Online and Real Life BDSM

[SweetDommes]

By no means have I said that I must understand something for it to be real, and if I’ve given that impression, it’s solely due to my own lack of clarity in expressing myself. Similarly, I have clearly acknowledged the reality of ‘online BDSM’. It is real. It exists. It is an actual form of relationship. I just don’t happen to believe at this time, that it is the same as skin to skin BDSM. I don’t believe the two equate to the same thing; one being talking about the subject and shared fantasy, the other, whilst containing elements of the former, also incorporates doing it together (as opposed to talking about it).

No one has said that it *is* the same thing ... what we have said is that they are equally valid, as they *mean* the same things to the respective practitioners. As such, one group has no reason to look down upon the other ... which is what has happened many times in the past.

I don't even care if other people respect my version of D/s or other people's, be they online or r/t ... but I do expect that people not degrade me (or others) for not following their version because I don't degrade them for theirs (with the exceptions of those that are not honest about their versions ... but I've already been through all that, haven't I?). It's an issue of simple human decency and common courtesy ... the Golden Rule, for those who are religious - "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." If you do not wish to be treated like dirt, then you shouldn't treat others as such.

 

[Kajira Callista]

By no means have I said that I must understand something for it to be real, and if I’ve given that impression, it’s solely due to my own lack of clarity in expressing myself. Similarly, I have clearly acknowledged the reality of ‘online BDSM’. It is real. It exists. It is an actual form of relationship. I just don’t happen to believe at this time, that it is the same as skin to skin BDSM. I don’t believe the two equate to the same thing; one being talking about the subject and shared fantasy, the other, whilst containing elements of the former, also incorporates doing it together (as opposed to talking about it).

I know both...have lived both (r/l longer then online)...and know how they are the same and in which ways they are different. If i thought my words would be heard i would waste no time explaining. Unfortunately this to me (and is not directed at you but just a general statement) is just another form of *holier then thou*. I dont mind when people live their lives thinking that their way is the only way... but when it hurts and offends other people, i dont like it much.
Do i crave skin to skin bdsm as part of my life? yes.
Do i tell people that something they are doing for real or feeling for real is fake? no
Do i chuckle to myself knowing that most who say r/l is the only way started online in the same way as a few ppl who post here? hell yeah.
I wont post to this thread or any like it in the future,because if no one wants to *hear* it is not worth my time to type.

 

[Silverlily]

Fair enough, I was working off the part "Online BDSM isn't BDSM". I'll be the first to admit that was the first of your posts I've read.

I have to disagree. When I have a pet use the plug he normally avoids for me via webcam, the anxiety, discomfort, and nervous energy are every bit as real as if I were there. And my voice praising his efforts is the same voice whether it be directly from my mouth to his ear or through a telephone.

I can't always be physically there with my pets, but I am in their heads nonetheless.


All I am saying is there is room within the BDSM community for all expressions of the same.

 

[SweetDommes]

I wont post to this thread or any like it in the future,because if no one wants to *hear* it is not worth my time to type.

Some of us do *hear* ... unfortunately, those who do *hear* you are already in the choir, so to speak ...

 

[incubus_dark]

So what you’re saying, is that you agree that it’s not the same, but that in some ways it’s the same and in some it’s different.

You’ve mentioned some of the ways it’s the same for you, what are others?

What are the ways, from your perspectives, that it’s different?

If we're happy enough to say it’s not the same, but as SweetDommes nicely put it, means the same thing to different people, are we not then only arguing over semantics? As a converse example, people who’s fetish is so entirely different that they don’t relate it to BDSM in any form, or even wish to, may say that their fetish means the same to them as mine does to me, and probably rightly so. And we’d happily acknowledge each other’s right to enjoy our own particular bents. Yet they would also probably be miffed if I insisted that they were a variety of BDSM, my fetish, as opposed to whatever they call themselves. The reality is valid either way. The two probably do not equate to the same thing, it’s merely the semantics that gives the situation any volatility, in that they reject my labelling them as something they don’t see themselves as.

 

[incubus'_sub]

And I remain curious as to when this great denigration occurred.

Who has ever said they were holier than thou? Who has ever said that they do not respect the right of anyone to believe what they wish & when was it said?

I've only been here a bit over a year & this debate has occurred quite often in that time, but I've yet to see anyone really trample on others' rights to believe, state categorically that their way is the only way, or for that matter, anyone who hasn't qualified their own opinion by stating that this or that works for me & the other doesn't & why.

I tend to think that this alleged wholesale denigration is really a bit of an urban myth which is now firmly entrenched in the minds of many.

 

[Caitlynne]

I dont mind when people live their lives thinking that their way is the only way... but when it hurts and offends other people, i dont like it much.

Gotta give a big Amen to this. I don't like it much either.

It screams of the same hypocrisy of "My church is the only TRUE church", "the only REAL family is one with a man and a woman", "the only REAL intimate relationship is between one man and one woman", "etc, etc, etc...." It's the same kind of 'my way is the only way'.

No one might have meant it to sound that way, but it certainly comes across as that more often than not. And saying that you (plural 'you' here) agree that on-line and R/t BDSM are different with one breath, and then saying it is not real BDSM, is a contradiction. It either is BDSM or it isn't. It's a lot like being a little bit pregnant. It might not meet your BDSM needs, but I have read quite a few around here, and their needs seem to be met one way or another.

This discussion would perhaps be better served if we ventured off into a discussion of the nature of REALITY. AA stated it well, and some seem to miss the most cogent point...

They still exist, still rival the real time relationships of some, and in a few special cases, beat the majority of real time relationships hands down because it suits the fucking parties involved.

How many times have you seen the quiet woman or man reading a book in the park. S/he calls that a 'good time', because it meets his/her needs. Then there are the people who need to run every morning and/or play team sports on the weekend. To them that is a 'good time', because it meets their needs. One is mental, the other is physical. Is one more real than the other? No, of course not, they are jsut different.

Some people watch football on Sunday, and some people take a walk. Some people write a story, and some take photos'. All of these are chosen by the individual because they meet their needs for expression.

We all walk our own path. Hopefully, we are all aware of our needs on some level, and seek to increase our awareness of what we need in life and how to fulfill those needs. But spare me the 'dictation' on what is real and not real.

Some people are more physical than others, some more mental, some more emotional, and then there are those that are more spiritual ... and all the combinations of these factors at any given time in a person's life. We are all different, and we all probably practice our own brand of power games. The common thread is that whether on line or skin to skin, we're all dealing with power exchanges of some sort or another.

Unless I completely miss the boat, BDSM is about power being ceded by one, to another, to be used as they desire. How that expresses itself is a vast expanse of wonderfully human perv-iness.

I'll be honest I even take exception to saying it is real but different. Why? Because it is irrelevant to make such a distinction, it implies a hierarchy. Saying it is different does not say anything about whether it is real BDSM or not. Real is defined by each individual, not by the fans in the bleachers.

Mind you I am not an on-liner, but I take exception to some of the remarks about true and real BDSM vs. on-line.

If we want to talk about the nature of reality, then pull out your philosophy books and let's have a go.

I you want to talk about the varying degrees that people require physical, mental, emotional and spiritual stimulation, then pull up a chair and let's talk about it.

But let's be constructive here, the only thing you can know (and even that is not a certainty given the nature of the human mind) is what is REAL to you, the individual.

Sharing our POV and sharing what is real to us personally is a way to increase our experience, expand our awareness. I'm talking about opening up your mind and looking at the way (just perhaps) words can bind the soul just as surely as rope binds the body. The way that love can bind the heart and the way that the spirit can be touched by a word, spoken on-line, on the phone or from across the room. It is all different, but it is ALL BDSM.

Hopefully we can all agree that the optimum is a smattering of all physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual elements in BDSM. How we divvy up the proportions of each is merely individual taste, isn't it?

~ cait

 

[incubus_dark]

Saying things which aren’t the same, are different, is bad because it implies a hierarchy? Should we then claim everything is the same, whether it is or not, in order to avoid imputing hierarchies, real or imagined, in those who may hear us? The English language is brimming with words with sole purpose to delineate one type of thing or experience from another. It would be quite difficult to communicate without them. The concept is nonsensical.

 

[Netzach]

All I know is that spitting in my slave's mouth and telling him I'm going to spit in his mouth when I see him over the phone are two different things.

And the former is far far far more intense, meaningful, and hot to me than the latter.

However, the latter is hot as fuck, meaningful and intense, as well.

 

[rosco rathbone]

Sometimes you have to be satisfied with the latter. This medium has allowed me to meet and perv on people that never would have turned up in my neighborhood discoteque. Just take it for what it is--a means to an end.

 

[Caitlynne]

Saying things which aren’t the same, are different, is bad because it implies a hierarchy? Should we then claim everything is the same, whether it is or not, in order to avoid imputing hierarchies, real or imagined, in those who may hear us? The English language is brimming with words with sole purpose to delineate one type of thing or experience from another. It would be quite difficult to communicate without them. The concept is nonsensical.

Oops, you're quite right. I wasn't clear in that part of my post.

I should have included some remarks about 'things being judged different AND therefore not REAL because of the difference.

You stated in the simulator analogy that a person with only simulation experience wasn't a real pilot. You used that to imply that the same difference existed between on line and skin to skin BDSM. Didn't you?

All I'm saying is that the 'difference between simulator pilots and real air pilots' and the 'difference between real time and on line BDSM aren't viable comparisons. On-liner's aren't practicing BDSM, they are 'doing it', abiet in a mental medium.

Distinguishing the differences as you did was meaningless in the context of this discussion because it didn't illustrate why on-line isn't real BDSM because of this difference.

I can accept that simulator pilots haven't really flown a plane. I can also see that they could if they chose to, but like I said, it's sort of an irrelevant comparison to make re: online and real time BDSM.

Why? Because real power games can exist on their own merit in a mental medium, and that is why real BDSM can occur in that medium. A pilot cannot really be in the sky in a simulator, but a submissive can turn over real power and a Dominant can use his will to dominate. It's merely done using mental energy. So the illustration of differences as you presented it is meaningless in the context presented.

If we accept your example, then by your account ONLY skin to skin is REAL. Just as only a pilot sitting in the cockpit of a 747 at 30,000 feet is a real pilot. That is the thrust of our argument is it not? The examples you've presented are all about trying to convey that only the physical is REAL. That the mental is only pretend.

I'll repeat, we need to discuss the nature of reality if we're really going to do this discussion justice. I'm in a rush right now, but I will come back to this perhaps tomorrow.

~ cait

 

[Caitlynne]

All I know is that spitting in my slave's mouth and telling him I'm going to spit in his mouth when I see him over the phone are two different things.

And the former is far far far more intense, meaningful, and hot to me than the latter.

However, the latter is hot as fuck, meaningful and intense, as well.

Can we hear an "amen" from the choir!!!!

 

[SweetDommes]

incubus' sub - some of your posts in this thread could DEFINATELY be construed as you thinking that because you are skin to skin, your relationship is better than others' who do not have skin to skin relationships.

Beyond that, it has been posted in other threads, things like:

"Even if you end up meeting someone in RT
that you meet online ...... you still started online
and your perception of them
and them of you
is an online perception ........ objectification" (spelling errors, hopefully all corrected)
Implying that no matter where the relationship goes, it started out online and is therefore flawed.

"It is an issue of respect

But than again I have issues with online stuff
but more with the sensuality of BDSM
versus the surrender of D/s"
And statements like this ... pointing out that supposedly one is better than the other (although in this case, he is apparently going on about BDSM vs D/s) and yes, both of these came from the same person, and yes, most of you probably have already seen them, as they are recent ... but they are examples of the kind of thing that goes on ... little things, yes, but they add up - and they are everywhere. *quick clarification - this is not to stir up more trouble with the person who said these things, but to prove a point that it does happen*

It all boils down to the same thing "mine is better than yours because it's mine" ... "mine way is right and yours is wrong" ... blah

 

[incubus'_sub]

The choir can amen to the rooftops, in fact the choir has been singing so loudly for so long that they have just about drowned everyone else out with the erroneous chant that they have, at some time, by someone, been disrespected. Try to get over it and realise that at this point in time it's the doers, not the onliners who could use a bit of respect for their own valid views & beliefs & not have threads started to chastise them for stating them.

Now excuse me, I have important things to do. I firmly believe that I earned a million dollars today. All I have to do is to convince the real estate agent & the Ferrari shop man that they are real.

 

[AngelicAssassin]

Nail away AA & be as rude as you wish. In that particular instance I considered my general observation to be sufficient ... It's extraneous & irrelevant detail in this context.

Rudely consider your general observation sufficient if you wish. Claim the correction as extraneous and irrelevant if you wish. Your observation doesn't hold up under scrutiny outside of your frame of reference, however, and i find that detail neither extraneous, nor irrelevant.

Originally posted by incubus'_sub
As neither of us can see the point of distant directives, even when we are apart for some reason, I'm sorry, there will be no perve value. It's not uppity, it's not nose in the air, it's not bigotry & it's not lack of understanding, it's simply how we see it due to the lives & experiences we have had both together & prior to that.

Based on your statement, he's never forgotten nor lacked clarity in an instruction, never called to remind you of anything, and the two of you have never misunderstood one another, in a BDSM context, or without. i'm happy for both of you, and i say that without a trace of sarcasm. Most of us don't have that kind of omniscience.

Originally posted by incubus'_sub
Fun to do when you have the time, but a problem if it assumes the proportions to take over your mind & body.

The tolerant portion of the world community might say the exact thing to any of us, online or skin to skin. The intolerant call practitioneers of either flavor sick. If you play in some fetish circles, the psychologists have chapter and verse in their DSM-IV tome of wisdom for what to do with you.

 

[incubus'_sub]

Sweet Dommes, how people perceive certain statements is really up to them. You can find insults in anything if you try hard enough.

Noone has, to my knowledge, ever said anything about being better & it would be better if words were not placed in others'mouths.

As we are discussing here, reality these days seems to be in the mind of the beholder and I also have the right (& have spent this thread saying so) to state my realities too.

Perhaps it's the tiny little voice in the bottom of the minds that is actually making itself heard rather than anything any of us actually say here.

 

[SweetDommes]

Sweet Dommes, how people perceive certain statements is really up to them. You can find insults in anything if you try hard enough.

Some things are pretty easy to interpret ...

Online is convenient for meeting people, as letters once were. It's also an easy & lazy way to conduct a relationship. It's always going to be at your own convenience & if it doesn't work out the way you want it to ie fulfills the fantasy you personally have of the BDSM practices, you can turn it off without another thought. Please don't try to tell me that there's so much more to it because fact is you CAN turn it off whenever you choose to do so

Yes, it can be turned off ... but you can walk out the door whenever you choose as well. It might be a lot harder, but it can still be done, and to disrespect those who choose not to, and who *are* committed to the relationship ... that's what we are talking about here.

Much has been said about respect and whilst I have great respect for people's rights to believe in whatever they want to, I do not have to respect the pretense that online fantasies are real. To me, walking around in drag on orders from an online mistress means less about commitment & more about losing touch with your real world, more of a modern day shared masturbatory tool, not that there's anything wrong with that.

Qualifier at the end aside (and for the record, that "qualifier" seems to be a very un-sincere attempt at appeasing people that you dont' really feel are worthy of being appeased), this is the one that has me the most convinced that you have a "holier than thou" attitude. If someone does it, it doesn't matter if the order came from a computer screen, a letter, a phone call, or from a mouth, bare millimeters away from an ear.

I do have a problem with being told I have to believe in it too.

No one has told you what you had to believe in ... what we are asking is that you not make statements like the above that make people feel unwanted and unwelcome.

The bias is there in your words - I quoted them directly and without cutting any portion of the paragraph for a reason ... I am not putting words into your mouth, I am not changing the meaning with creative editing ...

 

[Caitlynne]

Try to get over it and realise that at this point in time it's the doers, not the onliners who could use a bit of respect for their own valid views & beliefs & not have threads started to chastise them for stating them.

I guess you missed the part where I explained that I am NOT an on-liner, but OK, since we seem to be taking the non-friendly approach, let me point out what I think is obvious..........

You need to get over it.

And here is where pointing out a 'difference' IS relevant. No one begins threads stating that skin on skin is NOT real. No one challenges the 'brand of BDSM' a real timer may practice. No one questions your reality and dedicates thread upon thread to determine if what you feel and need has any relevance. No one questions your reality. (or mine)

YOU however, (and those like you) question the reality of on-liners, and when you do that you'd better expect some 'warriors' to take up the challenge and take you on. It's the way it works when one passes judgment.

You'll just have to excuse me if I don't break out the hankies and have a long cry with you because no one understands how tough a real-time BDSM'er has it. Those terrible on-liners accuse us all the time of being posers, and fakers and the like ... why it's scandalous...

~ cait

 

[kinky babydoll]

I'm sorry to disagree Catilina.
I see this as 2 seperate entities.
True, RL BDSMers do communicate extensively online. It is part of real life. But comparing RL to OL is like comparing apples to oranges.

RL=BDSM
OL=Fantasy play

Just MHO.

BRAVO!! Well said navarre!!!

You cannot see through the computer screen to see if the other is doing what they say they are, therefor making trust almost impossible.

The whole "you are my sub" deal, after talking to a person once, twice, even three times makes me ill. Get off your behinds, go out into the world, and find a real person to practice your kinks with. Instead of staring at a computer screen fantasizing about what you want.

Most people DON'T really do what they say they are doing.... am i right people? It's way too easy to type in "OMG Master, You make me feel sooooooooo good...... " hogwash........ 'i want to cum for You and only You"....... blah..... "Noone completes me like You do Master"...... after only 1 meeting online..... makes me want to choke.

Now........for those that have to communicate online, but have either met in r/l or are having to do both online and r/l together....... kudos to you!!

i'm speaking of the velcro wearing collars, that Masters go "goo goo" over, thinking these are perfect submissives.

Get real people. Live life in real time, not fantasyland.

just my 2 cents............

 

[catalina_francisco]

I know both...have lived both (r/l longer then online)...and know how they are the same and in which ways they are different. If i thought my words would be heard i would waste no time explaining. Unfortunately this to me (and is not directed at you but just a general statement) is just another form of *holier then thou*. I dont mind when people live their lives thinking that their way is the only way... but when it hurts and offends other people, i dont like it much.
Do i crave skin to skin bdsm as part of my life? yes.
Do i tell people that something they are doing for real or feeling for real is fake? no
Do i chuckle to myself knowing that most who say r/l is the only way started online in the same way as a few ppl who post here? hell yeah.
I wont post to this thread or any like it in the future,because if no one wants to *hear* it is not worth my time to type.

But this post is just one example of why it would be great if you did more of the same posting. It speaks a truth, and it is a lived reality. Unfortunately, many who come to this lifestyle through an online meeting which becomes realtime, then prefer to not talk about or acknowledge the online part. I find that sad as for many, us as one example, without onine both as my own serious beginning in the ifestyle, and our own meeting though 16,000 kms apart, there would never have been the relationship that exists today. To deny that is to deny a part of your own history and life IMHO.

Even now we live 24/7, there are often commands delivered through the phone or by email or IM, and we use all those electronic means to ciommunicate daily and constantly, so I guess in reality online is still a big part of who we are as well as the real life face to face which is daily also. The online parts do not seem less serious than the face to face, nor am I ready to let my behind test the waters of deciding those commands are less important or real than the face to face (call me chicken!!). In my way of thinking our relationship would be the poorer if we limited it only to those times we are in each other's physical presence.

Catalina

 

[catalina_francisco]

BRAVO!! Well said navarre!!!

You cannot see through the computer screen to see if the other is doing what they say they are, therefor making trust almost impossible.

Ever heard of webcam? And yes, it can be left on for hours and hours as you go about your daily routine in your house while your Dominant checks onscreen in their house.

Catalina

 

[catalina_francisco]

This thread is not online BDSM practitioners against Real life BDSM practitioners. All of the more vocal voices who have been strongly opposed against treating Onliners as a piece of shit are real life BDSM practitioners.

It is funny that we who are supposed to be superior according to some, disagree and have decided to show our disagreement. The majority of the real life practitioners on lit. have had it with this ‘I am real and you are fake’ attitude.

Like I have said before, I will say it again. I am a real life BDSMer who believes that onliners have a valid expression of BDSM. Yes, they are not doing the same things I do, but neither am I doing the same as they do.

I have followed my path to BDSM which is different than that of Incubus_dark or Sweetdommes or Angelic Assassin. We all have different experiences; I have heard many times in many different groups that their way was the only true one. I have had long boring repetitive discussion with the king of stupidity (Jon Jacobs) about true domination and true submission. I have been part of BDSM groups and stepped out of them because of their narrow minded view on the world.

If I know one thing, it is that I know that my way is not the only way. That my BDSM is true and real to me, but to someone else it might not be.

Francisco.

 

[kinky babydoll]

Ever heard of webcam? And yes, it can be left on for hours and hours as you go about your daily routine in your house while your Dominant checks onscreen in their house.

Catalina

Pardon me...... i was speaking of those that don't have a webcam, and that have never even traded pics with each other.

 

[A Desert Rose]

I can't see why any of this is even an issue, to begin with. How someone else (in this forum) lives is of no consequence to me, at all; just as, how I live means nothing to anyone here.

Read and digest what you want and what fits for you and ignore the rest. It's really not that hard to do and it requires nothing... not even an acknowledgement of opinions that one finds are not acceptable in his or her life.

I stay out of threads that hold no interest for me... that's just how easy it is to do.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Pardon me...... i was speaking of those that don't have a webcam, and that have never even traded pics with each other.

Those that were wanting to trade pics almost from the word go were usually the ones I figured were really more into appearances than actually D/s, so unless there was some other compelling factor in their favour I moved on to the next possibility for a real long term relationship. Once I did send my pic though, most were not sorry they had taken the time to get to know each other, and I was fortunate in that most wanted to meet, even those like my now Master who had to leave their country to do so, or offer to fly me to theirs (which I declined).

Catalina