Split from BDSM therapy (discussion on validity of BDSM)

[redbaron]

Being tied down is fun. Try it some time.

On that note, I know so many people who like to tie/be tied down by their partners but they wouldn't consider themselves as BDSM aficionados. Yet they still engage in power role-play in the bedroom.

Never really bothered to ask if they spank or whatever but the concept is really not unnatural or born of abuse or whatever other things you want to attribute it to.

 

[Brontosaurie]

There's nothing wrong with a bit of role-play and sex is an inherently physical act but I think a discussion needs to be had about how far is too far, BDSM has come into the spotlight recently with the popularity of "Fifty Shades of Grey" and the hilarious number of people hurting themselves and each other whilst trying to imitate what they've read about.

Clearly there's an issue here, not whether or not BDSM is wrong (what are we going to do, ban it?) but rather about what a safe & healthy level of BDSM is and how people can tell the difference between bedroom roleplay and actual physical/emotional abuse/exploitation.

Now shall we have that discussion?

i'm inclined to believe what you describe is when the seemingly innocuous rears its ugly head. the corrupting effect on mentality becomes evident on this scale. the phenomenon must be understood holistically. it's never a simple question of personal liberty. ban? no. banning things is never the way to go. banning perpetuates the identity factor, it's like socio-psychologcal picking scabs. understanding is key, not reaction.

 

[Brontosaurie]

Being tied down is fun. Try it some time.

mhm i should. it might be a learning experience.

Architect: excellent point about the topic that spawned this. i chose to abstract it right away but your comment elucidates the principle.

 

[Latte]

I learned so much today reading this very enlightening discussion. I guess I'll stop playing violent video games, board games doing and any sort of role playing in general that doesn't involve me playing a role where me and anyone else involved plays a .

Wouldn't want to have any unavoidable moral or emotional-mechanical corruptive spillover effects that are sure to come about any time now if I don't stop.

Any time now.

Actually nevermind, it's probably too late. I should probably be euthanized before it manifests. Once the root is properly planted, the cravings for more intense and real experiences is sure to sprout forth at some point, because surely role playing something is just a weaker version of doing that actual thing and not something about which one can have a very different cognitive approach to, experience of, and derived pleasurable feelings from, right?

 

[Architect]

Architect: excellent point about the topic that spawned this. i chose to abstract it right away but your comment elucidates the principle.

I didn't want to post it over there as it would be picking on her. If she was abused then she doesn't need people cutting on what she finds helpful in dealing with the abuse, even though I don't believe it's a valid long term treatment.

I learned so much today reading this very enlightening discussion. I guess I'll stop playing violent video games, board games doing and any sort of role playing in general that doesn't involve me playing a role where me and anyone else involved plays a .

Well that's a valid point I thought about when writing the post above. My son got GTA 5 (Grand Theft Auto) which I long considered the worst of the worst violent video games. In reality it's actually less violent than most of the games he's played. Consider Shadow of Mordor which gives explicit closeups of you running an orc through or cutting their throat, or head off. Because it's not people it's not considered as violent.

But again, here it's a way to indulge the darker side. I think there are limits however. If GTA 6 included gang rape missions people would freak out. As to where the limit is, well that's hard to define. It's the old adage on the difference between pornography and art, "I know it when I see it".

 

[Seteleechete]

"The limit" is only an artificial construct of society and does not have to apply for every individual. Which is why I call it subjective.

Note I am referring to made up situations only.

 

[Brontosaurie]

I learned so much today reading this very enlightening discussion. I guess I'll stop playing violent video games, board games doing and any sort of role playing in general that doesn't involve me playing a role where me and anyone else involved plays a .

Wouldn't want to have any unavoidable moral or emotional-mechanical corruptive spillover effects that are sure to come about any time now if I don't stop.

Any time now.

Actually nevermind, it's probably too late. I should probably be euthanized before it manifests. Once the root is properly planted, the cravings for more intense and real experiences is sure to sprout forth at some point, because surely role playing something is just a weaker version of doing that actual thing and not something about which one can have a very different cognitive approach to, experience of, and derived pleasurable feelings from, right?

no one is telling you to stop. and fiction is completely different from violent sex in all relevant regards. fiction is talking.

 

[Seteleechete]

no one is telling you to stop. and fiction is completely different from violent sex in all relevant regards. fiction is talking.

No it's not, BDSM can just be a more innvolved form of fiction. Actual rape wouldn't be fiction on the other hand.

 

[Latte]

no one is telling you to stop. and fiction is completely different from violent sex in all relevant regards.

Nice assertions without argumentation, and a usage of language lumping together any sex involving elements of physical pain, be they controlled, non-controlled, consensual, non-consensual, experiences with or without applied extreme fear and terror, and so forth.

I'm sure your kindergarden rhetoric teacher would be very impressed.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

how people can tell the difference between bedroom roleplay and actual physical/emotional abuse/exploitation.

Now shall we have that discussion?

I find that your post kind of gets closer to the core.

If a person doesn't understand their limits and agrees for the sake of the other person, they are going to feel hurt and establish a negative dynamic with their partner. If they continue to ignore their internal problems without communicating that is. It's just one perspective of what can go wrong in about any social dynamic that doesn't even have to involve sex.

People knowing what they want and knowing what they are willing to give, vs things gone wrong when one side tries to exploit or one doesn't assert.

i cannot find any scenario where power and violence belong in love. i've never heard anyone else do either. it's always "uh, it's a subjective preference, preferences are sacred, you just don't get it". with varying degrees of sophistry and poetry depending on level of education.

Neither can I. It's just that you seem to forget that any experience doesn't have to revolve around power tripping or personal gratification from violence.

 

[Cognisant]

Imagine if a video game came out as a form of therapy, that allowed you to kill all the jews, asians or whoever, or better maybe all the Arayans, so that Jewish people could have some therapy over what happened to them? Of course they'd never be allowed to sell it.

Lol are you kidding? I've personally killed so many Nazis I could have won WWII by myself several times over, now considering how many FPS players there are the actual death toll must be absolutely astronomical.

Since September 11 how many games have featured middle eastern antagonists?

 

[Brontosaurie]

Nice assertions without argumentation, and a usage of language lumping together any sex involving elements of physical pain, be they controlled, non-controlled, consensual, non-consensual, experiences with or without applied extreme fear and terror, and so forth.

I'm sure your kindergarden rhetoric teacher would be very impressed.

it's always easy to make distinctions. but those distinctions are irrelevant to the core pathology of this entire subculture and all of your objections have been covered previously in this thread. physical pain sometimes happens during sex, during life. seeking to inflict physical pain is another matter. that's a relevant distinction.

we are talking strictly about BDSM which can be defined as sex combined with intentional displays of violence and/or power. i'm not lumping together BDSM with transgressions of personal boundaries. how did you interpret anything like that? it's all about consenting adults. doesn't make it a good thing. sure, there may be no serious harm in most cases. sure, it may be a safe and controlled (as in: non life-threatening, and predictable) practice. that's not what i'm arguing. i'm arguing that it's a pointless endeavour with no real intrinsic reward because all it does is dilute or contradict life and love, and that its systemic prevalence thus indicates cultural disease. all incentives regress to habit. put simply, it's surrogate self-harm, a desire to be hurt. it cannot be healthy, a priori. the veil of libertarian subjectivist contract doesn't make it healthy, although a surface glance may tell you so.

i'm not looking to "impress". i'm looking to test my idea, both by exposing it to your arguments and by checking what reactions it provokes which gives me information about the BDSM's cultural status. so far most of you have provided corroboration by making premature and irrelevant kneejerk objections like "how can it be bad if people want it???"

fuck a human or fuck a leather dummy. want an attractive specimen or want someone to act as fetish pawn.

 

[Architect]

Lol are you kidding? I've personally killed so many Nazis I could have won WWII by myself several times over, now considering how many FPS players there are the actual death toll must be absolutely astronomical.

Since September 11 how many games have featured middle eastern antagonists?

Good point, I don't play those games so aren't knowledgable about what is available. But my example was specifically about genocide. Any games with Auschwitz style death camps that keep a running total of how many jews you gassed? Probably not.

 

[Cognisant]

Googled it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=771pxXhERB4

 

[TBerg]

Talk about people getting primed for the real thing again someday.

"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you."--Friedrich Nietzsche

 

[Seteleechete]

"how can it be bad if people want it???"

People want it, I see nothing in it that hurts anyone (themselves or others) unless practised in a wrong manner. There is no negatives beyond others disagreeing with it(your idea that it infringes on these undefined things like "life" and "love" included), which I don't see as a negative. There is the simple positive of it being fun, if nothing else. Thus I see nothing wrong with it.

 

[Brontosaurie]

People want it, I see nothing in it that hurts anyone (themselves or others) unless practised in a wrong manner. There is no negatives beyond others disagreeing with it(your idea that it infringes on these undefined things like "life" and "love" included), which I don't see as a negative. There is the simple positive of it being fun, if nothing else. Thus I see nothing wrong with it.

we're back into that huge disagreement of whether irrational beliefs/assumptions/practices are unproblematic if no immediate damage is detectible. this is a perfect analogy in my mind: while minimized/harmless religion is a contradiction of knowledge, so is BDSM (minimized/harmless sexual abuse) a contradiction of survival/reproduction.

to me it seems that religion can impede the pursuit of knowledge even though it exists only as a voluntary, non-enforced cultural convention which doesn't claim the domains that science has conquered - because we don't know what's out there yet to conquer, and religion by definition makes claims regarding the unknown. and BDSM can impede the pursuit of love in the same fashion. in fact these phenomena are still enforced, though it's internalized. they limit the potential scope of our intrinsic impulses. we are all commie bastards in one way or the other.

 

[Seteleechete]

Oh it is problematic, from a societal standpoint, not from a personal first person one, unless other unrelated factors make it a problem but that is not the fault of the practise itself and as such there is no fault in the practise itself.

 

[Cognisant]

we're back into that huge disagreement of whether irrational beliefs/assumptions/practices are unproblematic if no immediate damage is detectible. this is a perfect analogy in my mind. while minimized/harmless religion is a contradiction of knowledge, so is BDSM (minimized/harmless sexual abuse) a contradiction of survival/reproduction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGJXt55S9dU

 

[Brontosaurie]

Oh it is problematic, from a societal standpoint, not from a personal first person one, unless other unrelated factors make it a problem but that is not the fault of the practise itself and as such there is no fault in the practise itself.

the perspective is society at large. it's hard to say anything about some random person i don't know. likely that person is better off staying in BDSM rather than going cold turkey. can't hope to save everyone.

 

[Bock]

from a societal standpoint, not from a personal first person one

Because society doesn't consist of individuals?

 

[Seteleechete]

The difference of "likely" and "always" society enforces the "likely" so that there aren't any problems, which is fine but it doesn't change a likely to an always.

 

[Bock]

The difference of "likely" and "always" society enforces the "likely" so that aren't any problems, which is fine but it doesn't change a likely to an always.

 

[Seteleechete]

aggh a bad way to say it, I meant; just because something might be true for the majority, for whatever reason, doesn't mean it is always true for everyone.

Society exists to enforce the rules and expectations for the majority.

In the same line even though irrational behaviour is negative for the majority, doesn't mean it is bad for everyone. Most irrational behaviours (religion, BDSM) have positive aspect/outcomes as as well.

These behaviours are bad if abused but they don't have to be.

 

[TBerg]

I think the problem lies with movements to enshrine minority behavior, as in the behavior that most people find disruptive if they do it. That's why the discussion around marriage has to be taken seriously by all sides and with the compassion of understanding the development of nurturing relationships and the courage not to give up on people.

 

[SpaceYeti]

no. i also have no practice in the safe and voluntary consumption of little rocks, although i imagine it could be integrated in a life and portrayed as having some neutralizing, cathartic, therapeutic function as an emotional outlet or whatnot, if one is into that sort of thing. it could also be borne out of resentment and alienation from life and survival itself, which makes more sense and is a funner theory. conspiracies may be added. out of your hypotheses, "arguing for the shit of it" most accurately describes my angle.

what is wrong about my simple observation that violence opposes love?

ironically, your answer consists mainly of "you just don't get it", like i described.

Maybe my answer is mostly "you just don't get it", but the fact of the matter is that you don't. I mean, I don't "get" gay sex. That doesn't mean I'm going to invent reasons it shouldn't be done. Just because I don't see the appeal and find it personally disgusting doesn't mean there's anything actually wrong with it.

Your simple observation is incorrect, depending on our definition of "violence". If you define it to oppose "love", then BDSM does not involve violence.

Now, I'm not saying that BDSM is a necessarily healthy lifestyle for everyone involved, either. For those who come to it of major psychological problems, obviously they're coming at it from the wrong angle, but that's true of pretty much every area of life. It may allow a wolf to slip on a sheep's clothing more easily, but that doesn't mean the sheep are all wolves. The exceptions do not define the rule. Unhealthy relationships can certainly involve BDSM themes, but those themes are not (innately) the problem. If you have an abusive partner who is also into tying you up and spanking you, it doesn't mean people enjoying being tied up and spanked is a problem.

Basically, the problem is that you're using a hugely wide brush to paint this subject with. "People who are into BDSM typically have some psychological issues, thus BDSM is bad and necessarily non-therapeutic, but rather harmful."

This ignores the insanely diverse set of "BDSM activities", ranging anywhere from light bondage on rare occasions to a full 24/7 D/s relationship. The variety is so huge and ill-defined that placing it all under the same cap is, frankly, a mistake. It'd be like using the Westboro Baptist Church as an indication that baptists are crazy.

 

[Bock]

So far i've seen two arguments somewhat against BDSM:

- Violence and potentially destructive power dynamics does not belong in a context where love/balanced intimacy should rule

- Dulling your senses/fucking up your cognitive experience to the point that you enjoy having your balls kicked/being choked half unconscious is not a good thing (and if you enjoy it to begin with, well yeah...). Also, anyone who has read warhammer 40K lore knows that uncontrolled hedonism leads to chaos gods and dark eldar.


Human instincts and behaviours should be understood and nurtured, not abused (violence and power imbalances etc = intrinsically bad). Optimally, that is - As we all know the human condition and the humans themselves are quite unoptimized, which i guess is why dissonant stuff like BDSM exist in the first place.

 

[Brontosaurie]

SpaceYeti: sure, compare BDSM to homosexuality. it's in some ways relevant, others not. both are deviant and without clear purpose but probably in some way natural, that's a commonality. BDSM is violent, homosexuality is not. that's a difference. i would compare BDSM rather to "gay culture", as almost exotized and commodified outlets for the desires of homosexuality and intense physical passion respectively. they can be seen as countercultures to mainstream intolerance, sure. but also as inherently sick, hyper-structured, coercive manifestations of these natural desires. again it's a different thing to prefer physically intense sex, than to partake in an artificial subculturally imposed pseudo-environment where the pain is an end of itself. and then we could go on to discuss the rape-game-phenotypes who really crave to inflict suffering and whether BDSM has any chance of regulating that into a framework of genuinely voluntary mutual practice.

Bock: not sure you summarizing my posts or general opinions but +1 agree

 

[Bock]

Bock: not sure you summarizing my posts or general opinions but +1 agree

So far i've seen two arguments somewhat against BDSM:

Just slightly developed my earlier post and summarized what i've gathered from yours.

 

[QuickTwist]

I'm currently interested in a girl who likes BDSM porn. She is actually quite normal and I am seeing if being romantic with her will have any effect. So far, she actually is into me on a number of levels. I'm not really into BDSM myself and am hoping she will lose interest in that once we become intimate.

 

[SpaceYeti]

I'm currently interested in a girl who likes BDSM porn. She is actually quite normal and I am seeing if being romantic with her will have any effect. So far, she actually is into me on a number of levels. I'm not really into BDSM myself and am hoping she will lose interest in that once we become intimate.

Nope. Once a freak, always a freak.

 

[Jennywocky]

It's kind of like what I described with my friend... he says he is experiencing it as an actual part of his preference. It's something he has experienced since after puberty, and it doesn't just "go away" even if one wants it to.

So no, I wouldn't assume she'd "lose interest" later.

 

[TBerg]

The only thing I would add is that "gay" isn't deviant in and of itself. That's the whole point of gay marriage, minus the radical entrenchment of the queers.

 

[QuickTwist]

Nope. Once a freak, always a freak.

Well the weird thing is that A) she is a virgin, and B) She said she doesn't really know what she would really like in the bedroom, only what she like looking at and finally C) I've already made her cum just by sweet talking her (she has spontaneous orgasms).

 

[Yellow]

Well the weird thing is that A) she is a virgin, and B) She said she doesn't really know what she would really like in the bedroom, only what she like looking at and finally C) I've already made her cum just by sweet talking her (she has spontaneous orgasms).

You just confirmed it. Luckily, BDSM encompasses a wide range of activities and relationship dynamics. The two of you will likely find your groove without too much trouble.

 

[QuickTwist]

You just confirmed it. Luckily, BDSM encompasses a wide range of activities and relationship dynamics. The two of you will likely find your groove without too much trouble.

Thanks, that makes me feel better about the situation. I've always been more of the romantic/sensual type in the bedroom and I think I might have difficulty even pretending to hurt my lover, but I think I'd be willing to go along with some things if that's what she really wanted.

 

[crippli]

Isn't love and violence fueled by the same mechanism - emotions?

Indulging in one aspect may mean to suppress ones emotional specter. Is this healthy?

Maybe love can not even exist without violence? Like can there be night if there is no day?

Regardless. Violence is a pretty work, much more so then the word love- utterly boring and mundane word.

 

[Ex-User (9062)]

your pseudo-occultist sexual practices make you a world-weary bad-ass

I don't even know how to respond to this hogwash.
What the hell on earth is a "bad-ass" to even be considered to be an entity that is going to bring about good fortune?
You have your linguistics mangled, along with your principles...
Can you explain to me what "occultist" means and how you apply that to my posts, finally?

 

[Sinny91]

sorry, i fail to see how my proposition is in any sense reducible to personal subjectivity. it concerns the basic premise of life itself. dismissal as "subjective" can not be invoked meaningfully.

Your argument demonstrates the definition of 'subjective', that's clear as day to see from the responses that you recieved. I see here you note that sexual activity concerns the 'basic premise of life' .... But, it also concerns the 'basic premise of death'... Does that change anything for you?

Still not finished reading so allow me to catch up if I'm currently ignorant of anything..

 

[Sinny91]

i'd be intrigued to know if you find the benign religion i described in my previous post a rational behavior and not deluded, just because it lacks foreseeable detrimental consequences for each respective participant. if the answer is yes, we're onto a much bigger disagreement which could benefit from more general terms. please respond to this paragraph.

anyway, BDSM is fundamentally deluded because it counters the purpose of love in a relationship by introducing its opposite: power and violence. there can be no sane motivation for this. i maintain that the burden of proof is on you to find a single instance where BDSM has merit other than as fulfillment of an established habit, a conditioned appetite for BDSM (circular).

(i already had replied btw, though apparently you don't take a good old reductio ad absurdum for an answer)

BDSM is about 'power and violence' .... What about emotional trust, sensual pleasure and a taste for adventure?

For fun, I just put the argument to my two mates, who are on your side Bronto.
I'm not haha. My friend said that anyone involved in any form of BDSM has mental issue's, even if they aren't aware of them.

I think that's a bigoted remark to make on behalf of others lol.

Not finished with this post, but I need everyone to shut up around me so I can compose my thoughts...

ETA:

My mates are having a full blown convo over this as I type... They argue that BDSM is intrinsically linked to pain, like emotional pain.

My arguement here is that pain and pleasure are intrinsic anyway.

My mate then says that all forms of BDSM stem from childhood abuse.
I informed her that I have not been abused and if I turned to BDSM, how she would then explain that? Quote 'you're fucked up anyway', (lol). As an after thought she expanded stating that I have been a victim of abuse... Which I suppose I have been to an extent, but here I argue, haven't we all been subject to abuse in some form or another? In regards to trauma etc I argue that we are all traumatised from birth.

Mate has back tracked a bit and now says the only other reason is escape from reality. I agree with that one.. Another is adrenaline rushes n stuff. I argue here that there's nothing wrong with wanting a rush/kick/escape... Why the hell not eh?

 

[Sinny91]

The original thread was clearly looking for justification for doing something that, in any other context would be considered illegal. Surely two consenting adults can and will do what they want in their bedroom, if for nothing else because there's no way to prevent or prosecute them. But if there was a way they would.

On this topic it's worth putting it in a different context, say any other illegal activity like genocide. Imagine if a video game came out as a form of therapy, that allowed you to kill all the jews, asians or whoever, or better maybe all the Arayans, so that Jewish people could have some therapy over what happened to them? Of course they'd never be allowed to sell it. Same thing here, if there was some product claimed to be therapy for rape, which included acting it out, I doubt it would get far.

Personally I don't care either way in the slightest, but taking a step back I think the idea that acting out rape scenes is therapy for previous abuse is flawed. It's like the old idea of anger management. People who were pissed would go to therapy and beat each other up with soft bats, yell and the like. What they found is that it didn't make them less angry, but more. Stewing on something is a form of practicing something, that is building a habit.

In this case I think it's likely this woman got a taste for consensual rape, which isn't that uncommon, and wants justification for it. Well it's not illegal so there's no need for justification - go for it. But I don't think it can or should be considered therapy in any form.

Can't quote properly from this device, but 'acting out rape scene's for therapy' could have it's uses, even based on the work that Jung himself explored.. I'll fill in the blanks if asked.. But I cba right this second.

 

[INTPWolf]

I haven't the time to read this entire post, but what i can surmise so far, is that Bronto hasn't once had a girlfriend that was into BDSM.

 

[TBerg]

BDSM sublimates our deepest vulnerabilities in a very crude manner consistent with the crude atmosphere of modern bread and circuses. Subtlety is lost in all milliieux these days.

 

[Sinny91]

Just found this stored on my phone, honestly the stuff I look up at 3am and forget about the next day never ceases to amaze me:

BDSM and altered states of conciousness:
http://theprimalgrimoire.proboards.com/thread/189/magick