RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition

RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (Full Version)

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

Message

Spiritedsub2 -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/24/2012 9:02:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OsideGirl quote: ORIGINAL: Spiritedsub2 quote: ORIGINAL: littlewonder the distinction is about the extent of power one is willing to turn over. Is it somewhat typical for a couple to start out D/s, then move into M/s if the relationship continues? Is it somewhat typical for new people to start out sub, then develop into slave? Or do slaves start out the gate knowing what they are as newbies? I'm asking based on what you've seen over time. It's very subjective. Personally, I don't believe in consensual slavery and feel that the term "slave" is distasteful, but many here would consider our relationship M/s. Some believe that a submissive has to consent every time. That said, our relationship is based on the fact that I've consented once and I consider myself a submissive. You regard yourself as a submissive, and I think littlewonder would regard you as a slave, based on her response. The uniform bright line definitions really don't exist, do they, no matter how hard I try to pin them down! It seems to make detailed discussions with a new person more essential than maybe they were in the past to determine whether one is a good fit for someone else. Honestly it's confusing as hell, but maybe it's just always confusing when you're learning it by yourself rather than in the context of a D/s or M/s relationship.

chatterbox24 -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/24/2012 9:39:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Spiritedsub2 quote: ORIGINAL: littlewonder the distinction is about the extent of power one is willing to turn over. Is it somewhat typical for a couple to start out D/s, then move into M/s if the relationship continues? Is it somewhat typical for new people to start out sub, then develop into slave? Or do slaves start out the gate knowing what they are as newbies? I'm asking based on what you've seen over time. Nothing is typical. If you look at it as some set stereotype, a set of answers to your questions, well forever you will be frustrated. Its not about what is right for me or for joe blow, it is about what is right for You. Its not about what someone else dictates to you, what they want you to believe, its about what you feel in the core of you. Your beliefs, your convictions, your choices. Being a slave doesnt mean you follow someone without a brain. It means you follow someone because you have a brain, and you are devoted to do so. Whatever position you are in, whether slave, sub, dom, master, etc etc etc. It means you are your own guide. Your own strength. Your own discipline. It means you have found your way. It means whatever decision you have made deep within yourself, whether in heart, or soul, or however you gain yourself, it means you are SOLID. Its your decision.

OsideGirl -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/25/2012 8:25:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Spiritedsub2 It seems to make detailed discussions with a new person more essential than maybe they were in the past to determine whether one is a good fit for someone else. I think it's more important that a relationship works for the people involved in that relationship. I don't think you should put too much importance on labels. Keeping in mind that a lot of people think that labeling themselves as Master or slave makes them better than others.

Spiritedsub2 -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/25/2012 9:50:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OsideGirl quote: ORIGINAL: Spiritedsub2 It seems to make detailed discussions with a new person more essential than maybe they were in the past to determine whether one is a good fit for someone else. I think it's more important that a relationship works for the people involved in that relationship. I don't think you should put too much importance on labels. Keeping in mind that a lot of people think that labeling themselves as Master or slave makes them better than others. Initially it seemed to me that when we meet somebody here, we first look to the label they give themselves to see if we might be a fit. For example, I wouldn't pursue anything beyond friendship with a submissive man, or with a switch looking for another switch. It seemed that labels would help identify potentially compatible relationships, and would help somebody else identify whether they would be interested in me. I also thought that labeling could help me know what someone might be expecting from me from the label I choose. Now I don't know what I think! Confusion before clarity.

crazyml -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/25/2012 10:07:07 AM)
What a fab thread. In practice today... It seems to me that you can take any of the letters and merge them any how you like. B = Bondage D = Domination or Discipline M = Masochism or Master S = Sadism or Submission And I'm sure you could squeeze other B,D,S or M words in there. I take a very broad view of BDSM, to me it's analogous to "Alternative Lifestyles" and I tend to go "meh" when someone who is into Head of Household, or 1950's insists that they're not into "BDSM". Like a couple of the others, I don't really like the blurring of terms and naturally prefer it when things have a stable agreed definition - But, hell will freeze over before there are definitive definitions of some of the most commonly used terms in WIITWD. I think I'm going to stop using BDSM (except in the original sense) and start using Alternative Lifestyles or WIITWD (which I like because it's deliberately broad) instead.

littlewonder -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/25/2012 1:18:35 PM)
quote: You regard yourself as a submissive, and I think littlewonder would regard you as a slave, based on her response. I don't know Oside and I don't know her life so I wouldn't call her anything. Whatever she and her partner do is their choice. I don't put labels upon long term relationships, mostly because, honestly, I don't care.

JeffBC -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/25/2012 1:30:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OsideGirl You're confusing BDSM with D/s. BDSM is Bondage, Discipline, Sado-Masochism. It's basically "kinky sex" (for lack of a better description) The "discipline" refers to corporal punishment acts like spanking, flogging, strapping etc. Adding D/s into the acronym is bastardization and IMO incorrect. You can engage in BDSM without engaging in D/s. You can engage in D/s without ever engaging in BDSM. 1950's, M/s are D/s realtionships. They may or may not include BDSM. I, of course, would be the last person on the face of the planet to argue with this. In fact, if everyone thought this it'd make my life a bunch simpler. "No, I'm not into BDSM but Carol and I are interested in the control elements of D/s." That all being said, my own experience says that the community at large disagrees with this. I can't think of a single time I've ever said "I don't think we are BDSM" that rafts of folks haven't popped out of the woodwork to say "yes you are" -- real life people I mean not internet people -- people who know us. Whatever it is that we "are", we appear to fit into the community by the community's own standards.

JeffBC -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/25/2012 1:35:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littlewonder I don't know Oside and I don't know her life so I wouldn't call her anything. Whatever she and her partner do is their choice. I don't put labels upon long term relationships, mostly because, honestly, I don't care. chuckles Another good reason not to label long-term relationships is that they tend to become hideously complex over time. Things get shaded with infinite layers of nuance and meaning and simplistic labels become increasingly inaccurate. I think the largest reason that I dislike labelling other people's relationships though is that it precludes me from understanding them. Whether or not I think Oside is a slave or a sub or a turnip, if I apply the label then I am deliberately ignoring something that seemed important to her/them when she chose her own label. That means "I'm not getting it". I, for one, value diversity. Yours and Kana's relationship is one of the most recognizable to me as a TPE, M/s relationship on these boards. But if you said you were a sub not a slave I'd want to understand that distinction rather than argue with it or simply ignore it.

LadyPact -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/26/2012 4:08:22 AM)
quote: I can't think of a single time I've ever said "I don't think we are BDSM" that rafts of folks haven't popped out of the woodwork to say "yes you are" - Think harder.

punisher440 -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/26/2012 6:39:20 AM)
quote: S/m: an interaction between a sadist and a masochist. Doesn't always have to include a power exchange or sex. LW,while I totally agree with the doesn't have to include sex part,I do however think that some type power exchange is included.No,it doesn't have to be TPE in a S/m relationship or dynamic but there seems to be some sort of power exchange in my mind even if on a limited basis.I do totally agree with all your other descriptions and I think you hit the nail on the head IMO.

OsideGirl -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/26/2012 10:15:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: punisher440 quote: S/m: an interaction between a sadist and a masochist. Doesn't always have to include a power exchange or sex. LW,while I totally agree with the doesn't have to include sex part,I do however think that some type power exchange is included.No,it doesn't have to be TPE in a S/m relationship or dynamic but there seems to be some sort of power exchange in my mind even if on a limited basis.I do totally agree with all your other descriptions and I think you hit the nail on the head IMO. Not really. I have a friend that wants you to beat her, then fuck her and then leave. She doesn't submit and has no interest in submitting at all. It's straight up S&M between equals with no power exchange.

LadyPact -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/26/2012 10:19:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: punisher440 quote: S/m: an interaction between a sadist and a masochist. Doesn't always have to include a power exchange or sex. LW,while I totally agree with the doesn't have to include sex part,I do however think that some type power exchange is included.No,it doesn't have to be TPE in a S/m relationship or dynamic but there seems to be some sort of power exchange in my mind even if on a limited basis.I do totally agree with all your other descriptions and I think you hit the nail on the head IMO. Two words for you: Service top.

littlewonder -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/26/2012 11:14:24 AM)
Exactly what Oside and LP said...service top, woman who likes pain....nothing else. I know a lot of s/m people who are like this. It's only a power exchange when you decide to lump it in with d/s and call it bdsm. She tells you to beat her. You say ok, sure. Then it's over. A power exchange come in when she tells you to beat her with a cane and you say, whenever I'm ready to and I will do what I want and with whatever tool I want.

graceadieu -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/27/2012 9:42:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littlewonder 1950's relationship:Usually is between a husband and wife. Husband in charge of the household, wife stays home, cooks, cleans, etc...man can punish her if she screws up something. This is usually no more than spankings. Female led marriage: Same as 1950's relationship except reverse genders. You know, I've always wondered how a D/s version of these two differs from a vanilla version. I guess the punishment and spankings? Or maybe it's just a matter of self-indentification. It just makes me think of a couple I know, where the husband is a successful well-off businessman but the wife runs the household and has total control of their finances and he defers to her in basically everything outside of running his business, and even sometimes in that. But they don't consider themselves D/s or anything like that (ETA: at least as far as I know!) - it's just how their relationship works.

littlewonder -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/27/2012 11:51:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: graceadieu quote: ORIGINAL: littlewonder 1950's relationship:Usually is between a husband and wife. Husband in charge of the household, wife stays home, cooks, cleans, etc...man can punish her if she screws up something. This is usually no more than spankings. Female led marriage: Same as 1950's relationship except reverse genders. You know, I've always wondered how a D/s version of these two differs from a vanilla version. I guess the punishment and spankings? Or maybe it's just a matter of self-indentification. It just makes me think of a couple I know, where the husband is a successful well-off businessman but the wife runs the household and has total control of their finances and he defers to her in basically everything outside of running his business, and even sometimes in that. But they don't consider themselves D/s or anything like that (ETA: at least as far as I know!) - it's just how their relationship works. Like I've been saying for years, it isn't. I grew up in a community where the 1950's relationship was the norm for everyone. Husband works and provides for the wife. Wife stays home and takes care of the children of the house. Husband is the head of the household, the "voice of God". The wife is led by the husband because he is the "voice of God" but she is the "Godhead" and thus a deep respect for each other because of the part they play in their roles to God. I would guess that the God thing is the only difference between what bdsm people consider "1950 household" and just everyday old fashioned relationships.

thexxxxmaster -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/28/2012 4:33:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml I think I'm going to stop using BDSM (except in the original sense) and start using Alternative Lifestyles or WIITWD (which I like because it's deliberately broad) instead. Hi fellow Alts, or is that Wits?

ResidentSadist -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/28/2012 8:07:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml ........ B = Bondage D = Domination or Discipline M = Masochism or Master S = Sadism or Submission .......... I'll stand corrected if I am wrong but the acronym, if spoken in rhythm to its associations, would be B - D - SM. The SM are not and never were separate in meaning, they stand for sadomasochism. S&M is a separate acronym for Sadism and Masochism. Dominance and submission also have nothing to do with it, that is D/s and yet another separate acronym. Master and slave (you forget to mention slaves) is M/s a separate acronym. B = Bondage D = Discipline SM = Sadomasochism You can't jam 8 meanings into a 3 part acronym. I'm just sayin' words have meanings and so do acronyms, I hate seeing someone get it wrong. I feel like you are disrespecting the people you inherited this lifestyle from when you rewrite the history, the meanings of our words and finally jam 8 meanings into a 3 part acronym. WTF? It seems impossible for newcomers to find the real meaning of BDSM thanks to all the disinformation on the internet, including an errant wiki entry I tried fighting years ago. I blame it all on CastleRealm.com and their fearless leader's 14 sock puppets, who invented a fake hetro BDSM history to support his fake online world. ETA: If you are gonna' fuck with the meaning of the acronym, at least do it with some honesty: B = Bastardized D = Disinformation S = Saturating M = the Media

OsideGirl -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/28/2012 9:03:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist I'll stand corrected if I am wrong but the acronym, if spoken in rhythm to its associations, would be B - D - SM. The SM are not and never were separate in meaning, they stand for sadomasochism. S&M is a separate acronym for Sadism and Masochism. Dominance and submission also have nothing to do with it, that is D/s and yet another separate acronym. Master and slave (you forget to mention slaves) is M/s a separate acronym. You are absolutely correct. I hate to actually say this, but I've been around long enough to actually remember when it was first coined. Any definition that includes D/s or M/s is a bastardization.

Spiritedsub2 -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/28/2012 9:46:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OsideGirl quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist I'll stand corrected if I am wrong but the acronym, if spoken in rhythm to its associations, would be B - D - SM. The SM are not and never were separate in meaning, they stand for sadomasochism. S&M is a separate acronym for Sadism and Masochism. Dominance and submission also have nothing to do with it, that is D/s and yet another separate acronym. Master and slave (you forget to mention slaves) is M/s a separate acronym. You are absolutely correct. I hate to actually say this, but I've been around long enough to actually remember when it was first coined. Any definition that includes D/s or M/s is a bastardization. Do you mean then that D/s and M/s are not really part of BDSM?

OsideGirl -> RE: Oh I'm confused about the complete BDSM definition (10/28/2012 9:50:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Spiritedsub2 quote: ORIGINAL: OsideGirl quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist I'll stand corrected if I am wrong but the acronym, if spoken in rhythm to its associations, would be B - D - SM. The SM are not and never were separate in meaning, they stand for sadomasochism. S&M is a separate acronym for Sadism and Masochism. Dominance and submission also have nothing to do with it, that is D/s and yet another separate acronym. Master and slave (you forget to mention slaves) is M/s a separate acronym. You are absolutely correct. I hate to actually say this, but I've been around long enough to actually remember when it was first coined. Any definition that includes D/s or M/s is a bastardization. Do you mean then that D/s and M/s are not really part of BDSM? They are not. BDSM is basically kinky sex. You can be in a D/s relationship that also includes BDSM. You can be in a D/s relationship that does not include BDSM. You can engage in BDSM and not engage in D/s.

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125