BDSM for Nice Guys
- Thread starter rosco rathbone
- Start date
bridgeburner
threadkiller
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2001
- Posts
- 2,712
Pure,
Perhaps it is, but that's not really pertinent. I was specifically addressing the conversation with Netzach not the general bent of anonymous others who preach the reciprocity you're talking about.
That depends on how one defines respect. I seriously doubt that the only thing that keeps Rosco from beating and raping women is the fact that it's illegal.
Again, though, I don't know that you're operating with the same definition of respect as she is. I may not be either, but I understand her to mean that she doesn't fuck people she holds in contempt.
Fair enough, but I'd venture to say that she also doesn't engage with those she holds in contempt.
Grrrr....traffic calls and I'm off home for the day, but I've got more to say (as usual) I'll get back to you tomorrow morning and address your other points.
-B
Perhaps it is, but that's not really pertinent. I was specifically addressing the conversation with Netzach not the general bent of anonymous others who preach the reciprocity you're talking about.
That depends on how one defines respect. I seriously doubt that the only thing that keeps Rosco from beating and raping women is the fact that it's illegal.
Again, though, I don't know that you're operating with the same definition of respect as she is. I may not be either, but I understand her to mean that she doesn't fuck people she holds in contempt.
Fair enough, but I'd venture to say that she also doesn't engage with those she holds in contempt.
Grrrr....traffic calls and I'm off home for the day, but I've got more to say (as usual) I'll get back to you tomorrow morning and address your other points.
-B
rosco rathbone
1. f3e5 2. g4??
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Posts
- 42,431
TaintedB said:
Or, more pertinently; could you enjoy acting like an SOB if it sexually pleased you to do so despite the fact that your mate might disenjoy it?
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
well, rr, that sounds like disrespect. but that is not a criticism.
(as i opined already, respect is overrated. )
further, even from the pov of the 'bottom', who the hell wants the orifices ravaged---respectfully!
is every bottom to be treated as an insecure so-and-so who must, every minute, be fed 'respect' in order to have a satisfactory existence?
some of us experimenters much prefer *indifference.* (I don't give a fuck *how you're feeling.) else it's about as interesting as being 'misused' by Mother Teresa.
(as i opined already, respect is overrated. )
further, even from the pov of the 'bottom', who the hell wants the orifices ravaged---respectfully!
is every bottom to be treated as an insecure so-and-so who must, every minute, be fed 'respect' in order to have a satisfactory existence?
some of us experimenters much prefer *indifference.* (I don't give a fuck *how you're feeling.) else it's about as interesting as being 'misused' by Mother Teresa.
shy slave
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2004
- Posts
- 8,255
My 2c worth
&
by TaintedBCould you enjoy acting like an SOB who happens to be a sadist, if you had a sub who was really into that?
Have thought about both these quotes today when I really should have been thinking other things & Pure's concept of 'respect' being overrated.
For me, Catalina & Francisco have the measure of all three concepts when they talk of symbiosis.
To me Master gives me respect by meeting my needs and i His.
When He uses me, I do not always take immediate physical pleasure but I do have a mental pleasure that He is meeting non-physical needs that I have.
I see many parrellels with BDSM and vanilla sex/lifestyle.
Symbiosis is the change to that. Meeting each others needs in a mental non-sexual and sexual way almost simultaneously isn't possible in vanilla life (unless you do the Times crossword whilst having sex!).
Meeting each others needs, without matching like for like, acknowledges a level of understanding and respect that is difficult for any othe couple to understand.
Catalina explains that she and Francisco probably work in others 'way off limits,' but they know when far is to far~if they didn't would Catalina be here to tell us?
To some 'off limits is blood play to others its being and SOB when the other does not take any form of pleasure from it.
As an aside even if its consenual where does that end up on the spectrum of abuse?
There are 'off limits' and 'off limits'. Several threads in the past have talked of the safeword ,ssc and rack.
WHat is sane to one person is not to another.
If it is looked on as two (or more) people who have a symbiotic relationship, it means nice guys can be sadists, sadists can be SOB's and every grey level of life inbetween.
As a final note I don't agree with BB when they say That depends on how one defines respect. I seriously doubt that the only thing that keeps Rosco from beating and raping women is the fact that it's illegal.
I think this is an unfair and oversimplification of someone who is probably an SOB/sadist but, who gives me the impression that he ONLY plays with those who understand his rules.
If RR or any other person were inclined to beat and rape women I am damn sure that the legal ramifications would not stop him or them.
rosco rathbone said:
&
by TaintedBCould you enjoy acting like an SOB who happens to be a sadist, if you had a sub who was really into that?
Have thought about both these quotes today when I really should have been thinking other things & Pure's concept of 'respect' being overrated.
For me, Catalina & Francisco have the measure of all three concepts when they talk of symbiosis.
To me Master gives me respect by meeting my needs and i His.
When He uses me, I do not always take immediate physical pleasure but I do have a mental pleasure that He is meeting non-physical needs that I have.
I see many parrellels with BDSM and vanilla sex/lifestyle.
Symbiosis is the change to that. Meeting each others needs in a mental non-sexual and sexual way almost simultaneously isn't possible in vanilla life (unless you do the Times crossword whilst having sex!).
Meeting each others needs, without matching like for like, acknowledges a level of understanding and respect that is difficult for any othe couple to understand.
Catalina explains that she and Francisco probably work in others 'way off limits,' but they know when far is to far~if they didn't would Catalina be here to tell us?
To some 'off limits is blood play to others its being and SOB when the other does not take any form of pleasure from it.
As an aside even if its consenual where does that end up on the spectrum of abuse?
There are 'off limits' and 'off limits'. Several threads in the past have talked of the safeword ,ssc and rack.
WHat is sane to one person is not to another.
If it is looked on as two (or more) people who have a symbiotic relationship, it means nice guys can be sadists, sadists can be SOB's and every grey level of life inbetween.
As a final note I don't agree with BB when they say That depends on how one defines respect. I seriously doubt that the only thing that keeps Rosco from beating and raping women is the fact that it's illegal.
I think this is an unfair and oversimplification of someone who is probably an SOB/sadist but, who gives me the impression that he ONLY plays with those who understand his rules.
If RR or any other person were inclined to beat and rape women I am damn sure that the legal ramifications would not stop him or them.
Sir_Winston54
Assume the position!
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2004
- Posts
- 14,027
TaintedB[/i][b]Could you enjoy acting like an SOB who happens to be a sadist said:
Hmmm... Yes. And yes.
Of course, one must qualify those responses. "Acting like an SOB" to me implies verbal or other forms of humiliation, including public display of my ownership (e.g., going into a store to pick out clothing for her, telling the clerk she is going to try it on, and accompanying her into the changing room. Should the clerk try to object, she would be required to inform the clerk that she is not allowed to dress herself). While many pyls are tremendously aroused by humilation, private or public, very few of them actually enjoy it at the top levels of their mind.
As far as my mate "disenjoying" it, our position is that her enjoyment comes secondary to my wishes or pleasure. Her primary enjoyment comes from serving me in whatever manner I find appropriate, and while I certainly consider that giving her pleasure is an important part of our relationship - of my caring for her - it is my pleasure that ultimately drives us both.
I hope this answers the questions sufficiently... if not, ask away. I'm never shy in offering MNSHO.
Esclava
10 Locks-Do U have keys?
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2004
- Posts
- 1,541
Is there an icon for....
..."Feeling cross-eyed with all the questions in my head"?
None of which will settle down long enough for me to articulate an intelligent comment.
I still believe that in a BDSM relationship - especially one with a foundation of love - PYLs cannot - absolutely cannot - objectify their pyls 24/7/365.
Granted, One can objectify a pyl during a scene - along with the resolute insensitivity needed to inflict the emotional and physical pain necessary to achieve said PYL's satisfaction. But is it possible to carry that insensitivity all day, every day - with someone you LOVE? I think not.
Somewhere inside that "love", there has to be an outlet. And inflicting a torturous beating (or other kink) - then leaving a pyl marked, bruised and hurting - without reconnecting to that "love" is asking for a very short-lived relationship. Especially if the pyl needs that reconnection to feel whole again.
So, in my opinion, if the "nice-guy" half of a relationship "learns to be a Dom/me" for the other half by "playing" and learning (or vice versa-'nillas can learn to be submissive - maybe not pain sluts, but they CAN learn to be sub); then I say let them! There is nothing to be gained by not allowing a novice Dom/me and the (perhaps) novice sub to learn together to create what could turn out to be the most beautiful, long term relationship either of them has ever known - knitting the joy of learning with discovery and growth - deepening the love they only had a clue could be shared by two people.
Esclava
..."Feeling cross-eyed with all the questions in my head"?
None of which will settle down long enough for me to articulate an intelligent comment.
I still believe that in a BDSM relationship - especially one with a foundation of love - PYLs cannot - absolutely cannot - objectify their pyls 24/7/365.
Granted, One can objectify a pyl during a scene - along with the resolute insensitivity needed to inflict the emotional and physical pain necessary to achieve said PYL's satisfaction. But is it possible to carry that insensitivity all day, every day - with someone you LOVE? I think not.
Somewhere inside that "love", there has to be an outlet. And inflicting a torturous beating (or other kink) - then leaving a pyl marked, bruised and hurting - without reconnecting to that "love" is asking for a very short-lived relationship. Especially if the pyl needs that reconnection to feel whole again.
So, in my opinion, if the "nice-guy" half of a relationship "learns to be a Dom/me" for the other half by "playing" and learning (or vice versa-'nillas can learn to be submissive - maybe not pain sluts, but they CAN learn to be sub); then I say let them! There is nothing to be gained by not allowing a novice Dom/me and the (perhaps) novice sub to learn together to create what could turn out to be the most beautiful, long term relationship either of them has ever known - knitting the joy of learning with discovery and growth - deepening the love they only had a clue could be shared by two people.
Esclava
catalina_francisco
Happily insatiable always
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2002
- Posts
- 18,730
Re: Is there an icon for....
But can they really become happy as a couple if the only reason the nice-guy is learning to become a Dominant is to please his other half. Can a pyl truly enjoy the joining if the PYL is only a PYL to please and not out of a need to be pleased?
It comes back to the nature question, if BDSM is considered learned behaviour and it does not fulfil or answer to a deeper sensation or need, as long as there is a commitment to learn and please your partner anyone could be a PYL or pyl.
Francisco.
Esclava said:
But can they really become happy as a couple if the only reason the nice-guy is learning to become a Dominant is to please his other half. Can a pyl truly enjoy the joining if the PYL is only a PYL to please and not out of a need to be pleased?
It comes back to the nature question, if BDSM is considered learned behaviour and it does not fulfil or answer to a deeper sensation or need, as long as there is a commitment to learn and please your partner anyone could be a PYL or pyl.
Francisco.
Last edited:
catalina_francisco
Happily insatiable always
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2002
- Posts
- 18,730
Re: Is there an icon for....
I'm not so sure it is impossible for the PYL in a love connected D/s relationship to objectify the pyl on a 24/7 basis. Naturally there cannot be whippings every hour, by the hour, but if the desire and need of the pyl is to be objectified and treated in the fashion described, and the PYL also has a desire or need to be one who delivers such treatment, cannot that be a sign of love? Granted it is not what most on the planet would want or identify as love, but I believe it is a fully informed and healthy need of some, and if the recognition of that corresponding need in the other is established there could be a foundation for a deep and lasting love, and I imagine, relief to have found another who understands and does not try to change the other to fit with what is socially or community accepted.
Stepping outside the box it would mean the PYL (and pyl) could continue and be fulfilled by expressing their love in this socially unconventional way with someone who also relates to it as an act of love and appreciates the opportunity to express their love and selves in this way...the connection of love comes through sharing the same vision and living it, celebrating the reality, not just reserving it for scening in between what others would term real life. Hope this has made some sense.
Catalina
Esclava said:
I still believe that in a BDSM relationship - especially one with a foundation of love - PYLs cannot - absolutely cannot - objectify their pyls 24/7/365.
Granted, One can objectify a pyl during a scene - along with the resolute insensitivity needed to inflict the emotional and physical pain necessary to achieve said PYL's satisfaction. But is it possible to carry that insensitivity all day, every day - with someone you LOVE? I think not.
Somewhere inside that "love", there has to be an outlet. And inflicting a torturous beating (or other kink) - then leaving a pyl marked, bruised and hurting - without reconnecting to that "love" is asking for a very short-lived relationship. Especially if the pyl needs that reconnection to feel whole again.
Esclava
I'm not so sure it is impossible for the PYL in a love connected D/s relationship to objectify the pyl on a 24/7 basis. Naturally there cannot be whippings every hour, by the hour, but if the desire and need of the pyl is to be objectified and treated in the fashion described, and the PYL also has a desire or need to be one who delivers such treatment, cannot that be a sign of love? Granted it is not what most on the planet would want or identify as love, but I believe it is a fully informed and healthy need of some, and if the recognition of that corresponding need in the other is established there could be a foundation for a deep and lasting love, and I imagine, relief to have found another who understands and does not try to change the other to fit with what is socially or community accepted.
Stepping outside the box it would mean the PYL (and pyl) could continue and be fulfilled by expressing their love in this socially unconventional way with someone who also relates to it as an act of love and appreciates the opportunity to express their love and selves in this way...the connection of love comes through sharing the same vision and living it, celebrating the reality, not just reserving it for scening in between what others would term real life. Hope this has made some sense.
Catalina
catalina_francisco
Happily insatiable always
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2002
- Posts
- 18,730
Re: My 2c worth
Have to agree with the last statement wholeheartedly...it does cover a wide area and is relevant to those in the relationship. Hopefully I will remain to 'be here', but it is also a reality of ours that sometimes things go wrong...and as our tastes can at times rage beyond the safe limits, to date we have tried to keep the consequences in mind before acting on those things which drive a craving in us. Our limits have certainly moved throughout the relationship and very few remain as definite 'no way it will happen'.
For us being in a TPE the consensual no longer comes into play as I have long ago given away that right (as he reminds me often of late I notice ), but he also does not want to lose what we have in any sense so gives thought and planning to any action he may think of taking which he is aware will cause major major difficulties. It doesn't mean I control the situation, just he is aware and takes into consideration the expected difficulties and how best to work with them to ensure it does not bring him displeasure or time wasted trying to repair the damage that may be avoided if handled differently....IMO that comes with being a responsible Dominant as well as making sure his needs are met.....and at the end of the day though he does as he sees fit in each situation, not what I want, need, or desire.
Of course some may advocate the swashbuckling, barrel on ahead approach regardless of negative outcomes, but also may find it leads to many shortlived unhappy relationships where their own needs are rarely met. Guess if they were an emotionally masochistic Dominant though that may satisy their needs in another way.
Catalina
shy slave said:
Have to agree with the last statement wholeheartedly...it does cover a wide area and is relevant to those in the relationship. Hopefully I will remain to 'be here'
, but it is also a reality of ours that sometimes things go wrong...and as our tastes can at times rage beyond the safe limits, to date we have tried to keep the consequences in mind before acting on those things which drive a craving in us. Our limits have certainly moved throughout the relationship and very few remain as definite 'no way it will happen'. For us being in a TPE the consensual no longer comes into play as I have long ago given away that right (as he reminds me often of late I notice
), but he also does not want to lose what we have in any sense so gives thought and planning to any action he may think of taking which he is aware will cause major major difficulties. It doesn't mean I control the situation, just he is aware and takes into consideration the expected difficulties and how best to work with them to ensure it does not bring him displeasure or time wasted trying to repair the damage that may be avoided if handled differently....IMO that comes with being a responsible Dominant as well as making sure his needs are met.....and at the end of the day though he does as he sees fit in each situation, not what I want, need, or desire. Of course some may advocate the swashbuckling, barrel on ahead approach regardless of negative outcomes, but also may find it leads to many shortlived unhappy relationships where their own needs are rarely met. Guess if they were an emotionally masochistic Dominant though that may satisy their needs in another way.
Catalina
Last edited:
Netzach
>semiotics?
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2003
- Posts
- 21,732
FungiUg said:
Ok, the kiwis are policing the English language now? Would someone tell me what's ok, or the spelling police will cart me away too.
I reiterate: I'm placing "enjoyment" secondary to "need." I feel compelled when I sense a genuine *need* on the part of my passive half, I feel often laughably indifferent when I sense a "want."
I like what esclava said. To me, it says "who the hell cares how people make their way into enjoying BDSM or D/s, let them enjoy it if they get there."
I say amen. As long as they're enjoying it. Or enjoying not-enjoying in some cases.
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
I suppose it you want a word to cover both 'romantic equality' type of relationships, and drastically unequal ones like master and servant, the 'symbiotic' would do. We learned the word, not just for the 'flowers and trees' but for (the relationship of) those birds that walk into the hippo's mouth and pick his teeth for him.
Each helps the other to live, and to live a bit better.
The connection between me and the mice in the basement is symbiotic.
Each helps the other to live, and to live a bit better.
The connection between me and the mice in the basement is symbiotic.
Last edited:
bridgeburner
threadkiller
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2001
- Posts
- 2,712
Shy Slave,
I think you seriously misunderstood what I said. Your response leads me to believe that you think I meant exactly the opposite of what I did.
No big worries, but I wanted to make it clear that what I said was an endorsement rather than an indictment. You just got it backwards.
-B
I think you seriously misunderstood what I said. Your response leads me to believe that you think I meant exactly the opposite of what I did.
No big worries, but I wanted to make it clear that what I said was an endorsement rather than an indictment. You just got it backwards.
-B
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
N said,
//I reiterate: I'm placing "enjoyment" secondary to "need." I feel compelled when I sense a genuine *need* on the part of my passive half, I feel often laughably indifferent when I sense a "want."//
I'm not clear if the 'passive half' is your partner, or a part of you.
Are you saying you're indifferent to your wants, but not your needs?
If so, does this apply to your partner's needs--those you'll attend to, but not his wants, necessarily.
//I reiterate: I'm placing "enjoyment" secondary to "need." I feel compelled when I sense a genuine *need* on the part of my passive half, I feel often laughably indifferent when I sense a "want."//
I'm not clear if the 'passive half' is your partner, or a part of you.
Are you saying you're indifferent to your wants, but not your needs?
If so, does this apply to your partner's needs--those you'll attend to, but not his wants, necessarily.
lol
TaintedB
Finished
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2004
- Posts
- 4,579
Your example made me realize that we all have different ideas of what being an SOB is. To me, the dressing room humiliation is pretty normal dom behavior, not particularly mean or SOB acting. So what would I call being an SOB? Hard to answer, probably because I'm tired, but for me it would definitely involve unfair trickery or else somebody manipulating a known weakness. Here's a little example:
He: (with hand behind his back) Thanks for coming over on such short notice sweetheart. As I told you on the phone, I have something really special for you.
She: (approaches him happily) Oh! What is it? Is it behind your back? I bet it is.
He: It sure is, darling. (he then pulls his fist out from behind his back, punches her very hard in the stomach, then, as she falls over trying to get her breath back, pulls her pants down and assrapes here...or has the dog assrape her.
That sort of thing, a bait-and-switch situation, would be SOB behavior to me, because it seems so unfair. How do some of the rest of you define being an SOB?
Taint
Esclava
10 Locks-Do U have keys?
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2004
- Posts
- 1,541
Re: Re: Is there an icon for....
With all due respect to you, Francisco, even if the "nice-guy" partner is playing at PYL/pyl - and it does SOMETHING to fulfill the "natural" BDSM partner - AND they, as a couple, enjoy it and feel fulfilled together - does that not constitute happiness?
Even if something totally un-BDSM related causes a rift in the relationship - but the loving and learning that occurred during their discovery opens each of them up to things about themselves that weren't realized...until they found someone willing to experiment at their own level (both novice) - do you not think they would be happy as a couple for having allowed each other to expand beyond the confines of what society had taught them was acceptable?
I think they would carry a deep seated fondness forever because each dared to step outside of their box - and venture where they never dreamed - to find an inner peace many never know.
Esclava
catalina_francisco said:
With all due respect to you, Francisco, even if the "nice-guy" partner is playing at PYL/pyl - and it does SOMETHING to fulfill the "natural" BDSM partner - AND they, as a couple, enjoy it and feel fulfilled together - does that not constitute happiness?
Even if something totally un-BDSM related causes a rift in the relationship - but the loving and learning that occurred during their discovery opens each of them up to things about themselves that weren't realized...until they found someone willing to experiment at their own level (both novice) - do you not think they would be happy as a couple for having allowed each other to expand beyond the confines of what society had taught them was acceptable?
I think they would carry a deep seated fondness forever because each dared to step outside of their box - and venture where they never dreamed - to find an inner peace many never know.
Esclava
