|
TreasureKY -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/26/2008 12:26:23 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
Well, here you have said it's an ultimatum that you question:
quote:
In D/s relationships where truthfulness and trust are so highly vaunted, I question the wisdom of a dominant making such an ultimatum… one that, for all intents and purposes, is not true. Since it seems to be a common ultimatum, is there some other purpose for this that I am missing?
Seemed like some confusion to me, since you weren't sure if you were missing something.
No, not confusion. A question... asking for different opinions as to why something so complex and easily mis-taken might be presented in a form that does not do it justice and possibly places the presentor in a bad light. Really, it was just an opening... an invitation for discussion.
To be honest, I can recall only one person on this thread who actually responded to my op as presented. That was DominantJenny. She clearly explained how she viewed the comment within her own relationships and suggested that the choice of form as an ultimatum might be considered hot.
Pretty much everyone else has either simply related their opinions on how the concept works within their own personal relationships, commented to the structure of my op, or argued my reasoning.
In the end, it's all good. Aside from an unnecessary personal attack or two and a bit of misunderstanding, it's been a lively and engaging discussion. It has offered an opportunity for people to consider their own feelings and relay their viewpoints on a subject that doesn't involve the weight of submissives, whether femmedommes are only interested in money, complaints about unaswered mail, or the difference between submissive and slave. [;)]
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
And while we all seem to have the same general understanding as to what the ultimatum means, it does leave much open to interpretation and misunderstanding... as well as putting a dominant in the position of having made a demand that is generally understood to be not what it sounds like.
How do you know a dominant is demanding something that isn't so?
Because words have meaning. Saying, "As long as you are pleasing, you will not be replaced" is not the same as saying, "As long as you are willing to be pleasing, as long as you are making a geniune effort to be pleasing, and as long as I am satisfied that you are overall more often pleasing than not, then you will not be replaced."
Look at it this way, it's really just a call for thougtfulness and clarity. By considering the reasoning presented for how something believed to be a simple statement can be taken by another to mean something entirely different, if it causes even one participant or witness to this discussion to be more careful in how they choose to communicate, then it has been a beneficial discussion.
Unless, of course, you believe there is no room for improvement in communication amongst the membership of this forum... [;)]
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
But it would seem that how the ultimatum is voiced, as well as presented within the context of the relationship is going to make the difference... along with the mind set of the individuals involved.
You continue to call something an ultimatum that many of us do not receive as such, in our relationships, and have said so.
I identified the original comment and variations thereof in my op as the ultimatum. For clarity and consistency's sake, I tried to stick with it, though occasionally I referred to it as "the statement" or "the comment". It was really no reflection on other people's viewpoints.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
With us, though, it is presented not so much as an ultimatum...
Why have you decided it is not an ultimatum for you, but is for someone else? Is it because you do not like the wording? Do you not believe those who say it is not an ultimatum but a promise, an assurance, a condition...etc.?
The concept exists in my relationship, pretty much like it does for every other relationship.
We have an understanding. Firm and I have both talked about how neither of us wishes to ever be trapped again in a relationship where our needs and desires are not met sufficiently. From our conversations Firm knows how important it is to me that he is pleased with me and I know how important it is that he be pleased. Those are basic needs to us and our opinions agree that if those needs are not met with each other, we would end the relationship.
However, Firm has never said that my pleasing him is a condition of our relationship. He has never promised me that I will always be his so long as I please him. He has never even stated that our relationship would end should his needs or expectations not be met.
And neither have I.
We have no contract. We have no formal agreement. We have not discussed terms for the continuation or dissolution of our relationship. lol... There aren't even any rules.
I've not claimed that the ultimatum does not exist in my relationship... it's just not voiced as an ultimatum.
As for how other's relationships are defined, that is up to those involved. I've no interest in interpreting or judging other people's relationships. I've simply stated the criteria for what I believe to be an ultimatum and explained why I think it's a bad idea for a dominant to convey his or her desires in such a narrow fashion.
If posters have volunteered their own opinion of their relationship, I've not attempted to sway their opinion, discuss their relationship, or even asked questions related specifically to their relationship. Aside from my citing the actual person's comments that began my train of thought that led to this thread, I've seriously avoided trying to discuss any one person's relationship. I can't say that I've been entirely successful with regard to DV and softness, and for that I apologize.
It really does amaze me that people insist on taking offense at my opinion. What I think with regard to this subject is no threat to anyone or a personal attack, no more so than my opinion on poly, watersports, or whether rope or chain make more erotic sessions.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
But like you, I'm not so certain that I would feel as secure if it were couched in the "be pleasing, or else" fashion.
Where have you seen someone say "be pleasing or else?" It seems as though you are paraphrasing your own interpretations here.
It is a paraphrase of my own interpretation. It's a concise, simple phrase which conveys my opinion on a myriad of different ways where I've seen the idea presented in what I believe to be an ultimatum fashion.
As for where I've seen it? lol... Do you really want to ask me to cite more specific relationships?
As I explained to softness, I only cited her example because it provoked my current train of thought and provided a specific instance so that I didn't have to resort to a generic "I've heard dominants say..." Too often that kind of beginning leads to accusations of generalizing and a blurs the whole point of the post.
Not that that didn't happen anyway. [;)]
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
To MadRabbit:
quote:
It seems apparent from your explanation that this type of ultimatum given in conjunction with additional guidelines makes much more sense than simply taking the ultimatum as a stand-alone demand.
Again you assume it's an ultimatum. Only now that MR explained his additional guidelines, it makes sense to you, in regards to him.
*whispering* This is another instance where I'm using "ultimatum" for consistency's sake.
Am I not allowed to say something positive to show understanding? And simply because I say that I understand something or state that it makes sense, I'm not necessarily saying that I agree.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
Did you not think others would have additional guidelines, too, or did you think that people really do state edicts of "Please me or else" without any guidelines about it?
Are you saying that because I did not specifically state that I think other people might have similar guidelines, too, that you believe I thought MR is the only one?
If so, wouldn't that make you guilty of the very same thing you would accuse me of... making assumptions based on limited knowledge?
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
I realize I am being somewhat stubborn and particularly picky on the point of how this requirement is made. But imagine, if you will, a dominant who makes a rule and declares that it will be followed or else the submissive will be released... what message would the submissive receive if the first time she breaks a rule (or the second, or the third), she is not released?
Where I am curious is why you are stubborn and picky as to how dominants in other people's relationships convey messages to their submissives? Do you believe these rules are made without subsequent conversation and understanding?
I am not stubborn and picky as to how dominants in other people's relationships convey messages to their submissives... I'm being somewhat stubborn and picky about making my point. [;)]
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
But I suppose my question has been, why frame the requirement as an ultimatum in the first place if it really isn't an ultimatum?
Unless my memory has failed me, I think you are the only one referring to this as an ultimatum.
I don't believe so, but I don't believe it really matters.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
The general ultimatum as I've identified it contains no context; it simply is what it is. The underlying implications of when and under what specific conditions that the ultimatum applies are relevant only to the individuals who employ it.
Here you seem to ease up on that stubbornness and recognize that what goes on in an individual relationship is up to them. So then why the OP?
My op was never about other people's relationships and how they work.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
While Firm has an expectation for me to always be pleasing, that expectation was not framed as an explicit, "be pleasing, or else" ultimatum. If it had been, I would have insisted upon knowing the specific criteria that would invoke the "or else" part before I ever agreed to become his. If my behavior is to be judged so critically as to bring about the pre-determined sentence of "goodbye"... no if ands or buts... I want to know just how it will be measured.
Again, who said "be pleasing, or else?" Why not accept that others have the same expectation, and that if such expectations in a relationship are not met, the relationship ceases to be what it was? Why is this acceptable for your relationship but you are stubborn and picky about how others communicate theirs? And who said no if ands or buts? And maybe others who hear they must be pleasing are also asking for and receiving clarity on how it's measured?
You're beginning to repeat yourself. Continuing to ask the same question isn't going to elicit a different answer.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
As it is, Firm and I have a common understanding that neither of us wishes to be entangled in a relationship where we find our partner displeasing. That may seem to be essentially the same as "be pleasing, or else", but the difference is that by not couching it in ultimatum terms, we've left ourselves room to be human, make mistakes, and be indecisive.
This theme of deciding others' expectations of being pleasing is an ultimatum with no room for being human is what tells me you have some confusion about the relationship structure of others.
*sighs* And I am getting tired of repeating myself.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
You and any other couples who might employ the ultimatum, may also enjoy the same room for error and discussion... my question is and always has been, why use the "be pleasing, or else" terminology when it really isn't that cut and dried. I'm simply advocating "say what you mean and mean what you say".
Why are you deciding it isn't cut and dried? KOM made a perfect distinction between macro and micro. Overall, I am very pleasing to my Master, such that he has no intention of cutting the dynamic off if I fuck up. If overall I were not pleasing, I would not be his slave any longer. And yet, who exactly said "be pleasing, or else", as I have not seen it.
I do believe that I'm entitled to interpret my own opinion.
I'm happy for you that your relationship works for you and that you are happy with it. My opinion on what I believe to be a poor use of wording is not a commentary on your personal relationship or anyone else's. You really shouldn't let this bother you so.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
As for my somewhat rhetorical question of "Where can softness ever find security in her relationship if she doesn’t know if the very next screw up will send her packing?"... if it is your contention that this is a strawman, you would be wrong. Just so you know, it actually came from softness' own words, "Sir has told me again and again that I am secure in my position as long as I am pleasing."
Here, in your use of softness as your example, you are stating this "ultimatum," as you call it, as a reflection of security in a relationship.
Actually, no. In the quote you cite, I reiterated the example because DV inferred that due to some flaw in my logic, I created the erroneous concept that "some relationship somewhere is secure". I thought it was an interesting twist considering it was his submissive who claimed security in their relationship based on his own words... especially in light of his insistence to me that no relationship is secure. [:D]
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
So why the rhetorical question about her being sent packing?
The original rhetorical question was part of a hyperbolic stance used in my op to illustrate the strict confines of the ultimatum.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
I can understand that, and there is nothing unreasonable about it. I suspect that this is what most dominants mean when they make the "be pleasing, or else" ultimatum. Again, though, if that is what you want, why say it any other way?
I think most dominants aren't saying "be pleasing, or else." I think most are saying something along the lines of what DV said to softness - as long as you are meeting the conditions set forth in this relationship, you will have a place in it. When my Master says that, I know he means it.
Okay.
Though I don't believe anywhere have I claimed most dominants are saying "be pleasing, or else".
I do see, however, where my comment that you quote... "I suspect that this is what most dominants mean when they make the "be pleasing, or else" ultimatum."... can be taken that way. Perhaps if I'd worded it, "When dominants make the "be pleasing, or else" ultimatum, I suspect that this is what most of them mean."
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
Despite what you believe, the position that I've put forward from the beginning is that the idea I've seen put forth by many dominants... that a submissive's position is secure as long as she is pleasing to the dominant... is a vague ultimatum and implies that her position is forfeit should she cease to be pleasing. I've acknowledged all along that I understand that this threat of "be pleasing, or else" is deceptive as it most likely is meant to allow latitude for mistakes and human error. I've also said repeatedly that this concept is not unique to D/s relationships but that most all relationships work with the understanding that the partnership will end when the partners are no longer able to or are interested in pleasing each other.
So here you are taking a dominants conditions and deciding they are a vague ultimatum. Who says they are vague?
Yes, I decided how I would interpret something. I formed my own opinion. Is that such a strange concept?
And believe it or not, if your interpretation and opinion differ from mine, that's okay... you aren't wrong and mine doesn't change.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
And who says it is an ultimatum? Now, not only are you calling it an ultimatum, but a threat.
Again, that my interpretation and opinion thingy. But to share with you that it's not completely arbitrary...
ul·ti·ma·tum [uhl-tuh-mey-tuhm]
–noun
1. a final, uncompromising demand or set of terms issued by a party to a dispute, the rejection of which may lead to a severance of relations or to the use of force.
I actually discussed this earlier with thedark...
quote:
ORIGINAL: TreasureKY
quote:
ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark
... Personally, I don't see the statement as an ultimatum ... to me, it is a promise.
My best wishes to you and Darcy.
I can see the correlation as the concepts are so similar. Both declare what will or will not be done, and it is understandable how an ultimatum might be also viewed as a promise. However, with an ultimatum conditions are given... as the dictionary explains, "a final, uncompromising demand or set of terms issued ... the rejection of which may lead to a severance of relations..."
While a promise can have conditions applied ... as in "if you complete your chores, I will take you out for dinner" ... conditions are not necessary. If someone simply assures you that they will take you out to dinner, it can still be a promise. The same cannot be said for an ultimatum.
I realize that I'm arguing semantics, but after all, that's what we're discussing, isn't it? The meaning or interpretation of the meaning of words.
Viewing the statement as a promise is optimistic and romantic... and perhaps a better fit for the subjective emotional intent. It's just that I see where "ultimatum" is a better fit concerning the actual use of the words.
Even so, thedark and I don't agree on interpretations, but we still respect each other's opinion.
As far as also calling it a threat, I've got the thesaurus to back me up that it's a valid synomym for ultimatum...
Main Entry: ultimatum
Part of Speech: noun
Synonyms: demand, offer, order, requirement, terms, threat
I just hate using the same word over and over and over, but I do like to be as consistent as I can. [:)]
Just as an aside, I wasn't the first to call it a threat. I believe Lashra has that honor in post #6.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
And again, "be pleasing, or else." Maybe I'm just tired in the middle of the night here, and if I missed it, I apologize, but where was this stated?
In the op.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
The point has always been that, considering all the thoughts outlined in my original post, it appears to me that the "be pleasing, or else" ultimatum is an empty threat. Why would a dominant flat out make it and set his or herself up to appear disingenuous when pretty much everyone understands and accepts the concept anyway?
Now these quoted words, from a source I still haven't seen, are not just a threat, but an empty threat by an apparent disingenuous dominant. And if everyone understands and accepts the concetp, why would you want to wordsmith what is said (or in this case, what wasn't said) in someone's relationship?
lol... Because it makes an interesting topic of conversation?
Really, why does it matter to you?
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
Precisely. So why verbalize it framed in terms that can be taken in a negative fashion, when it is, as you say, "stating the obvious"?
I haven't seen anyone in this thread (again, I'm tired and may have missed it) who has actually been told such conditions (be it to be pleasing, to be obedient, to be submissive, etc.) that they received it negatively. You are exercising "stubbornness" into the dialogue between other dominants and slaves about something that bothers you but doesn't seem to bother them. Why?
Because it makes an interesting topic of conversation? [:D]
Why not?
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
To the.dark.,
quote:
Viewing the statement as a promise is optimistic and romantic... and perhaps a better fit for the subjective emotional intent. It's just that I see where "ultimatum" is a better fit concerning the actual use of the words.
So in spite of others who have this condition in their dynamic saying it is not an ultimatum for them...you are deciding it is?
It's my opinion, owned... I get to decide it. I've not told anyone that their opinion is wrong and I've not tried to persuade anyone away from how they see their own relationship. I've shared my thoughts, they've shared theirs. It's all good.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
And, let's just say it really is an ultimatum - is that so bad?
From my op...
quote:
ORIGINAL: TreasureKY
Generally, the idea that a dominant would only keep a slave or submissive so long as he or she is pleasing seems to be a reasonable requirement… though not exclusively from a dominant perspective. I would posit that most people, regardless of orientation or lifestyle choice, would have a difficult time staying committed to someone who behaved in a manner they did not like.
...
Ultimatums, in and of themselves, are not really a problem. Whether recognized or not, we live with ultimatums all the time. If you do not get a license, you cannot legally drive a car… if you do not meet entrance requirements, you cannot attend college… if you do not show up for work, you will not get paid… etcetera.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
Do you assume that ultimatums are not presented with conversation that gives clear understanding?
As you quoted me above...
quote:
ORIGINAL: TreasureKY
You and any other couples who might employ the ultimatum, may also enjoy the same room for error and discussion... my question is and always has been, why use the "be pleasing, or else" terminology when it really isn't that cut and dried. I'm simply advocating "say what you mean and mean what you say".
I would think you wouldn't need to ask.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
I guess my confusion is with your "stubbornness and pickiness" about others' relationships and why you do not like the choice of words that work for them. I can understand if you think dominants are tossing threats around to their submissives without any explanations or clarity. But that doesn't seem to be the case here.
I'm afraid that at this point there's not much I can possibly say to help clear up your confusion.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
Which is kinda my objection with the whole concept being framed as an ultimatum. The words don't match the intent.
Except a lot of us have told you they do.
Yes. And?
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
I agree. That's pretty much why I dislike the concept being couched as an ultimatum. It leaves little room for the details.
Perhaps for you it does. But you aren't talking about yourself. You're talking about others. And others are telling you they have worked out the details.
That still doesn't invalidate my opinion or the discussion. I honestly don't understand why you are taking such exception with this, owned. You don't typically appear to take things so personally or be this judgmental.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
And finally (at last!)...
lol... Tell me about it!
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
quote:
owned... I brought up a subject and expressed an opinion, other people have expressed theirs... it's just been a discussion.
Though I do admit that it's been a bit difficult keeping the point of the discussion clear. [;)]
Of course it's just been a discussion. I haven't stated or implied otherwise.
I'm glad we're in agreement. [;)]
quote:
ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie
Where I see the difficulty in keeping the point of the discussion clear is that others are telling you their opinions which, in their own relationships, counter to what you are surmising happens in others' relationships, and you are continuing to say it's an ultimatum, it's an empty threat, it leaves no room for details...etc. I guess I'm wondering why you don't seem to be believing it.
lol... Who said that I've not believed anyone?
My continuing comments have for the most part been provided as clarification of my op. Now if the intent of my op had been to request people provide me with evidence from their own relationships that proved my reasoning flawed, then it might have made a difference. As it is, that is not the case.
And to be honest, my participation in this discussion has reached its end. I don't know about you, but it's consumed far too much of my time and gone beyond its entertainment value. [;)]
I wish you well, owned, and hope we can continue to have conversations in the future.
|
|
|
|
