The 'ethics' of casual 'bdsm'

[BLoved]

I'd agree with ES on this one. Yes, those feelings are associated with romantic love, but that romantic love adds a sense of, well, entropy that can make things unstable.

You and I have different experiences with love, it would appear.

But wouldn't they be, if they weren't feeling "love" ?

Yes, those feelings can be part of love, but they can also stand alone.

CutieMouse has made a case that if the behaviour matches that of love, and the only difference is the absence of the word "love", then it is still love.

I'm inclined to agree with that argument (tho' I see an aversion to the word "love" as indicative of a dysfunctional attitude towards love).

At any rate, I only said I'd "question" whether they were engaging in casual 'bdsm'. I did not say I would conclude anything from such information alone.

 

[BLoved]

I've answered, as others did, and it got ignored.

I see the claim made without evidence to support it.

This is an old ploy, I've seen it many times before. It occurs late in a discussion, long after the questions have been asked and the answers not forthcoming.

I invite the readers to review the discussion and determine the truth for themselves.

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

You and I have different experiences with love, it would appear.

I'd hope we did. Given that we're different people and all.

I don't think any two experiences with love are the same.

Mind you, outside of familial love, I've also only experienced two.

(tho' I see an aversion to the word "love" as indicative of a dysfunctional attitude towards love).

I see it as a cautious one, given the way love is bandied about. I'd agree that it is better to go slow, to let the love grow and develop. Even if you recognise it, you can take time to label it.

 

[BLoved]

I'd hope we did. Given that we're different people and all.

I don't think any two experiences with love are the same.

Mind you, outside of familial love, I've also only experienced two.

I've been analyzing the Love paradigm since I was 13, forty years now.

I see it as a cautious one, given the way love is bandied about. I'd agree that it is better to go slow, to let the love grow and develop. Even if you recognise it, you can take time to label it.

I'm not afraid of the word "love", nor the reality of love.

As vulnerable and as selfless as love makes me, I place my faith in it, I trust it.

 

[chy_girl]

There is a difference between being a willing participant with full knowledge of what is going on, and being a participant without that knowledge.

The community has been guilty of many forms of abuse in this discussion alone, and yet you are still a willing member of it. You ignore these abuses and pretend they don't exist.

When we have so much evidence of members of the community turning a blind eye to abuse because other members of the community are engaging in abuse does not provide much evidence that anyone in the community cares about abuse.

Has everyone acted with decorum the entire time? No. But it would be helpful for everyone if perhaps you could step back from the emotional aspect far enough to see it from our point of view.

We're a group of people who often have to defend our choices to the entire world - if we can tell the world. Some of us stand to lose in very major ways - professionally or personally- if it ever comes out that we like a good flogging now and then. For some this is the one place where they can simply chill out and shoot the shit. For others (like myself) it's also a place of support totally independent of my Mistress and Sir, a place where I can bitch and whine and get feedback and not have to worry about hurting their feeling or making the matter worse. But no matter the why the who is fairly constant - a group of people, flexing and growing and flowing, who share various degrees of friendship and who share various degrees of kink.

Then one day someone shows up and says "BDSM with out true Love is unethical. The casual community has no true Love. This is the casual community. Ergo YOU are unethical." Of course it offended everyone. We dug in our heels, you dug in your heels and the "hearing" is not at the same level as the "explaining."

That being said, self/group-protection that got a bit out of hand is one thing. Implying that I wouldn't take attitudes of child abuse into consideration in the 'checking it out' stage is almost insulting to my intelligence, my education, and my ability as a mother to keep my children safe.

Verbal sparring with another adult is one thing. Using and abusing a child is another.

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

I've been analyzing the Love paradigm since I was 13, forty years now.

Yikes. Early starter.

I'm not afraid of the word "love", nor the reality of love.

As vulnerable and as selfless as love makes me, I place my faith in it, I trust it.

I don't. For some reason I was always leary of it, and then it hurt me.

 

[CutieMouse]

I've spoken with people who have made such claims.

They couldn't answer my questions regarding their self-esteem.

You haven't asked me. LOL

The interesting thing about your views is that you somehow keep running into submissive women who fit your mold - damaged, abused, poor self esteem, in need of rescue, weak, unable to recognize abuse/set boundaries/etc... whereas most the submissives I've met are confidant, secure, self-assured, intelligent, analytical, successful people with a very healthy understanding of boundaries and personal responsibility.

It makes me wonder why so many damaged people wander into your life, and so few wander into mine...

Thanks CM.

Just more confirmation of the theory.

Another selective quote - you completely ignored the bolded part of my post.

You are now stating that your argument, based on anecdotal evidence, conjecture and biased information is a paradigm, and any opposing argument based on anecdotal evidence, conjecture and biased information is not a paradigm. Wow.

You have clarified that you are paranoid, narrow minded, melodramatic, obtuse, hypocritical martyr lacking critical thinking skills. The last several posts you've made have done an excellent job of cementing that impression.

You have repeatedly accused all online communities of being a mob determined to silence you - even though you have been repeatedly reminded Lit is a Free Speech site and you won't be banned (paranoia).

You refuse to accept anyone who's relationship falls outside your paradigm can have as healthy a self-esteem as those who do fall inside your paradigm (narrow minded).

Your comments reach histrionic proportions (claiming 16 year olds are being lured into events), yet refuse to do your own research to back up those claims (melodramatic).

When anyone uses your own words to discredit your statements, you selectively ignore/misquote the post and twist their words to suit your opinion - a perfect example is the bolded bit you ignored, above (obtuse).

You continually utilize your [limited] experience as a legitimate foundation for your arguments, yet denying anyone else the same foundation (hypocritical).

And you're shown an amazing inability to comprehend anything outside your viewpoint (lack of critical thinking skills).

Yes to both questions.

Keep in mind that when I start these discussions I am looking for just that kind of information.

When you start these discussions, you are selectively looking for a particular answer - no wonder you find it.

I am open to change my mind, providing I have good information upon which to base the change.

But what I have found is that those who engage in love-based relationships exclusively have a healthier self-esteem than those who don't. Such individuals are far more patient and mature than the casual players.

Meaning, you dismiss/ignore/belittle any information that doesn't suit your model, and refuse to accept anyone outside of your model can possibly be as emotionally healthy as you.

The inability to answer a question is, in and of itself, an answer.

As I've said before, this is not the first time I've discussed this topic in a forum. I have tried many times to get this information, but casual players would prefer to respond with immature attempts to discredit me until they call for my banishment, at which time the discussion ends.

This has left me to conclude there is no answer, they know it, and to distract from this fact they attack me instead.

This discussion is very typical of that process.

Except that you refuse to have an actual DISCUSSION. The impression I'm left with, is that in order for this to meet your criteria of a productive conversation, everyone would have to agree with you. Information discrediting or questioning your opinions (stated as fact), is ignored and/or attacked as proof of your martyrdom for the cause.

When you're looking for a fight, you're going to find one.

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

I invite the readers to review the discussion and determine the truth for themselves.

But when they de-lurk and disagree with you, you see it as trying to curry favour with the regular posters.

It couldn't possibly be because they disagree with you, could it?

There is a difference between being a willing participant with full knowledge of what is going on, and being a participant without that knowledge.

How does one truly gain full knowledge without participating?

Second hand knowledge is never as good.

 

[rida]

I see the claim made without evidence to support it.

This is an old ploy, I've seen it many times before. It occurs late in a discussion, long after the questions have been asked and the answers not forthcoming.

I invite the readers to review the discussion and determine the truth for themselves.

Your claim of my lack of self-esteem comes from your belief that everybody that engage in casual sex/BDSM and do not consider such activities outside of a love based relationships to be abuse is a dysfunctional individual and as such either an abuser or an abused, and in both cases lacking self esteem.

My (and others' claims) that we do not suffer such ailment as been shot down as lacking proof. While at the same time using other's outburst of annoyance with you for your obtuse reading, as a further proof of your opinion.

There is no way we can prove ourselves to you as you are not willing to consider anything outside of your own experience and your own beliefs to be honest, true and not tainted by an agenda (the Casual BDSM Community one).

And for the records, I know love very well. I've been married for almost 14 years. My marriage is based on love, a our love has and will survive each and every adversity that life might bring us.

 

[BLoved]

Has everyone acted with decorum the entire time? No. But it would be helpful for everyone if perhaps you could step back from the emotional aspect far enough to see it from our point of view.

We're a group of people who often have to defend our choices to the entire world - if we can tell the world. Some of us stand to lose in very major ways - professionally or personally- if it ever comes out that we like a good flogging now and then. For some this is the one place where they can simply chill out and shoot the shit. For others (like myself) it's also a place of support totally independent of my Mistress and Sir, a place where I can bitch and whine and get feedback and not have to worry about hurting their feeling or making the matter worse. But no matter the why the who is fairly constant - a group of people, flexing and growing and flowing, who share various degrees of friendship and who share various degrees of kink.

Then one day someone shows up and says "BDSM with out true Love is unethical. The casual community has no true Love. This is the casual community. Ergo YOU are unethical." Of course it offended everyone. We dug in our heels, you dug in your heels and the "hearing" is not at the same level as the "explaining."

That being said, self/group-protection that got a bit out of hand is one thing.

Do I have less of a reason to feel attacked than anyone here?

Has anyone stood up for me, as you have all done for each other? Do I have the same kind of support as you?

And yet, despite this uneven distribution of support, have I told anyone to kill themselves, as did ImOnIt?

Have I gloated over anyone's loss, as has Daddy2mylilgirl?

Have I stalked anyone, as Graceanne did?

Have I run off with the potty mouth as has Netzach?

Have I melted down, as has CutieMouse?

Have I stormed away from the discussion, as have several people?

One person against a mob, and yet I still manage full disclosure, as you yourself learned through your questions to me a few days ago. I still have the patience to explain things to CutieMouse, to Lizzie, to you.

Your argument that you are all inflamed because you've been insulted falls apart when you look at how I handle all of your collective efforts to demonize me, to discredit me.

If I can handle myself in such circumstances, without a shred of support from anyone, why can't any of you do the same with all the support you are giving each other?

 

[rida]

I'm not afraid of the word "love", nor the reality of love.

As vulnerable and as selfless as love makes me, I place my faith in it, I trust it.

And I'm not afraid of the word love or the feeling either.

I've always expressed my love even when I knew it would be rejected. Because you know what? My love has nothing to do with the fact that it is reciprocate. My feeling of love come from my soul when it feels a connection with anther's soul.

They are free to take my love or leave it, and it does not change the way I feel toward them.

I'm patient and will put up with a lot for the ones I love. However I'm not going to let anybody walk all over me in the name of love, because the only way I can give love is if I love myself enough to protect myself from being destroyed.

Also, I never exclude the possibility of love to develop from casual encounters. I do not however actively pursue it or feel hurt if it does not happen or my love is not returned.

 

[BLoved]

Yikes. Early starter.

You will recall my earlier exchanges with chy_girl where I explained that if I was to learn what my father would have taught me, I had to learn it for myself.

I started with "The Prophet" by Kahlil Gibran. His essay on "Love" is still a very important aspect of my paradigm.

I don't. For some reason I was always leary of it, and then it hurt me.

You are not the only one who has suffered in that way.

To me, the mistake is in blaming love, rather than the inadequacies of the other person.

Not everyone knows how to love. That doesn't mean love is bad, only that one must find another who knows how to truly love.

 

[Homburg]

No.

One can rely on testimonials, which are subjective and influenced by the bias of the one who testifies.

Or, one can analyze the paradigm, which one can approach without bias.

Translation: Everyone is biased. Except me.

 

[CutieMouse]

CutieMouse has made a case that if the behaviour matches that of love, and the only difference is the absence of the word "love", then it is still love.

I'm inclined to agree with that argument (tho' I see an aversion to the word "love" as indicative of a dysfunctional attitude towards love).

Or maybe, just maybe, it means someone has a healthy sense of boundaries and health esteem and takes longer than 3 weeks to fall in love.

 

[intothewoods]

I'm willing to leave that to the judgment of each reader.

That is why on many ocassions I've invited them to read the discussion for themselves.

As am I.

As far as maturity and policing the conversation, I don't bother responding to people who say something as ridiculous as you should kill yourself. You need that policed for you? I just ignore posts like that. I wasn't aware that not engaging in that was immature.

You seem to be quite focused on the concept of policing, but I would not want to live in a world where everything is policed. I like my freedom, whether it's in my community or in the local scene.

There are many things about the scene that I don't like, but I have also witnessed outpourings of support and fundraising (one particular event was to raise funds for a couple who had lost their child to a rare illness), selfless efforts to help others (i.e., where there was nothing for the person to gain), and a safe place for people who don't have it in their other lives (e.g., transgendered and queer folk). All that can't be overshadowed by the few sleazy would-be predators that are usually tossed out on their ear.

ETA - Good grief, this conversation is like a full time job. The weather is fabulous this weekend. It's time to go spend time with family.

 

[BLoved]

But when they de-lurk and disagree with you, you see it as trying to curry favour with the regular posters.

It couldn't possibly be because they disagree with you, could it?

Approach me as a mature adult and I respond in kind.

Approach me as just another bully trying to get a kick in, and I'm only going to see yet more evidence supporting my theory.

How does one truly gain full knowledge without participating?

Second hand knowledge is never as good.

I don't need to burn myself to know it will hurt.

I don't need to smother myself in steak sauce and enter the lion's den to know it is an unwise idea.

I don't need to be abused, raped or murdered to know these are experiences I'd prefer to avoid.

Analyzing a paradigm is another way of working out consequences for behaviour without actually engaging in the behaviour itself.

I don't need to be a murderer (to give one example) to see that the paradigm of such individuals is abusive and unhealthy.

 

[eastern sun]

My feeling is that if indeed there are mature casual players, they should have appeared by now. I'd recognize them because they'd be the ones policing the others.

The notion of mature people "policing" immature people in a public forum disturbs me.

Like you, I believe that readers can determine for themselves the credibility of any post or argument. They can observe the nature of any poster's behavior and form a judgment of their own.

Though I am frequently saddened by the quality of "discussion" that takes place online, it isn't by any means limited to the realm of "casual BDSM."

 

[BLoved]

My (and others' claims) that we do not suffer such ailment as been shot down as lacking proof. While at the same time using other's outburst of annoyance with you for your obtuse reading, as a further proof of your opinion.

Words are cheap, deeds are not.

When words and deeds disagree, trust the deeds, not the words.

There is no way we can prove ourselves to you

Behave in a mature manner, rather than enraged bullies in the schoolyard.

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

You are not the only one who has suffered in that way.

To me, the mistake is in blaming love, rather than the inadequacies of the other person.

Not everyone knows how to love. That doesn't mean love is bad, only that one must find another who knows how to truly love.

I blamed love because it both blinded me to his inadequacies as a prtner, and because he used my love for him to manipulate me.

Weaponised love. Fuck. There's you WMD right there.

 

[BLoved]

Like you, I believe that readers can determine for themselves the credibility of any post or argument. They can observe the nature of any poster's behavior and form a judgment of their own.

And that is why this discussion is useful.

 

[BLoved]

As far as maturity and policing the conversation, I don't bother responding to people who say something as ridiculous as you should kill yourself. You need that policed for you? I just ignore posts like that. I wasn't aware that not engaging in that was immature.

Turning a blind eye to it is.

How are we to believe the casual community can police itself (which is a claim that has often been made) when it refuses to police itself in an online forum?

 

[Lizzie_Borden]

Analyzing a paradigm is another way of working out consequences for behaviour without actually engaging in the behaviour itself.

Working out assumed consequences.

 

[chy_girl]

Do I have less of a reason to feel attacked than anyone here?

Has anyone stood up for me, as you have all done for each other? Do I have the same kind of support as you?

And yet, despite this uneven distribution of support, have I told anyone to kill themselves, as did ImOnIt?

Have I gloated over anyone's loss, as has Daddy2mylilgirl?

Have I stalked anyone, as Graceanne did?

Have I run off with the potty mouth as has Netzach?

Have I melted down, as has CutieMouse?

Have I stormed away from the discussion, as have several people?

One person against a mob, and yet I still manage full disclosure, as you yourself learned through your questions to me a few days ago. I still have the patience to explain things to CutieMouse, to Lizzie, to you.

Your argument that you are all inflamed because you've been insulted falls apart when you look at how I handle all of your collective efforts to demonize me, to discredit me.

If I can handle myself in such circumstances, without a shred of support from anyone, why can't any of you do the same with all the support you are giving each other?

I worry about you. I worry that you've gotten so caught up in trying to share your beliefs - in trying to share your love - that you might unintentionally be shutting people out who would otherwise agree with you. I worry that the loss you have unfortunately experienced has hurt you in ways not readily visible to most people. I worry that you are so caught up in your message that you might have lost sight of the fact that empathy is a very large component of love. I worry that you have become so focused on the argument, and winning the argument in order to validate a personal need, that you've lost the forest for the trees.

I really do thing it would be a tremendous act of self-love for you to seek support IRL for some of the things you've experienced and to allow yourself the opportunity to grow in new ways.

 

[BLoved]

I blamed love because it both blinded me to his inadequacies as a prtner, and because he used my love for him to manipulate me.

Weaponised love. Fuck. There's you WMD right there.

Whereas I blame the individual's low self-esteem for feeling the need to deceive and manipulate me.

I do not blame love for having the faith in another to give her the chance to rise above such behaviour. If no one is ever given a chance, there would be no love and we'd be a poorer species for the loss.

Love requires having the courage to risk it all. In many ways it is a much greater challenge than anything casual 'bdsm' can offer, and the rewards for success are so much greater.

Neither love nor life offer guarantees to anyone. They only offer us opportunities to grow and to learn, to be better people.

We either embrace those opportunities, or we run from them. But running from them does not produce growth, nor do we learn, nor do we become better people.

Running means giving up, it means embracing fear and all that entails.

Running erodes our self-esteem.

 

[Homburg]

My feeling is that if indeed there are mature casual players, they should have appeared by now. I'd recognize them because they'd be the ones policing the others.

The need to police other does not connote maturity, merely pathological need for power.

Situations where I am treated as a human being, such as chy_girl a few days ago and Lizzie today, they almost never happen.

This is because you are patronising, and your over-broad generalisations are insulting.