Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: The De-Demonization Thread


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: The De-Demonization Thread Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/11/2009 12:35:10 PM   
Hierodule


Posts: 597
Joined: 9/22/2009
Status: offline 		Ok I will do one:

Fisting: What is the appeal? I don't see how it could be a physically pleasurable experience. I associate it with masochism because it seems like it cold only hurt, never "feel good'

To the fisters: Why do you do it? To me it seems like a "because I can" sort of thing. I don't have a problem with that at all but I wonder if there are people who actually get physical pleasure from putting there whole hand "up there."

To the fistees:  Does it feel good? How could it? Do you get "pleasure" from it or is it pleasure through pain?

(in reply to subtee)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/11/2009 1:46:34 PM   
Elisabella


Posts: 3939
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucienne

quote:

ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark

Lucienne
Exactly... a 7th grader.  Being 'snarky' makes one look like a they are acting immaturely.  It isn't 'fun' as you initially claimed it to be - not for the other person on the receiving end - it is sometimes cruel and ultimately boring (as you have discovered) and it just makes someone look stupid!

Thank you for actively participating in my demonstration and allowing the point of this experiment to be - very much - a visual one.

the.dark.


Just because you suck at it doesn't prove a universal point.



Oh shit I laughed out loud on that one.

At least now you can say you're providing examples of how snark can be a good thing.

(in reply to Lucienne)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/11/2009 2:05:11 PM   
agirl


Posts: 4530
Joined: 6/14/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hierodule

Ok I will do one:

Fisting: What is the appeal? I don't see how it could be a physically pleasurable experience. I associate it with masochism because it seems like it cold only hurt, never "feel good'

To the fisters: Why do you do it? To me it seems like a "because I can" sort of thing. I don't have a problem with that at all but I wonder if there are people who actually get physical pleasure from putting there whole hand "up there."

To the fistees:  Does it feel good? How could it? Do you get "pleasure" from it or is it pleasure through pain?


Fisting, what is the appeal?

Yes, I get a lot of pleasure from it. The painful part is mixed with the pleasure part at different times during. The initial stretching can hurt but it also is mixed with a *nice* sensation of being very full.....it seems to hit so many erogenous zones all at the same time. Orgasming on his hand inside me has been pretty memorable.

I've only ever had it done by my owner, and it's a *him and me* thing......the fact that it's him doing it, like with many , many other things we do together, is a huge part of it. I would never list fisting as something I *like* to do.......it's something I experience with him now and then and we both enjoy the experience.

I think his pleasure from it comes from the reactions  he gets from me and the fact that we are sharing the experience. It's always been a very intense thing when it happens.

agirl

(in reply to Hierodule)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/11/2009 2:12:53 PM   
mc1234


Posts: 683
Joined: 10/4/2008
Status: offline
quote:

To the fistees:  Does it feel good? How could it? Do you get "pleasure" from it or is it pleasure through pain?


Fisting:  As the fistee (lol), I can say that yes, it feels remarkably good, and I orgasm like crazy when he does it.  I think it's a combination of the intensity of it, the remarkably full sensation it creates, and the intimacy between us and the trust that is required to do it.  E's the only person I've ever shared this with.  And it is definitely pleasure - not pleasure through pain. 


_____________________________

** Owned by E **

(in reply to Hierodule)
Profile   Post #: 84
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/12/2009 6:07:54 AM   
ranja


Posts: 2111
Joined: 11/1/2007
Status: offline 		#1 this scenario:
a fem sub or slave all tied up with vibrators inserted, also tied into place with ropes or belt and then the Dom leaves the sub to orgasm herself silly for quite a while...

I have been presented this scenario quite a few times by on-line characters as something that is supposedly very hot and would be a way to achieve multiple orgasms and squirting... and i do not get it at all...

are there any Doms who actually do this and find they get  good results from this? don't you think it is a bit boring? or dangerous to leave her?

are there any subs who like to be left like this and then indeed orgasm themselves to exhaustion? how long would you be left like this? would you not get bored and annoyed or even hurt by the relentless hammering vibrator... would you not get cramp?

(in reply to NihilusZero)
Profile   Post #: 85
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/12/2009 9:09:00 AM   
CaringandReal


Posts: 1397
Joined: 2/15/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

1.  willing to submit and give up ownership to their control, but at the same time they wouldn't accept every idea and wish that passed their Dom's/Dommes' kinky imagination.



In all the time I've been... well, doing what I do, I never once imagined I'd be arguing the positive side of this. Sometimes I love how unpredicatble life is. ;)

quote:


"why use such words like "submit and give up ownership to their control" to describe your relationship dynamic, when you participate in a relationship in which you retain the authority to deny your "owner", if that is what you so choose...and your "owner" wants their wishes to be considered and either permitted or denied, situationally? entering into a relationship where both parties have an equal say in what goes on, backed up by the law of the land~doesn't strike this slave as being D/s or M/s or Owner/owned...it sounds like the conventional way to structure a relationship...so why bother to call it D/s or M/s or Owner/owned"


I don't recall the situation you're speaking of from the other thread but I get the general idea of what you are talking about, given how common it is.

I think this thought and behavior, which some of us know is deception, allows some people (obviously not all) to try on ideas and practices that they otherwise could not approach or have access to. Think of it as a bunch of people in a halfway house...or a dollhouse. They aren't straight edgers, they aren't there yet, but they're trying, they're curious, they're approaching something. They're playing with it, trying it on for size. They can't do it all the way yet, they're too scared or concerned or something (whatever the emotional roadblocks are) but they want it. Would you find it sexy or hot, in their shoes to say, "Oh I'm having a vanilla relationship or a mildly kinky one where I maintain most of the veto power and control, and my master aquieses to me." Or even "I'm living a little fantasy, trying this on for size, not ready to commit to it yet, so of course it isn't real handing over of power and aquiesing to someone's will."

Words have power because they evoke ideas, like a wizard might conjur a being or an object from another world. By calling something ownership or control, the person using those words, even if wrong, can feel a little bit of the ownership and control. Maybe enough to know that they want more of it. And then they can take the next step. Dishonesty, to me, is less important in these cases than it is in others, because the people are trying to grow, to change, to become something else, to become their dreams. It reminds me a little of the old piece of advice, "If you want to feel happy, force yourself to smile." It's a bootstrapping process: first you don't feel anything, then you go through the motions in a limited way and give yourself and the relationship the names, and pretty soon you're diving deeper into it, becoming the thing you once just imagined you were.

So in summary, if it helps people become more kinky, explore deeper extremes of power, I am all for their calling themselves whatever makes them feel best, even if it's not exactly accurate from certain perspectives. ;)

_____________________________

"A friend who bleeds is better" --placebo

"How seldom we recognize the sound when the bolt of our fate slides home." --thomas harris

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 86
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/12/2009 9:38:42 AM   
CaringandReal


Posts: 1397
Joined: 2/15/2008
Status: offline 		I hope this one hasn't been posted already. I don't have time to read every post in this fascinating thread at the momnet. If it has been, go ahead mark my contribution as a "duplicate bug." ;)

The belief that men are superior to women or the converse, that women are superior to men.

Anything you want to say in general about how this is positive is fine. I particularly want to know, though, if you see this as a positive thing, whether it's a necessary thing to have in some relationships, and why.

< Message edited by CaringandReal -- 12/12/2009 9:39:02 AM >

_____________________________

"A friend who bleeds is better" --placebo

"How seldom we recognize the sound when the bolt of our fate slides home." --thomas harris

(in reply to wisdomtogive)
Profile   Post #: 87
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/24/2009 1:09:36 AM   
Ialdabaoth


Posts: 1073
Joined: 5/4/2008
From: Tempe, AZ
Status: offline 		The inherent superiority of one sex over another is a sticky thing.

To me, "people" transcend those sorts of hard-and-fast categorizations. That said, I'm heterosexual and strictly dominant, so I definitely believe that any girl I am interested in sexually should see me as her "natural superior". The people I'm interested in emotionally/mentally/socially/spiritually? Their gender is irrelevant.

Anyone else wish to weigh in?


(in reply to CaringandReal)
Profile   Post #: 88
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/24/2009 1:16:24 AM   
Elisabella


Posts: 3939
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth

The inherent superiority of one sex over another is a sticky thing.

To me, "people" transcend those sorts of hard-and-fast categorizations. That said, I'm heterosexual and strictly dominant, so I definitely believe that any girl I am interested in sexually should see me as her "natural superior". The people I'm interested in emotionally/mentally/socially/spiritually? Their gender is irrelevant.

Anyone else wish to weigh in?




Do you think you're her natural superior because you're a guy, because you're a dom, or because of something else?

(in reply to Ialdabaoth)
Profile   Post #: 89
RE: Animal play and Daddy play - 12/24/2009 7:46:26 AM   
osf


Posts: 3288
Joined: 10/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

#1
"Daddy" and animal play as sexualized roles

These two have a bit in common for me, because they are sexualizing things that IMO shouldn't be sexualized (ie father figures and animals) and it just kind of squicks me. Like "oh hai I'm pretending to be a dog and you're a person so lets go have sex now" or "you're like a father to me, can I go suck your cock now Daddy"

I don't understand what's so sexual about these roles, I mean I can kinda get it if *both* people were pretending to be a puppy, but if one's pretending to be the owner, and the other is the dog, and they have sex...well...wtf.

The "Daddy" thing I often hear explained in the context of "a paternal like father figure" but even if the dominant takes a paternal role in a relationship you don't have to actually call him "Daddy" - it's not the role itself that confuses me on this one, simply the name. I can get if you identify them as "paternal" or even "fatherlike" but to call him "Daddy" is saying he is in the father role. Not in a role like it, but actually in that role, which means you're basically roleplaying having sex with your surrogate father.

quote:

#1
"Daddy" and animal play as sexualized roles

These two have a bit in common for me, because they are sexualizing things that IMO shouldn't be sexualized (ie father figures and animals) and it just kind of squicks me. Like "oh hai I'm pretending to be a dog and you're a person so lets go have sex now" or "you're like a father to me, can I go suck your cock now Daddy"

I don't understand what's so sexual about these roles, I mean I can kinda get it if *both* people were pretending to be a puppy, but if one's pretending to be the owner, and the other is the dog, and they have sex...well...wtf.

The "Daddy" thing I often hear explained in the context of "a paternal like father figure" but even if the dominant takes a paternal role in a relationship you don't have to actually call him "Daddy" - it's not the role itself that confuses me on this one, simply the name. I can get if you identify them as "paternal" or even "fatherlike" but to call him "Daddy" is saying he is in the father role. Not in a role like it, but actually in that role, which means you're basically roleplaying having sex with your surrogate father.


while far from a daddy dom,i don't wanna have to pay child support , i do recognize that the d/s relationship is a parent/child relationship in many respects

(in reply to Elisabella)
Profile   Post #: 90
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/24/2009 7:49:27 AM   
osf


Posts: 3288
Joined: 10/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

I think this thought and behavior, which some of us know is deception, allows some people (obviously not all) to try on ideas and practices that they otherwise could not approach or have access to. Think of it as a bunch of people in a halfway house...or a dollhouse. They aren't straight edgers, they aren't there yet, but they're trying, they're curious, they're approaching something. They're playing with it, trying it on for size. They can't do it all the way yet, they're too scared or concerned or something (whatever the emotional roadblocks are) but they want it. Would you find it sexy or hot, in their shoes to say, "Oh I'm having a vanilla relationship or a mildly kinky one where I maintain most of the veto power and control, and my master aquieses to me." Or even "I'm living a little fantasy, trying this on for size, not ready to commit to it yet, so of course it isn't real handing over of power and aquiesing to someone's wil


sorta like teenage dating

(in reply to CaringandReal)
Profile   Post #: 91
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/24/2009 7:53:28 AM   
osf


Posts: 3288
Joined: 10/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

So in summary, if it helps people become more kinky, explore deeper extremes of power, I am all for their calling themselves whatever makes them feel best, even if it's not exactly accurate from certain perspectives. ;)


people have the right to call themselves anything they want

but it does introduce noise into the system for those looking for a signal

but alas there's no easy answer, i don't have one anyway

just an observation

(in reply to CaringandReal)
Profile   Post #: 92
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/24/2009 7:56:59 AM   
osf


Posts: 3288
Joined: 10/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth

The inherent superiority of one sex over another is a sticky thing.

To me, "people" transcend those sorts of hard-and-fast categorizations. That said, I'm heterosexual and strictly dominant, so I definitely believe that any girl I am interested in sexually should see me as her "natural superior". The people I'm interested in emotionally/mentally/socially/spiritually? Their gender is irrelevant.

Anyone else wish to weigh in?




nature doesn't see a superiority in one sex over the other or why else are we both still around?

(in reply to Ialdabaoth)
Profile   Post #: 93
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/24/2009 8:05:41 AM   
NihilusZero


Posts: 4036
Joined: 9/10/2008
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth

The inherent superiority of one sex over another is a sticky thing.

Trying to get this back into the context and system of the original posts.

The relationships I've been in (sexually, as you say) do have that skew towards superiority. At least in the decision-making arena, the entire process of authority transfer rests on that premise: that one person in generally superior to the next. Being in a dynamic with someone who sees me as such just reinforces the natural symbiosis of the dynamic.

For me, it isn't about what some would characterize as an ego issue or a broad-stroke generalization of every person in that gender, just an honest description of the status of each individual in the relationship. If, in the facets that the s-type is surrendering to me, I am not superior, then why on earth would I be holding the reins?

_____________________________

"I know it's all a game
I know they're all insane
I know it's all in vain
I know that I'm to blame."
~Siouxsie & the Banshees

NihilusZero.com

CM Sex God du Jour
CM Hall Monitor

(in reply to Ialdabaoth)
Profile   Post #: 94
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/24/2009 8:10:29 AM   
NihilusZero


Posts: 4036
Joined: 9/10/2008
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline 		osf,

Just in case you hadn't realized from the beginnings of this thread: the intended process is for people to mention things they dislike or find displeasing or uncomfortable with WIITWD (ideally as it pertains to them) and then for another person to share a story of their own life where that thing you would have mentioned gets shown in a positive light.

So, the idea isn't a point-counterpoint debate or to argue someone's views but rather to offer up a personal example of a situation where the first persons (negative) topic can be shown to be a positive.


_____________________________

"I know it's all a game
I know they're all insane
I know it's all in vain
I know that I'm to blame."
~Siouxsie & the Banshees

NihilusZero.com

CM Sex God du Jour
CM Hall Monitor

(in reply to NihilusZero)
Profile   Post #: 95
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/24/2009 8:51:27 AM   
osf


Posts: 3288
Joined: 10/19/2009
Status: offline 		ok in that vein in the mid 80's i first attended the black rose, at that time known as PEP DC i had just found their ad in a local paper

that was the first i even knew we were organized

the first meeting i attended as part of the preliminaries a sort of rules/conduct spiel was given and the one thing that knocked me off my feet was that " women are our most precious resource" or some such

i sat there , wtf, instinctively that didn't feel right, as jaded as i am to me women are people and not to be coddled or protected

after awhile i began to see the result of that doctrine as there were a few women that took advantage to cause trouble

one especially was so bad that when a new woman showed up she would grab her and take her aside to give her her own orientation and tell her who was who and who to avoid. it was common knowledge she was doing it but nothing was done

her behavior was so bad that when i was elected to the board of coordinators ( a fiction so they wouldn't have a board and there for not be an origination that would have to be listed on fed security forms, this was DC ) i actively campaigned to have her thrown out to no avail

i never did feel comfortable in the black rose but it took me a couple years to realize why, they weren't really a d/s oriented group

i really am for womans rights and equality, just not my woman lol



< Message edited by osf -- 12/24/2009 8:54:08 AM >

(in reply to NihilusZero)
Profile   Post #: 96
RE: Saying "He can kill me if he wants to" - 12/24/2009 12:45:52 PM   
alittleevil


Posts: 235
Joined: 10/25/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucienne
One strike you're out - M/s relationship

I've seen some people around here talk about disobedient slaves in terms of - if the slave disobeys, the slave is out the door. I think more practical people work around this seemingly rigid standard by not asking their slave to do something they think the slave might refuse to do. But others take a purist approach - their slave will obey their every order or they will no longer be their slave, no exceptions.

I'd be curious to hear from either a Master or slave perspective their positive experience of a one-strike you're out relationship, after the strike.


Hello,
I can't answer your question exactly as asked at the end.  Nor about a literal "one strike" policy, though it is true that there are several of Master's rules/requirements that, broken even once, would mean the end of slavery to him.  These particular rules, however, would not break all of a sudden, there would be signs that things were seriously FUBAR, time during which things/me could be fixed, before it ever got that far.

However, when it comes to "obey or leave" as a foundation, i can speak to that from my perspective.  See, Master wants a slave.  I'm not here cause i'm cute, funny, smart, a good cook, give good head, am a nice person or because i'm compatibly sexually kinked with him.  I could still be all of these things but if i were not also obedient and fundamentally driven to serve him, i would not be welcome to stay.  In the big picture, the choice is stay (and be a slave) or (don't be a slave, don't obey) or leave--there is no less extreme sort of relationship as an option.  Am i ever disobedient? On occasion, usually through negligence, not willfulness.   Am i ever slightly less than enthusiastic about something or 'nother? Sometimes, in which cases i am a disobedient, displeasing slave. There are (unpleasant!) consequences for that.  There are no "work arounds" such as you mentioned.  He wants what he wants and he expects to get it.  He doesn't want to have to endlessly fight for it.  So, if i ceased to be compliant and he could no longer compel me to be, i would go. The onus for that, though, is on both of us:  i am a slave because i am enslaved.

Best to you,
aj


_____________________________

Throw me to the wolves because there's order in the pack (RHCP)

(in reply to Lucienne)
Profile   Post #: 97
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/24/2009 6:01:15 PM   
Ialdabaoth


Posts: 1073
Joined: 5/4/2008
From: Tempe, AZ
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella
Do you think you're her natural superior because you're a guy, because you're a dom, or because of something else?


Because of something else. And in many cases, I DON'T think I'm many people's "natural superiors". But the people that I don't see myself as clearly superior to, I do not wish to own.

Basically, I recognize that people have variable levels of usefulness within any given framework. So, within any framework I choose to operate within, I can treat people in one of four ways:

1) If I feel they are my superior, and wish to instruct me, I try to learn as much as I can from them, and improve myself.
2) If I feel they are my equal, and wish to associate with me, then I try to befriend them.
3) If I feel they are my inferior, and wish to obey me, then I try to acquire, own, and lead them.
4) If they do not wish to engage in any of the above relationships that they qualify for, then I attempt to leave them to their lives, and avoid any entanglements that will fail to honor themselves or me. If that's not possible, then I deal with the consequences of whatever I have to.

(in reply to Elisabella)
Profile   Post #: 98
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/24/2009 8:34:03 PM   
Justme696


Posts: 3236
Joined: 1/7/2008
From: Royal kingdom of the Netherlands
Status: offline 		Are you really superior when a girls submits?
If you give up something for an other, it doesn't mean you are less, possibly you just made a decision to do so for what ever reason.

( not sure if this question fits in...I lost kinda track of the purpose of the thread..sorry)

(in reply to Ialdabaoth)
Profile   Post #: 99
RE: The De-Demonization Thread - 12/24/2009 8:37:31 PM   
Ialdabaoth


Posts: 1073
Joined: 5/4/2008
From: Tempe, AZ
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Justme696

Are you really superior when a girls submits?
If you give up something for an other, it doesn't mean you are less, possibly you just made a decision to do so for what ever reason.

( not sure if this question fits in...I lost kinda track of the purpose of the thread..sorry)


that's...not what I meant. We might be experiencing a communication failure.

(in reply to Justme696)
Profile   Post #: 100
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: The De-Demonization Thread Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109