Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Banned Friendships


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

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Banned Friendships Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 10:42:07 AM   
VeryMercurial


Posts: 620
Joined: 6/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

So there is only one true way?


quote:

ORIGINAL: Firebirdseeking

It really bothers me sometimes what passes for "Lifestyle".  There is no reason to isolate a sub from her support system.  Ever.  People dont understand this lifestyle, so we cut them off?  Thats a crock too.



You hit the nail on the head for me Orion.
The "one way" aspect.
There are many different ways to live in the world, if the people involved are content it is not my place
to attempt to dictate to them, how they should live.
If Daddy and Daddy'sProp are happy in their little world, and they have been together for almost 10 years,
why should I attempt to say how they should conduct thier affairs?

It is not how I would or want to live, but so what?
I also don't plan to live as the majority on this website live.
Again so what?

Many in this lifestyle are so far from accepting "differences" that it is amusing.

< Message edited by VeryMercurial -- 6/21/2009 10:44:31 AM >

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 10:55:55 AM   
leadership527


Posts: 5026
Joined: 6/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf
So there is only one true way?

I've got to agree with Orion on this. More to the point, is there only one true scenario? In my experience, life is complex.

For Carol and I, none of her friends and family are counter productive to her or our relationship. Unlike with Dame Calla, I have no "intensive training period" which would necessitate sharp focus. Rather, for us, things just move along on a gradual, day-by-day, growth. So really I have no incentive to want to cut off some or all of her friends.

But if I did have reasons, I surely would do so. In the end, I would deliver on exactly what I have promised her... I will lead her and our marriage according to what I believe to be best for us. And if that determination resulted in one or more of her social circles being jettisoned, then so be it.

So put me in with Orion, daddysprop, and Calla and hand me some koolaid. I would, however, be greatly amused with anyone who wants to try to sell Carol on the notion that I'm an abusive personality. That'd be one of those "fly on the wall" moments that would be worth it's weight in gold for future humor potential.

_____________________________

~Jeff

I didn't so much "enslave" Carol as I did "enlove" her. - Me
I want a joyous, loving, respectful relationship where the male is in charge and deserves to be. - DavanKael

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 10:57:47 AM   
VeryMercurial


Posts: 620
Joined: 6/5/2006
Status: offline
You forgot to add me to the list!
I also don't drink the koolaid, or attempt to tell others "what is acceptable" or how
they should live.
I just don't own a copy of "The rules for all to follow" handbook. 

< Message edited by VeryMercurial -- 6/21/2009 11:10:03 AM >

(in reply to leadership527)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 10:59:19 AM   
Firebirdseeking


Posts: 477
Joined: 9/3/2006
Status: offline
"Many in this lifestyle are so far from accepting "differences" that it is amusing"

And many are so quick to accept anything as "lifestyle", its scary.

(in reply to leadership527)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 11:10:16 AM   
daddysprop247


Posts: 1712
Joined: 6/24/2005
From: DC Metro area
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Firebirdseeking

"Many in this lifestyle are so far from accepting "differences" that it is amusing"

And many are so quick to accept anything as "lifestyle", its scary.


so i suppose you and you alone are the Grand High Arbiter Poobah on what is and is not "lifestyle"?

(in reply to Firebirdseeking)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 11:11:27 AM   
VeryMercurial


Posts: 620
Joined: 6/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: daddysprop247

quote:

ORIGINAL: Firebirdseeking

"Many in this lifestyle are so far from accepting "differences" that it is amusing"

And many are so quick to accept anything as "lifestyle", its scary.


so i suppose you and you alone are the Grand High Arbiter Poobah on what is and is not "lifestyle"?



Sorry to say Daddysprop, their are a lot of poobah's around here!

(in reply to daddysprop247)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 11:12:35 AM   
daddysprop247


Posts: 1712
Joined: 6/24/2005
From: DC Metro area
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: VeryMercurial



Sorry to say Daddysprop, their are a lot of poobah's around here!


lol, sad but true.

(in reply to VeryMercurial)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 11:25:05 AM   
Toppingfrmbottom


Posts: 6528
Joined: 6/7/2009
Status: offline
 Daddy forbid me from ever speaking or talking to someone before, and it was because they would, just always be a shit stir'er in my life. Always try to undermine the relationship Daddy and I had, always put me in the position of between a rock and a hard place.

When Daddy found out what was going on he forbid me to see them or speak to them. And Honestly if he had not forbidden me I wouldn't of spoke to them anyway. I am not a glutton for punishment, if you cause me problems in my life more than you contribute to my life I won't speak to you. Weather or not Daddy ordered me  not to.



Daddy also said I am not to fly out to see my brother any more unless Daddy can come, because last time I did lyn treated me like shit, started fights made me cry, and completly terrorized me. Again I wouldn't anyway,  I am of the mind fool me once shame on you fool me twice shame on me, and will not be giving my brother the chance to terrorize me again.
quote:

ORIGINAL: CNJDom

When someone bans someone else from seeing or talking to others, it's not just a power trip..it's also an insecurity that is harbored from jealously and inadequacy.  They feel that if another person is met and talked to, that perhaps that person could sway their sub from the person doing the banning.  This may come from the type of behavior that the Dominant is displaying that could be considered abusive even by our kink-standards.  Putting isolation restrictions and controlling the environment like this isn't considered healthy in a normal day-to-day situation.

I could see that a certain amount of people outside of the core relationship that might be destructive or manipulative way that I would think would be discussed and mutually arrived to the conclusion of discontinuing to see someone.  But this would be decision, gotten from an agreed reason, and not just a ban.  Banning would imply that the sub still wishes to continue a relationship with  this other person, and the Dominant wants to take that away.  There are good reasons to restrict outside contact with others for a set, short period of time if it's decided upon that some specific training or adjusting in say a slave/Master relationship.  This would be up to that particular situation, and is only a concept...but to do this again on a day-to-day situation is not proper.  Just not healthy.   

(in reply to CNJDom)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 12:33:58 PM   
OrionTheWolf


Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline
Yeah diversity of human behavior and nature can be a scary thing to some. BDSM is such a broad term, that there are all these other acronyms that have to be added, and even then it is not a nice, neat little package. If it works for you, great, but just because it may not does not mean that it is automatically something that is not for someone else.

What is scary, is the judgmental attitudes that many have in this lifestyle, and if you were to change the reasons and words, it would be the same attitude the religious zealots have against BDSM in general. Kind of a hypocricy thing that is also a part of human nature.

Someone else mentioned that it should be discussed with the slave/sub/whatever. That would depend upon the power dynamic. I may decide to discuss something before I make a decision, and sometimes I may not. The communication will always remain open so that I may measure the effects my decisions make. In the end, it is my decision within the relationship as to what is what.

Just since some of these topics started my girl has received email, saying how abusive I must be. She just chuckles and says "I am the happiest and most secure I have been in my entire life. If this is abuse, hurt me some more please Master."


quote:

ORIGINAL: Firebirdseeking

"Many in this lifestyle are so far from accepting "differences" that it is amusing"

And many are so quick to accept anything as "lifestyle", its scary.


_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to Firebirdseeking)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 12:47:25 PM   
CallaFirestormBW


Posts: 3651
Joined: 6/29/2008
Status: offline
Although the OP specified that this wasn't about dealing with unhealthy relationships, I'd like to relay a little something from my 'very nearly vanilla' days. For a while, in my life, I chose to have a monogamous, mainstream sort of marriage. Of course, we re-wrote our vows so that they wouldn't promise things one or the other of us knew we couldn't promise, and didn't promise each other 'forever'... but the relevant portion comes out of our -very- mainstream, not kinky even in the bedroom relationship, and an incident that happened shortly after he and I became engaged. He came home one afternoon to find me in a tearful conversation, if you could call it that, with my mother. She was berating me, over the phone, so loudly that he could hear every word across the room. I was sitting, silent, tear-stained, and stoic, because by this point in my life I'd figured out that there was no way to argue with her--not only would she not let anyone else get a word in, she -also- didn't hear anyone else, even if they spoke... just kept on her rant until she was damned good and ready to stop.

Now I'm not very accepting of help -- I've done everything I could in my life to be completely self-sufficient, but my parents were a weak spot for me. I'd been raised to "Honor thy father and thy mother", and at this point (at 19 years old), I still believed there was -something- I could do that would make them proud of me and make them accept me as a worthwhile person.* My fiance, an astute man, if somewhat beleaguered in his own right, took the receiver out of my hand by force, hung up on my mother, and informed me that I was -never- to use our phone to contact that woman again, talk to her on the streets, or invite her into our home, until she had come to -me- and apologized for ever making me feel like an unworthy person. And if my Papi couldn't deal with that, -HE- could just be added to the 'no call' list.

I need to be clear that, when it came to my marriage, I was "the rock". I ran the household, and directed the discipline and controlled money, time, and major decisions... we weren't 'kinky', but I could no more put aside my need to direct my own life and the lives of those who put their faith in me than I could stop breathing... but this man, willing though he was to let me run every other aspect of our household to suit me, stepped up to bar my mother from our home and even from contact and conversation. So when I hear people screaming "abusive... abusive" and being so vehement about stating that -every- situation is the same and underneath its all about insecurity and abuse, I have to shake my head and wonder about how people who know -virtually nothing- about another person's circumstance except for a few words on a message board can be so certain of what is going to be 'healthy' for that person and relationship.

Everything boils down to intention, responsibility, and consent. If all of those things are present, and the people who are involved have a level of trust and respect for one another (yes, respect) and for the sanctity of their -relationship-, pursuant to its terms, then the relationship is healthy, regardless of the opinions of outsiders concerning the trappings that relationship contains.

Dame Calla

*PS: I need to state here, that my father eventually -did- come to both cherish and respect me. But he only did so after 10 years of no contact, and me standing up and telling him, in no uncertain terms, that if he wished to have a relationship with me, he would have to accept who and what I was... and if he felt that he couldn't do that, with solid information about the reality of what I was and how I lived, in a way that was going to be healthy for -him- in accepting things he found distasteful without that information, then maybe it would be better if we just didn't communicate. He chose contact, and has learned a LOT about alternative ways of living since then. He's still skittish about some of it, but has been gracious and accepting of myself, my companions, my piercings and tattoos, my belief-path, my work, and has accepted me as an adult -friend-... and without my ex's input, I don't think that would have ever happened.

< Message edited by CallaFirestormBW -- 6/21/2009 12:54:32 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 Toppingfrmbottom)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 12:54:11 PM   
Firebirdseeking


Posts: 477
Joined: 9/3/2006
Status: offline
Not at all.  But if , for example, someone posts that he or she and his or her partner have multiple partners, and do not practice safe sex, I am going to say that is wrong.  Irresponsible.  Possibly life threatening to all involved.

(in reply to daddysprop247)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 1:18:17 PM   
oceanwinds


Posts: 530
Status: offline
Since I do not live any lifestyIe, I prefer to omit this word for my response here. Banned friendships without a reason that is supportive to the s-type would be confusing to me. If you need to train someone, I would assume the s-type you are choosing to train would be aware of it. If agreed then it is their thing. For me it would be a no go.

When married, seldom did he put controls on who i seen or if I could keep them as a friend. There were 2 or 3 that he did not want me to associate with. In 29 years, that is not bad. He also knew the affect my family had on me and did step in often. True i was not a slave, this was my husband. He cared about the all of me, even to the point that when he found out he only had a matter of a couple years left, that I would know how to live. He did not want to leave behind an empty shell within me. That would have been an insult to his name and to all he was. This is why he helped me to maintain friends, and to be part of the world. He did not want my spirit to die with him, and he did all he could to make sure my mind set was not there. Naturally when death came i became empty for bit and my world came crushing down, but i also had his words and teachings with his love for me. Without those it would been harder for me to move on. If he kept me isolated from everyone, it would have been a diservice to me.

With that said, and I am not here to debate right or wrongs of isolation for training, be careful though with the spirit within your s-type. When banning friends and faminly think hard on who she will have if something happens to you.  I am grateful I never had to experience this, and that hubby loved me enough to not cut me off from the world.

_____________________________

I know where I came from and where I am today. I am forever grateful to all that touched my life. Thank you all and especially you, Goddess.

(in reply to Firebirdseeking)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 1:26:32 PM   
daddysprop247


Posts: 1712
Joined: 6/24/2005
From: DC Metro area
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Firebirdseeking

Not at all.  But if , for example, someone posts that he or she and his or her partner have multiple partners, and do not practice safe sex, I am going to say that is wrong.  Irresponsible.  Possibly life threatening to all involved.


the statements in bold are simply personal opinion. the last statement is a fact, however it is a fact which can apply to nearly everything in life (driving, walking, exercise, sleeping, eating, etc.).

what your, or anyone else's for that matter, personal values and ideas of right and wrong have to do with what defines the D/s lifestyle, i don't know. many things i see and hear from others go against my own personal moral or ethical code, however D/s is not defined by right/wrong, good/bad, or any other such subjective ideas.

(in reply to Firebirdseeking)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 1:54:05 PM   
leadership527


Posts: 5026
Joined: 6/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: daddysprop247
the statements in bold are simply personal opinion. the last statement is a fact, however it is a fact which can apply to nearly everything in life (driving, walking, exercise, sleeping, eating, etc.).


You know I just can't help shake the feeling that I'm lining up on the wrong side of this debate, but once again I have to agree with this *laughs*

Look, as a society, we tolerate all kinds of risky behavior. Yes, those risks are spread across the rest of us and so it is quite reasonable to say that the "less risky" people pay for the lifestyles of the "more risky" ones. But that is a function of our society and, apparently, we've more or less worked it out to our collective satisfaction. In fact, a large number of BDSM practices fit into this category -- risk that the "edge players" are asking the rest of society to pay for. So why is this any different? Insofar as I can see, none of this becomes a moral or ethical judgement unless there is less than full disclosure going on with the parties involved. But nobody's said that.

Do we judge all swingers (loose wording) this way or only when the swinging dynamic (whatever that is) also aligns with an M/s dynamic?

< Message edited by leadership527 -- 6/21/2009 1:55:06 PM >


_____________________________

~Jeff

I didn't so much "enslave" Carol as I did "enlove" her. - Me
I want a joyous, loving, respectful relationship where the male is in charge and deserves to be. - DavanKael

(in reply to daddysprop247)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 2:11:39 PM   
DomImus


Posts: 2004
Joined: 3/17/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CatdeMedici

One of the things I am always intrigued about is the "banned friendship" aspect that I see all too often in this life--now I get it if the friend or relative creates drama or destruction in the submissive, but banning contact with friends, relatives because... well what would be a reason to isolate a submissive from seemingly normal yet vanilla friends or for that matter other friends in the life be they D or s? The only answer I can come up with is insecurity---am I way off base?
 
I'd like some enlightenment...


I think to put this question into proper perspective we could assemble a group of vanillas and let them view some of the things you or I do as part of our D/s relationships. They would not be able to see the rationale in many cases. Just as they could not see our rationale I think you may have trouble seeing someone else's rationale in doing things. Control is control. I do it my way and I don't try to rationalize how other people do it at their local level based on my own personal yardstick. It could be insecurity on the part of the banner or the fact that the banned is a poor influence on the submissive in question or it could be any of a myriad of other protocol based reasons.

I stopped trying to make sense of how others live their lives about the same time I insisted that they stop trying to make sense of the way I live mine.




(in reply to CatdeMedici)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 2:30:12 PM   
Firebirdseeking


Posts: 477
Joined: 9/3/2006
Status: offline
General reply:

Then we might as well say it is ok, for example, to drink and drive because it is a personal decision to do so, and the drunk person is aware of the risk.  And that we should not drive cars because we might meet up with a drunk driver.

I realize I am somewhat off the topic here.  I believe values are a part of a relationship, as is responsibility, and it was my understanding that SSC was one of the pillars of "the Lifestyle".  "Sane" being obviously open to interpretation.

(in reply to DomImus)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 2:40:14 PM   
OrionTheWolf


Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline
Not everyone in the lifestyle, or these types of relationships (which would be seperate really) pratices SSC. Instead they may use RACK or MWTINH (My way there is no highway). When something is obviously dangerous to any that would look at the situation, is different than a narrow view of saying something is wrong. Maybe that drunk driver is not drunk, and having a diabetic attack.

Isolation works for some, for different reasons, and different methods. It is not always abusive, nor is it always detrimental. That is the point. Your comments come across as there is only one true way, and you are the one to determine that. Which is a correct statement when you add, there is only one true way for you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Firebirdseeking

I realize I am somewhat off the topic here.  I believe values are a part of a relationship, as is responsibility, and it was my understanding that SSC was one of the pillars of "the Lifestyle".  "Sane" being obviously open to interpretation.


_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to Firebirdseeking)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 2:48:32 PM   
leadership527


Posts: 5026
Joined: 6/2/2008
Status: offline
Well stated Orion.

Show me actual harm in an actual relationship and I don't like it. But the fact that some specific dynamic wouldn't work for most people doesn't invalidate it for some. I think I'd be perfectly happy with some general guidance that said something like, "In general, isolating the submissive from all outside contact is a risky move and one that is unlikely to work out well in most cases." That's probably true enough. But most cases are not specific cases.

_____________________________

~Jeff

I didn't so much "enslave" Carol as I did "enlove" her. - Me
I want a joyous, loving, respectful relationship where the male is in charge and deserves to be. - DavanKael

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 2:59:02 PM   
variation30


Posts: 1190
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: Alabama
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CatdeMedici

One of the things I am always intrigued about is the "banned friendship" aspect that I see all too often in this life--now I get it if the friend or relative creates drama or destruction in the submissive, but banning contact with friends, relatives because... well what would be a reason to isolate a submissive from seemingly normal yet vanilla friends or for that matter other friends in the life be they D or s? The only answer I can come up with is insecurity---am I way off base?
 
I'd like some enlightenment...


my fiancee is a very social person. I am not. I limit my real life friends to people I've known and like for two decades or so, to people who have similar political/economic views as myself (as an anarcho-capitalist, that's a very small group), and people with similar aesthetic views as mine (again, a very small group). This leaves the number of people  would consider friends nationally at <10. The number of friends I have in the town in which I attend school is around four. I'm civil to most other people, but I consider them to be either banal to such degree that I get chestpains or so unprincipled that I could never take them seriously as a human being. I have a strong disdain for the masses - though I have no problem interacting with them for a mutually beneficial exchange (e.g. frequenting a bar where the bartender is a drunken, dishoenst, pig so I can get out of my apartment and relax). My fiancee, though having almost identical views as myself, is very social and sincerely enjoys having friends who are not like her...or as I put it, who are her lessers. For example, I don't like seeing her hang around most of the people from her atheist group not because they are atheists (as I am one myself) but because most of them are petty, unintelligent, and hypocritial. In my eyes, it is as if such affiliations sully her. She is beautiful and brilliant and is doing nothing but wasting precious time and her wonderful mind on such...people. I would compare it to me lending a cd of Schoenberg's 'Transfigured Night' to a friend only to find out that he made a techno remix from it.

however, such interactions make her happy. Her happiness is the reason I brutalize her and it is the reason I do not ban her from certain people. I can imagine myself doing such in the future - being so disappointed with the company she keeps and how she would be better off without them, but as of right now, it's not too much of an issue.

in summary, she is mine. what she does and what she is reflects upon me. if some of her relationships make her anything less than the jewel she is now, then I'll sever that relationship.


_____________________________

all the good ones are collared or lesbians.

or old.

(in reply to CatdeMedici)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: Banned Friendships - 6/21/2009 3:05:33 PM   
variation30


Posts: 1190
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: Alabama
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: IronBear

In a few cases where it is evident that the friend is unable to handle the D/s or M/s relationship and starts working to cause a rift, that interfering person should legitimately banned. 


If the woman is sincere about her role in life, this would never be a problem.


_____________________________

all the good ones are collared or lesbians.

or old.

(in reply to IronBear)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Banned Friendships Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
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

0.094