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

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



Message

LillyoftheVally -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 7:32:13 AM)

I want to second loving the.darkness' pictures. I swear one day when I dont have a job interview (Which I got by the way) I shall be up there with bells on posing away.



CreativeDominant -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 8:10:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady


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.
Hmmmmmmmmm...an interesting speculation enters into the equation here then, one thaat has been discussed on the boards before.  A D/s dynamic alongside a love-based relationship.  Which one rules?  Can they exist alongside each other (personally, I think they can which is why I search for someone to not only be my submissive but my partner) in harmony or are there going to be trouble spots along the way?  Hypothetically...let's say the master insists on having passwords to all of her accounts and yet, she cannot have access to his without asking permission, is he wrong because that is unfair from a D/s standpoint or is he wrong because that is unfair from a romantic standpoint?  But isn't there an inherent unfairness in the structuring of a D/s dynamic?  And what if she has agreed to this rule, unfair or not?  Is she allowed to overrule his "Dominant-to-submissive" command and go snooping if he leaves his account open because, after all, it was left open in plain view?  And after she read one incriminating email...which she should not have read in the first place...then is it right for her to continue snooping because now she has "found evidence"?  And if she finds no more, not even from the same lady?  Then does she say "I'm sorry, honey" and invoke the "you have to remember, I am protecting my status in my love relationship with you and that overrules my D/s dynamic with you in which I have agreed to obey you?"

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."   New to what?  Being in a love relationship?  or being in a D/s dynamic?  Does being new justify being a snoop?  See the above.
quote:

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.
What is more unethical?  His coming on to other submissives when he had agreed to a monogamous situation?  Agreed.  However, you are rationalizing her actions..."well, of COURSE once you find one, you are forgiven for searching for more...you HAVE to."  No...you don't. There is another choice:  You can choose not to violate your own code of ethics further and decide that the one you looked at...which you should not have OPENED to look at in the first place...is enough to confront him with.

quote:

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?
You said it yourself...that is an extreme example.  Again, we are talking of degree of danger and the bugaboo excuse of "well, he might be bringing me STDs" doesn't cut it either.  He was fucking other girls before he met her and she has decided that it is safe to be with him...why?  Because the minute you enter into a partnership with someone new, you are automatically protected from what he/she did BEFORE you?  Sorry...that is not how it works.

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. You are right....I WOULD state that.  But there again, call me cynical or call me overly suspicious but if I were to ask something of someone and they didn't answer, I am of the bent to ask them again and when they complainingly say "Yes, of course I agree...I thought that I didn't need to answer because the answer is obvious", I tell them that nothing in life is obvious and I have no intention of entering into something wherein there has not been vocal agreement.  Saves time and trouble later and denies them that little escape hatch that he tried to use.

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.I may be wrong as to whether or not it is a crime.  I can tell you that from my own standpoint, it is wrong.  I never opened my ex-wife's mail and I never went looking in her purse without asking her first.  I was raised that something that belonged to someone else was not mine to explore.  Legally, you may have no right to expect privacy regarding your mail once it is out of your mail box but ethically?  In my world, you do.

quote:

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.
Not from a legal standpoint, no...probably not.  From an ethical one?  Open to interpretation by each and every one of us.

quote:

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.
Whooooooaaaaaaaaaaaaaa...hold on a minute.  You wish to invoke the law by stating that he had NO legal right to privacy and could not fall back on the law but you want to invoke the law to give her the legal right to search???  In the first place, our legal system provides for a seach by law enforcement, not private citizens.  In the second place, if he has no legal rights regarding mail once it is out of the box, she has no legal rights regarding the reading of that mail.
quote:

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."
Again, there are other reasons to see what she did as unethical.  One of them being a right to expectation of privacy.  The first note?  Maybe.  Searching for more in a deliberate fashion?  No.  She was not married to the man so she could not even claim "wifely" right as her defense.  Now, I don't see where any of this justifies what he did.  He agreed to something and could not abide by it.  He doesn't get a free pass by pulling out the "because I am Master and this is New Law" card.  But neither does his bad behavior justify her own.  That's tit for tat, like little kids on a playground..."he hit me so I shoved him into the dirt".  "He shoved me into the dirt so I kicked him in the nuts" while conveniently forgetting that someone had to start it.  He did.  She found out.  As I noted earlier, it only took one note to give her ammunition to ask him for a serious discussion.  This is not a case of "if 1 is good, 100 are better".

quote:

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.
No argument from me here.
quote:

By not saying so, he started from a position lacking in ethics and integrity, and therefore was not deserving of receiving either.
Yes, he did.  But please do not forget that she picked the choice that his silence meant agreement rather than making sure that it did.  And again, I maintain my position that her finding that first indication that he hadn't been did NOT invoke the clause of "at this point, ANYTHING I choose to do...including more snooping...is o.k. because his behavior seems to be worse".  You always have choices and laying off your choice of the more irresponsible or unethical or illegal or immoral route because someone else did something just as bad is laying off of personal thought, personal soul-searching and personal responsibility.  Or don't submissives have to do that work, even when the dominant has done something wrong?  Or does that work only come when the dominant is right...or has made the choices easy....or when it suits their agenda?  Don't get me wrong, Dominants have to do that work too but in truth, it is work that someone makes a conscious choice to do. 
quote:

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.
Agreed....and here we get to the crux of the matter.  To me, the minute he said "trust me", he was giving vocalization to the agreement to be honest.  The fact that HE could not be does not justify her further snooping.

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.Again...as shown above...I disagree.  It is still the same argument...his behavior automatically excuses ANY of her behavior.  While I concede the point that her behavior is not as bad nor as unethical, she herself amped up the degree of how bad her behavior was...still less than his...by continuing to snoop.  If you are going to be honest and trustworthy, the fact that someone else does something which is not honest and trustworthy to you does not justify you giving up your own moral code.

quote:

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.
Plain and simple...bull.  If you want to know, ask.  If you find one thing, then don't go looking for more...ask.  We talk about honesty and communication and all of that...why not step up and be true to what you say you are and confront rather than fall to the level that you suspect they have? 



SimplyMichael -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 9:14:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark

I find both of you, unethical.

the.dark.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark

I never get why you have to be so nasty or base people on the way you may behave yourself. 

the.dark.


Can you explain how you were being whatever you think you were being but I was being "nasty"?  I was for the above remark and others like it in this thread that I thought I would mention to the pot that it was every bit as black as the kettle.

quote:

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.


Ah, and here we see extenuating circumstances and a request for sympathy that was in no way evident when you wrote : "I find both of you, unethical."  I am a big believer in acting ethically and have what I think are high standards but part of my ethics is sympathy for others.

And oh my god yes do I look forward to meeting the two of you!  I specifically asked Merc what he thought of the two of you and he spoke highly of both of you which is why I have been doing my best to find common ground.  Not only that, I tend to fight most with people who I end up being dear friends with, Merc and I used to rail against each other in the political threads till I "won"....actually we do our best to steer clear of talking politics although after the last election, my heart isn't in it anymore.



daintydimples -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 9:33:40 AM)

Okay, I really have to weigh in here *cracking tiny knuckles.*

Although I agree reading someone's mail is unethical, reading mail someone left open is human. Reading that mail and finding highly dishonest not to mention hurtful information about your other and then going on to read more mail, again, human. Who among us could find themselves in that situation and not read on?

I seriously doubt I could stop myself, even though I like to think of myself as a highly ethical person. I know I'm going to get a lot of flak for this statement but ethics do tend to be situational. I can easily say, "I am no thief !" But if I were dying of starvation, you don't think I'd steal a loaf of bread?

To compare the subs reading of the mail to this man's (I won't call him a dom) blatent dishonesty and lack of ethics (not just to his current submissive, but to the many women he was playing around with) is like comparing apples and oranges.

And to the OP: I hope you have disassociated yourself from this person for good. Liars lie and cheaters cheat, it doesn't get better.




Mercnbeth -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 9:46:17 AM)

quote:

Does a Master have an absolute right to do as he pleases?
 
in this slave's universe He does.  if it makes Him happy...this slave is all for it.
 
then again, we don't have the type of relationship where this slave limits Him as to what He can and cannot do, which includes what He cares to share with this slave and what He cares to keep from her.
 
if you had read his mail and didn't find anything which offended you, would you have confessed your unethical behavior?



janiebelle -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 9:49:34 AM)

DD, I seey our point.  And you are right, ethics are situational, as much as we would rather they weren't.
I think it is wrong to pyroot anyone's private things, but like we see here, sometimes it happens.  And no good comes of it.
The line between what is private and what is secret is often blurry.  And how much access you give someone to your private/secret things is something you should consider carefully.  Complete transparency is tough, and not always the best thing for everyone.
YMMV,
j



RCdc -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 9:53:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael
Can you explain how you were being whatever you think you were being but I was being "nasty"?  I was for the above remark and others like it in this thread that I thought I would mention to the pot that it was every bit as black as the kettle.


Then colourmeconfused.[;)]
Because you quoted me, and because your post was redirected to me, it reads that you were saying I was was kicking the OP when she was down and made the observation that Master and I have a 'perfected ethics'.  You will need to clear up your position on this before I can respond.  It could simply be an issue of misunderstanding and miscommunication.

quote:

Ah, and here we see extenuating circumstances and a request for sympathy that was in no way evident when you wrote : "I find both of you, unethical."  I am a big believer in acting ethically and have what I think are high standards but part of my ethics is sympathy for others.


This is where we part I guess.  I lack sympathy and find it a bit insincere on a personal level.  But that's just me.  And yes, I am very aware that does come across as condecending in the written word - probably in the spoken too.  It is not meant to be, just personal preference.
But personally I have empathy instead of sympathy.  I don't feel sorry for people or see people as suffering and want to fight to save them.  Instead I feel the pain and the suffering instead and suffer alongside if I am permitted to.  You cannot know pain until you feel it, you can only offer empty words.   I can't just wish someone good luck unless I really feel them or mean it.  I do not participate in threads I cannot relate to because that would be me being false.  That's just my ethics I guess.

the.dark.



CreativeDominant -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 12:00:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: daintydimples

Okay, I really have to weigh in here *cracking tiny knuckles.*

Although I agree reading someone's mail is unethical, reading mail someone left open is human. Reading that mail and finding highly dishonest not to mention hurtful information about your other and then going on to read more mail, again, human. Who among us could find themselves in that situation and not read on?

I seriously doubt I could stop myself, even though I like to think of myself as a highly ethical person. I know I'm going to get a lot of flak for this statement but ethics do tend to be situational. I can easily say, "I am no thief !" But if I were dying of starvation, you don't think I'd steal a loaf of bread?

To compare the subs reading of the mail to this man's (I won't call him a dom) blatent dishonesty and lack of ethics (not just to his current submissive, but to the many women he was playing around with) is like comparing apples and oranges.

And to the OP: I hope you have disassociated yourself from this person for good. Liars lie and cheaters cheat, it doesn't get better.


Again...I don't believe many, if any, have stated that her behavior is just as bad as his was.  But that still doesn't give her a pass.  Tis one thing to snoop on your children, tis another to snoop on your husband//wife and tis another thing to snoop on your dominant/submissive (though given all the lip service we pay to communication and honesty and transparency, I still don't see why, after discovery of the first note, she didn't confront him with it and hang onto her own moral code, given she prizes morals so highly iin others).

This notion that cheaters and liars are worse than snoops...given most situations...is probably correct.  But just because one thing is wrong does not take away from something else being wrong.  Even the OP admits that.



RCdc -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 1:18:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: janiebelle
Complete transparency is tough, and not always the best thing for everyone.


I completely agree.  It's not for everyone and not a way that everyone wants to go.
 
the.dark.



lally2 -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 1:35:56 PM)

im going to throw in a hypothetical here -

what if this guy enjoys playing games.  the sort of games that would get a reaction like jealousy, insecurity - by doing that he gets off on it, maybe, or he gets reassured that she cares enough to be upset.

frazzle, what you described is another aspect of this, only he leaves the messages on youre computer - same game.

being manipulated into a state of insecurity enough to read his activity on the pc is also part of the game.

honey, youre well away and well out of it.  sounds like a mind-fucker with no other angle than to reassure his own fragile ego.

and frankly, poo to ethics.  ill hazzard he'd given her cause to be suspicous and she did the only thing she could in terms of ensuring her own self worth, she outed the bugger - good on ya!

ill bet he left the computer on for her to read anyway - all part of the game.  no point playing if you dont get to share.



Missokyst -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 2:27:21 PM)

OP While I do think what you did was wrong in reading his email, I applaud you for your composure.  I don't play games and I do not like it when people play me like I am stupid.  I would have been PISSED OFF and left immediately.  He might have been testing you or he might have been an idiot for leaving that page up, either way it had the same effect, getting you out of his life.
Any way you look at it, it is the act of a coward.  Games serve no end except to move on to the next player.
Kyst



sweetsub1957 -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 4:18:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

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.



Maybe I did sound a bit harsh to some, but I wasn't calling her untrustworthy because she discovered he was cheating on her.  I called her untrustworthy because she read his e-mails, and the e-mails in question could have been about anything.  The fact is she read e-mails that were not addressed to her and that is what makes her untrustworthy, not the discovery she made.  The fact that she read subsequent e-mails and not just the one in plain view didn't make it look any better. 

At the same time, he is also untrustworthy because he was lying to all those other women about being unattached.  And he never promised the OP honesty, but he was being sneaky by hiding his activities from her.  And really, how trustworthy can someone be if he or she won't promise honesty?  That would be red flag for me.

From my POV, both of them are unethical.  To me, something is either ethical or not, two wrongs don't make a right.  It's like you can't be a little bit pregnant, either you are or you aren't.  Bottom line?  Right or wrong, now they know they aren't compatible.



WyldHrt -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 4:53:19 PM)

quote:

I called her untrustworthy because she read his e-mails, and the e-mails in question could have been about anything.

quote:

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)."

Doesn't really sound like the emails were about knitting or gardening to me.



DarkSteven -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 4:54:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

Does a Master have an absolute right to do as he pleases?
 
in this slave's universe He does.  if it makes Him happy...this slave is all for it.
 
then again, we don't have the type of relationship where this slave limits Him as to what He can and cannot do, which includes what He cares to share with this slave and what He cares to keep from her.
 
if you had read his mail and didn't find anything which offended you, would you have confessed your unethical behavior?


I'm going to disagree with you here while agreeing...

There is no question that you consider Merc to be your Master.  He has earned that consideration and continues to do so.

If he were to lie, cheat, and steal, you would lose respect for him, and he would cease to be your Master.

The fool about whom OP writes cheated on her.  He lied to her as well.  When caught, he did not apologize or show any indication that he gave a shit about the lies he has told others or her, or the pain he caused and will cause in the future.

He ain't no Master.  As such, your statements about what a Master can and cannot do, do not apply to him.



IronBear -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 7:00:13 PM)

There is an interesting twist to the reading of other's mails and what have you on the computer. A few years ago a male slave collared to Neets and living TPE with us used to tell both of us he left his computer on so we could both read his mails. When later things were becoming evident that he wasn't going to work out, we read his evening's logs and not to our surprise found he was planning on leaving and becoming a Dominant to a slave girl collared to me but released for telling me porkies. Their conversations showed the enormity of her lies and the length she had been telling them and his verbal abused against both Neets and I. When confronted, he flew into a temper tantrum more like a 14 year old school girl on her first period. he was horrified that we had actually taken him at his word and read his chat logs. Mind you he was more worried about that than he was about the proof I had of his thievery steeling form friends and family during his time with us. 



sweetsub1957 -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 7:42:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: WyldHrt

quote:

I called her untrustworthy because she read his e-mails, and the e-mails in question could have been about anything.

quote:

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)."

Doesn't really sound like the emails were about knitting or gardening to me.



I agree.  It's NOT fun.  Awhile back, I had just started seeing a Dom & accidentally, through a slip-up of his, I found out he lied to me, so I KNOW how shitty it feels.  It's totally fucked up.  But if I had seen that thread and the heading, I would've questioned him about it at the earliest available opportunity, but I would not have read the e-mails.  Without being unethical about it, the thread and heading would've been enough that he couldn't have wiggled his way out of it.  I mis-worded it when I said "the e-mails in question could have been about anything."  What I was trying to say was, it's unethical to read someone else's mail regardless of the contents therein.  It's terrible what happened to her and I just hope she can move on & find the right, honest, Dom.



Mistressbinature -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 7:42:43 PM)


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.





Does this man think you have idiot stamped on you ass? I am sorry but it appears you have been played for a fool



LafayetteLady -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 7:44:09 PM)

FR

So many people hear are very quick to talk about ethical behavior while at the same time, posting responses that would be, by their code, highly unethical, rude and plain mean. Ethics is a moral code, a person's checks and balances of right and wrong. While two wrongs don't make a right, not all wrongs are equal. Those that say they would never tell a white lie to spare a friend's feelings are likely being dishonest in making the statement to begin with.

Has anyone thought about what might cause looking to begin with? Well, let's see....she stated that the subject lines were a bit disturbing. Should she have just questioned him there, which would have given him a much easier opportunity to lie more? After reading the first email, some say she should have stopped. Again, easier to explain away than several emails. One email may be written off as a "game," several is establishing just how far he has gone to violate her trust.

And what about trust? When someone gives their trust to someone and it is violated, their is a high risk that a future relationship will take more time to establish trust. They apparently hadn't reached that point. Comparing her 6 month relationship to those of couples who have been together for several years and whose dynamic is not comparable to what she was working towards is nothing more than spin.

While sweet is right that you can't be a "little bit pregnant," again, all wrongs are not equal. I know how much people don't like the legal comparisons, but they are easiest to establish a point. Murder is wrong, most can agree on that. But if someone breaks into your home and is going to kill you and your family, are you equally wrong in defending yourself and killing him? Most will say no, it was JUSTIFIED. In fact, that is why the law allows for JUSTIFIABLE homicide, because while it remains wrong in the most technical sense, it is LESS wrong because of the reason. So when she saw subjects indicating she was being violated, she took the steps to find out how much.

I seriously doubt that the majority who claim they are so much more ethical than the rest of us, that ethics are purely black and white, with no shades of gray are doing much more than giving lip service. Because if you think of the above example, unless you say that the person who killed in protection of their own and their families lives should suffer the same punishment as the intruder attempting to kill them, you are admitting that there is gray. The only point you are making is that some things ARE more wrong than others, and negating any prior points you may have tried to make.

Another example, it is wrong to be late for work, does the reason matter? Is being late for work worthy of the same punishment as embezzling from the company? Remember, those of you who are saying "wrong is wrong," "unethical is unethical" then doing the wrong is all that matters, not the mitigating circumstances surrounding it. And what about your personal morals and ethics when you are so eager and willing to point out another's part in the failure of a relationship while they are still hurting? Is it because you don't know them, and so it doesn't matter?

Do that many of you feel that you have risen above basic human behavior?

CreativeDominant,

Yes, the rules can *sometimes* be very different when it is a loving D/s relationship. The stakes are higher, and yes it is basically because hearts are involved. The only thing adding a D/s dynamic does really (in theory anyway) is cause the two people to discuss the boundaries of the relationship up front, something that doesn't necessarily happen in a vanilla relationship. After all, in vanilla, no one is typically going into it with the idea that they or their partner are going to be soley responsible the decisions. It does make a difference. As for which dynamic is "used" in the event of a break up, it doesn't really matter unless only one part of the dynamic was directly responsible. In other words, if monogamy was part of the agreement, and a partner cheats, the dynamic doesn't come into play. Monogamy was the expectation and the expectation was not met.




Mercnbeth -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 7:47:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

Does a Master have an absolute right to do as he pleases?
 
in this slave's universe He does.  if it makes Him happy...this slave is all for it.
 
then again, we don't have the type of relationship where this slave limits Him as to what He can and cannot do, which includes what He cares to share with this slave and what He cares to keep from her.
 
if you had read his mail and didn't find anything which offended you, would you have confessed your unethical behavior?


I'm going to disagree with you here while agreeing...

There is no question that you consider Merc to be your Master.  He has earned that consideration and continues to do so.

If he were to lie, cheat, and steal, you would lose respect for him, and he would cease to be your Master.

The fool about whom OP writes cheated on her.  He lied to her as well.  When caught, he did not apologize or show any indication that he gave a shit about the lies he has told others or her, or the pain he caused and will cause in the future.

He ain't no Master.  As such, your statements about what a Master can and cannot do, do not apply to him.



this slave thinks it is rather presumptuous of you to know what this slave would consider worthy of losing respect and ceasing to be this slave's Master entails.  all submissives are not the same...and neither are Masters.  You know absolutely nothing about our relationship if you think Master earned this slave's submission, to begin with or in the here and now.  not that you knew it when you wrote your response, but it is an insult, to this slave, for you to even suggest that she require(s) or had required Master to earn her submission.
 
in this slave's universe, (which she spoke of in her response to the OP), it IS all about Him...and this slave doesn't hold Him to the same standard He requires of her as far as transparency and full disclosure and brutal honesty and calling the shots is concerned.  sometimes she hopes He does lie to her...convincingly, even...especially when she is feeling old...or fat.  He can do whatever He wants, unlike the OP's Master, who was given limits on what He could or could not do as long as he wished to retain her as his submissive.
 
this slave does not require Master to tell her everything that is going on or has gone on in His life...past or present.  anything He does offer is appreciated as information He chooses to share---not information He is required to share.  there is no consequence for Master to face (contrary to the OP's declaration that she would end the relationship IF there was dishonesty involved) for telling something to this slave that is untrue.
 
he is...or was...her Master, because she considered him to be so.  he might not be one that YOU would call or consider Master, but that's merely your opinion, as was the rest of your response, not a statement of facts.



sweetsub1957 -> RE: Opinions,please, on ethical behavior (7/23/2009 7:59:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: IronBear

There is an interesting twist to the reading of other's mails and what have you on the computer. A few years ago a male slave collared to Neets and living TPE with us used to tell both of us he left his computer on so we could both read his mails. When later things were becoming evident that he wasn't going to work out, we read his evening's logs ....


I would not think it unethical to read someone else's e-mails when they've given me open-ended permission.  I have given - and received - that permission before, quite some time ago before I "discovered kink," and it would not bother me at all if Sir read all my e-mails right now.  As a matter of fact, I tell Him He's welcome to at any time.



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
4.492188E-02