quote:

ORIGINAL: MissIsis

I will refrain from giving my own opinions, and I know this is subjective.  I really just want to get a discussion going. 

Is it really considered cheating if someone is married & they seek out a dominant for bdsm activities only, & exclude sexual contact?  After all, it isn't considered cheating if someone gets their nails done by someone other than their SO, or a pedicure, which can be quite intimate, or finding a tennis partner other than their SO?  Wouldn't receiving bdsm activities be along the lines of receiving a service sometimes? 

quote:

ORIGINAL: camille65

There is energy being shunted to a third party when it should be directed to their marriage partner. Getting ones nails done doesn't involve emotion (heh at least it doesn't for me!) but dipping into BDSM activities requires and gives emotional energy.
In my eyes it is the old apple/oranges comparison, they don't fit. There is a big difference between getting an emotionally neutral service (like nails) and getting a BDSM fix.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThunderRoad

If you aren't telling your partner, it's cheating.  If you have their permission, it's not.  Can't really be much clearer than that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sammy7626

Why couldn't BDSM be non-sexual?  What about service oriented submissives?  One's who serve master's that have nothing to do with sex in the commission of their services (like cleaning maid, gopher, typist, organizer, secretary, butler)?  If they choose to identify as a Master and servant/slave, yet there is no sexual contact, nor any desire for sexual contact, does that mean that they are not "true" practitioners of BDSM?

What about spiritual BDSM?  Acts done, not for sexual purposes, but for spiritual ones?

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: sammy7626

CreativeDominant: [As mist noted, the definition you pick to use is the 2a...not the most common definition.  The most common definition and the one first thought of when the word is used...as according to most dictionary's rules of grammar is definition 1.  This holds true for all words in the dictionary.]--

I understand.  But all I was attempting to point out, is that, much like the most common line of thought is that BDSM is sexual in nature, there are still possibilities, albeit less common in occurance, that are none the less, non-sexual.  I'm not personally saying that *all* bdsm activities can be made non-sexual, I might be naive, but I'm not stupid.  All I was saying was that some of them can be, and was responding to the initial post which implied that *none* of them were or could be made, non-sexual in nature.

And I don't mean to make it seem as if I am picking on you nor do I wish to hijack the thread but I look at the activities under the main headings of ..........................
Bondage / Discipline / Sadism / Masochism...and I see very little that is not sexual in some manner.  Let's set aside sadism and masochism.  That has been discussed.

Bondage.  Sure, you can use bondage to tie your submissive into an ottoman posture and then use her as such.  Sexual?  Most likely not.  But many dominants use bondage to enhance OTHER activities, activities that often fall within the S/M realm and then, we are back to sexual arousal of some sort.

Discipline.  I admit that I draw a line.  Many of the dominants I talk to, both here and outside of here, do also.  I do so in order that I do not mix serious business with the pleasurable aspects of BDSM.  The discipline involved in the D/s side of the coin is that which usually involves correction/training in behavior or mental attitude.  It tends to be of a serious nature and is NOT sexual.  The discipline on the BDSM realm is more of the "play" type of discipline and tends to involve aspects of "corporal" punishment.

Activities such as kneeling or making my bed or shining my shoes or ironing my shirt or cruising around the house in heels and a thong are all pleasurable and non-sexual but they occur on the D/s side of the coin, not the BDSM side.