Is IC bad for BDSM? - Discuss (46)

I also remember reading a paper about student alcohol consumption, where peer pressure exerted through social networking sites was cited as a factor in the number of events that people attend.

The analogy with IC would be that individuals who express unusual opinions are jumped upon on the boards, or labelled as trolls and ignored. Of course, some of these individuals are trolling or being deliberately provocative, but all of them?

Is there a peer pressure created when x number of people sign up for an event?

So:

• Do you agree with the idea that social networking sites such as IC encourage homogeneity and stifle the very community they purport to represent?

A dirty mind is a joy for life.

Admin says: The bottom line is don't call people cunts

There are those who don't go to events who private play which I'm more in favour of these days. I don't mind going to the odd munch but I find public play sour at the moment but that's my mindsett and not anyone else's fault.

I am really bad as I treat ic at the moment as an online diary.

So i think ic is good for certain things and about learning far more than any website but from a personal point of view I've found it to be bad for my bdsm life

As I see it, people on here jump on people who are being stupid or childish, or who rub them up the wrong way. But that's not the same, clearly, as being "different". I am "different" from the norm, if only because I don't know what the norm is and can't particularly be arsed to find out - but I do okay. Perhaps not everyone is fawning on my every word, which is crushing, but I can live with that. Thing is that IC people are usually different from the madding crowd anyway.

As for social media generally, I think it operates in much the same way as society generally. People meet, they mix, they congregate - and if they like what someone does they become friends, form cliques, whatever. The only difference - and this may be a major difference but it's not germane to the argument of the o.p., is that we cannot see each other as we interact, so our interactions are limited by the corresponding information famine.

Holmes: Meretricious
Lestrade: And a happy new year

Peace and love

The homogeneity argument is a powerful one, and a move towards that kind of uniform majority shaped monoculture is something that should be resisted – but if you look at the common threads running through discussions in arenas such as IC (and IC is certainly not the only place where this is happening) you'll see a consensus view of BDSMery emerging – the usual suspects come out en mass to defend their idea of *what BDSM* should be and the rest of us should fall in line, or accept the consequences.

Now in addition to social networking, I do believe that the basic tenet of YKIOK is very much at the centre of this move towards homogeneity – which on the surface sounds counter-intuitive – how can acceptance of everything lead towards uniformity? But I do believe it *will* because as everyone becomes accepted and equally valued, we all become the same. Dissent and disagreement are good things. The only way we can become sure of ourselves is for our ideas and values to be open to scrutiny to see if our arguments stand up.

The cult of YKIOK generally means if someone points out the basic wrongness of some activity or idea, that the shit-storm of follow up is usually about them being *bad people* rather than engaging with the argument.

Once you stifle dissent, you get homogeneity, because people will be disinclined to say what they think for fear of attack or being ostracised.

Having ideas that offend the majority keeps a check on the majority.

Just remember, when you think you're free, that crack inside your fucking heart is me.

I think "peer pressure" is not necessarily the right phrase. It's the old "frog in boiling water" argument, where you become subliminally acclimated to a particular world view. Same argument as with wall-to-wall violence or inarticulateness on TV.

Having said that, I don't think that this is a problem with IC - and the reason for that is also the reason why I think IC is bad for BDSM. Any casual visitor to the sight is first of all presented with a selection from the most active threads. This means they will quite likely get the impression that it's a site for humourless politically motivated young codgers with, apparently, precious little interest in BDSM. So anyone who's just curious about BDSM will likely go elsewhere. These days, paradoxically, the people I meet on Collarme or even some vanilla sites are far more likely to be my cup of tea than the people I meet here.....

In other words, the membership of IC is more likely to become self-selecting, than IC is to affect its membership's behaviour.

Edited 14 Jun 11, 8:30 AM by Ian_2007

Thats not what YKIOK is about. Nothing wrong with being critical about kinks or peoples motives for getting involved.

Ive been known to post critical points. ITs to stop the mindless condemnation based on taste, ie "Your an adult babie, oooh yuk thats weird!".

Homogeneity arguments depend on the dynamics and character of people. Twitter for example, where people follow each others mindless drivel like sheep could be a culprit, wereas IC as a "Collective of radical individuals" probably isn't.

Also you have the uniformed type of "alternatives", like goths or political parrots. You dont have to be a goth or agree with the parrots. Any coercive behaviour would come from the group, quite often towards other members of the group.

FTR. I haven't heard of "Forced Goth", but I'm sure it happens, even if very rarely.

Edited 14 Jun 11, 8:35 AM by CookieMonster

I'm sorry if my profile pic offends but...TOUGH

I heard the same broadcast and I have a feeling you may have inadvertently misrepresented the point that was being made.

If you remove all technological aids to communications, then people tend to try to reach agreement or to adopt a shared viewpoint. This doesn't necessarily mean people are sheep or stupid, merely that there is a human tendency for a community to harmonise their beliefs. Sometimes this tendency can become exaggerated in a way that is pathological.

You see this phenomenon for instance in science. No branch of science is "finished" in the sense of having all the data, so instead there is a current consensus that is a social phenomenon or collective understanding. This can become pathological when an outsider proposes ideas that challenge the the collective understanding.

What social media do is to make it far easier for people to reach a collective viewpoint because they provide an easily accessible pubic forum. Equally they provide an easily accessible mechanism for self-elected defenders of the current orthodoy to hurl handfuls of their excrement at people who disagree, thus making the penalty for dissent more of a threat.

There is more than one way to skin a cat but there is only one try per cat

Edited 14 Jun 11, 10:16 AM by The_Perfect_Sadist