off the street to witness/participate in a public 'bdsm play party' are more likely to be akin to those who walk into a restaurant or a movie, and not like those who wandered into here, here or here.

I know what I have observed, what I have heard from many people and what I have read about the who, what, where, when and why of violence. I make no claims about what you believe.

And with that, I'm going to go to snuggle with my BLoved. Good night folks!

 

[Daddy2mylilgirl]

You would rather we believe that the 200+ strangers who walk in off the street to witness/participate in a public 'bdsm play party' are more likely to be akin to those who walk into a restaurant or a movie, and not like those who wandered into here, here or here.

you really are one of the stupidest people I have ever seen.

Bravo.

 

[Daddy2mylilgirl]

Oh. And...

Um. No.

Love is not a cure all. It does not heal deep emotional scars. It's at best a band-aid to cover deeper issues. It sits on the surface making you feel good and like all those past issues are magically gone, but deep down those issues are waiting to come to the surface again. If those deeper issues are not taken care of then eventually they will break through the "love" and ruin your relationship. There is a reason people seek third party professionals (whom they don't Love) to help heal those wounds.

If you have to put that much weight into love in order to free yourself from past issues then you are turning a blind eye to deeper problems that will continue to hurt you and others in the future.

You can "Love" an abuse victim as much as you want, but that still won't stop them from flinching when you go to give them a hug.

I told you so.

~smile~

 

[BLoved]

Oh. And...

Love is not a cure all. It does not heal deep emotional scars. It's at best a band-aid to cover deeper issues. It sits on the surface making you feel good and like all those past issues are magically gone, but deep down those issues are waiting to come to the surface again. If those deeper issues are not taken care of then eventually they will break through the "love" and ruin your relationship. There is a reason people seek third party professionals (whom they don't Love) to help heal those wounds.

If you have to put that much weight into love in order to free yourself from past issues then you are turning a blind eye to deeper problems that will continue to hurt you and others in the future.

You can "Love" an abuse victim as much as you want, but that still won't stop them from flinching when you go to give them a hug.

I told you so.

~smile~

Living with Trauma: Cycles of Self-Destruction

As was described in the previous section, past abuse can predispose a submissive to accept more abuse.

This is not inevitable. Love has a healing quality when it comes to abuse.

Whether the love of one person can heal the abuse suffered by another very much depends on the individuals and the degree to which Love and Fear motivates them.

But there is no cure for abuse but Love.

Love helps to restore self-respect.

Love provides a solid foundation from which one can determine what is real, what is flattery, and what is delusion.

Love does not deceive.

But for those who do not find love, and for those combinations of people where the love of one was insufficient to overcome the fears of the abused, there continues this diminished sense of self-respect.

In their need for relief, they seek solace in the arms of others. But in allowing themselves to be used for the sake of the illusion of being desired they further undermine their self-respect.

Some, convinced they are not doing enough to be desirable, seek to go further, casting off limits if need be, ignoring safety concerns and pushing themselves to the brink of extinction, emotionally if not physically as well.

It is a vicious cycle which, if not stopped, eventually leaves the submissive incapable of accepting love, pushing away anything that looks like love.

After so much abuse, she simply no longer believes in it, or no longer believes herself worthy of it.

She may well go to the extreme of only seeking out situations where there is no chance of Love entering her world.

Jaded and calloused, she may even join in the abuse of others.

After so much abuse, the ability to relate to the feelings of others grows numb.

Just as it does for the domly types who abuse others.

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

 

[Homburg]

What misinformation from others am I overlooking? That Homburg called you a goat fucker? You aren't a goat fucker. That was bullshit. Ok?

Bullshit? It wasn't bullshit. It was reductio ad absurdum. I figured if nothing else works, RAA might. Obviously it failed to reach the mark too, but a few people appreciated it.

 

[BLoved]

Bullshit? It wasn't bullshit. It was reductio ad absurdum. I figured if nothing else works, RAA might. Obviously it failed to reach the mark too, but a few people appreciated it.

ad hominem: An ad hominem, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument toward the person"), is an attempt to persuade which links the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise. The ad hominem is a classic logical fallacy.

 

[rida]

You really want to compare the crowd that attends a movie with the crowd that attends a public 'play party'?

You really want to admit you don't see a difference between the crowd who attends a restaurant and those who attend a public 'bdsm' event?

And letting 200+ strangers in off the street to witness/participate in a public 'bdsm play party' improves the odds?

When it comes to gun violence (which you brought up)? Yes.

Let's put it this way: your one and only experience was an even where people were free to walk in from the street. I too would have not liked such thing and would have walked away from such lack of security.

However, the experience shared by me and other people is different: people are have to show IDs, or it is a reservation only event, or a membership club event. And in the case of private parties, you have to personally know the organizer or one of the guests to be invited.

And in the type of public environment I and others have experienced, I'd say that yes, there is no difference from the two type of crowds when it come to gun violence.

And who, pray tell, is claiming to be the only trustworthy individual on the planet?

Not me.

And there was a time when the tobacco companies claimed there was no evidence linking smoking with cancer.

And there was a time when anyone who thought the world was round was certifiable.

And there was a time when a refusal to say Jesus was the son of God earned you a one way ticket to the stake.

In what way will you bear the consequences for persuading others to engage in an emotionally abusive situation that erodes self-esteem?

Not at all?

Easy to put others at risk, isn't it?

You are missing the point: I'm not trying to persuade anybody. I'm not hunting for fresh meat (nor old meat, nor meat at all). I'm only explaining that your beliefs do not apply to my experience or myself.

I fail to see how I'm putting someone at risk by showing a different reality than yours.

Unless you believe to be the only trustworthy individual on this forum, or on any other BDSM site.