The "meaning" of a scene? (Full Version)

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



Message

SimplyMichael -> The "meaning" of a scene? (11/4/2012 9:44:27 AM)

Its common for people who are not particants in large public kink communities to think acts have a specific meaning (and even some in those larger scenes) rather than understanding that an acts meaning is unique because the participants are unique, and if you change either side of the / the meaning can change radically.

What might be hot fantasy to one person, might be humiliating to another, and a soft or,hard limit to another.

Being forced to do something you loathe could do anything from inspire resentment, to deepening ones submission.

I know confirmed sadist tops that could wrap their heads around forcing a bottom who hates topping to beat them just to fuck with their heads. Sadist would love her discomfort and she would love that he forced her.
As many here have said, that would end their relationship. Same scene, VERY different reactions.

In many places, it is socially frowned on a female Domme giving a male sub a blowjob. So the meaning and,what people "see" can be very different.

Take marks and bruises. To me they are ugly, they make me feel cloddish to see them even though,i love marking people.

Piss play for me isnt me humiliating my partners, it is a deep act of intimacy.

I like to force my partners only about half the time because if I always force then I begin to feel rejected. So the meaning of that same act with the same partner can shift in meaning.

Same goes for partners, what is a turn off with one might be the hottest thing ever with the next.



SimplyMichael -> RE: The "meaning" of a scene? (11/4/2012 10:13:34 AM)

I didnt put the question...I was hoping people who had very diffetent reactions to scenes with cliche meanings would post along with people who had either different reactions to the same kink or that had seen limits become kink or best of all, kinks become limits.



DesFIP -> RE: The "meaning" of a scene? (11/4/2012 10:45:49 AM)

I'm confused as to why you think that only those who play publicly would understand this. To me, it's axiomatic. The old, 'one man's fish is another man's poison.' Obviously we are individuals and our reactions are informed by our individual make up and past.



SinFix -> RE: The "meaning" of a scene? (11/4/2012 10:51:14 AM)

I don't see any act as being inherently submissive or dominant.. to me that is an exchange of will and of offer up your being to the other (God that sounds hokie).

So any act be it sexual, household, or what have you that is not what makes one dominant or submissive, but the mind set of the individual person. Take lets say the topping with a flogger, to me the act is not dominant nor submissive, I am submissive to him no matter what he would have me do. That said I am not the type to put any label on anything, I think the world around us is more complex than the boxes we try to put it in...



mnottertail -> RE: The "meaning" of a scene? (11/4/2012 10:59:27 AM)

quote:


I don't see any act as being inherently submissive or dominant.. to me that is an exchange of will and of offer up your being to the other (God that sounds hokie).

Maybe god is hokie, cuz that sure is a truism.



theRose4U -> RE: The "meaning" of a scene? (11/4/2012 1:20:34 PM)

Damn I guess now I have to turn in my master card for giving subs head because I feel like it! If he's tied to the headboard being denied orgasm but getting head, I never would have imagined he was in charge...thanks for the heads up



ProlificNeeds -> RE: The "meaning" of a scene? (11/4/2012 2:32:25 PM)

Maybe it's my lack of exposure to public play and large groups, but most acts have no other meaning to them then mutual gratification, sexual and emotional, when it comes to me and my partner.




ChatteParfaitt -> RE: The "meaning" of a scene? (11/4/2012 2:50:00 PM)

Your thread appears to have been misread, perhaps b/c the responders were not following the forced bi thread that I believe (in part at least) engendered this one.

I'm going to change your words around just a bit and say the "intent of the act," as opposed to the meaning of the scene.

To me, this is what is crucial, the intent. For example, I routinely flog Himself, all over his body. He's not a masochist and he's not "switching" with me. He *is* a over 50 dom male with diabetes who gets achy and loves the feel of our suede flogger. He knows I am very proficient with this implement and can give him a fantastic massage with it.

The *intent* is for me to relieve his achy muscles and give him pleasure, much more so than I could with a traditional massage, as I have tiny hands and wrists, and my joint pain means I am very limited in my massage strength. (This man has a massive back, with huge muscles, so that's an issue.)

Now if I said, "I flog Himself on a regular basis," someone may think this means he's my sub. But the "intent" of the flogging is anything but.

Now, that is a physical example. I think "intent" and "meaning" get far trickier when you are talking humiliation, or emotional sadism. Example, I have heard you say more than once that "Piss play for me isnt me humiliating my partners, it is a deep act of intimacy." And I agree. It's not humiliating to me in the least, it's pure intimacy.

But if the *intent* is to humiliate, then that changes everything, does it not?



SimplyMichael -> RE: The "meaning" of a scene? (11/4/2012 3:01:05 PM)

EXACTLY! I thought the other thread brought up some interesting results and wanted to expand on them.

Intent is important, as that is one factor among many that can change how a recipient percieves the act.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125