ShaktiSama
Posts: 1674
Joined: 8/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jeptha
If anyone's a whore, we're all whores.
Bullshit. Your logic is dubious and your analogies are weak. BDSM sexual "hiring out" is demonstrably higher-risk than even normal heterosexual or homosexual swinging. The increased risk of tissue damage to the receiver of penetrative acts alone is enough to increase risk significantly. Also, people who "hook-up" singly on occasion are presumably exercising some personal judgment about who they choose to hook up with and how. The no-limits slave leaves this matter to a dominant who clearly does not priotitize his/her slave's health and survival.
The comparison between two partners in six months versus two partners in one night is also shoddy. That's like the comparison between smoking two packs of cigarettes in a lifetime, versus two packs of cigarettes in a day. How likely is any person who smokes two packs of cigarettes on any given day to smoke NONE the next day, and for the rest of his/her life?
The factors that increase risk--in particular abrasion and micro-tears in tissue--are compounded by the frequency. Two partners in one night IS more dangerous than two partners in six months, for a variety of reasons. Not only is the physical damage and transmission of pathogens worse, but the sort of people who participate in group sex are far less likely to have only those two partners for that six month period.
When being "hired out" to the sort of people who are willing to participate in these hijinx, how likely are your penetrating partners to be at all selective in their penetrations? Seems to me that a man willing to stick his joint into someone else's whore without protection is NOT a safe choice for play of any kind. The lack of sound judgment and concern for safety is something that becomes exponentially worse with every additional moron added to the equation. This is true of "vanilla" sex as well as BDSM, of course--but as with other risks, BDSM raises the stakes.
The upshot of the matter is simply this: there is a very wide reach between the lowest possible risk of the person who has one sexual partner in as lifetime versus the maximum risk of the human waste dump who has unprotected sex with multiple unscreened partners constantly. The submissive being "hired out" is far too often the latter. Period. End of story.
Consequences predictably follow.
I fail to see how I "lack compassion" by pointing this out, and by refusing to romanticize, eroticize or NORMALIZE these activities, and the people who engage in them. From my point of view, I'm being far more compassionate by stating the downside. By standing up to formally state that as a dominant, I find it unsexy and repellent. And by completely rejecting the idea that this sort of abuse is "What All Slaves Should Expect".
Doms like the OP are very, very fond of telling potential submissives, especially inexperienced men and women, that they are not "True Submissives" unless they submit to insane, high-risk, unclean degradation. I am sure they manage to victimize a lot of people who don't know better by convincing them that this is the only way that they can live out any of their fantasies and that this is the True Way to express a submissive nature.
Personally, I find this "No Limits" mentality infects the rest of the community in a variety of unpleasant ways. For one thing, it leads to a constantly apologetic attitude on the part of rational submissives who expect to have any level of sanity or safety in their lives. So many in this community feel the need to admit their limits only with shame, as if they were somehow inferior because they expect to survive their sexual encounters with their minds and bodies in reasonably sound condition!
This is pure garbage. A person who submits within reason is actually superior to a self-destructive cretin who hands over the keys to body and soul without any boundary. There is nothing noble about yielding all responsibility for your well-being to a person who clearly does not intend to act in your best interest.
As for the rest of this discussion--I feel it is completely beside the point to talk about whether the postings of people who profess to being "No Limts" slaves are "coherent". A sizable percentage of profiles/personas here are fictional; they do not represent real people who are in real relationships. For all we know, the women who claim to be "No Limits" slaves in this thread are not women at all; they are men expressing their fantasies of what a woman should be. Further, even if these people really existed and were absolutely truthful when they said that their partners abuse, degrade, and will probably eventually kill them--what correlation is there, really, between being self-destructively insane and being unable to spell, write, etc? A great many people who have reasonably high IQ's have very low states of mental wellness. Being articulate or intelligent is NO defense against being irrational, self-destructive--even suicidal.
People will do what they want, as always, and normally I do not care. I am not arguing in this thread that people have no right to BE a no-limits slave; I am arguing that there is nothing automatic or normal about this expectation, and that the OP's assertion that all submissives should automatically expect to become the property of a Kevorkian Dom who degrades his partners to death is absurd.
_____________________________
"Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea."
-- Robert A. Heinlein
|
RE: The Power or " Right" - 
Profile
. 
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