RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1

RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (Full Version)

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

Message

slaveluci -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 5:53:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble I am weary of fending off the macho-masochistic subs who continue to beat on their pierced-nippled chests shouting how much more submissive they are because they have been whipped, branded, poked full of holes, passed around at the local scene party or humiliated to the lowest form of human life. If that's what you like, then more power to you, but it's not for everyone nor does everyone want or need it and it certainly is not a measure of submission." Amen! I totally agree. One's level of masochism certainly is no measure of their level of submission to their partner(s). That's been stated and agreed with here on CM more times than I can count. Just because this particular quote happened to come from .... gasp, Castle Realm, .... doesn't make it one iota less true.................luci Edited to add: I went back and read all the previous responses after posting this and I felt I wanted to add that it doesn't appear to me that she is downing ALL "macho-masochistic subs." She seems to be speaking about ones she has encountered. I don't read it as a blanket statement about all masochistic subs everywhere. I read it as her feelings about those she has encountered who apparently must have felt, stated or somehow indicated they were "more submissive" since they were masochistic. That's what I agreed with. I am in no way saying all masochistic subs act that way. Hell, I am one. I know I don't feel that way at all (more submissive 'cuz I can take alot of pain). So, I didn't agree with such a blanket statement. I agree with the fact that it is easy to encounter those who give off those (inaccurate) vibes that masochism makes them "more submissive."

IrishMist -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 6:16:43 AM)
Unlike many others, I never went out of my way to ‘discover’ anything about BDSM, masochism, sadists; etc. I was thrown into it when I chose the man I wanted to be with. He was, without a doubt, a brutal, violent, sadist; something that I knew going into our relationship ( though at the time, I would not have termed him a sadist; just someone who really enjoyed knowing that he hurt me ). I am NOT a submissive person; I think that much is apparent. I don’t even particularly LIKE being submissive to a man. I will physically, mentally, and psychologically fight the feelings every chance I get; and NOT because I want to be beaten into submission; but because I don’t LIKE being out of control. Sometimes though, you find someone that just literally brings you to your knees with a single look the first time they glance your way J It was not until probably 5 years ago or so that I ran across Castle Realm and took the time to read the articles and thoughts that were there. To tell the truth, it disgusted me; the way they went on about how *this is how a D/s relationship should be, anything else is abuse.* All I can remember thinking is ‘what a crock of shit’. I realize that the web site was nothing more than two people’s thoughts on *their own relationship,* however, they presented it in a way that said “this is the only way to do it “.

juliaoceania -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 6:58:53 AM)
quote: Is humiliation part of the masochistic mind set? Not for me.

juliaoceania -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 7:03:28 AM)
quote: At first I exclaimed, "I am not a masochist!!" with as many exclamation points as I could muster up, and with the same sense of denigration that the author of the original excerpt put forth. I read this article when I first began discovering my masochistic side. It was hard for me to come to terms with my masochism because, lets face it, society kind of ridicules what we are probably as much or more than any other part of the lifestyle. I cannot count how many times I have heard "What, are you a masochist or something?" when someone hurts themselves, or puts up with an abusive relationship. I came to terms with being a masochist, and it was not that long after I read the above article. It was part of what put me off on CR originally. I figured that the site was not written for people like me, and I had garnered enough information from it to have a base to branch off from.

sexyred1 -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 7:10:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark quote: ORIGINAL: awmslave quote: The clash of the S/M submissives and D/s submissives I never heared about the "clash" before. There are different desires. Why should we care or do we need to do something about it? Re-education boot camps perhaps? The 'clash' happens an awful lot. I love going to munches and parties and watching demos or scenes - however Darcy and I do not play or scene in front of others. And there is an awful lot of pressure to do so - but primarily Darcy and I are a Ds relationship. And there are many times that I have heard the discussion between Ds couples or units where they feel left out and excluded because they won't 'share their wares' in a public setting. Now to me, sitting at Darcys feet, holding his plate whilst he eats, sharing food from his mouth - is just as important as taking 10 blows from cane in an open setting. I'll take a beating with the best of them, but not for anyone elses enjoyment only Darcy's. But the times I have been pushed to participate is really overwhelming (I am strong enough to refuse, and Darcy will not be told what he should do so is all good) - and I can see why people feel the way they do at events and why they end up not going because they are 'only Ds'. the.dark. That is interesting. Especially given in another thread discussing public play, when I said that I would never consider playing in public, I was lambasted for "obviously you could never connect deeply with your partner like I can in public where I can ignore everything and anyone else around me that is how strong my connection to my sub is" If that is not an elitist attitude, I don't know what is. When I tried to explain that I can and do have the most incredibly intense connection and experiences privately and do not need to share it in public, I was told that I was criticizing other subs. Sorry. I am still not getting where I went wrong with my opinion. I did not put anyone down for loving public play, I simply said it was not for me and refused to be put down as not being "deeply into my submission and Dominant" enough for not doing so.

mistoferin -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 9:46:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sexyred1 That is interesting. Especially given in another thread discussing public play, when I said that I would never consider playing in public, I was lambasted for "obviously you could never connect deeply with your partner like I can in public where I can ignore everything and anyone else around me that is how strong my connection to my sub is" If that is not an elitist attitude, I don't know what is. When I tried to explain that I can and do have the most incredibly intense connection and experiences privately and do not need to share it in public, I was told that I was criticizing other subs. Sorry. I am still not getting where I went wrong with my opinion. I did not put anyone down for loving public play, I simply said it was not for me and refused to be put down as not being "deeply into my submission and Dominant" enough for not doing so. I would suggest that there are many times when "the battle" is perceived to be there when it really is not. Sometimes, for some reason, people will take offense if you share your own experience if it is different than theirs. This seems to be especially true if you present your reality in a light that is joyful. I'm not sure why this occurs because one's experience does not invalidate the other's, nor does it make either of them better, deeper, more right or more wrong. This would be a perfect example and I would suggest that you go back to the thread you are referring to once again and try to read it from a different perspective. I didn't see the "lambasting" and "putting down" you are referring to other than that is obviously how you perceived what was being said. I am not sure how others relating their own experiences, especially when they have not said or even implied that their experiences are somehow superior to your own, is being "elitist". I really am not trying to be snarky here, nor am I trying to attack you or put you down, but no one on that thread ever suggested that you could not "connect deeply with your partner" or that the way you choose to interact is in any way wrong or inferior. Aside from the OP who kind of lashed out at you AFTER you made some rather venomous comments to him. If you are feeling like people were trying to make you feel inferior, you may want to take a closer look at where that might be coming from, because it wasn't in the thoughts expressed by other posters on that thread.

sexyred1 -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 9:52:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mistoferin quote: ORIGINAL: sexyred1 That is interesting. Especially given in another thread discussing public play, when I said that I would never consider playing in public, I was lambasted for "obviously you could never connect deeply with your partner like I can in public where I can ignore everything and anyone else around me that is how strong my connection to my sub is" If that is not an elitist attitude, I don't know what is. When I tried to explain that I can and do have the most incredibly intense connection and experiences privately and do not need to share it in public, I was told that I was criticizing other subs. Sorry. I am still not getting where I went wrong with my opinion. I did not put anyone down for loving public play, I simply said it was not for me and refused to be put down as not being "deeply into my submission and Dominant" enough for not doing so. I would suggest that there are many times when "the battle" is perceived to be there when it really is not. Sometimes, for some reason, people will take offense if you share your own experience if it is different than theirs. This seems to be especially true if you present your reality in a light that is joyful. I'm not sure why this occurs because one's experience does not invalidate the other's, nor does it make either of them better, deeper, more right or more wrong. This would be a perfect example and I would suggest that you go back to the thread you are referring to once again and try to read it from a different perspective. I didn't see the "lambasting" and "putting down" you are referring to other than that is obviously how you perceived what was being said. I am not sure how others relating their own experiences, especially when they have not said their experiences are somehow superior to your own, as being "elitist". I really am not trying to be snarky here, nor am I trying to attack you or put you down, but no one on that thread ever suggested that you could not "connect deeply with your partner" or that the way you choose to interact is in any way wrong or inferior. Aside from the OP who kind of lashed out at you AFTER you made some rather venomous comments to him. If you are feeling like people were trying to make you feel inferior, you may want to take a closer look at where that might be coming from, because it wasn't in the thoughts expressed by other posters on that thread. No, erin, I am perfectly capable of discerning what exactly happened on that thread, but I am not surprised you are seeing it this way, since you agreed with that OP, of course you would. I did not make any "venomous" comments (again, judging my comments is not your place) to him, and if I made any comments at all to him, it was only after he expressly stated that if I did not agree with what he said, then I must be putting down all subs who scene in public and that I must not be capable of forming deep attachments in my own relationships because I did not "fully support" the romantic prose he was writing about publically. He also has no idea of me and proceeded to insult me right and left. If you think I was just going to walk away, you were mistaken. Perhaps I should have, since it resulted in the posts being moderated. Oh and erin? Not only I am quite positive that I am not inferior, in fact, my self esteem is at it's pinnacle right about now, but I can assure you, I am at a point in my life where no one, least of all pixels on a screen could ever make me feel badly about myself. When you have a core of self-worth, nothing and no one can take that away from you. You should know that. That, however, would NEVER stop me from slapping someone down who acts like an idiot when I express myself and tries to misinterpret my comments. That right to self expression is what makes the online forum experience such a delight. But thanks for your analysis, all views even if incorrect, are interesting to me.

DesFIP -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 10:12:08 AM)
Going off onto the playing in public part, besides the fact that we're over two hours away from anyplace, what the hell would we do there? We always have sex with bondage and you can't do that in NY, nor would we feel comfortable doing so in public. And the play we do doesn't require any of that fancy equipment. So he would tie me onto a cross and then do nothing else? Public play doesn't fit nonpain types.

RCdc -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 10:42:04 AM)
I don't know erin. Whilst I did like the post that is under discussion here - I guess I see it from both side. I can get why the dominant felt 'ruffled' by some of the reactions. But that was no excuse to then go on and become totally condecending (to one particular person in which he did single out and try just as equally to provoke a strong reaction from) - and that is what I saw happen which to me, was not as humble as the poster was trying to reflect in the initial post. In other words, his actions did not meet his words - and whilst the words about his submissive was beautiful, his actions to others from whom he did not get the 'required' reaction was not. I'm not saying one was more to blame than the other, just observing that there was a 'strong-willed' and a 'passive-aggressive' in that particular conversation - and I know to whom I would much rather have a heated discussion with. Again just my observation. quote: That is interesting. Especially given in another thread discussing public play, when I said that I would never consider playing in public, I was lambasted for "obviously you could never connect deeply with your partner like I can in public where I can ignore everything and anyone else around me that is how strong my connection to my sub is" I did find that particular statement distasteful red and it is something I have come across before in public settings quite a bit. And I do repeat what I said to erin, no matter how ruffled that person felt by the reactions to his post, it was totaly uncalled for and was meant to provoke and be insulting for those who don't participate in public scenes out of personal choice imo. the.dark.

ExSteelAgain -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 10:44:44 AM)
A Dom has to be part poet and put words to what a submissive does in a validating way. When he can say that it is okay to enjoy pleasing a man, being disciplined, whipped or whatever in a way that creates a positive self image for her, he changes the energy of erotic BDSM play into something she can be proud of. That poetic rhythm is a powerful balance.

sexyred1 -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 10:45:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark I don't know erin. Whilst I did like the post that is under discussion here - I guess I see it from both side. I can get why the dominant felt 'ruffled' by some of the reactions. But that was no excuse to then go on and become totally condecending (to one particular person in which he did single out and try just as equally to provoke a strong reaction from) - and that is what I saw happen which to me, was not as humble as the poster was trying to reflect in the initial post. In other words, his actions did not meet his words - and whilst the words about his submissive was beautiful, his actions to others from whom he did not get the 'required' reaction was not. I'm not saying one was more to blame than the other, just observing that there was a 'strong-willed' and a 'passive-aggressive' in that particular conversation - and I know to whom I would much rather have a heated discussion with. Again just my observation. quote: That is interesting. Especially given in another thread discussing public play, when I said that I would never consider playing in public, I was lambasted for "obviously you could never connect deeply with your partner like I can in public where I can ignore everything and anyone else around me that is how strong my connection to my sub is" I did find that particular statement distasteful red and it is something I have come across before in public settings quite a bit. And I do repeat what I said to erin, no matter how ruffled that person felt by the reactions to his post, it was totaly uncalled for and was meant to provoke and be insulting for those who don't participate in public scenes out of personal choice imo. the.dark. thanks, .dark. it is nice to have someone "get" me. [sm=wave.gif]

DarkDaddyZ -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 11:03:46 AM)
I agree with both what LA and the.dark. said. Someone who followed the labels in her original posting irked her and she wanted to get that off of her chest. Some into BDSM come in and want everyone to know that are into BDSM they want attention in the room and are loud in their quest to get it either via play, fashion, attitude or all of the above. Others come in quiet but with a style of grace and a connection with their partner. The main thing I find wrong with her original posting is she is labeling people too. Z-

batshalom -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 11:13:37 AM)
~quick hijack~ DDZ, nice new pic. ~smiling~ I don't know what the other thread is - I'll look for it since it seems like I missed something really juicy. I've run across quite a few people who "look down" on my decision to not play publicly but it doesn't bother me much just because I've always been a little quiet and a little conservative in many arenas and am used to being baited. I used to bite the bait too ... but I got tired of having to pull the hooks out of my mouth.

MadRabbit -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 1:56:05 PM)
Minus the social commentary on the bullshit in the public scene, the other half just seems like yet another attempt to draw a simplistic, linear outline of something that is complex and non linear and therefore explaining it in black and white terms in hopes of having some grasp of false order.

SeeksOnlyOne -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 2:05:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sexyred1 quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark quote: ORIGINAL: awmslave quote: The clash of the S/M submissives and D/s submissives I never heared about the "clash" before. There are different desires. Why should we care or do we need to do something about it? Re-education boot camps perhaps? The 'clash' happens an awful lot. I love going to munches and parties and watching demos or scenes - however Darcy and I do not play or scene in front of others. And there is an awful lot of pressure to do so - but primarily Darcy and I are a Ds relationship. And there are many times that I have heard the discussion between Ds couples or units where they feel left out and excluded because they won't 'share their wares' in a public setting. Now to me, sitting at Darcys feet, holding his plate whilst he eats, sharing food from his mouth - is just as important as taking 10 blows from cane in an open setting. I'll take a beating with the best of them, but not for anyone elses enjoyment only Darcy's. But the times I have been pushed to participate is really overwhelming (I am strong enough to refuse, and Darcy will not be told what he should do so is all good) - and I can see why people feel the way they do at events and why they end up not going because they are 'only Ds'. the.dark. That is interesting. Especially given in another thread discussing public play, when I said that I would never consider playing in public, I was lambasted for "obviously you could never connect deeply with your partner like I can in public where I can ignore everything and anyone else around me that is how strong my connection to my sub is" If that is not an elitist attitude, I don't know what is. When I tried to explain that I can and do have the most incredibly intense connection and experiences privately and do not need to share it in public, I was told that I was criticizing other subs. Sorry. I am still not getting where I went wrong with my opinion. I did not put anyone down for loving public play, I simply said it was not for me and refused to be put down as not being "deeply into my submission and Dominant" enough for not doing so. i had to go back and reread that thread, thinking i may not have a good memory.....actually the comments, from him, then you were as follows... quote: ORIGINAL: Beuford There's so much more to it then just sex, I'm glad there are at least some people that can see that. The level of intamicy comes from the 2 people invlved, not the surroundings. then you replied.... Spare us you holier than thou sentiments. We don't need any lectures from you. Some people here do find this to be sexual connection, primarily. That is called their preferences, just as it was for you to print your little story. i see nothing that he stated saying his way was better or more special-just that he was glad some could understand where he was coming from.

RCdc -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 2:13:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SeeksOnlyOne i had to go back and reread that thread, thinking i may not have a good memory.....actually the comments, from him, then you were as follows... quote: ORIGINAL: Beuford There's so much more to it then just sex, I'm glad there are at least some people that can see that. The level of intamicy comes from the 2 people invlved, not the surroundings. then you replied.... Spare us you holier than thou sentiments. We don't need any lectures from you. Some people here do find this to be sexual connection, primarily. That is called their preferences, just as it was for you to print your little story. i see nothing that he stated saying his way was better or more special-just that he was glad some could understand where he was coming from. Hello Soo - I don't know if you were aware - a number of posts have been pulled from that thread by the moderators. the.dark.

ownedgirlie -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 2:24:37 PM)
~ FR ~ Just a suggestion - - maybe we should debate what was said on that thread....well...on that thread! [;)]

SeeksOnlyOne -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 2:30:09 PM)
no dark i didnt know that......that was the one i remembered cause i went hmmmmm i dont see how she got to that point a to point b...... ill go back to my usual lurking-lol

sexyred1 -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 2:32:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SeeksOnlyOne quote: ORIGINAL: sexyred1 quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark quote: ORIGINAL: awmslave quote: The clash of the S/M submissives and D/s submissives I never heared about the "clash" before. There are different desires. Why should we care or do we need to do something about it? Re-education boot camps perhaps? The 'clash' happens an awful lot. I love going to munches and parties and watching demos or scenes - however Darcy and I do not play or scene in front of others. And there is an awful lot of pressure to do so - but primarily Darcy and I are a Ds relationship. And there are many times that I have heard the discussion between Ds couples or units where they feel left out and excluded because they won't 'share their wares' in a public setting. Now to me, sitting at Darcys feet, holding his plate whilst he eats, sharing food from his mouth - is just as important as taking 10 blows from cane in an open setting. I'll take a beating with the best of them, but not for anyone elses enjoyment only Darcy's. But the times I have been pushed to participate is really overwhelming (I am strong enough to refuse, and Darcy will not be told what he should do so is all good) - and I can see why people feel the way they do at events and why they end up not going because they are 'only Ds'. the.dark. That is interesting. Especially given in another thread discussing public play, when I said that I would never consider playing in public, I was lambasted for "obviously you could never connect deeply with your partner like I can in public where I can ignore everything and anyone else around me that is how strong my connection to my sub is" If that is not an elitist attitude, I don't know what is. When I tried to explain that I can and do have the most incredibly intense connection and experiences privately and do not need to share it in public, I was told that I was criticizing other subs. Sorry. I am still not getting where I went wrong with my opinion. I did not put anyone down for loving public play, I simply said it was not for me and refused to be put down as not being "deeply into my submission and Dominant" enough for not doing so. i had to go back and reread that thread, thinking i may not have a good memory.....actually the comments, from him, then you were as follows... quote: ORIGINAL: Beuford There's so much more to it then just sex, I'm glad there are at least some people that can see that. The level of intamicy comes from the 2 people invlved, not the surroundings. then you replied.... Spare us you holier than thou sentiments. We don't need any lectures from you. Some people here do find this to be sexual connection, primarily. That is called their preferences, just as it was for you to print your little story. i see nothing that he stated saying his way was better or more special-just that he was glad some could understand where he was coming from. Considering I am not at liberty to pull my own threads from a deleted thread, I would kindly ask you to refrain from posting or speak with MOD 11 about it.

RCdc -> RE: Debating CastleRealm Idea Part 1 (12/22/2007 2:42:24 PM)
Hey OG (Bear with me because I don't know if this is going to make any sense once I type it) I'm not discussing the thread specifically, but the comments and just see a similarity. Jade was discussing/complaining/ranting on the 'cooler' image and attitudes of some masochists - equally, masochists are often in the firing line as not being submissive but only pain bottoms - you hear it over and over. I have heard many Ds couples state they wont attend clubs because they aren't welcomed because they don't scene and I just find that a really sad occurance. I myself have been pressured - I am fortunate to not feel swayed but I do see how s-types feel obliged to scene. And then - you get comments here - as red went through, being suggested she wasn't able to get that intimate and it was sad and that someone felt bad for her because she didnt get it. Then you get those teasing because something comes across as fantasy or romance(subjectively). And ultimately - you get the 'castlerealm is bad'. But it was - just like the thoughts placed down here - thoughts. Just because someone put them on a website doesn't make it gospel, but doesn't make it fantasy either. It was a resource that did have a place. I just find it curious that people really seemed to find CR so repulsive and find the time to deride it but bother placing their experiences on a forum like this and do not see that there is only one difference. The only difference is that the words and thoughts are now theirs and not Jades. the.dark.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

6.054688E-02