|
marie2 -> RE: The Power or " Right" (4/1/2009 9:28:01 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama
quote:
ORIGINAL:marie2 What a lot of these couples mean when they say "we have a no-limits relationship" is that the "sub"/"slave" has found someone that they will allow to lead them, because he/she has a desire to relinquish control and allow the "dom"/"master" to be the one to decide when, how, where, how far, how fast etc.
Yes, but the problem is this: what in the WORLD distinguishes the scenario you're describing from the vast majority of BDSM relationships that involve some sort of long-term commitment? In what way is this relationship supposed to be different from what anyone and everyone else is doing? Because what you're talking about here is not unusual or special, in my experience--it is actually much closer to the "standard practice" for the majority of d/s couples. I don't disagree with this. The only difference that I've seen though, is that some couples do go into it with the submissive party having some cut and dried terms/conditions/limits, where the "no limits" person doesn't go into it giving any of those terms (or limits) to their partner. I don't think it's "special" or "uncommon". It's just the way they run their particular show.
quote:
The dominant leads/commands, the submissive follows/obeys. Absence of a formal safeword. Is this all that is required to qualify for the "no limits" label that so many people use to lord it over others, claiming superior intimacy and "purer" dominance/submission? And if this is all that is really involved, why do they so often feel the need to make outlandish claims about what they could do and would do if the mood struck them? Sure, I've seen plenty of the "subblier than thou" stuff that goes on on these boards all the time with regards, to "no limits". But it also applies to the "no safeword" topic and the "sub vs slave" topic and the "who plays the hardest" topic, along with all the doms who sit here and have pissing contests with one another over various topics to see who will hail as the domliest of doms. At times I have definitely felt a very strong sense of people trying to claim they are somehow superior to another "type" of bdsmer. I've probably gotten caught up in my own convictions at one time or another and come off that way as well. I think a lot of this is human nature, where we (generic) need to make this stuff work in our heads and we need to frame it in whatever way works for us. And when someone comes along and upsets the apple cart that we've worked so hard to neatly arrange, we tend to defend it vigorously. Yes, some genuinely feel superior in the way they do things. And others yet, are simply trying to share or discuss different points of view.
quote:
Personally, I think if people want a serious answer to the question of "Why does this phrase stir such strong reactions?"--this is your answer. The rhetoric and the bravado of the "No-Limits" relationship is always centered on real harm. The dominant brags that he/she can and will do real harm if they please; the submissive brags that he/she will passively endure real harm and real abuse without resistance or complaint. Not sure I've made the same observations. Sure, there has been rhetoric and bravado from some people about "real harm" and 'master can kill me or maim me if he wants' type of stuff....I keep in mind that some people will throw shit out here at times just for shock value, and to entertain themselves while they watch the masses go apeshit for a few days. But in most cases, the "no limits" people are coming from a less-extreme point of view.
quote:
This is not only a huge turn off for an ethically responsible human being--it also sets off an enormous number of alarms and red flags. It is political and social suicide to allow my community and by extension myself and my partners to ever be associated with the harms that these people are constantly bragging about. Agree, but you can't just group every couple who claims to have a 'no limits' relationship into this basket. Sure, we (generic) condemn those we feel are ethically irresponsible. But I don't think it's a logical jump to assume that all couples who identify as "no-limits" must be ethically/morally bankrupt. Especially because we know from experience that there are many various interpretations of these bdsm terms. quote:
Tolerating harm and abuse and defining them as "sexy" is NOT in my best interest as a member of the community, and a citizen of the real world--the place where real harm leads to real consequences.
Of course we all have different lines on what constitutes harm and abuse, but I'm sure that the majority of people ( in any community) would agree that if a person is in a relationship in which they feel harmed and abused, it's not a good thing, nor should it be touted as something positive or something to aspire to.
|
|
|
|
