|
DemonKia -> RE: Pepper punishement (9/13/2009 5:21:53 PM)
|
Okey, dokey, now that the chuckles have died back enough for me to get past my own snarkiness, there was some assumptive & misapprehensional stuff worth taking a looksie at, here . . . . . . Not sure what I did to earn the honor of being the one to get roasted by you, Noah, as opposed to roasting one of the several others who expressed exactly the same impulse, but I'll return the favor by letting go all over you cuz I'm feelin' it right this moment . . . . .
Firstly, much of your (relatively projective, given how little inspired it) quoted text, below, comes off, to me, as being defensive around your issues with being a one-way-power-flow guy . . . . . If one-way is what does it for you, great, not sure why you have to feel better about yourself by jumping salty all over the two-way-power-flow thing . . . . .
& I say 'projective' decidedly cuz some of your extrapolations from what 'do to oneself before doing to others' are a little bizarre & not in the slightest bit intuitive to me . . . . . . .
& I unearthed more than a hint of that perfectionism expectation thing in your whole line of reasoning that goes: if I don't perfectly match the experience of a bottom I might top, then this whole methodology of 'trying on oneself' is useless, defective, or otherwise unworthy . . . . . . But, see, I'm of the opinion that (a) such rhetorical expectations of perfect whatever are less-than-effective logical argumentation techniques, & (b) perfectionism is a troublesome habit to cultivate, almost disease-like in its memetic power . .. . . . .
& one of the bizarre off-shoots of that 'only a perfect understanding of the bottom experience counts' thing is that I have no idea how the one-way-BDSM-flow person ever would be justified in doing anything . . . . . If one deliberately eschews any & all opportunity to get any kind of similar experience to what one dishes out, how can one have any clue what is going on with the other? That does bug me, personally. I don't give a rat's ass how it works out for others, but for those who want to BDSM_interact with me, yeah, I have preferences influenced by these concepts . . . .
The great penises-&-clits-are-so-very-very-very-different argument. Yes. One of my faves. My reading of human developmental anatomy leads me to notice that almost every organ of generation is simply twinned between the two sexes. Thus, I tend to frequently see, say, genitalia in the following framework: girls have tiny penises (& thus get to drive giant trucks), & boys have large clitorises . . . . . . (& it's true, I'll never know the vulnerability of having my internal-organs-dangling-on-the-outside, but I've studied with gay men (& straight & bi) to make up for the limitations of my capacities. & I'm a firm believer in continuing ed . . . . . & I really like those dangly bits, I'm a very motivated learner . . . . . . . *smirkles*)
I guess the most offensive assumption buried in your diatribe is that my one little paragraph about feeling the need for a more reciprocal understanding of various BDSM practices is the be-all-&-end-all of my topping skill set. &, see, I tend to not like to over-reach my limited knowledge of others with such assumptions, but your standards may vary. I have no more idea of how much communication you conduct with your partners, how many classes you've taken, how many serious non-fiction BDSM texts you've read, how many scenes you've participated in or witnessed, & so on & so forth, than you do about me . . . . . . But, my, that didn't stop you one iota . . . . . .
Ah. & the prostate thing . . . . lol . . . . I get that everything differs for everyone, which is why sharing different experiences has so much value, for me . . . . I've personally found that the better I get to know my own anus, rectum, et al., the better I get at playing with other peoples'; & the prostate is an add-on gadget that can be learned in my restricted workings . . . . Hehehe . . . . . See, I tend to see the one-way-power-flow people as the ones with the greater set of restrictions, so your use of that concept in that framework was, well, just fascinating . . . . . .
Best of luck with your whole, um, style of being . . . . . . .
quote:
ORIGINAL: Noah
So you've never observed a partner who was blindfolded? Because you clearly haven't observed yourself while blindfolded.
Never bound a partner while remaining unbound yourself? Because you clearly couldn't bind yourself while remaining unbound yourself.
Never touched a partner's penis? (or is there something you haven't told us about your own anatomy, Miss?
You've never nibbled on a partner's neck or ear? Nor even kissed a partner on the lips, not to say the small of the back?
Interesting. Glad these, uh, restrictions are working for you.
In fact your partner's response to a hot pepper inserted (here or there) will not necessarily even mirror that same partner's experience of the very same thing the day before or six hours after. All sorts of objective and subjective factors influence--sometimes dramatically--our response to a given stimulus.
If you want to learn, by self-experimentation, what a given stimulus will be experienced as by your partner, here's all you need to do. Be sure to precisely match your age to his or hers. Also, match state of health, state of fatigue, blood sugar level (in fact blood chemistry across the board), state of galvanic skin response, ECG conditions, allergies, mood, feelings toward you, degree of subspace and, well, his or her entire genome and life history just to get started.
But you still have a long way to go.
Setting aside the vast range of physical/medical reasons why it is delusional to think that you can know your partner's response based on your own, consider the more subjective issues.
Do you think for a moment that a person's emotional response to a stimulus is walled off from his or her physical response?
Let's say a some cop pulls you over, falsely claiming that you ran a stop sign. Let's say the cop pats you down, strips you, does a full body cavity search there by the roadside, and then proceeds to slap you back and forth across your face. Do you think that he or she can reasonably claim "I know just what that citizen felt when slapped. After all, I slapped myself back and forth just last Tuesday (just after quizzically probing my own intimate orifices.) One things is for sure: my slapping of that citizen gave rise to no feelings of outrage, humiliation or injustice. I know this because I felt no such things when I slapped myself."
I suspect that for some citizens the cop's slaps would scarcely hurt at all, any otherwise expected physical response being submerged beneath a quite righteous emotional one. For another citizen, the physical response might be exagerrated, it might hurt twice as much because of the strange subjective factors.
Analogously, your partner's physical responses to stimuli received at your hand can be strongly conditioned by your partner's emotional response to you and the time and the setting and the relationship context in which you administer stimulus A, B or C. Among many other things.
Consider your emotional state, set of intentions, and degree and kind of engagement in the moment while sticking a nettle up your own nose for research purposes. Can you reliably assume that these factors will pretty closely match those of your partner whenever you happen to decide on a nettly invasion of his or her nostrils?
Maybe so. Maybe not. I mean I don't know you guys. Maybe you're really in tune.
It is dangerously irresponsible to presume that someone else's response to a given stimulus will mirror your own. Inexperienced subs who take such claims from doms as reassuring should instead read them as red flags, in my opinion.
Tops who are into auto-erotic masochism are just as worthy as any others. Go for it, y'all. If some of them feel the need to camoflage this activity with talk about how it is all for the sake of their partners, that's fine too. Sort of a pity, from one point of view, given the bankruptcy of the claim that this self-play let's them know what their partner will experience, but there is is.
By the way, I'm intrigued by the tut-tut-tutting about blisters(!) from people liberally sprinkled with tattoos. Painful brief disfigurement is just wrong while painful permanent disfigurement is a swell hobby?
Interesting.
<<<<clippity-clip-clip-clip>>>>>>>>>>
|
|
|
|
