Code of ethics/protocals

[Never]

ownedsubgal, you say you don't hold everyone in the world to your ethics and values yet you then talk about "relationships being torn apart…lives being ruined" as though they were bad thing independent of your feeling of them to be so. If you're suggesting that my sticking my nose into someone's relationship is unethical because the relationship might be torn apart then you're holding me to your ethics and values. If you can't judge what's right and wrong for other people then you can't tell me what's unethical because you've rejected ethics as being anything other than a personal choice.

 

[Etoile]

Actually, I'm still pleased with the way I already put it.

Non-consensual domestic violence in a non-TPE or non-slave relationship.

IMHO, if it's non-consensual, it's not okay. I'm not talking about a slave, mind you - a slave or TPE relationship involves voluntarily giving up your consent beforehand. I'm talking about relationships that do have established limits. If somebody's limits or rights are violated, and they have not already stated that this is okay with them, then I think it's not okay. Why? Because while it isn't my place to judge, it is their place to judge. And if they see something as non-consensual, I'll accept their perspective.

 

[sweetnpetite]

Originally posted by sweetnpetite:
"Another good way of looking at the question is:

When is it ok to look at another BDSM couple and say, "That is *not* ok"

Ever?"

The things that I consider *not* okay aren't limited to BDSM couples.

ownedsubgal:
"i personally feel there is never a point where it is okay to look at another couple...bdsm, vanilla, D/s, or anything else...from the outside in, and say "that is 'not' okay". because we can never know, from the outside, one can only make assumptions and judgements based on those assumptions, combined with our own individual, personal beliefs about what is and is not acceptable in a relationship."

Oh, please. That's just an excuse to not get involved. The BDSM community doesn't gain anything from ignoring abusive or just poisonous relationships inside of it just because they "have no right to judge". If nothing else, I'd say the community is obliged to acknowledged that not everything that is called BDSM is "okay".

I think *that* is sort of the point I was trying to make. Well put.

I'm conserned particularly with TPE, personally. If it's power that is given over only, ok, but sometimes it sounds more like people are handing over there *minds* and I don't think that's ok. Now maybe I'm reading it all wrong, but as there is room for abuse and misuse of terms, how does one decide that someone has passed the point of making a consentual choice and has become a Kool-Aid drinking zombie? I'm not trying to be alarmist or anything, but it gets rather dicey when people start saying that they no longer have the responsiblity for there actions, because they have given all power over to another. This is just one example. There are many ways that abusive or poisonous relationships (as you said, quite well) could be descised as 'consentual' in and out of the realm of BDSM.

 

[sweetnpetite]

and who is the allmighty judge as to what is okay or not okay?

Someone who cares about what happens to another- not just someone who feels everyone should do things this way or that way because they are *right* or *moral* or conversly not do them because they are *immoral*- people have a right to be *immoral*

But people who feel that someone is being harmed, or may do harm to themselves.

ONe could argue that if I want to swallow a bottle of sleeping pills, who the hell are you to call the paramedics. And that may be true, but if you care about someone, you don't leave them on the floor to die. Same goes for a relationship. Sometimes you do have to but in, weather it's technically *your* business or not.

Or at least that's how I feel about it.

 

[ownedsubgal]

Someone who cares about what happens to another- not just someone who feels everyone should do things this way or that way because they are *right* or *moral* or conversly not do them because they are *immoral*- people have a right to be *immoral*

But people who feel that someone is being harmed, or may do harm to themselves.

ONe could argue that if I want to swallow a bottle of sleeping pills, who the hell are you to call the paramedics. And that may be true, but if you care about someone, you don't leave them on the floor to die. Same goes for a relationship. Sometimes you do have to but in, weather it's technically *your* business or not.

Or at least that's how I feel about it.

as i stated before in this thread, often it's the people who claim to care and who believe they have the very best intentions, who blindly ruin relationships and lives. for example, say i had a "friend", aware of my lifestyle but who did not, could not understand it. say they knew about my Master beating me and decided to alert the police...despite the fact that i tell them this relationship is what i need to be happy, it's my dream come true, etc...they are "concerned", and so they decide the best thing would be to have my Master put behind bars. that would at the very least cause us a great deal of stress and headache, and could be far more serious depending how far things went. i could lose my Master, lose my Mate, all because someone who "cares" decided to step in. caring is no excuse.

if someone is truly being harmed, and they express this, then i think that person should be helped...no question. but it is not the place of those on the outside to judge what is "harm" for each and everyone else.

 

[sexymom]

Well-meaning people do, all too often, use their own standards as to what is abuse and thereby cause problems. Where to draw the line is a difficult issue. I think one answer is "serious" physical or mental harm- which would require medical attention, or- more difficult to judge- risk of serious physical or mental harm.

On the other hand, the fact that the person says they aren't being abused, or the presence of a contract, are not particularly important- abuse victims, kidnap victims, etc. routinely say they have consented, and professionals are trained to disregard such protestations and consider the facts.