RE: Zero Sum Game?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Zero Sum Game?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Zero Sum Game?

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Zero Sum Game? - 5/12/2008 2:46:52 AM

Owner4SexSlave

Posts: 1311
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline

I have to agree with most of the things SteelofUtah posted in his rant. I'm actually very glad to see a thread like this started up.

Here's my part of my rant! Like Minded people should pair up... if you don't want to sleep on the fucking floor at night, make certain you find a master that you can be a reflection of.    Basically, if you want to spend half the damn day locked away in a cage, fine, pair up with somebody who is into that. If you don't like being caged find somebody who is not into cages.

What is abuse to some people is not to others. Think SteelofUtah nailed it about what is right or wrong.   The Question is what is right or wrong for you.

Be it relationship dynamics or activities.   Dynamics are different from couple to couple. Hell, the dynamics and mutual activities in all my relationships have been somewhat different.   Yes, I am a human being. I have flaws and faults and I'm not perfect.  I'm not a god, I have moments of being god like, but if you place me high on a pedalstal, I promise you I will fall off from it.

Yes, I'm Dom, and I like to take control and like to be in charge. Does this make me an abusive control freak, perhaps in the eyes of some.   Hell, I have had kinky vanilla girlfriends tell me in the past that I needed a slave. These remarks were not put downs or insults, or a play in the Zero Sum game. When somebody says, I'm going to tell you something and please do not take it the wrong way and I mean no insult by it, it should mean just that. Basically, having a good honest conversation about personality conflicts and acceptence that things are not a right match.    Ok, I've even been told that I was a little too controling for a few kinky vanilla girls. OK, I can accept that one as well. Why? Because it's true and it's part of who and what I am. Good honest communication without resorting to low ball zero sum game tactics. The thing is the context in how words are used, by no means was I being insulted.

OK, I have had a number of short term and a number of long term relationships over the years. Each on different. The majority of them ended peacefully and on good terms.   I have had only a few that have ended where the bridges were burned, blown up and the ashes scattered to the ends of the earth.   They ended with hard feelings and great misunderstandings with a lot of Zero Sum game that went down.   I myself have played the Zero Sum game.   The Zero Sum game is the route to go if you wanna burn bridges, trust me, it works rather well.  At times, it may become useful to burn bridges for one's own sanity. It's a little hard to judge other people for their actions and choices in life.   We are amazing emotional creatures that are not always calm and collected and rational at times.    If we were all perfect nobody would have any regrets, nobody would make any mistakes.   Is a mistake really a mistake or not.

I have done things that would make any Vanilla point the finger at me, and accuse me of being abusive. Yet, the person I was with enjoyed and loved the experience to death.   Does the fact that I've owned a slave make me a bad or questionable person to the vanilla world. Is there something wrong with me for enjoying rough kinky sex and getting off on it. Who the Hells business is it besides mine and who I am with. If they enjoy it, or do it because it pleases me and they find pleasure in pleasing me, who the hell is anybody to say that it's wrong?

SteelofUtah hit the nail on the head, about having it your way! What works for you, and not what everybody else thinks. The rules are what we personally want to do and live with.   I laugh my ass off at the precanned Slave Contracts floating around on the internet. Who the hell came up with a slave must be kept naked around the house rule? What if this is not something I want.   I see newbies coming into the lifestyle trying to follow some set standard that does not really exists. Hell, the last relationship I was involved with, she enjoyed being naked and could not wait to get inside the door and strip her clothes off. Did I enjoy this, you betcha I damn well did.   OK, this was a twisted relationship I had with a kinky girl without any relationship D/s going on.  Sex and kink was not an issue at all between us. She enjoyed bedroom D/s very much. Ok, shame on me for not having a full blown BDSM D/s relationship. Should I be ashamed of this, or should I try pretending it was D/s relationship when it was not, just for the sake of living up to some BDSM standard. Should I be concerned or worried that people will think less of me for not having a D/s relationship or not. Fuck it, I went and did what I wanted to do. I got involved with somebody who I believed was worth the time and energy.  Things did not turn out so well.

My last relationship was so radically different compared to any I've had before. I had a difficult time making the decision to end things. I'm not the type to simple cut bait and run quickly at the first sign of trouble. I had to do what was best for me, and my own sanity, and I care(d) deeply for this girl.

I think SimpleMicheal best expressed it.

"Relationships SHOULD be a team against all comers. Some teams have captains, some don't, but the point is that you should look to each other for support and feel that you only win if you all win."

Her and I were not a team together against all corners.   In the End, I have to follow my own advice that I often hand out to people. Find like minded partners to pair up with!

I have attempted to swear off BDSM to have kinky vanilla girls tell me that we are not a good match, or even me telling them, hey look this is not working out for me.   I have tried to hang up the whip and turn my back on BDSM.   It's kind of like the old expression, you can take the boy out of the city, but you can't take the city out of the boy.

OK, I'm using myself as the example here. I'm pointing the finger at myself and sharing with you guys something of a personal nature.   I have a heart and a soul, and I can be sensual, I can be sadistic at times, I am so many diverse things rolled into one package.

I myself can relate very heavy to SteelofUtah, when he said he was acused of being Abusive. I've only had one Ex accuse me of this, on top of other things such as just using her for Sex, and being accused of being into WitchCraft and ever other thing in the book.   Some people look at people that own Ouija boards as being into witchcraft.   Look at BDSM as being abusive, and frown on High Sex Drives to boot.   These things, I have been condemned forever by her own family for. Her family is basically right wing christians.   Now to share something I've never mentioned before on this Board Ever, is that I have Twin Girls, that get to be caught up in the middle of this crap.   I'm forever Judged as a some evil, abusive, Satanic...... ...........

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Profile

Post #: 41

RE: Zero Sum Game? - 5/12/2008 4:43:05 AM

gypsygrl

Posts: 1471
Joined: 10/8/2005
From: new york state
Status: offline

quote:

Relationships SHOULD be a team against all comers.

I'm tripping over the word SHOULD. I think I understand the position your putting forth: The people involved in the relationship should bond with each other and defend their relationship against...what? Marauding bandits? Aliens? Pirates? Locusts? Killer bees? Who are the 'comers'? Are relationships typically subject to attack from external forces? Its here I get lost.

I've been in situations where I felt like I needed to defend my turf against intruders but over time, I relized those intruders were being invited in through the back door and then blamed for trouble. Basically--it took me a while to figure this out-- there was some heavy duty displacement/ scapegoating going on. Eventually, I got to be the goat, which was only fair because I, in the short term at least, had originally (passively) participated in and benefitted from the scapegoating of others.

I guess my point is that I'm not especially comfortable with a relationship framework that includes the existence of an alien other to create a sense of togetherness within the relationship. A viable stable relationship SHOULD stand on its own.

_____________________________

“To be happy is to be able to become aware of oneself without fright.” ~Walter Benjamin

(in reply to SimplyMichael)

Profile

Post #: 42

RE: Zero Sum Game? - 5/12/2008 9:45:16 AM

smilingjaguar

Posts: 271
Status: offline

quote:

I'm tripping over the word SHOULD. I think I understand the position your putting forth: The people involved in the relationship should bond with each other and defend their relationship against...what? Marauding bandits? Aliens? Pirates? Locusts? Killer bees? Who are the 'comers'? Are relationships typically subject to attack from external forces? Its here I get lost.

Against anything that can pull a relationship apart...nosy in-laws, intrusive guests, gossip, jealousy, lack of communication, medical issues...in short any of life's challenges that make a relationship more difficult. Sir and I tag-team everything. It's no use to go to the other one if you don't like what one of us said. Chances are good we've had a discussion about it and know where we stand on that issue. We do what's best for our relationship and our family, period. Anything that disrupts our peace and harmony is a "comer".

(in reply to gypsygrl)

Profile

Post #: 43

RE: Zero Sum Game? - 5/12/2008 10:05:15 AM

gypsygrl

Posts: 1471
Joined: 10/8/2005
From: new york state
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: smilingjaguar

quote:

I'm tripping over the word SHOULD. I think I understand the position your putting forth: The people involved in the relationship should bond with each other and defend their relationship against...what? Marauding bandits? Aliens? Pirates? Locusts? Killer bees? Who are the 'comers'? Are relationships typically subject to attack from external forces? Its here I get lost.

Against anything that can pull a relationship apart...nosy in-laws, intrusive guests, gossip, jealousy, lack of communication, medical issues...in short any of life's challenges that make a relationship more difficult. Sir and I tag-team everything. It's no use to go to the other one if you don't like what one of us said. Chances are good we've had a discussion about it and know where we stand on that issue. We do what's best for our relationship and our family, period. Anything that disrupts our peace and harmony is a "comer".

Ok. Thank you for the clarifaction. Its kind of an "us against the world" idea?

I can't say I'm any fully comfortable with it because it seems to pre-define those "comers" as threats rather than opportunities for growth, or just neutral phenomena.

I mean, nosy in laws and intrusive guests, jealousy and gossip can be a problem, but taking a defensive stance might not be the best way of dealing with them and may will exacerbate things. Medical issues are pretty neutral, and communication issues occur within the boundaries of the relationship, and can't be thought of being external to it (the threat within).

The rhetoric just makes it sounds like a 'relationship' is a fortress that needs to be defended, and I worry about some of the subtle consequences of that perspective. There's a romantic appeal, but it sounds really isolating. Like, a relationship is a fortress, with a moat around it and no draw bridge.

_____________________________

“To be happy is to be able to become aware of oneself without fright.” ~Walter Benjamin

(in reply to smilingjaguar)

Profile

Post #: 44

RE: Zero Sum Game? - 5/12/2008 6:10:17 PM

KnightofMists

Posts: 7149
Joined: 7/29/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Leatherist
You don't have a girl designated as "first"

No.. I don't have a designated first... which I see as a Rigid Hiearchy. I adopt a Flexible Hiearchy... meaning.. the alpha is assigned on a per task/duty basis. Usually to the person most skilled in the given task or duty.

_____________________________

Knight of Mists

An Optimal relationship is achieved when the individuals do what is best for themselves and their relationship.

(in reply to Leatherist)

Profile

Post #: 45

RE: Zero Sum Game? - 5/12/2008 6:13:42 PM

KnightofMists

Posts: 7149
Joined: 7/29/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gypsygrl

quote:

Relationships SHOULD be a team against all comers.

I'm tripping over the word SHOULD. I think I understand the position your putting forth: The people involved in the relationship should bond with each other and defend their relationship against...what? Marauding bandits? Aliens? Pirates? Locusts? Killer bees? Who are the 'comers'? Are relationships typically subject to attack from external forces? Its here I get lost.

Well something must be attacking them... since a good 50% fail... but.. I think it's an Inside job most of the time that seal it's fate.

_____________________________

Knight of Mists

An Optimal relationship is achieved when the individuals do what is best for themselves and their relationship.

(in reply to gypsygrl)

Profile

Post #: 46

RE: Zero Sum Game? - 5/12/2008 8:46:36 PM

Noah

Posts: 1660
Joined: 7/5/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth

It's not a zero-sum game, but it is a prisoner's dilemna metagame.

By which I mean: The choice is on both partners whether to treat it as a zero-sum game. If EITHER partner treats it as a zero-sum game, then the other partner loses, horribly, unless they also treat it as a zero-sum game - in which case both parties are stuck playing a zero-sum game. So the payoff matrix looks like:

                                      B chooses Zero-Sum                  B chooses to be positive
A chooses Zero-Sum            Zero-Sum Game, may the most vicious jerk win!                            A abuses B
A chooses to be positive       B abuses A                                                              Loving, stable relationship so far.

The other problem is, once either party chooses to defect, the whole game gets de-railed, and gets forced permanently into an abuse-or-zero-sum configuration. So you pretty much have to trust that both partners will NEVER see a reason to defect - which is not going to happen - which ITSELF is a reason to defect, which is one of the reasons WHY it's not going to happen. So what do you do?

One option would be to eschew the game-theoretic approach altogether.

I'm not saying it can't be useful in a given moment, to a given task. A game theory view of relationships is put to good use in the original post. But let's remember that any theory is at best a set of tools. It is never the blueprint. Whichever set of tools we choose, the thing-in-itself is still standing there breathing on us

I try carefully to avoid seeing/discussing relationships in economic or game-theoretic terms. It takes some effort since I'm acculturated to see the world in those ways. I've made progress though and I think it is worth the effort. Since I've begun scraping off those presumptions about How Things Work I feel I'm seeing my partners and myself more clearly, inhabiting my relationships more fully (and my acne's almost cleared up too.)

Now, with any luck Ron will turn up with a pocket-sized diatribe on how relationships are better viewed as dim sum games.

(in reply to Ialdabaoth)

Profile

Post #: 47