|
NihilusZero -> RE: Forgetting to be a human being (7/29/2009 8:08:00 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: leadership527
OK, I don't know where you are going here NZ. Do you want my approval that you can be as picky as you'd like? You have it. Are you seriously arguing that there is no such thing as a flawed "mating plan"? You're not going to convince me of that so we can just agree to disagree. It's not that relevant anyway.
Yes. There is no such thing as a flawed mating plan if the people using it arrive at a successful result. This is obvious. The entirety of WIITWD specifically revolves around it.
No matter how ridiculous an idea, if two people can make it work for them, it is functional and propagates their interactive happiness. There's nothing flawed about that at all save whether the likelihood of the specific plan is so astronomically small that no one would believe it could happen.
quote:
ORIGINAL: leadership527
quote:
My personal preferences aside, I'd say if there is even one facet of your life that you surrender completely to your partner (color of your fingernail polish?) that you are on the submission scale.
Heh, I think we are ALL on the submission scale. I see that as a basic part of human nature right along with dominance. The real question is where on that scale. I believe the answer to that question is highly situational.
Based on who we are, what relationship we're in, personality type, relationship style, public social demeanor, private social demeanor...
quote:
ORIGINAL: leadership527
quote:
I haven't had the pleasure of meeting you both personally, but from what you've described I'd say she does trust you as completely as can be. But that doesn't mean that she is consumed with an irrational idea that you cannot and will not make mistakes...only that you are of sufficient character that you can realize and/or admit when that's the case and adjust accordingly. That's still trust.
Obviously Carol trusts me in some way, but aren't we beginning to play word games here? What I was pointing out is that absolutes are hard to come by in the real world. I'm not absolutley trust worthy.
Barring some neurological accident, you are entirely in control of whether you are "absolutely" trustworthy.
Maybe you'd consider honest mistakes (with no deceptive or duplicitous intent) as being able to disqualify someone from being absolutely trustworthy and that factors in to your refusal to entertain the possibility (I might add, while espousing an absolute yourself: that no one is capable of continually acting in a permanently trustworthy way).
quote:
ORIGINAL: leadership527
She's not absolutely submissive. I'm not a paragon of virtue, etc. For me personally, this is an important point. Remember that I am as we speak considering what sort of theoretical commands Carol would not obey and deciding how I feel about that. This really gets down to how much am I going to chase a word like "total". Heh, all except for it's way not sexy enough, don't I wish they had called it something like, "Adequate Authority Transfer" *chuckles*.
"Total" should be understood to be malleable to the individual Dom and also adjusted for human reality. Ask Carol to grow eagle talons and she will (willingly or not) disobey. As a result of the disobedience, she would have nullified your specific TPE dynamic (based on our earlier equation). Yet, somehow it is suggesting that it would be that the concept of growing eagle talons has some bearing on this hypothetical result of your relationship and not (entirely) your choice to make such a request in the face of clear illogic about Carol's hypothetical ability to do such a thing.
And since we can imagine the asking of such a question and since there is (in all likelihood) no one who can willingly grow eagle talons upon request, then there cannot possibly be "total" power exchange. For anyone.
Should we adjust the acronym for purposes of elucidation?
TattiPE?
Total (available to the individual) Power Exchange?
|
|
|
|
