RE: Is this objectification?

RE: Is this objectification? (Full Version)

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

Message

xXsoumisXx -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/15/2012 8:42:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist Are you fucking your friends as sexy exploration, out of lust and friendship? ... or Are you fucking your friends out of obedience to Master, as proof of ownership? ... or Are you a worthless piece of fuck meat with no human rights or characteristics to be casually used as an object to deposit cum in? It's not always what we do as much as why we do it that defines us. As RS says so well, (and GT) it is all about the headspace. And that is deeply personal, and varies with every scene, and with each person involved.

xssve -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/16/2012 6:53:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lemmony2 Sexual objectification refers to the practice of regarding or treating another person merely as an instrument (object) towards one's sexual pleasure, and a sex object is a person who is regarded simply as an object of sexual gratification or who is sexually attractive. Objectification is an attitude that regards a person as a commodity or as an object for use, with little or no regard for a person's personality or sentience.~ (Wikipedia) Not the most reliable place but reliable enough for this purpose. So with that as a set definition my answer to your question would be NO. The key reason for my logic in this matter is in this :"as an object for use, with little or no regard for a person's personality or sentience.".. Since you have already stated it is acceptable and actual pleasurable to you as well to take part in this behavior then it could be considered that you have been considered which means obviously their has been regard for your sentience. Mr Levi My point exactly. There is otherwise, no reason to get so hung up on definitions or seeming logical inconsistancies, all of BDSM in large part, grew out of a mockery of, and rebellion against, the the Catholic and Protestant inquisition - the trappings, the leather, the bondage, the instruments of torture, etc., are lifted wholesale from the inquisition, but where they inflicted pain to correct "error" and political deviance, we use it to inflict ecstasy, and celebrate deviance, it is an act of political deviance - it's inherently an inversion of what it appears to be, it's human. So, if you're having fun, you're doing it right.

shylilbear -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/16/2012 8:42:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesFIP I would suggest op that you think out why exactly being objectified is so unpleasant for you? Have you been in a relationship where your input was ignored, and you were devalued? Because then it would be that to have a relationship like that is what you should hard limit. But if you're lying on the floor and he puts his feet on you to rest them, that's not the same as being devalued and belittled. Although it is being treated like an object, in this case a foot stool. Unless for you, there isn't any way not to feel devalued in such a situation. More than the label is required here, you need to talk about the emotions behind them. Some women feel like toys during gang bangs, others feel the center of attention and very powerful for being able to arouse all those men and have all of them wanting her. I think that has a lot to do with it Des. I was in an M/s relationship where I was pretty much considered to be of no real value. I was never directly referred to as "it", but he made sure I knew that I was pretty much lower in value/importance/status? (I'm not sure of the right wording here) than any other living thing. I was just something else around the house that had use, and that's about it.

shylilbear -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/16/2012 8:43:45 AM)
What is it then that I would be participating in? quote: ORIGINAL: neKr0w If you are made to feel like an object (devoid of feelings, desires, emotion and thought) then you are indeed the subject of objectification. If however you (or are required to) beg, object, praise, etc. then you are participating in something else.

shylilbear -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/16/2012 8:54:24 AM)
That's what I'm trying to figure out. If your idea of objectification is being reduced to nothing more than an object, then my answer is no. I don't know if this will make sense, but even if I'm just being used as a sex toy during a scene, I'm still ME. I don't feel like I've lost any sense of personhood just because I'm being used that way. quote: ORIGINAL: GreedyTop do you FEEL objectified, OP? there's your answer.

shylilbear -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/16/2012 9:32:38 AM)
I am starting to see your point Daddy, but I still don't FEEL like an object even though that may be your intended use for me sometimes. Being used in this way is a good thing in my mind and it does turn me on, but to me that's different than feeling objectified. Feeling degraded is something entirely different altogether but I'll leave that for future discussions lol. quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr Personally, I think it's a no-brainer. It is *absolutely* objectification. It is of a type that you are okay with but it is objectification, all the same. It's no different than the go-go dancer/stripper that uses her body to make a metric shit-ton of cash because she likes nice clothes and fast cars and has the means (her body) to go out and make it happen. Neither she nor her customers see it as a bad thing. There are womens' groups that would disagree but no one who has looked up the word could honestly conclude that it isn't objectification. I'll give a somewhat more timid example: fashion models are objectified. When they walk the runway, their only reason for exsistence is to show the clothes they're wearing and make them look as desirable as possible. They're animated clothes hangers! Not many complain about their objectification but that is exactly what it is. I believe a lot of what we do is objectification to one degree or another. I believe it is an under-current to what it is we do and how we choose to live. How many people consistantly use "submissive", "slave", "dominant", and "master" as opposed to "lady", "wife", "boyfriend" or "husband"? While the "lifestyle labels" are not *offensive* terms by any stretch, they are labels th ey at remove a bit of the "human element" of the person to whom we've assigned the label. If the question is: "Should this make me feel used or degraded?" Well, I think there is some element of that and that is part of the turn-on. and if it turns on all parties involved, what's the beef? If the question is: "Is this a measure of objectification?", you bet your sweet ass it is! Peace and comfort, Michael

shylilbear -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/16/2012 9:40:02 AM)
Both of us are very much into this. I'm not being talked into it, and he has no problem handling it. quote: ORIGINAL: xssve I should add there is also a distinction between objectification and humiliation, RS is correct in that the former is the act of ignoring your emotions, the latter is using them against you - they do overlap slightly, and are often mentioned together, but they're not quite the same thing, objects of worship and objects of derision are both objects, it's a much more complicated subject than it first appears. In any case, in a gangbang you are basically an object everybody wants to fuck, which can be quite pleasant - it's a very common, if not the most common female fantasy - most women's reservations have to do with how they're supposed to act and how they'll be treated afterwards, i.e., "will you still respect me in the morning?" Of course I tell them, "I don't respect you now". In this case, if he's talking you into it, then I'd go for the ride as long as it sounds fun, and you're not exactly dead set against it. If it turns out he can't handle it then it's really on him for biting off more than he can swallow, but most guys who are into the hotwife thing are pretty much into that, anything bothers you after, talk about it with him. Don't worry about how to act, be yourself, trust your own emotions.

mnottertail -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/16/2012 9:42:27 AM)
So, it appears as though you are playing the part of a pencil sharpener, in an allegorical way. (thats an object).

shylilbear -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/16/2012 9:50:23 AM)
I think I got everything I wanted to respond to lol. I appreciate everyone's input, thank you. A lot of good points have been made and it has helped me a lot.

xssve -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/16/2012 8:18:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: shylilbear I think that has a lot to do with it Des. I was in an M/s relationship where I was pretty much considered to be of no real value. I was never directly referred to as "it", but he made sure I knew that I was pretty much lower in value/importance/status? (I'm not sure of the right wording here) than any other living thing. I was just something else around the house that had use, and that's about it. That would be much closer to objectification.

Awareness -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/16/2012 8:22:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: shylilbear Good morning to everyone reading this. Part of my Daddy's plans for me include sharing me with his friends, to be used by them in any way he sees fit, to basically be a sex toy at times. I love the idea, as I think it sounds really hot and I get all sorts of tingly when I think about it. Does this qualify as objectification? Why or why not? shylilbear Yes. Just bear in mind, that like any sex toy, you're apt to be disposed of at a moment's notice, once your usefulness is at an end. If you're into this kind of scenario, then go for your life. If you actually think for one moment that he cares about you, then my dear, you are in for a world of hurt.

shylilbear -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/16/2012 9:36:59 PM)
No Awareness, I am MUCH more to him than JUST a sex toy. That reference was for scenes ONLY. I said that was PART of his plans for me, not his ONLY plan. I don't know where you get the idea that he doesn't care for me, or that being objectified is going to be a 24/7 thing, but you are seriously wrong in that line of thinking. quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness quote: ORIGINAL: shylilbear Good morning to everyone reading this. Part of my Daddy's plans for me include sharing me with his friends, to be used by them in any way he sees fit, to basically be a sex toy at times. I love the idea, as I think it sounds really hot and I get all sorts of tingly when I think about it. Does this qualify as objectification? Why or why not? shylilbear Yes. Just bear in mind, that like any sex toy, you're apt to be disposed of at a moment's notice, once your usefulness is at an end. If you're into this kind of scenario, then go for your life. If you actually think for one moment that he cares about you, then my dear, you are in for a world of hurt.

Awareness -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/16/2012 10:19:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: shylilbear No Awareness, I am MUCH more to him than JUST a sex toy. That reference was for scenes ONLY. I said that was PART of his plans for me, not his ONLY plan. I don't know where you get the idea that he doesn't care for me, or that being objectified is going to be a 24/7 thing, but you are seriously wrong in that line of thinking. No, I'm not. You cannot be an object and somehow maintain the delusion that he cares for you. If you're an object, you have no humanity and therefore are not worthy of being a partner for a man. And I'll give you a little tip which women really need to wise up on. If a dude is in love with you, he will not share you. The reason is simple. Territory. Men may share a lot of things, they'll share an object, a fucktoy, a whore - but they'll never share a partner who is identified territory. That's not the way we're wired. When we fall in love with a woman, that bitch is ours and we'll rip the throat out of any man who encroaches on our territory. If you're being shared, you're not territory and if you're not territory then you're not who we're in love with. You can tell me I'm wrong all you like, but when you're disposed of, you'll know I was right. Have fun looking forward to that. Christ, sometimes women are so naive.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/16/2012 11:22:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness And I'll give you a little tip which women really need to wise up on. If a dude is in love with you, he will not share you. The reason is simple. Territory. Men may share a lot of things, they'll share an object, a fucktoy, a whore - but they'll never share a partner who is identified territory. That's not the way we're wired. When we fall in love with a woman, that bitch is ours and we'll rip the throat out of any man who encroaches on our territory. If you're being shared, you're not territory and if you're not territory then you're not who we're in love with. You could not be more wrong about me. You could try but you would fail, miserably. There's a "little pocket" of people that don't try to limit their partners' inter-action with others in sexual situations. They are, generally, secure enough in their relationships where they don't feel the need to lock their partner away for fear that their partner might realize that there are greener pastures out there, somewhere. I have a little parable that I like to trot out, occasionally ... I am firmly in the D/s camp in this lifestyle. The BDSM part is a bit "if-y" but I am all about the TPE aspect. I believe that almost all ladies are beautiful, in some way or another and that is where I get to comparing them to The Mona Lisa. If I'm a wealthy man and I want to buy the Mona Lisa because I want to take her to my gallery and present her to people under my ownership; if I take a pride in being able to say: "She is mine", I own that painting and display and present that painting as it was meant to be. If I'm that same wealthy man and I purchase the painting because I wish to lock it away in a "dungeon" where no one can ever enjoy it or inter-act with it, ever again, I am doing a disservice to the painting and to the people whose lives it may touch and influence. I am not saying that your way isn't valid for you but, you are way off base for assigning your beliefs and lifestyle to others. I don't need to "lock my lady away". I "need" to allow her to be the person she is in a loving, caring, atmosphere that promotes free-thinking and allows her to be the person she is. I don't own a lady to stifle her. I own a lady because she is desirable and I wish to nurture and guide her in her journey. quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness You can tell me I'm wrong all you like, but when you're disposed of, you'll know I was right. Have fun looking forward to that. Once again; you could not possibly be more wrong in your judgement of me. Unfortunately, many relationships end. It's just the sad truth of human inter-action. Also, you are correct that there are some who treat ladies like chattel and nothing more. To assign causation based on one incident is a little closed-minded but, that is your prerogative. However, if this relationship does end, it won't it will be a matter of post hoc ergo propter hoc based upon a little bit of sexual exploration and game-playing. I am firmly entrenched in the polyamorous lifestyle which not only means that the occasional gang-bang is on the table (swingers do those) but that my lady/ies are free to engage in caring loving relationships with others in whom they're interested and of whom I approve. quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness Christ, sometimes women are so naive. ... and some people are so pompous as to believe that theirs is the only way. Peace and comfort, Michael

ResidentSadist -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/16/2012 11:52:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness quote: ORIGINAL: shylilbear No Awareness, I am MUCH more to him than JUST a sex toy. That reference was for scenes ONLY. I said that was PART of his plans for me, not his ONLY plan. I don't know where you get the idea that he doesn't care for me, or that being objectified is going to be a 24/7 thing, but you are seriously wrong in that line of thinking. No, I'm not. You cannot be an object and somehow maintain the delusion that he cares for you. If you're an object, you have no humanity and therefore are not worthy of being a partner for a man. And I'll give you a little tip which women really need to wise up on. If a dude is in love with you, he will not share you. The reason is simple. Territory. Men may share a lot of things, they'll share an object, a fucktoy, a whore - but they'll never share a partner who is identified territory. That's not the way we're wired. When we fall in love with a woman, that bitch is ours and we'll rip the throat out of any man who encroaches on our territory. If you're being shared, you're not territory and if you're not territory then you're not who we're in love with. You can tell me I'm wrong all you like, but when you're disposed of, you'll know I was right. Have fun looking forward to that. Christ, sometimes women are so naive. I disagree. My car is one of my favorite objects. I "care" about it. I take good "care" of it and I sure as fuck don't "dispose of it" after I drive it. My slaves are property, unlike inanimate possessions (objects), they are living things that require a degree of concern or they will get injured, emotionally whither or run away. So, although I have ultimate rule, and they can be displayed and used as property, just like a rancher with cattle, I have to take care of them. If a rancher abuses the heard, they will run away to greener pastures. Your reply gives me the impression you have never had a (successful) power exchange relationship. I think you have no concept and no experience in what you are talking about. I highly doubt you have any authority on the topic at all.

ResidentSadist -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/17/2012 5:21:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist Posted by request. ----------------------------------------------------------- -=The End All of Limits =- In line with reality, if I tell my slave to "fly" she will not be able to whether there are negotiated limits or not. However, a good slave once said, "with a running start, I can give you 2 seconds of flight". There are no limits in TPE. Anything otherwise is semantic word games. As Master I am in control and I own my slave in the same way I own any property. My car does not negotiate limits with me when I ask it to turn left or stop, neither should my slave. My car has real life limitations like my slave. If I abuse it or push it past its' limits, it will break. However, I am smart and responsible enough not to abuse my property, living or otherwise. My car can't fly for more than a few seconds either by the way. If "limits" are a concern to the point you feel you must mention or negotiate for them you are either not suited for TPE or poorly paired with someone you don't trust. Either way, "limits" should be a clue to both parties that something is amiss. ----------------------------------------------------------- Can I "steal" this? I *love* it! In case I use it, elsewhere, does credit go to you or to someone else? Peace and comfort, Michael That’s my philosophy. I wrote it, feel free to use it and no credits required. It was refined through years of debate about the confusion people have between the difference in slavery role-playing vs a slavery lifestyle. TPE or M/s is hard to perceive if you have no personal experience with it. Many believe they are M/s because they role play with the slave fantasy. Then they end up comparing apples (slave lifestyle) with oranges (slave role-play) when they try to debate about it. Some like oranges, some like apples. If someone holds up an orange proclaiming it's an apple, they only make a fool of themselves.

xssve -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/17/2012 7:50:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: shylilbear No Awareness, I am MUCH more to him than JUST a sex toy. That reference was for scenes ONLY. I said that was PART of his plans for me, not his ONLY plan. I don't know where you get the idea that he doesn't care for me, or that being objectified is going to be a 24/7 thing, but you are seriously wrong in that line of thinking. quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness quote: ORIGINAL: shylilbear Good morning to everyone reading this. Part of my Daddy's plans for me include sharing me with his friends, to be used by them in any way he sees fit, to basically be a sex toy at times. I love the idea, as I think it sounds really hot and I get all sorts of tingly when I think about it. Does this qualify as objectification? Why or why not? shylilbear Yes. Just bear in mind, that like any sex toy, you're apt to be disposed of at a moment's notice, once your usefulness is at an end. If you're into this kind of scenario, then go for your life. If you actually think for one moment that he cares about you, then my dear, you are in for a world of hurt. Most of us consider Awareness's nick to be an egregious misnomer.

DesFIP -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/17/2012 11:21:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist My car has real life limitations like my slave. If I abuse it or push it past its' limits, it will break. However, I am smart and responsible enough not to abuse my property, living or otherwise. My car can't fly for more than a few seconds either by the way. If "limits" are a concern to the point you feel you must mention or negotiate for them you are either not suited for TPE or poorly paired with someone you don't trust. Either way, "limits" should be a clue to both parties that something is amiss. Actually I disagree. Just as you have to be sufficiently self aware to know what you need your car to do; ie go 100 mph vs haul 5,000 lbs before purchasing in the same way you have to know ahead of time what you're going to want your sub/slave/property to do after she commits in order to make sure she can do what you want without breaking. Those are limits. I'm totally suited to being property to him, because he doesn't want me to do things I can't do without being damaged. At the same time RS, I'm totally not suited to a TPE with you because I can't do half the stuff you want your slaves to do. And, since I'm not getting any younger, I'm likely to develop more limits in the future. Have a heart attack and you have to hard limit electrical play. Get cataracts removed and you have to hard limit face slapping. My limits are health issues; physical, mental and emotional. Break them and you break me. Thankfully as I said, his interests are not in anything that would break me.

shylilbear -> RE: Is this objectification? (1/17/2012 12:53:25 PM)
This is exactly why it's so important for those looking for a TPE dynamic to be very careful who they submit to. Most of my hard limits are also there for health reasons. A few of them have changed, but those are the ones that involve things I had originally thought I just couldn't do. Like having a Daddy, and being in a polyamorous relationship, but that's exactly the type of relationship I'm in now and I'm incredibly happy. The few true limits I have though much up with what Daddy won't do anyway, so it works out perfectly. He knew what I can and can't do before I submitted to him, and now that I have, negotiations about limits stops. With that said though, if there should ever be anything he asks of me that I'm not sure I can do, then he expects me to discuss it with him, but he has the final say as to whether or not I do it anyway. I trust him him not to expect me to do anything that would truly be damaging to me in some way, so I don't see that as ever being an issue. I just want to make a side note for the Mods that although talking about limits is a bit off topic, I am perfectly fine with that, so please don't pull these posts. It's not WAY off topic, and since it's my thread, I want them to stay. Thank you. quote: ORIGINAL: DesFIP quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist My car has real life limitations like my slave. If I abuse it or push it past its' limits, it will break. However, I am smart and responsible enough not to abuse my property, living or otherwise. My car can't fly for more than a few seconds either by the way. If "limits" are a concern to the point you feel you must mention or negotiate for them you are either not suited for TPE or poorly paired with someone you don't trust. Either way, "limits" should be a clue to both parties that something is amiss. Actually I disagree. Just as you have to be sufficiently self aware to know what you need your car to do; ie go 100 mph vs haul 5,000 lbs before purchasing in the same way you have to know ahead of time what you're going to want your sub/slave/property to do after she commits in order to make sure she can do what you want without breaking. Those are limits. I'm totally suited to being property to him, because he doesn't want me to do things I can't do without being damaged. At the same time RS, I'm totally not suited to a TPE with you because I can't do half the stuff you want your slaves to do. And, since I'm not getting any younger, I'm likely to develop more limits in the future. Have a heart attack and you have to hard limit electrical play. Get cataracts removed and you have to hard limit face slapping. My limits are health issues; physical, mental and emotional. Break them and you break me. Thankfully as I said, his interests are not in anything that would break me.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875