RE: are we all "equal"?

RE: are we all "equal"? (Full Version)

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

Message

tazzygirl -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:07:14 PM)
and what about sadists in your philosophical question? where do they enter? i guess you and going to be disturbed... alot.

mnottertail -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:07:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alanshoreisgod And, frankly, any answer other than "yes, of course" is considerably disturbing. I will retire, as I do not wish to disturb you. Ron

tazzygirl -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:09:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Missokyst LOL then you really have me confused. How does this pertain to ds, nilla, life? We are different. Wouldn't we all know that by definition and at the very least by a visual representation of people? I would be a blue eyed blond if I could choose. I seriously do not understand your question if you meant to correlate this to bdsm. Kyst quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl ummm... i am saying we are all different... no one is equal to another. that was the basis for this whole thread. the thread was about being equal... more than.. less than... and the difference between the equality of humans vs the equality of lifestyle partners. the rest you will have to figure out.

RedMagic1 -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:12:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alanshoreisgod Are we, doms and subs, of equal value, of equal worth, as people, and as partners? And, frankly, any answer other than "yes, of course" is considerably disturbing. Out of curiosity, does your username mean that you are referring to yourself as a god? If so, how much does that disturb you? And if you are not "Alan," then Alan's whore is rather unfaithful, because she is spending a lot of time flirting with you. I imagine it's because she's a mere mortal, not divine like us Dominants.

Alanshoreisgod -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:14:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl and what about sadists in your philosophical question? where do they enter? I'm not sure how "sadists" are really relevant to the question. Sadists derive pleasure from causing pain. Pure and simple. That neither requires a violation of consent nor a feeling of some degree of innate "superiority. And because being a sadist does not, in any way, invalidate my point, I'm very curious why you felt the need to bring it up. quote: i guess you and going to be disturbed... alot. I'm often disturbed by people. Amongst the list of people that disturb me are those who seem to think that they're superior people compared to their partners (or perhaps more often than not, their hypothetical partners that they hope to have some day) because they refer to themselves in capitalized honorifics.

Missokyst -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:16:43 PM)
Then again, I don't judge my life by another's yardstick. Or care what someone else does within their relationship. But common sense should tell you that there are no hard and fast rules for all people. And power/equality only mean something when it affects you personally. I submit when I am in a relationship. I don't submit otherwise. I don't know what that has to do with equality, so I will pass on figuring that out. What I do, works and that is all that matters. Kyst

Alanshoreisgod -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:17:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 quote: ORIGINAL: Alanshoreisgod Are we, doms and subs, of equal value, of equal worth, as people, and as partners? And, frankly, any answer other than "yes, of course" is considerably disturbing. Out of curiosity, does your username mean that you are referring to yourself as a god? If so, how much does that disturb you? And if you are not "Alan," then Alan's whore is rather unfaithful, because she is spending a lot of time flirting with you. I imagine it's because she's a mere mortal, not divine like us Dominants. cough Alan Shore is a fictional character from a fictional TV show. A character which I happen to admire (for various reasons). Hence my tongue in cheek user name. And because my girlfriend introduced me to the TV show from which I drew the name, her user name here is equally tongue in cheek. I don't "refer to myself" as a god, and my girlfriend is quite not being unfaithful flirting with...me. 30 seconds with google could have answered that question for you.

alanswhore -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:17:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 quote: ORIGINAL: Alanshoreisgod Are we, doms and subs, of equal value, of equal worth, as people, and as partners? And, frankly, any answer other than "yes, of course" is considerably disturbing. Out of curiosity, does your username mean that you are referring to yourself as a god? If so, how much does that disturb you? And if you are not "Alan," then Alan's whore is rather unfaithful, because she is spending a lot of time flirting with you. I imagine it's because she's a mere mortal, not divine like us Dominants. My owner actually explained the usernames in a thread over in the introduction forum. It's a joking reference to a fictional character.

tazzygirl -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:19:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alanshoreisgod quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl and what about sadists in your philosophical question? where do they enter? I'm not sure how "sadists" are really relevant to the question. Sadists derive pleasure from causing pain. Pure and simple. That neither requires a violation of consent nor a feeling of some degree of innate "superiority. And because being a sadist does not, in any way, invalidate my point, I'm very curious why you felt the need to bring it up. quote: i guess you and going to be disturbed... alot. I'm often disturbed by people. Amongst the list of people that disturb me are those who seem to think that they're superior people because of their partners (or perhaps more often than not, their hypothetical partners that they hope to have some day) because they refer to themselves in capitalized honorifics. quote: even that doesn't really address the question. "Equity" in its most basic, refers to a sense of "fairness". A system that complies with our moral sense of right and wrong. As such I'd sincerely HOPE that all d/s relationships are "equitable", in that they are entered into with fully informed consent, free of coercion or threat. Which, as far as relationships go, is really all that "equitable" means. but, even beyond that other question... who decides what is "fairness"?

RedMagic1 -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:20:42 PM)
You certainly believe you are better than, well, me at least, if you think it is my job to google your username for you.

Alanshoreisgod -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:21:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl but, even beyond that other question... who decides what is "fairness"? Well I'm not sure any of us are particularly qualified to answer questions of such broad morality. For me and me alone, I gave my definition of what I feel is an "equitable" relationship. One entered into with informed consent by consenting, reasonably intelligent adults.

Alanshoreisgod -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:24:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 You certainly believe you are better than, well, me at least, if you think it is my job to google your username for you. Why would I need you to google my username for me? I know what it means. I made it. However, one would think that when presented with two options, either a) trying to make an effort to obtain information for themselves or b) making a presumption without information, or the least bit of effort to acquire it, until someone goes through the effort to correct them, MOST people would go for option "a". But that choice is ENTIRELY up to you.

ishyB -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:26:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alanshoreisgod Well I'm not sure any of us are particularly qualified to answer questions of such broad morality. For me and me alone, I gave my definition of what I feel is an "equitable" relationship. One entered into with informed consent by consenting, reasonably intelligent adults. Greetings Master, if I understand your point correctly; consenting, stupid adults should stay out of relationships? I wish you well, ishy

mnottertail -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:27:31 PM)
My definition of equality, equinamity, and equivalence is: The whale is undoubtably one of the largest mammals alive today. Ron

Alanshoreisgod -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:30:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ishyB if I understand your point correctly; consenting, stupid adults should stay out of relationships? Heh, well perhaps we'd all be better off if they did....but to be serious, I use the term "reasonably intelligent" in a more...technical fashion. By which I mean "of sufficient intellect so that they are aware of their circumstances and give meaningful consent" And, um, points to girlfriend she's going to hurt you if you call me that again :p

lronitulstahp -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:34:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 quote: ORIGINAL: Alanshoreisgod Are we, doms and subs, of equal value, of equal worth, as people, and as partners? And, frankly, any answer other than "yes, of course" is considerably disturbing. Out of curiosity, does your username mean that you are referring to yourself as a god? If so, how much does that disturb you? And if you are not "Alan," then Alan's whore is rather unfaithful, because she is spending a lot of time flirting with you. I imagine it's because she's a mere mortal, not divine like us Dominants. RedMagic...pay attention, like, the 'G' in god is lower-cased, obviously...like, sooo implicative of his not thinking...like, he's a deity, or whatever....blows a bubble, readjusts bra strap for the umpteenth time, absentmindedly twists hair, and flicks through newest copy of "InStyle" ~obtuse slut

RedMagic1 -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:35:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alanshoreisgod quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 You certainly believe you are better than, well, me at least, if you think it is my job to google your username for you. Why would I need you to google my username for me? I know what it means. I made it. However, one would think that when presented with two options, either a) trying to make an effort to obtain information for themselves or b) making a presumption without information, or the least bit of effort to acquire it, until someone goes through the effort to correct them, MOST people would go for option "a". But that choice is ENTIRELY up to you. Every post you make refers to a human being as a god. If you believe that people are equals, you contradict yourself every time you post. You can choose to label that contradiction as "humor," and take a "fuck 'em if they can't take a joke" attitude with people like me, who notice the discrepancy and don't realize it is humor because the way you post is not humorous. Or you can recognize that you are setting yourself up for miscommunication every time you hit the "OK" button. I believe it is my responsibility to communicate my ideas to others, wherever they are at. I don't believe I have the right to berate others for having less knowledge than I do. It takes more effort on my part. It is easier to blame others, instead of doing hard work. But if you truly believe others are equal to you, it makes no sense to try to diminish them because they are ignorant about a piece of popular culture.

barelynangel -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:36:25 PM)
Isn't Alan Shore a tv character on Boston Legal?

OrionTheWolf -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:38:59 PM)
What is that saying about lawyers and politicians?

mnottertail -> RE: are we all "equal"? (7/1/2009 6:41:39 PM)
The needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many? Spock

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125