So this girl on Twitter is pretty fucked up....

[bastardofmelbourne]

Ok, you're not really giving me anything to go by here. Are you aware of what puts so many underage girls and boys into drug-induced prostitution? Not tweets. Not some guy wanting to get his jollies off by communing with what he considers a hot girl...look, I don't really wanna have to detail the shit that people get forced through...but these guys... they honestly idiots. And she is just another asshole making money off of idiots. When it comes down to the level of seriousness of human suffering...this is some teenage bullshit that shouldn't have been given a spotlight. I can give you at least 3 personal stories more messed up than this, depending on your idea of ethics and whatnot. This is...it's....learn?

Misery poker is fun and all, but...not super relevant. Like, we know there are worse problems in the world. We know there are worse fates than being called dickless by your Twitter girlfriend. There's always a worse problem. But I think we can safely say that emotionally abusing vulnerable people over Twitter is A Bad Thing without it having to be provably worse than The Other Bad Things.

I mean, say a poster comes up here and says "My girlfriend was mugged on the bus yesterday!" It's generally not relevant to respond with "How is this outrage worthy? At least she wasn't gang raped [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Delhi_gang_rape] and disemboweled with a crowbar."

There's "keeping things in context," and then there's misery poker. No-one wins at misery poker.

 

[kurokotetsu]

Well, considering my avatar, my title and some topics that I made and that I'm openly a proudly a DOm, I have a few things to say on this topic.

FIrst THIS GIRL IS NOT A DOMME NOR DOES REPRESENT THE BDSM COMMUNITY. Very simple. Her way of acting, her descriptio, hell her years and all she does is some virtual light humiliation plau (I have yet failed to see when she forced the guy to cry or to shave himself, a coursory glance at her tweets was unsuccesful to put blame on her rather than a codependant "sub") and from what I read of her, she is an idiot teen wih no idea of what it is or how to be a Dom. THis is like calling a bored housewife that reads Gray and posts how she wants to be dominanted a sub, an utterly ridiculous idea to anyone that practices BDSM.

Maybe if she reads, grows and is able to face a sub odown n the ground and really be a Domme to him you can discuss her conduct as something else than an idiot teen with a power fantasy that doesn't o the shit in real life. But right now, I fail to consder her anymore than a girl that knows nothing (not that she can't learn, but her attitude is pretty common in "inertnet Doms" that are just vanilla guys wiht zero idea what they are talking about).

"No true Domme", am I right?

THat somehting has a form of a fallacy doesn't mean it is. The "No True Scotsman" fallacy is wiggling out of a counter example by saynig it is not a real example without any basis. Describing hy something is not a counter example is not a fallacy. By my definition (and I ould believe, although admittetly baselessly the hole community) ould not conisder this teen a DOmme, and therefore is not a fallacy.

THank you questioning the moral integruity of myself and all that share my preference and by doing that also questioning the decision of my slave (a beatiful, independant and brilliant woman that I love very much and do not take kindly to any perceived insult agianst her) and showing a complete lack of respect for the poepl that have this preference. Your words are exaclty why I nhad to come out of the closet basically to show I'm not afriad of your clsoed mindness.

The pleasure is all mine.

You can keep enjoying inflicting all the pain you want to your "independent" slave (nice oxymoron, by the way), your brave display of indignation has moved me to the point of requestioning my skepticism at the notion of hurting others to achieve sexual gratification.

Mind you I said independant woman, not slave. Which she is. She can be fiercely independent, but she willingly and lovingly submitts to me. It shows that you are not very aware. Also, I never thought to chage your skepticism, but that doesn't mean I have to hold my tongue.

If you are against abuse, I do wonder, how many of the cases of domestic abuse in the world are done by BDSM participants? Let's quote a couple of things:

http://ncadv.org/learn-more/statistics

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/23/domestic-violence-statistics_n_5959776.html?

Unless you are willing to say that all those cases of abuse are form BDSM practicioners (or even a majority or disporoporsionate amount) your barometer of "it can turn sour quickly [...] cause permanent damgae" is highly off and biased agianst a community that as quoted by another posetr, when practised seriously have as a mantra to taken things safely. The "suffering" you refer to although not ficticious in the sense that it does indeed hurt, it is alos enjoyed very muh by the submissive part of the equation.

Considering how small, and generally private (closeted, as you yourself put it) the BDSM community is, I highly doubt they'd ever be properly represented on such polls. You have to take in mind abused partners' whose consent cannot be properly given too (such as the poor saps in the OP), I doubt they'd ever report the abuse itself.

But this is all besides the point, as I never implied that BDSM folk such as yourself are more likely to be abusers, simply that the normalization of emotional and physical violence in the relationship coupled with the dependence of the sub on the domme can be a nasty mix potentially leading to severe and under-reported abuse.

Which means that your point is, acocrding to your own post, never going to be proven, and is then basically a prejudice. You are saying that polls cannot represent a small population (untrue matehmatically speaking, such as trans or psycopaths are small populations with studies about them, and although complicated "Black" nubers can be estimated).

And my point is that your point of "severe and under-reported abuse" is unfounded prejudice and that unless shown differently, teh statistics show that a vanilla relationship is just as dangerous. And the reason is that although there are dependent subs (see my previous point of my personal salve), from what I know most subs are not depnendant and the moment it turns into abuse, they cut of the relation (and for them it is very celar, since there are levels for each masochist), and mind you, my onw submissive has done that several times in the past. (Also, lexic detail, Dom is the male and gender neutral way of referring to a dominante, Domme is femenine exclusively, which makes your post have unintended implications).

And per the same statistics, I guess you are openly against relationships in general since they "pone the door for physical and psiclogical abuse"...

Why, yes, I think people should be extremely careful/wary in who they choose as a partner in a standard vanilla relationship, as you said, bad relationships are a potential gateway to abuse. The potential severity goes up a notch when you give said partner the green light to hurt you though.

How can you prove, aside form prejudice and your own incomplete knowledge of BDSM relationships, that the potential severity goes "up a notch"? I could argue it goes down, since the levels of pain are very clear (form pleasure to discomfort) and the control of ending a session or even a relation by a sub that isn't enjoying her/himself gives less potential risk. Also the high levels of communication needed for the relationship means that it is more communicative than a standard vanilla relationship, therefore less dangerous. But I don't have proof, and therefore it would be daft of me to say it.

Also, bieng in a relationship with someone that practised BDSM does not give you a big inside look into what it is, how it is practised or anything else. Again my sub is a bisexual, and I would notclaim to know anything about bisexuality aside form hers and what she tells me.

Hey, simply stating where I stand here. I'm not claiming to be an expert, I'm only saying where what knowledge I have of the milieu comes from.

But where you stand may be a very skewed and incomplete point of information, which was alos my point there. And where you get your knowledge may be important and give you incorrect information.

ANd I think I said most of what I wanted to.

Good on you, man.

Venting is healthy.

It is.