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

RRafe -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/20/2007 10:19:49 PM)
Can I hard limit people who take themselves seriously?

Kimveri -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 12:07:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad Ya think the topic of personal freedom has some significance to me? THAT is what it's all about. Some exercise theirs, others wish to limit everyone's. Chew on this... "I believe in only one thing: liberty; but I do not believe in liberty enough to want to force it upon anyone."~H. L. Mencken ~Kimveri

rubey -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 2:36:32 AM)
"In someone you've just met, no limits means wanker. " This made me chuckle this morning. Thanks. I agree most of y'all. One should seek to meet someone that matches their own personal limits, build that relationship, and then you can relinquish the need to have 'stated limits' and feel free to let the Dominant lead. I've always said my limits are the ABCD'S... NO Animals, (extreme) Blood, Children, Death and Scat. smiles

Mercnbeth -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 6:27:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin I think this thread has uncovered one universal limit: the involvement of 'civilians'.I haven't seen anyone from the "no limit" camp claim they'd grab kids if told to. Bzzzt... go back and search the archives. This horse is deader than you think. [sm=evil.gif] So you're saying there have been slaves who declared they would? Seems to me that puts an even greater emphasis on the ethics and morality of the master. Bob (or others if Bob's still blocking) I remember reading that one Master gave his slave a test to get rid of the slave's child. It nearly ended in tragedy but the child wasn't hurt. Would you think that Master, and His test, immoral and unethical?

GoldStallion -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 6:37:38 AM)
To this whole thread which I havent read because its too long I got a limit for all doms and subs: PERMANENT VANILLA. If deaths a limit then its a dead end, so not a no limit thing-move away from things which use you up or kill you, that opens up the horizons more. If no limits means unlimited, then look in ALL directions. Submit to natural laws. Or dominate them. That should keep the no limits camp busy and end this thread.

Bobkgin -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 6:54:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin I think this thread has uncovered one universal limit: the involvement of 'civilians'.I haven't seen anyone from the "no limit" camp claim they'd grab kids if told to. Bzzzt... go back and search the archives. This horse is deader than you think. [sm=evil.gif] So you're saying there have been slaves who declared they would? Seems to me that puts an even greater emphasis on the ethics and morality of the master. Bob (or others if Bob's still blocking) I remember reading that one Master gave his slave a test to get rid of the slave's child. It nearly ended in tragedy but the child wasn't hurt. Would you think that Master, and His test, immoral and unethical? Insufficient data to answer the question. If I had accepted a slave with child into my home there's no way I'd run a test to see if she would "get rid" of the child. My assumption would be the mother's first loyalty is to the child and if it wasn't, I'd wonder what's wrong with her.

Mercnbeth -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 7:16:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin I think this thread has uncovered one universal limit: the involvement of 'civilians'.I haven't seen anyone from the "no limit" camp claim they'd grab kids if told to. Bzzzt... go back and search the archives. This horse is deader than you think. [sm=evil.gif] So you're saying there have been slaves who declared they would? Seems to me that puts an even greater emphasis on the ethics and morality of the master. Bob (or others if Bob's still blocking) I remember reading that one Master gave his slave a test to get rid of the slave's child. It nearly ended in tragedy but the child wasn't hurt. Would you think that Master, and His test, immoral and unethical? Insufficient data to answer the question. If I had accepted a slave with child into my home there's no way I'd run a test to see if she would "get rid" of the child. My assumption would be the mother's first loyalty is to the child and if it wasn't, I'd wonder what's wrong with her. Don't have much more "data" other than what was given. The Master was very well respected and held in high esteem and the test was a right of passage. The test; "If you love ME sacrifice your child"; is as simple as the question; - Is the test immoral and unethical? Do you think this Master should be used as an example of what is "good" or "bad" in the BDSM community? Remember the child was never hurt, just used for a 'test'. It is an actual event that I'd be happy to reference, but I don't think it relevant. This Master's example gives a ultimate "How far would you go?" Many have drawn various lines in the sand, and it seems that the UM's and the worship of UM's is a clear dividing line. What's your opinion?

chellekitty -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 7:19:09 AM)
are you sure you're not talking about Abraham in the bible?

BeingChewsie -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 7:38:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Don't have much more "data" other than what was given. The Master was very well respected and held in high esteem and the test was a right of passage. The test; "If you love ME sacrifice your child"; is as simple as the question; - Is the test immoral and unethical? Do you think this Master should be used as an example of what is "good" or "bad" in the BDSM community? Remember the child was never hurt, just used for a 'test'. It is an actual event that I'd be happy to reference, but I don't think it relevant. This Master's example gives a ultimate "How far would you go?" Many have drawn various lines in the sand, and it seems that the UM's and the worship of UM's is a clear dividing line. What's your opinion? It entirely depends on the culture they come from. There are cultures and religions that support exactly what you describe and following through wouldn't be unethical or immoral. So yes people draw different lines in the sand based on their morals/ethics/values..they developed from their culture/religion. I'd bet the farm there are children sacrificed in this country by people who believe they are doing it for their "God" or supreme being and I know people do it for the boyfriend..lets not forget more than one kid has been driven in lake because mommy's boy toy didn't want the crumb snatchers around...unethical/immoral will entirey depend on your own morals/ethics. but....Why should any "Master" be held up as "good" or "bad" in the BDSM community?...and what community? ...that is very creepy to me.

velvetears -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 7:47:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Don't have much more "data" other than what was given. The Master was very well respected and held in high esteem and the test was a right of passage. The test; "If you love ME sacrifice your child"; is as simple as the question; - Is the test immoral and unethical? Do you think this Master should be used as an example of what is "good" or "bad" in the BDSM community? Remember the child was never hurt, just used for a 'test'. It is an actual event that I'd be happy to reference, but I don't think it relevant. This Master's example gives a ultimate "How far would you go?" Many have drawn various lines in the sand, and it seems that the UM's and the worship of UM's is a clear dividing line. What's your opinion? The test wasn't a rite of passage it was a meglomaniacs obsession with power. Well respected? For what, creating emotional turmoil and possibly damage in a submissive/slave because she had to make a choice, irregardless of whether or not he made her carry through with it or not - remember there are emotional scars as well as physical (ever see Sophie's Choice, if not a suggest it). This "test" imo was highly immoral, short sighted, lacked empathy and showed the "Master" for what he was - a pitiful creature with no strength and confidence who had to emotionally bully slaves to feel like he had control. To put a woman, after she gives her herself to a man like this, under that kind of torment is sick, cruel and thoughtless. He is no "Master" in my eyes. All respect would be lost for him and i would have walked. This is all my opinion only, obviously, i am sure others like the no limits followers will think this is perfectly hunky dorey - to each their own.

Bobkgin -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 7:50:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin I think this thread has uncovered one universal limit: the involvement of 'civilians'.I haven't seen anyone from the "no limit" camp claim they'd grab kids if told to. Bzzzt... go back and search the archives. This horse is deader than you think. [sm=evil.gif] So you're saying there have been slaves who declared they would? Seems to me that puts an even greater emphasis on the ethics and morality of the master. Bob (or others if Bob's still blocking) I remember reading that one Master gave his slave a test to get rid of the slave's child. It nearly ended in tragedy but the child wasn't hurt. Would you think that Master, and His test, immoral and unethical? Insufficient data to answer the question. If I had accepted a slave with child into my home there's no way I'd run a test to see if she would "get rid" of the child. My assumption would be the mother's first loyalty is to the child and if it wasn't, I'd wonder what's wrong with her. Don't have much more "data" other than what was given. The Master was very well respected and held in high esteem and the test was a right of passage. The test; "If you love ME sacrifice your child"; is as simple as the question; - Is the test immoral and unethical? If by "sacrifice your child" you are suggesting that the child be murdered, then yes: the test is immoral and unethical. For the purposes of what follows, I'll assume you mean it was being suggested that the child be given up for adoption. If this test is happening before cohabitation has begun, as part of the interview process, then no, this is not immoral nor unethical. The master is stating in unequivocal terms his requirements. The mother is free to say yea or nay. If this test is occurring after cohabitation, I'd say both individuals (especially the mother, as primary guardian for the child) have been irresponsible for not nailing this down prior to cohabitation. This would also apply to a mother who has accepted a "no limits" slavery without a clear understanding of how this would affect her child (and the master is culpable if this was something he'd intended but failed to mention during the interview process). The answer depends very much on the circumstances that led to the situation. quote: Do you think this Master should be used as an example of what is "good" or "bad" in the BDSM community? Remember the child was never hurt, just used for a 'test'. It is an actual event that I'd be happy to reference, but I don't think it relevant. This Master's example gives a ultimate "How far would you go?" Many have drawn various lines in the sand, and it seems that the UM's and the worship of UM's is a clear dividing line. What's your opinion? I would challenge the existence of this "BDSM community" for a start. Nor do I foresee a point where a centralized body will be in a position to hold up individuals as "examples" of good and bad behaviour and be taken seriously by most others. Each individual decides this for him/herself. I still maintain we are each a piece of the puzzle, seeking those pieces that fit. I see no purpose being served in the "worship of UM" (I assume "UM" stands for "Ultimate Master"). Either an individual finds the lifestyle and person involved desirable, or not. BDSM is a spectrum of activities and lifestyles. The idea is to find what works for each person, and to pursue it. So while holding up individuals and lifestyles as "examples" can be expected from their fans, it would be unreasonable to expect everyone involved in BDSM to agree with those "examples". BDSM is like having your clothing tailor-made: doesn't matter what others wear, what matters is that you like what you wear.

Mercnbeth -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 7:53:09 AM)
quote: Why should any "Master" be held up as "good" or "bad" in the BDSM community?...and what community? ...that is very creepy to me. Why indeed! Yet - you have 33 pages, thus far, of debate where many have attempted to do just that. There are referenced to "Moral Authority" and "Universal Limits". These positions must have a absolute "one true way" position in mind or they are simply rhetoric. I would like to know how they apply to the situation posed in order to determine the fundamental belief of the people using those terms. If these absolutes are a requirement of a "community", BDSM or any other, it may not be one I would want to reside.

ModeratorEleven -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 8:03:17 AM)
Folks, please leave children out of this discussion or it will get locked down. Thank you, XI

mrdpettigrew -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 8:10:32 AM)
if you care for and aboutthe one you are with and understand their needs and wishes do you need to have limits . of course you do and they are placed and based on yuor understanding of the others needs and you wish not to pass them . no limits does not exist as we al lset them by compassion

Mercnbeth -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 1:14:30 PM)
quote: Bobkgin If by "sacrifice your UM" you are suggesting that the UM be murdered, then yes: the test is immoral and unethical. Bob, I'd agree. However, as chellekitty astutely pointed out, the example comes from Abraham's Biblically documented sacrifice of Isaac. I use it to make a point. If the God of the bible, 'Master' to many, has such broad parameters for testing a person's limits; who among us should set any standard for what limits may be in effect in any mere mortal relationship? Who here would say that any earthly Master making such a demand was anything but abusive and deserving of scorn? Yet in God's own words - it's not only appropriate but serves as a valuable lesson. Prop, To you your Master is your god. I respect your relationship and hope it is as real as you claim it to be. If not - my compliments on the storyline. At least in your situation the life you would be sacrificing is yours. In that light, as "abusive" as others may think your Master, he's not required of you a similar sacrifice. quote: ORIGINAL: ModeratorEleven Folks, please leave children out of this discussion or it will get locked down. Thank you, XI My apologies for the Biblical reference.

Bobkgin -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 2:44:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: Bobkgin If by "sacrifice your UM" you are suggesting that the UM be murdered, then yes: the test is immoral and unethical. Bob, I'd agree. However, as chellekitty astutely pointed out, the example comes from Abraham's Biblically documented sacrifice of Isaac. I use it to make a point. If the God of the bible, 'Master' to many, has such broad parameters for testing a person's limits; who among us should set any standard for what limits may be in effect in any mere mortal relationship? Who here would say that any earthly Master making such a demand was anything but abusive and deserving of scorn? Yet in God's own words - it's not only appropriate but serves as a valuable lesson. I would point out that to most of the planet, including me, that entity is a fictional character, and the events described in Genesis 22 are allegorical. While I have a great deal of tolerance for what a master and slave may share (even if I personally would not make such choices), that tolerance pretty much disappears when 'civilians' are involved. Participants can surrender their own rights if they wish, but they cannot void the rights of non-participants. For me, that is where BDSM ends and crime begins. Sorry for the delay in responding: errands and so forth.

Mercnbeth -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 3:11:02 PM)
quote: I would point out that to most of the planet, including me, that entity is a fictional character, and the events described in Genesis 22 are allegorical. Bobkgin, I don't know about "most of the planet" its 50/50 in our house, but I agree in general. However that doesn't prevent people using those allegorical stories to rationalize all kinds of activities in the name of god and inflicting them on all of us. It seems that the entity came up with the 'commandments' by the entities experience and cold expertise in committing them. Allegory or actual, who here would serve a Master, or rationalize support of a Master, who ordered the execution of the first born male from all of Egypt as a good plan to free "his" people? Then again maybe not all the 1st born could vocalize their 'safe-word'. quote: While I have a great deal of tolerance for what a master and slave may share (even if I personally would not make such choices), that tolerance pretty much disappears when 'civilians' are involved. I also agree with this. I'll go further and say that I respect any others' "one true way" as long as they don't subject me to it without my consent, or if consent doesn't conflict with my "one true way". On those occasions, I illustrate my "respect" by leaving. More agreement between us, and a removal of the 'block'!? "...people will say we're in love." Damn! What was that? Lightning in the South Bay!? HA HA - ya missed! [sm=evil.gif]

Rule -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 3:55:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bobkgin I would point out that to most of the planet, including me, that entity is a fictional character, and the events described in Genesis 22 are allegorical. That god was not fictional. quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth However that doesn't prevent people using those allegorical stories to rationalize all kinds of activities in the name of god and inflicting them on all of us. Unfortunately, because they lack wisdom. quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth It seems that the entity came up with the 'commandments' by the entities experience and cold expertise in committing them. Allegory or actual, who here would serve a Master, or rationalize support of a Master, who ordered the execution of the first born male from all of Egypt as a good plan to free "his" people? Then again maybe not all the 1st born could vocalize their 'safe-word'. Those first born were doomed in any case. Nothing could have saved them.

Mercnbeth -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 4:06:27 PM)
quote: Rule: Those first born were doomed in any case. Nothing could have saved them. But of course, birth is the first symptom of ultimate death. Ah, but Rule the resulting logic of the referenced act would mean that rationalizing murder in the name of god is a sincere form of worship - imitation. The concept has been used regularly throughout history and is still used this day, by any number of religions. It brought me to the conclusion that a world with such an example would be better off without the example in the first place.

Rule -> RE: No Limits: How far would you go? (9/21/2007 4:53:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth But of course, birth is the first symptom of ultimate death. I was not being philosophical. quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Ah, but Rule the resulting logic of the referenced act would mean that rationalizing murder in the name of god is a sincere form of worship - imitation. Some events in mythology have profound theological implications. However, those that imitate do so because they lack the guidance of wisdom. Some acts of the gods are merely necessities of the time and not to be imitated. quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth The concept has been used regularly throughout history and is still used this day, by any number of religions. Regrettably, yes. Few people are able to recognize wisdom. quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth It brought me to the conclusion that a world with such an example would be better off without the example in the first place. The death of the first born of the Egyptians? There are events that are pivotal in history, Merc. It is impossible to stop the tide and the Gods themselves are as subject to the tides of history as ordinary men. The old testament was eventually done away with by Jesus and surpassed by the new testament. Those ancient examples of ruthlessness were at that time invalidated. We have outgrown them - or at least some of us have.

Page: << < prev 31 32 [33] 34 35 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875