1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle

1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

LoveSparkie -> 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/22/2010 2:45:59 AM)
I asked this question to someone in a private message, but was curious to hear others opinions on this subject. What is the difference between the 1950's household and the BDSM lifestyle? Isn't it really all about taking care of the home and pleasing the dominant?? (Among other things as well..)

phoenixmoonn13 -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/22/2010 4:56:50 AM)
for us its a bit of both we have a 1950's but witth some bdsm as well i am his sub somtimes slave and most of the daily things are 1950. the protocals i follow (for want of a better word) are both really but things like he gets his meal served first., take care of the home, etc etc also the bdsm thins like sitting on the floor also in the bedroom were bdsm. thinking as i write this we takes bits from both as feels right to us and our limits. so cant really answer your question as to the differences as they are so intwined in our relationship

anniezz338 -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/22/2010 5:11:21 AM)
-- "Ward, you were awfully hard on the Beaver last night." Ok, did some searches on this and this paragraph seems to sound right. I've never been in a 1950's relationship but I like the dynamics, the family values, the distinct roles. Anyway, I found this: In a 1950s household, social roles are strictly divided along traditional lines. The man of the house earns the income for the family. The woman of the house is responsible for the running of the household, however she is subservient to her husband and cares for his needs, as well as those of any children. For a number of couples, this context is carried over to a BDSM lifestyle. In addition to the basic roles, the sub/domme elements are reinforced. "The 1950s household is a social and sexual dynamic that attempts to recreate the stereotypical male-dominated marital relationship of the 50s. In truth, this activity is more social and relational than sexual, although sex can play a part. In a 1950s household, traditional gender roles are maintained. This is a type of power exchange based completely on gender roles. The man probably works at something "manly" like business, skilled labor, or management. He takes pride in his career and providing for the family.

allthatjaz -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/22/2010 5:15:48 AM)
We equate our lifestyle to 1950's for a few reasons but the main one is because we live on a boat and so don't have things like the luxury of central heating, a dish washer or constant hot water. Dinner is cooked on an old temperamental range, the wood fire has to be cleaned and made before we have warmth and generally our general living is probably about as backward as the 50's! Other things that possibly relate us to the 50's era are, He is definitely the man of the house and the main decision maker. He does the hard work and I do all the housework, cooking and houswifey things. Our life is much more simple than it used to be and yet at the same time its much tougher.

mbes -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/22/2010 6:01:05 AM)
Do you mean 1950's home as it was lived in the 50's? or as it is lived now by kinksters? Most of our marriage has been spent in what probably happened in most homes in the 50's. He worked, I stayed home with the kids, and I made most of the decisions because I was the one there. Of course, I tended to him, as he tended to me. It's pretty much how my parents lived, and my grandparents, although my grandmothers were on opposite ends of the scale when it came to levels of deference toward the men of the house. Now we live what is probably closer to the kinkster version of 1950's. He still works, I still stay home (although looking) and he makes whatever decisions he wants to make. I make the decisions he doesn't want to fool with, with the chance of being overridden at any time. Oh yeah, and he gets to beat my ass, or other parts, whenever he likes. [:D] Which are you referring to being "really all about taking care of the home and pleasing the dominant?" Really, our lives are about pleasing both of us, and both of us take care of the home in our own ways.

sunshinemiss -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/22/2010 6:46:54 AM)
I always think of the 1950's as the time of the Civil Rights Movement and Race Riots, McCarthyism, Korean War, birth control pills, and Castro coming to power. But that's just me... I could be terribly U.S. - centric.

DarkSteven -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/22/2010 7:39:31 AM)
"1950s household" IMO refers to the woman having household duties and the man overseeing that. Like he's management and she's labor, so to speak. And he sets the rules and she follows them. Many sites give this, along with a strong emphasis on her getting spanked for infractions. Maledom BDSM refers to that as well but there's a strong connotation of kink in the bedroom as well.

cloudboy -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/22/2010 7:47:30 AM)
Here's my stab at it: 1950s lifestyle operates as natural law, and BDSM operates as power exchange.

AquaticSub -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/22/2010 8:01:48 AM)
~Fast Reply~ I don't see how they are "vs". To me, a 1950s household is a way of running a household and BDSM (whips, chains, floggers, etc) are part of my bedroom delight. Things that can be combined, or not, depending on your pleasure.

MissAsylum -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/22/2010 8:03:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AquaticSub ~Fast Reply~ I don't see how they are "vs". To me, a 1950s household is a way of running a household and BDSM (whips, chains, floggers, etc) are part of my bedroom delight. Things that can be combined, or not, depending on your pleasure. THIS.

cloudboy -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/23/2010 8:32:05 AM)
The 1950s household presupposes a natural order in the home with divided roles between the homemaker and breadwinner. We were all "happier" in the good old days when roles weren't blurred and conformed to "natural" gender roles between June and Ward Cleaver. This set of mores was turned upside down by women entering the workforce, the civil rights movement, the Vietnam War, and feminism, which all helped destabilize the 1950s status-quo. So, a return to a 1950s household is a return to 'the way we were,' before "individual" agendas and rights muddied the waters. So, there's an underlying ideology of natural order in a 1950s household and this is not true for BDSM, save female supremacists and Goreans. Your bright line distinction between the household and the bedroom might draw opposition from BDSM lifestylers.

AquaticSub -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/23/2010 9:43:51 AM)
I think you are reading way to much into my post when you say a "bright line" distinction but it's cool. If my personal opinion that BDSM and 1950s household are two different things that aren't in a vs. match offends people, I can live with that. Can't please everyone. :-)

xssve -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/24/2010 7:44:42 AM)
Makes sense, although I just tend to think of it as a slightly different set of fetishes, i.e., aprons, heels and stockings, suits and ties, rather than leather and chains - I don't think there is any shortage of "natural law" fetishes in leather BDSM.

NuevaVida -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/24/2010 9:03:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AquaticSub I think you are reading way to much into my post when you say a "bright line" distinction but it's cool. If my personal opinion that BDSM and 1950s household are two different things that aren't in a vs. match offends people, I can live with that. Can't please everyone. :-) That's because you & I see "BDSM" as the activities (bondage, etc...) within a relationship dynamic. 50's household, M/s, D/s, etc., are the actually lifestyle variations. "BDSM" can be incorporated into pretty much anything. I think a lot of people are thinking M/s, D/s (etc) lifestyle when referencing BDSM. So, I agree with you. I don't see a "vs", either. Perhaps 1950's lifestyle vs. D/s is what the OP meant. In my view and relationship, it means he runs the house and I submit to my man. Not all slaves are about taking care of the home and pleasing the master. In many O/p type relationships, this isn't the case at all. Some slaves are not naturally submissive, some are not about being pleasing. Doesn't mean they do not thrive while owned, or do not ultimately obey. But they're personal make-up isn't necessarily to be pleasing and submissive and domestic.

sexyred1 -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/24/2010 9:09:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NuevaVida quote: ORIGINAL: AquaticSub I think you are reading way to much into my post when you say a "bright line" distinction but it's cool. If my personal opinion that BDSM and 1950s household are two different things that aren't in a vs. match offends people, I can live with that. Can't please everyone. :-) That's because you & I see "BDSM" as the activities (bondage, etc...) within a relationship dynamic. 50's household, M/s, D/s, etc., are the actually lifestyle variations. "BDSM" can be incorporated into pretty much anything. I think a lot of people are thinking M/s, D/s (etc) lifestyle when referencing BDSM. So, I agree with you. I don't see a "vs", either. Perhaps 1950's lifestyle vs. D/s is what the OP meant. In my view and relationship, it means he runs the house and I submit to my man. Not all slaves are about taking care of the home and pleasing the master. In many O/p type relationships, this isn't the case at all. Some slaves are not naturally submissive, some are not about being pleasing. Doesn't mean they do not thrive while owned, or do not ultimately obey. But they're personal make-up isn't necessarily to be pleasing and submissive and domestic. This.

Toppingfrmbottom -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/24/2010 9:10:46 AM)
Not for me, bdsm for me is about my sexual hollies, not being pleasing to a Dom, or minding a house or none of that. I think you mean d/s not the acronym bdsm. quote: ORIGINAL: LoveSparkie I asked this question to someone in a private message, but was curious to hear others opinions on this subject. What is the difference between the 1950's household and the BDSM lifestyle? Isn't it really all about taking care of the home and pleasing the dominant?? (Among other things as well..)

xssve -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/24/2010 9:25:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NuevaVida quote: ORIGINAL: AquaticSub I think you are reading way to much into my post when you say a "bright line" distinction but it's cool. If my personal opinion that BDSM and 1950s household are two different things that aren't in a vs. match offends people, I can live with that. Can't please everyone. :-) That's because you & I see "BDSM" as the activities (bondage, etc...) within a relationship dynamic. 50's household, M/s, D/s, etc., are the actually lifestyle variations. "BDSM" can be incorporated into pretty much anything. I think a lot of people are thinking M/s, D/s (etc) lifestyle when referencing BDSM. So, I agree with you. I don't see a "vs", either. Perhaps 1950's lifestyle vs. D/s is what the OP meant. In my view and relationship, it means he runs the house and I submit to my man. Not all slaves are about taking care of the home and pleasing the master. In many O/p type relationships, this isn't the case at all. Some slaves are not naturally submissive, some are not about being pleasing. Doesn't mean they do not thrive while owned, or do not ultimately obey. But they're personal make-up isn't necessarily to be pleasing and submissive and domestic. True, domestic duties like housework, and traditional divisions of labor seem to be more implicit and incorporated in Fifties Household than in other forms of D/S, it's way of making a game of housework, which might otherwise just be mostly tedious, or punishment, etc.

plushiecat -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/24/2010 9:41:33 AM)
Well, for many, D/s is incorporated into BDSM. I've always seen it used as a 3-in-1 abbreviation (B/d, D/s, S/m), with the D/s aspect neatly nestled in the middle, implying that the other two aspects are 'window dressing' for the heart of the relationship.

LadyPact -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/24/2010 9:45:08 AM)
I may be going against the tide here, but it's My understanding that some who identify as a 1950's household prefer the term because their household runs on a simple male in charge premise. The BDSM part of it doesn't necessarily have to be a part of the arrangement for them, and often, the kink doesn't come into play at all. Definitely a power structure in place, but not always associated with terms such as Dominant and submissive or Master and slave. It's just a situation where the woman tends to the household, but the male has final authority should a decision on a matter need to be brought to him. I can't say that I have any personal knowledge of anyone identifying as 1950's household where the woman has the final authority. Seems to Me it would be a poor descriptor, considering that women didn't have much authority in that time frame.

NuevaVida -> RE: 1950's lifestyle vs BDSM lifestyle (12/24/2010 9:51:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xssve ... it's way of making a game of housework, which might otherwise just be mostly tedious, or punishment, etc. Maybe for some but not a game for me. Trust me, it can still be tedious at times, but mostly it's just something I want to do for him. My enjoyment doesn't come from making it a game, it comes from knowing his house is sparkly clean for him. The actual DOING of the chores is still a chore. [;)]

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875