lovingpet
Posts: 4270
Joined: 6/19/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: leadership527
quote:
ORIGINAL: porcelaine
i understand what you're grasping at. we've discussed this privately and i will confess the harsher points were difficult for me in the past. but i was also grappling with an internal conflict of my own and an inability to accept that i desired His cruelty. i no longer have that dissension. even though it causes me pain, there's a measure of contentment that i'm unable to articulate but take comfort in immensely. my reference to cruelty extends beyond the physical. the mental and emotional kind leave a deeper impression that i find more intoxicating.
... and... just because I think this is FINALLY going somewhere other than a train wreck, I'd like to point out that a desire to move further and further towards the TPE end need not include cruelty. That may be a part of the motivation for porcelaine. It is not for Carol and I. There are lots and lots of reasons why someone might choose to do this... probably as many reasons as there are people. I still maintain that Carol's and my reasons, while not being any "purer" in any way than any other reasons, are certainly more understandable to the average person. As I like to joke when I'm talking to a vanilla friend...
Hey! All we are doing is exactly what perfectly mainstream and vanilla poets and lyricists have been writing about since the dawn of time. We just happen to take it seriously is all.
Cruelty doesn't have to be a component, but I find nothing wrong with it's inclusion either if it is both desired and healthy within the context of particular relationship. My guess is that it is not desired and would be wholly unhealthy in your case, Jeff and thoroughly desired and vital to the health of the relationship in porcelaine's case. There is no right or wrong here. Inclusion and degree are a both simply a matter of preference.
I have a problem with the idea that gets purported that extreme practices are somehow unhealthy and insane. I also have a problem with milder practices being viewed as weak or not "true". Just like the dosing of a medication, some will need more and others will need far less. It doesn't mean it is not the same medicine with similar effects, just that the threshold to experience those effects is greater or lesser. It is no flaw in the person, the drug, or the method. One needing more (except in the case of an addict) or one needing less (except in the case of someone allergic) really has no additional consequences. One can be extreme without tipping into the issues of an "addict" and one can remain very light and not have the fatal reactions of one who's "allergic".
I don't know about anyone else, but I find a great deal of satisfaction from getting to taste the many flavors of things this world has to offer. Some will suit me better than others, but I love to dabble in the sweet salsa as much as I like to tempt fate with the toxic waste salsa. I appreciate diversity and enjoy the perspectives of other. I don't need to judge one as better than the other, but just as one that suits my tastes or needs better than another. In so doing, no one is condemned and no one is elevated. I truly love the diversity of opinions here, but also tend to cringe in the face of overblown, emotional truisms.
<<Nearly all of this, not directed to either of you whom I've quote btw! 
lovingpet
_____________________________
If you put your head into more, you'd have to put your back into less. ~Me
10 Fluffy pts.
|
RE: Can't vs Won't - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread