quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucienne
Also, at what point in time did "snark" become a "facet" of WIITWD? Is it important to you to stretch and make that argument, or are you capable of acknowledging that ranja was outside the parameters of your stated purpose? You wrote about kinks and relationships, not communication style on the internet. the.dark did her best to repurpose it (with a not-so-sly dig to boot), but still it's kind of outside what you said you wanted to talk about.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

1.  willing to submit and give up ownership to their control, but at the same time they wouldn't accept every idea and wish that passed their Dom's/Dommes' kinky imagination.

(from the doormat thread, since SlayerZ had no response when this slave crafted a response to the statement above which, to her, would be an impossible oxymoron to live each day)
 
why use such words like "submit and give up ownership to their control" to describe your relationship dynamic, when you participate in a relationship in which you retain the authority to deny your "owner", if that is what you so choose...and your "owner" wants their wishes to be considered and either permitted or denied, situationally?  entering into a relationship where both parties have an equal say in what goes on, backed up by the law of the land~doesn't strike this slave as being D/s or M/s or Owner/owned...it sounds like the conventional way to structure a relationship...so why bother to call it D/s or M/s or Owner/owned?
 
p.s.  thanks, NZ!!!

quote:

ORIGINAL: allthatjaz

Unnecessary talk about juvenile years.
My absolute hate is a certain chat room banter that funnily enough so many people find ok. That particular banter goes like this...
Someone asks the room who was spanked as a kid. Suddenly all these women are giving their story. The initial questioner and other guys want more details often intimate details and at this point I step in and say 'what the fuck' at which point I am ejected from the room. I find this sort of talk not only unacceptable but really disturbing. If my guy ever wanted to go into detail about the punishment I had as a kid I would be running for the hills and not looking back

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth

quote:

ORIGINAL: allthatjaz

Unnecessary talk about juvenile years.
My absolute hate is a certain chat room banter that funnily enough so many people find ok. That particular banter goes like this...
Someone asks the room who was spanked as a kid. Suddenly all these women are giving their story. The initial questioner and other guys want more details often intimate details and at this point I step in and say 'what the fuck' at which point I am ejected from the room. I find this sort of talk not only unacceptable but really disturbing. If my guy ever wanted to go into detail about the punishment I had as a kid I would be running for the hills and not looking back

Okay, I'll dive on this one.

For me, understanding how our childhood experiences shaped our sexuality is an important part of understanding what makes us who we are. Being able to examine someone's early triumphs and traumas - including anything with sexual undertones in it - allows me to understand how to treat them, how to deal with them, and what directions to push them in to get them to grow / find out what they like / show them a good time.

Like it or not, children are sexual beings. Yes, most adolescent sexual contact in modern culture is deeply negative - and that which isn't necessarily negative is quickly painted as being so - but that doesn't mean that it isn't influential in defining our adult sexualities. The things that happened to me in my childhood are important. Sharing them with others allows me the opportunity to gain new insights on them and on myself - insights I cannot gain from within my own perspective.

Does this all make sense?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth

quote:

ORIGINAL: allthatjaz

Unnecessary talk about juvenile years.
My absolute hate is a certain chat room banter that funnily enough so many people find ok. That particular banter goes like this...
Someone asks the room who was spanked as a kid. Suddenly all these women are giving their story. The initial questioner and other guys want more details often intimate details and at this point I step in and say 'what the fuck' at which point I am ejected from the room. I find this sort of talk not only unacceptable but really disturbing. If my guy ever wanted to go into detail about the punishment I had as a kid I would be running for the hills and not looking back

Okay, I'll dive on this one.

For me, understanding how our childhood experiences shaped our sexuality is an important part of understanding what makes us who we are. Being able to examine someone's early triumphs and traumas - including anything with sexual undertones in it - allows me to understand how to treat them, how to deal with them, and what directions to push them in to get them to grow / find out what they like / show them a good time.

Like it or not, children are sexual beings. Yes, most adolescent sexual contact in modern culture is deeply negative - and that which isn't necessarily negative is quickly painted as being so - but that doesn't mean that it isn't influential in defining our adult sexualities. The things that happened to me in my childhood are important. Sharing them with others allows me the opportunity to gain new insights on them and on myself - insights I cannot gain from within my own perspective.

Does this all make sense?

it makes sense to this slave.  whenever she related the story of getting caught masturbating at 5, most folks assume (wrongly) that this slave was molested...else why would a child so young masterbate...and other nonsense like that...it definitely had a role in indicating this slave's sexuality, as it was an all consuming passion from age 5 until meeting Master.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucienne
Also, at what point in time did "snark" become a "facet" of WIITWD? Is it important to you to stretch and make that argument, or are you capable of acknowledging that ranja was outside the parameters of your stated purpose? You wrote about kinks and relationships, not communication style on the internet. the.dark did her best to repurpose it (with a not-so-sly dig to boot), but still it's kind of outside what you said you wanted to talk about.

Oh goodness Lucienne, let us(generic) make something very clear, as I do not wish to be accused of and make it seem that I am being underhanded.  I did not make a not so sly dig.  It was intentionally pointed.

quote:

Ranja commented on snark - you responded by stating that she was not using the word accurately - or at least in the way you believe and stated it was fun.  I asked you why you thought it was fun - looking for the positive response(which is the purpose of the thread).  You have still chosen not to answer that or you do not have a postive example, which is cool and your choice.  How is that outside what the OP was looking for people to discuss?

The latter question is simply rhetorical because I am not prepared to hijack the OPs thread anymore than you already have.

quote:

I will still await the postive examples of snark being 'fun' in an environment of wiitwd from whomever would care to participate.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero

One of the recurring habits I see of people here and elsewhere is the predisposition to see an unattractive hypothetical in theory and permanently stick that label on it across the board. Obviously we all are free to choose the things we like and want to do in a relationship, but we are also able to have our views morph over time or under certain circumstances. We just typically react defensively when it comes up as a topic in debate/conversation, at which point a default skepticism that someone is attempting to 'convert' us takes over.

This also goes back to my concerns with how liberally the YKINMKBYKIOK (YourKinkIsNotMyKinkButYourKinkIsOKay) adage really gets applied...because there always seems to be a threshold beyond which we individually do not openly accept or respect the choices of others' relationships (I try to avoid using "kink" specifically because this isn't just about kink to many).

With that in mind, it occurred to me that there is one nearly universal means by which a certain enlightenment about the 'okayness' of other things comes about without much resistance: exposure to a positive real case of the thing you think is always bad.

So, my intent with this thread involves the introduction of two roles:

• 1) To welcome people to come in here and propose certain things/facets about WIITWD they see as 'bad' (even the more extreme or taboo ones) and to feel free to express why they view that specific thing as negative (either to themselves or to others).

• 2) To welcome people who read the posts of people doing #1 to share their personal positive experiences if they happen to be in a relationship that engages in the very thing the other poster views negatively.

That's it in a nutshell.

Now, while I know it's not possible to actually create thread-related rules and enforce them, I would like to lay some ground-etiquette that I hope posters will follow in order for this to actually be a beneficial experience and not an argument-fest:

1 - No debating someone's views. The whole point here is to accept that the people writing #1s honestly feel negatively (or are confused) about the thing they are writing. No deconstructing their reasons. No showing why the logic is faulty. No demeaning them for having it (even if it's blatant...e.g. "I don't understand how men can submit and still be men!"). Also, no debating the personal sharing of the people who write #2s. No arguing the veracity or sensibility of their stories or their relationships. No reducing their comments to "unhealthy" status because you still cannot comprehend how they can be happy in that situation.

2 - Work under the presumption that people actually taking the time to contribute to this thread are being honest. The idea, hopefully, is that honest expression of thinking something is negative when replied to by another's expression of how that very thing is a positive in their life may help everyone strip away stereotypical veils of bias. At very least, it means we get to further understand how not everyone marches to the same drum and yet can still be happy in their lives.

3 - It would probably streamline the thread more if people writing both #1s and #2s started each post with the title of the topic they are concerned/curious about (e.g. a post that starts with: "Sharing your s-type sexually with others", followed by a break and a new paragraph then going into the specifics of why they cannot wrap their understanding around it.). This way, people can wander in here and see if a certain topic has been tossed into the arena that they happen to be living.

In the end, the underlying thought is that sometimes all it takes is to be able to see someone else happily living with something you find abhorrent to stop and wonder if maybe it isn't as abhorrent as you thought. Not that such would mean you have to incorporate it into your life at all...but just that when you hear or read about that topic in the future, you'll remember that it isn't "all bad all the time"; a worldview that, I think, would benefit us all.

So...off you go! 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

ranja,
 
thanks for the response!!!
 
...and if you don't mind, a follow-up question(?) regarding this statement:

quote:

i want to do anything He orders me to do... but obviously not kill myself...

has He...or anyone else for that matter, ever ordered you to kill yourself?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark

Lucienne
Exactly... a 7th grader.  Being 'snarky' makes one look like a they are acting immaturely.  It isn't 'fun' as you initially claimed it to be - not for the other person on the receiving end - it is sometimes cruel and ultimately boring (as you have discovered) and it just makes someone look stupid!

Thank you for actively participating in my demonstration and allowing the point of this experiment to be - very much - a visual one.

the.dark.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucienne

quote:

ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark

Lucienne
Exactly... a 7th grader.  Being 'snarky' makes one look like a they are acting immaturely.  It isn't 'fun' as you initially claimed it to be - not for the other person on the receiving end - it is sometimes cruel and ultimately boring (as you have discovered) and it just makes someone look stupid!

Thank you for actively participating in my demonstration and allowing the point of this experiment to be - very much - a visual one.

the.dark.

Just because you suck at it doesn't prove a universal point.

quote:

In this context, sharp wit is frequently treated like a fart in church. Personally, I find that response tedious.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark

But apparently it's fun! *I am trying to learn by a postive example... hmmm... only it's not so positive maybe?*