Not Dom, not sub...

[Pure]

Pure said, //Person A is your partner who loves you and gets off on saying humiliating things. Person B hardly knows you and is mostly neutral, but perhaps slightly disgusted with your kink.

Who is going to be better at erotically humiliating you?//

Saw man,
SMWho is better at humiliating you? The person who knows you.

P: If you mean person A, I see the knowledge part, but generally there'd be a lack of will --i.e. will to take away self respect, at least for a bit.

Person B can initially work from 'rules of thumb'**and, through observation quickly get the lay of the land.

**E.g. most folks are embarrassed/humiliated if they can't help but wet their skirt or pants in the presence of strangers.

 

[Ebonyfire]

You do not have to be a dom or sub to erotically and any other way humiliate someone.

What a person considers humiliating is in that person's head and sometimes they don't even know what it is until it manifests itself.

Since it is in the person's head, anyone who is in the position to do so can humiliate another person.

As for erotic humiliation, whether the person loves you or not is a moot point. Your body will react the way it wants to. If someone who does not know you is there providing the action, then they will get the arousal.

I see it all the time.

Eb

 

[SpectreT]

Nice sidetrack; the discussion has become specifically about humiliation, rather than about mismatched kinks. I'll quote my reply from before.

The rubber's gotta meet the road, and the gears have to mesh, otherwise, the car won't drive. Pour sand in the transmission fluid, and see how well the car shifts, how long the engine can deliver power to the tires. It'll work for a while, but eventually it'll wear down, and finally, foul up so bad it's unworkable.

In this case, the kinks are the gears, and the rest of the relationship is the transmission fluid. A good, viscous fluid will help slightly mismatched gears mesh, and eventually the gears can wear into each other's grooves, but if they're too mismatched, nothing's going to help them mesh.

<snip>
is the complement the best match? a whippEE, finds a whippER.

consider [that you might want] humiliation. Person A is your partner who loves you and gets off on saying humiliating things. Person B hardly knows you and is mostly neutral, but perhaps slightly disgusted with your kink.

Who is going to be better at erotically humiliating you?

[Added for clarity: My answer: it could well be B.]

And to address the specific example of humiliation: Due to my life experiences, humiliation is an absolute dealbreaker for me, no amount of a partner being into it can possibly overcome my aversion to it. I hope that addresses the specific example and illustrates my point.

 

[SirFace]

Nice sidetrack; the discussion has become specifically about humiliation, rather than about mismatched kinks. I'll quote my reply from before.





And to address the specific example of humiliation: Due to my life experiences, humiliation is an absolute dealbreaker for me, no amount of a partner being into it can possibly overcome my aversion to it. I hope that addresses the specific example and illustrates my point.

Ditto, at least at this point, and I was interested in this thread in the beginning.

 

[Pure]

spectre

Nice sidetrack; the discussion has become specifically about humiliation, rather than about mismatched kinks.

i don't see the 'rather than.' humiliation was an example.

sorry i never did quite grasp your automotive analogy.

Let_it gave another example:

I relish cruelty in the bedroom. I love to hurt for my own pleasure and I love to witness others enjoying the same pleasure.
Idealy my b/f and I would both get off tormenting a 3rd party. At the moment we just take turns to hurt each other and enjoy each other's reactions.

This doesn't sound quite like complementation, but more like similarity. It's not an executor of cruelty meeting a lover of being the object of cruelty.

 

[Ebonyfire]

[Let_it gave another example:

I relish cruelty in the bedroom. I love to hurt for my own pleasure and I love to witness others enjoying the same pleasure.
Idealy my b/f and I would both get off tormenting a 3rd party. At the moment we just take turns to hurt each other and enjoy each other's reactions.

This doesn't sound quite like complementation, but more like similarity. It's not an executor of cruelty meeting a lover of being the object of cruelty.

I can buy that. Their similarity is the use of cruelty in the bedroom. And they have reciprocity in their implementation of it. There are many ways of carrying out that similar kink..even kinks within that kink that night be similar and/or dissimilar to the individual.


In the context of being not a Dom or sub, the label has little or no meaning because they have reciprocity in the relationship.

Eb

 

[Let_it_come]

I can buy that. Their similarity is the use of cruelty in the bedroom. And they have reciprocity in their implementation of it. There are many ways of carrying out that similar kink..even kinks within that kink that night be similar and/or dissimilar to the individual.


In the context of being not a Dom or sub, the label has little or no meaning because they have reciprocity in the relationship.

Eb

That is exactly our situation. Very well worded Pure & Ebonyfire - Better than I could put it myself.
Sub/Dom is the usual partnership I think. Could Dom/Dom ever work or Sub/Sub in a similar way to the way two Sadists together can work?
Probably not? They would both have to be 'Switches', I guess.
Could two Masochists together work in the way that two Sadists can work?
I supose yes, but I don't know how.
Really interesting thread - Very thought provoking.
Thanks.

 

[Ebonyfire]

That is exactly our situation. Very well worded Pure & Ebonyfire - Better than I could put it myself.
Sub/Dom is the usual partnership I think. Could Dom/Dom ever work or Sub/Sub in a similar way to the way two Sadists together can work?
Probably not? They would both have to be 'Switches', I guess.
Could two Masochists together work in the way that two Sadists can work?
I supose yes, but I don't know how.
Really interesting thread - Very thought provoking.
Thanks.

I probably should have said that they have reciprocity in this particular circumstance.

slave and I have reciprocity in many things, but the fundamental basis is that there is a power exchange and I am the dominant partner.

Eb

 

[Let_it_come]

I probably should have said that they have reciprocity in this particular circumstance.

slave and I have reciprocity in many things, but the fundamental basis is that there is a power exchange and I am the dominant partner.

Eb

For sure. Yes. My comment was only about sex.

 

[Let_it_come]

Thinking out loud...

Just continuing my thoughts on this...

Subs & Doms (or Dommes) are so much more acceptable than Sadists & Masochists aren't they?
And Sadists are probably the least acceptable of all.
I've played quite a bit with Masochists & I always find that if I consider that they are actually enjoying what I am doing to them it ruins my Sadistic buzz. Such is the nature of Sadism.
'Sadist' & 'Masochist' seem also to be really outdated terms now. I suppose their roots as popular terms are in 19th Century psycho-Anaysis. Pretty much all you get to hear about these days are Subs & Doms.
Is there a PC element to this? Subs & Doms are sharing & nurturing, they are having a relationship. Masochists are endlessly 'giving' to the other person, but Sadists are selfish. The Sadist's pleasure is his/her pleasure only. For the fullest Sadistic enjoyment the other person should hate what the Sadist is doing.
Not very PC at all.
Maybe that's why we don't get to hear about them so much?
Certainly they are a minority here on Lit. and in RL they only seem to feature in police reports.
Any thoughts anybody?

Jenny

 

[Ebonyfire]

For sure. Yes. My comment was only about sex.

I never comment only about sex. I realize that many of the people who post are only interested in the sexual aspects of the lifestyle, but I am not one of them.

Eb

 

[Let_it_come]

I never comment only about sex. I realize that many of the people who post are only interested in the sexual aspects of the lifestyle, but I am not one of them.

Eb

S'fine.

 

[Hester]

Just continuing my thoughts on this...

Subs & Doms (or Dommes) are so much more acceptable than Sadists & Masochists aren't they?
And Sadists are probably the least acceptable of all.
I've played quite a bit with Masochists & I always find that if I consider that they are actually enjoying what I am doing to them it ruins my Sadistic buzz. Such is the nature of Sadism.
'Sadist' & 'Masochist' seem also to be really outdated terms now. I suppose their roots as popular terms are in 19th Century psycho-Anaysis. Pretty much all you get to hear about these days are Subs & Doms.
Is there a PC element to this? Subs & Doms are sharing & nurturing, they are having a relationship. Masochists are endlessly 'giving' to the other person, but Sadists are selfish. The Sadist's pleasure is his/her pleasure only. For the fullest Sadistic enjoyment the other person should hate what the Sadist is doing.
Not very PC at all.
Maybe that's why we don't get to hear about them so much?
Certainly they are a minority here on Lit. and in RL they only seem to feature in police reports.
Any thoughts anybody?

Jenny

although it's not a perfect fit i i align much better into the sado/maso category than the sub/dom one. thanks for bringing that up

to avoid the police issue i engage in legally violent passtimes. doesn't get rid of all the urges but it's a good bleed-off valve for a lot of it.

 

[Let_it_come]

although it's not a perfect fit i i align much better into the sado/maso category than the sub/dom one. thanks for bringing that up

to avoid the police issue i engage in legally violent passtimes. doesn't get rid of all the urges but it's a good bleed-off valve for a lot of it.

Sense.


Edit: So Sado or Maso or Switch?

 

[Hester]

Sense.


Edit: So Sado or Maso or Switch?

a little of everything. my own psychosexual multiple personality disorder, although i can't really say switch as that implies i fit well at times into sub/dom territory, which i don't think is the case.

 

[Let_it_come]

a little of everything. my own psychosexual multiple personality disorder, although i can't really say switch as that implies i fit well at times into sub/dom territory, which i don't think is the case.

Actually that is spot on - There is no switch with Sadists & Masochists, unlike the Sub/Dom pairings. I hadn't thought that through. Good point.
All I really know is my own POV on this. I know I could never be a Masochist and that's about that.
Aint life grand?

 

[catalina_francisco]

Actually that is spot on - There is no switch with Sadists & Masochists, unlike the Sub/Dom pairings.

Really? Says who?!!

Catalina

 

[SpectreT]

Nice sidetrack; the discussion has become specifically about humiliation, rather than about mismatched kinks.

i don't see the 'rather than.' humiliation was an example.

sorry i never did quite grasp your automotive analogy.

Let_it gave another example:

I relish cruelty in the bedroom. I love to hurt for my own pleasure and I love to witness others enjoying the same pleasure.
Idealy my b/f and I would both get off tormenting a 3rd party. At the moment we just take turns to hurt each other and enjoy each other's reactions.

This doesn't sound quite like complementation, but more like similarity. It's not an executor of cruelty meeting a lover of being the object of cruelty.

The analogy was simple; some things are malleable, some are not. Sometimes the gulf can be too wide to bridge, as in my response to your humiliation example. Now we're off on Sadism and Masochism, it seems.

I can't comment on that too much, since I'm more B/D with a little D/S and almost no S/M. My own "psychosexual multiple personality disorder" (love that phrase - thanks, Hester) is an example of how S/M can be separated from the other two. I don't think I could knock sombody's teeth down their throat or carve a Shakespeare soliloquy in their ass with a soldering iron, no matter how hot it'd make them. Serious pain and damage potential (Not counting the effects of really tight long-term bondage) are outside my realm of what's acceptable.

That said, in your example, they're both Sadists, satisfying their own Sadistic urges, not with a complementary (Masochistic) partner, but with a Sadistic partner. I think you may have picked the one thing that doesn't require complementary interests; a Sadist can satisfy himself/herself by causing suffering to anyone. Ethics, and knowledge of consequenses may shape the forms of expression that Sadism will take, but they don't need to (and if they're really Sadistic, wouldn't even want to) hurt someone who likes it.

 

[Ebonyfire]

Actually that is spot on - There is no switch with Sadists & Masochists, unlike the Sub/Dom pairings.

That is not true.

Eb

 

[Let_it_come]

Cat. & Ebony -

As I say, all I really know is my own POV.
Tell me why I'm wrong?
In my opinion & experience I say that there is no Sado/Maso 'switch' like the Sub/Dom switch.
I say that because I can't imagine it.
I also think Sado/Maso is a little more basic & cruder than S/D. I'm basing that on comparing my experience with the experiences I'm reading about on Lit.
All this really interests me.
Help me understand more?
SpectereT's final paragraph above hits home with me. I never want to give pleasure as a Sadist I want to take it. End of.
As I say... Not very PC !
Jenny

 

[Let_it_come]

A little PS to my last post on this -
I actually hate masochists because they take the Sadistic pleasure out of hurting.
Could I be any more honest here or any more ugly?


I think when you are Maso or Sado you are polar opposites. Sub/Dom I see as a partnership. I see the person I hurt always as my 'victim'. That's why I'm having a hard time 'getting it'. But I'm loving learning here so much.

Jenny

 

[Let_it_come]

Just quoting to to be explicit re: my last 2 posts.
The last para is spot on for me/us.
Jen.

The analogy was simple; some things are malleable, some are not. Sometimes the gulf can be too wide to bridge, as in my response to your humiliation example. Now we're off on Sadism and Masochism, it seems.

I can't comment on that too much, since I'm more B/D with a little D/S and almost no S/M. My own "psychosexual multiple personality disorder" (love that phrase - thanks, Hester) is an example of how S/M can be separated from the other two. I don't think I could knock sombody's teeth down their throat or carve a Shakespeare soliloquy in their ass with a soldering iron, no matter how hot it'd make them. Serious pain and damage potential (Not counting the effects of really tight long-term bondage) are outside my realm of what's acceptable.

That said, in your example, they're both Sadists, satisfying their own Sadistic urges, not with a complementary (Masochistic) partner, but with a Sadistic partner. I think you may have picked the one thing that doesn't require complementary interests; a Sadist can satisfy himself/herself by causing suffering to anyone. Ethics, and knowledge of consequenses may shape the forms of expression that Sadism will take, but they don't need to (and if they're really Sadistic, wouldn't even want to) hurt someone who likes it.

 

[Pure]

hmmmm

Originally Posted by Hester
a little of everything. my own psychosexual multiple personality disorder, although i can't really say switch as that implies i fit well at times into sub/dom territory, which i don't think is the case.



Let-it //Actually that is spot on - There is no switch with Sadists & Masochists, unlike the Sub/Dom pairings. I hadn't thought that through. Good point.
All I really know is my own POV on this. I know I could never be a Masochist and that's about that.
Aint life grand?//

---
in many people's minds 'switch' just means sometimes acting as dom, sometimes as sub--usually suggesting staying as one for any given session. it's a somewhat vague concept trying to do duty for several, most likely.

it wasn't really the main point of the thread, and why it hasn't been used much, here, by me, excepting to show that not everyone is 'born' to a single category.

what i think hester is saying, seconded by Let-it, is the S and M impulses are often a blend. e.g., the 'real' Marquis would whip and be whipped in a single session. the movie "The Piano Teacher" illustrates this rather well; there is desire to torture (carried out 'sadistically') and (co-existing) greed to be tortured/humiliated.

this is not to deny that a person might be sadist in one session and masochistic in the next, but that sort of 'switching' is not the main thing being talked about. that is how i see it.

 

[Pure]

to spectre

ST: I can't comment on that too much, since I'm more B/D with a little D/S and almost no S/M. My own "psychosexual multiple personality disorder" (love that phrase - thanks, Hester) is an example of how S/M can be separated from the other two.

P: I think that's an important distinction to make.


ST: I don't think I could knock sombody's teeth down their throat or carve a Shakespeare soliloquy in their ass with a soldering iron, no matter how hot it'd make them. Serious pain and damage potential (Not counting the effects of really tight long-term bondage) are outside my realm of what's acceptable.

Probably you're speaking humorously, but your choice of gentle stuff for DS and extreme nasties for SM biases the comparison. It is surely 'sadism' (also) to inflict medium level pain, and minimize longterm damage potential (bodily harms that are transient, iow). And of course all sadism does not involve the 'operating' on the body.

 

[Let_it_come]

I suspect I am muddying the waters here on this thread...
And I need to be much more careful with my phrasing!

...

I think a really terminal case of Sadism like mine precludes the 'switch' option in a relationship, and I imagine that a really, really masochistic masochist would feel the same.
I take no pleasure in experiencing pain. When I am hurt I just want to hurt the other person back ten times as hard. There is no two-way street for me - I must always hurt them most.
When I accept pain from another Sadist it is so I can enjoy their cruel nature being exhibited. I still want to make them pay for it by hurting them though.
This is nothing like the sharing of S/D is it?
I've no idea!
Tell?