Reverence.

Reverence. (Full Version)

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

Message

missturbation -> Reverence. (12/20/2008 11:15:36 AM)
Revere - to regard with repsect tinged with awe. A thread i was reading and participating in yesterday got me thinking on the above. Reverence was mentioned more than once and seemed to me to be being held in a bad light. I know when i think of reverence personally i don't hold it in a bad light at all. I see absolutely nothing wrong with regarding something / someone with respect, slight awe. I also see nothing wrong in holding someone / something in higher reverence than something / someone else. After all isn't that just personal preference? I personally revere anyone who can draw, play with needles,be a heavy sadist, write well and act with conviction consistently. When it comes to bdsm (it's a bdsm board after all lol) there are things i hold in higher reverence than others. I personally revere heavy sadists more than i revere non - sadists. Why? Because a heavy sadist is my personal preference and for me plain and simply a heavy sadist is of far more value to me than a non - sadist. On the other side of the coin is being revered more highly than someone else for a trait, ability etc. Again i would say it is only personal preference, we all value different things more highly than others. Somehow though it usually turns out that being highly revered for something is not always a positive thing. It can be viewed as it was in the other thread as a bad thing. It seems to me that whether we like it or not, want to admit it or not jealousy rears it's ugly head. We start proclaiming that people should not be held in higher value than others because they are, can (insert reason here). We claim that there is always something far more of value than what is being held in higher reverence. Is it not possible that sometimes, just sometimes whatever is being held in higher reverence to a person could be one of the most important things for them? Let's face it (following names just used for example)Merc will always hold Beth in higher reverence than me because (insert reason here), KoM will always hold Kyra and Alandra in higher reverence than me because (insert reason here), LaT may hold simply michael in higher revernce to me because (insert reason here). There really is nothing wrong with holding something / someone in higher reverence than someone / something else. Is there? There is no reason to get on our high horses and proclaim there are things of far more value than what someone holds in a higher reverence. Is there?

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 11:20:12 AM)
No one denied that they personally would hold certain things as higher value than others. But to suggest that "being a heavy sadist" makes you higher in general society is what's ridiculous.

IronBear -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 11:23:07 AM)
Excelent, well thought out and constructed post hitting the subject right on the head. Thank you... Thre jealost you refer to when one person is held higher than others appears to be part of the Australian psyche where the unwashed massed just love to see some highly successful person (except in cricker or football) get ripped down. This has a name >> Tall Poppy Syndrome and inmy opinion is our national shame.

NihilusZero -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 11:23:33 AM)
The human concept of 'value' is an eternally subjective entity. You may run into the same general disdain for the term "discrimination" when, in actuality, we are all discriminating in our choices...as well we should be, assuming we actually seek to fulfill our individual wants and needs.

missturbation -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 11:25:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross No one denied that they personally would hold certain things as higher value than others. But to suggest that "being a heavy sadist" makes you higher in general society is what's ridiculous. I would agree with you completely. Being a heavy sadist or sub does not make you or more value in general society at all. However the impression i got was that it was ridiculous to hold a high pain threshold sub in higher reverence at all. The implication time and again that there are things of far higher value said it all. It needs to be remembered that everyone has top priorities and they are far from the same or even close in each case.

oceanwynds -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 11:26:30 AM)
Reverence is something i shy away from. There are people that i enjoy more then others, because of common interest. Reverence to me is sticking someone on a pedistal and only direction they can go is down.

IronBear -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 11:27:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross No one denied that they personally would hold certain things as higher value than others. But to suggest that "being a heavy sadist" makes you higher in general society is what's ridiculous. If LA you read the OP again you will find the following statement: quote: When it comes to bdsm (it's a bdsm board after all lol) there are things i hold in higher reverence than others. I personally revere heavy sadists more than i revere non - sadists. Why? Because a heavy sadist is my personal preference and for me plain and simply a heavy sadist is of far more value to me than a non - sadist. The decision to hold a heavy sadist above a non heavy sadist was a personal decision not a general one..

NihilusZero -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 11:29:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross But to suggest that "being a heavy sadist" makes you higher in general society is what's ridiculous. And yet, being a heavy sadist may indeed make one 'higher' in a general BDSM society. The problem arises in the confusion of the term "higher". Reality will inevitably dictate to us, if only by an argumentum ad populum, what is "better" and "higher". The semi-vacuous counterargument of altruistic 'equality' fails because, even though there is no necessarily totally objective barometer for those things, people seek to have their worth praised by others (or at least to have it empathized). The more appropriate conclusion is that the entire concept of "better" and "higher" is illusory in the first place...and the only marginally useful context that remains is how it plays out in the compatibility between partners.

missturbation -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 11:30:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IronBear Excelent, well thought out and constructed post hitting the subject right on the head. Thank you... Thre jealost you refer to when one person is held higher than others appears to be part of the Australian psyche where the unwashed massed just love to see some highly successful person (except in cricker or football) get ripped down. This has a name >> Tall Poppy Syndrome and inmy opinion is our national shame. Thank you Bear. I have very carefully thought this out before writing it. Jealousy, envy and reverence are in the main very touchy subjects. Rarely does anyone want to admit to feeling jealousy or that rip others down scenario you speak of. quote: The human concept of 'value' is an eternally subjective entity. Agreed.

Sexycelticlady -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 11:45:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero And yet, being a heavy sadist may indeed make one 'higher' in a general BDSM society. The problem arises in the confusion of the term "higher". Reality will inevitably dictate to us, if only by an argumentum ad populum, what is "better" and "higher". The semi-vacuous counterargument of altruistic 'equality' fails because, even though there is no necessarily totally objective barometer for those things, people seek to have their worth praised by others (or at least to have it empathized). The more appropriate conclusion is that the entire concept of "better" and "higher" is illusory in the first place...and the only marginally useful context that remains is how it plays out in the compatibility between partners. You have worded my thoughts very well. In reality everyone differs and we have a variety of traits that contribute to the individual we are. Personal values dictate what we desire in another human, be it as a friend, companion or partner, and is not only highly subjective but it is also irrelevent to anyone outside of the interacton between those two individuals. As far as society goes, there are people with skill sets or personal attributes that are of external value to a community. Someone particularly skilled at flogging, for example, will be someone to whom others interested in BDSM will look to for advise or tutoring or even simply to admire a skill, it will not be of value to someone uninterested in the lifestyle. What having these type of attributes or skill sets do not mean is that as a human they are "better" than anyone else, that as a human they are above others and it certainly does not lessen the individual value of those who do not possess the same.

Aszhrae -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 11:48:37 AM)
To place someone in such reverence is the next step to worship. Unless they are ascended, girl is not likely to be in awe of any human being unless of course they can pull a live rabbit out of their ass.

cjan -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 12:15:27 PM)
I'll take irreverance over reverance anytime. Imo, reverance is always illusion based.

slavejali -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 12:28:12 PM)
I like the line in desiderata" There will always be greater and lesser persons than yourself"... I dont see that as a negative thing. I think the ability to get out of your own way and actually be able to revere someone is a really humbling experience... When I met the Dalai Lama, man my whole face hurt from smiling so much just being in the same room with him, his presence is awe inspiring. If he ever gave me advice about something I'd take it over someone elses opinion in a heartbeat. When I see Master with his martial arts students I am awe inspired, to see someone selflessly give their time and energy to others is a really humbling experience. I would also take Masters advice over anyone elses, not because I'm mindless but because I revere him. Anyways to answer the op, I think there is a time and a place for reverence within the psyche of each individual..I think people who have never felt a sense of reverence are missing out on a wonderful experience. And no, who are we to judge what another feels respect, awed or feels humbled by.

mc1234 -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 1:26:50 PM)
There's absolutely nothing wrong with describing someone you revere ... whether it's a sadist, a Daddy Dom, a masochist, a painslut, or whatever labels you may want to come up with. Saying you prefer one sort doesn't negate the others - it's simply your preference. But we tiptoe around that so much so as to not hurt anyone's feelings ... I wonder about that deference sometimes. I may prefer a softer touch ... or a harder one - doesn't make me better or worse; it just makes me ... me.

AquaticSub -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 2:37:08 PM)
~Fast Reply~ I don't feel reverence for those I am more interested in as play partners or long-term partners. I'm not awed by Valyraen, heavy sadists, needle players, fire play or any of the other things I am very excited about getting into. I respect their knowledge highly but I don't consider it worth reverence, which is a fairly spiritual/religious term for me. Your choice is revere them is fine and dandy. However I would be uncomfortable if someone revered me because the style of play I enjoy.

slaveluci -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 6:50:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: missturbation There is no reason to get on our high horses and proclaim there are things of far more value than what someone holds in a higher reverence. Is there? I think it's absolutely fine for me to say that "X" is of "far more value" TO ME "than what someone [else] holds in higher reverence." What, IMO, is NOT fine is for me to say that "X" is of "far more value" PERIOD. I think that's the distinction. Saying that a sadist is worth more of your awe than a non-sadist is fine. Saying that everyone should revere sadists more than non-sadists is foolish. Therein lies the difference for me................luci

DesFIP -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 7:19:36 PM)
I'm not supposed to view him in that light. He put an end to it very early on. Because he doesn't think he can live up to it. He wants me to see his feet of clay very clearly and love him flaws and all. Reverence usually raises the expectations to include perfection, and that's a hard trick to pull off day in and day out.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 9:39:24 PM)
Nihilist- excellent points, I completely agree and appreciate the elaboration there. And a person on a pedastal can go up. I've had people I had high expectations for and they completely blew them away.

pompeii -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 9:56:31 PM)
Oh ... to be revered ... that would be heaven!

DavanKael -> RE: Reverence. (12/20/2008 9:57:27 PM)
I think that the points discussed in the original post are entirely opinion-based and believe that what is right for you or something that you revere is your choice or orientation. I see nothing wrong with revering one thing more than another inherently; we all value certain things more than others, some to such a degree that they would fall within the realm of reverence: I know I certianly have my list. It would strike me as some bizarre form of political correctness or marginalization to say that all things are equal because we, as the filters, make that inherently not so. As for illusions, I think that we all have them, to one degree or another. Certainly, some serve us more positively than others but I believe it is human nature. Can we fight against our nature and attempt to divest ourselves of our illusions. Certainly, and if an individual choice is made to do so, I believe that is a valid selection. Taking the illusions of another is another thing entirely; unless there's some substantial reason for me to do so, I tend to leave people to their illusions; they tend to react (And behave poorly) when they are stripped away without their desire for such to be the case. I was out with some friends this evening who proclaimed me the 'anti-chick' and listed off a bunch of reasons why that is a really cool thing. To some others, those very same 'anti-chick' traits could be negatives. Obviously, those who find them to be positives and whose traits I value as positives are likely to be within my frame of reference and circle of contacts. I believe this all boils down to value and what value (or, when value is elevated to a substantial degree, reverence) we place on various traits. Davan

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125