quote:

ORIGINAL: Surrenderwithin

However, on that same note if one were to call me extreme. On the other side of the coin how would they feel about being called dabblers or some other minial term?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Surrenderwithin

I would not consider it to be an insult that one would see how I live as an extreme. It does not seem an extreme to me until I compare it with choices of others. However, on that same note if one were to call me extreme. On the other side of the coin how would they feel about being called dabblers or some other minial term?

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

To your last statement, I say I am in agreement.  As to what comes before that statement...even if the submissive is into bedroom-only submission, it could be argued that while she has the right to dictate "can'ts"---which are based on limits, as discussed earlier--- it can be further argured that dictation of, and making the decision as to when to use them, "won'ts" makes her more of a "bottom" than a submissive, even if the submission is bedroom only.  Or a bottom playing at "submission in the bedroom.  Limiting your "submission" to the bedroom does not take away from the fact that "to submit" means "to yield" unless there is a valid reason for not doing so, hence leading to the "can't" vs. "won't" discussion once more and...in my world, at least...communication.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

True...and I think you would find that the decision-making she has surrendered revolves around those things she does not care about or cares little about or has no vested self-interest that she is protecting contained therein.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Falkenstein

what we miss on this forum is a structured alternative to the "extremist " (as in pushed to its last consequence, not with negative connotations) power exchange. Something I would call "humanistic power exchange" which takes into consideration that all people have limits, hard, soft or in between, and that all people have limitations too, even masters, dominant or whatever you want to call them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: catize

I guess that I just get tired of the fact that in D/s when a dominant says “you will” there is, in these type discussions anyway, a propensity for the majority to say it would be arrogant and unacceptable for the submissive to ask ‘why must I?’  Is that lack of trust or simply a request for more information?

quote:

ORIGINAL: catize

“I won’t” is information.

quote:

ORIGINAL: catize

If I want to go through the pain of dealing with my bogeyman I will pay a professional.

quote:

ORIGINAL: catize

Wishing to give all that I can does not mean that I am willing to compromise my integrity and self-worth.

quote:

ORIGINAL: catize

I submit fully up to a certain line.  If my line is not acceptable, with or without explanation, if it is viewed as selfish, it is best to move on.  Both R. and S. focus on all the ways I do submit, and have repeatedly expressed their satisfaction with the relationship(s) we have. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

The problem here is that what may be a paramount item to me could well be ridiculous to you.

I'm terrified of duct tape on skin, especially as a gag. Most people think this is ridiculous and told me they would not accept this as a hard limit. The fact that it doesn't give them a panic attack doesn't change the fact that it does do so to me. So being told my reason is ridiculous, that my feelings are of no validity, and that he is uninterested in how this effects me is something that to me is unacceptable.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

But then I never said I was in a obedience based relationship nor a service based one. Mine is based on emotional transparency and as such, my feelings being accepted, me not being invalidated is a sticking point. Because without that, I won't be here. This is the first time in my life where I am always heard and that matters to me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andalusite

NZ, I know a lot of very heavy masochists and pretty extreme submissives who have tickling as a limit due to bad experiences with it in childhood. I think it's perfectly reasonable, even though I mostly like getting tickled, but several of them have had potential partners try to "push" that limit or outright do it when it has been set as a hard limit, because "oh, it's silly."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andalusite

I don't tend to phrase things quite as baldly as "I can't," or "I won't," nor quite as floridly as porcelaine did (not that there's anything wrong with being poetic). We had a few in-depth discussions about limits before I became owned by my Master. Instead of making blanket hard limits for the most part, I tried to isolate the specific aspects that were an issue.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andalusite

There were other things that weren't hard limits, or which I even referred to as limits, but had had a bad experience with, or was fearful of, such as needles. I'd almost passed out the one time I'd had a playpiercing, even though I'm fine with shots and donating blood. A little over a week ago, he inserted 5 needles in me, and it was a wonderful experience. He didn't pressure me into it at all, it was actually more that my playpartner wanted me to do them to her. So, I got brave and offered to give it another try. We tried to address all of the possible causes of the problem the previous time. In general, I'm very much willing to be molded, and to do things I dislike/don't want to do. He's not especially interested in high protocol, but if he developed an interest, or wished it of me for an event/etc., I'd be happy to comply. I'm not a fan of S/slashy s/Speak or Weird Capitalisation of Pronouns, and if he had demanded them right off the bat, I would have worried that he was primarily or only experienced online. However, if he felt like having me do so, I'd comply, even though I think it's a bit silly (and there are some people I respect a lot who *do* have a lot of real-time experience, like LadyPact, who use the capitalisation protocol online).

quote:

 This is an empty statement because "integrity" and "self-worth" and not universal values. Furthermore, they are willingly spawned concepts. they are not the magical cores of our persona that we would want them to be...they are just more arduously held preferences. And if we treated them as such, it would go much farther in the communication process between people.

One person's degradation is another person's self worth. Like the infamous "love" word, it's useless without a descriptive frame of reference upon which to understand what it meant when each individual says it.  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Falkenstein

Elisabella,

what we miss on this forum is a structured alternative to the "extremist " (as in pushed to its last consequence, not with negative connotations) power exchange. Something I would call "humanistic power exchange" which takes into consideration that all people have limits, hard, soft or in between, and that all people have limitations too, even masters, dominant or whatever you want to call them.

Be seeing you,

Henry

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero
Either there are no goalposts and every conceived thing could be genuinely traumatic ... or there are some means by which to determine if someone is just overreacting to a dislike or expressing a serious psychological issue.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero
I think you bring up a great personal example (not the story, just you being you). Forgive me if I'm incorrect, but I think I recall reading that your current relationship is relatively new, yes? So, it strikes me quite pleasantly that how you speak and the way you approach things seems to show a "can do/will try my damndest" attitude without having to have years of comfort to ease you into that mindset.

quote:

ORIGINAL: porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Falkenstein

what we miss on this forum is a structured alternative to the "extremist " (as in pushed to its last consequence, not with negative connotations) power exchange. Something I would call "humanistic power exchange" which takes into consideration that all people have limits, hard, soft or in between, and that all people have limitations too, even masters, dominant or whatever you want to call them.

what we're lacking is the ability for people to understand that their reality isn't someone else's. just because that is YOUR view of the lifestyle and someone elects to practice differently doesn't imply they are extreme or lacking humanity. the reverse could be said about your practices and when placed under a microscope and dissected one could surmise and question who's really in charge. but again, that structure works for you and that's fine. it needn't be acceptable to me because i'm not on the kneel.

furthermore, it is ridiculously insulting to assume that my choice is extreme because an individual lacks that capacity, desire, or for some the balls to step up and take control or surrender in that vain. i have heard every imaginable adjective applied to this form of exchange and i've begun to wonder if the dissenters real issue stems from a lack of ability to do the same versus the capacity of grasping that we're individuals and not garish clones mimicking one another.

porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Falkenstein

What I call for is a structured alternative to TPE, which would better fit my type of domination than TPE. Looking for an alternative does not mean invalidating the existing. I think that a structured alternative, that I call Humanistic Power Exchange(I like the acronym HPE too), will also ease the debates here.

quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

quote:

ORIGINAL: Falkenstein
what we miss on this forum is a structured alternative to the "extremist " (as in pushed to its last consequence, not with negative connotations) power exchange. Something I would call "humanistic power exchange" which takes into consideration that all people have limits, hard, soft or in between, and that all people have limitations too, even masters, dominant or whatever you want to call them.

Henry:

I agree that to some extent, there is a bit of who can be the domliest/slaviest. Humans tend to compete with each other. But really, pretty much everyone here would agree that there is no prize for having more or less limits. There's no competition anywhere and nothing to win. I don't hink anyone's going to argue with you that for a LOT of people, something way less than total is going to be the best answer.

But I also feel like you read into some of these posts things that are not there. Honestly, my marriage is happy and filled with love. We live together in a tiny little cottage and, apparently, can spend all day with each other, day in and day out. There's nothing inhuman about it. My personal opinion is that we live the very normal, very vanilla marriage that poets write about. That is the baseline truth for at least my marriage. No matter how "extreme" the authority dynamic looks, it's all about love.

It is my suspicion that way more women that you'd think would be happy to give me the submission Carol provides... thrilled even... to get what she gets in return. And I'm talking about normal, vanilla, never-posted-on-collarme, type women.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andalusite

Falkenstein, I don't see any need for a widespread adoption of your views.

quote:

ORIGINAL: porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Falkenstein

What I call for is a structured alternative to TPE, which would better fit my type of domination than TPE. Looking for an alternative does not mean invalidating the existing. I think that a structured alternative, that I call Humanistic Power Exchange(I like the acronym HPE too), will also ease the debates here.

perhaps you can explain what you're proposing in detail. because i happen to believe that already exists. i don't pretend that tpe and absolute oriented power exchanges are the proper dynamic for all. in fact i feel most are quite content exchanging in other ways that allow wider latitudes than those power structures. so why is it necessary to coin yet another term when the premise of D/s encompasses what you're stating?

porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Falkenstein

First, are we both agreeing that I did not try to insult you or at least are my apologies accepted by you?
You know I how much care about your opinion.

To answer your question: I do not know. I have an intuition that a clear thought model of a "temperate power exchange" would be very useful, at least for me.