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

[bridgeburner]

Ah, I see Fury has left the building. I don't mean to draw you back if you're done so you're welcome to totally disregard my last post --- I won't be offended in the least. I'm for dog walking myself at this point.

'Night

 

[bridgeburner]

Trust is trust no mater how you want to slice it....."It Is what it is, not or is, and that is all that it is."

Nice post, RJ. Good stuff.

-B

 

[*curious*]

Interesting last few pages...

This may be long and rambly (can't sleep and not all that sure my thoughts are clear)...

On the subject (pages and eons ago) of switches:

Once upon a time there was a little girl who always wanted to please everyone. From a young age she wanted so much to be a "good girl". Her will was easily bent; she sought out ways to serve people she cared deeply for. (She also had a kinky streak a mile wide; however, she never shared that with anyone because it wasn't what "good girls" did.) She eventually discovered BDSM and went "A-Hah! This makes so much sense!" and promptly assigned herself the role of submissive based on her understanding of such things and her life-long desires to please others. She discovered Lit and considered the board to be a friendly source of research. She hung out for a year or two and eventually Life got in the way, so she wandered off Lit for a while. (10 points to anyone who figures out who this may have been- PMs only, please. )

Then she fell deeply, madly, achingly in Love... with a very "old school" gentleman who did not see things in terms of "Dom/Domme", "submissive/slave" or "switch"; the only truth was in being Lovers- in holding the other's very core and soul in the hollow of one's hand. Eek! How complicated! But but but.... there are definitions! There are rules! Thus began a year or so of "deprogramming" from the mindset that one must be a "Domme/Dom", "submissive/slave" or "switch".

I refuse to use the word "switch". I am not a switch. I am a woman who Loves as I am Loved and tries my hardest to meet his needs and provide him with opportunity to express his passion, dedication, Love and faithfulness to me. In return he provides the same. If asked what I "am" I respond, simply, "Myself". Does this mean I have turned away from my "submissive nature"? Or does it simply mean there has always been a "Domme" inside me waiting to feel safe enough to come out? Nope... simpy means I am happy, Loved and in Love.

On the subject of a BDSM based relationship being "more" than a "vanilla" relationship:

All I know is that it was easy for me to hide (emotionally, physically, spiritually) in a "vanilla" marriage. I did not have to bare my soul... it was not expected of me; it was not vital for the relationship to continue; the impact of hiding was not immediately felt in the relationship. Granted, my marriage was not a very good one; however, I do know the degree of trust, communication and commitment necessary for *this* relationship to grow is far more than what my "vanilla" friends expect from their relationships. We've discussed it and on some level they think I'm nuts... but acknowledge I'm happier than I've ever been. Most of those I've discussed the subject with also agree my relationship takes a far deeper level of commitment than they are willing to invest. Note- I did not say my relationship is better or their's lesser, somehow.

I am not sure that one Lifestyle (kinky or vanilla) is better/more/whatever than the other. IMO they will never be "equal". Both BDSM and vanilla relationships have strengths and weaknesses that are *unique* to the structure of those relationships. I view the two as being unequal without any issue of one being somehow better than the other. The depth of my relationship can not lessen the breadth of Alice's neighbor's marriage. The depth of her neighbor's marriage can not lessen the breadth of my relationship; however, I also can not see the two as equal.

 

[RJMasters]

Nice post, RJ. Good stuff.

-B

Thanks BB. I wanted to agree with you about what you mentioned earlier. I too don't think Bob meant to be condesending, but rather was pointing out his POV. I think Greoff did a great job explaining where he was coming from at the time he made these comments.

As I read all of these essays, I have to say that I have a great admiration and respect.

Just getting a feel for who Bob was by his writing, he seems to be a reasonable chap and a likable fellow. If he were here today I am sure he would be open minded and may change his statement to be "for me" or "my expereince has been" that D/s/BDSM relationships are far more loving, and require much more turst and respect. I am sure he would qualify his statement based off the other things he has written.


I think people who are D/s/BDSM have every right to proclaim from their experience that their realtionship from their POV is better than any other type of relationship. And I hope they believe that sincerely within their hearts. I also think those who may be more vanilla can do the same. It is hoped that those who hear the other could be secure enough in who they are and what they have, that they can be happy for someone else expressing their POV without being so offended.

I am sure if someone had told Bob they were deeply offended by what he said, he probably would have re-asserted that for "him", what he said was true, and would have been some what gracious in allowing the other person to feel the same about their own relationship.

Having two daughters....the example of them eating ice cream and arguing over which tastes better, actually happened. I remember saying to them both....Hush that kind of talk and enjoy the fact you are eating the type of ice cream that makes you happy. When they kept it up and didn't listen....I made them switch ice creams and told them both that they had to eat every bit of it. I never heard them argue again over who's ice cream was better. lol.

 

[jadefirefly]

All I'm going to say, at this point, is this:

Alice, you know I like you a great deal, I respect you, and I agree wholeheartedly with your statements. But you do, and always have, write/type in a very formal manner, which is easily misconstrued as uptight, condescending or unhappy, depending on the content. It's easier for some of us to get used to this, and see through to what you're really feeling or trying to convey; not everyone has such an easy time with it. I think what is confusing Fury is that you're -saying- you're not angry or condescending, but to some, you may -sound- as if you are.

Fury, you do the same thing. The -more- respectful you try to sound, the more you sound as if you're talking down at someone. You almost come across as more angry, though.

I think that while both of you are trying very hard to be polite, respectful and cooperative, you're both giving the other one the impression that you're angry, "blowing up" and treating the other like a child. These are -impressions-. Not actual intentions.

These are just outside opinions, from one who likes and respects you both very much, and is fairly used to reading both of your typing styles by now. Feel free to smack be back into my corner if I'm wrong on anything here; it wouldn't be a first.

 

[jadefirefly]

Both BDSM and vanilla relationships have strengths and weaknesses that are *unique* to the structure of those relationships. I view the two as being unequal without any issue of one being somehow better than the other. The depth of my relationship can not lessen the breadth of Alice's neighbor's marriage. The depth of her neighbor's marriage can not lessen the breadth of my relationship; however, I also can not see the two as equal.

THIS... is an incredibly insightful and well-worded comment. Bravo.

 

[FurryFury]

Interesting last few pages...

This may be long and rambly (can't sleep and not all that sure my thoughts are clear)...

On the subject (pages and eons ago) of switches:

Once upon a time there was a little girl who always wanted to please everyone. From a young age she wanted so much to be a "good girl". Her will was easily bent; she sought out ways to serve people she cared deeply for. (She also had a kinky streak a mile wide; however, she never shared that with anyone because it wasn't what "good girls" did.) She eventually discovered BDSM and went "A-Hah! This makes so much sense!" and promptly assigned herself the role of submissive based on her understanding of such things and her life-long desires to please others. She discovered Lit and considered the board to be a friendly source of research. She hung out for a year or two and eventually Life got in the way, so she wandered off Lit for a while. (10 points to anyone who figures out who this may have been- PMs only, please. )

Then she fell deeply, madly, achingly in Love... with a very "old school" gentleman who did not see things in terms of "Dom/Domme", "submissive/slave" or "switch"; the only truth was in being Lovers- in holding the other's very core and soul in the hollow of one's hand. Eek! How complicated! But but but.... there are definitions! There are rules! Thus began a year or so of "deprogramming" from the mindset that one must be a "Domme/Dom", "submissive/slave" or "switch".

I refuse to use the word "switch". I am not a switch. I am a woman who Loves as I am Loved and tries my hardest to meet his needs and provide him with opportunity to express his passion, dedication, Love and faithfulness to me. In return he provides the same. If asked what I "am" I respond, simply, "Myself". Does this mean I have turned away from my "submissive nature"? Or does it simply mean there has always been a "Domme" inside me waiting to feel safe enough to come out? Nope... simpy means I am happy, Loved and in Love.
<snip>.

Dear Curious,

I'm happy for you that you have found happiness! It's very heartwarming to hear it when someone feels they have found the place and relationship they can be happy in.

Fury

 

[alice_underneath]

At this point, I can see that whatever I say about this will be misinterpreted. That's just sad to me because I have really tried to communicate here without judgement, absolutes or disrespect. In the past we have always held each other with respect and known that was the case. How that can change over a discussion and some theories I'm not quite sure but I'm done here now.

Therefore I will quit this discussion. I can see it no matter what I say it is just becoming a circular argument leading nowhere. I will now simply and respectfully agree to disagree.

I wish you well as always Miss Alice.

Fury

Miss Fury,

I gratefully and sincerely accept your invitation to "agree to disagree" about your theory.

I would also like to say I have always viewed you as treating me, personally, with respect. That has not changed. In fact, that is exactly what I was trying to say yesterday, when I wrote:

Thank you for apologizing, Miss Fury.

I believe you when you say that it was not your intent to insult me, and I sincerely hope we can reach an understanding here.

https://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=16331913&postcount=443

Part of the reason that I have been going "on and on" with you, Miss Fury, is that I genuinely like and respect you. Because I value your friendship, I really would like to reach an understanding with you on a topic that I consider to be very important.

However, if we are unable to reach a common understanding, that does not change the fact that I respect you and consider you to be my friend.

It really only means one thing. As you suggested, we should drop the subject.

I wish you well, as always, too Miss Fury.

Alice

 

[alice_underneath]

As I read all of these essays, I have to say that I have a great admiration and respect.

Just getting a feel for who Bob was by his writing, he seems to be a reasonable chap and a likable fellow. If he were here today I am sure he would be open minded and may change his statement to be "for me" or "my expereince has been" that D/s/BDSM relationships are far more loving, and require much more turst and respect. I am sure he would qualify his statement based off the other things he has written.

I agree with you, RJ. Repeatedly..... going back to the very first post that I wrote about the man, I have been saying that my impression of bob is that: "He seems to have been a genuinely decent person, worthy of respect and admiration."

I have carefully tried to distinguish my comments in response to individuals here from my comments relating to bob's article, as you can see in this post:

https://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=16331562&postcount=437

I am sure if someone had told Bob they were deeply offended by what he said, he probably would have re-asserted that for "him", what he said was true, and would have been some what gracious in allowing the other person to feel the same about their own relationship.

Though using different words, I have tried to make this point too, several times on this thread.

That is exactly what I meant to say three days ago, when I wrote:

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.

https://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=16305317&postcount=404

I think people who are D/s/BDSM have every right to proclaim from their experience that their realtionship from their POV is better than any other type of relationship. And I hope they believe that sincerely within their hearts. I also think those who may be more vanilla can do the same. It is hoped that those who hear the other could be secure enough in who they are and what they have, that they can be happy for someone else expressing their POV without being so offended.

Just to clarify here, Mr. Masters, in case there has been a misunderstanding....

I am not now, nor have I ever been, offended by the idea that someone would say a particular lifestyle/kink/whatever works best for them. Over and over again, I have written things like: "That is true for you, Miss Fury. And that's wonderful." That is a 100% sincere and respectful expression of what I honestly believe.

Alice

 

[MadamaMiniTopic]

shuffle......shuffle....Shes baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack.........

Konnichiwa !!!!!
Oai-deki-te ureshii-desu.Hontou-ni moushiwake-gozaimasen .
Madama much been so tied up with esteemed Samurai Lover.
Travel many places, show show later.....smiles. Much priviledge to be
adored Geisha of esteemed Samurai Lover . Madama make more comfort now here. Please assist Thread Gods , purify and new begginings. Much loving you doumo arigatou gozai-masu.........smiles.

~ kochira koso bows ~

~ click first please ~

http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c224/rebecca000/shintopriestsavethread.gif

~ Music for to purify ~ click next please ~
Translation Above : Madama very sorry been away to long doing the shibari thang with hunky dude in kimono feels very neglectful hopes she can buy you off with ridiculous pictures from her extended naughty weekend with he who must be obeyed (have you seen his mighty sword , submit my sweet ....nvm) feels fresh karma is due here , asked some dude in a cool looking conehead inspired hat to do affirmation thingys for the thread. Ain't she a peach !!!​

 

[MadamaMiniTopic]

Madama Valentines Holiday Photos ~ Part 1

http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c224/rebecca000/MadamaGOdzilla.jpg

ohh this very bad creature has very kink thing going on Madama very scared. Though some here may inspired be.......

http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c224/rebecca000/spankygodzilla.jpg
What this one me no sure....... Ohh spank manta feathersan...heh

~ bows ~​

 

[RJMasters]

*laughs

MadamaMiniTopic you crack me up.

Domzilla!

How cool would it be to walk through the city smashing and stomping things at random....I think it would be theraputic in many ways.

Thanks for the grin.

 

[FurryFury]

Oh! Godzilla make me so hottie! Must fan self and sit on ice now!

Fury

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

NOT BDSM related but interesting...........

Ahh hope Madama is cool with this I am just going to hijack this Thread a bit I found this site below a few days ago quite by accident. It both engages my attention for its 'beauty' and puts me in a 'cerebral/philosophical' place as well. Has anyone that reads beyond here actually been there ? How do others here viewing relate to it ? I am thrilled it exists in a sense that it is so unique, though I guess a little conflicted that I can view it so passively. Any thoughts ?

The Ossuary in Sedlec
'Where human bones become Art'

http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c224/rebecca000/Knoglekapellet_i_Sedlec_Kutna_Hora_.jpg
The Chandelier

Kutna Hora is a town in the Czech Republic about 70 km (44 miles) east
of the capital Prague. The town flourished during the 1300 due to the
immense silver findings in the vicinity. The town provided most of
the silver for the coins circulating in Europe at the time. As the town
grew new churches were built and old ones repaired and expanded.
One of the most famous medieval cathedrals, the Church of Santa Barbara
(Kostel sv. Barbora), was built at that time with money raised from the
miners from the area in honour of their industry's patron saint and
without involvment of any governmental funding.

Another less known church (but of major interest to us!) was sittuated
in Sedlec - a kind of a suburb to Kutna Hora some 2 kilometres away from
the Kutna Hora town centre itself and got heavily expanded with a new
Chapel added to the old buildings.

The Sedlec Cistercians weren't just joining the Kutna Hora construction
boom when they started expanding. They did it because of practical
reasons. That chapel with its belonging graveyard had become a well-known
and attractive place to get ones relatives buried in a long
time ago. Why you may ask?..

The answer is to be found in the actions of a certain abbot Henry. In the
year of thy lord 1278 the Cistercian abbot Henry embarked on a pilgrim
voyage to the Holy Land (Palestine). This was more or less common practice
for people of the church at the time. What he couldn't have imagined is the
effect a little symbolic deed that he performed would have on the future of
the little Sedlec church.

While in Palestine abbot Henry visited the Golgotha and from there he
brought back to Sedlec a jar full of earth. He referred to this as 'Holy Soil'.
When he got back he spread the earth over the Sedlec cemetery and thus the
cemetery begun to be considered as a piece of sacred land. The burial ground
rapidly became one of the most popular in central Europe and people from all
over the country and Europe came to Sedlec to get buried when they felt the
strength of life diminishing. Many brought their dead relatives or friends
to be buried in the holy soil of the Sedlec cemetery believing that the holyness
of the ground was a sure way to guarantee the buried a place in heaven.
Many corpses and bones were accumulated this way and especially during the
times of the plague (the black death) many who were about to die from the
disease came themselves to be buried in Sedlec. By 1318 over 30 000 bodies
were buried there and this gave rise to the creation of the ossuary.

The ossuary is located in the All Saints' Chapel built around 1400.
The chapel is still surrounded by a functioning graveyard and if you
take a careful look at the top of its towers you will see that
that a "jolly roger", or a skull and crossbones, replace the usual Christian
cross. The ossuary itself dates from 1511 when a half-blind monk
was given the task to gather the bones from the abolished graves and
putting them in the crypt to make place for new "customers". The task
may seem somewhat macabre and unenviable but it served a practical
purpose. Anyhow - now the material was in store and waiting for an
idea and someone to realize that idea.

A more questionable task than the one of the half-blind monk was the
one of the local woodcarver who as late as 1870 was hired to decorate
the inside of the Chapel with the human material (an approximate of
40 000 sets of human bones) at his disposal. The name of the artist
was Frantisek Rindt and the employer was the Duke (Prince?) of
Shwartzenberg. The coats of arms of the family Shwartzenberg was
one of the creations evolved from the artists mind. Another one is
the chandelier which contains every human bone in the body, several
times over, of course.

However questionable the Ossuary - it is real. The bones are real.
The feeling of death is real. But also the feeling of peace.
Most of the dead in the Ossuary died a "natural" i.e. non-violent
death and the bones were removed from the ground to give more
Christians the possibility to be buried on holy ground.
I'd like to stress the fact that the church is not made of bones
as so many seem to think! The interior is decorated with human
bones but it's a "normal" church made of stone and bricks. I'd also
like to point out that it's a normal Christian church with a Christ
on the cross figure and all the rest. It's not some weird cult or
Satanist church or anything like that.
(Introduction from Website)

The Ossuary in Sedlec ~ See Galleries

Virtual Visit of Sedlec from different Site

.
​

 

[FurryFury]

I haven't been there in RL but I do find it fascinatingly beautiful. This really appeals to me. As soon as I have some time to really do so I will take some time looking around at that site!

Thanks for putting this up Miss Rebecca!

Fury

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

Postcards From The Edge......

Hmmmn little dusty in here , might be time to call Madama and see what she has been up to. Yet another postcard arrived from her this week. She certainly does rock...........

http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c224/rebecca000/PostcardsfromtheEdge.jpg

Ohhh ........slipped...fell.......smiles.....found this while doing the online version of surfing......

F**K Her Gently ~ Oh my....laughs ~ Click Me

​

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

I haven't been there in RL but I do find it fascinatingly beautiful. This really appeals to me. As soon as I have some time to really do so I will take some time looking around at that site!

Thanks for putting this up Miss Rebecca!

Fury

Hey Miss Fury

Not quite sure how to describe it I think you did rather well "fascinatingly beautiful" . I must admit I am slightly disappointed for the amount of people who viewed it here and also that I have spoken to directly no one to date has been there first hand. Oh well have to put it on my list after Antartica (its a real list to !!! My son and I may be there in November if I am very very lucky).

love

@}-}rebecca-----

 

[bridgeburner]

It is beautiful and certainly something I'd love to see if I were in that part of the world. Prague is on my short list so a visit to the Osuary at Sedlec is a distinct possibility for me.

While I'm glad to live the age of modern dentistry and at least a nod toward the causes of human rights and freedom of expression I think we've lost a lot of the magic in our world---the ability to be both practical and reverent at once.

And yes of course I know I'm creating a past that likely never existed, but the very idea that art from human remains, both sacred art and also secular art in the form of Victorian Mourning Jewelry existed so relatively recently and would now be regarded as ......well, wait a minute. Isn't there a company that's making diamonds from cremated human and pet remains?

I think it's kind of cool, but I've always been a bit of a barbarian at heart anyway so what's my opinon worth. ;->

-B

 

[alice_underneath]

I don't really have a taste for the ornate. Simple and subtle is more my style. However, I can understand why the art at the Sedlec Ossuary might be considered beautiful. And from a practical perspective, I don't see a difference between intricate art created with bones and other natural objects, like seashells.

Issues of personal taste in art aside, I have a hard time separating this photograph from various horrific images seared into my consciousness - for example, images created by the Pol Pot regime (e.g., the one at the following link).

http://*******.com/j4y79

Intellectually, I am able to acknowledge the difference in the way that the bones were gathered and displayed. On an emotional level, however, the images blend together in my head..... and the result is a sense of revulsion.

Alice

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

It is beautiful and certainly something I'd love to see if I were in that part of the world. Prague is on my short list so a visit to the Osuary at Sedlec is a distinct possibility for me.

While I'm glad to live the age of modern dentistry and at least a nod toward the causes of human rights and freedom of expression I think we've lost a lot of the magic in our world---the ability to be both practical and reverent at once.

And yes of course I know I'm creating a past that likely never existed, but the very idea that art from human remains, both sacred art and also secular art in the form of Victorian Mourning Jewelry existed so relatively recently and would now be regarded as ......well, wait a minute. Isn't there a company that's making diamonds from cremated human and pet remains?

I think it's kind of cool, but I've always been a bit of a barbarian at heart anyway so what's my opinon worth. ;->

-B

Okay Bridgeburner so I can count on your barbarian self to report back here please if and when you should visit the Ossuary in Sedlec.......smiles

I think you make a point about 'magic in our world'. Something I am always trying to remember to recognise in my life with varying degrees of success.

I think its 'there' I don't think one needs to be delusional find it , I know it takes insight and perception to embrace it. I have been most fortunate , for without it I would perish.

 

[bridgeburner]

I don't really have a taste for the ornate. Simple and subtle is more my style. However, I can understand why the art at the Sedlec Ossuary might be considered beautiful. And from a practical perspective, I don't see a difference between intricate art created with bones and other natural objects, like seashells.

My taste is fairly eclectic but I'm far too much of a hoarder and gatherer to ever truly embrace minimalism. The purity of Japanese line appeals to my eye but my personal aesthetic would never produce such a thing. The trouble with ornate is that it's a pain in the ass to dust.

Issues of personal taste in art aside, I have a hard time separating this photograph from various horrific images seared into my consciousness - for example, images created by the Pol Pot regime...

Intellectually, I am able to acknowledge the difference in the way that the bones were gathered and displayed. On an emotional level, however, the images blend together in my head..... and the result is a sense of revulsion.

Alice

I can see how that would be, but it definitely makes a difference for me how the people died.

The remains in the Ossuary are those of people who died natural deaths for the most part over the course of hundreds of years. Many of them travelled specifically to Sedlac for the purpose of being laid to rest in the sacred ground there and the display of their remains while shocking to the modern eye was done with reverence.

Pol Pot's victims suffered horribly. There was nothing peaceful or reverent or willing or sacred about their deaths. It was a monstrous crime.

The remains in the second picture are not beautiful, but I wouldn't want them buried which I think many would feel is an affront. I don't mean disrespect to the dead or to any of their relatives or descendants who might remain, but the sheer number, the weight of that sight....Reading on a plaque that there were 20,000 unidentified people buried in a mass grave is not the same as being confronted with the sight of all of those bones. It's horrifying. But it should be horrifying. I think we need to be horrified. Clearly we aren't horrified enough to have the kinds of things happening in the world that are happening while nobody really lifts a hand to stop it.

But that's all a bit far afield.

I think that part of it is also that skeletons are not corpses to me. They represent people and lives lived and lost and histories but with the flesh gone they are not quite as immediate. My grandmother's bones I could feel reverence for. I absolutely refused to "view" her at the wake.


-B

 

[alice_underneath]

The remains in the Ossuary are those of people who died natural deaths for the most part over the course of hundreds of years. Many of them travelled specifically to Sedlac for the purpose of being laid to rest in the sacred ground there and the display of their remains while shocking to the modern eye was done with reverence.

The display doesn't shock me in the sense of thinking - omigod, how could they DO that?!? Rather, it upsets me because the image immediately and powerfully reminds me of images relating to genocide. This is my problem as the viewer of the display, not a problem with the display itself.

The remains in the second picture are not beautiful, but I wouldn't want them buried which I think many would feel is an affront. I don't mean disrespect to the dead or to any of their relatives or descendants who might remain, but the sheer number, the weight of that sight....Reading on a plaque that there were 20,000 unidentified people buried in a mass grave is not the same as being confronted with the sight of all of those bones. It's horrifying. But it should be horrifying. I think we need to be horrified. Clearly we aren't horrified enough to have the kinds of things happening in the world that are happening while nobody really lifts a hand to stop it.

I agree with these comments about the Museum of Genocide in Cambodia.

I think that part of it is also that skeletons are not corpses to me. They represent people and lives lived and lost and histories but with the flesh gone they are not quite as immediate. My grandmother's bones I could feel reverence for. I absolutely refused to "view" her at the wake.

I agree with this too, and had a similar experience with my grandfather.

Alice

 

[Kajira Callista]

.

My sincere and honest opinion is that, if he had had a chance to get to know Mr. and Mrs. Johnson...... he would have understood that their relationship was just as strong, just as meaningful, and just as intimate as the one he shared with his Master.

I am reiterating the point here, because I do not want my subsequent comments (responding to Cati or others) to be misconstrued as an attack on Bob Harris himself.

I think there are a few points you are neglecting here alice (BTW i haven't read past this post yet so i dunno if i am to be repeating someone else). What you aren't seeing is what you are actually feeling (confused yet?).


Most...not all... people see what we do as role play or just sex when in fact it is much more. They think we are mentally ill or freaks or dangerous.
It IS a relationship based on the same thing the Johnson's was, but it is not respected or acknowledged. When i read what Cati and Geoff had to say it was clear that what they posted was what was the truth in their lives yet you saw it as them disagreeing with you.
Do i believe that more trust is involved in a D/s BDSM relationship? Yep because i know i needed that in place to make the magic happen, so for me that statement is true.
It is not only physical trust, it is emotional trust for me. The reason being is because i am opening myself in a dangerous way for the pleasure of the person i am opening up myself for as well as my own pleasure.
Anyway, what i was getting at was that because of this thing we do and the intensity involved, people looking in need to remember that it is based on love etc. and we are fulfilled as much (even if it feels to us more so) as nilla lovers.
Basically "My sincere and honest opinion is that, if he had had a chance to get to know Mr. and Mrs. Johnson...... he would have understood that their relationship was just as strong, just as meaningful, and just as intimate as the one he shared with his Master." take your own words and do a character switch and see if that makes sense to you.

 

[alice_underneath]

Do i believe that more trust is involved in a D/s BDSM relationship? Yep because i know i needed that in place to make the magic happen, so for me that statement is true.

That's great! For you, that's what makes the magic happen. If you haven't read the whole thread, then perhaps you missed the times I said this - over and over again. This is what works for you. That's wonderful!

Basically "My sincere and honest opinion is that, if he had had a chance to get to know Mr. and Mrs. Johnson...... he would have understood that their relationship was just as strong, just as meaningful, and just as intimate as the one he shared with his Master." take your own words and do a character switch and see if that makes sense to you.

Would the Johnsons have described bob's relationship as a relationship that was just as strong, meaningful, and intimate as their own? Probably not.

But I would.

Alice

 

[FurryFury]

Hey Miss Fury

Not quite sure how to describe it I think you did rather well "fascinatingly beautiful" . I must admit I am slightly disappointed for the amount of people who viewed it here and also that I have spoken to directly no one to date has been there first hand. Oh well have to put it on my list after Antartica (its a real list to !!! My son and I may be there in November if I am very very lucky).

love

@}-}rebecca-----

Sounds like a great trip! I do hope y'all get to do it!

Fury