lilminx's dilemma

[Ebonyfire]

Re: My limits to "undercover"

No we haven't. Some of us do not go under cover.

Ebony

Dating is never easy, specially when, as many of us do, we are doing it online and not with a direct person that we meet, see, hear the voice, see facial expressions, smell, can judge reactions and take notice of the little, even subconscious actions and gestures they display.

Getting a second opinion has always been part of the "dating game" though.Remember sharing all those little details and news with your friend about the guy you had just met, who he was, what he did, where he came from...? I know I did! there wasn't much I would know about a pontential bf that I wouldn't relate to some choice person of my trusting to get their opinion.

And haven't we all sent our those little letter "on behalf of our frined" to see what another person thought about them, checking out possibly mutual feelings or at least avoiding embarrassment?

There were no "real risks" involved back then apart froma bit of lost dignity and a broken heart till the end of the summer holidays. And there is so much more on stake if you head out into a BDSM search. You can loose all from reputation, career to your life (ok, maybe I AM exaggerating but you catch my drift ... ) if you aren't carefull. On the other hand - there is so much to be won.

I still do swap information about interesting profiles I find with trusted friends, I may exchange a bit of background info about someone if I have gotten in touch (I NEVER exchange full correspondence, that feels a bit dodgy and not honest). I will discuss impressions, feelings, little "bumps" that stirr me the right or wrong way, just like I used to do when dating at age 16, no more, no less.

If there is a potential partner who seems geniuinely interested, usually he/she won't oppose to be brought in touch with other online friends of the other party. For them to know they are known by others who are "on your side" heightens the risks at a later stage for them to be exposed if they turn out to be a fraud, they know you are part of healthy community life, and not a "screen monster" who has nothing else to do, is isolated and thus easy prey. So why not follow the open approach? Nothing wrong with "Mind if I introduce you to a few of my friends?" if you think the further development is worth your while?

I do think a "second opinion" on officially available info like a profile is ok, without ever mentioning it, a bit of discussion with your freinds about a potential play partner is to be expected and is ok. All that goes beyond that in ways of being "sneaky", like sending a friened to "seduce" your possible partner to see how serious he is etc. is taking things too far, in Rl and online.

Never forgdt that after all ther are REAL people behind all the typed words on screens - anyway, in most cases there are. Simply follow the "don't do to others what you don't want to be done to you " rule and you should be fine.

 

[morninggirl5]

Re: My limits to "undercover"

Dating is never easy, specially when, as many of us do, we are doing it online and not with a direct person that we meet, see, hear the voice, see facial expressions, smell, can judge reactions and take notice of the little, even subconscious actions and gestures they display.

Getting a second opinion has always been part of the "dating game" though.Remember sharing all those little details and news with your friend about the guy you had just met, who he was, what he did, where he came from...? I know I did! there wasn't much I would know about a pontential bf that I wouldn't relate to some choice person of my trusting to get their opinion.

And haven't we all sent our those little letter "on behalf of our frined" to see what another person thought about them, checking out possibly mutual feelings or at least avoiding embarrassment?

There were no "real risks" involved back then apart froma bit of lost dignity and a broken heart till the end of the summer holidays. And there is so much more on stake if you head out into a BDSM search. You can loose all from reputation, career to your life (ok, maybe I AM exaggerating but you catch my drift ... ) if you aren't carefull. On the other hand - there is so much to be won.

Most of us still have those "girl talks." They're no longer conducted in the bathroom by giggling teenagers and the different, but we still have them.

As long as there is no "testing" or breaking of confidences, i don't see that there is a problem.

 

[Lancecastor]

Re: didn't mean to get in the middle of that cream

someone who is nice to you and mean to the waiter is not a nice person.

you can tell a lot about a person by the way they treat people around them.






okay... maybe i did mean to get in the middle of the cream and raspberries

Agreed...you did in fact intend to stick your nose in my cream.

Now that you've so rudely done so, you should know that in my book, nosy people who say backhanded things then run away are considered to bereft of character and backbone.

Waiters love me; they remember my name in cities and years distant without fail, as I remember them, tip well and behave as a proper customer. Not that it's any of your business.

And I'll bet no wait staff would ever forget the pleasure of serving Ms. Ebony Fire.

So, mskittycat....run along with your cute insults and don't bother me with your piffling again.

Thank-you.
Lance

 

[Lancecastor]

Re: Re: My limits to "undercover"

Most of us still have those "girl talks." They're no longer conducted in the bathroom by giggling teenagers and the different, but we still have them.

As long as there is no "testing" or breaking of confidences, i don't see that there is a problem.

Women should cease with all double standards in dating.

We're either equals....or we're not.

Any woman who twitters off to the loo with her pal in a man's presence for a giggle should be immediately downgraded to "barbie" status and treated like an object thereafter.

And rightly so.

It's your call;
Lance

 

[Ebonyfire]

Re: Re: Re: My limits to "undercover"

Women should cease with all double standards in dating.

We're either equals....or we're not.

Any woman who twitters off to the loo with her pal in a man's presence for a giggle should be immediately downgraded to "barbie" status and treated like an object thereafter.

And rightly so.

It's your call;
Lance

When we went as a group to the john, it was to talk about other women. But I'm black.

Ebony

 

[cymbidia]

Re: Re: didn't mean to get in the middle of that cream

you did in fact intend to stick your nose in my cream.

Now that you've so rudely done so, you should know that in my book, nosy people who say backhanded things then run away are considered to bereft of character and backbone.

Actually, Lance, it was you who stuck your fluffy little bit 'o cream into an interesting and rather meaty discussion, a discussion that did not have you-glorious-you as its focal point, i might add. In fact, it nothing at all to do with you.

As is becoming drearily usual, you arrived and immediately turned the focus of the dicussion on to you-glorious-you. After the floodlights were affixed where you wanted them (on you-glorious-you, of course), you spasmed into a parody of food flirting (of the lightest kind). (Sometimes instead of the food flirting trip, you elect to keep slinging arrows willy-nilly while crowing about how badly all here are treating you [-glorious-you]).

Stop scaring the scared little girls, okay? Why don't you take on those of us who aren't scared of you and leave the others alone? It's kinda bullyish otherwise.

In my book, rude and self-centered people are just that.
I think you may be one of them, Lance.
Perhaps i'm wrong, perhaps not.
Perhaps i'm being unfair, perhaps not.

I'd just like to have a reasonable adult discussion about issues that relate to BDSM sexuality without it devolving into a discussion about you and/or your food flirting. I don't think that's an unreasonable want, and i don't think all those who come here for solid info would find it unreasonable, either.

 

[Ebonyfire]

Re: Re: Re: didn't mean to get in the middle of that cream

Actually, Lance, it was you who stuck your fluffy little bit 'o cream into an interesting and rather meaty discussion, a discussion that did not have you-glorious-you as its focal point, i might add. In fact, it nothing at all to do with you.

As is becoming drearily usual, you arrived and immediately turned the focus of the dicussion on to you-glorious-you. After the floodlights were affixed where you wanted them (on you-glorious-you, of course), you spasmed into a parody of food flirting (of the lightest kind). (Sometimes instead of the food flirting trip, you elect to keep slinging arrows willy-nilly while crowing about how badly all here are treating you [-glorious-you]).

Stop scaring the scared little girls, okay? Why don't you take on those of us who aren't scared of you and leave the others alone? It's kinda bullyish otherwise.

In my book, rude and self-centered people are just that.
I think you may be one of them, Lance.
Perhaps i'm wrong, perhaps not.
Perhaps i'm being unfair, perhaps not.

I'd just like to have a reasonable adult discussion about issues that relate to BDSM sexuality without it devolving into a discussion about you and/or your food flirting. I don't think that's an unreasonable want, and i don't think all those who come here for solid info would find it unreasonable, either.

Cym, kinda reminds me of you, ya know?

Ebony

 

[Lancecastor]

Re: Re: Re: didn't mean to get in the middle of that cream

Actually, Lance, it was you who stuck your fluffy little bit 'o cream into an interesting and rather meaty discussion, a discussion that did not have you-glorious-you as its focal point, i might add. In fact, it nothing at all to do with you.

As is becoming drearily usual, you arrived and immediately turned the focus of the dicussion on to you-glorious-you. After the floodlights were affixed where you wanted them (on you-glorious-you, of course), you spasmed into a parody of food flirting (of the lightest kind). (Sometimes instead of the food flirting trip, you elect to keep slinging arrows willy-nilly while crowing about how badly all here are treating you [-glorious-you]).

Stop scaring the scared little girls, okay? Why don't you take on those of us who aren't scared of you and leave the others alone? It's kinda bullyish otherwise.

In my book, rude and self-centered people are just that.
I think you may be one of them, Lance.
Perhaps i'm wrong, perhaps not.
Perhaps i'm being unfair, perhaps not.

I'd just like to have a reasonable adult discussion about issues that relate to BDSM sexuality without it devolving into a discussion about you and/or your food flirting. I don't think that's an unreasonable want, and i don't think all those who come here for solid info would find it unreasonable, either.

Lilminx's *problem* was solved by lilminx before this thread started.

From where I sit, the rest of it, and the entire day, has been spent by people clubbing me over the head, with me foolishly pickin' and grinnin along and, like an idiot, explaining myself to people who really just want to call me names.

No more.

Each and every load of insulting fluff that crosses my bow with a view to sullying my name and character will be summarily plowed under.

Cogent discussion within the letter and intent of the Sticky governing this forum will receive the same in return.

Lance

 

[cymbidia]

Re: Re: Re: Re: didn't mean to get in the middle of that cream

Cym, kinda reminds me of you, ya know?

Which part, Eb? One-line zingers aren't all that helpful in discussions that involve explanations and detail differences and similarities in thoughts and intentions. They just don't further understanding in any meaningful manner. Perhaps you could elaborate. Please keep in mind that i'm not calling names or engaging in any battles. I've not picked any sides - except, of course, the furthering of the goals of this forum itself. THAT'S my overriding prejudice, every time.

From where I sit, the rest of it, and the entire day, has been spent by people clubbing me over the head, with me foolishly pickin' and grinnin along and, like an idiot, explaining myself to people who really just want to call me names.

Trust me, i know just how you feel.

Someone's sig line: Sometimes you're the pigeon and sometimes you're the statue.

Blow it off or take a little Lit-break. We all have to have one from time to time. The place gets too, uh, in-your-face after a while if one doesn't take some time off on occasion. Or just saunter on.

Life is a caberet - and Lit is just one instrument in the orchestra up in the balcony. Sometimes we all lose sight of that fact.

 

[morninggirl5]

Re: Re: Re: My limits to "undercover"

Women should cease with all double standards in dating.

We're either equals....or we're not.

Any woman who twitters off to the loo with her pal in a man's presence for a giggle should be immediately downgraded to "barbie" status and treated like an object thereafter.

And rightly so.

It's your call;
Lance

I think you read my post and inferred your own meaning. I said the conversations no longer take place in the bathroom like they did when we were teenagers, but they still happen.

I never mentioned giggling.

I guess you'd already painted me with "barbie" status and read my post accordingly.

 

[lilminx]

Re: Re: Re: Re: didn't mean to get in the middle of that cream

Lilminx's *problem* was solved by lilminx before this thread started.

You are the last person I want speaking for me on here. Yes, I made my decision, but I enjoyed reading input from other people after I sent off my e-mail. It's how I learn, as well as how ther people learn. Maybe things posted after I sent the e-mail didn't help me in this particular situation, but they could help me (or someone else reading it) in another similar situation.

I think Cym was being far too nice to you by comparing you to Sparky. I like Sparky.

You seem to enjoy inciting people and corrupting threads that are started out of genuine concern or want of learning. As Cym said, it's enough to scare people away from wanting to post here, and it also prevents people from getting the true information that might be in the thread.

 

[Lancecastor]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: didn't mean to get in the middle of that cream

You are the last person I want speaking for me on here. Yes, I made my decision, but I enjoyed reading input from other people after I sent off my e-mail. It's how I learn, as well as how ther people learn. Maybe things posted after I sent the e-mail didn't help me in this particular situation, but they could help me (or someone else reading it) in another similar situation.

I think Cym was being far too nice to you by comparing you to Sparky. I like Sparky.

You seem to enjoy inciting people and corrupting threads that are started out of genuine concern or want of learning. As Cym said, it's enough to scare people away from wanting to post here, and it also prevents people from getting the true information that might be in the thread.

You had two threads on the same issue today, lilminx....and you referred to another on the same topic you started some time ago.

The issue of some guy wanting a picture of you was (righteously, correctly) resolved by you before this thread was ever started by WD.

But this last post of yours was a fine opportunity for you to reiterate yet again that you don't like me, using the thinnest of precepts...my mention that your issue was resolved already....as the rationale to say it.

Duly noted ...for the umpteenth time today.

Thanks again;
Lance

 

[lilminx]

Lance, I don't know you enough to say I don't like you- there you go again, talking for me. I don't like your actions, and I don't like your words.

And if it continues to be duly noted, and I'm getting tiresome to you, then stop posting to me- problem solved.

By the way, I only started one of the threads about it today. Of course, it turned into a big brouhaha- as did this one.

The reason I referred to the other thread in the general forum was to show you that not everyone lies, and most people don't seem to be cool with it. My issue there wasn't with whether it was protocol to show a self-proclaimed Dom who demanded it my picture.

 

[mskittykatt]

leave me the fuck out of this - i wasn't talking specifically to or about anyone here, i just remembered a quote from readers digest and thought it pertained to the nature of people discussion going on here....

i'm outta here for awhile