Please grovel, bitch?

[Voboy]

What did they want? Why did they 'say' they wanted to play that way?

It staggers me that you'd think they'd need to explain the "why," or even want to.

Your partner wants what your partner wants. If you care about their pleasure, and are willing to go along, who cares why?

 

[pink_silk_glove]

This just dawned on me ... the thread title ...

Please grovel, bitch?

Why ask please? : P

 

[Bramblethorn]

I say "no thanks."

This. Subs aren't the only ones who get to have limits.

Also, if we're talking black eyes and split lips: these are pretty common things in boxing and MMA, far more so than in BDSM. Yet it seems to me that people don't require martial artists to field these "how could anybody be okay with that?" questions nearly so often as they do BDSMers.

Or maybe it happens and I'm just not in the right forums? If anybody here reads boxing/MMA forums and interviews, how often do you see fighters being asked why they're okay with punching and being punched in the head?

 

[Bramblethorn]

I judge other people's kinks if they result in someone being permanently physically or psychologically abused.

A lot lies in how one defines "abused".

 

[Britva415]

A lot lies in how one defines "abused".

And not just how but whether the person involved does. It's easy to project gaslighting and abuse onto them when they insist it's safe, sane, consensual and frankly delightful to them.

 

[LargoKitt]

Maybe we're talking about different things. Up till now, every question about "why" in this thread so far has seemed to me like "why do you have this kink. What's the reason, what caused it, what happened to you." That's the version I'm pushing back against.

This last instance though sounds like it could be something more like "why do you want this? If I understand WHAT you get out of it, WHAT it does for you, HOW you like it, I could perform it better." It's a "why" which doesn't really mean "why". That's a very different question from the first, and it also seems very different from how I took the whole rest of this thread.

Maybe there are sore of two questions that become one: This thread was sparked by seeing stories/videos that are mostly about women's bodies being degraded; not just objectified but kind of 'used like a dirty rag and then thrown away'. (This genre probably exists in the gay and lesbian communities, but I haven't seen it.) These aren't dom/sub stories.

A lot lies in how one defines "abused".

I would assume it is how the person characterizes it. If a person signs up for 'humiliation night', not. If they come away from a night of rough sex feeling they have lost something, probably abused.

 

[LargoKitt]

This just dawned on me ... the thread title ...



Why ask please? : P

Why indeed?

 

[LargoKitt]

Basically, those are my red lines too.

And here's a thing, for those asking why 'why?': For one person having grandpa pat their bottom at an early birthday party is something that makes them feel weird from then on. For others, uncle Fud did them in the kitchen for seven years and they come away with "yeah, my family was strange, pass the butter." Sex with another person is never just about one person.

 

[LargoKitt]

I think this states it as well as it can be stated.

There's an instructive video clip from an interview with the great physicist Richard Feynman (you can find it easily online) where the interviewer asks him "why" a magnet attracts a bit of metal, and Feynman goes on to deconstruct the problem of asking "why" questions in the context of physics. Things just are. I think the problem applies to people's sexual kinks, too. You can try to peel back the layers of the onion, but you keep finding more layers. The onion keeps going.

I don't offer this as a definitive explanation, because I believe everybody is different, but at the root of a lot of these "why do people have X kink?" questions is an answer that many people seem to have a hard time accepting.

People want to be deviant.

They want to be bad. They want to be naughty. They want to transgress. There's something delicious about it. As an avid consumer of erotic lit and art, this seems fairly obvious to me. But I think many people have trouble accepting the truth of it.

People (at least some significant percentage of them) want, somewhere deep inside themselves, the opposite of what they're told to want.

Women are told to be virtuous and to keep their clothes on. Some women react to that by fantasizing about running naked through the streets and letting men fuck them with abandon.

Men are told to be strong and courageous. Some men react by fantasizing about being weak and small, helpless, worthless, trampled on, spit on. They want their penises put in metal cages.

It's the way we are.

You can ask "why" all you want, but at some point the answer is simply "because."

I think that's part of the fun of erotica.

Hmm, a small problem with this is that it suggests that all kinks are created equal. But somebody who really has a thing for sucking on nipples is not equal to someone who gets of one branding people, even if the branding is consentual. One of those damages a person. One of those is about damaging a person.

 

[LargoKitt]

I think this states it as well as it can be stated.

There's an instructive video clip from an interview with the great physicist Richard Feynman (you can find it easily online) where the interviewer asks him "why" a magnet attracts a bit of metal, and Feynman goes on to deconstruct the problem of asking "why" questions in the context of physics. Things just are. I think the problem applies to people's sexual kinks, too. You can try to peel back the layers of the onion, but you keep finding more layers. The onion keeps going.

I don't offer this as a definitive explanation, because I believe everybody is different, but at the root of a lot of these "why do people have X kink?" questions is an answer that many people seem to have a hard time accepting.

People want to be deviant.

They want to be bad. They want to be naughty. They want to transgress. There's something delicious about it. As an avid consumer of erotic lit and art, this seems fairly obvious to me. But I think many people have trouble accepting the truth of it.

People (at least some significant percentage of them) want, somewhere deep inside themselves, the opposite of what they're told to want.

Women are told to be virtuous and to keep their clothes on. Some women react to that by fantasizing about running naked through the streets and letting men fuck them with abandon.

Men are told to be strong and courageous. Some men react by fantasizing about being weak and small, helpless, worthless, trampled on, spit on. They want their penises put in metal cages.

It's the way we are.

You can ask "why" all you want, but at some point the answer is simply "because."

I think that's part of the fun of erotica.

Except that we are creatures with either 'free wills' or a 'will to be free'. I understand that transgressing the bounds of usual human behavior is a turn-on for many many folks. But if someone I know has a serious meth habit I'm not going to say, "Well, that's just their groove." I'm going to wish they *chose* a less harmful *kink*, because we can choose.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Hmm, a small problem with this is that it suggests that all kinks are created equal. But somebody who really has a thing for sucking on nipples is not equal to someone who gets of one branding people, even if the branding is consentual. One of those damages a person.

Suntan and freckles result from UV-induced damage to the skin. Laser hair removal works by damaging hair follicles so they stop doing their thing. An ear piercing, obviously, damages the ear. Are we to pathologise people involved in these practices?

 

[NoTalentHack]

Ah, are we doing this again?

Just say, “It gives me the ick, so I’m making it your problem” and be done with it. That’s what it boils down to.

 

[Erozetta]

I think at least one of my stories plays along the line of humiliation for arousal and humiliation for harm.

It basically revolves around a girl who indulges her boyfriend's kink to see her humiliate herself (knowing he's watching) with men *he* deems below her. She's not into it, but goes along with it because he gets excited by it and his enjoyment of it is arousing to her.

All's well until a mark basically tells her that her boyfriend is setting her up to be assaulted and he won't intervene if one of the guys goes further than a blowjob in a dirty alley, particularly if it's against her will. She agrees to test this with him, she thinks her boyfriend will stop it. She's wrong. He joins in.

She leaves with the mark after that encounter, recognizing that her boyfriend's intent was never about just seeing her humiliated by giving blowjobs in disgusting conditions, but about seeing her fully degraded with a loss of agency in the situation while he's degraded by a man he deems lesser than himself.

 

[SimonDoom]

Except that we are creatures with either 'free wills' or a 'will to be free'. I understand that transgressing the bounds of usual human behavior is a turn-on for many many folks. But if someone I know has a serious meth habit I'm not going to say, "Well, that's just their groove." I'm going to wish they *chose* a less harmful *kink*, because we can choose.

The question is "what is harm?" and who decides what is harm?

As Bramblethorn pointed out, there are a variety of activities that result in physical alterations to the body and involve some pain. Some activities involve the risk of harm or pain. But we don't pathologize most of these activities. On matters of sex, however, people are much more apt to disapprove.

Let's say Person A likes to be cropped and whipped and spanked, to a degree that leaves bruises that last for a while. Person A consents to have Person B do this to her/him. Has something bad happened? Something we should disapprove of? I would say no, not necessarily. It's possible that such activity could lead to true self harm, but we have psychological guidelines that we can look to to know when people are truly hurting themselves. We should be cautious about making our own judgments about others and their activities.

 

[redgarters]

I've always been a switch so I have the ability to see it from both the giving it and taking it end of things, and over the years I have tried to explain it to people who I knew would listen with an open mind, but it's just hard to put into words how things that most people see as negative behavior/experiences like pain, being verbally abused and humiliated, being sexually debased and in extreme instances almost dehumanized, can be arousing both in the case of someone doing this to someone or wanting it done to you.

The Safe/Sane /Consensual standard 'big three' of the lifestyle really only contains the hard rule of consent. Safe and sane varies on the person and your definition may not be mine which is why in these encounters what's often left out of stories/movies etc is that it works best when the top/sub have had discussions on what they like, don't like, and what the limits are.

This is fiction here and other places, but nothing gets under my skin more than people who think you just meet someone at a club and go home and get into this type of game. Blessed be Fifty Shades for romanticizing abuse and shitting all over what we're actually about.

This is what it's about.

"My kink isn't your kink, and that's okay."
But you don't get to judge my kink from a place of non-understanding. Humiliation, degredation, bodily harm, all of those can fall under the umbrella of safe, sane and most importantly consensual. If it does, there's really nothing more that you need to understand.

Sadly, there are too many people who get off on things that are non-consensual. That's never okay.

Understanding the importance of consent is the first step towards understanding a lot of sexual practices.

 

[Writer61]

Sadly, there are too many people who get off on things that are non-consensual.

 

[SimonDoom]

Sadly, there are too many people who get off on things that are non-consensual. That's never okay.

Understanding the importance of consent is the first step towards understanding a lot of sexual practices.

OK, but to add my wrinkle to this: there's all the difference in the world between wanting to practice non-consensual activities in the real world and fantasizing about non-consensual activities within the space of erotic stories. This is a point that I think some people get confused about in this forum, but, IMO, if they are going to be consistent with the tolerant posture they take in this thread they should be clear about this.

I don't think there's anything "wrong" with people getting off on fantasies that involve non-consent. People fantasize about what they fantasize about, and I don't judge that any more than I judge people who like to submit to humiliation and degradation, the subject the OP brought up.

 

[redgarters]

I don't think there's anything "wrong" with people getting off on fantasies that involve non-consent.

Agreed. Fantasies aren't the real world.

 

[Britva415]

One of those damages a person. One of those is about damaging a person.

Do I understand you to mean that sucking nipples damages a person?

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

Do I understand you to mean that sucking nipples damages a person?

Sucking with what?

Lips?

Vacuum cleaner?

 

[Britva415]

Sucking with what?

Lips?

Vacuum cleaner?

They didn't say!

 

[Britva415]

Sucking with what?

Lips?

Vacuum cleaner?

Whichever one damages a person without being about damaging a person.