Question about the building blocks of BDSM

[KillerMuffin]

Thanks for the link, mg.


5. BDSM is mental sex, it's not about the whips and the chains at all. It's all about power exchange and trust. Everything else is frosting.

I have to disagree. That's like saying sex only happens between married couples. A lot of bdsm involves whips and chains and very little else.[/QUOTE]

I don't think I'm wrong here, but I've been wrong about BDSM before.

What do you think?

From this thread:

http://www.literotica.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=100040

 

[monster666]

I think you are right, at least in what is understood here as BDSM.

WD's observation that BDSM includes little other than whips and chains to me implies that a consentual power transfer as a result of some degree of trust has taken place - or it's not so consentual.

A lot of abuse takes place and gets called BDSM. There is never a power transfer, never trust involved, just a jerk calling him or herself Dom/me and beating up on people.

I know of a couple of such cases personally. It's not pretty, and it bothers me that this behavior gets categorically lumped into BDSM along with every other screwed up, hurtful behaviour that comes down the pike.

I have to disagree. That's like saying sex only happens between married couples. A lot of bdsm involves whips and chains and very little else.

I don't think I'm wrong here, but I've been wrong about BDSM before.

What do you think?

From this thread:

http://www.literotica.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=100040 [/B][/QUOTE]

 

[Lancecastor]

I suggest.....

......that there is no universally agreed definition of BDSM.

LC

 

[monster666]

Re: I suggest.....

You can suggest it, but if there is no consent and no power transfer, then it's not BDSM anymore, is it? Just some dumbass beating up on someone else. That's abuse, not BDSM.

......that there is no universally agreed definition of BDSM.

LC

 

[Lancecastor]

Re: Re: I suggest.....

You can suggest it, but if there is no consent and no power transfer, then it's not BDSM anymore, is it? Just some dumbass beating up on someone else. That's abuse, not BDSM.

Well, it's not Vanilla Mainstream Mainstreet USA BDSM, no.....but there's lots of less polite BDSM out there and they call it BDSM as well.

Goreans call what they do BDSM as well....but their flavour of BDSM is not the same as the variety that is welcomed at Lit.

And on it goes....

I therefore believe that my supposition is sound: There is no universal definition of BDSM.

That being said, the question still is about Building Blocks.

I know of 4: B, D, S & M.

Beyond that, i suggest to you it's all wordplay and opinion....cuz there aint no Union or Trademark or recognized Universal Authority on the subject.

Cheers;
LC

 

[monster666]

Re: Re: Re: I suggest.....

We can go round and round on this one, but discard the term "building blocks" and I still think KM is right about trust and power transfer being basic common components to any flavor of BDSM that's consentual. You might call other stuff involving whips and chains BDSM, but I might call it an assault, an abuse, an unlawful restraint, clearly illegal in all 50 states (and in Canada) and not fit for discussion here as anything worthy of pursuit.

Well, it's not Vanilla Mainstream Mainstreet USA BDSM, no.....but there's lots of less polite BDSM out there and they call it BDSM as well.

Goreans call what they do BDSM as well....but their flavour of BDSM is not the same as the variety that is welcomed at Lit.

And on it goes....

I therefore believe that my supposition is sound: There is no universal definition of BDSM.

That being said, the question still is about Building Blocks.

I know of 4: B, D, S & M.

Beyond that, i suggest to you it's all wordplay and opinion....cuz there aint no Union or Trademark or recognized Universal Authority on the subject.

Cheers;
LC

 

[monster666]

BDSM Defined

These are the first three definitions I found. There doesn't leave much room for notions that BDSM is anything but consentual, and the terms trust and power transfer show up pretty consistantly.

Seems this BDSM thing is better organized and defined than one might think.


http://www.angelfire.com/on3/bdsmkingston/bdsm.html

http://home.gci.net/~loveit/academy/defined.htm

http://www.teramis.com/kink/bdsm/bdsm1.html

 

[WriterDom]

We celebrate whips and chains. Yeah, it's hidden away in our play rooms. I've seen great presenters booed to get along with the whipping. I've had subs to count their orgasms and lose count around 5. I read everything that I could find, and only began to learn what I don't know. But being Dom is part of who I am. And I embrace it.


I play safe and consensual. Sane? perhaps not. Safe? Safe is an ongoing process.

 

[WriterDom]

It's hard because bdsm is pretty big tent. There are those who are very couple intensive who are looking for a greater connection. And it seems to work for them. There are others who are looking for a lot less. There is a belief that consensual should include consent of their significant other. I tend to argree with that so I shy away from married women. There are women who would rather be flogged than fucked. And they can pm me

 

[~*sunkyssed_kym*~]

Thanks for the links Monster

While I knew the terminalogy used in all of the links and that true BDSM is consensual; It is encouraging to know that my passions are considered "healthy" by the physiological community. We may not be so well looked upon by mainstream society, but who cares? These are the very people who condem our lifestyle to the public, but are secretly curious and maybe envious of our relationship with our D/s.

 

[SexyChele]

I would have to agree with KM on this one. But I would also state that the world and culture of BDSM runs a long line - and most who say they are into BDSM fall somewhere on that line. To me, I am more into the B and D and less into the S and M. Certain pain is okay, but pain for pain's sake just doesn't do it for me. I happen to be more into the mental aspects of BDSM, so you would not find me at a club or party asking just anyone to beat me. And, quite frankly, I'd be more than a little leery of anyone who would. But that's just me.

Without the mental aspects in place, I can't even imagine a scene or playing with some one. But then, I can't imagine having sex with some one I'm not emotionally connected to at one level or another, either.

 

[Never]

I have to disagree with you KM.
Yes, it has to be consensual, that's the difference between sex and rape.
But 'mental sex'? That's just the D/s. You can cut that out at your leisure. Before BDSM and SSC there was rough trade and plain old S&M.

BDSM is like any other type of sex, it can be deep and meaningful or it can be a quick fuck (er, slap?) behind the dumpster.

 

[Lancecastor]

Succinctly put.

BDSM is like any other type of sex, it can be deep and meaningful or it can be a quick fuck (er, slap?) behind the dumpster.

Nicely done, a lovely turn of phrase!
LC

 

[WriterDom]

Re: Re: Question about the building blocks of BDSM

WD's observation that BDSM includes little other than whips and chains to me implies that a consentual power transfer as a result of some degree of trust has taken place - or it's not so consentual.

A lot of abuse takes place and gets called BDSM. There is never a power transfer, never trust involved, just a jerk calling him or herself Dom/me and beating up on people.

That was never my observation. If someone says all eggs are white, and I say no, some eggs are yellow, it doesn't mean that I'm saying all eggs are yellow.

The abuse you are speaking of is a crime. If you see that going on, call 911.

 

[cellis]

BDSM is a broad spectrum!

You have to remember that we deal with pretty much the mainstream, garden variety of BDSM here at Lit. And although Kestrel has brought us the Daddis and bois imformation, there has been very little exposure to some of the more extreme areas of BDSM.

For most of us, Killer is right, we define ourselves and our relationships within the bounds of Safe Sane and Consensual. But not everyone does. There are people out there practising their own brand of BDSM that I want no part of, but I don't deny them the right to call it BDSM.

The beauty and wonder of this whole lifestyle is that there are not real rules to follow. You can define your relationship as it fits you. You can define it as D/s, as S&M, as B/D, or as all of it. Some people just want to play the mental games, others of us need it all... the mental and physical. It feeds the soul and is part of our spirituality.

Of course, this is just my opinion and I own it.



By the way, welcome back KM. It is nice to see you posting here again.

 

[WriterDom]

I'm not sure how this discussion got off on the tangent of things outside of safe, sane, and consensual. Two people can get together for the cake and icing of whips and chains and stay well inside ss&c. I'm sorry if anything I said lead people to believe otherwise.

Yes, there is an exchange of power. Trust is implied. If you don't trust someone, then why are you letting them beat you?

And both people have to be clear about what's going on. If a predator Dom who is only interested in Whips and Chains seduces a sub with promises of more, well, that's very wrong.

 

[CarolineOh]

I did not think WD was saying bdsm was "just" about whips and chains, he said "a lot" of bdsm was just that, yes, but not that there was nothing else.
I have seen a number of bdsm scenes that carried no more mental aspect than , as Never says, a quick fuck behind the dumpster, and I have met people who's bdsm relationship takes no physical manifestation at all.

 

[monster666]

With BDSM, consent means a transfer of power and some level of trust must take place, even if it is a quickie behind a dumpster.

It's not much different with nilla sex; people must trust each other for some relative level of safety from things up to and including axe murdering. The real difference is that no transfer of power needs to take place in the case of the nilla dumpsterfest.

If any relationship worth salt is analyzed, some level of trust is employed, even if it's simply trust that a certain misbehavior can be counted on. Cops operate on that theory on a daily basis.

And sex among humans is always mental, particularly with BDSM. Think about it - when was the last time your ass formed wordfarts to tell you it wanted a few nasty lashes? I'll grant that it doesn't have to be particularly meaningful or rocket-science cerebral and in fact is more likely to be very primal, but it's nevertheless addressing needs of the mind.

Think of it this way; without a degree of trust and a power transfer, how can consent be given by a sub?

Now, what was so wrong with what KM said that exception was taken to in the first place? I still don't see it.

I did not think WD was saying bdsm was "just" about whips and chains, he said "a lot" of bdsm was just that, yes, but not that there was nothing else.
I have seen a number of bdsm scenes that carried no more mental aspect than , as Never says, a quick fuck behind the dumpster, and I have met people who's bdsm relationship takes no physical manifestation at all.

 

[WriterDom]

The only part I meant to question was "it's not about the whips and chains at all." You are correct that one must pass through the door of trust and ring the bell of power exchange before even a swat behind the dumpster takes place.

We love our whips here. We clean and condition them, spends hours doing figure 8s inside a doorway trying to not hit the sides, and share with everyone here when we get a new one. And we don't go to play parties to get great trust.

Her post was fine as advice to a outsider doing a story. I would have preferred her to say "it's not all about whips and chains" When you speak in absolutes about bdsm, my ears perk up. And sometimes my month opens when it should stay shut

 

[MzChrista]

I cant subscribe to "mental sex". I love to play with men, who I wouldnt have sex with for all the tea in China. Sometimes, friends will send them to me, Ill have my fun, and send them home, end of story.
Now if you want to tell me tying people up and whipping them isnt BDSM, go ahead, but excuse me when I snort.
Yes I think trust is a part of it but sometimes they arent trusting me, they are trusting the person who recommended me . And it definitely a power exchange since they give it up to me.
Now I am not saying thats the only way I play. I have women I play with where there is a strong emotional part to what we do.
So I guess Im saying that both KillerMuffin and WriterDom are right.So who said this had to be a zero sum deal?

 

[catalina_francisco]

Interesting thread.

Catalina

 

[FungiUg]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but BDSM includes S&M, right? I can easily imagine an S&M scene that is all about physical sensation, no the mental power exchange of D/s.

It's an interesting thread, and I side with WD. We've had other discussions around what is and isn't BDSM, and from what I have read, KM seems to be using a very narrow definition. One I would have thought more applicable to D/s rather than BDSM as an entirety.

 

[Netzach]

I think it takes a certain amount of trust to hand someone else a knife and roll up your sleeve, or hand someone else a stick and drop your pants, from a purely Top/bottom perspective!

I think y'all are reading too much into the "mental sex" assertion. I simply think they are trying to verbalize that no uglies need get bumped in the SM process.

 

[Pure]

I'd hate to get tangled up in the question, Is sex in the body or in the mind. Same for any perversion. I don't see why one would want to choose; it's a false set of alternatives.

 

[FungiUg]

I didn't read the question as being about the choice between mental or physical sex. I saw it as an assertion that all BDSM included mental power exchange. "It's all about power exchange and trust. Everything else is frosting."

I think there's going to be a mental aspect in everything we do sexually (well, possibly excluding necrophilia.) So there's no option to exclude that.