Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message

ManOwner -> Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/11/2005 1:52:19 PM)

Please forgive me if there is a thread in the archives that has already hashed out this discussion. I did the best I could to search for it and came up empty-handed.

I suffered abuse as a young child, and I believe this experience is the root cause of my dominant tendencies. Being subjugated, humiliated, or degraded is my worst nightmare, but it totally turns me on to do it to other people.

I am still having trouble resolving the moral conflict I see inherent in BDSM. If I am treating someone in a way that I would not want to be treated, that violates the golden rule as I see it. I understand that the sub enjoys being dominated, and I further understand that I have a duty to keep things safe, sane, consensual, and fun. Nonetheless, I feel guilty taking pleasure in dominating another person. I feel as though it must be unhealthy since it all stems from abuse (fruit of a poison tree, after a fashion).

If you have ever wrestled with these issues, would you please share your thoughts with me either privately or on this thread? Thanks.



Lordandmaster -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/11/2005 2:07:53 PM)

It can be a problem, but my attitude is that the Golden Rule is a useful guide, but not an infallible standard. All variants of the Golden Rule (and there are a few: the Negative Golden Rule, the Silver Rule, etc.--it gets kind of gimicky) will fail some version of the "S&M test."

The reasoning behind the Golden Rule is that, ideally, you'd like to treat everyone how THEY want to be treated, but it's usually not possible to read people's minds. So the best guide is to use yourself as an analogy, and imagine how YOU would want to be treated in the same situation. That's where the Golden Rule comes from. (It's related to the injunction "Know thyself," which is usually misunderstood. Hobbes discusses that one in the Preface to Leviathan.)

Anyway, if you really DO know how the other person wants to be treated, it's not necessary to resort to the Golden Rule. So consensual d/s, S&M, and so on are perfectly moral as far as I'm concerned. The only complication is if the sub/slave/bottom is not capable of informed consent, but among ordinary adults, that's usually not the case.

Lam



Mercnbeth -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/11/2005 2:53:56 PM)

quote:

I am still having trouble resolving the moral conflict I see inherent in BDSM.


Man Owner,
I don't think you should be involved in the lifestyle until you resolve this conflict. Prior to finding and being able to interact with another you should know yourself well enough to not have negative feelings concerning the activity. Regardless if you are a Dom or a sub, and regardless of the specific activity.

The most difficult step in determining if the lifestyle is right for you is a honest self assessment considering your current mental, emotional, and spiritual state. From that assessment you should establish goals for yourself. Elimination of guilt should be a desired goal. Naive people believe every sub is a masochist who desires pain and/or humiliation to satisfy and purge some deep seated psychological guilt. That shouldn't be the case any more than you should feel guilt from being a Dominant.

I think knowing the "why" may help you with those guilt feelings. Why do you desire to be active in the lifestyle as a Dom? Why do you seek a sub and/or slave? Why will having one fulfill or complete yourself? Why will you be happy being active in the lifestyle. Next would be to determine what you have to offer the person you seek. Knowing those answers going in will generate confidence not guilt. Self confidence is one of the most essential traits that a Dom brings to the table.



ManOwner -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/11/2005 3:10:03 PM)

Both great answers. Thanks.



Raphael -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/11/2005 4:38:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ManOwner

Please forgive me if there is a thread in the archives that has already hashed out this discussion. I did the best I could to search for it and came up empty-handed.

I suffered abuse as a young child, and I believe this experience is the root cause of my dominant tendencies. Being subjugated, humiliated, or degraded is my worst nightmare, but it totally turns me on to do it to other people.

I am still having trouble resolving the moral conflict I see inherent in BDSM. If I am treating someone in a way that I would not want to be treated, that violates the golden rule as I see it. I understand that the sub enjoys being dominated, and I further understand that I have a duty to keep things safe, sane, consensual, and fun. Nonetheless, I feel guilty taking pleasure in dominating another person. I feel as though it must be unhealthy since it all stems from abuse (fruit of a poison tree, after a fashion).

If you have ever wrestled with these issues, would you please share your thoughts with me either privately or on this thread? Thanks.


I did wrestle with these and similar issues, for certain.

You can see this as a violation of the golden rule, as you post above, but you can also see it as profoundly consistent.

To do this, you need to be able, at some level, to empathise with the needs of the 'sub.'

If you are asking this, I suspect you are having difficulty (as I once did) really, truly, deep down inside believing that she really does want, enjoy, and need this. Once you are certain of that, it follows naturally that if you were in her place, you would want those needs to be fulfilled, right?

To come at it another way, I'll tell you a short joke that has a tremendous amount of truth to it.

Q: What's the definition of a True Sadist?

A: Someone that ties a masochist up, takes a few practice swings with the whip, bringing it closer and closer each time... then lays it down and walks out.

Editing to add:

Gaining that empathy is a matter of spending time, and conversation (in the broader sense, it's not all words, not even close) with your partner. Don't feel you need to 'play' until you are really convinced, deep down, that it's right.

As to there being something wrong with you for the way you feel - feelings are pre-moral. They have nothing to do with morality. Morality is about your actions, not your feelings. If you have these desires, and act them out consensually with someone who has matching needs, there is no moral problem. If you go kidnap someone and do it non-consensually, there's a big problem. But even then, the problem isn't your feelings - it's what you do with them.



MistressFire70 -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/11/2005 4:47:06 PM)

I think perhaps we look too closely at statements. We all agree that "Do unto others..." is just good sense (All modern positive religions/spiritualities have variations of this rule). However, if we look so closely at the trees, we won't see the forest. Perhaps, instead of looking at it as: I don't want to be humiliated, therefore I shouldn't humiliate" we should see the forest as: I won't do anything of harm to another since I don't want to be harmed myself. Hence, if you perform an act that you personally don't like, you still are not violating the "rule", provided they DO like it. It's when you DO like it and they DON'T or when both of your DON'T that you are violating the rule.

Just a thought.

Fire



Archer -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/11/2005 5:07:49 PM)

I'm pretty sure that your perspective on it is only putting yourself partway into their shoes.

Try going further into their shoes for a moment, If you recived fullfillment from humiation would you want someone to deny that humiliation to you?

If you put not only the act but the resulting feelings into consideration then you are not violating the golden rule at all.

Lets reverse it for a second and se if it makes it clearer.
I wouldn't be distressed at all by being "forced to eat brusselsprouts" I happen to like brussel sprouts so the forced behaviour wouldn't distress me at all, but someone else may dispise them and they might bring back bad memories of youth.

If I read the golden rule literally I could force them to eat brussel sprouts withpout a second thought, because I wouldn't mind being forced to eat brussel sprouts. However it would violate the golden rule because I am not just forcing brussel sprouts but forcing them to eat something they don't like.

It really depends on looking not at the letter of the rule but the spirit of it.

Widen your view of the rule consider the rule's intention.


In Leather

Archer



Jasmyn -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/11/2005 9:38:42 PM)


quote:


If I am treating someone in a way that I would not want to be treated, that violates the golden rule as I see it.


There's a golden rule? Ayecrumba I must have missed that lesson j/k ... seriously though I don't see a conflict. The only golden rule I adhere to is respect ... I do genuinely appreciate these men for what they give me ...

And of course there are things I'm going to do to my submissive that I would never think about doing myself ... lets be real ... I have no interest in crawling around the floor barking like a dog ... but I get a right kick out of making someone bounce around my lounge yelling "I'm a roo! I'm a roo!...on Kangeroo Appreciation Day...go figure.





Kiaban -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/12/2005 7:59:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MistressFire70

I think perhaps we look too closely at statements. We all agree that "Do unto others..." is just good sense (All modern positive religions/spiritualities have variations of this rule). However, if we look so closely at the trees, we won't see the forest. Perhaps, instead of looking at it as: I don't want to be humiliated, therefore I shouldn't humiliate" we should see the forest as: I won't do anything of harm to another since I don't want to be harmed myself. Hence, if you perform an act that you personally don't like, you still are not violating the "rule", provided they DO like it. It's when you DO like it and they DON'T or when both of your DON'T that you are violating the rule.

Just a thought.

Fire



Can't say it better so will just have to /agree



KngEircBrehonWng -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/12/2005 10:20:52 AM)

Jasmyn:
The golden rules are what we make of them, also how we respect others and how others truely respect us. I am A Dom Straight Master as it were.........as a student in elementryschool and highschool for about 7 years then a very long 5-7 years again, I was horriably psychologically tortured. It was worse than physical torture and perhaps I would have wished physical torture.

So you should ask them, the bullies both male and female that psychologically tortured me, did they go by the christian way? Did they care anything about the spirit of the rules both at school and even the neighbourhood kids that I knew up and down our small fishing village of 500 got into the torture of me on a daily basis.......understand the golden rules themselves?

The answer was, of course they did not; worse yet they made up their own rules as they went along and our school principals did not catch on to what they were doing to me for those long years. Our rural elementary school and highschool in a farming community had about some 2000 students altogether, some from the surrounding mountain areas and some from the nearby local towns about it. There were Clicks, Clacks and kids acting like gangland thugs and both the boys and girls parents were in the know on the schoolboard, their kiddies were "innocents"......lord no, they would never do this to poor Eric would they?"
So me comming in here and wanting an sub female to dom with, may be a reflection of what had happen to me between when I was 6 yrs old untill I was 20 years old, would it?

I am of the attitude that to dom and have subs wish to have you dom them then it is good to be in the christian spirit and not take things over board, to respect the positions of both King Godly Dom Master or Mistress and respect the sub servants for what they are, your own special peasants and servants. You can treat them accordingly to your structure of domming that is considered in good taste as christian and in spirit with your own chosen morals.



pat512 -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/12/2005 11:01:27 AM)

A friend uses this in his .sig:

"Do unto others as they would have done unto them. When in doubt, ask."

Works for me.

Pat



ManOwner -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/12/2005 11:45:59 AM)

Thanks for all your thought provoking responses. Let me ask you this. Has anyone ever talked about such a thing as dom space? Have any of you ever felt yourself drift into a frame of mind where you just let go and feel as if you truly own your partner or something like that? Do you ever allow yourself to feel disrespect for your partner that justifies treating them the way we do in scenes? As EmeraldSlave2 said in another thread, "BDSM is not all flowers and roses and sweetness. Sometimes it's downright harsh and cruel. Some people like it like that." I like it like that, but in my normal life I would feel way too guilty to treat someone cruelly - even someone I actually don't have respect for.



Mercnbeth -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/12/2005 12:10:52 PM)

quote:

Do you ever allow yourself to feel disrespect for your partner that justifies treating them the way we do in scenes?


NEVER! Respect can't come and go. Respect is an asset you have that you can't spend or use. I would not want a partner I didn't respect or lost respect. Considering some specific activities we partake it may seem a dichotomy, but I have never felt anything but respect and pride for beth. It just grows as she evolves deeper into her submission.

I don't consider it "Dom Space" to have feelings of ownership. I'm confident that in every important aspect, I have ownership. During scenes and some activities I may experience an enhanced focus of the power dynamic between us, which may fall under the definition of "Dom Space". I think that in this regard a Dom is at a bit of a disadvantage. A sub can and should 'surrender' to her Dom and go deeper within herself through trust to a place referred to as "sub-space". I feel that the responsibility of the Dom excludes a similar total 'surrender' to the scene. At least up until this point. My own personal growth within this lifestyle hasn't gotten to the point where I feel it's appropriate to give up that need to feel attached and in control.

I have had conversations on this subject with a few Dominates that I respect and who say that I am cheating myself in that regard. That say that "Dom-Space" is as real and powerful as the submissive's sub-space experience. Looking at beth's eyes, her face, her body, and witnessing her passion while in sub space, I envy her. But the thought prohibiting me from getting so "deep" is that if we were both "spacing"; who would bring refreshment and wrap us both in the needed blanket of scene aftercare? Maybe that's the best reason yet to have an extra "service" sub in the household! That and morning coffee.



ManOwner -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/12/2005 12:56:51 PM)

Wow, I guess I still don't get it. How can the concept of "cruelty" fit in any way, shape, or form with the concepts of love and respect?



Oumae -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/12/2005 1:13:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ManOwner

Wow, I guess I still don't get it. How can the concept of "cruelty" fit in any way, shape, or form with the concepts of love and respect?


What about "cruel to be kind" ?

Oumae



Mercnbeth -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/12/2005 1:20:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ManOwner

Wow, I guess I still don't get it. How can the concept of "cruelty" fit in any way, shape, or form with the concepts of love and respect?


I take it your comment is concerning this quote:

quote:

Sometimes it's downright harsh and cruel.


It is only harsh and cruel to the untrained observer, not to the participants.



Kinkypupper -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/12/2005 5:08:09 PM)

No bdsm does NOT violate any "rule"
Simply as bsdm activitys are NOT EVER EVER done in anger..
But done in a loving , giving direction.
You maybe forced to do something but YOU have first submitted to another and given them the "gift" and right to do this to you.
It is NOT against your wishes..

If it is then you really need to rethink the relationship with that person.



ScooterTrash -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/12/2005 6:14:03 PM)

I understand your delimma, to a point.

I don't hold much credence with rules made by man to make man control himself, utilizing the assumption that he has a conscience, but I do understand the principle of morals, none the less. I don't see your situation as violating any "rules" of any kind however. Put it in context perhaps, as if you were a supervisor. You certainly wouldn't be able to get anything done, if you weren't the Dominant one in that case..so it actually IS socially and morally acceptable to be Dominant over another human being. We all live in a world of Domination actually, we have Governments and bosses and whatever, all of whom take a rung on that ladder, some above us, some below. So Domination is OK...as for the infliction of pain being an act of that Domination, always keep in mind what Mercnbeth said however...never lose the respect.



ShiftedJewel -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/12/2005 7:18:26 PM)

quote:

"BDSM is not all flowers and roses and sweetness. Sometimes it's downright harsh and cruel. Some people like it like that." I like it like that, but in my normal life I would feel way too guilty to treat someone cruelly - even someone I actually don't have respect for.


I understand what you are feeling. I don't think the problem here is about the golden rule. I think it's about not understanding the mindset. It's best to think of it this way... If your partner truly enjoyed a gentle stroking of their genitals, that would be fine, wouldn't it? And you would be willing to do that for them in a sincere attempt to make it as pleasureable as possible. There would be no concern about "the golden rule", no concern about having to loose respect for them to accomplish their pleasure. So when you are talking about what you now see as cruel treatment, they see as that gentle stroking. It's all the same thing, it's giving them pleasure, it's fulfilling their need. To take control is to give them freedom to be who they are.

I hope this helps some.

Jewel



GentleLady -> RE: Does Domming Violate The Golden Rule? (5/13/2005 6:11:02 AM)

quote:

Has anyone ever talked about such a thing as dom space? Have any of you ever felt yourself drift into a frame of mind where you just let go and feel as if you truly own your partner or something like that? Do you ever allow yourself to feel disrespect for your partner that justifies treating them the way we do in scenes?


Yes there have been times I have slid into Dom space, as I define it, and feel that the submissive is an extension of Myself and My desires....however at no time have I ever felt disrespect for them. If I am in Dom space then it would feel the same as disrespecting Myself. For Me Dom space is defined as that point during play when nothing exists except for the physical/emotional tensions and connections between Myself and the submissive. This is a rare treat for Me because it requires stepping outside of Myself and easing the reins of control on My own emotions. I find it difficult to submit even to Myself.

Except for casual play, I only play with submissives that I can feel respect for. Even with a casual play partner I need to like them enough to play with them and if I felt no respect for a person I could not like them. The more Mine submits to Me the greater My respect for him. Submission is not easy and requires trust. He is putting his body and care into My hands. How could I feel disrespect for someone who is doing that? He works hard to increase his pain tolerance both because he enjoys the pain and because he knows it brings Me Pleasure to do these things to his body.

I do not understand what you mean by "treating them the way we do in scenes"? Do you mean humiliation play?

To disrespect someone implies that they have no value in your eyes. They are nothing. This is not a good position to be in for a submissive. If something has no value then there is no need to take care of it. IMO and in My experience, when respect is lost within a relationship, abuse has room to creep in.

A quick point about some aspects being considered harsh and cruel. Mine cannot reach a good orgasm without the application of pain. What would look vicious to an observer gives him nothing but intense pleasure.

Gentle Lady



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875