And I used to be such a nice guy...

[The I]

TheI, in Denmark you actually have an excellent organisation, SMiL, who are working hard behind the scenes to educate police, doctors, social workers and the like about the real face of BDSM and make it safer for people like you to come out. Social acceptance comes next.

I am aware of SMiL and have been poking around their site before. It's nice though to hear that they're doing a good job and you might just have given me push needed to join them, at least when I've worked out a few practical matters and finally decided on 'coming out' on that level.

Either way it's good to know that they are doing something good.

" My ideal sub is a strong self-willed woman whose submission is valuable because it comes from love and trust. You can't give yourself if you don't own yourself." by leo9.

Because it was well worth repeating.

I agree with Kuskovian on this one and therefore I'll just let it be repeated again. Thanks once again Leo for a very well-worded argument.

It sounds like what I have seen and heard many times. The liberalization of society has taught us to be converse to the many inclinations of man, to do what comes unnaturally as opposed to the natural it began in the west with the advent of Chistianity in some peoples opinion.

The "Transvaluation of Values" mentioned by Nietzsche and the "Bio-Truths of Dr. Lange (John Norman); as well as many other philosophers, consistantly point out how modern political and social values have been twisted to emasculate mankind, which does a great dis-service to both man and woman.

It is my opinion that your second guessing yourself comes from the many years of phycological conditioning that this society has fostered upon you against your will.

It should pass with time and experience.

I must, however, politely disagree with you on all the other things you say.

I do not think it's a good idea to rationalize our desire with references to Nietzsche or the like. I believe Nietszche's thoughts are interesting, quite right on a few points, and definitely intellectually challenging but there are a lot of parts I do not agree with as well.

I'm not qualified to go into a discussion of Nietzsche, or John Normann for that matter, though. I still find it's a dangerous part to use any kind of overarching 'philosophy' to justify what we desire. In that I very much agree with what’s said in the link in the following quote:

http://www.submissivewomenspeak.net/writings.htm

The top letter might interest you.

And taken from that:
"The damn thing is sexual, Master X, and you can jump up and down and insist otherwise all day long, and it will not alter the truth of it. You do what you do, and want to do what you want to do, because it is thrilling for you, because you get a high off of doing it, because there is a rush from it that makes you willing to walk on hot coals in order to be able to do that. The submissives, the real ones, do what they do because there is a rush in it, because it does things to them emotionally and physically, because it is the highest form of sexual expression there can be, the highest level of personal fulfillment there can be. *Everything* is sexual to a true dominant and a true submissive because every aspect of their lives reflects the power structure, and that power structure is the focal point of erotic fixation.”

The problem, as I see it, with overarching philosophies is that they might solve something if you subscribe to Nietzsche’s idea of an ‘übermench’ or John Normanns that some are meant to serve. But to everyone else, who has not won that conviction I think it makes things much harder: When I worry about whether I’m really not a good person when I get off on what I get off on honestly the last thing I need is someone telling me that it’s all good and well because some are meant to rule others to be ruled over and I happen to be in the first category. The last thing I want to do is associate my kink with Nietzsche since this would mean that I should either start believing in his philosophy or give up my kink… I’d probably end up doing the last.

Furthermore I don’t think this is a good road to follow if we are to become less politically incorrect. Associating ourselves with thinkers who state that some are meant to lead, others to be lead make it way to easy for our critics. I think I’d much prefer to make the simple statement of the fact that power is sexy, at least to a lot of us, that we like things that are sexy and satisfying and therefore exchange power to get off, simple as that.

It’s exactly at the point where we begin mixing politics and philosophy into it I start worrying because at least persons like myself then gets to worry: ‘Oh god, I like this… but that means I have to subscribe to X and Y and Z ideas and since I don’t I can’t allow myself to like this’. No matter what political thought, philosophy or religion we ‘hinge’ our kink on we’re bound to alienate anyone who would not subscribe to that. I prefer my kink apolitical, arreligious and aphilosophical… I’ll just take it kinky instead. Thanks!

I don’t hope I’ve read your post as saying more than it did and am chasing ghosts or whatever. If I do I apologize.