"Real" BDSM (Full Version)

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



Message

Copper29 -> "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 8:23:16 AM)

In exploring the kink community at large and this forum specifically, I've run across many people who state that they are only interested in "real" bdsm experience, or that they are frustrated with the lack of a "real" experience. However, it seems to me that there is no real consensus on what exactly that experience is, much like eating "real" food or having "real" hobbies. Every person has a different and specific idea about what that means, and has different ideas about what does not qualify as as true bdsm.

This seems counteractive to me-- as if we were policing other's interests and kinks, as if one experience somehow invalidates another. What are we to gain from criticizing another's desire? Is it not "real" bdsm if they're new, or unsure about what they're doing? If they pay for it? If their hard limits are what someone else would consider vanilla?

What for you, counts as "real" bdsm? What quantifies it? Why do you feel that your brand is the true version, while others are not?

Discuss.



ChatteParfaitt -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 8:44:36 AM)

Real BDSM to me is real time, as in not on cam and not virtual in any way.




Copper29 -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 8:51:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt

Real BDSM to me is real time, as in not on cam and not virtual in any way.




Okay. Why do you feel that way? Are we not having a real conversation, despite it being online?



ChatteParfaitt -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 8:59:19 AM)

I don't need to validate my opinion to you. If you're looking for a pissing contest, stick around, I'm sure you'll find one.

Though I'd think you were busy enough on another thread.




thishereboi -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 9:06:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Copper29


quote:

ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt

Real BDSM to me is real time, as in not on cam and not virtual in any way.




Okay. Why do you feel that way? Are we not having a real conversation, despite it being online?


Having a conversation is not practicing bdsm. To me that is like saying driving a car on the street is the same as playing in a simulator or playing a first shooter video game is the same as actually pointing a gun at someone and killing them. Now that is not saying that playing online isn't fun, I do it all the time. It just isn't the same as actually doing it in the real world. I don't care how sexy you look online when you tell me you're bending me over your knee to spank me. If I can't feel the paddle, it's not real.



RedMagic1 -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 9:12:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Copper29
What for you, counts as "real" bdsm? What quantifies it? Why do you feel that your brand is the true version, while others are not?

The kink world is full of people who compensate for some deficiency by being sexually active in a nonstandard way. Men who have a hard time getting it up use a paddle or whip to compensate, or ask to be placed in chastity by a hotwife who gets her pleasure elsewhere. Bigger women go to fet clubs because they can be naked in public without being ashamed of their bodies, and they can be the center of attention in a way that's impossible in the vanilla world. I'm not talking about everybody, and I'm not saying it's a bad thing either. Why shouldn't men with ED know that they are still able to please a woman? And why shouldn't big women feel sexually important?

But, similarly, people whose kink focus is solely online tend to be finding a way to have sexual interactions despite being socially incompetent or socially anxious. The incompetence is more common in men -- they are terrible at asking women out -- and the anxiety is more common in women -- paralyzing fear of being around other people or the (same or) opposite sex. And so online communities, not just kink communities, tend to contain a lot of forever aloners, who have online relationships with others in order to have some human connection, and to feel feelings. And, again, why shouldn't they?

The problem arises when people claim that online relationships are just as important as real-life relationships. This is a defensive reaction, maybe, because in the kink world and elsewhere, there are definitely people who say that online relationships aren't real, or are just fake. That isn't true, but they aren't as valuable as real-life relationships either, for the following reason.

In real-life relationships, there is a lot more annoying bullshit. Little details that you can't possibly predict ahead of time. I hate how my partner smells first thing in the morning. Why the fuck do I have to be the one who peels your hair off the wall of the shower? This intensifies when there is more at stake, for example when kids are involved and the parents don't have the same parenting style. And you have to figure out how to live with some of the things, how to put your foot down about other things, and you're forced to grow into a more mature version of yourself. Online relationships are more sanitized, and don't allow for the same amount of personal growth. People's perceptions of themselves and the world are less likely to be challenged, so they're likely to think that they understand more about kink and relationships than they really do.



DesFIP -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 9:14:13 AM)

It means real life, not online.
I don't know why you are insisting on arguing about the definition. You asked what it meant when people say this. You were told the answer, and you think we ought to change everyone's mind about the answer. Sorry, not happening.

This is what people mean when they say real. They want physicality, touch, not just conversation.



ChatteParfaitt -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 9:21:43 AM)

Nice posting, RedMagic, I agree.



Copper29 -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 9:35:39 AM)

Not pissing anywhere, just trying to get dialogue started~ No need to get so defensive.

It's not only what you feel is real but why you feel it is real that's interesting to me. The consensus thusfar in this particular forum seems to be that it isn't "real" bdsm unless it's in person. Fine, lovely, all well and good. Let's try another point-- say a relationship begins in person, then has to go long distance, but then begins again in person. Are the things not done in person real? Does it cease to be a meaningful relationship, and then begin anew when they meet again in person?

RedMagic, you bring up some very interesting points. Online and physical relationships are completely difficult, and by no means should be used as a substitute for one another-- they are their own separate experiences with different boundaries and very different sets of interaction. A person who I might get along with fabulously in person could annoy me to no end in person, and a person that I love very well in person could send me up the wall were we interacting online. But seeing these experiences as separate and not replacements-- does that mean that the online is somehow lesser, or less meaningful, because it is not a substitute and is a different sort of experience?



DesFIP -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 9:40:07 AM)

You don't understand.
We're not defensive.
You asking why this is the definition is like asking why chocolate is an ingredient in chocolate milk. It's the definition of the word as commonly used.
So why keep badgering people about why this is the definition?



RedMagic1 -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 9:45:17 AM)

You might want to proofread your post. I had to change some words to read what I think you intended to type. About this:
quote:

ORIGINAL: Copper29
But seeing these experiences as separate and not replacements-- does that mean that the online is somehow lesser, or less meaningful, because it is not a substitute and is a different sort of experience?

If you believe, as I do, that no human being is finished, and we can all use more personal growth, then, yes, online is a lesser experience. That said, a good online relationship might be better than a terrible real-life relationship, in the same way as great porn masturbation might be better than lousy sex. But when people say that online leaves them feeling empty, or unfulfilled, I don't think they are kidding. There's a big difference between living while using all five senses, and living while using only two.



BitaTruble -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 9:48:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Copper29



What for you, counts as "real" bdsm?


Activities which involves bondage, discipline or sadomasochism.

quote:

What quantifies it?


I don't understand this question.
quote:



Why do you feel that your brand is the true version, while others are not?



I don't feel that way.



Copper29 -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 9:53:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RedMagic1

You might want to proofread your post. I had to change some words to read what I think you intended to type. About this:
quote:

ORIGINAL: Copper29
But seeing these experiences as separate and not replacements-- does that mean that the online is somehow lesser, or less meaningful, because it is not a substitute and is a different sort of experience?

If you believe, as I do, that no human being is finished, and we can all use more personal growth, then, yes, online is a lesser experience. That said, a good online relationship might be better than a terrible real-life relationship, in the same way as great porn masturbation might be better than lousy sex. But when people say that online leaves them feeling empty, or unfulfilled, I don't think they are kidding. There's a big difference between living while using all five senses, and living while using only two.



Okay, sure, I think I get where you're coming from. To use your analogy, though, I masturbate when I want to masturbate-- and I have sex with another person when I want to have sex. Yes, many people use masturbation as a replacement for sex, and that leaves them feeling empty and hollow because it was not what they were seeking out. But some people (me, even!) masturbate just because they wanted to masturbate and feel perfectly content. I don't feel that one is less or more meaningful in relation to the other-- they are just different.



ChatteParfaitt -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 9:54:14 AM)

It's posters like you, who think their world view is the only correct one, that make this place a less than happy experience. B/c too many will try to argue their own view, and that's what you want.

It's all just a smokescreen for posting in the forums to drive traffic to your online fem dom business.

You want to convince your clients what you do is real...be my guest. Convince away.

But thinking you can convince people who do this real time is not going to happen.

Now, you could say a conversation here, or a conversation on the phone, or one in real time is the same. And I'll say no it's not. In real time you get the benefit of body language, which comprises 90% or more of how humans communicate. The phone allows for the changes in tone and timber in a voice, more communication cues which are totally lost in online communication.

You see, if I was standing in front of you right now, you'd see my left eyebrow cocked up in amusement, and the wicked smile on my face, and the frown line between my brows b/c as much as I love debate, I'm not going to waste much time on you.

But you go on arguing with your bad self. LOL



RedMagic1 -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 10:02:59 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Copper29
Okay, sure, I think I get where you're coming from. To use your analogy, though, I masturbate when I want to masturbate-- and I have sex with another person when I want to have sex. Yes, many people use masturbation as a replacement for sex, and that leaves them feeling empty and hollow because it was not what they were seeking out. But some people (me, even!) masturbate just because they wanted to masturbate and feel perfectly content. I don't feel that one is less or more meaningful in relation to the other-- they are just different.

If you aren't able to attend the person's funeral because you can't even be sure that they died, then you don't care about that person very much.



Copper29 -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 10:07:30 AM)

@ChatteParfaitt-- Thanks for the personal remarks, they really contribute to the conversation. [;)] Loved the description of yourself. I'm not here to tear down everyone else's ideas-- I want to hear the supporting arguments FOR their ideas. That's all. There doesn't have to be a "winner."

You're right-- body language does play quite a bit into it. You seem to be coming from the point of view that I am trying to make all experiences one and the same. I am not. I am saying they are all different and all valid. That is the core of my argument. Yet others feel very passionately that certain kinds of experience are not valid, do not qualify. I want to know why. Your reasoning is that in order for it to feel like a real experience, you must be physically there, because of the sensation of touch and the ability to communicate via body language. But just because you would not be happy with a different kind of experience, does that make it not "real"?



DesFIP -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 10:12:53 AM)

We weren't saying that. If online only is your thing, go for it. It's real to you.

But that isn't what you asked. We answered what you asked, not what you meant to say. Sorry, I can barely mind read The Man and my kids, I sure as hell can't do it for anyone online.

As to why online only isn't enough for lots of us? Because it isn't. It's like reading a recipe and seeing a picture of the finished meal. Great for as far as it goes but I'm still hungry when I get up from the computer.

Now you may be well fed from looking at pictures of food and if so, that's great.



ChatteParfaitt -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 10:14:59 AM)

Nice analogy Des.

Glad you enjoyed my post. I know it's close to Christmas and baby needs a new pair of shoes, but I for one have driven enough traffic to your site.




Copper29 -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 10:17:37 AM)

@DesFIP But that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying "Lots of different people have different ideas about their interest in food! You're hungry and you want to eat a meal, and that's great, but I'm full and I just wanted to look at pictures of food online-- they're pretty and it makes me happy." What you seem to think I'm saying is "Everyone has to look at pictures of food! Looking at pictures of food is just the same as eating! Everyone has to do it my way!"



AthenaSurrenders -> RE: "Real" BDSM (12/18/2013 10:19:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Copper29
Let's try another point-- say a relationship begins in person, then has to go long distance, but then begins again in person. Are the things not done in person real? Does it cease to be a meaningful relationship, and then begin anew when they meet again in person?



Alright, I've been in a similar situation. Rather, we met online, met a couple of times in person, then moved in together. We were extremely long distance.

What happened when we were apart had meaning for me only in the context of our wider, in-the-flesh relationship. There was continuing D/s (once we had met and decided we wanted that) and it served as a stop-gap measure, but it was less meaningful. Online, especially through a text medium, you have that moment to think about what you are going to say and how to present yourself. Even via skype you are presenting a particular part of your life. Generally it's some time set aside with no distractions and outside influences, where the two of you can focus entirely on each other.
Real life has interruptions. It has bad habits, and sick days, and grumpy moments. It also has hugs and sex and just being in each others presence. Those things are very important to me.

When it comes to BDSM, there are a great many things you can't replicate online. I can't spank myself - even if I were to try, it wouldn't have the same force because we instinctively protect ourselves. It wouldn't have the same energy of us reacting to each other. It wouldn't have the element of surprise from not knowing what he would do next. And you can't really imagine how these things will feel. I imagined myself to me quite a masochist, because I surely was turned on by some extreme stories. BUT actually feeling a cane on your backside puts things into perspective.

So while I wouldn't say online BDSM isn't 'real', I would certainly say it is one very limited aspect of it, much like watching nature documentaries gives you a very limited taste of the experience of a safari. And yes, people are going to bristle if someone with online-only experience starts dictating to those who have experience in person how BDSM works.

When it comes up that people are told they need to experience the 'real' thing, it tends to be because they've posted something wholly unrealistic that reads like a porn script. When someone comes here claiming they want to be bound, gagged and shagged 24/7 it's pretty obvious they haven't experienced the real thing, and best they know that before they sign up for something they aren't prepared for.

For the record, I don't think my preferences or kinks are the 'real' BDSM any more than yours are.

Now I wouldn't say that online isn't real per se, but I would roll my eyes somewhat if someone claimed extensive experience but turned out to only have experienced online.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875