I think it’s because the people like this are doing it for more than just sexual reasons, or if they aren’t, they just don’t care about other people at all. Or it’s because there’s some sort of weird “kink” (I hesitate to even call it that) going around in people with power for genuinely hurting and controlling people, like you said. Like the point isn’t the appearance of the thing or even the actions, but the result of hurting someone else.
It must be that because, especially with someone as famous as Gaiman, I would be surprised if there wasn’t girls would would consensually submit to him (though, imo safe words are non-negotiable). I’m well-versed in the power dynamic he seemed to be looking for (Master/slave), but in a real power exchange* like this, trust and time are needed to establish it (*in reality, the slave mustgive the power over to the Master). Even things like sadism and consensual non-consent, which he also seemed to be into (though maybe not the consensual part), are sought after by many subs, but the trust• has to be established first (•that, though it may hurt, no true harm will befall the sub, and also that, if it becomes too much, the sub can stop it at any time). It doesn’t seem like Gaiman was willing to establish that kind of dynamic and, even if he were, it doesn’t seem like he would keep the bond of trust that a true Dom would - it seems like he would want no limits (and no safe word), ultimate power which, in the end, is just rape.
I am actually really glad the article itself made note that what he was doing was not BDSM because I think it’s important for people to know that real BDSM is absolutely consensual, even if it appears to not be.
I think it’s because the people like this are doing it for more than just sexual reasons, or if they aren’t, they just don’t care about other people at all. Or it’s because there’s some sort of weird “kink” (I hesitate to even call it that) going around in people with power for genuinely hurting and controlling people, like you said. Like the point isn’t the appearance of the thing or even the actions, but the result of hurting someone else.
It must be that because, especially with someone as famous as Gaiman, I would be surprised if there wasn’t girls would would consensually submit to him (though, imo safe words are non-negotiable). I’m well-versed in the power dynamic he seemed to be looking for (Master/slave), but in a real power exchange* like this, trust and time are needed to establish it (*in reality, the slave must give the power over to the Master). Even things like sadism and consensual non-consent, which he also seemed to be into (though maybe not the consensual part), are sought after by many subs, but the trust• has to be established first (•that, though it may hurt, no true harm will befall the sub, and also that, if it becomes too much, the sub can stop it at any time). It doesn’t seem like Gaiman was willing to establish that kind of dynamic and, even if he were, it doesn’t seem like he would keep the bond of trust that a true Dom would - it seems like he would want no limits (and no safe word), ultimate power which, in the end, is just rape.
If I could upvote this a hundred times I would. Very well said.
Thank you!
I am actually really glad the article itself made note that what he was doing was not BDSM because I think it’s important for people to know that real BDSM is absolutely consensual, even if it appears to not be.