|
kittensmailbox -> RE: Real BDSM (6/29/2006 8:45:48 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: zenofeller
As you'd expect, I give you the latest in controversial topics. What you find below is theory, nothing more. Bear that in mind. If you post something, would you kindly make it NOT an anecdotal event ? With all respect due to your personal experience, there's five million threads asking for it. This one would appreciate your abstract thinking instead.
There's two ways to play poker. The way everyone does it, you put the money in the middle, fiddle with the cards, split the money accordingly and when you've had enough, walk out. The way some might be doing it, not that I would ever play with them, would be as above except at the end the money is re-split so everyone leaves with what they came. All the fun, none of the downside.
Now let's take an example. If someone enjoys being tied up and left alone, the word of advice is "you must always have a way to untie yourself". Why ? Well, because you might need to. Certainly. But maybe the entire point of the exercise is to not be able to untie yourself ?
We distinguish between sex and masturbation roughly on the lines that while sex is interaction with another, masturbation is the pretense of interaction with another, using some sort of imagery. But, importantly, that imagery holds no sway over the masturbator other than what he conceedes at every moment. Jena Jamesson will never fart loudly when you're half way through. A real woman might. A .JPG never will.
Consequently, I choose to distinguish between real BDSM and pseudo BDSM.
Now, there's nothing wrong with masturbation, the same way there's nothing wrong with sex, as a choice of personal expression. What may be dangerous to a person, maybe, is if they fail to make the difference between the two.
However, in the case of BDSM, there exists a historical catch. Power comes with numbers, and in a repressive society like the united states enjoy, where a majority is at liberty to impose behaviours on any minority, the choice is simple. Power or extinction.
It was then observed that by including the pseudo-BDSM, numbers would swell and social acceptance might be easier attained, since in general the debate is not decided at the social level by whether people have a right to do something, but whether does anyone know someone doing it, and do they like that someone.
This is fine, and perfectly logical as a political choice, but then there's a problem. Wearing a choker does not BDSM make. Being tied up and left in the woods with an easy way to get out of it is not being tied up and left in the woods. Scripting a session is different from living a session.
Yet, the tempting political stand is to say, everything is equally BDSM, as everyone choses to practice it. This is correct from an ethical stand, no one practice is wrong and no one practice is correct. But it is false from a logical stand. Drawing ropes on your body does not constitute bondage.
The inability to clearly see this difference, often enough voluntary, due to the catfighting reflexively prompted by any suggestion that this or that is or is not "real BDSM", where "real" is of course seen as an ethical distinction, put the community in a very strange position, and in my oppinion generate most of the drama.
And since you are restricted from posting your own anecdotes, i'll share my own, to tantalize. Talking to a longtime friend, she said she could never be interested in "the scene" because every single move seems fake and scripted, and she'd much rather have the genuine article.
I do not mean any disrespect toward You Sir, however, why must You be so long~winded... i have to be honest, i lost interest in the begining...
|
|
|
|
