‘More acceptance’ of S&M needed

[Imnobody4]

talkradio.co.uk/news/more-acceptance-needed-sm-activities-19032230392
My morning isn't starting well. Haven't heard the programme - not sure I could stand it.

Apologies broke my own rule and should I know a seriously perverted fella - or some such thing.

non-BDSM practitioners.

Now see I hate that term and would not like being referred to that way. I don’t like being called a non-man either.

Yes.

'Normal' would do.

Pain and degradation aren’t things people generally consent to without being mentally unwell or extremely vulnerable

You would be surprised then at the reality. Personally, noone gets to humiliate, degrade or hurt me. They may do things which could hurt if done too hard/tight/with too much force etc, but the point is to avoid that level of pain and only do what feels good. A nipple clamp would hurt like hell if too tight. Feels amazing when it is "just right".

Same as being spanked/whipped/whatever. It's to do with the level of force used. Gently feels fabulous to some people. Hard just bloody hurts to me. To others, being spanked hard feels pleasurable rather than painful.

If it tips from pleasure to pain, then that is abuse and, frankly, means the Dom is crap. I know without a shadow of a doubt, that if my ex partner thought he had hurt me, he would never, ever have done that thing to me again. He would be heartbroken.

If I dominated him, it gave me no pleasure to cane him. It gave him great pleasure. If I did it too hard then he didn't hesitate to say and I felt awful for hurting him. What gave me pleasure is that he was trusting me to give him pleasure without hurting him and that his sexual response was entirely down to me.

Totally different mentally to enjoying assaulting someone.

I don’t see people continuing to use the word pervert.
People continued to use the term after I had mentioned it's connotations could be damaging several times. When I expressed distaste for that, I was told I was a precious snowflake wet blanket who needed to toughen up.
But it's fine I see to hate the term I used (instead of using one that had already been pointed out as offensive), state that you hate it and to not be told you too then are a wet blanket snowflake policing my language and instead be agreed with.

Non-BDSM and non-standard were attempts to avoid offence. For some reason, I thought normal would be offence in the same way that vanilla seems to be.

For some reason, I thought normal would be offence in the same way that vanilla seems to be.
I did too, probably because vanilla means ordinary and ordinary means normal.

agirlhasnonameX

Yes because most people don’t agree with BDSM, so are more likely to not accept terms or phrases describing people based on whether or not they engage in it. It’s like non-trans or cis, terms that identify others based on a minority belief.
I didn’t call you a pervert personally, so your beef isn’t with me.

Vanilla is used in derogatory ways most of the time, like you’re boring or don’t like sex just because you don’t engage in BDSM. That’ll be why people don’t like it.

You would be surprised then at the reality

Well, the way you’re attempting to normalise and minimise it, I’m not surprised at.

I thought normal would be offence in the same way that vanilla seems to be.

Sure.

Things really have got that far.

Normal and deviant/perverted go together as a pair.

Vanilla is annoying because it is used to equate normal with boring, predictable and unadventurous and can be used as a way of controlling someone - eg- 'Don't be so vanilla!' - if someone has reservations about some weird shit that's being proposed. They are made to feel ashamed of their own aversion/disgust/boundaries. Its similar to 'frigid'.

By the way, I dont think either I or anyone else on this thread, are trying to claim that BDSM is something that everyone should be into.

I am not trying to change people's personal opinion as to what appeals to them.

Nor am I trying to claim that BDSM is a bastion of feminism. It obviously isn't.

Yes, there are some subs who have been abused and are trying to gain mastery over it in their own way. It isnt a way I would choose, but if it works for them, who am I to tell them they are wrong?

Most Doms who are any good, would swerve a sub who seemed vulnerable. Predators would gladly go near them. So it is up to the BDSM community to teach people the difference. But that can't happen if people feel they cannot speak out without being outwardly judged and called names.

Of course we all privately judge things, sure. But publically judging doesn't stop behaviour. It just leads to silence and shame. That silence prevents BDSM practitioners speaking out against assault.

Well, the way you’re attempting to normalise and minimise it, I’m not surprised at

I am really not. I explaining what it is to me.

So it is up to the BDSM community to teach people the difference.

This is the thing. The onus really is on the BDSM community.

The normal/ordinary community has clear definitions of what is and isn't abuse. The deviant/BDSM community messes with those definitions and gives out some pretty contradictory messages.

Currently, these confusing narratives of the BDSM community are being used by sadistic murderers to attack and kill with impunity.

The BDSM community needs to come forward and loudly declare 'not in our name' when 'rough sex gone wrong' is used as an excuse for murder. That is your opportunity to get a clear message out there.

And get some of the men off there arses to do it.

Enough of women and feminists being expected to do all the heavy lifting.

I completely agree with your latter points. Men should not be hiding behind BDSM to perpetuate abuse, and Doms should be loudly shouting "not in my name".

I appreciate that to those outside the community, that it looks like women being hurt for sexual kicks. I totally get that. So we need to explain that that is not BDSM. That is assault, torture, rape etc.

Just please listen to us when we say that those things are not what BDSM is about. And that abusers shouldn't be using it as a defence.

No matter how extreme the activities that the Dom and Sub get up to, and it may look violent to onlookers, it should always be with full consent and the Sub can stop it at any time. She has control. Or should have. If she doesn't then it is assault.

That's the message that needs to get out. And women should be supported to report abuse, and the police need to wise up to what consent is. It isn't tricky. No matter what abusers may tell them.

The law should remain as it is. Doms should always fear prosecution if they breach the Sub's boundaries and consent.

I’m a female Domme. (Obv) I’ve n/c for this.

I speak out very very loudly against abuse in BDSM. And I give practical help - run workshops, I’m crew at events, I am part of vetting, I take action when I’m aware of someone overstepping lines to get the blackballed and I have accompanied victims to police stations and reported off my own accord to the police/relevant authorities.

Please don’t assume that all Dominants are male and that there aren’t those in the community who speak up and stand up and be counted.

Thought of another way to phrase it:

For as long as people see BDSM as being about men and women hurting each other with impunity, for kicks, then murderers have a defence.

I am not trying to normalize BDSM. I am stating the standards that anyone inquisitive about BDSM should know about. If those standards aren't met, then it isn't BDSM.

Bankofenglandfiver thanks for all you do I know there are loads of Dommes and that people do speak out. I was using Dom here as it is FWR and we were discussing the men who have used BDSM as a defence. Sorry for causing offence.

The BDSM community needs to come forward and loudly declare 'not in our name' when 'rough sex gone wrong' is used as an excuse for murder. That is your opportunity to get a clear message out there.
This is what I have been saying since the beginning of this thread. Unfortunately the way BDSM is stigmatised (and no I'm not saying it should be accepted, just understood) will play a huge factor in people having the confidence to be honest about what they enjoy. I don't think I could, personally, go out in the public and announce to my normal community that I am into BDSM and that these acts are not in my name. I would be, just as I have on this thread, shut down for being part of the problem and not listened to as part of the solution. My normal neighbours would assume I was a pervert or feel sympathy for my make believe child hood abuse that obviously that has caused me to be this way (and possibly they would be very surprised but left with no choice but to conclude that I was also catholic ), this is what would stick in people's heads, not the message itself.
R.E the vanilla/normal thing, I think normal implies that everyone normal has the same sex life. I think everyone's normal is different, so it's not really normal except on an individual level (I understand the relevance in this conversation), but if normal people want to be called normal I am capable of respecting that whether I agree or not.

@Bankofenglandfiver thank you for the work you do to keep people talking about abuse and to keep them safe.

One of the events I run, we have vetting. As part of that vetting interview, we run through the “rules” of behaviour we expect.

A Dom friend does the blokes, I do the girls. And I’m very very clear about what consent is and where the boundaries lie as is the Dom who does the blokes sessions.

(The reason for the separate sessions is because I hammer it home to the women, who tend to be sub, that there’s a difference between BDSM and abuse. And we think it comes better from me than a Dom).

I don’t do to “pay per view” events. The ones that are £20 entry and any one can get in. Because my personal opinion is that they’re an abusers charter. So I don’t go. I write about why I think certain things are a bad idea, and I give my opinion.

I’ve taken the side of a woman who was assaulted - talked to her, went with her to the police, moderated online discussions about the case, and in one case went to the police off my own bat. And in another contacted other relevant authorities and said “this person is planning to do this thing. It’s a very bad idea because x y z.”

I have blackballed “prominent” members in the local scene. Zero fucks do I give how important they are. If they don’t play by the rules they can find another playpen. And I’ll make it as hard as I can for them to get in anywhere. (See above re open events)

But by fuck it irritates me that there’s an assumption that people in BDSM aren’t speaking out. We are.

For as long as people see BDSM as being about men and women hurting each other with impunity, for kicks, then murderers have a defence.

Um, no, not if we never accept sadism as normal and acceptable.

Your argument makes no sense to me because what we are saying is that consent in such contexts should never have any kind of legal meaning. This is not about trying to find out who is consenting and who isn't - it's about saying that there are some things that you should not be able to legally consent to. We're saying get rid of the impunity.

So the sadist says 'It was consensual'. And we say 'That is neither here nor there, your actions were immoral and we as a civilised society will not stand for them'.

The immoral argument is a shaky one - morals change with time.

Having said that, I’m very well aware of the law.

I’m not a hurty sadist, so I don’t tend to do the heavy duty whippy paddle stuff, but those who do need to know that it’s illegal and that everytime you lift a whip you are technically committing an offence in law. (I do flog/spank/bit of light whipping but I’m not that way overly inclined)