RE: Why online isn't (Full Version)

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



Message

Arpig -> RE: Why online isn't (6/17/2006 7:25:50 AM)

5pages later, and where are we?

Those who do it, will keep on doing it, and those who don't.
Some of those who do will stop, and some of those who don't will start.
Some will say they would prefer face-to-face, but cannot due to any number of factors, some will say they don't.
Some will be honest about who and what they are, some will be wankers pretending.

My take on it......
Hey...whatever floats your boat and makes you hot and spermy



OedipusRexIt -> RE: Why online isn't (6/17/2006 7:28:35 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ExistentialSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: OedipusRexIt

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brosco

I wasn't going to respond to this thread, its seems every day there is another 'lets bash online' thread and its tedious to have to repeat the opinions to the same people knowing that they will dismiss the opinion out of hand.

I had to reply to Noah though.  That was a very well written and an excellent explanation for those that 'just dont get it' and I live in hope that it doesn't fall on deaf ears.

Brosco


Really?  Honestly, I found it long, a bit tedioius, and involved far-fetched made up examples.  IMO.


What's this? Dueling critics? Ha. Put me down as giving Noah stars for that post. I can see why cyber would work for him.


I wouldn't try to change your mind.



MistressOfGa -> RE: Why online isn't (6/17/2006 8:02:27 AM)

quote:

whatever floats your boat and makes you hot and spermy

hahahaha I love that term!



meatcleaver -> RE: Why online isn't (6/17/2006 8:09:59 AM)

Shit! Now I've got sperm all over my monitor!



MistressOfGa -> RE: Why online isn't (6/17/2006 8:15:44 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

Shit! Now I've got sperm all over my monitor!

A little TMI right there MC lol but thanks for sharing <eg>



KnightofMists -> RE: Why online isn't (6/17/2006 9:48:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrappyDom

Ever read a book or take a class on how to do something and then struggle to do the simplest things on your own? 

Online is quite real in my opinion, but it isn't real S&M, it isn't real sex, it isn't real relationships, it isn't much of anything, it is just "real online" and NOTHING more.  Combine that with the fact that online self selects for people who often don't have real life relationships and tend not to have any real life S&M experience, you have a recipe for disaster and broken hearts.


And a book ... is not  Real SM or Real Relationship or Real Sex.... It's just a Real Book... nothing more.

However the difference between the book and online... is that with a book there is the implication that the writer has more creditibility than the writer in an online forum.  Maybe because most writers of the books our there are more known in the community and their creditibilty can be verified and checked up on.  But, in this online environment... Creditibility is one of the harder things to establish of another person.



Shayna -> RE: Why online isn't (6/17/2006 9:51:59 AM)

Thanks for your elequent post, Noah. You captured my online experiences in your words.

As I posted in a previous thread, I create my reality and make meanings of what is happening around me. We all do that. Have you ever felt intense feelings for someone who didn't reciprocate? You can't believe they aren't interested because you're feeling this fateful, special connection with this other person. You barely register on their radar. And this person could be someone you sit next to at work everyday, or lives across the country. So how real are your feelings?

What if this person DOES reciprocate your feelings? Awesome! Are your feelings less real in one situation than the other?  My point is that reality exists in our minds; we choose to validate what we see as real or not. I'm not talking about objective experiences that happen; I'm talking about how we make meaning of those experiences.



hizgeorgiapeach -> RE: Why online isn't (6/17/2006 11:00:39 AM)

Having been there, done that on both sides of the coin - face to face bdsm activities since I was 17 (I'm 40 now), and a couple of short lived online only relationships - I have to admit that I Prefer face to face.  I find something distinctly lacking in online only interaction, and intentionally guard myself from certain types of emotional involvement until such time as I can be face to face with someone.  Does this mean that I haven't developed several friendships online?  Not at all.  Some of my dearest and longest lasting friendships are people whom I got to know online - and dealt with exclusively online for the vast majority of (if not all of) our friendship.  However, I do not allow myself to delve into the area of romantic love with any of those people.  They don't live close enough to me for the two of us ever to reasonably expect to meet, and I see no reason to inflict that sort of frustration and emotional turmoil on myself - or them.
 
SM specifically - as opposed to DS specifically - cannot be experienced in it's fullness in a textual setting.  Regardless of how good someone's imagination is, they can't really know what a flogging or spanking feels like..... Physically Feels Like... until they've been in the physical act.  Yes, the imagination is a powerful tool, and can show you where you Might enjoy going physically, or return you to the memories of a prior experience to revel there briefly.  However, if you have no physical memory to return to, or contemplate, it remains forever in the "maybe" catagory.  Maybe you'll enjoy it, maybe you won't - either way, you'll never know for certain until you've actually been there.  I liken it to going through a pregnancy.  In either case, you can only project yourself so far into the mentality surrounding the experience unless you have personally been there.  For those who have never been through a pregnancy, they can empathize only so far - and sometimes, if the imagination is active enough, that can be quite a bit.  That empathy, however, will never really show them how it feels to wake up with morning sickness, how it feels to have a new life expanding within, or some of the deeper psychological aspects that are touched upon by that physical experience.
 
For DS specifically, without the aspect of SM or BD added to it (which I personally don't enjoy, and therefore don't take part in by choice and preference) then online can indeed be a media where it can be fulfilled.  It is a mental/emotional thing, rather than a strictly physical set of sensations, and therefore conducive to a media wherein the physical is impossible.  I don't find it fulfilling, but that does not negate the validity of the emotional responce that someone else experiences.  I might personally consider them whacked, in fact, for allowing themselves something that I personally consider so much less than is available.  Still doesn't negate the validity of their emotions, and in the long run, it doesn't even impact on whether they continue to enjoy what they're doing.



SoquilisGirl -> RE: Why online isn't (6/17/2006 5:27:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows

I get the feeling that most people who deny the 'reality' of online communication - do so because they are for the want of a different word - sex obsessed.  Most of the people I talk to who have experimented online do not do it for pure sexual release.  It isn't all cyber and getting your rocks off with the first collar offer that comes along. BDSM doesn't have to be sexual.  It doesn't have to be physical.  There are so many diverse ways to be mentally dominated or to submit mentally.  Mental and spiritual control is an incredible power to play with - and there are many facets to such a glorious gem and online is just one of them.


Amen!


I originally wrote a long rambling reply to this post, but I have decided to just post an abbreviated version.
  Since 1995 I have had 3 D/s relationships. The first was with a man I met online. We fell in love online and met in RL before anything D/s started happening between us and in the years we were ‘together’ we met in RL on 3 different occasions. He was my first D/s partner and our relationship was extremely deep and intense. We are still friends and he still has D/s feelings for me.
  The second D/s relationship I had was also with a man I originally met online. Nothing D/s or even sexual happened between us until we met in RL. But the D/s aspect was not fulfilling in the same way my first D/s relationship one was. We didn’t play as much as either of us wanted to and our communication was not what it would have been had we been able to chat online (which I find it easier to reveal myself than in RL).
  The third D/s relationship I had was online only. It only lasted a few months, but it was nearly as deep as the first one.
  Now I am trying again with the second guy (who I have lived with for the past 9+ years). We are getting better at communicating our needs to each other, but I still do not feel the depth of love and submission I felt in my online relationships and I don’t know if I ever will. He and I have discussed this and we hope that eventually I will feel for him what I felt for my online Doms, but we both know that may not be possible.
  As others have noted, when you are only (or mostly) online there is nothing physical to distract you from the important business of getting to know each other deeply and intimately. In RL sex gets in the way of properly learning about a person. Although I enjoy the physical aspects of D/s, the mental and emotional aspects are far more important to me, and that is why I prefer online relationships.
  If things with my current Daddy / Dom ever become as deep and intimate as my online relationships were then it would truly be mind-blowing, but so far it hasn’t come close. That makes me sad, but maybe it has more to do with us as individuals and not with the format of our relationship. I guess the only way to know is to take our relationship exclusively online for awhile, but that’s unlikely to happen for various reasons.

Soquili's Girl(Edited to fix formatting)
     



HarryVanWinkle -> RE: Why online isn't (6/17/2006 5:38:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

Shit! Now I've got sperm all over my monitor!


That's not sperm.  Now, go wipe your nose.



sharainks -> RE: Why online isn't (6/17/2006 6:32:53 PM)

To me the answer to why people can feel a deep submission online is that it is their own mind that produces those feelings and emotions.  In your mind someone can be anything you want them to be.  You don't have to deal with the daily reality of what living with that person might be like.  If the bulk of the relationship is online and there are only infrequent meetings over a period of months or year both are on best behavior when physically together.  Thats not sustainable in real life.

In your own mind you can be as submissive as you feel you want to be as well.  There isn't someone standing in front of you with their expectations of you showing in their eyes and body language.  You don't feel the bite of regret the same as you do when you have failed to please and see it in their eyes and hear it in their voice.

It seems to be a case of seeing the glass as half empty or half full.  Those with online only relationships see it much more optimistically than those who do it in meatlife.  For myself I see places to connect with others in this as just that.  My own experience has made it plain to me that no matter how much you have talked the first meeting you are still meeting a stranger.  You have no idea if what it takes to make a relationship work is actually there until you make the move to meatlife. 

Its not about sex.  Its about a sense of connectedness.   Connection via internet leaves too many things unknown for me to feel any "real" connection to someone.  Its only when I actually meet someone that I know if there is enough interest there for there to be any reason to continue.




ScooterTrash -> RE: Why online isn't (6/17/2006 7:30:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows

Hello Scooter -
 
I completely understand the point you are making - but that is on the assumption that all sadism or masochism is physical.  It isn't and it has never been defined as purely physical - sexual yes - but not only physical.  It is mental as well.  Masturbation isn't intercourse, but it is still sexual.  So therefore, if online communication is a mental force, if CAN exist and does.  It isn't the same - I don't believe anyone has said it is as I have read it.  But the use of a crop vs. a paddle are not the same.  Online and realtime are different sections - but does not make them any more or less than each other - just different.  Online is what it is - it is real.  Personal preference.
 
Peace and Rapture


I didn't say S&M was "purely" physical and I certainly do not agree with you that it is sexual. It very well may be sexual for many, but doesn't have to have any sexual connotations to it at all. As for it not being totally physical, this does not leave physical out of the equation however. In order to satisfy a sadist's or a masochist's needs, in all probability there needs to be some physical interaction. You can imply till the cows come home that this is possible on-line, but in reality you can only inflict (or accept) something S&M related through physical means, where it is tangible, something that can be felt. Yes, you can say that you can inflict some sort of mental torture or anguish upon someone, but no, you will never know if you actually did...that can only be determined by the virtual receiver and you can not affirm that information. S&M does in fact, primarily, involve some sort of physical act...the mental aspect follows suit.



Brosco -> RE: Why online isn't (6/17/2006 7:56:19 PM)

sharainks,

That was extremely well written and does explain very well why online cannot work for you, so do not read my response as a criticism or even a dispute, but merely as an explanation of how for others it can be different.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sharainks

To me the answer to why people can feel a deep submission online is that it is their own mind that produces those feelings and emotions. 


but isn't the mind where ....
quote:

There isn't someone standing in front of you with their expectations of you showing in their eyes and body language.  You don't feel the bite of regret the same as you do when you have failed to please and see it in their eyes and hear it in their voice.

.. experiences such things?

Do you also believe that if a person is blind or deaf that they also wouldn't be able to have a full relationship?

BTW .. on a side note - many online do use voice communications, and while not effective as face-to-face, some also use cam.  I have found it amazing as to how much more one can read from a voice - the tone, the words chosen, immediate or hesitant response, etc., when not distracted by the physical.

quote:


Its not about sex.  Its about a sense of connectedness.   Connection via internet leaves too many things unknown for me to feel any "real" connection to someone.  Its only when I actually meet someone that I know if there is enough interest there for there to be any reason to continue.


Yes, I can understand those that cannot get the same connection online, but again, many can. 

I had a friend online for 7 years that I never got to meet in r/l.  He and I got along so well that other online friends used to refer to us as the twins that were separated at birth.  (without going into details here, he also had a problem where he had to occasionally fight bouts of severe depression, and 14 months ago he lost the fight and took his own life).    I grieved his loss as much as I would have the closest of my friends here in r/l.  His friendship to me was as close as any I have experienced.  I still communicate with the mutual online friends and he is someone that touched us all and we still to this day repeat our fond memories of him.  Some of these people also met him in reallife - one couple even joined him and shared a joint civil ceremony of Dom/sub marriages, with several others attending the ceremony.  Most though acknowledge the special closeness we had and the loss I suffered was as much if not more than themselves.

OK, yes this is unusual to experience such a 'connectedness' online, but then again,  aren't extremely close relationships rare in r/l?  How many of you have many really close friends that affect your lives and you can feel perfectly in sync with all that they say and do?  We all have friends (I hope), but most of us only have one or two that have that very special  'connectedness'. 

And so when it comes to a D/s relationship, to find that special someone that has the level of 'connectedness' is very difficult.  I know many, and have seen it here in CM, where people have searched for years and never found it.  In a relationship, what is the most important, the red marks across a butt or that 'connectedness'? 

For those that can feel the connection online, they can have a very fulfilling relationship.

Brosco

edited for typos.



darkinshadows -> RE: Why online isn't (6/18/2006 4:48:22 AM)

quote:

 but in reality you can only inflict (or accept) something S&M related through physical means, where it is tangible, something that can be felt
 
I do not totally agree Scooter, it depends on the SM couple involved.  Some Sadists gain sexual relief by inflicting humilitaion and mental sadism.  If you are sadistic and enjoy sensations and touch - that is you - but not all sadists are the same. (I am not suggestiong you are S, just used as an example'generic').  That doesn't make mental SM any less important and there is a different level of consciousness there.  Orgasm is 'just' orgasm.  But there are different types of release.  If I am in meditation and in a higher place, I can orgasm just by hearing the simple words and obeying.  Touch isnt there, physical stimulation isn't there - but stimulation of the mind.  But it doesn't make it less a subject, infact at times a mental orgasm is more intense than a simple physical one.   Online is different - no doubt - but doesn't make it less real or less important.
If my dominant chooses to use music and words as a means of sexual control over me - does that make it less important and less real and less stimulating?  No - because it is the control that is the key - not the physical.  Maybe thats why I can understand why online can be for some people - is a wonderful tecnique to use.  If people deal only in the physical or cannot practise BDSM without physical or tactile intent - then the understanding may not be there.   But no technique is less important or any less real than another.
 
Peace and Rapture



ScooterTrash -> RE: Why online isn't (6/18/2006 5:25:34 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkinshadows

quote:

 but in reality you can only inflict (or accept) something S&M related through physical means, where it is tangible, something that can be felt
 
I do not totally agree Scooter, it depends on the SM couple involved.  Some Sadists gain sexual relief by inflicting humilitaion and mental sadism.  If you are sadistic and enjoy sensations and touch - that is you - but not all sadists are the same. (I am not suggestiong you are S, just used as an example'generic').  That doesn't make mental SM any less important and there is a different level of consciousness there.  Orgasm is 'just' orgasm.  But there are different types of release.  If I am in meditation and in a higher place, I can orgasm just by hearing the simple words and obeying.  Touch isnt there, physical stimulation isn't there - but stimulation of the mind.  But it doesn't make it less a subject, infact at times a mental orgasm is more intense than a simple physical one.   Online is different - no doubt - but doesn't make it less real or less important.
If my dominant chooses to use music and words as a means of sexual control over me - does that make it less important and less real and less stimulating?  No - because it is the control that is the key - not the physical.  Maybe thats why I can understand why online can be for some people - is a wonderful tecnique to use.  If people deal only in the physical or cannot practise BDSM without physical or tactile intent - then the understanding may not be there.   But no technique is less important or any less real than another.
 
Peace and Rapture


I think we would be best to just agree to disagree. I think the topic is getting watered down and not staying within the confines of what I and many others would consider S & M, which is creating varied responses. Personally, to inflict pain, or for someone to receive pain, physically or mentally, it would need to up close and personal so there was mutual feedback. Yes, I could most likely cause an emotion response, up to and including an orgasm with "mine", long distance through some form of media, but I could not obtain validation that I did so, unless I was there.



sharainks -> RE: Why online isn't (6/18/2006 5:26:05 AM)

Brosco, No I do believe that those with physical challenges life deafness or blindness can experience D/s or any other relationship to the fullest extent possible.  Being very auditory in nature I can't imagine not hearing my so's voice.  I've never placed a lot on looks so seeing things is not as important to me other than just in getting around and the freedoms that sightedness entails. 

Touch is also terribly important to me.  That is probably one of the biggies why online could never work for me as well as what was already stated.




agirl -> RE: Why online isn't (6/18/2006 5:33:13 AM)

Hello Brosco,

Having had some incredible online interaction over the years, I can easily understand your closeness to your online friend.

There are things that I've discussed, explored and shared with people entirely online that have been immensely edifying. It was an utterly different way of relating and the fact that it was through the written word forced me to hone my skills in expressing. 

I think that I'm unlikely to meet people that I can relate to in such a way in real-life due to my circumstances and personality .

One friend that I became close to, moved on to become a real life(vanilla) friend, despite the fact that I'm in the UK and he in Norway. Years on, we stay with each other, our children are friends and it's one of my (very) few enduring friendships.

agirl



darkinshadows -> RE: Why online isn't (6/18/2006 5:40:28 AM)

Scooter
 
OK... I think I am beginning to understand - you desire validation and that must be 'visual' - is that what you are interested in 'seeing'?
 
If that is a personal preference, thats understandable - now we are getting down to aftercare - which is a different scenario altogether.  Whilst SM is achieveable through online stimulus - how is aftercare achieved?  That is a more interesting thought (to me) than the discussion of what is more real/true/better.
 
Many SM couples/people I have contact with do not deny the validity of non tactile interaction and usually I only find staunch objections to it on online forums such as this.
 
sharainks
 
quote:

Touch is also terribly important to me.  That is probably one of the biggies why online could never work for me as well as what was already stated.

I concur - touch is incredibly important to me.  I am an extremely tactile person.  However mental stimulation is another tool and I guess I can just see how it can work via online.



LaTigresse -> RE: Why online isn't (6/18/2006 6:55:36 AM)

Not to go completely off topic because I do have a connection in thought. It seems that the biggest problem with all the disagreement revolves around one word "REAL"

I pose a thought........exactly what is "REAL"?

Now each persons definition to that on a personal level will probably be very different. A christian for example will say that god is real and that everything written in the bible is real and be VERY emotional and totally combative if you try to argue against any of their beliefs. An atheist on the other hand wants physical concrete proof and will argue themselves blue in the face based upon their "facts". I can say that my emotions are real because I feel them, I say I am happy, however you cannot see that, touch it, smell it......is my happiness not "real"?

Because none of us are ever going to agree 100% as to what is "real" because reality is different for each, I think its just purely assinine to continue arguing such a point. What is "real" for me does not have to be for you. Does not mean your reality doesn't work for you or mine for me. They are different, we are all different. Exactly WHAT is the purpose of trying to bash and argue one another into submission of our own opinions of such an elusive thing?



KnightofMists -> RE: Why online isn't (6/18/2006 12:19:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Noah
Finally:

My condolences to those who have been burned in online relationships. But ruling all online experience as inauthentic on that basis is too much like deciding to be a racist because someone of another color stole your car.



just quoting the last part of an incredible post.  As I read the post, I realized why I was very happy to see you back posting on the boards and why I appreciate a few others her as well.  It is not just the content and quality of the posts.  It's not the quanity or the vast knowledge coveyed.  It really comes down to the Open-Mindedness that comes from you and a few others like Lucky and Padraig.  Expressing your thoughts in a manner that doesn't seek to close mines... but open them to new insights.

I said it before.... and I will say it again..... Damn it's great to have you back posting!  Thank you



Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
6.298828E-02