Will you/do you teach your children about D/s?

[sincerely_helene]

I don't really understand the question.

Do you mean would I teach my kids about S&M?

Or do you mean would I teach my kids about the dominant and submissive persona?

Either way, the answer is no.

 

[Private_Label]

MY son?


You watch your damn mouth!

What if your son was a daughter (oh horrors!) will you train her the same way?

 

[jasonlf]

There is a world of difference between a freely-chosen, consensual M/f D/s relationship and the kind of outdated chauvanism and misogyny put forward in the Bible. The problem is, if you tell them your D/s relationship is ok, because it's superficially similar to the biblical model of male domination of wife and family, then you are clearly implying that any other D/s relationship--F/m, F/f, M/m--is not ok because it doesn't have the sanction of the Bible.

To be honest, most traditional Christian households would be teaching their kids that F/F and M/M is wrong (not saying it is or is not, people can do what people want, just saying what traditionalist would teach)... so that part is irrelevent.

And I think that D/s in Biblical sense v.s. the sense discussed here is MORE similar than different. Really, the only true difference is the S/m portion of it...

I would teach my kids about what is ideal version of a relationship in Biblical terms, which, IMO, is a light D/s relationship with a male at the head. Would I teach them it's the only way? No. Would I teach them that it's the way Paul said was best for most people? Yes.

If I have a daughter that's a Dom or a son that's a sub, would I discourage them? No. God created us all different... a lot of Paul's teachings have to be taken in context, and in the context of the letter to the Ephesians where the "Wifes, submit yourselves" statement was at, I don't think it applies to 100% of people.

I think where the misunderstanding is that some areas in the Bible are about "best practice for most" versus "decreed for all".

 

[Jay Davis]

I think that to use the Bible to justify the sort of SSC D/s relationship is a fallacy. Maybe I'm projecting my own feelings on the community as a whole (and by that, I mean the whole BDSM community, NOT just the lit BDSM forum community), but the kind of male-dominated relationship that the Bible promotes is the exact opposite of even an M/f D/s relationship as we generally accept and discuss it. Why? Because there is no option in the Biblical model--the man is the head of the household, and the wife will submit to him, no questions, no options, no room for any other conformation. Whether the woman WANTS to submit is irrelevant; so is whether the man WANTS to dominate, for that matter.

The Biblical model prescribes a specific set out-dated set of behaviors; it ignores the personas and psyches of the individuals involved. It not only pays no attention to SSC, it at least implicitly denies it. Consent is flat out not an issue in the Biblical model of marriage, but it's one of the foundations upon which our lifestyle exists. In fact, consent is the ONLY thing that separates our Dominants from abusers, and our submissives from victims.

Now, you female subs and male Dominants can go along believing you're living in accordance with God's will, as set out in the Bible. Lucky you. But when you say that to yourselves, you're condemning all your Domme and male-sub friends on this board to burn in Hell. Oh, and you're doing the same to the same-sex couples you know, too, whether they are D/s-oriented or not.

If anyone here is actually trying to imply that the Bible says their D/s lifestyle is ok, but mine is not, I'd appreciate you being honest enough to say that out loud. That position isn't logically consistent with SSC-based BDSM, and it's bigoted against anyone not inclined toward male-Dominant/female-submissive, heterosexual, monogamous relationships. If you've had sex with anyone other than your church-wed spouse--ever--but you maintain that your M/f relationship is specifically approved in the Bible, then you are a rationalizer at best, and quite probably a hypocrite as well.

Now, I'm not going to try to tear down anyone's faith. All I ask is logical consistency. Either you subscribe to the Biblical model of Husband-supreme, wife-submissive, monogamous, life-long marriage, or you recognize that none of our D/s relationships--regardless of who's on top--is sanctioned in the text of the Bible, because the Bible cares not a whit about the submissive wife's consent. Pick one position or the other--you can't have both, in effect saying, "All D/s relationships are created equal, but some of them are more equal than others."

 

[Netzach]

One could also say that if someone wants/needs a biblical bent in their D/s relationship, that's just ducky, live and let live. I don't, just like I don't need to explore the outer limits of knife play (which I find fairly boring.) That doesn't mean I can't accept that there are knife play fanatics, many of whom probably feel that I am missing all that makes life worth living.

If they can accept that my F/m secular marriage exists without getting too in my face about what they think I'm doing wrong, I can extend the same courtesy. I also prefer not to be subjected to the diatribe about how all women inherently ARE submissive, but I've gotten that more from Goreans than Christians and supposedly we embrace that branch of the BDSM family tree.


As for the av, thank you all, you are too kind, it's nice to have the post-sick body validated, though. Now if we can just get the face to play along...

 

[Summer_Jasmine]

I have two young boys, and I am not quite sure what I will do when the time comes to explain my life to them. I truly hope that they will feel comfortable coming to me with anything at all and I can give them the honest and age appropriate answer. Right now they are just happy to hear that they were in my tummy and were born. They're not so interested in anything else. I will also teach them what my faith believes...

I'm Jewish and in Judaism, women and men are just different. I can certainly understand the observer who sees a Jewish woman walk down the street with her hair covered either with a wig or with a hat and a long skirt, a shirt with long sleeves and all her skin covered and think "wow, women are dirt in Judaism, they have to cover themselves, they are opressed..." That thought process is totally innacurate. I could honestly go on for days about this, but I'll try to keep it brief. Women are considered to have a more spiritual relationship with G-d. They don't have to pray in a community, they don't have many obligations that men have because they have to run the household. Men are considered so weak that a woman's hair, or their singing voice distracts them from prayer. Do I believe that? I'm not sure and it is something I wish to explore. I do appreciate it when my time for prayer is not turned into a singles event

So, I will teach my children that women and men are different and that is ok. I will teach them that relationships are different. People have different preferences, people have different desires and that is ok. If I do nothing else as a parent, I want to teach my boys to accept people for who they are. Since I am not in a 24/7 relationship I don't have to worry about how to explain that to them today, but I can't imagine being anything less than honest when approached with any question from them.

 

[Jay Davis]

One could also say that if someone wants/needs a biblical bent in their D/s relationship, that's just ducky, live and let live.

I have no problem with anyone adding a Biblical or religious flavor to their play. But I caught a distinct whiff of "M/f is ok with God, everything else is not what He wants," in a couple of the previous posts. Now, it's all fine and good to feel that way, and even to try to raise your kids to believe that, too. But it's a position that is directly contrary to the tolerant, accepting, and non-judgemental attitude that we normally expect in forums such as this.

Judge not, lest ye be judged.

 

[Netzach]

Should I ever lose my mind or just my mindset and adopt human kids, my plan for explanations is that the sexuality and specific (we do somewhat unconventional things in bed) discussion can happen in the early teens IF it is initiated by the kid. I'd feel comfortable passing a copy of Screw the Roses to a curious 15 or 16 year old, I think the way it's written is overall positive and approachable enough.

As for why Dad does what Mom says it's fairly easy to explain in terms of the fact that different people have different personalities and different strengths, and it makes better sense for me to be in charge of certain things and him to be in charge of other ones. A simple discussion free of weird terminology, weird sex antics explained, and hopefully unburdened by gender expectations.

Frankly explaining D/s is low on the totem pole as far as fears about ways I'd fuck up kids.

 

[Netzach]

I have no problem with anyone adding a Biblical or religious flavor to their play. But I caught a distinct whiff of "M/f is ok with God, everything else is not what He wants," in a couple of the previous posts. Now, it's all fine and good to feel that way, and even to try to raise your kids to believe that, too. But it's a position that is directly contrary to the tolerant, accepting, and non-judgemental attitude that we normally expect in forums such as this.

Judge not, lest ye be judged.

Well, if you are very literal in your read of the Bible, as some people are, you are going to come to that conclusion...that M/f is better than other permutations. Just like it says not to eat shellfish if you thumb back a few hundred pages, it's pretty clear, and you can either decide that this is an important part of God's plan for humans, or utterly irrelvant to your life today for whatever reason.

I'm not a literalist, AND I'm Jewish but if someone is, I'm not going to change their mind. I don't see how saying something tantamount to "this is what I believe because it's in the Bible" is all that judgemental.

 

[graceanne]

I actually have discussed my beliefs in length with several people on this board. Before I go into it, I also want to state that I don't believe that any sin is greater than another. I am a gossip, I occasionally lie, I covet, I'm EXTREEMLY prideful . . . you get the idea. I think, though, that the most overlooked sin in the Christian community is judging. Judge not, lest ye be judged. Until the day that I am perfect I will not be judging others. Or at least I'll try not to. I am human - but I try. The Christian community will tell you in one breath that all you gotta do to be saved is accept Jesus is your savior and he died for your sins, and in the next breath say 'But you can't do this or that to be saved, and you can't believe this or that''. The hypocrisy annoy's the hell out of me.

So please, don't jump down my throat for what I'm going to say. I believe that homosexuality is a sin, but not any worse a sin than lying or a gossiping. In the bible, out of the thousands of times that sexual sins are brought up, homosexuality is only brought up twice - I think that's significant. I would be sad if my child was gay, but not any sadder than if they were a liar. I actually think I'd be sadder if they were a liar, cause being a liar will mess up your whole life, and there are many homosexuals (just as many as there are heterosexuals) who are happy, and good people.

I DO NOT believe that a F/m relationship is a sin, but I also do not believe that it is biblical, and that's what I'll tell my children if they ask. I choose to follow Jesus to the best of my ability, and by doing that I do what I can to be as biblical as I can. I fail, every single day I fail, but I hope someday that my failures will get fewer and further between, and that someday I'll be more ready to meet Jesus. I want the same thing for my children, that when it comes time to meet Jesus that they'll be able to say 'I was as Christlike as I possibly could be'.

 

[graceanne]

Well, if you are very literal in your read of the Bible, as some people are, you are going to come to that conclusion...that M/f is better than other permutations. Just like it says not to eat shellfish if you thumb back a few hundred pages, it's pretty clear, and you can either decide that this is an important part of God's plan for humans, or utterly irrelvant to your life today for whatever reason.

I'm not a literalist, AND I'm Jewish but if someone is, I'm not going to change their mind. I don't see how saying something tantamount to "this is what I believe because it's in the Bible" is all that judgemental.

I agree. The thread asked my opinion. I gave it. If you 9generic you) don't agree, then you don't agree. I don't agree with things I see here, too, so I just take it with a grain of salt. Many people here post about their beliefs, and that's fine with me. Why, because I'm a Christian, am I not allowed to post about mine. If I were Buddist, or WICCAN no one would raise a brow, but because I'm Christian, I'm being intolerant. I ask of anyone who knows me well on this board . . .


Am I intolerant?

Killi, Dolf, Shy, Netzach, Snowy?

 

[catalina_francisco]

LOL, as my experience with many who consider themselves devout Christians has shown me several times throughout my life, it comes with the individual's selective and unique interpretation of the Bible and what it says.....views which any number of pastors, priests, and clergy might just dispute. I have yet to find someone who is heavily into supporting the Bible and into sex in any of it's forms apart from the purest 'it's just for procreation' who do not skew the contents to support their own view and excuse their own behaviour and/or beliefs. That to me is hypocrisy, but it is them who has to live with it, not me. I actually bought a Bible a few years back which was written in non-discriminatory language to any group of people.....women, disabled, gay, etc. Haven't waded through it all as yet, but is an interesting concept and one which might actually approach a form of religion which would support all people, not just a small, select group who try to hold onto the power they feel it gives them. Heaven may be a very lonely place if only those who conform to the contents of the Bible get let through the pearly gates. and no, I don't find you intolerant Grace...but I also don't think it is that Christianity cannot be mentioned here so much as many feel hurt if someone does not see things exactly as they do, or question what they say as opposed to what they do....that to me is living your religion and taking responsibility for your choices, as well as accepting not everyone sees it the same ..... and often to defend or discuss your beliefs with those who may not share them either strenghtens your conviction or erodes it....that disturbs many who would prefer to be left to not question or justify or explain.

Catalina

 

[AntiPope]

maybe we can stear this away from religion and back to the thread. i would definately tell them about it if they asked. but until that point i will leave it be.

 

[jasonlf]

I actually have discussed my beliefs in length with several people on this board. Before I go into it, I also want to state that I don't believe that any sin is greater than another. I am a gossip, I occasionally lie, I covet, I'm EXTREEMLY prideful . . . you get the idea. I think, though, that the most overlooked sin in the Christian community is judging. Judge not, lest ye be judged. Until the day that I am perfect I will not be judging others. Or at least I'll try not to. I am human - but I try. The Christian community will tell you in one breath that all you gotta do to be saved is accept Jesus is your savior and he died for your sins, and in the next breath say 'But you can't do this or that to be saved, and you can't believe this or that''. The hypocrisy annoy's the hell out of me.

So please, don't jump down my throat for what I'm going to say. I believe that homosexuality is a sin, but not any worse a sin than lying or a gossiping. In the bible, out of the thousands of times that sexual sins are brought up, homosexuality is only brought up twice - I think that's significant. I would be sad if my child was gay, but not any sadder than if they were a liar. I actually think I'd be sadder if they were a liar, cause being a liar will mess up your whole life, and there are many homosexuals (just as many as there are heterosexuals) who are happy, and good people.

I DO NOT believe that a F/m relationship is a sin, but I also do not believe that it is biblical, and that's what I'll tell my children if they ask. I choose to follow Jesus to the best of my ability, and by doing that I do what I can to be as biblical as I can. I fail, every single day I fail, but I hope someday that my failures will get fewer and further between, and that someday I'll be more ready to meet Jesus. I want the same thing for my children, that when it comes time to meet Jesus that they'll be able to say 'I was as Christlike as I possibly could be'.

It's scary how much we think alike sometimes

 

[Jay Davis]

OK, I wrote out a long response to Jason and Grace, but I deleted it as inappropriate to this thread. Suffice to say, anyone who takes a position on any issue "because the Bible says so" makes me very nervous, no matter how nice they are or how benevolent their intentions seem. This is because an unquestioning and usually highly selective interpretation of the Bible has been used repeatedly through history to justify all sorts of oppression, abuse, bigotry, persecution and war.

Make no mistake, friends. Most people who believe things "because the Bible says so" believe that every single one of us who posts in these forums is a dangerous, deviant sexual pervert, regardless of who holds the flogger in your bedroom. If religious conservatives got their way, this forum would be shut down as pornography, and most of us would be tossed in jail as sex offenders.

If I react more defensively to statements made by self-labelled Christians than I do to self-labelled Wiccans or Buddhists, it's because in the United States, the fundamentalist Christian right has the political power to force its religious beliefs onto the rest of the country in the form of laws, policies, even declarations of war. I don't think it's devout Buddhism being used to deny gays in life-long loving partnerships the legal rights and responsibilities of marriage, nor do I think it's fundamentalist Wicca that began a crusade against the Muslim world. I'm not saying that Buddhism or Paganism, or Judaism or Islam for that matter, are better than Christianity--just that in the country where I life, they are far less likely to try to exert control over how I live my private life, and how my country allocates its limited resources to make the world a better place.

 

[jasonlf]

OK, I wrote out a long response to Jason and Grace, but I deleted it as inappropriate to this thread. Suffice to say, anyone who takes a position on any issue "because the Bible says so" makes me very nervous, no matter how nice they are or how benevolent their intentions seem. This is because an unquestioning and usually highly selective interpretation of the Bible has been used repeatedly through history to justify all sorts of oppression, abuse, bigotry, persecution and war.

Make no mistake, friends. Most people who believe things "because the Bible says so" believe that every single one of us who posts in these forums is a dangerous, deviant sexual pervert, regardless of who holds the flogger in your bedroom. If religious conservatives got their way, this forum would be shut down as pornography, and most of us would be tossed in jail as sex offenders.

If I react more defensively to statements made by self-labelled Christians than I do to self-labelled Wiccans or Buddhists, it's because in the United States, the fundamentalist Christian right has the political power to force its religious beliefs onto the rest of the country in the form of laws, policies, even declarations of war. I don't think it's devout Buddhism being used to deny gays in life-long loving partnerships the legal rights and responsibilities of marriage, nor do I think it's fundamentalist Wicca that began a crusade against the Muslim world. I'm not saying that Buddhism or Paganism, or Judaism or Islam for that matter, are better than Christianity--just that in the country where I life, they are far less likely to try to exert control over how I live my private life, and how my country allocates its limited resources to make the world a better place.

Please Jay D., don't put words in my mouth or thoughts in my head. I think you're missing a HUGE difference between grace and myself versus the crusaders (correct me if I'm wrong grace)... I know I say what you do is between you and God. You'll never see me condemn you. I may say "I think the Bible says X is right and Y is wrong"... but in all honesty, conduct is God's business, not mine. If other christians have made you feel condemned in the past, I apologize on their behalf, because it isn't their or my place to do so.

 

[graceanne]

Please Jay D., don't put words in my mouth or thoughts in my head. I think you're missing a HUGE difference between grace and myself versus the crusaders (correct me if I'm wrong grace)... I know I say what you do is between you and God. You'll never see me condemn you. I may say "I think the Bible says X is right and Y is wrong"... but in all honesty, conduct is God's business, not mine. If other christians have made you feel condemned in the past, I apologize on their behalf, because it isn't their or my place to do so.

I agree with everything but the apology. I'm not apologizing for something I've never done. I've never forced my beliefs on others. I was beat up by a WICCAN in Jr. High, I don't go around accusing all WICCAN'S of being bullys, and I don't appreciate people of painting me with a single brush, because some other Christian was mean to them, or pushy or unkind. I am me, and I would appreciate it if you would take me at face value, just like you do everyone else.

Beyond that - in this country the Christians might be the ones to force their beliefs on others but we aren't the only country with people who force their religious beliefs on other people. Muslims in the middle east come to mind first, but there are many many others. Its not Christianity that's the issue, it's people. As a rule people are close minded, clique-ish, and blind to what they don't want to see.

 

[nightdancer2876]

I don't go around accusing all WICCAN'S of being bullys,

Grace, just out of curiousity, why is Wiccan capped in your post? I noticed it several times.

On the religious side..As long as I behave, you behave, and none of us scare the horses, then I'm all good. *smiles*

On the subject of the OP? I will answer their questions on an age appropriate level. Sex, drugs, alcohol, whatever. I am not going to look at them in horror and demand to know where they heard that. I might also pass along STR if my child was old enough. I do have two children, and I will do what I can to encourage them in whatever personality paths I see.

D

 

[Quint]

Just wanted to say I respect how people are presenting their views here. Disagree or not, we're being pretty fucking civil and that's fabulous.

Like Netzach said, in the event that I have kids, there are far worse things I could do to them. BDSM, as integral a part of my life as it is, will essentially a footnote in that particular chapter. The best thing I can do with and for my children will be to always keep communication open--between T and myself and between my kids and myself. That's what will make the biggest impression.

But I think I'd be disappointed if it NEVER came up.

 

[bysable]

Having six kids, I might or might not be a bit of an expert. My oldest (24) clued in awhile back, when he found my leather cuffs. He didn't say all that much, but I think the boy has a touch of sub in him anyway.

The others, also aware of the cuffs, think mom is a bit flaky. But none of them have been judgmental about it. But it's never really all that blatant around them.

 

[Jay Davis]

Jason, Grace, I'm not putting words in your mouths, or thoughts in your head. I genuinely believe that you are both nice people, and are sincere in your good intentions. I am made nervous, however, by the fact that you fall back on the same justification for your views that has been used for centuries to justify all sorts of inhumane behavior. Do I think that either of you is likely to personally do harm to me or anyone like me? No, of course not. But do I think that people who use the same belief system that you subscribe to will attempt to judge, legislate, and otherwise control the private personal lives of all the people in this country, up to and including altering the Constitution to serve the viewpoint of a single religion? Yes, quite frankly, I think that exact thing is already happening as we speak.

Without intending to condemn either of you individually, I stand by what I said in my previous post--that this exact pattern of reasoning, if it continues to dominate our country, will result directly in the reversal of over two centuries of religious and personal freedom. I also stand by my belief that as people whose sexual inclinations lie outside the heterosexual, baby-making, man-on-top, get-it-done-fast-and-who-cares-if-she-enjoys-it vaginal intercourse between married people will be among the first to have their freedoms and privacy stripped away. That means all of us--not just the gays, not just the Femme tops and male bottoms, but anyone who owns a pair of handcuffs, a dildo, or a tube of KY.

I'm sorry if my fear of people who think the way you say you do offends you. But when you say that your relationship is OK because it's approved in the Bible (though I maintain it isn't, because, as I've said before, the Bible doesn't give a fig for the woman's consent to be dominated), while mine is "not a sin," but also "not Biblical," and Etoile's is sin plain and simple--yeah, you make me nervous. Maybe you're willing to leave the judging of me and Etoile up to God, but a whole bunch of folks who think what you think are perfectly happy to step up and start in on the judging in this life. So, no, I don't think I'm out of line in challenging your position.

Note to Etoile: Sorry to drag you into this; I needed an example of someone in a same-sex relationship who was known and respected on this forum, and you were the first one to pop into my head. My apologies for singling you out.

 

[Private_Label]

I consider myself a Christian, but I am also a scientist who has learned to look at every theory and hypothesis (including scientific ones) and say that "until a theory with a better fit comes along." I have read about other religions and basically most have similar ideal at the heart of the religion. Don't do bad things to children, try to work out your problems with others through mediation (court system, arbitration etc) before you resort to violence, and in general try to leave a place better than you found it.

That being said, I think if I ever had any kids to tell about BDSM, I'd say the same thing I said to those who were curious about sex... It is something that can make me feel very good, but I keep the consequences of my actions in mind. Other info to be handed out at age appropritate times in response to specific questions.

 

[graceanne]

Grace, just out of curiousity, why is Wiccan capped in your post? I noticed it several times.

On the religious side..As long as I behave, you behave, and none of us scare the horses, then I'm all good. *smiles*

On the subject of the OP? I will answer their questions on an age appropriate level. Sex, drugs, alcohol, whatever. I am not going to look at them in horror and demand to know where they heard that. I might also pass along STR if my child was old enough. I do have two children, and I will do what I can to encourage them in whatever personality paths I see.

D

Doesn't it stand for something? And acronym for something or the other? If it does it should be capitalized.

 

[graceanne]

Jason, Grace, I'm not putting words in your mouths, or thoughts in your head. I genuinely believe that you are both nice people, and are sincere in your good intentions. I am made nervous, however, by the fact that you fall back on the same justification for your views that has been used for centuries to justify all sorts of inhumane behavior. Do I think that either of you is likely to personally do harm to me or anyone like me? No, of course not. But do I think that people who use the same belief system that you subscribe to will attempt to judge, legislate, and otherwise control the private personal lives of all the people in this country, up to and including altering the Constitution to serve the viewpoint of a single religion? Yes, quite frankly, I think that exact thing is already happening as we speak.

Ok, you want the whole long and faluted reason behind why I believe the bible? My beliefs are not going to make me popular, so I want to remind people that my beliefs are general, I think that their are exceptions to every rule. I also think a lot of those exceptions are becuase of the introduction of sin into the world.

In the beginning their was a man and a woman. (Yes, this can be debated, but that's what I believe.) God mad the man first, and the woman second, as the mans companion. Adam was lonely, and therefore God made woman. I believe that God DELIBERATELY waited until Adam was lonely to make woman, so that Adam would fully appreciate what God had made for him.

I believe that originally Adam and Eve represented two seperate parts of God, both good, and both different. And then sin was introduced into the world, and things began to become confusing.

My beliefs are backed up by many things. (1) When a baby is developing in a womb, their brains develop in different ways, depending on their gender. Female brains develop the communication part of their brain first, and then their problem solving part then their visual part. Male brains develop their problem solving part, then visual, then their communication. That's why women want to talk out their problems - that's how they problem solve them. It's also why they aren't as visually oriented as men. Men solve the problem in their brain, and then don't see why it needs to be talked about - the problem has already been solved. This of course does not prove that men are meant to dominate - all it proves is that men and women are different in more ways than body parts.

(2)Men, as a rule, are also more agressive - they have like twice more testosterone than women. They are bigger and stronger. If you believe in evolution than you can say that's just the way they evolved. I believe that God made them that way on purpose, the better to provide for and protect their families. I know that women can also provide and protect their families, I just feel that God made them that way because he knew that their is not always a man to do it. He made women smaller and softer, the better to mother and comfort their man. He also made them more pleasing to the eye, because he knew that men are visually oriented, and he wanted them to please man.

I do not think that domination comes naturally to men, anymore than submission comes naturally to women. Just as I think that be truthful or kind doesn't always come natrually. No one is born capable of being exactly how God saw it when he originally made the earth. And as I stated, I don't feel that a F/m relationship is a sin, I just don't think it's how God wanted it to be.

 

[Jay Davis]

Grace, Jason, I think it's pretty clear that none of us is going to shift the position or perception of the other through this discussion forum. It's probably best if we agree to disagree, and move on, especially since I'll be out of town and offline for the next several days.