Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

‘More acceptance’ of S&M needed

999 replies

Imnobody4 · 25/03/2019 10:05

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.

OP posts:
Endofthedays · 01/04/2019 21:59

SomeDyke, yes, that explains a lot to me.

PencilsInSpace · 01/04/2019 22:25

What if the dom had a heart attack or seizure while you were tied up or something?

Yes, even if we accept that your True Dom™ is totally not abusive and cares only about your wellbeing and sexual pleasure, the idea that the sub is in control is utter BS. If you are blindfolded and tied naked to a chair you are in control of nothing.

That's the whole point, isn't it?

Original poster
Imnobody4 · 01/04/2019 22:29

Agree entirely at the softening of language. Reminds me of enhanced interrogation techniques, not only fudging what is actually happening but removing the sense of individual conscience and responsibility.

OP posts:
MagicMix · 01/04/2019 22:47

Well it used to be called S&M or sadism and masochism. They extended the acronym to BDSM and never seem to use the words sadism and masochism anymore. These words make it too clear what is going on.

BDSM has become a sort of word in itself (beedee-essem), because it's too long to say it all properly - there are probably plenty of people on the street who couldn't tell you what the letters stand for. It obscures and sanitises the practices (as does 'dom' and 'sub' instead of 'sadist' and 'masochist'). Kink is just one more step along that road, and also serves to blur the lines between sadism and things like foot fetishes which people might find a bit weird and gross but which obviously don't illicit the same level of disgust.

If you're not in their club, don't use their terminology.

Has anyone ever read the Andrea Dworkin chapter in Pornography on the Marquis de Sade? It is glorious - I highly recommend it.

agirlhasnonameX · 02/04/2019 09:32

I could go for a bath with music playing and my partner could have a heart attack and die before I could even try to do anything. Surely there are 'what ifs' to everything we do and we decide whether to do them based on how big or likely we think that risk is. Otherwise we would do nothing just incase an awful situation occurred.
It's interesting that a Dominant has been posting and when asked should she stop helping victims and protecting the community, pp said no of course not. But then by the definition on this thread she is a violent sadist is she not? A violent sadist who helps victims and tries her best to report and deter abusers?
I think it's also worth mentioning that the biggest part of 'BDSM' is D/s, not s/m. A BDSM relationship can involve no S&m at all and can include things like puppy play, which often involves no pain, bondage or even sex. The Dominant person in this situation is not 'getting off' on playing out a fantasy of fucking a dog or abusing an animal or causing 'violence' of any sort, yet those people might still say they are involved in BDSM.

agirlhasnonameX · 02/04/2019 09:37

Yes, even if we accept that your True Dom™ is totally not abusive and cares only about your wellbeing and sexual pleasure, the idea that the sub is in control is utter BS. If you are blindfolded and tied naked to a chair you are in control of nothing.
In a situation where he was unconscious from his hypothetical heart attack, I wouldn't have much control no. In a situation where we are both fully conscious, I am in control of the situation. I can stop it any time, I can express I don't want him to do something particular but that I want to continue. Even if I was blindfolded and gagged. The sub sets the margins for the scene in which the Dominant must stay within. If he does not it is abuse.

JessicaWakefieldSVH · 02/04/2019 09:39

I can stop it any time

No, you can’t, you can ask for that and rely on the trust you’ve built up. But the Dom actually is the one who stops it.

SomeDyke · 02/04/2019 09:45

Did someone just introduce puppies in an attempt to make BDSM seem less threatening!!!!!!!!!

Frankly, that just makes it all seem more creepy and dodgy not less. Ditto the continued pretence that "I'm in control really" & repeat -- although the addition of abuse if not shows the truth of it.

Yossarian22 · 02/04/2019 09:54

SomeDyke
Puppies, play, practitioners, workshops, high protocols, what we’re doing is perverted but don’t call us perverts.

All the terms thrown at this thread to normalise BDSM and all of it is bullshit.

JessicaWakefieldSVH · 02/04/2019 09:57

Puppy play. Wtf.

Furrytoebean · 02/04/2019 09:58

But then by the definition on this thread she is a violent sadist is she not? A violent sadist who helps victims and tries her best to report and deter abusers?

So if you report an abuser you can't be a violent sadist?
Two things can exist at the same time.

Your point about pup play is very misleading.
How many people doing pup play aren't having sex or touching each other? Very few I would imagine.

And literally no one cares if grown people want to put on those rubber outfits and pretend to be dogs in the privacy of their own homes.
It's when they start wearing the buttplug tails in public and therefore involving over people in their sexual acts without their consent that people start getting upset.

This isn't a thread about how feminists just want everyone to do missionary and have no exploration in their sex lives, it's looking at when those acts start to encroach on other people or start to damage women as a class.

If there is no violent acts and it's in the privacy of your own home then i think you'd struggle to find anyone who had a problem to be honest.

Furrytoebean · 02/04/2019 10:03

Also I struggle with the 'sub is control really' narrative.

The idea that people with no power really DO have the power because they are manipulating the person with power is a dangerous trope as old as time.

A bloody sexist one at that.

Furrytoebean · 02/04/2019 10:06

A BDSM relationship can involve no S&m at all and can include things like puppy play, which often involves no pain, bondage or even sex

So what defines a bdsm relationship if it can involve no pain, bondage or even sex.

How do I know I'm not having one with the bus driver?

agirlhasnonameX · 02/04/2019 10:27

My point in mentioning puppy play was to point out that lots of things can fall under BDSM. People will automatically think of S&M but it's possible to have no S&M at all and that the whole acronym doesn't apply to every individual. Puppy play could be considered D/s and it's pretty well known it isn't about sex or touching each other for the majority.
I tell my trusted Dominant partner he can do XY and Z but not AB and C. We agree on these things and have lengthy, repetitive conversation about the particularities and make sure we are both clear without a doubt. If something has not been discussed and agreed on it falls under the red area and I have not consented. So then if I am bound and physically have no control, I still know I've set the rules and I trust him to follow them. Often he will communicate with me whilst this is going on, he will regularly check. He cannot tie me up and do whatever he wants to me. He can tie me up and I will tell him what I permit him to. He does not get to decide what acts we will do and when and that applies to 'normal' sexual acts too.

Furrytoebean · 02/04/2019 10:38

Pup play IS about sex.
Whether they touch each other or not.

Otherwise it wouldn't be common practise to put a butt plug shaped like a tail in your anus and walk around in public.

If they were just reenacting the Andrex advert no one would give a shit.

Endofthedays · 02/04/2019 10:47

If you entirely trust him why you are experiencing the survival instinct i.e. the instinct that kicks in when your brain thinks you are not going to survive?

Florescentadolescent · 02/04/2019 10:48

A few years ago bdsm was only really carried out by those within the community. And as people have said, there are rules, regulations and people are vetted. That community got on quietly and happily for years and us vanilla folk only had an insight from watching shows like euro trash and sexsetera.

Now its become more main stream. We see bdsm in popular books, films, TV shows, music videos and men and boys are watching and getting off on the most extreme bdsm watching porn.

Now all off a sudden its not the respectful community that are doing it. But the bloke that you met on tinder who wants to recreate what he saw in porn. And you saw Rihanna do a bdsm video so you think it'll be OK.

The next think we have women and girls beaten, abused and even killed by their partners in the name of kinky sex.

I'm not sure what the answer is but I do think bdsm should be banned from porn and mainstream media.

Endofthedays · 02/04/2019 10:48

Sorry, why are you not why you are?

BettyDuMonde · 02/04/2019 10:49

thehappypup.com

There may not be the expectation of penetrative sexual intercourse but the assertion that puppy play is non-sexual is beyond laughable.

Moralitym1n1 · 02/04/2019 11:27

Sub is 'in control' only so long as Dom allows them to have control. Sub is often restrained in a way that removes all ability to control what happens.

Dom can do anything they like and you may say 'but I'll never sub for them again and I'll report them within the community' - and what, it's done (to you) then, it's too late. And no doubt Dom will tell people it was a misunderstanding, you misled them, you're lying, minimise what happened .. all the usual things people say. Plus they can just go to a different community, or try to get women to do BDSM in personal relationships. We've already seen the likelihood sub getting it to court let alone a conviction if sub were to try to go that route.

For each act you only have as much control as they let you.

(And this is presuming restraibt but the reality is a man can overpower a woman in most cases even without restraint).

Moralitym1n1 · 02/04/2019 11:29

And as people have said, there are rules, regulations and people are vetted. That community got on quietly and happily for years

Did they though? You don't have to look far to see stories from women saying otherwise.

Florescentadolescent · 02/04/2019 11:47

Did they though? You don't have to look far to see stories from women saying otherwise.

Well, I don't really know, it's not my world. But people come out and have said on this thread that it's all consentual and controlled.

The stories of abuse excused as sex in the media seem to be individuals committing the acts alone on women that there is no evidence have interest in bdsm. Not people that are part of an organised group with rules.

It's like DIY bdsm

Furrytoebean · 02/04/2019 11:57

But people come out and have said on this thread that it's all consentual and controlled.

Controlled by who?

They've said where their individual boundaries are but there's no bdsm police.

And once again we get to the fact that just because someone consents to an act doesn't mean that act is ok.

Furrytoebean · 02/04/2019 12:00

That doesn't happen

And when it does happen it was the sub instigating it.

And when it wasn't then it wasn't real bdsm

Onlyinanemergency · 02/04/2019 12:15

I think what florescent says is really interesting. It's not just the (alleged) BDSM "community" that is pushing for these acts to be more mainstream. It's advertising, high fashion, film and TV, and most notably porn. I think it's worth asking who else benefits from casting women in the role of "sub", and I think we all know the answer. I feel the BDSM lot are pushing against an open, patriarchal, door!