Comment on Well that showed them

• BreakerSwitch@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Correct. Consent is so fucking hot. For so many reasons

  source

  • krooklochurm@lemmy.ca ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Agreed.

    It’s cool that some people get off on power dynamics. And if some people think sex is intrinsically about that then it’s not my job to persuade them otherwise.

    But the best sex I’ve had is with people who just want it, who ask for what they want, who want to try new things, and who are agreeable to almost anything.

    When that kind of energy is present between two (or more) people. My god.

    It’s one thing that took me a long time to articulate about why I didn’t seem to vibe with most of the kinky people I’d met. To them kink was bdsm. The two terms were used almost interchangeably. Kinky sex to me is more or less the opposite of that. The absence of power dynamics and the presence of humble, adventurous, wild inhibition.

    source
• Dasus@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I mean, insofar that violence is power, yes, the person with someone’s engorged penis filled with blood (the thing people need to live) between the sharpest and hardest parts of their body (teeth) armed with the strongest muscle (the masseter, the jaw muscle), does in fact have power over the other person owning the penis.

  Power over life and death is very much “power” in my book, even if I don’t agree with it.

  I do agree that they must have trust, otherwise it wouldn’t be smart to give that much power over you to someone else.

  And when it comes to regular power dynamics, yeah sure it’s annoying they exist in the first place, but you can’t really deny them, even if they aren’t always one and the same. Not all men would be able to beat up all women, but in general, men have an advantage in physical combat. But that advantage is very much given away at least a bit when you put your dick in someone’s mouth.

  Then again it could be a trans woman who owns the penis and a man doing the sucking, so like assumptions, power dynamics definitely aren’t always the same.

  So while I agree with you that they shouldn’t be intrinsic, to most people they are.

  My sensibilities are more in line with Deadpool.

  source

  • krooklochurm@lemmy.ca ⁨8⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Power dynamics are the product of complicated interactions between two or more people.

    The ability to physically harm someone is only relevant if a) one chooses to believe someone will harm or then, or might or b) someone expresses that they will harm the other person, or might.

    The ability of someone to commit violence is secondary, and dependent on either one or both of those factors to be relevant.

    If one person does not believe they will be harmed and the other does not create that belief through threat of action then the ability to commit violence is utterly irrelevant.

    source

    • Dasus@lemmy.world ⁨8⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      The ability to physically harm someone is only relevant if a) one chooses to believe someone will harm or then, or might or b) someone expresses that they will harm the other person, or might.

      That is to say, “a person you don’t trust”. Implicitly you trust everyone in your society, more or less. Or in your “city”, if you will.

      Just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Even if a power dynamic is completely equal, it still exists. It’s just balanced.

      The ability to commit violence is at the very core of our civilization. Literally. There’s a reason we still call them POLICE officers. They’re the only people “in the city” (“polis” as in Akropolis, Annapolis, Marioupolis, etc) allowed to physically harm other people, and that is what makes them literally powerful.

      Your reasoning only applies when you’re already in the context of “we’re not allowed to do violence or each other or the police will come and threaten me with violence unless I obey them”.

      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence

      source