RE: BDSM in nature (Full Version)

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



Message


marsman -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/17/2012 8:22:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TallullahHk

except I didn't say that.


No you did not.




sexyred1 -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/17/2012 8:26:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: marsman


quote:

ORIGINAL: doctorgrey


quote:

ORIGINAL: marsman

What do you call a creature who actively desires painful sex over and over again?



But is it "desire"?
Nope, it's a driven instinct.

DrG


Ok, what do you call a creature who actively and instinctively has painful sex over and over again?

Still sounds like a submissive to me.



Are you serious?? BDSM in animals. Jeez.

You are aware of something called evolution, instinct and biology, right?

You do know that these animals mate and are predators, etc. because it is in their DNA, right?

You do know that these animals have no reasoning, therefore cannot decide whether they are dominant or submissive?

So silly, this must be a joke.




stellauk -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/17/2012 8:54:50 PM)

Strewth..

Whatever next?

I suppose anacondas and pythons are into breath play, right?




Darkfeather -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/18/2012 12:04:58 AM)

Yeah, no. Sorry, but any informed scientific mind would throw out your conclusions. One has to be actively cognisant to be sadistic, or even interested in BDSM. Animals just don't have the "higher" mental learning capacity to process complex thoughts like we do. Anyone who owns a cat, and smacks them every time they get on the couch, can tell you that cat will still come to you for petting. The cat does not crave punishment from smacking, nor does he suffer it simply for the affections. Cats are base instinct and emotion, lacking that associative part to connect the two actions. If he wants on the couch, no matter how many times you smack him, he will still go on the couch.

Following this, feline sex falls under the same vein. The female is in heat and wants to mate. But in order to, she needs a male to induce ovulation. If you think penetration for cats is painful, you should see foreplay (males clamp down on the scruff just behind the neck). She doesn't suffer these pains because she enjoys it, or runs from them because she hates them. To her, there is no choice if she is to mate




metamorfosis -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/18/2012 12:05:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rochsub2009
Can someone please salvage this thread so it's not a complete waste of time? There may be REAL examples in nature, but the OP certainly hasn't provided any.


There are hierarchies of power in nature. That could qualify as D/s. There are also hierarchies in all human civilizations. I think it's fair to say that those hierarchies are necessary for human survival. For society to function, there must be leaders and followers. People in power often get pleasure for themselves at the expense of others. So do animals. There are many species in which the male gets sex by basically raping the female. You could argue that the interplay of power in BDSM is just a psychologically charged mimicry of the power plays in nature.

ETA: I think it's totally fair to say D/s is paralleled in nature. Sadism and masochism? I dunno, that's a stretch. Regardless, I want to have sex with an anaconda. So, there you have it.

P.S.- That lioness didn't look like she was in any pain.

Pam




crazyml -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/18/2012 12:40:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: marsman

I'm not making wild assumptions, I'm listening to what I hear online.


Your internet is faulty, I would suggest you take it back to the shop and ask them to repair it for you.





NiceButMeanGirl -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/18/2012 1:44:36 AM)

I am very disappointed in this OP and I feel cheated out of my time by even reading his posts. Just because cats are driven by instinct during the female's heat does not make their activities BDSM or S&M for crying out loud. To show that it is, the OP would have to prove that the creatures freely choose to engage in the painful behavior. I don't see that happening anytime soon, as responding to instinct is not the same as freely choosing.
quote:

ORIGINAL: marsman
Ok, what do you call a creature who actively and instinctively has painful sex over and over again?

Still sounds like a submissive to me.

That's making generalizations about submissives. NOT all submissives like painful sex.

quote:

ORIGINAL: marsman
I'm not making wild assumptions, I'm listening to what I hear online.

Do you believe everything you see on the internet? I hope not. If someone told you to jump off the Brooklyn Bridge, would you do that too? [8|]

NBMG




Rochsub2009 -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/18/2012 7:57:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: stellauk

I suppose anacondas and pythons are into breath play, right?



I absolutely adore you, Stellauk. Your posts are always a must-read in my opinion. Your wit is second to none.

Great post!




Hillwilliam -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/18/2012 8:02:46 AM)

I wonder what the OP would say about the mating of the Praying Mantis?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYp_Xi4AtAQ




mnottertail -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/18/2012 8:03:25 AM)

Right wing evangelicals?




Rochsub2009 -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/18/2012 8:08:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

I wonder what the OP would say about the mating of the Praying Mantis?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYp_Xi4AtAQ


I think he'd call that "body modification", or some other loosely related branch of BDSM. [:D]




Rochsub2009 -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/18/2012 8:12:49 AM)

In all seriousness though, the OP strikes me as someone who only has an outsider's perspective on BDSM. He mistakenly sees his examples as true acts of sadism and masochism, just as someone from another planet might mistake shaking hands as a sexual act.

Even though the conclusion is incorrect, it IS reasonable that someone with no experience might draw that conclusion.




autumnember -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/18/2012 8:19:55 AM)

all animals have dominant and submissive traits in them (including animals). This dominance and submission is vital to the species life. That does not equate to bdsm though. It is just biology that an animal (other than dolphins and humans) engage in sexual activities.




lizi -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/18/2012 8:41:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rochsub2009

In all seriousness though, the OP strikes me as someone who only has an outsider's perspective on BDSM. He mistakenly sees his examples as true acts of sadism and masochism, just as someone from another planet might mistake shaking hands as a sexual act.

Even though the conclusion is incorrect, it IS reasonable that someone with no experience might draw that conclusion.


I agree, he sees things as a BDSM outsider. People who only have the ability to see things through their own experiences, beliefs, and opinions, can and do mistake things for being other than what they truly are all the time- they make a judgement call and don't look for any additional information.

To me this is the equivalent to people who do not understand another's culture and call it uncivilized or people that believe that the actor/actress they are watching on the screen holds the same occupation/beliefs in real life or has the same disability - there was a law series on a good while back with a mentally challenged character. This actor constantly ran into people who were shocked that he didn't have the same mental/physical symptoms of his character in real life. They saw something, believed it, and didn't have the perspective to think that what they were seeing on TV wasn't the same as real life.

It's shocking to me that a grown man would think that he can apply human emotions, desires, and motivations to an animal. Truly bizarre.




CuriousFerret -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/18/2012 9:28:56 AM)

Okay, I've seen at least one example of this mindset, "animals are only acting on instinct, and they can't have the kinds of sophisticated desires that a human can." Stop feeding the world that ignorant garbage. Human and animal brains do have morphological differences, but they operate based on similar principles.

In colloquial usage, the term "instinct" makes the erroneous assumption that instincts are like some sort of computer code that is built into an animal's firmware. It's really not that tidy. The closest thing to this is found in the hypothalamus, which is involved in anti-predatory behavior, sex, and social defeat reflexes, among other things. The hypothalamus may also control sexual orientation. Primitive organs like the hypothalamus govern most of the near-reflexive instinctive behaviors we see in the animal kingdom.

As I said, though, it's not as tidy as if it were a purpose-written computer program. Instead, behaviors that require a similar response can become mucked-up with each other. For example, let's take the freeze reflex, or "playing opossum." When you encounter something that is too big for you to have a chance of either defeating or running away from, your natural reflex, which is rigged into your hypothalamus, is to freeze and sit perfectly still.

The freeze reflex, in response to overwhelming fear, can actually get mixed-up with the female instinct to get herself still in preparation for being mounted and bred, and you can see this manifested throughout the animal kingdom. Mustelids, in particular, are notoriously violent in their mating habits. If you were to watch a few videos of ferrets breeding, you will notice that the jill is in a total stupor when the hob is breeding her. They are like rag dolls.

Now, why would ferrets need to put their females practically into a coma when breeding them? Look at their bodies, and it's easy enough to sort this out. Their bodies are so whip-like, the slightest agitation on the part of a female could thoroughly ruin an attempted breeding. Therefore, a necessary aspect of breeding, in ferrets, is for the male to actually violently dominate the female, into total submission, before attempting entry.

And it's not just in our sexuality that fear-related stimuli get mixed-up with pleasurable reactions. Let's take the enjoyment derived from watching a horror movie. We're doing this when we're children. The excitement of watching a good horror film is extremely intoxicating. When we are strapped in and helpless on a roller coaster ride, we feel pleasure even though the ride is designed to incite feelings related to fear. It goes back to the hypothalamus and similar organs.

When you get right down to it, tying up your wife and beating her with a cane to provide sexual excitement is not much more strange than taking your children to a haunted house on Halloween. Telling your wife horrible things like, "you're a pathetic slut whore," and all that kind of bull crap is not really far removed from telling your kid a scary story around a campfire. You are simply hijacking a pain and fear-related reflex for the sake of producing tingly feelings of excitement and delight.

Of course, it's always withering when your kid tells you, "Dad, this really isn't all that scary."




orgasmdenial12 -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/18/2012 11:48:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: marsman

Ok, what do you call a creature who actively and instinctively has painful sex over and over again?

Still sounds like a submissive to me.



Uhm, no - sounds more like a masochist.

BDSM is an umbrella term involving many things, such as high heel worship and rubber fetishism, I fail to see even the slightest sign of this in nature.

If you are attempting to ask a question about masochism, then do so, and don't confuse the issue by using the term 'bdsm'.




LaTigresse -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/18/2012 11:58:17 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: poise

Looks at the post.


Scratches her head and raises an eyebrow.


Looks at the Ops user name.


Whew!



Indeed.

Next thing you know the OP will be creating a thread using animals and nature to justify gender superiourity.




Darkfeather -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/18/2012 12:22:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousFerret

Okay, I've seen at least one example of this mindset, "animals are only acting on instinct, and they can't have the kinds of sophisticated desires that a human can." Stop feeding the world that ignorant garbage. Human and animal brains do have morphological differences, but they operate based on similar principles.

In colloquial usage, the term "instinct" makes the erroneous assumption that instincts are like some sort of computer code that is built into an animal's firmware. It's really not that tidy. The closest thing to this is found in the hypothalamus, which is involved in anti-predatory behavior, sex, and social defeat reflexes, among other things. The hypothalamus may also control sexual orientation. Primitive organs like the hypothalamus govern most of the near-reflexive instinctive behaviors we see in the animal kingdom.

As I said, though, it's not as tidy as if it were a purpose-written computer program. Instead, behaviors that require a similar response can become mucked-up with each other. For example, let's take the freeze reflex, or "playing opossum." When you encounter something that is too big for you to have a chance of either defeating or running away from, your natural reflex, which is rigged into your hypothalamus, is to freeze and sit perfectly still.

The freeze reflex, in response to overwhelming fear, can actually get mixed-up with the female instinct to get herself still in preparation for being mounted and bred, and you can see this manifested throughout the animal kingdom. Mustelids, in particular, are notoriously violent in their mating habits. If you were to watch a few videos of ferrets breeding, you will notice that the jill is in a total stupor when the hob is breeding her. They are like rag dolls.

Now, why would ferrets need to put their females practically into a coma when breeding them? Look at their bodies, and it's easy enough to sort this out. Their bodies are so whip-like, the slightest agitation on the part of a female could thoroughly ruin an attempted breeding. Therefore, a necessary aspect of breeding, in ferrets, is for the male to actually violently dominate the female, into total submission, before attempting entry.

And it's not just in our sexuality that fear-related stimuli get mixed-up with pleasurable reactions. Let's take the enjoyment derived from watching a horror movie. We're doing this when we're children. The excitement of watching a good horror film is extremely intoxicating. When we are strapped in and helpless on a roller coaster ride, we feel pleasure even though the ride is designed to incite feelings related to fear. It goes back to the hypothalamus and similar organs.

When you get right down to it, tying up your wife and beating her with a cane to provide sexual excitement is not much more strange than taking your children to a haunted house on Halloween. Telling your wife horrible things like, "you're a pathetic slut whore," and all that kind of bull crap is not really far removed from telling your kid a scary story around a campfire. You are simply hijacking a pain and fear-related reflex for the sake of producing tingly feelings of excitement and delight.

Of course, it's always withering when your kid tells you, "Dad, this really isn't all that scary."



These may sound similar on the surface, but they are remarkably different. It take actually quite a bit of higher brain processing to equate a similar action "I whip my dog with a cane" to an emotion "he enjoys it" to a psychological pathway "he therefore comes back every time he wants to get the cane or enjoys it when I cane him. Now that is not to say animals cannot be trained, but that is also different. It took a LOT of evolution to get the human brain as complex as it is. Heck, there are only a few species f animal on the planet that have sex for something other than procreation, and that is a huge step forward. That show just how rare it is for animals to develop the cognitive thinking needed to break from instinct to desire or want.

As for the horror to kink analogy, this too can be in some cases but for the most part they are dissimilar. For the most part, people still have very clear defined separations between survival stimuli, and pleasurable ones. The fear induced by walking in a dark hallway, or watching a serial killer knife that co-ed, is completely different from the fear one feels when blindfolded with one they trust and is dragging a knife across their skin. The brain distinguishes the two. An easy example is, even a masochist would not find getting stabbed in the gut, or breaking a leg pleasurable. Pain for pain's sake is much different than pain for pleasure




CuriousFerret -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/18/2012 12:55:33 PM)

quote:

These may sound similar on the surface,
And they are identical upon closer examination. You have sex for the same reasons as your pet dog, and your mentality about sex is not far removed from that of your pet dog. You'd be a fool to say otherwise. The fact that many people think that human love is somehow special, derived from higher thought processes, is pure vanity. You want to have sex because it tickles your nucleus accumbens, and it's exactly the same for your pet dog.

quote:

an emotion
Yes, animals do have them. They also form opinions, including about their owners. You and your dog are not all that different. You are just a more sophisticated version of the same animal, nothing more, nothing less.

quote:

It took a LOT of evolution to get the human brain as complex as it is.
And it took a lot of evolution for your dog's brain to become as sophisticated as it is. Sure, dogs don't go around building cities or fighting wars, but we'll catch up with them someday.

quote:

Heck, there are only a few species f animal on the planet that have sex for something other than procreation, and that is a huge step forward. That show just how rare it is for animals to develop the cognitive thinking needed to break from instinct to desire or want.
If you think that your sexuality is really different, at its base, from that of an animal, then you are delusional. The fact that you can take it to a more sophisticated level is only due to the fact that you have a higher volume of pyramidal cells in your prefrontal cortex. Your basic drives are still the same, though, when you get right down to it.

This is because your hypothalamus is the most ancient part of your brain. Among the majority of placental mammals, one is all but indistinguishable from the other in its basic functions. It is essentially the same organ that our ancestors had when they were lungfish, flopping around in the mud. No matter how many layers of sophistication you throw on top of it, the way it works and what it does is ultimately very much the same.

When you get right down to it, you are a hypothalamus and a nucleus accumbens with added bling. It might not appeal to your vanity, but it does happen to be a fact.




Darkfeather -> RE: BDSM in nature (10/18/2012 1:37:17 PM)

quote:

And they are identical upon closer examination. You have sex for the same reasons as your pet dog, and your mentality about sex is not far removed from that of your pet dog. You'd be a fool to say otherwise. The fact that many people think that human love is somehow special, derived from higher thought processes, is pure vanity. You want to have sex because it tickles your nucleus accumbens, and it's exactly the same for your pet dog.


I don't know where you get this conclusion but humans and dogs do NOT see sexual congress in the same light. A human can reason, postulate, hell even birth control. The moment a dog walks into CVS and buys a condom, you'd win this one. Fact is, procreation is an instinct, it furthers a species. That is why females go into heat, to force males into seeking them out. We as humans have evolved past this, we can have sex for non-procreation reasons, even opt to not have sex at all. And also humans tend to not mark their territory by musking, another side effect of sexual instinct

quote:

Yes, animals do have them. They also form opinions, including about their owners. You and your dog are not all that different. You are just a more sophisticated version of the same animal, nothing more, nothing less.


I never said they don't have emotions, just the inability to link them to complex psychological actions. A dog can feel happiness when you pet him or play with him, feel sad when you leave him in a locked house for the day. But to say he becomes addicted to these actions or was somehow disposed to this, is wrong. Dogs, cats, most animals simply make the connection from an action to an emotion. If you ever try to train animals, you know this quite easily. You want the dog to do something, you associate it with either positive or negative feedback. Eventually the dog will come to understand the link. Now does the dog "enjoy" getting swatted with a rolled up newspaper every time he poops on the rug? Not very likely, he was just trained not to.

quote:

If you think that your sexuality is really different, at its base, from that of an animal, then you are delusional. The fact that you can take it to a more sophisticated level is only due to the fact that you have a higher volume of pyramidal cells in your prefrontal cortex. Your basic drives are still the same, though, when you get right down to it.

This is because your hypothalamus is the most ancient part of your brain. Among the majority of placental mammals, one is all but indistinguishable from the other in its basic functions. It is essentially the same organ that our ancestors had when they were lungfish, flopping around in the mud. No matter how many layers of sophistication you throw on top of it, the way it works and what it does is ultimately very much the same.

When you get right down to it, you are a hypothalamus and a nucleus accumbens with added bling. It might not appeal to your vanity, but it does happen to be a fact.


This is simply not true. Because you are neglecting one important fact, evolution. We also possesses a pineal gland and a coccyx bone, but these along with the hypothalamus evolved in humans to do more. Sure, when we were primitive humans, sex was necessary to increase the species, as it is in all animals. But as the millenia passes, we no longer needed to. We no longer needed a tail or webbed feet, and we had to stop having so many children. So yes, the ability to NOT have sex is quite a major leap on the evolutionary scale, because it is hard-wired into every species. To not do it, to choose not to do it, shows some pretty sophisticated brain chemistry, not just bling




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




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