- perrin wrote:
Just turning it on its head. Would there even be a BDSM without the stereotypes? Do we need them?
That's a very good question. And one I don't have an answer to. :) Ideally, I think a lot of problems come from stereotypes, and not just in our own little subculture. But, we never seem to quite escape them. If we do get rid of one, we appear to replace it with another.
I think they help us sort through our world. As long as stereotypes *remain* something other than concrete examples that we force people to adapt their behavior into, they may not be a bad thing. Once we start expecting conformance to the stereotype we start having problems...both from the people that are comfortable in that role and with the people that don't fit into the "standard".
- perrin wrote:
Everywhere you look, literature, the internet (ahem newsgroups) guidance is there on how to behave. Femsubs should be like this, malesubs like this, femdoms...... so on and so forth. There is pressure to conform to the stereotype. So would the Ds dynamics work without conformity to the stereotypes?
I think it would be driven much more by individual needs. And that, in my book, is a good thing. It presents different challenges than conforming to standards and stereotypes, but I think in the long run it might be healthier.
- perrin wrote:
Is this because it would be more difficult to live up to the Dom stereotype if he felt that it might be perceived that he'd been tainted with the sub stereotype? Especially difficult if the switch himself considers that stereotype to infer weakness.
Some of it's internal and some of it's external. I'm a switch, so I'm forced to look at it from that perspective. What I've seen is that people assume that I'm not a dom or a sub. I haven't made up my mind which I want to be, that I can't experience the "true" ranges of D or S because I'm not fully committed to one or the other, and a couple other variations of "that poor thing".
I've been an owned, collared submissive for 13 years. I've done things that horrify people with the depths of submission they think my actions call for. If I can't fully "experience" what it means to be a sub because I switch...well....I dunno what all you "true" subs are diving down to, but it must be pretty deep and pretty amazing. :)
I suspect that in another 11 years or so, I'll say the same thing about the dom side of me. I'm still learning about that, though. :)
Now...extrapolate that out to someone that identifies as a dom or a sub. If they show an inclination to switch or explore the other side, they have to face the "well, they're not a "real" X" or "they can't experience the "true" depths of what they *say* they are." And that throws doubt on the identity that they already have.
That's a pretty damn hard row to walk if you've already *got* the reputation of a dom or sub...particularly if you're identified as a "heavy" player in either of those roles. The "heavier" or more well known you are for your role, the harder to step out of it in public where people can *see* you.
That's where the enforcement of "standards" and "stereotypes" leads. Stratification and stagnation of BDSM roles because it becomes too difficult to move outside of what the community expects to see.
This is the same reason that edgeplayers are often marginalized by the mainstream in our community. They're too far "out"....too far away from SSC for what the community believes that means. Ageplay also can quickly fall into this category. Bestiality, bloodplay (particularly those folks that are into vampirism), anything that is seen as too far out of "normal" or "standard" becomes dangerous territory. And we like people to fit into our categories...not be hard to define.
- perrin wrote:
Would it be intimidating for a male sub to be submissive/ weak to his Mistress, but speak to everyone else as equals?
hat would depend on the makeup of the sub, I would think. Some subs get into such a headspace that it could very well be difficult to speak in two different registers depending on who they were talking to. Particularly if it was a group conversation where the Mistress was actively participating in the group conversation.
Again, I want to make clear that I see a difference between weak behaviors and weak people. Headspace can make the strongest of people into a quivering lump of goo. And that's usually a very good thing. :)
- perrin wrote:
As it is for a vanilla to understand BDSM at all I suppose.
I think it's very similar yes. One of the things that I try to keep myself aware of is that while I may not understand a particular kink, that doesn't make it bad or ugly for the people involved. I know a lot of vanilla friends of mine do *not* understand what I do or why I do it. But they see me as a happy, healthy, productive adult that doesn't exhibit the symptoms they've seen with battered and abbused partners, so they are able to accept that this is not dangerous or harmful *to me*.
- perrin wrote:
A seperate issue but I crave humiliation. I do know it's bad for me though and so I try to avoid it. It's a very confusing issue for me and so I'll not speak further about it right now.
That's perfectly understandable. The gun scene that I posted a couple of years ago took me quite a while to process to the point that I was able to speak about it in public. I needed to know that I could handle the negative comments that I might get right along with the positive ones and the questions that would come from it. Some things *should* remain private until you can discuss them without it being damaging to yourself.
