RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior

RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master

Message

CreativeDominant -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/22/2009 2:59:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Goddess2002 I appreciate everyone's honest feedback...which was the basis of my ethical dilemma to begin with. Yes..it was wrong for me to read his messages...hands down. Yes, it was wrong for him to lie. So what does one do in a situation like that? We were both wrong. Another element to this is that recently when he gives me permission to speak freely to express a concern, etc, I am punished if I say something he doesn't like. So in a way I felt trapped because I had no venue to communicate with him. Keep in mind I was at the time a sub, not a slave. Although my heart misses him terribly, my head tells me it's time to move on. [X(] I'm sorry that the guy could not be honest with you. I disagree with an earlier poster that not commenting means "agreement"...there've been plenty of times when people have said things to me that I disagreed with and my silence was not because of "agreement", it was due to me formulating an answer that was tactful but honest. This guy had a problem with vocalizing his honest opinions. I am glad to see that you agree that your actions were also unethical. Someone's mail is THEIR mail, not yours. If it is a federal crime to open someone's mail, then I would say it is probably a crime to read someone's mail...and whether or not it has been left open in plain view doesn't matter. However, I don't think it is as unethical as his behavior. He was talking out of both sides of his mouth...telling you that he wants you, wants you for life, intends to collar you while all the while not following his side of a mutually-agreed upon "contract point" but instead, chatting up other submissives. But that's MY point of view. You have several choices to make. 1. Leave with nothing further being said 2. Relate to him exactly why you are leaving and then leave. 3. Ask him why you should stay given the breaching of your mutually-agreed upon pact to be monogamous, his inability to give a definitive answer regarding your dealbreaker about honesty, his pulling of the "dom" card. 4. Sit down and communicate in as honest and open fashion as you both can, see how he measures up in comparison, and decide whether or not you can go with that. If you can, then you stay and continue on. All of these choices are yours. Therefore, the consequences associated with each choice is yours. While his actions are responsible for provocation of your feelings of heartbreak and loss...no matter what some people feel about not being responsible for another's feelings..., the depth of that feeling and the means of expressing it is yours to control.

littlewonder -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/22/2009 4:48:53 PM)
Chalk it up to incompatibility, shrug it off, don't get angry and just walk away. Learn from this lesson though...much much much much more communication about your needs and wants BEFORE you get involved with someone. There really is no rush. If it's meant to be he'll still be there.

sweetsub1957 -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/22/2009 5:05:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HeavansKeeper quote: ORIGINAL: sweetsub1957 quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark quote: ORIGINAL: Goddess2002 quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark I find both of you, unethical. the.dark. Couldyou elaborate? I appreciate all input and am trying to use this as a learning experience. That means looking at my part in this as well. You read his mail. Whether it was in plain view or not, unless he instructed you to read them, then I find it unethical to have read through them at all. If Masters mail is open the immediate thought from me is to inform him that his account is still active and he then has the choice to close it or inform me to close it or to just keep it open. Regardless, I would not read through it anyway and just open another window. Your actions are just as unethical as his. Reading personal mail without permission is rude, nosey and impolite and sends up red flags for me as well as his actions. While the actions of this man are insincere and unethical, your actions are equally so, IMO. the.dark. Perfectly said, the.dark. My thoughts exactly. I disagree. An open email browser has zero expectation of privacy. It's like leaving a pink perfumed letter from his mistress on his desk. It invites speculation, most notably so if -without clicking- one is able to see the names of other women. No human adult can stop themselves from automatically reading words, why are they to blame for reading words put in front of them? In honest, the.dark (and Sweetsub) if you glanced at the screen and saw "fuck my brains out" would you be able to completely ignore such a sentence. What about other phrases? "Hyatt Hotel, 7:30 p.m." "Bring condoms." "put you on your back." "suck your cock." "kiss you all over." "lick you." "my mouth..." "rub your..." These phrases, and infinite others, warrant suspicion. I don't know what Goddess saw... or how far she clicked... or if she noticed he was logged in so she purposefully snooped... That information could change how I feel. This is my stance assuming the information was, truly, in plain view. Okay, I will say that yes, I would have a hard time not reading a message that was already opened up right in front of my eyes and, yes, I admit I may have read THAT one. But she read multiple messages, having had to open each one, except possibly the first one. In the OP, she said yes, I read the messages. They were in plain view. The messages were all initiated by him to sub females. He told them he was free (i.e., uninvolved), and each message seemed to be a sincere attempt to recruit them as potential slaves. He told them he was looking for long term...when he has been telling me he wants ME for life for the past six months! I still say she should not have opened up the additional messages. That was snooping. Too bad really, the end result is neither one of them is trustworthy.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/22/2009 6:12:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael I agree that it is rude, nosey, and impolite. HOWEVER, NONE of those things ranks up their with lying to other women about not having a partner, a HORRIBLE breach of integrity. Frankly, I can't imagine having someone I considered a serious partner who I wouldn't share my passwords with. I either trust them with my life or I don't. SimplyMichael, Thank you for pointing out that all things are not equal. Yes committing a crime is breaking the law, but there is a big difference between shop lifting and murder. quote: ORIGINAL: HeavansKeeper I disagree. An open email browser has zero expectation of privacy. It's like leaving a pink perfumed letter from his mistress on his desk. It invites speculation, most notably so if -without clicking- one is able to see the names of other women. No human adult can stop themselves from automatically reading words, why are they to blame for reading words put in front of them? The concept that within a D/s dynamic that people won't have "natural human tendancies" is why this happens. A submissive/slave is not "required" to give up their need to be loved or honesty. The "ethical" standards in a D/s relationship are not necessarily higher than in a vanilla. Notice I said a "relationship." I'm not talking about the service only, nothing more than a slave who means nothing to master type of situation. This is in regards to relationships where LOVE enters into the equation and is expected by both parties. quote: ORIGINAL: HeavansKeeper In honest, the.dark (and Sweetsub) if you glanced at the screen and saw "fuck my brains out" would you be able to completely ignore such a sentence. What about other phrases? "Hyatt Hotel, 7:30 p.m." "Bring condoms." "put you on your back." "suck your cock." "kiss you all over." "lick you." "my mouth..." "rub your..." These phrases, and infinite others, warrant suspicion. I don't know what Goddess saw... or how far she clicked... or if she noticed he was logged in so she purposefully snooped... That information could change how I feel. This is my stance assuming the information was, truly, in plain view. For just a moment, let's say she was snooping just for the sake of snooping. Had she found nothing, there would be two options. She could say nothing, but have the comfort of having found nothing to warrant any kind of worrisome ideas. She could have turned to him and said, "you left your email open and I read them. It was wrong, and I'm sorry, but I'm new to this and made a mistake." Once something is found, you are going to snoop more to see if maybe you misunderstood something somehow. After all, that first one violated her trust, and she wanted to know just how violated it was. One is definately more unethical than the other. Again, let's look at an extreme example. Say you are cleaning master's room and putting away his clothes. You drop a shirt on the floor and it lands on an open box that has a sheet of paper on top that is titled "how to murder your slave and get away with it" Are you seriously not going to look further? After all, he could be just writing a story or and after all, it's really none of your business. I know most of you will counter with, "but he would be putting me in danger and I have a right to know that." But you can't quantify being a snoop, nor can you determine what constitutes "danger" for someone else. As someone else mentioned, he could be bringing STDs to the relationship now. Is that not her business either because "master" can do what he pleases? quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant I'm sorry that the guy could not be honest with you. I disagree with an earlier poster that not commenting means "agreement"...there've been plenty of times when people have said things to me that I disagreed with and my silence was not because of "agreement", it was due to me formulating an answer that was tactful but honest. This guy had a problem with vocalizing his honest opinions. I seriously doubt that your silence had lasted days or months, rather than moments. I've read and respected many of your posts, and I don't believe that you are the type that if you needed to think about something even overnight, you wouldn't state that you were doing such. quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant I am glad to see that you agree that your actions were also unethical. Someone's mail is THEIR mail, not yours. If it is a federal crime to open someone's mail, then I would say it is probably a crime to read someone's mail...and whether or not it has been left open in plain view doesn't matter. Yea, this would be completely wrong, sorry. It is a federal crime to remove someone's mail from their mail box, not to open something left sitting on a table or read something left out in plain view. Further laws relating to the US Postal Service in no way, shape or form apply to the internet. There have been no test cases regarding the privacy rights of email other than in an employer/employee situation. To my knowledge, the expectation of privacy regarding email accounts on a home computer have not be tested by the courts and therefore there is no precedent, and ergo, no law regarding them. I am researching to see if some case shows up (which will likely be a matrimonial case) and will let you know should something turn up. In any case, at this point, it is relatively safe to assume that since he left the account in plain view, there was no expectation of privacy from a legal standpoint. Essentially, the concept of what she was doing being unethical technically would only apply had there been nothing to find. After all, our legal system provides for a search when there is a suspicion of unlawful behavior. Something in Goddess's mind gave her suspicion, whether it was the subject line of the email or what. The suspicion negated the ethical obligation. Like I said, had her suspicion and behavior not resulted in her finding the emails, her behavior could be reasonably questioned. However, once the incriminating information of the emails was known, her further searching was justified. Unless, of course, you are of the belief that he was justified in doing what he did, simply because he calls himself a "master." Honestly, if you tell someone that you REQUIRE honesty from them, and they are not sure that they can be honest with you, they have a moral obligation to say so. By not saying so, he started from a position lacking in ethics and integrity, and therefore was not deserving of receiving either. And saying "trust me" is implying that you are trustworthy. Part of being trustworthy is being honest. Anyone who can't see that is likely not very trustworthy themselves. quote: ORIGINAL: sweetsub1957 I still say she should not have opened up the additional messages. That was snooping. Too bad really, the end result is neither one of them is trustworthy. sweet, To say that she is untrustworthy because she discovered her partner was cheating on her is a bit harsh. After all, he is likely to continue in his duplicitous behavior and use the "because I'm master, king, chief asshole" excuse. However, in her next relationship, if her new partner doesn't give her reason to suspect him of being dishonest, she likely won't find herself in the same position of looking at the emails. There ARE situations where each of us would be prone to some type of snooping when we know something must be occurring behind out backs and we are desperate to find out what it is. When we take the risk of giving our hearts to someone, self preservation causes us to attempt to reduce having that risk end in heartbreak if it can be avoided.

HuskerDu -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/22/2009 6:56:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Goddess2002 I appreciate everyone's honest feedback...which was the basis of my ethical dilemma to begin with. Yes..it was wrong for me to read his messages...hands down. Yes, it was wrong for him to lie. So what does one do in a situation like that? We were both wrong. Another element to this is that recently when he gives me permission to speak freely to express a concern, etc, I am punished if I say something he doesn't like. So in a way I felt trapped because I had no venue to communicate with him. Keep in mind I was at the time a sub, not a slave. Although my heart misses him terribly, my head tells me it's time to move on. [X(] That, to me, is a read flag right there! If you're given permission to speak freely, and then are punished anyway, how does that render trust? [sm=wtf.gif]

RCdc -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 2:47:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark If Masters mail is open the immediate thought from me is to inform him that his account is still active and he then has the choice to close it or inform me to close it or to just keep it open. the.dark. That is a wonderful way of being, one I can greatly respect. It does however allow someone the chance to say "he doesn't trust me to view his email, now I get to decide if that is an issue or not" In this scenario I see many things. Either he felt he had nothing to hide and kept his mail open. Or he trusted that she wouldn't look OR he was testing her. Or the last, he fucked up and made a mistake. But regardless, she looked. It all comes down to personal ethics at the end of the day and if anyone used my PC, I would tell them their mail was left open and not read it. So for me, she did an unethical thing. quote: Your actions are just as unethical as his. Reading personal mail without permission is rude, nosey and impolite and sends up red flags for me as well as his actions. I agree that it is rude, nosey, and impolite. HOWEVER, NONE of those things ranks up their with lying to other women about not having a partner, a HORRIBLE breach of integrity. Frankly, I can't imagine having someone I considered a serious partner who I wouldn't share my passwords with. I either trust them with my life or I don't. Again, personal ethics I guess. For me, I do not see areas of one action is more wrong than another. They are both unethical. Master and I also do not have private accounts or passwords, hence the joint one here and elsewhere. I simply choose not to go read his mail unless I am instructed to search for something for him, or he shows me. But then we are in an established relationship and not everyone has that when they first begin a relationship. the.dark.

RCdc -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 2:55:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HeavansKeeper These phrases, and infinite others, warrant suspicion. I don't know what Goddess saw... or how far she clicked... or if she noticed he was logged in so she purposefully snooped... That information could change how I feel. This is my stance assuming the information was, truly, in plain view. If it was one page open, she of course, may be unable to miss something written. But she stated that she read multiple messages. Now seeing as messages are usually individual I read the statement as that she looked into it further. If it's plain view, I would have got straight up and instructed what I have seen and show him the screen. One would have been enough and I wouldn't have destroyed my integrity just to ruin more of his. the.dark.

RCdc -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 3:01:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Thank you for pointing out that all things are not equal. Yes committing a crime is breaking the law, but there is a big difference between shop lifting and murder. But we are not talking crime, we are talking ethics. In such a case, both are unethical. If you are talking crime, then murdering someone who was coming at you and your child with an axe, would be different than someone stealing a tv from an old woman to make their front room nicer. There is no difference from an ethical standpoint. Crime? Well that is more a gray area. the.dark.

Goddess2002 -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 3:08:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark quote: ORIGINAL: HeavansKeeper These phrases, and infinite others, warrant suspicion. I don't know what Goddess saw... or how far she clicked... or if she noticed he was logged in so she purposefully snooped... That information could change how I feel. This is my stance assuming the information was, truly, in plain view. If it was one page open, she of course, may be unable to miss something written. But she stated that she read multiple messages. Now seeing as messages are usually individual I read the statement as that she looked into it further. If it's plain view, I would have got straight up and instructed what I have seen and show him the screen. One would have been enough and I wouldn't have destroyed my integrity just to ruin more of his. the.dark. In retrospect...that's what Ishould have done....asked him to explain the screen first without going further. Hindsight is always 20/20. In all fairness, though...it's no fun to sit down to a computer and the first thing you see WITHOUT TOUCHING A KEY are email subject threads and pictures of your dom with headings that say "A Dom for you!" or "Looking for Play partners in (his city)."

DarkSteven -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 4:34:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael I agree that it is rude, nosey, and impolite. HOWEVER, NONE of those things ranks up their with lying to other women about not having a partner, a HORRIBLE breach of integrity. I agree with Michael here. In addition, I'll add that OP was shocked by the open email at the time and on the spur of the moment decided to open the others. No premeditation. The man sustained his lying/cheating over a period of time. Speaking practically, I could see OP never opening others' emails again but I could not see her man quitting his pattern of lying and cheating.

SimplyMichael -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 5:06:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Thank you for pointing out that all things are not equal. Yes committing a crime is breaking the law, but there is a big difference between shop lifting and murder. But we are not talking crime, we are talking ethics. In such a case, both are unethical. If you are talking crime, then murdering someone who was coming at you and your child with an axe, would be different than someone stealing a tv from an old woman to make their front room nicer. There is no difference from an ethical standpoint. Crime? Well that is more a gray area. the.dark. However, despite your having both perfected your ethics, you don't seem to have a problem kicking someone when they are down.

DemonKia -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 6:05:31 AM)
Two thoughts: Firstly, I'm intensely curious & love to 'snoop', tho' I pretty much always ask . ... For instance, I love to look thru my platonic lady friends' purses (after asking) . . ... . & in intimate relationship one of my conditions, that I bring up pretty quickly, is that I'm gonna wanna know everything about the other. & if the other is so interested in me as to want to read my emails, that's kinda exciting . . . . . . I don't have much use for secrets & hiding stuff, so I just don't get that whole part of people's discussion here . . . . . I cannot relate to the idea of 'Yeah, I want you to lick my private bits but don't read my email' -- for me, intimacy is intimacy, verbal, textual, physical, whatever . .... . So, the key, for me, is the whole informed consent thing . . . . . & it's as simple as stating, again & again, from the get-go that I don't 'do' secrets, that I'm only interested in conducting sexual-romantic-BDSM (especially BDSM) relationships in an open-book manner, all cards on the table face-up . . . . . . Secondly, the following was excellent, LafayetteLady . . . . . . quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant I am glad to see that you agree that your actions were also unethical. Someone's mail is THEIR mail, not yours. If it is a federal crime to open someone's mail, then I would say it is probably a crime to read someone's mail...and whether or not it has been left open in plain view doesn't matter. Yea, this would be completely wrong, sorry. It is a federal crime to remove someone's mail from their mail box, not to open something left sitting on a table or read something left out in plain view. Further laws relating to the US Postal Service in no way, shape or form apply to the internet. There have been no test cases regarding the privacy rights of email other than in an employer/employee situation. To my knowledge, the expectation of privacy regarding email accounts on a home computer have not be tested by the courts and therefore there is no precedent, and ergo, no law regarding them. I am researching to see if some case shows up (which will likely be a matrimonial case) and will let you know should something turn up. In any case, at this point, it is relatively safe to assume that since he left the account in plain view, there was no expectation of privacy from a legal standpoint. Essentially, the concept of what she was doing being unethical technically would only apply had there been nothing to find. After all, our legal system provides for a search when there is a suspicion of unlawful behavior. Something in Goddess's mind gave her suspicion, whether it was the subject line of the email or what. The suspicion negated the ethical obligation. Like I said, had her suspicion and behavior not resulted in her finding the emails, her behavior could be reasonably questioned. However, once the incriminating information of the emails was known, her further searching was justified. Unless, of course, you are of the belief that he was justified in doing what he did, simply because he calls himself a "master." Honestly, if you tell someone that you REQUIRE honesty from them, and they are not sure that they can be honest with you, they have a moral obligation to say so. By not saying so, he started from a position lacking in ethics and integrity, and therefore was not deserving of receiving either. And saying "trust me" is implying that you are trustworthy. Part of being trustworthy is being honest. Anyone who can't see that is likely not very trustworthy themselves. quote: ORIGINAL: sweetsub1957 I still say she should not have opened up the additional messages. That was snooping. Too bad really, the end result is neither one of them is trustworthy. sweet, To say that she is untrustworthy because she discovered her partner was cheating on her is a bit harsh. After all, he is likely to continue in his duplicitous behavior and use the "because I'm master, king, chief asshole" excuse. However, in her next relationship, if her new partner doesn't give her reason to suspect him of being dishonest, she likely won't find herself in the same position of looking at the emails. There ARE situations where each of us would be prone to some type of snooping when we know something must be occurring behind out backs and we are desperate to find out what it is. When we take the risk of giving our hearts to someone, self preservation causes us to attempt to reduce having that risk end in heartbreak if it can be avoided.

NihilusZero -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 6:43:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark But we are not talking crime, we are talking ethics. In such a case, both are unethical. If you are talking crime, then murdering someone who was coming at you and your child with an axe, would be different than someone stealing a tv from an old woman to make their front room nicer. There is no difference from an ethical standpoint. Crime? Well that is more a gray area. A tricky point in the situation being spoken of because many people are going to immediately make the two instances of ethical breach comparative. Her instance of it enabled her awareness of his. Plus, the 'ends justify the means' mentality is pretty prevalent. Of course, what is ethical is based on the relationship parameters. For instance, I would expect those in my relationship to be free to look through anything of mine and vice versa.

RCdc -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 6:47:39 AM)
Absolutely. It would be terrible to see such things. It also makes you lose perspective. No one is immune from that when emotions get in the way. It's always easy to look at things in retrospect and say 'do this do that'. I just perved your profile and that you were a dominant female before this encounter? Do not know if I am mistaken by that. If this is the case, what would you do if your s-type where to question you, as you had. Punish them? Tell them you can do what you want regardless of anyones feelings? I am pretty much guessing that you already know the answer and coming to the message boards was just for clarification to put your mind at rest. Regardless of how you handled the situation, you know what he did was unethical for you. And that at the end of the day it the most important thing you need to worry about - yourself. the.dark.

RCdc -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 7:06:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Thank you for pointing out that all things are not equal. Yes committing a crime is breaking the law, but there is a big difference between shop lifting and murder. But we are not talking crime, we are talking ethics. In such a case, both are unethical. If you are talking crime, then murdering someone who was coming at you and your child with an axe, would be different than someone stealing a tv from an old woman to make their front room nicer. There is no difference from an ethical standpoint. Crime? Well that is more a gray area. the.dark. However, despite your having both perfected your ethics, you don't seem to have a problem kicking someone when they are down. Michael, you simply cannot help but make things personal or attack people, can you? I haven't perfected any ethics, I just understand my own. I fail, just like any human being. I accept my failiure and move on or I get clarification from Master and other close friends that I did right or wrong. I never get why you have to be so nasty or base people on the way you may behave yourself. I was not kicking someone who is down. In fact I don't see the OP as 'down' and for me, it speaks a lot for people who do. I find her terribly courageous and not down at all, but a strong woman who is learning from a negative situation. Just because I may have a different set of ethics from her and maybe yourself, that doesn't mean I don't have empathy or admiration for a person. But then, this post is not all about you and your personal attacks on Master and myself, but maybe when we make Folsom with Mercnbeth, you will get to see we aren't as 'perfect' as you seem to believe our posts make you percieve, that we are just a normal couple with an authority dynamic who fuck up just like everyone does - even when we know the ethical course we might want to take and that sometimes, emotions or life, just gets in the way. the.dark.

NihilusZero -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 7:11:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark I was not kicking someone who is down. In fact I don't see the OP as 'down' and for me, it speaks a lot for people who do. I find her terribly courageous and not down at all, but a strong woman who is learning from a negative situation. No one thinking lucidly would have wrought that conclusion. The OP herself took your words to heart rather objectively: quote: ORIGINAL: Goddess2002 In retrospect...that's what Ishould have done....asked him to explain the screen first without going further. Hindsight is always 20/20. In all fairness, though...it's no fun to sit down to a computer and the first thing you see WITHOUT TOUCHING A KEY are email subject threads and pictures of your dom with headings that say "A Dom for you!" or "Looking for Play partners in (his city)."

RCdc -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 7:13:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero A tricky point in the situation being spoken of because many people are going to immediately make the two instances of ethical breach comparative. Her instance of it enabled her awareness of his. Plus, the 'ends justify the means' mentality is pretty prevalent. Of course, what is ethical is based on the relationship parameters. For instance, I would expect those in my relationship to be free to look through anything of mine and vice versa. Yup. The end justifys the means scenario is the tricky part. I have seen lots of times when an OP starts by admiting to reading mail and then being dumped, because there was nothing going on. People tear into them and cite a lack of trust being the issue, but because the ends justify the means in this case, the persons involved get different reactions from people. (Meh you said it better than me with less words....you are just far too articulate) [:D] I totally agree. Master and I never just 'had' a relationship. It takes time to work on the ethics, they don't just all appear on day one of the relationship. the.dark.

NihilusZero -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 7:17:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark (Meh you said it better than me with less words....you are just far too articulate) [:D] I totally agree. Master and I never just 'had' a relationship. It takes time to work on the ethics, they don't just all appear on day one of the relationship. the.dark. [:)] I think I'd mentioned it in a passing private message to you both before, but I'm still digging the (no longer quite so) new avatar!

LaTigresse -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 7:19:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Goddess2002 Long story short: I spent last week with my Dom, and during my stay we shared his computer. He left his inbox on another kink site open on the screen,and yes, I read the messages. They were in plain view. The messages were all initiated by him to sub females. He told them he was free (i.e., uninvolved), and each message seemed to be a sincere attempt to recruit them as potential slaves. He told them he was looking for long term...when he has been telling me he wants ME for life for the past six months! When I asked him about why he lied in the messages (and lied to me...he told me I was the only sub he wanted) he basically said "I was playing online and had no intention of following through." I had told him before we began training that the only thing that would cause me to request being let go is dishonesty. I have to note that he never agreed to be honest...only that he would protect me and care for me. We had discussed play with others and had agreed that we would be open and mutually engage potential play partners. So,in my fury, I basically told him I wanted nothing more to do with him,and that I was releasing myself. His point was that he is a Dom, a KING, a Master, and has the right to do as he pleases without me questioning him. Of course now I am heartbroken. So...I am confused. Did I have a right to question him? I believe trust is THE key element within a BDSM dynamic, and I could never see myself accepting a permanent collar and becoming a slave to a Master I don't trust. Does a Master have an absolute right to do as he pleases? Part of me believes that he left the messages open on purpose to prove the point that yes,he CAN do anything he wants, and as a sub, I have to like it. Any input would be appreciated. Thanks. I am going to answer with my own feelings before reading others and may have things to add after reading. While your reading his email is something I find bothersome and would be annoyed at where I him, I also understand human nature. Maybe he did do it on purpose to test you or he is forgetful like I am. Who knows... While you violated his privacy in snooping, you displayed typical human nature, something he should half expect, regardless. As for what to do, well that really is on you based upon the type of relationship you are willing to submit to. If honesty and integrity are vital to you, then I would say you've made the correct choice. Just the idea that he is leading others on is disgusting to me, let alone the fact that he is being deceitful with you, the woman actually IN his life. Basically, I don't think either of you have behaved in a manner I find appealing. Neither has displayed integrity. If I have an s-type in my house, I expect them to honour me by honouring my personal space. However, if they were in my home serving, they would have earned a certain level of trust from me and in return I would hope I had earned a great deal of trust from them. They would not have a reason to care about my email, and.......there would be nothing there to upset them should I give them access to it. It's a two way street, trust. Earning it and giving it. So, again, if honesty and integrity is vital to you, find in yourself what lead you to snoop and behave without integrity and you may find out why you were lead to submit to a man that also lives without integrity and honesty. Like usually attracts like. Granted I don't know either person and I could be way off base. I can only go by my own life experiences and what I've read in the OP.

RCdc -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 7:22:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero I think I'd mentioned it in a passing private message to you both before, but I'm still digging the (no longer quite so) new avatar! And your kind words are always appriciated. May not be there long, we have a new shoot planned for the weekend! (Well, that and seeing Gary Numan again yay!) the.dark.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875