whatsitallabout

[FurryFury]

I must say the whole denying oneself to become better thing rings the wrong bell with me. I grew up with that philosophy being shoved down my throat, mostly due to religion.

I have no desire to be some sort of martyr by denying myself that which brings me, and others joy. I'm not hurting anyone, far from it. Artificially stopping myself from doing what I enjoy serves absolutely no purpose that I can see.

I consider myself to be a very sexual being. I'm glad of it.

Each to their own. If your self denial brings you joy, that's great.

However assuming that what other's do, that you don't understand is inherently unhealthy for them, isn't okay, IMO. It's understandable but highly regrettable. It's also not particularly conductive to a good conversation.

I'm not really sure what you are looking for on this thread. I hope you enjoy your life journey in any case.

Fury

 

[Evil_Geoff]

Some people are followers.
Some people are leaders.
Some people thrive on being large and in charge.
Some people thrive on making the dreams of others come true.
Some people are absolute, total asshats.
Some people are absolute, total angels.
Some people sadistic, but compassionate and caring.
Some people are masochistic, narcissistic, and selfish.

But all in all... People are people are people. And being people, they do what they do for any number of reasons, a lot of them total incomprehensible to anyone who isn't sharing the skull of the one doing whatever it is they are doing. Asking why people participate in BDSM is kinda like asking people "Why do you jump out of perfectly good, working airplanes?"

They do it, because they do it. It meets a need, fulfills a desire, does SOMETHING positive for the participant. BDSM, skydiving, kayaking, mountain climbing, knitting, whatever...

BDSM is an umbrella that covers a myriad ways of thought, approaches to llife, kinks, desires, needs. If there are 10 million people doing BDSM, there are probably 30 to 40 million reasons those people are doing it.

If no one was a follower, who would the leaders lead?
If no one worked to make others dreams come true, seriously, how much would be accomplished if everyone was "looking out for number one?"

If having a leader/follower relationship works in a business setting or social setting, why shouldn't it work in a personal relationship setting? Is there something inherently wrong with the conscious decision to relinquish power/authority to someone you trust with your heart, your life, your safety, your well-being?

How does this demean someone who CHOOSES to surrender their power. I could see it demeaning someone who is stripped of their power involuntarily. I can understand it being bad when it is forced, without consent, without consideration, without negotiation. But when this exchange of power occurs through discussion, communication, through trust, even love, where is this demeaning?

Are you going to tell Grandma that her fixing all of Grandpa's meals is wrong? That it's demeaning for her to wash his clothes, clean his house? That her submitting to his needs and desires is something to be ashamed of? And they may not have ever discussed how they would live their life at all. So if it's okay for Grandma and Grandpa, what makes it wrong, or demeaning or shameful for someone who goes into it knowing and understanding this is what is expected of them?

Curious minds want to know.

 

[Ebonyfire]

Some people are followers.
Some people are leaders.
Some people thrive on being large and in charge.
Some people thrive on making the dreams of others come true.
Some people are absolute, total asshats.
Some people are absolute, total angels.
Some people sadistic, but compassionate and caring.
Some people are masochistic, narcissistic, and selfish.

But all in all... People are people are people. And being people, they do what they do for any number of reasons, a lot of them total incomprehensible to anyone who isn't sharing the skull of the one doing whatever it is they are doing. Asking why people participate in BDSM is kinda like asking people "Why do you jump out of perfectly good, working airplanes?"

They do it, because they do it. It meets a need, fulfills a desire, does SOMETHING positive for the participant. BDSM, skydiving, kayaking, mountain climbing, knitting, whatever...

BDSM is an umbrella that covers a myriad ways of thought, approaches to llife, kinks, desires, needs. If there are 10 million people doing BDSM, there are probably 30 to 40 million reasons those people are doing it.

If no one was a follower, who would the leaders lead?
If no one worked to make others dreams come true, seriously, how much would be accomplished if everyone was "looking out for number one?"

If having a leader/follower relationship works in a business setting or social setting, why shouldn't it work in a personal relationship setting? Is there something inherently wrong with the conscious decision to relinquish power/authority to someone you trust with your heart, your life, your safety, your well-being?

How does this demean someone who CHOOSES to surrender their power. I could see it demeaning someone who is stripped of their power involuntarily. I can understand it being bad when it is forced, without consent, without consideration, without negotiation. But when this exchange of power occurs through discussion, communication, through trust, even love, where is this demeaning?

Are you going to tell Grandma that her fixing all of Grandpa's meals is wrong? That it's demeaning for her to wash his clothes, clean his house? That her submitting to his needs and desires is something to be ashamed of? And they may not have ever discussed how they would live their life at all. So if it's okay for Grandma and Grandpa, what makes it wrong, or demeaning or shameful for someone who goes into it knowing and understanding this is what is expected of them?

Curious minds want to know.

As always EG you take the time to say the things that hit the nail on the head. Another slam dunk.

Eb

 

[Ice2000]

EG for President!

I'm starting to read threads and think about a comment,, and then I say.. EG will come along in a while and deal with this much more comprehensively than my chatter...

 

[neonflux]

Some people are followers.
Some people are leaders.
Some people thrive on being large and in charge.
Some people thrive on making the dreams of others come true.
Some people are absolute, total asshats.
Some people are absolute, total angels.
Some people sadistic, but compassionate and caring.
Some people are masochistic, narcissistic, and selfish.

But all in all... People are people are people. And being people, they do what they do for any number of reasons, a lot of them total incomprehensible to anyone who isn't sharing the skull of the one doing whatever it is they are doing. Asking why people participate in BDSM is kinda like asking people "Why do you jump out of perfectly good, working airplanes?"

They do it, because they do it. It meets a need, fulfills a desire, does SOMETHING positive for the participant. BDSM, skydiving, kayaking, mountain climbing, knitting, whatever...

BDSM is an umbrella that covers a myriad ways of thought, approaches to llife, kinks, desires, needs. If there are 10 million people doing BDSM, there are probably 30 to 40 million reasons those people are doing it.

If no one was a follower, who would the leaders lead?
If no one worked to make others dreams come true, seriously, how much would be accomplished if everyone was "looking out for number one?"

If having a leader/follower relationship works in a business setting or social setting, why shouldn't it work in a personal relationship setting? Is there something inherently wrong with the conscious decision to relinquish power/authority to someone you trust with your heart, your life, your safety, your well-being?

How does this demean someone who CHOOSES to surrender their power. I could see it demeaning someone who is stripped of their power involuntarily. I can understand it being bad when it is forced, without consent, without consideration, without negotiation. But when this exchange of power occurs through discussion, communication, through trust, even love, where is this demeaning?

Are you going to tell Grandma that her fixing all of Grandpa's meals is wrong? That it's demeaning for her to wash his clothes, clean his house? That her submitting to his needs and desires is something to be ashamed of? And they may not have ever discussed how they would live their life at all. So if it's okay for Grandma and Grandpa, what makes it wrong, or demeaning or shameful for someone who goes into it knowing and understanding this is what is expected of them?

Curious minds want to know.

(No offense intended to you, travelboy.)

 

[JBWE]

Everyone has their own personal ideals and desires. Some men are attracted to RedHeads[\QUOTE]

Indeed

 

[SometimesNever]

Once again, EG for the win!

*spikes the ball* Touch dooooown!

 

[Netzach]

I dont believe that we should necessarily cater to all of our desires. That doing so does not allow for enduring personal growth – but rather how we resist our primal needs (not just sex) allows us to elevate us from our base self.

Then this explains your inability to get it. Some people can only transcend or get past or appreciate or understand things by facing them and soaking in them, not by avoiding them. Also, some of us don't see "our base self" as something to be transcended at all, more like the gun moll we've got to protect whether we want to or not.

 

[FurryFury]

Then this explains your inability to get it. Some people can only transcend or get past or appreciate or understand things by facing them and soaking in them, not by avoiding them. Also, some of us don't see "our base self" as something to be transcended at all, more like the gun moll we've got to protect whether we want to or not.

Exactly!

*nods*

Fury