quote:

ORIGINAL: ScooterTrash

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.

quote:

ORIGINAL: KnightofMists

.....


I agree that SM is can be physical (meaning touch).  It does not mean that SM must be physical.  SM however, is Sensory.  Meaning that it will have all or any grouping of the follow (touch, sound, smell, sight, taste).   The question in any play is what sensory preception is being perceived by one of the other.  In the complete online context (meaning only chat/email)  There is no sensory preceptions occuring between the indiviudauls.  It really is soley a Mental exercise between two individuals.  With the addition of phone and webcam, we have the ability to communicate at a sensory level and not just a mental level.  You may have only experienced SM through physical (touch) demonstrations.  However, there is more than a few that have performed SM without making physical contact.

...

I would say that SM is Sensory and that the mental doesn't follow suit but co-exists

quote:

ORIGINAL: Noah




But each of us should have something better to do today than launch an unsolicited diatribe about how much "realer" they are than a vast group of people, almost all of whom they've never even met.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Noah

Another thought I had on the matter was that online interaction could reasonably viewed as a kink in itself, one of the zillion overlapping circles in the Venn diagram of BDSM interactions. Call it a distant bastard cousin of sensory deprivation if you like, since it inherently restricts the range of sensory inputs--to employ your insight.

quote:


I wonder if the detractors of online relationships would consider viewing online BDSM as just--from their point of view--a really lame-ass kink. It does nothing for them. And then let it go. This instead of taking the time and trouble to attack it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

Because some people attack the person instead of the behavior... plain and simple. They make blanket statements about the orientation of those involved with things such as online romances as being fakers, wannabes. blah blah blah. They ARE entitled to their opinions, but when you say "You are a faker and your feelings are not real" is a different statement then "Online is fake bullshit". One is about an action, the other is a personal attack.

There was another thread I was posting on where people were ridiculed for a behavior.They were labelled as "weak", "immature", "liars" because people do not like what they do which is in no way insane, unsafe, or nonconsensual. Now it is one thing to ridicule an activity you do not like, it is another to ridicule the person doing the activity. That happens here, and because it happens then there are flames back and forth. When you make statements about someone's orientation such as "A REAL submissive wouldnt do XY or Z" and then someone reads that post and they think... "Well I do that! I 'thought' I was real!" well it can rub people the wrong way.

If you say "this is my opinion" it does take the sting out of the barb. People are not perfect, I have been insensitive to others, they are to me at times... such is life...some subjects just aren't worth posting a reply to

quote:

ORIGINAL: NINASHARP

In the past, I met someone on line, and found a good chemistry between us, this person wasn't far away from me, so after IMing each other and talking on the phone, we met in person.  A few public meetings and after getting to know one another better, we took it a step further to play. Every time in parting, I was asked, would I be online later? I said I'd call and then I would call but each and every time before hanging up I was again asked, "Would I be online later?"

Each time I signed on to the internet just to check mail, this person was there and would IM within 30 seconds after my signing on.  Even after spending days and nights together, it was always somehow asked if I was going to be online later?  It was like an addiction  to this person to be online even after the relationship evolved off line. Under normal circumstances, the online thing was a starting point to meeting, at least for me. Yet this person was always wanting to take it back to online. I could never figure out why it had to always be back online. 

Nina

quote:

ORIGINAL: agirl


 Hello Nina,

My daughter's partner always seems to text his thoughts and feelings to her, the moment he gets on his train home each week....He seems to find it easier to text these things than to say them *face to face* sometimes.

I am similar, in that there are certain things that I find easier to speak about in IM than face to face, initially...... and have asked to speak via IM at times. Also, I can often express myself better using type. It can be a very useful, helpful way of interacting in a r/l relationship though I also find it curious that your chap behaved that way and would probably be wondering, just as you are......lol

Regards, agirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: slavejali

quote:

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.

I think that's a fairly accurate statement based on some simple truths:

1. I've heard so tragic stories about people meeting up from online and it just wasnt what they thought it was going to be or it didnt turn out how they thought it would.

2. Online is very much like reading a book, or watching a movie, it can engage our feelings and thoughts, even make us feel we are part of the movie or story in the book but it could have no reflection on our abilities to live the story we have become so involved in.

3. Just in general life, people can talk about their desires and their wants and needs but to actually put them into action can be a difficult thing. Example: I could fantacise about lotsa thing, if I will ever do everything, is another matter.

4. Its easy to philosophise over issues, putting our philosophies into action is an entirely different thing.

5. Taking on the role of dominant or submissive in a relationship brings with it some challenges. You really have to get to know and be comfortable with yourself for it to really play out harmoniously within relationship. How many people really know themselves or are really comfortable with themselves? When the shit hits the fan, or there is a bump in the relationship or a challenge to face, or an obstacle to surmount, what personality is your default? This can only be fully tested in RT situations.

6. Just looking at the problems faced by online only people and RT people even on this forum, there is an obvious difference between the issues that come up. Example: When we were chatting, if Master had to go work on his car, I would feel a bit frantic, now when he is working on his car, he is just out in the garage, I can even take him a pop, its a non issue.

7. Nothing can replace touch and being in the same room with someone.

8. People can spend more time talking about their wants and needs online within 3 months than they would in the entirety of a 50 year RT relationship. Might find this interesting..but since Master and I have been together, we hardly ever *talk* about our wants and needs, we just live life and deal with things as they come up. However in our 11 months of chatting, we expressed more to each other than most people would when forumalating a new relationship in RT. I think thats a real positive to online meetings initially. However, it has to be said that its the dealing with outside issues together, with the same influences effecting us together that make a relationship concrete. Example: If the car breaks down, we are both in the car and have to deal with the issue, together.

9. There is a big difference to sticking needles in myself on webcam and Master actually doing it. S/m play can really hurt and a real cock with a human attached to it, is much much better than a dildo.

10. Its the little things that concrete a relationship, things like, making coffee in the morning, doing his washing, arranging the house the way he likes it, making the food he likes and actually being able to serve it to him.

I think most people would agree with those points. There is a significant difference to online and RT. I find it bemusing kinda when I see arguements to the contrary. Each,  is just what they are, no more, no less. And the differences and the way we choose to live our lives, makes no difference to anyone else but our own experiences.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Noah

As for the need for physical proximity for sadism, a couple of things need to be said.

Has one of your "real life" lovers never told you from across the room to do something for yourself? To undress, say, or to touch yourself in a certain pleasurable or painful way? If he says it through the door before entering from the shower does it not thrill you just as much or little? If he says it over the phone when he calls to say he's on his way from work does it mean nothing? Even if online interaction has never done anything for you personally, can you not see how this is all just a matter of degree?

What you are describing is submission, not sadism.  Sadism does, at least for me, require touching; the physical infliction of pain.  I want to be the instrument of her pain, I want to watch, feel, smell and hear her reactions.  Watching it on a computer screen is qualitatively different and, frankly, I'm just not interested. 

I don't have any interest in mere physical "play". Online porn wanking seems no more masturbatory to me than casually hooking up with someone where the physical connection is present, period. Let me put it this way: People can masturbate one another up close; coitus can mean less than a kiss blown from a train window, or a chat window; people can love one another and exchange power at a distance.

It baffles me that these observations are difficult for anyone to appreciate.

It baffles me that you can equate masturbating in front of a computer screen, with actually fucking someone.  A bad fuck is 100 times better than the best masturbatory experience alone, in front of a computer. 
 
Just my opinion, of course I could be wrong.  *grin*
 
Dan

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? 

Now, I am the first to recommend that people new to S&M read books, but at least those books were written by people who had actually done the things they write about.  Would you choose the doctor fresh out of med school or would you prefer the one who has cut open a few hundred people and gained real world experience to do your brain surgery?

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.