Just a thought on Doms

[SexyChele]

Re: Re: Re: Just a thought on Doms

If your submissive gets angry at you, big deal, you can afford to laugh at it or even ignore it. You OWN her and she's not going anywhere, so who cares if she has a temper tantrum. It's not threatening because the submissive, at least in a master-slave relationship, has no ability to make any relationship-shattering decisions due to her anger (and you will not allow that).

I have to agree with Art's comments, totally. But in addition, I think it might be helpful if you were to clarify what rights, if any, you believe a submissive would or should have. In the statement above, you seem to imply that a submissive (I'm assuming you use "submissive" and "slave" interchangeably, correct me if I'm wrong), cannot walk away from the relationship. She can only be dismissed.

If that were true, then if a submissive wanted out of the relationship, and a Dominant held her against her will, that would be illegal in most states of the US.

I really hope I'm reading this wrong...

 

[UCE]

Re: Re: Just a thought on Doms

<--------Snipped

UCE,...I am one of the most patient, and accepting of others peoples faults, that anyone might ever meet. BUT,...for you to "IMPLY",...Dom/mes don't care if their subs/slaves, has a "temper tantrum" or not is,...well,...it's absurd.

If YOU have this kind of relationship, and have lived it for so many years,...truly,...you have my sympathy. What you have posted in the above quote can easily be likened to a sub/slave being treated as a doormat.

There is MUCH more I could comment about, but I feel others will do a better job, in making their POV understood.

I will say ONE thing more, I think you need to STUDY and RESEARCH your own posts, maybe you will see what Zip, myself, and OTHERS have seen.

LOLOL! Artful, artful, artful, gimme a break! I saids I wuz drunk. Now let me deal with your points. I have been living as the absolute slave of one man for almost 15 years--all of it but six months in person. I also have been in the position to talk to thousands, yup I said thousands of submissives over the years, so I do just a leetle about what I'm talking about. The research is all upstairs in my noggin', dude. With that said...

MY dom laughs when I throw temper tantrums. And sometimes he ignores them. Do I write very much like a doormat, kiddo? (Come on, say it, I dares ya! LOL) His response is an extremely healthy one and and heps ME immensely. You can say whatever you want to justify the fact that maybe YOUR sub pulls your strings or maybe YOUR sub makes you enraged with anger--knee jerk reactive anger which you irresponsibly do NOT CONTROL, but I have never once managed to pull this off with my master. I CAN'T make him angry, no matter how much I try! (Remember boy, I'm talking about 15 LONG _years_ of trying here. How long has YOUR longest D&S relationship been?) Perhaps the fact that he's been dominant since he was a child, practicing for 40 years, etc have something to do with it. Perhaps the fact that he LEARNED in his 30s through observation and desire to change and then very hard effort to control his temper has something to do with our differences in experiences.

Artful, I am an old, old pro at this sort of thing and I know for dead certainty having seen at least two hundred crowing dominant fools pull the same sort of shit you're pulling now, that anybody who could feel so threatened by a submissive so that he took something extremely positive she wrote about the control of one's anger and turned it into its opposite (what is it? you think chuckling at a submisive you love getting angry for reasons you understand perfectly is treating her like a doormat? say WHAT?) because he has to find some way to prover her wrong just screams out to the world, Artful, just screams it, how very insecure you atually are about who you are and what you are doing. You are the one, my child, (you may be 70 for all I know, but I am adressing your emtional maturity here) who needs to do his research. Would you like to send me the 400 or 500 pages I have written on bdsm dynamics so far? Naw, you aren't ready to understand what I've written yet.. My guess is you need 5-10 years in the old school of hard knocks and failed relationships first.

Having a dominant who has learned to control his anger and who DOES NOT get angry with his beloved slave is such a wonderful happy release for a woman who had a very insane absuisve angry screaming alcoholic father. I encourage you to have all the sympathy for me in my "oh so dreadful!" angerless situation that you want and throw your little outrage this way and that, becuase frankly, all of this make me giggle muchly.

I imagine your ego has been ruffled because I'm not treating you with the sort of respect that you imagine you deserve, Artful, but in the past I have tried nevertheess to be very helful and courteous in my responses to you WHILE STILL STICKING WITH THE ROCK BOTTOM TRUTH. The fact that what I say enrages you rather than opens your eyes or helps you shows you how very much undrestanding you lack and how very far you have to go. Artful, I've seen so many men in your place in life with your false assumptions and confusions. You, on the other hand, have never met somebody like me--and you never will again, my boy. Folks like me usually keep our words of wisdom for those who have ears to hear. I think it's about time my attempts to help you out come to an end. Pearls before swine and all that jazz.

Have a nice life,
Unda

 

[UCE]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Just a thought on Doms

I have to agree with Art's comments, totally. But in addition, I think it might be helpful if you were to clarify what rights, if any, you believe a submissive would or should have. In the statement above, you seem to imply that a submissive (I'm assuming you use "submissive" and "slave" interchangeably, correct me if I'm wrong), cannot walk away from the relationship. She can only be dismissed.

If that were true, then if a submissive wanted out of the relationship, and a Dominant held her against her will, that would be illegal in most states of the US.

I really hope I'm reading this wrong...

Chele, some of us take slavery with deadly seriousness. We usually do not post in forums like this because we must hide ourselves away from our fellow BDSM'ers who would prosecute us for our feely chosen right to our own sexuality (case in point: your threatening post above). I am an absoulte slave and that means SLAVERY the real thing. I cannot walk away. Saying that this situation is abusive is doing exactly what the straights do when they say your whip n chains consesual play is abuseive. My relationship is NON-CONSENUSAL and I initially freely chose it for myself and I will DEFEND TO THE DEATH my right to live this way.

I'm what you call a deeply radical submissive. I'll kill for what is important to me and my loved ones. My lifestyle is extreme but IT IS NOT WRONG. It is the only way I can live and be happy. I came to this decision when I was a fully mature woman of 30. Cause any trouble for me and mine, and I'll make sure that you get ten times more back in return. I've been living happily ever since and will die a happy woman tommorow if I get killed because I have FULLFILLED MY LIFE. I have done what I needed to do. Do you undrestand me?

Sorry to be so harsh, but how would YOU feel if someone tried to threaten your way of life by insinuating that it is illegal (which it is, actually, in most states. What _you_ do, I mean. Keep it in mind.).

I'm here. I'm queer. Get used to it or get assailed everywhere you go for the extreme bigotry you are assuming. I mean it, honey.

Unda. Crucia. Eximius.

 

[SexyChele]

Getting drunk on a Friday evening and then hurtling insults at other people may be your way of having fun over the weekend. In my book, it is just rude.

I never threatened you. I asked for clarification. However, you have threatened me ("Cause any trouble for me and mine, and I'll make sure that you get ten times more back in return.") And that could be grounds to have your post removed.

You have been extremely arrogant in your supposed "knowledge" and "experience". Yet, I find it somewhat amusing that whenever anyone questions your foundation of "research", or proves you wrong, you never respond. Those who do scientific research can usually back it up. I've not seen one thing from you that proves this. Therefore, for me personally, I must discredit everything you say.

I have tried to give you the benefit of the doubt by reading your posts. You have, so far, stated some sort of research on the "emotional age" of all subs and when asked by several people as to what you were basing your research on, never responded. You publically misquoted Zipman, and used his words against him, and when he called you on it, you never responded. Now, you insult Artful, a man you don't even know.

Because in my eyes your ramblings have no basis of any real truth, and you seem to be, by nature, a rather rude person, I will no longer waste my time. So, I guess you don't need to concern yourself with giving "ten times more back in return."

 

[UCE]

Getting drunk on a Friday evening and then hurtling insults at other people may be your way of having fun over the weekend. In my book, it is just rude.

I never threatened you. I asked for clarification. However, you have threatened me ("Cause any trouble for me and mine, and I'll make sure that you get ten times more back in return.") And that could be grounds to have your post removed.

You have been extremely arrogant in your supposed "knowledge" and "experience". Yet, I find it somewhat amusing that whenever anyone questions your foundation of "research", or proves you wrong, you never respond. Those who do scientific research can usually back it up. I've not seen one thing from you that proves this. Therefore, for me personally, I must discredit everything you say.

I have tried to give you the benefit of the doubt by reading your posts. You have, so far, stated some sort of research on the "emotional age" of all subs and when asked by several people as to what you were basing your research on, never responded. You publically misquoted Zipman, and used his words against him, and when he called you on it, you never responded. Now, you insult Artful, a man you don't even know.

Because in my eyes your ramblings have no basis of any real truth, and you seem to be, by nature, a rather rude person, I will no longer waste my time. So, I guess you don't need to concern yourself with giving "ten times more back in return."

Oh my. Where to begin?

It's hard to know how to respond to a message in which every statment is pretty much an intentional lie. But I'm going to give this one try and then put this baby to rest. Nice try on the "drunk and hurtling insults" attempt to discredit what I said. But now it's cold morning and I still feel the same way and stand by every word I wrote last night. Ad Hominum DISsmissed.

1. I read your message as threatening to my lifestyle, as completely unaccepting of a way of real-life bdsm that a majority of us engage in. And your asking for clarification took the form of that one deeply insulting (to my way of life) line at the end of your message where you said in effect, "OH SURELY THIS CAN'T BE SO! OH PLEASE CLARIFY FOR ME SO I AM NOT WORRIED!" How dare you think that a woman who is very happy in her life and has succeeded in her relationship for so many years needs to be worried about? You. Little. Fool. And all this bigotry and dislike for a way of life you don't even have a clue about (interesting, your post never asked me for clarification about what it's like to be me, you just wanted to be reassured that the "horror" that you imagined wasn't really happening) spews out of you in a forum where differences are supposed to be tolerated! This is utterly unacceptable. Are differences only supposed to be tolerated by all of us _except_ Chele? I think not, although by your posts you apparently believe that to be so.

About threat: Whenever someone says, as you said, that a person's way of life or relationship or activities is "Illegal," that is a THREAT, where you want to admit that into your misty little brain or not. I strongly advise that next time you leave that nasty little word out of your posts, even though you may feel that my "execrable" lifestyle deserves it.

"And that could be grounds to have your post removed."

Have you noticed that you are STILL threatening me? Making threats seem to be your modus opperendi, Chele. Also, my counter-threat, such as it was, hinged entirely upon what you freely do. Attack the right of people like me to live freely and participate happily in an open-minded forum such as this and I will do the same to you. In spades. The reason I was so strong in my wording last night is becuase I have encountered hundreds of little net bullies (yes you were being a bully in your first post to me, whether you can admit that now or not) just like you over the years and the only way to get them to BACK OFF from the lies and rumors they spread about one and their attempts to blackmail you or get you into legal difficulties is to show them you are not scared _and will do the same back to them_. That was the intent of my post to you last night.

2. I haven't been extremely arrogant. I have stated the facts as I know them to be true, I have stated my opinion, just as you and everybody else does here. The problem here is that you don't like what I am saying, therefore it's "arrogant." If you agreed with what I was saying you would characterize my style as "strong" and "logical."

Now, listen closely: I haven't seen any the posts of the people who have questioned my research and experience or attempted to prove it wrong for the following reasons: (a) I have a limited amount of time here and usually just look at the top threads (b) I have not figured out a way to find when people respond to me and I don't have the time to search through all the threads to try to find where I've posted. Very recently someone PM'd me a good suggestion about this, however, and I may try it.

(c) This one is long and requires its own paragraph. Where is it an ironclad rule here that a person has to respond to every single response written to them? Do you do so, Chele? Maybe you can because you don't have a life outside this forum, but as I've already mentioned, my time here is extremely limited (and as you may have noticed I'm extremely irritated at having to spend it discrediting the huge pack of lies in your message that never should have been spoken in the first place!)

There are many, many situations in a forum, Chele, where replying to someone only adds to the confusion and muddles the clear waters of what you originally said. Lots of times someone who is opposed to you will attempt to engage you in the sort of argument that mis-states your points about bdsm dishonestly. It's the height of foolishness, for me at least, to respond to such posts, because the charges they are trying to bring against you are for crimes you didn't commit, they want to fight you on things you never said. There are dozens of other circumstances in which a response would not be wise if you care about your words being heard by others. Trust me, honey, to know, whether I am drunk or sober, when such situations exist for me and my posts and when they do not. Of course, the strategy I'm talking about here is for me in this place entirely theoretical beacuse as I said above in point b, I haven't yet seen many threads where people responded to my posts because I haven't found them or come arcross them. But it's something I encounter and practice in many other forums.

3. I'm not here to win any popularity contents, Chele, and quite personally, while it would be cool to develop some friendships here, I can't possibly be freinds with anybody so shallow that they would misinterpret my lack of response as having nothing more to say or having backed down or, even worse, that I am snubbing them. I suggest that if someone really wants me to reply to a point they've made, they pm me with the thread name or link so I can go see it. If you don't care if I respond or not, continue as usual.

I don't care if you discredit anything I say. Haven't you figured this out yet? I'm not here writing for you personally, nor am I necessarily writing for the regular posters although at times I may address them. Usually however, in a forum where you wish to persent alterantive ideas and choices other than the approved mainstream ones, the regular posters are not going to be the ones assisted by what you say. They already, quite clearly, have a stake in holding tightly to the status quo, of what they consider to be right and most certainly about what they consider wrong, just as your extremely bigoted message to me proved last night. My audience is a small minority of lurkers who may also hold the alterative views or practice the minority lifestyle that I do. Such people are greatly encouraged and affirmed when somebody has the guts to speak out in a hostile environment and say YES! Actual Slavery is A Beautiful and Wonderous Thing for those Suited For it!

"You publically misquoted Zipman, and used his words against him, and when he called you on it, you never responded. "

4. All three parts of this statement of yours are a lie, Chele. How am I supposed to take what YOU say seriously, if you are willing to baldly lie about my activities simply because you do not like me?

First part: If I quote somebody I use their actual words, in quotes or by some quote formatting. If I paraphrase somebody, describe what they said in terms of my understanding of them, I do not use quotes. I never misquote. Back this cute little like up with a few examples, why don't you, honey?

Second part: I also didn't use his words "against" him. I commented on his mesasge and what I thought of it, in the same way that any of us might. His interpretation that I was flaming him was totally off-base and I am going to deal with that with him and explain myself better when and if I have the time today.

Third part: You're also lying about my never responding to zipman. I responded to him last night. Get your facts striaght before you accuse, Little Liar, or become the laughingstock of people who respect the truth.

I find it astonishing that you could pack so much deception into such a short sentence. You ought to get a prize for that!

5. I also didn't insult Artful, that is simple another misrepresentation of the actual facts. He attacked me, in this thread, out of the blue (from my perspective--remember I haven't seen his repsonses to any of my other messages) and tried to ridiculously and dishonestly turn something very wonderful (a dominant who does not get angry at his slave) into something horrific and false (a dominant who treats his slave as a doormat). I don't know Artful except for the stuff he posts here and I have had no reason to attack or flame him except last night when he attacked first, in that ridiculous attempt to make what is a beautiful and right thing seem ugly and wrong! Excuse me, dearest, but don't you think I have a right to defend myself and the way I life and the insulting of my master against ridicuous claims such as his? You can misrepresent that as an attack. I call it a defense against someone who attacked first. I think mine is the more honest point of view, frankly.

6. I'm not rude. Another misstatement, Chele. I am simply direct and honest. Rudeness implies a desire to hurt someone or make them look bad. I never have that intention in my posts, my emotion, as I stated to Zipman last night, is one of mild interest in the topic and an enthusiasm for talking about what I know. It appears that some people on this forum are not used to my style of communication. A pity, as bdsm relationships require intense directness and honesty, and if you cannot manage that among strangers or even tolerate it because it offends your ego, what hope do you have of doing it in the much more intense and trying confines of a relationship?

Thank you for backing off your personal threat toward me and mine. I know minorities are persecuted wherever they go, but it seems particularly hypocritical for you to do so in a forum that is supposedly open and accepting of all real-life relationships. Pardon the icy coldness of this post, but my dear, you have greatly earned it today.

Unda. Crucia. Eximius.

 

[SexyChele]

Oh my. Where to begin?

Yes, where to begin? Except to say that your entire post is dripping with a defensive behavior and the outright lies you accuse me of. Shall we begin?

It's hard to know how to respond to a message in which every statment is pretty much an intentional lie. But I'm going to give this one try and then put this baby to rest. Nice try on the "drunk and hurtling insults" attempt to discredit what I said. But now it's cold morning and I still feel the same way and stand by every word I wrote last night. Ad Hominum DISsmissed.

I did not write one intentional lie, and you surely - logical person that you are - can plainly see that. Anyone can. That is just a bullshit statement, and I think you realize it. Hence, were some of the defensiveness is coming from?

1. I read your message as threatening to my lifestyle, as completely unaccepting of a way of real-life bdsm that a majority of us engage in. And your asking for clarification took the form of that one deeply insulting (to my way of life) line at the end of your message where you said in effect, "OH SURELY THIS CAN'T BE SO! OH PLEASE CLARIFY FOR ME SO I AM NOT WORRIED!" How dare you think that a woman who is very happy in her life and has succeeded in her relationship for so many years needs to be worried about? You. Little. Fool. And all this bigotry and dislike for a way of life you don't even have a clue about (interesting, your post never asked me for clarification about what it's like to be me, you just wanted to be reassured that the "horror" that you imagined wasn't really happening) spews out of you in a forum where differences are supposed to be tolerated! This is utterly unacceptable. Are differences only supposed to be tolerated by all of us _except_ Chele? I think not, although by your posts you apparently believe that to be so.

Personally, I could give a rat's ass how you choose to live your life. I don't know you. I never will know you. And it has absolutely no affect on my life whatsoever. I asked for clarification because I had thought I must be misterpreting something, not because I was worried about your well-being. Hell, for all I know, you are some big hairy sitting behind a computer with nothing better to do. Why waste my energies on that?

Call me a "little fool" if you like. I do not call people names. That is the height of rudeness, which you have exemplified. And shows how you seemed to have lost your cool logic for a time.

So, tell me. Exactly where in my post did I directly say your lifestyle choice was bad? Huh? Where? No, really, I would like to know. Where did I ever say, "your choice is wrong"? To you or anybody? Yet you think you have the qualifications to call me a bigot? Interesting indeed.

Let me make this clear - as you have obviously not understood. 1. If a man and woman enter into a relationship (of any sort) willingly, then 2. the woman - for whatever reason - decides she no longer wants to be in that relationship, and 3. the man forcibly restrains her from leaving, that is typically called abduction or kidnap. And, yes, it is against the law. By your statement that a sub couldn't leave if she wanted to, it appeared you were stating the above scenario. Now, for you, in your particular lifestyle, you obviously want to be where you are, so your case is not abduction or kidnap. What you do behind closed doors may or may not be consentual, but the fact of you being there is consentual. That was the gist of my comment. Now, nowhere in there (or the original comment) was there anything that stated you were wrong, nor even a threat.

About threat: Whenever someone says, as you said, that a person's way of life or relationship or activities is "Illegal," that is a THREAT, where you want to admit that into your misty little brain or not. I strongly advise that next time you leave that nasty little word out of your posts, even though you may feel that my "execrable" lifestyle deserves it.

To state that an activity is illegal does in no way constitute a threat, hon. Look it up in the dictionary. I presume you have one?

"And that could be grounds to have your post removed."

Have you noticed that you are STILL threatening me? Making threats seem to be your modus opperendi, Chele. Also, my counter-threat, such as it was, hinged entirely upon what you freely do. Attack the right of people like me to live freely and participate happily in an open-minded forum such as this and I will do the same to you. In spades. The reason I was so strong in my wording last night is becuase I have encountered hundreds of little net bullies (yes you were being a bully in your first post to me, whether you can admit that now or not) just like you over the years and the only way to get them to BACK OFF from the lies and rumors they spread about one and their attempts to blackmail you or get you into legal difficulties is to show them you are not scared _and will do the same back to them_. That was the intent of my post to you last night.

"Still"? Excuse me? I am only referring to the standards of this board. Check it out with RS if doubt me. And if you have so little time for these boards, then how can you state that threats are my "modus opperendi"? Hmmm? Or do you just read my posts? I'd be flattered, of course, but since I don't spend that much time here, you wouldn't have much to read.

Again, I ask you - find one time where I have told some one, anyone, they did not have the right to live as they please. I'm serious about this, because, if so, then I need to do some apologizing. (Yeah, you know? Where you say you are sorry for doing something wrong?)

And now I'm a "net bully"? Good grief, woman, get to know who the hell you are writing to, will you? Yes, I have made strong comments to people - people who have either made strong comments to me first, or who returned fire. I don't, and never have, "bullied" anyone. On the net or in real life. Get to know me and the facts before you begin spewing your hatred at people. And just who is the bigot here?

Now, I don't know you, I haven't the foggiest clue as to where you live, what you do for a living, the people you know. Yet somehow I can blackmail you or cause legal difficulties? My, but you are delusional! I agree that one who attempts blackmail and/or legal difficulties could threaten you. But exactly how is that possible when some one (me) has no recourse to do that to another person (you). Of course, the idea of evening doing anything remotely like that doesn't concern me, because, as I said, I really don't care.

2. I haven't been extremely arrogant. I have stated the facts as I know them to be true, I have stated my opinion, just as you and everybody else does here. The problem here is that you don't like what I am saying, therefore it's "arrogant." If you agreed with what I was saying you would characterize my style as "strong" and "logical."

In your post to Artful, you were very, very arrogant. And in prior posts you have also come across that way. Don't know if you realize it or not, but it is there. You state that you have "research", and expect all and sundry to simply accept it - that is arrogance.

Now, listen closely: I haven't seen any the posts of the people who have questioned my research and experience or attempted to prove it wrong for the following reasons: (a) I have a limited amount of time here and usually just look at the top threads

Well, for having limited time on the computer, you certainly seem to imply that you have read all of my posts. Interesting.

(b) I have not figured out a way to find when people respond to me and I don't have the time to search through all the threads to try to find where I've posted. Very recently someone PM'd me a good suggestion about this, however, and I may try it.

Actually, it is quite simply. Just check the "Email Notification" box at the bottom of your post.

(c) This one is long and requires its own paragraph. Where is it an ironclad rule here that a person has to respond to every single response written to them? Do you do so, Chele? Maybe you can because you don't have a life outside this forum, but as I've already mentioned, my time here is extremely limited (and as you may have noticed I'm extremely irritated at having to spend it discrediting the huge pack of lies in your message that never should have been spoken in the first place!)

No one has to respond to any post directed at them. However, if one states they have done "research" into a particular topic, and does not show sources, it is typical for others who may not agree or who are simply curious to want to know what the sources were. If you choose to not to respond, then a lot of times that is taken for someone not willing to prove themselves.

Ah, the old "you must be on here a lot because you don't have a life" routine. Now, that is pathetic - can't be anymore original than that? If you truly have read all of my posts, as you seem to imply, then you will note that I am on here very, very rarely. Why? Because I'm out doing other things. Plus, it is not me who seems to have all this time to write overly long posts - or do you simply copy and paste them? Sorry, couldn't resist.

My "huge pack of lies"? In one small post? I never knew I had that talent. Well, despite the fact that it isn't true, of course.

There are many, many situations in a forum, Chele, where replying to someone only adds to the confusion and muddles the clear waters of what you originally said. Lots of times someone who is opposed to you will attempt to engage you in the sort of argument that mis-states your points about bdsm dishonestly. It's the height of foolishness, for me at least, to respond to such posts, because the charges they are trying to bring against you are for crimes you didn't commit, they want to fight you on things you never said. There are dozens of other circumstances in which a response would not be wise if you care about your words being heard by others. Trust me, honey, to know, whether I am drunk or sober, when such situations exist for me and my posts and when they do not. Of course, the strategy I'm talking about here is for me in this place entirely theoretical beacuse as I said above in point b, I haven't yet seen many threads where people responded to my posts because I haven't found them or come arcross them. But it's something I encounter and practice in many other forums.

To note whether some one is engaging you on purpose is something that can easily be figured out in the first two or three lines of a post. Besides, most people who want to engage in arguing for arguing only do not waste their time on more than a couple of lines at most. And, yes, you could say that by the amount of time I've spent on this post, I do not wish to argue.

3. I'm not here to win any popularity contents, Chele, and quite personally, while it would be cool to develop some friendships here, I can't possibly be freinds with anybody so shallow that they would misinterpret my lack of response as having nothing more to say or having backed down or, even worse, that I am snubbing them. I suggest that if someone really wants me to reply to a point they've made, they pm me with the thread name or link so I can go see it. If you don't care if I respond or not, continue as usual.

I don't know of too many of us here out to win a popularity contest. What would be the point? Who really cares about anyone one here anyway?

Now, exactly why should I have to go through all the hassle of finding a link to something I want you to respond to, then creating a PM, then wait around until you have time to answer? I've stated my questions in the thread. I expect to be answered there. If I wanted to take it to the PM route, I would do that initially. And, for the record, I figured out how to find those threads that I had participated in the first day I was at Lit. It really isn't all that difficult. Well, that is, unless some one (and, no, not you) is afraid another person will see they are on Lit through their email.

I don't care if you discredit anything I say. Haven't you figured this out yet? I'm not here writing for you personally, nor am I necessarily writing for the regular posters although at times I may address them. Usually however, in a forum where you wish to persent alterantive ideas and choices other than the approved mainstream ones, the regular posters are not going to be the ones assisted by what you say. They already, quite clearly, have a stake in holding tightly to the status quo, of what they consider to be right and most certainly about what they consider wrong, just as your extremely bigoted message to me proved last night. My audience is a small minority of lurkers who may also hold the alterative views or practice the minority lifestyle that I do. Such people are greatly encouraged and affirmed when somebody has the guts to speak out in a hostile environment and say YES! Actual Slavery is A Beautiful and Wonderous Thing for those Suited For it!

So, now you have called the majority of posters (regulars) on this board bigots as well? You really ARE defensive, aren't you? And I don't expect you or anyone else to be writing to me specifically, unless I ask a specific question of some one. And I take it you are calling this place a "hostile environment"? How interesting it is to know what you truly think of this place. It only gives me further reason to skip over your posts.

"Actual Slavery"? Actually this is a topic I am interested in - not for me to live out. And, no, not because you think that I would say it was wrong. Because I am curious about it. It is because in an "actual slavery" situation, the slave has no rights, can offer no questions, must have no limits. If legal to do so, a "Master" can kill his "slave", no questions asked. And no, that is not a "threat" - murder in the United States is illegal. Or do I have to explain that to you as well?

"You publically misquoted Zipman, and used his words against him, and when he called you on it, you never responded. "

4. All three parts of this statement of yours are a lie, Chele. How am I supposed to take what YOU say seriously, if you are willing to baldly lie about my activities simply because you do not like me?

I've lied, huh? Okay, let's see what ya said....

First part: If I quote somebody I use their actual words, in quotes or by some quote formatting. If I paraphrase somebody, describe what they said in terms of my understanding of them, I do not use quotes. I never misquote. Back this cute little like up with a few examples, why don't you, honey?

First, I find the term "honey" to be offensive. I don't expect you to stop, as you are trying to be as insulting as possible. But I am stating it for the record. The example came from Zipman's own words, btw.

Second part: I also didn't use his words "against" him. I commented on his mesasge and what I thought of it, in the same way that any of us might. His interpretation that I was flaming him was totally off-base and I am going to deal with that with him and explain myself better when and if I have the time today.

I am glad you are going to take responsibility. It shows a mature person. But then, as a sub, you are not very mature emotionally, are you? What a paradox....

Third part: You're also lying about my never responding to zipman. I responded to him last night. Get your facts striaght before you accuse, Little Liar, or become the laughingstock of people who respect the truth.

Calling me a "little liar" on the boards only makes me demand that you prove it. Otherwise, it is slander. Oh, is that another term I must explain to you, or will you simply say it is a "threat"?

Yes, I did notice that you responded to him - after I had written my post to you. How very convenient....

I find it astonishing that you could pack so much deception into such a short sentence. You ought to get a prize for that!

Me too, if it weren't for the fact that none of what you said is true.

5. I also didn't insult Artful, that is simple another misrepresentation of the actual facts. He attacked me, in this thread, out of the blue (from my perspective--remember I haven't seen his repsonses to any of my other messages) and tried to ridiculously and dishonestly turn something very wonderful (a dominant who does not get angry at his slave) into something horrific and false (a dominant who treats his slave as a doormat). I don't know Artful except for the stuff he posts here and I have had no reason to attack or flame him except last night when he attacked first, in that ridiculous attempt to make what is a beautiful and right thing seem ugly and wrong! Excuse me, dearest, but don't you think I have a right to defend myself and the way I life and the insulting of my master against ridicuous claims such as his? You can misrepresent that as an attack. I call it a defense against someone who attacked first. I think mine is the more honest point of view, frankly.

Had you taken the time to go back to the places where you have posted, you would have seen Artful's responses to you time and again. This is what happens when some one posts and runs. There are some who are responding to you, disagreeing with you, but when you never come back to the thread (and some have remained at the top), then the one time you return you feel as though you have been insulted.

Artful's response did not come from out of the blue. It is simply the first time you have every read (if I take your word for the idea that you did not ever go back to the threads you posted to) anything he responded to you. You do have a right to defend yourself, just as anyone else here does (and the term, dearest, is also offensive to me). But Artful has been responding to you all along, in the hopes of having you say something. When you finally did, you insult him. Now, how do you think that looks?

6. I'm not rude. Another misstatement, Chele. I am simply direct and honest. Rudeness implies a desire to hurt someone or make them look bad. I never have that intention in my posts, my emotion, as I stated to Zipman last night, is one of mild interest in the topic and an enthusiasm for talking about what I know. It appears that some people on this forum are not used to my style of communication. A pity, as bdsm relationships require intense directness and honesty, and if you cannot manage that among strangers or even tolerate it because it offends your ego, what hope do you have of doing it in the much more intense and trying confines of a relationship?

This entire post consists of rudeness. Calling me names is being rude. Accusing me of things I have not done is being rude. Direct and honest is something I can handle. I do that myself. Or maybe the posts where I have been direct and honest, you have misinterpreted as being rude?

The only thing that offends me - and not even my ego - is your penchant for name-calling when it is uncalled for. My ego is actually quite strong, thank you very much. And I have been involved relationships and know and realize the intensity of them. Simply another example of the extent of your arrogance.

Thank you for backing off your personal threat toward me and mine. I know minorities are persecuted wherever they go, but it seems particularly hypocritical for you to do so in a forum that is supposedly open and accepting of all real-life relationships. Pardon the icy coldness of this post, but my dear, you have greatly earned it today.

I have no need to back off a personal threat, as none was ever made. And I have not persecuted anyone on this forum. Again, slander, and I ask you find where I have done so.

No, I choose not to pardon the icy coldness of your post, as it was clearly intentional. And, also, I am in no way "your dear" - that is offensive. And I have earned none of this today. Your rantings are simply an outpouring of your own defensiveness and something you need to really get a handle on. But that is my own personal opinion - not a "threat".

Unda. Crucia. Eximius.

Yeah, whatever. Good-bye and have a nice life....

 

[UCE]

Edit: Nevermind, she doesn't even deserve those last words. Just:

*plonk*

 

[justgem]

.

 

[stgeorge6602]

My whole understanding on the BD/SM label is this and though it may differ from others thats just fine.

a SADIST hurts people or even animals,they enjoy and receive pleasure from the act of inflicting pain,it doesnt have to be sexual or even physical aslong as that lifeform suffers in some way.No consent is needed between them.

a MASCHIST enjoys receiving pain,the act of being hurt is a source of pleasure for them,more often than not it is a sexual pleasure.

a DOMINATRIX is one of two types of people.

The first is just a paid performer who does it for a living.
and to me shouldnt count.

Or one of two people involved in a relationship.
Who enjoy the role play of being in control or acts in this way solely to give pleasure to their partner.

a SUBMISSIVE enjoys being controlled,they enjoy being degradedits,whether it be manifested in a physical or mental way.
Its not really about the receiving of pain.

And as for the labels of MASTER or SLAVE Well that depends on what the people involved in the act of B/D like to be called when together.

 

[~Dream~]

Re; what I perceive my Master meant

UCE stated :
There's a second kind of self-control that's more important to me than this habit stuff. It's the ability of a dominant to control their personal responses to me and not just respond in a knee-jerk fashion or "react" emotionally without thinking how it will effect me. I think I can generalise here and say this is important for a lot of other submissives, too. We tend to be hyersensitive to anger, criticism, and other negative emotions and easily crushed. But the crux of the matter is that when someone else has all the control and you have none, their feelings about you matter very very VERY much to you, as how they feel about you affects your life in very sweeping ways. If your submissive gets angry at you, big deal, you can afford to laugh at it or even ignore it. You OWN her and she's not going anywhere, so who cares if she has a temper tantrum. It's not threatening because the submissive, at least in a master-slave relationship, has no ability to make any relationship-shattering decisions

*** I have to say I resent the implication that as asubmissive slave I have NO say .. I ALWAYS indeed DO have a say in my relationship.. I can CHOOSE to WALK .. I have the power to end my relationship with Master Artful at anytime I so choose ,in that respect as well as others we are EQUAL in value..also I STILL CONTROL..ALL my Emotions ,those are MINE ,period..Master cannot afford to just laugh off ,or ignore me anymore than I can Him ,we NEED each other to make this work ,period..
His feelings about me Do matter indeed as they ALWAYS will,above all others besides my children ,His feelings affect me the most ..THEY do matter to my life in the real FACT that I want and NEED to Please Him..I want Him happy..but as far as relationship issues go,rest assured ,a slave has just as much POWER as the Master does in making it or breaking it ,1 without the other does NOT work ,I am incomplete without His Control,and He is Incomplete without my Submission ,period .. Jmho and I hope that's what Master meant ..

 

[justgem]

.

 

[stgeorge6602]

JUSTGEM you quote a dictionary for the meaning of the word Submissive as being the trait of being willing to yield to the will of another person.
Is that called being controlled ?
If some stranger controlled or made you act in a submissive way would that be degrading to you,or is it something that you would take pleasure in.

Are you be submissive in public?or only in private?

 

[Grvdigger]

Ok where to start.......

I was away during most of the weekend, I come back and start scratching My head at what happened to a simple post. This is part of a prblm I see many places. PPl get very defensive when anything they hold personal gets attacked....and it seems more so when the subject is D/s or bdsm.

First, thank you My little one for checking in and trying to keep the thread on track. you know My will well.

Second, Uce and SexyChele, I hope I speak for many when I say that if you have personal prblms with another poster in any thread, plz try the pm option. I started this thread to try to help some new ppl thinking in the right directions. I was not trying to tell them what to think or how, just stimulate it. When ever ppl in the lifestyle tear at each others throats it hurts the whole community. Also...I agree in some with UCE on the tantrum from a sub. My gem knows at any point she can say whatever she is feeling even if that includes yelling. she is safe in knowing that she is mine no matter what. But it is a mutal agreement, if something in the future changes and W/we are not longer compatable then she has the right to walk away. This is what is right for U/us but not for A/all. Also...slavery is illegal in the U.S., that is a fact. But also many bdsm activites are illegal in some states. Does this stop anyone from doing them, NO. Again, each must chose their own path.

Last.... I am not sure what your point was stgeorge. Are you saying that being a submissive is degrading in itself? I would very much like if you clarified if you would, that way I can sense what you were saying, ty.

Again, I apologize to A/all that have seen the worse behavior of ppl during this thread. Just know that most ppl in the D/s lifestyle are very understanding of whatever choices you make, W/we personally may not like them, but that does not mean hide from them either. Remeber, D/s is about choices, You and your sub make them and decide how far is too far....thank you to all posters.

 

[Domn8]

Clapping

It seems to me... if you're happy... and you're making your partner happy... you're doing it right.

Good Answer.

 

[stgeorge6602]

Well lets see..GRVDIGGER ...maybe in my thought on the word Submissive I should have stated that they enjoy being controlled OR degraded..and thats what they got pleasure in..
As for being degaded if you are submissive,yes I believe that at certain times this is the case.

One quick example to me would be the Adult males who enjoy wearing babies nappies and getting their bottoms spanked,whilst being told that they are bad bad boys.

Would you get down on your hands and knees in a public place like a shopping mall,and lick the feet of your master/owner if he told you.

As ive stated this is only my view on things,and I enjoy reading and never mean to attack others who have expressed their own thoughts on things..

 

[Grvdigger]

Ty stgeorge for the clarifaction.

degradation is something that a sub may or may not enjoy. Some only get pleasure out of serving or just out of bondage. Personally I do not degradate My gem, I build her up. I know some subs that do enjoy this but it is just one small part of the submissiveness, it is not a prerequisite. Here are My thoughts:

submissive- this is someone who gets pleasure (sexual or otherwise) from submitting to a Dominate. Most subs will differ between slave and sub. Most do not see their selves as "property" but more as belonging to a Dom. Their nature may include many things. Also being submissive does not mean that they bow down to just anyone. They chose who to give this honor to. subs also set their own limits, but these may change with time.

slave- is a peson who makes a commitment to serve a lifestyle Dom, usually permanent. They give "owernership" over to the Dom. Most even "give up" the right to use safe words, limits and negotiate scenes. Their Master decides all for them and are given the right to do whatever They chose. Power exchange is a must for them.

bottom- is the reciever in bdsm. again this does not mean the person has to be a submissive. Most bottoms also enjoy being the top and switch readly back and forth depending on their desire at the time.

These are just My thoughts on those. It is a bit harder to define somthing that I am not.

 

[UCE]

Gravedigger

"degradation is something that a sub may or may not enjoy. Some only get pleasure out of serving or just out of bondage. Personally I do not degradate My gem, I build her up. "

You do realize, don't you, that the two are not polar opposites of each other. My master's only thought is to build me up and he does this constantly, has been for years. However, sexually I adore degradation and when experiencing it I never feel like my self is being torn down. Just like physical pain, degradation is not abuse when it's a sexual fetish for a person.

 

[Grvdigger]

Yes uce.....I do know for you that it brings pleasure. What I had wanted to say was that you did not have to like it to be a sub. It can be but does not have to be inclusive. It is something that I personaly do not enjoy, but just cause I do not does not make it any better or worse than anything I do.

And you are right, nothing consensual is abuse.

 

[UCE]

What I had wanted to say was that you did not have to like it to be a sub.

Yeah, that is very true. It's a good thing, too, a lot of subs do not like degradation or humiliation and even those of us that do have certain types that we cannot take because they push big buttons and make us feel just bad, instead of that delicious mixture of sexy and embarassed that makes it worthwhile.

 

[rosco rathbone]

*takes out black book and pen*

certain types such as what?

 

[rosco rathbone]

My whole understanding on the BD/SM label is this and though it may differ from others thats just fine.

a SADIST hurts people or even animals,they enjoy and receive pleasure from the act of inflicting pain,it doesnt have to be sexual or even physical aslong as that lifeform suffers in some way.No consent is needed between them.

a MASCHIST enjoys receiving pain,the act of being hurt is a source of pleasure for them,more often than not it is a sexual pleasure.

a DOMINATRIX is one of two types of people.

The first is just a paid performer who does it for a living.
and to me shouldnt count.

Or one of two people involved in a relationship.
Who enjoy the role play of being in control or acts in this way solely to give pleasure to their partner.

a SUBMISSIVE enjoys being controlled,they enjoy being degradedits,whether it be manifested in a physical or mental way.
Its not really about the receiving of pain.

And as for the labels of MASTER or SLAVE Well that depends on what the people involved in the act of B/D like to be called when together.

What about DOMINATE MASTER? WHere do they fit into the scheme?

 

[UCE]

*takes out black book and pen*

certain types such as what?

Um, are you taking notes for the fine and upstanding purpose of avoiding doing these scary henious things to the women that you encounter or for the opposite reason? (Very suspicious look at Innocent Rosco)

Unda

The following image is part of a series that was described in a TGP as Victorian Sexual Habits and I clicked on the link several dozen times getting pay site after pay site (the tgps will do that to you sometimes) until I finally got the photo gallery having the what I hoped would be those wonderful Victorian outfits and settings.... and what do I get instead? Louie the XIV's bastard brother and some slatterns he hauled into a dungeon to have some fun with! grrrr! Still, it's a kind of cute series.

 

[UCE]

What about DOMINATE MASTER? WHere do they fit into the scheme?

I think that they're the ones who get to Dominant the Remedial Reading course.

 

[A Desert Rose]

Unfuckingbelievable.......

My first question is: why would anyone want to TRY to muddle through this "subs" essays? I simply do not have time to nor the inclination to ATTEMPT to read her posts.

Second question is: why does anyone care what she says?

So, UCE.... please flame me too, if that is all you have better to do, but be assured that I will not flame back or engage in any way.

As one sub to another, you really are beneath me.

 

[Grvdigger]

rose, I know where you are coming from, but responding to her is what she wants. Just remember, more than just you see the truth.