inclusive or exclusive.....

inclusive or exclusive..... (Full Version)

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

Message

wwwkevinww -> inclusive or exclusive..... (6/24/2007 5:40:18 PM)
I feel as a BDSM community we are better off if we presume that most vanilla people are actually into BDSM, but just don't know it. It makes more sense to try and be inclusive than to think that we are an exclusive type of community that the vanilla world will never understand..... I remember a conversation I had where they talked about using a bullwhip to draw blood, and another story of a man punching a woman dead in the face and that was considered okay by the woman in question. I think there is a point when its no longer BDSM but abuse/assault..... I think that BDSM is going more mainstream as the definitions on what is and isn't acceptable is defined better, but think if our perceptions changed slightly we could realize its already "mainstream".

Celeste43 -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/24/2007 5:53:28 PM)
You really think your elderly grandmother gets off on being hogtied and spanked? And the waitress at the local diner? And why do you want to know what every one around you does in bed? Not normal conversations at my family get togethers. But then I'm not in a community or a lifestyle, whatever they are. I'm in a relationship with one man who likes sex the same way I do, and likes his relationships the same way I like mine. We're both into bondage, we're both into male dom/fem sub, we're both fond of red meat, we both enjoy picnics up by the lake, and we're both fond of going out to TCBY for ice cream. In other words, we're compatible.

IrishMist -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/24/2007 5:55:09 PM)
I had a nice long reply all thought out for this, but well; Celeste put it so much more nicely than I would have [:)] Well said Celeste

bandit25 -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/24/2007 5:55:18 PM)
Well put Celeste.

wwwkevinww -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/24/2007 5:59:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Celeste43 You really think your elderly grandmother gets off on being hogtied and spanked? And the waitress at the local diner? And why do you want to know what every one around you does in bed? Not normal conversations at my family get togethers. But then I'm not in a community or a lifestyle, whatever they are. I'm in a relationship with one man who likes sex the same way I do, and likes his relationships the same way I like mine. We're both into bondage, we're both into male dom/fem sub, we're both fond of red meat, we both enjoy picnics up by the lake, and we're both fond of going out to TCBY for ice cream. In other words, we're compatible. normally most people consider incest as bad, so their is no benefit in talking sex with family.....although in subtle ways it can come up.....so and so is with who? their sex life is dead? I know I don't want to think about my grandma & sex, but if you have a pulse, you should be getting some. sex & bdsm shouldn't have an maximum age limit....

PairOfDimes -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/24/2007 7:21:02 PM)
Well done, Celeste. Kevin, it's good to think about these NCSF-type issues. Some people like to identify themselves mostly by a given hobby or sexuality, and it seems that you're attracted to identifying yourself chiefly with BDSM. That's not my own approach--I do BDSM, yes, and I think it makes me happier to do it. I hang out on these websites, and go to some group meetings, and I think it would be awful nice if the state quit poking its head into my bedroom, but my sense of self comes mostly from other aspects of my life that don't have anything to do with the genders of the people I fuck, how many people I fuck, or how I fuck them. Yes, it does seem like a lot of people practice elements of BDSM without identifying with those four letters. Many people are in subtly inequal-authority personal relationships--there is a reason for the pop culture images of the subservient, dependent housewife, but also of the "henpecked husband." It seems like bondage and spanking are relatively mainstream as parts of an adventurous sex life--the idea that a couple occasionally does a bit of spanking or tying is gossipy-scandalous, perhaps, just like any specific detail of one's sex life is a bit scandalous, (details about one's sex life being a private, intimate matter), but not terribly shocking any longer. At least, among my younger(ish) generation, this is so. So, I'm with you there--yes, lots of people do stuff that might look like BDSM without identifying with BDSM. Absolutely. I don't understand why this means that BDSM needs to become an evangelical movement, nor do I understand why, as it seems in your message, there is a choice between either everyone being really kinky after all or kink being an impenetrable, rarefied minority activity. Isn't it possible to understand something without practicing it? A number of straight people seem to have grasped the idea that some people like to have same-gender sexual experiences, relationships and households, and that that's okay and valid. (But that's a better example for poly, as I think about it.) More to the point, almost everyone, I would venture, is okay with the idea of their friends engaging in hobbies that they don't themselves enjoy--people seem to be okay with my fondness for sudoku and weight lifting without enjoying either activity. Although, I'd argue that BDSM ought to be a private, quiet hobby, legally and socially, and, as such, my friends and family really wouldn't need to know. Personal boundaries, libertarianism, and all that. It seems that you're answering the "BDSM vs. abuse" question by distinguishing the activities based on physical severity. I think this has some problems, and I prefer the consent model--if all parties are of sound mind and they all consent, then the activity is not wrong. First, where does one draw the line? It strikes me as arbitrary--forty-nine cane strokes is fun adventurous sex but fifty is bad abusive wrongness? Then, too, if physical severity defines abuse, does that mean that it's not abusive and wrong to tie up an unwilling man and do some light sensation play and easy spanking? Then again, are you arguing that simply consenting to being hit in the face indicates that one is of unsound mind and thus unable to consent, independent of other qualities that indicate one's sanity? That's a touch harder to answer, but I would submit legions of fighting athletes, amateur and professional. Surely they all couldn't be crazy. By the way, while I agree that it would be nice to stop regarding people as asexual once they hit seventy, it seems ill-put, and not exactly conducive in general to sexual freedom, to say that everyone "should" have sex. If I don't want sex, I shouldn't have sex, and neither should my grandmother.

BrutalMasterOne -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/24/2007 7:29:40 PM)
Well I have been around longer than most and I have seen what you are talking about. Here in the USA we go in cycles. Forget about BDSM, just look at women's fashions. About ten years ago or so high spike heels were all the rage. Then it became a time for "sensible" footwear. Today once more we are looking at towering heels on women. It is much the same way with BDSM. However I do agree that it is more above ground than ever before. It seems that every city with a population of over a million has a bdsm boutique and that is a change in things. Still no matter what you do only about 15% of the population ever become interested in what it is that we do.

LadyPaige -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/24/2007 9:17:10 PM)
I agree that most vanilla people I know well enough to know any intimate details about their sex life indulge in at least some of what we consider BDSM activities, but that may just be because I like people who are not inhibited. D/s itself is biblical. Adult toys, leather, viny, latex, high high heels, paddles and restraints... None of this is new in our society. What's new is that society is beginning to admit that is isn't so abnormal afterall. That being said, don't fool yourself into thinking that because you see it all over TV, sold in stores, and practiced in vanilla bedrooms, that it's mainstream. It's still not legally possible to consentually "batter" someone in most places.

ownedgirlie -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/24/2007 9:20:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Celeste43 But then I'm not in a community or a lifestyle, whatever they are. I'm in a relationship with one man who likes sex the same way I do, and likes his relationships the same way I like mine. We're both into bondage, we're both into male dom/fem sub, we're both fond of red meat, we both enjoy picnics up by the lake, and we're both fond of going out to TCBY for ice cream. In other words, we're compatible. This was awesome.

patwi -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/24/2007 9:26:15 PM)
As a vanilla person...(sort of. but please don't disregard what I have to say because I'm not "In the scene" as it were. :) ) I have to say that the BDSM lifestyle comes off as very intimidating. It took me a few weeks after finding this site to work up the nerve to post here. And looking through some of the threads, I still question if I belong here or not when I see what amounts to a lot of categorization and requirements for the Lifestyle, and comments looking down on us "Vanilla people." If that makes sense. The point of my reply being...perhaps being a bit more accepting of us outsiders wouldn't be an entirely bad thng, noteabley for people such as myself who are very terrifyingly taking the first steps to learn what it's actually about.

wwwkevinww -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/25/2007 12:50:19 AM)
alot of interesting comments, I appreciate everyone who has commented or contributed to this thread. One of the things I see alot is people who are only interested in others WITH EXP. Like there is too much effort to have actual intimacy and teach someone with little to no experience what you enjoy...... Another thing I saw when I was a kid was my peers who knew nothing about BDSM, yet still by natural tendancies are interested in what we consider "bdsm activities" like playing with handcuffs or tying up someone so you can "have your way with them"..... Talking about terminology, I use BDSM in a broad context meaning anything considered kinky....I could just as easily use the words "all things kinky". Using those terms, I feel that "all things kinky" is going more mainstream, and although there are a few hiccups along the way, like laws catching up with reality.....it would behoove us to realize we are not as exclusive as people would think....and this is good imho....... exclusion would leave peeps out of the fun and games, and I think if you are intereted in fun and games, you should be able to partake.....(with consent)........

becca333 -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/25/2007 1:06:21 AM)
I think a lot of people aren't opposed to trying a few fun things... maybe just a teeny bit kinky and naughty... After that it's a slippery slope until suddenly you're tied naked and spreadeagled to a cross while your Dom whales away at your rear with a riding crop. I also believe that most vanillas would never identify with BDSM people, those scary types who do depraved and dangerous things. But they'll do a bit of spanking... blindfolds... maybe handcuffs just for fun.... a paddle... and still say they're vanilla and proud of it. It's all a continuum, and most of our definitions are an attempt to control a reality that's far more complex. Most people would try a few fun, kinky things now and then. And don't dis granny - you never know what a goer she could have been when she was younger - and she could be the biggest swinger in the nursing home even now!

LadyPact -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/26/2007 6:33:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wwwkevinww alot of interesting comments, I appreciate everyone who has commented or contributed to this thread. One of the things I see alot is people who are only interested in others WITH EXP. Like there is too much effort to have actual intimacy and teach someone with little to no experience what you enjoy...... Another thing I saw when I was a kid was my peers who knew nothing about BDSM, yet still by natural tendancies are interested in what we consider "bdsm activities" like playing with handcuffs or tying up someone so you can "have your way with them"..... Talking about terminology, I use BDSM in a broad context meaning anything considered kinky....I could just as easily use the words "all things kinky". Using those terms, I feel that "all things kinky" is going more mainstream, and although there are a few hiccups along the way, like laws catching up with reality.....it would behoove us to realize we are not as exclusive as people would think....and this is good imho....... exclusion would leave peeps out of the fun and games, and I think if you are intereted in fun and games, you should be able to partake.....(with consent)........ This comes with a better tone than the OP. I think this secondary statement is more accepting of comment. In regards to some only being interested in those with experience, I certainly understand the mindset. For Myself, I'm not against spending time on those who have no experience, but I think many will agree that it is a lot of work. Many (not all) with no experience have a tendency to sit behind their computer screen, and have all their learning handed to them. They neither go out to meet other people in the lifestyle, nor bother themselves enough to do some reading to get some basic knowledge. Back before the net, these were things you had to do if you were actually interested. This is the greatest advantage AND disadvantage of the electronic age. Greater access for those who are interested, while at the same time, a much increased number of those whose interest isn't serious at all, unless it's handed to them on a silver platter. As for those who show any interest should be able to partake (with consent), I do see one tiny little issue. I'm not a submissive, but even if I were, I wouldn't be willing to offer up My backside to any Joe Blow who wants to slap the words Master/Dominant/Top on his profile and then decide he wants to hold a bullwhip for the first time. I'd be willing to take the experienced, who have spent the time to learn skill, over the inexperienced any day. I have taken inexperienced submissives. I have helped Dominants with less experience than Myself. I've taken people on their first trip to sub space. I've helped people with their lack of basic knowledge. However, I'm more likely to do so, and have an 'inclusive' attitude with those who show that they have put forth a little of their own work to be 'in'.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/26/2007 8:29:18 AM)
I just accept people as people and understand that their personal relationship orientation has nothing to do with me or how we interact UNTIL we want to form a personal intimate relationship with eachother.

Eldritchdancer -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/26/2007 9:44:09 AM)
In my community, with my friends and coworkers, etc... I am LOUD AND PROUD about being a kinky fucker who likes to tie up girls and beat them. The result? I get asked lots and lots of questions about it. "Is X activity safe?" "I thought about trying bondage. What would you recommend for beginner restraints?"... And the offers/flirts from the men and women. It is my opinion, and I only speak for MYSELF when I say this, that ignorance is dangerous. The more 'in the dark' people are, the more they will ASSUME or work from partial, false or misunderstood information. Before the flames start, I will note that I recognize not everyone can be so very Out. But, wouldn't it be nice? Master Darkmoon

thetammyjo -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/26/2007 10:02:49 AM)
I would say that the things we do in BDSM resemble much of what happens in the rest of the world. I would never agree that they are the same or have the same motivations or criteria. But if you see doing BSDM as just another way of human being relating to each other, doesn't it make sense that you could talk to other human beings? Or to quote a person who attended a panel about BDSM once in the university where I teach and study "It's just another way of getting it on" and another said "It's just a different way of loving". Simplistic I'm sure some would say but that's how those vanilla people were understanding what we were talking about.

Archer -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/26/2007 11:16:56 AM)
The ever debated exclussive vs inclussive idea. Both have good points both have bad points, find myself on the slightly exclussive side of the debate most of the time. I don't want to see things go to the point where it takes 4 references and a credit/criminal background check just to attend a munch or party. I'm all for educating folks with little to no exclussivity for basic knowledge. However when it comes to more edgy techniques, when it comes to some parties, when it comes to who gets invited to party at my own home, I get a bit more exclussive. Show me that you are serious about wanting the information, show me that you are someone who's ethics match my own closely enough and then I'll invite you over, teach a class on an edgy technique etc.

CreativeDominant -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/26/2007 12:03:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wwwkevinww I feel as a BDSM community we are better off if we presume that most vanilla people are actually into BDSM, but just don't know it. It makes more sense to try and be inclusive than to think that we are an exclusive type of community that the vanilla world will never understand..... I remember a conversation I had where they talked about using a bullwhip to draw blood, and another story of a man punching a woman dead in the face and that was considered okay by the woman in question. I think there is a point when its no longer BDSM but abuse/assault..... I think that BDSM is going more mainstream as the definitions on what is and isn't acceptable is defined better, but think if our perceptions changed slightly we could realize its already "mainstream". I see it conversely. Given the profession that I am, the "outing" of the activities I like to participate in by my ex did nothing to improve my work weeks and in fact, for about 5 or 6 years, the information threatened to destroy my work. It took a lot of hard work, biting my tongue, and being extremely careful about what I talk about to people...even those who do not use my services...to build my practice back up. One could argue that it is because it is a small town, that the people here are narrow-minded, etc., etc. but I really think that in the long run, what you do outside of what you do to make a living can have an effect on what you do to make a living, depending on what it is that you do. For some reason, many people...and again, this is my experience in a small town...don't like to think of their doctors or lawyers or policemen being kinky and doing "all that weird stuff". I really don't care to discuss it with most of my family. They are aware of some of it and, when necessary, I have answered questions to try and straighten out misconceptions or have pointed them to places where they can find answers. All in all...I can think of better things to do with my time than to deal with slings and arrows and the lack of clientele that results from them knowing what I do behind closed doors and trying to help them "see the light". Thanks but no...

WhiplashSmile -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/26/2007 12:25:17 PM)
I'm going to admit to something here. While at times I will use the word "vanilla" to refer to non lifestylers on the message board or talk with fellow BDSMers, I actually don't look at people I met a being either "vanilla" or not. I don't try to include or exclude anybody I met from this lifestyle. BDSM is not the center of the universe, though at times it might seem like it.

crouchingtigress -> RE: inclusive or exclusive..... (6/26/2007 1:13:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: I see alot is people who are only interested in others WITH EXP. Like there is too much effort to have actual intimacy and teach someone with little to no experience what you enjoy it is an awfull heap of work, kevin, i will do it, but not just for play, i would have to have some indication that there was a reason to invest all that time and effort.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875