Curious

I'm not trying to be a crank, I'm just genuinely tossing this out as food for thought and giving my personal 2 cents, call it an inspired moment of "huh....hmmm"

I can see a bit of controversy brewing a few posts down. Now, I personally am all for anyone having any kind of sexual fantasy under the sun and writing about it and talking about it is fine.

I don't think that every time someone says "I fantasize about XYZ immoral and antisocial activity" there always has to be a chorus saying "oh but the reality is not hot or pretty..." among intelligent and reasonably decent adults, that's a given.

But what's got me wondering is how/why BDSM becomes the ghetto for every anti-social sexual impulse there is out there? Why when someone has a thought about death, disfigurement, animal-fucking and rape, here we are?
Why do we ask these things on our own board? Other than we're the only board who won't make it a shouting match and witch hunt, but I'm not talking about things as they are, merely theoretically how they are...

As an example, does rosco's thread really have anything remotely to do with my life in leather? I love the thread, and I like the author quite a lot, and I don't really think it does. It has a lot to do with my sexual landscape, it asks some really good questions...but in an ideal world, it might be part of the discourse on sexuality, not "BDSM"

True, I think that we are probably the more tolerant of the fringes of sexual behavior than most other sexual subcultures, but is there a point at which some of this becomes a more generalized sexuality discussion? Maybe what needs to happen is that the discourse around "sexuality" in general needs to expand to accomodate its kinks better.

All I know is that when I think about what I think my BDSM is, I do draw some harder lines around it than I used to in the past. I *am* talking about a linear path from postwar leather and 70's-80's prodomme fetish culture somehow over the internet and to me. I'm not saying this in some fucked up exclusionary way, most of you know me better than that. I'm not saying if you don't adhere to this you don't belong on this board or at my munches or anywhere near me, that's not the point either...

I am just beginning to question the "BDSM is anything remotely related to bondage discipline sado masochism dee ess and fetishes" mentality-- and I'm recognizing that there IS a BDSM which is located in a specific subcultural millieu, and that we might be kidding ourselves when we think it can accomodate everything left of sexual center.

It's a very tenuous thought. I doubt that many of the scene people I feel I derive from would likewise claim me as an actual descendant. But my philosophies are created in relation to reading Baldwin, Rinella, Califia, etc. my safety fetishes are ideally served by Wiseman, I go to conventions, I read leather journal, and I say this merely to be very clear about one thing--

I am coming from inside the mainstream of BDSM. You know, the boring, overgroomed, polite part that everyone likes to complain about. The lifeless floggings, the shitty manners, the personal grudges, the political games, the weekend warriors, the kinky swingers, the internet-infested "gee it used to be great" middle of the road. SSC is not something that makes me roll my eyes, even if it is very very very overstated-- I think it's a fairly good idea.

BDSM has all those elements. But not for everyone and it does not have to be that way --

Negotiating MY scenes never felt like I was giving the bottom too much power, it felt like maybe I might get some great ideas for things I've not tried yet if I talked to them.

MY floggings are sometimes very soft and hypnotic and not about pain. We call that "a reward." If I'm doing it in public and people find it boring, that's fucking great, I'm flogging my boy for me, not for Laura Antoniou. You might get lucky and get to see me make someone scream another night.

I personally believe that if someone's not deriving any enjoyment or satisfaction or positive outcome from the scene or the way the scene fits into their relationship, they are being abused. No, that does not mean the slave gets spoiled and pampered, that means they feel fulfilled at the end of the day's hard work.

(Slaves, in my world, are for working, not keeping in a crate, and not usually for fucking, mostly for working...see why they are so very very very rare?)

The endless discussion about real submission versus fake submission is moot for ME. Genuinely felt submission, even with provisions around certain things, is still submission to the best of one's ability, it's still something to be savored and enjoyed. Even a physical decision to bottom as an equal power is an expression of trust, often more so than a lot of submission and service endeavors.

Given a choice between the two, I'll take the latter a lot of the time.

So, you can ask me about horse fucking, snuff, Masters who order slaves to kill themselves, disfigurement, forced gender transitioning, 24/7 rubber dolls, 24/7 ponies, but I assure you this--

my perspective is not going to be any more informed than a reasonably open minded vanilla person. My being involved in BDSM does not mean I have insight into these things above and beyond that.

I worry that in posting this post I'm doing something I detest, which is when a subculture distances itself from its fringes in an effort to be more acceptable. I hope that's not how this comes across. I'm just saying that I don't necessarily possess expertise on the outer limits of sexuality simply because I like to smack people and poke them with needles in an organized fashion, and encourage men to suck each other off and all manner of things that are just as fringe in some people's minds.

LOL, love the thread topic and all you have to say. I'm not sure I have any answers to your questions/musings, but can see the trends you highlight and the wonderings that come from them. I think in part we attract a lot of fringe topics simply because as you say, we are usually tolerant, and are seen as kink friendly. Let's face it, most people would be virtually crucified for even stepping outside the vanilla mold if they revealed their thoughts in the mainstream. There are some open minded vanilla people out there, but not an oversupply IMO. So where else do you go if you want to discuss the more out of the ordinary topics?

That being said, I also think a lot of the topics, though they can be practiced or thought about outside the D/s realm, many of them can be made and used to serve aspects of D/s rather effectively. I think we are all an eclectic mix of likes and dislikes and though some of us may lean more one way than the other, we are all different and share varying degrees of the same desires while coexisting as a group. I suspect the answers will also be subjective to people's individual experiences and personalities. One thing I did notice while browsing Bopndage.com this week is there has been a sticky added warning people of topics that if mentioned even remotely in a post will attract a deletion...even the words are not to be mentioned (eg. sexual fantasies in childhood or underage as well as with children/underage; beastiality and related topics....ie, your post would never have remained because you mentioned horsefucking in passing). I would hate this forum to become that restricted that people could not even speak of their own experiences or thoughts.

Catalina

Have had to read this several times as each time my mind went of on different tangents.

Kind of thought provoking posts I love to ponder.

Master is here this weekend so will not have too much time to think this through.

In essence I understand some of Netzach frustrations.

The BDSM board and lifestyle do seem to be a melting pot for all those things/people/thoughts/fantasies that do not sit well anywhere else.

BDSM people are perceived as tolerant.
This could be for a variety of reasons.

1) The initials BDSM cover a range of issues, therefore we 'as a group' have larger boundaries than a group that (for example) collect dolls houses from circa 1880-1900.

2) No-one can clearly define SSC or RACK as it differs from person to person. Just as no-one can define 'normal.'

3) Its uncomfortable pointing out that someones kink is unacceptable when we live in a pc world where any kind of kink could be viewed as unacceptable.


4) Its can be a difficult pathway and when we look at others on a similiar pathway empathy for them, understanding the road they are travelling makes us tolerant.

These are only ideas about our tolerance not a given set of reasons written in stone

Netzachs says

....we might be kidding ourselves when we think it can accomodate left of sexual center.

Anyone can wrap their mind around pretty much anything once in the right frame of mind, so theoretically we can accomodate anything we want either as individuals or a group. Whether we want to is a different issue.

Netzach is a strong enough person to deal with flogging her slave her way in public or not. That takes courage, personal strength, self confidence and an understanding of what tthe aim of the scene is..in detail not an overall objective.

Its difficult to imagine where people would go to learn and understand themselves if they have kinks that are not spoken about in general mainstream conversation.

Whether BDSM is the right place, I don't know.

Off to think and think some more
Interesting post N x

I'm gonna get crucified for this one but maybe some thoughts should be kept just for yourself. Aren't the details of those thoughts what keeps them fantasies? Isnt part of the fun for you knowing that they are yours and doesnt it get ruined when it takes a step into reality by you writing about them?
This prolly should have went on the other thread sorry.


BTW Netzach, that was a fabulous post!

good thread Netzach and good points made. i too, do not think that any and everything falls under the umbrella of BDSM. i think that the mainstream BDSM world is actually a fairly restrictive and not necessarily open-minded one. one reason why i don't fit or wish to fit into that world.

however since many lifestyle Dominants and submissives (something imo entirely apart form BDSM) frequent this board, i feel comfortable posting things that fall within that realm as well. not necessarily typical "D/s" things, but ideas and thoughts and feelings from my own submissive (albeit sometimes dark) mind.
when i read a thread here created by a Dominant talking about some of their own pervy thoughts, though they may have nothing whatever to do with BDSM, i still see it as having a place here because it can all be a part of D/s.

like Catalina, i too would be very disappointed if this board were to become as restricted and censored as most other so called
"alternative" online communties. that is not to say that any and all topics of a sexual nature belong here, but who is the one to judge what does and does not fit? beastiality, snuff, forced gender-bending, rape, etc. can be "kinks" all their own. however each and every one of them can also be a part of BDSM or D/s.

Wonderful post and one that simply needs to be addressed.

I am also One that lives and breathes BDSM and D/s within a very large worldwide community in the real world and the internet community.

I attend munches with 50 to 90 BDSMers every Tuesday night, host a play party in My home no less than once a week, walk the ProDomme tight rope and attend kink or fetish events no less than once a month. Sit on the board of the largest Kink club in BC as well.

It is safe to say that I have a diverse group at My side and under My feet. W/we speak deeply on many subjects and are constantly riding the edge of kink but never once in all of the years I have been living and playing this game has subjects such as snuff, dismembering and animal sex been considered even interesting subjects of fantasy or reality.

How do I view these subjects? They bore Me. Why? Because I suppose I like My fantasy to have some basis in the possibility of reality and for Me BDSM and D/s is reality. They also trouble Me when they begin to take on a life of their own on boards such as these as those new to BDSM and those opposing it have fodder to hold U/us up to ridicule and judgements that do not foster reality. To each their own and I am not trying to come off as judgemental of what turns others on but as Netz points out it would appear that the lines of sexuality do not always meld with BDSM or D/s. W/we are not the blanket that covers every depravity known to mankind.

I am a hard nosed Mistress that often wears a velvet glove. I can knock a slave to his knees with a single blow from My leather paddle and make him scream while large tears run down his cheeks. This same man will crawl to Me to thank Me for such treatment. I can scratch My girls chin and have her purr for My entertainment as I watch her soft eyes smile up at Me.

Sex...where does it fit in for Me? Almost never with My slaves...they are for work and endurance and that is where they crave to be placed in My life. Even My submissives are kept at a sexual bay except for the one that I have chosen to be My sex toy. This one is My slut in every way that turns Me on which is his biggest joy. None of My toys is immune to teasing and denial but even on the edge of their extreme frustration they know that I will remain sane in My treatment of them. They know that I will take them safely past the place they ever had any desire to go and on the way they will be consenting with every body move they have.

I to think the SSC is over done and has become no more than a catch phrase that makes newbies bask in a false sense of security and gives Us old timers one more reason to shake Our heads and wonder whos phrases We are expected to mouth next.

I guess My point is much as that of Netz. I wonder why the BDSM community has become such a catch all online when it does not appear to be such a catch all in My real world. Perhaps I live in a smaller BDSM community than I am aware of.

No disrespect is meant for the views of other who do see the edges that I see between BDSM and sex and the extremes that are their turn ons. Nor is this post pointing a finger at anyone or ones.

Shadowsdream said:

I can scratch My girls chin and have her purr for My entertainment as I watch her soft eyes smile up at Me

Click to expand...

oh my ...oh my.... speechless again

This is an interesting thread. Like Netzach and like Shadowsdream I come from “mainstream” BDSM. My roots do not lie in the internet community but are more firmly planted in the BDSM clay of the Netherlands/Spanish BDSM scene. Unlike the previously mentioned PYL my views of what belongs in BDSM and what doesn’t is not as sharply bordered as theirs is.

In essence Netzach has a great deal to do with that, two years ago when we started to post on Literotica, I had a much more structured view of what was and what was not BDSM. I had made my own definitions and everything that fall out of that frame I considered to be false and not true. It was in discussions with the sharp minds of the Literotica posters that I learned that there are many ways and many different roads that have the same name.

The mind is a beautiful thing, imagination is a thing of beauty, and open mindedness is a quality that should be part of our community if what we have can be called a community that is. I think it is a dangerous path we are following, trying to create a framework, a definition on what is and what is not BDSM. Of course there are extremities that no normal sane or insane person could even consider. However what about the rest, who decides what is an extremity that falls outside BDSM?

It has been my experience that almost anything can be part of BDSM, almost anything can be used as part of a D/s game. To deny others the right to decide to call their activities BDSM is not something I would ever do. I believe in individuality, I believe in tolerance, I believe in diversity. The reality is that even in the BDSM communities more often than not people are discriminated and excluded for their beliefs. I have often seen closed-minded groups who believe that the only way to have true dominance and true submission is to follow their way.

I have found that the so-called real BDSM groups are very closed to people who do not fall into their specific mould. That is why there are so many different currents and views on BDSM. So many clubs and communities have started purely out of frustration or out of an inability to join a BDSM community they felt at home with.

I believe that we should try to make everyone at home here. I do not believe we should discourage anyone from looking for sincere open discussion and a way to reflect their beliefs and opinions on others. If only to have an opportunity to show them the wrongness of their ways

To misquote a very famous American,

I have a dream that one day BDSM will be accepted.
I have a dream that we will not judge others as other have judge us.
I have a dream that we will be able to life freely without fear of persecution.
I have a dream that we will not persecute others.

Francisco.

Hi N,
The drift of your posting is that some things are 'in' BDSM and some are 'out', so I ask,

What do you make of the following, though it's posted as part of agreeing with you on some points:

osg: however since many lifestyle Dominants and submissives (something imo entirely apart form BDSM) frequent this board, i feel comfortable posting things that fall within that realm as well. not necessarily typical "D/s" things, but ideas and thoughts and feelings from my own submissive (albeit sometimes dark) mind.
when i read a thread here created by a Dominant talking about some of their own pervy thoughts, though they may have nothing whatever to do with BDSM, i still see it as having a place here because it can all be a part of D/s.
----

I, pure, say: I believe she's saying, go ahead define 'bdsm', but then recognize that 'lifestyle dominants and submissives' and their 'dark' thoughts do NOT fit in.

Isn't that odd? IOW, her postings are the first casualty of your effort to rein in the scope of 'bdsm.' Wouldn't many of the fantasies of BDSM persons have to be placed outside BDSM?

I think you're saying "Let's define 'sadism' our way and NOT in accord with the dictionary, the DSM-IV, sexologists, and criminologists." Let's see, that would be: "Sadism is inflicting minor pain, in a very loving way discussed beforehand, to a lover who wants it."

Further, you see no connection between such controlled, civilized sadism and the more raw forms? Hence you seem to suggest there's no connection between sadism and rape. You speak for the 'civilized sadists' who never even *think* of rape.

PS. Your posting, as usual has its good points:
we might be kidding ourselves when we think it can accomodate everything left of sexual center.
-------

OK, but I'm not sure why rape and murder are defined as 'left' of sexual center. The big divide is between the perverse persons who harm others, breaking the law, and those who do not. In action.

Unfortunately, once you get to fantasy, the divide disappears; I don't think some of your fantasies can be distinguished from those of persons behind bars.

Despite those good points, I'm focussing on some specifics.

Best, & c.

-----

N said
I'm not trying to be a crank, I'm just genuinely tossing this out as food for thought and giving my personal 2 cents, call it an inspired moment of "huh....hmmm"

I can see a bit of controversy brewing a few posts down. Now, I personally am all for anyone having any kind of sexual fantasy under the sun and writing about it and talking about it is fine.

I don't think that every time someone says "I fantasize about XYZ immoral and antisocial activity" there always has to be a chorus saying "oh but the reality is not hot or pretty..." among intelligent and reasonably decent adults, that's a given.

But what's got me wondering is how/why BDSM becomes the ghetto for every anti-social sexual impulse there is out there? Why when someone has a thought about death, disfigurement, animal-fucking and rape, here we are?
Why do we ask these things on our own board? Other than we're the only board who won't make it a shouting match and witch hunt, but I'm not talking about things as they are, merely theoretically how they are...

As an example, does rosco's thread really have anything remotely to do with my life in leather? I love the thread, and I like the author quite a lot, and I don't really think it does. It has a lot to do with my sexual landscape, it asks some really good questions...but in an ideal world, it might be part of the discourse on sexuality, not "BDSM"

True, I think that we are probably the more tolerant of the fringes of sexual behavior than most other sexual subcultures, but is there a point at which some of this becomes a more generalized sexuality discussion? Maybe what needs to happen is that the discourse around "sexuality" in general needs to expand to accomodate its kinks better.

All I know is that when I think about what I think my BDSM is, I do draw some harder lines around it than I used to in the past. I *am* talking about a linear path from postwar leather and 70's-80's prodomme fetish culture somehow over the internet and to me. I'm not saying this in some fucked up exclusionary way, most of you know me better than that. I'm not saying if you don't adhere to this you don't belong on this board or at my munches or anywhere near me, that's not the point either...

I am just beginning to question the "BDSM is anything remotely related to bondage discipline sado masochism dee ess and fetishes" mentality-- and I'm recognizing that there IS a BDSM which is located in a specific subcultural millieu, and that we might be kidding ourselves when we think it can accomodate everything left of sexual center.

It's a very tenuous thought. I doubt that many of the scene people I feel I derive from would likewise claim me as an actual descendant. But my philosophies are created in relation to reading Baldwin, Rinella, Califia, etc. my safety fetishes are ideally served by Wiseman, I go to conventions, I read leather journal, and I say this merely to be very clear about one thing--

I am coming from inside the mainstream of BDSM. You know, the boring, overgroomed, polite part that everyone likes to complain about. The lifeless floggings, the shitty manners, the personal grudges, the political games, the weekend warriors, the kinky swingers, the internet-infested "gee it used to be great" middle of the road. SSC is not something that makes me roll my eyes, even if it is very very very overstated-- I think it's a fairly good idea.

BDSM has all those elements. But not for everyone and it does not have to be that way --

Negotiating MY scenes never felt like I was giving the bottom too much power, it felt like maybe I might get some great ideas for things I've not tried yet if I talked to them.

MY floggings are sometimes very soft and hypnotic and not about pain. We call that "a reward." If I'm doing it in public and people find it boring, that's fucking great, I'm flogging my boy for me, not for Laura Antoniou. You might get lucky and get to see me make someone scream another night.

I personally believe that if someone's not deriving any enjoyment or satisfaction or positive outcome from the scene or the way the scene fits into their relationship, they are being abused. No, that does not mean the slave gets spoiled and pampered, that means they feel fulfilled at the end of the day's hard work.

(Slaves, in my world, are for working, not keeping in a crate, and not usually for fucking, mostly for working...see why they are so very very very rare?)

The endless discussion about real submission versus fake submission is moot for ME. Genuinely felt submission, even with provisions around certain things, is still submission to the best of one's ability, it's still something to be savored and enjoyed. Even a physical decision to bottom as an equal power is an expression of trust, often more so than a lot of submission and service endeavors.

Given a choice between the two, I'll take the latter a lot of the time.

So, you can ask me about horse fucking, snuff, Masters who order slaves to kill themselves, disfigurement, forced gender transitioning, 24/7 rubber dolls, 24/7 ponies, but I assure you this--

my perspective is not going to be any more informed than a reasonably open minded vanilla person. My being involved in BDSM does not mean I have insight into these things above and beyond that.

I worry that in posting this post I'm doing something I detest, which is when a subculture distances itself from its fringes in an effort to be more acceptable. I hope that's not how this comes across. I'm just saying that I don't necessarily possess expertise on the outer limits of sexuality simply because I like to smack people and poke them with needles in an organized fashion, and encourage men to suck each other off and all manner of things that are just as fringe in some people's minds.

Pure ... Please, please, please !!!

italicize, bold, underline, or color your quotes.

i have to read the same lines three times and lose track of your point.

Just make it a little easier on the reader so we know where you're going.

Thank you Pure

.

Hangs my hat with Netz and SD on this.

Though there does seem to be an undercurrent of:

I may not like what you say, but I will die protecting your right to say kinda thing. One can only hope that as a whole the community is strong enough to withstand the expression of the extreme edges.

Just remember that if someone says they want to make it with an animal, I am gonna say...that's fucked up. And if I am labeld with being closed minded for saying that, it won't bother my sleep none.

But with all due respect, RJ, how do you avoid the charge of complete moral opportunism.

Upstanding citizen says, 'Hanging weights from your testicles is pretty fucked up; call me closed minded if you like.'

You merely want to move the boundary, to *just past where you are located*. "Hey, those weights are just fine and dandy, but sex with animals--THAT's fucked up; call me closed minded if you like."

Reminds me of the call girl's rationale: Hey selling sex can be classy and it doesn't reflect a fucked up mind. But let me say street hoes are really low lifes, and most have serious mental problems.

Best,
J.

----
RJM said
Hangs my hat with Netz and SD on this.

Though there does seem to be an undercurrent of:

I may not like what you say, but I will die protecting your right to say kinda thing. One can only hope that as a whole the community is strong enough to withstand the expression of the extreme edges.

Just remember that if someone says they want to make it with an animal, I am gonna say...that's fucked up. And if I am labeld with being closed minded for saying that, it won't bother my sleep none.

Pure, to abuse your analogy --

if you ask a bunch of callgirls how to work a highway you are not going to get an accurate nor relevant response, hierarchies aside.

I'm saying my knowledge bus stops at a certain point, and I'm questioning why it's assumed that I and others clocking in where I do have any particular knowledge about certain practises or interest in them. Not so much on this board, as much as in a wider cultural context, and perhaps the trend is being highlighted here.

I'm glad no one else saw this as a distancing tactic or me trying to pass my kink off as better than anyone else's. Or be saying "I don't think certain people or things belong on this board" it's certainly not mine to say and I would not want it to be that way anyhow.

As a generalist in sexuality, I say, dream on, be as sick as you like.
Maybe I agree with osg the most on the issue -- some D/s M/s relationships fit stunningly well within a BDSM framework and some just don't and don't want to or should have to.

Maybe I'm pining for a sexuality community that's as tolerant as this one without slapping the BDSM label up on it.

Pure said:

But with all due respect, RJ, how do you avoid the charge of complete moral opportunism.

Click to expand...

I don't. Guilty as charged...that said, I did say there is also a deeper principal which brings balance, in that I may not agree or even like what you say, but I will die for your right to say it.

That is not just spat talk, but is a very real principal/right/freedom I am willing to fight and die for as our forefathers did in america.

When I read some of these extreme edge stuff....I can understand and even relate to some extent where this person is coming from. Meaning I get the perversion and why it may seem attractive or have an appeal.

But I am content to have my opinion as to why I feel the reality of such practices are fucked up. I would hope that the same curteiousy is extended back to me from the other side, that though I may disagree with them, they would still be willing to die for my right to say that.

In some ways I admit it is an indefensable position to take, but I do not think I have to accept everything in order to be considered open minded. In fact part of things which I refuse to accept equally defines me as much as the things I do.

Where I put this this defining line....is where I have to put it for me...and I believe each person has to do it for themselves.

When we put forth someting for others to see...we are in a sense saying...you know me...and the type of person I am....and this is my view on this particular matter. "IF" you consider the type of person I am to be of value or a patter to emulate...then you would stop and consider why I have drawn that line "here" on this particular issue(fill in the blank).

This is a far cry from me trying to impose my views on others or trying to take away their right to express or place that defining line where they want.

I do not believe nor practce/live the philosophy of the absence of moral absolutes. Much of the peace, happiness and fulfillment I have in this life depends heavily upon what truths I base those absolutes on. As I said before, I will not lose any sleep over being closed minded about saying having sex with animals is fucked up. Another thing I find to be fucked up is non-consetting sex or sex with children. Anyone who is accepting of these practices in reality should not expect me to accept them and what they do. For those who keep such in fantasy, I am able to extend tolerance because at least they have enough control to not bring this into reality. As long as it stays in fantasy, and if someone feels they want to publicly share their fantasy, then they should not be offended when I share my disdain. Because sharing is often the way we seek for acceptance, so one should not be surprised when they find none from me when it comes to sex with animals or children.

I am thankful I live in a country where the "Majority" agrees with my view about such things, to the point laws are put into place to punish those who would do such things.

And while I am at it...for any society to exist there must be laws which are based on what? Moral truths.

I am glad there are laws against

Murder
Stealing
Lieing

These laws are based on moral truths and without them society would fall. It matters not to argue certain situations where any of these might be justified, I am glad as a whole these law are in place and in effect. Through the enforcing of them they provide many of the freedoms we have. Someone may argue with me that going to war is nothing more than murder being justified/disguised under some notion of a higher purpose. Sometimes they are right and I am not happy about it, other times I disagree and am willing to fight and die to ensure that my kids and their kids are able to enjoy the freedom which others have fought and died for, that I enjoy.

It is nice to live in a country where one is not hauled off to jail for speaking against the government. It is nice to live in a country where I am free to worship any God or not to worship any God and not have to fear being thrown into jail for my beliefs.

So I hang my hat along the lines with what Netz and SD has said when I scale this back to the BDSM community.

It is also why I do not like label-phobia, though I do not like the forced practice of pigeon holing either. I think as a community it is good and right to set forth the best possible attempt at defining titles and terms, but I am willing to fight equally as hard to allow people who do not fit perfectly into those definitions the freedom to find their place among them.

It is my view that if SSC or RISK are overused and their meanings have been lost, I feel an obligation to refocus and bring the true meaing of them back to life. I think both of these are founded on deeper truths, and must keep in mind the new people who come, and seek to teach them those deep truths and "why" they are important. I feel an obligation to speak up when I see something being put forth to be accepted that violates the deep truths of SSC and/or RISK. And though I may extend tolerance to fantasies which may fall outside of these truths, I will never tire of cautioning and warning others of the dangers should these fantasies ever come to reality.

Okay, I am answering in the blind -- read the initial post but none of the replies. Will go back and read full thread after I post.

I tend to agree with your comments, Netzach. It seems BDSM message boards attract every nutty little whacko and every over-introspective wanker. At some point I step away and ask myself: How many of these people are actually living their life? How many of these posters have relationships and are pursuing things in a non-theoretical context? Is is just a wankfest for geeks, rejects and bored housewives? Or are we functional adults who have a general understanding of ourselves and are reaching outside of our own daily experience to gather wider perspectives?

Some of the stuff is just so over the top, impossibly off the wall...I don't even know where to start with seeing it at all relevant to BDSM as I understand it. I definitely agree that some of this stuff would get no better replies than from a tolerant/liberal vanilla board. Anyway, yeah...BDSM forums by default become a hangout for people who just want to discuss weird stuff.

Edit: Yes, after reading replies, I see some of the comments by Shadowsdream and I remember newbies being confused about how puppy play had something to do with beastiality. Do you guys remember that thread? So maybe being a "catch-all" for every weird obsession actually hurts the quality of our forums? Anyway...I concur with many of the points made in this thread by Catalina and others.

RJMasters said:

When I read some of these extreme edge stuff....I can understand and even relate to some extent where this person is coming from. Meaning I get the perversion and why it may seem attractive or have an appeal.

But I am content to have my opinion as to why I feel the reality of such practices are fucked up. I would hope that the same curteiousy is extended back to me from the other side, that though I may disagree with them, they would still be willing to die for my right to say that.

In some ways I admit it is an indefensable position to take, but I do not think I have to accept everything in order to be considered open minded.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure I can agree with you. If you get someone's perversion and why it may appeal to them, how can you then tell them they are fucked up and also claim open mindedness? Telling someone they are fucked up because of their preferences (and remember many on the General Board and mainstream community will tell you you are FU because you are interested in being part of this community), is judgemental and based solely on your reality. It is the same process gays have had to fight for years and still have to live with and hope they are not killed for it.

Not wanting to participate in the same activity does not mean those that do are fucked up...it just means they differ from you in some way. I believe in someone saying it is not their way or not for them for whatever reason, but once you start declaring who is OK and who is FU based on your preferences, beliefs, and personal tastes, it is being closed minded.

It is not unusual when you come up against things you have not previously been exposed to before, or at least not in a place where people have not felt the need to try and hide their thoughts, to at first feel shocked or repulsed by some things.....but that requires realising not everyone is you, we all differ and accepting just as you don't want to be called something derogatory because you don't share another's particular kink (and you have voiced your view you have a right to be accepted), so should as you say, the favour be returned. It doesn't just go one way. Acceptance does not mean you have to agree or join, just honour another's rights.

I do not abide with murder or pedophelia either, but nor do I agree with governments policing our bedrooms. It is not that many years since it was illegal to have anal sex (heterosexual or otherwise), and I believe it is still illegal in places.....does that mean those that did were bad and immoral? Add to that in your own country in certain states it is illegal to buy or sell a vibrator.....immoral? In some countries adultry or even the thought of it is punishable by death....do you think that is OK? Open minded is appreciating others may differ from you and though you may not share their difference or feel it is great, as you say, you honour their right to have it....and that does not mean, "yeah sure, you can think that way or do that and I will accept it as your right, but be warned I am going to support anyone who wants to punish you for it'.

Catalina

I find it ironic that we can seriously put the words "mainstream" and "BDSM" together. I'm not arguing the validity... I just find it ironic.

From experience, I have found some of the most close-minded bigoted people I have ever met have been in the gay, lesbian or BDSM circles. On the other hand, some haven't.

I hate to say it, but I haven't seen any evidence to support that "we" (as in BDSM-centric) are any better at being open-minded or non-judgemental than any other group.

But yes, I also find it intriguing that BDSM seems to have become the "catch all" for all softs of sexual interests and perversions. I can't say it has bothered me too much, as I am certainly happy to be vocal in defending what BDSM isn't. But it does make you wonder what happened to have people believe that in the first place.

FungiUg said:

But yes, I also find it intriguing that BDSM seems to have become the "catch all" for all softs of sexual interests and perversions. I can't say it has bothered me too much, as I am certainly happy to be vocal in defending what BDSM isn't. But it does make you wonder what happened to have people believe that in the first place.

Click to expand...

I too find it intriguing, though I am not sure who defines what falls within the borders of what should be considered pure BDSM or D/s. For example, back in my teen vanilla days I knew many people who were heavily into roleplay, and continued to encounter enthusiasts throughout my life though it does not overly thrill or intrest me ....maybe that will change, who knows? None of these people were remotely into BDSM or are now, and yet I see it mentioned in BDSM circles, Lit included as an accepted practice and along the same themes as the people I knew who belonged to roleplaying groups or just practiced it in their own sexuality.

I also wonder if by trying to limit the list of what can be defined true and real in terms of BDSM etc., if we are a bit hypocritical. We tell newcomers and interested people that part of the beauty of BDSM is we evolve/grow, try new things, explore new frontiers in terms of our sexuality and tastes, and yet there is a suggestion perhaps there should be a list of what is real and nothing else is allowed to be added after that list is designed. Isn't that in theory saying BDSM as a sexuality choice is not permitted to evolve, reach new dimensions, move forward with the times, just remain stagnant and static?

Catalina

I'm more than happy for BDSM to evolve and change -- I consider myself to be more D/s than "BDSM" anyway. BDSM works for me as an umbrella term.

But there's also a point where we have to recognise that BDSM is NOT all-encompassing. It overlaps many sexualities, but that doesn't make them BDSM. Some things deserve their own label.

FungiUg said:

I'm more than happy for BDSM to evolve and change -- I consider myself to be more D/s than "BDSM" anyway. BDSM works for me as an umbrella term.

But there's also a point where we have to recognise that BDSM is NOT all-encompassing. It overlaps many sexualities, but that doesn't make them BDSM. Some things deserve their own label.

Click to expand...

True, and we also see it as an umbrella term, but once again who defines what fits and if related to circumstances. I think as in all things in life, we are all a mix of roles. For example I am a mother and grandmother.....that does not change when I am in a session, but still remains a part of who I am. If someone decides to challenge their submissive/slave by expecting them to act as a sex worker either for a temporary time or as a fulltime occupation as part of the D/s element, how do we decide that is not D/s but perhaps asking them to lick the Dominant's boots or clean their house is? To me there are many elements which can exist without D/s, but also can exist as part of that.

Certainly if the only purpose to ask a sub to sell themselves, or become involved with one who already does is for financial purposes totally outside the D/s I can see where it might be considered as not D/s by some, but if it is as part of the challenge of submitting to something the sub may not normally be able to consider, or serving the needs of the Dominant, is it not still an action and part of that couple's D/s?

Catalina

hmmmm

BDSM works for me as an umbrella term.

Click to expand...

I agree. Most of what I do does not fit under the official umbrella of BDSM. However when you're having a D/s relationship with someone, you regularly enact rape fantasies, engage in lovely long elaborate hogtieing nights, have your partner fist you, mouthfuck etc etc etc, where the heck else are you going to go???
I dont think I've had a vanilla fantasy in my life. So if I'm not BDSM what am I???
I do not like caning, flogging etc. Its actually a hard limit of mine. If anyone was to ever do that to me I would lose it. So I read THOSE threads and struggle to understand where the poster is coming from. But I accept it, its all a part of what I call BDSM.
I also do not do BBW, infantileism, fancy dress, etc etc etc, the idea of it makes me sick. But hey, if its what turns you on in bed, you go for it!!!!
I struggle in finding Netzach's post a little judgmental, but I admire its intelligence and eloquence. You have a good point.
I wouldnt personally have sex with animals. But good on you if you do.
If you fantasize about having sex with children, keep it to yourself, please, and you damn well better keep it as fantasy and never ever act it out. I accept that it IS a genuine sexual attraction, but its never one that should actually be acted apon.
Sex with dead people??? Not my thing........
Rape and torture fantasy and partial enactment??? mmmmmmm..... My favourite
I have to go meet Master for lunch. Good thread.
R

Interesting thread. I wish I didn't have aDD so I could've read the whole thing.

I'll just say this. Until recently I was a math teacher. I taught low level Algebra and Geometry. I was also the assistant coach of the debate team, and debate kids would often ask me for help with their Calculus homework. The last time I had taken Calculus, I was their age, but they weren't totally wrong to come to me.

I may not know Calculus anymore, but as a Math teacher I knew people who do and how to find them. At the very least, I am familiar with the framework of what they were asking about as a Mathematical mind, and I could often answer their questions after using their book to refresh my memory.

You may not be the AskJeeves of the alternative sexuality world Netz, but if it wasn't for Lit I might still not even know what BDSM is. Ya dig?

You see, I have problems with this whole concept of "vanilla" too. What IS vanilla?

I see this artificial distinction of "well, it's not vanilla, therefore it must be BDSM." But I truly don't think vanilla exists -- it's just that different people have different levels of sexuality and different sexual interests.

I try to use the term non-BDSM rather than "vanilla", but even that has issues, since it relies on some understanding of what BDSM really is. And to me, what BDSM really is... is an unspecific umbrella term that collects together a bunch of related sexual and lifestyle interests. Those interests feature bondage, discipline, dominance, submission, sadism and masochism. But those are probably only 80% (if that) of what we understand as BDSM.

"Vanilla" on the other hand is... what? A euphimism for "boring", I think. Straight sex? So are gay people vanilla? How about swingers? If you use a sex toy, are you vanilla? So that's even more fuzzy. And personally, I think it's possible to be BDSM and boring, so why can't you have vanilla BDSM? Ooops, sorry, "mainstream BDSM."

It all comes down to this urge we have to draw a line in the sand and say "you lot over there aren't as good as we are, because you are different." And I hate that!