Kaelah's Corner (May 2011): Therapy?

Today's topic is a very controversial one. As a matter of fact I assume that some readers might even be offended by the mere fact that I'm going to ask certain questions in this post. Mind you, my intention isn't to say that things are either this or that way. But I've made some observations and experiences in our community that made me wonder. And I've decided to share my thoughts with you and ask for your opinion.

I guess all of you have heard or read about stress-relief spankings, spanking for the purpose of releasing otherwise suppressed emotions, spankings that helped people to get rid of a bad mood and even spankings that worked as a kind of therapy against forms of chronic pain. And I assume that it is widely agreed in our community that many kinksters don't only use spanking as a part of their sexual play, but also, at least from time to time, for the one or other of the “therapeutic” purposes mentioned above.

But these aren't the forms of therapy I want to talk about today. So, what is today's post all about? Basically, it is about the question whether spanking and the frameworks of kinky relationships are used, much more often than one might assume at first sight, as a kind of self-therapy that helps people to cope with negative experiences, personal insecurities and even potentially damaging behaviour in a controlled manner. And secondly, it is about the question whether there is a significantly higher amount of people with certain forms of insecurities or a predisposition for certain forms of self-violating behaviour in our community compared to society as a whole.

The observations I am going to share with you touch completely different aspects of kink and our community. My intention is not to say that these aspects are in any way correlated with each other. And this is not about a moral judgement, either. However, all of these observations fed similar thoughts and questions. I'll share them with you one by one to show you what I'm talking about.

The first observation is one that I have made about kinky relationships, in the online community as well as in one of the local communities here in Munich. In both environments I've been confronted with many relationships that involve a permanent unidirectional power dynamics. I'm not only talking about kinky play here, I'm talking about concepts for a partnership as a whole.

A form that seems very common to me and which Ludwig has often come across at the local community is the daddy-girl dynamic. I'm well aware that many people only use that dynamic for role-play scenarios, but there also seem to be a lot of couples for whom this is a permanent part of their relationship. From my observation, these relationships tend to be between rather young women and men who usually are at least a few years older than their partner.

Several of the women I know who are in such a form of relationship admit that they don't feel like adults (yet) and that they are looking for someone to protect them and care for them. Someone who is older and wiser and can teach them things about life. And someone they can call whenever things are getting rough and who will, like a friend aptly called it, “jump in on his white horse, wearing his shining armor, and go to tilt at windmills”.

Ludwig has made the observation that, in his view, many of the women he knows from the local scene seem less self-reliant and less adult than the average women their age. Another observation we both made, when listening to stories about their background, is that many of the women seeking this form of daddy-girl relationship apparently did not have a caring father figure in their childhood and deeply missed that experience.

From my observation, there seem to be certain types of tops that are involved in daddy-girl relationships as well. I've got the impression that often the men in these relationships seem to seek not only the feeling of being loved, but also the feeling of being needed, of being looked up to and of being superior to their partner concerning life experience, knowledge and the like.

What makes me think even more about the question whether both parties use the power dynamics of their relationship to deal with certain insecurities is that I have seen women outgrow this form of relationship, which usually led to a split-up. While the women, from what I have seen, then usually looked for a more equal partnership, it seems to me like the men involved often found it more difficult to cope with the end of the relationship and tried to overcome the loss by looking for a new girl to care for.

Of course, the daddy-girl relationships are not the only ones with a permanent power dynamics like this. Forms of relationships which seem to be much more uncommon among our local friends, but about which I've read a lot in the online community are HOH (head of household), FLR (female led relationship) and 24/7 master-slave relationships. I don't have as much knowledge about the background of the people involved in these kinds of relationships, but what strikes me is that the submissives often describe certain similar-sounding needs.

Those are: the need for leadership in their lives, the need to be given rules and to be held accountable, the need to be helped with improving their behaviour and with getting rid of bad habits. What I've heard quite often as well is the wish to please their partner in return. I've read much less from people who are in charge in such a relationship, but it seems to me that what they seek often is caring for and helping another person, but also obedient behaviour and (unquestioning) submission from their partner. So, it seems to me that the power dynamics in these kinds of relationships are quite similar to the one in daddy-girl relationships.

What I'm asking myself is: Why do there seem to be so many relationships with that kind of power dynamics in our community? Does submission often go along with insecurities and the wish to give up a certain amount of responsibility for one's own daily life? Does dominance often go along with the wish to feel strong through caring for and having the obedience of another person? Or am I completely wrong about the power dynamics and the underlying motives of the kinds of relationships I've described? Maybe the truth lies somewhere in the middle?

Power dynamics in relationships are not the only thing that made me think, though. I have to admit that I have never read and heard as much about horrible experiences of real abuse during childhood / adolescence as in the kinky community. And I've never come across so many stories about, and evidence of, self-harming behaviour as I did here. In both cases, I have no idea whether this is just because we generally talk more openly about life experiences in our community or whether there is indeed a significantly higher number of people with bad experiences in our community than in the general population. The self-destructive behaviours I'm talking about are, for example, self-cutting or beating oneself up mentally with permanent feelings of guilt.

So, the question is: Is there a statistical correlation at all or is it just co-incidence? And can spanking be used in any way to deal with horrible memories or to control potentially self-harming tendencies? Furthermore, can spanking play also be dangerous in case someone has a tendency towards a certain form of self-harming behaviour? I know at least one woman who eventually interpreted her tendency of getting involved in increasingly dark play scenarios as a self-destructive pattern and then turned away from that form of play.

I've also come across some self-descriptions of tops that were quite similar and to me sounded like they somehow used spanking as a form of therapy. Basically, these tops admitted to having a kind of dark side, “inner demons” or an “inner werewolf” with which they dealt by letting it out in a controlled manner in their kinky play. I don't know how common this experience is (and I'm not sure how many people would admit to having made that experience), but I know at least two tops who described themselves this way...

So much for the diverse observations that made me wonder about possible common patterns. Of course, I thought about my own kink and possible motives for my personal fantasies as well and  I found the results quite revealing. I'm going to share them with you in another post.

For today I'd like to leave you with my different observations and these questions: Do therapeutic effects explain a (smaller or bigger) part of our spanking fantasies and the power dynamics of kinky relationships? If so, what are the advantages and possible risks? And, the certainly most controversial question of all: Could there be a statistical correlation between kinkiness and certain problematic character traits (like being easily stressed out, or even a tendency towards self-harm), negative experiences during childhood or adolescence, and / or feelings of insecurity? I don't think that anyone knows the ultimate truth about these questions, but I would very much like to hear about your personal experiences and thoughts.

Castle Schreckenstein

 (Castle Deuna in Thuringia - A drawing that comes

close to my mental image of Castle Schreckenstein.)

Today I would like to share a book excerpt with you that has had a major influence on my kink. It's from a German book series written by Oliver Hassencamp about a school for boys which is located in an old castle named “Schreckenstein” (“Horrorstone”). The boys call themselves knights and have decided to stick to the ideals of the former inhabitants of the castle: fairness, honesty and truthfulness. Their code includes not lying to anybody, not even the teachers, vouching for each other and neither drinking nor smoking, because these are habits that the knights consider lame.

The oldest and most merited boys form the “board of knights“. Their conferences are held in the old torture chamber of the castle. The board of knights is responsible for working out plans if the school faces some kind of trouble, but of course the boys also love to play pranks. The rules are that pranks are supposed to be creative fun and that no one should get hurt.

Castle Schreckenstein is located at a lake and across that lake, opposite to Schreckenstein, there is a girls school named “Rosenfels” (“Rosecliff”). The knights have a love-hate relationship with the girls and they enjoy playing pranks on each other. Sometimes the boys, girls and their teachers also meet officially, for example for lessons in what the boys call “moving cupboards”, which of course means dancing.

When Castle Schreckenstein has to be renovated, the boys are allowed to stay at Rosenfels with their teachers for the time being. Of course, this leads to the one or other strange or funny event. Then a problematic incident happens: A boy nicknamed “Steamroller” (because of his strength), a member of the board of knights, violates the code of honour. When the girls make fun of him, calling him “muscleman with a featherbrain”, Steamroller assumes that Stephan, another member of the board of knights, must have told them about this rarely used and hated second nickname of his. Angrily, he attacks Stephan and gives him a kick in front of the girls. In the evening, the board of knights meets in the barn to solve the issue.

I have translated the excerpt for you into English:

“Do you admit to having embarrassed us with your lack of self control?” asked “Midge” who acted as chairman. Steamroller nodded. Midge continued: “It is difficult enough for our headmaster to defend our special ways here at Rosenfels. Your misdemeanour redounds upon all of us.” Steamroller nodded again. Midge came to the conclusion: “Then let's begin with the torture.”

Under normal circumstances, a knight who had vialoted the code of hounour would have been sentenced to a ritual boxing match. It was an honour to be choosen as the opponent on such an occasion. The matches were only witnessed by the headmaster, the head boy and two seconds. The results weren't published. After the match the whole incident was always forgiven and forgotten.

At Rosenfels, a boxing match wasn't a valid option, though. The inevitable marks on the faces would have caught the girls' attention and they surely would have made fun of the boys in question. In addition to that, the strict headmistress of Rosenfels would probably have accused the headmaster of Schreckenstein of not managing to keep his boys from brawling.

That's why the knights had decided for a punishment on the bottom instead. Steamroller was about to receive 21 cane strokes on the bare, three from each of them. He leaned with his forehead on a pillar, his backside facing the judges. One by one Stephan, Ottokar, Andi, Klaus, Dieter, Hans-Jürgen and Midge stepped forward, took aim and diligently administered their strokes. Steamroller didn't make a sound.

"Hereby the incident is forgiven and forgotten", proclaimed Midge after the last stroke had been administered. "Forgiven and forgotten", repeated Steamroller the ritual formular and shook hands with everyone. His face looked like it were made of stone. After the ceremony he stormed outside and sat down in the snow. "For cooling down", he explained. The others had followed him. Suddenly they heard the sound of footsteps in the snow. An electric torch was lit and a female voice asked: "What's going on here? Have you killed one of you guys?"

It was Sonja [a young teacher at Rosenfels] and with her came Beatrix and Ingrid [two of the girls who witnessed Steamroller's attack earlier that day]. Klaus and Andi had stepped in front of Steamroller who jumped up and rearranged his clothes as quickly as possible. Meanwhile, Midge detracted the unexpected female guests by involving them in a conversation: "Actually, we thought about sleeping outside tonight", he said. "Oh, in that case we've got a warm blanket for you", answered his sister Ingrid and showed the puzzled knights something that must have been a frozen tablecloth but rather looked like a board, stiff as it was. "We forgot that one outside", Beatrix explained.

Suddenly Steamroller stepped forward: "And you expect us to believe that?" he asked. "Oh, my...", answered Ingrid, "I didn't know that the hot-tempered maharaja was here as well. What was wrong with you earlier?" - "He just reminded me of something...", said Stephan and changed the topic: "Why are we standing outside in the cold? Don't you like to come in?" "Okay", Sonja agreed, "but just until half past nine."

Steamroller ran ahead, put away the cane and positioned two raw wooden benches in front of the heater. The girls stepped in, followed by the knights. Steamroller fetched cups and a boiler and soon they were all sitting in front of the heater drinking hot bouillon. "What a great idea, Steamoller!" praised Ingrid. Steamroller smiled. Now his misdeed was truly forgiven and forgotton. [...] A while later, Steamroller also fetched some soft blankets. "How mindful of you", remarked Ingrid. Steamroller folded the blankets and made sure that he was sitting on a soft pad as well. The other knights understood his act of courtesy only too well...

What I love about this scene is that it is consensual, taking the spanking is a matter of honour, there is a lot of ritual, the reactions are very restrained, there is no talking-off and no humiliation and no hard feelings afterwards. Everything stays among the people involved and afterwards, the misdeed is forgiven and forgotten. The other knights even defend Steamroller in front of the girls.

I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of this spanking, though, because the feeling of having let the others down would be horrible and not sexy at all. But in the role of an observer, I find this scenario very intriguing indeed. Of course, I would have loved to go to school at Schreckenstein, anyway, being the only girl among the knights, living with them as an accepted member of their community, playing pranks and proudly defending their code of honour.

The combination of a kinky scene that had all the ingredients that turn me on with an environment which I felt drawn to and characters whom I loved was a thrilling find. Even today, I very rarely read or watch any kinky scenes that touch me in the way this little excerpt did. Although I had to smile a bit, when I re-read the scene for the translation after so many years, because I thought: That was it? Such a short description without any explicit details?

Speaking of explicit details: Unfortunately I know that a scene like that will most probably never be captured on video. Pandora is already struggling to find two male spanking models who are interested in making a M/M scene for her upcoming site. (Go, Pandora!) Unfortunately I am not able to help out (that's the irony, I can help with every spanking constellation except for the one I'm most interested in as a viewer). And I assume the chances for a scene with so many sweet guys are rather low.

Well, sometimes only having a written description of a great scene also has its advantages! One can visualize the scenario the way one prefers. When I was younger, the scene which I have just shared with you was one I definitely imagined very often and very vividly. It has influenced my kink to this day.

The Bubble of Viewer Fantasy

There was one interesting point that came up during a comment debate on Zille Defeu's blog a while ago, which I would like to raise again today. I think it deserves a post of its own and I would like to hear your opinions. In a nutshell, the question is: if a spanking video viewer has the fantasy (or rather, the belief) that models are suffering real, i.e. non-consensual abuse at spanking video shoots, and if he gets off on that idea, does the producer then have an obligation to leave that belief in place, to not destroy the hot fantasy? Or does the producer have an obligation to speak up and dispel such ideas because they give entirely the wrong impression about the industry?

The answer seems obvious to me, but I don't want to get ahead of myself. Let me start by recounting how the issue came up. In a response to Zille's question What do YOU want from spanking porn?, a commenter with a tears fetish complained that there wasn't enough crying in spanking videos (has he seen any Eastern European stuff?). He theorised that "most spanking models don't want to cry because they are too in control" and suggested that they should be made to cry "whether they like it or not", perhaps with the help of onions. "Of course, the best route is to find newbie models that are nervous and can't control themselves once they realize just how much it hurts and how little prepared they were."

Kaelah and I replied that forcing models to show reactions with which they are obviously not comfortable and taking advantage of the inexperience of newbies is borderline abusive, if not outright abusive. To be fair, the commenter later modified / clarified his positon: "I am not talking about forcing someone to do something they don’t want to do." But this was not apparent in the beginning, and instead of going over the whole boring discussion again, I would like to focus on something Zille wrote after the initial exchange of comments:

"[T]he consumers deserve to have their fantasies about the porn industry left in place. [...] Many porn sites exist within a fantasy bubble. Take the idea, for instance, that 'just a normal guy' gets a camera and a van and drives around getting girls to have sex with him in the van, while he takes pictures of them in action. Is he really picking a girl up off the street — hell no. He’s advertised for the models, and the 'pick up' is acted. (Sorry if I have just busted anyone’s bubble, there!) The thing is, while this would be reprehensible in real life (or at least, would lead to a good deal of STDs — the nice thing about finding real models is that they have all their tests done!), the fantasy that this is 'real' is what is working for the customers of the porn he makes. And without that delicate bubble being maintained, the site looses most of its potency."

 

"As a model, I need to know I’m being taken care of, and I will only work with producers who will be ethical. [...] But customers don’t have those details to worry about (unless they want to) and it shouldn’t be forced on them. None of us can help what turns us on. If [a customer] likes thinking about shoots that are possibly less consensual than they ought to be, that’s his right, and he never needs to have reality get in the way of that. As makers of porn, we DO have to worry about it. He doesn’t."

Now, before we go on, I think we should be very careful to distinguish between what is fantasy and what is reality. Zille is certainly right when she writes: "None of us can help what turns us on." I have never criticised anyone for their erotic fantasies. You can fantasise about the sickest, vilest, most sadistic, most abusive acts imaginable, it's all good as far as I'm concerned (I have some pretty vile fantasies myself). There are no immoral fantasies, there are only immoral actions.

But that is the point: you should, of course, be able to distinguish between fantasy and reality. And you should, of course, understand that while issues of morality don't apply to fantasies, they do apply to actions in the real world.

If a spanking video viewer wants to fantasise about shoots "that are possibly less consensual than they ought to be", knowing that this is a mere fantasy and that nothing of the sort is really happening at spanking video shoots, then that is perfectly fine with me. But I don't think that this is what Zille was talking about. The way I read her, she was talking about viewers who really believe that shoots aren't consensual, and about how their "fantasy bubble" has to be left in place in order not to ruin that precious fantasy.

This is where I disagree with her. The point is that this kind of "fantasy" is not a mere fantasy anymore, it is a belief - a belief about what goes on in the spanking video industry in the real world. And if someone voices such a belief publicly, or the suggestion that this is how things should really be done, then I as someone who has many friends in the spanking video industry and who has occasionally starred in spanking videos himself feel the need to speak up.

Why? Why not just let people believe what they want to believe? Where is the harm? They aren't hurting anyone, they are not porn producers, they are just viewers... So why the need to confront them with reality? This is the position Zille was taking. But in my opinion, she is missing one very important point. If people voice the belief that spanking video shoots aren't consensual, and if we endorse this belief (either quietly, by not saying anything to dispel it, or worse, by active encouragement), then we are creating the impression

1) that this is really going on at spanking video shoots, and

2) that we consider it acceptable that this is going on at spanking video shoots

Sorry, but that is not an image I want to create, and it is not the kind of industry I as a performer would want to be associated with. So, not only do I not feel any obligation to leave intact viewer “fantasies” about real abuse taking place at spanking video shoots. I feel an obligation to speak up against them. I would say to anyone who harbours them: “Look, dude, you can fantasise all you want, but here you are talking about the real world, and this is just not how things work in the real world.”

If we as makers of spanking porn fail to dispel publicly uttered beliefs about shoots that are "less consensual than they ought to be", how are we going to defend ourselves against the anti-porn prudes who claim that all porn is inherently immoral and abusive, anyway?

I also disagree with the view that porn consumers don't have to worry about the reality of the industry. I believe that consumers have an obligation to worry about whether the products they buy are produced in an ethical manner or not. This applies to cosmetics and animal experiments, clothes and child labour - and to pornography and how it is made.

I know that Zille has shot with producers like Pandora Blake and that she is very keen on the whole ethical porn / fair trade porn concept. So I was surprised by her stance in this discussion. Then again, I might be reading too much into her comment. Perhaps I am misinterpreting what, exactly, she was trying to say. Or perhaps she was simply trying to calm down the discussion, trying to keep the two verbose Germans from hijacking the thread further and further from its original purpose!

In any case, I do believe that the necessity and the benefit of educating people about the spanking porn industry and about the fact that we strive to operate in an ethical manner outweighs the sacrifice of potentially bursting a few "fantasy bubbles". The pragmatic question I ask myself in this context is: how many people really believe in the fantasy bubble nonsense, anyway? How many people actually believe that there is a guy, driving around in his car, picking up regular girls from the street who spontaneously and enthusiastically agree to make a porn video with him? How many people actually believe (to name another fluffy story, one that I have seen on a spanking site) that a spanking model "misbehaved" at a video shoot and was then promptly and seriously punished by the producer, with the cameras running, of course?

If you are ready to believe any of these stories, then... Sorry, sir, but you are an idiot! And you could perhaps benefit from a little refresher in common sense and in how real people behave in the real world. Don't be insulted. It might save you from a few slaps in the face, in case you were contemplating driving around in your car, looking for random girls to shoot porn videos with...

But my guess is that there are only very, very few people who believe such stories, anyway. I believe (I hope, at least!) that the vast majority of spanking video viewers is quite capable of telling fantasy from reality, telling a porn site's advertising shtick from what is really going on at shoots. Doesn't diminish their enjoyment of the videos one bit. The spankings are real, the pain is real, the marks on the bottoms are real, and that is the main thing. The fact that there isn't any real, i.e. non-consensual abuse, that everything is agreed on between the performers, is a cause of reaussurance for the majority of viewers, not a cause of disappointment.

Look at professional wrestling. Everyone knows that it is a pre-arranged spectacle rather than a true sport, that the outcomes of the matches are fixed, that the moves are chereographed in advance, that the wrestlers don't really hate each other, that the "feuds" between them are just stories. And still, there are millions of fans who watch it. Because they can still go into that fantasy world and be excited and entertained by it, despite knowing the reality. People are entertained by horror films and action films, too, while understanding perfectly well that they do not depict real events.

Anyway, that is my take on it. But I am really interested in your opinions. How important is the viewer "fantasy bubble"? Does it have to be left in place when it concerns beliefs about what is really going on at spanking video shoots? Or do we have to burst it and make clear how things really work? Am I being naive when I claim that no one believes in ludicrous "regular guy picks up girls for porn videos" stories, anyway? Am I over-optimistic when I posit that 99% of the viewing public understand what is real and what isn't? Let me know your thoughts.

Am I a Masochist?

Do you remember when I told you that I wouldn't participate in any online discussions for a while? Well, how long did that resolution last? Hmm, maybe two weeks? But it wasn't my fault! You really can't blame me for the fact that Erica Scott writes such thought-provoking posts, can you? Luckily, this time the discussion was one of the interesting and absolutely positive ones. Because Erica has two clear rules on her blog: 1) Different opinions are always welcome. 2) Flame wars and rudeness towards other commenters are prohibited.

So, what was the discussion all about? It was about the definition of the word masochism and the question whether any of the readers consider themselves masochists. Most of the commenters agreed with Erica that they weren't masochists. In short, there were three main arguments for that point of view: 1) People who don't like to play very hard (= seek a high amount of pain) aren't masochistic. 2) Spanking is more about the headspace and the fantasies than about the pain for most people, so these spankees aren't real masochists. 3) A masochist would seek any form of pain at any time, the more the better. So, people who don't like pain in certain areas of their bodies (i.e. have no-play areas, like for example the breasts or the feet) and who hate forms of pain that don't have to do with spanking (like headaches) aren't masochistic.

There were different definitions and points of view, too, among them one that resonated very well with my definition, but they were the minority. In addition to masochism, other terms came up as well in the discussion like submission and bottom. Interestingly, many of the commenters seemed to have less issues with the term submissive, the term I always had the biggest issues with, while masochist seemed to have a very negative connotation for some of them. Some comments about more severe forms of play occurred, for example about these "masochistic" Russian girls who participate in the more severe films, about pictures of more severe marks that had scared some of the commenters and about possible risks of more severe play without a proper warm-up.

The comments weren't offensive, but they showed fears that were connected with more severe play. Obviously, for some commenters, the term masochism described a dangerous form of pain-seeking which showed in very severe and therefore possibly damaging forms of spanking play. Being someone who had issues with severe play myself and who has now made positive experiences with this form of play, I decided to enter the discussion and share some of my thoughts with the other readers.

I started with an overview of my definitions for the different terms that had been mentioned in the discussion:

First of all, I would like to distinguish between pathological sadism and affectionate erotic sadism. The former is the kind of sadism that for example some killers and rapists are diagnosed with. It's a mental dysfunction based on the fact that these people aren't able to feel any compassion and therefore enjoy torturing others. Of course, this is NOT what we are talking about in the context of erotic spanking at all! My definition for the erotic form of sadism is: An erotic sadist is someone who enjoys inflicting pain in a consensual (erotic) setting. Usually this goes along with affection for the “victim”.

I'm not sure whether there are two forms of masochism as well. Maybe one could say that the mental dysfunction that makes some people who feel completely numb need pain regularly in order to feel alive at all is a form of masochism, too. Again, this is not the form of masochism that plays a role in spanking play. My definition for the erotic form of masochism is: An erotic masochist is someone who enjoys receiving pain in a consensual (erotic) setting.

Given those two definitions, I consider myself to be both, a masochist and a sadist. Like Erica, I don't enjoy any form of non-erotic pain like headaches. I only play with people I trust, I usually prefer a certain amount of pain only and a warm-up, I've got certain no-spanking areas, I only enjoy the pain in combination with certain fantasies and so on. But still I think that I am a masochist because at least in combination with some of my fantasies mere love-taps don't do it for me (that was a point that had been made by another commenter, too). And I'm a sadist as well because when I switch I enjoy inflicting pain on someone who enjoys receiving it.

Concerning submission and domination: For me the former means that someone enjoys being controlled by another person (and giving in to that control) and the latter means to enjoy controlling another person. Concerning erotic play of course consent, respecting limits and so on are the framework for this power dynamics. I don't consider myself submissive or dominant in the context of my relationship or in the context of spanking play in general. But there are very special play scenarios (with my partner only) in which I can enjoy being submissive or being dominant.

And, last but not least: Top and bottom. For me, these terms only say something about the side on which someone likes to play. In my definition a bottom simply is someone who enjoys to be on the receiving end of a spanking (for whatever reason) and a top someone who enjoys being on the giving end. A switch enjoys both positions. According to that definition I'm a switch with a higher preference for playing on the bottom side.

I added a few words about severe play and health as well which I don't want to repeat here, as you all now my stance on that point. In case you don't, you can read more about my experiences in my recent post Healthy Severity. I also wrote a few sentences about how I see the connection between more severe forms of play and masochism. I would like to share those with you as well:

I am into more severe play from time to time and I know several people who are. Some of them have also made severe spanking films (for example for Lupus Pictures). But most of the people I know don't enjoy the pain during such a severe spanking at all, it's either about flying afterwards or about the experience of letting go.

As you know, I neither fly after a severe scene nor do I want to let go. For me it's all about my heroine fantasies and about combining both, a challenge and healthy play. While I can enjoy lighter forms of pain, though, the pain during a severe scene isn't enjoyable for me at all. When everything goes well, it's bearable, but joy is something different...

So, I would love to hear your definitions of the different terms! What do or don't you consider yourself to be? Have you got issues with any of the terms? And what do you think: Are people who play harder (from time to time) also the bigger masochists? Please feel free to share your thoughts in the comment section!

The Stupid, It Hurts!

To start off the sunny cheerful month of May on this blog (at least it's sunny and cheerful where I live), here is an anecdote I recently heard from a friend from the local German BDSM scene. It's one of those stories that are hard to believe, but I consider it believable because the source is reliable and not known for making things up.

The source is a young woman who is into CP (as a bottom) and into more sexual forms of kinky play as well, and she likes to mix the two. She is also single at the moment and plays with many different people. (Before anyone asks, I never played with her myself. Kaelah and I only play with others during movie-making.) So, she was doing a classical "master, slave" scenario with a top she had met. They had played one or two times before and this was the first time when explicitly sexual activities were on the menu in addition to the CP. My friend wanted to take that step out of curiosity, even though by her own account, she already knew that no deeper relationship would develop with this particular top. He was basically a nice guy, but a little too self-important and too serious about the whole "master, slave" thing for her taste. One of the "I am Lord Sir Master Domly McDomlyson!" types. Still, why not do some sexual play with him. My friend felt attracted and excited enough for that.

They start the scenario, he whips her for a while and then he decides that he wants her to kneel down and give him a blowjob. No surprises so far, given how popular blowjobs are with the male population in general and toppy guys in particular. My friend does her best, which I am told is very good indeed, because she really enjoys the practice of fellatio. The only problem was, she seemed to be enjoying it a tad too much in the view of this particular master. Hey, this was supposed to be uncomfortable for the slave! A punishment, not a pleasure ride! He tried to think of something that would make things more uncomfortable for her.

So, here comes the good part. The guy goes to the kitchen (they were playing at his place) and, believe it or not, he puts chili on his penis. (It occurs to me that I never asked my friend whether it was chili sauce or chili powder. I was too busy laughing. In any case, it apparently was some really hot stuff, where you only need a tiny bit on your food and you already have a very spicy dish.) His thinking was that the hot chili would make the blowjob a more painful experience for her. He seemed oblivious to the fact that it would affect his penis in just the same way...

Needless to say, the play session came to a rather abrupt end. My friend, kneeling on the floor and patiently waiting for her man to return, just heard a scream of anguish from the kitchen, followed by wild curses. Alarmed, she ran over and discovered The Master in a rather undignified pose, frantically trying to wash the chili off his dick. She helped him (no, not with her mouth!) and it took a while for things to settle down again. I think they even tried pouring milk over the dick because it is supposed to neutralise the spice more effectively than water.

My friend was very polite about it all, which is to say, she only burst out laughing after she had left. Still, the guy has not called her since and has not expressed interest in any new play sessions. He is just too embarrassed. Well, it serves him right. I mean, good lord, how stupid can you be? I have a hard time feeling compassion when people inflict misfortune on themselves in such a staggeringly idiotic way. On the contrary, I admit to feeling a good amount of schadenfreude, all the more so because it hit one of those self-inflated "Lord Sir Master Domly McDomlyson" types. Har har!

(Sadly, I can not take credit for the wonderful "Lord Sir Master Domly McDomlyson" quip. Pandora Blake came up with that one in an older post of hers, and I loved it so much that I have remembered it ever since.)