RE: Questioning the answers (Full Version)

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



Message


leadership527 -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 1:22:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero
If you did trust the reader (or at very least trust that people making inaccurate interpretations of things they read that lead them to make stupid choices is a fact of life) there would be no cause for worry.
*chuckles* Yeah, there is that too. I trust that some percentage of humanity are too stupid to avoid doing dumbassed things. I also trust that some percentage of humanity is just plain evil. And I don't feel responsible for those folks.




MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 1:48:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: IrishMist

It almost sickened me to read what he wrote. But what really got to me was the fact that he was almost excusing his behavior simply because he had found, on these boards, a reason to excuse it.



OH NO, NO, NO... now don't you go JUDGING anyone for their kink!!!  That's the type of nonsense and supposed "tolerance" that everyone involved in kink/BDSM is SUPPOSED to have.  It's bullshit and the "Tolerance Police" are always right there to tell you that it's all good, no matter what people want to do. 

Bottom line is there ARE abusers who use this dynamic to find their victims... and NO, not everything one does under the guise of BDSM makes it okay.  Though few on these and similar boards will ever get that.  After posting here, they'll trot off to another thread, and in a flurry of key-swipes and political/kinky correctness, proclaim at the top of their lungs how EVERYTHING is peachy-keen and fine, as long as it's in Kinkville, USA.




aldompdx -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 2:11:25 PM)

It is healthy to introspectively question one's self. You cannot change the past, but you can change the future.

You highlight the hyperbole of extremism, and the myopia of narcissism. People would do well to design their response to answer and support the original poster, while also considering how it will influence the many lurkers who read it but do not comment.




NihilusZero -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 2:24:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA

Bottom line is there ARE abusers who use this dynamic to find their victims...

Right. People who seek to force themselves on other people without those people's consent or via outright coercion or blatant emotional blackmail.

From what is written in the OP, would you care to share with us why you think that conclusion was applicable to the fellow in question?

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA

and NO, not everything one does under the guise of BDSM makes it okay.

Just everything done under the shroud of consent.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA

Though few on these and similar boards will ever get that.  After posting here, they'll trot off to another thread, and in a flurry of key-swipes and political/kinky correctness, proclaim at the top of their lungs how EVERYTHING is peachy-keen and fine, as long as it's in Kinkville, USA.


As opposed to imagining ourselves as such moral paragons that we must save adults from their own naivete.

It's a fundamentally backwards viewpoint: it's a concern with trying to fix the occurrence of the result without being analytical enough to understand how the process begins: with lack of sensibility, critical thinking and good ole honest self-reflection.




NihilusZero -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 2:30:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: aldompdx

It is healthy to introspectively question one's self.

Perfect. We should leave it at that.

If people understood that then there would likely be far less people crying about being manipulated or abused in situations they willingly stayed in by choice and, only afterward, started feeling that they made a mistake.

Really, what the "responsibility" angle is arguing is: some people are just too stupid (despite being adults) to understand what they read and how it could or should apply to their lives, so we should censor our words in case someone takes anything we say as a means to further their own agendas. And, it would be one thing if the argument was focused just on defending people who could become unwilling victims of such a 'stupid person' committing personal violations...but inevitably we see the motivation is often not so virtuously pure that it isn't tainted with also wanting to defend supposed 'consensual victims' engaging in acts that just weird us out.




DesFIP -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 2:39:22 PM)

IrishMist, did your ex hit those who couldn't consent? Did he torture kittens and children? If you had said stop or you'll call the cops, would he have stopped or would he have threatened to kill you if you asked for help?

Because there are right answers here which make what he did, and what you wanted, ethical.

It may not have been sexual sadism but it was sadism. The difference is consent by those able to consent.

As far as the young man who wrote you, he may be an abuser, he may just have fantasies of extreme sadism and never knew there were people who played the way he wants to, but the line between ethical and unethical is very clear. It is his responsibility as to which side he's on.

Basically, if he wound up with someone like me who does not consent to much more pain than a pinch here and there, and did this anyway, then he would be an abuser. If he said "shit, I like you but we just aren't compatible" then he'd be an ethical sadist.

And if the lines you quoted are accurate, I don't see an abuser in them. I see someone who has always fantasized about unleashing the depths of his sadism and was overwhelmed with relief to know there were people out there who would want to play the way he wants to.




agirl -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 3:54:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero

Right, so...presuming this individual is not a joke profile/account...

I still fail to see the introspective horror at having someone take the time to essentially say to you: "Hey, thanks for inadvertently making me feel like the things I like and want don't make me the psychopathic freak I'd normally be considered even if I'm engaging in those things with consensual partners."

I'm as isolationist as most anyone, at times, and I have no history of siding with the presumption of needing to have any excessive "responsibility" to others...but this is a community site for a niche minority, for crying out loud! The very reason this site exists is for people to find solidarity with others who are facing the same social issues and personal questions.



I wouldn't lose a moment's snooze over it, personally.

agirl




OrionTheWolf -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 4:06:27 PM)

There, now that is a more accurate statement.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA

Bottom line is there ARE abusers




MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 5:18:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero



As an example, if one CONSENTS to having their limbs cut off, the fact they CONSENTED to this act does not render it acceptable. 

Example that this actually exists... there ARE those who would CONSENT to this:

"The patients who presented to Dr Smith were said to be suffering from a psychiatric illness, a disease "of the mind" that led them to believe that their otherwise healthy limbs did not belong to them and that they would be healthy and whole once the limb was removed." 

Linkhttp://www.the-philosopher.co.uk/dysmorphia.htm


You may not be a nut-job, but there are PLENTY on these boards (not giving any names) who have very dangerous things in mind that pass them off under the cloak of BDSM/slavery. Should some idiot CONSENT to these things (which I promise you would ultimately end in death), that doesn't render it acceptable just because it's cloaked in BDSM.





MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 5:22:09 PM)

NO!  My original statement stands" "Bottom line is there ARE abusers who use this dynamic to find their victims..."

You may choose to think differently, and you'd be grossly naive (and wrong) for doing so.


quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

There, now that is a more accurate statement.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA

Bottom line is there ARE abusers





Elisabella -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 7:56:31 PM)

-FR-

I wonder how people can reconcile 'consent to extreme sadism' and the threads about 'mastery.' According to other threads, 'mastery' is bringing a D/s relationship to a point where the s is compelled to follow, unable to disobey or leave. In my opinion 'mastery' is a combination of codependence and stockholm syndrome, masterfully delivered.

So if the guy being discussed in the OP met someone like DesFIP and 'mastered' her, then a few years into the 'mastery' started to increase his sadism, and she didn't leave, didn't call the police, etc. because she was 'mastered' would it be a consensual relationship, or would it be abuse?

Yeah people say nice catch-phrases like 'once you consent to slavery you consent to everything that follows after' but the thing is that people change, and genuine abusers never start off breaking your face on the first date. If you really don't want something at the start of the relationship, if it's a hard limit and you're 'mastered' into accepting it, did you change your mind, or is it just a more subtle form of coersion played long?




NihilusZero -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 8:03:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA

As an example, if one CONSENTS to having their limbs cut off, the fact they CONSENTED to this act does not render it acceptable. 

Example that this actually exists... there ARE those who would CONSENT to this:

"The patients who presented to Dr Smith were said to be suffering from a psychiatric illness, a disease "of the mind" that led them to believe that their otherwise healthy limbs did not belong to them and that they would be healthy and whole once the limb was removed." 

Linkhttp://www.the-philosopher.co.uk/dysmorphia.htm


You may not be a nut-job, but there are PLENTY on these boards (not giving any names) who have very dangerous things in mind that pass them off under the cloak of BDSM/slavery. Should some idiot CONSENT to these things (which I promise you would ultimately end in death), that doesn't render it acceptable just because it's cloaked in BDSM.



Apotemnophiliacs aren't nut jobs any more than transgendered people are.

Care to try and get away with that accusation on this site?




lovingpet -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 8:22:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: IrishMist

This is the first time that I have ever posted a question here, on the general boards; so please bear with me for a bit.

A lot of times, when we answer questions posted by others, we always tend to use our own past experiences to explain an answer. Normally, I don't even think about it. I simply state that this is how it was for me, how it pertains to the question at hand, and that's it. I don't worry about how others actually might view things past that. ( Right/wrong is what I meaning here ) I have never let myself think or believe that what I was saying, might in some way, 'be an agreement' with another for how they may treat their own partner or partners. Chances are, I just refused to think that perhaps something like that could possibly happen. Free will, responsibility and all that.

Any way, yesterday, I received a cmail from a young man, in his early twenties; literally 'cyberly' shaking my hand and patting me on the back for being a willing punching bag for a man for more than 10 years. This young man expressed how happy it was to see that there were others out there like him. In his words ' he was a sadistic dominant man who enjoyed seeing the swelling and bruises on eyes and knowing that he had put them there; that he found enjoyment in the knowing that because he could call himself sadistic, it excused him when he hurt the property that he claimed'.

I will be honest. It almost sickened me to read what he wrote. But what really got to me was the fact that he was almost excusing his behavior simply because he had found, on these boards, a reason to excuse it. And that the simple words I may have typed has helped this along.

For the first time I have actually found something that has gotten to me; and rattled me enough to wonder if I am doing more damage than good to others when I use my own past experiences to help explain something that I am trying to express.

I have never liked labels. Not so much because of the reasons I have given in the past; but because I know, from experience, that none actually apply to me or to my past relationship.

My late husband was not sadistic. Not by a long shot. He was a cruel bastard that got off on the pain, and the control that he exerted over others. He was abusive. He was assertive, harsh, demanding, cruel, egotistical, and selfish.

These things I know. These are things that I knew from the day that I met him. These are things that I allowed because I needed him. I needed that cruelety, harshness...I needed the abuse. I had a fire burning me from the inside out, and he, and his way of doing things, is all that kept it from exploding.


I know I have a tendency to shrug off anyone who thinks or says that a relationship such as that will only destroy. I have a tendency to defend it. And yet, by defending it, I am somehow getting a message across that I am also defending abuse.

Until that message in my mail yesterday, I had never really stopped to think about how others might view what was written.

And dayum it all, it's pissing me off because I am now questioning how I put things in perspective when I answer something on a message board. I am 41 fucking ears old, and never once in my life have I questioned myself, my actions, or how they may affect others. I sure as hell, don't like doing it now.

Fuck, I don't even know what my question is here lol. But I do know, I don't like this feeling one bit. It makes me cranky.


~FR~

What this comes down to is a person who wanted to find some out or justification chose to use your experiences to do it. It could have just as easily been someone else he picked on. It really had nothing to do with you and everything to do with someone needing an excuse. I could attempt to justify his remarks that he may have meant it more in the way of relief that it wasn't strange to want to do those kinds of things with a partner, but I somehow doubt it.

I try to walk a balance in my posts. I am on some of these outer fringes (not all, and some of them different ones from you or others). I want to remain pretty open and genuine in my answers, but I am fully aware that there are some pretty unbalanced people out there in this world that will take my experiences and perspectives and warp them to suit their own purposes. This means that I don't want to give a view of things that doesn't take into account the pitfalls that can be inherent to something, regardless of how it is working for me. I tend to encourage a spiral down method to things because I know that, in general, most people aren't going to be able to endure certain things the way they had hoped and it is less traumatic to just stop at a comfortable level than to fail and have to go through all the processing that entails.

It is a risk all of us take when we post on these boards that what we say will be used by another in an unwise or unscrupulous manner. The more out there some of our experiences and interests are, the more prone we are to this. This is the first time it has come to your attention that your words were used this way, but I am sure it is far from an isolated incident. You really can't take up some burden of guilt for simply discussing a topic and honestly answering questions. People are responsible for their own actions. What another person does with your words is out of your hands. They will have to deal with the consequences soon enough.

lovingpet




pyroaquatic -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 8:42:41 PM)

:|

I just want people to be happy without them becoming dead.

All of these doors that people choose to walk through only lead up to more doors. Some may jump out of a window, and that is not savvy with me.

As far as abuse is concerned,

I've seen a relationship where the woman deemed herself a 'slave', everything was under consent, yet the male absolutely hated his 'slave' and cheated on her (i am not sure if there was a bdsm subtext to this but does it matter?)

I told her the truth (in fact she already knew) and promptly cut off the relationship. Thankfully, for he verbally threatened ME for breaking up a relationship HE hated to be in.

BAH.

Sometimes it does not take a fist to abuse a person.

As to questioning the Answers...

That is what I am here for. I question all of these 'answers'. There is more information left out of an answer than in one.

You may question that statement if you would like to.

But yes....

Excellent post.

*clap,clap,clap,clap*




DesFIP -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 9:16:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

-FR-

I wonder how people can reconcile 'consent to extreme sadism' and the threads about 'mastery.' According to other threads, 'mastery' is bringing a D/s relationship to a point where the s is compelled to follow, unable to disobey or leave. In my opinion 'mastery' is a combination of codependence and stockholm syndrome, masterfully delivered.

So if the guy being discussed in the OP met someone like DesFIP and 'mastered' her, then a few years into the 'mastery' started to increase his sadism, and she didn't leave, didn't call the police, etc. because she was 'mastered' would it be a consensual relationship, or would it be abuse?

Yeah people say nice catch-phrases like 'once you consent to slavery you consent to everything that follows after' but the thing is that people change, and genuine abusers never start off breaking your face on the first date. If you really don't want something at the start of the relationship, if it's a hard limit and you're 'mastered' into accepting it, did you change your mind, or is it just a more subtle form of coersion played long?


Interesting question. But see, I don't believe you can be mastered into enjoying unacceptable stuff. You can be forced to take it, but that brain washing stuff? Doesn't work for me. Abused women know their partners are doing the wrong thing, they stay because they aren;t ready to leave, not because they're enjoying it.

Abuse makes you less, consensual activities with someone who wants the best for you makes you more.




OrionTheWolf -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 10:19:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA

NO!  My original statement stands" "Bottom line is there ARE abusers who use this dynamic to find their victims..."

You may choose to think differently, and you'd be grossly naive (and wrong) for doing so.


There are those that use their profession and hobbies to find their victims. That was my point. You want to limit it to just BDSM, but the percentages are pretty even across the spectrum. You are showing ignorance, since I doubt you have read any recent studies about BDSM and abuse.

BTW, you mentioned a psychiatric illness about amputees, but you do realize that many psychiatric professionals consider any form of BDSM to be an indication of a mental illness? Most social services people consider ALL BDSM that involves any physical contact or restraint abuse.

So from a mainstream view you have a point, but for those of us that are involved, we know differently, and not just act like we know.




OrionTheWolf -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 10:20:51 PM)

Very well said.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP


Interesting question. But see, I don't believe you can be mastered into enjoying unacceptable stuff. You can be forced to take it, but that brain washing stuff? Doesn't work for me. Abused women know their partners are doing the wrong thing, they stay because they aren;t ready to leave, not because they're enjoying it.

Abuse makes you less, consensual activities with someone who wants the best for you makes you more.




Elisabella -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 10:57:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

-FR-

I wonder how people can reconcile 'consent to extreme sadism' and the threads about 'mastery.' According to other threads, 'mastery' is bringing a D/s relationship to a point where the s is compelled to follow, unable to disobey or leave. In my opinion 'mastery' is a combination of codependence and stockholm syndrome, masterfully delivered.

So if the guy being discussed in the OP met someone like DesFIP and 'mastered' her, then a few years into the 'mastery' started to increase his sadism, and she didn't leave, didn't call the police, etc. because she was 'mastered' would it be a consensual relationship, or would it be abuse?

Yeah people say nice catch-phrases like 'once you consent to slavery you consent to everything that follows after' but the thing is that people change, and genuine abusers never start off breaking your face on the first date. If you really don't want something at the start of the relationship, if it's a hard limit and you're 'mastered' into accepting it, did you change your mind, or is it just a more subtle form of coersion played long?


Interesting question. But see, I don't believe you can be mastered into enjoying unacceptable stuff. You can be forced to take it, but that brain washing stuff? Doesn't work for me. Abused women know their partners are doing the wrong thing, they stay because they aren;t ready to leave, not because they're enjoying it.

Abuse makes you less, consensual activities with someone who wants the best for you makes you more.


"Someone who wants the best for you" is seriously subjective. I mean, don't the abuser and the M/s master have the same goal - to make the girl compliant and pleasing? To make her a better wife/slave? Don't they both use physical force to obtain that goal?

That's why I brought up stockholm syndrome. Of course, not everyone in the world is vulnerable for it, but captor-captive bonding is very real. In abusive relationships there's usually a strong emotional blackmail aspect. And oftentimes it would sound very similar to an extreme D/s punishment scene.

Girl burns guy's breakfast. He slaps her, calls her a cunt, drags her by her hair to bend her over the bed and starts to rape her, telling her that's all she's good for. If she resists, he threatens to cut her, kill her, beat her. Et cetera.

Totally hot BDSM scene or abusive relationship?

We say it's consensual if you use BDSM language, but how is the slave who stays any different from the wife who stays? Especially if she's had emotional conditioning (or "training") that makes her find his behavior acceptable enough to not call the police.

I really don't know the answer to that question, but I wonder if that's only because I've been in the BDSM lifestyle so long that I've conditioned myself to see D/s "punishment" based dynamics as acceptable. Even so, I don't see how broken bones and genuinely threatening to kill someone can be in that person's best interest - whether they call themselves a slave, or just a wife.




AnimusRex -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 11:27:29 PM)

You have cmail on the other side




Justme696 -> RE: Questioning the answers (10/9/2009 11:45:45 PM)

quote:

You want to limit it to just BDSM, but the percentages are pretty even across the spectrum. You are showing ignorance, since I doubt you have read any recent studies about BDSM and abuse



Abuse happens everywere. But..bdsm is legal here..and getting abused in that situation will make it hard for a female to say it was an other kind of abuse then what it should have been.
Bdsm can eassier be used as a cloak to hide illegal activities.
( have read about this also in Dutch, Belgium and German newspapers...for a judge it is hard to judge)




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125