Levels of emotional involvement in a scene

[neonflux]

I started a thread some time ago about The Normans, a married couple who would later set the legal standard as an example of battered wife syndrome. The Mrs. Norman eventually killed Mr. Norman in his sleep and used self defense as a justification.

I'm not sure how to answer this question other than to direct you to my comments in that thread.



I'm inclined to believe that those who take an active interest in BDSM are offering themself a chance not to slip into an abusive relationship. The BDSM community offers us some great parameters and a general push towards healthy expression of D/s and S&M, which I think has been pivotal for a lot of people, like myself , in both allowing me to take things further, but also more responsibly then I might've without the knowledge the BDSM community offers me.

I just finished reading the first part of the "Normans" thread. For the record, I would agree with others who sided with the wife in this case. I also greatly appreciated the discussion - I think that you brought up some aspects of "this thing we do" (I am never sure I'm getting that phrase right) that are uncomfortable to look at. It's too easy to just fall back on SSC and RACK and to assert that this ensures that "we" are not like "people in abusive relationships." (I found Pure's comments particularly interesting in this regard.)

I also definitely believe that there is a "deep ethics" to SSC (I tend to see RACK as describing more the process by which one achieves the former), one which has a great deal to offer every relationship, regardless of where it falls on the "kink" continuum. I am wondering, however, if involvement in BDSM doesn't go well beyond this philosophy in that it invites self-reflection into one's "dark side" on a level that is rare for most people? Is this at all related to your statement that, "...both allowing me to take things further, but also more responsibly then I might've without the knowledge the BDSM community offers me?"

It's funny. I don't know if it has to do with the age at which I began to explore this part of my sexuality in depth - by the time I came to formal BDSM, I felt that I had already excised the great majority of my "demons." I have never felt that my impulses were abusive in origin, despite struggling with that very "psychologically cruel" part of myself. (My compulsions, in the main, tend towards physical rather than psychological sadism.) Perhaps I will fell differently if and when I begin to let her - that "cruel mistress" out to play.

Neon

 

[liberatedslave]

I'm a bit skittish about scenarios 3&4 sometimes because my previous relationship deteriorated to the point where I could do nothing right and he didn't trust me so much as 6 feet away from him. I wouldn't go so far as to say it was abusive because the process from healthy D/s couple to tyrannical, paranoid bastard & strung-out, terrified, over compensating sub was a gradual one and for a time I chose to stay and try to heal the relationship rather than walk. It wasn't till after I left that I realised how unhealthily oppressive things had become.

My new Sir and I hit a bit of a catch 22 when he realised that if I did everything expected of me to the best of my ability there was no reason to punish me - something we both wanted but seemed to need some kind of existential justification for.

So we started with scenarios 1&2 and have never really looked back. I feel much more liberated and exhilerated knowing that Sir is paddling my ass simply because it turns him on and I have given him licence to do pretty much what the fuck he chooses to me. I belong to him and if beating my ass makes him hard then that's what he'll do in the same way that whenever he wants sex he gets it.

Works for us anyway

 

[Marquis]

This makes total sense to me in the abstract. I never find it hot however - but I do like "existential" punishements. I had a play partner who was a very wealthy trust fund girl - she loved the idea of me punishing her for being a freaking spoiled brat and I could get into that. Not for what you've done but for who you are - kinda messed up. I am also perpetually punishing men for being men, while I am not a female supremacist or anything like that. I just always find "you have done X and now you shall suffer Y" false for me, or infantilizing in a not-hot way or just a cold shower. I really groove to the notion that that person has no idea why I'm punishing them and doesn't feel he/she has a right to know or can possibly understand my higher motives as it is, so just suffers it.

Kudos for proper use of the word "existential". Not that I would have any doubt of your ability to use it, just that it seems to be a very hip word to throw in anywhere, usually with confidence that it'll make the speaker sound smart without the audience having any real clue what it means.

I'll be totally honest.

In my relationships, there's usually a transmogrification process between what actually upsets me and what is being punished for. It feels uber-unfair at times, but it keeps me from having to justify my actions and allows me to just focus on whuppin that ass.

The message usually gets across one way or another.

For example, S forgets her expensive camera at the restaurant, D laughs about forgetfulness to cheer S up; D is feeling very tense because the weather has been so bad recently and must hurt something, namely S.

Is this along the lines of what you do? Or are you talking about an even wider separation of cause and effect?

No connection at all?

 

[intothewoods]

Kudos for proper use of the word "existential". Not that I would have any doubt of your ability to use it, just that it seems to be a very hip word to throw in anywhere, usually with confidence that it'll make the speaker sound smart without the audience having any real clue what it means.

I'll be totally honest.

In my relationships, there's usually a transmogrification process between what actually upsets me and what is being punished for. It feels uber-unfair at times, but it keeps me from having to justify my actions and allows me to just focus on whuppin that ass.

The message usually gets across one way or another.

For example, S forgets her expensive camera at the restaurant, D laughs about forgetfulness to cheer S up; D is feeling very tense because the weather has been so bad recently and must hurt something, namely S.

Is this along the lines of what you do? Or are you talking about an even wider separation of cause and effect?

No connection at all?

You and Netz crack me up, first of all. I hope I get points for knowing what existential means.

Anyway. Doesn't it make a difference that you are talking about punishing someone you're in a relationship with, whereas Netz is talking about play punishment? It sounds like you're saying you need, well, something of a justification for your desire to whoop some ass. You want to do it, but you feel a bit guilty. So you need a reason. Is that true?

If both parties know what's going on in that situation, it doesn't strike me as particularly unhealthy.

 

[catalina_francisco]

For what it's worth, Cat, my gut tells me this is 1000% right. I just don't think it would be healthy for someone in their 20s to be in a 24/7 M/s relationship. Hey, maybe I'm wrong. But that's what my instinct says.

Not sure if it is healthy or not, depends on the person I think, but it is much easier to take advantage and mindfuck in a bad way than with someone who has a firm footing based on some solid adult experience of the world to fall back on. Unfortunately, it is also difficult to explain to most people who have not moved into the 30-40's+ as often it is seen as discriminating based on age when you voice what you have learned. I know for one I did it with my own parents and a couple of other people in the older age bracket when I was young, though as a rule I liked to hear of people's experiences, but once I started getting away from my youthful years I began to see things from a different and widened perspective. It has been liberating in many ways.

Catalina

 

[Netzach]

Kudos for proper use of the word "existential". Not that I would have any doubt of your ability to use it, just that it seems to be a very hip word to throw in anywhere, usually with confidence that it'll make the speaker sound smart without the audience having any real clue what it means.

I'll be totally honest.

In my relationships, there's usually a transmogrification process between what actually upsets me and what is being punished for. It feels uber-unfair at times, but it keeps me from having to justify my actions and allows me to just focus on whuppin that ass.

The message usually gets across one way or another.

For example, S forgets her expensive camera at the restaurant, D laughs about forgetfulness to cheer S up; D is feeling very tense because the weather has been so bad recently and must hurt something, namely S.

Is this along the lines of what you do? Or are you talking about an even wider separation of cause and effect?

No connection at all?

Ooooo...Hm. This actually makes me think. I can't say that it's totally un-tied to anything, I mean it's entirely possible that moods and events affect it. I'm usually the most sexual/sadistic when I feel like I'm winning. Probably has to do with testosterone (hey we ALL have some)

But if you asked me "are you being especially mean because you're having your period or because the traffic was all fucked up from the Twins game, or because you're really really pissed that M missed his meds and you're taking it out on him" I'd have to say no, none of the above.

If I began punishing him for these things I'd probably resent his shortcomings more than I do now, way more. I'd be really pissed off all the time that I'm forced into a position of monitoring and parenting, and that this thing in my own psyche has to become some kind of tool or reaction. I don't like the idea of my sadism being reactionary to anything - it's me for fuck's sake. It's a given, and a person will either be attracted to me or repelled from me by it.


Aside to intothewoods: I would never say that I do "play punishments" the whole notion makes my skin crawl. I am just doing SM, there's no rationale involved beyond it makes me wet to make people suffer, and I like to do it. It makes me happy when their motives are complex or dovetail with mine in interesting ways, as in the example of the rich girl being whipped by the working class educated older girl, but I don't use it as a tool to alter their behavior unless it means training them to like the sensation, to like it from ME and to come back for more like little junkies.

 

[lilyandthelion]

I think it depends on the nature of what you plan to do, which scenario you should you use. All have their place and are gratifying to different people at different times. Ha, yeah, I know, tell you something you don't know.

 

[intothewoods]

Aside to intothewoods: I would never say that I do "play punishments" the whole notion makes my skin crawl. I am just doing SM, there's no rationale involved beyond it makes me wet to make people suffer, and I like to do it. It makes me happy when their motives are complex or dovetail with mine in interesting ways, as in the example of the rich girl being whipped by the working class educated older girl, but I don't use it as a tool to alter their behavior unless it means training them to like the sensation, to like it from ME and to come back for more like little junkies.

Yes, I totally got that, even if I used the word punishment.

I used to think I wasn't so down with humilation, and maybe I'm still not if there isn't a cool person at the other end, but I am discovering the state of mind is everything. Anyone can physically administer a spanking, but to actually get in my head and make me bend? That's hawt!