Why do many BDSM people look down on switches?

[Flaming_Redhead]

BDSM as we know it today evolved from protocol established by what is commonly referred to as the Old Guard which consisted of gay World War II veterans. Until the Old Guard, S&M was practiced in private or in brothels. There was no established set of rules. The gay leathermen utilized their military experience and organized groups with dress codes and etiquette. It was all very formal and very ritualized. To join their clubs, you had to demonstrate a sincere interest in and a great deal of dedication to becoming involved in S&M, either as a top or a bottom. Tops and bottoms typically apprenticed to the more experienced players. Switches were not considered to be serious players because they lacked the dedication necessary to commit to either role.

Eventually, heterosexuals and lesbians got wind of the clubs and wanted to join in order to learn and participate. This generation is referred to as Old School. They changed some of the protocol to be less militant, but the clubs were still exclusive in that only "serious" people need apply. While the Old Guard was into "rough" sex, the AIDS epidemic necessitated safer play, so the motto "safe, sane, and consensual" was coined.

With the introduction of the Internet came an influx of new people from the mildly curious to the adventurous kinkster. Munches and clubs became all inclusive. This wasn't necessarily a bad thing. However, people new to BDSM tend to believe that just because they are "kinky" they should be accepted. The acronym BDSM stands for bondage, discipline, dominance, submission, sadism, and masochism. There is such a wide variety of kink contained in those 4 small letters that being kinky isn't enough to bring a community together. That's why there tend to be subgroups for dominatrices, masters and slaves, Goreans, et al.

Just because someone decides you're incompatible because you label yourself a switch doesn't always mean they're insecure or closed minded. They just know what they want. I'm a switch who is mostly submissive, and I want my dominant to be only that. I don't want a switch for the same reason many don't. I need my dominant to be very...dominant. I don't want to switch with him because it would totally ruin the dynamic for me, and I don't want to share him with a dominatrix because I don't want anyone having that level of control and intimacy with my man. I also don't want to make him choose and risk being unfulfilled. As for myself, I can live with whatever boundaries are set for me, but there are many dominants who won't take the risk. The people who make comments about switches being "fake" are usually Old School style BDSMers or just repeating what they've always heard or believed out of ignorance. There isn't anything wrong with having one true way or being open minded as long as you aren't trying to shove your way down anybody else's throat, and that goes for all...poly, monog, bi, straight, gay, Old School, The Next Generation, etc.

[Ninva]

There isn't anything wrong with having one true way or being open minded as long as you aren't trying to shove your way down anybody else's throat, and that goes for all...poly, monog, bi, straight, gay, Old School, The Next Generation, etc.

Very nicely said, and thank you!

[denuseri]

BDSM as we know it today evolved from protocol established by what is commonly referred to as the Old Guard which consisted of gay World War II veterans. Until the Old Guard, S&M was practiced in private or in brothels. There was no established set of rules. The gay leathermen utilized their military experience and organized groups with dress codes and etiquette. It was all very formal and very ritualized. To join their clubs, you had to demonstrate a sincere interest in and a great deal of dedication to becoming involved in S&M, either as a top or a bottom. Tops and bottoms typically apprenticed to the more experienced players. Switches were not considered to be serious players because they lacked the dedication necessary to commit to either role.

Eventually, heterosexuals and lesbians got wind of the clubs and wanted to join in order to learn and participate. This generation is referred to as Old School. They changed some of the protocol to be less militant, but the clubs were still exclusive in that only "serious" people need apply. While the Old Guard was into "rough" sex, the AIDS epidemic necessitated safer play, so the motto "safe, sane, and consensual" was coined.

With the introduction of the Internet came an influx of new people from the mildly curious to the adventurous kinkster. Munches and clubs became all inclusive. This wasn't necessarily a bad thing. However, people new to BDSM tend to believe that just because they are "kinky" they should be accepted. The acronym BDSM stands for bondage, discipline, dominance, submission, sadism, and masochism. There is such a wide variety of kink contained in those 4 small letters that being kinky isn't enough to bring a community together. That's why there tend to be subgroups for dominatrices, masters and slaves, Goreans, et al.

Just because someone decides you're incompatible because you label yourself a switch doesn't always mean they're insecure or closed minded. They just know what they want. I'm a switch who is mostly submissive, and I want my dominant to be only that. I don't want a switch for the same reason many don't. I need my dominant to be very...dominant. I don't want to switch with him because it would totally ruin the dynamic for me, and I don't want to share him with a dominatrix because I don't want anyone having that level of control and intimacy with my man. I also don't want to make him choose and risk being unfulfilled. As for myself, I can live with whatever boundaries are set for me, but there are many dominants who won't take the risk. The people who make comments about switches being "fake" are usually Old School style BDSMers or just repeating what they've always heard or believed out of ignorance. There isn't anything wrong with having one true way or being open minded as long as you aren't trying to shove your way down anybody else's throat, and that goes for all...poly, monog, bi, straight, gay, Old School, The Next Generation, etc.

Thank You so much for saying what so needed to be said sisa !!!!

[thir]

Sorry to come a little late back to this..real life getting in the way of the pc ;-)

BDSM as we know it today evolved from protocol established by what is commonly referred to as the Old Guard which consisted of gay World War II veterans. Until the Old Guard, S&M was practiced in private or in brothels. There was no established set of rules. The gay leathermen utilized their military experience and organized groups with dress codes and etiquette. It was all very formal and very ritualized. To join their clubs, you had to demonstrate a sincere interest in and a great deal of dedication to becoming involved in S&M, either as a top or a bottom. Tops and bottoms typically apprenticed to the more experienced players. Switches were not considered to be serious players because they lacked the dedication necessary to commit to either role.

Nods - I have read that this is how it went in US. But in other countries things were different. Gay men were there first, but the rest followed soon after, and we never had any old school history. I would like to know how it went in the Netherlands as well, for instance, they have had a thriving free sexual culture of any kind for a long time.

With the introduction of the Internet came an influx of new people from the mildly curious to the adventurous kinkster. Munches and clubs became all inclusive. This wasn't necessarily a bad thing. However, people new to BDSM tend to believe that just because they are "kinky" they should be accepted. The acronym BDSM stands for bondage, discipline, dominance, submission, sadism, and masochism. There is such a wide variety of kink contained in those 4 small letters that being kinky isn't enough to bring a community together. That's why there tend to be subgroups for dominatrices, masters and slaves, Goreans, et al.

This paragraph I do not understand..? could you elaborate a bit?

Just because someone decides you're incompatible because you label yourself a switch doesn't always mean they're insecure or closed minded. They just know what they want.

True.

The people who make comments about switches being "fake" are usually Old School style BDSMers or just repeating what they've always heard or believed out of ignorance.

That is also my impression.

There isn't anything wrong with having one true way or being open minded as long as you aren't trying to shove your way down anybody else's throat, and that goes for all...poly, monog, bi, straight, gay, Old School, The Next Generation, etc.

Very true!
Only so many do in fact try to shove their way down your throat..

[Flaming_Redhead]

This paragraph I do not understand..? could you elaborate a bit?

People being the social creatures that they are, they want to fit in somewhere. The problem is that once everyone claiming to be kinky was allowed entry into the clubs there began to be cliques and in-fighting. You had Old School butting heads with The Next Generation who didn't want to be told how they had to do things. The fact is that people like to associate with others of a similar mindset, and once diversity was achieved...well....it actually became harder for groups to maintain any sort of togetherness.

For example, in my own life, if my kinky friends and I formed a group, it would be hard to find topics that applied to all of us and didn't end up in an argument. My friend since high school and her husband are bedroom kinksters. To her, it's all fun and games. She is appalled, at times, that I, a lifestyler, prefer to actually be controlled. In her own words, my relationship is unhealthy. On the other hand, I find her "pretending" in the bedroom to be shallow and meaningless. Then, there's the couple who are into swinging with a little bit of kink thrown in. The wife is the dominant partner. She is also somewhat appalled that I'd prefer to let a man be in control. In her words, I'm a grown woman who can do as I please, and if he doesn't like it...tough shit. Thankfully, our friendships aren't based on kink. We can accept that we have different beliefs, but it's much harder for strangers to walk into a group of people and find acceptance or be accepting of others. It's just human nature.

[orchidsoul]

This is surely an interesting thread.

The only way I can describe being a switch is that of someone who chooses love regardless of gender. They don't identify as gay/lesbian, straight or even bi for that matter. They identify with people are people, and certain people make them want to fall in love regardless of gender.

For me, there are some people who have completely beckoned my submission. And others, my dominance. It's really as simple as that. I've never switched with the same person as it tends to be one or the other for me. I lean more to the submissive side generally, but as a submissive... I don't much identify with heavier masochism. However, my dominant mind is quite sadistic. Just tossing another layer of confusion

I'm a fairly middle of the road type person as well, and perhaps that's why I lean both ways in this regard. I sort of don't understand what IS so difficult to understand about being a switch? Hopefully we've all helped explain it a bit better.

Like was pointed out, there's few submissives who would declare everyone beckons their submissive side. Just because you may not act out dominance in a sexual or d/s fashion is not necessarily relevant, imo. You're still not submissive around certain people. It's the same really. We've just added an intimate layer.

[thir]

Thanks for making it clearer.

People being the social creatures that they are, they want to fit in somewhere. The problem is that once everyone claiming to be kinky was allowed entry into the clubs there began to be cliques and in-fighting. You had Old School butting heads with The Next Generation who didn't want to be told how they had to do things. The fact is that people like to associate with others of a similar mindset, and once diversity was achieved...well....it actually became harder for groups to maintain any sort of togetherness.

Oh woe for tolerance and diversity!!
But you do have a way with words and I do recognize the situation - even among people who try hard not to. Is there no hope for us???

My friend since high school and her husband are bedroom kinksters. To her, it's all fun and games. She is appalled, at times, that I, a lifestyler, prefer to actually be controlled. In her own words, my relationship is unhealthy. On the other hand, I find her "pretending" in the bedroom to be shallow and meaningless.

That, too, sounds awfully familiar..

[quote}Thankfully, our friendships aren't based on kink. We can accept that we have different beliefs, but it's much harder for strangers to walk into a group of people and find acceptance or be accepting of others. It's just human nature.[/QUOTE]

Well then we just have to get to know each other better - maybe there is hope.