|
orgasmdenial12 -> RE: The Vanillarisation of Kink? (1/21/2015 1:31:16 PM)
|
It's interesting what everyone is saying about one twoo wayism. Actually, I guess I'm at the other end of the argument.
I recently had a protracted discussion (argument) with someone who said that anything more than 'roleplay' was dysfunctional, abusive, oppressive and non-consensual. They stated that any relationship without a safeword was abusive. They believed that all BDSM relationships should be 'healthy' and 'empowering', in a 'loving', 'respectful' and 'supportive' relationship where the submissive should be free to negotiate and even insist on the dynamic and rules that they most liked, to the extent that if a Dom initiated a situation that the submissive found difficult or frustrating, the submissive should decline to obey and renegotiate the dynamic to their own liking.
Now, obviously, everything we do is consensual and to that extent we are free to choose, negotiate and define our own relationships. But the comments of this person suggested that actively wanting things such as suffering, humiliation, degradation, objectification, cuckolding, punishment, pain, TPE, CNC were, de facto, abuse and thus not real BDSM. I maintain that there is nothing wrong with a desire to suffer, that such a desire is commonly known as masochism and that masochism is acceptable within the BDSM community. I also maintain that dynamics such as TPE, M/s and CNC which may or may not utilise safewords are a common and accepted part of BDSM. I also think it is inappropriate to insist that everyone should prefer traditional relationship structures, at risk of being labelled 'abusive' if, for example, one prefers a relationship in which love is not the main motivating factor and which may even be termed 'disrespectful' in terms of humiliation play or knowingly including other partners, either to cuckold one partner or loan one's partner to another dominant (if consensual, of course).
It seems to me that, in some ways, BDSM is being redefined as, almost, a vanilla-style relationship with a roleplay of power or mild s&m that never goes beyond certain boundaries. Now of course I have no issue at all with love, support, empowerment, respect, safewords or anything else that people in BDSM relationships enjoy. But to insist that these things *must* be a part of BDSM relationships and that any relationship that did not meet these criteria was abusive seems to me judgemental and misguided.
I feel like we're back at a question that's been going for over 100 years. Is the desire to suffer and be dominated simply a different kind of sexuality, or is it a sign of deeper mental health issues that cannot be accepted even by the BDSM community?
Must all BDSM relationships, at heart, be based on traditionally 'healthy' activities or do we in the scene accept the darker side of some sexualities, within the boundaries of consent and a basic avoidance of serious harm?
Are the edgier aspects of BDSM being chiselled away by those who would make the scene more palatable to vanilla adventurers? And, ultimately, will this result in the reinvention of a niche separate from the mainstream BDSM, remaining controversial, such as those who engage in breath play, or play without safewords, etc?
Hope this clarifies my question somewhat.
|
|
|
|
