CreativeDominant
Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GddssBella G'morning all: I will probably get lots of flames for this this post, but what the hey, I like swimming upstream. Let's get something straight. BDSM is NOT about sex. It's about power. How it is surrendered. How it is applied to gain control over another person. The psychological stimulation that power exchange evokes is the key element to D/s. Sexual stimulation is merely a pleasant after effect. In point of fact, BDSM IS about sex, at least the SM part is. Like it or not, sadism has been and is defined as sexual arousal derived from infliction of pain, be it physical or emotional or mental, on another. Now, for some in WIITWD, it has come to mean inflicting other things besides pain but the intent is still sexual arousal. If you use the means to practice sadism for anything other than sexual arousal, it may well be about power but it no longer fits the definition of sadism then, even the broader one enjoyed in WIITWD. Masochism has been and is defined as sexual arousal derived from the reception of pain, be it physical or emotional or mental, from another. Again, for some in WIITWD, it has come to mean receiving things other than pain but the intent is still sexual arousal. If your reception of these things...pain, sensation, etc....is for any other reason than sexual arousal, then it no longer fits the definition of masochism, even the broader one encompassed by WIITWD. Now, the bondage and the discipline...they may well have sexual elements or they may be more about the power but in those cases, I would venture to say it depends on the context. Now...D/s? D/s...in MOO and from what I've read, many others opinions also...is MUCH more about power. That statement I can agree with. But not the BDSM. While BDSM is often an expression of the power within the D/s relationship, if the sexual arousal is not an intent for one party or the other, then by the dictionary definition and the legal definition, it is not sadism/masochism you are engaged in. quote:
People offering sexual services are a dime a dozen. This form of submission has much less to do with the desires of the dominant/top and is merely indicative of the sub/slave/bottom looking for sexual gratification. Lip service is cheap. You can spew whatever platitudes you like, but a lack of sincerity will shine through. Rant over, all vented. Have at it kiddies! Here is an area where I am pretty sure I am in disagreement with you. Maybe I should put my flame suit on but here goes. I've heard dominants, mainly female dominants, state something along the lines of what you've stated above. It is a way of putting into the submissive's head that their sexual desires and needs are not important and that consideration of them or wanting/expecting them to be fulfilled is somehow a lesser form of submission. Sorry...don't agree unless you are talking a purely D/s relationship with no BDSM or...if BDSM elements are involved, then a statement by the dominant that they use BDSM elements but not for the purpose of sadism/masochism. And if that is what happens...why do we see so many posts from male submissives asking if it is wrong to want some sort of sexual release with their Mistress or some recognition of their sexual needs? I happen to think a D/s relationship that is going to incorporate BDSM is a recognition of the fact that there is a desire on the part of the dominant AND the submissive for sexual fulfillment. I happen to believe that a submissive has every right to hold onto their sexual desires and find someone who recognizes his/her right to have them and to have them fulfilled and not purely at the whim of the dominant. Bella
|