What makes it BDSM for you?

[Mei5ter]

I'm not sure I can add much to the comments others have already posted. I've learned a lot from them, and my thoughts have evolved in consequence.

I'd suggest that any relationship in which one partner's kink is cherished by the other, rather than being hidden for fear of rejection and disgust, or grimly tolerated in a wider context, deserves to be acknowledged as a BDSM one. It doesn't matter whether that kink is labelled B, D, S, M, or something else entirely.

Because this is the BDSM area on an erotic discussion forum, we are perhaps more used to kink being something accepted and understood. It isn't always. It isn't often, in fact. Not many people would respond positively to me saying, "Hi, I'm Max, and I get my purest form of pleasure from hurting women until they cry."

I get the impression that D/S can be a dynamic which pervades a relationship, and informs most or all of your feelings and interactions with your partner. I don't think discipline and sadism, which I suppose are the least-worst general labels for what I like, work in the same way. Partners whose tastes compliment mine might enjoy discipline because they are submissive in other respects too, but equally might be in charge and responsible in all other aspects of their lives, and crave discipline and pain for the relief that brings. So, for me, a BDSM relationship probably looks and works exactly the same as any other kind of relationship - except for what happens in the bedroom, basement, hotel room, or centre of a Neolithic stone circle.

 

[AveryElle]

It’s BDSM for me when there’s a drop. When they can say something and I’m a puddle of submission. I tend to be a brat, so I don’t always show it.

EMOTIONAL submission is incredibly rare for me. I almost never let anyone get that close. So I focus on the S&M part. Once there’s enough trust and boundaries are discussed, that’s when the fun starts and that’s the line. If I can’t get to the point of someone knowing I want them to hurt me, it’s not likely going to be a BDSM-like encounter. I don’t HAVE to have it to be a quality encounter, and I’m married and there’s no logistical way every time we fuck, the full weight of BDSM is thrown into it because, well, life. But being able to have that initial conversation and potentially reassess boundaries is how I know it’s that type of relationship.

The emotional side of submission has only happened 2-3 times in my life and I don’t seek it out in others.

 

[cookiecat]

My submission is half the pie. With whipped cream.

Didn't you put that pie on a chair somewhere?

 

[cookiecat]

It’s BDSM for me when there’s a drop. When they can say something and I’m a puddle of submission. I tend to be a brat, so I don’t always show it.

EMOTIONAL submission is incredibly rare for me. I almost never let anyone get that close. So I focus on the S&M part. Once there’s enough trust and boundaries are discussed, that’s when the fun starts and that’s the line. If I can’t get to the point of someone knowing I want them to hurt me, it’s not likely going to be a BDSM-like encounter. I don’t HAVE to have it to be a quality encounter, and I’m married and there’s no logistical way every time we fuck, the full weight of BDSM is thrown into it because, well, life. But being able to have that initial conversation and potentially reassess boundaries is how I know it’s that type of relationship.

The emotional side of submission has only happened 2-3 times in my life and I don’t seek it out in others.

What defines emotional submission for you?

 

[AveryElle]

What defines emotional submission for you?

It’s not one definition I can pinpoint but a reaction. It’s more that I’m yielding power over certain things to my partner and not just in a sexual way. It’s often doing what my partner wants more than what I want. It’s also probably what subspace feels like to others.

 

[AveryElle]

I don’t think I can physically submit without the emotional.

I have realized that I am emotionally monogamous and sexually...not? I think disconnecting sex from emotion, while not for everyone, makes it much easier for me to spend a few hours being kinky with someone and then move on. It’s when there are multiple partners that I get overwhelmingly insecure and it’s not something I really care to change. It’s just who I am. To me, the kinky stuff IN a relationship is intimate, and that’s how I end up on the emotional submission side of things.

That said, my kinks, which aren’t many, are fun. I hook up to have fun. I’m in a relationship for other reasons. I have learned the hard way that poly doesn’t work for me. I’m not interested in being vulnerable with someone that doesn’t find me enough.

 

[ultramarineblue]

I have realized that I am emotionally monogamous and sexually...not? I think disconnecting sex from emotion, while not for everyone, makes it much easier for me to spend a few hours being kinky with someone and then move on. It’s when there are multiple partners that I get overwhelmingly insecure and it’s not something I really care to change. It’s just who I am. To me, the kinky stuff IN a relationship is intimate, and that’s how I end up on the emotional submission side of things.

That said, my kinks, which aren’t many, are fun. I hook up to have fun. I’m in a relationship for other reasons. I have learned the hard way that poly doesn’t work for me. I’m not interested in being vulnerable with someone that doesn’t find me enough.

Are you talking about having just kinky fun with people only once and then move on to the next or something that's defined as casual and kept casual even though you play somewhat ongoing?

 

[SimonDoom]

Two things.

It's got to involve a) the willing exchange of power and b) sex or sexuality of some kind.

So, to answer the OP's question, if one partner dominates the other in many aspects but there's no sexual element to it -- if sex is wholly vanilla -- then no, that's not BDSM. In real life there are many male-female relationships where the man dominates the woman but where it's not really BDSM.

There's no particular bondage/sadism/masochism requirement. It can involve almost anything. If I have a partner and we make a deal where she can only achieve orgasm if she is wearing the clown shoes of my choice, that's BDSM (no, I'm not working on such a story).

When I wrote my second story as an author at Lit, a BDSM story, I wanted to emphasize power exchange without any of the traditional elements of BDSM -- no leather, no whips or paddles, no spanking, no masochism or bondage or sadism of any kind, except to the degree that the woman's willingness to submit to the man's demands regarding her exhibitionism and submission to his sexual desire had a sadomasochistic element. People responded well to the story even though it lacked those traditional elements, so I think many other BDSM readers agree with me about the power exchange element.

 

[AveryElle]

Are you talking about having just kinky fun with people only once and then move on to the next or something that's defined as casual and kept casual even though you play somewhat ongoing?

Usually one and done. Maybe 2-3x. But I don’t develop king standing sexual relationships with people if I can avoid it.

 

[ultramarineblue]

Two things.

It's got to involve a) the willing exchange of power and b) sex or sexuality of some kind.

So, to answer the OP's question, if one partner dominates the other in many aspects but there's no sexual element to it -- if sex is wholly vanilla -- then no, that's not BDSM. In real life there are many male-female relationships where the man dominates the woman but where it's not really BDSM.

There's no particular bondage/sadism/masochism requirement. It can involve almost anything. If I have a partner and we make a deal where she can only achieve orgasm if she is wearing the clown shoes of my choice, that's BDSM (no, I'm not working on such a story).

When I wrote my second story as an author at Lit, a BDSM story, I wanted to emphasize power exchange without any of the traditional elements of BDSM -- no leather, no whips or paddles, no spanking, no masochism or bondage or sadism of any kind, except to the degree that the woman's willingness to submit to the man's demands regarding her exhibitionism and submission to his sexual desire had a sadomasochistic element. People responded well to the story even though it lacked those traditional elements, so I think many other BDSM readers agree with me about the power exchange element.

I think power exchange is definitely a requirement but I'm not so sure that sex has to be involved. For me personally it is often an aspect but I think there are times when a person can knowingly submit to another person without sex. It could be a session with rope and impact play but not sexual contact. I've witnessed demonstrations where there was maybe fire play or violet wand and nothing sexual seemed to occur. I think also some relationships maybe more of a mentor mentee type without a sexual element like submitting and providing a service like cleaning or cooking or shopping. I guess demonstrations may not be about domination and submission as much as just education so that might not really fit.

Usually one and done. Maybe 2-3x. But I don’t develop king standing sexual relationships with people if I can avoid it.

I understand. I've got a friend that prefers one time encounters that ended up having more with me because some of our interests matched. I think part of the fun of one and done or just a couple of times is the variety that you are exposed to with people. I have learned a good bit through both types of encounters.

 

[IrisAlthea]

I wasn’t here when the thread was started and hadn’t seen it because it was hidden in the Café.

I think that for a relationship to be a BDSM relationship the partners agree that it is and have at least an understanding or agreement of what that entails.

I agree mostly. It does tie into something I have been thinking about lately:
How explicitly wordy does this understanding have to be?
I might start a thread if I ever manage to put it in words, let alone English ones.

I would like to add that maybe it also has to be sexual at the bottom of it all. I don't mean sexual in the overt manner that it always involves your genitals or active arousal, but sexual in the way that deep down you get sexual, acknowledged pleasure from the relationship

Yes, perhaps not a sexual act, but tickling that part of the brain.

All sex has to be consensual but what I mean is - equitable and enthusiastic.

I’m not really sure I get what you mean here. If you mean about the relationship I agree but for each and every situation, sexual or not, that wouldn’t hold true for me in any relationship.

Because I do like doing those types of things for people but also need to realize that just because I might feel a need to do those type things, they aren't necessarily the most important things that I can do for someone.

Yes, I think this is a huge thing to realize.
To me it kind of ties in to what I wrote about the quote above.
This thing might not be my forte or what I want to contribute, but it is what they need/want and while there are limits, that sometimes trumps my want/need/preference.

 

[seela]

I wasn’t here when the thread was started and hadn’t seen it because it was hidden in the Café.



I agree mostly. It does tie into something I have been thinking about lately:
How explicitly wordy does this understanding have to be?
I might start a thread if I ever manage to put it in words, let alone English ones.



Yes, perhaps not a sexual act, but tickling that part of the brain.



I’m not really sure I get what you mean here. If you mean about the relationship I agree but for each and every situation, sexual or not, that wouldn’t hold true for me in any relationship.



Yes, I think this is a huge thing to realize.
To me it kind of ties in to what I wrote about the quote above.
This thing might not be my forte or what I want to contribute, but it is what they need/want and while there are limits, that sometimes trumps my want/need/preference.

Yes, start the thread, sounds like it could be interesting.

I also like the rest of what you posted, especially the bit about a certain part of the brain being tickled, because that describes it perfectly for me. I’ll use that description from now on.

 

[IrisAlthea]

Yes, start the thread, sounds like it could be interesting.

I will if I can figure out how to narrow it down and word it.

 

[fma20fma]

bdsm for me is when my ex bf subjected me to bare bottom caning before sodomy on some crazy weekend anal night meets, after getting me tipsy on whisky and motivating me to submit to his cane to enhance my anal pleasure. (thats what was his standard method, and every time i fell for it and regretted the day after when i couldnt sit on the chair)