RE: Internal Enslavement

RE: Internal Enslavement (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master

Message

pettingdragons -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 12:24:20 PM)
[sm=anger.gif]

ownedgirlie -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 12:28:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhiteFox77 Do me a favor a check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_fallacy "So then if an offspring can leave in 18 years, it is not inherently wrong to be in an abusive relationship." HUH!?! Where did anything I say even imply that. All abusive relationship are inherently wrong. You could interpret what I said as saying: Situations that could lead to abuse are not inherently wrong, so long as the person who might end up being abused has some method of eventually preventing or ending the abuse. No, I'm interpreting your words literally. "ANYTHING that creates the possibility of a person being in an abusive relationship and not being able to leave that relationship is inherently wrong. Unless you can prove it will NEVER happen, then the only rational approach is to avoid any situation completely." I used your words to ask about offspring, since anyone having offspring creates a possibility of long term abuse. You rebutted by saying offspring can leave when they are 18. Your words implied (to me, anyway) that since this was a rebuttal, then procration does not need to be avoided completely even though there is a possibility for abuse because the offspring can leave in 18 years. In fact, you specifically corrected my abbreviated quote to include that the person must be unable to leave in order for it to be inherently wrong, and therefore should not ever happen. Based on what I'm understanding from your words, IE should be avoided at all times ("the only rational approach is to avoid any situation completely") because there is a possibility that a person abused in such a situation would not be able to leave. But since offspring CAN leave at the age of 18, procreation should not be avoided completely. Your initial statement is flawed to me, and I am asking you to make sense of it. Basically I see you saying, "If you're a slave in IE who can never leave, you should not ever be enslaved in IE because there is a possibility for that situation to be abused, but if you are an offspring who has to wait until the age of 18 to leave, it is OK for procreation to exist, because even though there is a possibility for you to be abused, you can at least leave when you're an adult." I'm using procreation as a comparison because you said, specifically, "ANYTHING that creates the possibility of a person being in an abusive relationship and not being able to leave that relationship is inherently wrong. Unless you can prove it will NEVER happen, then the only rational approach is to avoid any situation completely." (I'm quoting you directly so you don't accuse me of misquoting again, but highlighting some key words). quote: "How long is this time frame in your argument?" To be honest, I haven't even thought about it. I'm have not, and don't intend to suggest an alternative. I think you should think about it, since, according to your arguments, something that might last forever should be avoided completely, but something that lasts 18 years does not have to be avoided completely. If you want to present a strong argument for your case that you want people to understand and be compelled by, I'd suggest knowing your argument, and all the ins and outs of it...AND knowing an alternative, as well. quote: "If an adult in an abusive relationship CAN leave at some point, given whatever stated time frame is ok with you, is it OK to seek out other rational approaches? What if someone in an IE relationship CAN leave in 18 years, just as an offspring could? Would your opinion change?" That is out side the scope of the argument I'm making against the site this is (supposedly) the focus of this discussion. The descriptions of IE in that site state clearly that the submissive can not leave on their own. It is a comparison, as stated above, using your words about anything creating a possibility should never occur (I'm abbreviating here, rather than copy/pasting your quote over and over again).

Leatherist -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 12:31:37 PM)
Aren't absolutes annoying?

ownedgirlie -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 12:33:33 PM)
Well, unless one can provide specific and clear evidence of them being factual, they tend to automatically make arguments lose credibility. When you argue using absolutes, you invite people to point out the holes in your argument. Absolutes tend to be emotional based rather than factual based. I know, I used to be the queen of absolutes. [8D]

Leatherist -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 12:35:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie Well, unless one can provide specific and clear evidence of them being factual, they tend to automatically make arguments lose credibility. When you argue using absolutes, you invite people to point out the holes in your argument. Absolutes tend to be emotional based rather than factual based. I know, I used to be the queen of absolutes. [8D] Is that sort of like self inflicted emotional masochism then? Kinda makes sense,when you see the end result.

MasterDragon1963 -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 12:45:06 PM)
"Breaking down & rebuilding" + "why would you want to" = the following "From that which I find in you, your past, your inner being, I shall collect what of you I wish, that I deem required, and I shall put upon you the might of my desires, I shall forge your very being, pressed and bent, stretched and tested. Mind, heart and spirit shall be honed and shaped until the rings of fire temper and harden the changes. Stronger than my own urge for your use is my responcibility to your being. Stronger than my ownership of your life and body are the bonds that bind us, the bonds that link us, the harmony that brought us both to this point, the point of risking ourselves for a purpose without another, we did not have." I do hope that helps you in some way. Master Dragon

MasterDragon1963 -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 12:49:39 PM)
heres an absolute "nothing lasts forever"

SaraZeal -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 4:28:33 PM)
quote: I used your words to ask about offspring, since anyone having offspring creates a possibility of long term abuse. You rebutted by saying offspring can leave when they are 18. and don't forget, if a child is truly abused, they can be prevented from getting an education, treated like shit and abused against their will - AND kept under parental custody due to mental illnesses created ironically enough, by the abuse itself. The parent could lengthen their power over the child to mid-20s or longer. I have someone I know who's mother was against her to the extent that she made her legally disabled, and as such, unable to find any employment until that status was changed.

CruelDesires -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 4:35:48 PM)
Quick answer Trying to explain the color red to one who was born legally blind is impossible. Trying to explain IE to someone who cannot comprehend it is just as futile. Why bother? CD

Alumbrado -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 5:25:54 PM)
Classic cultspeak.. thanks for the example.

WhiteFox77 -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 5:32:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie If you want to present a strong argument for your case that you want people to understand and be compelled by, I'd suggest knowing your argument, and all the ins and outs of it...AND knowing an alternative, as well. I am strictly arguing against something (specifically IE as defined on the site in question). I don't particularly care what the other available options are. It is a basic rule of logic that a strong argument against something does not require a strong argument for an alternative. quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie Basically I see you saying, "If you're a slave in IE who can never leave, you should not ever be enslaved in IE because there is a possibility for that situation to be abused, but if you are an offspring who has to wait until the age of 18 to leave, it is OK for procreation to exist, because even though there is a possibility for you to be abused, you can at least leave when you're an adult." ... It is a comparison, as stated above, using your words about anything creating a possibility should never occur (I'm abbreviating here, rather than copy/pasting your quote over and over again). So long as there is some capability for a person that might end up being abused to, on their own, take action to end an abusive relationship, I don't see that the situations that could potentially lead up to the abusive relationship needs to be completely avoided. However, that is still out side the scope of the argument, as the site in question does not allow the possibility of a slave in an IE relationship to ever leave on their own. quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie You invite people to point out the holes in your argument. You've been trying to point out those wholes for a while. In all the time here, you've yet to give one compelling argument as to why it should be considered acceptable for a person to be in an abusive relationship that they are unable to ever leave. Even when trying to pick at what I say, all you've done is twist my words to mean things that I never said, attempt to drag the arguments out side the bounds of the topic (based on the question that started the thread), and attempt to make invalid comparisons. You talk about the strength of my argument, but if this were a formal argument in a structured debate setting, you would have already been disqualified. MasterDragon1963: Actually that was very moving and did speak to me. It is certainly part of the role of a owner or master to encourage a submissive to grow as a person. Sometimes to build a building larger and stronger you must first knock down a couple walls.

RedMagic1 -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 5:58:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhiteFox77 you've yet to give one compelling argument as to why it should be considered acceptable for a person to be in an abusive relationship that they are unable to ever leave. I refuse to waste my life reading this thread. However, I would be stunned if ownedgirlie, CruelDesires or MadRabbit ever made any such claims. You're missing an extremely basic point here -- one which makes me question your level of real-time experience building committed relationships. One party doesn't commit to serve the other party, not really. The commitment is to serve the RELATIONSHIP -- to build something bigger than either person. And, as leadership pointed out, there are very similar psychological dynamics in vanilla marriages -- and there have been for ten thousand years! Force of habit, societal and religious pressure, and the devil you know being less scary than the devil you don't know, all combine so the longer you are with someone the harder it becomes to leave. The rhetoric is not different from the idea of cultivating a perfect obedience to the will of God, or the teachings of the Buddha. There are people in the world who believe in the value of something besides permanent skepticism, and who choose to embrace something as completely as they can. That is not sinister, nor abusive. Neither is trying to build the best possible relationship between two people. If anything, IE is fancy words for something normal, well-known, and old school vanilla: interwoven lifelong commitment.

MadRabbit -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 6:11:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 quote: ORIGINAL: WhiteFox77 you've yet to give one compelling argument as to why it should be considered acceptable for a person to be in an abusive relationship that they are unable to ever leave. I refuse to waste my life reading this thread. However, I would be stunned if ownedgirlie, CruelDesires or MadRabbit ever made any such claims. You're missing an extremely basic point here -- one which makes me question your level of real-time experience building committed relationships. One party doesn't commit to serve the other party, not really. The commitment is to serve the RELATIONSHIP -- to build something bigger than either person. And, as leadership pointed out, there are very similar psychological dynamics in vanilla marriages -- and there have been for ten thousand years! Force of habit, societal and religious pressure, and the devil you know being less scary than the devil you don't know, all combine so the longer you are with someone the harder it becomes to leave. The rhetoric is not different from the idea of cultivating a perfect obedience to the will of God, or the teachings of the Buddha. There are people in the world who believe in the value of something besides permanent skepticism, and who choose to embrace something as completely as they can. That is not sinister, nor abusive. Neither is trying to build the best possible relationship between two people. If anything, IE is fancy words for something normal, well-known, and old school vanilla: interwoven lifelong commitment. It's always nice to see people who can think outside of the box of paranoid cynicism, one-sided cliches, and a surface, literal understanding of the definition on the site to a deeper and more realistic understanding of human psychology. After as many examples as I have given as to how this bares resemblence to many other very realistic and empirical concepts in real life, I have to say I am slightly amazed to see yet another person puffing hot hair using the same mycopic example and lack of any real thinking to carry on and on again with the unethicality. I mean, for fuck's sake....if all people are going to do is read the first paragraph of a website and respond with the knee to jerk reaction of toting this abstract misconception of what IE actually consists of...over....and over....and over again, then discussion and achieving any greater understanding dies a horrible death.

WhiteFox77 -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 6:20:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 If anything, IE is fancy words for something normal, well-known, and old school vanilla: interwoven lifelong commitment. As IE is commonly practiced, I'd agree with you completely. But the person that started this thread didn't ask our opinions of IE as it is practiced, they asked our opinions of a specific web site (how many times have I pointed that out now?). And I refuse to see staying on topic as a flaw.

RedMagic1 -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 6:30:52 PM)
Words disconnected from life experience cloud. Words connected to life experience illuminate. If you want to write a philosophy paper, go to college. If you want to post here without being called a bullshit artist, describe which IE relationships you have seen or been in, and how they are similar or different from that web site or others.

MadRabbit -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 6:51:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhiteFox77 As IE is commonly practiced, I'd agree with you completely. But the person that started this thread didn't ask our opinions of IE as it is practiced, they asked our opinions of a specific web site (how many times have I pointed that out now?). And I refuse to see staying on topic as a flaw. quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 Words disconnected from life experience cloud. What he said, Sparky. To be honest, I have serious doubts that you or Heavenskeeper have any vague conception of how IE or how other M/S relationships that follow this line of thinking operate or have any vague conception of what the website your so zealously "discussing" is really trying to communicate. Why? Lack of context. The definition your argueing against isn't promoting some social code or universal set of rules of how M/S relationships should operate. It's not advocating people not being realeased from abusive relationships. It's not talking about forcing people to stay in those relationships through external means like the endless examples in this thread. It's about Internal Enslavement, an emotional and psycholgical state that compells the slave to keep herself in the relationship and as such, the definition is defining that emotional and psychological experience and not some great M/S divine law that says all slaves can never ever leave their relationships. They aren't advocating abuse, "brainwashing", or ruthless psychological tactics, so why keep acting like they are? It's not about turning people into mindless, broken zombies and those results can't really be achieved by what they suggest when you think about realisticlly. Sure, those relationships are out there and I am certain they masquerade as these kind of relationships as Alumandro pointed out, but they aren't the same thing so why focus on them as if they are the end all and be all of how IE works? Everyone I have ever met, both offline and online have articulated it to me as an emotional bond of Interdependacy and the formation of a psychological identity. I hope maybe one day you get to experience that bond, because I have in a mild fashion and it's quite a poignant and beautiful experience and not something weak, abusive, or pathetically dependant.

barelynangel -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 7:04:02 PM)
quote: compells My favorite saying -- His will is such i can only be what naturally compels me. There is no greater pleasure for me as a woman to be able to simply be a woman to a Man, who is compelled by him to be exactly what i am supposed to be because of who he himself is -- simply a Man who has choosen and achieved how i, a slave, will exist in his life. His will is such i can only be what naturally compels me.

WhiteFox77 -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 7:17:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 Words disconnected from life experience cloud. Words connected to life experience illuminate. If you want to write a philosophy paper, go to college. If you want to post here without being called a bullshit artist, describe which IE relationships you have seen or been in, and how they are similar or different from that web site or others. THANK YOU!!! I've been waiting for someone to ask me to do exactly that for the last page and a half worth of posts. Although in reality I think it probably belongs under a different topic. Actually, as has been pointed out, my currently relationship is very smiler to how most people would describe IE (although definitely not is it is described on the site in question). The biggest difference in how I see IE V.S. what is on that site is that it is not about a bond between master and slave due the the master having complete knowledge of their slave, then using that knowledge to create an environment where the slave becomes mentally/emotionally incapable of leaving. As people have said several times, the relationship is about the bond between the slave and the environment the master creates. It is about the feelings of trust, safety and the ability to grow as a person that such an environment creates for the submissive. Although I believe for most people having someone create such an environment for you would likely cause you to build strong emotional ties to that person. Another thing I'd like to point out is that the methods depicted on that site are completely full of BS. Just as each subs needs and personality are different, creating the ideal enviornment to fulfill their needs and make them feel safe are different. Completely stipping away all control of time and privacy to make a person trust you and feel safe is a lot like looking for dinasore bones with a pick-axe. It'll definatly get the dirt out of the way, but it's also likely to damage the fragile fossels underneith. A more delicate and subtle method of getting your slave to completely open up to you is likely to give you more satisfactory results, and be a lot less tromitizing to your slave. Also, if the environment was NOT maintained, I don't see that the submissive would be likely to remain feeling fulfilled. And as the feelings of trust, safety and fulfillment went away, I believe the "enslavement" would also end. So, in the end the idea that in an IE relationship the slave should be incapable of leaving on their own is still a load of BS. I can't see that it could ever be accomplished without conditioning the slave in ways that would be damaging to their psychie instead of supportive of it. So I still think the site that was asked about in the first post is full of BS, and I think attempting to use it's description of IE and methods as your goal is potentially very destructive. But I see other methods of practicing IE as being potentially very fulfilling to the slave. Another aspect of this is the growth of the slave. If the slaves need for this kind of relationship is rooted in feelings of insecurity and the master has properly created an environment where the slave can grow as a person, then it is possible that at some future point the slave may wish to end their slavery simply because they have changed in such a way that they want to find out what life is like without the safety net of always having their master there to take care of them. quote: ORIGINAL: barelynangel quote: compells My favorite saying -- His will is such i can only be what naturally compels me. There is no greater pleasure for me as a woman to be able to simply be a woman to a Man, who is compelled by him to be exactly what i am supposed to be because of who he himself is -- simply a Man who has choosen and achieved how i, a slave, will exist in his life. His will is such i can only be what naturally compels me. A master using his power and authority over a slave to help/force her to live up to her fullest potential is a wonderful thing. But after reading the entire FAQ, and all the essays on the site, I don't beleive that is what this: http://www.enslavement.org.uk/ site is recommending.

RedMagic1 -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 7:42:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhiteFox77 I've been waiting for someone to ask me to do exactly that for the last page and a half worth of posts. I stopped reading here, because you appear to be connected only loosely to reality. People have been insisting you deal in the real world for several pages now. I don't know what message board you're used to, but the people I have learned the most from on this site do not have much formal education, and are "not good with words" -- but they understand that life experience is more important than legalistic argumentation. If you want me to read your posts in future, you will need to keep the sophistry in your pocket, and deal with the hard reality of human emotions as observed by you in your own life. I also have found that the people who type the most words usually have the least to say.

CruelDesires -> RE: Internal Enslavement (7/24/2008 7:44:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado Classic cultspeak.. thanks for the example. Come with me and worship the head of lettuce named Ralph. [:)] CD

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

5.078125E-02