RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 8:47:32 AM

Posts: 32566
Status: offline

Just thoughts running through My head this morning.

A number of the responses are talking about this line. No offense, but I'm not getting a clear picture on where this line is for folks. A few have specifically mentioned broken bones would be some kind of indicator. I'm even kind of iffy on that. Resistance play comes immediately to mind and accidents can absolutely happen. All it takes is a bad landing during a take down scene. (I can't help but mention here how many posts I've read on these boards about how hot some bottoms think it is to be overpowered.)

The problem here is, wherever we fall on the play scale, each of us finds what we do as acceptable. The stuff that is too much for our personal tastes is where we might be looking to think that people are abusive. That's dangerous ground because the opposite is also true. There somebody out there who plays lighter than we do thinking the same thing about us.

_____________________________

The crowned Diva of Destruction. ~ ExT

Beach Ball Sized Lady Nuts. ~ TWD

Happily dating a new submissive. It's official. I've named him engie.

Please do not send me email here. Unless I know you, I will delete the email unread

(in reply to CreativeDominant)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 9:04:16 AM

Posts: 244
Joined: 10/3/2010
Status: offline

The line, as it were, is subjective.

As you noted people can view things differently. For most here spanking would be fairly normal and mundane unless taken to the extreme. But for some out there, the very fact that you are taking your hand to someone to strike them, even in play, is unacceptable.

I think the only valid line that can be drawn is when non consenting people are brought into the play. IE: if you like sex in public, it's fine so long as you don't get caught. But if you do, you deal with the consequences.

I think the same holds true for extreme play. If you cannot handle the consequences of your play without getting others involved, or there is no way you can possibly do the play without it affecting others (IE severe injuries requiring hospital care)... then you are beyond a line that society in general will accept, even if you are both fully rational and consenting adults.

(in reply to LadyPact)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 9:18:16 AM

Posts: 5568
Joined: 7/3/2007
Status: offline

[Ed to remove redundant quoteage]

LadyPact,

Drawing that "line" is mind-numbingly difficult, which is why I tried in my first reply to give a couple of examples. I think "broken bones" must be on the wrong side of the line - but it is a personal (and therefore very subjective take).

The examples you gave of broken bones both related to accidents which (for me) would be on the "ok" side of the line - Accidents happen. But then there's a grey (or gray) area - If a person hit someone really hard with a baseball bat, but didn't "intend" to break a bone... then I'd say that that person's recklessness was criminal, because any reasonable person would expect that bone breakage was a likely consequence of hitting someone really hard with a bat...

But I completely agree with you about the difficulty with the "line".

My internal definition relates to "lasting harm".. but that just moves the problem to defining "lasting harm"!

_____________________________

Remember.... There's always somewhere on the planet where it's jackass o'clock.

(in reply to LadyPact)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 9:28:14 AM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

To me, it's all about risk assessment, what is the risk to you, what is the risk to me? But experience is going shape how you assess risks, it's not always a strictly empirical process. I was in my twenties, and in the Navy, when the AIDS epidemic struck in the Eighties, and I'm slightly germaphobic as a result: at that time, nobody really knew what the hell was going on, what it was or how it was transmitted, and at that time the whole promiscuity ethic of the Seventies "disco culture" was in full swing - I developed a bit of a latex fetish, and was even celibate for a while.

I'm still not comfortable with anything that involves breaking the skin, me or her - I like to eat pussy too, but as a practical matter, I have to be in an exclusive relationship, or at least know quite a bit about your current and recent sexual activity to properly assess your risk profile, and be comfortable doing it - and in that sense, privacy is an obstacle to healthy risk assessment, which requires transparency.

One of the primary reasons I make a concerted effort to be "gay-friendly", and confront homophobia, is because, other than a basic human rights issue, homophobia and gay bashing mostly just incentives deceit: out of the closet, I can assess my risks, and control them - how someone can be married to a gay man for 20 years and not know it, I'm not sure, but it happens with surprising frequency, and these are exactly the guys incentivized to take the greatest risks: drugs and alcohol to reduce the stress and guilt, anonymous sex with strangers, etc., that are somewhat alarming in either sex.

Anyway, by that train of logic, homophobia is "harmful", and not just to the psyches of gay men and women, it increases my risks as well.

"Harm" itself is a pretty fuzzy concept, empirically, physical damage is easier to assess, any kind of percusison play can cause a crush injury and is potentially lethal - Houdini routinely allowed member of the audience to gut punch him to test his abdominal strength, but died from a ruptured appendix after a blow to the abdomen he wasn't prepared for, but in that sense, risk becomes more a issue of timing and communication rather than the particular act being performed, and that can be hard to judge from a distance - if indeed traumatic injury is resulting from some practice, it's hard not to conclude that something is "off" somewhere.

If there is more than one person involved, it raises ethical questions: the "victim" may well be egging the other person on - Meiwes's "victim" basically talked him into it, even tried to talk him into continuing afterward with others - it's rare that this particular dynamic is so transparent, as we are conditioned to automatically empathize with the victim - for good reason, of course, the opposite is to blame the victim, and that is pretty well established as a slippery slope that facilitate widespread and institutional psychopathy - the Pentagon denying various forms of "collateral damage" even exist, Gulf War Syndrome, PTSD, etc., but there often is a sort of symbiotic relationship there, in fact, it's in a sense, exactly what many of us are seeking - when it's being characterized as dysfunctional, we call it co-dependence, but in fact, we've evolved to form these symbiotic pair bonds in order to facilitate K strategies, it's just that the mechanisms involved are sometimes unpredictable except as broad, statistical patterns - biological diversity means that some iterations of a given "pattern" are going to be more functional than others, but the pattern itself is a recurring, and predictable phenomena.

In the cases like above, it's all well and good to say, "they're made for each other", but if it turns out the abuser is indeed a sociopath, there is some probability that if their masochist dies, they'll need replacements.

Empirically, however, I'm not sure that this happens a lot, and maybe even less so in BDSM than in the vanilla population, as BDSM may well have some therapeutic value, i.e., a potential serial killer or rapist, may simply become a mildly popular top - these personality types tend to be pressure cookers, and if they don't blow off a little steam on a semi-regular basis, there is a risk they'll suffer a psychotic break and blow completely - serial killers for example are much more likely to have been brought up in a strict, repressive, religious environment, though abuse is often a factor as well, and in some cases, even environmental neurotoxins like lead or heavy metal poisoning may be critical factors.

Thus, you could empirically argue that religion is harmful, statistically speaking, much worse than kink, but these risks, as I say, are not always assessed empirically.

And, it may be that masochists of this variety are in some sense, sacrificing themselves for the sake of overall group fitness: reciprocal altruism, facilitating two at least marginally functional members of society instead of one rogue, and a string of bodies.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 9:35:00 AM

Kana

Posts: 6674
Joined: 10/24/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

[ Ed for formatting and typo]

Hey Kana,

I totally respect your pont of view, and this response isn't in any way a judgment on your views - just an expression of mine and how I seem them personally.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kana

Experience here.
I have a friend who is a hard core maso, as in real hard core. Doesn't play in public because people get too freaked, and that's at what she would call foreplay, not even anything rough.
She has been with the same guy forever. Their relationship crosses back and forth between what I would label abuse and extreme S/M edge play.
He's a huge and brutal guy, as in over 6'5, 300 pounds, highly physical. He;s hurt her badly before and will again in the future. One fine afternoon she looked at me and said, "I expect he will kill me one day."
Not a dramatic statement, not a cry for help, just a calm assessment of the facts as she saw them.

It's that last phrase that utterly nails it for me; in my utterly unqualified and subjective opinion, I believe that your friend is mentally ill. This is not meant with any disrespect to her, it's just a statement of my belief about her mental health.

quote:

This is a lady who is smart, competent, beautiful, vibrant. She is actively involved in BDSM community (No held hostage and isolated syndrome here) and touches and teaches others. She works in the medical field for Gods sake. She's dated others over the years, had great guys dominate her, but none fill her need the way the brute does.

Many, many mentally ill people present as smart, competent, beautiful etc. But her "need" for such extreme physical abuse is (in my subjective/unqualified etc etc) a sign of illness.

quote:

I don't have to like her decision. I don't have to understand her decision. What I can do is accept the fact that she is a rational person making the decision that she thinks is best in her life.

I simply cannot agree that accepting regular physical abuse, and having the expectation that your partner will eventually kill you is a rational choice about what is best in your life.

quote:

She's a grown woman and entitled to that respect. As a friend, I can give her the right, the dignity, to be right or wrong in her own life.
I think she deserves that.

But you could put it another way - she's a grown woman and entitled to that respect, and the fact that she is mentally ill doesn't take away from her right to respect.

quote:

I know I certainly don't like others making such calls in my life.I do some stuff that others may consider waaaaay out on the edge, but if an outsider wandered in and started telling me what I could/or could not do, I would be deeply offended and it's a safe bet that the intruder would walk away with ears a-blistered.I'm an adult, been one for a long time. I make the decisions that I think are right for me and mine.

To me, it's not about what your friend would "like" it's about what is in her best interests. Therapy is in her best interests, not regular beatings and eventual murder.

And, you're entitled to be pissed with busy bodies (perhaps lke me!) who say things - and if it came to it I'd take the ear blistering. And if I was wrong (god knows I am wrong a lot) I'd happily apologise - but I'd rather inervene and make an ass of myself than walk on by.

quote:

As long as she willingly consents, then there is no problem.
Again, this is based on the concepts that the people involve aren't insane, minors and that they are competent enough to make rational decisions in their own life.

As a base point it seems we agree on the core - so it's "how do you define sane" that's the key thing here I reckon? I'm being a busybody (an unqualified one at that) by determining (in my limited wisdom) that someone who accepts that situation cannot be making a rational choice.

So at what point would you feel that someone's choice was so irrational that you'd have to conclude they were suffering from mental illness?

Subjectively, while some things might be borderline - regular black eyes, sprains etc. "Likely to be murdered" is comfortably over the line for me.

quote:

Now, I can see some people raising some ethical questions re using health insurance to pay for Dr's visits, but that's a different thread.

Ok, I suck at separating quotes, so I am gonna Italicize your comments and respond:

It's that last phrase that utterly nails it for me; in my utterly unqualified and subjective opinion, I believe that your friend is mentally ill. This is not meant with any disrespect to her, it's just a statement of my belief about her mental health.

See, this, and I mean this with all due respect, is a huge danger of the net. It's easy for someone far removed from the situation to make assessments and judge, often with little info, based on personal morals or beliefs. Before I go further, let me mention that I spent almost a decade working within the field of mental health, and I have experience working with some of the more aggressive types of mental health issues. I'm trained to spot and recognize issues. This gal wasn't mentally ill in any way, she had just found a relationship basis that worked for her.

Many, many mentally ill people present as smart, competent, beautiful etc. But her "need" for such extreme physical abuse is (in my subjective/unqualified etc etc) a sign of illness.

Hmmm, now where does this leave the rest of the masochists on the board? Are they all mentally ill?

I simply cannot agree that accepting regular physical abuse, and having the expectation that your partner will eventually kill you is a rational choice about what is best in your life.

Again, this is your perspective and your moral belief system (Note-That I tried real hard to keep any thoughts I may have had re her situations out of my post). There are many people in hard core S/M relationships (Me for one) who regularly accept (Or give) very heavy physical abuse. Does this make them mentally ill?
Taking this thought one step further, what we are really talking about is people indulging in self-harming behaviors. We all know people who regularly indulge in self destructive acts, whether it be smoking, taking drugs, driving fast, risky sexual behavior, poor eating habits etc...
Look at it like this, eat shit food, don't exercise, pound on weight, clog your arteries (Or drink, or have condom free sex or fuck around with a dangerous mans wife, the list is endless) and no one says squat, even though science has demonstrably shown that such actions will take years off your life. People gamble all the time with things that can kill them, but for some reason one thing is acceptable and the other not.
My perspective is dual.
1-People are gonna do what they are gonna do no matter what. I give them the room to run, and if they ever want help, hey, if you're a friend or someone I care about, I will be there to help. What I do know for sure is that attempting to intercede won't do anyone any good, complicate an already difficult situation, won't do anything towards changing her mind or the situation. Buuuuuut, if I don't judge, stay open minded, keep love in my heart and be a good friend, maybe one day if she does need help, she won't have any compunction asking me.
2-Damnitall, maybe this is an archaic idealistic sentiment, but I have this irrational idea that we are all adults and should be treated accordingly. That means we get to take responsibility for our own lives. If someone wants to make self destructive decisions, that's on them...as are the consequences of said decision. It's their life to do what they want with, if they wanna shine, awesome. If they wanna take a different road, that's on them.

To me, it's not about what your friend would "like" it's about what is in her best interests. Therapy is in her best interests, not regular beatings and eventual murder.

Have you considered that maybe she's been through the therapy, been through all the mental stuff, and concluded that this relationship IS what is in her best interest. She finds her place in life, she knows who and what she is. Questions others wrestle with, she doesn't. This relationship (Which isn't all bad. It's not all beating and whipping. In fact, it's like most of our relationships, cooking, cleaning, jobs, living life, just with real strict rules and consequences) is where she finds happiness and satisfaction.

Just a few thoughts...

< Message edited by Kana -- 11/19/2010 9:38:34 AM >

_____________________________

"One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die. "
HST

(in reply to crazyml)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 9:39:15 AM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

And, in order not to appear misandric, the pressure valve thing probably works both ways - shit rolls downhill, and while men may be more likely abuse their spouses, women may be more likely to abuse their children - not necessarily a cause and effect, but merely to argue the point that blowing off a little steam once in a while may be good for everybody.

(in reply to xssve)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 9:39:38 AM

Posts: 81
Joined: 9/14/2010
Status: offline

Accidents do happen but when they happen repeatedly they are no longer really accidents.

As far as a play scale there is no doubt there are all sorts of ranges. It's almost a moot point as long as everyone is prepared to accept the consequences of their choices. Trying to defend something that you knew full and well beforehand was either illegal or outside the bounds of social acceptability won't work too well hence you don't put yourself in a position to need to. If you do then you accept the consequences should they come about.

That's kind of just the cost of living in a civilized society. We may not agree with all the rules but usually the rules do have their reasons for being there even though some may personally hinder us in one way or another. But as a whole they are probably good. Some do need to change and will over time but harming someone else physically, mentally or psychologically I don't foresee. Even if they desire it.

(in reply to crazyml)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 10:09:13 AM

Posts: 5568
Joined: 7/3/2007
Status: offline

Thanks for replying. I'll ditch the quotage thingie too as it drive me nuts.

You're absolutely right to point out the danger of making a "diagnosis" from 3000 miles on the basis of a couple of paragraphs of text, and you're clearly a whole heck of a lot more qualified than me. It could very well be that with your personal knowledge of the situation (even if I couldn't magically acquire your experience in the field of mental health) I'd end up agreeing with your take on this situation - with the same kind of sadness/regret that I sense you have (apologies if I'm inferring too much).

You called me on my statement "I simply cannot agree that accepting regular physical abuse, and having the expectation that your partner will eventually kill you is a rational choice about what is best in your life. "

And asked where this would leave the other masochists. Good point. Personally I think it depends upon the extent of the harm and the likelihood of that harm occurring. You're totally right - drug taking, bad food, and alcohol are all harmful but it's that equation. Last year a statistician concluded that horse riding was more likely to result in harm than taking MDMA and there was an uproar in our conservative press, that prevented any rational discussion of the risks associated with MDMA.

I don't pretend to know the answer, all I can say is that I draw the line more or less on the basis of that "harm"/"risk" formula.

I think you're right that there are times when no matter what you do to intercede you can't prevent people from making bad choices. And I hope that faced with a similar situation I could be as good and non-judgemental friend as you are.

You make a really good point in your second to last paragraph - And no, I hadn't considered the fact that she might have already tried and failed to get a resolution through therapy (which was somewhat stupid of me)... so it is possible that if I knew a little more I'd take that step back and just be ready for when I was needed.

Finally you said "Just a few thoughts"... well you weren't kidding! This is a fascinating topic for me.

_____________________________

Remember.... There's always somewhere on the planet where it's jackass o'clock.

(in reply to Kana)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 10:26:11 AM

Kana

Posts: 6674
Joined: 10/24/2006
Status: offline

I think for me, the question is less what answer the other person arrive at, than the process involved. Have they thought it through? Have they considered the ramifications? Is it reasonable, from a certain perspective? Is the logic something that can be followed?

Grins
And don't be thinking I'm all kinds of warm and fuzzy and non-judgmental. I judge all the time. It's a huge character flaw. And ya know what, I ain't really sure that a guy who thinks a nice night at home involves binding some poor woman up, throttle her till she's begging for air, flip em over, wail on the ass with a cane, ram objects up her rectum, attach 10 lb clamps to her cunt lips and run needles through her tits BEFORE I begin seriously gagging her with my cock has room to judge anyone.
Just saying...

_____________________________

"One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die. "
HST

(in reply to crazyml)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 10:26:49 AM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

There is always an inherent tension between individual fitness and the group - which is like a vehicle - the group enhances individual fitness, and as long as the vehicle is headed your direction, there is an incentive to optimize it - if it's going in the wrong direction for you, not so much, as, by the same token, there is an inherent tension even at the biological level between conformity and diversity.

It's a bell curve: the fat center of the curve of a given population will tend to conform to some normative value/ideal, while members at either end of the curve will tend to diverge to various degrees. It's at the ends of the curve that evolution, including social/technological evolution.

The whole thing started when one organism living in a sulfur vent at the bottom of the ocean, mutated enough to tolerate temperatures a degree or Two cooler - the conformists are still there floating in the same sulfur vent, one of the ancestors of the "deviant" is sitting here writing about it.

The Law of the Observant Herd" simply describes the way the "ideal", that abstraction which represents the values being conformed to, changes - if one of the innovations happening at the margins appears to offer enhanced utility, it will gradually spread into the center - if it appears to decrease utility, it will not tend to be replicated.

In any case, as the balance of global population shifts from rural/agrarian to urban/industrial, it behooves us to contemplate the mechanisms of conformity and diversity themselves, so that we can exert come kind of control over them, as they surely exert control over us.

In particular, w/respect to the OP, the whole notion of privacy has become somewhat abstract in the digital age - we can either become more inhibited, lest our youthful hijinks brand us for life, or we can become more tolerant of the diversity of human experience.

I'm probably preaching to choir here, but I think it needs to be said - I'm betting on the latter in the long term, it more closely conforms to the biological pattern in general, but in the short term, it more resembles a pendulum.

A sense of some loss of "meaning" is common in Fin de siècle cultural transitions, in the current circumstances, there is also a significant "break border", in McLuhanesque terms, a conflict between different media: oral and literary, and in this case, both of those and digital - they represent not only different modes of communication, but implicitly affect modes of thinking depending on the media.

In practical terms, it means that the old assumptions may be overturned, and something has to take their place - gender bending is common for example, as sexual roles shift and change, sexual identity has to be re-evaluated on a broad, cultural level - in the digital age, upper body strength is no longer the most significant factor in division of labor: its change, and we're adapting to it in many unique and individually diverse ways.

Sorry, rambling, sort of long winded way to explain why various flavors of Nihilism are also predicable, "Jackass" springs to mind, but I'm sure you can spot a few others.

< Message edited by xssve -- 11/19/2010 10:30:22 AM >

(in reply to subkatslut)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 10:34:02 AM

Posts: 5568
Joined: 7/3/2007
Status: offline

grin. good point, well made.

_____________________________

Remember.... There's always somewhere on the planet where it's jackass o'clock.

(in reply to Kana)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 10:46:51 AM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

Given that a lot of it occurs on a subconscious level, one has to stay on ones feet if one want to try and sort it out logically- "random" is a word I've been hearing from my teenager a lot recently.

In that, a sort of rebooting process, wiping the slate, I think you do need to re-examine and re-evaluate the lines more frequently: some things are more stable than others, and some things don't ever change: the basic requirements to sustain metabolic function for example - but google anorexic porn, or Calorie restriction, and you'll find people pushing that envelope.

Kinda freaky to me, I like a little baby fat.

(in reply to crazyml)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 10:55:29 AM

Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kana
Damnitall, maybe this is an archaic idealistic sentiment, but I have this irrational idea that we are all adults and should be treated accordingly. That means we get to take responsibility for our own lives.

Kana,

Many might consider that it's childish - even infantile - to want to give over one's power to one's partner. If true, then whether or not that's a bad thing is beside the point. The real point is that theyy could argue, 'you're giving up (a large measure of) your responsibility for your life to another - therefore you're not thinking and acting like an adult'.

No offence meant, but in a sense I do think your statement expressed a possibly archaic, idealistic sentiment. The ethical system that we're brought up with, that we now take for granted as the 'natural' and 'only-possible' ethical system, is premised upon the assumption that no-one willingly allows someone else to harm him or herself. It's a vanilla assumption, and the bundle of ethics that stem from it are designed for a vanilla world.

I think we have to be prepared to expect that another thing - to add to the burgeoning list - of issues that might be different about kinksters' lives is our ethical systems. What feels intuitively right and wrong is no longer automatically to be taken as reliable. Perhaps those vanilla ethics work fine in most situations, but there could be others where they aren't appropriate. To make us kinksters sound a bit noble and impressive (Hell, why not, for once?!), kinksters are in a sense pioneers. Pioneers have to assume that they'll be challenged in ways that they'd never expected. This one - that relates to fundamental ethical questions regarding harm, and public/private boundaries, is one of those ways in which we're challenged. Or so I'd suggest.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com

(in reply to Kana)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 11:15:18 AM

Kana

Posts: 6674
Joined: 10/24/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kana
Damnitall, maybe this is an archaic idealistic sentiment, but I have this irrational idea that we are all adults and should be treated accordingly. That means we get to take responsibility for our own lives.

Kana,

Many might consider that it's childish - even infantile - to want to give over one's power to one's partner. If true, then whether or not that's a bad thing is beside the point. The real point is that theyy could argue, 'you're giving up (a large measure of) your responsibility for your life to another - therefore you're not thinking and acting like an adult'.

No offence meant, but in a sense I do think your statement expressed a possibly archaic, idealistic sentiment. The ethical system that we're brought up with, that we now take for granted as the 'natural' and 'only-possible' ethical system, is premised upon the assumption that no-one willingly allows someone else to harm him or herself. It's a vanilla assumption, and the bundle of ethics that stem from it are designed for a vanilla world.

I think we have to be prepared to expect that another thing - to add to the burgeoning list - of issues that might be different about kinksters' lives is our ethical systems. What feels intuitively right and wrong is no longer automatically to be taken as reliable. Perhaps those vanilla ethics work fine in most situations, but there could be others where they aren't appropriate. To make us kinksters sound a bit noble and impressive (Hell, why not, for once?!), kinksters are in a sense pioneers. Pioneers have to assume that they'll be challenged in ways that they'd never expected. This one - that relates to fundamental ethical questions regarding harm, and public/private boundaries, is one of those ways in which we're challenged. Or so I'd suggest.

Grins
I stand on the dominant side of the kneel so I'm not surrendering any responsibility!
Hell, by owning a slave, I am taking on a whole helluva lot of responsibility.
Course, she can equally point out that she , by taking on a role as a slave, also takes on the added responsibility of living her life so as to serve, please and obey.

So I own a slave. She's a rational adult. She understood what she was getting into before she made the decision to enter it. My house has one hard rule, the door is always open.
She can leave at any time. Of course, should she do so, there are consequences...but then again, there are consequences for every decision we make in life.
My point is that she isn't thinking like a child, or operating out of a childish moral or ethical system (Matter of fact, she would be insulted were it to be suggested). She operates out of an adult ethos at all times, which really isn't a problem because we are both good people-the fact that we are in a TPE has zero to do with our ethics-it just happens to be what we like and the lifestyle that fits our personalities.
Now, what others think of that is really none of my business. I don't go shoving what I do down the worlds throat (I play in public and such, at places like Crucible, but she's not wearing a posture collar that says CUNTSLUT to work-a decision based on politeness, rationality and basic human decency).
As for ethics, I am a firm believer that every person has not just the right, but the responsibility to question the ethics that they were brought up in and determine their own course.
I don't think we are any sort of ethical pioneers though. BDSM and freaky sex has been around forever, and certain cultures have always had sexual hang-ups.I choose to live a lifestyle outside the norm-this means some people are gonna have questions, some may take offense. So what? That's on them. They have their ethos, I have mine. If they have an issue with what I do, that's on them as well.
Me? I sleep well at night, warm and snuggly, wrapped in the soft blankets of a clean conscience and the love of a terrific slave.

Message edited to add-And yes-I am a dinosaur. I have irrational beliefs in self responsibility that I am slowly coming to realize, are ideals our society has left about thirty years in the dust, replaced with PC, slick talk,blame mentalities, sophistry etc, etc...

< Message edited by Kana -- 11/19/2010 11:19:50 AM >

_____________________________

"One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die. "
HST

(in reply to PeonForHer)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 11:27:05 AM

Posts: 1584
Joined: 5/20/2009
Status: offline

Fast reply -

If you knew someone who engaged in a sport, a hobby or a career they loved, and it was a high-risk physical activity that often left them with injuries, what would you say to them? Would you say, "Oh no, you are being ABUSED, you must stop playing rugby or training wild horses or being a professional stuntperson!" If not, why does it suddenly become any different if what they love doing is rough sex?

Sure, you can recommend that they do their thing in a safer way and be more careful. And if you think that they're only doing what they're doing because they are being emotionally or financially or physically coerced, obviously there's a whole separate issue there. Nobody should be coerced into taking any risks they don't want to take. Likewise, nobody should be coerced into giving up any risky activity that they genuinely love and consider worth the risk.

_____________________________

Your dominant Personal Trainer for fitness and body shaping in the lifestyle. Let my fetish be your motivation.

(in reply to LadyPact)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 12:03:55 PM

CreativeDominant

Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyNTrainer

Fast reply -

If you knew someone who engaged in a sport, a hobby or a career they loved, and it was a high-risk physical activity that often left them with injuries, what would you say to them? Would you say, "Oh no, you are being ABUSED, you must stop playing rugby or training wild horses or being a professional stuntperson!" If not, why does it suddenly become any different if what they love doing is rough sex?

Intent? Almost no one I know of that goes out and engages in extreme and/or dangerous sports does so with the intent of doing harm to themselves. As a matter of fact, they take every possible precaution not to hurt themselve...i.e...snowboarders wearing helmets, skateboarders wearing allllllll kinds of padding...mountain climbers not starting out on Mt. McKinley, etc.

But...with some of the more extreme forms of BDSM that have been mentioned here...ultraviolence, breaking of bones, even cutting...the intent IS to bring about what can only be described as injuries. On the "softer" edge...a black eye or a split lip or open wounds on an ass cheek or closed bruising...these are things that are going to be found in play occasionally and are not the sort of thing that are going to require medical intervention. But on the harder edge, you begin to wander into that "minefield". And while the risk of acceptance of injury may be the same in both extreme sports and "ultra-extreme" play, the problem...for me and ME only here...comes in because while the goal in extreme sports is enjoyment of the adrenaline rush that comes about from participation in extreme play WITHOUT injury, what has been spoken of here in some instances is the acceptance that injury...sometimes of a serious nature...is GOING to take place and is welcomed.

DELIBERATE Injuries that require intervention of one sort or another...medical or police or whatever...is where I have a problem, as noted earlier.

quote:

Sure, you can recommend that they do their thing in a safer way and be more careful. And if you think that they're only doing what they're doing because they are being emotionally or financially or physically coerced, obviously there's a whole separate issue there. Nobody should be coerced into taking any risks they don't want to take. Likewise, nobody should be coerced into giving up any risky activity that they genuinely love and consider worth the risk

As noted though, oftentimes the risk of injury is dismissed because injury is what they seek.

(in reply to LadyNTrainer)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 12:19:46 PM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

Lol, my last sub was on a lot of medications, and kept falling out of bed while sleeping; ended up with a Black eye after hitting face first on the last one - I hadda go buy one of those bed rails for infants and put cushions on the floor.

She has neuralgia, and painplay wasn't part of the thing, but she had to convince her family I wasn't beating her, lol.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 12:24:51 PM

Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kana
I don't think we are any sort of ethical pioneers though. BDSM and freaky sex has been around forever, and certain cultures have always had sexual hang-ups.

I can't agree. We are pioneers, in some small sense, and have to be. I'm certain that BDSM and freaky sex has been around for ever and a day - but I'm also certain that even the most fundamental principles of mainstream ethics have never been entirely adequate to deal with that kind of lifestyle. It isn't just about sexual hang-ups - it goes to real, rational moral principles, too.

The the nub of what I think's the rational problem is that your sub has (tacitly) declared to you, 'I'm going to use my fully-aware, entirely mature and adult sense of responsibility to give up that adult responsibility to you, Kana'. It's a paradox. I could be happy to make the same declaration to a dominant, and even be perfectly happy that I am taking a very adult decision to be very childish in doing so (Nothing like a good dose of 'childish' as far as I'm concerned.) Me, I'm fine with paradoxes. IMO you pretty much have to get used to them if you're a kinkster. But paradoxes are slippery customers and may not be handled all that well . . . .

< Message edited by PeonForHer -- 11/19/2010 12:26:31 PM >

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com

(in reply to Kana)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 1:06:46 PM

DaddysInkedSlut

Posts: 1837
Joined: 5/14/2010
Status: offline

Intent? Almost no one I know of that goes out and engages in extreme and/or dangerous sports does so with the intent of doing harm to themselves. As a matter of fact, they take every possible precaution not to hurt themselve...i.e...snowboarders wearing helmets, skateboarders wearing allllllll kinds of padding...mountain climbers not starting out on Mt. McKinley, etc.

I disagree with this statement completely. I know people who fight in mixed martial arts, who not only KNOW that they can / will be injured but they are also very are of the damage they can / will do their opponents. They don't use padding, hell they don't even use gloves. Their bodies feel the full impact of EVERY strike they receive and give. The same would apply for street fighters.

DELIBERATE Injuries that require intervention of one sort or another...medical or police or whatever...is where I have a problem, as noted earlier.

I again disagree. I was at a local BDSM club one night and a couple was on the wrestling mats. One woman straddled her partner and began to beat the loving hell out of her. Punching her face, her chest, her ribs. Relentlessly. It truthfully made me cringe. However, these were two conscenting adults. There was delibarate intent of the top to cause bodily harm, to leave bruises, ect.

When my play partners beat my ass they have the delibrate intent of leaving welts or bruises. Infact he wants me to be reminded for days of that session. He wants me to wince everytime I sit, wash, put on panties or even wipe my ass. When my play partner chokes me, he has the delibrate intent of making me unable to breath. So for me to simply say there was "delibrate intent" is not good enough.

For ME, I feel I have a moral obligation to step in if children are involved (directly or indirectly), animal involved or elderly adult are involved. In these cases they CANNOT give conscent. I will also admit, that if I am drawn into a situation and conscent comes into question, I am going to ask or point out my concerns. I would rather have someone pissed off at me for "getting involved" than live with the guilt of not stepping in and someone I know die.

< Message edited by DaddysInkedSlut -- 11/19/2010 1:38:52 PM >

_____________________________

Inkie Goodness!

http://www.freakmommas3.com/daddysinkedslut/main.htm

(in reply to PeonForHer)

RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy - 11/19/2010 2:28:41 PM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

The line between abuse and "rough play" is often described in terms of "I don't know, but I know it when I see it", and that isn't altogether fuzzy - as an artist, I have to be something of a trained observer, and I tend to pay fairly close attention to facial expression and body language: genuine pain can be distinguished from feigned pain for example through subtle differences in facial expression - but even untrained observers can probably make the disctinction on a subconscious level - and it means the difference between "WTF?" and "call 911".

Like watching cats fuck, you don't know if they're fucking or trying to kill each other, and it can be confusing - the difference may be the difference between a queasy feeling in your gut, and the hair raising on the back of your neck.

(in reply to DaddysInkedSlut)

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: "Mind your own business"...TPE and privancy

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.102