|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 7:00 pm
Zurah I understand what you're saying. I think what you really need are some good local social ties-- people to cement who you are and stuff like that. I could be completely wrong, but I've noticed that since I've found friends with similar interests, I've been much much happier as myself. That would be great. I just need to know what I'm into before I go looking for like-minded people. No point in joining a golden showers club if it turns out I'm really a furry. blaugh
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 7:16 pm
Why not be both? You'd be amazed at how much overlap there is in the fetish community. Sure, there's a bit of one-true-way-ism, and some 'purists', but in general, if someone's kinky, they'll be a few different flavors of kinky.
I understand your reluctance, and I have to say, the best way to find out is to experiment. There's a lot of pornography out there. Don't be hesitant to explore what all you might be missing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 7:21 pm
Zurah Why not be both? You'd be amazed at how much overlap there is in the fetish community. Sure, there's a bit of one-true-way-ism, and some 'purists', but in general, if someone's kinky, they'll be a few different flavors of kinky.
I understand your reluctance, and I have to say, the best way to find out is to experiment. There's a lot of pornography out there. Don't be hesitant to explore what all you might be missing. I think you misunderstand me. I'm not reluctant - I'm eager! I want to see what's out there! I'm not saying you can't be both, I'm just saying I should find out what I am before I go out and try to find others like me. Truth be told, I know for damn sure I'm not a furry. blaugh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 7:40 pm
Reluctance to commit to a lifestyle you don't like, is what I meant.
Basically, what BDSM is founded on is trust. Not pain, not power, not safewords or fancy toys, but trust. I wrote an essay that touches on what it is to me (that I'm rather proud of) and if you'd like to read it, you can copy/paste it into notepad or what have you to see the text.
As things go, I’m a fairly well-behaved sub. None of us are perfect, and for myself… major flaws are present. I am self-centered, lazy, manipulative, procrastinating, indulgent, sinful, demanding, and often need to be reminded of my place. However, I know to submit to your authority, and rarely must be told something twice.
Admitting one’s weaknesses is a vital part in a Dom/sub relationship. It may even be described as embracing the weaknesses of two people, and turning them both to strength. In the intoxicating blend of subtlety and control, hints and sparks of erotic themes flourishing among the twilight of sin and justice, sadism and masochism, decadence in its’ most cruel yet tender form. As two pieces of a puzzle interlock, so must the participants in the relationship. Not only must they have the right disposition and role, but all of the other details must as well align. If neither had weakness, neither would have strength, and all remaining would be two polygons and that wouldn’t be much fun.
There is a sense of unity, of one-ness with a partner that a platonic or vanilla relationship can simply not supply. When you rely on your partner for your most basic needs, and they take you, showing you, telling you how they would like you to obey their every desire, you become a slave to their dreams as they become to your needs. In some ways, it is very swayed and biased, and in others, it is frighteningly equal. As a dog pleads its’ owner for food, the owner still seeks out the favorite pet in times of need and sorrow.
Distance can both strengthen and undermine a Dominant/subdominant relationship, due to its’ tendency to dilute actions. For example, if the physical realm, a lengthy kiss upon the lips means quite a bit more than in mere fantasy. It is in the same way that a physical threat loses ground. However, more mental mind ******** can be far more potent. If all one person hears of/from another is via a screen with text, or some sort of speaker, the desire to keep what is there, and to, hopefully, gain more in time is very strong. Punishments such as refusing to speak to someone or denying them a sort of conversation can be more effective than face to face.
It is in similar aspects that the more erotic aspects are taken toll of. Photographs or recordings can become more valued, as well as conversations and/or just about anything sexual given. Often, a few mildly provocative things and perchance one or two quite erotic ones can be very nice, as they need to replace physical memories. Five fairly politically correct photographs coupled with one to two more exciting ones seem to work quite well, though most of them should not be more than a few months old. Also, there is a lot more trust that must be built, for there is no true way to be sure that the other is doing what they say they are. I believe attempting to prove such things is just silly, and that they should be assumed true, unless reason or circumstance warns them to be otherwise. Again, in order for a long-distance relationship to prosper, I believe all parties must be honest and open, as well as accessible.
In general, Dom/sub relationships can be quite satisfying, though have their own minor sets of codes as well as pros and cons, whilst relying upon the weaknesses and strengths of the other to not only cement but add another dimension, and are quite possible, but must be adapted for long-distance durability. Not only do I enjoy them, but have minor experiences with both flavors of long-distance relationships and, though not necessarily as pleasurable as a relationship with a local can be, they can be quite fulfilling for all involved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 1:55 am
Erebus Rex: For me there is an inherent joy in just knowing how something works. It's probably even more than just a joy, it's akin to a need. Perhaps again due to the (for me at the time apparently) highly irrational and unpredictable behavior of my family when I was a little child, few things unnerve me as much as not knowing how those around me tick. I need to get into their heads to feel comfortable. (Again one of the joys of a BDSM relationship: Since hierarchy and responsibility are so clearly defined, this need is greatly alleviated. I feel less threatened.)
But as to changing myself: Certainly I want to change myself. Not to conform to any norm or "straight" or "normal" in any way, though (although as a child I often wished that). But to become a better father and better husband. To be able to achive my goals better. To less sabotage my own endeavors. To know what I truly want in the first place, and be able to separate superficial and distracting wishes from my true will. Because if years on a psychoanalysts couch have taught me anything, you cannot become somebody else - but you can be more or less yourself. And you will only ever be happy if you succeed in being true to yourself. But that is not at all easy.
As for looking for your interests and like-minded folks: I agree (for once) with Zurah and recommend experimentation. As the divine Oscar said: You'll only ever regret the things you didn't do. And what if you join a golden shower circle and figure out it's not your cup after all. YOu can always leave. How would you find out if it is otherwise? Often other people can guide you to sides and aspects of yourself you'd never before allowed yourself to recognize.
I'd beware of labels though: Are all furries the same? All golden shower aficionados. Communities are great, but they have a tendency to become dogmatic, to straight-jacket you with their (own) conformist idea of what a certain lifestyle ought to be. Pick and chose, don't let them tie you down (hehe, pardon the pun.)
BTW: Love your avatar! 4laugh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 1:56 am
Zurah: I will read your essay as soon as I find the time. I have heard the BDSM=trust argument before and have never been convinced, but I'm very curious what you have to say to it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 6:02 pm
Orvil- I'm glad you are, it's a short thing, less than a page.
The basis is mostly the surrender of power. The complete surrender, in my book, and how each acts as the other's parachute, so to speak. If it doesn't work, they both get hurt, the Dom, at times, much more so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 6:53 am
Read your essay, Zurah. Very interesting and nicely written. If I understand it correctly, it is as much about a long-distance and/or on-line relationship than about BDSM in general.
I'm not certain that you make any point concerning trust in relation to BDSM that wouldn't hold as much for any vanilla relationship. Relationships are built on trust, if they are meant to work, BDSM as much or little as any other.
In some way what you describe (esp. when you invoke the master-dog example) sounds more like co-dependence than trust and commitment, though. Perhaps BDSM is a way to make a co-dependent relationship as little (or not at all) psychologically damaging? (Ok, I AM being somewhat intentionally provocative here, hehe.)
I was intrigued by the list of "weaknesses" you supply at the beginning. With myself (and most people interested in BDSM that I know well enough to be able to judge this) it seems that there is a close correlation between those things that they do not do well outside of BDSM and their specific kinks and fetishes inside of it. I am very proud and can take criticism very badly, but in BDSM I crave humiliation abd enforced obedience. I am rather peculiar as to what I will eat and what not, but in BDSM I relish being forced to eat the most disgusting stuff. I too am lazy and procrastinate, but in BDSM I want to be expected to follow every order completely at a moment's notice. The list goes on and on.
This brings me back to Jung and his idea of the shadow (as opposed to Freud's Id) and the opposing forces of anima and animus. Perhaps there are two souls alas in our chests, and no matter which we chose, we suffer - and therefore we yearn for someone to "take over" one of these sides, be its externalized representative, and relieve us of the burden of having to chosen ourselves. Thus we can be the spoiled, lazy little kid, and yet rest asured in the certainty that our sins are held above us by our kind-cruel masters?
(I have not yet checked this theory from the dom's POV, I admit.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:59 pm
In a vanilla relationship, there is trust. It isn't as strong, though. Basically, BDSM (IMHO) takes all the trust in a vanilla relationship and adds the weight of a flogger, or cuffs, rope, etc. You trust them to enjoy it, and they trust you to let you know if something is wrong.
Sort of. Co-dependence only works if each sides supply their end of things. I need my clothing, I trust it to start to tear before it completely wears out, it trusts that I will repair tears and such before they get to the point of making the clothing unusable. We are both committed to each other. I, myself, don't find a D/s relationship physiologically damaging in the least.
It's simply necessary to be that open-- the list was provided to let the person know, as well as to admit to these faults myself. Everyone needs to be a bit more humble.
Two souls? Maybe. I know that there are different strains of my personality and different parts of my brain I use when playing different roles, but I don't know if I'd go so far as to say multiple souls.
Have you read Venus in Furs?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 7:25 am
I think what I loved most in any form of kinky relationship was the feeling that I could be 100% myself, no disguise, no fakery, no bowing to the pressure of society. So for me, I guess, it's less the trust (although that is sort of the other side to the medallion) than the honesty.
BDSM for me = Lack of Lies. (Weird, never thought of that before.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2008 6:35 pm
Hello... yeah remember me back from like, page one >.< Anyways I kinda lost interest in gaia and the discussions, everything seemed to fall silent so I quit signing on. But anyways I'm back and just got done reading the last two pages, which quite surprising contained alot of information, so if I miss anything, or someone would like to discuss something in further detail with me, please pm me.
After reading two main ideas jump out at me. First off is that someone said that no more trust is needed in a BDSM relationship then in a vanilla relationship.... and I say this with all due respects, but if you're in a BDSM relationshp and still think that, then perhaps you're in BDSM for the wrong reasons. I for one, on trust alone, trust my servant to do what is told of her, I trust her to tell me when she is truely enjoying something and when she isn't, I trust her to be open and honest with me at all times. She trusts me to tie her down and remove all power, to push her to her physical and mental limits, and even though I can, never push her beyond those limits. She trusts me to cause pain, but with that pain to bring pleasure, she trusts me enough to do just about whatever I say without question, knowing that I always think of her first.... I don't mean to offend you, but if you think there's no extra trust involved in any of this, then perhaps you need to re-consider why you're into bdsm, or perhaps just who you're into it with.
The second idea that jumped out at me is that of the duel souls... I don't think it's duel souls, but more of a balance. All life rides in balance, chaos, order, an anti for every positive. Our souls and minds and bodys are like a yin-yang. Some of us have more defined lines where the colors meet, others tend to blend more. Some of us have a type of, duel persona, or thought train.... I for one did, before I found my balance I literally thought of myself as two people, Cortez and Trefold. Trefold was the honor bound 'gunslinger' type, the person I wanted to be and thrived to be. Cortez was the...... hell the rapist and killer, the man that was able to do everything I was to 'afraid' to do, and better yet the part that scared me the most, enjoyed it. Only when I found a balance, when I realized that what Cort was doing was a type of fetish, and yet being able to do it (not rape and killing, but I think you guys know what I mean) with the morals, trust, and honor Trefold gave me, have I been truely happy with life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 3:09 pm
Ah, the question of trust: Of course it takes a lot of trust to let somebody tie you up or perhaps even gag you. That somebody you allow to hurt you on purpose will stop where the lustful pain becomes just pain. And it probably takes even more trust to show somebody enough to show them your need for this sort of treatment... or the need to treat somebody like that. But is it really that much MORE trust than that you need to share your wealth and life's plan with? To entrust your children to the care of your partner? To include into your life's choices, about friends, career, or family? What I mean is that any kind of serious partnership, of real commitment requires a level of trust where the specific trust of a BDSM relationship hardly makes much of a difference.
I guess the whole issue bugs me so, because the insistence with which I have been told about this "special trust" involved in BDSM again and again makes me wonder if many of those pushing that particular meme (and I really do not want to address anyone here specifically!) simply do not know the commitment of a real partnership and take the bit of trust needed to play a few tie-up and whipping games for the real deal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 6:29 pm
Simply not knowing the real deal?
I think it's less a matter of ignorance and more of simply a different sort of trust. Like the many flavors of love, one would think that trust very well could be a multitude of different subtexts and emotion.
For me, it's more of surrendering emotions and feelings rather than care of the body. Then again, we all probably see something different in it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 9:19 am
You are certainly right there, without doubt trust comes in many forms, shades and flavors. But that would bring me back to the point that the argument a BDSM relationship is defined by more or deeper trust, than a vanilla one is folly. Any true relationship (certainly including but by no means exclusively those of a BDSM nature) requires a very high level of trust.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
