Contact Info --

Email us --



Our Other Blogs --
We are three adults living in a polyamorous triad family. The content here is intended for an adult audience. If you are not an adult, please leave now.

10/20/2009

Online BDSM?

I don't usually think much about the keyword search terms that our stat counter captures, but this one is just so far out of line with what we are and how we do this that it merits a conversation:



online bdsm lifestyle rules and discipline



That search brought someone to us because of posts that discussed similarities and differences between BDSM and Domestic Discipline. Looking for rules and discipline protocols for online BDSM relationships, they would have been disappointed reading here. There is not one, single, shred of anything here that addresses online BDSM relating -- because we really do not do that.



Before I go on with this, let me be clear -- I don't discount the reality that people do meet online and create relationships from those online meetings. We met in exactly that way -- online with no previous connection except a shared interest in spanking and Domestic Discipline. Our first contacts were as correspondents through an Internet listserv, and in the beginning, we were not clearly aware of, or focused on, one another. When we did notice one another, we circled with some wariness and caution. That said, once we began to relate with each other, it took only a short bit of time before we made contact with each other by phone, and IM, and fairly quickly, face to face. Ours evolved, fairly quickly, from an online acquaintance to a long distance relationship -- and those two things are not the same.



I will admit that I am not any kind of expert when it comes to online BDSM. I've hung around the edges of that realm now and then; watching; shaking my head with bemusement. I have never participated beyond the occasional "hello," because it just seems silly and juvenile when I encounter it. The fact is that I can be cordial and polite when conversing in an online forum, but I cannot sit on your lap, serve you a drink, or feel you spank me. The "kneel before me slut" online wannabe dominant is not just a lifestyle cliche. Those critters really do exist, even as most of us joke about it. I try to be pretty non-judgemental, and I am always reluctant to get into discussions of "real" and "not real," but online BDSM is not real. All of that chat room and second life driven stuff is a pure fantasy. It is not real -- no matter how intensely people (or their avatars) get wrapped up in it.



BDSM is about a power exchange between partners. Aside from the specific details of the particular relationship regarding sex and SM play and service orientation and all the rest of it, the core remains the power exchange. In that context, one person takes some of their personal power and autonomy, and offers that to the partner -- who may choose to accept it. At that juncture, the locus of control within the relationship shifts to the "Dominant" partner. There are a variety of mechanisms for making that exchange, but the endpoint is the same. Simply, in a BDSM relationship, one person gives up the control and the other assumes it. That does not and cannot happen when the relationship is entirely and completely online; webcams and the like not withstanding.



Long distance relationships can, in my view, certainly include BDSM dynamics. I know several pairs who make that work -- and it is wickedly difficult. Master and I, in the beginning, related long distance. It was the fact of where we were when we first met. Those 1200 miles were very, very real, and it took us some time to arrive at a plan to bridge the geographic gap between us. But long distance partners, do on occasion, see each other. They lay eyes on one another. They touch one another. They share, face to face and in realtime, the simple truth of their beings with each other.



So there is not any information here for conducting an online BDSM relationship. No rules or protocols to follow in the myriad chat fora that cater to the pretenders and the wannabes of that ilk. Making rules for someone you cannot see; cannot touch; cannot ever be with (and maybe don't actually plan for any of that to ever happen) is just silly. "Of course, I am following the rules; doing exactly as you say, Sir..." Or, perhaps, not depending on how I feel about things -- maybe it suits me better to report failure to comply and have you (Oh Dominant One) discipline me for the infraction. All online of course. All in our imaginings with one another. Not one ounce of control ever moves from either end of the spectrum. It is all just an elaborate online game -- more sophisticated, perhaps than Bejeweled or Bookworm, but no less a game.



I understand that those views will not win me any popularity points in the online BDSM crowd, although I'd be surprised if there were too many onliners reading here. I don't mean to cause hard feelings or dash anyone's dreams. Never that. But in fact, the only way to have an actual BDSM relationship is to take the risk to build something truthful and intimate and physical and emotional and demanding with another human. That requires that we bring our skins and the selves inside those skins to the place where we meet. This I believe.



swan

5 comments:

  1. Anonymous11:45 AM

    "Simply, in a BDSM relationship, one person gives up the control and the other assumes it. That does not and cannot happen when the relationship is entirely and completely online; webcams and the like not withstanding."

    Why can't that happen? Control is not merely a physical thing, so why not?

    In case it's not clear, I am genuinely interested in your thoughts on this. I live with my owner, and take no umbrage at what you're saying. I'm just very curious. :)

    Best wishes,
    Grace

    ReplyDelete
  2. Grace,
    First, welcome -- I'm not sure we've met before. Thank you for your thoughtful and insightful question.

    You are, of course, right that control is not merely physical. That being true, it is reasonable to wonder why two people who have no physical presence for one another cannot engage in actual power exchange. I will contend that psychologically, control exists in our beliefs about what causes our actions and behaviors. Some people believe that their actions are driven by their own personal decisions and choices, while others see themselves as compelled by external forces and events (sometimes including powerful others). So, for example, I may see myself as entirely self-driven, making the choices I make based on my own internal motivations, or perhaps I am really at the mercy of all those BIG outside forces: economy, government, employer, church, etc. Either way, I am convinced that there is a tangible "presence" to the forces that exert that control in my life. Even if I do not interact one on one with my government, I must still annually file my taxes, and that faceless, formless economy delivers its message to me daily at the gas pump and the grocery and the mail box. I do not imagine or conjure these forces in my life. They are real and solid and present on an ongoing basis. How I respond to their influences is up to me, but respond I must.

    The purely online relationship has none of the weight of those BIG controlling forces. It has no genuine and verifiable face, and the interactions do not factually extend beyond the range of the online time. To cede control in reality is to accept that I do not have the power, ability, or the right to make decisions in particular areas any longer. To give that control to another means that I will no longer influence the choices or decisions about my life in those areas. In the surrender of control, I lose my grip on those choices and decisions. And that surrender is enforceable. He is here. He can see me. Touch me. Hear my voice. See my face. There is no way to hide from the fact of His control. I cannot walk away from the screen or the camera; cannot choose what to report; cannot present the appearance that best suits my mood or His.

    His control exists as a reality in my belief about my life. He can control me with just a word, delivered in person or on the phone. He can shift my world with a look, but that is all built on His very real presence and my sure and certain knowledge of Him and who He is. I simply do not believe that, absent that essential awareness built on real time relatedness, we'd ever have come to be anything other than playmates to one another. There's nothing wrong with having a playmate, mind you, but it is not at all what I experience of living, growing, dynamic power exchange.

    swan

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous1:45 AM

    "So. I do choose what to share with Him -- and what to simply keep to myself. I do decide when there is something going on in my mind that is "real," and germane to our relationship. If it is just me, talking myself into feeling sad, pouty, anxious, or angry for no real reason, then I most often decide to keep the details to myself."

    "I cannot walk away from the screen or the camera; cannot choose what to report; cannot present the appearance that best suits my mood or His."

    these comments strike me as contradictory.

    melissa

    ReplyDelete
  4. I am full of contradictions, melissa.

    swan

    ReplyDelete
  5. grace8:13 PM

    Dear Swan,

    Thank you for the welcome, and for answering my question! I have been quietly reading your blog for quite a while, and have been enjoying it very much.

    I agree quite a bit with how you see the reality and application of control. I spent a few years living apart from my owner (though not long distance), and now that I have been living with him for a while, it is becoming more and more clear to me that the "experience of living, growing, dynamic power exchange," as you call it, is in describably more immersive and encompassing.

    Thank you for your ongoing blogging efforts, Swan. :)

    Best wishes,
    Grace

    ReplyDelete

Something to add? Enter the conversation with us.