What place has tolerance in BDSM? (Full Version)

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



Message

Oumae -> What place has tolerance in BDSM? (3/31/2005 4:18:48 AM)

What place if any has tolerance in BDSM?

I ask as of late there has been some intolerance shown on these boards and I think we get enough of that from people outside of BDSM.

I don't think we need to all agree... a good debate/discussion can be fun and also educational nor do we all need to like each other.

I didn't answer on the threads as didn't wish to flame situations further and don't want to cite them as am hoping for a more general discussion on the idea of tolerance than on specific incidences.

Oumae



EmeraldSlave2 -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (3/31/2005 6:19:22 AM)

Tolerance should be shown the same as it is in everyday life- tolerating people living their own lives as they feel best, possibly intervening in cases of extreme immediate danger, understanding that disagreement or disgust is no reason to disrespect.

Tolerating does not mean agreeing and it doesn't mean loving- it just means respecting someone else's rights in a civilized way.



Harrison -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (3/31/2005 6:48:02 AM)

I think tolerance in BDSM is essential because there are many different reasons each of us come here. There is no one true path into the BDSM world like there is into other groups, kink or not.

The reason you see some intolerance here is partly because it's much easier to flame someone or some idea on line than in person. That is just the nature of the internet. If you face someone in person, they can "getcha back." On line, you can lob an intolerant message and then, get up and turn off your computer. The person or idea you attacked can't reach you to return the favor.

That being said, I see less intolerance here than I expected. I know other groups where you tow the official line or else. (I remember my Gor days.....) Here, there is a genuine spirit of sharing of thoughts and ideas.

Sure, there still are those who would rather flame than discuss. That's too bad. But, when they get involved in a thread, I just consider the source and ignore them.

Just my side....

Harrison



LadyShoshin -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (3/31/2005 7:03:59 AM)

There is a place for intolerance in BDSM, intolerance of bigotry, prejudice, abuse, hiding behind the cloak of the Dom/me to rationalize being out of control, hating the opposite sex, getting pay back for past hurts or being a bully.

Intolerance of others sexuality, lifestyle, BDSM choices, fetish, spirituality or opinions has no place in BDSM. Tolerance does not mean we would choose that person as a partner, but that while not agreeing with their choices for themselves, we respect those choices.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oumae

What place if any has tolerance in BDSM?

I ask as of late there has been some intolerance shown on these boards and I think we get enough of that from people outside of BDSM.

I don't think we need to all agree... a good debate/discussion can be fun and also educational nor do we all need to like each other.

I didn't answer on the threads as didn't wish to flame situations further and don't want to cite them as am hoping for a more general discussion on the idea of tolerance than on specific incidences.

Oumae




ShiftedJewel -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (3/31/2005 7:48:49 AM)

quote:

That being said, I see less intolerance here than I expected. I know other groups where you tow the official line or else. (I remember my Gor days.....) Here, there is a genuine spirit of sharing of thoughts and ideas.


That's one of the reasons I love reading and posting here. The mods have their hands full at times, but for the most part people just speak their mind and agree to disagree. I may not always be able to contain my opinion, but like you, I do try to avoid threads that have turned into flaming wars and I have to believe that if everyone did they would go away. I learned long ago to chose my battles carefully.

Jewel



onceburned -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (3/31/2005 8:15:46 AM)

quote:

I ask as of late there has been some intolerance shown on these boards


Yes, I have found this to be distressing as well. It would be good if we could discuss our disagreements in a civil manner. But I suppose it is in human nature to be self-righteous fools on occasion and limited communication of an online forum makes us even more defensive than we might be in "real life".

The quality of forums, in my limited experience, is related to the quality of the members who post and the quality of the moderation. This is actually a rather good place in terms of flaming/drama versus the quality of the messages... it could be a lot worse.

As someone mentioned, when a thread's signal to noise ratio gets too small, I just stop reading that thread. There is good stuff in these forums and I would rather spend my time on that.



ruffnecksbabygir -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (3/31/2005 9:01:34 AM)

Can't we be tolerant of intolerance? [:)]



Oumae -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (3/31/2005 9:03:16 AM)

I by no means want to be seen as having a go ..... I, in the short time I've been here have enjoyed the boards and found much of interest on them.

Just thought maybe if we discussed it it might have some result.

Thanks for your input.

Oumae



domtimothy46176 -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (3/31/2005 9:49:36 AM)

As one who will at times indulge myself and play the part of a self-righteous fool, I think I can speak for another perspective of tolerance. I believe in debate as a means of comunication. I believe that good debates require intellectual honesty and open minds. When promoting or defending a position, I believe it's important to be dedicated to debating ideas rather than personalities.
I don't, however, believe that I must pay lip service to the notion that tolerance requires me to mute my opinion rather that inadverdently offend someone who may disagree with my position. I can state inequivocably that I believe that actions X, Y and Z are morally reprehensible and still remain civil when discussing not only those topics but also unrelated topics with people who defend those actions I see as wrong. In my mind, this is tolerance within the context of exchanging ideas and opinions.
My personal judgements on the pros and cons of an idea are not binding on anyone not actively seeking a place in my service. No one who is not actively seeking to serve me needs to feel compelled to conduct themselves in accordance with my views. However much I may speak out on my views, others are free to pursue their own agendas. I see this as tolerance in action.
What I consider intolerant, within forums such as this, is the idea that one must be supportive of every idea or else remain silent. There are good ideas and bad ideas and each of us may choose for ourselves which we choose to support and oppose. I think it requires tolerance to accept that others may make different judgements and choices and allow them to voice thier points of view without belittling and insulting them. I try to practice my personal brand of tolerance by attacking the post but not the poster.
Timothy



CitizenCane -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (3/31/2005 10:48:25 AM)

I haven't been here long, but over all, it seems to be a pretty civilized venue, for an internet site.
I'm not sure what 'tolerance' really means absent the power to prohibit something. Only the Mods really have the power of intolerance here, the rest of us can tolerate what others say or take a hike. If stating an objection or disagreement with something is intolerant, then so is expecting that no one can object to what we say ourselves. I think what people are calling 'intolerance' here is really just bad manners- and they don't want to tolerate bad manners.
I have a kind of Taoist/Confucian outlook on these issues, and I believe that good manners are the foundation of civilization. I don't preach tolerance. Tolerance is something we have for ills we cannot ameliorate. The ill of bad manners is something we can effect, on these boards, only in our own conduct- unless we happen to be a Mod.




ProScatman -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (3/31/2005 8:41:14 PM)

I too was witness to the Flame Thrower Party, and rather than get my ass flamed in the process of pointing out the agree to disagree hypothesis; I kept silent and went elseware. So, I guess I could be tolorant of intolerance; but from a distance! I believe everyone who has posted on this thread so far has very valid points to ponder. To me the shame of flameing is that the quality of the discussion goes straight to hell sometime thereafter, and is a lose to all those involved in the discussion. The beauty of this site is the diverse people who are active here.



LordODiscipline -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (4/3/2005 4:58:59 AM)

I agree with Emerald -

The whole concept and mantra about "tolerance" in BDSM was intended for other people's kinks - it is all about 'not casting stones' in this 'glass house' of ours.

But, even this is not "all inclusive" - we (as a sub-culture) step away from pedeophiles and beastialists as a general demonstration that 'consensuality' is a key element in WIITWD.

However, despite our request for tolerance of kinks and predelictions, it is not asked, requested, or even necessary to tolerate people in general - and - many people are 'people in general' when you are dealing with the idiocy, lies, subterfuge, and half truths that are often perpetrated by people on the internet - and - more and more, in real life as they become comfortable with themselves in the 'role' they have created.

And, further, from my personal perspective:

I do not tolerate people who demean me in real life - and, lieing about (what I consider to be) our history definitively is. It is akin to saying that the "X" family participated in "X" - although they were not in that country at the time.

So... when someone states they are "X" and, it is impossible - I consider that to be exceptionally insulting, and come back on them for it - real life/or/on line.

I am not sure why anyone would consider the internet to be a bastion of fine civility, or, that it is a place where we should and/or must behave differently than we do in real life.

I believe it might be 'bleed over' from the chivalric element of our people's who extoll the virtues of protecting people from reality.

~J




Sundew02 -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (4/3/2005 10:44:47 AM)

I believe acceptance of others life choices is important here as well as in the vanilla world. But I will forever and a day verbalize my concern when I read or hear of unsafe practices in this or any other lifestyle. And YES, I love to debate, cuss and discuss topics, laughing. I try very hard not to fuel the flames of irrational conflict. I do have a temper and on occassion it slips its leash. I tend to lose patience with those that speak out of ignorance, since there truly are some people that believe everything they see typed here. If there is no one answering back with facts and an opposing point of view with stats and verifiable information these people could get seriously injured or pick up something that won't wash off.
I would not say I am tolerate of others choices, that would indicate I didn't truly believe they have the right to their choices. I believe all people have that right. I accept them, as long as no other living creature is harmed. Laughing, possibly just a word choice to others, but a very important point to me. Take care, stay safe, Sundew



CitizenCane -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (4/3/2005 1:08:49 PM)

quote:

But, even this is not "all inclusive" - we (as a sub-culture) step away from pedeophiles and beastialists as a general demonstration that 'consensuality' is a key element in WIITWD.


Do 'we (as a sub-culture)' do this? I don't think so. I, as a person, have a really serious problem with pedophiles and no particular interest in whether or not a person has sex with sheep. While you, J, may be a Vegan on the grounds of consensuality, I happen to think that consent is a form of judgement, and thus reserved for those able to exercise judgement. I'm really not that interested in whether chickens 'consent' to be part of my dinner or cows, in the form of nice shiney black leather straps, 'consent' to be part of my kink. From what I've seen, the trend in the 'sub-culture' is to just go ahead and assume the consent of the cows and long-dead dinosaurs that make up so much of our culturally identifiable apparel. It's not clear to me why enlisting, say, a dog who humps women's legs of his own accord, to hump another part of her anatomy, requires a higher order of consent than neutering him, housetraining him, preventing him from humping her leg, or, of course, euthanizing him, as we do to millions of dogs every year. I think that 'consent' has become a piece of PC propaganda in this 'lifestyle' that is bandied about in much the same irreflective way as 'freedom' and 'patriotism' are in politics. But that's a different thread.






darkinshadows -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (4/3/2005 1:38:05 PM)

You say tomatoe, I say tomato...

Thats where people differ. I disagree (with tollerence...lol)... that either subjects that you mention have anything to do with consensuality, and all to do about safe and sane.
I do not care for the SSC code that is banded about like a righteous, unwritten law of BDSM, because I truely believe that my sane can be another mans madness, and visa versa... and as for safe... well... same thing again...
In truth, if I wanted safe and wanted sane, I wouldnt be involved iwiitwd.

But consensuality is a key element.




LordODiscipline -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (4/3/2005 2:34:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CitizenCane

Do 'we (as a sub-culture)' do this? I don't think so. I, as a person, have a really serious problem with pedophiles and no particular interest in whether or not a person has sex with sheep. While you, J, may be a Vegan on the grounds of consensuality, I happen to think that consent is a form of judgement, and thus reserved for those able to exercise judgement. I'm really not that interested in whether chickens 'consent' to be part of my dinner or cows, in the form of nice shiney black leather straps, 'consent' to be part of my kink. From what I've seen, the trend in the 'sub-culture' is to just go ahead and assume the consent of the cows and long-dead dinosaurs that make up so much of our culturally identifiable apparel. It's not clear to me why enlisting, say, a dog who humps women's legs of his own accord, to hump another part of her anatomy, requires a higher order of consent than neutering him, housetraining him, preventing him from humping her leg, or, of course, euthanizing him, as we do to millions of dogs every year. I think that 'consent' has become a piece of PC propaganda in this 'lifestyle' that is bandied about in much the same irreflective way as 'freedom' and 'patriotism' are in politics. But that's a different thread.


Talk about taking this to an extreme:
1. My personal choices were not what we were discussing - although you did an excellent job demonstrating that you do not know me.
2. We are talking about a sub-culture based on interrelational dynamics- not food products or whether you insert your 'wee' into a sheep.
3. Animals cannot consent in a relational dynamic as they are not capable of intelligent intercourse (a small pun).
4. If you decide that sheep are your thing, or, that you would support this decision, then you are outside the boundaries commonly imposed by this culture.

Note: Cultures (as a rule) impose restrictions to define the boundaries by which they are defined. This is one sub-culture in which people affiliated decry peodophilia and beasiality for the same reason - that is (again for the purpose of repetitive cognizance) "non-consensual" - and, yes - even our sub-culture, that supports individuality and free will to an extreme that is seldom paralleled, does so.

5. Lastly (an interesting word) I do not really care if you are (or, are not) PC - that is not the issue, although your bravado is sincerely impressive (wow - I got a boner) - it really has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

Good luck with that dog.

~J






CitizenCane -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (4/3/2005 4:34:03 PM)

J,
Apparently you've decided that I am not a part of your sub-culture. If you label that sub-culture 'People who agree with LordODiscipline,' then of course I concur. However, if you're under the impression that your views are the authoritative voice of people practicing BDSM, allow me to disabuse you. Whatever your, or my, personal feelings may be about bestiality or pedophilia, or SSC or the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, these are exactly that- our personal feelings, and I promise you that many people involved in WIITWD differ with each of us on any or all of these. If you are speaking only of WIITYD, then of course yours is the one true word, but if you're referring to BDSM, others' mileage may (and does) vary.




Gemeni -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (4/3/2005 5:00:16 PM)

Tolerance is often rationalized as being in agreement with a particular view point. This is a fallacy of thought-in diverse groupings there will never be a consensus. I often find that people who whine the loudest about tolerance usually posess the least. Instead, they use the CONCEPT as a bludgeon to try to beat others into submission, and come into agreement with *correct thought forms*.

Tolerance at it's core, is simply showing the courtesy to politely agree to disagree- And allow others to live as they see fit..Not to behave like a display of little noddy dogs who's heads obediently bob up and down in unison. If you have to complain about tolerance,it probably means you need to work on YOURS-not the other way around.



LordODiscipline -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (4/3/2005 7:28:11 PM)



Nice retort -

But, that is all that it is -

You see, once again you are bending the discussion (about the culture, about consensuality, and about a commonalities withint the subculture) to suit an ego bent on rearranging the discussion to suit itself.

Question: Do you believe that 'boinking sheep' is an "OK" thing to do?

If the answer (as you have indicated) is 'yes' - then (and, of necessity) you are (indeed) outside of the culture as it defines itself.

I am not speaking "for" anyone -or- stating 'one true wayisms' - I am talking about a commonality that does exist within the culture.

That you would utilize a personalization of the issue to suit an argument that is indefensible, is rather 'telling'.

Tell you what though - just to be fair - find one major BDSM group, or, a majority of the purveyors in any area that supports your supposition - and, I will agree with you.... query the folks here on collar.me... ask any of your on line buddies to sign a petition (or some other such thing)... if you can find a significant subset to agree with something of this within this culture... I will agree that you are not simply 'spouting out of your mouth what nature intended for south'.

Otherwise, you are talking (just so much) flotsam, jetsam, and expositional posturing.

But, it is spring - we can use the nitrates.

Thank you for playing.

~J



Oumae -> RE: What place has tolerance in BDSM? (4/4/2005 5:46:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gemeni


Tolerance at it's core, is simply showing the courtesy to politely agree to disagree- And allow others to live as they see fit..Not to behave like a display of little noddy dogs who's heads obediently bob up and down in unison. If you have to complain about tolerance,it probably means you need to work on YOURS-not the other way around.


Yes, maybe courtesy would have been a better word to have used for some. As said before I enjoy a good debate, I just feel the original topic under discussion can get lost in some threads where it becomes heated in a personal way.

Oumae



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




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