Ignoring as a punishment.

[minx1]

I'm not suggesting that anyone accept anything they don't want to in a relationship. If you and your partner are happy and it works for you, more power to you (general you). And I wasn't calling anyone out here either.

Quite honestly, I just don't want to glorify the stereotype of a fragile, damaged, ultra-delicate pyl. And I am not saying that those who have said here that it's a hard limit are like that. I can see that limit being a perfectly reasonable one, and I can also see where someone enters a D/s relationship expecting Daddy to heal them and lead them to enlightenment.

No and I can completely understand that ITW. I was trying to cover all corners to be honest. Because you are so right not every pyl is fragile or broken. And the ones that are, are to different degrees.

And that was my main point. There is no blue print in my opinion. But I take exception at people saying that this isn't a legitimate hard limit. When it obviously and understandably is.

Anyway I can hardly string a sentence together at the moment *laugh*, he has that effevt on me! I need to sleep

 

[Homburg]

I'll probably respond to your post tomorrow, my D has just been and I'm going to bed shortly. But I have to say I think this speaks volumes.

You see I would say it is also in the hand and mind of the abuser.

I would agree with you, but for various things I've experienced, read, and seen recently.

1) Many abusers do not think that they are being abusive at all. I'd be willing to say that most very likely do not see themselves as abusive.
2) Even if the abuser is a sadistic bastard and considers what he or she is doing as abuse, if the victim agrees to it, it's not really abuse. It may be fucked up, but if the victim consents, it's just bad behaviour.
3) If everybody is happy, and have granted informed consent, it is not abuse.

Let's face it, we all know people involved in activities/relationships that we consider abusive. If they are happy and realising their dreams in that relationship (osg, ataxia.girl in previous relationships, and any number of other folks), it is not abuse. In my own life, MIS was in that situation, and if she'd been happy with her relationship, I would not have called it abuse. She was not.

As for the last paragraph, thanks for the suggestion. Whether its snide or snarky, it has no impact on me. If anything I find it slightly patronising, but however you meant to deliver it, is your choice. Its rather presumptious to think that I or any of the others haven't had therapy and time out etc. Having said that maybe we just prefer to set our limits; the ones that we think are necessary and look for partners who can understand, take it into account and deal with it with the sensitivity it warrants.

I'm going to apologise. That "you" was intended to be followed by "(generic)". It was not directed specifically or solely at you, and I will edit the post to reflect that. You have my apologies that I did not make that clear.

*bows*

That said, I'm in a relationship with an abuse survivor who is suffering from PTSD, disassociation, etc, and for whome ignoring is a HUGE problem. Feel free to ask MIS if I deal with her issues with sensitivity and understanding.

 

[minx1]

I would agree with you, but for various things I've experienced, read, and seen recently.

1) Many abusers do not think that they are being abusive at all. I'd be willing to say that most very likely do not see themselves as abusive.
2) Even if the abuser is a sadistic bastard and considers what he or she is doing as abuse, if the victim agrees to it, it's not really abuse. It may be fucked up, but if the victim consents, it's just bad behaviour.
3) If everybody is happy, and have granted informed consent, it is not abuse.

Let's face it, we all know people involved in activities/relationships that we consider abusive. If they are happy and realising their dreams in that relationship (osg, ataxia.girl in previous relationships, and any number of other folks), it is not abuse. In my own life, MIS was in that situation, and if she'd been happy with her relationship, I would not have called it abuse. She was not.



I'm going to apologise. That "you" was intended to be followed by "(generic)". It was not directed specifically or solely at you, and I will edit the post to reflect that. You have my apologies that I did not make that clear.

*bows*

That said, I'm in a relationship with an abuse survivor who is suffering from PTSD, disassociation, etc, and for whome ignoring is a HUGE problem. Feel free to ask MIS if I deal with her issues with sensitivity and understanding.

Thankyou.

As for the points here'

1. I would agree that many don't see it as abuse or they choose not to acknowledge it.
2.Not always. Sometimes the victim ''agrees'' or doesn't act because they don't know how to. Or they have has so much shit kicked out of them that they have no soul or fight left.
3. Absolutely. I completely agree with that.

That is what I said, for some people there is no problem whatsoever, but then I don't see those relationships as abusive because of the consent. I was never trying to say that those relationships are abusive.

 

[Homburg]

In reference to this:



Was this a general you and not to minx? In that case, you weren't being unfair to her, but I don't agree that anyone who has "don't ignore me" as a limit should not be in a D/s relationship.

Yup, meant as general, and I already apologised to Minx, and feel like a dickwad.

I'm not saying that as a hard thing. That's why I put maybes and such in there. See, I agree with you insofar as blanket statements are concerned. As I said in the self esteem thread, everybody has damage, and that should not preclude people from getting into power exchange relationships. I just think that it is a sign that maybe that person is not ready for power exchange at that moment. If their limits include such a broad control on their PYL, how much power exchange is present anyway?

I disagree that it's always a poor choice of something to assign a limit to. I think don't ignore means I need to hear from you after 5 days, is pretty clear. I think it can be negotiated in a reasonable way. There are a kajillion online "dom" dickwads that get their jollies off of showering someone with attention and then disappearing, reappearing, disappearing again, etc. It's not so bad to have that limit in the beginning if you are meeting someone you don't know from Adam. Just as a for example.

Eh, I have antipathy for those fuckwits as well. I just balk at being told "check in every five days".

See, it may just be me, but when I read a limit, I see it is a directive from the pyl. Many of these directives are perfectly cool, and I would have no problems with them. Telling me "don't go there!" specifically is cool. Telling me "you must go here and here on this schedule" is not cool in my eyes.

It's the difference between "Stay off the grass" and "You must always walk on the sidewalk".

My point is that MIS doesn't have to say "don't ignore me." In practice, you don't ignore her. And you wouldn't do it on a whim. But maybe early on in a relationship that's not a given, and a person sets it as a limit. My point is I can think of situations in which it's perfectly reasonable as a limit, and situations in which it isn't.

No, she literally said "Please don't ignore me, okay?" when we first started, and it worked and still does. That's kind of the point I'm making. There was no limit needed.

That gets into another kettle of fish entirely. Specifically that limits are areas where the pyl does not trust the PYL to use judgement. That was what I was alluding to earlier. "Hard limit" caning" is a strong pronouncement against caning, and removes all judgement from the PYL's hands. He or she cannot decide anything, because it is firmly off the table. "Soft limit: caning" allows the PYL to discuss the idea and offer light rythmic caning as a possibility. The pyl decides if the top is trustworthy enough or not at that point.

"Hard limit: don't ignore me" shows a lack of trust in the top's judgement. "Please don't ignore me, okay?" says that she trusts me enough to handle the situation properly. And, again, those statements were made at a point when she still retained limits and safeword and such. she could easily have negotiated for such a thing, but chose to trust me.

 

[Homburg]

Thankyou.

As for the points here'

1. I would agree that many don't see it as abuse or they choose not to acknowledge it.
2.Not always. Sometimes the victim ''agrees'' or doesn't act because they don't know how to. Or they have has so much shit kicked out of them that they have no soul or fight left.
3. Absolutely. I completely agree with that.

That is what I said, for some people there is no problem whatsoever, but then I don't see those relationships as abusive because of the consent. I was never trying to say that those relationships are abusive.

Point #2 was what I was talking about in #3 above. If the soul is beat out of them, they aren't going to be happy. I guess I am victim-focused in abuse simply because of BDSM. So much of what we do can be seen as abuse by outsiders. It is the dynamic that allows these activities, and thus keeps them from being the abuse that they might resemble. I won't go so far as to say "It's not abuse until she leaves him over it", but the victim, in my opinion, is the final arbiter of abuse or not.

 

[honoria]

Going to jump in here. I've been reading this thread and it seems to me that the problem is with the language being used. I see "ignoring" as different from taking time to "cool off" or "time out" when emotions are running high. Separating from a volotile situation is just good sense, otherwise things are said/done that can't be unsaid/undone. Yes, in my view it can take several days for that "cooling off" to happen to the point where reasonable discussion can take place. Having said that, I don't think that telling the person you are angry with that "I'm royally pissed. Leave me alone till I settle and no I don't know how long that will take." is too much to ask.

Ignoring on the other hand is an indicator of "I don't care. You are not important enough for me to be concerned about. If this hurts you too bad." Like many that have posted here I've been involved with someone who ignores. For a lot of years. You can lose all sense of who you are because you spend so much time trying to figure out what you did to warrant this treatment and "fix" it. Ignoring is long term and while it is abuse if it is used conciously(sp?) as a method of control and in conjuction with other forms of abuse, whether physical or mental I tend to see it more as an act of selfishness. Someone so focused on their own power, needs, and wants that others just aren't that important to them. That is the kind of ignoring I have experienced. I am working to rebuild myself to the person I was before I allowed this to consume me. It's not easy and being in a relationship where ignoring was used as a method of control/punishment would be harmful to me. So anyone I am with would need to understand that and be able to deal with it. Because I have no intention of ever going through this again.

 

[Netzach]

While I agree with you on the statement overall, I'm honestly not sure where this is coming from. I've yet to see anyone here say that they would ignore their pyl simply because they feel like it.

I did. Would. Can. Do.

And would not be in a relationship where this wasn't OK.

And, honestly, if you (generic) are at a point in your life where you need a limit like "don't ignore me" or "don't yell at me", maybe therapy, time on your own, and not being in a D/s relationship is a good idea. I'm not saying this to be snide or snarky, just, as the self-esteem thread pointed out, if the trauma is that severe, maybe it's best to take the time to get therapy etc to get that issue resolved before you jump into a relationship with that level of constraint added.

And that's why.

 

[Homburg]

I did. Would. Can. Do.

And would not be in a relationship where this wasn't OK.

Oh, I wasn't saying that no one would do it. I was just saying that it hadn't been mentioned, so I wasn't sure what was spawning the comment.

I remember you discussing it in some other thread, specifically about H, from what I recall.

 

[Netzach]

The beauty of this is we all get to choose our partners and our boundaries.

I would not be in a serious D/s relationship with someone who hadn't resolved that issue in relation to me specifically - whether I could be entrusted to understand and tread carefully amidst their desire for attention whatever it might be. That I can do. "Please understand the effect this will have on me" is FINE. Telling me what I can and can't do is not on the table. I'm a remarkably soft and creamy-centered compassionate and intuitive donut with a huge benign and loving core - if you can't see and trust that and just give me the info, what exactly are we doing here?

Whether through therapy, consideration, or just plain being a risk junkie and kinked that way in the start, as H is. Like I would not be in a serious D/s relationship with someone who didn't do any painplay or didn't get off talking about it, thinking about it, anticipating it. It's not going to work with me.

I'm sure that sounds totally callous cruel and fucked up to those for whom it makes no sense. That's fine, they don't have to be with me.

 

[honoria]

I did. Would. Can. Do.

And would not be in a relationship where this wasn't OK.


Is it done as part of your relationship? I'm not sure I'm asking this correctly. But, if it is part and parcel of how you interact then is it really "ignoring"? Not sure what else you would call it but it doesn't sound like what I consider to be ignoring. As in long term, weeks, months.

 

[Netzach]

Ignoring on the other hand is an indicator of "I don't care. You are not important enough for me to be concerned about. If this hurts you too bad."

This is, thank the sweet giving Lord above, some people's kink.

 

[Netzach]

I did. Would. Can. Do.

And would not be in a relationship where this wasn't OK.


Is it done as part of your relationship? I'm not sure I'm asking this correctly. But, if it is part and parcel of how you interact then is it really "ignoring"? Not sure what else you would call it but it doesn't sound like what I consider to be ignoring. As in long term, weeks, months.

Eh. There are long dry spells for my slave, weeks at times as other things in my life take over. That's how it is LDR. The connection is stronger at times than others. But that is a paradox, you're right. Kind of how humiliation always has a paradoxical core "I don't care about you and I care enough to show it often" is kind of interesting.

 

[ataxia.girl]

"Hard limit: don't ignore me" shows a lack of trust in the top's judgement. "Please don't ignore me, okay?" says that she trusts me enough to handle the situation properly. And, again, those statements were made at a point when she still retained limits and safeword and such. she could easily have negotiated for such a thing, but chose to trust me.

This is the tack i generally take as well. i want to be able to trust them to do what is best and not have to be the one to decide. i honestly don't want the burden of making the decision.

 

[subbie_333]

When i initially read the linked article from the OP, i had very strong feelings about it. But, i decided to wait until others posted. After reading the discussion, i went back and read the article again. i really haven’t changed my stance, but, look at the article a bit differently. i think the author of the article blew things out of proportion, overreacting big time. Plus, i think there are some logic issues with the author’s reasoning in some places.

The submissive does something wrong and the Dominant ignores the submissive.

OK, this is presented in the fourth paragraph, but, probably should have been in the first. The reader makes the assumption that ignoring is used as punishment for a specific action and that the dominant has stated such. So, discussions in this thread of ignoring used randomly and/or as abuse are off-topic IMHO. And, the dominant needing to get away for a period of time to calm down is not “ignoring as punishment”. Most of us do that in all sorts of vanilla situations and it is never called punishment or abuse.

This form of punishment always sets off little red flag buttons in me. I started to think of the reasons why I do not think this is a good form of punishment.

OK, cool. The author has the right to state their opinion, and, in this case, present a laundry list. But, nowhere in the article does it state that this form of punishment might be appropriate sometimes. Or necessary. Or effective. Or not damaging to some. Or only damaging to a portion of submissive/slaves who have specific preexisting issues. The author doesn’t tackle opposing arguments. It comes off as the author being completely right about this subject and that there are no good (or any) arguments opposed to their decree.

The submissive does something wrong and the Dominant ignores the submissive. The submissive frets, feels terrible and beats themselves up, while in many cases the Dominant is off doing something they enjoy - being with family and friends, watching tv, shopping and so on. I feel that shows the submissive the Dominant does not care. I feel it shows the submissive that when there are tough times the Dominant will leave.

OK, i gotta call “bullshit” on this. In the first statement, there is an acknowledgment that the sub screwed up and they both understand that the sub is being punished for that. But, then the author’s logical progression gets out of hand. Are we to assume that in *ALL* cases of ignoring as punishment that the dominant basically says “you fucked up so I am punishing you by maybe not coming back”. Yes, *that* can be argued as abuse, but, that is not the scenario that the author is presenting. It can also be a sign that the sub fucked up so bad that the dominant *is* seriously considering leaving. But, to say that the dominant doesn’t care or to deduce that the dominant will run in tough times to absurd, especially if the dominant doesn’t actually even say anything along those lines. This is also not giving credit to dominants who feel bad about having to punish in general and using ignoring in particular.

I feel it re-enforces low self esteem issues as it shows them all the little messages playing in their head are correct. It shows them they cannot trust because if they do something wrong, slip, make a mistake, the Dominant will leave. It shows them the Dominant will abandon them if they are "bad.".

OK, “bullshit” again. If the sub’s head is *so* fucked up that their imagination runs wild, whose fault is that? If their psyche is that screwed, then, having their favorite Starbucks close is gonna drive them to suicide. If there has not been enough communication all along (and in this specific incident) for the sub to know better, then, there are a lot bigger problems. At some point the sub has to take responsibility for their own mental health. If ignoring as punishment is well defined for a specific incident and the dominant comes back, that completely *disproves* that “all the little messages in their head are correct”. On the other hand, if ignoring for a specific incident actually causes the dominant to leave, well, it isn’t “ignoring as punishment” any more – it actually *is* leaving.

Parents give children time outs and I have heard Dominants say this is the same as ignoring a submissive as a form of punishment. I believe it is different. Most Dominants I know who use this as a form of punishment do not even live with their submissive and say "I am not talking to you for two days because you did such and such." When a parent gives a child a time out most of the time they are in the same room or the next, so that the child knows they are still cared for but that they need to slow down and look at what they did.

So, why does the author’s argument also apply to dominants and submissives who live together? Oh right, the dominant is off with family and friends, not caring about the submissive. Also, i think that the author is giving too much credit for the child’s experience and reasoning ability, and, not giving enough credit to a fully grown adult who has chosen to enter a D/s relationship with another adult. If one assumes that the dominant gives a reason for the punishment, then, one should assume that the submissive can comprehend that one-to-one relationship better than a child.

So when a Dominant ignores his/her submissive for two days, to me that is giving the submissive the attitude that the Dominant does not care, that they are not to be trusted, and that when tough times hit the Dominant will leave.

OK, “bullshit” again. Is that the attitude that all dominants are conveying? When is the author going to reference all the dominants who have told them this? Where this has actually happened? Let’s see statistics of when the dominant said “two days” and it was actually one or three or 47, or, in which they said that then actually left. One can only guess at the number of submissives who are so paralyzed by this fear that they don’t even start a relationship. And “trust? Come on, has the relationship progressed to the point of using “ignoring as punishment” but “trust” is not established?

Plus the Dominant is not in contact with them for two days and how do they know what has happened in that two days? Maybe this punishment has effected them so much their work or family life is suffering. So in a time when they are needing their Dominant, the submissive feels they cannot contact the Dominant to express this, as this is a punishment and submissives are not supposed to "enjoy" their punishment.

Huh? This assumes that the submissive has absolutely no alternative than their dominant in which to handle their not being able to handle the ignoring by the dominant. What? If two days of ignoring by a dominant who doesn’t live with them has screwed up their life that bad, once again their problem is a whole lot bigger than the wrong choice of punishment. Are they gonna throw themselves off a bridge if their LD dominant goes on vacation and they can’t get any service on their cell phone for two days? And, yeah, it *is* punishment and not to be enjoyed. And, yeah, because there is no communication the submissive can’t communicate with the dominant (DUH). Talk to somebody else! It’s like saying that spanking as a form of punishment should be eliminated because it makes it uncomfortable to sit and ignoring (bad pun) the remedies of standing or lying down.

The reason for punishment is to make it something that the submissive can learn from so that the behavior is not repeated.

Very good statement

I do not think making a submissive fear the Dominant is going to abandon them is a good deterrence.

OK, once again i don’t agree with the leap in logic. The author has presented their feelings as to how a submissive can react to ignoring as punishment. This statement is making the argument that ignoring as a form of punishment causes abandonment fears. Or, that the purpose of the punishment is to instill that fear in the submissive. But, that is not what the reader has assumed from my first quoted statement above. It is agreed that some submissives can act as the author has described. But not all. It would seem to me that most if not all of these fears come from previous situations not directly related to the current relationship. So, how can the submissive “prove” that this dominant will act so unreasonably as well? And, it can be argued that a large portion of those that have this fear need professional help to deal with those unfounded feelings.

I feel a Dominant should compel their submissive to submit and obey . . . not make them fear the Dominant will leave the submissive if they do not obey.

Yeah, a good statement. But, by itself it is not a good enough goal to completely eliminate ingoring as punishment for everybody all the time. And, at no point in the article did the author say that the dominant made that threat. All of the author’s arguments were how the submissive’s anxieties would get out of control simply because that is how the submissive chose to react to the punishment. Nothing in the article hints at discussions in the aftercare of the punishment and/or positive lessons that can be learned by the submissive.

 

[FFOTS4Life]

I think for me (can only really guess as I'm not in a relationship right now) it would depend on the 'why' and the 'how' of the ignoring. If it were a matter of him being angry about something and needing to be in another room pretending I didn't exist for a little while to cool off and collect himself I think I would be o.k. with that. Lord knows I have my own temper and sometimes need to pull away from a situation so I can come back and discuss it calmly and rationally. If it were a matter of ignoring me even while I were right in front of him though, I don't think i would take it as well. Just the thought of being ignored like that tweaks out all my temper buttons.

It would likely push me to do something something stupid or mean to make him acknowledge me.

I completely agree with you.

I could understand if it was as you said a few hours and I wasn't with my Dom...however if it was used as a punishment and I was not acknowledged even though I was in the same room with him I woud probably go nuts. I think it is just cruel. To me taking it that far would just take the joy out of the whole BDSM experience.

But that's just me...what works for some just doesn't work for others.

 

[nh23]

I completely agree with you.

I could understand if it was as you said a few hours and I wasn't with my Dom...however if it was used as a punishment and I was not acknowledged even though I was in the same room with him I woud probably go nuts. I think it is just cruel. To me taking it that far would just take the joy out of the whole BDSM experience.

But that's just me...what works for some just doesn't work for others.

Hmmm.. I've read this thread with a lot of interest. I wasn't going to post because my thoughts seem to be a little mixed, but here goes. I was in a two year relationship where my Dominant would sometimes disappear for days, weeks, and once two months at a time. A few times it was because of things I had said that pissed him off, but the other times it was just him basically being a coward and ignoring things that needed to be taken care of. In that situation.. I think it was cruel . He should have had the balls to tell me that he needed time to think. I sat and waited for him to call sick to my stomach everyday until I heard from him.

On the other hand if Master is upset with me about something at times he will leave the room and take time to cool off. And will ignore anything I say until he has his composure back and has time to think. I don't find that cruel at all..it's necessary. I suppose it's also easier because we live together and even if he's ignoring me I still know that he's somewhere in the house and don't have to sit and worry that he's dead in a ditch. I'm not allowed to have limits so it wouldn't do me a bit of good to have him ignoring me as a hard limit anyway.

The reason I quoted your post FFOTS4life is because I wanted to address the part of your post I bolded. For us BDSM is a part of our lifestyle..it's who we are. And with life comes the good and the bad. We aren't going to get enjoyment from every single thing we have to do in life. BDSM is no different. Master may very well choose to do things that I enjoy, or he may choose to do things he knows I hate, or refuse to do anything at all for my enjoyment for the rest of our lives. Sometimes people have a romantic view of how M/s, D/s relationships work..and real life just isn't that way.

 

[subbie_333]

Hmmm.. I've read this thread with a lot of interest. I wasn't going to post because my thoughts seem to be a little mixed, but here goes. I was in a two year relationship where my Dominant would sometimes disappear for days, weeks, and once two months at a time. A few times it was because of things I had said that pissed him off, but the other times it was just him basically being a coward and ignoring things that needed to be taken care of. In that situation.. I think it was cruel . He should have had the balls to tell me that he needed time to think. I sat and waited for him to call sick to my stomach everyday until I heard from him.

If he thought that his version of "ignoring as punishment" was done well, he was mistaken. On his side, he was an idiot, or, at best, ignorant. On your side, it was cruel.

 

[nh23]

If he thought that his version of "ignoring as punishment" was done well, he was mistaken. On his side, he was an idiot, or, at best, ignorant. On your side, it was cruel.

Well it wasn't always for punishment. It's a long story with a lot of background. But lets just say that my saying he was a coward just about covers it.

 

[FFOTS4Life]

Hmmm.. I've read this thread with a lot of interest. I wasn't going to post because my thoughts seem to be a little mixed, but here goes. I was in a two year relationship where my Dominant would sometimes disappear for days, weeks, and once two months at a time. A few times it was because of things I had said that pissed him off, but the other times it was just him basically being a coward and ignoring things that needed to be taken care of. In that situation.. I think it was cruel . He should have had the balls to tell me that he needed time to think. I sat and waited for him to call sick to my stomach everyday until I heard from him.

On the other hand if Master is upset with me about something at times he will leave the room and take time to cool off. And will ignore anything I say until he has his composure back and has time to think. I don't find that cruel at all..it's necessary. I suppose it's also easier because we live together and even if he's ignoring me I still know that he's somewhere in the house and don't have to sit and worry that he's dead in a ditch. I'm not allowed to have limits so it wouldn't do me a bit of good to have him ignoring me as a hard limit anyway.

The reason I quoted your post FFOTS4life is because I wanted to address the part of your post I bolded. For us BDSM is a part of our lifestyle..it's who we are. And with life comes the good and the bad. We aren't going to get enjoyment from every single thing we have to do in life. BDSM is no different. Master may very well choose to do things that I enjoy, or he may choose to do things he knows I hate, or refuse to do anything at all for my enjoyment for the rest of our lives. Sometimes people have a romantic view of how M/s, D/s relationships work..and real life just isn't that way.

I can completely understand that...I have not chosen to make it a lifestyle as others...I like to keep it purely for pleasure and I admire people like you who do go through and make it a lifestyle choice because I don't think I really ever could.

I am glad that you are okay with it...just for me personally I wouldn't be able to handle being ignored (especially since I look at BDSM for the pleasure and not as a lifestyle).

But like I said what works for some doesn't always work for others right?

 

[Homburg]

We aren't going to get enjoyment from every single thing we have to do in life. BDSM is no different. Master may very well choose to do things that I enjoy, or he may choose to do things he knows I hate, or refuse to do anything at all for my enjoyment for the rest of our lives. Sometimes people have a romantic view of how M/s, D/s relationships work..and real life just isn't that way.

It's not on topic, but I wanted to say how much I agree with this paragraph. It's not all roses and bunny-floggers. Sometimes it's crying real tears and hating what is being done to you because your PYL needs to do it.

 

[nh23]

I can completely understand that...I have not chosen to make it a lifestyle as others...I like to keep it purely for pleasure and I admire people like you who do go through and make it a lifestyle choice because I don't think I really ever could.

I am glad that you are okay with it...just for me personally I wouldn't be able to handle being ignored (especially since I look at BDSM for the pleasure and not as a lifestyle).

But like I said what works for some doesn't always work for others right?

*nods* I can respect that. Even doing it for pleasure I'm sure you still experience the ups and down's. It just gives you more control over you limits, etc.. I imagine.

It's not on topic, but I wanted to say how much I agree with this paragraph. It's not all roses and bunny-floggers. Sometimes it's crying real tears and hating what is being done to you because your PYL needs to do it.

Yep

 

[minx1]

Am at work so can't post long. I haven't had time to catch up but I wanted to point out that just for the record I for one am well aware that D/s isn't all about roses and bunny floggers. I don't have a romanticised view of what its like. I know what its like. I have lived it too through all the highs and lows.

What I can expect though is not to have my mental wellbeing broken because it has to be hard and because a PYL just feels like it.
If you want to punish me, fine but use one of your numerous other ways; one that isn't such a huge issue (and yes, limit) or find yourself another pyl. Its simple really.

 

[minx1]

Going to jump in here. I've been reading this thread and it seems to me that the problem is with the language being used. I see "ignoring" as different from taking time to "cool off" or "time out" when emotions are running high. Separating from a volotile situation is just good sense, otherwise things are said/done that can't be unsaid/undone. Yes, in my view it can take several days for that "cooling off" to happen to the point where reasonable discussion can take place. Having said that, I don't think that telling the person you are angry with that "I'm royally pissed. Leave me alone till I settle and no I don't know how long that will take." is too much to ask.

Ignoring on the other hand is an indicator of "I don't care. You are not important enough for me to be concerned about. If this hurts you too bad." Like many that have posted here I've been involved with someone who ignores. For a lot of years. You can lose all sense of who you are because you spend so much time trying to figure out what you did to warrant this treatment and "fix" it. Ignoring is long term and while it is abuse if it is used conciously(sp?) as a method of control and in conjuction with other forms of abuse, whether physical or mental I tend to see it more as an act of selfishness. Someone so focused on their own power, needs, and wants that others just aren't that important to them. That is the kind of ignoring I have experienced. I am working to rebuild myself to the person I was before I allowed this to consume me. It's not easy and being in a relationship where ignoring was used as a method of control/punishment would be harmful to me. So anyone I am with would need to understand that and be able to deal with it. Because I have no intention of ever going through this again.

I think this is a good post. For me ignoring and abandoment were just a part of what I experienced. And for me was by far the worst part. It had much more impact on me than any of the physical things.

 

[JMohegan]

I saw the reference to scat, which confuses me slightly. Are people suggesting that scat is an acceptable hard limit when this, which comes as a result of an abusive episode, is not a good enough reason? That abuse and its aftermath; having to constantly deal with its far reaching effects and try to manage it on a day to day basis isn't valid? That its inappropriate?
I was under the impression that that is what hard limits are for; for protection of ones self.

In a private setting, hard limits have never protected anyone from anything.

Minx, I say this not to discourage you from declaring limits, but because I believe it is an important point for s-types to focus on and really comprehend.

If you're tied up in some guy's bedroom and he gets the urge do whatever it is that scat people do with their bodily functions, the ONLY thing holding him back will be his character. His regard for you, his investment in the relationship, his interpersonal intelligence, and his sense of honor. That's it.

Whether he has agreed to a scat hard limit, or you have a "no-limits" relationship and he understands your medical views, issues, & aversions, it makes no difference. The bottom line is the same. He's gonna do what he wants to do, and you can't stop him.

Which is why I understand what Netzach means when she writes: "Telling me what I can and can't do is not on the table. I'm a remarkably soft and creamy-centered compassionate and intuitive donut with a huge benign and loving core - if you can't see and trust that and just give me the info, what exactly are we doing here?"

A man of character would take the information about your prior experiences and adjust his behavior accordingly. A passive aggressive idiot, manipulative fool, or uncaring bastard would not. Those statements are true, irrespective of whatever hard limit agreements may, or may not, have been spoken.

A man of character will make mistakes, but when it comes to maintaining your fundamental health & well-being - he won't stop trying. The passive aggressive, manipulative, or uncaring guy may put on a good show and promise whatever you demand in order to obtain your love & devotion and get what he wants - but when he tires of that it will end. Your heart's on the line, it's too late to pretend otherwise, and he starts ignoring/abusing you and you're screwed.

I can see why a hard limit agreement on whatever type of ignoring triggers the nasties might be comforting to someone who had been abused. The prefatory discussion would convey a lot of information, and the open acknowledgment of the potential for damage might reassure. If you and your D are comfortable with whatever has been agreed to, that's obviously more than fine.

Just remember, Minx, that there's no adequate substitute for character. When it comes to "protection of one's self", that's *all* that really matters.

 

[CutieMouse]

In a private setting, hard limits have never protected anyone from anything.

<snip>

Just remember, Minx, that there's no adequate substitute for character. When it comes to "protection of one's self", that's *all* that really matters.

(I'm just popping in to say I just had a geeking out on JM moment... well said.)