RE: Just a rant.

RE: Just a rant. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

NihilusZero -> RE: Just a rant. (6/13/2009 7:54:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth Of course, that makes things really difficult, when people deliberately obfuscate their desires. Oh yeah. Or, even worse, when people are in the middle of a 'Dr. Jeckyll/Mr. Hyde' internal civil war about certain desires.

beargonewild -> RE: Just a rant. (6/13/2009 8:03:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GYPZYQUEEN Can you tell me what you mean that you view forced as negative.. Do you mean as in not consenual?? GQ Yes and I apologize for using the incorrect term.

Ialdabaoth -> RE: Just a rant. (6/13/2009 8:05:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero quote: ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth Of course, that makes things really difficult, when people deliberately obfuscate their desires. Oh yeah. Or, even worse, when people are in the middle of a 'Dr. Jeckyll/Mr. Hyde' internal civil war about certain desires. Sure. This is one of the problems I have with SSC, "No means No", and all that, incidentally. If we were actually being honest about the dating process, we'd realize that "No means No" is a formula - in the US, anyway - for people to never get past first base. We train girls that they're supposed to be "chaste", and act like they don't want it; we train boys that they're supposed to be aggressive and "not take no for an answer". That way, the girl can say 'no' - fulfilling her obligations towards chastity - but broadcast to the boy that she wants to be taken - thus placing on him the responsibility for interpreting and fulfilling her actual desires. Of course, this means you can't tell the difference between "No means No" and "No means Yes", which pretty much guarantees that the kind of boy who isn't lusted after by the ladies is going to get sent to jail if he emulates the actions of his hot stud best friend.

LinnaeaBorealis -> RE: Just a rant. (6/13/2009 8:22:18 PM)
His Evilness & I learned early in the getting-to-know-you negotiation stage of our relationship that we share a "forced" kink. I get hawt when I feel that he is forcing me to do things & he gets hawt when he feels that he is forcing me to do things. It's simply acting out of fantasies on both our parts. If he ever gets the hit that I'm not really into what he's trying to force me to do, he stops & changes directions. If it's not turning both of us on, there's no reason to continue. I used to tell people that I had a "rape" fantasy & one person explained that it was probably more accurate to say that I had a "taken" fantasy. I didn't really want to be raped, but I did want to be taken. I enjoy being bound & gagged & taken. This is what I see as desiring something forced. He takes me further & further each time we play. We both get off on that. I go places with him I never in a million years thought that I would ever agree to go. And happily. So the forced part is really just a part of our fantasies, something that gets both of us off.

Andalusite -> RE: Just a rant. (6/14/2009 11:17:35 AM)
To me, if someone comes flat out and requests an activity, especially in their profile/initial e-mail contact, it isn't forced, it's something they want. They essentially want a lot of scripted role-playing, which I would find a bit stifling. I have done things I didn't intrinsically enjoy as a submissive (ie. eating foods I hate, chores, taking pain that is pushing against "too much" for him, etc.). I wouldn't necessarily consider it to be "forced," but it was very much an expression of my submission. I certainly wasn't asking him to do them, though, unless he specifically ordered me to beg. Likewise, when I was a Domme, my submissive occasionally did things for me that he wasn't thrilled about, because that's what I wanted. I love force play in the sense of takedowns/playfighting/sparring - struggling against the other person. Delicious violence...

PeonForHer -> RE: Just a rant. (6/14/2009 11:42:55 AM)
To me it's simple, Anda. As a sub I have two feelings that contradict one another. One feeling says that it's wrong to be forced. The other is excited by being forced. The problem is that people expect feelings to conform to a certain idea of what they assume to be 'logical'. If feeling X and feeling Y are considered, logically, to be mutually contradictory, then people assume that they just mustn't, or even can't, co-exist. This is called 'ambivalence' and ambivalence is unacceptable in today's reasonable, wholesome world, with its reassuring straight lines and square buildings. One way to deal with ambivalence is to 'blend' the X and the Y, so that the brain can see it as just one feeling - call it Z, say. "Mutual consent" is a form of Z. Another way is just to accept the ambivalence and enjoy the tension of it. I do a lot more of the latter nowadays. It's more fun. [;)]

Andalusite -> RE: Just a rant. (6/14/2009 12:08:23 PM)
Oh, absolutely - expecting emotions to be logical and reasonable is illogical! I just have a hard time thinking of any activity as being forced if the person being forced is actively seeking it out, begging and pleading for it, and won't get involved with someone unless they can get it from them! "Not the briar patch! Anything but the briar patch! I won't be your submissive unless you throw/force me into the briar patch!" [;)]

PeonForHer -> RE: Just a rant. (6/14/2009 12:46:44 PM)
That gets right to my point. If you truly didn't expect emotions to be logical and reasonable, you wouldn't have a hard time thinking of such activities as being both forced and desired! Underneath what you're saying here, I'd suggest, is a tone of "Come, come. I have logic on my side."

Andalusite -> RE: Just a rant. (6/14/2009 1:00:02 PM)
Hmm, I can see things as wanted but forced, like in the second example. Personally, if I had a submissive, and he wanted me to do something for him, I would probably do it as a treat for him as long as it was within my boundaries. However, if he's the one initiating/requesting activity A, B, and C, when I can take it or leave it, I wouldn't think of MYSELF as forcing or coercing him. So, any "force" involved would be scripted playacting on MY part, no matter how genuine his ambivalence and mixed feelings are, unless I was grabbing his hair or something and physically making him do it. From his perspective, it might well be "forced," and the scenario could involve all kinds of things that play to his ambivalence about it, and he could genuinely have mixed feelings about it. I'm not intending to diminish that, it's just my perspective from when I was actively looking for a partner, and had lots of submissives contacting me wanting me to "force" them to play dress-up or have sex with other guys. I've rarely seen that type of request (about anything) from female submissives, so I think that a lot of it is linked to people's views of gender/etc. (and notably, those are the things that are most often requested to be forced). A big part of it too, is that most of this type of "force" play seems to be very driven by humiliation. I'm not into humiliation play in general, and I don't see anything humiliating about dressing like a woman, or in two men being sexual with each other. So, calling someone a "cocksucker" feels like an insult toward my gay and bisexual friends, and seems to me to be insulting women who have oral sex, and making fun of someone for being a "sissy" or "pantyboy" seems like it's making fun of women and cross-dressers. It's very similar to raceplay in some respects that way, IMHO. I don't interact with bisexual men, cross-dressers, or women those ways, I don't have those attitudes, so it feels stilted, artificial, weird, and degrading toward people I care about. None of those guys seem to want to do feminisation or male-male contact in a way that I would actually enjoy or want to do. They need their specific script to be followed almost to the letter, then they have the nerve to call it submission?!? I completely admit, online, and in writing in general, I tend to be very logic-driven, while in person, I'm far more emotionally reactive. I don't feel I can express the emotional parts as well when I am using a pencil or a computer as when I'm talking. Plus, we're mostly discussing this in abstract, so I kind of step back from it a bit, rather than it being a situation I'm actively involved with in person. My submissive didn't have the "make me do stuff I want to do" paradigm, and neither have the bottoms or switches I've been in relationships with, so I'm having some trouble figuring out how it would apply in "real life" away from the Internet.

PeonForHer -> RE: Just a rant. (6/14/2009 1:13:19 PM)
I guess the main point - a point I very often want to make to dominants - is the much more general one of "You'll find it a lot easier to handle submissives if you accept that they're very often going to have a fundamental ambivalence in them". Or, at least, that's true of me and I suspect a good number of submissives. Hah! I know what you mean about a sub contacting you expressing a desire to be forced, for instance, to dress up. I have a core kink that really gets me going, but about which I generally keep quiet. I know that I'll enjoy it ten times as much if I know that the dominant in question gets me to do it as a result of her own desire. OK, she'll see after the first time that I loved doing it. But, forever after, whenever we repeat that activity, I'll be able to tell myself she's having it done in great part for herself and not for me. I'll be able to believe that there's at least an element of force from her. If that makes sense!

Andalusite -> RE: Just a rant. (6/14/2009 1:22:33 PM)
I can certainly understand wanting to do it for her, not to feel like she's letting you do it as a favour, and there are some things that I did do with my submissive (and men I was in egalitarian kinky relationships with, for that matter) on those terms. In general, I want both people to enjoy what we're doing, and I react a lot off of their reactions. Anyway, it's a moot point, since I'm in a M/s relationship and off the market right now. [;)]

GotSteel -> RE: Just a rant. (6/14/2009 6:36:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MidnightKat5000 What's with this "I am into forced ___." If you're into it isn't really forced, now is it. This is usually from guys in regards to forced "femme". When you have self-taken photos of you dressed, how it the fuck is it forced?! Ugh, morons. A lot of the people on this site redefine words to suit their fantasy, so you can go around calling "slaves" morons because they aren't actually slaves and insulting all the "princesses", "goddesses", "puppies", "pets", "babies", etc. However, as a "woman" you may want to consider that whole don't throw stones in a glass house idiom and be a little more tolerant.

krazykatelyn -> RE: Just a rant. (6/14/2009 6:46:16 PM)
Maybe it is like rape play. Its called rape even though both people are into it, but they want to act out the scenario.

BitaTruble -> RE: Just a rant. (6/14/2009 6:54:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer OK, she'll see after the first time that I loved doing it. But, forever after, whenever we repeat that activity, I'll be able to tell myself she's having it done in great part for herself and not for me. I'll be able to believe that there's at least an element of force from her. If that makes sense! This makes perfect sense to me, but then we share the same side of the kneel. Loving something on my own is great.. getting to engage in it is even better.. but getting to engage in it because Sir loves it as much or more than I do is the absolute best. That is the sweetest sugar there is IMO. :)

catize -> RE: Just a rant. (6/14/2009 8:36:06 PM)
quote: That way, the girl can say 'no' - fulfilling her obligations towards chastity - but broadcast to the boy that she wants to be taken - thus placing on him the responsibility for interpreting and fulfilling her actual desires. Of course, this means you can't tell the difference between "No means No" and "No means Yes", Instead of trying to guess, all you have to do is stop when someone says “no”. And if they say “yes” but you can’t trust that, then I’d say it is a good idea to take more time to get acquainted. It seems pretty simple to me!

EmelineRose -> RE: Just a rant. (6/15/2009 1:46:07 AM)
Heh. Consensual force. One of those funny little phrases BDSMers are so fond of using! No wonder so many newbies get confused...

Andalusite -> RE: Just a rant. (6/15/2009 8:42:12 AM)
Catize - exactly! No means no unless you've specifically negotiated otherwise (ie. use of a safeword with "no" and "stop" and such disregarded). Ialdabaoth - you brought up something similar over on Flogger's thread. It's not just about who is hot/attractive, but someone who's aware of body language and such is going to be likely to get away with more than someone who isn't as socially adept or who doesn't pay attention. There can be some wiggle room (not in "No," IMHO, but within being touchy-feely/etc.), but the person has to immediately back off as soon as the person's breathing or body language indicates that they are uncomfortable. It's the same skills as are used in BDSM to "read" the bottom or submissive, to help figure out how she is doing. Yes, the bottom or submissive should usually use their safeword if needed. Sometimes, we're not aware of just how much our bodies are physically hurting, or try to tough it out, or simply cannot speak.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125