SMACK--a concept, a gathering. Welcome.

[rosco rathbone]

There are some people; some of whom I know personally; who simply enjoy taking what appears on the surface to be the "submissive" or "passive" role and then turning the tables on the other, as if to say "nope, you don't have what it takes, either, just like all the rest" even as the whip comes down so to speak. Not sure where this fits in with Pure's learned analysis.

 

[Pure]

Such tactics fit well with my view that the alleged sub or self-said slave is often engaged in complex maneuvering. In the case you cite, the fundamental desire seems to be to 'one up' or to catch by surprise, or even to demean: 'you don't have what it takes.'

These are, in my view, tactics for 'having one's way' though by a most complex, perhaps more hostile route.

Would it not follow that the alleged 'dom/me' in such a situation, if s/he persists, is in fact getting jollies from the 'subs' imposition, i.e., may be some kinda closet maso type?

Approaches based on 'shopping' essentially fit the description you give. The 'picky' (as she says) self-said 'sub' is carrying out a screening process, 'disqualifying' many as 'unfit' to (supposedly) dominate her. There seem to be two possibilities: 1) the chase is more fun than the capture, which is to say that the process and all the 'disqualifications' are the thing, the source of enjoyment, or 2) the final selection --alleged 'qualified' dom--if that's what's aimed at, is going to be something more like a kept pet.

 

[Pure]

N said,

Pure darling....

if I give the man what he wants, albeit a fresh loogie to chow on....and this dampens the spirit of that elusive beast "dominance" because he asks for it...

how on earth does performing according to some third parties' imagined enhancements of the "dominance factor" increase same? IE. What if I don't feel like playing the piss game?

Contentious-sugary....

Moi.
-------------

Toi,

The 'piss game' is one of two examples given--there are hundreds of others-- to illustrate passing beyond particular consent to achieve some degree of genuine imposition, discomfort and humiliation.

No one, least of all you Dear (sugary), is to perform/interact according to my, or any other's -- including noted author's-- standards. If John and Jane Minikink want to play tickle each other tushes, that's fine by me. And if the Master/Mistress of Warm Hugs wants to spend time assuaging the Adoring Waif's voracious desire for affection, that's fine too. They simply won't find the activities of this thread very interesting. And in general SMACK is not about making recommendations to anyone or issueing guidelines for correct sadists.

One point you suggest, I do find myself in limited agreement. If you consider the analogy of a marine corps training camp, certainly the 'maggots' are sometime permitted pleasures, and/or rewarded, but in a limited, controlled, and calculated manner.

To impose on someone or control them is not to whap them every time you walk by. (Think of how an effective prison guard operates, as opposed to a thuggish one.) But one has to look at the intricacies and intent of the 'reward' regime. If it's to gain love and expressions of thanks, if it weakens or transfers control, then it's essentially service, essentially as a bottom. (Think of a camp counsellor at a rich kids summer camp.)

If the occasional rewards are to strengthen the hold over the person, and weaken their capacity to resist, that's certainly part of genuine imposition.

Most cleverly, as suggested in lara's story (1-17) above, if the sadist's 'niceness' or 'reward' (e.g., a smile) is essentialy a 'set up,' a way to get the 'victim' to let down her guard, that's especially fine, imo, as a way of cruelty, since the soon-following sudden slap or insult is going to be doubly shocking.

And so, Sweet, any kinda chow down you and the mr have going is just fine. I'm only interested in accurate labels, not in changing anyone. And my point is that instituting any such c-d according to request may not be--depending on the aim and effect of the overall regime-- anything like Sadism.

 

[Netzach]

1. What if I want love adoration warm fuzzies *and* total robotic compliance?

2. If a smile is always a setup, it fails to be a good one. Stockholm syndrome seems like the most effective captivity of all.

3. RR: you found my old photo in the bottom's yearbook 1999.

4. "Mine's OK. Yours isn't."

I live an upside down reality as RR calls it. I forsee a fembottom, tied perhaps....

screaming ranting raving, calling me every name in the book while I just stand there saying nothing. When she's done when she hasn't got any more in her, I silently get the cane.

Hers is fine. I'm above it.

 

[Pure]

N: 2. If a smile is always a setup,

That wasn't said.

it fails to be a good one. Stockholm syndrome seems like the most effective captivity of all.

Indeed, it's pretty damned effective-- and not brought about by an excess of smiles and hugs. In Patty Hearsts case, ircc, she was tied, and kept in a dark closet, for some days, and raped a few times. As I understand the syndrome, it arises in situations of utter dependence, as a solution to desperate fears (including for one's life) and complete helplessness.

I think that harsh parents, with access to a person in infancy, with all the usual dependencies and vulnerabilities, can achieve a similar 'compliant' syndrome where vociferous orders and harsh punishments are unnecessary in the exercize of control.

I've agreed, and tried to illustrate it with my marine corps training example, that ,in the aftermath of training, where one's will and being are in a major way imposed upon (and one's desires revised and molded), subsequent 'direction' and control can be exercised with a simple request, even with a smile, and only the rarest recourse to force majeur. This is because of the extinguishment of any desires to resist or be ones' own person.

Unless there's a lot you haven't told us about your history with b.f., it would seem that none of the above particulary applies to you and him.


moi même

 

[Netzach]

Honestly...

I don't get the point.

Everything seems to operate in huge swaths of either or.

If the spectre of dreaded mutuality or concern for the bottom creeps into SM it's a sudden immersion in the Hallmark world of CastleRealm.

I love my boy. Otherwise I wouldn't spend the time, frankly. I don't even like most people.

That he happens to enjoy the same esoteric games I do and likes to be on the opposite team, well that works.

There's nothing Oprah-esque or cute about it.

I don't need to feel like I've forced anyone to do anything at the end of the day. If I can poke them with a fork and watch them twitch, if I can tell them to grab their balls and squeeze and they do and they let out that unmistakable little muffled "nnnh..." and this is precisely what they wanted, that part doesn't concern me.

I'm a Chef. The ones who want foie gras come to me, I give it to them. If they want a burger they can fuck off. But if they expect force fed goose liver and I give it to them, cause it's what I do....and its what they want....it remains real food.

 

[bridgeburner]

Pure,

I asked "If the Top enjoys winning and the bottom enjoys it when the Top wins, haven't they both won?"

You said "no"

I ask why not? If you get what you want you win (are satisfied). If I get what I want I win (am satisfied). If we both get what we want we both win. It seems to me that you're saying it's only topping if the one who held the whip is more satisfied than the whipee.

the bottom cannot be directly working for 'satisfaction' or for the outcome.

The very fact that the bottom gets off on being abused means that the bottom has directly and actively worked for satisfaction by allowing the top to abuse him. Now, trying to direct how the top goes about the business of abusing him would certainly be topping from the bottom but that's not what I'm talking about. We're all agreed on what that is. What seems to be the problem is determining if any topping ever takes place in any non-rape situation.

The one who's fufilling his/her will or desires over and above the other's is 'topping'

And what if nobody is? Then no one is topping? Following this to it's logical conclusion would mean that there is no such thing as sexual dominance except in the case of rape.

In the chess example, if I were to 'try' or 'work' to lose to my expert friend, and thereby secure his winning, then I'm not really losing, I'm throwing the game.

Yes, but that's a topping from the bottom scenario and not applicable, because, as I just stated we all know what topping from the bottom is.

If after tying down this 'sub' (having blanket consent) and beginning with the brush, I then switch to the flogger, and s/he starts saying 'stop' 'please', and I continue--then at that point some 'topping' is going on. In the end, that episode, in a manner of speaking, 'satisfies' the bottom (if that's what s/he is) but that's quite different from the simple spanking situation.

If she has a safeword and doesn't use it then according to your own definintions, you haven't topped her at all -- she consented to whatever you were doing however little she might've liked it or expected it. Until she revokes consent you are only acting with her permission. She isn't going to revoke consent until she is unhappy enough with what she's getting to call a halt ---- IOW she's getting what she wants and you're giving it to her. If she revokes that permission and you do not stop then you've topped her but it's rape or assault.

So if only rapists are tops what term should be applied to such obvious tops as Rosco and Netzach who are clearly not rapists? I'm not about to tell either one of them they aren't sexually dominant and fully accomplished tops in their chosen activities simply because their partners not only consent to play with them but fully desire it.

it's not simply a difference in 'going about' getting enjoyment. That misses the agonistic character of the situation.

I don't think it does. Both parties desire sexual/emotional fulfillment. One party gets it by commanding and torturing the other. One party gets it by submitting to those commands and being tortured. One desires to compel, the other desires to be compelled but in the end everybody is looking to scratch his itch. There is still the contest of seeing how much one can dish out and how much the other can take.


This all puts me in mind of the old joke:

A sasist and a masochist agree to play together. They retire to the sadist's dungeon whereupon the sadist ties the masochist to the rack and then leaves the room.

The masochist cries out "Aren't you going to beat me?"

The sadist replies "No."


-B

 

[bridgeburner]

Pure,

Approaches based on 'shopping' essentially fit the description you give. The 'picky' (as she says) self-said 'sub' is carrying out a screening process, 'disqualifying' many as 'unfit' to (supposedly) dominate her. There seem to be two possibilities: 1) the chase is more fun than the capture, which is to say that the process and all the 'disqualifications' are the thing, the source of enjoyment, or 2) the final selection --alleged 'qualified' dom--if that's what's aimed at, is going to be something more like a kept pet.

Why would the dom have to be a pet? You're assuming that she's looking for someone she can top from the bottom when it is equally plausible that she just hasn't met a competent dom. Why do you assume that she's not looking for someone who can really impose upon her?


-B

 

[lark sparrow]

Interesting thoughts perhaps... but I don't get this whole need to be part of a club, against the club, bit. Free spirits? Perhaps I need to be SMACKed!

 

[Netzach]

That sado-maso old chestnut, I always thought it kinda funny.

In my right mind, I'd nearly never be able to resist the chance to leave welts on a hungry ass in the name of denial.

Forgo an orgasm or two sure, but not beat?

My achilles heel.

 

[Netzach]

Ditto LS.

But I went to art school, I have a higher manifesto tolerance than a lot of people.

 

[Pure]

Hi Lark S.

Welcome,

Interesting thoughts perhaps... but I don't get this whole need to be part of a club, against the club, bit. Free spirits? Perhaps I need to be SMACKed!

Hey, at least we're not boring!.

SMACK is a concept or more simply a thread topic--amoral and cruel sexual impulses--. There are many other valid and fine thread topics. The posters here share that interest in that topic, and likely acknowledge those impulses, but aren't a club, nor against any other group or posters to other threads. Indeed most posters here have posted outside, extensively, notwithstanding their avant garde panache and singular artistry.

Perhaps, in time, 'a community for those without a community' will evolve.

Best,
J.

 

[Pure]

Netzach said,

Honestly...

I don't get the point.

Everything seems to operate in huge swaths of either or.

If the spectre of dreaded mutuality or concern for the bottom creeps into SM it's a sudden immersion in the Hallmark world of CastleRealm.

I love my boy. Otherwise I wouldn't spend the time, frankly. I don't even like most people.

That he happens to enjoy the same esoteric games I do and likes to be on the opposite team, well that works.

There's nothing Oprah-esque or cute about it.

I don't need to feel like I've forced anyone to do anything at the end of the day. If I can poke them with a fork and watch them twitch, if I can tell them to grab their balls and squeeze and they do and they let out that unmistakable little muffled "nnnh..." and this is precisely what they wanted, that part doesn't concern me.

I'm a Chef. The ones who want foie gras come to me, I give it to them. If they want a burger they can fuck off. But if they expect force fed goose liver and I give it to them, cause it's what I do....and its what they want....it remains real food.

------

Actual relationships have complementary as well as agonistic components; there's no either/or; and there are varying shadings and degrees of each. Encounters, too, come is different shades and flavors and combinations of them.

The SMACK concept has to do with amoral and cruel sexual impulses (defining a subset of the 'perversions'), and the thread may be of interest mostly to those who acknowledge them and/or 'play' with them--acting on them or undergoing such acts-- especially in encounters.

Other threads, in other forums, deal with a thousand topics from sub-collar styles and types of adjustable nipple clamps; to dom poetry and relationship maintenance among the straight and the not-so, including when to say you're sorry.

A poster here, and I include myself, is evincing an interest in a concept. He or she is not necessarily

1.) Claiming to practice (or suffer) cruelty 24-7, or asserting that's desirable;
2.) Denouncing relationships or 'mutuality' or dreading to hear those words.

Proneness to sprees of kitten drowning, unsuitedness for urban or indoor living, and presence of head hair merging into the eyebrows are not the requirements of admittance to the dark rituals herein.

While the utter inability to relate to a single other human being (or member of the 'opposite' gender) is greatly admired, it is not necessarily seen as the pinnacle of human achievement in these parts.

From what I hear, you're a fine chef, your 'foie' is excellent, and your loogies sacramental. That said, perhaps you would agree that the question of the degree and kind of your sadism, and where and how it's embedded in your famed regimens, is question that may be asked, and for which your thoughts are most welcome.

J.

 

[Marquis]

I have a pretty extensive digital porn library. I am always looking for videos that fit the SMACK desription, so if anyone has any, I'd love to trade.

 

[sigsauerprinces]

ive been reading this thread and i find it fascinating...can someone give another example of SMACK-not the spitting one, something different?

 

[Quint]

Me personally, I think of it from more of the "what makes you do this?" angle rather than the "what do you do?" one. What drives the Top to commit these acts of violent debauchery, and why the hell does the bottom take them? A slap could be administered out of lovingkindness, a desire to correct a deed unworthy of His Darling Princess...or it could be simply because the Top wanted to slap her whore face and so did.

Capricious whim, check. Rage, check. Disgust, check. Because it fucking gets your rocks off, check.

 

[sigsauerprinces]

or it could be simply because the Top wanted to slap her whore face and so did.

Because it fucking gets your rocks off, check.

i really like this. of all the reasons for me being slapped, or any cruel act on me, id rather its this one.

 

[Pure]

Hi SigsauerPrincess and welcome,

...can someone give another example of SMACK-not the spitting one, something different?

I gave a 'peeing' example, earlier in this thread.

There are a thousand ways in which cruelty, erotically tinged, can be envisioned. Some you see in the exceptionally 'hard' bdsm stories or fantasies, such as those below. So the SMACK concept in art and story is a thing of great variety.

The possibilities of acting out sadistic or cruel scenes in real life is a different matter, and that may be what you're asking. Here the wishes or acquiescence of a partner have to be considered.

Some scenes might never be legally realizable, and some only under 'blanket consent' arrangements. There are grey areas (implied consent, e.g.) to be aware of, and porn stories do not necessarily capture the issues that might be of concern in the law.

Besides the stories, a number of threads have come up dealing with concepts of sadism and cruelty, including our 'ancestral' topopolis thread. You can see a number of real and imagined scenes described, of the type which is of interest to those pervy sorts in this thread.

Besides what's below, click 'search' under any posting of Quint's, and see her contributions to topopolis and an number of other threads. She presents as a kind of spiritual fore-mother of SMACK and a midwife/contributor to much sharing on the topics of masochism and humiliation.

"Sucking" roscoe's story
http://www.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=63139

"Proud" (rape story)
http://www.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=114752

"auction of a slave"
http://www.literotica.com:81/stories/showstory.php?id=31818

rape as fantasy thread
https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=134643

topopolis thread
https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=121312

heteros submitting to bisexual encounters (see esp. p. 4)
https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=70372

 

[Pure]

Quint said,

in response to ssp request for examples of cruelty and sadism

I think of it from more of the "what makes you do this?" angle rather than the "what do you do?" one. What drives the Top to commit these acts of violent debauchery, and why the hell does the bottom take them?

That's the essence. quint. The context, the mind and the imagination are what constitute and situate an act of cruelty.

Conjuring it up, writing it in a way that seizes the imagination is a matter of indicating character and psychology, notoriously weak or absent in much porn. The depths of cruelty are more clear in the sophisticated stories than in many of the ham-handed torture stories that used to be in 'extreme.'

As for actual practice, cruelty and its refinement require a top's insight and empathy, not simply a ham-fisted smack in the chops by a belligerent, but craven drunk.

 

[sigsauerprinces]

Hi SigsauerPrincess and welcome,

...can someone give another example of SMACK-not the spitting one, something different?

I gave a 'peeing' example, earlier in this thread.




"Proud" (rape story)
http://www.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=114752

illl go back and look for the peeing example, i must have missed it. ive just read the "Proud" story...WOW., i liked it a lot til towards the very end.

 

[Pure]

SSP: What was it about the end of the "Proud" story you did not like? The woman is let go, possibly to be raped again. What other outcome would fit, iyo.

Did you have a chance to read roscoe's little tale?

 

[Pure]

here are a couple other threads with material of relevance to this thread:

masochism
https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=197811

the rape fantasy
https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=207229

humiliation v. degradation
https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=203983

 

[sigsauerprinces]

SSP: What was it about the end of the "Proud" story you did not like? The woman is let go, possibly to be raped again. What other outcome would fit, iyo.

Did you have a chance to read roscoe's little tale?

hey sorry it took me so long to reply. i started roscoes tale but didnt get very far because to be honest, it grossed me out a bit and didnt turn me on in the slightest or press any of my buttons (rosco i trust you wont be offended as you know i think you're Aces). its just not my kind of story. the gross fat ugly smelly guy..turned me off right away. even in my most extreme fantasies where i am used abused humiliated and degraded, the person doing it is always attractive. i understand, i think that thats the point of the story-that she doesnt like it at all. its just not my thing.

as for the proud story-his utter cruelty with no reason at all except that he wnated to humiliate her really turned me on and pressed my buttons.

"I had just watched, in a fire of joy, as her brain ran into the stone wall of the unexplainable."

"Don't hurt me. I don't know what the hell to do." Eyes downcast. She defers to me.

""What I want?" I yelled; she was making me crazy; I pushed my foot down on her, hard, and the whole hand slipped past the outer ring, and in. Her face collapsed into a look of utter shock and incomprehension. I can smell triumph. It's near."

so hot.



""You make me want to crawl under the dirt. Like my step-dad. Oh Lord.""

and this is the line that ruined it for me..and the later stuff about her stepdad too. might as well have turned the hot water faucet off and turned the cold one on full blast. but thats just me...i just didntl ike it.

still, the story up til then was very good

 

[Pure]

Those are interesting comments.

We're back to the old 'fantasy' and reality question.

The usual 'nonconsent' story at Lit is pure fantasy, with almost instant sexual enjoyment, 'coming' on the part of the woman, and often begging for more.

elements of fear, terror, 'numbing' what are frequent, would not be mentioned or are downplayed.

further, the woman is essentially without any character (i.e., is a porn 'cardboard' woman, whose main desire is to be fucked repeatedly by anyone over 12).

in the proud story, it appears there was an attempt at character; characters have vulnerabilties. Being abused, creates one.

the intent of the story seems to be to show this 'underground man's' deranged plan to totally degrade his 'rape' victim. So to speak, to fuck with her mind as much as possible.

in that way, imo, the his callousness about abuse and willingness to exploit it, makes some sense-- wouln't you agree? it would be odd for the man to say, "Jeezz honey, I'm sorry to hear that, and now I feel badly about adding to your sexual problems."

So we are at the point of a 'degradation' that you find a 'turn off'.
That's fine, and yet we don't know about others. Ymmv, as they say.

When, if ever, is degradation erotic?

It occurs to me that for some, the realism of the whole story may prevent its being a turn on, at all.

 

[sigsauerprinces]

oh i know it wouldnt make sense for him to say "oh gee im sorry that happened". im just saying that the mere hint of that happening at all, turned me off the whole story. i know it makes sense in the context of the story.

about the realism being a turn off-it wasnt for me, up until that point. it did seem very real but that didnt prevent me from liking it. tho i responded to how his character was feeling the most- the pure pleasure he was getting from humilating and scaring her. that is one of my favorite things- really seeing a Dom in real life or a rapist/predator in fiction utterly enjoying what theyre doing with no moral compunctions whatsoever. not even a grain of regret.

about the nonconsent stories at LIT-ive found a few that included a lot of pain, violence and torture-tho they are few and far between, which gets frustrating because those are the ones i want to read.

when is degradation erotic....i dont know, i think thats a highly personal question that would vary with whom you asked. for me personally...i am an emotional masochist as much as a physical one, as someone helped me realize recently. the thought of me falling for a Dom, hard..wanting him so much. him knowing that and using it to his benefit. calling me and telling me to come to his house. now remember i have strong feelings for this person. they slap my face, slam me up against a wall, shove me to my knees, and he makes me suck him off. makes me hold his cum in my mouth and open wide for him to see. slaps me SO hard and says "now swallow that shit bitch". i swallow, and he walks past me and opens the door "now get the fuck out". that would fit the definition of degrading, right? but in that scenario, i would enjoy it. i know it sounds crazy..but my wanting and needing him and his utter cold indifference to that...makes me hot. and it gives me another feeling that i find it utterly impossible to put into words. sort of sweet and painful at the same time. and driving home from his house, i would have a smile on my face.