|
Mercnbeth -> RE: Online or Distance relationships (1/13/2006 8:52:43 AM)
|
quote:
My question is in the context of on-line or an LDR--how does a slave relationship exist?
It exists in the rationalization of the minds of people participating in them. It's all it takes. Ask someone how their character exists in a prolonged fantasy role playing game and the answers are similar. Even the ancillary factors are common. Formal "title", requirements of conduct, form and structure; point to an altered reality that the participants chose to live. Meeting irregularly with extended periods of time between contact is actually conducive to making the fantasy stronger. Role playing in person with a character established through internet interaction becomes a personal challenge. The build up before upcoming contact must be like that of an actor in long rehearsals for play. Props and titles build during the on-line internet "sessions" create the storyline and "sets".
It's defended so adamantly because no one like their reality challenged. And it is reality for the practitioners. They can't or don't want to live together and take on the responsibilities. It doesn't have to be their goal. Some seek and only interact with people at long distance because it's automatically going to create an environment making it difficult to have daily contact. If a person really wanted to seek a counterpart to have a lifelong, in person relationship wouldn't be essential that you limit your search to a distance where that would be easily accomplished? By definition, a relationship with someone in a different state or country, or outside practical travel distance, will have intermittent contact at best. The relationship will be internet based cyber reality. To argue quality will never find common ground. I can't find any satisfaction, mental or physical, in on-line; I wouldn't be able to maintain a meaningful relationship with someone long distance. That's me, if it brings satisfaction to someone - call it my shortcoming. Obviously there are enough who do find it exciting that beth and I haven't been missed. Participants find quality and a sense of fulfillment. That should be everyone's bottom line.
The reality is there is no lifestyle "slave" existence as textbook defined. We've, define "we've" as beth & I or the "lifestyle" world, established a relationship and then to announce it to the world, we label it. To have a common image we label it "slave". It seems that submissive wasn't good or strong enough. The image of "submissive", which allows things to happen, didn't meet lifestyle community test for a person who turned over all aspects of themselves to another. "Slave" seems to have won favor to make that distinction.
I always hate using the word or the reference. It denigrates the historical and current situations in some parts of the world where slaves and slavery are all too real. Kajira would be such a nice alternative but my tongue always trips over the word and now it seems to identify a Gorean perspective. Sure, I still refer to beth as my "slave" for the reason of expediency. Our definition, we live together under my rules, my limits, 24/7. But when you meet us, we introduce ourselves simply as Merc & beth. No one else has to "buy in" to our reality. No one has to "buy in" to anyone's on-line reality either.
|
|
|
|
