Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
05-13-2002, 01:55 PM | #1 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 451
|
Consentual BDSM - Immoral?
I'm still trying to figure out why Christians (protestants specifically) have such a huge problem with the idea of BDSM. Especially considering the Southern Baptist Convention's decree that women should be submissive to their husbands.
Ok, I'll agree that in general, causing someone unnecessary pain is bad. But if someone WANTS to experience unnecessary pain, or even considers pain to be necessary to sexual gratification, I don't quite see how that's still bad. I also have a difficult time fitting the idea of BDSM into my own moral code of "harm none". It's tough to argue that taking a cat-o-nine to someone's bare behind isn't harming them. Maybe there's a subtle distinction between "hurt" and "harm"? Or between "pain" and "hurt" and/or "harm"? Anyone have any thoughts? |
05-13-2002, 05:39 PM | #2 | |
Regular Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: DC Metropolitan Area
Posts: 417
|
Quote:
Who are we to tell someone this? I carry the simple logic that the only acts which are immoral are those which negatively impact others, believes aside. What does this mean? Well, for starters, just because I believe that my friend (for example) is doing something wrong by engaging in casual sex with multiple partners in a given day, that is just my belief, so we have to push it aside. Pardon the pun but: I am not a god, nor do I have moral authority over anyone. So, does it negatively impact others? Well, what "others" are we talking about? Of course, the direct parties involved come to mind, but in order to hold a candle to this argument, we would have to admit that bungee jumping, full-contact football and alcohol harm others, so they must be immoral. But we cannot, because 1.)Only in certain circumstances or instances does the harm actually apply. It's like the saying goes--we cannot equate alcohol to alcoholism & 2.)Who are we to control the lives of others anyways. If the others we refer to are the general population, than by all means, let's cater to them right. Let's push aside our own freedoms for the good of the general population. Oh wait...we do that anyway. It's called censorship. It's called shunning homosexuality, because it may make others "gay". It's all garbage--and it's all about individual freedoms--since they do not negatively impact others. |
|
05-13-2002, 06:10 PM | #3 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Down South
Posts: 12,879
|
Quote:
|
|
05-13-2002, 10:20 PM | #4 |
Beloved Deceased
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Vancouver BC Canada
Posts: 2,704
|
I'd add why.
|
05-14-2002, 09:26 AM | #5 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 932
|
Quote:
Mainly, however, Christians seem to be trying to make sex less fun, not more. Quote:
However, "harm" is fluid, depending on the people involved. What harms one sub, might be the best part to another. Harm, to them, is best described as either breaking limits (doing more than a sub can handle), or doing things that represent risk of real damage. I've never met a more safety-concious, consent seeking group in all my life. And they're quick to toss out the wankers who aren't anal about the "safe, sane, and consenual" motto... |
||
05-14-2002, 10:08 AM | #6 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 451
|
Safe, Sane and Consentual..
It's nice, but really it should be obvious. I mean, doesn't it apply to EVERYTHING? That should really be my bank's motto, or the DMV's. I find it slightly odd... it's like making PFLAGs motto "Happy, Normal, and Not After Your Children". Sorry, side rant. Back to discussion! |
05-14-2002, 12:20 PM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 932
|
When you play like BDSM people play, you need the reminder. Plus it helps keep the differences between couples in the forefront.
I know a girl who can take a flogging that makes even experienced players wince. She loves every second of it. I know another that can't take anything but the lightest touch. And then there's the risk of spiralling into ever more extreme scenes... |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|