Foole Flambe
Philip the Foole
experience of volunteering to let FireDancer and YogaLady try out some
of their "not ready for prime time" experimental fire play techniques
on me.
First, let me say that until you have watched a sharp dissection
needle heated white hot in a blow torch and then had it touched to
your nipples and other wabbly bits, you haven't really been fully
awake. I'm not suggesting for a moment that you *want* to be that
fully awake, you understand.
Anyway, the experience was delightfully intense, and I survived
mostly intact. Of course, with the circular bruises from the fire
cupping, Lady Foole is going to suspect that I have been making
out with an octopus. I think FireDancer and YogaLady had a
"Christmas Tree" theme in mind, but they got a teensy bit carried away.
Guys, if you ever hear this girlish giggle:
"Ooooh goodie! A man to torture!"
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
I had a wonderful time. In an odd way, I feel tremendously pampered.
There's something exquisitely luxurious about having two lovely
and talented dommes devoting themselves to finding new and more
creative ways to make one scream.
Your Humble Jester,
Philip the Foole
Highly Trained Professional Stunt Pervert
jenner
> I had a wonderful time. In an odd way, I feel tremendously pampered.
> There's something exquisitely luxurious about having two lovely and
> talented dommes devoting themselves to finding new and more creative ways
> to make one scream.
"It's a sick world and I'm a happy, happy man."
You are a stupide^H^H^H^H^H^H...braver man than I, Philip.
--
-- jenner
Philip the Foole
Funny you should say that.
At one point, Firedancer leaned over me, giving me a good look at the
glowing, white-hot needle tip and asked "Can I use this on your balls?"
I said "Yes."
Then YogaLady leaned over me and asked "Are you being incredibly brave,
or just stupid?"
I said "Both."
Of course, by then, they could have asked if I wanted to have my arm cut
off with a chain saw, and I would have happily agreed.
Fortunately, they exercised considerable control and skill, and I am
none the worse for wear other than a few slightly tender spots (which
Lady Foole is taking gleeful advantage of.)
Switchmaybe(BG)
put you into the right place first...
I am very wary of burns, particularly under the balls, as I gave myself one
there when younger and it got infected. Not pleasant at all.
Also, I had to find a good cover story for the doctor.
:-)
Brian
--
--
___________________________________________________________________________
Any opinions expressed above, are just that, opinions.
please add salt to taste.
Only my Eyes are blind....
switc...@blueyonder.co.uk
___________________________________________________________________________
"Philip the Foole" <fo...@icehouse.net> wrote in message
news:3FEEA4E9...@icehouse.net...
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free, so there!
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.555 / Virus Database: 347 - Release Date: 23/12/03
Morgane
Philip the Foole <fo...@icehouse.net> wrote in article
<3FEE8EB4...@icehouse.net>...
> I figured you folks would want to know whether I survived the
> experience of volunteering to let FireDancer and YogaLady try out some
> of their "not ready for prime time" experimental fire play techniques
> on me.
Yes : )
> Anyway, the experience was delightfully intense, and I survived
> mostly intact. Of course, with the circular bruises from the fire
> cupping, Lady Foole is going to suspect that I have been making
> out with an octopus.
My kink is not okay.
>I think FireDancer and YogaLady had a
> "Christmas Tree" theme in mind, but they got a teensy bit carried away.
Christmas Tree is a very hard theme to stay with, -hope you forgive them.
-M
jk
Does this mean that you'll be running for United Way Poster Boy contest,
become the next shirtless fireman with his very own calendar, or the new
Sears underwear wonder boy?
JK
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
jk
Somehow Foole's Christmas Tinsle comes to mind for the holiday
season...white hot variety that is.
The Evil Twin
>
> "Ooooh goodie! A man to torture!"
>
> Be afraid. Be very afraid.
WAH! Want a man to torture too!
>
> I had a wonderful time. In an odd way, I feel tremendously pampered.
> There's something exquisitely luxurious about having two lovely
> and talented dommes devoting themselves to finding new and more
> creative ways to make one scream.
That sounds like a lot of fun. I'm glad you got lots of good attention.
Evil Twin
Jason Crowell
> I figured you folks would want to know whether I survived the
> experience of volunteering to let FireDancer and YogaLady try out some
> of their "not ready for prime time" experimental fire play techniques
> on me.
>
> First, let me say that until you have watched a sharp dissection
> needle heated white hot in a blow torch and then had it touched to
> your nipples and other wabbly bits, you haven't really been fully
> awake. I'm not suggesting for a moment that you *want* to be that
> fully awake, you understand.
I'm getting weirder. That actually sounds interesting to me, and I'm
normally a complete pain wuss...
> Anyway, the experience was delightfully intense, and I survived
> mostly intact. Of course, with the circular bruises from the fire
> cupping, Lady Foole is going to suspect that I have been making
> out with an octopus. I think FireDancer and YogaLady had a
> "Christmas Tree" theme in mind, but they got a teensy bit carried away.
>
> Guys, if you ever hear this girlish giggle:
>
> "Ooooh goodie! A man to torture!"
>
> Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Is that good fear or bad fear?
Asmodeus
news:MPG.1a58a4b1e...@news.comcast.giganews.com:
> Is that good fear or bad fear?
Are they different?
--
"I practice the most successful form of martial art, the
art of Ching-Chang and am proficient in the forms of 1911
and SIG SAUER."
--Scout
ayla
news:01c3cd39$b9d9e240$ce00...@cr1001062-a.ym1.on.wave.home.com.
..
survived
> > mostly intact. Of course, with the circular bruises from the
fire
> > cupping, Lady Foole is going to suspect that I have been
making
> > out with an octopus.
>
> My kink is not okay.
This may be a stupid newbie question, Morgane, but what did you
mean by that? I'm just asking simply because I don't understand
the exchange.
ayla
--
"Passwords are like condoms: they let you do cool things, but
change 'em frequently, and NEVER LEND THEM TO FRIENDS if you
expect to use 'em again."
I prefer reply by post, but if you'd like to reply via email,
prove you're not an idiot.
Sockermom9
>First, let me say that until you have watched a sharp dissection
>needle heated white hot in a blow torch and then had it touched to
>your nipples and other wabbly bits, you haven't really been fully
>awake. I'm not suggesting for a moment that you *want* to be that
>fully awake, you understand.
A local guy discovered this a few years back, and it was quite the party game
for a while. I never tried it, as my skin sometimes does strange things, and
some of the happy victims mentioned that they had some trouble healing all the
little burns. Please let us know how that goes for you--it sure looks like
fun!
Lynn
Sockermom9
>Then YogaLady leaned over me and asked "Are you being incredibly brave,
>or just stupid?"
I maintain that it's a "curious switch" thing. I want to know how something
feels, and the best way for me to find out is to get it done to me, and here's
this nice toppy person offering to help me with my studies; who am I to say no?
Lynn
jenner
> Jason Crowell <jas...@iquest.net> wrote in
> news:MPG.1a58a4b1e...@news.comcast.giganews.com:
>
>> Is that good fear or bad fear?
>
> Are they different?
This is why I like you.
--
-- jenner
Asmodeus
news:pan.2003.12.28....@Xcomcast.netX:
> This is why I like you
<blush>
Seriously, though, what is "bad" or "good" fear? Fear is
fear, and if it's not real, it's not fear. Thrill, perhaps,
but not fear. If you know you're safe, you're not going to
feel fear.
Fear is for me absolutely crucial, and it's getting more
and more difficult to find people to play with in this
SSC era. I want the bottom to fear me--in the most real,
the only, sense of the word. I want to see terror in his
eyes--the real thing--terror and submission. I want him
to wonder if he will live to see tomorrow. I don't want
him to think he's safe and only playacting; I want to
hear him beg me for his life. I want him to piss himself
solely out of fear. I want to reduce him to that instinct
of self-preservation with no power to indulge it, I want
him to do nothing but fear me. I want him to sweat for a
few hours not knowing whether I will let him live or not.
As I've said before, I only have one switch turned on,
and that's the one thing I hide from whoever bottoms
for me. I hide that well. I don't do anything that
would encourage him to feel safe or that we're just
playing. I want him to have the same experience with
me he would have if he were in the hands of a killer,
and KNOW that's what he's experiencing.
Control. Power of life and death. Terror. Crying and
pleading. Beautiful, vulnerable, powerless, weak and
helpless, shivering and begging and praying that he
will live. That's what cranks my engine.
Okay, Urban Primitive folks, flame away.
--
"If George W. Bush announced that a cure for cancer had been discovered,
Democrats would complain about unemployed laboratory rats."
--Ann Coulter
Conrad Hodson
> Ahem, This sounds extremely painful to me. I hope the warm up (pun intended)
> put you into the right place first...
>
> I am very wary of burns, particularly under the balls, as I gave myself one
> there when younger and it got infected. Not pleasant at all.
>
> Also, I had to find a good cover story for the doctor.
>
That seems like the easy part to me--but then I heat the house with a
woodstove and work a forge for a living. If I had a burn there, and if I
wasn't out to my doctor, I'd just tell him I sat on a coal that popped out
of the fire without my noticing.
As for healing minor dings in the crotch, I find that a dry dressing,
changed often, helps a lot. Otherwise sweat and body heat makes it as
warm and moist as a bacterial incubator, and an infection could really
take off. If you're into kilts, or skirts, or wearing nothing at all, it
_really_ helps to have such a wound exposed to free air circulation, with
just a light dressing to prevent chafe.
Conrad Hodson
Conrad Hodson
I find that all three of these explanations--brave, stupid, curious--might
apply to me. Brave--because the longer I live the more truth I find in
"Do what frightens you" as a touchstone principle. Stupid, because that's
how you can feel the times the results really don't seem worth it, and you
suspected as much before you tried it. And curious certainly, because the
alternative to curiousity is having a mind that dies years before your
body does, and to hell with that notion!
Conrad Hodson
"Our Politics:
Tell the truth
Do what frightens you
Have as much fun as you can stand
If you're oppressing someone, cut it out
---Sunah Cherwin
jenner
<applause>
--
-- jenner
Philip the Foole
That's one of the (many) things that really turns me on when I play with
fellow switches.
We both know that as they expand my limits, they are simultaneously
expanding their own.
Your Humble Jester,
Philip the Foole
I don't think of it as revenge. I think of it as expressing my
gratitude by returning the favor.
- Ancient Kung Foole Proverb by TchMe2Nyt
Philip the Foole
The Evil Twin wrote:
>
> Philip the Foole <fo...@icehouse.net> wrote
> > Guys, if you ever hear this girlish giggle:
> >
> > "Ooooh goodie! A man to torture!"
> >
> > Be afraid. Be very afraid.
>
> WAH! Want a man to torture too!
Aw, poor baby. If we weren't located on opposite sides of the planet,
I'd be glad to be your crash test dummy.
Binder
> Anyway, the experience was delightfully intense, and I survived
> mostly intact. Of course, with the circular bruises from the fire
> cupping, Lady Foole is going to suspect that I have been making
> out with an octopus.
I'm crushed. You're the one person I'd be utterly certain has made out
with an octopus. Or at least, several people impersonating (is that the
right word?) one.
Conrad Hodson
IIRC, Patti actually had a live-in octopus when I first met her. Used to
be wild-sounding noises on her answering machine, and a message to the
effect that she couldn't come to the phone right then because the octopus
had escaped. She was always coy about just what the octopus _did_ while
it was out, but she kept the thing around so it must have done something
right....
Conrad Hodson
who doesn't usually date outside his species, let alone his phylum
Jason Crowell
asmo...@removeinsightbb.com says...
> Jason Crowell <jas...@iquest.net> wrote in
> news:MPG.1a58a4b1e...@news.comcast.giganews.com:
>
> > Is that good fear or bad fear?
>
> Are they different?
Yes, they are thousands of light years apart. IMHO YMMV (and in your
case YMDefinitely Does Vary), and all that
Morgane
ayla <ayla...@hotpop.idiotproof.com> wrote in article
<YsWdnT6DZvZ...@comcast.com>...
> > My kink is not okay.
>
> This may be a stupid newbie question, Morgane, but what did you
> mean by that? I'm just asking simply because I don't understand
> the exchange.
That's not a newb question at all.
My comment was just a silly way for me to say that I think tentacles are sexy.
People into the tentacle thing aren't very well thought of, so while I'm
giving a little cheer to Philip's mentioning the idea that people might think
he was "making out with an octopus" I also realize and jokingly imply that it's
wrong of me to do so.
http://www.netsukesource.com/shunga.htm
search string: netsuke erotic octopus
Morgane
raptu...@aol.com
> Jason Crowell <jas...@iquest.net> wrote in
> news:MPG.1a58a4b1e...@news.comcast.giganews.com:
>
> > Is that good fear or bad fear?
>
> Are they different?
You didn't ask me, but the answer is no. The primal body response of
fear is neither good nor bad -- it just is.
The question isn't whether fear is good or bad, but whether or not
fear is a hot-button for you or not. For bottoms who eroticize fear,
the only "bad" fear is the one where there isn't enough threat/danger
to trigger that suspension of disbelief.
I'm telling you, trust can be such a scene-killer.
--Katharine H.
Asmodeus
@posting.google.com:
> I'm telling you, trust can be such a scene-killer
Hear, hear.
--
/"\ ||
\ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN || A democracy occurs when three wolves and
X AGAINST HTML MAIL || one sheep vote on what to have for dinner.
/ \ AND POSTINGS || A republic occurs when the sheep is armed.
-- mr_antone
ayla
..
>
>
> ayla <ayla...@hotpop.idiotproof.com> wrote in article
> <YsWdnT6DZvZ...@comcast.com>...
> > > My kink is not okay.
> >
> > This may be a stupid newbie question, Morgane, but what did
you
> > mean by that? I'm just asking simply because I don't
understand
> > the exchange.
>
> That's not a newb question at all.
>
> My comment was just a silly way for me to say that I think
tentacles are sexy.
> People into the tentacle thing aren't very well thought of, so
while I'm
> giving a little cheer to Philip's mentioning the idea that
people might think
> he was "making out with an octopus" I also realize and jokingly
imply that it's
> wrong of me to do so.
Ahhh, thank you for the clarification. Tentacles? LOL. Hey,
everyone has something, I suppose.
Thanks again,
faviola llervu
that sounds like a lots of fun. :) I can diss-out and absorb a lot of pain
stuff, but burning stuff I can't. that must have felt wonderful. :)
faviola
"Philip the Foole" <fo...@icehouse.net> wrote in message
news:3FEE8EB4...@icehouse.net...
Sockermom9
>Seriously, though, what is "bad" or "good" fear? Fear is
>fear, and if it's not real, it's not fear. Thrill, perhaps,
>but not fear. If you know you're safe, you're not going to
>feel fear.
Fear's cool. Makes me wet.
>Okay, Urban Primitive folks, flame away.
Yawn.
Lynn
raptu...@aol.com
> needle heated white hot in a blow torch and then had it touched to
> your nipples and other wabbly bits, you haven't really been fully
> awake. I'm not suggesting for a moment that you *want* to be that
> fully awake, you understand.
<snip>
An alternate tool is to use a disposable medical cauterizer -- one of
my favorite toys. They're battery powered and heat up to 2200 deg F.
The filament is very small and thin and the burn mark is the size of a
pin prick. They cost about $10.
I like using the cauterizers because of the precision of the strike.
I time the strike with the rhythms of the bottom's breathing.
I can see how weilding a blow torch would have certain appeal though.
--Katharine H.
Morgane
ayla <ayla...@hotpop.idiotproof.com> wrote in article
<q9OdnWHvtKZ...@comcast.com>...
>
> Ahhh, thank you for the clarification. Tentacles? LOL. Hey,
> everyone has something, I suppose.
That's right, go ahead and laugh at my innermost desires and feelings ; )
It just feeds my persecution complex.
Thank you.
Morgane
faviola llervu
"Conrad Hodson" <con...@efn.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.SUN.4.56.03...@garcia.efn.org...
> who doesn't usually date outside his species, let alone his phylum
Crustaceans are interesting and are unusually good kissers. ;)
I think it would be neat to have an octopus. are their suckers the same as
sea star feet?
faviola
faviola llervu
"Asmodeus" <asmo...@removeinsightbb.com> wrote in message
news:Xns945FAF181EF70as...@216.148.227.77...
> Seriously, though, what is "bad" or "good" fear? Fear is
> fear, and if it's not real, it's not fear. Thrill, perhaps,
> but not fear. If you know you're safe, you're not going to
> feel fear.
Hmm. I sense three kinds of fear. Fear from someone who I accept the
possibility of severe harm or death from, fear from someone I don't, and the
fear from being triggered. The first two are kind of the same. Terror of
something happening that I don't want and can do nothing about. But with the
first, since I accept that possibility, it comes with a sadness and a sense
of inevitablility. The second is a shift into survival mode with escape the
only thing in my mind along with what I can give up or lose to survive the
situtaion. The third there are no thoughts, just a flood of terror and pain;
a rabbit squirming in one's hands.
Do you sense any of those differences with ppl you do things with?
I don't like playing with fear too much. I shift into survival mode too
easily. But my master wants to play with it. And I think I'm ok with it even
though I personally will get nothing positive out of it.
> Control. Power of life and death. Terror. Crying and
> pleading. Beautiful, vulnerable, powerless, weak and
> helpless, shivering and begging and praying that he
> will live. That's what cranks my engine.
:)
That makes way too much sense to me.
faviola
--
Blend and balance pain and comfort deep within you till you will not have me
any other way. It's not enough. I need more. Nothing seems to satisfy. I
don't want it. I just need it. To feel, to breathe, to know I'm alive.
-Tool
StormWolf
I see you hve the same switch and it's continually flipped to "on".
Some days that really sucks. :)
moonlight
StormWolf
<asmo...@removeinsightbb.com> wrote:
>Control. Power of life and death. Terror. Crying and
>pleading. Beautiful, vulnerable, powerless, weak and
>helpless, shivering and begging and praying that he
>will live. That's what cranks my engine.
>
>Okay, Urban Primitive folks, flame away.
Marshmallow? I'm looking forward to s'mores. :)
moonlight - who occasionally wishes she were not female.
StormWolf
>The question isn't whether fear is good or bad, but whether or not
>fear is a hot-button for you or not. For bottoms who eroticize fear,
>the only "bad" fear is the one where there isn't enough threat/danger
>to trigger that suspension of disbelief.
>
>I'm telling you, trust can be such a scene-killer.
I definitely live in the wrong place. Or hang out in the wrong groups.
moonlight
Asmodeus
news:gjd1vvgcvb6b2fkvv...@4ax.com:
> I definitely live in the wrong place. Or hang out in the wrong groups
Come to the dark side.
--
Notice posted.
* This is not a peanut free zone!
* The use of adult beverages, tobacco products,
sugar, salt, caffeine, high fat foods and firearms
(when necessary) is encouraged on these premises.
* Jack-booted government thugs without warrants
will be shot upon entry.
Have a nice day :-)
-- Mark Renfro
OldRope
>the only, sense of the word. I want to see terror in his
>eyes--the real thing--terror and submission. I want him
>to wonder if he will live to see tomorrow. I don't want
>him to think he's safe and only playacting; I want to
>hear him beg me for his life. I want him to piss himself
>solely out of fear. I want to reduce him to that instinct
>of self-preservation with no power to indulge it, I want
>him to do nothing but fear me. I want him to sweat for a
>few hours not knowing whether I will let him live or not.
>
>As I've said before, I only have one switch turned on,
>and that's the one thing I hide from whoever bottoms
>for me. I hide that well. I don't do anything that
>would encourage him to feel safe or that we're just
>playing. I want him to have the same experience with
>me he would have if he were in the hands of a killer,
>and KNOW that's what he's experiencing.
>
>Control. Power of life and death. Terror. Crying and
>pleading. Beautiful, vulnerable, powerless, weak and
>helpless, shivering and begging and praying that he
>will live. That's what cranks my engine.
>
>Okay, Urban Primitive folks, flame away.
Oh shit. This is one of "those" posts. I really should know better than to
rise to bait like this. I really should. (What did Eric Berne write about
"second degree games" versus "third degree games"?) This is like that goddamn,
never-ending "I don't allow my bottoms to use safe words" debate. Actually, I
do know better than to respond, but sometimes my impulse control just isn't
what it should be. Anyway....
[I probably shouldn't get overly into this, but I have been in this exact
space, meaning in the presence of a killer, in a real world sense, on too damn
many occasions. I've been shot at, been slashed at, been held captive at
gunpoint, and had knives held to my throat -- all in the very "real world"
sense of the matter. (I wonder if the original poster has.) I did what I had
to do to survive. If I ever find myself in such a situation again, I'll do
likewise, and preserving the well-being of the threatening person will be, as
it was then, _very_ low on my list of priorities.]
Anyway [shaking head to clear it, taking a deep breath] OK, so let me see if I
get this straight. You want your bottom to be in honest-to-God, no-shit,
really really real fear for their life. You want them in that brainstem-level
"do anything to survive" mode, but with no power to do anything about it. You
want them to believe, to be totally freakin' convinced, that there is good
reason to conclude that you are about to not only simply kill them, but slowly
and hideously torture them to death. OK, got it.
The thing is, you cannot ever be truly sure, no matter how physically helpless
_you_think_ you've made them, that they indeed have no power to do anything
their situation.
You're talking about putting them in ultra fight-or-flight mode. What this
necessarily means _to_you_ is that you have put yourself in danger of being
immediately killed by the bottom in question -- and, from a legal point of
view, very likely justifiably so.
I'm not speaking hypothetically here. I know of at least two cases in which
the top has been physically attacked by what I shall over simplistically call a
"freaked out" bottom. Bad stuff, Maynard.
(There is the additional issue of creating a deep-seated and well-concealed --
after all, they believe their life depends upon such effective concealment --
desire for _vengance_ in the mind of the bottom, which means that no matter how
happy, pleased, and so forth _they_seem_ once the play is over, very shortly
after the restraints are removed and they can move freely then their previously
perfectly concealed killing rage will surface and you will be immediately
embarking on a new career as a corpse, perhaps a very bloody corpse.
Then there are such utterly trivial issues as a lawsuit against you for battery
and intentional infliction of emotional distress (those are just the warm-up
charges), plus the major criminal charges. (A conviction of the charges such a
scene would involve could easily invoke the criminal justice saying "that
person's parole officer hasn't been born yet.") Oh, and let's not forget the
potential for your behavior to induce post traumatic stress disorder in the
bottom's mind.
So, let's see, in summary, such play...
1. Puts the top at risk of being killed.
2. Puts the top at risk of serious felony charges.
3. Puts the top at risk of serious civil liability.
4. Puts the bottom at risk of PTSD, etc.
Let's just say YKINMK.
For basic BDSM info and links to much more, particularly regarding the needs of
novice submissive women, visit my "submissive women kvetch" website at
http://members.aol.com/oldrope/index.htm To reply to this email, remove
"nospam" from my address.
jenner
> I'm telling you, trust can be such a scene-killer.
It can be. And no, I'm not trolling.
--
-- jenner
ayla
news:20031229185635...@mb-m22.aol.com...
> > From: Asmodeus > asmo...@removeinsightbb.com
<snip asmodeus' kink>
>
> Oh shit. This is one of "those" posts. I really should know
better than to
> rise to bait like this. I really should. (What did Eric Berne
write about
> "second degree games" versus "third degree games"?) This is
like that goddamn,
> never-ending "I don't allow my bottoms to use safe words"
debate. Actually, I
> do know better than to respond, but sometimes my impulse
control just isn't
> what it should be. Anyway....
>
Yeah, I shouldn't rise to the bait, either.
I happen to want to be in real fear for my life in a scene
sometimes. Angelus and I have been talking about that, about
playing that scene, without safewords, where he gets to terrify
and threaten me and I get to be terrified and threatened. It's a
knife-edge game, requiring you to know yourself and your partner
very very well. It takes a lot of time. Sure, we have the
conversations where he's told me he'll never actually do
such-and-such. I even have some of it in writing. But when I'm
tied up with a knife to my throat, even having that reassurance
is small comfort, and I'm really afraid. Because, if he's really
going to kill me, he won't care that it's in writing, will he?
After I'm dead, he can destroy the pieces of paper and electronic
media. But he won't kill me. He needs me too much. But does he?
Does he really need me? Couldn't he just have been luring me into
complacency, lying to me to get me to let him tie me up without a
struggle? Similar has happened, to me. And when the light is in
his eyes as he sharpens his blades or loads his gun, and he's
describing in meticulous detail how he's going to kill me, how
he's going to love it, how I'm going to scream and how he's going
to get away with it all, I'm really afraid. It's too well
thought-out. He can really kill me. Sure I trust him, but I trust
him when we're both sane and clothed, not when I'm naked and
dressed only in rope around my wrists, ankles, and hair.
> Let's just say YKINMK.
If that was all you had said, it might have been better, IMHO.
Like Morgane's tentacle kink, I don't understand it and I can't,
but if she and the octopus are willing to risk themselves to have
a good time, I'm not one to talk about how stupid she is. People
do all sorts of fucked-up stuff. Just like if I agree to submit
to someone else, it's my right to do so, also is it my right to
submit with or without a safeword. I risk my own PTSD. He risks
his own life in driving me to that point. None of it affects you
at all.
But, you're entitled to your opinion.
Take care,
jenner
> IIRC, Patti actually had a live-in octopus when I first met her. Used to
> be wild-sounding noises on her answering machine, and a message to the
> effect that she couldn't come to the phone right then because the octopus
> had escaped. She was always coy about just what the octopus _did_ while
> it was out, but she kept the thing around so it must have done something
> right....
I think I remember that message.
--
-- jenner
ayla
..
>
>
> ayla <ayla...@hotpop.idiotproof.com> wrote in article
> <q9OdnWHvtKZ...@comcast.com>...
> >
> > Ahhh, thank you for the clarification. Tentacles? LOL. Hey,
> > everyone has something, I suppose.
>
> That's right, go ahead and laugh at my innermost desires and
feelings ; )
I'm laughing WITH you, not AT you! :-)
>
> It just feeds my persecution complex.
Glad I can be of service. ;-)
>
> Thank you.
I live to please (Anyone with Angelus' permission).
Sockermom9
>Oh shit. This is one of "those" posts. I really should know better than to
>rise to bait like this.
We all have our moments of weakness.
>(There is the additional issue of creating a deep-seated and well-concealed
>--
>after all, they believe their life depends upon such effective concealment --
>desire for _vengance_ in the mind of the bottom, which means that no matter
>how
>happy, pleased, and so forth _they_seem_ once the play is over, very shortly
>after the restraints are removed and they can move freely then their
>previously
>perfectly concealed killing rage will surface and you will be immediately
>embarking on a new career as a corpse, perhaps a very bloody corpse.
Well, you see, that's just *it*. Asmodeous is just so darn good that after his
victim comes and comes and comes, she'll fall genuinely in love with him, and
all desire to go for vengeance, either physical or legal, will fade from her
now-fawning memory of the wild roller-coaster ride he's just made such a
pleasant part of her life. So much so that she'll immediately sign up for the
same treatment again, even offering to allow him to kill her just so she can
experience the thrill again.
As I said, I love being afraid. I love knifeplay, knowing as I do that even
the most skillful top gets the hiccups sometimes, and if I should
sneeze...well, there goes the party. I also know that I'm a pain wimp, and can
easily be pushed beyond my limits and *that's* scary as hell, even without the
chainsaw thing ever coming into it. It's quite easy to cause me real fear.
But then, I'm not a Big Bad, No, I Mean It, Bigger And Badder Than The Rest Of
You Wimpy Cowards Who Aren't True Masters Anyway, player. And, since such talk
is redolent of Ancient European BDSM Houses and Only True Submissives Need
Apply and, yes, the I Don't Allow My Slave A Safeword schticks, I find it
quaint at best. But I've read too much porn to find it interesting, and I know
too many intelligent people who can tell fantasy from reality to worry about it
much.
Lynn
Sockermom9
> It's a
>knife-edge game, requiring you to know yourself and your partner
>very very well. It takes a lot of time. Sure, we have the
>conversations where he's told me he'll never actually do
>such-and-such. I even have some of it in writing. But when I'm
>tied up with a knife to my throat, even having that reassurance
>is small comfort, and I'm really afraid. Because, if he's really
>going to kill me, he won't care that it's in writing, will he?
>After I'm dead, he can destroy the pieces of paper and electronic
>media. But he won't kill me. He needs me too much. But does he?
>Does he really need me? Couldn't he just have been luring me into
>complacency, lying to me to get me to let him tie me up without a
>struggle? Similar has happened, to me. And when the light is in
>his eyes as he sharpens his blades or loads his gun, and he's
>describing in meticulous detail how he's going to kill me, how
>he's going to love it, how I'm going to scream and how he's going
>to get away with it all, I'm really afraid. It's too well
>thought-out. He can really kill me. Sure I trust him, but I trust
>him when we're both sane and clothed, not when I'm naked and
>dressed only in rope around my wrists, ankles, and hair.
So you choose to stay with someone you truly believe has some intention of
killing you? Sort of like the wife who lives in fear of her next beating,
knowing that it might be her last? Or do you have a large life-insurance
policy, benefitting someone greatly in need?
No, I don't believe you do. You--like most intelligent, creative people--have
the ability to suspend disbelief for your own pleasure. My heart pounds when I
watch a good movie (_The River Wild_ was on yesterday--Meryl Streep, Kevin
Bacon, bondage, guns; what else is there in life?), all the while knowing full
well that no actors were harmed in the making of the film (and I'm totally
unmoved by those sports in which there is every possibility that someone will
be injured--have you ever watched hocky or lacrosse? Dear lord!).
Philip shared that he'd feared as a child that the only way he;d ever be able
to get off was to do dangerous, life-threatening things with genuine criminals.
Ditto--I know that the only people who would possibly want to do to me what I
wanted done would kill me so as to leave no witnesses. What changed? I found
a whole community of people willing to scare the holy living fuck out of me,
while leaving me reasonably sure that I'd be alive at the end of it.
Lynn
Sockermom9
I saw Fakir Musafar do a demo once, branding two friends. One brand was a
multiple strike design, using a torch to heat the metal. The other was done
with a cauterizer, and the bottom found it much more challenging than the first
method--so much so that she requested that I step in and help her through it,
giving me one of the most intense energy-transfer experiences of my life (yes,
I know I don't do woo-woo shit, so I must really mean it, no?)
Lynn
Sockermom9
>I see you hve the same switch and it's continually flipped to "on".
>
>Some days that really sucks. :)
You know how the most frequent phrase spoken just before a group of hikers
realizes that they're lost is usually, "I know this great shortcup"? Well, the
followup to the curious-switch thing is most often, Oh, fuck!"
I'm beginning to think gags are a good thing.
Lynn
Binder
> Philip the Foole <fo...@icehouse.net> wrote in message news:<3FEE8EB4...@icehouse.net>...
>
>
>>First, let me say that until you have watched a sharp dissection
>>needle heated white hot in a blow torch and then had it touched to
>>your nipples and other wabbly bits, you haven't really been fully
>>awake. I'm not suggesting for a moment that you *want* to be that
>>fully awake, you understand.
>
>
> <snip>
>
> An alternate tool is to use a disposable medical cauterizer -- one of
> my favorite toys. They're battery powered and heat up to 2200 deg F.
> The filament is very small and thin and the burn mark is the size of a
> pin prick. They cost about $10.
I paid a little more than that for mine at a junk store... but it's c.
1950, 110VAC, has interchangable tips and a few useless extras, like a
chrome sort-of- speculum for precision location.
> I like using the cauterizers because of the precision of the strike.
> I time the strike with the rhythms of the bottom's breathing.
Yeah! For brandings, they lose some of the single-ish strike stuff, but
precision, IMO, more than makes up for that small lack.
> I can see how weilding a blow torch would have certain appeal though.
It does... myohmy, does it ever!
Binder
--
LLEBOOTHSLG
remove my TAILS to email me
Whips, Quirts, Etc http://www.madplaiter.com
John Warren
news:bsqlf2$esbn$1...@ID-217865.news.uni-berlin.de...
> > I can see how weilding a blow torch would have certain appeal though.
>
> It does... myohmy, does it ever!
One of the nicest compliments I've ever been paid came from Spectrum
commenting on his feelings on being told the only things I needed his group
to provide for a demo was a blow torch and a woman who doesn't mind a knife
in her vagina
--
--
www.diversifiedservices.biz Serving the Scene since 1992
>
Binder
I suspect so. I do do woowoo shit, and there's a substantial difference
between the energy transfer in play and that in the spiritual realms.
The former is far more intentional, for one thing, and of a different
means of exchange. The woowoo shit is far more mondirectional, while in
play it seems to me that it's much more "broadcast", where all parties
involved feed the charge.
None of which makes a great deal of sense. You may take my word for it,
if you like.
Binder
> Moonlight writes:
>
>
>>I see you hve the same switch and it's continually flipped to "on".
>>
>>Some days that really sucks. :)
>
>
> You know how the most frequent phrase spoken just before a group of hikers
> realizes that they're lost is usually, "I know this great shortcup"? Well, the
> followup to the curious-switch thing is most often, Oh, fuck!"
Personally, I think doing the expletive is a great distraction. I mean,
at least I know where my wabblies are!
ayla
news:bsqm5d$eucs$1...@ID-63352.news.uni-berlin.de...
> "Binder" <binder...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:bsqlf2$esbn$1...@ID-217865.news.uni-berlin.de...
>
>
> > > I can see how weilding a blow torch would have certain
appeal though.
> >
> > It does... myohmy, does it ever!
>
>
> One of the nicest compliments I've ever been paid came from
Spectrum
> commenting on his feelings on being told the only things I
needed his group
> to provide for a demo was a blow torch and a woman who doesn't
mind a knife
> in her vagina
>
:-)
John Warren
news:iNqdnbumlMg...@comcast.com...
> "John Warren" <jo...@diversifiedservices.biz> wrote in message
> news:bsqm5d$eucs$1...@ID-63352.news.uni-berlin.de...
> > "Binder" <binder...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:bsqlf2$esbn$1...@ID-217865.news.uni-berlin.de...
> >
> >
> > > > I can see how weilding a blow torch would have certain
> appeal though.
> > >
> > > It does... myohmy, does it ever!
> >
> >
> > One of the nicest compliments I've ever been paid came from
> Spectrum
> > commenting on his feelings on being told the only things I
> needed his group
> > to provide for a demo was a blow torch and a woman who doesn't
> mind a knife
> > in her vagina
> >
> John, you make my heart stop. Damn I love you for that sometimes.
> :-)
>
> ayla
Yes, but the real thrill is ... you aren't sure I'll let you restart it
[evil cackle]
StormWolf
<asmo...@removeinsightbb.com> wrote:
>StormWolf <moonl...@kc99.rr.com> wrote in
>news:gjd1vvgcvb6b2fkvv...@4ax.com:
>
>> I definitely live in the wrong place. Or hang out in the wrong groups
>
>Come to the dark side.
*heh* Just which dark side are we talking about? There's several to
choose from.
moonlight
StormWolf
>You know how the most frequent phrase spoken just before a group of hikers
>realizes that they're lost is usually, "I know this great shortcup"? Well, the
>followup to the curious-switch thing is most often, Oh, fuck!"
*grins* Yes, I've definitely been hiking that trail. I believe I've
uttered that sentiment on more than occasional instances.
>I'm beginning to think gags are a good thing.
I've been thinking that myself...though I can't decide if it should be
applied before or after saying "Sure, why not?"
moonlight
StormWolf
>Anyway [shaking head to clear it, taking a deep breath] OK, so let me see if I
>get this straight. You want your bottom to be in honest-to-God, no-shit,
>really really real fear for their life. You want them in that brainstem-level
>"do anything to survive" mode, but with no power to do anything about it. You
>want them to believe, to be totally freakin' convinced, that there is good
>reason to conclude that you are about to not only simply kill them, but slowly
>and hideously torture them to death. OK, got it.
Yes. And there are bottoms that want to *be* in that position. It's a
pretty severe mindfuck, yes, but it's not an impossible place to be in
with the right partner. Some people can carry off the dichotomy of
being someone you know you can trust to take you to that point *AND*
be able to get you to that point despite the trust.
Or, maybe some of us have a semi-sorta-death-wish fantasy life.
There's a reason why Steven Davis' writing is so popular among certain
folk. There are dangers to it, just like any edgeplay, not the least
of which is choosing your partner badly.
>The thing is, you cannot ever be truly sure, no matter how physically helpless
>_you_think_ you've made them, that they indeed have no power to do anything
>their situation.
Or that adrenaline won't make them stronger than they normally would
be. Or they won't snap completely and become a danger to you both.
You could also die driving down the street.
>You're talking about putting them in ultra fight-or-flight mode. What this
>necessarily means _to_you_ is that you have put yourself in danger of being
>immediately killed by the bottom in question -- and, from a legal point of
>view, very likely justifiably so.
This is very true. And one of the risks that need to be evaluated,
just like with any other type of play. It takes a long time to get to
the point where you know your partner mentally in and out enough to be
able to judge this type of thing.
>I'm not speaking hypothetically here. I know of at least two cases in which
>the top has been physically attacked by what I shall over simplistically call a
>"freaked out" bottom. Bad stuff, Maynard.
And? *ANY* bottom can snap provided the right motivation and
stimulation. No one's said this type of play is for everyone...just
as edgeplay isn't. Or needleplay. Pick a type.
>Then there are such utterly trivial issues as a lawsuit against you for battery
>and intentional infliction of emotional distress (those are just the warm-up
>charges), plus the major criminal charges. (A conviction of the charges such a
>scene would involve could easily invoke the criminal justice saying "that
>person's parole officer hasn't been born yet.") Oh, and let's not forget the
>potential for your behavior to induce post traumatic stress disorder in the
>bottom's mind.
Jay, quite honestly, not all play is SSC. Most play has that veneer.
Edgeplay often strips that veneer away. And while you bring up many
good points for things that partners should think about, the manner in
which you're doing so is rather condescending and really doesn't
become you. If you don't like it or the idea of it, don't do it.
Getting snarky on the topic (and yes, I believe you're bordering on
it) doesn't make your case.
>So, let's see, in summary, such play...
>
>1. Puts the top at risk of being killed.
>
>2. Puts the top at risk of serious felony charges.
>
>3. Puts the top at risk of serious civil liability.
>
>4. Puts the bottom at risk of PTSD, etc.
>
>Let's just say YKINMK.
Fine. So, politely point out what you see as the isses by laying down
them down in a neutral manner instead of loading them negatively as
you've done here.
You don't like it, don't watch it or participate in it. Same rules
apply to you as anyone else that walks through the door.
moonlight
ayla
sometimes.
> > :-)
> >
> > ayla
>
> Yes, but the real thrill is ... you aren't sure I'll let you
restart it
> [evil cackle]
>
Oh my god! I'm in real fear for my life! I might snap on you or
develop post-traumatic stress disorder!
</sarcastic bratty "wit">
I'm obviously up past my bedtime.
raptu...@aol.com
I rarely can grok your communication when you write a post like this.
I could name all the activities I do each day (including sitting in
front of a computer writing this) and you could do a medline search
and find evidence of risk associated with this behavior.
Sometimes I wonder if you think we are idiots - like we don't know
that each and every thing we do has risks associated with it. I
routinely kayak in a shallow, easy-flowing river without a life vest.
Frankly, I find it bizarre that people wear flotation devices at all
on that river. I also find it bizarre that mothers now carry around
anti-bacterial wipes to sterilize their children anytime they touch a
foreign object. (Sheesh, on same days, I'm lucky if I can remember to
wash my hands after I piss.)
The cultural assumption that danger is bad and we should do everything
we can to minimize danger is, from my vantage point, an absolute
threat to vitality. I would rather spend my time and mental energy
doing fun shit than doing half-as-fun shit with a lower predicted risk
quotient. And, I have no objection to minimizing risk. I do wear a
seatbelt and I hate wearing them. What is personally objectionable to
me is the *primacy* that is given to keeping people safe. Great... we
now have a culture of alive people who are not quite as alive as they
physically appear.
I suspect that I simply have a different relationship to risk than you
do. And I also suspect that the people I play with do as well. When
something gets fucked up in a scene, the bottoms I play with are more
likely to take on a "you pays your money and you takes your chances"
attitude than "oh my gosh my boundaries have been violated and I am
now damaged" attitude. In other words, the people I play with are not
likely to look for ways to invent themselves as victims no matter what
the circumstances look like. We are more like ducks -- shit happens
and we move on. And I'm asserting that, because we are less focused
on and give less energy to "danger" we're less likely to relate to
many experiences as dangerous or harmful.
Which is all why one of the things I look for in partners is how they
process risk. You would not be happy playing with someone like me,
because I will take a "fuck it.. let's go for it" attitude each and
every time and you will research and evaluate and look for ways to
minimize risk. It's simply different perceptual approaches to risk
management.
Some of us LIKE risk. Sometimes that is the WHOLE point.
--Katharine H.
raptu...@aol.com
> I suspect so. I do do woowoo shit, and there's a substantial difference
> between the energy transfer in play and that in the spiritual realms.
> The former is far more intentional, for one thing, and of a different
> means of exchange. The woowoo shit is far more mondirectional, while in
> play it seems to me that it's much more "broadcast", where all parties
> involved feed the charge.
>
> None of which makes a great deal of sense. You may take my word for it,
> if you like.
Ok... I'm lost. What are you guys talking about anyway?
--Katharine H.
Gene P.
On 30 Dec 2003 raptu...@aol.com wrote:
[snip]
>The cultural assumption that danger is bad and we should do everything
>we can to minimize danger is, from my vantage point, an absolute
>threat to vitality. I would rather spend my time and mental energy
>doing fun shit than doing half-as-fun shit with a lower predicted risk
>quotient. And, I have no objection to minimizing risk. I do wear a
>seatbelt and I hate wearing them. What is personally objectionable to
>me is the *primacy* that is given to keeping people safe. Great... we
>now have a culture of alive people who are not quite as alive as they
>physically appear.
[snip]
Roller-Coasters.
My favorite roller-coaster used to be the Texas Cyclone at Astroworld.
It was fast. It was bumpy. It banged you around. All the while, the
world whizzed past at incomprehensible speed.
It was a hell of a lot of fun.
We went to Astroworld every summer for about 5 years. After a coaster
accident one winter that killed a few folks, they got sued.
The next year, they installed all new "safety restraints". They were
uncomfortable. They limited head movement, and therefore the view. It
was like being an egg packed in foam for long-distance shipment.
In short, the ride was ruined.
I find the same trend in BDSM. It is often associated with playstyle and
techniques, but sometimes manifests as privacy paranoia. Either way, it
appears as a need by fearful people to limit the activities OF OTHERS for
"their own good".
Bah. Save me from people who won't let me assume the level of risk *I*
find acceptable.
I find this sort of debate to be *THE* most common non-consentual form of
domination in the BDSM scene. And the only safeword is to go it alone
outside of the social support net. (Once this sort of control freak
gains control of a group, they rarely let go until it is run into the
ground.)
You can see the evidence here and there: Arbitrary bans on certain forms
of play that are percieved as "dangerous" (like fire or breath play) while
permitting and encouraging other forms (like the singletail).
>I suspect that I simply have a different relationship to risk than you
>do. And I also suspect that the people I play with do as well. When
>something gets fucked up in a scene, the bottoms I play with are more
>likely to take on a "you pays your money and you takes your chances"
>attitude than "oh my gosh my boundaries have been violated and I am
>now damaged" attitude. In other words, the people I play with are not
>likely to look for ways to invent themselves as victims no matter what
>the circumstances look like. We are more like ducks -- shit happens
>and we move on. And I'm asserting that, because we are less focused
>on and give less energy to "danger" we're less likely to relate to
>many experiences as dangerous or harmful.
The cult of Victimhood is a strong social movement in the USA. It
constantly pisses me off. Of course, if we didn't think of ourselves as
victims, the need for ambulance chaser lawyers would drop WAY off.
Certainly, a Top has a responsibility to portray their level of competency
in an accurate way. But if a Bottom consents to being the first human
test subject of a novice Single-Tail Top, then they should accept their
own share of the resposibility if they get cut, or otherwise hurt. And if
the Botton never even bothered to check on the experience level of the Top
before playing, then in many ways they deserve the consequences they get.
(Self-responsibility is the key here.)
[snip]
>Which is all why one of the things I look for in partners is how they
>process risk. You would not be happy playing with someone like me,
>because I will take a "fuck it.. let's go for it" attitude each and
>every time and you will research and evaluate and look for ways to
>minimize risk. It's simply different perceptual approaches to risk
>management.
>
>Some of us LIKE risk. Sometimes that is the WHOLE point.
[snip]
When I was new to the scene, every new activity came with the mystery of
the unknown. Every new activity could be good or bad, and every new
activity was a powerful new "danger".
Oh how I miss that. The things that now evoke that feeling for me are
mostly well beyond my other limits now. I know how much pain I'm willing
to take, for instance, and a flogging that could evoke fear would be
safeworded early on.
I've grown into appreciating the things I like for themselves now instead
of being an excitement junkie.
It's funny; but for activities that I understand very well, enjoy, and no
longer fear, I take all sorts of safety precautions. My wife is baffled
at how picky I am about using ropes and the comfort/fitting of cuffs.
The details of getting these things "just right" drive her nuts.
But when it's something new and exciting, things are different. The first
time I get a chance to go sky-diving, I don't want to be pestered with
safety lectures I won't understand anyway. I just want to know what I
need and can absorb. I just want to jump out of the plane, have fun, and
not become a professional. And because of this, I will choose a guide to
lead me through this experience who can watch the safety angles for me.
Risk is fun... Or there would be no roller coasters.
Gene P.
Slidell, LA
--
Alcore Nilth - The Mad Alchemist of Gevbeck
alc...@uurth.com
Heikki
[snip a lot]
> Risk is fun... Or there would be no roller coasters.
Yes, risk does have its charms. More for some people than for others.
I am mostly in the farily safe camp, but I have seen, and done, things we
always warn against when we discuss safety. It is refreshing, if sometimes
unsettling to hear of the high-risk players talking of their views. But I
well understand that people like Jay want to jump in wand warn about those
risks. Not so much for the high-risk players themselves, but for benefit of
the thousands of newbies lurking here, so that when they want to play such
risky things, they at least have an idea that some activities carry more
risk than others.
Ever so humbly
-H
StormWolf
>I suspect that I simply have a different relationship to risk than you
>do. And I also suspect that the people I play with do as well. When
>something gets fucked up in a scene, the bottoms I play with are more
>likely to take on a "you pays your money and you takes your chances"
>attitude than "oh my gosh my boundaries have been violated and I am
>now damaged" attitude.
I remember an exchange I had with Charles here several years ago now
in which he demonstrated that *any* "hard limit" can be bent and
twisted around and still not have the line crossed.
I believe the example he used was my absolute hard limit about
watersports. My statement was "Watersports are a hard limt." He then
went about illustrating a variety of ways in which he could
incorporate urine into a scene that didn't violate what *I* perceived
as a limit and still not have crossed the line, ranging from putting
it in a glass somewhere near to make me wonder if he *was* going to
cross the line to talking about it while having me restrained.
And I thank god daily for that lesson and for the people that hear
"that's a hard limit" and ask "is that a limit you want pushed" rather
than backing off away from it as an absolute statement.
For someone that likes edgeplay and mindfucks, backing away from the
squicky, horrifying, terrifying, (whateverothering) makes it harder to
push those limits...and that's what I enjoy.
> In other words, the people I play with are not
>likely to look for ways to invent themselves as victims no matter what
>the circumstances look like. We are more like ducks -- shit happens
>and we move on. And I'm asserting that, because we are less focused
>on and give less energy to "danger" we're less likely to relate to
>many experiences as dangerous or harmful.
Illustrated quite readily by the belief that whips, floggers, cats and
various other of our "toys" aren't weapons used to maim and punish
historically. They're "safe" ways to play.
>Some of us LIKE risk. Sometimes that is the WHOLE point.
Yes. Thank you.
moonlight
John Warren
news:06iIb.65391$jf4.4...@news000.worldonline.dk...
Also, Jay's not saying (or at least I'm not hearing) "Do not do this." The
message is more "these are the risks you should know about."
The BDSM world doesn't have cops. People are free to do just about whatever
they want in association with people who want or tolerate the same thing.
However, I'm a big fan of "informed risk." What scares me is people who say
things like "I saw this in a movie and it looked hot; now I want to do it."
StormWolf
>I am mostly in the farily safe camp, but I have seen, and done, things we
>always warn against when we discuss safety. It is refreshing, if sometimes
>unsettling to hear of the high-risk players talking of their views. But I
>well understand that people like Jay want to jump in wand warn about those
>risks. Not so much for the high-risk players themselves, but for benefit of
>the thousands of newbies lurking here, so that when they want to play such
>risky things, they at least have an idea that some activities carry more
>risk than others.
I don't think people object to having safety issues pointed out or the
possible risks brought up. That's just common sense. I've posted
about high risk play I've done. In particular, the gun scene that I
participated in was followed up *immediately* by the safety concernes
and precautions that were taken for the very reason that newbies *do*
read here and this may be their only form of information.
What I object to in particular was Jay's tone, consescension, and
arrogance about a type of play that he disagrees with. It's displayed
in his posts on breathplay and it was displayed in his initial
response to this.
moonlight
Alcore
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, John Warren wrote:
[snip]
>The BDSM world doesn't have cops. People are free to do just about whatever
>they want in association with people who want or tolerate the same thing.
>However, I'm a big fan of "informed risk." What scares me is people who say
>things like "I saw this in a movie and it looked hot; now I want to do it."
[snip]
I agree, the standard of "informed risk" is an excellent one. I simply
hold to the philosophy that it is not my job to second guess other
people's decisions or competence to make those decisions.
Yes, it's unnerving to watch human lemmings hurl themselves off a cliff of
stupidity. But it seems at times that rather than work to educate the
lemmings, social institutions (like BDSM clubs) would rather build safety
fences on the cliff edge... and thereby ruin it for the informed folk.
Since I know that I am a "human lemming" on occasion, I seek the support
of others of my kind to provide guidance. I find it frustrating that much
of the time, the tribal elders that ought to be reaching out to protect
the uninformed, prefer to circle the wagons and protect the group from
dangerous outsiders with new/crazy ideas.
I have the utmost respect for folks like Jay though. He is not the sort
that excludes. From personal experience talking with him I know
him to be the sort that offers council and advice that help the
educable improve their choices.
Sockermom9
>I suspect so. I do do woowoo shit, and there's a substantial difference
>between the energy transfer in play and that in the spiritual realms.
>The former is far more intentional, for one thing, and of a different
>means of exchange. The woowoo shit is far more mondirectional, while in
>play it seems to me that it's much more "broadcast", where all parties
>involved feed the charge.
>
>None of which makes a great deal of sense. You may take my word for it,
>if you like.
Um, huh? No, I really mean it; what did you just say? I'd love to hear an
explanation of what I experienced, and whether it relates to the woo-woo shit
the mainstream might recognize. I just lack the vocabulary, and *completely*
lack the experience, outside of those scenes where it happened, I can't deny it
happened, I want it to happen again, and can't figure out how to make it
happen.
See? I can fail to make sense too. ;-)
Lynn
Sockermom9
>Ok... I'm lost. What are you guys talking about anyway?
Well, there was your post about a cauterizing tool, which I somehow failed to
quote. Then I mentioned a branding I saw, which provided me with a very odd
experience of getting to drain off some of the energy the bottom wasn't able to
handle herself by holding her feet, and pressing on a reflex spot with my
thumbs. Binder was responding to that, and I'm curious to hear more too, since
I don't understand how it worked and it was terribly cool, er...hot...oh, hell,
you know what I mean.
Lynn
Sockermom9
>I've been thinking that myself...though I can't decide if it should be
>applied before or after saying "Sure, why not?"
Well, if I only had a brain, I'd say before. Since it's readily apparent to
the most casual observer that I haven't, after seems a good choice.
Lynn
faviola llervu
"Gene P." <alc...@uurth.com> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.44.03123...@uurth.com...
> (Self-responsibility is the key here.)
Yeah. And the obsessive focus on trying to remove damage to me also creates
an illusion of safety that feels more scary than taking an informed risk on
something.
I don't want to live in a world that's child-proofed. the universe is
complicated and confusing and scary, but I want to be able to grasp it and
understand it and face it at whatever form it happens to take at that
moment.
I'll do what I can to stay safe, but I understand that safety is ultimately
limited. I need to be responsible for myself, and I need to accept the
consequences of how I exist in the world.
faviola
SilverOz
raptu...@aol.com <raptu...@aol.com> wrote:
> do. And I also suspect that the people I play with do as well. When
> something gets fucked up in a scene, the bottoms I play with are more
> likely to take on a "you pays your money and you takes your chances"
> attitude than "oh my gosh my boundaries have been violated and I am
> now damaged" attitude. In other words, the people I play with are not
I've found that depends a lot on the person.
They *start* with that. And as long as the consequences can be handled,
they are handled.
But everyone has a breaking point, one they can't know till they reach
it. Which is one of the problems with risk management of this kind of
risk. We can manage the risk of physical harm reasonably easily. But
what makes someone go off the deep end, that's a lot harder.
And it really ain't no good to say "but they consented!" in that case...
I think that it's OK to take the risk someone will go troppo, but it's
important to acknowledge it's a possiblity, and it's important to work
out what you'll do if it happens. If you play on this edge and someone
*does* get PSTD, how will you know and what will you do? Both pitcher
and catcher?
Ignoring it is silly. Acknowledging it happens, and minimising the
chance and planning for the eventuality, that's the way to handle risks.
SilverOz
Sockermom9
>Or, maybe some of us have a semi-sorta-death-wish fantasy life.
>There's a reason why Steven Davis' writing is so popular among certain
>folk. There are dangers to it, just like any edgeplay, not the least
>of which is choosing your partner badly.
In other words, you choose the partner you're pretty sure won't really kill
you, rather than the partner you think *will* really kill you. Then you allow
yourself to believe that they are really going to kill you.
If you really, really thought you were in the hands of John Wayne Gacy, would
you be getting off?
>Or that adrenaline won't make them stronger than they normally would
>be.
I've faced that, both in reality and in scene. It's weird, especially in
scene.
> Or they won't snap completely and become a danger to you both.
I try to play with reasonably sane people.
>You could also die driving down the street.
Well, I take pretty complex steps to avoid that. I drive a (yes, mini-) van
with airbags, wear my seatbelt, pay attention to the idiot^H^H^Hother drivers
around me, and drive sober and well-rested.
I play with people whom I know care for me, people I can trust to take me to
the edge and bring me back safely. And I always wear my seatbelt, thought it
often shifts to around my wrists and ankles.
Lynn
StormWolf
You may have a point. Do you have a preference for gags? :)
moonlight
Sockermom9
>>Well, if I only had a brain, I'd say before. Since it's readily apparent to
>>the most casual observer that I haven't, after seems a good choice.
>
>You may have a point. Do you have a preference for gags? :)
Yes, "Truely" silent ones. ;-)
In fact, I can only use a gag when someone is around who knows how to reduce a
dislocated jaw. It's hard to reduce it yourself, did you know that?
Lynn
StormWolf
>In other words, you choose the partner you're pretty sure won't really kill
>you, rather than the partner you think *will* really kill you. Then you allow
>yourself to believe that they are really going to kill you.
>
>If you really, really thought you were in the hands of John Wayne Gacy, would
>you be getting off?
do you want the truth or would you like me to try to retain the
lighter, fluffier SSB image I sometimes potray?
The answer, in either case, would depend on a variety of things
including my current outlook on life, my mood, and quite possibly my
serrotinin levels.
Can I see an instance where I *would* get off in the hands of John
Wayne Gacy? Yes. Am I realistic enough to know that it would be a one
time blowout event with a huge permanence level that I'm not willing
to walk into at this point in my life? Yes. Can I see a time when
that might not be the case? Yes.
I'm quite certain that it frightens a goodly number of people that
there are people involved in the leather community that might like to
go out in a blaze of tortured glory. ANd that there are many that find
it baffling.
No, I'm not going to go out and look for a killer to torture me. Part
of *my* getting off on it is knowing it turns on my partner while he's
doing it. Sociopaths and psychopaths aren't necessarily sadists who
get turned on by it. Do I want a partner that can walk me up to that
edge just *before* I topple over it? Yes. Do I try to use good
judgement in finding partners that I can trust not to push me over til
the time is right (if ever)? Yes.
The two are not mutually exclusive. I'm going to assume that you don't
always follow the same routine when you play....37 strokes with a
deerhide flogger, 14 pops with a singletail, move on to three songs
worth of sjambok strokes and then finish up with a fuck. I don't want
that in a partner, either...I want a wide variety of things which may
occasionally include walking me up to that line. And I want a top
that's capable of that wide range of style.
Do I want to believe he's capable of that final push? Yes. Does it
matter if he *really* is capable? Not so much. I'd prefer, at this
moment in time, to not find out. I also know that I have chronic pain
and can envision a time when that becomes unbearable enough that I
would want it to end by whatever means possible. If I could, at the
same time, serve my top by fulfilling one final fantasy for
him...more's the better for me.
>> Or they won't snap completely and become a danger to you both.
>
>I try to play with reasonably sane people.
Define reasonably sane. Can you predict that you won't stumble over
something accidentally that will push someone so far the have a panic
reaction that causes a break with reality?
>Well, I take pretty complex steps to avoid that. I drive a (yes, mini-) van
>with airbags, wear my seatbelt, pay attention to the idiot^H^H^Hother drivers
>around me, and drive sober and well-rested.
You can control yourself. You can't control the drunk driver that
careens around a corner. Or someone that decides (from a dead stop)
that they can make it across the street before you get to them.
>I play with people whom I know care for me, people I can trust to take me to
>the edge and bring me back safely. And I always wear my seatbelt, thought it
>often shifts to around my wrists and ankles.
The two aren't mutually exclusive. I pick partners who treasure what
we have enough to take precautions and push me as close as we both
want to go. That doesn't mean their incapable of pushing me over.
moonlight
StormWolf
>Yes, "Truely" silent ones. ;-)
>
>In fact, I can only use a gag when someone is around who knows how to reduce a
>dislocated jaw. It's hard to reduce it yourself, did you know that?
Yep. I have TMJ. It's evil. No gags that hold the mouth open,
thenkyewverymuch. :(
Now...if you wanna talk duct tape...
moonlight
OldRope
There is some good food for thought in the replies here, so I may take a day or
so to mull things over before posting further in this thread, but let me make a
few points now.
Our play involves -- or, to use the dreaded "s" word -- _should_ involve, some
reasonably informed and realistic calculation of its risk/benefit ratio.
As we say in law school, "reasonable minds can differ" -- thus, assuming that
all people involved are reasonably informed, it's understood that different
people can come to different conclusions about the risk/benefit ratio of a
given activity and still have these differening conclusions all be "reasonable"
ones. (That a conclusion be a "reasonable" one is important because, in large
part, "reasonable" conclusions are generally immune from social, legal and
other penalties -- including the "penalty" of physical injury-- whereas
"unreasonable" ones are generally not so immune from penalty.)
The original post in question showed a detailed, even savoring, appreciation of
the great benefits -- to that particular top, anyway -- of creating an
ultra-exteme sense of "real world" fear of being murdered, by torture, in the
mind of the bottom, but not even the most minimal appreciation of the great
risks -- to both the top and the bottom, but especially to the top -- of
creating such a fear. Thus, I felt that a "balancing statement" was called
for, and provided a statement that, IMO, accomplished that balance.
The issue is not trivial. We are talking here about the transition between
putting someone in "play fear" of being nothing less than murdered and putting
them in "real fear" of being nothing less than murdered (by torture, no less).
Furthermore, we're not just talking fear here. We're talking about a fear that
has intentionally been built to a level so intense that it has led to panicked
mindlessness. Any scrap of consent, or even rational thought, in the bottom's
mind is long gone.
Let's highlight this word: murder.
Let's highlight this phrase (for this thread is about nothing less):
intentionally inducing extreme, sincere fear of immediate murder.
Taking the original post in question at face value, this is about inducing in
the bottom an extreme, honest-to-God fear that they are "really" in immediate
danger of being murdered.
We're talking about totally convincing the bottom that this top truly intends
to murder them, right then, by torture.
Can doing so _ever_ be reasonable?
("Reasonable" meaning, that we as a community should be OK with this type of
behavior. That we as a community should defend this behavior against
criticism.)
Given the necessarily accompanying significant potential for long-term,
life-shattering consequences, for both participants and perhaps "collateral"
others -- bystanders, friends and family members, etc. -- and given that how
such a scene will turn out can never be foreseen with perfection, can
intentionally inducing fear _to_this_admittedly_exceptionally_extreme_degree_
ever be, under a risk/benefit analysis, reasonable?
Personally, I don't think so.
If you disagree, I'd like to see why you think so. What facts, and what
reasoning based on those facts, lead you to a different conclusion?
I'm being sincere. I really honestly would like to see how you reach the
opposite conclusion.
Folks, I have looked into the face of this monster, at _very_ close range, and
have seen it looking right straight back at me. My past is such that I have
many times seen, and occasionally done, the things people do when they have
entirely-too-good reason to fear that they are in immediate danger of being
murdered. Very typically, Bad Things (tm) happen. (Not to speak for them to
any signficant degree, but some of the other posters to this thread have had
similar experiences.)
I'm done with it. Please, God, let me be done with it. I've been there, I've
done that, and I've got the t-shirt. (Although in this case the t-shirt is in
fact my mostly unscarred, mostly unpunctured skin, containing within it a
somewhat damaged but still basically functional body and mind.)
I could _very_ happily go the rest of my life without feeling that degree of
fear again, and I certainly have no desire to make another person feel such
fear (even assuming that I could do so without putting myself at various
risks).
In the end, of course, this may all be ultimately decided in the Supreme Court
of Darwin.
Regards to all,
Jay Wiseman
For basic BDSM info and links to much more, particularly regarding the needs of
novice submissive women, visit my "submissive women kvetch" website at
http://members.aol.com/oldrope/index.htm To reply to this email, remove
"nospam" from my address.
DonSideB
(Sockermom9) writes:
>
>In fact, I can only use a gag when someone is around who knows how to reduce
>a
>dislocated jaw. It's hard to reduce it yourself, did you know that?
>
Just inject a small amount of local anesthetic into the joint space and wait a
few minutes. Then it gets real easy. Usually, they just slip back into place
themselves once the proprioceptors and sensory nerves in the tendons and
muscles get numb.
And, its a lot less likely you will snap off the condyle or damage the
cartilage that way.
--
don
Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech
(except to muzzle critics of the Congress for 60 days before an election.)
SSBB Diplomatic Corps: Tidewater Virginia
Jason Crowell
@kc99.rr.com says...
Maybe one of the inflatable butterfly gags? It doesn't hold the mouth
too far open, and its fairly effective (I have mild TMJ too, and a
sensitive gag reflex that my dentist has commented about), but damn that
Jennings looked so cool and so useful, I didn't know until it was too
late that it wasn't usable by me for more than a few minutes (not if I
wanted to speak for the next week...).
Hmm...butterfly gag under duct tape? That sounds fun...
I've also had some success with gag harnesses with SMALL ball gags (push
the ball in the mouth, tighten other straps to hold the mouth closed), I
believe I wore that for 30+ minutes once.
Oh, neat gag trick for the butterflies: Open the valve a tiny bit, so
that air *slowly* escapes, every few seconds, squeeze again to re-
inflate. It fills the mouth as well as, umm...some*one* might fill the
nether region, and that reinflating seems about like the spasms before a
man orgasms. Interesting sensation...
> moonlight
>
>
>
Anson
@aol.com says...
> foreign object. (Sheesh, on same days, I'm lucky if I can remember to
> wash my hands after I piss.)
The old joke goes something like this:
Two men are in a toilet urinating, one turns to leave as the other goes
to wash his hands. The hand washer looks at the other fellow and says
"At Harvard they teach us to wash our hands after a piss", the other
fellow replies "At Yale they teach us not to piss on our hands".
Anson
--
Living in New Zealand since 1964.
New Zealand BDSM Resources: http://whisper.co.nz
"Subspace", "Owned" and "Bound", books on D/S by Toya
http://whisper.co.nz/subspace
Asmodeus
news:oob3vvog6tmk21ne4...@4ax.com:
> I remember an exchange I had with Charles here several years ago now
> in which he demonstrated that *any* "hard limit" can be bent and
> twisted around and still not have the line crossed
Let me quote another a.s.b old-timer here. "I have no limits,
just unexplored territories." Roger Klorese. I'll respond to
Jay's article here in a minute.
--
Notice posted.
* This is not a peanut free zone!
* The use of adult beverages, tobacco products,
sugar, salt, caffeine, high fat foods and firearms
(when necessary) is encouraged on these premises.
* Jack-booted government thugs without warrants
will be shot upon entry.
Have a nice day :-)
-- Mark Renfro
Asmodeus
news:20031229185635...@mb-m22.aol.com:
> Oh shit. This is one of "those" posts. I really should know better
> than to rise to bait like this. I really should. (What did Eric Berne
> write about "second degree games" versus "third degree games"?) This
> is like that goddamn, never-ending "I don't allow my bottoms to use
> safe words" debate. Actually, I do know better than to respond, but
> sometimes my impulse control just isn't what it should be. Anyway....
First, just to make sure, you *do* know who I am, do you
not? And assuming that you do, whyever would you expect
anything "safe" from me? I'm older and yes, more extreme
and sadistic than I was years ago, but I have never been
part of the SSC crowd. Yawn, snore, wake me when you're
done, please.
> [I probably shouldn't get overly into this, but I have been in this
> exact space, meaning in the presence of a killer, in a real world
> sense, on too damn many occasions. I've been shot at, been slashed
> at, been held captive at gunpoint, and had knives held to my throat --
> all in the very "real world" sense of the matter. (I wonder if the
> original poster has.)
This also makes me wonder if you realize who I am--because
you would know, unless your memory was dim, that I have
indeed been in such positions, more than once.
> Anyway [shaking head to clear it, taking a deep breath] OK, so let me
> see if I get this straight. You want your bottom to be in
> honest-to-God, no-shit, really really real fear for their life. You
> want them in that brainstem-level "do anything to survive" mode, but
> with no power to do anything about it. You want them to believe, to
> be totally freakin' convinced, that there is good reason to conclude
> that you are about to not only simply kill them, but slowly and
> hideously torture them to death. OK, got it.
Yup. I do, and I have. I choose my bottoms carefully,
however, and rarely do scenes these days. Way too many
players out there who want to "play" at least for me.
> The thing is, you cannot ever be truly sure, no matter how physically
> helpless _you_think_ you've made them, that they indeed have no power
> to do anything their situation.
Oh Jay, Jay, Jay, dear Jay, you are so very mistaken.
What you go on to say is true, provided that I am not
in utter control and that the bottom does indeed have
a way to retaliate--but I'm not that sloppy. I've been
doing this for far too long.
> (There is the additional issue of creating a deep-seated and
> well-concealed -- after all, they believe their life depends upon such
> effective concealment -- desire for _vengance_ in the mind of the
> bottom, which means that no matter how happy, pleased, and so forth
> _they_seem_ once the play is over, very shortly after the restraints
> are removed and they can move freely then their previously perfectly
> concealed killing rage will surface and you will be immediately
> embarking on a new career as a corpse, perhaps a very bloody corpse.
Again, this *would* be true (take note of the modality
in the clause) if I just picked some guy up in a bar
without spending a long time screening him, etc. But
I look for masochists who are as seriously masochistic
as I am sadistic. That changes everything.
> Let's just say YKINMK.
That's always cool.
Again, you *do* know who I am, don't you?
--
"I practice the most successful form of martial art, the
art of Ching-Chang and am proficient in the forms of 1911
and SIG SAUER."
--Scout
Asmodeus
> What scares me is people who say
> things like "I saw this in a movie and it looked hot; now I want to do
> it."
Yeah, that scares me too. I also don't post very often on
the stuff that I do because I don't want somebody thinking
it would be neat to try that. What turns me on is one of
those "don't try this at home" kinda things. Don't you think
it's rather ironic that I'm also the person who insists that
nobody should top until they've got lots of experience on
the bottom?
--
"Complete, fully thought through, professional, well-executed
violence never leads to more violence because, you see,
afterwards, the other guys are all dead. That's right, dead.
Not 'on trial,' not 'reeducated,' not 'nurtured back into the
bosom of love.' Dead. D-E-A-D. Well, you get the idea."
-- USMC General Hawley
StormWolf
>Let's highlight this word: murder.
Ok.
>Let's highlight this phrase (for this thread is about nothing less):
>intentionally inducing extreme, sincere fear of immediate murder.
Yes.
>Taking the original post in question at face value, this is about inducing in
>the bottom an extreme, honest-to-God fear that they are "really" in immediate
>danger of being murdered.
Repeating it isn't chaging it much.
>We're talking about totally convincing the bottom that this top truly intends
>to murder them, right then, by torture.
>
>Can doing so _ever_ be reasonable?
>("Reasonable" meaning, that we as a community should be OK with this type of
>behavior. That we as a community should defend this behavior against
>criticism.)
The "community" has no place in my bedroom, thank you, nor in telling
me what I can or cannot do once I've evaluated the risk. It's my
decidion and my top's decision. The rest of the community can, if they
choose, opt for ostracizing the participants, using them as bad
examples, and any one of a host of other things to get across that the
*community* doesn't approve.
However, the community has no right to stop actions that I and my
partner may or may not discuss or engage in. You're approaching it
from a community standpoint and a good many respondants are
approaching it from a personal one.
Quite frankly, I refuse to let a "community" tell me what I should
choose to support or not support, nor do I let it speak for me or tell
me what my opinions on things should be...therefore the "community" is
only a structure that is limited in scope and usefulness.
You do realize that this is the same rationalization that's used
against all edgeplaying and heavy SM, yes? That goring my ox opens the
door for your own to be similarly gored by other sections of the
community...and outsiders as well?
>Given the necessarily accompanying significant potential for long-term,
>life-shattering consequences, for both participants and perhaps "collateral"
>others -- bystanders, friends and family members, etc. -- and given that how
>such a scene will turn out can never be foreseen with perfection, can
>intentionally inducing fear _to_this_admittedly_exceptionally_extreme_degree_
>ever be, under a risk/benefit analysis, reasonable?
IMO, yes.
>Personally, I don't think so.
That's been obvious from the start. Fortunately, you don't speak for
everyone, nor do you get to make the rules.
>If you disagree, I'd like to see why you think so. What facts, and what
>reasoning based on those facts, lead you to a different conclusion?
I have the right to choose what I wish to do with my life. I have the
right to accept or deny whatever play style I choose. I have the right
to consent to that behavior which I accept and reject that behavior
which I don't.
What other reasoning do I need? I have no children that I have to
support, my family ties are minimal and I doubt I would engage in any
such thing before my parents had passed because it would distress
them. Beyond that, there are very few things I need worry about.
>I'm being sincere. I really honestly would like to see how you reach the
>opposite conclusion.
Because I am a rational, thinking person that is able to distinguish
what I need from what others may need. And I know that I may reach a
conclusion that they don't agree with.
If you think we all draw the same conclusions from the same data set,
I'll refer you to gun control, abortion, religion, or politics that
have been engaged in here on SSB within the last several months.
Implying that people that don't reach the same conclusion as you are
not reasonable is just plain silly and I would expect better from you
than that.
>Folks, I have looked into the face of this monster, at _very_ close range, and
>have seen it looking right straight back at me. My past is such that I have
>many times seen, and occasionally done, the things people do when they have
>entirely-too-good reason to fear that they are in immediate danger of being
>murdered. Very typically, Bad Things (tm) happen. (Not to speak for them to
>any signficant degree, but some of the other posters to this thread have had
>similar experiences.)
You assume that the people talking about engaging in this type of
scene haven't shared that experience? That's pretty damned arrogant.
>I'm done with it. Please, God, let me be done with it. I've been there, I've
>done that, and I've got the t-shirt. (Although in this case the t-shirt is in
>fact my mostly unscarred, mostly unpunctured skin, containing within it a
>somewhat damaged but still basically functional body and mind.)
>
>I could _very_ happily go the rest of my life without feeling that degree of
>fear again, and I certainly have no desire to make another person feel such
>fear (even assuming that I could do so without putting myself at various
>risks).
Can you quit with the histrionics, hand-waving, been there done that,
father knows best attitude these last three paragraphs are engaging
in? It's not helping things.
>In the end, of course, this may all be ultimately decided in the Supreme Court
>of Darwin.
Nice. Very nice. How's it feel to wear the YKINOK shirt? Does the
hair feel nice? After all, you're only trying to protect the innocent,
right?
moonlight
StormWolf
<asmo...@removeinsightbb.com> wrote:
>StormWolf <moonl...@kc99.rr.com> wrote in
>news:oob3vvog6tmk21ne4...@4ax.com:
>
>> I remember an exchange I had with Charles here several years ago now
>> in which he demonstrated that *any* "hard limit" can be bent and
>> twisted around and still not have the line crossed
>
>Let me quote another a.s.b old-timer here. "I have no limits,
>just unexplored territories." Roger Klorese. I'll respond to
>Jay's article here in a minute.
Oooh...nice. :) I suspect it was before my time. :(
moonlight
StormWolf
wrote:
>Maybe one of the inflatable butterfly gags? It doesn't hold the mouth
>too far open, and its fairly effective (I have mild TMJ too, and a
>sensitive gag reflex that my dentist has commented about), but damn that
>Jennings looked so cool and so useful, I didn't know until it was too
>late that it wasn't usable by me for more than a few minutes (not if I
>wanted to speak for the next week...).
That might be a possibility. I know for a fact that ring gags, ball
gags, and other hard insertable types are a *real* problem for me. I
can navigate a cloth with a knot tied in it unless the knot's
absolutely huge so that might be an option. Thank you. :)
>Hmm...butterfly gag under duct tape? That sounds fun...
Oooooooh...nice.
>I've also had some success with gag harnesses with SMALL ball gags (push
>the ball in the mouth, tighten other straps to hold the mouth closed), I
>believe I wore that for 30+ minutes once.
I'm not sure about this type. It's possible with a small enough ball
it would be no worse than the knotted cloth. Definitely some ideas to
try.
>Oh, neat gag trick for the butterflies: Open the valve a tiny bit, so
>that air *slowly* escapes, every few seconds, squeeze again to re-
>inflate. It fills the mouth as well as, umm...some*one* might fill the
>nether region, and that reinflating seems about like the spasms before a
>man orgasms. Interesting sensation...
*grins* I may have to try to find one of these....
moonlight
John Warren
news:MPG.1a5cb1116...@news.paradise.net.nz...
> In article <8eaf046f.03123...@posting.google.com>, rapture410
> @aol.com says...
> > foreign object. (Sheesh, on same days, I'm lucky if I can remember to
> > wash my hands after I piss.)
>
> The old joke goes something like this:
>
> Two men are in a toilet urinating, one turns to leave as the other goes
> to wash his hands. The hand washer looks at the other fellow and says
> "At Harvard they teach us to wash our hands after a piss", the other
> fellow replies "At Yale they teach us not to piss on our hands".
>
> Anson
At John Hopkins they taught us that piss was generally sterile so it didn't
matter.
Dave
"Jason Crowell" <jas...@iquest.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a5bb212...@news.comcast.giganews.com...
O.K., I'm curious now. What's a 'butterfly' gag? Thanks.
Asmodeus
news:d1t3vvs9mh5cgg43o...@4ax.com:
> Oooh...nice. :) I suspect it was before my time. :(
If you don't recognize Roger's name, yes. It was before
ssbb. Roger was the creator and maintainer of queernet,
to which we non-het folks retired from a.s.b after too
many "please put GAY in the subject line!" and "die
faggots!" postings.
My, but that was a few years ago ...
Sockermom9
>Yep. I have TMJ. It's evil. No gags that hold the mouth open,
>thenkyewverymuch. :(
>
>Now...if you wanna talk duct tape...
I'm the ultimate double-whammy. I have both TMJ and bad sinuses. Wearing a
gag can go from fun to breath-control play very quickly, which is a lovely
segue back to the fear thing, don't you think? Actually I prefer any breath
control be something my top chooses to do, rather than something nature imposes
on me.
Lynn
Sockermom9
>I've also had some success with gag harnesses with SMALL ball gags (push
>the ball in the mouth, tighten other straps to hold the mouth closed), I
>believe I wore that for 30+ minutes once.
There's a blindfold out there that uses a strap under the chin to hold
everything firm. You can open your mouth, but not very far, so a small bit of
foam might be just the ticket. Now I just have to find the darn blindfold
somewhere besides someone else's toybag.
Lynn
StormWolf
<asmo...@removeinsightbb.com> wrote:
>If you don't recognize Roger's name, yes. It was before
>ssbb. Roger was the creator and maintainer of queernet,
>to which we non-het folks retired from a.s.b after too
>many "please put GAY in the subject line!" and "die
>faggots!" postings.
>
>My, but that was a few years ago ...
I can't remember when I first started posting. I think I started
reading in 89 or 90. My non-anon postings I've got going back to
about 1993. The others are lost in the wastes of time gone by.
Which is probably for the best, all things considered. :/
moonlight
StormWolf
>I'm the ultimate double-whammy. I have both TMJ and bad sinuses. Wearing a
>gag can go from fun to breath-control play very quickly, which is a lovely
>segue back to the fear thing, don't you think? Actually I prefer any breath
>control be something my top chooses to do, rather than something nature imposes
>on me.
Yeah...the minute my nose starts running, I'm all done for with the
gags. Soon I'll be too stuffed up to breathe through my nose. God
forbid that happens at the same time the allergy meds wear off.
I'll have to agree with you. Bottoming to allergens is evil. Much
nicer to have an actual touch doing something like choking off your
air. ;)
moonlight
Sockermom9
>Just inject a small amount of local anesthetic into the joint space and wait
>a
>few minutes. Then it gets real easy. Usually, they just slip back into place
>themselves once the proprioceptors and sensory nerves in the tendons and
>muscles get numb.
Er, the odds of my having a shot of novacaine around when my jaw lislocates are
slim. Besides, shooting myself up with the stuff is even harder than reducing
the dislocation myself.
>And, its a lot less likely you will snap off the condyle or damage the
>cartilage that way.
Yeah, I know I shouldn't be doing it myself. But $95 a pop (you should pardon
the pun) was getting silly.
Lynn
Sockermom9
>Can I see an instance where I *would* get off in the hands of John
>Wayne Gacy? Yes. Am I realistic enough to know that it would be a one
>time blowout event with a huge permanence level that I'm not willing
>to walk into at this point in my life? Yes. Can I see a time when
>that might not be the case? Yes.
Well, the minute they tell me I have two months to live, I'll get a second
opinion and have them repeat the tests, and then I'm off to shop for just the
right top, and I'll pick him because he'll have an alibi that'll stand up and a
great lawyer.
>I'm quite certain that it frightens a goodly number of people that
>there are people involved in the leather community that might like to
>go out in a blaze of tortured glory. ANd that there are many that find
>it baffling.
Well, if one must go out, rather a blaze of glory than the alternative.
>The two are not mutually exclusive. I'm going to assume that you don't
>always follow the same routine when you play....37 strokes with a
>deerhide flogger, 14 pops with a singletail, move on to three songs
>worth of sjambok strokes and then finish up with a fuck.
ROFL! I can take the fuck or leave it, though.
>>I try to play with reasonably sane people.
>
>Define reasonably sane. Can you predict that you won't stumble over
>something accidentally that will push someone so far the have a panic
>reaction that causes a break with reality?
In the above exchange, I was thinking as a bottom. As a top, I'm too wimpy to
worry, and besides, as long as the weapon is in *my* hand, I think my skills
are up to it.
>You can control yourself. You can't control the drunk driver that
>careens around a corner. Or someone that decides (from a dead stop)
>that they can make it across the street before you get to them.
Sheeit, when have you driven through my neighborhood?
The point is, I actively avoid risks.I reduce them, because the only sort of
fear I get off on is fear that I know I will survive. If I honestly thought a
top was going to kill me--or anyone else--they'd be off my list of potential
partners and I'd keep my eyes on them. And yes, I'd be willing to testify in
court.
Lynn
SilverOz
StormWolf <moonl...@kc99.rr.com> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure about this type. It's possible with a small enough ball
> it would be no worse than the knotted cloth. Definitely some ideas to
> try.
I've found that a golf practice ball - whiffleball - on a stalk works.
basically you take a small diameter bolt and some nuts. poke bolt
through ball, and use nut to old the ball to the end of the bolt.
Then poke the other end of the bolt through a strap, hold there with a
nut on either side. Sop now you have a strap, with the ball on a
stalk. Ball goes all the way inside mouth. The strap doesn't have to
be tight, so doesn't pinch the corners of the mouth.
Probably best to put aquarium tube or similar over the bolt so the teeth
don't bite metal.
This puts the ball all the way inside the mouth. You can close your
mouth to the point you are biting on bolt-and-tube, as the bolt can be
quite thin, this doesn't open the mouth much. As the ball is mostly
holes, you can breathe through it, and it squashes some.
You can adjust the length of bolt between strap and ball to avoid gag
reflex.
SilverOz
Binder
> Binder <binder...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<bsqn2n$f0i1$1...@ID-217865.news.uni-berlin.de>...
>
>
>>I suspect so. I do do woowoo shit, and there's a substantial difference
>>between the energy transfer in play and that in the spiritual realms.
>>The former is far more intentional, for one thing, and of a different
>>means of exchange. The woowoo shit is far more mondirectional, while in
>>play it seems to me that it's much more "broadcast", where all parties
>>involved feed the charge.
>>
>>None of which makes a great deal of sense. You may take my word for it,
>>if you like.
>
>
> Ok... I'm lost. What are you guys talking about anyway?
Spiritual power exchange versus BDSMistic power exchange.
StormWolf
>Well, the minute they tell me I have two months to live, I'll get a second
>opinion and have them repeat the tests, and then I'm off to shop for just the
>right top, and I'll pick him because he'll have an alibi that'll stand up and a
>great lawyer.
Sounds about right. :) I'm skeptical of the "2 months to live" thing
as a general rule, but if I can verify it beyond a shadow of a
doubt...
>ROFL! I can take the fuck or leave it, though.
*heh* I process stuff through my sexuality, so it's generally a part.
Still, I'm sure you've seen stuff like that. :)
>Sheeit, when have you driven through my neighborhood?
*heh* Wasn't your neighborhood. However, it may have been a neighbor
visiting. He was in a minivan (an Astro, I believe) and forgot he
wasn't in his California sports car and that the two have very
different take off. Got to right in front of my Tempo and I smacked
into his side door. Not a pleasant experience. Nearly totalled my car.
>The point is, I actively avoid risks.I reduce them, because the only sort of
>fear I get off on is fear that I know I will survive. If I honestly thought a
>top was going to kill me--or anyone else--they'd be off my list of potential
>partners and I'd keep my eyes on them. And yes, I'd be willing to testify in
>court.
I don't avoid them. I try to minimize them as much as possible, with
the realization that Shit Happens.
moonlight
The Evil Twin
out of it.
I like using fear as part of how I play. I can be scary, and it turns me on to
see that scared look. I don't want to scare someone so much that they think I am
some kind of psycho, and never want to play with me again. The chances of me
actually finding someone who likes that kind of play (going all out and trying
to make them as afraid as they can possibly get) are pretty remote, and I don't
want to take that chance on someone I *think* might be capable of handling it,
just on the off chance.
For a start, breaking people like that isn't fun for me. Secondly, there's a
limited amount of people in the scene here who will play with others outside of
their current relationships. If I "shat in my own nest" and fucked someone up,
word would get around pretty quickly and I'd have an even more limited number of
people to play with. Also, there's already a couple of people I know of who are
quite scary. I like them, and we have a chat on occassion, but I've also seen
the damage they have caused. But that's a matter for them, and the people who
decide to play with them.
Evil Twin
Jason Crowell
Explaining it is somewhat difficult. I hope you don't mind ASCII art.
Take a pump, valve and tube much like a blood pressure cuff...
/---\
/ \
Hand pump | |
| |
\ /
\___/
|
|
Valve |-0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Then you connect it to an inflatable rubber gag...
/-----\
/-------/ \-------\
| |
\--------\ /--------/
| |
/---/ \---\
| |
\-------------/
The two large side sections go between the teeth and the cheek, while
the small section goes behind the teeth. Very effective, and the
inflatable nature allows it to be quickly and easily adapted to people
with small mouths or large, or to be adjusted for severity, you can let
someone mumble, or with a couple of squeezes, silence them almost
completely, or also to cause the outer flaps to press uncomfortably
against the cheek.
Jason Crowell
@kc99.rr.com says...
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 16:03:11 -0500, Jason Crowell <jas...@iquest.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Maybe one of the inflatable butterfly gags? It doesn't hold the mouth
> >too far open, and its fairly effective (I have mild TMJ too, and a
> >sensitive gag reflex that my dentist has commented about), but damn that
> >Jennings looked so cool and so useful, I didn't know until it was too
> >late that it wasn't usable by me for more than a few minutes (not if I
> >wanted to speak for the next week...).
>
> That might be a possibility. I know for a fact that ring gags, ball
> gags, and other hard insertable types are a *real* problem for me. I
> can navigate a cloth with a knot tied in it unless the knot's
> absolutely huge so that might be an option. Thank you. :)
Happy to help. Or is it happy to hurt? Is there even a difference in
this case? 8-)
> >Hmm...butterfly gag under duct tape? That sounds fun...
>
> Oooooooh...nice.
>
> >I've also had some success with gag harnesses with SMALL ball gags (push
> >the ball in the mouth, tighten other straps to hold the mouth closed), I
> >believe I wore that for 30+ minutes once.
>
> I'm not sure about this type. It's possible with a small enough ball
> it would be no worse than the knotted cloth. Definitely some ideas to
> try.
Another one I had success with, a I've used a larger foam ball gag,
instead of the small red rubber ball harness. It compressed, but I
couldn't push it out, so I didn't get the jaw pain that a similar hard
rubber ball caused. I lost that ball gag, and I have only found
suppliers for the rubber ball gags, none of the foam gags. 8-(
StormWolf
wrote:
>Happy to help. Or is it happy to hurt? Is there even a difference in
>this case? 8-)
*lol* Six of one, half a dozen of the other. :)
>Another one I had success with, a I've used a larger foam ball gag,
>instead of the small red rubber ball harness. It compressed, but I
>couldn't push it out, so I didn't get the jaw pain that a similar hard
>rubber ball caused. I lost that ball gag, and I have only found
>suppliers for the rubber ball gags, none of the foam gags. 8-(
That's been a problem for me. Most of the ones I see are Doc Johnsons
which are all red rubber (I think.) It's been a while since I
checked, though so that may have changed. I gave up looking.
moonlight