COVID-19 RESOURCES
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

Why Does BDSM get a Bad Wrap?

welcome.

I wouldn't say it gets a bad rap here. It's one of the larger story categories. If you are asking why it gets a bad rap in society, then you should find the BDSM thread in the "how to" and ask there. You may get more of a response.
 
Because it craves abuse. It thrives on it and actually gets off on it! It loves to be treated badly and even humiliated, degraded, maybe even whipped.

BDSM is really getting exactly what it wants. Those cries and whimpers aren't really sincere, at least not until the BDSM says the "safe" word.
 
Mr_Neb said:
Because it craves abuse. It thrives on it and actually gets off on it! It loves to be treated badly and even humiliated, degraded, maybe even whipped.

BDSM is really getting exactly what it wants. Those cries and whimpers aren't really sincere, at least not until the BDSM says the "safe" word.
Click to expand...
On the contrary. Abuse is never BDSM, nor is BDSM abusive. They are, as a matter of fact, as diametrically opposite each other as two distinct sexualities can be.

BDSM is always consensual. "Bad" treatment, or what someone on the outside looking in might percieve as such, is always a matter of choice between the two most intimately involved in such "treament".

Humiliation, degradation, whippings... these are all behaviors agreed to before any play by both people involved and do not involve force IF the play is actually, really, truely BDSM in nature.

If the "play" is forced in any manner, then it is not BDSM. Then, too, it is a matter of ugliness and nastiness; if it is forced, it is a crime.

Finally, and from personal experience, i can assure you that those cries and whimpers are most assuredly sincere, at least mine are, within the embrace of my very real, very monogamous, very loving BDSM relationship - one in which there is no safe word because we know each other, because the trust between us has built up over time, and because i am safer with Creidhne, with his flogger striking my bare skin, than anywhere else or with anyone else on Earth.

Nessus, please do as WriterDom suggested and go see the BDSM: Questions and Answers thread on the How To... Board, a place to post this kind of question and have it answered by people who know what they're talking about instead of those who spout ignorance and superstition on the topic. Here's the link: http://www.literotica.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=39661


(Just in checking the Boards really fast from my vacation... back for real next week, but the kinda distinctly incorrect passed off as fact here disturbs me, as some might know, and so i felt compelled to answer this one thread.)
:cool:
cym
 
uhhhmmm - wait!

Mr_Neb said:
Because it craves abuse. It thrives on it and actually gets off on it! It loves to be treated badly and even humiliated, degraded, maybe even whipped.

BDSM is really getting exactly what it wants. Those cries and whimpers aren't really sincere, at least not until the BDSM says the "safe" word.
Click to expand...

*g* this is only true for sub BDSM sories ... what if a Dom/me story is out there? that would mean it should be adored, cherished and praised by the mere fact of existing!

ok now - taking my tongue out of my cheek again *- never was in for gags ;)
 
bad rap

it is unfairly given a bad rap from society. simply put, it is because they are not educated about it. they all have the idea that it's purely torturing someone for their own pleasure and the other persons suffering.

a funny fact: my dorm area actually had a bdsm presentation. it was hillarious because the presenters really didn't know what they were talking about. they'd be surprised when they'd ask stuff like, what are water sports or something equally easy and i'd answer. hell, i practically gave the lecture/presentation, one of my resident advisors (ra) was scared of me after that presentation (LOL). the most i've ever done is a little light bondage, and i'm comfortable with that.

i am a very open and accepting person, but it does not mean i necessarily wish to experience everything. i feel that if you have fun and the other person is too, then ur fine.
 
Well, well.

Everytime I turn around. Ignorance and misinformation peaks its ugly little head out from beneath the 'nilla covers from which it lives.

I sincerely wish people, who don't know BDSM, would investigate it before before they judge. Before they lump us into categories. Before they make statements telling me who I am and what I like.

Play safe.
 
Just for the record, my post was completely in jest, the facetious guy that I am.
 
Mr_Neb said:
Just for the record, my post was completely in jest, the facetious guy that I am.
Click to expand...

And I'm sure we all took it that way, although it may have just been me. I'm something of an irreverant smartass myself.

And it never ceases to amaze me just how many uneducated people there are in tis country on any manner of divergent sexual tastes. Like tmuyo's little "funny story", I've often "creeped people out" with my knowledge (not all first-hand) of bondage, and the tools & toys of BDSM games.

It's tempting to get all "in your face" with it, to really put a burr in people's britches over the whole thing, but why bother? And I've learned the hard way that you can't educate everyone. Both of my parents, for example, aren't likely to understand and accept the real me. I've nudged conversations obliquely, or discussed related topics when the opportunity arose, only to get knee-jerk, bigoted replies. The last time I tried was when A&E did a Biography on Bettie Page, and my parents were watching it. They'd never even heard of her, and when I mentioned that the show had glossed over the treatment the Klaws had recieved especially over the bondage films and photos, I heard something about "serving the perverts right." Not a fun place for a deviant to grow up.
 
I took the posting on this thread WAY too seriously. I am sorry i was so lacking in a sense of humor. My sincere apologies.
:(
 
Last edited:
She doesn't deserve a spanking unless she wants one. There wasn't anything she said that was incorrect. I took Neb's post as an uninformed joke. She took a harder line. Sometimes it's hard to read the tone behind a post. cym has nothing to apologize for.
 
Well,
Handled the spanking (cropping?) part on our dear cym. Wasn't really thinking of this thread while doing it though. ~g~

I was also to quick to go the BDSM defense. Guess it's just the hockey player in me.

My apologies.
 
Well

My opinion is it doesn't get a bad rep. In society unconventional (and I say that for lack of a better term, I didn't wanna say weird or bizzarre) sexual practices are sort of pushed "swept under the rug" and aren't really discussed. Bi/Homosexuality wasn't even something that was very public until I'd say around the 60s. Before then it was only discussed in psychology matters and was considered a mental illness. BDSM is merely a lifestyle (or experimentation for those who are just trying it for the first time) in which they prefer to live. Dommes get pleasure from being dominant, subs prefer to be submissive, sadists enjoy inflicting pain, masochists enjoy recieving pain, sadomasochists enjoy both. So if 2 (or more) consenting adults are agreeing to pleasure each other (albeit thru pain and control) that's their business. I go with the "what goes on behind closed doors is no business of mine" saying in most circumstances.
 
BDSM rap

cymbidia said:
On the contrary. Abuse is never BDSM, nor is BDSM abusive. They are, as a matter of fact, as diametrically opposite each other as two distinct sexualities can be.

BDSM is always consensual. "Bad" treatment, or what someone on the outside looking in might percieve as such, is always a matter of choice between the two most intimately involved in such "treament".

Humiliation, degradation, whippings... these are all behaviors agreed to before any play by both people involved and do not involve force IF the play is actually, really, truely BDSM in nature.

If the "play" is forced in any manner, then it is not BDSM. Then, too, it is a matter of ugliness and nastiness; if it is forced, it is a crime.
===
If I may add an opinion. It may not be for anyone to say what
is true or "really" BDSM. Cimbidia's is hers, fine. To me it sounds
sanitized.
First, is abuse ever BDSM. C says no. She plays with words. Define abuse as what causes significant injury to the body and no potential benefit (so amputating a gangrenous limb is not abusive). Well grinding a shoe into someone's face is abusive, or shoving a large needle through their nipple. Ah, but it's agreed. It doesn't matter; in real life many folks agree, just as kids 'agree' to be punished.
Consider two topics which C cannot explain. Power and Danger. If
everything is consensual, there is no power differential, except one play acted. Ergo. Whatever thrill there may be in a situation with a power differential cannot be present. I will agree that to avoid
illegality a kind of overall consent is necessary: "You may do as you want, excepting kill me in the next couple hours." But if the 'game' can be called off in an instant, like a play rehearsal, there is no power differential. Indeed, it could be argued (well known point) that the one who stops the game, has the power; as the saying goes, "the bottom is in control."
The same point applies to danger. Any erotic thrill from danger,
--as in sex in public place-- will necessarily be absent from C's
scenes. How much danger can I be in if I can stop things in an instant. It would have a much thrill as a simulated ride in roller coaster in a booth one can simply step out of.
Some of the about points are the reasons why some people perceive danger in s/m. If it were simply play acting, no one would be worried, any more than they are upset attending plays in which a murder occurs. The 'murder' is acted, consensual, and can be enjoyed as a dramatice piece that doesn't make one rest uneasy at night.
Just my perspective. For what it's worth.
Click to expand...
 
Well, comparing BDSM to murder may be a bit much, don't you think?

First and foremost, BDSM is ALWAYS consensual, always has boundaries or limits. Sure, there are those that play beyond those limits. And yes, I push limits.

But I always, always, discuss crossing the limit before ever doing it. Anything nonconsenual is just plain wrong.

You wanna know what BDSM is?? I'm going to oversimplify here, so bare with me.

Heightened sensation.
That is the pleasure a sub gets from me. And in return I get the knowledge of having pleased someone, and the power trip of doing it in my own way, and in my own sweet time. BDSM is about pleasure, and how we get there. No more.

Bdsm's bad rap simply comes from people making judgements prior to asking questions or seeking out the infomation elsewhere. Something that shouldn't be done on any subject.
 
Creidhne said:
Heightened sensation.
That is the pleasure a sub gets from me. And in return I get the knowledge of having pleased someone, and the power trip of doing it in my own way, and in my own sweet time. BDSM is about pleasure, and how we get there. No more.

Bdsm's bad rap simply comes from people making judgements prior to asking questions or seeking out the infomation elsewhere. Something that shouldn't be done on any subject.
Click to expand...

Very true, Creidhne. Great post.

And with abuse being so prevalent in our society, I can completely understand why bdsm gets a bad rap. We represent the polar opposite of abuse.
 
Consider the point that persons who are into masochism perform acts of self-mutilation or allow/induce others to perform acts of mutilation on them. Masochism isn't an emotionally healthy state. Even Cymbidia must agree that a masochist is not a well-balanced person. Pushing limits in masochism isn't a good thing, though it may seem like it. Pain is there for a reason, and that reason isn't sexual gratification. It's there to tell you that something is wrong with your body. When you push the limit on masochism, you raise that limit. To push it more is to continue to raise that limit.

Now, there are reasonable acts of masochism, peircings, spankings, and the like. There are unreasonable acts of masochisms, like having a barbaque skewer shoved through the breast. Not the nipple, the breast.

There is a line in masochism where I think mutilation goes beyond what is reasonable or sane.

And contrary to popular belief, sadism does not require consent. In fact a true sadist prefers that there be no consent of any sort. The originator of the term sadism was jailed for performing acts of torture on 16 year old girls who did not consent to it. A sadist is not an emotionally balanced person either. When one receives pleasure from inflicting pain on others, and then going on to push the limits of that, one is also pushing the limits on the amount of pain one enjoys inflicting on others. How much is too much? Can individual sadists and masochists actually recognize when they've crossed that line from sane and reasonable sexual deviance to acts that are insane?

There is nothing wrong with bondage, discipline, dominance, and submission. These things, while off kilter, aren't inherently bad. Sadism and masochism is inherently bad. Any activity that requires mutilation or pain for sexual pleasure IS inherently bad.

And sadism and masochism ARE the reason why BDSM is given such a bad rap. Because sadism and masochism are bad in and of themselves.

Cym and co. can disagree as hotly as they like, however, I do not see a way that anyone could present a lucid, supportable argument in favor of sadism or masochism.
 
KM helped me define a point I had thought of before. The more I thought out my "Hard Limits", the more I realized that they were about avoiding actual damage to my body. It seems one of my goals is to keep the hell away from an emergency room.

Hence, I've never really classified myself as a masochist.

Piercings, Fire play, knife play, ball crushing, pretty much anything involving being cut or burned is straight out of the question for me. Makes me a boring sub, I would imagine, for some folks, but it keeps the machine in better running condition. Progressively tighter and more strict bondage, cock and ball bondage, slapping, spanking, whipping; these are my idea of fun. Course, this is all a moot point for me since I'm not in a relationship right now anyway. :( Similar limits apply to what I will do to a woman who has willingly placed herself into my hands. And to mention a point in another's post, namely control: The sub is in control, in one sense. They can stop the game, or call a time out (At least in my scenes. I like the "yellow" and "red" safeword system). Aside from pre-discussed limits, that's where their control begins and ends. The rest of it is all in my hands.
 
Last edited:
Warning: long-assed rebuttal ahead

abashed-dreamer said:
If I may add an opinion. It may not be for anyone to say what
is true or "really" BDSM. Cimbidia's is hers, fine. To me it sounds
sanitized.
Click to expand...
Please try to spell my nick correctly. You can use “cym” if you prefer. Thank you.
First, is abuse ever BDSM. C says no. She plays with words. Define abuse as what causes significant injury to the body and no potential benefit (so amputating a gangrenous limb is not abusive). Well grinding a shoe into someone's face is abusive, or shoving a large needle through their nipple. Ah, but it's agreed. It doesn't matter; in real life many folks agree, just as kids 'agree' to be punished.
Click to expand...
BDSM, consensual and shared fully by those involved, is never abuse, nor is the reverse true. Steadfastly, i stand by my original assertions.

I “play with words” in order to try to explain the finer shadings and meanings of my thoughts. That is all. I don’t seek to subvert or entice anyone to my way of thinking. I only hope to shed some light on what is a misunderstood topic by so many. If that is an objectionable case of “playing with words” to your ears/eyes, then so be it.

For the purposes of this post, i accept your definition of abuse: that which causes significant injury to the body and offers no potential benefit.

Amputating a gangrenous limb is not abusive; we agree on that.
However, your subsequent examples (grinding a shoe into someone's face, shoving a large needle through their nipple) fail the test that your own definition set up. For some people, that grinding or that needle shove is a sexual pleasure they may not get in any other way. That’s a benefit by anyone’s definition, and surely by your own, is it not?

Yes, those are agreed-to actions. Someone does the needle push and someone feels the needle push. It’s a voluntary action. It’s consensual. It’s desired. It’s a form of sexual play. It definitely offers benefits to those who agree to such play.

To link this kind of agreement, this consensuality of edgy sexuality, with a scared kid agreeing to a punishment is both illogical and insulting. We who practice such sexuality are not scared children.
Consider two topics which C cannot explain. Power and Danger. If everything is consensual, there is no power differential, except one play acted. Ergo. Whatever thrill there may be in a situation with a power differential cannot be present. I will agree that to avoid illegality a kind of overall consent is necessary: "You may do as you want, excepting kill me in the next couple hours." But if the 'game' can be called off in an instant, like a play rehearsal, there is no power differential. Indeed, it could be argued (well known point) that the one who stops the game, has the power; as the saying goes, "the bottom is in control."
Click to expand...
There is always a power differential between the people involved in such sexualities. It’s the basis and the heart of our choosing each other, the ability to be open and reciprocal with our need for holding power within a relationship in an unequal fashion. It is not play-acted, except in particular “fantasy scene” cases, such as rape (which no one really wants since it’s rage-driven in most cases, and NOT fun, not sexually driven and fun if a little rough).

Ergo, your entire premise falls into dust, abashed-dreamer. I will, however, address your other points as if your logic didn’t fall apart here.

There is a power differential present to some degree in all lasting and mutually-fulfilling BDSM relationships, and it’s a completely consensual power differential, btw. You’ll have to accept this as the truth in order to begin to understand why we do what we do. If you cannot accept this very basic part of what constitutes a good BDSM relationship, then you cannot argue any points about it with clarity and precision.

Overall consent is necessary because
-- it’s morally proper to have such consent
-- no one wants to play with the unwilling (that’s the stuff of criminal behavior and NOT a part of anything under the BDSM umbrella – EVER).

Very few scenes between BDSM partners are anything at all like your mocking example – "You may do as you want, excepting kill me in the next couple hours." In fact, we are far more likely to talk over what we want, what we expect, what we need, what’s to come, than most nilla lovers, I think. BECAUSE we play more intensely, because we could hurt each other if we’re not careful, we all tend to talk over what’s going to happen between us with regularity and in great detail BEFORE we play. It’s a way for the Dom/me to insure s/he will not freak the sub out WAY too much by going where the sub is WAY afraid to go.

Again, almost no one gives tacit or overt permission to her Dom/me to do anything at all but kill her. In fact, most of us make jokes about online subbies who say they have no limits, online players who haven’t actually done any of this but try to act as if they have. Lack of real, hands-on experience shows in the area of limits, almost more than anywhere else.

The game can be called off in an instant, most times, by the sub, yes, though Dom/mes definitely have their limits, too. And it is the sub who does, in fact, have the ultimate power, yes. ~puzzled~ What is so hard to understand here? Has anyone ever denied this? We know it's true. What don't you understand about this?

Anytime anyone is feeling uncomfortable with what’s happening, s/he can call a stop or slow down. I think that’s a human characteristic and one not limited to sexual or BDSM-sexual situations, isn’t it? Why should we be different in this respect? Dom/mes WANT to care properly for the subs. They don’t want to damage us. They don’t want to frighten us. They only want to call up in us the special, wild heat that’s only possible between those of us who are like each other in our needs.

The sub can call a halt or slow-down to what’s happening, yes, but that doesn’t equate to a corresponding halt/slow-down in the power differential between the two. All it speaks to is the amount of trust and real caring between them, necessary ingredients for all positive human relationships. There are very few of what we call TPE (Total Power Exchange) relationships that exist in the real world (and correspondingly WAY more that exist online, again: online BDSM is not real life BDSM) BECAUSE they simply don’t work well between real life people. Even the harshest Dom/me will actively seek to know what his/her sub needs and provide that for the sub because that’s one of the ways a real life Dom/me finds satisfaction.
The same point applies to danger. Any erotic thrill from danger, --as in sex in public place-- will necessarily be absent from C's scenes. How much danger can I be in if I can stop things in an instant. It would have a much thrill as a simulated ride in roller coaster in a booth one can simply step out of.
Some of the about points are the reasons why some people perceive danger in s/m. If it were simply play acting, no one would be worried, any more than they are upset attending plays in which a murder occurs. The 'murder' is acted, consensual, and can be enjoyed as a dramatice piece that doesn't make one rest uneasy at night.
Click to expand...
“Danger” is an entirely individual perception. Sex in a public place might be intercourse to me but the touching of a clothed breast to you. One has the possibility of a little jail visit, the other some raised eyebrows. If I can stop things in an instant, is the build-up toward the danger any less erotic (if that’s the way my partner and I find our pleasure)?

Simulated rides are underrated. I was just at Disneyland with my 4-year-old son. We went on “Star Tours”. My little guy was THRILLED, and I was pleased, too, though I’ve been on it many times before. It was simulated. He knew it. I knew it. I told him what would happen over and over before the ride began. Still, it was **fun**. Still, it felt like we were flying around on an almost out-of-control space shuttle. Simulations have their place.

So it is with BDSM sexual play and the availability of the sub to use a stop/slow down word when s/he gets scared or nervous or upset. Such words are in place to protect her and, vitally, to protect the trust that exists between the two people, Dom/me and sub. Without the sub being able to trust that the Dom/me will not push her past what she can take, very few of us would be able to let go sufficiently to seek into this kind of sexuality.

BDSM sexuality is a hotly flowing, ultimately enjoyable, exceedingly honorable flowing of trust and caring – and, most often, love – between two people who are triumphantly rejoicing in the fact that they’ve found each other and their kinks match pretty well.

Those who do not understand the above fear us and what we do.
It is not play-acting.
It is as real a form of lovemaking as any other.

People who rest uneasy at night over BDSM sexuality need to get a life of their own and leave ours to us, safe in the knowledge that we don't want to play with you. You're not sexually arousing to us. Honestly. You're safe from being forced into partaking of our pleasures cuz we don't desire you.
:cool:


(KM, your time is coming. You know I cannot leave your assertions unanswered. You were counting on that, my friend.)
Click to expand...
 
You're no hothouse flower, darlin. I get a kick out of being proven wrong.
 
Sadism and masochism are really outdated terms for what goes on in a BDSM relationship. The acronym was developed as some sort of compromise to provide a wide umbrella for what we do. Those of us in the lifestyle know that SM really stands for Sexual Magic ;)

More important to us is the creed: safe, sane, and consensual or ssc.
 
cym pointed me toward this thread and I have to say it was interesting to read.

In a way, I agree with KM. A sadist is by definition a person that enjoys inflicting mental or physical pain on others. Depending on the level to which this is done, decides whether or not it is a criminal act. Any person who inflicts pain of any kind and enjoys it, whether consensual or not, is a sadist. Even if the enjoyment is that the person you are inflicting the pain on is enjoying it - and you enjoy their pleasure - it is still sadism. You are deriving some form of pleasure from their pain.

Not all sadists are criminals. In good old Websters, no where does it stipulate that a sadist is only a true sadist if his victims are non-consenting. Sadist's in the lifestyle play with masochists that get off on it and give their informed consent. Sadists not in the lifestyle that practice without consent are criminals and can not be lumped in with those BDSM people. Unfortunately, sadist's with criminal intent move in the BDSM circle because it is a place to find victims. These are the ones you hear about on the news. In many clubs and organizations you will find people involved for malicious, dangerous or criminal reasons. But when they are found out, they are put out, and the same is true in the BDSM community. If we know about them, they will not be tolerated. Unfortunately, as KM stated they give the BDSM community its bad reputation.

KM also stated that masochist are not mentally healthy but then goes on to say that there are some masochistic activities that are ok - like piercings, floggings etc. I think this reflects the confusion so many people have about BDSM. On the one hand, a lot of people are ok with blindfolds, spankings and maybe a little bondage. Heck! They have probably even tried it. So, they allow for what they are comfortable with personally to set the standard for everyone. But when they hear about, or witness what they personally would never allow - then it becomes mentally unhealthy. There is no argument for this really. A person's opinion is formed from their prejudices, their life experiences and many other factors. The liklihood of changing someone's opinion is slim to none. It is a case of everyone agrees to disagree.

Pierced ears and tattoos are a form of self-mutilation. But these are examples of masochistic activities that have become mainstream and therefore excepted as a community standard. Atheletes who push their physical limits and experience the excruitiating pain of muscle spasms of carbon dioxide buildup are masochistic also. What about ice hockey and football? Two sports that cause more life threatening injuries than any BDSM dungeons. But once again, they are accepted. Once again, the mainstream population determines what is ok and not ok. In many cultures self-mutilation in the form of scarification is a sacred right of passage. Is it "bad"? Are people that get pierced ears bad? Because atheletes are willing to go through the painful preperation and outcome of their sport - are they bad? Because people involved in BDSM are willing to experience pain for pleasure - are they bad?

On the other hand, is my Master etching designs into my skin with a scalpel normal? Even I can look at this and say that, no, it is not normal! But neither is it "bad". The problem is not being able to do it often enough because we do it where it won't show! And why do I think it isn't normal? Because I grow up in a society that looks at that kind of stuff as not normal. I'm a product of my environment too, I have just been able to shed a lot of the baggage :D.

I do think that BDSM is like drugs. The more you do the more you need. When do you draw the line? Where do you stop? When does it become not ok? When I first began, spankings and floggings were great! Now, I find that I need cuttings, fire play and single-tails to get that same level of headspace. What's next? And can there be a next?

My ramblings are completely my own opinions and do not reflect nor try to impose on others beliefs or opinions. :eek: If I misunderstood what someone was saying - I apologize in advance - take it all with a grain or too of pepper.

Steamy
 
When I play with a partner, I have to trust them completely . I am very submissive; and in being so my Master has more responsibility than anyone would imagine (except for the ones who are familiar with the lifestyle).

I've heard the mention of safe words in a couple of posts. Yes, I do believe in them, and yes my Master and I have agreed on the use; but what good is safe words if you don't trust the person you're with? I'm not going to allow just anyone to tie and gag me; that isn't safe. When you're tied and gagged you have to believe and trust in that person. They have to have your welfare in mind when they have their will with you. You are at their mercy; if that isn't a power exchange I don't know what is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Norway_1705
Chastity cage: BDSM or Fetish category?
Replies
24
Views
348
nice90sguy
nice90sguy
PandemicReader8
Under Represented Aspects of BDSM Play
2 3
Replies
54
Views
886
theWollstonecraftWoman
theWollstonecraftWoman
AG31
BDSM vs NC/R
Replies
14
Views
348
RainyDayPen
R
CyranoJ
Why Does It Hurt So Good?
Replies
0
Views
171
CyranoJ
CyranoJ
joy_of_cooking
What does this character description say to you?
Replies
15
Views
314
lustychimera
lustychimera
Back
Top