Punching, kicking, etc. in D/s...

[catalina_francisco]

Re: children

people, to clarify, I am not compring subs to kids or saying it's ok to be with kids sexually
if you read the last part of ownedsubgal's post that I was responding to she said :
"i am hard pressed to find any activity to be universally "wrong"...if those involved are happy in the situation, what is wrong about it??"
So I was responding with comments about an activity that IS generally universally considered wrong to provoke a response

I am a sick freak but not sick like THAT
Strictly consensual adults here, thanks

James, I personally did not read you were okaying play of any type with children, but I also did not read osg's statement to cover such instances. To me she was speaking of adult relationships and I just felt we need to keep things in some sort of perspective, if only to ensure discussion remains vaguely on track and does not get consumed by everyone having to dissect and clarify each word they type.

I have been rather outspoken of late, I'm sure most would agree, on this issue of open discussion needing to have a piile of disclaimers in every post just to ward of those who would take advantage of the situation to try and infer other than what the poster is really saying. I, as have many others, have been subjected to this nd it not only becomes counter productive to conversation, but at times becomes downright ridiculous. And for those waiting, yes, this is IMHO only and I respect your right to differ or disagree.

Catalina

 

[James G 5]

Re: Re: children

James, I personally did not read you were okaying play of any type with children, but I also did not read osg's statement to cover such instances. To me she was speaking of adult relationships and I just felt we need to keep things in some sort of perspective, if only to ensure discussion remains vaguely on track and does not get consumed by everyone having to dissect and clarify each word they type.

I have been rather outspoken of late, I'm sure most would agree, on this issue of open discussion needing to have a piile of disclaimers in every post just to ward of those who would take advantage of the situation to try and infer other than what the poster is really saying. I, as have many others, have been subjected to this nd it not only becomes counter productive to conversation, but at times becomes downright ridiculous. And for those waiting, yes, this is IMHO only and I respect your right to differ or disagree.

Catalina

I understand your point, and I agree to an extent
But she made an EXTREMELY broad statement and she has stated in the past that her beliefs extend well beyond what most consider reasonable, to the extent that she said once she is PROPERTY and as such her Master may kill her on a whim
Given this, I felt clarification was warranted
Usually I am not QUITE so picky, altho I can be a bit of a pedant when it comes to what is said and how it is said
People rarely pause to consider the power or implications of their words, and in a forum like this where we have ONLY words to go on it IS important to communicate clearly and with little room for misinterpretations and false meanings
IMHO, of course

 

[catalina_francisco]

Re: Re: Re: children

I understand your point, and I agree to an extent
But she made an EXTREMELY broad statement and she has stated in the past that her beliefs extend well beyond what most consider reasonable, to the extent that she said once she is PROPERTY and as such her Master may kill her on a whim
Given this, I felt clarification was warranted
Usually I am not QUITE so picky, altho I can be a bit of a pedant when it comes to what is said and how it is said
People rarelt pause to consider the power or implications of their words, and in a forum like this where we have ONLY words to go on it IS important to communicate clearly and with little room for misinterpretations and false meanings
IMHO, of course

Mmmm..at the risk of raising the ire of some, I agree with her in relation to us being the property of our Master's. I also accept my life is my Master's control to give or take, though he is not quite so comfortable with this and like osg's Master, is highly unlikely to ever decide that to end my life would be his choice. It is all about how you perceive the role, the expectations, and the responsibilities. I could have chosen to be someone's submissive, but it holds no interest for me in the long term.

Catalina

 

[James G 5]

Re: Re: Re: Re: children

Mmmm..at the risk of raising the ire of some, I agree with her in relation to us being the property of our Master's. I also accept my life is my Master's control to give or take, though he is not quite so comfortable with this and like osg's Master, is highly unlikely to ever decide that to end my life would be his choice. It is all about how you perceive the role, the expectations, and the responsibilities. I could have chosen to be someone's submissive, but it holds no interest for me in the long term.

Catalina

I wasn't disagreeing with how she lives
I stated that it was outside the bounds of what most people consider reasonable, citing the killing line to make my point
So I was wondering where she drew the line
Not saying she was wrong
I am VERY precise in my words and people STILL read things in to it or read them incorrectly
That's EXACTLY why I ask for clarifications from others and apoligize or correct MY statements if I speak poorly or in a contradictory fashion

 

[catalina_francisco]

And James I did not read that you were, though you did say it was wrong which some may equate with disagreement. I know many find those aspects too extreme to consider acceptable even for those who make their own choices, and it does border on judgement when someone repeatedly gets told over and over by many they need to think about it more, change the things they do etc., when they have justified their reality and explained the experience and knowledge they have. Though I would never feel I could survive her life, and was careful in my choice of Master for these reasons, I accept her right to choose. Some people here find any type of pain infliction bad, but it doesn't stop those of us who need it. It is al about personal taste I think.

C

 

[James G 5]

And James I did not read that you were, though you did say it was wrong which some may equate with disagreement. I know many find those aspects too extreme to consider acceptable even for those who make their own choices, and it does border on judgement when someone repeatedly gets told over and over by many they need to think about it more, change the things they do etc., when they have justified their reality and explained the experience and knowledge they have. Though I would never feel I could survive her life, and was careful in my choice of Master for these reasons, I accept her right to choose. Some people here find any type of pain infliction bad, but it doesn't stop those of us who need it. It is al about personal taste I think.

C

I went back and re-read everything I have said. The only thing I said I felt was wrong was deliberately engaging in activities that have a needlessly high risk of personal harm, and even then I would not condemn or tell anyone who chose to live so that they shouldn't do so
I never said owned's lifestyle or choices were wrong, at least not for her
I was speaking my opinion about styles of play
And in that, if it is judegmental for me to say that I thing it's wrong, or a bad idea to engage in such types of play, well, I can live with it
I feel we are ALL of us too precious to treat so casually and capriciously and think that anyone who seeks such harm, be it in D/s or any number of other things, DOES have a problem. There's a line between seeking experience and sensation and seeking harm to one's self or your own DEATH. Aside from those who're terminal and have no hope of life, such quests are usually engendered by deep seated problems.
And even there, I say "usually"
If a person is comfortable in his or her life and reality, as you say, they have NO need to defend or justify themselves to others
The fact that they feel the need to do so makes me question their commitment
Much as a true believer in a religion can smile at doubters and hold true to his faith, someone who is secure enough could say "This is how I choose to live my life, and if you don't like it, it's your issue, not mine"

And I always say, IMHO....and we all know about opinions, right?

 

[ownedsubgal]

James, as i said, abuse does not make one feel "good". that goes against the very definition of abuse. so a child could never ever feel good about being molested/abused. again, i don't define abuse by actions, as many/maybe most do. so i don't know how to respond to a statement like:

"So if there is no harmful intent and the child feels ok, it's ok?"

abuse isn't about actions, it's about hurting. destroying. damaging.

now as for where i draw the line? i do not draw any lines. i am a slave, it is not my place to have boundaries or limits. the only lines in my life are those of my Master's, and he can cross those as he wills.

Catalina, i think you give me far too much credit...you are clearly devoted to your Master as i am to mine. for me, this was the only way i could live and be fulfilled. as you said yourself, simply being someone's submissive would not be enough for me. being anything less than a total slave (with everything that entails) to my beloved Master/Mate, would not be enough for me.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Catalina, i think you give me far too much credit...you are clearly devoted to your Master as i am to mine. for me, this was the only way i could live and be fulfilled. as you said yourself, simply being someone's submissive would not be enough for me. being anything less than a total slave (with everything that entails) to my beloved Master/Mate, would not be enough for me.

Thank you osg...for me the position of slave is sublime.

Catalina

 

[sigsauerprinces]

A dangerous statement: there is something sexy about dee vee to a lot of people. Naturally, one must tread carefully.

yes...i have to admit to being one of the people to whom "dee vee" is sexy. (i hope no one minds me bringing this thread back up-was looking thru old threads and this one caught my eye).

i cant explain why...and its not the same thing as bdsm to me, whips and floggers and kneeling and all that. its something totally different. i used to wish for a bf who would "abuse" me. hit me, slap my face, even punch me. this was before i discovered bdsm. i'd always had these urges, to have violence taken out on me-i just never really knew anything at all about bdsm and D/s. when i finally discovered it it was like a light bulb went on over my head. "ohhh..so THATS what that is. thats what i like!" i was kind of in awe that there were lots of other ppl like me.

but i have to admit that the idea of plain old domestic violence-not bdsm..not violence dressed up with formal bows and flowery words (not that theres anything wrong with all that), just me saying something out of line and getting checked for it, physically, with a few really hard slaps, or a punch... the thought of that pushes buttons in me, way deep down, sexually and otherwise, that i cant explain. its a desire but more than that, its a need..and getting it... there is nothing better than that.

 

[catalina_francisco]

yes...i have to admit to being one of the people to whom "dee vee" is sexy. (i hope no one minds me bringing this thread back up-was looking thru old threads and this one caught my eye).

i cant explain why...and its not the same thing as bdsm to me, whips and floggers and kneeling and all that. its something totally different. i used to wish for a bf who would "abuse" me. hit me, slap my face, even punch me. this was before i discovered bdsm. i'd always had these urges, to have violence taken out on me-i just never really knew anything at all about bdsm and D/s. when i finally discovered it it was like a light bulb went on over my head. "ohhh..so THATS what that is. thats what i like!" i was kind of in awe that there were lots of other ppl like me.

but i have to admit that the idea of plain old domestic violence-not bdsm..not violence dressed up with formal bows and flowery words (not that theres anything wrong with all that), just me saying something out of line and getting checked for it, physically, with a few really hard slaps, or a punch... the thought of that pushes buttons in me, way deep down, sexually and otherwise, that i cant explain. its a desire but more than that, its a need..and getting it... there is nothing better than that.

But this idea of DV you have is not DV. DV is abuse which is not welcomed by the victim/survivor, nor is it pleasureable in any sense. Sorry to differ but working with DV survivors is my profession and I can't stand by and have it glorified to be something it isn't. Out of all the women I have worked with, even the ones who felt sorry for their perpetrator, loved them, none found it pleasureable, none felt they needed it, and none wanted it to continue. Wanting and enjoying that which is dished out comes back to D/s, a whole different ballgame.

Catalina

 

[sigsauerprinces]

But this idea of DV you have is not DV. DV is abuse which is not welcomed by the victim/survivor, nor is it pleasureable in any sense. Sorry to differ but working with DV survivors is my profession and I can't stand by and have it glorified to be something it isn't. Out of all the women I have worked with, even the ones who felt sorry for their perpetrator, loved them, none found it pleasureable, none felt they needed it, and none wanted it to continue. Wanting and enjoying that which is dished out comes back to D/s, a whole different ballgame.

Catalina

i know what you're saying... and i do know the difference between what im describing, and real genuine domestic violence. trust me i do. i suppose i was just using the term as a way to describe the particular act that so appeals to me. and perhaps maybe even the term appeals to me. but rest assured, i know the difference between actual non consensual domestic violence, and bdsm, or D/s behaviour, that seems to mimic it.

 

[Quint]

Eeyup, I know where you're coming from, ssp. (I think I say that a lot to you.) I've just recently discovered a dirty little exciting thrilling need from hearing T say a certain phrase, stare down at me a certain way, pull his belt out of his pants. Any of that. Random acts of violence. Part of the thrill is akin to roleplaying, but I think that's my mind's rationalization of what I know is not abuse, but sure as hell feels like it at the time*.

It's the part of me that hungers for stereotypes--Nazi, abusive Southern husband who's had too much to drink, Daddy with impure intentions. The end result is that it isn't a beating I've asked for, but I get it anyway. Much scarier that way.


*As opposed to feeling like it afterwards, which it does not because as Catalina said, it's not DV but a "consensual" remix of it.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Well ssp and Quint, I guess my problem comes from fighting long and hard for women who despite the accusations of some males on this board and in society who like to promote the idea women have it all their own way with the law etc. always on their side, don't have protection from something which they do not choose to live with. I find it abhorrant for women especially, to then promote this idea it is pleasureable, which is inadvertently supporting the oppression and abuse of women and children. It is far from pleasureable or acceptable, and as you say, you know that and are describing BDSM. So my question is if you are knowingly describing BDSM why not do that and name it as such and not increase the risks to women and children in non-consensual situations, just to feed your own jollies? Are you happy to accept your words may somewhere contribute to the death of an abused woman?

I guess it doesn't seem to touch you personally so you see no connection, but believe me every word you utter promoting this as something desireable in a non-consesual way, has some degree of assisting the continued oppression and abuse of women who basically are told by police throughout the western world their best hope for help is to survive an attempted murder by their SO, and then maybe something can be done to protect them, maybe not. It is not fun trying to help a woman escape DV or protect herself and her children, only to have her killed because the laws of the land and society were not interested enough to provide her and her children with adequate protection...believe me I have first hand experience of dealing with this situation and being told it is just the way things are. It is neither sexy or a turn on.

How can you so lightly play with these words if you understand the reality? As for your partner administering a beating or such without warning or reason, that is BDSM for those of us who accept and consent to extreme play, not DV, so whether it tweaks your clit or not to pretend otherwise, it is hugely irresponsible for you to promote DV as OK and sexy. You may say, 'oh, but we have said we know it is not DV', but would you have said that if I or someone had not challenged your fantasy fed words? Get the labels right and take responsibility...it can be even sexier that way. Sorry if my words offend, but I won't apologise for fighting for the rights of anyone to live safely without unprovoked, non-consensual violence.

Catalina

 

[Netzach]

Wow. So the words describing the act are tantamount to the act.

Sounds a lot like "the image is the oppression" arguments against SM and porn that I've heard somewhere before.

Ideas, last I checked, were ideas. If someone carries out violence it's on their head, whether they read a post of Quints or a passage of the Bible it doesn't matter.

They both used a buzzword that you don't like. DV, two letters for an acronym that smugly euphemises what I personally like to call spousal abuse or child abuse and let's not sanitize that.

I think it was made pretty abundantly clear that they are eroticizing something consensual. Shall we call Nazi fetish scenes "military dress up games" for fear of the possible results?

 

[catalina_francisco]

Wow. So the words describing the act are tantamount to the act.

Sounds a lot like "the image is the oppression" arguments against SM and porn that I've heard somewhere before.

Ideas, last I checked, were ideas. If someone carries out violence it's on their head, whether they read a post of Quints or a passage of the Bible it doesn't matter.

They both used a buzzword that you don't like. DV, two letters for an acronym that smugly euphemises what I personally like to call spousal abuse or child abuse and let's not sanitize that.

I think it was made pretty abundantly clear that they are eroticizing something consensual. Shall we call Nazi fetish scenes "

As I said Netzach, fantasy is fine, but when you start promoting spousal abuse, or DV, or wife battering, or child abuse or any number of names you can come up with to describe the same recognised form of abuse as consensual acts, it is going to get some of those who have had to deal with it first hand more than a little upset. As I also said, to sit in front of a computer and send out words to the world saying you get off on DV, (which you admit you know is non-consensual,) but then admit when challenged is not really DV but consensual BDSM, maybe easy to pretend it is only your opinion and goes no further, but is not taking responsibility for your actions.

You can say it is a free world and we are free to think what we like, and I agree, but misnaming a serious, often life threatening act and saying it is sexy is not responsible any way you want to paint it. Perpetrators are only too happy to point out to an abused SO that there is something wrong with them because see, these women have no problem with it and actually find it sexy.

Not ony does it endanger women and childen in these relationships, (and I don't care if it is one or a million, it is too many just for the sake of someone getting their jollies), but it also undoes a lot of the work many in the BDSM community have done to promote it is a legitimate lifestyle choice, deserving of the freedom of choice we say we (most) want, and frankly makes us look like a bunch of idiots who really the community does need protection from as we are obviously not able of controlling ourselves or our desires, or respecting the rights of those who do not wish to be involved in our choices. I'm afraid while I am always on the side of less censorship, freedom of choice, and a less conservative mindset then we are forced to live with, I do not IMO think it need come with a 'throw your hands up' mentality and attitude which promotes no responsibility for what we do or say publicly. The reality is, both Quint and ssp admit they would not really get off on non-consensual abuse, so why pretend to the world you do when it can endanger another who has not asked to be included in your fantasy? Why not say, 'hey I love the fact my SO can beat me without reason, punish me for whatever', and openly acknowledge the consent instead of comparing your consensual situation with someone who faces death every day without the luxury of consent?

Catalina

 

[Netzach]

What if someone has no knowledge of the acronym BDSM. They don't speak english, or they aren't as savvy and informed as us enlightened folk for some reason.

"I like it when he hits me." A woman might say, in a totally conesntual arrangement. Wait, that didn't sound too good, did it?

Do we need to teach this person what she really meant to say?

I don't understand how the minute risk that some evil lurker on Lit is going to use these specific posts to justify his abuse versus myriad other fucked up societal messages available widely all over to justify his abuse...how this merits chastisement, as though the people who said they could get off on thinking about and mimicking something brutal, cruel, totally inappropriate and totally incorrect...are advocating the reality. If this is endangerment you have a lot of people to fight. I think in mentioning the problematic nature of attraction to DV depcitions or political torture depictions, for one of my personal hot-button squicks, one is doing justice to the notion that neither DV nor political torture are ok.

I'm still going to bat for the notion that it's the intent and the usage, not the word that we have to worry about.

 

[paperdolly]

Having my face slapped holds an intimacy for me the way kissing does. At times he slaps me when I tell him love him.

On the floor at his feet, I came to surrender, trust, let go. I found myself compelled to lick the boots that had kicked me, the way submissive men had done to me, something I had never imagined myself doing. Later he slapped me over and over, my hair clinging to my tear streaked face, regarding me calmly before kissing me for the first time.

One year later domestic CP is discipline in real time, authenticating our dominant and submissive roles. In the bedroom body punching at the hands of an experienced boxer takes my breath away, so to say.

 

[catalina_francisco]

What if someone has no knowledge of the acronym BDSM. They don't speak english, or they aren't as savvy and informed as us enlightened folk for some reason.

"I like it when he hits me." A woman might say, in a totally conesntual arrangement. Wait, that didn't sound too good, did it?

Do we need to teach this person what she really meant to say?

I'm still going to bat for the notion that it's the intent and the usage, not the word that we have to worry about.

Firstly, if they don't speak english, the whole argument is redundent isn't it? If they don't understand what BDSM stands for, I daresay being on this board they are soon going to understand at least something about it, and are in terms of speaking of odds unlikely to hit on these couple of posts first off.

As for someone saying they like to be hit, that was not my issue was it? My issue was with identifying with loving being a DV victim and finding the whole act sexy and a turn on......then admitting it doesn't really turn on at all and isn't sexy. It is not about teaching, but perhaps enlightening someone who hadn't thought about something from another's real life perspective, that it is not just a light and funny statement to make with no possible repercussions.

I would hazard to guess you yourself Netzach, for all your bravado, would not get off on having a gun held to your head, beaten to a pulp, and strangled to death or near death..so why glorify it as a desired choice when you know it isn't? And if you say you would never let yourself be in that position, it just shows your inability to comprehend that even the smartest women, judges, doctors, lawyers, policewomen, scientists, actresses, you name it, are all on the list of dead and living victims/survivors..and most of those living will tell you they were very vocal earlier in their life they would never be a victim of abuse. Is a huge misconception many have that only stupid women become victims...reality is a significant number are in the higher IQ bracket.

Catalina

 

[catalina_francisco]

Do we need to teach this person what she really meant to say?

I don't understand how the minute risk that some evil lurker on Lit is going to use these specific posts to justify his abuse versus myriad other fucked up societal messages available widely all over to justify his abuse...how this merits chastisement, as though the people who said they could get off on thinking about and mimicking something brutal, cruel, totally inappropriate and totally incorrect...are advocating the reality. If this is endangerment you have a lot of people to fight. I think in mentioning the problematic nature of attraction to DV depcitions or political torture depictions, for one of my personal hot-button squicks, one is doing justice to the notion that neither DV nor political torture are ok.

I'm still going to bat for the notion that it's the intent and the usage, not the word that we have to worry about.

Teaching and chastisement are your interpretation from your reality Netzach, I prefer enlightenment to an issue some may never have had to deal with first hand, had seen as just a small notice in the newspaper...not really real or effecting them. And I admit it is a sore spot to me as I have had to deal with it first hand, gone to court with women, one in particular who was black and blue and begging for protection, only to be told by the judge she deserved what she got because she chose to go for chemo for breast cancer instead of cooking her husband's lunch when it would have been less hassel to her suffering husband if she had just had her breasts 'lopped off, and gotten over herself', then denied any protection; had to take calls when you walk into work telling you one of your clients had been murdered the night before by their SO; had to visit women in hospital who are unable to move, speak, or breath on their own, all because some guy thinks it is OK to beat his SO to feed his own ego.

So yes, I get more than pissed off when women think and continue to defend it as sexy and fun and don't think in terms of reality as opposed to their own consensual fantasies, when naming thier relationship DV and not consensual BDSM. To me it is disrespectful of every woman and child who has died in this way, and those who live with it on a daily basis, to continue claiming it is fun, but I didn't see such a desire from Quint or ssp...bot acknowledged their fantasies were based on consensual and not DV. And I'm sorry, if someone prefers to be left to live in their fantasy and pretend they are a DV victim for their turn on factor, doesn't want to know about it from another perspective and maybe be open to the thought they did not understand and have the answer to everything in this world, it is sad. No-one knows everything....learning more and thinking have never been a negative IMO and need not be seen as such. I do not chastise, but I do give my opinion and experience, do express my thoughts, same as you N. Quint and ssp didn't seem to have much problem with it or acknowledging the difference.

Catalina

 

[sigsauerprinces]

ok whoah..wait a minute. you are making a whole bunch of FAULTY assumptions catalina.

faulty assumption #1- that i have never been personally touched by domestic violence or known anyone who has been-wrong. very very wrong.

faulty assumption #2-you keep saying that i "admitted" this or that. i havent changed my position from my first post. i find situations mimicing domestic violence hot. if that bothers you, that is your own personal issue to deal with. but do not try demonize me and say that becuz im sitting here posting on lit saying it gets me off, that some wifebeater is going to read my post and decide its ok to beat his wife, and shes going to die. becuz of that post i made earlier. the fact that you could even insinuate such a thing boggles my mind. this is obviously a personal issue for you, but i'd thank you to not take out your disgusts with domestic violence on ME.

you said:

"I guess it doesn't seem to touch you personally so you see no connection, but believe me every word you utter promoting this as something desireable in a non-consesual way, has some degree of assisting the continued oppression and abuse of women who basically are told by police throughout the western world their best hope for help is to survive an attempted murder by their SO, and then maybe something can be done to protect them, maybe not. "

i disagree. that is wayyy oversimplified and just not true. men who non consensually beat women do not do so because some chick into bdsm says on a mssgboard "i think playing with the concept of domestic violence in a D/s relationship is hot".

catalina said
"Teaching and chastisement are your interpretation from your reality Netzach, I prefer enlightenment to an issue some may never have had to deal with first hand, had seen as just a small notice in the newspaper..."

do me a favor and do not assumem that i have no firsthand experience with it.

catalina said
"
So yes, I get more than pissed off when women think and continue to defend it as sexy and fun and don't think in terms of reality as opposed to their own consensual fantasies, when naming thier relationship DV and not consensual BDSM. "


i never "named my relationship DV". i said i found the term erotic.

i have a feeling all of this is falling on deaf ears with you tho. *sighs* wtf. this is the second time ive come in and just casually mentioned that something turned me on, only to have a big brouhahaha erupt over it. which was really not my intent-i bumped this thread to see if anyone else found the actual dee vee term and connotations hot, beside sme and (i dare say) RR (tho im sure he'll correct me if im wrong and he doesnt find it hot).

curiouser and curiouser.

Quint- you said exactly what i was trying to say, only much more eloquently.


sorry i know this post is probably rambling all over the place but its late and im tired.

 

[catalina_francisco]

ok whoah..wait a minute. you are making a whole bunch of FAULTY assumptions catalina.

faulty assumption #1- that i have never been personally touched by domestic violence or known anyone who has been-wrong. very very wrong.

faulty assumption #2-you keep saying that i "admitted" this or that. i havent changed my position from my first post. i find situations mimicing domestic violence hot. if that bothers you, that is your own personal issue to deal with.

And if you read correctly, I never said you did not have experience with, I just suggested you or others who at first glorified it in their words "may not have" experience with it...huge difference. Secondly, as you say NOW,and in your second post, you are referring to acts which "mimic" which I had no issue with. Reading my posts again you wil see my issue is with calling BDSM mimicing acts, DV, which you did and once challenged on it admit the difference and that it was not intended to be seen as DV loving.

And thirdly, I have openly admitted it is a personal/professional issue for me as I and others have fought hard to have the rights of such women and children recognised and are not interested in someone making out DV is pleasureable and sexy when first they later acknowledge it isn't, and secondly they admit they were not talking about 'real' DV, but extremem BDSM. All I ask is when people get off and decide to tell the world why, they use the correct story and terms and not ones which contribute to the disregard for the misery and death of others who do not get heard or protected. In other words respect the real life battles of some who do not live in a world of choice which we are privileged to. What differs here is you are lucky your partner is not trying to kill you and you do give consent to the violence you love.

As to semantics, I'm sorry but when I see a statement such as this one you made... "yes...i have to admit to being one of the people to whom "dee vee" is sexy"...it is saying to me DV is sexy in your eyes...then going on to describe how you do not want BDSM but the relationship which you see as DV, and then about living in DV which you then say "its a desire but more than that, its a need..and getting it... there is nothing better than that."" is saying you see it as sexy and from what you have posted before, these descriptions seemed to fit your relationship detail. If I have somehow misunderstood your words, which you did later clarify when you said "i do know the difference between what im describing, and real genuine domestic violence. trust me i do." please help me understand as it escapes me right now and I do try and understand other perspectives. From where I stand I have not done any of what you accuse in your previous post, but have voiced my dislike and concern for applying the wrong term in such a serious issue. Your posts seem to be jumping from saying DV is sexy, no it isn't really only if it is pretend, to then it is a need/desire you have to experience "plain old domestic violence-not bdsm..not violence dressed up with formal bows and flowery ". I am confused to all get out which it is you want extreme BDSM which you see as mimicing DV even though in your words it is not, or real DV. Sorry for any misunderstandings.

Catalina

 

[sunfox]

Well, since this has been revitalized, I might as well add my .02 cents worth... I never can keep my opinions to myself.

While I do like a good hard slap, and I mean a good one: head ringing, skin reddening, painful slap, I don't find anything interesting about being struck with a closed fist, or being kicked. This is just me, but all that does is make me furious, and it's really bad to make me that angry. A slap is degrading, humiliating, for me, and that can enhance the situation or the relationship in certain ways. But a punch or a kick, no matter how light, no matter in what context, simply intimates that I mean nothing, am like an object on the floor to be kicked out of the way.

I have no desire for that feeling, and as I said, all it does is piss me right off. It's not about societal outlook, for me, although I am thoroughly outspoken about domestic violence of any kind.. it's just not something I care to have done to me at all, ever.

 

[Queen Bee]

Catalina, it is evident that "Domestic Violence" is a very loaded phrase for you, and I understand why, but it is just a phrase, and a rather vague and euphemistic one at that. It means "violence in the home," nothing more or less. The violence could be consensual or nonconsensual, mild or extreme.

The kinds of heinous acts you deplore under the D.V. label are more accurately described as "extreme spousal abuse," "spousal torture," and "spousal endangerment." I'm not sure why the sanitized phrase D.V. was popularized as the catchall phrase for these and other abusive acts, but I suspect it was done deliberately in order to encompass such acts as namecalling, impatient shoving, etc. In my opinion, such a general usage does a disservice to the victims in the kinds of harrowing abusive relationships you are talking about.

The sexy mock D.V. that sig and Quint have described is one of my favorite games of make-believe, un-PC though it may be. Actually, I dig scenarios of both domestic violence (the "Bitch, where's my dinner?" backhand) and domestic discipline (the grave, paternal, "this hurts me more than it hurts you" beating). I like a good pretend struggle, too, with biting, clawing, kicking, hairpulling -- putting up a good fight but being overpowered in the end. Hot stuff. Always makes me recall the line that Ado Annie sings: "Every time I lose a wrestling match, I get a funny feeling that I've won."

 

[Texture]

I think it's a shame that people are saying that punching and kicking someone for sex is related to domestic violence.

Don't we know better? A BDSM relationship isn't the same as capturing someone and locking them in your cellar.

What about an omega male who enjoys the exploration (in a controlled ess ess see fashion) of the ways and means of wifebeating?

I'm not sure if this is a point for or against, but if against I don't know see what omega male has to do with it. If you're saying someones psychosexual gubbins affects what they like in bed then yeh, probably, but then obviously not every 'submissive' wants a masterful dom with subtle control.

I was into punching girls before I knew what BDSM was. I'd like to learn more safety before I do it again. I have also come to see the benefits of more subtle play.

At the end of the day, it's just what 2 people are into.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Catalina, it is evident that "Domestic Violence" is a very loaded phrase for you, and I understand why, but it is just a phrase, and a rather vague and euphemistic one at that. It means "violence in the home," nothing more or less. The violence could be consensual or nonconsensual, mild or extreme.

Sorry to disagree, but it does not refer to consensual violence in the home, and is illegal. It is a recognised term used throughout the western world, along with battering (US); wife beating; spousal assault etc., to name non-consensual violence anywhere by a SO of a spouse or de facto, and/or children...not just behind closed doors. A simple search on the net, or in a library will bring that up as shown in this one definition (http://www.ncadv.org/problem/what.htm) : Battering is a pattern of behavior used to establish power and control over another person through fear and intimidation, often including the threat or use of violence. Battering happens when one person believes they are entitled to control another. Assault, battering and domestic violence are crimes.

Definitions: Abuse of family members can take many forms. Battering may include emotional abuse, economic abuse, sexual abuse, using children, threats, using male privilege, intimidation, isolation, and a variety of other behaviors used to maintain fear, intimidation and power. In all cultures, the perpetrators are most commonly the men of the family. Women are most commonly the victims of violence. Elder and child abuse are also prevalent.


As to it turning you or anyone on to be kicked, hit, or whatever, that is not the issue I referred to, nor is it abuse or DV. Quint and SSP both recognised and acknowledged this so I have not had a problem with them. As to the level and type of violence anyone consents to, I have no problem with, as we are ourselves on the extreme end of that scale, but once you find pleasure in and look forward to violence, it ceases to be non-consensual and/or DV.

Catalina