all i have to say is blame songbird.
A Christian BDSM Question & Answer Page
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Me
- Delia Christina
- blasian ex-academic, ex-corporate wench turned social do-gooder, about to turn the page again. Follow me on Twitter @DeliaChristina
Blog for Choice - Jan 22
ChurchGal Reads
-
-
-
Kavanaugh for SCOTUS: So how fucked are we?6 years ago
-
-
2020 Most Popular Rolex Watches4 years ago
-
-
-
Last Blog Post10 years ago
-
The Medal of Honor "feminized"9 years ago
-
-
-
-
-
Sermoning2 years ago
-
-
From scATX: Proof12 years ago
-
go on hiatus14 years ago
-
-
-
Huh?16 years ago
-
13 comments:
Hey! It's not like I thought it up!!
So is your blind blown by the actual existence of this, or because they try to point out the difference between "Christian BDSM" and "secular BDSM"? Personally, I find the second part much scarier.
It's also kind of funny how women's issues carry over to this. There are Christian BDSMers who feel that only men can be the one dominating, and there are those who feel that women can dominate, too. Bet you never thought you'd find that particular controversy in the Christian community.
That would be "mind blown." Must...have...coffee.
Then there's me--a third of the way through the piece before I figure out what BDSM means . . . thought it was some odd abbreviation for Buddhism at first.
purechristian,
that's hilarious. hee.
i think i'm blown by both things: there's a christian bdsm community and that they're splitting hairs. like, it makes a difference??
but, really, songbird. it's classic. this beats anything i could've trawled to find.
why do people find it necessary to make everything "christian"? a *christian* bdsm, *christian* financial planners assoc. in addition to the plain old financial planners assoc. and on and on it goes. but this. . .wow that's whacked!
I'm glad I was able to be of service. :-)
'christian' is necessary because it signifies membership in the subculture! how else will we know each other?
so, slightly related to this whole thing, for the record, down the street from my apartment, we enjoy trying to look into the windows of the local, very private dominatrix club. so far, everyone we've caught going inside looks...suburban. it's rather mundane.
That's nothing, really, compared to being a Christian and realizing that you find such things erotic and are de facto a member of the BDSM community, like it or not. THAT left me in shock for about a year, I think.
I agree with Kevin, the attempt to create a distinction between Christian and Secular BDSM is what makes this a bit creepy. It feels like an attempt to justify the fact that they are human beings with sexual feelings and part of a sexual minority by pointing out explicitly how they are trying to follow the "rules" of Christianity.
you know, one of my favorite movies was 'secretary' (james spader has been my boyfriend ever since 'tuff turf'). i actually thought it was a truer depiction of romance and that metaphysical state we call love than any straight romantic comedy i'd seen.
The problem with "ChristiansandBDSM" (and similar sites) is, in my opinion and experience, that their view remains very narrow. BDSM is OK within a Christian belief as long as the man is always the "top". It's simply not the case. The broad spectrum of human desire, sexual and sexually-related is, surely, one of a greatest God-given gifts? To suggest, as many of these people do, that it is right to indulge in BDSM when the man is dominant but not when the woman is dominant is ludicrous.
susan, i agree.
i think there was another post of mine where i mentioned this - i think it was about a christian couple adhering to a 'spousal spanking' thing. i thought it was interesting that what all these couples agreed to was that it was right (and erotic) for the man to spank his wife and discipline her but the thought never crossed their minds that going in the opposite direction was ok, too.
somehow, that would make it less 'christian'?
anyway, it just confirms for me that 'christian' sexuality is really frakked up. something is always hidden or denied.
Post a Comment