The 'ethics' of casual 'bdsm'

[seela]

Just another tangent to muddy the waters like his AIDS and rape rants. The fact is he doesn't want any woman of any age at any public bdsm event. Correct?

This seems to be the case, yes. I wonder if it would make any difference, if the women were in a loving relationship and went to the events with their partners.

 

[Netzach]

Would you like to find any of these exceptions here:

Ages of consent in North America: United States - Wikipedia.

Thus far I've not found them.

As for claims about what a casual community will and won't do ... without evidence from jurisdictions where 16 is the age of consent, they are nothing more than claims.

I'm in Minnesota, it's 16, and you are in a state of profound delusion.

 

[Netzach]

This seems to be the case, yes. I wonder if it would make any difference, if the women were in a loving relationship and went to the events with their partners.

She just thinks she's in a loving relationship if she's not getting the BLoved injection nightly. The entire MO here is that there's some emotionally crippled woman here whose pity can be converted to bom chicka bom.

Women are too stupid to know that they're crushed abuse victims when they make a choice that doesn't involve the BLoved stick.

 

[BLoved]

16 year old children "know full well where they are headed to and what kind of an event it will be like"?

Yes, I believe even a 16 year old children these days know where they are headed to if they have gone through the trouble of finding a BDSM event they would be allowed enter because of their age.

And if they are allowed to enter, then presuambly they are also allowed to participate.

The only person who might know their true age would be the member of the casual community who sold the ticket, assuming they check for age.

Again, I only know what happens in the events where I live.

And unless you are actually monitoring everything that happens at these events, the best we can say is that you attend them.

if someone is capable of finding out where these events are, they are capable of taking care of their own boundaries. If they aren't, then they shouldn't be attending the events in the first place.

And if someone is not "capable of taking care of their own boundaries", how are they to know "they shouldn't be attending the events in the first place"?

If they lack the maturity to take care of their boundaries, why expect them to be mature enough to know it?

In their impatience to sell a ticket, how thoroughly do they screen people to determine whether the stranger is mature enough to handle the event?

This doesn't just apply to 16 year olds. This applies to any age. Age isn't an automatic cure for immaturity.

You see, in a loving relationship a person will screen another for weeks or months before placing themselves into a bdsm situation. People want to know the person is sane, stable, honest, sincere before choosing them as a partner.

But in a public casual 'bdsm' event anyone can get into a 'bdsm' situation for the price of admission.

No screening required.

Even 16 year olds in the right jurisdictions.

The one public casual 'bdsm' event I attended I learned of from the one munch I attended.

No one spoke to me at that munch, let alone screened me.

They just sold me the ticket.

According to most everyone who has posted here, I'm Satan Incarnate.

~smile~

How concerned is the casual community about safety at these public casual 'bdsm' events, and how concerned for profit?

And why keep going on about those 16 year olds?

They are no less vulnerable to the emotional abuse caused by casual 'bdsm', and indeed are more likely the most vulnerable.

I've often spoken of the immature behaviour so obvious in this discussion (Keroin's earlier post comes to mind). It has always been a mystery to me who they thought they'd convince with such behaviour.

16 year old children, perhaps?

Kids who are familiar with schoolyard bullies?

If you want protection, you join a gang. And low and behold, we have one in this forum.

Those who have helped build this discussion to 60 pages.

Do you believe in personal responsibility? Should everything be adjusted to the level of the least capable of being able to take care of themselves? Or do you only want to adjust the BDSM communities to that level?

Actually, I expect those involved in BDSM to set a higher standard for safety than anyone else.

We have an obligation to ourselves, to our loved ones and to the community to show we're not a bunch of would-be rapists and spouse abusers.

We've an obligation to establish the most impeccable standard of ethics, and enforce it, even at the cost of no longer hosting public events.

If practitioners of bdsm cannot demonstrate a greater concern for safety than profit, then they deserve no better a consideration than pimps.

 

[seela]

She just thinks she's in a loving relationship if she's not getting the BLoved injection nightly. The entire MO here is that there's some emotionally crippled woman here whose pity can be converted to bom chicka bom.

Women are too stupid to know that they're crushed abuse victims when they make a choice that doesn't involve the BLoved stick.

Right... I forgot about that for a moment there.

*I shall remember I'm a crushed abuse victim*
*I shall remember I'm a crushed abuse victim*
*I shall remember I'm a crushed abuse victim*
*I shall remember I'm a crushed abuse victim*

Granted, there are people in the community who are crippled and are looking for to be fixed. But it's BDSM, goddamnit, not therapy!

 

[intothewoods]

Would you like to find any of these exceptions here:

Ages of consent in North America: United States - Wikipedia.

Thus far I've not found them.

As for claims about what a casual community will and won't do ... without evidence from jurisdictions where 16 is the age of consent, they are nothing more than claims.

Right, bdsm groups across the country welcome 16 year olds with firearms and have a big ol' orgy that ends in a shootout every Saturday night. And we've all managed to keep it a big secret. Until now.

Yep. Gun-toting predators with an eye for 16 year olds = the kink scene these days.

I don't often take lessons from tv, but if anyone watches the Real Housewives of New York City, this is starting to remind me of last episode's meltdown. Good luck with your life, Bloved. I hope you find love again, and everything works out well for you.

 

[BLoved]

Just another tangent to muddy the waters like his AIDS and rape rants.

~smile~

What I've been doing is defining the scope of the problem.

The casual 'bdsm' paradigm has many consequences, all of them bad.

The fact is he doesn't want any woman of any age at any public bdsm event. Correct?

The fact is I see public casual 'bdsm' events as inherently abusive.

Even if we assume the people performing the 'bdsm' acts are deeply in love with each other, we certainly cannot say that about the 200+ spectators who attended the event I witnessed.

Nor can we say that about the organizers who encouraged others to risk themselves for the profit of the organizers.

So we have 200+ spectators plus the organizers vicariously or actually exploiting the participants ... participants who could include 16 year old children in the right jurisdictions.

And in some jurisdictions even the event itself would be illegal.

In what way is that not abusive?

In what way does taking such a risk, not for love, but for endorphins, orgasms, approval or whatever not demonstrate a degree of low self-esteem?

In what way would it not aggravate low self-esteem?

In what way does it not teach a 16 year old child that the more he or she is objectified, the more approval he or she will get?

And what about the spectators? Who is checking them out to screen out psychopaths?

 

[Netzach]

Right, bdsm groups across the country welcome 16 year olds with firearms and have a big ol' orgy that ends in a shootout every Saturday night. And we've all managed to keep it a big secret. Until now.

Yep. Gun-toting predators with an eye for 16 year olds = the kink scene these days.

Exactly.

 

[BLoved]

Granted, there are people in the community who are crippled and are looking for to be fixed. But it's BDSM, goddamnit, not therapy!

And if you happen to abuse someone who is crippled, it's not your fault for not screening them properly in the first place.

Caveat emptor.

And you wonder why I won't subscribe to a paradigm as indifferent to the needs of others as this?

 

[TypicalDeviant]

[url="http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=34068755&postcount=932]Casual 'BDSM' and Emotional Abuse: The Case for Love[/url]

I wrote it.

It is not yet published.

Oh. I thought it was written by a professor or other professional who had done tons of research which was then peer-reviewed.

Other than the one munch you went to, did you do any primary research?

EDIT: What I'm getting at is you're supporting your argument (opinion? see below) with your own writing, which is a bit circular. You've gone to one munch, you've had a certain set of experiences with BDSM. Your experience is not authoritative of the entire BDSM community. For that matter, neither is anyone else's experience.

As far as I can tell, you're just stating your opinion and people are disagreeing with it. Some people disagree with all of it, others just with some of it. All the other posts in this, and related, threads tends to take issue with your presentation of your opinion, your response to their responses, and so on.

Some people just like to argue, regardless of the topic. I wouldn't confuse it with immaturity or the "attitude" of the entire community.

You find that BDSM works best within the structure of a committed relationship. That works for you, it helps fulfill you and make you emotionally healthy. You would not feel the same if you engaged in those behaviors outside of a committed relationship. And because it works for you, I support you in your endeavors. Really. It makes you happy, you're not hurting anyone (by your own admission). That's awesome.

But that's not what works for other people. They're free to make their own choices. And if they're not hurting anyone, that's fine too. Any claim you make that they are, in fact, hurting someone is baseless. You don't know the veracity of their claims anymore than we know the truth of yours.

Essentially, and to quote The Big Lebowski: "Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man. "

And the same to the rest of us.

 

[BLoved]

Oh. I thought it was written by a professor or other professional who had done tons of research which was then peer-reviewed.

Thank you for the compliment.

 

[WriterDom]

All this would be fine if you were against bdsm in general. But you see nothing dysfunctional about a woman meeting a guy for a bdsm relationship from CollarMe or any other casual site and playing house for a month. All in the name of love which in your case seems sadly to evaporate overnight.

In fact, one of the few suggestions you had was to make sure the sub got a picture.

That's great advice. There are only 100000 billion or so images available online.

Yep, guys online telling you they love you. No red flags there.

 

[seela]

And if they are allowed to enter, then presuambly they are also allowed to participate.

The only person who might know their true age would be the member of the casual community who sold the ticket, assuming they check for age.

Yes, they would be allowed to participate, because the age of consent here is 16. And if the person who sold the ticket checked their age then it's quite enough. But let me reiterate, no 16 year old would be allowed to enter these events because you have to be at least 18 (which is the age by law, the event organizers may use even a higher age limit) to attend.

And if someone is not "capable of taking care of their own boundaries", how are they to know "they shouldn't be attending the events in the first place"?

What can I say. I believe in personal responsibility and I that people are allowed to decide for themselves, for the most part, what feels right for them. They are allowed to make mistakes, even. I don't believe that people need an organization to evaluate if they are ready to enter the big, scary and mystical world of BDSM.

What the community and organizers do have to look out for, is all illegal acts. Those have to be weeded out immediately and I don't see any reason why they wouldn't be because the organizers certainly aren't looking for trouble.

You see, in a loving relationship a person will screen another for weeks or months before placing themselves into a bdsm situation. People want to know the person is sane, stable, honest, sincere before choosing them as a partner.

But in a public casual 'bdsm' event anyone can get into a 'bdsm' situation for the price of admission.

No screening required.

Even 16 year olds in the right jurisdictions.

They are not mating for life in the events, if they're looking for someone to flog them for the fun of it. They could mate for life and nothing wrong with that, but a bit different set of requirements should be met for those casually flogging than those who will be the mate from now to eternity. For the casual flogger it pretty much is enough that they understand that no means no, or whatever the safeword might be in that situation. And in public events there are also other people present and watching what happens and someone will interefere if the helpless submissive yelps the safeword.

Yes, the community actually is pretty rigid about its own rules.

The one public casual 'bdsm' event I attended I learned of from the one munch I attended.

No one spoke to me at that munch, let alone screened me.

They just sold me the ticket.

How could you have trusted that the one screening you knew what they were doing? They only would have been implementing their own set of requirements for you and if they said you don't pass then you wouldn't be allowed to enter even if you were the Christ reborn and wanting to flog some pretty lil' ass.

So I suppose you're now saying that all BDSM events are Satan's spawn and should be made illegal?

~smile~

~smile~

If you want protection, you join a gang. And low and behold, we have one in this forum.

Yes. The fear of the mighty BDSM mob here kept me from joining the conversations all this time. *sob sob*

There are random people talking about sex here, not a gang. Friendships emerge when people crowd the forum for long enough, but you can hardly talk about a gang here. If you're feeling attacked, then the only reason I can see for it is your poorish way of deliver your opinions (ie. you make them sound like the One True Way which isn't generally a very appreciated approach) and not so much the opinions you hold.

Actually, I expect those involved in BDSM to set a higher standard for safety than anyone else.

We have an obligation to ourselves, to our loved ones and to the community to show we're not a bunch of would-be rapists and spouse abusers.

We've an obligation to establish the most impeccable standard of ethics, and enforce it, even at the cost of no longer hosting public events.

If practitioners of bdsm cannot demonstrate a greater concern for safety than profit, then they deserve no better a consideration than pimps.

Wow. I don't know what to say anymore. I'm not expecting anyone to show me that they're not rapists. I also don't know why the BDSM practitioners should have any higher standard of ethic than any Joe Sixpack.

 

[seela]

And if you happen to abuse someone who is crippled, it's not your fault for not screening them properly in the first place.

Caveat emptor.

And you wonder why I won't subscribe to a paradigm as indifferent to the needs of others as this?

I don't know what you expect to happen in typical BDSM events. In my experience they aren't full blown orgies where everything goes. What mostly happens between people who don't know each other beforehand is usually some flogging or bondage. I cannot see how that can be considered abuse if and when the safewords are respected and both parties enter the situation willingly.

 

[LaRocha]

Why is it called a "munch"? That's gross.

 

[BLoved]

All this would be fine if you were against bdsm in general. But you see nothing dysfunctional about a woman meeting a guy for a bdsm relationship from CollarMe or any other casual site and playing house for a month. All in the name of love which in your case seems sadly to evaporate overnight.

Funny you should mention that.

I was thinking of the days when I dated, after my second beloved and before I met my wife.

I'd come to realize that in establishing any loving relationship there was a three month 'hump'.

Either a relationship failed within three months, or it lasted no less than a year.

Neither of the two relationships I've had since my wife died lasted longer than three months.

There have been four that lasted a year or more (three of whom I lived with).

Six years, four years, one year and then my wife for almost eleven years.

In fact, one of the few suggestions you had was to make sure the sub got a picture.

A few tips for Submissives questing for a Beloved

 

[BLoved]

Yes, they would be allowed to participate, because the age of consent here is 16. And if the person who sold the ticket checked their age then it's quite enough. ... I'm not expecting anyone to show me that they're not rapists. I also don't know why the BDSM practitioners should have any higher standard of ethic than any Joe Sixpack.

Thank you for shedding some light on the 'ethics' of casual 'bdsm'.

 

[seela]

Thank you for shedding some light on the 'ethics' of casual 'bdsm'.

You're quite welcome, hon. But I shedded some light on the ethics of seela, don't mix it with 'ethics' of casual 'bdsm'. That's much too big a hat for me to wear...

 

[chy_girl]

*snip*

If that were true, why do we have so many people posting to say they've never attended a public event where there was a weapons check?

Why would Rida and ImOnIt be telling people they attend these events at their own risk, and if they get abused they only have themselves to blame for being so stupid as to attend these public 'bdsm' events in the first place?

The weapons check might have something to do with dickDoms who don't listen to the 'no gunplay' rule. And it's far more pleasant to deal with stupid shit before the play starts than in the middle of a scene... totally ruins the head space.

And how is the sub to do this when she is bound and gagged?



I said "here", as in Canada where the age of adulthood is 18.

But thanks for telling us that people as young as 16 could also attend, local laws willing.

By a non-verbal safeword. Usually a 'dropsy' of some sort. And if a sub safe words during an event and the Top doesn't stop, people will step in because we just don't ignore a safe word -verbal or not.

And the age of consent doesn't have shit to do with the minimum age required for attendance.

When I have my sub bound and gagged she is always holding a red ball in one hand. If she drops the ball EVERYTHING STOPS she is released until she feels safe enough to continue.

Will admit that I have had this happen once, we continued the scene right away and she orgasmed over the next few swats.

Even if I'm not bound and gagged my People give me a ball on a string. We learned very quickly that as non-chatty as I am IRL, I'm down right non-verbal in subspace. Even in lighter scenes where I don't need it (and if it starts to get heavy Mistress *will* go get it for me) the safeword is ball.

Dropping a ball is not the same as being "fully able to call the police if things get out of hand." (quote from Ravenwind).

No, but you drop the ball, ask to be let down and then call the police. This is actually an argument in *favor* of public play because there is a room full of people who are going to call bullshit if a safeword is ignored. And I know multiple people in the local community who would dial the police for said sub.

Right... I forgot about that for a moment there.

*I shall remember I'm a crushed abuse victim*
*I shall remember I'm a crushed abuse victim*
*I shall remember I'm a crushed abuse victim*
*I shall remember I'm a crushed abuse victim*

Granted, there are people in the community who are crippled and are looking for to be fixed. But it's BDSM, goddamnit, not therapy!

Last night was the weekly play party with my People. I telling you, if that's what it's like to be a "crushed abuse victim" I'd like my People to crush me some more.

Why is it called a "munch"? That's gross.

Because people get together and eat while they chat. As in munching on chips...

 

[Netzach]

Neither of the two relationships I've had since my wife died lasted longer than three months.

Don't mind me, I'm just trying out your cool editing style.

 

[Netzach]

16 year olds screened me. I'm Satan Incarnate.

~smile~

Yep, that's a cool trick.

 

[seela]

Don't mind me, I'm just trying out your cool editing style.

BLoved, out of curiosity, how do you feel about women attending BDSM events together with their partners?

 

[BLoved]

Yep, that's a cool trick.

You are missing several ellipses.

 

[BLoved]

BLoved, out of curiosity, how do you feel about women attending BDSM events together with their partners?

Would that be to objectify others, or to be objectified by others?

I attended one because my wife requested it of me. Not having any experience with a casual 'bdsm' event, I agreed.

We never attended another.

 

[seela]

Would that be to objectify others, or to be objectified by others?

...because there's absolutely no other reason to attend a BDSM event than to objectify somebody or to be objectified, right.
Many people get off on exhibitionism and voyeurism. They are hard to practice out in the real world in a way that doesn't give you jail time or some other repercussions.

And what's wrong with objectification, anyways? It's completely hot under the right circumstances.