BDSM is a state of mind (minor rant)

[FungiUg]

[...]I completely support more respect shown between posters at lit, regardless of how they are proceeding or practicing the lifestyle and regardless of how "serious" their kink is percieved by others.

Amen. I don't regard D/s as a "lifestyle" for me -- it's something I have a strong interest in, and enjoy practicing. But I wouldn't consider it a "lifestyle".

I know many who have many years of real time feel that on line D/s mocks their own lifestyle. I don't believe that is the case.

Nor would I. Many people gain an interest or acceptance of D/s through on-line play, so how is that "mocking" their lifestyle?

I think it often just comes down to "well, that's not how I did it, so it must be wrong." Which is just downright closed-minded.

I do however, believe that on line D/s and the internet are playing a big role in mainstreaming BDSM and possibly helping to find more tolerance and understanding of us "freaks" in our lives outside the net.

Agreed. For some people it does trivialise it, and for others they get entirely the wrong impression of what D/s is about. But in the most part, I think it's an excellent introduction to D/s. As most people who have studied will remember, interactive sessions are far better for learning than just reading.

I also believe that exploring BDSM on line can assist some who are interested, but unsure. They can explore their fantasies without causing harm, they can explore the ideologies and philosophies without getting into a real life commited relationship before knowing with some certainty this is what they want and potentially, will find their happiness, in or out of D/s without causing major trauma and heartache for themselves and another.

Also, some people will NEVER be ready for a real life D/s session. Or may not even want it. It's a bit of harmless escapism. I enjoy reading Fantasy novels, but I wouldn't want to live them.

So what's wrong with that? Absolutely nothing.

We all need to relax and not take ourselves quite so seriously. Learning to laugh at ourselves is an important lesson. And learning to accept alternative truths is another lesson. So... if people are enjoying on-line D/s, then all the more power to them!

 

[Pure]

Hi Lark S,

Thanks for your thoughtful reply:

The following is where my personal preference/need/possibilities come into play and color my opinion - it is not analogous to actually engaging in the identical activity with another person in the flesh. Imagination can fill in a lot of gaps and much distance, but it is not real life, as in face-to-face, skin-to-skin, and physically controlled by another’s hand.

I have no problem with this; I'm all for fleshly delights. At the same time, I wouldn't say flesh is 'real life' and imagination is not.
Every look and 'feel' of the partner resonates in imagination. The curve of a breast calls up associations, feelings; the flesh-to-flesh taps into our earliest imagery; all 'sucking,' for instance, ties in with primal imagining and imaged early experiences.

but to ignore or avoid the mutual corporal aspects and simply call BDSM a state of mind that can be fulfilled through typing or talking or following directions remotely seems lacking in the possible depth of full personal experience (to me).

Again, all hail to 'mutual coporeal aspects". But let me raise an issue that didn't yet get mentioned on this thread.

What has not been mentioned is the term 'mindfuck'. In all the talk of 'physical control', and 'can you tickle yourself', the real role of mind-mind contact and the power-plays that may be embodied therein, have not gotten much mention. (This is not to say SM is all 'state of mind' etc., one way it's possible to interpret the thread title.) I'd bet that often 'physical control' or physical compulsion is often in a secondary role, just as with guards and prisoners. Power is often exerted or embodied in words, glances, gestures, routines, rituals, where no physical compulsion is being exercized.

You mention 'talking', as perhaps 'lacking in possible depth of full personal experience.'

Yet many of us spend ten times as much time 'talking' to the partner as 'skin to skin'. I like the saying, "Marriage [or equivalent, here] is a long conversation.' In any case, I bet if you think of 'key' or 'meaningul' or 'memorable' moments in your erotic life, many if not most will involve talk, possibly mixed with fleshly experience in a way that defies saying the former is shallow and the latter is deep. This is certainly the case with me. In memory, especially, the 'image' of sensation fades, while its meaning, doesn't.

Just some thoughts on a complex area. I appreciate your reflective abilities.

J.

 

[lark sparrow]

I agree with you on all of these points, but a conversation or a glance, words, gestures, routines, etc. are, to me, more fully experienced in person. While I have concentrated on the corporal aspect, the corporal still encompasses all of these factors and more – not simply ‘fleshly delights’… none of these are better had across the Internet (to me).

Again, it’s really going to come down to individual preference, possibility and need. If at the end of the evening one enjoys or doesn’t mind turning off the computer and finding oneself alone, or in a situation that has nothing to do with one’s passions online that is a completely personal choice which can be valid and valuable to the individual. Marriage is a long conversation (well, sometimes), and it’s not held computer screen to computer screen generally speaking.

I don’t think you can get too literal with corporeal, and limit it strictly to sexual acts – that was not my intention, more so that although many things can be had online, many things cannot. Everything you have mentioned below is, to me, better had face-to-face – more fulfilling and significant and obviously on more than an exclusively physical level. For someone else that may not be true, and they are of course free to do what they choose and feel is right for them.

Hi Lark S,

Thanks for your thoughtful reply:

The following is where my personal preference/need/possibilities come into play and color my opinion - it is not analogous to actually engaging in the identical activity with another person in the flesh. Imagination can fill in a lot of gaps and much distance, but it is not real life, as in face-to-face, skin-to-skin, and physically controlled by another’s hand.

I have no problem with this; I'm all for fleshly delights. At the same time, I wouldn't say flesh is 'real life' and imagination is not.
Every look and 'feel' of the partner resonates in imagination. The curve of a breast calls up associations, feelings; the flesh-to-flesh taps into our earliest imagery; all 'sucking,' for instance, ties in with primal imagining and imaged early experiences.

but to ignore or avoid the mutual corporal aspects and simply call BDSM a state of mind that can be fulfilled through typing or talking or following directions remotely seems lacking in the possible depth of full personal experience (to me).

Again, all hail to 'mutual coporeal aspects". But let me raise an issue that didn't yet get mentioned on this thread.

What has not been mentioned is the term 'mindfuck'. In all the talk of 'physical control', and 'can you tickle yourself', the real role of mind-mind contact and the power-plays that may be embodied therein, have not gotten much mention. (This is not to say SM is all 'state of mind' etc., one way it's possible to interpret the thread title.) I'd bet that often 'physical control' or physical compulsion is often in a secondary role, just as with guards and prisoners. Power is often exerted or embodied in words, glances, gestures, routines, rituals, where no physical compulsion is being exercized.

You mention 'talking', as perhaps 'lacking in possible depth of full personal experience.'

Yet many of us spend ten times as much time 'talking' to the partner as 'skin to skin'. I like the saying, "Marriage [or equivalent, here] is a long conversation.' In any case, I bet if you think of 'key' or 'meaningul' or 'memorable' moments in your erotic life, many if not most will involve talk, possibly mixed with fleshly experience in a way that defies saying the former is shallow and the latter is deep. This is certainly the case with me. In memory, especially, the 'image' of sensation fades, while its meaning, doesn't.

Just some thoughts on a complex area. I appreciate your reflective abilities.

J.

 

[catalina_francisco]

An intersting link on why we can not tickle ourselves.

Have been following the discussion and thought this might add a scientifice note towards it. It is a known medical and scientific fact that self-inflicted sensations are de-emphasized by our brain.

This leads to the simple conclusion that online created self inflected sensations such as spanking, clothespins, etc., are just not the same as real life. I thought it would be nice to have the scientific based facts.

Nice article for whomever is interested.
http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/07/11/strength_perceive030711
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_57566.html

Interesting is the hypothesis that schizophrenics might be the only people able to tickle themselves successfully.

Francisco.

 

[Pure]

That said, mr. science, how do you account for the reported *greater* intensity of self induced orgasms? and the non rare cases of women *only able to come that way? why do you think 'orgasm' workshops for women, esp., and sometimes for 'delayed' [ejaculation] men, *start with masturbation?

(from trying to tickle myself)

 

[catalina_francisco]

Mmmmm..I would have to say my orgasms are 10 times more intense with company than alone...and if they are more often better as the result of masturbation, why the heck is most of the planet knocking themselves out looking for their special person, surely it can't all be for the stimulating conversation?

Catalina

 

[Pure]

I guess you're pretty unique... but we all knew that.

 

[catalina_francisco]

about Masturbation

And no I am not trying to teach about the birds and the bees.

In the article there is a very interesting remark.

http://www2.rz.hu-berlin.de/sexology/GESUND/ARCHIV/SEN/CH19.HTM#b5-ORGASM

Orgasm, in a sense, is a learned behavior, and it is learned by trying different activities. Masturbation is the easiest way to learn. Orgasm with intercourse does not feel the same as it does with masturbation, since different areas are usually being stimulated.

Francisco.

 

[Pure]

Hi Francisco,

Here's a bit of evidence from your source that tends to support what I was stating, that the masturbated orgasm is not of inferior quality or secondary importance/desirability.

http://www2.rz.hu-berlin.de/sexology/GESUND/ARCHIV/SEN/CH17.HTM#b4-MASTURBATION

It has often been postulated that masturbatory frequency is greatly reduced or stopped when the individual gets married, but that may not be the case. Many members of married couples find that they still wish to masturbate alone, or they often begin to incorporate the practice into their intercourse. The practice continues into old age, the frequency varying with health, religious, and personal considerations such as divorce or the death of a spouse.

Members of couples who go to their side of the bed or to the bathroom after intercourse, in order to finish gratifying themselves are not rare.

The question why many people seek a mate/partner ("special person") esp. in marriage, as posed by Catalina is, I believe, answered in terms of finding love, esteem, skin/skin contact, cosiness and closeness during intercourse or sex; and there are many reports of those obtaining these objectives, preferentially, just cuddling. The intensity of orgasm, *if any* during intercourse becomes a side issue, or is made that way.

J.

 

[bridgeburner]

Tangential thought here:


There is a conflicting desire on the part of perverts and outcasts everywhere to be both accepted and to be unique and isolated.

You think you want everyone to accept you for yourself with all your quirks and perversions but when that starts to happen and Dick and Jane vanilla start using the vocabulary of your world it's offensive. "Hey! That's MY world, dammit! You may say the words but you'll never be like me!"

This isn't limited to BDSM but extends to all "fringe" or "alternative" groups. Think of the beat poets or Punk Rock. Anyone can wear a beret or a safety-pin through his nose, but that doesn't mean he's legit.

The more successful mainstreaming of the bizarre is, the more there are people who try to redefine or narrow the definition of the bizarre to keep the mainstream population out.

Just human perversity to want your cake and eat it too.



-B

 

[Netzach]

Well, I spend an inordinate amount of time doing guided fantasy over the phone, AND a large amount of time playing with corporeal forms.

Better worse up down I have no clue.

But it's like comparing a shit dipped sea bass to a piss filled aardvark.

 

[Pure]

Netzach said,

Well, I spend an inordinate amount of time doing guided fantasy over the phone, AND a large amount of time playing with corporeal forms.

Better worse up down I have no clue.

But it's like comparing a shit dipped sea bass to a piss filled aardvark.


Any two experiences of different things may be incomparable in qualitative terms, as say, 'is roast beef better than chocolate ice cream?' One 'has no clue.' But don't you think, N, that in one person's life, you can look at *frequency and make deductions about *preferences, *tendencies, and *habits.

For instance, were phone sex a pale and inferior to straight fucking, the people with access to straight fucking wouldn't be on the phone much. Conversely, if you find well accessed (in r.l.) people on the phone, there is some preference, at least secondary (perhaps primary) for phone encounters.

So I'd query, do you find people giving a fair degree of preference to phone or not-in-person activities, when in-person sex is available?

When you have to or choose to deal with someone on the phone or online do you feel you're less able to achieve subordination of the other; that your impact is substantially disminished?

Assuming for the sake of arguement that a guy [woman] gets laid regularly by his wife [her husband] several times a week, AND he [she] makes certain kinky phone calls, does that not tell you something of his [her] preferences?

Again, despite incomparability, what does a person's continuance of masturbation or online stuff tell you, when s/he has regular sexual, in-person outlet?

best,

Piss filled aardvark.

 

[Netzach]

Any two experiences of different things may be incomparable in qualitative terms, as say, 'is roast beef better than chocolate ice cream?' One 'has no clue.' But don't you think, N, that in one person's life, you can look at *frequency and make deductions about *preferences, *tendencies, and *habits.

For instance, were phone sex a pale and inferior to straight fucking, the people with access to straight fucking wouldn't be on the phone much. Conversely, if you find well accessed (in r.l.) people on the phone, there is some preference, at least secondary (perhaps primary) for phone encounters.

I think that theoretical braingames and physical matters really are different things. Because of the difference, phone sex and sexual stimulation involving verbosity is not a direct one to one with sex sex. I think that some people are turned on by words and need that specific itch scratched. A lot of the people I do guided fantasy with have no interest in "playing along" with toys, simply jacking to the images and situational suggestion.

I spent a lot of time exploring things online while gearing up to get less chicken and take my show on the 3-D road. At the time I felt very into my deal and like there was some kind of emotional authenticity to it, and there was. But I think it had as much to do with the chemical and physical reality of most SM as fantasizing about dancing Swan Lake has to do with grand plies. (I share serijules' frustration sometimes in speaking to the experienced online slave) Only, until I had done SM with a live body, I didn't know that, and could not articulate a difference.


So I'd query, do you find people giving a fair degree of preference to phone or not-in-person activities, when in-person sex is available?

Can't answer for sure. Half the time a guy talks about his hot wife and how she sleeps around and if she exists I'll sell you a bridge. Then again, no I do not think all phone and OL jackers are desperate and simply can't get a live girl.

When you have to or choose to deal with someone on the phone or online do you feel you're less able to achieve subordination of the other; that your impact is substantially disminished?

Depends on the person. Some people really are submissive, and there's not a doubt in my mind that if I close the conversation with "no cumming till Tuesday" they are going to do their damndest to hold out. They are a minority, but they are out there. People look for different fixes.


Assuming for the sake of arguement that a guy [woman] gets laid regularly by his wife [her husband] several times a week, AND he [she] makes certain kinky phone calls, does that not tell you something of his [her] preferences?

Again, despite incomparability, what does a person's continuance of masturbation or online stuff tell you, when s/he has regular sexual, in-person outlet?

That they need to hear the words. That the reality could be shitty, lukewarm, or even fan fucking tastic, but there's some situational and mental image that's not getting touched on. That their partner is likely like mine, fabulous, but really "not into dirty talk" and they are. Who knows.

 

[shereads]

If I may...I'm grateful to have had the opportunity to "play" online in preparation for an RL experience. Recognizing and accepting my submissive nature was a challenge and sometimes emotionally draining even when it was happening only online. By the time I was able to experience D/s in real life, I had already accepted and begun to crave certain things that I couldn't possibly have submitted to in the beginning, outside the boundaries of cyber-play.

If I could offer a word of caution to anyone who is in an online relationship in the submissive role: if you make plans for a real-life meeting that's destined to be a long-distance relationship with limited time together, be prepared for a couple of traumatic weeks (or three or four) when you're alone in the aftermath. Both parties my accept intellectually that it's not going to be a 24/7 relationship, but to submit to bondage, I had spent months transforming myself, emotionally, into someone whose ultimate reward would be not only the incredibly fulfilling sex, but the comfort and reassurance he'd give me afterwards. He did, and it was everything I could have hoped for - but we had only a few hours of "afterwards" available to us before he had to leave (we live far apart), and it wasn't nearly enough. I was so needy and panicked afterwards, that I nearly drove him away even as a friend. I knew that the confident, independent person I had been was still somewhere inside, but she was buried so deep that I didn't know who I was without the constant direction and guideance and affection I had come to expect.

I'll know next time what to expect, and that it's necessry to prepare in advance for the withdrawal of closeness. If you can't accept being ignored occasionally in an online relationship, expect to feel his absence after RL as something like a child being abandoned by a parent. If you have friends who know what's going on, it might be easier for you. I had kept the D/s aspect of this a secret from everyone with whom I was close, and in doing so I had set myself up to feel entirely alone.

I got past it, and I don't have any regrets. It was beautiful, a revelation - as if I'd been fed oatmeal all my life and suddenly discovered hot fudge sundaes. I hope for more, and I know I'm prepared to be stronger when our visit ends. But first-timers be warned: even months of online D/s play is play, compared to the physical fact of submission. Be ready to experience D/s is without the D. Have a friendly support system in place, as I will next time, by confiding in friends I thought would be ashamed or embarrassed for me. The rewards may be worth it to you, as they are to me.

Thanks for letting me express this.

 

[catalina_francisco]

I got past it, and I don't have any regrets. It was beautiful, a revelation - as if I'd been fed oatmeal all my life and suddenly discovered hot fudge sundaes. I hope for more, and I know I'm prepared to be stronger when our visit ends. But first-timers be warned: even months of online D/s play is play, compared to the physical fact of submission. Be ready to experience D/s is without the D. Have a friendly support system in place, as I will next time, by confiding in friends I thought would be ashamed or embarrassed for me. The rewards may be worth it to you, as they are to me.

Thanks for letting me express this.

A beautiful post and very honest about what some call subdrop (there is a thread about it here if you are interested and haven't found it). LDR are difficult and though the online connection remains, it pales significantly after that first meeting. I can relate to what you say as I have been there and it was unbearable. The pain is like nothing else I have felt and the addiction like qualities you speak of are real. It is incredible how that first taste awakens a hunger that has lied dormant out of ignorance for so long, but once awakened has a voracious and demanding appetite which needs feeding. I wish you well in your future and hope you find one as special as I have. Take care.

Catalina

 

[MissTaken]

Tangential thought here:


There is a conflicting desire on the part of perverts and outcasts everywhere to be both accepted and to be unique and isolated.

You think you want everyone to accept you for yourself with all your quirks and perversions but when that starts to happen and Dick and Jane vanilla start using the vocabulary of your world it's offensive. "Hey! That's MY world, dammit! You may say the words but you'll never be like me!"

This isn't limited to BDSM but extends to all "fringe" or "alternative" groups. Think of the beat poets or Punk Rock. Anyone can wear a beret or a safety-pin through his nose, but that doesn't mean he's legit.

The more successful mainstreaming of the bizarre is, the more there are people who try to redefine or narrow the definition of the bizarre to keep the mainstream population out.

Just human perversity to want your cake and eat it too.



-B

I like this post. Thanks!

It is sort of what I was getting at.

With mainstreaming of BDSM, there will be some evolution, some new interpretations of what many of have believed and practiced for years.

I think we should more concerned about what works for us as individuals than judging what works for someone else.

 

[MissTaken]

A beautiful post and very honest about what some call subdrop (there is a thread about it here if you are interested and haven't found it). LDR are difficult and though the online connection remains, it pales significantly after that first meeting. I can relate to what you say as I have been there and it was unbearable. The pain is like nothing else I have felt and the addiction like qualities you speak of are real. It is incredible how that first taste awakens a hunger that has lied dormant out of ignorance for so long, but once awakened has a voracious and demanding appetite which needs feeding. I wish you well in your future and hope you find one as special as I have. Take care.

Catalina

It is wonderful that shereads recognizes her needs.
When I had my first real life experience, I hungered for more to the degree that any of the means by which we used to meet our needs seemed empty and shallow. It was very difficult and ultimately told me that I am not of strong enough fiber to carry out a long distance relationship.

Another observation: when involved in long distance relationships, it can be terribly challenging to fit a everything into a few days that would take a month to build to in real life. I think we feel rushed to do as much, feel as much and experience as much as possible.

This can take away from the some of the magic of slow and methodical exploration of one another's needs, wants and desires. This can be a detriment to some.

Just something to be wary of, imho.

Long distance relationships are extremely difficult to maintain and hat's off to anyone who is able to do it!

 

[Pure]

Shereads, that's a very interesting and heartfelt posting. In your case it was not simply a transition to r.l., but to sporadic r.l. within a long distance relationship. If you don't mind my asking, what role did or does continues online or phone contact play in the l.d.r. once established. What is your experience of any continuing 'acts of submissive play' during such contacts?

Best of luck. It takes fortitude these days, I think, since one can't always say that the l.d.r is temporary, or know when, if ever, it will change.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Long distance relationships are extremely difficult to maintain and hat's off to anyone who is able to do it!

LOL. Ain't that the truth. I think I failed miserably as after he left apart from mass depression, I practically crawled into the screen when he came on webcam and found it a cold substitute, so then I went through the tumultuous emotions to the point of feeling I was going nuts. After a couple of weeks of that, and the million phone calls to try and calm my stressed out emotions and his own sense of loss, he just sent me money and ordered me on the next possible flight to be by his side.

I dropped everything, went on my first international flight which made 30 hours seem a lifetime, and instead of going home after 3 weeks as planned to begin planning the final move, I stayed 3 months, then rushed home to the subsequent disasters that had happened in my absence, sold my house, packed, and found new homes for the pets, all in 7 weeks and was still finalising things on the way to the airport to fly back to his arms. I have never regretted a moment of the chaos and heartache the move caused as it has been soothed by something I was beginning to think was a myth.

Catalina