quote:

ORIGINAL: sissymaidlola
"WRT" means whatever you tell us all at CollarMe you think it should mean.

quote:

sissy is now wondering if there is some kind of a term in the EmerladSlave2 Esperanto lexicon of BDSM terminology that covers this new and unique feeling that he is experiencing here?

quote:


That's because you AREN'T a slave by most knowledgeable kinkster's understanding of the term. You already completely LOST that debate to SenorX, mistoferin, RiotGirl, Mercnbeth, et al over on the Submission and Slavery thread

quote:

That latter statement can be verified and refuted by examining it against known and agreed upon BDSM criteria

quote:


sissy Doesn't disagree that one has to take a somewhat relativist approach to some of these definitions, but your own approach is nihilistic rather than relativistic. You will reduce everybody to total solipsism with your approach.

quote:

You define yourself as polyamorous which presumably means that you believe you could be a slave to two or three (or more) Masters simultaneously, and maybe even have a vanilla boyfriend on the side. Almost no one else would agree with you on that one. Slave ownership implies exclusive ownership and the commitment that goes along with it.

quote:

An M/s relationship is a pretty intense and severe lifestyle, and in referring to your own situation as being an M/s lifestyle you are completely watering down that concept for those people that really have one. You are purloining terminology that applies to their much more intense and committed relationship and appropriating it for your own laissez faire promiscuous situation ... that is quite insulting to those people if you consider exactly what you are doing.

quote:

The reason you balk at the term "TPE" WRT your own M/s relationship is because you don't have an M/s relationship ... you only have a D/s relationship which you insist on calling an M/s relationship. That's why the term "UAT" fits your actual D/s relationship better than the term "TPE".

quote:


Just out of curiosity, what do you have against the term submissive ?

quote:

Why do you insist that you are a slave (even when you are not owned) as if being a submissive is far too wimpy a term to capture the intensity of the way that you feel ? There is no implied level of intensity of submission in the term submissive ... so why do you behave like there is one ?

quote:

But that is EXACTLY what most real slaves do and why yours is NOT an M/s relationship, but rather a D/s relationship that you falsely call an M/s relationship. A real slave would NOT have any problem with the term "TPE"!

quote:

This might be the source of all your problems ...

quote:


[How do you reconcile your stance of cavalierly redefining commonly understood BDSM terminology such as slave and M/s relationship and ownership to suit your own purposes while at the same time claiming: "I like to be precise in my language" ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: sissymaidlola

quote:

Oh, and if that day ever comes, I'm fleeing to Mars.

Oh, really ... Mars, eh ? So would that be the large planet with the rings that the rest of us all call Saturn, Lam ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika

Would you say Em that even though you might have the same amount of power that you had before, that because you have transfered authority, your power might have been redistributed? reassigned? I know this is a stretch. But then again, I sometimes I need to do that as part of the process of trying to grasp concepts.

- LA

quote:

Being misunderstood really isn't so terrible. In fact, it's inevitable. The more widely a writer is read, the more widely he is misunderstood.

Hee, hee, hee ... that's always been sissy's excuse and he's sticking to it!

sissy maid lola





_____________________________

If i don't seem submissive to You, it may be because i'm NOT submissive to You.

(in reply to Lordandmaster)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sissymaidlola
Hee, hee, hee ... that's always been sissy's excuse and he's sticking to it!
sissy maid lola

HaHaHa, Is that it? M


_____________________________

a.k.a. SexyBossyBBW
""Touching was, and still is, and will always be, the true revolution" Nikki Giovanni

(in reply to sissymaidlola)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sissymaidlola

quote:

Actually sub4hire, it was not a point, it was a jab.

Oooh, thanks for posting that, LA, because it explains something that had been baffling sissy all day long. When he logged onto CollarMe this morning sissy was completely confused by the fact that he had 27 new PMs in his message box that all said exactly the same thing: "jab well done." Now the mystery is finally resolved.

Curtsies, Miss LA.

sissy maid lola

quote:

Personally I think it's a fairly obvious paradox- people say all the time "subs are powerful and strong, it takes a strong person to submit well" And then immediate turn around and say "I exchanged all my power to my dom, I have no power"

Doesn't work for me.

quote:

I'm glad you have a secret admirer. In case you are suggesting that I did this, I have better things to do with my time then to carry a vendetta against you.

Oh no, LA ... that would be 27 separate admirers, and none of them secret. Let's see now ... sissy is checking through his inbox here ... no, no, Miss, you don't seem to have initiated any of those PMs, so sissy is certainly not suggesting that you did that. And thank you very much for suggesting the idea of carrying on a vendetta against sissy, LA, but he already has four other people that have vendettas against him right now, so he must decline your kind offer at this time. Very good of you to think that way, though, Miss. Perhaps you might consider offering again a little later in the month when things have died down a bit, eh ?

quote:

As you might have noticed, I have been ignoring you

You know, LA, sissy feels really bad about that, he's been so busy recently ignoring you he hadn't even noticed that you were ignoring him back ... hee, hee, it's a small world, isn't it? Tell you what, Miss, are you up for a challenge? sissy Bets he can ignore you longer than you can ignore him ... <closes eyes, takes a deep breath, and pinches nose with his fingers>

quote:

I speak up this once to ask you politely to stop trying to drag my name through the mud.

And just exactly how has sissy managed to do that, Miss? That's quite an accusation. Do you have some facts to substantiate it? Please feel free to PM them over to sissy, Miss, or even post them at your convenience. Just out of curiosity, though ... if you have been ignoring sissy all this time like you say you have, then how would you know if sissy was or was not doing what you accuse him of doing? You do like to play your little games with the truth, don't you Miss? You're such a great tease ...

quote:

We had a tiff in another thread months ago. I’m way over it.

We did? Oh my gosh, sissy had forgotten completely about that yonks ago. Fancy you still remembering that, Miss! Anyways, so glad to hear that you are finally over it now, LA. Way to go, Miss! sissy Would hate to think that you were still bearing a grudge after all this time, ha, ha.

quote:

Now your turn Lola.

My turn for what, Miss?

Respectfrilly Yours,

sissy maid lola




_____________________________

If i don't seem submissive to You, it may be because i'm NOT submissive to You.

(in reply to LadyAngelika)

quote:

Oh, and if that day ever comes, I'm fleeing to Mars.

Will there be room on your spaceship for an angel, LaM?


Peace and Love

quote:

Perhaps now we have broken into a new age realm of 'timeshare' ownership of slaves. Maybe we can develop a network of timeshare slaves so that we might be able to exchange one week in one slave for another week in another slave?

quote:

ORIGINAL: SenorX

The posting had something to do with whether a person could actually be owned by a multiple of 'owners'.

quote:

What I don't understand is why people think we have to define everything (leaving aside the problem that it isn't possible to define everything). What's so terrible about ambiguity? Nothing is defined very well right now, and the world isn't exactly coming to an end.

The world isn't exactly coming to an end, eh? When was the last time You picked up a newspaper and read it, then, Lam? Maybe if the threat of Saddam's WMD had not been so vague and ambiguous perhaps the average under-informed schmo on the streets of the USA, instead of having been terrified of being nuked in his bed, would rather have realized that there was no immediate threat and contacted his Congressman and told him that at this time he didn't think that such a threat merited the accumulating of over 300 billion dollars of additional U.S. debt and the loss of 1500+ U.S. military lives (and still counting) - not to mention the number of those injured and maimed - and could he please not vote for war. Waddya fink about that, Lam ? How do you like the thought that if instead of crying, "Saddam has WMD, Saddam has WMD" the Bush administration had been a little less ambiguous and instead cried, "Saddam has WMD with a max. range of 600 kms, Saddam has WMD with a max. range of 600 kms" ? Or how about they had cried, "We think Saddam has WMD programs, we think Saddam has WMD programs" ? Still think ambiguity is good, Lam ? Do You even see where this might be going ?

quote:

But where's the urgency in making sure that everyone marches to the same drummer when it comes to words like "submissive" and "slave"?

Well it's one thing not to be able to agree on whether a 2" or a 3" wide collar is the most appropriate for use on a collared slave, but it is quite another not to be able to define what a goddam slave is! It's one thing not to be able to agree what clauses belong in a slave contract, but it is quite another not to have the faintest idea regarding the status of a released slave - is she now a Masterless slave or is she demoted (promoted?) back to submissive again ? It's one thing not to be able to agree on whether a slave should not be allowed to speak unless first spoken to, but it is entirely another thing not to be able to distinguish someone in the USA that has, say, exchanged four emails with someone in Canada and now claims to be their collared slave and owned property from someone that sleeps in a cage at the bottom of their Mistress’ bed and spends all their waking hours in the pursuit of pleasing, serving and worshipping that Mistress, and who also dresses and disposes himself according to that station.

If someone You knew retired from the military after 25 years service and You asked him what the difference between a tank and an armored vehicle was and he replied that in all his years in the service he had never been able to work that out, You would be perfectly entitled in thinking that he was a major cretin, and he would be perfectly right feeling totally embarrassed that he responded that way. For folk that claim to have been interested in, indulging in, or even living a BDSM lifestyle for over 25 years to not be able to clearly recognize and explain the difference between something as basic as a slave and a submissive is as equally ludicrous! It may be even worse, it may be the analogue of the retired military guy admitting that he was not able to tell the difference between any form of a military transport and a military building! “Well the rule was, if it moves, salute it!”

quote:

Live and let live, people. If someone wants to call herself a slave, and her understanding of that term happens not to square with yours, chill out and see whether you can still tolerate her. And if you can't, just move on to a different corner of the party. The only alternatives are to force her to conform, or to lament the fact that she refuses to do so.

Every day of his life sissy takes people to task for being too black and white in their opinions (and not seeing the inherent degrees of grey in almost everything) or being too rigid or bigoted in their beliefs, so as sure as hell he is the last person that is going to advocate the rigid definition and anal pigeon–holing of everything to do with BDSM (or any other area of life for that matter). Almost all of sissy’s posts on these boards that are not made simply for the humor or banter involved are to take some idiot to task (i.e., the administration of the old bonk on the head) for espousing over-simplistic views on anything from human gender to how to interpret a JAMA report on prostrate cancer incidence in males. But there is a hell of a difference between anal retentive rigidity and the intolerant labeling and judging of others, and adopting a total nihilistic approach to life, especially the things that are meant to be your passions in life. It is not about “live and let live” … it is about having enough structure and definition that one can go about conducting one’s life and successfully communicating with others about it.

Just because some doofus claims they are a slave six hours a week across town for someone, and that they have several other similarly deep and meaningful contemporaneous M/s relationships with anything from an email account to a computer moniker to an actual real person, does NOT mean that we all have to immediately accommodate such baloney into the basic definitions and terminology of BDSM. To try and be everything to everybody is a totally losing strategy … there are times in life that one just has to say things how they really are … “ding, thank you for your input and we all love you really, but you are a doofus and we’ll weight your input accordingly.”

Every state of the union in the USA publishes a DMV highway code that explains the rules for driving on the highways in that particular state. They all differ slightly but for the most part all 50 state highway code manuals are essentially the same – they differ over only about 10% of the driving rules at most. In this particular state one can turn right on red, while in that particular state you cannot; over in this state there are rules on how to navigate a circle (a traffic roundabout for those reading this in the UK), while over in that state they don’t even address traffic circles because they don’t have any in that state; and so on. These are similar to the difference of opinion in the BDSM community over whether all slaves must wear a collar, or must sign a slave contract, etc.

There are some drivers that drive the wrong way down one-way streets, that try and enter interstates via the off-ramp, and which drive in the wrong direction on the wrong side of a dual causeway, or always cruise 5-10 m.p.h. above the posted interstate speed limits. You won’t find rules for how to do any of those things in any of the highway code manuals because they are WRONG. They are exactly the things we do NOT want drivers to do. Your all-inclusive “live and let live” little rant, Lam, is the equivalent of saying let’s do away with the highway code manuals completely and leave it totally to the individuals to decide for themselves how they wish to drive … how dare one thrust the DMV’s preconceived rigid and judgmental views on everyone and stifle their individuality. Emerald’s justification that multiple concurrent polyamorous M/s and vanilla relationships is what works for her is the equivalent of the drunk driver’s justification of why entering the interstate via the off-ramp works for him, and that this technique should accordingly be added to the highway code handbook.

Perhaps it is time you looked into that flight to Mars now, Lam ?

sissy maid lola




_____________________________

If i don't seem submissive to You, it may be because i'm NOT submissive to You.

(in reply to Lordandmaster)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

Ravenna is owned by two owners. There was a long thread about it not long ago.

Yes, there are things in the world that you hadn't imagined.

Lam

quote:

ORIGINAL: SenorX

The posting had something to do with whether a person could actually be owned by a multiple of 'owners'.

quote:

Oh even with the incredibly vivid and warped imagination that I have, I was always sure of this. I'd be curious to know how this power/authority dynamic works out. Then again, I imagine it's like having 2 parents. Can you play one against the other? Do they govern seperate parts?

--- Hmmm.. I'm editing to say maybe if this is something we want to discuss, we should start another thread? I don't want to highjack Em's thread. ---

quote:

ORIGINAL: allyC

quote:

Oh even with the incredibly vivid and warped imagination that I have, I was always sure of this. I'd be curious to know how this power/authority dynamic works out. Then again, I imagine it's like having 2 parents. Can you play one against the other? Do they govern seperate parts?

--- Hmmm.. I'm editing to say maybe if this is something we want to discuss, we should start another thread? I don't want to highjack Em's thread. ---

Here's a link to a thread on the topic :)

http://www.collarme.com/forum/Serving_multiple_masters/m_67515/tm.htm

Cav's girl
ally

quote:

ORIGINAL: sissymaidlola

quote:

ORIGINAL: EmeraldSlave2
A sub certainly can transfer authority to another person, vanilla, random person, dominant, whatever. Whether that authority is then handled in a way that the submissive finds compatible to her sense of self or not is another issue.

quote:

You said in your OP that you can "only have sex" which to me implied that you would be having and desire sex.