RE: What is Monogamy?

RE: What is Monogamy? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

Petruchio -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/5/2006 4:42:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SelkiePet1 WHY do so many in this thread have their knickers in a twist? for god's sake, not ONCE did candy even suggest that what she was looking for was the ONLY way or the RIGHT away - all she said is what she would like! she used the term "high" ina way I understood clearly - becuase I know that reading theses boards (indeed many of the replies), the term "monogomy" is used fast and loose. and befre you attack me - I have no issue with whatever turns your crank - any of you - as long you and yours are happy with therelationship. but monogomy, no matter how you couch it - is a relationship betwen two people - exclusively - why so many of you are so defensive I don't understand! we are adults. what any of us choose do as consenting adults is no one's business - at all - in any way, means or form. but candy's desires are just as legitimate as anyone elses. I would never presume to decide for someone else what sort of lifestyle or what sort of relationship they should have - I'll leave that to the religious right! But what I do respect is each individuals' choice as to what works for them. and I think that is ALL that candy was saying! What you say. Selkie, makes sense to me; this seems to have become a debate about BDSM political correctness, and aren't we among the most in need not to have sensitized labels? 9 times out of 10, I find myself in agreement with MrD, but I can't map 'high monogamy' to 'nígger' at all, it's akin to execution for jaywalkers. I once read that when we want to demonize, that we pull out the full arsenal of the simplest words. (The article was talking about the over use of 'nazi' and 'Hitler'.) It grates on my nerves when someone says 'white only' or 'black only', but that might arguably be only a predilicition and not a prejudice, like preferring blonde or redhead, although it smells like bigotry. If we accept Judeo-Christian Muslim Wiccan tri-sexual polyam sadomasochistic D/s bloodletting foot-fetishers with two dogs and a milking machine, what is our problem with accepting lo or hi monogamy?

Gomez -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/5/2006 5:18:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrDiscipline44 quote: ORIGINAL: SelkiePet1 for god's sake, not ONCE did candy even suggest that what she was looking for was the ONLY way or the RIGHT away - all she said is what she would like! she used the term "high" ina way I understood clearly - becuase I know that reading theses boards (indeed many of the replies), the term "monogomy" is used fast and loose. Well selkie, let me see if I can explain something that I come away with in this post. A word, reguardless of how you try to change it's meaning, will still infer a certain implication. Lets take the word n#gger. Somewhere down the line, white elitist started using it as a derogatory term. It's use then became insultive to the point of violence. Now a days, a black man walkin down the street calls those closest to him this same word. But let a white man utter it and he'll be lucky if an ambulance will be called for him after the beating. So what am I saying here. I'm saying that just because you "try" to change the meaning of a word, it'll still "imply" it's original meaning and to constanly use the term is to insult those you use it in front of. The word in reference is "high" and the fact that it refers to her veiw being better then everyone else's. What should we come away with in this? If this term is used in a circle of friends that finds it acceptable, then by all means use it with them. If it is used in a circle that does not find it acceptable, then to keep using it is an insult and an afront to people. But all in all, I find that the rest of your post to be acceptable. I think in his words, MrDiscipline has hit the nail on the head. But I also agree with cloudboy as it did create a great threat and made me think about my past relationships.

SelkiePet1 -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/5/2006 5:23:17 PM)
thank you petruchio ... (btw - love the name - He that knows better how to tame a shrew!). that was my take too - we in this lifestyle are the last that should be "throwing stones" as it were! each to their own, I say!

Petruchio -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/5/2006 6:00:52 PM)
Ah, Selkie! An educated lady!

Wildfleurs -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/5/2006 7:25:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrDiscipline44 \ Well selkie, let me see if I can explain something that I come away with in this post. A word, reguardless of how you try to change it's meaning, will still infer a certain implication. Lets take the word n#gger. Somewhere down the line, white elitist started using it as a derogatory term. It's use then became insultive to the point of violence. Now a days, a black man walkin down the street calls those closest to him this same word. But let a white man utter it and he'll be lucky if an ambulance will be called for him after the beating. So what am I saying here. I'm saying that just because you "try" to change the meaning of a word, it'll still "imply" it's original meaning and to constanly use the term is to insult those you use it in front of. The word in reference is "high" and the fact that it refers to her veiw being better then everyone else's. What should we come away with in this? If this term is used in a circle of friends that finds it acceptable, then by all means use it with them. If it is used in a circle that does not find it acceptable, then to keep using it is an insult and an afront to people. But all in all, I find that the rest of your post to be acceptable. I agree that a word no matter how you try to change it still retains much of its original meaning. Thats why for many blacks using the term nigger is still an insult, even if it comes from another black (somehow the use of the term in rap music seems to have convinced mainstream america that blacks everywhere are running around using it and are absolutely fine with it - when in fact there is heavy disagreement within the black community over its use in rap music). C~

la90066 -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/5/2006 9:16:15 PM)
Oh help me Rhonda... Can we not even agree on the word "Monogamy" now? Monogamy = You fuck one person and one person only. Cheater = You fuck more than one person while the others think you're only fucking them. There... I just made it easy for everyone to remember. [;)]

Gomez -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/5/2006 9:21:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: la90066 Oh help me Rhonda... Can we not even agree on the word "Monogamy" now? Monogamy = You fuck one person and one person only. Cheater = You fuck more than one person while the others think you're only fucking them. There... I just made it easy for everyone to remember. [;)] So thats the Macquaire version (Australian Dictionary)....and also in plain English for those of us that are mentally challenged!![:D]

ExistentialSteel -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/6/2006 1:28:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Petruchio But what I do reIf we accept Judeo-Christian Muslim Wiccan tri-sexual polyam sadomasochistic D/s bloodletting foot-fetishers with two dogs and a milking machine, what is our problem with accepting lo or hi monogamy? Haha. But, seriously, I try not to knock anyone because of decisions concerning sexual activity. I mean I'm friends with every damn body. To take this to the extreme, I have a friend who is a hooker (nah, I didn't meet her as a customer..ha) and I respect her immensely. We all have a tendency to knock others because of sexual activity, but that is often a case of jealousy. You know something like why doesn't he or she just want to be with me? Taken to another level, it can be something like why did you do this and that in your past? It is best to leave it alone. PS This is not a knock of Candy's OP. I understand and respect what she said and wants. Again, don't knock her because of her sexual decisions.

Mercnbeth -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/6/2006 6:25:50 AM)
quote: Monogamy = You fuck one person and one person only. The same definition that Bill Clinton used to define sex? Taken in lifestyle context... If you are married or in a significant relationship and meet someone on CM and they flog you, cane you, whip you and you have a very intense scene but don't fuck you are practicing monogamy? My slave decides to web cam with some one handed web surfer and she'd be practicing monogamy? I'll take a monogamous mind, soul and heart over a monogamous body. When you have a partner it's more important to be monogamous to the relationship and each other, however you define it, versus some dictionary definition that is subject to personal interpretation and rationalization.

la90066 -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/6/2006 11:38:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: Monogamy = You fuck one person and one person only. The same definition that Bill Clinton used to define sex? Taken in lifestyle context... If you are married or in a significant relationship and meet someone on CM and they flog you, cane you, whip you and you have a very intense scene but don't fuck you are practicing monogamy? My slave decides to web cam with some one handed web surfer and she'd be practicing monogamy? I'll take a monogamous mind, soul and heart over a monogamous body. When you have a partner it's more important to be monogamous to the relationship and each other, however you define it, versus some dictionary definition that is subject to personal interpretation and rationalization. Fine, then: Monogamy = You engage in ANY sexual/kink/romantic activities with one person and one person only. Cheater = You engage in ANY sexual/kink/romantic activities with more than one person while the others think you're engaging in said sexual/kink/romantic activities with ONLY them. There.... Better? Don't MAKE me come over there, damn it!!! [:D] hee hee hee (I'm silly... I know...)

Mercnbeth -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/6/2006 11:50:57 AM)
quote: Fine, then: Monogamy = You engage in ANY sexual/kink/romantic activities with one person and one person only. Cheater = You engage in ANY sexual/kink/romantic activities with more than one person while the others think you're engaging in said sexual/kink/romantic activities with ONLY them. There.... Better? Don't MAKE me come over there, damn it!!! hee hee hee (I'm silly... I know...) LA, That works, now try "high monogamy"? I'll go first... Being monogamist even after smoking a controlled substance.[8\|] quote: There.... Better? Don't MAKE me come over there, damn it!!! You're always welcome in the South Bay!

brightspot -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/6/2006 12:33:36 PM)
quote: "high monogamy"? Fking one, the only one you ever fk, atop the Sears Tower...[8\|]

IrishMist -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/6/2006 1:00:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: brightspot quote: "high monogamy"? Fking one, the only one you ever fk, atop the Sears Tower...[8\|] LMFAO

windchymes -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/6/2006 4:36:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: Fine, then: Monogamy = You engage in ANY sexual/kink/romantic activities with one person and one person only. Cheater = You engage in ANY sexual/kink/romantic activities with more than one person while the others think you're engaging in said sexual/kink/romantic activities with ONLY them. There.... Better? Don't MAKE me come over there, damn it!!! hee hee hee (I'm silly... I know...) LA, That works, now try "high monogamy"? I'll go first... Being monogamist even after smoking a controlled substance.[8\|] quote: There.... Better? Don't MAKE me come over there, damn it!!! You're always welcome in the South Bay! Cheater = you didn't inhale? chymes

redheadedfire4u -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/7/2006 10:05:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: brightspot quote: "high monogamy"? Fking one, the only one you ever fk, atop the Sears Tower...[8\|] OMG so when Sir and I climbed the 57m Diamond tree and He chose to tit fuck me on the top platform We were practicing a natures own High Monogamy? I must let Him know lol warm smiles to all

FionaFineass -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/8/2006 10:48:29 AM)
Using a Phrase like "High" Monogamy is no different than using the phrase like "Real" Slave. It makes it sound better than everyone else. Monogamy is monogamy it isn't higher it isn't lower it isn't better slave is just slave it isn't realer truer or better it just is. so whether the OP intended it or not. Her words DID come across as what she wanted or was looking for was better more special than anyone else's here. Simply stating Monogamy would of sufficed as we all know what it means.

Petruchio -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/8/2006 5:32:13 PM)
quote: Using a Phrase like "High" Monogamy is no different than using the phrase like "Real" Slave. It makes it sound better than everyone else. So you're saying it's like 'almost pregnant'?

Crazytwice -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/8/2006 6:48:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Petruchio If we accept Judeo-Christian Muslim Wiccan tri-sexual polyam sadomasochistic D/s bloodletting foot-fetishers with two dogs and a milking machine, what is our problem with accepting lo or hi monogamy? Kudos to you, Petruchio. I was very disappointed at the pettiness of some of the responses in this thread. It became a perfect example of mob mentality. As a newcomer, it was rather disheartening and I can understand why many in the lifestyle will avoid the "public scene" due to the politics that are inherent when any group of people come together. For experienced and mature dominants to allow themselves to get into a spitting contest was ridiculous. Gave me pause- does this exemplify the type of man available to me as a sub seeking a dom? I hope not. Because if this is the case, my "journey" will surely and swiftly come to an end. Candy's words were poorly chosen. She's clearly new and inexperienced. Arguing with her version of a BDSM ideal is like arguing with a teenager about the meaning of life. Borrowing your words, if we can accept Judeo-Christian Muslim tri-sexual polyam Sadomasochistic d/s bloodletting foot fetishers with 2 dogs and a milking machine [laughing] , why can't we accept the starry-eyed ideals of a newbie? Maybe newbie thoughts are just too damn vanilla. Well, either I've burned a couple of bridges here, or perhaps nobody gives a damn, but, hey, I'm a bit of a brat and love to declare the emperor has no clothes. Thinking of changing my nick to Crazyshrew. [;)]

Mercnbeth -> RE: What is Monogamy? (1/8/2006 7:43:30 PM)
quote: If we accept Judeo-Christian Muslim Wiccan tri-sexual polyam sadomasochistic D/s bloodletting foot-fetishers with two dogs and a milking machine, what is our problem with accepting lo or hi monogamy? "We" don't. Or at least identify the "we". In this instance the point you make is applicable. The OP goes out of the way to dislike, polygamy, pain givers, bi-sexuality, young subs or doms, and more that I don't want to bother to look up to document. That, along with self contradiction, and pleads for sympathy, or agreement generated the response. It wasn't the "newbie" status, if anything that was given excessive consideration. Being "accepting" is a double edged sword. "We", being the people who post to this site or within the broad spectrum of some intangible community under the umbrella "lifestyle" offer no idyllic utopia. If anything the unique paths we traveled to get where we are generated MORE prejudices and assumptions. Not in the stereotypical sense because I think the vanilla racial, sexual orientation, and gender prejudices are less pronounced, but for specific activities condemned or condoned many would consider our positions similar to KKK type fanaticism. Need a for instance? On-line play. I have KKK type prejudice that anyone who involves themselves in that activity and claims "lifestyle" experience or identifies as someone's slave, sub, dom, master to someone they've never met, and never will meet. Compound that with the lie that what they are doing isn't cheating on the spouse snoring away in the bedroom, and my cross is burning in the window of their private chat room. That attitude right? Wrong? Accepted by others? Who gives a rats ass. Maybe it implies jealousy or some perverted "keyboard-envy". Or maybe like "high monogamy" it's just funny to people who play on line all the time and satisfy any/all lifestyle desires through the activity. No need to convince either side. More important - no need to take sides. Other polarizing issues; is "play" sex and therefore cheating on your spouse, playing with married people, polygamy, watersports, gor, weight, age, appearance, location, and an infinite number of others. When you think about it, there is far less acceptance than acceptance. In fact coming into this little community it may be a good piece of advise to say - "Prepare to NOT be accepted!" Most of us are only here for one person anyway, so the whole concept of global acceptance isn't important. Whether me and beth, or the OP - all we need is to find our "One". The "One" needs to exhibit acceptance, not the community, not even any other one person. But again - ask for opinions - live with the responses. Piss off people by placing yourself in a superior moral position - live with the responses. If anything you should seek more contradiction than acceptance because beliefs not tested have less value. Contradiction merits thought, a good contradicting argument that causes you to think ultimately fortifies what you believe or changes it. Either result equals personal growth. And when all else fails, laugh and log off. If you really need acceptance, add a few fake profiles and post accepting responses to yourself. Just don't make it so obvious. Now the "two dogs and the milking machine" reference? Well - that's just wrong...

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875