RE: No Limits: How far would you go?

RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (Full Version)

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

Message

Aswad -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:21:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin Having seen how some people report what I've said, I'll take that with a sizable grain of salt. Quite. She stated she was not allowed to go into detail about it all, so it's not unlikely that the situation is different from what people interpret it to be, although I can't relay private communications. It has also been alluded to in her posts that such things are a viable route for those who are seeking a "vice grip" on the submissive/enslaved party. Heck, I've considered it myself, as Norway allows a fully competent person to appoint a legal guardian of their own choosing, which (like marriage) is just a formality to make the boot fit the foot a bit better, so to speak; i.e. legal recognition of a factual situation. It's a complicated thing to try to analyze when one doesn't have all the details. For all people here know, she could be fully competent now, and just sticking to the legal guardianship routine because it enhances his control (some find it hard to believe, but some subs/slaves actually want the control to be factual; i.e. real), or because the law mandates it anyway. I'm not familiar enough with US law to comment on the latter. In the end, though, it really boils down to this: they're both happy about it, long-term. A lot of people here cannot claim the same, despite less short-term suffering. One might point out that the standards for a legal guardian are presumably as stringent as the requirements for finding that someone needs to have one in the first place. And I've seen more than one patient where hospitalization was pretty much the worst option available, and where people who could have decent lives have been deprived of that via hospitalization. If prop is happier with this than she would've been as an inpatient, it's all good, regardless of what her legal state of competence is (a reevaluation might conclude differently, for that matter) and what means were used to realize that improvement. She's happy, he's happy, where's the problem? [:D] Health, al-Aswad.

MadRabbit -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:22:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hisannabelle greetings madrabbit, as i think someone else might have already mentioned, some people are unwilling to establish boundaries and defend themselves. if i felt like i needed to defend myself from him, i would not have consented to the relationship in the first place, because for me that would indicate a lack of trust in him. i am not giving over ownership of myself to someone i do not trust completely or someone i need to have boundaries with or defend myself from. respectfully, annabelle. Bingo! Thank you! This is the perspective I am trying to grind into this discussion. A slave having a mentality of surrender like yours or BitaTroubles doesnt equate to the Master not acting with a moral compass and with responsibility. Its about a heightened degree of trust and not the possession of this "absolute power to do whatever you want." Just because I am trying to instill this mentality of surrender in my own girl doesnt mean that I am not aware and responsible for her boundaries. Nor does it mean that she is a doormat who wont enforce those boundaries. It means we have gotten to the point where she trusts me enough to not have to worry about enforcing them.

hisannabelle -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:23:29 PM)
greetings xoxi, a lot of things normal for mainstream bdsm activity breaks laws and is consensual. why is it that some laws are more important than others, or should be enforced more in certain consensual situations than others? respectfully, annabelle.

Aswad -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:23:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mistoferin Do so if you wish. However, it is here in black and white, stated repeatedly by her in her own words for anyone who wishes to take the time to look back and see. Was a specific diagnosis, and reason for such, mentioned? Because, not too long ago, being into BDSM would qualify for hospitalization. Even today, being into actual TPE still qualifies, depending on the doc/pdoc in question. Health, al-Aswad.

EvilGenie -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:27:07 PM)
*Deleted by Evil Genie.........~really not worth it~*

xoxi -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:27:50 PM)
From the slave perspective, you say you see no point in giving ownership and control to someone if you will take it back whenever you want. That makes sense. I want to be clear I'm not criticizing her for being in that relationship. I am however criticizing him for his actions. And I would say forcing someone to have sex with anyone against their will is abusive (virtually rape by proxy even) whether that person is a man or a woman. I think you're arguing theoretical ideas from the slave perspective while I'm arguing factual occurrences from the master perspective. My biggest issue isn't "how can she stay in this relationship" but rather "what sort of sick fuck will abuse the trust placed in him by someone weaker who he is legally bound to protect?" I know that everyone has the right to be in any relationship they want to, and if she were truly unhappy she would leave (presuming of course he wouldn't kill her if she tried) but just because you give someone the 'right' to beat you to near death doesn't mean they have to actually do it.

hisannabelle -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:27:54 PM)
greetings madrabbit, except that you are still talking about respecting boundaries, and i am talking about not having them. it is very much about having the absolute power to do whatever he wants. he may not always exercise it, but when and if he does that does not mean i bail out because it doesn't suit me. many (some more mainstream bdsmers, i suppose) would say my master does not have much of a moral compass. what is moral and right and responsible is very much subjective. it is not too far from saying that daddysprop's master does not have a moral compass to saying that mine does not, i think. there are some people who would say that all dominants/masters are without a moral compass for less extreme harm they inflict on their property. it is very much a matter of perspective. yes, certain things are more widely supported/condemned than others, and certain things are prohibited by law in certain areas but allowed in others, and yes, i have my own views, too, on what is condemnable and what constitutes not having a moral compass, but it cannot be ignored that it is VERY much a matter of perspective. respectfully, annabelle.

MadRabbit -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:33:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hisannabelle greetings madrabbit, except that you are still talking about respecting boundaries, and i am talking about not having them. it is very much about having the absolute power to do whatever he wants. he may not always exercise it, but when and if he does that does not mean i bail out because it doesn't suit me. respectfully, annabelle. quote: ORIGINAL: hisannabelle as i think someone else might have already mentioned, some people are unwilling to establish boundaries and defend themselves. if i felt like i needed to defend myself from him, i would not have consented to the relationship in the first place, because for me that would indicate a lack of trust in him. i am not giving over ownership of myself to someone i do not trust completely or someone i need to have boundaries with or defend myself from. respectfully, annabelle. Ahh okay...so he has absolute power to do the things that you trusted him not to do in the beginning when you consented to the relationship? Please explain how stating your consent was based on your trust in him not to do certain things and then stating that he has absolute power to do those things without you leaving isnt a blatant contradiciton. I wish people would stop trying to distill this thread of any logic or reality.... Or at least will people learn the definition of absolute...

xoxi -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:34:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hisannabelle greetings xoxi, a lot of things normal for mainstream bdsm activity breaks laws and is consensual. why is it that some laws are more important than others, or should be enforced more in certain consensual situations than others? respectfully, annabelle. That is not what I said. Stephann said that there was nothing I could do unless they were breaking laws and I wanted to report it. I said that they were in fact breaking laws although I would not take it upon myself to report it. I am not using the law to justify the fact that this is sick behavior. I'm simply saying that it is abhorrent to treat another human being as disposable, and to expose a person who trusts you with their care to serious injury or death. You're saying it's okay as long as the other person consents - it might make it OK in their relationship, but it is still a horrific thing to do. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree...a consentual relationship will just go so far as to make me shrug and look the other way. It will not convince me that the actions this man is taking are in his girl's best interests in any way whatsoever, which is something that he as her guardian should be responsible for.

hisannabelle -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:36:13 PM)
greetings xoxi, perhaps the case is that we ARE arguing from two very different sides of the equation. i am not going to touch the legal guardian aspect of it, mainly because there are all SORTS of views on that (from the fact that he would enter into an m/s relationship with a ward is absolutely reprehensible to the fact that many very competent people choose to go that route because they want to make the control a legal thing). but i think it is pointless to say you are giving someone the right to beat you to near death, or loan you out for unprotected sex, etc. unless you are actually willing to face the reality of that happening. i am not saying that everybody's master SHOULD do things like that by ANY means whatsoever (mine certainly does not exercise his right to end my life very often, hehehe). and i am not saying that all complete control relationships should even push into those extremes. but it is silly to me to say that you are giving someone complete control if you are not willing to accept what that actually means. you are only giving them complete control in that case until you decide they've hit a limit, in which case it would not be complete control (again i am not saying they should necessarily do extreme things, only that if complete control until extreme things are done is what is occurring, it isn't complete control). there are plenty of dominants and masters out there who are, by all means, sick fucks, in my opinion. but as i mentioned in my post to madrabbit, what consitutes "sick fuck" is very much a subjective thing. yes, you could argue that laws and majority belief constitutes objectivity, but considering that there will always be a reasonable number of exceptions, room for laws to change, different laws in different areas, the belief that it is okay to break certain laws but not others, etc. i do not think that constitutes objectivity. as i mentioned to madrabbit, many people would consider my master a "sick fuck" by those standards. i do not. the law might. you might. somebody else might. but that is still one interpretation of the situation, not an objective reality. edited to add: sorry, i was responding to your first response and not your second. in light of your second, your position makes more sense. :) thank you! respectfully, annabelle.

hisannabelle -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:44:28 PM)
quote: Ahh okay...so he has absolute power to do the things that you trusted him not to do in the beginning when you consented to the relationship? Please explain how stating your consent was based on your trust in him not to do certain things and then stating that he has absolute power to do those things without you leaving isnt a blatant contradiciton. greetings madrabbit, actually, i was arguing the opposite. i don't trust in him not to do certain things, as i've said many times over already; i would comply regardless of what he did or how horrific/socially unacceptable it was. that is a reality that i came to terms with upon entering into the relationship. obviously when we are seeking partners we have certain areas of compatibility that we consider. obviously i would not choose to enter into a relationship with someone whose needs and wants were so incredibly vastly different from my own that i probably wouldn't "prefer" anything we did. given that reality, yes, we do see eye to eye on a lot of things. and there are also a lot of things that i would never have considered pleasurable or preferable (or, perhaps, that i would never have considered doing at all) that i have been subjected to. i do not pick and choose which i like, and i did not put trust in him with the understanding that he wouldn't do certain things because i might not like them or they might be harmful to me. i put complete trust in him and gave him control because i find it fulfilling to be his slave, which can and does entail doing things i might never have considered doing before in my life, doing things that i don't like, and, yes, possibly doing things that threaten my life and health. i entered into the relationship knowing and expecting that. now, i doubt he would kill me anytime soon, because that's just not the type of master he is, but yes, if he chose to, or told me to end my own life, i would do it. i didn't enter into the relationship expecting "complete trust" or "absolute control" to come with a "only in cases where it doesn't threaten my life or health" clause. respectfully, annabelle.

angelic -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:47:15 PM)
xoxi... i agree with you. However, you are seriously beating your head against a wall. prop's 'Master' will not read anything here and take it to heart...prop will not read anything here and take it to heart...it will not make either one of them think. It has been discussed ad nausim. In fact, the only time she is really active on this board is when there is a "No Limits" thread. Personally, i would like nothing better than to see him put behind bars....i highly doubt that will happen. There is nothing in my mind anything even remotely related to M/s in their relationship. It is simply what they call it and then come on here and justify it under the veil of BDSM or M/s. ~ducks from incoming~

xoxi -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:48:08 PM)
quote: but i think it is pointless to say you are giving someone the right to beat you to near death, or loan you out for unprotected sex, etc. unless you are actually willing to face the reality of that happening. i am not saying that everybody's master SHOULD do things like that by ANY means whatsoever (mine certainly does not exercise his right to end my life very often, hehehe). and i am not saying that all complete control relationships should even push into those extremes. but it is silly to me to say that you are giving someone complete control if you are not willing to accept what that actually means. you are only giving them complete control in that case until you decide they've hit a limit, in which case it would not be complete control (again i am not saying they should necessarily do extreme things, only that if complete control until extreme things are done is what is occurring, it isn't complete control). I see your point here and I think it's a valid one. Especially when you say that complete control doesn't have to push into those extremes. I think everyone is so focused on whether she is competent enough to give complete control that they overlook whether he is competent enough to assume it. When I give someone complete control over me, it's done so with the implicit trust that they will not harm me, injure me, or kill me. I give them control because I trust them to use it wisely. I think that putting someone who you have assumed responsibility for in positions that expose them to injury, illness or death shows an inability to use control wisely. Obviously yes this is my opinion, but I do think with any sort of power comes an equal amount of responsibility to use that power well. Consider how we vote for the President - by electing him we give him a tremendous amount of control. We also reserve the right to impeach him if he proves himself incapable of using that control. Perhaps you liken M/s relationships more to a despotic king (although every slave elects who will be her Master - it's not an arranged marriage) but even so there are countless bloody coups that show the leader has a responsibility to the one/s he leads. I would even compare the M/s dynamic to legal guardianship. Still though, the guardian must be competent. You and I have differing ideas as to what 'competence' entails, I'm sure, but you did say you wouldn't give that consent to someone you felt like you had to defend yourself from. I would assume (and correct me if I'm wrong) that when you consent to give a man complete control it is because you feel he is capable of using that control wisely? Obviously this is my opinion, but I don't think the "Daddy" in question is competent of maintaining control. That's al I am saying - I'm not trying to make a huge generalization about D/s relationships in general because I think every one needs to be judged for their individual merits. Discounting the idea that ALL D/s relationships are necessarily abusive does NOT mean that the specific one in question isn't.

hisannabelle -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:48:52 PM)
greetings angelic, i think you'll actually find that daddysprop posts quite a bit outside of the range of no limits posts, if you actually bother reading her posts. :) respectfully, annabelle.

angelic -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:51:30 PM)
hi annabelle, yes, occassionally. However, a good 85% of her posts are in response to no limits type threads. And she basically says the same thing in each and every one (you see i do read her posts). :)

hisannabelle -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:52:20 PM)
greetings xoxi, understood :) as i mentioned in my edit, i think i understand where you are coming from much better now. and i do see what you are saying to some extent. i did give him complete control because i felt he could use it wisely, but for me at least, in doing so and consenting to the relationship, i then gave up the right to judge his individual actions and commands as wise or unwise. to me, an action being potentially harmful to my life or health does not by necessity make it an unwise use of complete control. i guess that is where the distinction lies. i would like to thank you for discussing this with me...i have found your posts insightful and thought-provoking. respectfully, annabelle.

hisannabelle -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:54:18 PM)
greetings angelic, i say the same thing in my no limits thread posts as well, for the most part (well, my concept of no limits has evolved somewhat since i first began posting here). that's because in my relationship the case is the same, for the most part. i say the same things in threads on permanent markings and many other things, because for me i still have the same views on those topics. so i think there's a reasonable explanation for that besides just argument-mongering. just a thought. respectfully, annabelle.

xoxi -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:56:35 PM)
Thank you :) I actually have learned quite a bit from your posts as well. Especially this last one - that you gave up the right to judge what is wise or unwise, and have placed that trust in him. I hope someday I meet a man who I can place that much trust in. Because really, there is nothing more intense than knowing that a person has taken it upon himself to protect and guide you through thick and thin. Even if he has to smack the stupid out of me every so often to do so [;)]

MadRabbit -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 7:59:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hisannabelle quote: Ahh okay...so he has absolute power to do the things that you trusted him not to do in the beginning when you consented to the relationship? Please explain how stating your consent was based on your trust in him not to do certain things and then stating that he has absolute power to do those things without you leaving isnt a blatant contradiciton. greetings madrabbit, actually, i was arguing the opposite. i don't trust in him not to do certain things, as i've said many times over already; i would comply regardless of what he did or how horrific/socially unacceptable it was. that is a reality that i came to terms with upon entering into the relationship. obviously when we are seeking partners we have certain areas of compatibility that we consider. obviously i would not choose to enter into a relationship with someone whose needs and wants were so incredibly vastly different from my own that i probably wouldn't "prefer" anything we did. given that reality, yes, we do see eye to eye on a lot of things. and there are also a lot of things that i would never have considered pleasurable or preferable (or, perhaps, that i would never have considered doing at all) that i have been subjected to. i do not pick and choose which i like, and i did not put trust in him with the understanding that he wouldn't do certain things because i might not like them or they might be harmful to me. i put complete trust in him and gave him control because i find it fulfilling to be his slave, which can and does entail doing things i might never have considered doing before in my life, doing things that i don't like, and, yes, possibly doing things that threaten my life and health. i entered into the relationship knowing and expecting that. now, i doubt he would kill me anytime soon, because that's just not the type of master he is, but yes, if he chose to, or told me to end my own life, i would do it. i didn't enter into the relationship expecting "complete trust" or "absolute control" to come with a "only in cases where it doesn't threaten my life or health" clause. respectfully, annabelle. quote: ORIGINAL: hisannabelle as i think someone else might have already mentioned, some people are unwilling to establish boundaries and defend themselves. if i felt like i needed to defend myself from him, i would not have consented to the relationship in the first place, because for me that would indicate a lack of trust in him. i am not giving over ownership of myself to someone i do not trust completely or someone i need to have boundaries with or defend myself from. respectfully, annabelle. And once again, you are contradicting yourself. Which is it? Would you NOT enter into a relationship with someone you had to defend yourself from or WOULD you enter into a relationship without the trust that you dont have to defend yourself? You keep saying one thing and then saying another. I wish you would make up your mind regarding the premises in which you entered the relationship. Personally, I have about had it with this thread in general. Its 18 pages of people mainly contradicting themselves and dancing around logic. Edited to Add : I also fail to understand why I am not making myself clear in this thread. As a SLAVE, your mentality might be one of surrender and that your Master's word is absolute. Just because I am trying to instill that mentality in my girl doesnt mean that as a MASTER I share that same mentality or that perspective. It is my opinion that is incredibly dangerous as well as unhealthy for a Master to disillusion himself to thinking his power is absolute and he can do ANYTHING. Perspective determines reality and I am trying to argue that there is two different perspectives here. One bred from the slave and one bred from the Master. You have your reality, but doesnt necessarily mean that thats the reality of the master.

diklikr4u -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/19/2007 8:00:03 PM)
no limits ? i am still trying to learn my limits. should one at least do something at least once before knowing if its a limit or not? the 'somethings' should not be physically dangerous or permant.

Page: << < prev 17 18 [19] 20 21 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.492188E-02