|
lovingpet -> RE: The Manipulation Manifesto (11/18/2009 11:53:59 AM)
|
In my world, manipulation is a lie that changes an end result in favor of the liar. With that in mind, suggesting and then doing something can never be manipulation, though it can be poor judgement or a lack of consideration. In most cases, manipulations occurs when one party agrees to something knowing he/she plans to attempt to change the rules midstream. Once a certain level of investment in the relationship is made, now it is time to act. The manipulated party has to either forfeit everything or accept something that was never part of the deal. Life can throw curves and suddenly things change, but that is different. In this case it was the plan of the manipulator all along and serves only that person's selfish whims.
I don't buy that a submissive, new or otherwise, can claim any diminished capacity that relieved him or her of initial consent. I will say there are other factors that, over time, can lead to a person "consenting" to and participating in things he/she finds abhorrent, but those are a part of the equation only in a narrow set of circumstances. One of the big ones, is complete financial and material dependence. This is often negotiated and agreed upon, but it limits a person's ability to leave should a time come that it seems necessary. It is done for just this very reason, but in a legitmate case, it can backfire. It doesn't change the ability to consent, but it does impact whether or not it can be fully exercised. That's why I stated there is no diminished capacity when making initial consent.
I think what the whole manifesto boils down to is people rushing in and not caring about each other in the first place. Each serves as a means to get his/her fix. The person's background, life, values, interests, and more are never really discussed and issues never explored. Since we are not talking about a simple play partner senario, but rather a complete relationship, the idea that one would jump into the deep end with a stranger seems completely foolish. The dominant is just as responsible as the submissive for making sure his/her partner is able to enter into such a relationship in an informed manner. If someone is new, expect to have to do a lot of "education" before considering placing or taking a collar. Both are responsible for being open and honest. The moment someone chooses to hide things about themselves, informed consent is lost. I can't know what I am signing up for if it is not disclosed. Things may change over time, but if crucial information is missing, I can consent blindly. That goes both directions. If a person lacks maturity, life skills, or has other issues, those have to be addressed appropriately. I am not saying that every possibility can be accounted for, but if appropriate time has been invested, major things that need addressing should come to the surface rather clearly. If someone doesn't want to know about me and allow me to know them, I don't foresee a relationship going forward.
It may be a tired old thing, but communication and compatability go a long way. I get so tired of two people using each other and then being surprised, hurt, and accusatory when it all falls apart. I have a hard time stomaching people shifting blame when things go badly in a relationship. I will listen and help rather endlessly when a person is taking his/her share of the blame (perhaps even more than is actually appropriate). The moment I start hearing accusations and tearing down, I am done. Let's all put on our grown up outfits and accept the consequences and outcomes along with our roles in it. I don't think there are going to be too many who really agree with this idea of somehow having to assume dismissing a submissive from the responsibility of initial consent. These are adult relationships. I expect those who become involved in them to act like such.
lovingpet
|
|
|
|
