Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics


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

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master >> RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics - 9/26/2008 12:37:17 PM   
FRSguy


Posts: 653
Joined: 9/4/2007
Status: offline 		Yeah your right and thanks for pointing that out to me..LOL.  I compleatly appologise as it is a personal issues leaking out right now.  Where I work for some reason there is a rash of divorces going on from the woman so we have to hear there personal shit all day. They are vanilla of course... but they speak like slaves...LOL  if that makes any sense.

(in reply to NihilusZero)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics - 9/26/2008 1:26:52 PM   
Hekatonkheires


Posts: 18
Joined: 9/18/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sravaka

Hello, all.  I've been enjoying reading the discussions here for a while but this is the first time I'm venturing to post.  Please don't hurt me.

I have two big fuzzy questions I've been puzzling over for a long time, and thought I'd post them and see what happens. 

1)  Do dominants empathize with submissives?  Or do they merely understand submissives well enough to know which buttons to push to get a particular/desired reaction?  For my part, I know very well that while I might understand dominants intellectually, I cannot remotely empathize with them--  their view of things is entirely foreign to me.  If empathy is not part of the equation, what distinguishes dominants from more or less enlightened sociopaths?  I think the answer hinges on the next question. (your mileage may vary.)

2)  I realize we all define dominant, submissive, master, slave, and numerous other terms in wildly divergent ways....  but I wonder:  how/where does ethics figure in your definition of dominance?  Not necessarily for yourself; just in general.  In other words, is "do no harm," e.g., part and parcel of being a dominant?  Or does dominance precede "do no harm" and need to be restrained accordingly?

--sravaka





I haven't read the rest of the replies to your fascinating questions, sravaka, to know whether anyone else has already offered a response similar to mine. Speaking for myself, though, it is precisely because I can and do emphasize with my sub that she relinquishes power to me. Without digging deep into the semantics of the term 'empathy,' your context implies some level of understanding for their purpose or action.

Purpose is a keyword, and no doubt someone has already addressed the 'to each their own/no right or wrong way' doctrine. Some Doms exercise their authority for the pure pleasure of it, and their subs welcome that relationship (although strictly speaking, I classify that as Master/slave, not just Dom/sub). Others, like myself, entwine the dynamic with other aspects of our lives, for the purpose of enriching all of the aspects, and for each of us to realize those benefits. I accept and (eagerly) exercise the power granted to me with the knowledge my sub wants me to, and she trusts me to guide her forward.

Perhaps we're all achieving the same end result, just through different means. And if you pose the question while considering a relationship, your takeaway would be to find one compatible with your perspective - purpose, service, or otherwise.

Regarding ethics: 'do no harm' applies to healthcare, yes, but does it apply to relationships? That angle begs the question (no pun intended) to define 'harm.' Which, by popular perception, is the purpose for 'limits;' that is, to define and agree to acceptable harm. (Again, Master/slave commonly lacks any conditions such as limits. It's Master's way, or the highway.)

(in reply to sravaka)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics - 9/26/2008 1:56:56 PM   
antipode


Posts: 1787
Joined: 4/19/2004
Status: offline 		Generic, and "in general" questions get you little but useless answers.. I am actually surprised that if you've lurked around here for a while, you can still think there's such a thing as a "generic dominant". ???

(in reply to sravaka)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics - 9/26/2008 2:39:03 PM   
MadRabbit


Posts: 3460
Joined: 8/9/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

It is, perhaps, one of the hardest lessons of leadership to be able to extend yourself emotionally to another person that you will be required to discipline.  For that very reason, old school leadership books routinely suggested not allowing yourself to get close to those you lead.  That sort of thinking has pretty much gone the way of the dinosaur nowadays.  The bottom line is NOBODY is going to follow their leader through the proverbial gates of hell when they perceive that leader as cold, aloof, and disconnected from them and their problems.


What he said.

There is different levels of human understanding, connection and relation.

Can I understand why a submissive woman does what she does on an empathetical level? Nope, not at all. I have absolutely no idea of what the metaphysical experience of being submissive is like for her. I can understand it on intellectual level, but if you ask me to give you an analytical description of what the experience of "submission" feels like, I couldn't do it.

But the "Me Dominant, you submissive" part of it is only one small piece of the totality of the human experience. There is still a large amount of ground we can connect on simply because we are both "people" who have the same shared experiences of a wide variety of human emotions, problems, and issues.

Being able to connect and relate with a person on those levels is far more important being able to empathize with how a spanking feels while bent over a kneel or how being commanded feels.

And to be honest, as long as you have that intellectual understanding of submission, that's all you really need. I don't need to have that empathetical knowledge of submission to be a good dominant anymore than I need to know what it feels like to have a cock in a vagina to be a good male lover.





_____________________________

Advice for New Dominants
The Unpolitically Correct Lifestyle Definitions

Obama is NOT the Messiah! He's just a VERY NAUGHTY BOY

(in reply to leadership527)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics - 9/26/2008 3:01:35 PM   
djaleksandr


Posts: 203
Joined: 3/10/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero

quote:

ORIGINAL: FRSguy
I think when it comes to ethics I would be more to say that it is unethical for a man to be such a panzy ass whimp that he cant meet the challenges for being the head of a household and supporting the woman that make so many sacrafices to make life barable.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FRSguy
In this respect I find submisives / slaves to be incredibly dignifying and deserving of our care, integrity as well as humility in there defense.

Just not the male submissives, eh?



Amen.

And what of women? Is there no "ethical code" for women being the head of the household? It is default that a man should have to be the head of the household, and he is "unethical" and a "pansy ass wimp" if he doesn't? Is it the woman who should always have to make the sacrifices? Or are you saying it is the "submissive," and just replacing "submissive" with "woman"? Who says that a dominant doesn't make their own sacrifices?


< Message edited by djaleksandr -- 9/26/2008 3:03:01 PM >

_____________________________

'is simplicity best, or simply the easiest?
the narrowest path is always the holiest.
so walk on barefoot for me,
suffer some misery,
if you want my love.'
[ depechemode judas ]

(in reply to NihilusZero)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics - 9/26/2008 3:19:32 PM   
tweedydaddy


Posts: 673
Joined: 9/1/2008
Status: offline 		Ethics in BDSM are summed up in three classic words, safe, sane and consensual, anything else in unethical.
Of course Doms can empathise with subs, why else would we be Doms?
If we didn't know what you needed, we wouldn't be here. Would we? LadyLove

(in reply to sravaka)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics - 9/26/2008 4:28:49 PM   
CallaFirestormBW


Posts: 3651
Joined: 6/29/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sravaka

Hello, all.  I've been enjoying reading the discussions here for a while but this is the first time I'm venturing to post.  Please don't hurt me.

I have two big fuzzy questions I've been puzzling over for a long time, and thought I'd post them and see what happens. 

1)  Do dominants empathize with submissives?  Or do they merely understand submissives well enough to know which buttons to push to get a particular/desired reaction?  For my part, I know very well that while I might understand dominants intellectually, I cannot remotely empathize with them--  their view of things is entirely foreign to me.  If empathy is not part of the equation, what distinguishes dominants from more or less enlightened sociopaths?  I think the answer hinges on the next question. (your mileage may vary.)

2)  I realize we all define dominant, submissive, master, slave, and numerous other terms in wildly divergent ways....  but I wonder:  how/where does ethics figure in your definition of dominance?  Not necessarily for yourself; just in general.  In other words, is "do no harm," e.g., part and parcel of being a dominant?  Or does dominance precede "do no harm" and need to be restrained accordingly?

--sravaka


Interesting questions. I've been on both sides of the collar, but even when I was in submission earning my crop, I don't think I empathized with the other s-types around me. I think that I could sympathize with some of their issues and responses, but I don't think I'm capable of 'walking a mile in their shoes', so to speak, because I have gone (and would always go) into that space as a dominant personality compelled to serve, rather than submitting. It is one of the things that made the demands of the House that trained me so much more challenging for me than it would seem they would have been...because even when I yielded on the outside, I was still pushing up against the boundaries on the inside. I -do- know people, though, and while I may not be able to empathize, I can certainly intuit how a certain action or input on my part will effect a given response on the part of an s-type with whom I'm interacting.

Ethics are a key issue for me as a -person-, regardless of the side of the collar, but my ethical foundation does not -necessarily- require Primum Non Nocere (First, do no harm). Harm is such a subjective concept that it is virtually only identifiable after the fact by the individual who believes that xhe has been harmed, as such, it would be crippling to attempt to function as a leader/director if I were constantly trying to figure out whether so-and-so was going to perceive X command or X requirement or X action as "harmful". I do my best to be completely forthright about my intentions, to be honest about my background and my expectations, and to listen to input that might affect my decisions. To me, that comprises my ethical 'foundation', but 'harm', like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder, and getting hung up on trying to determine someone else's perception of my act... that's just way to convoluted to be able to be managed with any kind of integrity of self.

Calla Firestorm

< Message edited by CallaFirestormBW -- 9/26/2008 4:29:16 PM >

_____________________________

***
Said to me recently: "Look, I know you're the "voice of reason"... but dammit, I LIKE being unreasonable!!!!"

"Your mind is more interested in the challenge of becoming than the challenge of doing." Jon Benson, Bodybuilder/Trainer

(in reply to sravaka)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics - 9/26/2008 9:19:54 PM   
Jeptha


Posts: 780
Joined: 9/18/2008
From: Portland, Oregon
Status: offline
quote:

Hello, all. I've been enjoying reading the discussions here for a while but this is the first time I'm venturing to post. Please don't hurt me.

I have two big fuzzy questions I've been puzzling over for a long time, and thought I'd post them and see what happens.

1) Do dominants empathize with submissives? Or do they merely understand submissives well enough to know which buttons to push to get a particular/desired reaction? For my part, I know very well that while I might understand dominants intellectually, I cannot remotely empathize with them-- their view of things is entirely foreign to me.

This is hard for me to parse out, the distinction between empathy and "intellectually" knowing someone. The make-up of her being, and her essential experience, I can't really know, I suppose, but I do recognize it, and often sympathize, when I see obvious emotion (like sadness or pain or fear, but also happiness and pleasure).

quote:

If empathy is not part of the equation, what distinguishes dominants from more or less enlightened sociopaths?

Actually, sociopaths are sometimes empathetic: they know what you are feeling, but they just don't care, unless it somehow effects themselves in a very direct way.
A dom will care what his sub is experiencing (in my opinion, though it is always possible for people to opt for more extreme relationships where that might not be the case, I suppose), a sociopath is only concerned with what will serve their interests. A sociopath seems profoundly unable to care is a major difference.

quote:

I think the answer hinges on the next question. (your mileage may vary.)

2) I realize we all define dominant, submissive, master, slave, and numerous other terms in wildly divergent ways.... but I wonder: how/where does ethics figure in your definition of dominance? Not necessarily for yourself; just in general. In other words, is "do no harm," e.g., part and parcel of being a dominant? Or does dominance precede "do no harm" and need to be restrained accordingly?


I think "do no harm" is a good and relevant guideline. It works for me. It is possible that one day I could find myself in a relationship where we might consider opting for some other guideline, but it would be a mutual decision in that case. I haven't had that experience yet.
I do have some sadistic tendencies, and I rein them in. I recall going right up to the limit in using a riding crop once, in terms of how hard I struck. My partner instantly clung to my knees in an attitude of supplication and mercy-seeking. I responded immediately. I knew I had done no physical harm, really; it was her fear and trust that I wanted to address and honor, respectively.

(in reply to sravaka)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics - 9/26/2008 10:24:15 PM   
Ialdabaoth


Posts: 1073
Joined: 5/4/2008
From: Tempe, AZ
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sravaka

1)  Do dominants empathize with submissives?  Or do they merely understand submissives well enough to know which buttons to push to get a particular/desired reaction?  For my part, I know very well that while I might understand dominants intellectually, I cannot remotely empathize with them--  their view of things is entirely foreign to me.  If empathy is not part of the equation, what distinguishes dominants from more or less enlightened sociopaths?  I think the answer hinges on the next question. (your mileage may vary.)


I strive to empathize as much as I can with everyone. There are often specific desires that I do not share, but I can generally tell how strong those desires are, and can extrapolate that if they have them, they probably connect to their other desires and experiences in certain ways. And then I try to make the best of that for them. And sometimes, yes, we can choose to be "enlightened sociopaths".

2)  I realize we all define dominant, submissive, master, slave, and numerous other terms in wildly divergent ways....  but I wonder:  how/where does ethics figure in your definition of dominance?  Not necessarily for yourself; just in general.  In other words, is "do no harm," e.g., part and parcel of being a dominant?  Or does dominance precede "do no harm" and need to be restrained accordingly?

I wouldn't say "do no harm" is an inherent part of my ethics. I would say "maximize good as I understand it" is much closer. Sometimes harm has to be done in one area in order for help to occur in another. In that sense, I see myself ethically as much more of a surgeon than a physician. If that makes sense?

(in reply to sravaka)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics - 9/27/2008 10:22:13 AM   
DMFParadox


Posts: 1405
Joined: 9/11/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FRSguy

Yeah your right and thanks for pointing that out to me..LOL.  I compleatly appologise as it is a personal issues leaking out right now.  Where I work for some reason there is a rash of divorces going on from the woman so we have to hear there personal shit all day. They are vanilla of course... but they speak like slaves...LOL  if that makes any sense.


I call that a hunting ground. But be caaaaaarrreeful... pick the one that is least bitter about it all.

< Message edited by DMFParadox -- 9/27/2008 10:23:33 AM >

_____________________________

bloody hell, get me some aspirin and a whiskey straight

"The role of gender in society is the most complicated thing I’ve ever spent a lot of time learning about, and I’ve spent a lot of time learning about quantum mechanics." - Randall Munroe

(in reply to FRSguy)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics - 9/27/2008 4:13:17 PM   
KnightofMists


Posts: 7149
Joined: 7/29/2005
Status: offline 		I will answer question 2 first

quote:

ORIGINAL: sravaka

2)  I realize we all define dominant, submissive, master, slave, and numerous other terms in wildly divergent ways....  but I wonder:  how/where does ethics figure in your definition of dominance?  Not necessarily for yourself; just in general.  In other words, is "do no harm," e.g., part and parcel of being a dominant?  Or does dominance precede "do no harm" and need to be restrained accordingly?


In my view.. ethics are seperate from Dominance and submission.  One can be an Ethical Dominant as easily as another can be an Unethical Dominant.  This also applies to submission... an Ethical Submissive and the Unethical Submissive.

quote:

  1)  Do dominants empathize with submissives?  Or do they merely understand submissives well enough to know which buttons to push to get a particular/desired reaction?  For my part, I know very well that while I might understand dominants intellectually, I cannot remotely empathize with them--  their view of things is entirely foreign to me.  If empathy is not part of the equation, what distinguishes dominants from more or less enlightened sociopaths?  I think the answer hinges on the next question. (your mileage may vary.)


There is no universal answer here.... There is likely Dominants that can empathize.. just as there are some that can not empathize.  I am more of the latter than the former.  

and as far as Dominants being distinguished from sociopaths... mmmmmmmm maybe some sociopaths are unethical Dominants..  maybe many sociopaths are dominant personalities... but lack the ethics we expect in society.

_____________________________

Knight of Mists

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

(in reply to sravaka)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics - 9/27/2008 6:10:49 PM   
slaveluci


Posts: 4294
Joined: 3/2/2007
From: Little Rock, AR
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweedydaddy
Ethics in BDSM are summed up in three classic words, safe, sane and consensual, anything else in unethical.

Of course, this is your personal opinion and not fact, correct?  Not everyone subscribes to SSC or even RACK.  That doesn't mean they are "unethical" in any way.  Just my view...............luci

_____________________________

To choose a good book, look in an inquisitor’s prohibited list. ~John Aikin

(in reply to tweedydaddy)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics - 9/27/2008 6:29:36 PM   
scarlethiney


Posts: 492
Joined: 8/22/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: chamberqueen

sravaka, your questions are valid and the answers should also help other newcomers.  Doms (masculine or feminine) are just as diverse as any other group of people.

When I was a Domme I was so concerned about my subs that I was actually cheating myself.  I tried to get into their minds and hearts and make their fantasies turn into reality, all the while putting safety first.  I was at one end of the spectrum.  There are others at the opposite end, looking only for their own pleasure, and caring nothing for the sub.  Most find a happy balance somewhere in between.  If the sub feels no sense of fulfillment they can simply walk away from the relationship, so simply from that perspective it makes sense for a Dom to watch out for the sub's interests.  Most Doms do honestly care about whether the sub is getting enjoyment and if they are it makes their own pleasure grow.  That's when it is a true symbiotic relationship.  This is the way that the majority of healthy BDSM relationships work.

These Doms do have ethics that they apply.  It goes beyond the physical and crosses over into the emotional.  This can be much more tricky because there are times when something unexpected comes up - some trigger is touched that can leave the sub very vulnerable.  While many Doms may have exceptional physical abilities there is only a subset of those that can handle unexpected emotional reactions well.  In some cases the sub knows what the triggers are likely to be and should communicate those to the Dom.  In some cases they come as a surprise to both.

Have an idea of what your wants and needs are when looking for a Dom.  If you need to feel like you also count in the relationship, look for someone who seems that they can give that.  Some enjoy being treated as if they are nothing and there are Doms out there that can fill that need.  In my case I discovered that I fit the lifestyle better as a slave to a Master that shows me empathy and is ethical than as a Domme that was basically serving her subs.  You will find your own fit.



Beautifully said !!!!!!!!!! Thanks

scarlet


_____________________________

"The words 'I am...' are potent words; be careful what you hitch them to. The thing you're claiming has a way of reaching back and claiming you." - A.L. Kitselman.


see my profile masterkspet

(in reply to chamberqueen)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics - 9/27/2008 11:17:50 PM   
sravaka


Posts: 314
Joined: 6/20/2008
Status: offline 		Wow!  Thank you all SO much for your thoughtful and thought-provoking replies. 

I wish I could figure out how to quote here, but for the moment it appears to be beyond my cyber-dunce capacities.  So, I'll make do with a handful random responses for now.

My own view of the ethics question has tended to be quite like yours, Knight of Mists.  I used to prowl in some rather idiosyncratic TPE venues where the prevailing dogma was that a "real" dominant is by definition ethical, has the best interests of both the submissive and the relationship in mind.  However, unreal (?) dominants were held to be capable of mimicking dominant behavior and thereby of leading poor, hapless, TPE-inclined submissives into deep trouble.  I never bought this wholesale-- I tried, in fact, to argue that an ability to dominate others is distributed across the population quite independent of good intentions, and that the trick was being able to assess intentions intelligently prior to falling under the spell of a powerfully dominant aura, if you will.  But this pretty much fell on deaf ears. 

I was too hasty in tossing out "First do no harm" as equivalent to "ethical" (this in response to Calla Firestorm and Ialdabaoth).  I'm thinking now that the more important thing, given the nature of wiitwd, is a willingness to care, and ideally to be helpful, if harm is inadvertantlly done. Perhaps that is too much to ask in some kinds of relationships.  Perhaps the responsibility to steer clear of harm rests with the harm-ee.  But that aside...   it would be quite abhorrent to me, at least, if an obligation to worry about potential harm inhibited the expression of the dominant's dominance, or inhibited the pursuit of "greater good" goals.

I'm with slaveluci on SSC being far from a universally applicable encapsulation of BDSM ethics.  Especially with regard to consent. 

Jeptha, your thoughts on sociopathy and empathy were very helpful.  Thank you.  And so many of you (Mad Rabbit, DMF Paradox, Leadership 527, DesFIP, and others) gave me food for thought about empathy.   For me, when I empathize, it means someone else's sadness moves me to tears even if I have no particular connection with the stimulus that provokes the other person's sadness.  Same for joy, or anger, or whatever.  This, I think, is distinct from simply understanding and accounting for the other person's feeling.  My hypothesis was that it would be difficult to dominate if you were feeling a submissive's fears or whatever along with her.  But perhaps there are degrees of empathy, and clearly it also varies with the relationship, and which components of a relationship you're talking about.  And perhaps empathy can be squelched, again for a greater good.  (still puzzling over this one a bit.  particularly puzzling over DMFParadox's "equal and opposite" model of empathy....   broadly applied, it would explain a LOT about why dominants are so foreign and so...  interesting all at once.  But I can't empathize with it.  )

NihilusZero, at risk of starting a tangent, or worse, trouble, I wonder what you mean by segregative thinking?  (Consent questions are also greatly of interest to me.)

Again, many thanks to all of you who took the time to reply.  I'm so tickled.

--sravaka










_____________________________

Miseries hold me fixed, and I would gladly cut these roots to become a floating plant. I would yield myself up utterly, if the inviting stream could be relied upon. --Ono no Komachi

(in reply to KnightofMists)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics - 9/28/2008 6:49:11 AM   
chamberqueen


Posts: 1597
Joined: 10/25/2007
From: Kalamazoo, MI
Status: offline 		You are exactly right - there are different degrees of empathy.  For instance, a Dom might enjoy seeing a small amount of fear in a sub when they are entering new territory.  However, most Doms would not want to see outright panic.  While they might empathize with the fear they do not "feel" it the same way that the sub does.  They know that they are responsible, in control, and that no true harm will be done. 

I am training a novice Dom.  He had wanted to try wax play and then backed out, afraid that it would hurt.  I told him that I wanted him to keep those feelings fully in mind when he had a sub of his own and she said that she wanted something and then got scared and backed out.  The thought took him by surprise; he just assumed that if he gave a command it would be carried out.  I told him to keep in touch with those feelings of fear of the unknown, doubt of whether he really wanted to try something or not, and his unwillingness to trust someone with his body.  (These were his self admitted concerns.)  It was probably the best object lesson I was ever able to teach, and he now has a much better insight into what it takes to be a good Dom.  (And, to give credit where it is due, he decided to trust me enough to teach him how to do the wax play.)


_____________________________



(in reply to sravaka)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics - 9/28/2008 8:26:28 AM   
leadership527


Posts: 5026
Joined: 6/2/2008
Status: offline 		For me, when I empathize, it means someone else's sadness moves me to tears even if I have no particular connection with the stimulus that provokes the other person's sadness.  Same for joy, or anger, or whatever.  This, I think, is distinct from simply understanding and accounting for the other person's feeling.  My hypothesis was that it would be difficult to dominate if you were feeling a submissive's fears or whatever along with her.  But perhaps there are degrees of empathy, and clearly it also varies with the relationship, and which components of a relationship you're talking about.  And perhaps empathy can be squelched, again for a greater good. 
 
Bingo.  I've loved my wife for 13 years now.  You can absolutely bet that when she is unhappy, so am I.  When she is afraid, so am I.  When she's upset with me, I'm crushed.  I would have it no other way.  But none of that stops me from doing what I must do as her leader.  I suck up my own hurt and as much of hers as I can manage then do what needs to be done.  Later, I'll lick my wounds or, better, allow her to lick them.  It does, however, cause me to think carefully about my actions since normally it is literally true that "this will hurt me more than it'll hurt you." -- quite a bit more.  The dom thinking carefully about his actions just has to be a good thing in my book.

(in reply to chamberqueen)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics - 9/28/2008 8:56:47 AM   
RealSub58


Posts: 1073
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP
As far as ethics and dominance go, I can't understand why you can't be an ethical dominant. However I wonder about sadism and ethics, about how a sadist goes about reining his sadism in.


I am sure there are ethical sadists.  It's the unethical ones that, in the end, find themselves lonely, sad, depraved, indifferent and definately dangerous.  Even the unethical emotionl sadists. 

(in reply to DesFIP)
Profile   Post #: 37
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master >> RE: Doms & empathy; doms & ethics Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
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

0.078