Is it really safe, sane, and consensual?

[catalina_francisco]

Pure, once again your venomous response does not go down well nor does it have anything to do with the issues here. It is unfortunate you cannot discuss the issues without trying to become personal, attack anyong who does not agree with you, and introduce unrelated topics to the thread in an effort for a response, or maybe you just seek attention. Whatever the reason I have lost interest as I am much more interested in conversations which are conducted in a civil manner. And no, I did not get through the whole post as I soon saw it was not worth the time....just caught your end line as I pressed 'reply' and didn't feel right accepting your thanks for something I did not do.

Catalina

 

[Ebonyfire]

Eb, and if you didn't know yourself at the time you married?

I changed, and he didn't in the same way. We are divorcing and it is working out for the most part. Our divorce is at his request. He met someone who fulfilled his needs better than I did.

He is 'horrified' at my choices. He knows a bit. Since he doesn't know anything beyond the 'nilla world and didn't want to he worries.

He and his current woman think D/s-BDSM is sick. That is why she divorced her husband who has moved on to that life now too.

I know myself quite well, and always have that is why I NEVER married. Marriage is not to My taste or liking.

I am always prepared to walk away from a situation that is not good for Me.

 

[Temptress_1960]

I believe you do not get My point.

I guess I don't get your point.

I replied to what you said:

When I think of courage - "I do not think of being honest about ones sexuality.
That does not take courage (IMHO) it just makes good sense."

That is what I was commenting on.

As kayte and Pure have said, people do change.

In my own life, there are things that we regularly enjoy doing that, 10 or even 5 years ago, would have been unthinkable for either myself or my husband. Not even anything all that extreme, we're really pretty mild.

I'm not advocating dishonesty; I'm just commenting on the difficulty some of us lesser mortals have with taking the risk of being scorned or put down when we share our inner feelings and desires.

Apologies if this has strayed off topic.

 

[Ebonyfire]

I'm not advocating dishonesty; I'm just commenting on the difficulty some of us lesser mortals have with taking the risk of being scorned or put down when we share our inner feelings and desires.

"lesser mortals"?

Now, now, sarcasm is uncalled for.

It is really up to each individual to decide if they want to live a lie.

If you cannot share your inner feelings and desires with your partner, then that is you choice to make.

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

Pure, once again your venomous response does not go down well nor does it have anything to do with the issues here. It is unfortunate you cannot discuss the issues without trying to become personal, attack anyong who does not agree with you, and introduce unrelated topics to the thread in an effort for a response, or maybe you just seek attention. Whatever the reason I have lost interest as I am much more interested in conversations which are conducted in a civil manner. And no, I did not get through the whole post as I soon saw it was not worth the time....just caught your end line as I pressed 'reply' and didn't feel right accepting your thanks for something I did not do.

Catalina

I'm with you on this one. We aren't at all talking about abusive relationships. We are talking about people who get bored, and think it is ok to lie and decieve because it is easier than being honest. People grow apart, no fault in splitting up over it. To lie, and pretend things are ok, while cheating on your spouse is NOT ok.

 

[Pure]

Hi Catalina,

//your venomous response //

I don't see anything venomous, but if someone points it out, I'd be happy to apologize.

You seem *extremely touchy* when you don't get praise AND agreement. Sorry I can only do the former.

J.

 

[Pure]

Hi Johnny,

//I'm with you on this one. We aren't at all talking about abusive relationships. We are talking about people who get bored, and think it is ok to lie and decieve because it is easier than being honest. People grow apart, no fault in splitting up over it. To lie, and pretend things are ok, while cheating on your spouse is NOT ok.//


Same old dance. Like Catalina you're so intent on publicly pillorying the adultress that you do anything to preserve her
pre-eminent moral reprehensibility. She's only doing it out of boredom. Catalina: her spouse is desolate. Etc.

You seem unable to look at a real person in context, and simply want to denounce in now a dozen postings, an abstraction: the heartless, bored adultress who's only doing it to rip out the heart of the unsuspecting hubby.

J.

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

Hi Catalina,

//your venomous response //

I don't see anything venomous, but if someone points it out, I'd be happy to apologize.

You seem *extremely touchy* when you don't get praise AND agreement. Sorry I can only do the former.

J.

Did you ever consider that you are completely wrong, and that your entire discussion style could be seem as insulting, because it meanders all around, brings up points that have nothing to do with our points, and act dismissive towards our position?

 

[Pure]

Hi Catalina,

Catalina said to Pure:
//your venomous response //

Pure to Catalina
I don't see anything venomous, but if someone points it out, I'd be happy to apologize.

You seem *extremely touchy* when you don't get praise AND agreement. Sorry I can only do the former.

J.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jonny says,


/Did you ever consider that you are completely wrong, and that your entire discussion style could be seem as insulting, because it meanders all around, brings up points that have nothing to do with our points, and act dismissive towards our position?/

Yes, I might be 'wrong', though interesting topics don't usually give a 100% victory to one side, even those, like you, convinced they are shining moral exemplars.

Meandering, off topic. Maybe.

Check your dictionary, Johnny, if you're gonna lawyer for Ms Catalina:


"Venomous: virulent like venom, spiteful, malignant" (Concise Oxford)

What is my last posting is venomous?

Humbly awaiting enlightenment.

J.

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

Hi Catalina,

Catalina said to Pure:
//your venomous response //

Pure to Catalina
I don't see anything venomous, but if someone points it out, I'd be happy to apologize.

You seem *extremely touchy* when you don't get praise AND agreement. Sorry I can only do the former.

J.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jonny says,


/Did you ever consider that you are completely wrong, and that your entire discussion style could be seem as insulting, because it meanders all around, brings up points that have nothing to do with our points, and act dismissive towards our position?/

Yes, I might be 'wrong', though interesting topics don't usually give a 100% victory to one side, even those, like you, convinced they are shining moral exemplars.

Meandering, off topic. Maybe.

Check your dictionary, Johnny, if you're gonna lawyer for Ms Catalina:


"Venomous: virulent like venom, spiteful, malignant" (Concise Oxford)

What is my last posting is venomous?

Humbly awaiting enlightenment.

J.

You're the lawyer, aren't you? And, of course, nothing humble about you. Amorality works for you, I think we can ;eave the conversation at that, don't you?

My basic problem with all your examples is that you are too focused on actions, and not focused enough on intent. My particular problem is with people who cannot or will not be honest.

 

[Pure]

Hi Johnny,

you said,
//You're the lawyer, aren't you? And, of course, nothing humble about you. Amorality works for you,

And you know this, ... how?


I think we can ;eave the conversation at that, don't you?

Sure, Johnny, attack the person from beginning to end; stopping anywhere would be pretty much the same.


My basic problem with all your examples is that you are too focused on actions, and not focused enough on intent. My particular problem is with people who cannot or will not be honest.//

My entire last example of the 'burning bed' focused on intent, and I've tried to focus on various possible 'intents' in those who 'stray'. You've dealt with intent only by decree: "I will talk about those who for no reason but to get a sex thrill, coldly set out to betray their loving, unaware spouse." You have been unable to imagine anything else in the 'intent' department.

I'll say this in leaving. At 18 I felt the way you do. As the years progress and you reach ancient status like I have, you'll note that among the married people you know, there is no shortage of adulterers. Your best friend, maybe, your dad. Your brother in law. About 2/3 of all husbands and half of all wives, esp. in the younger age groups.

Although you'd like to think they have horns, and are only marginally better than those who sell crack to children or who poke the eyes out of the neighborhood cats, they're really not all that different from you, all in all. Your moral lapses may not ever include adultery, but the lapses of your family and friends will, and I figure you probably don't 'have a leg up' on them in the morality dept.

It's unfortunate that your experience in sexual deviation is not matched by experience in real people, real intentions, real failings, etc. but in a black-and-white world you probably grew up in. Perhaps, just as you shed your 'vanilla' sexual tastes, you'll get a more nuanced view of problems of 'honesty' in relationship.

Yours in utter corruption,

J.

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

Hi Johnny,

you said,
//You're the lawyer, aren't you? And, of course, nothing humble about you. Amorality works for you,

And you know this, ... how?


I think we can ;eave the conversation at that, don't you?

Sure, Johnny, attack the person from beginning to end; stopping anywhere would be pretty much the same.


My basic problem with all your examples is that you are too focused on actions, and not focused enough on intent. My particular problem is with people who cannot or will not be honest.//

My entire last example of the 'burning bed' focused on intent, and I've tried to focus on various possible 'intents' in those who 'stray'.

I'll say this in leaving. At 18 I felt the way you do. As the years progress and you reach ancient status like I have, you'll note that among the married people you know, there is no shortage of adulterers. Your best friend, maybe, your dad. Your brother in law. About 2/3 of all husbands and half of all wives, esp. in the younger age groups.

Although you'd like to think they have horns, and are only marginally better than those who sell crack to children or who poke the eyes out of the neighborhood cats, they're really not all that different from you, all in all. Your moral lapses may not ever include adultery, but the lapses of your family and friends will, and I figure you probably don't 'have a leg up' on them in the morality dept.

It's unfortunate that your experience in sexual deviation is not matched by experience in real people, real intentions, real failings, etc. but in a black-and-white world you probably grew up in. Perhaps, just as you shed your 'vanilla' sexual tastes, you'll get a more nuanced view of problems of 'honesty' in relationship.

Best,

J.

So you decide to leave by pretending I have no real life experience? And that I much be 'morally' deficient. You are such a joke. And, it is interesting how you seem to feel that ethics are 'vanilla', proving my charge of amorality, no?

All of your examples are strawmen, as I continue to point out. I have stated the specific instance that I disagree with, and you ignore it.
Oh, and how long have you cheated on your SO?

 

[Temptress_1960]

Wow, this has turned into a lose/lose kinda thread.

Interesting dynamic here, I think.

 

[Netzach]

It's gotten so ad-hominem and outta hand I have nothing to add anymore.

Everyone just needs to make decisions they can live with and as far as other people go, adopt the Ayn Randian view that their life is their F-ing problem.

 

[InnerDarkness]

Everyone just needs to make decisions they can live with and as far as other people go, adopt the Ayn Randian view that their life is their F-ing problem.

I could not agree more...

 

[kayte]

I know myself quite well, and always have that is why I NEVER married. Marriage is not to My taste or liking.

I am always prepared to walk away from a situation that is not good for Me.

You knew yourself that well 16 years ago? Congratulations.

I obviously didn't.

One thing that crosses my mind, it almost sounds static...

 

[Pure]

Johnny said,

//I have stated the specific instance that I disagree with, and you ignore it.//

I thought I'd addressed all your main points but maybe I missed one. Perhaps you could extract it from the torrent of abuse and post it for consideration.

Yours in amorality,

J.

 

[Pure]

Netzach

//Everyone just needs to make decisions they can live with and as far as other people go, adopt the Ayn Randian view that their life is their F-ing problem.//

Well part of being human is looking at others' situations and choices, both in autobiography and literature. We comment on how well or ill they are living their lives. It's not always an
exercise in priggery. Sometimes we are able to imaginatively put ourselves in their shoes.

As to Ayn Rand, I think she did the same--commenting on others, some of them her creations; her heros and heroines acted for themselves, and showed up the cowardly, the slimy, and the altruistic, those with names like "Ellsworth". For the record, I believe one heroine was an adultress, as was Ayn herself and/or Nathanial Branden (can't quite remember).

Didja see the recent movie Fridja, with Selma? Lots of interesting adultery issues, there. Query: is there a great artist/writer/poet of the last 250 years who was not adulterous?
(Leaving aside EBB and swain).

J.

 

[Ebonyfire]

You knew yourself that well 16 years ago? Congratulations.

I obviously didn't.

One thing that crosses my mind, it almost sounds static...

We all are different. Everyone deals with their own situation at their own pace, and in their own good time.

We all change and grow, but our core personalities do not change. Freedom is My number one core value. and has been all My life. That will never change cause it is at the root of My core personality.

YMMV.

 

[Pure]

Perhaps to unburden folks of some nasty history, I've started a new thread, for the "Way Less Than Perfect" with a focus on the issues of secrecy and BDSM. Perhaps a regrouping of the 'amoralists' and those not too outraged to talk with them/us will be beneficial.

I'm going to try to sign off this thread, if the other takes life.

Thanks to all.

J.





(watch the venom on those thorns)

 

[catalina_francisco]

I have been away on business for a couple of days and it seems as if World War 3 has just broken out here. We seem to be drifting away from the issue and it is becoming all very personal.

I am not going to go into personal attacks against my wife, partner and slave since she has been very proficient in dealing with those. The only remark I want to make is that I am very disappointed in someone who I held in high esteem and considered an intelligent considerate and open minded person.

If I may summarize what has been said so far there are two camps, one that out of principal and practical reasons refuse to get involved with people who cheat, and one camp that says it is perfectly ok.

I belong to the part that does not say it is wrong to cheat, that does not judge anyone for cheating, but just does not want to get involved in a relationship with anyone who cheats. There are several reasons for it, one of the most important being a purely (no pun intended) selfish one. If a person has cheated once who is to say they are not going to do it again, but this time cheating on me. And again I am talking here about repetitive cheating.

There are more reasons not to get involved. To me cheating is not a sign of honesty, it is not a sign of morals, and it is not a sign of being able to talk and discuss your problems with your partner. It is choosing the easy way out. If that is what you want perfectly fine with me, but I just will not get emotionally involved with anyone who does so.

For the people who cheat I just want to warn them about the risks. Please be very careful health wise, be aware that there are more persons murdered because of cheating then there are people killed in airplane accidents and train accidents counted together. Know what you are doing to your SO emotionally when they find out after years of being cheated on. Know that in a divorce it can be used against you, and especially if you are cheating in a BDSM relationship it can cost you dearly not only in money but also in the custody of your children. And as a final note for the ones who so now and then look through the bible and read the Commandments. Remember though shall not kill, though shall not.... If you still want to cheat and are informed about the risks go ahead it is your life and the life of your partner,

Francisco.

 

[Pure]

Francisco said what's quoted at the end.

Let's see: there are two camps, one that out of principal[sic] and practical reasons refuse[sic] to get involved with people who cheat, and one camp that says it is perfectly ok.

No Francisco, that wasn't it at all, though that was the perception among the folks attempting to occupy the moral high ground.

It's a bit like saying the debate in the US now is about "Whether to go after the fanatical Arabs armed with weapons of mass destruction or sit on our asses and let them make another 9/11"

One side created a caricature, an abstraction, and attempted to sell others on its reality and despicableness. As in some medieval book with illustrations of the Seven Deadly Sins, the
Cheater ("Lust") was portrayed with every black brush stroke possible:
This person was cold, lying, heartless, and selfish, _and they never let up with their evil_ they repeatedly betrayed and ripped the hearts out of their devoted spouses for their selfish gratification.

The question whether to have anything to do with them, esp. on the part of dom/mes, had a fairly obvious answer.

The other side said, "The Cheater" does not exist. Actual spouses who stray come in all shapes and sizes. Some do stray just once. Some stray with only one true love that they are never able to marry. Some are selfish, yes, but most are pretty much like the person next door--well on one side, let's say, since about 2/3 of married men and 1/2 of married women stray. Some get their act together, leave and remarry. Many of those remarried do NOT stray. Some do.

The other side said, "Look at each case." It could be your mother or your sister or your brother or your best friend. Decide what if anything you'll 'do' about their actions. Let others decide, not from an abstract picture of evil, but from first hand acquaintance.

Your third para says The Cheater is "choosing the easy way out," i.e., is cowardly. Not surprising, since s/he's rotten to the core. But the actual people who stray are only sometimes that way. Some are very courageous, since they are in a very oppressive and intimidated position, to manage this act of self assertion.

As to the advice, it's a bit too smug for my taste, and has the same lurid tones around its elements of truth. Like the movies the US government made for the sailors about 'dangerous women' (prostitutes). The genitals dripped with disease. Associating with them could infect your spouse and ruin your loved ones. Even get you killed by a treacherous pimp.

As to the chances of being murdered, well there are countries that celebrate the 'crime of honor.' The killing of the unfaithful wife and possibly her lover. This extends of course to the father and brothers killing the daughter--and maybe the boyfriend-- if she gets involved with the wrong person. Rather than condemn the murderers you remind "The Cheaters" about these consequences, presumably to keep them in line.

The ending is pretty much the same old same old. Make a choice about whether to Cheat, whether to do this evil and destructive deed. Whether to become 'one of them.' The reality of choices and actual situations is obscured by the lurid portraits that have come before.

J.





If I may summarize what has been said so far there are two camps, one that out of principal and practical reasons refuse to get involved with people who cheat, and one camp that says it is perfectly ok.

I belong to the part that does not say it is wrong to cheat, that does not judge anyone for cheating, but just does not want to get involved in a relationship with anyone who cheats. There are several reasons for it, one of the most important being a purely (no pun intended) selfish one. If a person has cheated once who is to say they are not going to do it again, but this time cheating on me. And again I am talking here about repetitive cheating.

There are more reasons not to get involved. To me cheating is not a sign of honesty, it is not a sign of morals, and it is not a sign of being able to talk and discuss your problems with your partner. It is choosing the easy way out. If that is what you want perfectly fine with me, but I just will not get emotionally involved with anyone who does so.

For the people who cheat I just want to warn them about the risks. Please be very careful health wise, be aware that there are more persons murdered because of cheating then there are people killed in airplane accidents and train accidents counted together. Know what you are doing to your SO emotionally when they find out after years of being cheated on. Know that in a divorce it can be used against you, and especially if you are cheating in a BDSM relationship it can cost you dearly not only in money but also in the custody of your children. And as a final note for the ones who so now and then look through the bible and read the Commandments. Remember though shall not kill, though shall not.... If you still want to cheat and are informed about the risks go ahead it is your life and the life of your partner,

 

[catalina_francisco]

The other side said, "The Cheater" does not exist. Actual spouses who stray come in all shapes and sizes. Some do stray just once. Some stray with only one true love that they are never able to marry. Some are selfish, yes, but most are pretty much like the person next door--well on one side, let's say, since about 2/3 of married men and 1/2 of married women stray. Some get their act together, leave and remarry. Many of those remarried do NOT stray. Some do.

Talking about semantics, without wanting to be insulting this is the biggest bullshit I have ever seen you write. In cheating there is no grey area, either you cheat or you do not. Look through a dictionary cheating means to be sexually unfaithful, cheating means fucking behind your partners back, without them knowing it.

You might repent from it, or have your reasons for it, but in essence you are fucking behind your partners back. And simply put the word cheating in the English dictionary also has another meaning, not chosen by me or any on this board but it is still there. You might not like it, you might not agree with it, well take it up with the English language association not with me.

I for one do not really care if a so called honourable man is fucking behind his wife’s back having gay affairs on the side for years. Not my problem, not my world. To me the only thing it means is that would I be a gay dominant that person would not be considered by me as a possible candidate.

About the rest of your comments, if you are stupid enough to not see the risks that are involved with cheating and are not willing to take appropriate measures, it is your life, your world unfortunately the world is filled with those that think alike and have infected their partners with a STD, so maybe it is not only your world and your life you are taking risks with. Just do not expect any compassion from anyone for not listening to advice, have the courtesy not to patronize those that are only giving advice and have the common decency not to belittle the dangers for others so they think there are none, basically stop acting irresponsible.

Francisco.

 

[Temptress_1960]

I would like to see the statistics catalina and Francisco keep citing about cheating.

...there are more persons murdered because of cheating then there are people killed in airplane accidents and train accidents counted together...

The above quote I believe, because overall, a very small percentage of people are killed in plane and train accidents.

That still doesn't say that cheating is apt to lead to murder, as is implied in previous posts (no, I don't feel like looking back and directly quoting).

 

[catalina_francisco]

I would like to see the statistics catalina and Francisco keep citing about cheating.

...there are more persons murdered because of cheating then there are people killed in airplane accidents and train accidents counted together...

The above quote I believe, because overall, a very small percentage of people are killed in plane and train accidents.

That still doesn't say that cheating is apt to lead to murder, as is implied in previous posts (no, I don't feel like looking back and directly quoting).

Off the top of my head I would recommend the book 'The Gift Of Fear' written by Gavin De Becker as a great read full of factual information based on cases he has been directly involved in. In fact that is where I drew my previous quote from. If in doubt and thinking he may just be someone who got an idea for a quick dollar by writing the book, he is world recognised as an expert into violence, personally and professionally, and has worked for government agencies, prosecutors, Hollywood stars, and toured highlighting the ways to be alert to, and avoid violence, as well as advocating for survivors and victims of domestic violence. As he notes,along with most who have experience in homicide, most people are killed by those they know, and I am sure you yourself have seen case after case in the news of 'crimes of passion'. Unfortunately, a modern development in these crimes seems to increasingly include innocent children as victims.

Catalina