I don’t know if anyone else sniffed out the links provided by ITR champion, but I have to suggest that they’re not really representative of the BDSM community; they’re both about Gor philosophy, which varies greatly from the “typical” BDSM philosophy. I don’t even know if they consider themselves a subset of BDSM (or just “a whole 'nother”). I actually hadn’t heard of it until I checked out those links…?
As for the OP’s three divisions of “why BDSM?” I don’t think any one applies to me or to the folx I know.
Esprix: “I’m a fairly vanilla guy”
OH NO YOU’RE NOT!! Get away from me!!
The way I understand it is that Goreans do NOT affiliate themselves with BDSM…although their lifestyles certainly incorporate lots of elements. In fact, the more I research Gor, the more I discover their lives are like a giant renaissance faire orgy complete with costumes and collars and ceremonies and all that…IMHO of course. My friends and I refer to them as Bondage Trekkies.
On a side note, I think a lot of people try to distance themselves from being labeled BDSM. They call themselves “Power Exchangers” or just FemSub MaleDom or DiD Enthusiasts whatever…rather than attach themselves to the stigma of saying “I’m into BDSM” or “I’m into Bondage” which conjures up images of black latex, arm bands, bullwhips and nipple clamps.
Most of the people I’ve encountered in this world of D/s are completely “undetectable” in real life, and their activities in the bondage realm aren’t done with the glam hollywood bondage materials that we see in horrible movies like 8mm and Exit to Eden.
For my personal tastes, I’d rather be dominated mentally and emotionally, humiliated with words…than be strung up in some 50 strap harness…although, I’ve never tried that, so I can’t say definitively
jarbaby
sexy
Flattery will get you everywhere 
haha
What I meant by ability to determine consent in a power relationship was simple enough, though not clearly stated.
If we have a relationship wherein one person hits the other (I thought about a thousand other words for “hits” but they were all so loaded as to cloud the issue–inflicts “pain?”) and tends to be in a dominant role, what could we possibly use to determine consent? Rule by force, rule by fear, this is a practical matter. Much like a truly abusive spouse “teaches” their partner to act a certain way…can we then say that the spouse consents to that behavior?
You mentioned “within certain limits,” and it made me wonder…how could one determine those limits? I’m looking here as someone external to the relationship. When power and physical and emotional “pain” are a part of a relationship, the boundry betwenn consent and forced action is well-nigh indeterminable, I think. Fear of reprisal could be used as an explanation for apparent consent, and there is little doubt that abuse, when taken to the extreme, IS detrimental: it can result in internal injuries and so on. So how can we outlaw abuse but allow abuse at the same time? How can we determine consent? (interestingly enough, anyone know how it is determined now?)
In the position of the abuser the case is more exaggerated because previous consent might lead to false conclusions later on as behaviors subtly change (since people aren’t static). Consider that “reading” a mate’s state at any particular time is based on a bunch of signals, and some couples never do get it right. When we throw abuse in, even if, originally, it was for kicks and very mild (abuse is a loaded term too, but I really can’t think of a better word) can the “spanker” (or whatever) easily say that, after some time, it is just for play?
I guess my contention is that relationships require a level of empathy and signal-reading that consistent play-acting or (and/or, I suppose) abuse undermines. The more I thought about this the more I thought that even the domination/bondage based relationship might even have similar pitfalls, though probably less pronounced.
Now it may be one thing to say that moderation here is the key, and I suppose I could back down to that stance easily enough if someone were to press me to it 
Firstly, aynrand, I think you may be under the false impression that Doms are out on the street snatching up young virgins and selling them into a life of sexual slavery, beating them into submission and treating them like dirt. That’s good for porn…not usually true in real life. A sub is a sub and she/he finds a dom who shares their view of sexual and emotional fulfillment, just like you might seek out a Christian or a Vegetarian or someone who likes bubblebaths as foreplay.
Discipline
How about this…before I even got involved with dom guy, I would say you can’t use fire torture on me, you can’t pee on me, you can’t call me fat and you can’t pretend I’m a five year old girl. If I say ‘pancakes’ you have to stop…got it? You have to trust the person you’re with to do what you both agree to.
BDSM enthusiasts CAN be dangerous. I dated someone who didn’t respect my limits, and I ended up hurt. It doesn’t mean BDSM in itself is dangerous, it means people are.
Firstly, i’m holding in my hand a brochure for “dominatrix training” here in Chicago (at the Discovery Center) which teaches safe practices of discipline. Whenever I’ve been tied up, my lover has carefully inspected my circulation and breathing and made sure that I was relatively safe. It’s not just someone running in the room and beating the crap out of you.
Secondly, do not have a cite, but I know a big bondage party was broken up in L.A. recently, and Doms were arrested for assualt because the cops said that “Submissive or not, a bound person cannot legally give consent”.
I also think that you’re under the impression that in these relationships there is no intimacy or romance or love involved, to which I say “FIE!”. A Dominant isn’t disciplining a submissive because he thinks she’s a worthless object, like in domestic violence situations. The D/s relationships I’ve been in or known have resulted in the sub feeling like a prized jewel, something treasured and desired. You feel safe and protected and a tremendous emotional release, a sort of freedom in slavery.
Again, these impressions of you are just what I’m taking from your post…I may be way off the mark in what you actually believe.
jarbaby
I hardly wanted to state such a thing.
My problem is with consent in relationships involving explicit force (even with safety words). I also have a problem with pain-for-pleasure, but that is largely biological IMO (though it may hurt so good it doesn’t hurt because it is good).
I am glad that people can do this responsibly; that does not change my opinion.
I do not wish to equate bondage and domination with sadism and masochism. They are different animals.
I really don’t want to turn this into a line-drawing game, but the question will always remain: how do we as a legal society determine consent in forceful relationships?
The problem with this discussion is that the concepts are completely abstract to folks with no experience looking on the outside and that’s what makes them scary.
I’ll start with the disclaimer that not all BDSM is good IMO. What I’m talking about is the diametric opposite of the executive that goes to a professional dominatrix for his weekly ass whuppin’
The idea of pain=pleasure is a confusing one. Let’s all agree that the person who wants to be branded with a red-hot poker has some problems as does anyone willing to inflict that pain. Let’s scale it back some. Lots of folks like nipple stimulation. Sometimes sucking isn’t enough and a gentle bite is called for. By practical definition that is causing pain so we’re talking a matter of degree here. A gentle spanking isn’t so bad but touch that warm flesh with an ice cube or a fur glove and WOW! The distinction between pain and pleasure is a blurred zone, not a line. Reminds me of the old joke that ends, “I know what you are, now we’re just negotiating price.”
The intimacy aspect of BDSM is the most overlooked factor. Doing it right requires very good communication. A sub may want to give up control for a bit, but keep it controlled. That requires a lot of mutual trust for both sub and dom. The intimacy that results can be much more deep than most people ever experience with “vanilla” sex.
Domming is not just tying up a partner or whacking them with a paddle. It’s caring for a person’s emotional needs as much if not more than their physical needs. The emotional high can also leave a sub vulnerable after things come down so “aftercare” is vital. The cuddling and holding when things wind down is often the best part of the whole experience.
We detemine consent by the consent that was given. The conversation that (hopefully) takes place previous to any BDSM activity occurring. Similarly, we determine consent in vanilla relationships the same way. Both partners agreed on what activities they would engage in, either implicitly or explicitly. I believe that in the BDSM situation, the “rules” very much need to be EXPLICIT.
I think you’re assuming that the couple who engages in BDSM lives their sex lives outside of their erotic encounters. In every relationship, we compartmentalize. We have time for child rearing, time for breakfast, time for sex, and time for shopping. If one partner asks the other to dress up like a cheerleader and jump around because it turns him on, does it then follow that the cheeleader persona is going with them when they run the daily errands?
You’re absolutely right: fear of reprisal CAN lead to an unhealthy relationship. It can lead to that under ANY circumstances. And I would argue that if this fear of reprisal is part of the BDSM (or any) relationship, than it is unhealthy. When one partner ends up being truly punished for transgressions, then there exists the power dichotomy and “extortion” that you’re imagining. This leans toward true master/slave, 24/7 situations, which I find personally appalling. Though, a long weekend of it here and there might be nice.
**
As much as we’d like to when we see others getting into what we consider dangerous territory, we CAN’T determine those limits for anyone else. Each person must decide if their own relationship is healthy for them. Unfortunately, I don’t believe the public at large is very good at this. But I also don’t believe adding “kinky sex” into the mix either exacerbates or alleviates this problem.
**
Ahh…the slippery slope. I used to fear this actually. I used to consider that since I now wanted MORE of something than I did before, perhaps there was no END to what I would desire.
In theory, you’re correct I suppose. It could happen that a submissive’s level of control over the situation is slowly undermined and she slowly loses “self.” However, in practice, I don’t see this happening (Except maybe for that movie 9 1/2 Weeks). We generally see anything that crosses our own personal “limits line” as GLARINGLY obvious and therefore it’s a matter for immediate discussion and perhaps causes an end to the relationship.
**
I disagree. I think that consistent play-acting and attempts to study one another’s reactions, along with the discussion that SHOULD lead to, creates a GREATER understanding of the other. It leads to BETTER empathetic skills, better signal-reading.
**
You and I differ the most greatly in this area I think. Because levels of “pain” are very distinct. This hurts too much, that does not. However, when you get into the area of being really DOMINATED by someone who has you in a helpless position and has clear control over your physical self, and generally your psychological self at that point, there’s more room (IMHO) for that slippery slope problem. There’s more gray area than there is with pain, more wiggle room…more chance for someone to step over the line and end up with humiliation or something else they’re not comfortable with. A desire to be at someone else’s mercy IS a form of emotional masochism. You crave the fear, the helplessness, and the loss of control.
Not that I avoid such things myself…but you see my point, no?
**
Yes, but we’re back to deciding WHO determines what qualifies as “moderation.” I tend to agree with you, but clearly my idea of “moderate” is not the same as yours. Therefore, I argue that we cannot determine it for ANYONE.
Whew. ARL, you’re killing me!
-L
Thanks for the enlightened debate everyone. I continue to read this thread with great interest.
aynrandlover
Once you involve animals, we’ve got a whole new debate.
SexyWriter, your comments about mapping out limits ahead of time doesn’t quite square in my mind with your stated refusal to use safewords. If you’ve explicitly informed your partner ahead of time that he may not, for example, make you paint his drywall (if you know what I mean), then how is that any less of a comedown than a reliance on safewords?
With explicit rules, you know there are certain things that won’t happen to you. With a safeword, you know there are certain things that will stop happening. Seems like the thrill that comes from the trust being implicit would be gone either way.
Padeye, I’m not sure if that comment was referencing me, but I would assure you anyway that I am not disgusted by or in fear of this sort of behavior. It does, however, trouble me. It would be a similar error to assume that atheists don’t have any morals. My dislike for certain activities does not extend to a religious intolerance of it.
Let’s not agree on that point. While tatoos are definitely more popular (and less painful) body-burning is not unheard of. I’ve seen some fantastic burns (I like tattoos myself, and have four).
I agree. I also think that the distinction between abuse and semi-habitual sadism is blurry as well, hence my problem.
Sexy
Ok. First, what the fuck does vanilla mean, lol.
Second,
Naw. I am aware that many people engage in behavior in private on an inconsistent basis, much like this. I do not doubt, as well, that many if not most practitioners likely have “normal” sex as well.
But even on an inconsistent basis I wonder about the behavior over extended periods of time. I really think it is a slippery slope.
9.5 weeks, haha. Mickey Rourke…HAHAHA. Still a decent flick tho. Anyway, you said yourself that the limit line is not permanent. Or rather, better said as not all limits are fixed, though some may be.
We tend to adapt to our situational environment over time; it becomes more banal as repetition occurs. The same video game, largely, gets boring and so we buy more. The same foods get boring, and so we switch night after night.
Perhaps sex can be the same way. A month or two of simple bondage, then a few weeks of regular old sex, then trade off every other day or so…do whatever the mood dictates (like sex usually ends up anyway). Fine, hardly a slope to slip down.
Our capacity to eat food is limited by our hunger mechanisms and stomach size; our capacity to enjoy a video game depends on how long it is and how well it suits one’s tastes; our ability to accept physical pleasure is, AFAIK, pretty damn limitless. If we combine physical pleasure of stimulation with mental pleasure of companionship and “fun” of the activity itself (in the case of “non-standard” sex, say) then the possibilities seem damn infinite. I don’t think, as this conversation stands now, that the limits we place on stimulation are as solid as is posited.
Martial artists, for example, can take a tremendous amount of punches and kicks to areas the rest of us would cringe at. The capacity to ignore and fend off pain is somewhat, to me anyway, suprising.
Now, when we combine the two what happens? We have a desire for light pain inducing larger amounts of pleasure. Can we see the slippery slope growing? Ugh.
The slippery slope here, of course, may not be the correct model for long-term sadistic relationships. I do not know. But it has also never been a part of my life; no one has ever tried to bring it into mine, at any rate.
I am not clear that sadistic sexual behavior can be, on a large scale, handled in a healthy manner much like I am unsure that pedophilia can be handled on a large scale in a healthy manner (for anyone who saw me in those debates). I am somewhat interested in the matter of adolescent pedophilia, but not in the sadism, so perhaps my personal taste is flowing into my discourse. YMMV.
I definitely disagree that, just because different people draw different lines differently that we cannot, as a society intererested in the general welfare of ourselves, draw a single line anyway. We’ve done it in every other field of existence.
Not sure I agree here either, being someone who takes an interest in such relationships. I’ve personally enjoyed both roles in some mild forms. I was never scared, and never felt helpless; hopefully my partner didn’t either. The loss of control, though, you got me there. If you ARE scared and you ARE helpless, then again…are we still playing or is it real? My problem with the whole affair, you might notice.
Don’t get the idea, either, that should the situation present itself to me that, being the good adventurer, I would turn it down. Perhaps at such a time I might revise my opinion on the matter (of sadism, the bondage thing isn’t much an issue with me). Any takers? lol However, I can also do drugs responsibly, drink responsibly, and so on and so forth. I am not in favor of repealing DUI laws which draw a clear line, or in legalizing all drugs as well (though there are a few that I wouldn’t mind buying at the corner store).
We draw these lines, but that doesn’t mean we presume to know best for each person.
The only way to measure genes versus environment ( at the moment ) is the study of identical twins who have been separated at birth.
You can search for this data if you like, on the web.
I think the general consensus is that genes are VERY important but the environment does have an effect.
HOWEVER I do not think anyone has researched there sexual desires.
There is a strong association theory that you link experience to pleasure so if your first sexual partner is very dominant you may link that to sexual arousal etc.
or, to be totally blunt, the reason American males like cheerleader outfits is that they spent a heck of a long time thinking about girls in them when they were going through puberty and post puberty i.e when they were, well you know, lots of tissues and stuff…
Hence, in general, as with most things, its a mix of genes and environment.
Marx, well, Marx, as his mum said ‘if only he had spent more time making capital instead of talking about it.’.
Bit harsh, suppose he didn’t know that planned economies would be a mess.
Instead of writing all those books wouldn’t ‘lets have a bit of wealth redistribution’ been a lot less hassle ?
Do you REALLY want me to detail and justify my own special perversion for you, right here in Great Debates? I didn’t think so. This is too far away from the OP to discuss here. Though, I’d be happy to explain my choices via another medium.
-L
Criticism accepted. It was not referring to you or anyone specific. If it makes my position more clear I draw a distinction between somone willing to endure pain of tattooing or scarification for the desired result and a person who just wants the pain of the third degree burn or perhaps think they deserve such as punishment.
And FWIW I’m Christian but don’t think we can claim any kind of monopoly on morality, far from it.
Cardinal Biggles, poke him with the soft cushion!
SexyWriter: Do you REALLY want me to detail and justify my own special perversion for you, right here in Great Debates?
[/quote]
You know what I want and where I want it, freaky chick. But, unique and wonderful though you are, I assume you’re not the only sub who adheres to this particular philosophy. Can you abstract from the personal to the general and tell us what the mainstream BDSM thought is on this matter?
If you can’t, and would rather explain it while chained to the drywall, that’s fine too.
Yes, I did chuckle OL a little at my use of “mainstream” in this context.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by aynrandlover *
Ok. First, what the fuck does vanilla mean, lol.
[QUOTE]
You know…white bread.
**
Yes, but have you considered how WILDLY peoples’ appetites vary? A couple of years ago, I ate myself into a size 26. My appetite for food had NO shut off valve. We sometimes have to learn to control our appetites for ALL things…they’re not necessarily “naturally” regulated. Sex is the same thing. Being forced to regulate a desire doesn’t mean the particular desire is inherently “bad.”
**
But this isn’t physically true. Every person has pain limits. And some things NEVER get old. An orgasm doesn’t become boring. In a similar fashion, someone who likes to be bound, doesn’t necessarily tire of it and need MORE of anything. I know this from my own personal experience, and from talking with others. The slippery slope doesn’t bear out in reality because of real physical and emotional limits and desires. Because a person MAY always find a the moans of a lover arousing and NEVER seek anything else.
**
I wondered when you would bring this up: A comparison between OTHER desires that a person can’t necessarily help, but are detrimental. The difference between pedophilia and other forms of “abnormal” sexual interest is the issue of consent. You can’t compare an activity in which everyone has the chance to decide whether to participate, with one which is inflicted upon one or more parties.
**
Oddly, I was thinking of using alcohol as an example earlier. We consider it socially acceptable to “escape” with a drink or two on Friday evening (I’m having one now). But we make laws that ensure that it won’t harm others. I agree with you on this.
The only problem I see with it is that assuming all activities are consensual, we’re not “legislating” (or making a moral judgement anyway) on an issue that may harm someone else. We’re making that judgement about what the person can choose to do (or have done to) their OWN body. Therefore, while I agree in a way that a line can and maybe even should be drawn, I think it should be pretty far to the left. If you want to drink yourself into oblivion, there are no consequences until you get in a car drunk. Similarly, if you choose to have an unhealthy relationship…well…have at it.
**
Aha! So you’re saying that because YOU personally know what it feels like to enjoy such things, you understand why it’s acceptable, even though from the outside, it may seem objectionable. You KNOW that it’s not, in your heart, because you know what it felt like to you? You know you’re a healthy person and capable of handling these actions.
What do you know…I felt the same way the last time I was flogged good and hard.
**
You know…sometimes I have a problem with this too. Because I like to arrange things so that it DOES feel very real. But of course, just the simple act of “arranging” means that it’s not in some ways.
**
I assume that’s true because personal experience is never quite the same as the theory we had worked out intellectually.
**
I agree. Though, as the responsible person you mentioned, I reserve the right to fight for MY ability to do as I choose.
You know, I have the feeling that given half a chance, you’d be every bit the freak I am.
-L
What was the question again? Oh yeah…I got this way through a combo of natural tendency and childhood trauma, leaning heavily on the latter.
What IS it with you and drywall?
The thing is, everyone has limits. Anyone who says they don’t is a fucking lunatic. Within those limits I, and others like me, appreciate feeling like we have NO control. I don’t think it’s necessarily true that we DON’T, mind you. Especially since we’ve carefully chosen our partners to be able to understand what we want and need. But still.
Within a certain context, I like to feel that I’m at someone else’s mercy…or as close to that as I can get.
Also, my choice not to mess with safewords is more the principle of the thing. If you’ve chosen a partner who can’t tell when you’ve had enough short of you’re screaming “uncle” then you’d better not be letting him chain you to the drywall or anything else.
Jeez…the way I figure, this opens up another can of worms, and hopefully, I won’t have to justify my perversions any further.
-L
For gosh sakes don’t chain your loved ones to the drywall! You have to put the eye bolts into the studs or they’ll pull out. Most unsafe.
Safewords are another one of those things are are absrtact to a person not involved in this. They are important but one of the goals of communication is never needing to use them. Whaling on someone until she has to say to stop is just being clumsy, brutal and crude. Good communication happens in many forms besides verbal. IMO part of doing it right is watching a partner’s responses to know where the threshold between just right and too much is. That kind of communication takes time and effort and a lot of communication up front about what is expected and desired. The end result of that is the sub knowing she can give total trust to someone for a while and just “fly” in the experience. Giving someone that kind of experience can be just as satisfying.
It may seem like we’re getting far away from the OP but I think not. There are a lot of psychological insights to this world but boxing them into categories like “Darwin” and “Marx” cheat one from understanding the reality. F*** Karl Marx and the revolution he rode in on. Keep politics out of my dungeon!
AHA! Oh, wait, I need to actually say something before getting excited about it.
No, I understand why some people like it. That doesn’t make it acceptable. I find the risks associated with heroin use to be greater than any pleasure I could get out of it, and so I chose not to involve myself with heroin. Should a law be suggested that proposes legalized heroin I would fight it.
Also, I don’t know that I’m a healthy person. I certainly seem to have other people think so, though I think there are plenty of things that I would change about myself because I find them to be detrimental to some other things which I hold to be more important. Whether or not domineering relationships are one of them remains to be seen since I’m half-single right now.
Yes, but have you considered that being overweight is unhealthy EVEN IF you consent to overeating?
Yay for analogies!
But my whole problem here WAS with consent, see? I feel that consent can be not-so-genuine in a habitually sadistic relationship, even if it only comes out in sex.
Interesting that I don’t see pedophilia as instantly wrong. You felt good the first time you got flogged, I felt good the first time I had sex at 13 (with a 13 year old, but still). But I’d rather not turn this into a pedophilia debate, there’s plenty of those to revive.
Hell, maybe even a quarter of a chance, LOL.
Damn you! Damn you and your big, pulsating, throbbing brain! I hate looking like a dork.
Seriously, this was what I MEANT to convey with the analogy. That the moderation you’re talking about is possible in the sexual avenue as well. What if I now only consent to eating a piece of cake once a month? (I don’t EVER eat sugar now, and have lost more than 150 pounds…but that’s a topic for another thread.) My point was that people have all sorts of appetites that they have to learn to control and maintain. That doesn’t necessarily make the appetite in and of itself “bad” or detrimental. Just something that needs to be kept in check. And even if it IS bad for me, it’s not something that someone else can pass down a judgement on and CERTAINLY not something that can be legisltaed. Otherwise, as a friend pointed out to me earlier this evening, we’d have to outlaw McDonald’s.
You CAN consent to an activity without letting it destroy you, even if it’s a piece of pie now and then.
-L