RE: BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity

[Poll]

BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa?


BDSM is a subset of D/s
  23% (5)
D/s is a subset of BDSM
  76% (16)


Total Votes : 21
(last vote on : 2/13/2010 11:14:27 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )


Message


RedMagic1 -> RE: BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa? (2/10/2010 12:03:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist
the pansexual BDSM movement, which is what let all you soft, fluffy, politically correct heterosexuals in the door in the first place.

Well, that's definitely me -- but to be honest, I'm not sure you and I are disagreeing.  I might even go a bit further than what you posted.  Not only do people like me owe a debt of gratitude to the gay leathermen now called "the Old Guard," but also to nilla homosexual activists, and to activists against anti-miscegenation laws.  As recently as 1970, it was illegal in California for a white woman to marry a Filipino man.

All this work, and more, helped lay a legal groundwork that "perversion" was a private matter, not to be regulated by government bodies.  And, of course, there's more work to do in that respect, both in the US, and worldwide.




Domin8tingUrDrmz -> RE: BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa? (2/10/2010 12:04:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist

Have some respect . . .



*Salutes those who made this easier for me to find and enjoy! [:)]




RedMagic1 -> RE: BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa? (2/10/2010 12:06:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bloodlineS
My issue with that is, how do I know your representation of those facts is correct without something to corroborate? That's all I was .. vaguely interested in.

Oh jeez.  This is where you have to do some W-O-R-K.  Have you ever read any of the Leather Archives?  You might want to start.  Besides, RS is a nationally known BDSM spokesperson, and has been for a long time.  So he's providing a professional opinion.

Or does "vague interest" equate to "too lazy to find out for myself?"




Fitznicely -> RE: BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa? (2/10/2010 12:08:26 PM)

There is no official definition of BDSM, and most people who practise whatever they practise could go months, years, without ever giving a crap what it's called.

BDSM as a label is about as useful that damn symbol someone made up: a fashion statement.

I don't do what I do because it's cool or edgy-trendy, or gets me laid more, I do it cos it completes my life - and my girls'.

Bloodlines, I said this from the first page, the honest answer most people have given you is "I don't care". doesn't mean we don't like the poll, it just means our opinion isn't represented by the options you've given.

Oh, and as I said quite plainly in response to your mail on the other side, have you all not had six pages of pointless arguing over semantics? The whole D/s vs BDSM is a devisive timesuck and nothing more. I hope you see that now. I did from the moment I saw the poll, and posted something that represented that opinion.

Did you send Cmail to everyone who's disagreed with you, telling them to shut up, like you sent to me?




VaguelyCurious -> RE: BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa? (2/10/2010 12:29:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fitznicely
have you all not had six pages of pointless arguing over semantics?


He's admitted that it's all semantics.

But hey! Not pointless! It was worth it just to get to construct Venn diagrams...




RCdc -> RE: BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa? (2/10/2010 12:32:45 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bloodlineS

quote:

ORIGINAL: RedMagic1

quote:

ORIGINAL: bloodlineS
I'm terribly sorry but I missed him making such a link, you could point my poor eyes at it?

http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=3058661

RcDc cited three different verifiable sources there.


I did somehow miss him posting that. My abject apologies for doing so.

OK so 3 quotes

1st: Ermine Saner? The guardian writer? I'm not sure I'm accepting that as a good source :)

2nd: Xeromag, now quotes BDSM as the meaning I've been putting forward on their info pages
http://www.xeromag.com/fvbdsm.html#AnchorB1
As for the "clumsy umbrella" article that RDC is quoting, is it this one?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/jul/13/jamiedoward.theobserver
Dated 2008? Seems like bad research from the article writer.

3rd: She isn't attempting to define the acronym BDSM in that quote.. and it actually looks like he misquoted, which is always the danger in making quotes without sources:
RDC said the quote was:
"Our findings support the idea that bondage and discipline and sadomasochism (BDSM) is simply a sexual interest or subculture attractive to a minority,"
However the quotes in the abstraction are:
"Our findings support the idea that BDSM is simply a sexual interest or subculture attractive to a minority"
and
"People with sexual interests in bondage and discipline, "sadomasochism" or dominance and submission (BDSM)"
Link: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/120126317/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

I think RDC's quote probably comes from someone reporting on the survey for a news item.



Sigh.

the medical journal is sourcable and not from a 'news item'.
My point is that the others were individual interpretation.... Just like yours.  What can you not understand about that?  Of course if you had bothered to respond to my question, you may have understood.
You quoted and linked to both wiki and castlerealm.  You cited them as genuine links.  What I and others have been trying to explain is that they are no more 'genuine' than any of the other links you have been given (the exception being the leather archives - that is a different thing altogether.  But I will come back to that.

You demanded that people give you more than 'I say so'... yet your links are nothing more than someone saying so. In all probablity 'someone' who didn't even exist. Do you understand that in any way?  Not rhetorical btw.

Whatever links that are presented are 'I say so'.... because that is what 'I was told' because initially, 'someone said so'.
Jay Wiseman, GT here, RS, yourself even - are all people who just say so.  So it doesn't matter if someone disagrees with your interpretation - but it is unfair of you to make the assertion that someone like RS  - and I quote you - is just 'incorrect therefore the rest invalid'(quote) - it was rude to just dismiss someone like that without considering that they have justified point.  It wasn't very objective to just dismiss VCs Venn, and the rudeness in ignoring my intital question lead to you not understanding my point because you are too wrapped up in making a biased poll.  I did not create the other poll out of spite or to be mean, but to give an example of how the percentage changes when you give people a much fairer set of options.  Have you even compared the two?

The leather resource you were given - you cannot just access that in 10 minutes.  It's been given to you for the history, not the future.  It's not personal opinion like 'jade' at castlerealm or online people from wiki or biased news reports, it's things that actually happened and ways that occured.  You cannot compare personal opinion, to documented history.

the.dark.




Fitznicely -> RE: BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa? (2/10/2010 12:54:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: VaguelyCurious

But hey! Not pointless! It was worth it just to get to construct Venn diagrams...



They are very sexy diagrams [:D]

I tried to do one, but I don't think it's quite right yet. This is what I got:




[image]local://upfiles/343852/A0758F77BE3D4BF0AF28E94A2CEDAFD6.jpg[/image]




SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa? (2/10/2010 12:58:48 PM)

oh visually alluring.




VaguelyCurious -> RE: BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa? (2/10/2010 1:21:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fitznicely


[image]local://upfiles/343852/A0758F77BE3D4BF0AF28E94A2CEDAFD6.jpg[/image]


now that is sexy!




ResidentSadist -> RE: BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa? (2/10/2010 1:33:54 PM)

I am not a devotee of Guy Baldwin’s books, nor do I discredit them. I just don’t worship his books as much as others do. However, more so than his books, I am impressed by him personally and his essay about Old Guard traditions and their origins. It is compact and concise. Here is an excerpt:

THE OLD GUARD
(The History of Leather Traditions) by Guy Baldwin M.S.

While reading a recent interview with Brian Dawson, I came across some of his comments about that '0ld Guard' in the leather lifestyle. Although I used that label in a piece I wrote almost three years ago, I only recently realized that there was a strong likelihood that large numbers of leather guys don't quite know for sure what the phrase, '0ld Guard' really means. I'm sure that I have never seen a description of the style (and it is a style), so I want to offer one now. I have carried my own '0ld Guard' card in my wallet right next to my Selective Service Registration card (draft card) for long enough that I probably qualify to offer what follows so, here goes...

First, a bit of historical perspective will be more helpful than you might guess. '0ld Guard' is really a misnomer-a misapplied name-for the earliest set of habits that jelled by the mid- to late 1950s in the men's leather community here in the U. S. It is very important to remember that the modern leather scene as we now know it first formalized itself out of the group of men who were soldiers returning home after World War ll. (l939-1945).

For many gay men of that era, their World War ll. military service was their first homosocial experience (first time being thrown together mostly in the company of other men for significant lengths of time), their first time away from their growing up places, and their first experience of male bonding during periods of high stress. War was (and is) serious business; people died, buddies depended on each other for their lives, and the chips were down. Discipline was the order of the day, and the nation believed that only discipline and dedication would win the war and champion freedom: (Ever notice the especially strong patriotic feelings that happen at leather events?)

Anyway, these gay war veterans learned about the value and pleasure of discipline and hard work in the achievement of a noble purpose. They also learned how to play hard when they got the chance for leave time. Indeed, military life during wartime was (and is) a mix of emotional extremes born out of sure knowledge that one could literally be 'here today, and gone tomorrow.' Lastly (for these purposes), the gay vets had the secret knowledge that they fought and served every bit as well as straight soldiers, and this information strengthened their self-esteem. All of these things came to be associated with the disciplined, military way of life as it existed during the wartime years.

Although not all gay men of that time served in the military, those who didn't were exposed to the military attitudes through their contact with the vast numbers of military men who were everywhere to be seen and cruised both during and immediately after the war years. In any case, all these things greatly influenced the shape of masculine gay sexualities.

Upon their return to the States about 1946, many of the gay vets wanted to retain the most satisfying elements of their military experience and, at the same time, hang out socially and sexually with other masculine gay men. They found that only in the swashbuckling motorcycle culture did such opportunities exist and so the gay bike clubs were born. It was here that they found the combination of easy camaraderie, the stress and thrill of real risk taking (the riding), and the masculine sexuality that they had known during their military days.

Since one can tell who is and is not in the military only when uniforms are worn, these gay men unconsciously (in most cases) transferred their loyalties to their own uniform-the leather gear of bike riders with a few paramilitary touches thrown in. Club insignia often recalled hose insignia of special military units: Thunderbolts, Warriors, Blue Max, and Iron Cross to name only a few. Club members would exchange their insignia with members of other clubs in friendship; christening rituals were transferred from tanks, ships and airplanes to motorcycles and piss was substituted for champagne; the military dress uniform hats became the leather bike caps-all these elements were just as had been during military service.

Incidentally, during the war, the soldiers would often put on skits for their own amusement. Since women were not allowed at the front, some of the men would play the parts of women by doing a kind of mock dress-up (as in one scene from 'South Pacific'). Later, this tradition would be expressed in 'drag' shows during bike runs. So, masculine men pretended to be pretending to be women-not truly 'drag' at all. (lt. still happens in a few places.)

In any case, being in the military also meant following lots of rules. And just as in the military, there were (unspoken) rules about what you did and did not wear, how you handled your personal affairs, who you could and could not socialize with and more. All this was overlaid with a kind of ritual formalism just as in the military. Those men who were really into dominance and submission, SM, or leather sex tended to take these rules rather more seriously than those guys who simply thought of themselves as butch. The butch ones wore just enough leather to be practical when riding, and those into the exotic sexualities tended to wear more gear than necessary to signal this fact about themselves, but they all hung out together in the same settings. As you might guess, in some cases, any particular person might be into both riding and the exotic sexualities.

Just as an aside here, before and during the war, kinky folks seeking to identify each other would sometimes defensively ask, 'Do you play the mandolin or the saxophone?' to discover which of them was the masochist or the sadist by the first letter of these instruments. All this while wearing street clothes! The creation of a butch subculture by the gay vets began to allow people to specialize their sexual interests in a way that had been impossible earlier. Prior to this development, it was not apparent that there were very many ways to be gay.

The bike clubs and the bars where they hung out became the magnets of their day which attracted those gay men who were interested in the masculine end of the gay spectrum, but it was the leather men who defined the masculine extreme at that time. (Nowadays, we know there are many ways to be masculine) This meant that those who had an inclination to kinky action pretty much felt compelled to explore kink in the context of the leather SM scene since it was the only game in town. If motorcycle riding or black leather itself was not 'your thing,' that meant one felt obligated to visit the hang outs and look and act the part as much as possible to find one's way into the inner circle of those who looked like they knew something about the exotic sexualities. This meant finding out what the rules of inclusion were (how can I be included?) in order to gain access. To some extent, all this is still true because the attitude still prevails that the 'uniform' indicates experience and social access to the Knowledgeable People.

And so, the Scene became EX-clusive rather than IN-clusive, meaning that the people in the Scene understood the rules and tried to keep outsiders out-to exclude them. An outsider became defined as anyone (butch or not) who did not have a primary interest in and experience with the exotic sexualities or at least an interest in motorcycles. (This excluding attitude was probably also reinforced by guilt about being kinky.)

I know that this combination of kinky men mixed in with motorcycle riders may sound a bit odd now, but that's how the Scene worked and, to some slight extent, still does. All through the 80's, with the emergence of kinky organizations and specifically leather/SM events, the motorcycle riding community and the kinky leather community have grown apart such that now those in one group are pretty much ignorant of or indifferent to the events happening in the other.

This growing separation is more true in larger cities which have the numbers of people that are necessary to support each of these two communities, each with separate needs and agendas. Consequently, many old and venerable bike clubs have experienced a drop in membership and some have disbanded altogether.

But for the most part, kinky people have segregated themselves out from the riders as the process of erotic specialization has continued. Generally, the riding community seems not to have minded this development perhaps because many of the members of riding clubs are either turned off or embarrassed by the erotic visibility of the kinky crowd "Birds of a feather". But for this discussion, it is noteworthy that many of those kinky people retained the paramilitary trappings, manners and attitudes of that early, core group of returning World War ll gay vets.

Most importantly, these features of the military mind-set joined with kinky interests and became erotic in and of themselves became fetishes. These men then were the original '0ld Guard,' and so it will come as no surprise that their quasi-military rules of inclusion and exclusion still influence kinky society today.

[snip --- essay goes on to list the “unspoken Old Guard' rules” and lists everything from the dress code to protocols]

. . . It is more useful to understand than to criticize. And, perhaps most importantly, what the Old Guard did for the development and expansion of kinky life and butch gay male sexuality can best be appreciated against the backdrop of what had existed earlier--not much of anything!

But remember this, as long as we have a military, and a paramilitary police system, and as long as that military has traditions of initiation, ritual, inclusion/exclusion, honor and service, there will always be an '0ld Guard.' Its size and influence in the leather/SM scene will probably always be proportional to the role played by the military and other paramilitary organizations in society-larger following wartime and smaller during peace. I thought maybe you'd like to know.

--- the end ---
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As to my point . . . “Sir . . . yes sir” is BDSM and it started long before D/s was even invented.


quote:

ORIGINAL: bloodlineS

quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist
Sir . . . yes, sir! That is BDSM and it has nothing to do with D/s no matter how badly the new comers in the D/s world grasp for an identity and longingly look at the “DS” in the middle of BDSM wishing and pretending it has something to do with them. It doesn’t.


My issue with that is, how do I know your representation of those facts is correct without something to corroborate? That's all I was .. vaguely interested in.





[edit to add closing lines of of essay]




ResidentSadist -> RE: BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa? (2/10/2010 1:44:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RedMagic1
quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist
the pansexual BDSM movement, which is what let all you soft, fluffy, politically correct heterosexuals in the door in the first place.

Well, that's definitely me -- but to be honest, I'm not sure you and I are disagreeing. I might even go a bit further than what you posted. Not only do people like me owe a debt of gratitude to the gay leathermen now called "the Old Guard," but also to nilla homosexual activists, and to activists against anti-miscegenation laws. As recently as 1970, it was illegal in California for a white woman to marry a Filipino man.

All this work, and more, helped lay a legal groundwork that "perversion" was a private matter, not to be regulated by government bodies. And, of course, there's more work to do in that respect, both in the US, and worldwide.


We do disagree because I have read your posts. You are not politically correct, nor do let peer pressure or false facts pollute your logic or bend your resolve. You are not soft.

Although I met you, we never dated so I wont touch any any comments about being “fluffy” . . . lol

Yes . . . there's a lot more work to do both in the US, and worldwide.





bloodlineS -> RE: BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa? (2/10/2010 3:44:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RedMagic1
Or does "vague interest" equate to "too lazy to find out for myself?"


Heh, I'm ok with working while I'm at work, but thanks.




bloodlineS -> RE: BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa? (2/10/2010 3:45:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCdc

the medical journal is sourcable and not from a 'news item'.



Source? I couldn't find more than the abstraction (for free) and I'd quite like to see how you got that quote from it.




Wolf2Bear -> RE: BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa? (2/10/2010 3:57:09 PM)

RS...as a gay male I just want to say thank you posting that piece.




ResidentSadist -> RE: BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa? (2/11/2010 2:17:04 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wolf2Bear
RS...as a gay male I just want to say thank you posting that piece.

Dear Bear,
I am glad the essay pleased you. Nowadays, many new comers' interest in BDSM is sparked because of something they read or saw on the Internet. Not everyone is brought into the lifestyle by gay leathermen. Often the 70-year-old roots of the BDSM community in the US aren't clearly apparent to newcomers.

I have met you in person. You have a leather clad spirit and embody the heart of BDSM. I am glad you here on these forums and in my life as a friend. Neither of us served in WWII or participated in BDSM 70 years ago, 60 years ago or even 50 years ago. We are fellow newcomers that became involved several decades after BDSM was born.

Guy Baldwin's explanations about exclusion and inclusion are astute. It is this exclusion/inclusion principle that inspires so many to publish what they have learned. It proves they are "in the know" by sharing knowledge with others. It is part of what makes up my code of conduct and has me still publishing here at CM. It may be part of what inspired him to publish that essay on the 0ld Guard (yes he spelled it with a zero in his essay).

I haven’t seen even one 90 year old leathermen on CM. We are a forum full of noobs teaching noobs and often it is chaos like the blind leading the blind can often be. I am glad you appreciate the moments of clarity and Guy’s essay as much as I did.

Hope all bodes well for you up there in the great white north!

Best Wishes,
Kalon Eric




RCdc -> RE: BDSM a subset of D/s or vice versa? (2/11/2010 2:43:09 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bloodlineS
Source? I couldn't find more than the abstraction (for free) and I'd quite like to see how you got that quote from it.



I make a deal with you.  I'll have a genuine discussion with you when you take the time to respond/address to at least one of the questions I came to you with.  You told people you wish to hear things that were not 'I say so'.  You used a resource that was someone saying 'I say so'.  What is the difference?  The only difference I can see is that the people on here are alive and pinchable (I have met a couple of them - yum).[;)]

You are in cheshire yes?  You perved our profile and it comes up that you are.  We aren't that far from you.  I can probably help if you want it and find out about a munch or group you can attend in your area too if you like if you aren't sure where to look if that's your thing - even there you will get some people who agree with your choice of the acronym usage and some won't.  It's all cool!  But if munches and groups aren't your thing(not everyone digs them and some can be a yawnfest!), there are plenty of people on CM who are in the UK that participate on the board here and some of us meet up from time to time.  That way you will get to meet some really cool people who have similar interests with you - even if we all don't agree from time to time!  The key being they are real people, with 'i say so' ideas... but at least they are real.

the.dark.




Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 6 [7]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875