?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous | Next


pointlessly purple


I am amused.

I am NOT amused by Humbled Females. (It's a site of essays and things about master/slave stuff - possibly NSFW.) The essay about consensuality is truly, truly disturbing. There's an LJ community too and it's got 750-odd members, which depresses me greatly.

I am caught between scathing derision and fits of laughter at Girls Of CS. They're female gamers who like Counter Strike, and demonstrate this by posting pictures of themselves playing it naked. Or covered in duct tape. Way to go - that'll encourage everyone to take female gamers SO much more seriously.

How much are BBC radio stars paid? Lots, by the looks of it. That'll be why they're having to cut backroom jobs by 20%...

Comments

( 15 comments — Comment )
miss_next
Apr. 19th, 2006 01:47 pm (UTC)
I'm all in favour of pointless purpleness. :-)

That Humbled Females site is, indeed, terrifying. Having said that, I've never understood the whole idea of BDSM in the first place.
nallac
Apr. 19th, 2006 02:17 pm (UTC)
I don't think the consensuality thing is quite that bad. The way I read it, it's about explicit / implied consent, and where the borderline is.
When the sub explicitly consents to have a master, they implicitly consent to a lot of things that the master does not subsequently have to get explicit consent for. However, there is a point at which the master has to get further explicit consent, or the original consent will be withdrawn. Working out where this line is should be part of the initial negotiations.

I find the idea of BDSM quite an interesting one, though I suspect the reality would be nowhere near the dream.
momentsmusicaux
Apr. 19th, 2006 03:11 pm (UTC)
But explicit / implied consent happens in any relationship. They're not breaking new ground there.
pickwick
Apr. 19th, 2006 03:31 pm (UTC)
I didn't think it was saying that at all - I read it more as saying that if they explicitly consent to have a master, "proper" subs have then consented to whatever he wants to do to them, with no right to say no to anything.

They said "Whatever our roles, we all feel the instinct to try to escape things we find unpleasant; does that mean that no Master should ever push his female or cause her pain, simply because she doesn't like it?" Eh, yeah. There's supposed to be mutual sexual pleasure here. D/s with a strictly adhered to safe word is fine, but that's a bit different to him being able to do whatever he wants no matter whether she finds it unpleasant or painful.
octopoid_horror
Apr. 19th, 2006 04:46 pm (UTC)
"There's supposed to be mutual sexual pleasure here". That's hardly a bdsm prerequisite. The pleasure can be one sided entirely, with enjoyment or at least consent on both sides. If you want an incredibly NOT worksafe link, then this very graphic site would demonstrate submission that has very little to do with mutual sexual pleasure -or- male supremacy.
pickwick
Apr. 19th, 2006 05:08 pm (UTC)
Well, I thought subs got some sort of sexual pleasure out of the whole thing - isn't that the definition of a sub? I don't mean that any of their sexbits are necessarily touched, but I've always thought of it as a sexual label. Especially when there's leather involved :D And I assume the domme gets their sexual needs met at other times within the relationship.

I didn't mean I think all BDSM relationships are based on dodgy male supremacy stuff, by the way - I've known too many dommes for that!

(I had a quick look at the link at work. God knows what I can say I was researching ;) )
momentsmusicaux
Apr. 19th, 2006 03:10 pm (UTC)
I wonder if it's all related to the Submissive Wife bollocks that was around a few years back.

This one seems to be a bunch of guys who want to be waited on hand and foot who whip up some mumbo jumbo about women's 'innate' qualities of this and that. Oh and a few token brainwashed women too, I expect.
pickwick
Apr. 19th, 2006 03:33 pm (UTC)
Yup. (I was going to complain that they seem to take it for granted that D/s means male dom, female sub, but I suppose on a website called Humbled Women I shouldn't expect anything else!)

I think they'd be disappointed in my innate qualities of submission, caring and servitude, to be honest :D
momentsmusicaux
Apr. 19th, 2006 04:52 pm (UTC)
Well I'm sure the site's creators have sufficient quantities of innate assholery to make up for it...
redatt
Apr. 19th, 2006 03:51 pm (UTC)
I suspect that the interest 'male supremacy' tells me more than enough about the beliefs at play, but I confess that I don't care to delve into it further in order to find out.

that'll encourage everyone to take female gamers SO much more seriously.

Probably not, but then not doing it wouldn't make anyone take female gamers more seriously, either. I'd go with fits of laughter and the idea that Girls Of CS just wanna have fu-un.

~is sad for the BBC~
octopoid_horror
Apr. 19th, 2006 04:51 pm (UTC)
"I suspect that the interest 'male supremacy' tells me more than enough about the beliefs at play"

If you left out the word "male" that'd sound a bit less sexist. There are plenty of websites/communities for female supremacy/male submission. Many of which, at a glance, would appear to go a lot further than a lot of the ones of this ilk.

If supremacy/submission regardless of gender tells you enough, that's fine.
redatt
Apr. 19th, 2006 04:56 pm (UTC)
I know, and I quite agree. However the 'male' was not left out. On the contrary, it was, presumably, deliberately put in and not by me, so I won't be leaving it out ;o)
pickwick
Apr. 19th, 2006 05:11 pm (UTC)
Is "supremacy" often used as another word for "dominance" in the scene, then? I've never heard it, and I immediately associate it with white supremacy and much more nasty stuff than just a healthy D/s relationship.
redatt
Apr. 19th, 2006 05:37 pm (UTC)
Hee! These days the word just makes me think of church hierarchy, and since it just means supreme authority/highest authority of power there's really no reason why the word on its own should automatically have negative connotations.



redatt
Apr. 19th, 2006 05:53 pm (UTC)
Fnh! LJ ate half of my comment.

The phrase 'male supremacy' does, I think, have negative connotations, though, because some men (and some women for that matter) genuinely belief that women are inferior--the weaker sex--and that men have the right to rule over them. So I immediately associate it with white supremacy, too.
( 15 comments — Comment )

Profile

bad wolf
pickwick
Notes from extinction

Latest Month

November 2010
S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930    
Powered by LiveJournal.com