DemonKia -> RE: Foot worshipping Dom (10/8/2009 12:30:01 PM)
|
FR lol Wait, wait, I gotta catch my breath, this thread is still . . . . No. No, I can't . . . . [sm=rofl.gif] *small break* Okay. I got some coffee. I think I can bring my 'serious' self & add some substantive thinking, maybe . . . . . . ... .. .. . . .. . Nope. [sm=rofl.gif] I'm a little over-whelmed by the stench of 'porn stereotypes' reading thru here, now . . . . . I didn't smell it yesterday (musta been distracted -- oh, yeah, we were talkin' feet, weren't we, lol) . .. . . But, yeah, this bright a.m. I am smelling stale fantasies of what 'twue D/s' relationships look like embedded throughout all the 'twue doms only do this or that' stuff . . . . .. Part of it must be this 'anti-dom' sketched out in some of this thread, someone calling self dom but otherwise acting in every way in stereotypically submissive ways. Kind of a Walter Mitty inverse. Sounds like a very interesting character. (Okay, first apology of the day: I am so stealing that character, oh originators of that idea; as a writer that feels so novel, so not done-to-death . . . . . ) That part was not porn stereotype, rather more, made out of deconstructed fragments of BDSM porn archetypes. Kudos on that! Some friends & I have been discussing the 'Dominant bottom', & this anti-Mitty could be an archtype ... .. . Name suggestions, anyone? He'll definitely have to have a foot fetish, fer sure . ... . . All those flesh-life people I've met, gotten to know, & etc, at munches, classes, & etc, yeah, I don't think I've ever seen someone who fit that anti-Walter-Mitty-dom description, but, wow, my ears are perked up on that one . . . . . I like 'em odd, I am so not into cliches, not straight-up with no chaser . . . . . That is one of the ongoingly most refreshing parts of going to munches, etc, etc, meeting 'real people' who do BDSM, in all its variant human glory. & it mostly looks very very very little like porn. But wow are those porn expectations buried all about . .. . It's true, there are lots of 'almost vanilla D/s' relationships in the meat-life world of out-&-organized-kink (& I'm striving mightily to keep in mind that that world is in no way representative of the 'weal, twue world of s&m & D/s' that does their stuff 'weally & twuly' in their private spheres -- that that's the 'weal twue' (I'm guessing silent) majority . . .. . [8|] ) Lots of out-ish-kinksters are mostly interested in a mere handful items on the BDSM banquet table (like, say, feet, to make some attempt to keep this post on-topic) . . . . . & there are sizeable contingents concerned primarily with power dynamics, & some of those don't even do anything else kinky other than the power dynamics (meaning they probably just think feet are what get walked on, presumably) . . .. & there are lots of hard-core BDSM types 'in the scene', too, but that should seem obvious . . . . . Er, at least it does to me. But, yeah, I will, with great chastisement, keep in mind, when I'm at a munch or whatever, that what we're doing is not representative of the 'weal twue world of ________' . . . . . . *ding, lightbulb time* . . . . Hey, that'll make a great conversational topic to throw out at the next munch . . . . . Yee-haw! . . . .. o.o.o.o, it'll be great to add that some people online told me so . .. . . . & wearing costumes makes it less real, too, I'm pretty sure that was somewhere in this thread ... . [:D] OP: As with just about anything human, this issue can boil out into an us-versus-them dichotomy, but I suspect that it has way more to do with human propensities to drop into dichotomous frameworks lickety quick than it does with the subject at hand . . . . The most coherent advice I have on tap for your friend is to do what he wants, to follow his own desires, to seek out those who support & affirm his desires, & to ignore any malcontents on the outside of his life . . . . . (With all the usual caveats . . . . [;)] ) (Note, mostly, I jus' blather on for my fans -- *kissiehugglesmoochies to the fans*)
|
|
|
|