Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Masochism??


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Masochism?? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Masochism?? - 11/28/2004 8:16:16 PM   
ShadeDiva


Posts: 1005
Joined: 3/31/2004
From: Sacramento, California
Status: offline 		Yeah most people do see a difference, thus why I said I differ from how the mass majority sees it. I just don't. It's all just levels of the same thing to me, and I personally think that people feel a need for their own comfort to make differences between their labels.

The problem is that you assume what BDSM means to me, and assume I am going by the same distinctions that you make in those initials.

BDSM does not mean the same thing to everyone, just as s/m and d/s doesnt mean the same thing to everyone. he majority would prefer that we folks that see it differently would convert or change so we fit their criteria, but the reality is, we aren't going to, becuase we don't agree.

I see things as being able to mean all sorts of things to other people without it reflecting on how I mean it and still being able to communicate effectively. Many that tend to disagree with me seem to have a narrow view about what communication can be used for, how it can be used, and what for, and as thus, tend to prefer to feel that words should mean the same things to everyone and that language should be a static unchanging, unmutable thing.

I have no trouble realizing that for the majority,,, for them and in their minds, that s/m HAS to mean and ONLY mean sadism and masochisn and there is no room at all for the concept that for others it doesn't mean that at all, and to adjust my communication accordingly unless I ascertain they are of the minority that realizes, hey some folks mean completely different words altogether.

So yes, the one way fits all I don't apply to and it doesn't suit me much. BDSM and d/s and s/m is all the same thing to me, just different aspects, and I realize that folks make their own calls as to what that means ... to them. Amazingly enough, not everyone thinks BDSM only stands for "bondage discipline sado masochism" any more that they all believe d/s and s/m are universally the same thing for everyone.

I also think obeying someone when you really dont want to can be a pain in the ass and thus classify itself in a sense as being a form of pain. *smile* So in that sense, would not submitting to something you find to be a pain in the ass be a form of masochism if you wound up enjoying it? *chuckle* I think it's all in ones perspective and how tied up you get with particulars.

Again, I'm used to being the odd duck, and I don't doubt that this instance will be any different - I'll prolly wind up being the weirdo oddball in this yet again lol.

~ShadeDiva

_____________________________

~ShadeDiva
My projects of love:
theFetishForums
HumanFauna
Kinked
DommeWorld

(in reply to MemphisDsCouple)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Masochism?? - 11/28/2004 8:26:28 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline 		The problem is that I don't believe dictionary definitions, whether from alleydog.com or Webster's, are of much use when the subject is masochism. All dictionaries can do is suggest meanings that the compilers have observed (and which they approve). They have no inherent authority--especially not in the case of technical terms. If you want to know what "retrovirus" means, what would do: ask a biologist or look it up in Webster's?

If you'd like to allow the word "masochism" to refer to non-sexualized pain, you're free to do so, because fortunately no one is empowered to dictate how people use language. But, as I said, I believe usage like that obscures more than it explains. In other words, what's the point of calling it "masochism"? How is that better than just saying "enjoying pain"? My rule of thumb with terminology is that once people start arguing about the terminology, and not the reality the terminology is supposed to describe, it's time to find a new terminology.

Lam

quote:

ORIGINAL: MemphisDsCouple

As I wrote originally, I took the trouble to look up "masochist" in Webster's Online just to make sure the definition of the word(s) have formally evolved to match their usage. "2 : pleasure in being abused or dominated : a taste for suffering".

I refer you here:

http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=masochist

The first definition of masochist does, in fact and as you point out, refer specifically to sexual pain.

Also, from: http://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.cfm?term=Masochism

"Masochism: Masochism is gaining pleasure from physical or psychological. The pain can be self inflicted or inflicted by someone else. When the pain inflicted produces sexual pleasure, the infliction of the pain is called sexual masochism or paraphilia."


(in reply to MemphisDsCouple)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Masochism?? - 11/28/2004 8:32:05 PM   
ShadeDiva


Posts: 1005
Joined: 3/31/2004
From: Sacramento, California
Status: offline 		Defining for the sake of this post: d/s equating a relationship of dominance and submission and s/m of a relationship between a sadist and a masochist.

That being said, I personally feel either the d/s or the s/m of what you make into seperate things is all separate and yet is not.

Like all food is food, and yet steak is not apples.

You can have one without the other all you want, no prob.

But all meat has traces of vegetables and all vegtables have traces of meat once you trace it all back far enough, so that in some sense they are in fact the same thing.

You might hate carrots as a toddler and then come to love them as a middle aged adult. Its still food, throughout when you applied it to your life and diet and didn't.

Thats sorta what I think of sadism and masochism and dominance and submission. There are trace elements of either in all factions, and in the end, it is inherantly at its base, it's the same thing, just has different nuances to express itself.

Some will hate pain in their infancy (infancy as in beginning their exploration of BDSM) some will come or learn to enjoy it as an adult (adult as in later years of their BDSM exploration), some will hate it always. Some will dance with it, play with it, some will embrace it and decide to give it. In the end, it's about power at the base.

D/s, S/m, it is all really at its base describing the flow of power and the tools and ways that one can make it flow or dance or sing or explode.

However, I sorta identify with a passage from sexual majik, that the variations were created to make folks comfy with dancing with such a scary beast, and through tme they gained a life unto themselves, real or imagined (its been ten years since I read that so yanno forgive the crappy recollection).

And after talking with folks that see bdsm as meaning other things than what the mjority uses, I just see it as a morass of stuff that we all pick and choose from but it's all basically the same thing that we dress up in various ways to make ourselves more comfy with the things we chose.

Again. I'm weird. What can I say. LOL.

~ShadeDiva

_____________________________

~ShadeDiva
My projects of love:
theFetishForums
HumanFauna
Kinked
DommeWorld

(in reply to ShadeDiva)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Masochism?? - 11/28/2004 8:44:07 PM   
ShadeDiva


Posts: 1005
Joined: 3/31/2004
From: Sacramento, California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster
My rule of thumb with terminology is that once people start arguing about the terminology, and not the reality the terminology is supposed to describe, it's time to find a new terminology.


The ironic thing here is that I believe you were the first person to bring up what the words were defined as and what they mean.

In other words, you were the one to broach debating what they meant rather than the reality they were being used to describe.

I dunno I dont have any issue with communication unless someone demands that language be a cold anf fast thing.

I disagree that it needs to be. <shrug> After all there is someone out there who argues that the word cold can't mean cold. lol

~ShadeDiva

_____________________________

~ShadeDiva
My projects of love:
theFetishForums
HumanFauna
Kinked
DommeWorld

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Masochism?? - 11/28/2004 8:47:54 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline 		You obviously haven't understood what I'm saying.

I'll try one last time. Why do you call it "masochism"? How is that different from just saying "enjoying pain"?

(in reply to ShadeDiva)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Masochism?? - 11/28/2004 8:51:53 PM   
ShadeDiva


Posts: 1005
Joined: 3/31/2004
From: Sacramento, California
Status: offline 		And you obviously misunderstood *my* replies to you specifically. *smile*

Let me be very clear as to your last query so it isn't lost:

It doesn't. Therefore I can use either one in place of the other.

However enjoying pain and masochism does not automatically equate sexual enjoyment.
What part of that wasn't clear prior to this post?

~ShadeDiva

_____________________________

~ShadeDiva
My projects of love:
theFetishForums
HumanFauna
Kinked
DommeWorld

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Masochism?? - 11/29/2004 2:55:49 AM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline 		Exactly--and that's confusing. THAT'S my point.

Why is it confusing? Because most other people are not likely to know that you use "masochism" to mean simply "enjoying pain"; they're likely to think you mean specifically sexualized pain. And why are they likely to misunderstand you? Because of the peculiar history of the word, which I've already outlined.

That's why I think you have to be careful about using words like "masochism." They're inherently confusing. Where does the word "masochism" come from, after all? From the writings of Sacher-Masoch. So unless you want to speak your own private language, you have to use the word "masochism" in a way that bears some relation to the work of Sacher-Masoch. And Venus in Furs is not about simply enjoying pain; it's about sexualized pain (mixed with a healthy dose of humiliation).

Anyway, as I've been saying, you're free to use words however you wish, but if you'd like to avoid confusion, it pays to know something about the origins, history, and common understanding of the words you use.

Lam

(in reply to ShadeDiva)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Masochism?? - 11/29/2004 6:10:52 AM   
MrThorns


Posts: 919
Joined: 6/4/2004
Status: offline 		I would have to ask then, Lordandmaster, what you consider to be "sexualized pain"? Is that pain inflicted upon erogenous areas? Areas known to be sexually arousing tp the particular person you're playing with? Does sexualized pain require some form of sexual stimulation besides the pain itself?

I ask, because some people find pain in certain areas to be highly erotic, even though the stimulated areas may have no sexual connection. Face slapping, asphixiation, caning the bottoms of the feet (I forget the official term), branding, needles, etc. Are you referring to the sexual energy behind the pain or the sexual response to the pain?

I believe masochism to be simple. How each individual masochist responds to the stimulus is more complex.

~Thorns

_____________________________

~"Do you know what the chain of command is? Its the chain I beat ya with when ya don't follow my command."

"My inner child is a mean little fucker"

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Masochism?? - 11/29/2004 6:54:24 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline 		It's the sexual response--and I agree with you that that can vary greatly from person to person. Some people get a sexual response from face-slapping and others don't, but people who don't get a sexual respons from face-slapping might get it from, say, whipping. That's only natural.

Anyway, you may have gathered that I'm not a big fan of the word "masochism" at all (since it was devised and employed by a pseudo-science that considered all of us diseased). Obviously, I'm not trying to say that people who enjoy non-sexualized pain are phoneys or inferior kinks; I'm saying that it's highly confusing, for many reasons, to call that "masochism." Just call it "enjoying pain."

Lam

(in reply to MrThorns)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Masochism?? - 12/3/2004 6:30:53 PM   
faithNZ


Posts: 82
Joined: 11/28/2004
From: New Zealand
Status: offline 		From my own, very limited experience, i have to say that i find particular types of pain a sexually arousing, but many others are just painful.
Does that mean i consider myself a masochist? Yes, to a certain degree in that i would not enjoy someone trying to remove my nipples with a hacksaw, but enjoy them being clamped.
i have submissive tendencies and basically a submissive personality, but do not let that show in my day to day life as it means that i would not be able to do my jobs properly.
Am i a submissive masochist? Short answer, yes, situational dependent.

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 30
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Masochism?? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




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

0.063