has pretty much answered the original question:
Originally Posted by NeonKaos
The moderators discussed this and we agree that if there were BDSM or furries or what-have-you ASKING for a section of the forum where they could discuss their special issues as pertains to polyamory, that would be a stronger argument than creating a separate section to corral those types of threads just because some people are sick of seeing it come up in situations every so often.
However, we are long overdue for a conference with Olivier (the owner, who doesn't really participate in the discussion threads) and we plan to ask him if he would like to create a sub-forum (no pun intended) for any type of alternative lifestyle + poly, should people of like-mind choose to use that to mingle with each other. This is not something we are empowered to do without explicit permission from him.
Also, we do not expect this to happen before the forum software upgrade, which went into "testing" almost a year ago IIRC, and is supposed to have a section where people can be in more control over their own blogs.
(i.e. It's an idea worth considering but the change can't be made yet, for reasons outside the moderators' control.)
It only remains for me to clarify my stand:
a) If I gave the idea that I'm "sick of seeing it come up in situations every so often"
, then I apologise. Different strokes for different folks. I may not understand
, but I'm not sickened.
b) A problem I do
have (and I may be pretty much an exceptional case here) is that because I'm new to this whole topic (as
a topic), because I live very much back-water and don't get to Internet often, a LOT
of the terminology is confusing (this means that I don't know the hell what people are talking about). Some of the terms have other meanings outside the poly and/or BDSM scene: unicorns, furries, power exchange, primary/secondary... and I've found myself (as I wrote in my first comment on this thread) naively commenting on BDSM relationships without knowing that that was what was being discussed - and perhaps coming across as a total berk.
c) To answer Magdlyn
re: my statement, "considering myself (among other definitions) a feminist, I find it hard to imagine a master/slave dynamic as having much to do with love and mutual respect."
Originally Posted by Magdlyn
You're making the assumption that all Doms are male and all subs are female?
There are female Dommes with male slaves or subs, and gay males and ardent feminist lesbians of both proclivities, Dom or sub, for example. (Google "On Our Backs" magazine.)
I make no such assumption.
1) Please notice those parentheses: "(among other definitions)"
2) Having said that, I would point out that there are many different flavours of feminism, most of which can be divided into 2 main groups:
i) "Feminist" means we want women to be allowed to have the same rights as / act like / earn as much as / belong to the same clubs as / etc. etc.... men.
ii) "Feminist" means we aspire to a new kind of interpersonal relationships without
inequalities and malaises rife in standard patriarchal society: powerful/powerless, master/servant, boss/worker, owner/owned, buyer/seller...
I belong to the 2nd group of feminist thinking. The group that would never demonstrate for women's rights in the military, because we'd like to demilitarise the World. The group that believes, for example, that - far from being a feminist icon - Margaret Thatcher (first woman Prime Minister of the UK) was about the most macho, anti-feminist PM in recent history.
3) If you want to play
at soldiers / capitalist (Monopoly is a great favourite) / master-slave and it's only a pasttime, that's your business (though personally - and I know that I'm being an extremist and very subjective here - I wish we could find more positive ways of enjoying ourselves). But my gut feeling tells me that the games we play affect our everyday personalities. And I suspect that for some
in the BDSM scene, it's more than just a game.