BDSM and Impregnation

[the shadow of a boy]

The point, as I see it, and apart from your silly posturing, is that some say this hypothetical child of OSG would be abused, because of what they hypothesize the 'master' would do, and what they hypothesize OSG would do...

So far as I can see, the only supplemental inference that needs to be made about the hypothetical 'what would happen if my master wished' situation as described by OSG is that when she speaks about raising the child as 'another slave', she is speaking about raising the child as a submissive slave such as herself.

I think you're dumping the text of OSG's posts over the side to save your argument, and I get the feeling that you're not following anyone's posts except for Johnny's.

 

[MissTaken]

There have been, are and will continue to be children who are raised within the lifestyle and expected to take on the role as assigned by their parents when adults.

I, myself, would not raise children to be Dominant or submissive, but do believe it can be done without abuse entering into it.

Issues of D/s are not always intermingled with S and m.

However, my remarks may be totally off base as I have only read about a quarter of this thread.

I will only add, that the legal issues surrounding adoption are not accurately represented here. As that was yesterday's discussion, I won't get too involved in the details.

 

[Etoile]

I will only add, that the legal issues surrounding adoption are not accurately represented here. As that was yesterday's discussion, I won't get too involved in the details.

I'm curious to know what was incorrect here. I was mostly basing my statements on what I know of adoption by gay male couples from a "carrier" mother. As far as I know it is possible for the mother to waive all rights and obligations to a child in this situation. This is what I was referring to, but I'm willing to accept that I'm wrong.

 

[sigsauerprinces]

There have been, are and will continue to be children who are raised within the lifestyle and expected to take on the role as assigned by their parents when adults.

I, myself, would not raise children to be Dominant or submissive, but do believe it can be done without abuse entering into it.

Issues of D/s are not always intermingled with S and m.

However, my remarks may be totally off base as I have only read about a quarter of this thread.

I will only add, that the legal issues surrounding adoption are not accurately represented here. As that was yesterday's discussion, I won't get too involved in the details.

how could one raise a kid to be Dom or sub without it being abuse? i dont understand how that would work. and WHY would someone want to raise their kid Dom or sub?

 

[MissTaken]

It wasn't your remark, etoile, that was inaccurate.

Pure asserts that a mother can reliquish parental rights to a father. That isn't the case. Custody can be reliquished, but parental rights remain in tact. They are two different issues. Further, this isn't likely to happen unless the parent is signing over their rights so that a step parent may adopt and take on legal responsibility for the child.

The only time I have seen the law look favorably upon single parent adoption is in the case of gay adoption. In NYS, a gay couple cannot adopt , but one of the partners may adopt thereby, circumventing the law and permitting the couple to raise the child together.

 

[Etoile]

It wasn't your remark, etoile, that was inaccurate.

Doh! Thanks for the clarification.

 

[MissTaken]

how could one raise a kid to be Dom or sub without it being abuse? i dont understand how that would work. and WHY would someone want to raise their kid Dom or sub?

Would it be abusive for a girl to be raised to show deference to her father? to defer to him in all things and to expect to be married to someone who will take on the same role?

Perhaps, that young girl would learn to serve tea, see to the needs of the men of the house, become learned in culinary arts, languages etc. Perhaps she would be taught to never sit or stand taller than her father, perhaps she would go to a boarding school in another country and perhaps she would be subjected to an arranged marriage.

And perhaps, she would be taught that her role in life is to serve , be used by and please her husband and be trained to do just that without the use of physical punishment or sexual acts occuring in the household.

It may sound archaic, in some ways, but it happens.

 

[MissTaken]

Doh! Thanks for the clarification.

No problem.

And here, I was really trying to stay out of this thread.

Since I am here, where are the Cliff's notes?

 

[sigsauerprinces]

Would it be abusive for a girl to be raised to show deference to her father? to defer to him in all things and to expect to be married to someone who will take on the same role?

Perhaps, that young girl would learn to serve tea, see to the needs of the men of the house, become learned in culinary arts, languages etc. Perhaps she would be taught to never sit or stand taller than her father, perhaps she would go to a boarding school in another country and perhaps she would be subjected to an arranged marriage.

And perhaps, she would be taught that her role in life is to serve , be used by and please her husband and be trained to do just that without the use of physical punishment or sexual acts occuring in the household.

It may sound archaic, in some ways, but it happens.

ok i see what you're saying. honestly id see that as very abusive, but thats just my opinion. i dont think all women are naturally submissive..or all men are naturally dominant. so to act as if they were and train them that way-thats wrong in my opinion. a kid should be allowed to grow into themselves. not be molded into what the parents want them to be.

 

[paperdolly]

Hi, I am new to this board so please pardon me if I breech proper etiquette by chiming in here but I very into fetishism and SM and being impregnated is one of my many fantasies. I was happy to have found a place to discuss my desires, until I read (all of) this thread.

With discussion of parental rights and responsibilities aside I think OSG's fantasies are hot! In SM the line between fantasy and reality becomes blurred. But ultimately, there are alternate sexualities in the world. Should children not be raised in homosexual households either?

I think of it this way, getting turned on at the thought of being made pregnant is a 100% natural response to being fucked. We are designed to breed, feeling horny about it is part of the plan.

As for the fantasy, which this thread was ostensibly about, I drool at the thought of sex as another chore to be done, "C'mon honey lets try and get you pregnant again..."

 

[MissTaken]

Hi paperdolly!

Welcome to the forums.



Feel free to chime in. As you can see with this and many other threads, there are no right answers. There are, however, a lot of opinions and a lot of experiences shared for others to draw upon.

Enjoy!

 

[MissTaken]

ok i see what you're saying. honestly id see that as very abusive, but thats just my opinion. i dont think all women are naturally submissive..or all men are naturally dominant. so to act as if they were and train them that way-thats wrong in my opinion. a kid should be allowed to grow into themselves. not be molded into what the parents want them to be.

While I cannot opine on whether this sort of upbringing is abusive or not, I do agree that children should be raised to blossom into their own beings.

In my home, the children are subjected to elements of D/s that should be existent in all relationships i.e. communication, trust and a mutual respect between scooter and I. They are not, however, subjected to some of the darker or more questionable practices nor should they be. They will find out about BDSM from me.

There are, however, times when things slip by. For example, their finding us in the morning and scooter was wearing his collar. We told them that it was like a necklace and that he was cool like some of the other older kids at the mall.

Now, what am I going to say when my daughter decides she wants to be cool by wearing leather around her neck???? Hmmm maybe that wasn't the best answer!

 

[MissTaken]

ok i see what you're saying. honestly id see that as very abusive, but thats just my opinion. i dont think all women are naturally submissive..or all men are naturally dominant. so to act as if they were and train them that way-thats wrong in my opinion. a kid should be allowed to grow into themselves. not be molded into what the parents want them to be.

While I cannot opine on whether this sort of upbringing is abusive or not, I do agree that children should be raised to blossom into their own beings.

In my home, the children are subjected to elements of D/s that should be existent in all relationships i.e. communication, trust and a mutual respect between scooter and I. They are not, however, subjected to some of the darker or more questionable practices nor should they be. They will find out about BDSM from me.

There are, however, times when things slip by. For example, their finding us in the morning and scooter was wearing his collar. We told them that it was like a necklace and that he was cool like some of the other older kids at the mall.

Now, what am I going to say when my daughter decides she wants to be cool by wearing leather around her neck???? Hmmm maybe that wasn't the best answer!

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

With discussion of parental rights and responsibilities aside I think OSG's fantasies are hot! In SM the line between fantasy and reality becomes blurred. But ultimately, there are alternate sexualities in the world. Should children not be raised in homosexual households either?

Welcome aboard...


Don't take this the wrong way, but I don't think that is what anyone here is trying to say. Nothing wrong in my eyes with kids being raised by fellow BDSMers, or by homosexuals. I would, however, have a problem with someone raising their child to be involved in the sexual activities of one or both parents. Almost everyone's parents have sex (as icky as that sounds, I have a younger brother, so I know it is true.) Most parents don't sexualize their children.

 

[AngelicAssassin]

Re: Re: Interesting bucket of worms

I don't think you are getting what we are saying, dude... no one here is addressing the idea of D/s with a child in the house. We are specifically addressing the idea of including children in the activities of the D/s relationship. Do you understand that part? I know pure doesn't seem to get it.

i read all eleven pages before posting bubba. Assumption being the mother of all fuck-ups, i started with the original title of the thread, read the ensuing outrage over a slave that took TPE to the extreme, chuckled over the deer strike interlude, endured the drama over he said, she said, and simply added, "Thank you for describing your limits, just remember this ain't a Black&White world."

All of you get this straight. The woman decided to abdicate all rights to her body and whatever may issue from that body. Despite your moral outrage and the law of whatever land you or she may reside, she decided to lay those rights at the feet of her PYL. i understand most, if not all feel uncomfortable with the idea she has stated she won't lift a finger ...

IF

... that PYL decides to be other than a saint like Francisco. Sorry, bro, not a jibe, but based on reputation, i don't think many here believe you would violate such an awesome responsibility.

Having read all the threads, i realized the group had varying opinions on what a child raised in a openly practicing BDSM household could/should hear/see. As a case in point, we've got people that don't think a child should see a submissive eat at a lower level than a PYL. Others seemed to find that notion not only acceptable, but appealing. Considering the title of this thread, i simply asked for opinion on what happens after the impregnation.

i think it safe to say most don't want the children sexually involved in the relationship between the adults. So, again, what is acceptable, and what is not?

 

[Pure]

{{greatly revised, 2 am 2-20}}
Hi Miss Taken,

you said,
It wasn't your remark, etoile, that was inaccurate.

Pure asserts that a mother can reliquish parental rights to a father. That isn't the case. Custody can be reliquished, but parental rights remain in tact. They are two different issues. Further, this isn't likely to happen unless the parent is signing over their rights so that a step parent may adopt and take on legal responsibility for the child.

The only time I have seen the law look favorably upon single parent adoption is in the case of gay adoption.

Recognize that neither of us is a lawyer and that jurisdictions matter-- here singles can adopt. The singles issue is a distraction. How about the biological father and a new wife?

You do agree that a mother can reliquish all rights; and that a strange couple (i.e., adoptive parents), suitably qualified, could then adopt, right?

You say,
unless the parent is signing over their rights so that a step parent may adopt and take on legal responsibility for the child.

Well that's exactly the point. The new adoptive (e.g. step) parent takes on legal responsibility for the child.

Now I haven't researched this, and we've got a lot of states and Canada, but it stands to reason that if there is reliquishment of parental rights, followed by adoption by strange couple, adoption by relatives could equally follow.

I realize there are two steps here; relinquishment and adoption.

Here's an example of laws on reliquishment in Illinois.
Termination of Parental Rights in Illinois

http://www.illinoislawhelp.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.dsp_content&contentID=1407#how voluntarily



What is the termination of parental rights?

The termination of parental rights means that a parent no longer has any legal rights to a child. The parent is no longer responsible for that child. This is a permanent situation that may cut off any more contact between you and your child.

Terminating parental rights is necessary in order for a child to be legally free for adoption. The rights of both biological parents must be either voluntarily terminated or terminated by court order before a child may be adopted.

Can I give up my rights to raise my child if I don't think I can take of him or her?

Yes. Voluntary termination of parental rights is when a parent decides that he or she (both parents can decide this too) can no longer care for the child and tells the judge that he or she gives up rights to the child. He or she will no longer have any responsibility for the child.

This is a hard decision and takes a lot of courage. If you really think it is the best decision and understand that it is final, your caseworker will work with you and your child to support you and help you work through this painful decision. Your caseworker also will help you complete the forms needed to give up your rights as a parent.

How do I voluntarily terminate my parental rights?

Terminating your rights voluntarily is most often done by executing either a “surrender” or a “consent” for adoption. A parent may also petition the court for a finding of dependency and appointment of a guardian with power to consent to adoption. The parent must prove that good cause exists for the court to terminate parental rights.

So termination can be effected; the remaining issue is who can adopt. But we know blood relatives--e.g., grandparents-- often do. The issue of single or couple is not a core one. For instance, in OSG's case, the Master could marry a new wife, then adopt. (Perhaps with a side agreement that the new wife would exercize no authority).

The simple point is that there are moral and legal ways for a birth parent to put her and or himself permanently and completely out of the picture, in respect of parental rights. And that ends obligations, too. Would you agree?

This could be followed by (assuming the case most favorable to your position) an adoption, if suitably approved, by the biological father and a wife, putting the birth mom, by her own actions, out of the picture.

The single dad and his own child, I'll have to look into. But clearly since some dads do have custody from day one, they are naturally exercizing care and authority. They need not 'adopt' to assume those roles. This might hold, for example, where mom has disappeared.

The authority/rights issue would arise if the 'unfit' mom turned up later; perhaps he, then, might (in some jurisdictions) seek to have her parental rights terminated because of unfitness. This isn't adoption, per se, but it leaves him with sole parental rights, if it can be done.

Thanks for encouraging some more thought, miss t.

J.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Re: Re: Interesting bucket of worms

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by AngelicAssassin
As an extension, histrionics aside please, i'd like to hear how others show/don't show dominance and submission in a household with children present and why.

Sounds like a good thread to go start!

Just a few of the threads which have dealt specifically with this issue:

Added: Holy crap. For some reason all along I've been thinking Pure is female. Whoa!

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=123320&highlight=BDSM+and+children

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=177586&highlight=BDSM+and+children

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=190117&highlight=BDSM+and+children

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=202523&highlight=BDSM+and+children

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=178256&highlight=BDSM+and+children

Catalina

 

[catalina_francisco]

Would it be abusive for a girl to be raised to show deference to her father? to defer to him in all things and to expect to be married to someone who will take on the same role?

Perhaps, that young girl would learn to serve tea, see to the needs of the men of the house, become learned in culinary arts, languages etc. Perhaps she would be taught to never sit or stand taller than her father, perhaps she would go to a boarding school in another country and perhaps she would be subjected to an arranged marriage.

And perhaps, she would be taught that her role in life is to serve , be used by and please her husband and be trained to do just that without the use of physical punishment or sexual acts occuring in the household.

It may sound archaic, in some ways, but it happens.

I don't know about the US, but in Australia it would be considered abuse in most states dependent on the degree of conditioning, and has been grounds for removing children from the household. I'm not talking about cultural issues if it can be proven it is a cultural practice and not an abusive household, though even in these situations, it is watched closely as it is seen as needing to fit within the existing laws of the country in relation to abuse. If it was an openly D/s lifestyle, it would, as in custody battles of the same type household, be viewed by most assessors as an unhealthy environment and at the least be monitored for implementation of recommended changes within the parenting methods used.

Catalina

 

[MissTaken]

Pure,

No, we aren't lawyers.
Yes, I have professional history with preparing terminations, surrenders and adoptions and have done so within the context and confines state and federal laws.

I misunderstood your statement about mother relinquishing her rights to think you meant a subbie mom relinquishing rights to the father with or without leaving the household. It won't happen unless their is a step to adopt.

If you want to discuss it further, pm me.

 

[MissTaken]

I don't know about the US, but in Australia it would be considered abuse in most states dependent on the degree of conditioning, and has been grounds for removing children from the household. I'm not talking about cultural issues if it can be proven it is a cultural practice and not an abusive household, though even in these situations, it is watched closely as it is seen as needing to fit within the existing laws of the country in relation to abuse. If it was an openly D/s lifestyle, it would, as in custody battles of the same type household, be viewed by most assessors as an unhealthy environment and at the least be monitored for implementation of recommended changes within the parenting methods used.

Catalina

Based only on what I have offered, it would not be abusive to the degree removal of children is required. It could be seen as neglectful if the father requires the child to miss an inordinate amount of school to clean house or whatever.

Chances are the degree of discretion would be key in terms of the community's and the authority's view on such a situation.

Culturally, the Amish live within similar confines as I described to varying degrees. They generally come to the eyes of the authorities when it boils down to medical issues as the Amish do not believe in utilizing hospitals, medicines or innoculations. Otherwise, as long as there are no beatings or sexual abuse, the families remain free to raise their children as they please.

 

[Kajira Callista]

Re: Re: Re: Interesting bucket of worms

i read all eleven pages before posting bubba. Assumption being the mother of all fuck-ups, i started with the original title of the thread, read the ensuing outrage over a slave that took TPE to the extreme, chuckled over the deer strike interlude, endured the drama over he said, she said, and simply added, "Thank you for describing your limits, just remember this ain't a Black&White world."

All of you get this straight. The woman decided to abdicate all rights to her body and whatever may issue from that body. Despite your moral outrage and the law of whatever land you or she may reside, she decided to lay those rights at the feet of her PYL. i understand most, if not all feel uncomfortable with the idea she has stated she won't lift a finger ...

IF

... that PYL decides to be other than a saint like Francisco. Sorry, bro, not a jibe, but based on reputation, i don't think many here believe you would violate such an awesome responsibility.

Having read all the threads, i realized the group had varying opinions on what a child raised in a openly practicing BDSM household could/should hear/see. As a case in point, we've got people that don't think a child should see a submissive eat at a lower level than a PYL. Others seemed to find that notion not only acceptable, but appealing. Considering the title of this thread, i simply asked for opinion on what happens after the impregnation.

i think it safe to say most don't want the children sexually involved in the relationship between the adults. So, again, what is acceptable, and what is not?

I think that basically a D/S or M/s relationship is see in nilla eyes as a close loving relationship. No it isnt all about scening and whips and all that. I was once told "it is amazing to see how you adore Him im glad true love still exists". If done tactfully and with other ppls comfort levels in mind, its not a problem. A child has no place knowing of the darker side....hell a child walking in on nilla sex sees it as a violent act, how would they see BDSM? What goes on in any parents bedroom is private, children have no place there nor do they need to know about it from birth. Do you have sex with your wife in the living room in front of your kids, do you involve them in your sex life? Get my (and i thing most who have posted here) point? I dont care what anyone says, it is OUR (and i mean all of us the whole community) job to protect childrens minds from that which they really cant comprehend...later in life the choice becomes theirs, when there is an understanding and they learn about their sexual interests. Same way as we tell ppl new to this life to learn and read and know before doing. Once again i say, you would not force an adult into this, why would you think it ok to force a child into this?A question...in the real world...in a D/s community, would this be tolerated? or would that person be strung up? for the simple reason that we have to fight to be accepted in this world to start with....we struggle to be understood, we try to educate ppl, we try to show them yes this was a grown up decision on my part because this is what i enjoy, i was not forced into it nor am i forced into anything. Once again i will say...in a relationship where power is EXCHANGED...where submission is GIVEN....where is a place for a child that is given no choice? ( my first post on this thread said i rest easy knowing this is fantasy, i do accept it as that but this thread took it further and the same way i accepted the fantasy.....i expect my opinion will be accepted)

 

[the shadow of a boy]

Re: Re: Re: Interesting bucket of worms

i read all eleven pages before posting ... and simply added, "Thank you for describing your limits, just remember this ain't a Black&White world."

All of you get this straight. The woman decided to abdicate all rights to her body and whatever may issue from that body. Despite your moral outrage and the law of whatever land you or she may reside, she decided to lay those rights at the feet of her PYL. i understand most, if not all feel uncomfortable with the idea she has stated she won't lift a finger ... IF ... that PYL decides to be other than a saint like Francisco.

I think it is somewhat disingenious to summarize the reactions as 'moral outrage', given that it implies some fundementalist knee-jerk response to a lifestyle. The question of 'rights' is beside the point. What is at issue is power and responsibility. I have been arguing against the contention that 'not lifting a finger' should not be seen as active complicity in whatever the PYL does. Regardless of how 'uncomfortable' we should or shouldn't feel with that decision, I think that it is simply incorrect to believe that the decision to abdicate power and responsibility actually results in an absence of power or responsibility.

Despite my 'to the death' approach to this particular argument, I am interested in and encouraged by the direction towards which the rest of your post has turned the thread. No coffee yet this morning = no response yet to new ideas.

(Please feel free to provide a baseline example of a situation or decision that would be morally unacceptable, provoking legitimate concern, rather than merely stimulating 'moral outrage' and 'discomfort'. )

 

[Netzach]

I think as the subject of periodic fantasy, which is how the whole thing was presented, it's fine.

I think if it were ever to become a reality it would not be fine, and BOTH osg and her Daddy would be complicit in something legally and morally problematic in a big way. I think osg, by her posts and her candor has shown herself to agree with this entirely, that it would be a huge moral burden and simply WRONG for it to happen (though she doesn't see herself as having agency to stop it) and that the WRONG of it is why it's likely to remain fantasy. It's like saying it's unlikely that I'm ever going to go out and shoot people, but I've masturbated to the concept, nobody here would have a problem with that, necessarily, perhaps I'm wrong.

I think those showing great amounts of concern are probably putting too much stock in the likelihood of it happening.

For this simple reason if none other: people who actually do raise children to be sex slaves usually aren't public about their desire to do so.

 

[Pure]

The Shadow said to pure,

I think you're dumping the text of OSG's posts over the side to save your argument,

On the contrary, I've often quoted her in making points.

Below are the main texts which indicate that OSG is not contemplating a scenario of abuse. Perhaps this will save some new person from reading 12 pages. In particular, these
passages refute the wild charge that she contemplates a child being sexually used by her master.

I will agree that occasionally some ambiguous or unclear phrases elsewhere *might* be suspected of indicating possible allowance of abuse, but since the postings below explicitly state the contrary, a reasonable approach is to take them as definitive (as sigsauer apparently has; see below) :

KEY PASSAGES WHERE OWNEDSUBGAL DISCUSSES THE 'CHILD' SCENARIO, WHICH SHE FANTASIZES ABOUT

[verbatim excerpts]
1-28: Owned Sub Gal: fantasies of being impregnated by my Master for the purpose of breeding another little slave girl for him to raise up in our ways....

1-29: OSG:

yes it is true that there is some small part of me that probably wishes it could become reality. the same part of me that wishes some of my Master's most extreme, cruel fantasies could become reality. the part of me able to ignore every other factor such as how others would be affected, how i'd be affected, how disastrous and awful they would be, etc...basically, the part of me that dreams up the fantasies in the first place. but in REALITY, it's not what i truly wish to happen, not something my Master wishes to happen, not something that will ever happen,
====

1-29:OSG

yes, i remain in my place at all times...i do not sit in a seat equal to my Master when dining at home...but nothing that would seem out of place or odd to a child or anyone else. Daddy often likes to have meals in the family room, so he can watch the news or sports and such as he eats. so Daddy has his seat on the couch, then i have mine on the floor beside him. His child might sit on the couch by Dad or on the floor with me. everyone is cozy comfy and happy, so there is nothing for the child to feel unusual about. i do not have a voice of authority in the house, i obey my Master, and his child sees nothing he should not. if after growing up they notice anything a bit "different" about their household as compared to their friends, it may be that Dad and me are a bit old-fashioned, with traditional, but always loving, Male and female roles.
====

1-29: OSG:
one point where i agree with you Limbhugger, and that is the fact that children are indeed astoundingly observant, and will notice everthing. my Master's child observes, between Dad and i, two people who love, respect, NEED, and cherish each other very much. why you seem to make the assumption that a slave cannot be respected by their Owner, i do not know, but that is unfortunate. yes i'm sure the child can see that we do not have equal power, that is obvious, but they can also see that no person's place and purpose is more or less important than the other. we're two halves that make a whole.
====

Originally posted by sigsauerprinces
osg-i guess what i was basically looking for was for you to confirm that if you were really to have a kid, you wouldnt allow your master to abuse it. which i think you just said in your last post. so thats goodto know.

when i was a kid my stepfather sexually abused me - someof it my mother saw. she didnt do a damn thing. so yah..i have strong feelings on this issue.


OSG: sigsauer, my Master is not the sort of Man who would ever abuse a child. that is simply not his nature. and i would never willingly give myself to a man in slavery if i even had an inkling he could harm a child. but i do not allow or not allow him to do anything. i do not have control over him...i am his property, not the other way round.
---
2-01
Sigsauer:right. good to know.
=====

2-02
OSG: Pure, i wanted to thank you for raising the question as to why one would assume a child raised within the lifestyle would be abused. it most certainly does not have to be that way. although i must state that my fantasy goes to extremes where were it reality, child abuse of some sort (primarily psychological) would be inevitable. but those are not the things one dwells on when one is fantasizing.
===
2-02

i am NOT a "sexual slave". i am my Master's slave, period. not his sex slave, not his domestic slave, simply his slave. meaning he owns me and rules me entirely, not simply when he has a hard cock. if you wish to refer to yourself as a sexual slave that is fine, but that term does not apply to our relationship. as for a fictional child serving my Master in all the ways i serve him, that would be 1. impossible and 2. not desired by my Master, so is a pointless issue to ponder all around.
===
2-03

actually Etoile, i meant this even in a legal sense. were the world to go topsy-turvy and my Master were to have a child with me, appropriate legal measures would be made by him to deny me of any parental rights even in the eyes of the law. when Daddy says that no slave of his will have any rights, then he means no slave of his will have any rights.

[end excerpts]

 

[ownedsubgal]

I think as the subject of periodic fantasy, which is how the whole thing was presented, it's fine.

I think if it were ever to become a reality it would not be fine, and BOTH osg and her Daddy would be complicit in something legally and morally problematic in a big way. I think osg, by her posts and her candor has shown herself to agree with this entirely, that it would be a huge moral burden and simply WRONG for it to happen (though she doesn't see herself as having agency to stop it) and that the WRONG of it is why it's likely to remain fantasy. It's like saying it's unlikely that I'm ever going to go out and shoot people, but I've masturbated to the concept, nobody here would have a problem with that, necessarily, perhaps I'm wrong.

I think those showing great amounts of concern are probably putting too much stock in the likelihood of it happening.

For this simple reason if none other: people who actually do raise children to be sex slaves usually aren't public about their desire to do so.

thank you Netzach, this is why all the fuss over this topic continues to boggle my mind. not only is this a fantasy, and not only is it a fantasy that will NEVER happen, but it is a fantasy that, were it even possible to realize, neither of us WANTS to make happen anyway. i have posted as much over and over again, but few seem to have read those words and instead prefer taking out a sentence or two and then making the rest up as they go. all i can assume is that most people have fantasies that they actually wish to realize. that most fantasize about what they desire only. as i said, i am a pervert...i have fantasies of a nature so morally and ethically wrong in my OWN eyes, that the absolute last thing i would want is for them to come true. but that doesn't stop the fantasies from creating themselves.

just one more thing i wanted to comment on before i left this thread, and perhaps this should be a topic all it's own, but KC's comment about D/s being about sexuality...that is no more accurate than it would be to say that a homosexual relationship is about sexuality, that a heterosexual relationship is about sexuality. i certainly cannot speak for all, but my relationship is not centered around sex. i was not drawn to the lifestyle for sexual reasons. it is about following one's true nature, and being in a relationship that simply feels most natural to you. take away all sexual elements from my own union with Daddy, and it would be no less D/s, no less M/s, and no less fulfilling to my heart and spirit.