|
CallaFirestormBW -> RE: respecting limits (1/26/2009 1:52:05 PM)
|
I won't expect a servant to breach a boundary whether or not I would be willing to consider doing so for someone else, unless that servant changes hir mind and desires to do so. To me, life often does not seem 'fair', but authority-biased relationships do have a measure of fairness, despite the appearance otherwise. That 'fairness' resides in respecting that "no" means "no" on both sides of the kneel. But a "no" doesn't mean "never discuss"... at least in our house. In fact, I would hazard that someone who told me "This is my position and we can never discuss it again, even on a philosophical basis." would not be a suitable candidate for our home.
This doesn't mean that, just because I brought it up, I expect a different answer than the first time we talked about it... I consider myself free to bring up any subject for discussion that I choose. We are not static individuals, and things may change over time and with experience, and so, I don't see any harm in bringing up a subject, whether or not I have given ground on something on my end.
The point, I think, is whether the person in control -forces- the issue, or attempts to guilt the person yielding control into going somewhere that xhe doesn't want to go. If I do something to someone else for my own pleasure and to hir detriment without hir consent, or worse, with hir active denial of consent, that is an act of not -only- unnecessary cruelty, but of a level of selfishness that I would find reprehensible, perhaps even going to far as to say that I would find it sociopathic and criminal.
|
|
|
|
