LadyHugs
Posts: 2299
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline
|
Dear Rover, Ladies and Gentlemen;
1. Not "all" groups were 'brothels.' Houses of Tolerances, Houses of Debauchery have also been described by Parisians as "erotic entertainment for high society" to watch. That is voyeurism and not engaged in sex, in my mind's eye. In addition, the writing of flagellation clubs and spanking clubs made no mention of sexual intercourse. In my mind's eye, it as a 'club' a 'group' of individuals either flogging or spanking. I would think, in the 1700's if sex was included in the behavior, debauchery would have been included somewhere or referenced vaguely. Of course, with any history of the past, a lot of assumptions can be made. Yet, writing freely about debauchery, using leather straps, dildoes, electric shock machines in their 'scenes of;' the absence of it does cause my mind's eye to assume the reporting writer and witness, saw no such sexual intercourse and or sensual seduction.
Historical descriptions and illustrations of behaviors of the past, indeed describe non-consensual elements of what we know in general, as BDSM. But, the point is, that tools and equipment and their uses, techniques were documented and in a 'torture'/'punishment'/death penalty context existed long before Old Guard of Gay Leathermen. The line though, is that in taking what worked well in the past history, such as the racks, the spreader bar, wrists and ankle restraints, the flail, the rod/cane and such are still used in BDSM. The only difference in these modern times, is that the modern M/s, D/s, S&M and BDSM community does demand of itself, in practice--consent, risk awareness, responsibility, applications of all things from A-Z, as it applies to flogging, whipping, bondage, sex and entering into a D/s, M/s exchange and to stop at the pre agreed boundaries of what will and what will not be tolerated.
It is also unfair, to place todays standards to historical standards of the decades and or centuries past. Nor is it fair, to chop to pieces individual relationships, practices that was done in private or within a small group. Of course, in the 1970's the 'sexual revolution' the "Peace" and "Flower power" generation, make love not war mentality. It is not fair, to hold others to historical documents and anything else is false.
Indeed there was a straddle between swingers groups and S&M groups.
A lot of people just did their thing privately, only to discover 15-20 years later there is a name to what is done. It doesn't make them any less truthful to what 'is' and or what 'was.'
There also needs to be a distinction made, that not all modern BDSM, M/s, D/s and or S&M was boarderline consensual there was an assumption, that this what they did was natural. But, what makes it criminal is the spirit of intent is the unnatural between two individuals, the force without the willingness to participate and the fight against the criminal force and or intent upon them. So, of course those in this modern M/s, D/s, S&M, BDSM community, there are many times where consent is assumed, especially when both willingly participated in a joined activity in a scene sense. Indeed, there are those who prey under the guise of modern BDSM. Unfortunately, nobody is ammuned from predators. But, for the majority of modern M/s, D/s, S&M and BDSM participants, we are always on the best sides of our nature.
2. Not all heterosexuals seeking through ads, were seeking S&M. They were seeking other elements, such as just bondage or selected elements of M/s or what is known as D/s and or Top/bottom. Just like ticking off a box its just a label but, doesn't always envelope the entire unique individual seeking.
3. Not everybody in M/s served in the military. Some had physical issues that prevented military service. In addition, a good many women never had military exposure at all but, started on the bottom and worked their way up in M/s like structures. I started at the bottom. A good many have served on the bottom. But, past military wasn't always an absolute.
4. Some heterosexuals did not borrow from World War II, Korea and Viet Nam military structures and protocols. Some went further back, using other periods, such as the Civil War. A lot of the Gay Leathermen did use their personal period in the military as a guide, a foundation and or point of reference.
5. At times swingers and BDSM was thrown together at some meetings and or parties. At times swingers and BDSM went on their seperate ways. As needs presented themselves to stick to BDSM, as we know it as today, the distance was made and more focused on 'just' BDSM, as we know it today. The opportunity to expose to the service side of BDSM and other interests took on. Only when it became a bigger need to get out of living rooms that held meetings, parties and or play as well as improved networking, did groups form, like PEP.
Bondage, is very general. Tying up one another from playground days playing Cowboy and Indians; playing "Fort" or "War" in the yards in the neighborhood, capturing and tying up or caging somebody in a room, a closet or a dirt pile or stick wooden fort. Collars are bondage, ankle and wrist restraints are bondage. The reference to Madori and her research on bondage is all well and good yet, the passages of history from Bible to historical accounts of maintaining control of prisoners by the military of many wars through the civilization. The control of any prisoner, be it military or civilian, e.g. judicial system, law enforcement; all have elements of 'bondage.' The military and law enforcement practice non-consensual bondage, every time they use handcuffs, cells or containment. Though their authority comes from the government; their dominance is from their legal authority. Respecting that authority, is submission and working within boundries of law, rules and regulations. A lot of artwork contains 'bondage.' Mostly in romantic presentation or telling story through art.
The picture, "Flaggellation of Jesus," shows his hands bound to a pole being struck with a Roman flail. Indeed an executioner flogged Jesus, to the point of blood and indeed Jesus was bound, in rope, to a pole. Done by the authority of Rome, the domination of Rome and it's military. The artwork was prior to World War I. So, in my mind's eye history has shown bondage in the true sense of the word 'bondage.'
The museums I mentioned before, my favorite being the Restraints Museum, documents bondage. Cuffs, chains and locks--and more.
Some in the community strictly practice bondage without S&M. I've seen individuals go into subspace just wearing a hood and straight jacket.
In summary, I hope to express that so many people practice their individual lives, undocumented, in private, who really don't need the past to enjoy it. It is interesting to some. To some it is not. Each region, each country, county, town or crossroads find what works for them and some have earned their way up from the bottom, starting as slave and progress into their Mastery. I never entered this lifestyle with a thought I would have to document every moment, every morsel of experiences remembered as if on 'trial.' Nobody would 'live for the sake of living.' I don't expect others to be put on trial either.
History, as we all know--is subjected to personal experiences through their mind's eye. It is often twisted to suit readers in the present. In my mind's eye; history is not to bound people into it but, to learn from it and learn to live from lessons learned. I didn't enter this lifestyle to 'make' history, just to understand it from my mind's eye in my time frame of 'today.' I didn't enter this lifestyle to be helpful to others, as to become famous, write books or go into the limelight.
I just want to be a good member of the community, like the majority of those who find a 'home' within the community.
Respectfully submitted for consideration,
Lady Hugs
|
RE: Master/Dom difference - 
Profile
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