Online and Real Life BDSM

[kinky babydoll]

Those that were wanting to trade pics almost from the word go were usually the ones I figured were really more into appearances than actually D/s, so unless there was some other compelling factor in their favour I moved on to the next possibility for a real long term relationship. Once I did send my pic though, most were not sorry they had taken the time to get to know each other, and I was fortunate in that most wanted to meet, even those like my now Master who had to leave their country to do so, or offer to fly me to theirs (which I declined).

Catalina

i do understand where you are coming from catalina. (((HUGS)))

i have just recently gone through this with my Master, and it tore us apart, so i guess i have a sore spot there now.

i'm sorry if i upset anyone... just my hurt talking.

 

[catalina_francisco]

i do understand where you are coming from catalina. (((HUGS)))

i have just recently gone through this with my Master, and it tore us apart, so i guess i have a sore spot there now.

i'm sorry if i upset anyone... just my hurt talking.

Don't think anyone is upset, and sorry you have had to go through pain yourself. It is never easy and our experiences always colour our words in some way. especially when the wounds are raw.

Catalina

 

[Guest]

Can we hear an "amen" from the choir!!!!

Well Brethren and Sistern!!!

Hmm Mainly because I feel like being an annoying bastard tonight..

I was just reading the long debate over "simulators". Now analogy is always suspect. But this one is already convicted.

We are not talking about "simulator sex" that would be if the person was not on the other end of the comp..But rather a program in the comp itself.
And just for the record it has been a long held fact that simulators are useful in direct proportion to the accuracy with which they simulate...er whatever.
Which is why they have become more and more useful.

What you have, in OL activity, the closest analogy is actually "waldo sex".
For those who haven't read their early Heinlein (and shame on your lazy ass), a "waldo" is a remote manipulator system. And if I remember the original story, the feedback was visual, via cam.
Sound a little familiar???

For myself I have tried assorted permutations (of a lot of things), but I can hold no interest in long term OL..But then the decade is young and I am not dead yet..(I think).
I DO know that spanking the comp would prob hurt my hand..And reading moans doesn't compare to hearing them as a lovely naked woman writhes across your lap, getting your thigh wet. Doesn't compare and probably never will.
But to make the above a complete statement, insert "For me".

 

[MissTaken]

I can't see why any of this is even an issue, to begin with. How someone else (in this forum) lives is of no consequence to me, at all; just as, how I live means nothing to anyone here.

Read and digest what you want and what fits for you and ignore the rest. It's really not that hard to do and it requires nothing... not even an acknowledgement of opinions that one finds are not acceptable in his or her life.

I stay out of threads that hold no interest for me... that's just how easy it is to do.

*nods*

 

[catalina_francisco]

Navarre,

I do not really see this as an apples to oranges type of deal at all. I will admit the scene was a bit more undergound back in the pre-internet days. Maybe that is the wrong way to explain it, to become involved in the scene back then was a bit more involved and took a certain amount of gumption. Don't want to date myself, but having to get the "Sandmutopia Guardian" at a news stand and stand in line while looking casual is a bit different than googling.

However, the current generation of people involved in BDSM probably got their start through google. So it can be said that nowadays most EVERYONE starts out as an OL practitioner, and some change to different things later on due to needs, comfort, or opportunity.

However, I would not state then that SOME of the apples MAY change into oranges, and by doing so they become better. They are just following a personal path or journey and it is a personal one, of which all should be judged equal rather than by the color of their fruit

How did I miss this post before? Beginnings can be so important when looking for the best foundation to build on. Sometimes that is OL, sometimes not.....for my journey which really began in seriousness OL, I could not have wished for a better way to find my feet, nor a more wise and caring One to guide me, and to think it all began quite by accident!!

Catalina

 

[catalina_francisco]

As I have stated before on these boards, it's very sad that even the outcasts must make outcasts ...

Doms don't like Dommes ... or the r/t people don't like the online people ... or the 24/7 people don't like the non-24/7 people ... or the "subs" don't like the "slaves" ... and of course, all variations in reverse, as well as other variations that I missed. And unfortuantely, it only takes one or two people to make someone feel unwelcome and unwanted.

Personally, I have no problems with other people in whatever version of the lifestyle that they live ... as long as they are honest with themselves and others about how they live. The bottom who calls herself a slave is going to irk me (and yes, I've seen one, and she drives me up the damn wall - which is why I quit going to the munch group that she started). The "weekend warrior" who claims to be 24/7 is going to irk me. The 24/7 lifestyler who claims to be a weekend warrior is going to irk me. You get the picture, I'm sure. Now, people can always change their minds, but someone that we hear say that the lifestyle can be nothing more than a hobby, and then turn around and say that they are looking for 24/7 lifestyle (within 10 min of the first statement) ... that's gonna piss us off.

We live together 24/7, and - within reasonable limits (meaning that we don't keep ghosst chained and bound whenever we aren't using him - which seems to be some people's perception of 24/7) we live the lifestyle 24/7.

Because ghosst is on the road a lot - being a truck driver and all - we do some things over the phone and online (now that he has his computer back) ... but we don't consider it to be an online D/s relationship, because 90% of the active domination is done when he is home - he has standing rules that are in place when he is home and when he isn't, but that's about it, in general (we are working on that though ... and we are working on getting him a job that will get him home at least 3 nights a week instead of 3 nights a month).

With sylvan, it's a little different because we haven't spent as much skin to skin time together, but we have, and hopefully we will - and if he ends up not moving, then we will end the online portion as well.

For us, though, we see both as long distance rather than online relationships, because ghosst does live with us, even though he's on the road a lot, and sylvan is planning to move in with us, at which time there will be no online/phone/mail/whatever.

This does not mean that we don't respect online relationships - both of ours started out with chatting online, and there was some online D/s between us, but minimal. Our issues are mostly when we are treated as if we are living a fantasy (as Francisco said) because "24/7 can't exist" according to some, or when someone tries to tell us that they have the same exact relationship with their PYL/pyl that we have, even though they have never actually met face to face. I'm sorry, but there are dynamics that just aren't possible without looking someone in the eye ... online is a great place to learn - as we did - and it's a great place to get started and/or find release for fantasies that aren't getting fulfilled elsewhere ... but now that we have done r/t, we can't and won't go back. Online is for some people, but not for us. And as always, as long as people are honest with themselves and with us, we don't care which flavor they prefer.

Miss Karen

Thought some might like to add to this topic and picked this post because it has IMHO a lot of truth in it, and because it was one of many which spoke openly and honestly about some of the issues which seem to come up frequently in a public forum.

Catalina

 

[Slutacus]

Being different and having different opinions on the board actually makes it more interesting because it gives you other points to consider and to compare with. I celebrate differences since it creates a much more interesting an open society. Online BDSM practitioners are human beings that are interested in BDSM that to me is already enough to exchange ideas with them.

I have followed my path to BDSM which is different than that of Incubus_dark or Sweetdommes or Angelic Assassin. We all have different experiences; I have heard many times in many different groups that their way was the only true one. I have had long boring repetitive discussion with the king of stupidity (Jon Jacobs) about true domination and true submission. I have been part of BDSM groups and stepped out of them because of their narrow minded view on the world.

Francisco.

LOLOL, I see.

You "Celebrate differences since it creates a much more interesting and open society" unless the differences are voiced by a man named Jon Jacobs, "The King of Stupidity." How is calling this person the king of stupidity any different from calling Sweetdommes that or AA that or an online bdsmer that? Is it cool to do so as long as YOU do it, becasue your shit doesn't stink? Francisco, I call you a big hypocrite. For all your talk of open-mindedness and treating people with respect, you're just as boorish and hurtful when it comes to the people whose opinions you strongly disagree with (or who, perhaps, have wounded your big ego?) as anybody else is on here whom you are critiquing for being narrow-minded. Is he "fair game" for venting your petty hatred on now because he's not here? Because he's dead? (Less than two months when you made that post.) Your boorishness regarding him, I would like to emphasize, is equally hurtful to the many of us who loved, respected, and understood that man as anybody's virrulent and vocal hatred of an online bdsmer is to that person. The behavior is no different: only the target has changed.

As I said in another post elsewhere in these two forums, we ALL have our petty resentments, seething hatreds, dislikes, we ALL disrespect certain others whom we consider to be lower and lesser or stupider than our great, glorious wonderful never-sinning selves, even those of us who talk such a pretty talk about tolerance and openmindedness. We all have our "Kings of Stupidity," whatever pretty and tolerant attitudes we claim as our own. And, we all deeply wound others by our open scorn and sarcasm for those we consider beneath our great and lofty selves, when those others happen to love and respect the targets of our scorn.

Don't make things worse and more hurtful than they already are, Francisco, by trying to turn this into a "All the Good Reasons Why The Evil Jon Jacobs Should Be Burned At the Verbal Stake" witchhunt. Your hateful intolerance has done more than enough damage to the people here who may not have the guts to speak out they way I do but who carry him very close in their hearts and are deeply wounded by your careless and childish grudge against the man. Don't compound your sin and hurt them more with your "I am so very tolerant except for..." brand of hypocricy, please.

He's long dead and buried and your bitter words will not touch or wound him. They will, however, continue to serve to hurt and punish those innocents who had no greater sin than to care deeply for the man. Do you enjoy that brand of sadism? I hope not!

 

[catalina_francisco]

LOLOL, I see.

You "...... not!

Yes, I have called Jon Jacobs the king of stupidity. Yes, I dislike the man, not only do I disagree completely and totally with his ideas of BDSM, but I mostly disliked him because he had no space left for any other opinion except his.

Yes, I know he died on 14th November 2004, now of course there are some who say you should never speak ill of the dead. However the truth should always be told, the man might have gone but his words are still there, I should not have called him the king of stupidity, it is always better to keep personal opinions of people away from forums.

However the notion that I should not speak my mind about someone just because he is dead is strange to say the least. Most of our recorded history deals of people who are dead, often unfavorably; does that mean we suddenly should rewrite history?

I have to compliment you on your strategy, first you throw enough dirt in my direction that even if I would have been a real saint some would have stuck onto me and then you try to remove any possibility I might have in defending the reasons for why I make that remark. I think though that if anyone uses the word sin and Francisco in one sentence they should at least visit my Saint Francisco thread and make a contribution to it.

However I have no interest in creating a witch hunt, if someone wants to have a discussion with me about Jon Jacobs ideas I would be more than happy of course to discuss them in an open polite way.

By the way, I happen to think that having a big ego is a good quality for being a Dominant, and my ego is big enough for at least 10 Dominants, so thank you for the compliment. I have to say that I found your post very witty and would like to thank you for making me enjoy a post on Lit. It was a lot better written than some I have been reading lately.

It is a good rule of thumb, if you put on the cloak of the righteous it looks better if you do not make the same sins you have so eloquently accused another of. However, you can comfort yourself with the knowledge that both you and I are sinners and Jesus Christ came to this world to save the sinners.

Francisco.

 

[stirbird]

What an incredibly hateful, callous, and (she nailed it on the head) hypocritical thing to say, Francisco. The woman tells you that you are hurting her and others by slandering a man they loved, and you simply continue with your hatefulness, calling her clever instead of hearing her passionate plea that you practice some of the tolerance which you preach so widely. Sure, go ahead, start a thread on the evils of Jon Jacobs. The woman just told you directly that this would be the most hurtful thing you could do to her and her friends. I am speechless before this crass and crude intolerance. How would you like it if you died and everybody started speaking hatefully and spitefully about you to Catalina...and their hatred of you was so pathetically irrational and high that they continued to torment her, your beloved slave, long after your death, simply for the "sin" of being associated with you. What a foul and ugly stance you take in such an "open-minded and tolerant" thread.

I noticed you never addressed any of Slutacus's points by the way. You simply dismiss them as "clever?" What's so "clever" about someone saying, "Your Intolerance to this man and his ideas is hurting me Francisco?" You're welcome to feel whatever you choose, obviously, we all do, but why can't you show the least little respect or concern for those less fortunate that yourself and stop slandering someone and their ideas when doing so clearly really hurts people.

How do you live with such utter hypocricy, for instance? That's a question of hers I am wondering if you can answer. The most ridiculous and false and dangerou online bdsm drivel is supposed to be tolerated here but not the quiet words of somebody who spoke so directly to many of us about bdsm relationships. So he insulted your ego, apparently? Are you not man enough to get over that if it means you'll stop hurting and victimizing his dependents and friends? How can you preace tolerance for others and other ideas while you are so hateful and intolerant toward someone that you won't even take her heartfelt plea to stop the hatred seriously. I do wonder how you manage to sleep at night.

This is really ugly, guy. I'm about to leave this forum because of it. Clearly there is no tolerance or care for others or openmindedness in here it's just lies and lipservice, unless we kowtow, of course, to YOUR ideas of what is proper bdsm, and allow you to cruelly insult whichever ones you don't like, even when such deeply wound and offend others.

You suck, Francisco. Your whole thread here is a total lie.

 

[catalina_francisco]

This is by far not as witty or intelligently written.

Instead of leaving lit why don't you start an "I hate Francisco" thread, that would actually be very cool. I have not had that honour yet. It would give you another chance at writing a better post.

Francisco

 

[stirbird]

Wow, you have no ability to admit it when you are wrong. I'm angry at your extreme hypocricy, preaching one thing and doing another, and how it is clearly hurtful to others and you don't give a shit about that, but I don't hate you. Disappointed is more the word.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Wow, you have no ability to admit it when you are wrong. I'm angry at your extreme hypocricy, preaching one thing and doing another, and how it is clearly hurtful to others and you don't give a shit about that, but I don't hate you. Disappointed is more the word.

O well maybe next time. Pitty I was looking forward to that thread.

Francisco.

 

[stirbird]

I think it's silly to even think I'd make such a thread! Francisco, all I am saying here (and Sluta, too, I believe) is that you are hurting other peoples' feelings...in a thread that is supposed to be about NOT hurting other peoples' feelings.

 

[catalina_francisco]

I think it's silly to even think I'd make such a thread! Francisco, all I am saying here (and Sluta, too, I believe) is that you are hurting other peoples' feelings...in a thread that is supposed to be about NOT hurting other peoples' feelings.

Now see this is a more civilized approach.

I agree that it can be considered quite tasteless to insult a person, especially if that person has passed away, and for that I apologize. Not for my opinion about his ideas of course.

Francisco.

 

[dexwebster]

However, the current generation of people involved in BDSM probably got their start through google. So it can be said that nowadays most EVERYONE starts out as an OL practitioner, and some change to different things later on due to needs, comfort, or opportunity.

I read voraciously online, then moved to books (and, yes, I went to an actual bookstore to get them and not online; I'm a big fan of patronizing your local niche booksellers, in this case Lambda Rising), and now, a little more secure in my theoretical knowledge, I've started attending the Black Rose TNG group. I pretty much always knew that was how it would go. The idea of cyberplay never appealed to me (too sybaritic, I suppose: if my senses aren't engaged, it's no good for me). But I didn't consider any of the time I spent reading as being "in the scene" or the like. It was just research, however I obtained it. In fact, with the exception of this forum, I've never had any actual online interaction with people in the community.

I'm not saying one of them is superior, but they're not really comparable to me either. If you go to a group, and even if you never play and never find a partner and don't talk besides saying hello (the closest thing to a RL equivalent of being an internet lurker), you're still there. Any RL lurker invested more effort than I possibly could've in months of reading just by sitting there and doing nothing, because she had to physically get up and go to this place and be seen by these people to do it. That, to me, is the fundamental difference. You get out of things what you put into them, and just the reality of it being a physical space requires a much larger necessary commitment--it doesn't rule out a similar commitment in a cyber environment, but it's a prerequisite in RL, just by virtue of its nature. It's that "gumption" necessary to actually get out there and do it.

 

[FurryFury]

So is there a dress code for munches?

I think there is for fetish clubs.

Fury

 

[dexwebster]

So is there a dress code for munches?

I haven't attended a huge variety of them or anything, so I can't say for sure, but I would assume not. They're often held in public places--restaurants and the like (the TNG group I attend meets in an Irish pub), so discretion is usually pretty important.

 

[catalina_francisco]

So is there a dress code for munches?

I think there is for fetish clubs.

Fury

In the UK normally there is not a dress code. It depends on the kind of munch you go to, like dexwebster has already mentioned most of the munches are held in public places.

A munch is very good to get to know others in a relax environment where nothing is obligatory. Full nudity is almost always considered to be inappropriate, expect some nice friendly people who just want to talk and get acquainted with people in a nice relaxing way.

Here is a list of most munches in the UK.
http://www.informedconsent.co.uk/uk/munches/

The London fetish club also has a very well maintained calendar where you can find more information on.
http://www.lfshosting.co.uk/calendar/

For the Netherlands there is a very well maintained calendar for BDSM events:

http://www.vssm.nl/index.php?option=com_events&Itemid=74&lang=dutch

Francisco.

 

[Evil_Geoff]

So is there a dress code for munches?

I think there is for fetish clubs.

Depends on the venue and the group sponsoring the munches. T3WD, for example, DOES have a dress code for munches:

> -No overt collars please
> -Dress casually, no fetishwear please
> -No BDSM activity inside or on the property, before,
> during or after the munch. We like going there, for
> the most part, they like us there

Our munches are almost always in a private room in a public restaurant, giving away the nature of the group by walking in wearing leather shorty shortsand corset corset, while leading your submissive in on a leash while they are wearing a leather hood is just WAY NOT COOL. While outting yourself is fine, the rest of us may not have not agreed to be painted with the same brush.

Fetish clubs may have a variety of dress codes in place, depending on the nature of the event. I've scene strict "Leather" dress required, "formal attire" (in this case meaning black tie and evening gowns or service uniforms), I've seen "uniform" nights and more... Just keep in mind that you _really_ need to be "Street Legal" on your way to the event. Rain/trench/overcoats are good for that. Particularly if you aren't wearing much else underneath it! *grin*

Just make certain to contact the organizers when you make your plans and confirm with them what is appropriate to wear. That's what I always do if it's not clear in their announcements or RSVP acknowledgements.

Hope that helps!
- Geoff

 

[FurryFury]

Thanks to all that replied. They were helpful responses. I am getting closer to a resolution, to at least go to a munch.

Fury

 

[Evil_Geoff]

What is "real"?

Wowsers, quite a bit of ire and rancor seem to have bubbled up here.

So just what is "real" anyway?

There is physical reality, the feel of textures, skin on skin or hair, pleasure, pain, the smell of sweat and hot sex, the sound of our partners moans and cries, the taste of their sweat, their tears, their sex, or blood...

Then there is emotional reality, the feeling of fear, anticipation, the joy of pleasing, the love, devotion, trust, longing, desire. Hate, anger, calm, peace acceptance.

We have mental reality too. The planning for a scene, learning the needs, desires, preferences of our partner. Finding ways to fulfill their needs. Communication with one another, the sharing of ideas, thoughts, feelings.

So what makes a relationship "real"? Does it take fucking? Does it take a flogger or crop actually smacking an ass? Does it take kisses and caresses? Does it take a shared candle-light dinner for two? Does it take going to movies together? Showers? Does it take PYL/ordering pyl to do something then standing over them to make sure it's done? Is it sharing the intimacy of your body that makes your relationship "real"?

Or is it the way your heart beat speeds up when you think about your partner? Is it the way you look forward to the time you share together? Is it pouring out your dreams to him/her? Is it their sharing their fantasies with you? Is it knowing, in your heart, that they are meeting your needs and you are meeting theirs? Or is it sharing the intimacy of your soul that makes your relationship "real"?

Or maybe it's the length of time that you have been hanging around one another. So does it take a year to make a realtionship "real"? Does it take a week? A decade? A month?

There are arguments for any of these approaches, no doubt. And I am certain that for those who are rooted in the "it ain't real unless I can touch it, feel it, smell it, taste it, hear it" camp, understanding the "we share our hearts and souls, therefore our relationship is very real" group will always be a problem. Those in the "it takes a year" group will never understand the "it was love at first sight" folks...

There will ALWAYS be those who must have the physical in front of them to consider something to be real. And there will always be those for whom faith is quite enough to KNOW that what they believe is real. And then there will be those of us with plenty of faith, but you know what, we want a burning bush now and then too... *grin*

I'm a believer. I have plenty of faith. I've seen OL only relationships last for years. And for the parties involved, the D/s relationship is very very real. And I've seen real-time f-2-f/s-2-s relationships last a week.

Who am I, then, to question the relationship of others, either OL or RT? Is her submission to Him "real"? Is Her ownership of her "real"? Who am I to tell Him that He doesnt "really" command his slave's obedience and loyalty? And who are you to question that, either? Who appointed you as the arbiter of "real" vs. fantasy relationships? When were you elected Judge of "REAL" BDSM? *grins and shrugs* I imagine that happened about the same time _I_ was made Judge of All That Is Worthwhile, Holy and True....

It's just that as I get older and wiser I find that I have much less need to impose my rulings on reality on anyone other than myself and those who have submitted to my authority. The rest of y'all can take what I share and use what works for you and yours, and discard the rest. If no one jumps on my bandwagon (or caboose! *LOL*) it's still a good day.

As always, I remain,

 

[graceanne]

Wowsers, quite a bit of ire and rancor seem to have bubbled up here.

So just what is "real" anyway?

There is physical reality, the feel of textures, skin on skin or hair, pleasure, pain, the smell of sweat and hot sex, the sound of our partners moans and cries, the taste of their sweat, their tears, their sex, or blood...

Then there is emotional reality, the feeling of fear, anticipation, the joy of pleasing, the love, devotion, trust, longing, desire. Hate, anger, calm, peace acceptance.

We have mental reality too. The planning for a scene, learning the needs, desires, preferences of our partner. Finding ways to fulfill their needs. Communication with one another, the sharing of ideas, thoughts, feelings.

So what makes a relationship "real"? Does it take fucking? Does it take a flogger or crop actually smacking an ass? Does it take kisses and caresses? Does it take a shared candle-light dinner for two? Does it take going to movies together? Showers? Does it take PYL/ordering pyl to do something then standing over them to make sure it's done? Is it sharing the intimacy of your body that makes your relationship "real"?

Or is it the way your heart beat speeds up when you think about your partner? Is it the way you look forward to the time you share together? Is it pouring out your dreams to him/her? Is it their sharing their fantasies with you? Is it knowing, in your heart, that they are meeting your needs and you are meeting theirs? Or is it sharing the intimacy of your soul that makes your relationship "real"?

Or maybe it's the length of time that you have been hanging around one another. So does it take a year to make a realtionship "real"? Does it take a week? A decade? A month?

There are arguments for any of these approaches, no doubt. And I am certain that for those who are rooted in the "it ain't real unless I can touch it, feel it, smell it, taste it, hear it" camp, understanding the "we share our hearts and souls, therefore our relationship is very real" group will always be a problem. Those in the "it takes a year" group will never understand the "it was love at first sight" folks...

There will ALWAYS be those who must have the physical in front of them to consider something to be real. And there will always be those for whom faith is quite enough to KNOW that what they believe is real. And then there will be those of us with plenty of faith, but you know what, we want a burning bush now and then too... *grin*

I'm a believer. I have plenty of faith. I've seen OL only relationships last for years. And for the parties involved, the D/s relationship is very very real. And I've seen real-time f-2-f/s-2-s relationships last a week.

Who am I, then, to question the relationship of others, either OL or RT? Is her submission to Him "real"? Is Her ownership of her "real"? Who am I to tell Him that He doesnt "really" command his slave's obedience and loyalty? And who are you to question that, either? Who appointed you as the arbiter of "real" vs. fantasy relationships? When were you elected Judge of "REAL" BDSM? *grins and shrugs* I imagine that happened about the same time _I_ was made Judge of All That Is Worthwhile, Holy and True....

It's just that as I get older and wiser I find that I have much less need to impose my rulings on reality on anyone other than myself and those who have submitted to my authority. The rest of y'all can take what I share and use what works for you and yours, and discard the rest. If no one jumps on my bandwagon (or caboose! *LOL*) it's still a good day.

As always, I remain,

Dude, if you were a sub I would SO put that in the sub thought of the day calender.

 

[Evil_Geoff]

Dude, if you were a sub I would SO put that in the sub thought of the day calender.

*chuckles* Thank you, gracie! I will take that as a sincere compliment (as opposed to seeing it as questioning my overall Dominant Domly-ness). But riddle me this... if it's worthy of inclusion as a "thought of the day", why does the orientation of the writer disqualify it for inclusion? I would certainly not worry about it making anyone question whether I was a Dominant or not.
*grin*

 

[graceanne]

*chuckles* Thank you, gracie! I will take that as a sincere compliment (as opposed to seeing it as questioning my overall Dominant Domly-ness). But riddle me this... if it's worthy of inclusion as a "thought of the day", why does the orientation of the writer disqualify it for inclusion? I would certainly not worry about it making anyone question whether I was a Dominant or not.
*grin*

Cause it's the SUB thought of the day calender, silly.

Their used to be a Dom thought of the day calendar, but it kinda died out.

 

[FurryFury]

Wowsers, quite a bit of ire and rancor seem to have bubbled up here.

So just what is "real" anyway?

There is physical reality, the feel of textures, skin on skin or hair, pleasure, pain, the smell of sweat and hot sex, the sound of our partners moans and cries, the taste of their sweat, their tears, their sex, or blood...

Then there is emotional reality, the feeling of fear, anticipation, the joy of pleasing, the love, devotion, trust, longing, desire. Hate, anger, calm, peace acceptance.

We have mental reality too. The planning for a scene, learning the needs, desires, preferences of our partner. Finding ways to fulfill their needs. Communication with one another, the sharing of ideas, thoughts, feelings.

So what makes a relationship "real"? Does it take fucking? Does it take a flogger or crop actually smacking an ass? Does it take kisses and caresses? Does it take a shared candle-light dinner for two? Does it take going to movies together? Showers? Does it take PYL/ordering pyl to do something then standing over them to make sure it's done? Is it sharing the intimacy of your body that makes your relationship "real"?

Or is it the way your heart beat speeds up when you think about your partner? Is it the way you look forward to the time you share together? Is it pouring out your dreams to him/her? Is it their sharing their fantasies with you? Is it knowing, in your heart, that they are meeting your needs and you are meeting theirs? Or is it sharing the intimacy of your soul that makes your relationship "real"?

Or maybe it's the length of time that you have been hanging around one another. So does it take a year to make a realtionship "real"? Does it take a week? A decade? A month?

There are arguments for any of these approaches, no doubt. And I am certain that for those who are rooted in the "it ain't real unless I can touch it, feel it, smell it, taste it, hear it" camp, understanding the "we share our hearts and souls, therefore our relationship is very real" group will always be a problem. Those in the "it takes a year" group will never understand the "it was love at first sight" folks...

There will ALWAYS be those who must have the physical in front of them to consider something to be real. And there will always be those for whom faith is quite enough to KNOW that what they believe is real. And then there will be those of us with plenty of faith, but you know what, we want a burning bush now and then too... *grin*

I'm a believer. I have plenty of faith. I've seen OL only relationships last for years. And for the parties involved, the D/s relationship is very very real. And I've seen real-time f-2-f/s-2-s relationships last a week.

Who am I, then, to question the relationship of others, either OL or RT? Is her submission to Him "real"? Is Her ownership of her "real"? Who am I to tell Him that He doesnt "really" command his slave's obedience and loyalty? And who are you to question that, either? Who appointed you as the arbiter of "real" vs. fantasy relationships? When were you elected Judge of "REAL" BDSM? *grins and shrugs* I imagine that happened about the same time _I_ was made Judge of All That Is Worthwhile, Holy and True....

It's just that as I get older and wiser I find that I have much less need to impose my rulings on reality on anyone other than myself and those who have submitted to my authority. The rest of y'all can take what I share and use what works for you and yours, and discard the rest. If no one jumps on my bandwagon (or caboose! *LOL*) it's still a good day.

As always, I remain,

Well thought out and beautiful as always Evil_Geoff.



Fury