BDSM kills yet another

nostradamas · Oct 28, 2008

This thread is hilarious and kinda sad at the same time.

To blindly love BDSM to the point where you have a zero tolerance policy toward anyone critical of it in the least, even when it is the apparent cause of a death, is disturbing/funny.

We even have moderators, the supposed "voice of reason" getting emotional and starting a witch hunt over anyone who dares to have a conflicting point of view. As Myriads would say, It's "cross talk" and "hijacking" when we start directly addressing members instead of the topic. Seems to me a mod should know that and instead of getting their collective panties in a wad, respond in a rational manner. That goes for avid BDSM enthusiasts as well.

If we find ourselves being crybabies over certain topics, and can't respond in a level-headed manner, perhaps we should avoid them and keep our pants dry. :cry1:

LD_Tickler · Oct 28, 2008

Drew,

isn't "risk aware" just another way of saying "safe?"

Presumably they got rid of "sane" because it's vaguely condescending; and the consentual bit just stayed the same.

Seems to me that the semantics of the new acronym really don't prove much.

asutickler · Oct 28, 2008

Back in my youth, I used to frequently get together with a bunch of other guys so that we could spend several hours beating the living shit out of each other. I'm not talking about a few swats with a cane here, either... Many of us literally couldn't walk the next day. On one occasion, I broke a kid's leg. On another, I dished out a pretty severe spinal injury. I wasn't even old enough to vote yet. Hell, most of us were still minors while all of this was going on. Even worse, grown adults and other kids would actually pay to come watch this violent spectacle, egging us on and cheering us to heightened levels of savage, brutal behavior.

They called it "High School Football," and it claimed the lives of three people last year. Ban it? 🙄

dvnc · Oct 28, 2008

nostradamas said:
This thread is hilarious and kinda sad at the same time.

To blindly love BDSM to the point where you have a zero tolerance policy toward anyone critical of it in the least, even when it is the apparent cause of a death, is disturbing/funny.

We even have moderators, the supposed "voice of reason" getting emotional and starting a witch hunt over anyone who dares to have a conflicting point of view. As Myriads would say, It's "cross talk" and "hijacking" when we start directly addressing members instead of the topic. Seems to me a mod should know that and instead of getting their collective panties in a wad, respond in a rational manner. That goes for avid BDSM enthusiasts as well.

If we find ourselves being crybabies over certain topics, and can't respond in a level-headed manner, perhaps we should avoid them and keep our pants dry.

Moderators may still express opinions if within bounds. You've been here when it has occurred before.

Members address members in many threads. It's an observable truth.

This whole thread is still based on one man losing someone, and Drew70 chosing that tragic story to blame an ENTIRE INTEREST GROUP which includes founders of this forum. If you don't like BDSM and cannot tolerate that folks have such interest, you're in the wrong forum.

That person lost someone. No one here knows even exactly HOW, yet it's okay to spin this horrific occurrence. It's thus horrific and sad.

That this thread's getting any more attention for Drew70s wretched interpretation of that tragedy is personally disappointing to me. As a mod, it's another fight waiting to happen.

Thus standing in the midst of it pointing out how wretched it is to do this sort of spin, AND how awful it is to assign blame to an entire practice. ASUTickler points out where even high school sports has a bigger damage count.

This taking of sides has no value here.

Tiger.Lily · Oct 29, 2008

Drew, generally I respect your opinions, even if I don't always agree with them. You're obviously a well-educated man, and your ideas are thought-out and articulated well.

However, attacks like these:

drew70 said:
As popular as you obviously consider youself to be, even you don't know everybody in the BDSM community, nor even the majority, so at best you are ill-qualified to speak on their behalf at all.

are fairly childish.

You seem to have it out for certain members, and that really hinders your merit.

Also,

drew70 said:
The vast majority of driving being done today is not for sexual thrill or excitement. The same cannot be said for BDSM. It has absolutely no other function other than a personal thrill.

I understand what you're saying. It's clever. But I disagree. There are plenty of things done for "the thrill" that aren't necessarily "safe", but with the right safety precautions are legitimate and safe enough for people to participate and enjoy themselves. For example; roller coasters, sports (football, basketball, cheerleading, wrestling), hot air balloon rides, sky diving, haunted houses, etc. The list goes on and on.

Of course, if you're going to act like a jackass and disregard any or all of the safety precautions put into place, then you obviously shouldn't be participating. If you're going to stand in your seat when the ride is going upside down, or cross the DANGER: NO ENTRANCE signs/fences to get your hat, or ignore safewords and practice BDSM when you're underqualified, and ill-educated, then of course you shouldn't participate in dangerous activities. However, if you're going to go about it in a mature manner, then I just simply don't see a reason not to go forth and thrill yourself.

BellaRisa · Oct 29, 2008

dvnc said:
Moderators may still express opinions if within bounds. You've been here when it has occurred before.

Members address members in many threads. It's an observable truth.

This whole thread is still based on one man losing someone, and Drew70 chosing that tragic story to blame an ENTIRE INTEREST GROUP which includes founders of this forum. If you don't like BDSM and cannot tolerate that folks have such interest, you're in the wrong forum.

That person lost someone. No one here knows even exactly HOW, yet it's okay to spin this horrific occurrence. It's thus horrific and sad.

That this thread's getting any more attention for Drew70s wretched interpretation of that tragedy is personally disappointing to me. As a mod, it's another fight waiting to happen.

Thus standing in the midst of it pointing out how wretched it is to do this sort of spin, AND how awful it is to assign blame to an entire practice. ASUTickler points out where even high school sports has a bigger damage count.

This taking of sides has no value here.

Well said. Thank you.

Let me add, as my final note to this misbegotten thread: the date on that article, which as we've said is entirely too vague to be of any use whatsoever, is February 2008. This was not even a current story. The OP, who has said time and again that he has no personal interest in BDSM, had to go looking for this in order to post it here. Ask yourself why someone would take the time to do so. For the good of the community? Right. Everyone here knows better than that. :disgust:

drew70 · Oct 29, 2008

I'm thankful for Crystal's BDSM thread, as many of the others seem to have flocked to it, leaving the rest of us to discuss this topic in a more reasonable and objective fashion.

LD_Tickler said:
Drew,

isn't "risk aware" just another way of saying "safe?"

Not at all. When one plays "safe" one acknowledges that there is a point in which even consentual play becomes unsafe. People are rightly encouraged not to play beyond that boundary.

"Risk Aware" on the other hand acknowledges no such boundary. Virtually anything goes so long as all participating parties understand the risk involved.

LD_Tickler said:
Presumably they got rid of "sane" because it's vaguely condescending; and the consentual bit just stayed the same.

They got rid of "sane" for the same reason they got rid of safety. It kept flagging or redlining extreme activities that people really wanted to pursue.

LD_Tickler said:
Seems to me that the semantics of the new acronym really don't prove much.

Then allow me to demonstrate with a hypothetical example. Suppose a couple wanted to engage in an extremely dangerous type of play. Something so wild and crazy that the chance of survival was less then 50%.

It only passes one of the three requirements of SSC. It's consentual, but hardly safe nor sane. SSC protocol would have red-flagged the idea and their peers would discourage them from trying it. RACK on the other hand would simply say, "Well you're both consenting, you both know the risk involved. It's kinky as hell. Go ahead, have at it."

asutickler said:
They called it "High School Football," and it claimed the lives of three people last year. Ban it? 🙄

This is a strawman argument, ASU. Nobody here is proposing a ban on BDSM. Football and most other contact sports take every available caution, particularly when kids are concerned. They have redlined rough tactics such as elbowing, and they don't permit knives on the field. They are definitely SSC. BDSM can be played this way too.

Euphoricy said:
Drew, generally I respect your opinions, even if I don't always agree with them. You're obviously a well-educated man, and your ideas are thought-out and articulated well.

Thank you for saying so. I genuinely appreciate the sentiments. But in truth my formal education doesn't extend much past a High School Diploma and a bunch of technical schools. 🙂

Euphoricy said:
However, attacks like these:

drew70 said:

As popular as you obviously consider youself to be, even you don't know everybody in the BDSM community, nor even the majority, so at best you are ill-qualified to speak on their behalf at all.

Click to expand...

are fairly childish.

LOL. You're kidding, right? I'm assuming you've read this thread, and all the posturing and attacking from even moderators who are supposed to be impartial; and THIS is what get's your attention as "childish"? Pardon my saying so, but you seem awfully selective in your criticism.

Euphoricy said:
You seem to have it out for certain members, and that really hinders your merit.

I disagree. If my arguments have merit, they do so on the strength of their content, not my willingness to schmooze.
__________________

dvnc · Oct 29, 2008

BellaRisa said:
Well said. Thank you.

Let me add, as my final note to this misbegotten thread: the date on that article, which as we've said is entirely too vague to be of any use whatsoever, is February 2008. This was not even a current story. The OP, who has said time and again that he has no personal interest in BDSM, had to go looking for this in order to post it here. Ask yourself why someone would take the time to do so. For the good of the community? Right. Everyone here knows better than that.

Wow. Sadder still. Picking on an article from the top of the year so you can take sides?

Wretched abuse of the man who lost someone. Truly wretched. I personally am so offended by that.

Deleted member 66627 · Oct 29, 2008

Let's just make this clear.

Drew70 Hates BDSM.

He doesn't understand it. He refuses to understand it. He has his own opinions on it.

The thread that basically started it all.

Did that solve anything?

No.

The temporary apology.

Did that solve anything??

Briefly.. untill--

The inevitable relapse.

Has *any* good come from doing this?

No.

Y'all get upset, no point is made and it's a circular argument with no outcome.

This is an empty discussion. No one is going to give and we all have our developed opinions, most Vets already from dealing with this shit in the past.

Speak to the thread and give your take and reaction on it.

There's no point speaking to the OP. This is proven by the links above.

Fire_Sprite · Oct 29, 2008

He just wants to ensure that people take proper precautions. That couple never should have practiced BDSM without a defibrillator, an adrenaline shot, and a team of cardiologists on standby. SAFETY FIRST PEOPLE!

nostradamas · Oct 29, 2008

dvnc said:
Moderators may still express opinions if within bounds. You've been here when it has occurred before.

Members address members in many threads. It's an observable truth.

Oh really?
Maybe you should check that with your bosses.

Look, all I'm asking for is consistency across the board.

And BTW, just because someone doesn't like something, doesn't mean they don't understand it.

Ciao, peeps.

Fire_Sprite · Oct 29, 2008

I missed the part where drew just said "I don't like BDSM" and then the shitstorm erupted. His constant reassertion of his moral superiority and making claims about bdsm killing people are what's led everyone to believe he doesn't understand it.

drew70 · Oct 29, 2008

CrystalLight said:
Let's just make this clear.

Drew70 Hates BDSM.

He doesn't understand it. He refuses to understand it. He has his own opinions on it.

I've been observing the phenomenon and interacting with participants of it since the mid seventies, Crystal. I understand the psychology, the dynamic, and the means by which these relationships are achieved and maintained. I don't claim to know all there is to know, but I'm confident that my understanding of it exceeds yours by a comfortable margin.

In fact, that's why certain people are so upset and refuse to leave this thread alone. They KNOW I understand. If I were just some goofball spouting nonsense, this thread wouldn't have lasted for even one page, must less five. They also know I'm right about the safety issue playing a large part in the death of the woman in the article. They can't provide a legitimate objection so they mount a smear campaign, much as you're doing now.

Crystal Lght said:
The thread that basically started it all.

LOL. If you want to know where it really started, you're going to have to dig deeper than that, sweetheart. 😉

Not that any of it has any relevance to the topic of THIS thread, namely the death of a woman during consentual S&M play, which raises the question of safety versus risk awareness.
__________________

Headsnap · Oct 29, 2008

drew70 said:
Not that any of it has any relevance to the topic of THIS thread, namely the death of a woman during consentual S&M play, which raises the question of safety versus risk awareness.

There's a lot of that going round at the moment. Some of us even get 7-day blocks for derailing threads; not everyone though. Just some. Concerning BDSM "killing yet another" I still don't think there's enough evidence to form an opinion one way or the other, and to be honest I think as a rational minded person you've got to accept that heart-attacks happen; if she'd choked to death on a gag because her husband forgot to watch out for her that'd be one thing, but people die of heart attacks all the time.

I don't necessarily disagree with your stance as regards BDSM and the people who practise it, I just think you might have gone off half-cocked on this occasion 😀

nostradamas · Oct 29, 2008

drew70 said:
They can't provide a legitimate objection so they mount a smear campaign, much as you're doing now.

LOL. If you want to know where it really started, you're going to have to dig deeper than that, sweetheart. 😉

QUIET YOU!

We have one of the TMF's finest gumshoes on this case, see.

You, good sir, are under investigation.

:omnomnom:

vladtickleman22 · Oct 29, 2008

I'm bored, so i will increase my post count by one. As i said in a previous post, i know nothing about BDSM. Which means i am probably going to be told to leave and let people who know about it argue in an endless loop.

So, after this is posted. Consider me gone. All i really have to say is simple. Safe Sane Consentual Vs Risk Aware Consentual Kink. The words "Safe" and "Sane" have been removed and replaced with "Risk" and "Aware". Using Drew70's hypothetical example of an act that has a chance of survival less then 50%. Wouldn't someone who was "Aware" of that "Risk". Realize it was neither "Safe" nor "Sane" ?

Personally, if they were not able to make that connection. I wouldn't let them have sharp objects nor a vehicle. Because that person(s) clearly have no common sense.

What happen was a horrible event and that person now must continue life without someone whom they loved.

drew70 · Oct 29, 2008

nostradamas said:
QUIET YOU!

We have one of the TMF's finest gumshoes on this case, see.

You, good sir, are under investigation.

Yikes! You don't suppose she'll uncover my song parody scandal, do you?! :blaugh:

__________________

LD_Tickler · Oct 29, 2008

drew70 said:
"Risk Aware" on the other hand acknowledges no such boundary. Virtually anything goes so long as all participating parties understand the risk involved.

They got rid of "sane" for the same reason they got rid of safety. It kept flagging or redlining extreme activities that people really wanted to pursue.

Then allow me to demonstrate with a hypothetical example. Suppose a couple wanted to engage in an extremely dangerous type of play. Something so wild and crazy that the chance of survival was less then 50%.

It only passes one of the three requirements of SSC. It's consentual, but hardly safe nor sane. SSC protocol would have red-flagged the idea and their peers would discourage them from trying it. RACK on the other hand would simply say, "Well you're both consenting, you both know the risk involved. It's kinky as hell. Go ahead, have at it."

That's a fair interpretation of the terms, I suppose. Still, I think it's just as likely that they changed the acronym so they could have a fun kinky word like RACK than for any more substantial reason. I don't see how you can be sure that changing a slogan reflects a substantive change in attitude. It might of course, but I don't see any reason to believe it must.

Whatever other points you're making, this slogan thing seems to be undeserving of so much of your attention.

BDSM kills yet another

nostradamas

Guest

LD_Tickler

3rd Level Yellow Feather

asutickler

Verified

dvnc

MODERATOR

Tiger.Lily

Verified

BellaRisa

Verified

drew70

Guest

dvnc

MODERATOR

Deleted member 66627

Guest

Fire_Sprite

2nd Level Red Feather

nostradamas

Guest

Fire_Sprite

2nd Level Red Feather

drew70

Guest

Headsnap

1st Level Orange Feather

nostradamas

Guest

vladtickleman22

2nd Level Violet Feather

drew70

Guest

LD_Tickler

3rd Level Yellow Feather