Scat (no, i'm not talking about jazz)

[Masterslilbidet]

Alts.

What a cheap way to get your digs in without any chance of feedback.

I might erase it if I hadn't started finding it funny.

With all due respect, Sir Moderator, not to piss in your fez, but, why don't you "digs" a hole, drop your pants around your ankles, squat carefully over said hole so as not to befoul your trousers, make copious poo poo in the hole and offer these neebobs the opportunity to plant their puny senses of humor so as to "feed back" from your potent moderator manly manpoo.

"Alt"ernately, we could just stab em all in the heart and kill em. Oh, as an aside, a little known fact; when one is stabbed in the heart, they poop their drawers.

Huggles and g'day from bidet

 

[Marquis]

With all due respect, Sir Moderator, not to piss in your fez, but, why don't you "digs" a hole, drop your pants around your ankles, squat carefully over said hole so as not to befoul your trousers, make copious poo poo in the hole and offer these neebobs the opportunity to plant their puny senses of humor so as to "feed back" from your potent moderator manly manpoo.

"Alt"ernately, we could just stab em all in the heart and kill em. Oh, as an aside, a little known fact; when one is stabbed in the heart, they poop their drawers.

Huggles and g'day from bidet

I thought it was you.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Kajira I did not think you made anything but a constructive contribution to the discussion. I happen to agree with you often on many occasions and find that your postings are often very informative, open, honest, and direct, which are all trademarks to be admired.

I hope that this thread can have a positive contribution to a deeper and better understanding of the power dynamic that is involved in using scat play as means of humiliation and degradation. Although we have very limited experience with scat play I might one day decide it would be interesting to explore further.

I also agree with you that it is important to confront and challenge the unrealistic expectations of TPE that some have but it is also equally important to present and clarify the beauty, fulfillment and yes the romance that can be found in power exchange when the parties involved understand what they are getting themselves into.

Francisco.

 

[snowy ciara]

I don't get this wild sense of TPE being attacked, sorry.

[ranty-hijack]

I didn't get tpe being attacked here either, but....

There's a lot of competitive bdsm going on around here as well as a lot of people who are acting as if they are THE AUTHORITY ON ALL THAT IS BDSM and I find it irritating. I get quite sick of the whole slave vs sub vs bottom shit. This is why I don't comment very much over here (here being the talk side in general, not this thread in specific.); I get the distinct feeling that I'm "only a sub" and not a "true submissive" at that as I haven't indulged in this area of my life yet. And I'm not even going into the fact that apparently I'm not a sub at all because I'm still pretty much a bdsm virgin. It's almost as if those of us with little experience, or those of us who engage in this part time or those of us who are not slaves or those of us who are not male Dom/fem slave or those of us who do not hand over our paychecks or those of us who are NOT whatever you ARE, are not qualified to have an opinion or, our opinions have less value because We Are Not Like You. (again, a generic you, no-one in particular). I don't pretend to have all the answers, cause I sure as hell don't! But I don't often feel like opening myself up to the type of attitude that I've been seeing, so I'm more likely to PM a person directly and ask if I might pester them for a bit. Some of them have requested that I re-post my question on the board because they feel it is a valid one, and I usually do that. But the majority of them answer my questions thoughtfully and non-judgmentally, too.

That being said, I still think Don Francisco had an awesome take on TPE relationships, and I appreciate his commentary. He is not the only 24/7 Dom lurking around here, but the other one I know of (Technobarbarian) is also frequently disgusted by the "your kink is not okay" atmosphere as well as some of the theatrics that occasionally go down around here. This is why he sticks mostly with Usenet groups.

[end ranty-hijack]

As for eating shit, rimming, I don't think I could go for that, in the abstract. BOT I think Quint mentioned that in the moment she may be tempted to clean her PYL's cock after it's been in her backside. I can sort of see myself being able to do that. Partially it's because I'm so weird about shit (literal shit, not figurative shit) that if I knew I was going to be in an anal position I would most likely clean myself that afternoon. Icky enema and the whole 9 yards. I know that this wouldn't completely get rid of the microscopic "stuff" and that it's impossible to completely 100 percent clean one's backside. But if I knew I was "theoretically" clean in the heat of the moment, I'd probably do it.

 

[catalina_francisco]

[ranty-hijack]

I didn't .....do it.

Hola Doňa Ciara,

I for one hope you will post a lot more on Talk, your postings are of a very high quality and very awesome themselves. I can see an enormous amount of personal experience and knowledge you have by having grown up in a loving and BDSM friendly environment, coming through in your posting. And which one of us can go and ask their parents about a question of the forum. In fact you are probably one of the most experienced persons here.

It is good to know there are more TPE male Dominants on lit. I also feel that Netzach, Etoile and Sweetdommes (to just name a few) are living in relationships which have power dynamics which are very close to TPE if not identical, but just do not label themselves as being in TPE. I am sure that there are more Dommes who are in relationships which are very close to the one I am in. But it seems that there are almost no Domme's who want to be associated with TPE.

This competition about which BDSM is truer or better is visible all around us in this thread (and various other places in cyberworld and RL) and I am sure has caused a lot of harm again. I for one believe in the unique individual experience of BDSM and have not much use or patience for this kind of game, and yes, they get on my nerves. It is this competition which makes adult honest discussion so difficult. There is no hierarchy in BDSM except for that one the participants of a particular relationship decide to have within their relationship, a slave is not a better submissive and a submissive is not healthier mental person.

I tend to think my judgement and understanding of BDSM is of course the best in the world, has to do with this big ego of mine. I do hope I have not insulted anyone because of it.

Don Francisco de la Mancha Negra.

 

[catalina_francisco]

I feel the map of "the edges of BDSM" can be difficult to grasp unless it is illuminated by the concepts you have so well delineated here. In thinking about TPE it is easy to get stuck on the false paradoxes that the "TOTAL" part of TPE can seem to imply. Perhaps the absolute quality of the word TOTAL tends push the mind into a static frame? And it then becomes just as it is easy religate actual realities of the dynamics of "EXCHANGE" to the fog of the background? Dominence /submission born of the exchange of Responsibility/power. The two ends... of the two sides.... of a wide leather strap balanced in Powerful tension.

As snowy ciara has said already, awesome post Francisco.

Thank you Exciteher,

I think you have touched the very nerve of the whole discussion about TPE. The word total is absolute in it's meaning and by such forces people to believe they have to be in static frame. This then leads to people discussing not the dynamics of the power exchange but the meaning of the word total.

TPE is just a label used to group together a wide variety of relationships which have a lot in common but have still been negotiated before commencing it. Maybe the word total has more relevance not about what the responsibilities of the Dominant are in the relationship but the variety of subjects discussed during the initial negotiations.

Francisco.

 

[Quint]

Although it may sound a bit presumptuous, I am not a god, nor does my partner see me as a god or a deity or something else but a human. I do not consider religion to be part of TPE, so the whole idea of TPE being a slave who gives herself to a divine being is quite amusing and also to an extent, insulting and dismissive of my partner’s submission. She does not submit to me because I am on a higher divine platform, I am not more intelligent or have super powers which she does not have, nor will she be condemned to an eternity of hell if she is not a nice little slave girl.

Francisco.

I really hope you weren't responding to my post, but considering I've been the only one to bring in religion, I'm afraid you did. If this isn't the case, please feel free to disregard this reply.

The analogy I drew was meant to show the motivation behind submission: obedience through trust that the being to which you submit ultimately knows and wants what is best for you. Hence any command that may seem extreme (eating shit, sacrificing Isaac) is made only after having taken stock of the potential consequences. Benevolent God, benevolent Dom, whatever. I didn't go any further than that and I'm sorry if it were interpreted that way.

 

[TaintedB]

The analogy I drew was meant to show the motivation behind submission: obedience through trust that the being to which you submit ultimately knows and wants what is best for you. Hence any command that may seem extreme (eating shit, sacrificing Isaac) is made only after having taken stock of the potential consequences. Benevolent God, benevolent Dom, whatever.

Didn't OSG make some mention of dominant as god too? Or maybe that was in another thread.

I've been with dominants who seemed so superior (and also good) in so many ways that I've thought of them as akin to gods. Apparently they did too because whenever I'd yell "Oh God!" when playing, they'd responds "Yes, what do you want?" ;0

I agree with you Quint, an intimate and intense power exchange the dominant seems very much like a god, at least in the way the submissive sees him or her: he smiles and you're happy; he frowns and you're sad. You're required to tell him everything and not hide anything, and he makes all the big decisions (and any little ones he wishes). More like a Greek god than a Christian god I would think because while both Gods can have ultimate control over everything you do due to their godliness, in Christianity this aspect of godhood is played down in favor of the "he gave us free will" theme.

I don't think that there's anything wrong with regarding your master as a god, unless, as in Francisco's case, he personally doesn't like it. It seems quite natural to me. I think that dogs have this sort of regard for their human owners: they are gods and goddesses who do no harm even when they do harm. Cats, on the other hand, have the odd idea that THEY themselves are the gods.

 

[TaintedB]

Actually, the comparison was originally made by Tainted B with her comment about ordinary schmucks who call themselves submissives as opposed to really committed slaves. As far as I can see, one's methods & ideas are formed to suit the needs & desires of each relationship. We are probably all equally hardcore in our own, but different, ways.

Scat, not for us. It stinks too much & we don't find bad smells in any way sexy.

One thing that has made me think though, was Tainted B's other comment that if she was owned, she would do whatever she was told. Now in Catalina's & osg's cases they are already in loving & committed relationships with people that they know & trust & I had thought that their power exchange would have taken place after the relationship was begun due to their interaction with their partners. Is this the case, or are there, as it seems, people who are prepared to eat poop, shoot themselves etc etc for any generic future master because they believe that that's the way it has to be for a slave?

Point the first: I was being self-derrogatory when using the term "ordinary schumcks." I was referring to my being less extreme than OSG. The fact that you took that phrase so defensively, or even could imagine it referred to you or some group you belong to, is very telling...but only about your own individual psychology. Your personal and rather silly affront taken at my self-derrogatory remark has caused a lot of rather stupid and needless confusion in this thread. Hope you had fun.

Point the second: You had _better_ love and trust and completely know your partner before you commit to an absolute power exchange or you are, in my opinion, pretty damn foolish (or extremely lucky if it just happens to work out--because in 99 times out of a hundred cases where you don't do your TPE homework, it doesn't). Sure the power exchange devleops and grows along with the relationship, but if you don't have a pretty clear idea of who you're getting involved with and their compatibility with your needs before you make the commitment, you're being extremely foolish, extremely self-destructive, or both. People's minds are capable of holding more than one thought at a time in them so actually, you can have both, IS: you can both be prepared to do whatever a future master wants because you believe it's the way it has to be for YOU (important point: what other people who call themselves slaves choose to do and not do is pretty much their own business, don't you think? I do. Too much, in fact. :/ ) and you can also do what you do because you know, love, and trust your future partner. Both are essential, actually. Knowing your sexual needs inside and out, knowing what you need before you enter a relationship and knowing how to find out if someone can give you what you need before you reach the "I do" stage, is not akin to some blind adherence to a general principle of slavishness, it's the essense of wisdom, I do believe. You mis-characterization of what I said is also rather silly because it completely ignores my clearly stated point that I know I would submit to all this sort of stuff with the right person because I have _done so before_. I tend to be very experienced about that which I speak... or, because I am the sort of poster who desires to cause _less_ confusion rather than _more_, I generally don't speak about it.

 

[TaintedB]

Ok from outside looking in... i have a few things to say.
1. OSG always has an undertone of being the one and only natural submissive in the world. Its nice that her Master has developed her self esteem to such a level, but i can see how and where it could start to bother others who are also submissive naturally.

Perhaps she has done so in the past, I can't comment too much on that as I'm not that familiar with her posts, but the most important thing to me is that she didn't do so in this thread--not that I saw.

People change, you know. Being genuinely openminded, particluarly about other people, involves looking for and incoporating their changes into your view of them when such changes occur and not trying to hold them up to some old stereotype that you've built in your mind about who they are or what they are capable of. Anyone who says they are openminded but who doesn't practice this principle is being rather hypocritical, IMO. This sort of closed attitude tends to look for and stir up trouble where it doesn't exist.

Don't you think it's a good idea in threads to respond to what people _actually say_, rather than what you imagine they are implying? I think that this is essential if your goal is to further clear and helpful communication rather than turn everything into the sort of sick comepetitive war you mentioned with all sorts of covert implications, meanings, and intentions being read into everything, in other words, people responding to everything in their heads and nothing that's actually being said.

If this were a thread where OSG had actually done what you've described her doing in the past, I would probably agree with you on this point Kajira. But it isn't.

 

[TaintedB]

Since i don't feel like retyping what i said earlier in different words im just gonna quote it and be done.

Here's an interesting point from your old quote, which didn't copy over automatically:

"Here is what pisses me off. When a slave says they would die for their Master or if they were told to kill themselves they would do it. If you would do that, then i see that as obsessed with, not devoted to serving Master. How the hell can you serve your Master if you are dead? And im betting that most dominants really wouldnt be interested in someone with such little regard for their own life."

First of all, why does it piss you off if somebody else says they'd die for their master? Unless you are great friends with that particular person and would really miss them if they died, why should you care how some random schmuck on a message board chooses to live their life? Where does your anger at people making their own personal choices about the way in which they wish to live come from, KC? This is not a debating point on my end, it is just something I don't understand about what you wrote.

Here are my debating points, in no particular oder. First of all, the only dominants I've considered worth being a slave to have been the sort who were absolutely interested in whether I would obey or do my best to obey them in all things, including commanded death (or the converse, commanded life when I really personally wanted to die), because they wouldn't order a death or anything else very extreme if it weren't absolutely essential and for the best for both of us.

We know and appreciate a different style of dominant, KC. And that's fine with me. Sure, absolutely, _most_ dominants wouldn't be interested in someone "with such little [apparent] regard for their own life." But because this low regard is not a generalized theme that runs through a slave's life and labels her as self-destructive but is actually a very specific circumstantial response that has far more to do with obedience than to any particular obession with not living, the sort of person I would be interested in having dominate me would not have this particular mental handicap--which is pretty much what it is to me personally, due to my own needs for extreme control. And yeah, such folks as I need are not common. So what? Might does not make right, and "majority" opinions have never, in any area of life throughout history, been known as being particularly astute. They can't be--the math (bellcurves) is against it.

"If you would do that, then i see that as obsessed with, not devoted to serving Master."

Semantic quibble: in deep love relationships, particularly of the intense power sort but also other kinds, I'd say that obsession and devotion are pretty interchangable terms. And one is not "worse" than the other. Both are good, for that particular sort of relationship, as they strengthen and deepen it and make the two persons involved incredibly happy. At bottom, isn't happiness or joy or deep contentment what this is all about? Why we do this sort of thing in the first place? It is the most motivating factor for me in a permanent relationship. In more casual relationships, my curiousity, need to explore, and desire to experience new things, takes precedence.

"How the hell can you serve your Master if you are dead?"

This is the most interesting point for me, because in it you pretty much lay out how you define "service." It shouldn't come as any surprise to you that some of us define that term in different ways? Different is not wrong or bad in this case as nobody is forcing you to do things the way theychoose to do them for themselves. But people in this thread are asserting their own individual right to choose what is best for themselves, not what _you_ consider best for them. And some of us are rather stumped over why other people would care or want or get pissed about our personal choices which affect nobody but ourselves? What's up with that?

To me, serving my master means doing or attempting to do whatever he tells me to do and when he has told me to do it. Just that. Period. The actual acts involved are so not the point, and I'm sorry to see so many people in this thread getting hung up on certain specific extreme acts, as if they had any actual relevance to the issue of extreme obedience. If you're into obeying extremely what you do isn't important. Actually doing it is what matters to you.

If I am serving somebody in this way it also means that I have been able to develop as absolute a trust in and respect for their decisions as it is humanly possible for me to have: in other words I am completely certain of the fact that no matter how strange or confusing these decisions may initially appear to me, in the long run they, far more often than not, work out of the best. Nobody's perfect, but in most things my master has proven himself to be right, and so obeying him has always turned out to be the right thing to do. The obedience which rises out of my respect for my master includes a very healthy respect for his mind: specifically, I am well aware that Kajira's question, "How the hell can (she) serve (me) if she is dead?" has also run through his head and been fully analyzed processed and given the proper weight in his decision to tell me to kill myself. And yet he has still made this decision. If this were a person whom I believed wasn't capable of thinking through all of this beforehand, Kajira, we'd have never had a relationship in the first place.

"How the hell can you serve your master if you are dead?" While this seems to be a very reasonable question when considered in isolation of any other circumstances, i.e., hypothetically and threoretically rather than in a real-life situation in which certain circumstances demand the command and the obedience, even when cut off from any real reasons for behavior, it still makes the assumption that you know far more about what service really is than than the person who has commanded you to kill yourself does, and if this is the case, then what the hell are you doing with such a clueless wonder to begin with?

I am a thinkie sort so I thought through a great many of these questions before I ever became somebody's slave, not only thought them through on my own without any outside influence, but then later talked them all over with him extensively. All the fucking what-if's my mind could come up with. The commanded death issue was one rather small and easily dealt with issue among many. And I clearly came to certain conclusions both on my own and later with him, based on my personal values system, on what I consider to be logical and rational, and on his values and logic which informed and expanded upon my own. In other words we did the GMTA thing, we were sympatico in all the most important ways. Even what we considered important in the very long term and what we considered relatively unimportant were extremely close matches. When you find somebody like this, who is in essential agreement with you on all the core human issues, then of course you fucking trust him no matter what he commands. It's pretty much like trusting yourself--something which I've always been capable of doing to a rather extreme degree.

 

[sunfox]

Does the emasculated purse carrying husband do it for you too?

I'm starting to see why we have a hard time connecting. Are you another one of those princess subs that have been spreading your venomous lies amongst the good doormat lot?

Get out of my brain permed one!!!!!

I don't have a purse.

But I am a princess. I'm sure you can recondition the doormats while I'm busy with shows this summer.

 

[Marquis]

I don't have a purse.

But I am a princess. I'm sure you can recondition the doormats while I'm busy with shows this summer.

I'm having a dream of you returning in Fall on a white Andalusian and freeing all my subs after you decapitate me with a single stroke of your soulblade.

 

[Aeroil]

Here's an interesting point from your old quote, which didn't copy over automatically:

"Here is what pisses me off. When a slave says they would die for their Master or if they were told to kill themselves they would do it. If you would do that, then i see that as obsessed with, not devoted to serving Master. How the hell can you serve your Master if you are dead? And im betting that most dominants really wouldnt be interested in someone with such little regard for their own life."

First of all, why does it piss you off if somebody else says they'd die for their master? Unless you are great friends with that particular person and would really miss them if they died, why should you care how some random schmuck on a message board chooses to live their life? Where does your anger at people making their own personal choices about the way in which they wish to live come from, KC? This is not a debating point on my end, it is just something I don't understand about what you wrote.

Here are my debating points, in no particular oder. First of all, the only dominants I've considered worth being a slave to have been the sort who were absolutely interested in whether I would obey or do my best to obey them in all things, including commanded death (or the converse, commanded life when I really personally wanted to die), because they wouldn't order a death or anything else very extreme if it weren't absolutely essential and for the best for both of us.

We know and appreciate a different style of dominant, KC. And that's fine with me. Sure, absolutely, _most_ dominants wouldn't be interested in someone "with such little [apparent] regard for their own life." But because this low regard is not a generalized theme that runs through a slave's life and labels her as self-destructive but is actually a very specific circumstantial response that has far more to do with obedience than to any particular obession with not living, the sort of person I would be interested in having dominate me would not have this particular mental handicap--which is pretty much what it is to me personally, due to my own needs for extreme control. And yeah, such folks as I need are not common. So what? Might does not make right, and "majority" opinions have never, in any area of life throughout history, been known as being particularly astute. They can't be--the math (bellcurves) is against it.

"If you would do that, then i see that as obsessed with, not devoted to serving Master."

Semantic quibble: in deep love relationships, particularly of the intense power sort but also other kinds, I'd say that obsession and devotion are pretty interchangable terms. And one is not "worse" than the other. Both are good, for that particular sort of relationship, as they strengthen and deepen it and make the two persons involved incredibly happy. At bottom, isn't happiness or joy or deep contentment what this is all about? Why we do this sort of thing in the first place? It is the most motivating factor for me in a permanent relationship. In more casual relationships, my curiousity, need to explore, and desire to experience new things, takes precedence.

"How the hell can you serve your Master if you are dead?"

This is the most interesting point for me, because in it you pretty much lay out how you define "service." It shouldn't come as any surprise to you that some of us define that term in different ways? Different is not wrong or bad in this case as nobody is forcing you to do things the way theychoose to do them for themselves. But people in this thread are asserting their own individual right to choose what is best for themselves, not what _you_ consider best for them. And some of us are rather stumped over why other people would care or want or get pissed about our personal choices which affect nobody but ourselves? What's up with that?

To me, serving my master means doing or attempting to do whatever he tells me to do and when he has told me to do it. Just that. Period. The actual acts involved are so not the point, and I'm sorry to see so many people in this thread getting hung up on certain specific extreme acts, as if they had any actual relevance to the issue of extreme obedience. If you're into obeying extremely what you do isn't important. Actually doing it is what matters to you.

If I am serving somebody in this way it also means that I have been able to develop as absolute a trust in and respect for their decisions as it is humanly possible for me to have: in other words I am completely certain of the fact that no matter how strange or confusing these decisions may initially appear to me, in the long run they, far more often than not, work out of the best. Nobody's perfect, but in most things my master has proven himself to be right, and so obeying him has always turned out to be the right thing to do. The obedience which rises out of my respect for my master includes a very healthy respect for his mind: specifically, I am well aware that Kajira's question, "How the hell can (she) serve (me) if she is dead?" has also run through his head and been fully analyzed processed and given the proper weight in his decision to tell me to kill myself. And yet he has still made this decision. If this were a person whom I believed wasn't capable of thinking through all of this beforehand, Kajira, we'd have never had a relationship in the first place.

"How the hell can you serve your master if you are dead?" While this seems to be a very reasonable question when considered in isolation of any other circumstances, i.e., hypothetically and threoretically rather than in a real-life situation in which certain circumstances demand the command and the obedience, even when cut off from any real reasons for behavior, it still makes the assumption that you know far more about what service really is than than the person who has commanded you to kill yourself does, and if this is the case, then what the hell are you doing with such a clueless wonder to begin with?

I am a thinkie sort so I thought through a great many of these questions before I ever became somebody's slave, not only thought them through on my own without any outside influence, but then later talked them all over with him extensively. All the fucking what-if's my mind could come up with. The commanded death issue was one rather small and easily dealt with issue among many. And I clearly came to certain conclusions both on my own and later with him, based on my personal values system, on what I consider to be logical and rational, and on his values and logic which informed and expanded upon my own. In other words we did the GMTA thing, we were sympatico in all the most important ways. Even what we considered important in the very long term and what we considered relatively unimportant were extremely close matches. When you find somebody like this, who is in essential agreement with you on all the core human issues, then of course you fucking trust him no matter what he commands. It's pretty much like trusting yourself--something which I've always been capable of doing to a rather extreme degree.

I agree with you Tainted, I think (I may have gotten lost in that sea of words ) There are very few situations where a dom/me has the right to tell a sub/slave to die, but there are a few, I think. The only ones I can think of would be when someone would be in serious physical danger (especially the dom/me) and in order to save them the sub would probably die. I can very potentially see myself doing that, I'm not afraid of the spectre, if I could give myself to him rather than the one I love, so be it.
Then again maybe you meant something else, I dunno, I suppose there probably are a few different situations where this could be applicable but I can't think of any right now.

 

[babiesmiles]

I'm having a dream of you returning in Fall on a white Andalusian and freeing all my subs after you decapitate me with a single stroke of your soulblade.

yay ..that would be a true great show ( a part the decapitation .. I think ) !

Soz Marquis

 

[sunfox]

<------------- Marquis...

I'm having a dream of you returning in Fall on a white Andalusian and freeing all my subs after you decapitate me with a single stroke of your soulblade.

.....Just for you.

I'll bring back a blue ribbon for you.

 

[Marquis]

.....Just for you.

I'll bring back a blue ribbon for you.

That's my girl.

 

[Kajira Callista]

Perhaps she has done so in the past, I can't comment too much on that as I'm not that familiar with her posts, but the most important thing to me is that she didn't do so in this thread--not that I saw.

People change, you know. Being genuinely openminded, particluarly about other people, involves looking for and incoporating their changes into your view of them when such changes occur and not trying to hold them up to some old stereotype that you've built in your mind about who they are or what they are capable of. Anyone who says they are openminded but who doesn't practice this principle is being rather hypocritical, IMO. This sort of closed attitude tends to look for and stir up trouble where it doesn't exist.

Don't you think it's a good idea in threads to respond to what people _actually say_, rather than what you imagine they are implying? I think that this is essential if your goal is to further clear and helpful communication rather than turn everything into the sort of sick comepetitive war you mentioned with all sorts of covert implications, meanings, and intentions being read into everything, in other words, people responding to everything in their heads and nothing that's actually being said.

If this were a thread where OSG had actually done what you've described her doing in the past, I would probably agree with you on this point Kajira. But it isn't.

uhmmmm my post was explaining somethign to Marquis...something he had questioned about a reply or something by sunfox....he seems to have understood it and that was my intent. No where in that post did it say i was closedminded or thinking of anyone in a judgmental way.

 

[Kajira Callista]

Here's an interesting point from your old quote, which didn't copy over automatically:

"Here is what pisses me off. When a slave says they would die for their Master or if they were told to kill themselves they would do it. If you would do that, then i see that as obsessed with, not devoted to serving Master. How the hell can you serve your Master if you are dead? And im betting that most dominants really wouldnt be interested in someone with such little regard for their own life."

First of all, why does it piss you off if somebody else says they'd die for their master? Unless you are great friends with that particular person and would really miss them if they died, why should you care how some random schmuck on a message board chooses to live their life? Where does your anger at people making their own personal choices about the way in which they wish to live come from, KC? This is not a debating point on my end, it is just something I don't understand about what you wrote.

Here are my debating points, in no particular oder. First of all, the only dominants I've considered worth being a slave to have been the sort who were absolutely interested in whether I would obey or do my best to obey them in all things, including commanded death (or the converse, commanded life when I really personally wanted to die), because they wouldn't order a death or anything else very extreme if it weren't absolutely essential and for the best for both of us.

We know and appreciate a different style of dominant, KC. And that's fine with me. Sure, absolutely, _most_ dominants wouldn't be interested in someone "with such little [apparent] regard for their own life." But because this low regard is not a generalized theme that runs through a slave's life and labels her as self-destructive but is actually a very specific circumstantial response that has far more to do with obedience than to any particular obession with not living, the sort of person I would be interested in having dominate me would not have this particular mental handicap--which is pretty much what it is to me personally, due to my own needs for extreme control. And yeah, such folks as I need are not common. So what? Might does not make right, and "majority" opinions have never, in any area of life throughout history, been known as being particularly astute. They can't be--the math (bellcurves) is against it.

"If you would do that, then i see that as obsessed with, not devoted to serving Master."

Semantic quibble: in deep love relationships, particularly of the intense power sort but also other kinds, I'd say that obsession and devotion are pretty interchangable terms. And one is not "worse" than the other. Both are good, for that particular sort of relationship, as they strengthen and deepen it and make the two persons involved incredibly happy. At bottom, isn't happiness or joy or deep contentment what this is all about? Why we do this sort of thing in the first place? It is the most motivating factor for me in a permanent relationship. In more casual relationships, my curiousity, need to explore, and desire to experience new things, takes precedence.

"How the hell can you serve your Master if you are dead?"

This is the most interesting point for me, because in it you pretty much lay out how you define "service." It shouldn't come as any surprise to you that some of us define that term in different ways? Different is not wrong or bad in this case as nobody is forcing you to do things the way theychoose to do them for themselves. But people in this thread are asserting their own individual right to choose what is best for themselves, not what _you_ consider best for them. And some of us are rather stumped over why other people would care or want or get pissed about our personal choices which affect nobody but ourselves? What's up with that?

To me, serving my master means doing or attempting to do whatever he tells me to do and when he has told me to do it. Just that. Period. The actual acts involved are so not the point, and I'm sorry to see so many people in this thread getting hung up on certain specific extreme acts, as if they had any actual relevance to the issue of extreme obedience. If you're into obeying extremely what you do isn't important. Actually doing it is what matters to you.

If I am serving somebody in this way it also means that I have been able to develop as absolute a trust in and respect for their decisions as it is humanly possible for me to have: in other words I am completely certain of the fact that no matter how strange or confusing these decisions may initially appear to me, in the long run they, far more often than not, work out of the best. Nobody's perfect, but in most things my master has proven himself to be right, and so obeying him has always turned out to be the right thing to do. The obedience which rises out of my respect for my master includes a very healthy respect for his mind: specifically, I am well aware that Kajira's question, "How the hell can (she) serve (me) if she is dead?" has also run through his head and been fully analyzed processed and given the proper weight in his decision to tell me to kill myself. And yet he has still made this decision. If this were a person whom I believed wasn't capable of thinking through all of this beforehand, Kajira, we'd have never had a relationship in the first place.

"How the hell can you serve your master if you are dead?" While this seems to be a very reasonable question when considered in isolation of any other circumstances, i.e., hypothetically and threoretically rather than in a real-life situation in which certain circumstances demand the command and the obedience, even when cut off from any real reasons for behavior, it still makes the assumption that you know far more about what service really is than than the person who has commanded you to kill yourself does, and if this is the case, then what the hell are you doing with such a clueless wonder to begin with?

I am a thinkie sort so I thought through a great many of these questions before I ever became somebody's slave, not only thought them through on my own without any outside influence, but then later talked them all over with him extensively. All the fucking what-if's my mind could come up with. The commanded death issue was one rather small and easily dealt with issue among many. And I clearly came to certain conclusions both on my own and later with him, based on my personal values system, on what I consider to be logical and rational, and on his values and logic which informed and expanded upon my own. In other words we did the GMTA thing, we were sympatico in all the most important ways. Even what we considered important in the very long term and what we considered relatively unimportant were extremely close matches. When you find somebody like this, who is in essential agreement with you on all the core human issues, then of course you fucking trust him no matter what he commands. It's pretty much like trusting yourself--something which I've always been capable of doing to a rather extreme degree.

I do have a reply to this but it will have to wait until tomorrow ...its too nice of a day for me to be sitting here indoors explaining every picked apart piece of my post.

 

[Netzach]

Most of the TPE websites and community I encounter is overwhelmingly M/f and not as many of them are as enlightened as you are, Francisco, about that not being the only viable D/s permutation out there. That might be part of the reason. At least in my experience.

Additionally, I have issues every time I hear a word like "total" or "absolute" I break out in hives, being the kinsey 4 or whatever it is that I am.

Oh, and I'm a cat person. I am not always obeyed by that which I own, but sometimes I can get over it.

Hola Doňa Ciara,

I for one hope you will post a lot more on Talk, your postings are of a very high quality and very awesome themselves. I can see an enormous amount of personal experience and knowledge you have by having grown up in a loving and BDSM friendly environment, coming through in your posting. And which one of us can go and ask their parents about a question of the forum. In fact you are probably one of the most experienced persons here.

It is good to know there are more TPE male Dominants on lit. I also feel that Netzach, Etoile and Sweetdommes (to just name a few) are living in relationships which have power dynamics which are very close to TPE if not identical, but just do not label themselves as being in TPE. I am sure that there are more Dommes who are in relationships which are very close to the one I am in. But it seems that there are almost no Domme's who want to be associated with TPE.

This competition about which BDSM is truer or better is visible all around us in this thread (and various other places in cyberworld and RL) and I am sure has caused a lot of harm again. I for one believe in the unique individual experience of BDSM and have not much use or patience for this kind of game, and yes, they get on my nerves. It is this competition which makes adult honest discussion so difficult. There is no hierarchy in BDSM except for that one the participants of a particular relationship decide to have within their relationship, a slave is not a better submissive and a submissive is not healthier mental person.

I tend to think my judgement and understanding of BDSM is of course the best in the world, has to do with this big ego of mine. I do hope I have not insulted anyone because of it.

Don Francisco de la Mancha Negra.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Most of the TPE websites and community I encounter is overwhelmingly M/f and not as many of them are as enlightened as you are, Francisco, about that not being the only viable D/s permutation out there. That might be part of the reason. At least in my experience.

Additionally, I have issues every time I hear a word like "total" or "absolute" I break out in hives, being the kinsey 4 or whatever it is that I am.

Oh, and I'm a cat person. I am not always obeyed by that which I own, but sometimes I can get over it.

Unfortunately you are correct, it is the reason why some years ago I distanced myself from a major group. Although I have to say that it is slowly changing even if you so now and then encounter a mentally retarded opinion about the purity of male domination.

We own two female cats since a week ago and I am convinced that eventually they will fall under my spell and become good little trained pets, and if not I will die trying.

Francisco.

 

[snowy ciara]

Hola Doňa Ciara,

I tend to think my judgement and understanding of BDSM is of course the best in the world, has to do with this big ego of mine. I do hope I have not insulted anyone because of it.

Don Francisco de la Mancha Negra.

Hola Don Fransisco

Thank you for your kind words! I admit it is kinda weird to email my mother a link and ask for her view, but it's cool too. I haven't ever asked my dad though. She doesn't really come here unless I ask her to look at something. She says it's hard enough to be a bisexual maso-sub creeping out of the closet without her mother hovering about. But it does give me an unusual point of view!

Re the part I quoted...

Although you may feel that way, I have never ever seen you try to ram your opinions down another's throat, or refuse to accept the existance of another's lifestyle simply because it is beyond your experience. I find the former repugnant in the same way I find tele-evangelists repugnant, and the I find the latter to be childish and stupid. It's like "If I ignore it, and you, it'll go away." Sadly, it seems to have worked for one of our msubs. He decided that if his time on the lit bdsm boards is going to be spent "sounding his barbaric yawp" and defending his lifestyle he has better things to do with his time.

dona ciara de la nieve

 

[Deadly Guardian]

We own two female cats since a week ago and I am convinced that eventually they will fall under my spell and become good little trained pets, and if not I will die trying.

Francisco.

Good luck Cat on training them you may find they will train you subversively. We have six and they have trained my mate well. It is fun to watch at times.

 

[catalina_francisco]

TaintedB I have nothing but respect for your posting and yourself, but I do strongly disagree with certain parts of your post. I happen to believe in absolute and total submission but there are certain things that do not belong in BDSM, TPE or D/s. I am a strong believer in life; no person in this world has the right to decide to end someone else's life. And no I am not talking here about defending your country, yourself or your family, those are other issues.

Your Master can and should expect nothing else but absolute and total devotion and a commitment to always try to comply with his wishes. But there are limits to what a Master's power is over his property. Every person has moral values and ethics which are their own and often form the core of that person's character and as it can be said, by altering those you are altering the pyl who submitted to the PYL effectively changing the pyl into another pyl. It is this change that cancels the earlier agreement since that was made with another person. Small changes do not affect the relationship between a PYL and his pyl, but major personality changes can and should.

If for example I train Catalina's submissive nature out of her (not that I believe this is possible but for argument sake), her slavery towards me would become void and non existent. There is the possibility that she gets a stroke which affects her personality removing her submissive nature. Personality changes affect the way PYL and pyl interact and have influence on the relationship. I think that having non functioning brains is the biggest personality change possible and as such it can be said that death does not fall under BDSM, TPE or D/s.

There is also the impossibility to comply with certain commands and orders from your PYL. Although of course hard to accept for me when Catalina has the flu, I can order her to get well and she tries but she simply cannot cure herself on my command. This can lead to the simple conclusion that matters concerning health are not part of the command structure of a BDSM relationship. I think that it is safe to say that death has a severe impact on your health.

Although I might be misinterpreting your connection between BDSM and religion, I feel it is important to point to certain aspects. A PYL is a human being, elevating a human being to godlike stature can be seen as creating a false god and the three major religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam strictly forbid the worship of false gods. I feel it cannot be justified to force another to ignore religious beliefs.

The Universal constitution of human rights gives any human being on this earth religious freedom; in many religions suicide is forbidden. I am a strong believer of religious freedom, and I have great problems with any PYL who will force their property to neglect and ignore religious beliefs but especially I find it despicable to force someone to do something which they believe will condemn them to an eternity of hell.

There is one big difference between the slavery in which we in BDSM take part in and the slavery which was done for example in Roman times. We speak of an internal slavery, one that is freely chosen and one that comes from a deep desire to serve and submit. The old days were based on external slavery, a slavery forced upon an individual, so while externally they were slaves internally they were free men (or women). And in these modern days externally the slave is free, but internally the pyl is enslaved.

Internal slavery has to be consensual; it has to be based on a deep desire to submit and serve and there has to be defining moments where consent is given. Removing the consent is destroying the base on which the relationship has been built on, although consent has been given only once at the start of the relationship it is that consent that makes the slavery internal and it is internal slavery that we are aiming for not forced external slavery. External slavery involves either the destruction of the subject or the destruction of the object. It is the difference between external and internal slavery which has been causing so much confusion. We should never forget that the state we want to achieve in a relationship is that of internal voluntary slavery. Internal slavery is based on the individual needs and character and it involves an exchange of power and an acceptance of responsibility.

Slavery is not just serving another being; it is not the lack of freedom. Internal slavery is the most sublime and ultimate act of freedom, it is the voluntary act of using your freedom to serve another; it is the choice that makes internal slavery the ultimate act of true love.

Francisco.
PS This is all just my honest opinion and not my answer to the meaning of life and everything else that is still 42.

 

[TaintedB]

TaintedB I have nothing but respect for your posting and yourself, but I do strongly disagree with certain parts of your post.

That's quite OK. You are right, we do have differing values about this. I'm from a more mystical bent of mind (if an atheist can be a mystic, lol, maybe it'd be more accurate to say that I think in rather long terms) and I've never put a very strong valuation on my own life. It's important but not that important when I weigh it against a few other extremely important (to me) values. Suspect I've been this way too long to change. I know I've said this already, but it's OK if people, whether on a forum or close friends or even lovers, differ on fundamental issues, as long as each can give each other breathing space to have their own views. You seem to be the type who is capable of doing that.