Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Slave Tendencies?


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

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Slave Tendencies? Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/22/2005 6:53:10 PM   
fyreredsub


Posts: 3403
Joined: 10/7/2005
Status: offline 		all are limits and Master has a few others as well. that is where combatability comes into being,lol. You find someone whose limits you can live with. Now Master knows I had many before entering our dynamic.However, they are gone now whether i like it or not. some i'm sure i will come to enjoy,some i may have to beg the whip instead(if allowed the option,wil cross this bridge eventually), some i will do b/c it brings him his pleasure. it was a choice i made when i said YES MASTER. point being, i gave up the right to have my way, when i became his.yes i can break my vow and leave,if i dont like it but i won't b/c that is just who i am.

< Message edited by fyreredsub -- 11/22/2005 6:57:46 PM >

_____________________________

"Accordingly, men must then either fulfill their nature, or deny it, and in denying their nature, deny us ours, for ours is the complement to theirs. " Renegades

(in reply to Rover)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/22/2005 6:54:17 PM   
Englishrogue


Posts: 11
Joined: 11/20/2005
Status: offline 		Can never stay away from these two topics. "No limits" and "slave or submissive"

On the no limits front, I am forced to agree with Rover. No wanting to rain on anyones parade or shatter illusions, but unless you are psychopathic, you have limits - if you are a very lucky individual, you have met a Dominant who you trust absolutely. Who you believe holds dear the moral fiber that you believe in too. One who is creative enough to push your perception and test your submission because he knows your limits and your strength. You trust him not to harm you.

A no limit slave would take "I wish he was dead", and offer to do the deed. And if was told "Yes", would carry it out without question.
There may very well be some out there who would, but I refer you to my first statement on that.

Perhaps placing full trust in your Master until he violated something you hold as imutable... Would be something I could respect as a No-limit slave, but even then... the limits are still there, you're just trusting that your Master/Mistress would never do something or require something so vile of you. A fairly reasonable expectation perhaps, except for that 1 in a million psychopath who's managed to talk his way into your heart.

So I must concur with Rover on his standpoint. Would be glad to hear any rebuttals.

As for labelling slave or submissive... labels are just a fast food generation way of getting to know someone - not all slaves are alike and seek/need/desire the same things... just as submissives are. It does indicate a desire for deep submission, but without communicating needs and desires, taking only a label as your judgement of someone is inherrently foolhardy. In some instances (Hopefully excluding all present company) the slave vs sub label is there for superiority. Something I find unnecessary and trite. Just as describing myself as Dominant or Top would adequately indicate the role I believe I play... calling myself a Master is just arrogant, and would only be for the purpose of attempting to appear "better". (Whats next, UberMaster? SuperDom? WonderTop?)

slave vs submissive labelling is a lot less harmless. And, for sure, "slave" sounds far sexier than "deeply submissive". You are what you are, and cannot easily be labelled, especially not by one word, but ultimately, you're just you to most people. This question comes up enough that I dont believe anyone except for you knows for sure what it means, anyway. So why waste your time defending it... defend your beliefs, of course you should! But don't waste energy defending your interpretation of a label.

Peace :)

Rogue

(in reply to LordODiscipline)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/22/2005 7:06:18 PM   
OsideGirl


Posts: 14441
Joined: 7/1/2005
From: United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Theslavetrainer

quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

It means the person has little to no real life experience and wants to believe that they're a slave because they read in a chat room that slaves have deper submission and more trust than a submissive and that slaves are better.


That was a rather narrow minded view, oside. Kind of like this one as well:

quote:

2. Based upon meaningless platitudes like "slaves have no rights, no limits" that are always proven false factually (though may continue as an enjoyable fantasy).

There are people that live as no limit slaves. Some become this way over time. As the trust grows between the Master and the slave, limits begine to fall away or in line with one another. My first slave has no limits with me, we've been together for over a year now. She also knows that I have certain dark places in my soul that I won't take her to like scat, waterspoarts and furry animals. Just because you don't believe it happens or have never seen it, does not mean it's not true.


Well, actually, I live this very lifestyle as a submissive. For the record she said "people that describe themselves as having 'slave tendencies'", which is not the same as someone living as a slave.


As I've said numerous times....when I came into the realm of D/s BDSM there were no distinctions between being a sub or being a slave unless you were Gorean or within certain structured societies. In some societies, a submissive was the more desirable title as it included more training and submission. Somewhere along the line someone decided that slaves submit more and have more trust and everyone else bought it. I don't buy it and I don't have to agree.

I've done loads of studying, been in the realm for more than a decade, based my views on what I see and live, if that makes me narrow minded, so be it. But, if you're not equally narrow minded, how do you explain that I fit your description of being a slave, when I'm a submissive?

_____________________________

Give a girl the right shoes and she will conquer the world. ~ Marilyn Monroe

The Accelerated Velocity of Terminological Inexactitude

(in reply to Theslavetrainer)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/22/2005 8:19:44 PM   
anopheles


Posts: 241
Joined: 6/23/2005
Status: offline 		This thread has taken a most interesting turn, and the opinions offered are very insightful into what makes Dominants and submissives "tick".

Many thanks.


Rogue: I am very much in agreement with you. Particularly on the "labels" aspect.

It seems to be a a very fluid and fine line between differentiating between a slave and a submissive, or is there really any reason to differentiate between the two at all? After quite a bit of thought, taking my own RL life for example, my Luvdragon is a mixture of both, I suppose. She is submissive to my wishes and my desires, but she will slave away to fufill them. She doesn't give in to my every whim, because she knows full well when something will be detrimental and when it won't, and she is allowed and encouraged to do so. I don't think she's any less of a slave or submissive because of it, because when she knows it's for the good of US, then she'll work her little fingers to the bone to make sure that it happens, and that it makes me happy.


--Anopheles

_____________________________

You've got me so high, my shoes are scraping the sky -- for my Luvdragon

(in reply to OsideGirl)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/22/2005 9:51:58 PM   
veronicaofML


Posts: 1317
Joined: 11/19/2005
From: from iowa..now in wisconsin
Status: offline 		but but but.......

tendencies?

ho'kay...here we go........
slave to one and sub to one may NOT be the SAME to another so "I" have difficulty even discussing this.
i have been in more fights over this than i cared for.

but hey.......whatever works..........go for it.


_____________________________

drugs sex and rock n roll,...drugs are good and so is the rock n roll, sex is over rated"
=============
"go straight to hell, do not pass go and do not collect $200"



(in reply to fyreredsub)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/23/2005 6:23:16 AM   
darkinshadows


Posts: 4145
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rover

Ok, let me simplify this whole issue. Please reply with a yes or no to the following questions:

Is death a limit for you?

Is dismemberment a limit for you?

Is bank robbery a limit for you?

Are activities that violate the TOS (don't wanna list them and get in trouble) a limit for you?

Are ANY of these limits relative to who your Master is?

Either you have those limits or you don't. I don't understand all the fuss in admitting reality.

John


Anything that is non consensual on any party is not what limits are about.
Limits are consensual acts. Lets get this in context and REALITY within BDSM. Anything that is NON CONSENSUAL is wrong - pure and simple. That's not a moral point of view, or a legal point of view it's just commen sense.
It does not matter about the legality but whether they are consensual.
Bank Robbery, TOS violation etc... are NOT CONSENSUAL ACTS. Death in some cases, is also non Consent.

Otherwise, all other things mentioned on the list, within a consensual context are limits.
So, I have none.

Simple, really.

Peace and Love

_____________________________
.dark.



...i surrender to gravity and the unknown...

(in reply to Rover)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/23/2005 6:42:39 AM   
Rover


Posts: 2634
Joined: 6/28/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: darkangel

Anything that is non consensual on any party is not what limits are about.
Limits are consensual acts.


Would you mind taking a few moments to explain this, and to cite any reference material that would support such a claim? It is confusing, at best. Thanking you in advance.

John

(in reply to darkinshadows)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/23/2005 7:32:33 AM   
Englishrogue


Posts: 11
Joined: 11/20/2005
Status: offline 		Pardon me Angel,

But surely a limit by its nature indicates non-consent, does it not?

I believe I am beginning to understand your position, but some of the absolutes are still clouding my interpretation.

If your thoughts are: "As long as it falls within the boundaries of Safe Sane and Consensual play, or better yet Risk Aware Consensual Kink, I will not limit my Master's desire to play in those boundaries" - I understand, and it certainly is easier to say "No-limit" than that mouthful. The limits are still there, but are placed within the care and keeping of your Dominant/Master/Mistress/Top.

Is that a reasonable compromise? Or is there more to it than that?

Finally, one of Rovers earlier points was about the dangers of newcomers seeing the allure of "No limit slavery" and potentially walking into a disaster. I still feel this is very valid, while at the same time having a great amount of admiration for all those in a healthy relationship they can surrender to and be surrendered to with such depth and trust :)

Best

Rogue


(in reply to Rover)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/23/2005 8:13:52 AM   
Patrick2005


Posts: 19
Joined: 1/27/2005
Status: offline 		Whenever we mention "limits vs. no limits" or "slave vs. sub", we always venture into the semantic morass that seems so prevalent in the bdsm world. For the sake of clarity and better understanding, I wish everyone would stick as closely as possible to the vanilla (meaning real world, rather than our fantasy world) meanings of words and concepts. That way most people understand what we mean.

For expample, slavery and submissive don't relate- they are very different concepts. Some slaves are very submissive; others not submissive at all. There are slaves who have limits, and even a few submissives who don't. A progression from submission to slavery would be like a cat progressing to a dog, or an apple to an orange.

As to the subject of limits; I think the common definition is that a limit is something you wouldn't do, even if your dom/master/owner commanded it. For many years, I didn't believe that no limits subs or slaves existed, and I argued that point often. I finally met one, though. She is a totally spooky individual who would be institutionalized if she wasn't under the control of her master. No morals, no judgement, no common sense- if master tells her to cut off two fingers, then her typing style is gonna change right away. The only reason I'm alive today is because her master never told her to kill me. She took pride in this status, too.

So they really do exist, but they are, fortunately, very rare. As to the others; our self-image is very important to us. I can understand why people wish to think of themselves as having no limits, and we shouldn't be critical of them for doing so.

Nor should they be critical of us for thinking they live in a fantasy world.

(in reply to Englishrogue)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/23/2005 8:15:10 AM   
starshineowned


Posts: 1551
Joined: 4/19/2005
From: Texas
Status: offline 		Is is safer to say and maybe more acceptable to say: We all have limits of something and to varying degree's in Life..no human being is limitless yet not all human beings have limits in every aspect/facet of their lives. So in the aspect/facet context of persons bdsm portion..some will have limits to varying degree's while some will not?


"dangers of newcomers seeing the allure of "No limit slavery"...

While I understand and accept this ideal..to me this ideal is over all "less" harmful to newcomers than is opening up the aspect/facets of all area's of Life in general, and including and accepting them as mainstream within the aspect/facet context of persons bdsm portion.


starshine
Happy slave of Master Delvin

(in reply to Englishrogue)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/23/2005 8:21:30 AM   
Rover


Posts: 2634
Joined: 6/28/2004
Status: offline
quote:

For many years, I didn't believe that no limits subs or slaves existed, and I argued that point often. I finally met one, though. She is a totally spooky individual who would be institutionalized if she wasn't under the control of her master.


And that has been my point all along. Anyone without limits (whether they self-identify as Dominant or Master, slave or submissive, vanilla or martian) needs the attention of a mental health professional. Even in the example used, unless her Master is a mental health professional himself, he should not be "treating" or "managing" her mental health disease.

The lifestyle is not therapy, and amatuers are not professionals.

John

(in reply to Patrick2005)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/23/2005 8:30:13 AM   
Rover


Posts: 2634
Joined: 6/28/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Is is safer to say and maybe more acceptable to say: We all have limits of something and to varying degree's in Life..no human being is limitless yet not all human beings have limits in every aspect/facet of their lives.


Perhaps we are headed towards some mutual understanding here. And yes, it is FAR more acceptable (and accurate) to say exactly that.

Can you list (specifically) what limits (even one or two) you have that are yours alone (and not prone to change should you find yourself with a new Master who may not have the same "limits" as your current Master)? I think that would be exceptionally helpful.

John

(in reply to starshineowned)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/23/2005 9:02:14 AM   
darkinshadows


Posts: 4145
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: UK
Status: offline

This answers Rover as well.

The fact is, that I - and this is a personal thing - I don't see any reason to count any non consensual activity as a limit. Limits are things that exist that are contained within or outside. Look it up. It is a confinement. If something doesn't exist within a confinement - then it isnt part of the process.

I agree completely that usage of the limit/no limit description for newcomers is confusing. Personally, I don't use it at all - unless it's answering a question like it is put forward. Personally I think its a crass over-exagerated usage which in its very meaning is too restricting. Its an over romantic idea that is used to make people feel better. If it works for them, then fine. Misrepresentation is all over the place and it always happens. People always act like this is a community. It isn't. BDSM is about individuality and unique desires. It's fun to meet up and chat and find partners, but its not a community. Community implies that everyone agrees and follows certain rules but the reality is that BDSM has no rules. No limitations within the context of consensuality. It is limitless - it has no boundries... no walls save those that individual relationships place around them to secure their desires.

So when someone asks if I have limits - then the answer is no - within my boundaries.

I am actually astounded that people feel they have to say - I dont do... (unmentionables).... or this, that and the other. Why do people do it. Because thats what is expected. It makes people look and seem decent to the world. I don't want to be what others think - if I did I wouldn't be interested in BDSM. If I cared that much about being accepted, or being subjected to others ideals, a sheep, a herd animal, then I wouldn't be here - the person I am - which is all that He has made, moulded.

People are so concerned about protecting the innocent... sheilding the newcomers - we ALL make mistakes. It happens. But we learn from them. If we can't make mistakes, learn these lessons then we never will learn, evolve and progress... we would stagnate in the perceptions of others. Individuals must learn to be responsible for themselves. Submission is worthless without that ability. We shouldn't nanny people - this isnt a nanny state... its a individual exploration in finding out what we are, what we are capable of and who we can be.

Peace and Rapture

_____________________________
.dark.



...i surrender to gravity and the unknown...

(in reply to Englishrogue)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/23/2005 9:18:58 AM   
Rover


Posts: 2634
Joined: 6/28/2004
Status: offline 		No disrespect intended, but I'm more confused now that you've "clarified" things. Perhaps you could direct me to some "deviant's dictionary" that you're relying upon for this definition that might explain it in simple terms that my limited mind can understand. Smart people sometimes talk over my head.

John

(in reply to darkinshadows)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/23/2005 9:23:14 AM   
darkinshadows


Posts: 4145
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: UK
Status: offline
quote:

Pardon me Angel,

But surely a limit by its nature indicates non-consent, does it not?


If You place a limit as not passing consent, then yes. Which is why I am a no limit person. If a limit indicates non consent, then I do nothing that is not consensual. Therefore - I am no limits.

Its when the perception is that a limit indicates something that is possible. That's where the confusion lies, thats where people mess up fact with fiction.

Non consent is abuse. Abuse isn't beating or hitting or whipping or locking in a cage. Abuse by its very definition is to do wrongly. And abuse in BDSM and outside it, is wrong.

People are taking words from everyday language and placing them within BDSM and trying to use them when they actually do not mean what they are supposed to. Consensual non-consent, limitations, submissive, slave... the words go on... Newcomers can't be protected unless someone decides to release a definitive BDSM Dictionary - and until they realise that communication is paramount and everyone defines things differently.

People are asking for conformity from a section of people who don't want to conform. If they wanted to conform, they wouldn't be practising that which is outside the normalities of conformity.

Peace and Love

_____________________________
.dark.



...i surrender to gravity and the unknown...

(in reply to Englishrogue)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/23/2005 9:35:27 AM   
starshineowned


Posts: 1551
Joined: 4/19/2005
From: Texas
Status: offline
quote:

Can you list (specifically) what limits (even one or two) you have that are yours alone (and not prone to change should you find yourself with a new Master who may not have the same "limits" as your current Master)? I think that would be exceptionally helpful.


I could if you specified what aspect of Life you were looking for a list of limits in. Physical?
Parenting? Work? The world around me? The vcr? What people say or think? Stopping acid rain? Getting cavity's despite aggressive oral hygiene? Limits in life occur naturally because there is no ultimate control of anything. You can even change the entire context of "limit" by stating it as: you can limit your chances of a heart attack by proper diet, exercise, stress reduction etc. . What then becomes of this term as in this usage form it completely makes using it as a "stop" "barn burner" "no can do" useless.

The entire point of stating anything thus far that I have regarding the use of the term "no limit" was merely to point out that it is now being used within the aspect/facet of persons ideals of bdsm. Not that it was right, wrong, or indifferent as it is not my place to tell persons how they should talk or perceive certain terms. It is prevalent enough now to acknowledge it's use, and as I also stated before, probably wise to just ask a person what exactly they mean when they say they have "no limits".

In life I have many limits in varying degree's in many facets. If you want to take bdsm..

bondage?..I have no limits known to me at this point in time except the one's that my Owner has, Inwhich I'm probably not privey to all of those as there just isn't a need for that information. I am safe and trust in his choices.

In discipline?..I have no limits of my own known to me at this time. I have the limits of my Owner as to how, what, when, where he will or won't, may or may not implement this upon me over the course of our lives.

In sadism?..I am not a sadist therefore can not state I have limits in this area of my own.

In masochism?..I am not a masochist therefore can not state I have limits in this area of my own.

sadistic acts upon me?..As of yet..what has been imposed upon me by my Owner has not resulted in "me" having a limit to make something stop..but rather limited by my Owner and his decisions as to what, and how much of something his property can take or will take.

So in the context of bdsm and it's conception of what the acronym stood for at time of coinage..I believe it was darkangel that stated there is no Dominant, submissive, Master, slave. Along the way persons just thought up to include these nifty terms to better illustrate their personal storys, understandings, ideals, take on what life is for them.

And in referrence to your posting on adding "books" on this as factual reality because you can see it, and feel it?..The book itself yes is reality. You say book, I look, I concur..that is a book. As for the words in that book?..Thats subject to debate. Opinions/point of views are subjective, open to interpretation on any and all levels of cognitive thought, and can not nor will it/they ever be in agreement by all of humanity.

starshine
Happy slave of Master Delvin

(in reply to Rover)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/23/2005 9:36:08 AM   
darkinshadows


Posts: 4145
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: UK
Status: offline
LoL Rover... I don't use a deviants dictionary... and I am not that smart. However, I am a word whore...

Pick up any dictionary and read the definitions.

The point, edge, or line beyond which something cannot or may not proceed.
limits The boundary surrounding a specific area; bounds: within the city limits.
A confining or restricting object, agent, or influence.
To confine or restrict within a boundary or bounds.
To fix definitely; to specify.
the greatest amount, number or level of something that is either possible or allowed:
A determined feature
something that bounds, restrains, or confines
a prescribed maximum or minimum amount, quantity, or number:
set or serve

From the latin - limes - boundary.

Then see above post - limit is a misused word. Doubt that it will change. Which is why I never claim its usage unless I am asked (Like now)... But my limitlessness is based on the word anyways.

Peace and Love

_____________________________
.dark.



...i surrender to gravity and the unknown...

(in reply to Rover)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/23/2005 9:42:43 AM   
Rover


Posts: 2634
Joined: 6/28/2004
Status: offline 		Ok, what you have eloquently stated is that you have not discovered limits because your Master has not been overly sadistic, or pushed you in any direction (physical, mental, moral) that you refuse to go. Great, sounds like a very compatible relationship (no, it does not sound like the absence of limits).

As for "books"... who mentioned them? I did not. Perhaps you're confusing me with someone else, or arguing a point not made? Or simply got it wrong?

John

(in reply to starshineowned)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/23/2005 9:53:15 AM   
LordODiscipline


Posts: 995
Joined: 6/28/2004
Status: offline 		~I am a bit confused - - - -

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkangel
The fact is, that I - and this is a personal thing - I don't see any reason to count any non consensual activity as a limit.


~But, do you have limits - or (as mentioned) are death and dismemberment things which are within the context of your relational allowances?

quote:

Limits are things that exist that are contained within or outside.

~I do not understand this - please, elaborate.

quote:

Look it up. It is a confinement. If something doesn't exist within a confinement - then it isnt part of the process.


~Please tell us what you are referring to as a 'confinement' - I believethe dictionary definition you utilized to discuss this with is speaking about restrictive walls (physical) - and, this is not a great metaphor for "limits'; within BDSM relationships/play - as "Limits" are not necessarily confining for the person who has them, as they are a manifest of protection from overt or inadvertant harm and are utilized as both a negoitiating tool and as a means of self-assurance.

~Confinement - to me - denotes something that is restrictive and inhibiting... and, although Limits can be (and, sometimes are) this, they are also a basic means of ensuring understanding between two parties.
quote:

I agree completely that usage of the limit/no limit description for newcomers is confusing. Personally, I don't use it at all - unless it's answering a question like it is put forward. Personally I think its a crass over-exagerated usage which in its very meaning is too restricting. Its an over romantic idea that is used to make people feel better. If it works for them, then fine. Misrepresentation is all over the place and it always happens.


~I agree.

quote:

People always act like this is a community. It isn't.


~I disagree - perhaps you do not belong to a local group, to an organizatio on a regional or national scale - but, you do belong (and, post frequesntly) to this group.. as such it is a defacto (yet, cyber) community in which you are a member.

quote:

BDSM is about individuality and unique desires.


~It is on a personal level.

quote:

It's fun to meet up and chat and find partners, but its not a community.


~I do not agree.

quote:

Community implies that everyone agrees and follows certain rules but the reality is that BDSM has no rules.


~Well - we have the basic rules that humanity has enforced for eons - SSC and RACK are simply reflections on a micro-sociological level of the "Golden Rule" - and, that is the basis for most laws that are in place in the countries of the world.

~So, we do have standards... we do disavow people who violate them.. and, this is a rather narrow view of 'who we are' that you are presenting.
quote:

No limitations within the context of consensuality. It is limitless - it has no boundries... no walls save those that individual relationships place around them to secure their desires.


~This is akin to saying: 'I can go anywhere within the walls of this prison, so I am a free man'. It is rather a reverse logic.

quote:

So when someone asks if I have limits - then the answer is no - within my boundaries.


~So - what you are saying is: the answer is 'yes' in the context of the community at large. Which is where such a question is poised.

quote:

I am actually astounded that people feel they have to say - I dont do... (unmentionables).... or this, that and the other. Why do people do it.


~Becaues they want to ensure that others understand where they are in their life relative to WIITWD.

quote:

Because thats what is expected.


~Because they are often asked.

quote:

It makes people look and seem decent to the world.


~So - posting generic limits is posturing/preening for effect? Wow.

quote:

I don't want to be what others think - if I did I wouldn't be interested in BDSM.


~I agree with you here.... but, at the same time... I recoignize that my basic morality (which is shared by many - hence another assertion for 'community') is sincerely circumspect when I first go to a new group... people do not only desire to know - they need to know that the person they just admitted into their presence is someone they might welcome- or, someone they should shun - and, there are those amongst us.

quote:

If I cared that much about being accepted, or being subjected to others ideals, a sheep, a herd animal, then I wouldn't be here - the person I am - which is all that He has made, moulded.


~Good. I am glad you are glad - sincerely.

quote:

People are so concerned about protecting the innocent... sheilding the newcomers - we ALL make mistakes. It happens.


~So - the ethos here, is: "Screw um all... they will learn when they make the same mistakes I did"?

quote:

But we learn from them. If we can't make mistakes, learn these lessons then we never will learn, evolve and progress...


~I agree - and, I am not speaking about being co-dependant and hindering personal development and/or growth - I am referring to doing someone a decent turn and allowing them to be aware of some very basic and essential things. I would do that for the local mongrel - why not for someone who is cognizant of a life.

quote:

we would stagnate in the perceptions of others. Individuals must learn to be responsible for themselves.


~I completely agree here.

quote:

Submission is worthless without that ability.


~Well - not "worthless' in my estimation - just not worth as much.

quote:

We shouldn't nanny people - this isnt a nanny state...


~You are in England - aren't you? ;)

quote:

its a individual exploration in finding out what we are, what we are capable of and who we can be.


~I agree with that - but, then so is childhood - and, they saw fit to provide us with schools and those dreaded parental things that hung over us and goaded us into the right course of action.....

Interesting read - thank you.
~J

(in reply to darkinshadows)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: Slave Tendencies? - 11/23/2005 10:13:28 AM   
Rover


Posts: 2634
Joined: 6/28/2004
Status: offline 		Seriously, are you just taking an adversarial stance because you think that you should (and perhaps have some animosity towards me), or do you really not understand what you have read (and posted here for us all to see)?

Either way, that's your issue. Hope you work it out.

John

(in reply to darkinshadows)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Slave Tendencies? Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125