Traditional vs Contemproary Domination

Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (Full Version)

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

Message

LotusSong -> Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 6:04:21 PM)
Perhaps we need to revisit the concept. I think what people mean by a "true" domination is one with a more traditional approach. Guys want Betty Page (it doesn't matter if she can do shit or not..she just has to look the part) and Women seek Conan the Barbarian (intelligence optional) types. Then we have the contemporary. aka : "I've got a whip.. To hell with the rules- let's have at it and fuck!" mentality. Swingers clubs fit this group nicely. We have the "Old School" group with definitions, protocols, and rules. Aside from the cutesy "twue" identifier, there are those looking for a reliable, authentic dominant individual.. and with so much "nobody is wrong- it's all good" attitude the same as where everyone gets a trophy regardless if they come in first or last... what can be relied on? If you think there is no foundation, go to a leather conference once. They actually have contests :) Ask yourself.. how would they see MY type of domination or submission? My point.. I do think there are rules and there should be. M/s, D/s has the potential to be too emotionally and physically devastating not to. Discuss :)

RedMagic1 -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 6:51:25 PM)
I apologize for the hijack, but I think the recent history of BDSM shows a different evolution. Go back 50 years, and pretty much all formal BDSM was for the pleasure of the male, including Bettie Page/"kitten with a whip"/Englishmen who got hit with hairbrushes or their spines walked on. The biggest change has been the rise of "female supremacy" and the notion that the primary (or sole) sexual pleasure should be the female's. Of course there are 50 bazillion different dynamics in individual relationships. I'm only pointing to a general shift, a rise of something that is brand new relative to a generation or two ago. Some of this change has been technological, for example the invention of mass-producible male chastity devices, which allowed for heightened Femdom/malesub dynamics. But it also parallels the rise of economic independence of women from men, allowing (some) women to explore their fantasies without catering to men -- and (paradoxically?) allowing a sub man to let go and be more willing to have a woman be in charge of his life. "Bad" news: the "Old Guard" notions don't have much basis in fact. Good news: there's a lot of models to choose from, more than ever before.[;)]

thetammyjo -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 6:57:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong My point.. I do think there are rules and there should be. M/s, D/s has the potential to be too emotionally and physically devastating not to. Discuss :) The only "rules" I have for others before I'll consider that they claim they do is what I claim I do is that it be consensual -- between parties who are capable of giving free consent (which means they can also not consent). Everything else is a matter of what the individual couple/triad/household agrees to. In my household there are more criteria of what I'll consider and how I judge the dynamics. For me both people have to benefit from the relationship and the dynamic should encourage and support their growth as individuals, as a unit, and the entire household as well. For me, nothing should be done that would restrict a person's ability to take care of him/herself as an adult when that dynamic ends -- for whatever means. I'm not a goddess, I will not live forever after all. And finally in my household everyone has to support the agreed upon dynamic and be as open and honest in their communication as possible at all times.

MzMia -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 6:58:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong Perhaps we need to revisit the concept. I think what people mean by a "true" domination is one with a more traditional approach. Guys want Betty Page (it doesn't matter if she can do shit or not..she just has to look the part) and Women seek Conan the Barbarian (intelligence optional) types. Then we have the contemporary. aka : "I've got a whip.. To hell with the rules- let's have at it and fuck!" mentality. Swingers clubs fit this group nicely. We have the "Old School" group with definitions, protocols, and rules. Aside from the cutesy "twue" identifier, there are those looking for a reliable, authentic dominant individual.. and with so much "nobody is wrong- it's all good" attitude the same as where everyone gets a trophy regardless if they come in first or last... what can be relied on? If you think there is no foundation, go to a leather conference once. They actually have contests :) Ask yourself.. how would they see MY type of domination or submission? My point.. I do think there are rules and there should be. M/s, D/s has the potential to be too emotionally and physically devastating not to. Discuss :) [sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif][sm=applause.gif] As we wait for the naysayers, I must say I agree. There is a lot of confusion as to roles, expectations, and people making shit up as they go along. I became interested in alternative lifestyles about 4 years ago, and I agree with many these days being swingers playing with whips and chains. I often can tell the difference these days between "lifestylers" and kinky vanilla people playing with whips, chains, handcuffs, costumes and sex toys. You tell me what the difference is? I actually agree with you on this one Lotus. [:D]

Shawn1066 -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 7:09:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong Perhaps we need to revisit the concept. I think what people mean by a "true" domination is one with a more traditional approach. Guys want Betty Page (it doesn't matter if she can do shit or not..she just has to look the part) and Women seek Conan the Barbarian (intelligence optional) types. Then we have the contemporary. aka : "I've got a whip.. To hell with the rules- let's have at it and fuck!" mentality. Swingers clubs fit this group nicely. We have the "Old School" group with definitions, protocols, and rules. Aside from the cutesy "twue" identifier, there are those looking for a reliable, authentic dominant individual.. and with so much "nobody is wrong- it's all good" attitude the same as where everyone gets a trophy regardless if they come in first or last... what can be relied on? If you think there is no foundation, go to a leather conference once. They actually have contests :) Ask yourself.. how would they see MY type of domination or submission? My point.. I do think there are rules and there should be. M/s, D/s has the potential to be too emotionally and physically devastating not to. Discuss :) I don't think there should be a clear cut seat of rules beyond the rules of individual relationships...aside from things being consentual between all partners. The Lifestyle needs to govern itself. We don't need rules and protocal telling all of us how we're supposed to act. We'll act as our natures and our relationships dictate. If the "Old School" made all the rules, it's my personal opinion that the lifestyle would attempt to become -exclusive- rather than -inclusive-. What good as an exclusive lifestyle? People would have to meet a narrow, boring list of imaginary standards before they'd be considered nice and proper in the eyes of everybody else. So yes, no rules other than SSC, in my ever so humble opinion. People in the lifestyle can't even agree on what makes a submissive and a slave different from one another, much less on a clear set of rules or protocol. My relationship has all sorts of rules, expectations, and such...but I wouldn't tell anybody that people should do things EXACTLY like my Owner and I do. I don't think there's a way submissives should HAVE to act any more than there should be a way dominants HAVE to act. I believe it would be a terrible mistake for something like that to happen...and people would get hurt, perhaps even moreso than they do now. The lifestyle is not a suicide pact, after all.

Sabella -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 7:13:14 PM)
What is there exactly to discuss unless you post your views on it? Also I don't see the issue with "making it up as you go along" because that is what every one does. No one twue group can decide on the exact colour of blue much less anything else.

MzMia -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 7:17:53 PM)
Also, when I say protocols and rules, I look at couples like Knight of Mist, Kyra and Alandra. They have been involved for years, they have guidelines, expectations, roles and it seems to work well for them. I know expectations, rules, guidelines are not for everybody. BUT, they are for some of us. Plus, I am so totally old school. [;)]

SirJohnMandevill -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 7:22:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shawn1066 I don't think there should be a clear cut seat of rules beyond the rules of individual relationships...aside from things being consentual between all partners. Lifestyle needs to govern itself. We don't need rules and protocal telling all of us how we're supposed to act. We'll act as our natures and our relationships dictate. I agree with Shawn. Individual relationships, and the people within those relationships -- at least those I know -- are too complex to follow some "Seven Pillars of BDSM," or whatever and find satisfaction. As a Dominant, I have certain expectations of my sub, but I'm following my rules, not anyone else's. And I'm quite happy to negotiate expectations with a submissive that I care enough about to arrive a a mutually satisfying relationship. I don't think that makes me less of a Dom. I'm living in the 21st Century, not 30 or even 20 years ago. Les (Purveyor of Fine, handcrafted Kink)

Padriag -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 7:26:55 PM)
My view is... "It's all good" in sofar as I'm not particularly judgemental (that is to say largely indifferent) to what other's do in their relationships. However, where "It's all good" stops is where my own personal relationships begin... at which point it becomes "My way or go find somebody elses way." The only ambiguity I feel a need to clear up is what exactly my way is... what my expectations are, what boundaries I set, etc. Prospective interested submissives then face the decision as to whether "my way" fits with what they seek or not. If it does, great, if not, no big deal and best of luck to them. Beyond that I could care less if I'm classified as contemporary, traditional, 1950s, old guard, new guard, avante guard, rear guard, or gorean (and that last one actually has been compared to me at times much to my amusement).

MzMia -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 7:31:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Padriag My view is... "It's all good" in sofar as I'm not particularly judgemental (that is to say largely indifferent) to what other's do in their relationships. However, where "It's all good" stops is where my own personal relationships begin... at which point it becomes "My way or go find somebody elses way." The only ambiguity I feel a need to clear up is what exactly my way is... what my expectations are, what boundaries I set, etc. Prospective interested submissives then face the decision as to whether "my way" fits with what they seek or not. If it does, great, if not, no big deal and best of luck to them. Beyond that I could care less if I'm classified as contemporary, traditional, 1950s, old guard, new guard, avante guard, rear guard, or gorean (and that last one actually has been compared to me at times much to my amusement). As usual I agree with you Padriag {damn cutie}. [:D] I am not into any one way {contemporary, traditional, 50's, old guard, new guard,rear guard}, BUT I am into having rules, expectations and rules for MY submissive. As you said, they are clearly defined and given at the beginning of a relationship. The submissive has the choice to follow your rules and guidelines or hit the road. It's not about the way--it's about having clear EXPECTATIONS and BOUNDARIES from day 1.

sexyred1 -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 7:33:22 PM)
Why should there be any rules for something that individuals participate in? Having rules would indicate that there is a right way or a wrong way and if you think that applies to relationships, BDSM or otherwise, you are all nuts. Perhaps the OP and others who agree find it necessary to adhere to structure, rules. protocol, etc. but others prefer to write their own rules and follow their own conduct of behavior in the fulfillment of their desires. I don't see the relevance of traditional vs. contemporary; this is not a discussion of those two words. What you are suggesting is that rules and structure are necessary for success. Could not be more wrong. And as for BDSM being harder emotionally or physically, I might agree with that from an intensity point of view, and that one needs to be educated on certain techniques and things that would keep someone safe from damage, but no definitions, labels or rules will I ever let anyone else dictate for me and my relationships. Myself and whomever I am partnered with make the only important rules.

juliaoceania -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 7:34:40 PM)
quote: Aside from the cutesy "twue" identifier, there are those looking for a reliable, authentic dominant individual.. and with so much "nobody is wrong- it's all good" attitude the same as where everyone gets a trophy regardless if they come in first or last... what can be relied on? If you think there is no foundation, go to a leather conference once. They actually have contests :) Ask yourself.. how would they see MY type of domination or submission? My point.. I do think there are rules and there should be. M/s, D/s has the potential to be too emotionally and physically devastating not to. Discuss :) Make a club and invite those you deem as worthy to fill it... Personally I could not give a crap how people at some leather conference view me.. that is laughable to me. As for emotional devastation, life hurts, that is part of it. We grow, we learn, we do better. I love that line from that song I beg your pardon, I never promised you a rose garden, along with the sunshine, you have to take a little rain sometimes. It does not matter what you call yourself, if people step on you when you trust them, it is emotionally devastating.. no matter what you call yourself.

MadRabbit -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 7:44:03 PM)
Sure, I would say there is a set of unwritten rules that could be determined by general consensus in leather communities and such. However, how do these rules relate to someone like me who works quite a lot, focuses on his personal life, and is not "part" of a community in a sense of commitment? When the oppurtunity presents itself, I will travel to munches and such to meet people and hopefully make new friends. My interest in going to such events is to meet people for private relations and not to be "part of a community". So...the question from my perspective is...what exactly does the qualifications and standards for D/S and M/S set forth by the WhipperSlappers SM Munch group in Connecticunt one night at the local Waffle House have to do with me? Absolutely nil. The only qualifications and standards in my relations are for fulfilling the desires and needs of me and whatever partner. If they don't conform to the greater BDSM subculture (that ironically prides itself on being rebels that don't conform to mainstream culture) or will take me to the finals for the Mr. Leatherman of the Year award, well...I am fine with that as long as I go to bed each night with personal fulfillment. As far as the notion of causing physical and emotional damage by not conforming to these rules, well...that's never been an issue or a worry for me. My rules and ethics are determined by my sense of morality. I trust my own judgement to make wise decisions and I trust my sense of responsibility for my partners, so any "harm" that might befall someone I am with will only come from human mistake, not malice. I am not foolish enough to think that I can learn everything I need to know on my own, but don't buy into the idea that just because I look for help and teaching from friends I make in the public scene that I have to live my life according to their perception of what a D/S or M/S relationship should be. The respect for my girl's submission or my dominance from people at a munch, based on how they think this "lifestyle" should be lived, is jejune since I ultimately I respect myself and the things that I do.

LotusSong -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 7:46:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sabella What is there exactly to discuss unless you post your views on it? Check out the line just above where I have "Discuss". I did.

catize -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 8:32:21 PM)
I believe, at least on forums such as this, many use the word ‘true’ to mean what they do is the only way to do it. I wouldn’t care what a Leather Society felt about MY D/s relationships any more than I would care what a local church (or forum church lady) thinks about MY morals. If my submission pleases the dominants in my life, that is what is important to me. I live my life with a moral code that makes my actions accountable to myself and to the dominants in my life. I am not accountable to any institutional morality clause. Rules? Whose rules matter other than the men I choose to submit to? Whether others regard what I may do as ‘just kinky, D/s or M/s’ I don’t see how that affects anything that those others may do. I’ve asked this before and not received any profound answers: If I play a game of flag football in my backyard, does that demean or negatively affect the NFL? Edited to add: MadRabbit said it much better. And to fix a typo.

sambamanslilgirl -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 8:42:07 PM)
Daddy (and SO as well) wouldn't fit any category you have mentioned in your original statement. they are merely men with titles who follow their own style of domination though taking their roles seriously. however if you really have to "classify" it, then they would fit under heading of romantic domination.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 10:07:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong Then we have the contemporary. aka : "I've got a whip.. To hell with the rules- let's have at it and fuck!" mentality. Swingers clubs fit this group nicely. Actually swingers say "to hell with repressive social closeness rules and bdsm protocols, lets just get to the fun and sex which is what we want." BDSM say "To hell with fun and sex, I want my repressive social closeness rules and protocols to feel valued and secure which is what I want" And the ones who enjoy both are able to be fulfilled in both sets of rules in whatever environment they are in at the time. quote: If you think there is no foundation, go to a leather conference once. They actually have contests :) Ask yourself.. how would they see MY type of domination or submission? Just because leather culture has contests hardly has anything to do with ME choosing who I want in MY relationships. I respect the leather culture, but I wouldn't insult any of them to suggest their culture has anything to do with me. quote: My point.. I do think there are rules and there should be. M/s, D/s has the potential to be too emotionally and physically devastating not to. Enjoy whatever rules you want for yourself. What people say "Do whatever" they mean "Do whatever works for you, and I'll do the same." That doesn't mean rules don't exist, it means universal rules don't apply. Go ahead and try, you'll fail. While I think there are some basics which need to exist in all relationships for people to be fulfilled, it would be really bad to try and say how and how much it needs to exist for any one person.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 10:08:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MzMia You tell me what the difference is? I actually agree with you on this one Lotus. One you judge to be less than the other...otherwise nothing. One group is enjoying doing what works for them and so is the other.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 10:11:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MzMia I know expectations, rules, guidelines are not for everybody. BUT, they are for some of us. Plus, I am so totally old school. Which is fine except that you go on to judge other groups as LESS then and look down on them if they don't do what you do like you do them. It's funny you mention those three because I'm pretty sure they respect me and my relationship a lot- and we're pretty much the poster children for the "do what feels good, no expectations, make it up as you go cuz there's no roadmap where we're going" way of life.

AllietheKitten -> RE: Traditional vs Contemproary Domination (1/1/2008 10:46:51 PM)
I left Fundamentalism behind 8 years ago when I left the church and I have no desire to go back to it, in any form. Is there a "right" and "wrong" way to do things in D/s? Yes-its called practicing safety and consent. But beyond that should there be rules that everyone should follow (a la Old Guard)? I don't think so and I wouldn't be into the scene if that were the case. I don't need others telling me how my relationships should be. My boy and I worked out the rules of our particular game before we got together and we seem to muddle through just fine. And, btw, what's wrong with "making it up as [I] go along?" Who says that everything has to be proscribed, practiced and approved? Isn't the whole point of this lifestyle that is isn't the norm? So what-we alienate people that should identify by shoving them into another box? I can tell you that discovering this part of myself was scary and hard. If it weren't for the inclusiveness and loving nature of some of the people I met here on CM I would probably have gone back to the 'nilla world in disgust. And if I'd found a load of rules and regulations for how I should act I would still be questioning and searching for a "fit"...I don't fit into the vanilla box. I don't want to. And (being a Domme lol) I don't really want to be boxed in period. So-in answer to the question-no.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875