Follow TV Tropes

Following

Discussion Main / PropertyOfLove

Go To

You will be notified by PM when someone responds to your discussion
Type the word in the image. This goes away if you get known.
If you can't read this one, hit reload for the page.
The next one might be easier to see.
Xzenu Since: Apr, 2010
May 11th 2011 at 1:05:52 AM •••

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).

Hide / Show Replies
Xzenu Since: Apr, 2010
May 11th 2011 at 1:15:04 AM •••

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.

RTanker Since: Oct, 2010
Oct 10th 2010 at 7:48:23 PM •••

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.

Edited by RTanker Hide / Show Replies
Xzenu Since: Apr, 2010
Oct 11th 2010 at 2:33:06 AM •••

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.

Top