Main Property Of Love Discussion

Collapse/Expand Topics

01:05:52 AM May 11th 2011
Someone added an analogy for why BDSM stories are rarely about BDSM. Then realized that there was already an analogy there, and deleted the old one that we could discuss it here if someone preferred the old analogy. Well, I do. :-)

The two analogies we now have to chose between are:

  • A) That BDSM stories usually aren't about people doing BDSM is for the same reason as why computer games are very rarely about people who play computer games.

  • B) (for the same reason that vanilla sex stories aren't usually about people pretending to have sex).

01:15:04 AM May 11th 2011
In my opinion, the advantages of A is that it's (1) more accurate and (2) also funnier. While the advantages of B is that it is (1) about sex and (2) that it's slightly shorter.

A1 and A2 are both strong advantages: Accuracy and fun are both central to TV Tropes.

Regarding A1, the accuracy issue: All BDSM play can be compared to be playing a game, while most BDSM can not be compared to pretending to do something you are not doing. Indeed, there are BDSM games where for example the dominant pretend to be a pirate and pretend to kidnap the the submissive (who pretend to be a princess or something). However, far from all BDSM contain such roleplaying.

B1 is a weak advantage: BDSM doesn't have to be about sex, and even if it did it wouldn't mean that the analogy would have to be.

B2 is a weak advantage for two reasons. First, A isn't overly long the way it is. Second, if we want to go with a slightly shorter analogy (and this might be a good idea) we could rephrase A to be in the same parenthesis format as B.
07:48:23 PM Oct 10th 2010
edited by RTanker
Cut this:
While unproblematically romantic if the owner is a woman and the owned one a man, this dynamic can come across as sexist and unbearably old-fashioned if the owner is a man and the owned is a woman. If they are both the same gender, it instead risks coming across as if the owner is "the man in the relationship" and vice versa.

Because seriously, is this a joke? Again, I mean this seriously: did someone just forget to link this quote to the The Unfair Sex page? Because if the above line was not meant as a joke, then it is insanely offensive.
02:33:06 AM Oct 11th 2010
Linking it to The Unfair Sex sounds like a good idea. But I'll also rephrase it before putting it back in. So I'll get back to it tomorrow or such.
Collapse/Expand Topics