BC SOCIETY

Saved by @CodyyyGardner

$Femme Loves\U0001f49c\U0001f90d\U0001f49a$

Femme Loves💜🤍💚
@FemmeLoves 4 years, 4 months ago 438 views

Save to PDF Share See On Twitter

I’ve seen lots of people defending porn and BDSM on this website recently, and a lot of other people critiquing them for it. I feel like both sides miss something important that the other side has to say. I usually stay out of this debate, but I feel quite strongly about this.

The critics of BDSM have many things right. The fact that BDSM is used as a smoke screen by abusive men who murder their partners and then blame it on a “sex game gone wrong” should appal all right thinking people.

Pornography/ 50 shades have mainstreamed many of the more extreme practices of BDSM, including choking and anal. This mainstreaming has not brought with it any understanding of consent, or how to reduce the risks associated with more extreme practices.

This has led to young women being pressured into painful and humiliating sex acts that they do not want, did not ask for, and do not understand, without having any trust in their partner to carry out the acts safely, or even with regard to their own desires. This is appalling.

Many defenders of BDSM would agree with all of this. No really, they would. The argument is that if you are pressuring an unwilling partner, murdering people, if you are a dom who has no concern for your sub’s experience, you are not practicing BDSM, you are being abusive.

I hear many critics of BDSM argue that *they* would not be capable of enjoying pain or humiliation during sex, and therefore *nobody* would be capable of enjoying pain or humiliation during sex, so therefore any sex that contains pain or humiliation is abuse.

Leaving aside for a moment *why* somebody might be capable of enjoying those things, this argument is false on its form. People enjoy different things. What feels like pain to one person might be pleasurable to another. Think about running – painful, but pleasurable.

One person might like to have their lip bitten, another one might like a back scratch, people are different and experience sensation differently. Worth reemphasising that this does not extend to the abusive asshats we discussed further up this thread. I’m talking “vanilla” still.

People might like different types of emotional experience during sex as well. One person might like to feel looked after and taken care of. Another might enjoy emotional depth, another "letting go." Another might enjoy the conquest. There’s no one way to feel about sex.

Isn’t it conceiveable, then, that some people actually do enjoy/ get off on humiliation? Both on the receiving end of it, but also on the dishing it out end. Of course it is. But then the question is, why? And what does that mean?

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t think that it’s optimal human flourishing to need to have your finger in a mousetrap, or to have to pretend that you’re being raped, in order to come. It very often speaks to trauma.

Dissociated people rubbing up against dissociated people, numbed by trauma, just trying to feel something. I was heavily into it myself when I slept with men, because I had to be, to feel anything about it at all. I used to tell people this:

“If you are wearing a blindfold and your hands are tied behind your back, it doesn’t matter what gender the person is who’s spanking you. I’m definitely bi.”
It was a tool of dissociation that allowed me, a lesbian, to engage in sex with men I didn’t like. Not healthy. Not good

There was a context, though. If you wanted to find somebody who was into that sort of thing, you had to go, physically, to clubs or parties. There was a community. That community really did look after young women too. I was warned off particular men, for instance.

Men who were new were usually taken aside and given the low down, told about consent, and boundaries, and about harm reduction. Harm reduction is HUGE, actually. Everybody is talking about choking at the moment, and it horrifies me that nobody knows about this.

If you don't know about harm reduction, look it up. The basic message is, ok, you have this maladaptive behaviour that's not optimal for human flourishing. Let's not judge it, let's look at how we can reduce the harm it does to you in your life.

So the teenager who cuts because she needs to feel SOMETHING would be encouraged to hold ice cubes instead. The alcoholic who gets in bar fights should drink at home instead. BDSM should be practiced as safely as possible, in a way that reduces the harm.

If you have to do breath play, start with a hand over the mouth and nose instead of choking. If you have to feel constricted, use your body weight/ lie on top of them. The fact that nobody is saying this in the debate is absolutely shocking to me.

Old school BDSM practitioners regard even vaginal or oral penetration, even with fingers, as being almost sacred, and not to be undertaken lightly. Choking and anal are regarded as very extreme, dangerous practices.

If somebody turned up at a club, back in the day, and said “I’m into choking and anal, and I don’t know what harm reduction is” they would be spoken to, and if they persisted, turned away. The conversation is not like this online.

Instead, anime avatars are explaining that it’s perfectly possible to choke somebody safely (no it’s not) to complete fucking strangers on the internet, when they have no clue about whether they even have the desire to do it safely. It boils my blood.

TL:DR so far – abusive men using BDSM as an excuse/ smokescreen to be abusive is bad; mainstreaming of extreme, niche BDSM practice is bad; young women being pressured is bad; none of these things are BDSM practice. Harm reduction is a great tool in any area of life.

In my view, the strongest card in the critic’s arsenal is this; why do you like to humiliate/ hurt/ be humiliated/ be hurt? Some people know the answer to this, and still practice BDSM. Others find out the answer and no longer want to. I’m the latter.

I had a very weird childhood, and my family of origin is messed up in layers, like an onion, layers of hurt and wrong and secrets and lies. I learned from them that love is suffering, and that there’s no point reaching out for love, it’ll only hurt.

I learned to dissociate, and to never say no to men. I learned that I do not have permission to explore my own sexuality, or my own identity or my needs, instead I must do what men want me to do. I carried others’ burdens.

Experimenting with BDSM as a sub gave me that permission; in short, if I pretended I wasn't consenting, it left me more free to let go of whatever I was holding on to.

Exploring more extreme physical sensations was also helpful in breaking my dissociation at times.

I don't practice BDSM any more, and it's been years since I've looked at any porn. Turns out that all I wanted was somebody to really see me, right where I am, and love me there, and make me safe.

It hurts my heart to think about that hurt kid I was.

The Hebrew word for salvation can be translated as "coming home," and in that sense, she was my salvation from so very much.

Violence has no place in my marriage or my homecoming, and whatever else BDSM is, there's no denying that it's violence.

I wish I'd never found it.

More from Society

kurt lash
@kurtlash1

1/ The “I Have a Dream" speech is one of the most extraordinary speeches in American history. You should read it again. First, a few thoughts about the common American heritage Dr. King relied upon in calling Americans to rededicate themselves to the unfinished work of freedom.

2/ Dr. King delivered his speech in what he called the “hallowed spot” of the Lincoln memorial. More than a picturesque backdrop, King relied on America’s reverence for Lincoln and the common celebration of Lincoln’s words and acts, especially the Emancipation Proclamation.

3/ “Five score years ago…” King echoes the words of the Gettysburg Address. Like Lincoln, King invokes the Declaration of Independence and the fundamental principles of American freedom, “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Every person in that crowd knew these words.

4/ The Declaration, Constitution and Emancipation Proclamation declared and established the fundamental American principles of freedom that all Americans knew and believed in. But these principles and promises remained unfulfilled for black Americans.

5/ Lincoln’s audience knew the history of slavery and many had suffered personal loss in the ongoing war. Dr. King’s audience knew the history of violent racism, segregation, and unequal economic opportunity. The Proclamation freed the slaves, “but the Negro still is not free.”

Yaneer Bar-Yam
@yaneerbaryam

I have been working on pandemic outbreaks for 15 years.

There is a misunderstanding of the difference between the response in much of the West, versus successful countries (including New Zealand and Australia).

Summarizing:

1.Reactive versus proactive and goal oriented.

1/-

2.Mitigation (slowing transmission) versus elimination (stopping transmission)

3.Gradually responding to increasing levels of infection by imposing greater restrictions which enables the infection rate to grow (red zone strategy), …

2/

versus starting with high restrictions to arrest transmission and relaxing restrictions only when the number of new cases is so low that contact tracing or localized short term action can stop community transmission (green zone strategy, including localized "fire fighting").

3/

4.Trying to keep economic activity and travel as open as possible but perpetuating the economic harm and imposing yoyo restrictions, versus making an initial sacrifice of economic activity and travel in order to benefit from the rapid restoration of normal economic activity.

4/

5.Focusing attention on few individuals resistant to social action because of shortsightedness or selfishness, versus recognizing the vast majority do the right thing if given clear guidance and support, which is what matters for success, as elimination is a robust strategy.

5/

Advertisement

$Caroline - Real Feminists XX \U0001f1ff\U0001f1e6$

Caroline - Real Femini...
@radicalhag

I think the UK trans debate has teased out the sticking points for feminists, and it might be useful to lay them out given that the battle in the US, with a very different legislative environment, is just starting.

The GRA of 2004 gave trans people the ability to change legal sex via a GRC, but only if they had a psychiatric diagnosis of dysphoria and only after having lived in role for 2 years. The spousal veto gave spouses a chance to annul or obtain a favourable divorce.

While this ultimately created the loophole in women's rights that we've been fighting against in the last few years, it catered for a tiny number of dysphoric transsexuals and so did not have an enormous impact.

Discussions with trans friends and allies make it clear that, although surgery wasn't a requirement for a GRC, the diagnostic procedures were expected to trap and exclude males who did not want surgery, thereby preventing fetishists and opportunists from exploiting a GRC.

The Equality Act of 2010 defined the various protected characteristics, including both sex and 'gender reassignment', and provided for sex-based exemptions, under the auspices of which it is legal to exclude trans people from some single-sex spaces and services.

Hollywood
@J_MoAGoGo

Overall I think Labour will be a bit disappointed with how the ‘relaunch’ has started. Labour have given themselves a mountain to climb anyway through a year of inaction but the speech today lacked coherence, purpose and distinction from the government.

Starmer is (funnily enough) making a lot of the same mistakes Corbyn made in 2019. He is listing a ‘bold’ set of policy proposals that come across as disjointed and lacking connection to Britain’s priorities.

The policies themselves were basically good, I wouldn’t argue against them. But I would cringe whenever Labour came out with spending proposal after spending proposal in 2019 without any rationale or connection to a larger economic strategy. That’s what Starmer did today.

The questions that voters will have about Starmer’s speech are the same ones that voters will have had about Corbyn’s 2019 manifesto: why are these policies your priority, how can we afford them and why aren’t we doing these already?

The first one needs to be answered by diagnosing Britain’s problems and their causes. He doesn’t have to diagnose all of them. For the purpose of today he could have picked three that feed off each other: inequality, stagnant income growth and stagnant productivity.

Tammy Bruce
@HeyTammyBruce

In the 90s I was a host on a talk radio station in LA, the same that aired Rush. I was president of LA NOW, & the liberal wkend host when he visited the station. He was so vilified by my then-crowd, I expected a monster. Instead, I met a remarkable, kind and encouraging man... 1/

He was gregarious & generous when we met. He shook my hand & I was shocked that he was nice & genuinely curious about my radio work and activism. I realized I was going to have a fascinating conversation 2/

There were many events during this time as a radio talk show host that changed me. It was my first job in the medium starting in 1993. My meeting Rush & our conversations made me realize the left had been lying to me about many things... 3/

Rush was not a monster, he wasn’t evil, he did not mean people harm, he wasn’t a bigot, or any of the other smears lobbed against him by my leftist associates. I liked him very much, and while we disagreed on many things (then) he was nothing has he had been painted 4/

In my conversations with him, we talked about the issues and despite the disagreements, he also took time to give me advice about hosting, style, connecting w the audience, etc. He encouraged me and gave me advice that made a huge difference in my career… 5/

You May Also Like

Noah Smith
@Noahpinion

1/OK, data mystery time.

This New York Times feature shows China with a Gini Index of less than 30, which would make it more equal than Canada, France, or the Netherlands. https://t.co/g3Sv6DZTDE

That's weird. Income inequality in China is legendary.

Let's check this number.

2/The New York Times cites the World Bank's recent report, "Fair Progress? Economic Mobility across Generations Around the World".

The report is available here:

3/The World Bank report has a graph in which it appears to show the same value for China's Gini - under 0.3.

The graph cites the World Development Indicators as its source for the income inequality data.

4/The World Development Indicators are available at the World Bank's website.

Here's the Gini index: https://t.co/MvylQzpX6A

It looks as if the latest estimate for China's Gini is 42.2.

That estimate is from 2012.

5/A Gini of 42.2 would put China in the same neighborhood as the U.S., whose Gini was estimated at 41 in 2013.

I can't find the <30 number anywhere. The only other estimate in the tables for China is from 2008, when it was estimated at 42.8.

JayneshKasliwal
@JayneshKasliwal

ULTIMATE GUIDE TO 21 and 200 Moving Average
SUNDAY THREAD 🔖
A trend Following System That will Help You Improve Trading immensely.

RETWEET AND SHARE 🔄
@kuttrapali26 @AmitabhJha3
#stocks #StockMarket
1/n

Moving averages
EMA and SMA
1. Exponential Moving Average (EMA) is similar to Simple Moving Average (SMA), measuring trend direction over a period of time.
2. However, whereas SMA simply calculates an average of price data, EMA applies more weight to data that is more current
2/

21 EMA : SHORT TERM TREND
1. Calculates the Average Price of past 21 days
2. A stock above 21 ema is in strong momentum , which will give pullbacks to 21 ema again and again.
3. Stock above 21 ema should never be shorted so as to stay with the trend
3/n

3. A stock which moves 10-15% above 21 ema will be too extended and hence will generally pullback
Stocks take dynamic support on 21 ema
4. You can Short only if its too extended like 15 to 20% from 21 ema ( Not advised )
#ADANIPOWER:
#pnbhousing
4/n

1. Whenever 21 ema is sloping upwards its called uptrend
2. Whenever 21 ema is sloping downwards its called dowtrend
3. Whenever 21 ema is sideways its called consolidation
⏫Buy in uptrend
⏬Sell in downtrend
Examples:
5/n

Advertisement

Anastasis
@OrdersofM

https://t.co/6cRR2B3jBE
Viruses and other pathogens are often studied as stand-alone entities, despite that, in nature, they mostly live in multispecies associations called biofilms—both externally and within the host.

https://t.co/FBfXhUrH5d

Microorganisms in biofilms are enclosed by an extracellular matrix that confers protection and improves survival. Previous studies have shown that viruses can secondarily colonize preexisting biofilms, and viral biofilms have also been described.

...we raise the perspective that CoVs can persistently infect bats due to their association with biofilm structures. This phenomenon potentially provides an optimal environment for nonpathogenic & well-adapted viruses to interact with the host, as well as for viral recombination.

Biofilms can also enhance virion viability in extracellular environments, such as on fomites and in aquatic sediments, allowing viral persistence and dissemination.

Emma Hilton
@FondOfBeetles

This is Kuinini ‘Nini’ Manumua, the woman who was ultimately displaced by inclusion of Laurel Hubbard.

She’s 21, and it would have been her first Olympics.

Dr. Barry J. Cooke
@barryjcooke1

1. Let's talk about the effects of #climatechange on the world's forests, with a focus on the northwest of Canada. This is also about electoral #greenwash, and my duty as public servant and right as private Canadian citizen to speak freely about what I know.

2. Why am I compelled to speak? How am I free to speak? The answer is in the federal Values and Ethics Code of Coduct (VECC).

3. It can be career-limiting to criticize government policy when you work for government. Duty of Loyalty is very, very important. However, as VECC makes clear, it is not absolute. In fact SCoC has ruled twice in favour of citizen free speech as a higher ideal. In 1985 and 2001.

4. I am therefore perfectly comfortable showing you the scary things that are happening in the North under a warming climate. A failure to meet global GHG emissions targets is hurting Canada's forests in a way we used to think wouldn't happen for decades.

5. Warming temperatures and rising [CO2] could, in theory, help green the planet with more vigorous tree growth. But that's not what's happening. Don't believe the #greenwash. The positive effects are over and it is warm enough that we are now starting the into the negative.