I know I will regret this..................

[@}-}rebecca----]

Thanks miss cati, miss Fury , RJMasters Sir, miss alice and raven2 for participating on the Thread......smiles. Your comments are appreciated.

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

bob Harris died of double Pneumocystis Carinii Pneumonia an opportunistic infection often associated with the late stages of AIDS in March 2002.

I will leave these essays of his now with a part of his obituary , a poem he wrote and finally a picture of bob and Doug Harris in more joyful times

"At 2:00PM, Friday, March 29, 2002 boy bob harris owned by Master Doug Harris of The Sanctuary of a Dark Angel in Atlanta, GA died. boy bob was Panther Prowl boy 1995, Mr. North Carolina Leather 1996, Mr. Southeast Drummer 1996 and received the Pantheon of Leather Reader's Choice Award 1999. As the first collared submissive to hold a title, boy bob championed the voice, presence and value of boys. his writing and generosity to all who knew him was apparent. he aided many boys in their journey and was always there to provide what was needed. he possessed the uncommon heart of a devoted slave. he will be greatly missed."

The Lock
by boy bob


Click --- it's a gentle sound,
Baptized in fire and blood
the chain is placed around a neck

Click --- it's a quiet sound,
A metal bar placed thru the ends of a chain
locks itself in place inside a metal box

Click --- it's an anxious sound,
Heard only by two, one standing, one kneeling
their worlds will be forever changed

Click --- it's a calming sound,
Two souls come together, binding completely becoming one
united by a total and unrelenting trust

Click --- one becomes owner, one becomes owned
One accepts the ultimate in responsibility
taking total control of another's body and soul

Click --- one becomes keeper, one gives away all
One freely and willingly, without any question
gives every fiber of his being in submission to the other

Click --- two come together, two become one
Melting together in a love so complete
its impossible to tell what part came from which

Click --- two lives join, intertwined as one
As one becomes Master
and one becomes slave.

http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c224/rebecca000/MasterDoug.jpg​

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

Ohh seperate issue , I am taking a week off from the BB to try and regain some perspective. I am not entirely sure what it is but some things here said , done and otherwise I am finding perhaps more unsettling than is good for me. Sort of defeats the purpose of participating at all for me.Time will tell.......smiles. Take care and be well all.​

@}-}rebecca----​

 

[alice_underneath]

"At 2:00PM, Friday, March 29, 2002 boy bob harris owned by Master Doug Harris of The Sanctuary of a Dark Angel in Atlanta, GA died. boy bob was Panther Prowl boy 1995, Mr. North Carolina Leather 1996, Mr. Southeast Drummer 1996 and received the Pantheon of Leather Reader's Choice Award 1999. As the first collared submissive to hold a title, boy bob championed the voice, presence and value of boys. his writing and generosity to all who knew him was apparent. he aided many boys in their journey and was always there to provide what was needed. he possessed the uncommon heart of a devoted slave. he will be greatly missed."

How lovely, Rebecca. Thank you again for introducing me to Bob Harris.

The poignant obituary and poem remind me so much of a small speech given by my neighbor across the street six months ago. She was sitting in her living room, surrounded by family and friends.... two days after the death of her husband.

At 85 years old, this woman had just lost the man who had been her husband for 62 years.

Her great-granddaughter, sitting at her feet, asked for advice on how to make a marriage last. The old woman caressed the young girl's cheek with a gnarled and wrinkled hand, and said:

"You're just gonna have to talk to him, honey. Every single day."

She chuckled and continued, "You'll always be disagreein' about somethin'. What should we buy with our extra twenty five dollars.... should Joey practice baseball or the piano on Tuesday night.... where should we go on vacation. You're just gonna have to talk to him to work all this out."

Then she sighed and looked out the window, and quiet tears started to roll down her cheeks. "The last thing we talked about was whether to replace our dead hydrangea with a forsythia bush. I really wanted another hydrangea bush. But he was right, that spot gets too much sun."

Then she smiled through her tears and looked down at her great-granddaughter, saying: "He was most always right."

Though perfectly healthy when she gave that little speech, Mrs. Johnson died six weeks later. She had lost her soulmate, the one who made her whole. And her life was over.

If he had had a chance to get to know Mr. and Mrs. Johnson..... somehow I think Bob Harris would have understood.



Respectfully,

Alice

 

[FurryFury]

And I wish I could take you there.

*looks eager and lustful*

*grins*

Me too Sugah!

Fury

Hmm, there is a lot going on in this thread.

I'm going to be honest and say that thus far, I haven't found the time to read these essays, which I'm sure are excellent.

I hate the idea that you, Miss Rebecca are not happy here and that you are feeling you need a break. *HUGS* I'm so sorry to hear that, but take care of you! I'll hope to hear from you soon!

I'm going to have to disagree with Miss Alice here just a bit. I do think it takes more communication to move into a kinky and/or D/s relationship. That's certainly been the case for me.

While we have always communicated and trusted one another very well and yes, I've also raised kids under trying circumstances, we are now, IMO, able to communicate and trust MORE.

Yes, I've turned to him for advice when I was at the end of my rope. One of our kids wasn't always his, not legally, and that was very hard to deal with because a dangerous toxic fellow would take that precious child regularly and bring her back so angry, well, it was scary. So while we may not have the same experiences exactly, I think I have some idea of what you mean by that.

Anyway, I don't mean to denigrate a wonderful vanilla relationship which I have had for a long time or that anyone might have when I say, yes, I think you do have to communicate better and trust even more when you start doing these things.

If done well, IMO, (this is only my idea of the "right" way to do things, mind you) you have to lay the ground work by careful and timely communication. Each time you submit or Dominate you have a feeling of increased trust. It sort of like those exercises when you fall backwards to prove your trust in others, that they will catch you. It just builds.

To me, this sort of relationship is just as full as a vanilla one and then there is a little more added. That's just my two cents.

Fury

 

[alice_underneath]

I'm going to have to disagree with Miss Alice here just a bit. I do think it takes more communication to move into a kinky and/or D/s relationship. That's certainly been the case for me.

While we have always communicated and trusted one another very well and yes, I've also raised kids under trying circumstances, we are now, IMO, able to communicate and trust MORE.

That is true for you, Miss Fury. And that's wonderful.

Anyway, I don't mean to denigrate a wonderful vanilla relationship.

In focusing only on your own experience, Miss Fury, you are not making insulting statements.

However, the quote to which I objected absolutely does denigrate vanilla relationships:

"Any SM or D/s relationship requires an extremely strong foundation built on a high degree of mutual trust, mutual respect and open and honest communication. Much more so than in any vanilla relationship."

It is insulting to those in vanilla relationships to categorically state that there is always more trust, more respect, and more open and honest communication in a non-vanilla relationship.

The idea is not just ridiculous, it is profoundly unfair.

There are many different kinds of trust, respect, and honest communication.

And is unacceptable to say: My relationship is better, more fulfilling, more full of trust/respect/communication, more wonderful, more [fill in the blank]..... simply because it is a different kind than your own.

Let me be clear here: It is the absolute that I object to, not any comments relating to an individual's personal experience.

To me, this sort of relationship is just as full as a vanilla one and then there is a little more added.

That's true for you. And again I say - fantastic! Go Miss Fury!

But, as you say:

....only my idea of the "right" way to do things, mind you

THAT is my only point.

Alice

 

[FurryFury]

That is true for you, Miss Fury. And that's wonderful.

In focusing only on your own experience, Miss Fury, you are not making insulting statements.

However, the quote to which I objected absolutely does denigrate vanilla relationships:

"Any SM or D/s relationship requires an extremely strong foundation built on a high degree of mutual trust, mutual respect and open and honest communication. Much more so than in any vanilla relationship."

It is insulting to those in vanilla relationships to categorically state that there is always more trust, more respect, and more open and honest communication in a non-vanilla relationship.

The idea is not just ridiculous, it is profoundly unfair.

There are many different kinds of trust, respect, and honest communication.

And is unacceptable to say: My relationship is better, more fulfilling, more full of trust/respect/communication, more wonderful, more [fill in the blank]..... simply because it is a different kind than your own.

Let me be clear here: It is the absolute that I object to, not any comments relating to an individual's personal experience.

That's true for you. And again I say - fantastic! Go Miss Fury!

But, as you say:

THAT is my only point.

Alice

Thanks Alice!



Fury

 

[cati]

My two cents

Any SM or D/s relationship requires an extremely strong foundation built on a high degree of mutual trust, mutual respect and open and honest communication. Much more so than in any vanilla relationship. It is this foundation, more than anything else, which sets relationships in our world apart from relationships in the vanilla world. For no matter how hidden, or out of commission, it may seem to be at any one point in time, there always exists that power exchange. Of one giving and one taking, the responsibility of caring for and protecting both body and soul.

I'm sorry Alice but what Bill Harris has said in his article is simply the truth. To be who we are and do what we do, requires a greater amount of trust, honesty and mutual respect between partners. You may call what you cannot accept or do not understand "offensive," but it still doesn't change the facts.

To be able to submit completely to one's Dominant and offer them your heart, mind and soul and often ones very life...damn straight you'd better have a greater degree of trust, respect and honesty in your relationship. I feel that BDSM is more more of everything...passion, emotion, sensation, sex and LOVE. For me, this lifestyle surpasses everything that a vanilla relationship can offer. I don't know how much you've learned while visiting these forums, but I can't imagine it has been very much, otherwise you would not have written such a rash and narrowly-opinionated post.

I hope with all sincerity that you will read as much as you possibly can about the BDSM lifestyle on the web and elsewhere and think deeply about what you've read, or you will continue to misunderstand what has been written by others who have actually "been there".

 

[alice_underneath]

Any SM or D/s relationship requires an extremely strong foundation built on a high degree of mutual trust, mutual respect and open and honest communication. Much more so than in any vanilla relationship. It is this foundation, more than anything else, which sets relationships in our world apart from relationships in the vanilla world. For no matter how hidden, or out of commission, it may seem to be at any one point in time, there always exists that power exchange. Of one giving and one taking, the responsibility of caring for and protecting both body and soul.

I'm sorry Alice but what Bill Harris has said in his article is simply the truth. To be who we are and do what we do, requires a greater amount of trust, honesty and mutual respect between partners. You may call what you cannot accept or do not understand "offensive," but it still doesn't change the facts.

To be able to submit completely to one's Dominant and offer them your heart, mind and soul and often ones very life...damn straight you'd better have a greater degree of trust, respect and honesty in your relationship. BDSM is more of everything...passion, emotion, sensation, sex and LOVE. This lifestyle surpasses everything that a vanilla relationship can offer. I don't know how much you've learned while visiting these forums, but I can't imagine it has been very much, otherwise you would not have written such a rash and narrowly-opinionated post.

I hope with all sincerity that you will read as much as you possibly can about the BDSM lifestyle on the web and elsewhere and think deeply about what you've read, or you will continue to misunderstand what has been written by others who have actually "been there".

Your world, and your relationships are not better or worse than relationships in the vanilla world. They are just different.

Some SM or D/s relationships do involve an extraordinary amount of trust, respect and honest, open communication.

Some SM or D/s relationships involve selfish jerks and naive fools, who have nothing even remotely resembling trust, respect, or honest communication.

And then there's everything in between.

The exact same thing is true for vanilla relationships.

That's my point.

He wrote:

"Much more so than in any vanilla relationship."

To agree with this statement is to utter a condescending and outrageous expression of superiority over the relationships of all of my family, friends, and acquaintances.... not to mention my own relationship with my Husband.

So sorry, Cati. You don't know nearly enough about all those relationships to stick your nose in the air and say that your relationships involve more respect, honesty, communication, passion, emotion, sensation, sex and LOVE.

That is condescending, arrogant, and judgmental. Not to mention, asinine.

I hope with all sincerity that you will read as much as you possibly can about the BDSM lifestyle

I hope will all sincerity that you come to realize that your way may work for you, but does not represent the path to fulfillment for everyone.

I hope with all sincerity that you will abandon your hypocritical attitude and learn to grant the "vanilla world" the same respect that you would appreciate for your own.

Alice

 

[cati]

Alice...once again you just don't seem to get it. You are also misinterpreting what I wrote in my post, but just as well.

Your world, and your relationships are not better or worse than relationships in the vanilla world. They are just different.

Undoubtably

Some SM or D/s relationships do involve an extraordinary amount of trust, respect and honest, open communication.

Absolutley

Some SM or D/s relationships involve selfish jerks and naive fools, who have nothing even remotely resembling trust, respect, or honest communication.

I agree and there's the rub. That is why honesty, trust, respect and open communication is an absolute must and stressed so often.

And then there's everything in between.

Uhuh.

The exact same thing is true for vanilla relationships.

Uhuh.

That's my point.

Point taken.

 

[alice_underneath]

Point taken.

OK, good. We are making progress.

Let's see if we can work things out even more.

My neighbors, the Johnsons, were married for 62 years. They were extremely close vanilla soulmates. Two halves of a whole.

Do you feel comfortable saying that your current relationship, Cati, involves more respect, trust, honest and open communication, emotion, and LOVE than theirs did?

If your answer to that question is "no", then you, like me, disagree with the absolute nature of the statement:

"Any SM or D/s relationship requires an extremely strong foundation built on a high degree of mutual trust, mutual respect and open and honest communication. Much more so than in any vanilla relationship."

If your answer to that question is "yes", then I respectfully ask you to consider that there are all kinds of trust, all kinds of respect, all kinds of communication, all kinds of emotion, and all kinds of love. You have no knowledge of the depth of intimacy shared by those two human beings. And you therefore have no right to declare that the intimacy that you enjoy is more profound.

Respectfully,
Alice

 

[cati]

Live and Let Live

Alice, I appreciate you wanting to talk this out further, but if you don't mind I will pass on the invite. Perhaps you can engage someone else in this discussion.

I will say this one more time, it is because you don't fully understand what the lifestyle is about that you can't seem to grasp what I'm saying, nor what Bill Harris was trying to say in his article. Fini

Please do not respond to this post Alice.

 

[jadefirefly]

I dislike absolutes. No matter what they are applied to.

Absolute statements suggest that the person stating them knows everything there is to know, ever, about a particular topic. This is ridiculous, and impossible.

No single person can know everything there is to know about a topic. There is always more. And that extends to the topic of relationships. No person out there can make a truthful, absolute statement regarding anyone else's relationships.

Therefore, I find myself agreeing, that the claim that one sort of relationship is somehow better, more fulfilling, or requiring/involving of more trust or *anything* than another kind.

Nobody out there can know all there is to know about my relationship. Or your (this "your" being used in a generic sense) relationships. All anyone can truly know is about their *own* relationships, and what they may observe, or be told, about others. To that extent, each person needs to decide for themselves which kind of relationship, and what goes into it, is right for them.

For the author of those essays, perhaps it did require more trust, honesty, and communication, and all those other things, to form a healthy, full relationship. IMHO, however, those things are required in -all- relationships. Personally I would like to see these things in our more casual relationships, too, but sometimes that's just not possible.

What it boils down to is, when someone makes an absolute statement about something, they are presuming a great deal about the people involved, or not involved, in that something. To say that one sort of relationship is somehow fuller, and more trusting, and more open, than another... that deals a great insult to those who are involved in a different kind of relationship.

And nobody really likes being insulted... well, okay, some do, but that's a totally different topic.

 

[Evil_Geoff]

...
Life is raising children, balancing the household budget, community service, learning about the world around you, developing hobbies and interests, etc. .... I am curious to know if his Master provided any nurturing or guidance in a more complete sense than the picture I have so far.

Good evening Alice,

Other than raising children, I can assure you that Doug and bob shared all the aspects of life together. They struggled to make ends meet, they worked in their home together to make it a beautiful, inviting place. They reached out and gave back to the community.


It is not my place to defend or excuse or apologize for either of them, nor is it my place to reveal any details about their relationship. But I will say this: Doug loved bob as much as I think one human being can love another. That, and I hold Master Doug and boy bob Harris in the highest esteem, and that as role models go, I can't think of many who would be better. Their home, The Sancuary of a Dark Angel, was the spiritual "center" of my BDSM journey for many years, and I was blessed with opportunity to learn from them both before bob passed away.

bob touched so many lives, and while he had his faults, as all of us do, he was a light, a candle in the darkness. His dedication to service, his devotion to, and love for, his Master, were an inspiration to many of us. His candle touched many others, his light lives on. In me, he lit the passion to share and teach new folks in this lifestyle, and to help build a community that will someday walk in the mainstream without fear of persecution or reprisal, free to be who we are, to love who, and _how_, we wish.

I'll stop now, before I get terribly maudlin, but I still miss him.

 

[Evil_Geoff]

I would be interested to read Bob Harris' views on dominance and submission as it relates to something other than sadomasochistic play.

As far as I know Alice, bob was not interested in writing about his feelings, thoughts and ideas in other areas besides sadomasochistic play and Master/slave relationships. I know I have not seen any other writings of his on other subjects. That doesn't mean that he _didn't_ write such articles, it just means I am not aware of any.

Keep in mind that other areas of life get LOTS of press. But SM? Well, we get all the negative, sensationalistic, "look what a buncha FREAKS those PERVERTS are." in the mainstream. bob shared his feelings with us and the world to put a human face on what we do. I think he did it very well.

 

[Evil_Geoff]

Last reply, Alice, really, I promise!

...I strongly disagree with his comments in two fundamental respects.

#1.The Us vs. Them mentality.

Please keep in mind that bob was writing from the perspective of a _gay_ leatherman. Who came up and out when gay was not "cool". And leather was WAY not "cool". Not even in the gay community. So you will have to excuse a little Us vs Them creeping in. bob had to fight for acceptance to be who he was in the vanilla world, with his family, in the gay community. His whole life was spent in an Us vs Them struggle.

Until you have been a member of a persecuted minority, you simply cannot understand how that colors your world view. Look, I'm a white, heterosexual male, but because I'm a sadist and Dominant, _I_ feel it's Us vs Them at times. Particularly when those ninnies at the CWA and AFA decide they know better than I do how I should be conducting my relationship and what me and my friends can or cannot do at our private fetish events.

#2. The idea that there is necessarily a higher "degree of mutual trust, mutual respect and open and honest communication" in a "SM or D/s relationship" than in "any vanilla relationship".

This idea is not just silly. To be honest, I find it very offensive as well.

The idea may not be terribly inclusive, but it isn't silly. And while you are certainly free to take offense, my own opinion is that you are offended because you took the idea out of context and therefore found something to take offense from.

bob was trying to impress upon the young, the new, and the overly eager, the importance of these facets of a relationship because many of them had not, and have not seen these things modelled in the relationships of their parents, or in their own gay vanilla relationships. They certainly don't see them modelled very often in our popular culture. Yes, I'm sure bob realized in the back of his mind that straights might read his articles but I don't think that was his target audience.

If it will make you feel better, stick a letter "M" on there and make the "any" a "many".

I could certainly take offense and find your assertion that a "marriage of equals" doesn't exist to be silly. My own marriage was a marriage of equals, and by the end of it we were equally angry, equally miserable, and equally ready to get the hell out of it. Two dominants do not (usually) a good marriage make. Ours was certainly not an exception to that rule. I _know_ there was no power "exchange" in that relationship, there was snatch and grab, fighting over the power tooth and nail, neither of us willing to surrender to the other. But I choose to not take offense or toss insults at your idea, even though I know through personal experience that you are incorrect.

And please keep in mind that even if _your_ absolute assertion:

...there is a "power exchange" in all relationships.

were true, then that merely means that all relationships are D/s relationships, none of them are purely vanilla.

And please, don't pounce on someone for using an absolute and then turn around in the same breath and do it yourself. That becomes a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

 

[alice_underneath]

Hi, Geoff.

Please note the first thing I wrote on this thread on the subject of Bob Harris: "He seems to have been a genuinely decent person, worthy of respect and admiration."

That was honest and sincere. Nothing I wrote subsequently changes that.

Other than raising children, I can assure you that Doug and bob shared all the aspects of life together. They struggled to make ends meet, they worked in their home together to make it a beautiful, inviting place. They reached out and gave back to the community.

I am sure you are correct. Which I why I expressed an honest and sincere interest in learning more about him when I wrote:

"I would be interested to read Bob Harris' views on dominance and submission as it relates to something other than sadomasochistic play. I am curious to know if his Master provided any nurturing or guidance in a more complete sense than the picture I have so far."

It seems that he had a wondefully intimate relationship with his Master.

Just like the my neighbors, the Johnsons, had a wonderfully intimate relationship.

My wish for more information was a sign of respect for their closeness - just like the great-granddaughter asking Mrs. Johnson the secrets to a long marriage.

 

[alice_underneath]

Please keep in mind that bob was writing from the perspective of a _gay_ leatherman. Who came up and out when gay was not "cool". And leather was WAY not "cool". Not even in the gay community. So you will have to excuse a little Us vs Them creeping in. bob had to fight for acceptance to be who he was in the vanilla world, with his family, in the gay community. His whole life was spent in an Us vs Them struggle.

I understand what you are saying here, Geoff, and in no way do I wish to belittle his struggle.

However, we are discussing an article that was written quite a while ago, by a man who is no longer with us.

As with any philosopher, Bob Harris' words will be viewed through the lens of a different time, place, and perspective, each time they are reprinted.

I am offering my honest response to his words. And part of the reason that I am doing so, is that this "Us vs. Them" mentality is still around. It exists on this Board to a very large degree.

Until you have been a member of a persecuted minority, you simply cannot understand how that colors your world view.

True enough. But I am getting a little tiny taste of it right here.

When Cati wrote......

"To be who we are and do what we do, requires a greater amount of trust, honesty and mutual respect between partners..... BDSM is more of everything...passion, emotion, sensation, sex and LOVE. This lifestyle surpasses everything that a vanilla relationship can offer."

....... her words displayed a fair amount of bigotry, lack of understanding, and disrespect toward my neighbors the Johnsons and so many other people whom I hold dear.

Two things that I firmly believe:

#1. No one has the right to say that the Johnsons had a relationship that was stronger, more meaningful, and more intimate than the relationship that bob and his Master enjoyed.

#2. No one has the right to say that Bob Harris and his Master had a relationship that was stonger, more meaningful, and more intimate than the relationship that the Johnsons enjoyed.

Either of those assertions would be offensive and bigoted.

Geoff, you work hard for sexual freedom and respect for your world. Please consider that respect works both ways. If you want your lifestyle/kink/whatever to be respected as equally valid, then I support you 100%.

On the other hand, if you want me to accept the idea that (to quote Cati): your "lifestyle surpasses everything that a vanilla relationship can offer", then I'm crying foul.

Equally valid? Absolutely.

A way to achieve more respect/trust/love/etc.? Not for everyone. There are other ways to achieve deep emotional bonds.

bob was trying to impress upon the young, the new, and the overly eager, the importance of these facets of a relationship because many of them had not, and have not seen these things modelled in the relationships of their parents, or in their own gay vanilla relationships. They certainly don't see them modelled very often in our popular culture. Yes, I'm sure bob realized in the back of his mind that straights might read his articles but I don't think that was his target audience.

Again I will point out, Geoff, that I am reading the words of Bob Harris years after the fact in a different venue and with a different perspective entirely.

He wrote something that I disagree with. I am presenting an alternative point of view. And I am doing so for two reasons:

1) Rebecca wrote to me and suggested that I read the Bob Harris articles. I took the time to carefully read them and draft an honest response to post on her thread.

2) This view - the idea that a BDSM relationship is necessarily more full of respect, communication, etc. - is one that I have seen repeated, over and over again, since coming to this Board. Cati's remarks here show that the view is held quite strongly by some. Therefore, my alternative point of view is a way of rebutting an opinion expressed not only by Bob Harris, but by many others here as well.

If it will make you feel better, stick a letter "M" on there and make the "any" a "many".

If you, and Cati, and everyone else here would stick in that "M"..... that would indeed make me "feel better".

And please keep in mind that even if _your_ absolute assertion:........there is a "power exchange" in all relationships....... were true, then that merely means that all relationships are D/s relationships, none of them are purely vanilla.

That's exactly what I believe, Geoff. There is an element of dominance and submission in every relationship. Hence my point about the spectruum of relationships being more appropriate than the idea of two gigantic boxes on the floor.

Married people disagree on many things. How is the disagreement resolved? Whoever "wins" the debate over where to go on vacation has exerted more power at that moment.

People submit to each other in countless ways that have nothing to do with kneeling or calling anybody Sir. To a very large extent, D/s relationships of the type that are discussed on this Board ritualize and formalize and openly acknowledge dynamics that exist - at least in part - in every pairing of two people.

Alice

 

[alice_underneath]

I dislike absolutes. No matter what they are applied to.

Absolute statements suggest that the person stating them knows everything there is to know, ever, about a particular topic. This is ridiculous, and impossible.

No single person can know everything there is to know about a topic. There is always more. And that extends to the topic of relationships. No person out there can make a truthful, absolute statement regarding anyone else's relationships.

Therefore, I find myself agreeing, that the claim that one sort of relationship is somehow better, more fulfilling, or requiring/involving of more trust or *anything* than another kind.

Nobody out there can know all there is to know about my relationship. Or your (this "your" being used in a generic sense) relationships. All anyone can truly know is about their *own* relationships, and what they may observe, or be told, about others. To that extent, each person needs to decide for themselves which kind of relationship, and what goes into it, is right for them.

For the author of those essays, perhaps it did require more trust, honesty, and communication, and all those other things, to form a healthy, full relationship. IMHO, however, those things are required in -all- relationships. Personally I would like to see these things in our more casual relationships, too, but sometimes that's just not possible.

What it boils down to is, when someone makes an absolute statement about something, they are presuming a great deal about the people involved, or not involved, in that something. To say that one sort of relationship is somehow fuller, and more trusting, and more open, than another... that deals a great insult to those who are involved in a different kind of relationship.

And nobody really likes being insulted... well, okay, some do, but that's a totally different topic.

Miss Firefly,

Beautifully written.

Thank you so much for understanding what I was trying to say.

You have turned my tears of frustration into tears of appreciation.

* hugs of intense gratitude *

Alice

 

[jadefirefly]

Miss Firefly,

Beautifully written.

Thank you so much for understanding what I was trying to say.

You have turned my tears of frustration into tears of appreciation.

* hugs of intense gratitude *

Alice

*smiles*

I was actually writing out a nice big response to this when I realized all I was doing was reiterating my own words, and some of yours as well, and I figured that was just silly.

So I'll just say it's no problem at all for me to understand where you're coming from. I'll also say that I do understand -why- Bob Harris wrote it as he did; I don't agree with how it was phrased, but I do understand where he was coming from.

I do plant my feet firmly on your side of the fence, however.

 

[alice_underneath]

So I'll just say it's no problem at all for me to understand where you're coming from.

Again, I thank you Miss Firefly, for your understanding and - most importantly - for the respect you show to my family, my neighbors, and my friends.

I'll also say that I do understand -why- Bob Harris wrote it as he did; I don't agree with how it was phrased, but I do understand where he was coming from

Geoff's comments really helped put the articles in perspective for me. What surprised me the most was this statement:

In me, he lit the passion to share and teach new folks in this lifestyle, and to help build a community that will someday walk in the mainstream without fear of persecution or reprisal, free to be who we are, to love who, and _how_, we wish

The reason I was surprised is that there is nothing in the articles posted here that (to me) reflects a zeal to achieve acceptance by the mainstream. In fact, to (obviously ill-informed) eyes, just the opposite seemed to be true.

In the very first article posted here, Whose Way is Right? (post #370), he writes eloquently, and at length, about acceptance and tolerance for different "ways" within the Leather Community..... not for acceptance and tolerance of the Leather Community itself within the world at large.

I am not saying that wasn't his goal. All I am saying is that he does not focus on that goal in these particular essays.

In fact, at times he seems to argue against the goal of mainstream acceptance for BDSM. For example, in the essay Thoughts, (post #377), he wrote:

"Everyone is aware that during the slavery days in the South there were Masters who treated their slaves like animals, barley giving them the basic needs for survival, forcing them to work beyond their physical limits and beating them whenever they didn't measure up to what the Master wanted. Likewise, there were Masters who treated their slaves fairly, who made sure they were well taken care of to the extent that they almost became members of the family.

So why can't the same be true for our lifesyle? The answer is it can and it is. It's just not well publicized, After all, our lifestyle has always been and probably always will be cloaked in mystery. It's fun to play off the evil image created in the fantasy magazines, and the popular image of the Master/slave helps preserve that mystery and evil image. But those in the lifestyle need to keep separate the real from the fantasy especially when teaching newcomers or talking about it with someone who is exploring and is truly interested in knowing what this lifestyle is really about.

So just what is the difference between a Daddy/boy and Master/slave relationship? Am i trying to say that there is no need for Daddy/boy? Should we try to eliminate the fantasy image of Master/slave from the lifestyle? No, the concept of Daddy/boy has become very much a part of our lifestyle and does help present an image that there can be love in a relationship even though one likes to get beat and the other likes giving the beatings. And to do away with the fantasy involved in the lifestyle would take away a large part of what this lifestyle is all about."

This extract confuses me a great deal, and I would appreciate it if a knowledgeable person would explain it to me.

He seems to be saying that the taboo nature of the Master/slave concept enhances its erotic appeal.

While the allure of the forbidden is something I can understand, it is much harder for me to understand a deliberate attempt to relate to slavery in the Old South - even as "fantasy" - especially if one's goal is (as Geoff stated), to "someday walk in the mainstream without fear of persecution or reprisal".

It is very possible that I am misinterpreting his words here. If so, I would appreciate a clarification from someone who understood what he was trying to say.

Alice

 

[FurryFury]

I know I should just let this drop but I really see things a bit differently.

Let's say you have a "normal" job. You are a secretary. You have a very good relationship with your boss. Both of you communicate well and respect each other as much as two people in that sort of relationship can.

Now, let's say you have an abnormal job. You are the girl who stands still while your boss man throws knives at you. Both of you communicate well and respect each other as much as two people in that sort of relationship can.

Just off hand, which relationship do you think might, of necessity, have the greatest amount of trust and communication?

I'm not saying vanilla relationships can't be very wonderful and full, of course they can be that way and many are.

I'm just saying it's logical that when you add activities that require more trust and more communication, it stands to reason you would then build those areas to a higher level, doesn't it? I don't think many people do BDSM things casually but I could be wrong. It certainly wouldn't work for me.

BTW, we really don't know what your elderly neighbors did in their private life either. You never know, they might well have been kinky. Either way it doesn't matter, they had something you admire and revere, they don't have to prove anything about how wonderful their relationship and love was, neither do you.

Fury

 

[alice_underneath]

Now, let's say you have an abnormal job. You are the girl who stands still while your boss man throws knives at you.

I could be a naive girl, giggling and ignoring the seriousness of the situation while I get excited thinking about fantasies I read on the Internet. My boss could be a jerk who is just taking out his rage and aggression in a very dangerous way.

Just because a relationship involves whips and floggers and knives does not mean that the relationship involves respect, trust, communication, and love. MANY DO. But many do not. Just like in the vanilla world. That is point number one.

And physical trust is just one kind of trust. There are all kinds of terror and all kinds of vulnerabilities.... physical is just one.

There are all kinds of communication, too. Negotiation is a fine example. In a strong Master/slave relationship, there is a lot of communication of a certain kind. But there are also many times when commands are given and the expectation is that there will be no discussion about what was asked. Isn't that right?

Contrast that to the daily negotiation - over a multitude of issues, large and small, in a strong non-TPE relationship. Do you see my point? Communication... just a different kind.

Different kinds of trust and communication. That is point number two.

Either way it doesn't matter, they had something you admire and revere, they don't have to prove anything about how wonderful their relationship and love was, neither do you.

I actually do have something to prove here, Miss Fury.

I am asking you to extend to me, my neighbors, my family, and friends, the same respect that I have always extended to you.

I am going to repeat the two things that I firmly believe:

#1. No one has the right to say that the Johnsons had a relationship that was stronger, more meaningful, and more intimate than the relationship that bob and his Master enjoyed.

#2. No one has the right to say that Bob Harris and his Master had a relationship that was stonger, more meaningful, and more intimate than the relationship that the Johnsons enjoyed.

I firmly believe both #1 and #2. In the vanilla world in which I live, I have stood up for alternative lifestyles - as openly and vigorously as I am doing now in defending the vanilla world to you. In addition, I have funded an organization listed on a thread started by Evil Geoff. Not the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom, but a sister corporation mentioned on that site. (More acronyms, I'll try to find it when I have time.)

The point is..... I am standing up for equal respect for all SSC lifestyles. And what I do not understand is..... why aren't you?

Alice

 

[FurryFury]

To me this is not a question of respect but in any case, I don't think I've ever withdrawn it from you or anyone you've mentioned on either side of the kink line. I'm sorry you do.

Fury

 

[alice_underneath]

To me this is not a question of respect but in any case, I don't think I've ever withdrawn it from you or anyone you've mentioned on either side of the kink line. I'm sorry you do.

Fury

My apologies, Miss Fury. I did not understand your post.

Sorry I do.... what?