RE: Is it right for daughters

RE: Is it right for daughters (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress

Message

GYPSYMAMBO -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/18/2009 1:13:06 PM)
OP: I raised 2 daughters and 1 son in a POLY Home...2 husbands... I went in to detail on this in another thread..but suffice to say.. They knew things on a need ot know basis..we all had our OWN spaces.. and a locked play shed.. THE POLY was not really discussed ..simply lived...the kink was discrete. (never saw david tied to the granery outside..or dad flogged). IN YOUR CASE:I think the eating from a dog bowl and waiting on them hand and foot and talking as if men are SHIT was a MISTAKE and abusive to thier spirit..and yours for that matter. IN MY CASE: What they saw MODELLED was harmony...group solving of problems..deep bonds of love..joy in each other's successes and a family based on respect and warmth. Just as I wished for them to choose their own religion or spiritual path I wished for them to choose their own realtionship path..... and they have GM

Rhodes85 -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/22/2009 5:53:36 PM)
quote: She tries instill in them about Female led relationships. She tells them men need to be harnessed and used for their advancement and happiness in life. That is not a 'female led relationship.' That is teaching them to exploit people to get ahead in life and it is NOT ok. quote: You speak of this relationship in past tense. Why did it end? Twenty is grown. Fifteen is close. As long as mom was not exposing the underage one to anything sexual or illegal, she has every right to instill female superiority in her daughters. Except that she wasn't doing that. She was teaching them it is acceptable to exploit others to get ahead in life. There is a difference between 'superiority' and exploitation. quote: Yes parents have the right to bring up their kids any way they see fit. Yes, within reason and I don't call what that woman is raising her kids to believe within reason.

LookieNoNookie -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/23/2009 8:16:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: beowulf1234 My former Mistress of whom I served on a 24\7 basis was also going to be my wife. She has 2 daughters one 20 years of age and the other 15 years old. She tries instill in them about Female led relationships. She tells them men need to be harnessed and used for their advancement and happiness in life. This was reinforced by my service and submission. They were never exposed to kink. But they did see me kneel, remove her shoes and kiss her feet when she came home.They viewed me eating out of my slave dish. I did all the cleaning, cooking, the wash and any and all domestics for the entire family. They hear her discipline me but also see how it is for the male to make life easier for a Woman. All chores are non existant to them. When we're all together watching tv, I always sit at her feet. She explained that I would be taking her lastname instead of the opposite. I never posed an opinion of this but I always wondered if it were wrong. I would appreciate some feedback You need a counselor.

LookieNoNookie -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/23/2009 8:19:47 PM)
Sorry....that was rude.....what I actually meant to say was..... You should probably go to ER right now....call a friend....have someone drop you off...with clothing and a toothbrush. (Ask them to leave you with 30 bucks for smokes).

sissyshoefetish -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/23/2009 8:38:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: beowulf1234 My former Mistress of whom I served on a 24\7 basis was also going to be my wife. She has 2 daughters one 20 years of age and the other 15 years old. She tries instill in them about Female led relationships. She tells them men need to be harnessed and used for their advancement and happiness in life. This was reinforced by my service and submission. They were never exposed to kink. But they did see me kneel, remove her shoes and kiss her feet when she came home.They viewed me eating out of my slave dish. I did all the cleaning, cooking, the wash and any and all domestics for the entire family. They hear her discipline me but also see how it is for the male to make life easier for a Woman. All chores are non existant to them. When we're all together watching tv, I always sit at her feet. She explained that I would be taking her lastname instead of the opposite. I never posed an opinion of this but I always wondered if it were wrong. I would appreciate some feedback Your post covers the ground wanted by many fantasists.. but in a real situation this presents real issues. In the UK the activities would be illegal (not that i necessarily support that). You have been causing a 15 year old (possibly younger as you mentin she is 15 ow and this has gone on for a while) girl to view sexual activity and at the least you could be arrested for it and social services notified. A defence of it not being full sexual activity might work but over here your DNA would be on the police database and they would very likely want to look further to see if you have any extreme porn or if other activities take place in the house. The news of your arrest and the possiblilty of investigation and court apperance shoud be enough to deter you from such actions, Now it is quite possible that a girl of that age might be unaffected but equally she might be. And there is no knowing who she or her sister tell about this and what reaction others might have to what they think they are being told. My feedback is that both you and your former mistress are on very dodgy ground.

MissJennMB -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/24/2009 8:48:54 AM)
I think that, as a parent, it is my job to teach my child tolerance about the world, and give them a supportive home in which to explore it and make their own choices (guided by parental involvement). I am a parent, and I am also poly, bisexual, Domme. I have lived with a female slave who made my meals, sat at my feet, massaged my feet as we watched television in the evening, fetched my drinks, and cleaned my home (I also financially supported us both and many of the household tasks were done while I was working). I never called her "slave" in front of our children (she and I both had 1), but she always referred to me as Mistress. If our children asked, we would have told them it was a pet name, something between us, and I see it as no different from "honey" and "baby" etc as used by vanilla couples. We slept together in our room, they never saw her beaten or tied up (beyond the occasional swat on the ass), etc. My floggers were left on hooks in our bedroom, and when they did ask about them, were told they were mommy's toys, but anything sexual was put securely away. I never said "I am poly" I just said "I care about this person and this person". The only part of that scenario that I would NEVER condone, is teaching that female supremacy is the only way. It is ONE way, and ONE belief, but that does not make it the RIGHT one. I do my children disservice by teaching them that there is no BDSM lifestyle, just as much as I would if I taught them that there was no way of the world beyond Christianity. But that doesn't mean I'm throwing down the food bowl in front of my kids. But then, it would depend on the age (i.e. 18 vs 12) and again I would NEVER teach them to use men for financial gain, but then, I'm not into this for money so it would never be shown to them as thus. Miss Jenn

Aswad -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/25/2009 1:45:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer This is exposing kink to others who are no part of it - at least one of whom is a minor, too. FFS... they're growing up in a household where that's the situation... Amish kids see Amish values, Jewish kids see Jewish values, Atheist kids see Atheist values. Engineer kids learn to think as engineers. Teaching kids about sports shapes them. Teaching them about music shapes them. Not teaching them about these things shapes them. Kids are bound to learn the bulk of their values from their peers and their home environment while growing up. Making it seem like mom and dad (or mom and the butler, whatever) are doing something wrong and need to hide it... that's just a recipe for trauma. Shielding kids from reality is a great disservice, thoroughly dishonest and somewhat incapacitating. That said, putting a female supremacy slant on their upbringing is a pretty sheltered view. In the real world, men are still overall the most aggressive, most competitive and most highly achieving (in terms of work, anyway). Going out there with an expectation that men are, overall, inherently wired to consider women's needs over their own (a trait that has been demonstrated to be very much expressed in women across cultures, and almost unheard of in men, considered at a statistical level) is setting them up for some very rude awakenings, and possibly some very dangerous ones (men are still in the lead as predators, too, and this kind of attitude in one who isn't wired to pull it off is a dead giveaway of easy prey). Men don't, overall, consider anyone but themselves and the people they feel responsible for. This is evident in how they resolve conflicts, already as children. Women, overall, take into account multiple people's needs and perspectives, and tend to yield to pressure. Again, evident as children, and all too commonly a source of mutual frustration at work. Men are generally hardwired to have a significant limbic response to conquest of any sort, a wiring which is absent in women; as such, men have a hardwired behavioral reinforcer on conquest oriented behavior which women lack. They can learn to pursue conquest, and even to enjoy it as much as men do, but to learn that men lack this wiring overall is a great way to get set up for a jarring round of reality shock. In short, I fail to see any problem with exposing kids to the lifestyle dynamic, though I do see problems with exposing them to play or other analogues of sex in cultures where that is a taboo, due to the trauma incurred by conflicts arising from friction with the culture which holds it to be a taboo, and the risk of CPS kidnappings and the like. However, the more troubling issues are well worth addressing, such as the lack of a balanced portrayal of things, or how they might end up repressing their own nature if they don't turn out to share their mother's wiring (what if one of them identifies with the sub party, or craves the sub's side of the emotional interaction they see there?), or how the personal dynamic is being portrayed as a general truth, and so forth. If the couple had an asexual M/s dynamic, the issue of incongruence between expectations and reality, and intolerance of individual variability, and lack of appreciation for individual merit and so forth... those would be the only real issues, IMO. Didn't harm kids in the antiquity to see their parents owning slaves of the conventional sort. One would think that consenting ones should be equally natural. Kids adapt quite readily. It's parents, and parents' taboos, that tend to be harder to adapt. We might as well say that kids shouldn't notice that their parents have a relationship, or that they shouldn't be introduced to the notion of the nuclear family until they're old enough to choose whether to go for the older model of endogamy, or whatever. Not going to happen. They have a relationship, which has a certain dynamic, and a certain emotional exchange which can't be hidden. And for the parents to pretend to have a different kind of relationship than they do, thereby sending mixed signals to the kids, with the only consistency being that the principal role models for the kids are ashamed of themselves, would be the real obscenity. Is this stuff valid, or isn't it? If it's valid, teach that. If it's not, stop doing it. Consistency. Kids love consistency; a world that makes some kind of sense. Problem is, teaching them supremacy makes no sense. Health, al-Aswad.

Aswad -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/25/2009 2:10:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse Yet with the female as the dominant and the male as the submissive/service role, it is considered 'exposing minors to kink'. Odd. Not the least bit odd, though I agree with what you're saying 100%. Reason I don't think it's odd, is two-fold: (a) people have just adapted to the notion of equal footing, and it will take a bit of time before a role reversal is seen as natural, if ever, especially given that the whole disparity thinking is what went out the window, rather than the assumption that the woman had to get the short end of the stick every time, and (b) this is being cast as an aspect of a BDSM relationship, which people are subconsciously unable to accept as natural and unable to see as having the same claim to legitimacy as a vanilla relationship, and thus people frame it in the terms and ideas they are used to, including consent. Of course, there's no such thing with kids; until they can fend for themselves, they learn what those who will fend for them allow them to be exposed to. Good parents, obviously, try to leave them fairly well equipped to form opinions on their own. Bad parents leave them highly motivated but poorly equipped to do so. Average parents try to leave them well equipped to personalize the ideals they grew up with, without deviating "too far" from those ideals. The ideals in question are in evidence whether one hides them or not, so the question is mostly one of how much intimacy is allowed in the host culture before crossing the line into taboo territory. Nothing wrong with kids seeing someone in charge of the household. It's a harmonious state of affairs. Teaching them that that role is assigned based on gender, rather than personality and qualifications and such, however, is not a smart move. And leaving them unable to deal with responsibilities and such, as in this case, is negligent. Anyway, the digression aside, if the BDSM crowd were to see their own wiring as natural and legitimate, and demand acknowledgement of that, the whole question of whether it's okay to expose the kids to those relationships would fade into the background, along with the question of whether it's okay for LGBT parents to adopt (which the rest of the west has gotten over; how's that coming along over there?). Now that LGBT parents adopting is a given up here, the next two groups to start campaigning has been the S/M crowd (mostly pertaining to the DSM/ICD revisions), and the poly crowd, who want poly marriages to be legally recognized and also want the state church compelled to perform the ceremonies. The D/s and M/s crowds, however, are still in the closet, sometimes even among the rest of the BDSM scene, apart from one brief stint where they essentially educated curious people in the capital as part of an event (wildly successful, actually, but not repeated, probably because the people who carry enough weight to gather enough people for an event have been busy with other stuff). I don't know if it's a consequence of modern hyperegalitarianism, or something else, but power imbalance is taboo. Sadly, unlike the past LGBT taboos, poly taboo, etc., most people in the D/s and M/s scene seem more concerned with suppressing their peers than with gaining recognition and breaking away from the taboo status. Health, al-Aswad bin Rantsville.

Elizabeth666 -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/25/2009 2:56:52 AM)
FR I personally don't, nor will I ever (until she's older and only if she asks) expose my daughter to what I'm in to. Not because I'm ashamed, think it's wrong etc. people can raise their kids however they want (to a point) I won't tell her about the lifestyle for the main reason that if she told a friend, and that friend told a friend....how would they view her? Would they think her mom is a "freak" and judge her the same way? She's 14 and too young to understand the dynamics of TTWD. And yes, people could say to give her the benefit of the doubt, but a few years ago she witnessed her father beating the shit out of me in a drunken rage. How do I explain to her the difference in a way she would understand? What daddy did was wrong, but what Sir does is OK. Ignorance is bliss, I prefer to keep it that way for her. My [sm=2cents.gif] ETA - Sir does NOT beat me up, but in the mind of a young, teenage girl...what's the difference?

LafayetteLady -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/25/2009 11:36:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elizabeth666 FR I personally don't, nor will I ever (until she's older and only if she asks) expose my daughter to what I'm in to. Not because I'm ashamed, think it's wrong etc. people can raise their kids however they want (to a point) I won't tell her about the lifestyle for the main reason that if she told a friend, and that friend told a friend....how would they view her? Would they think her mom is a "freak" and judge her the same way? She's 14 and too young to understand the dynamics of TTWD. And yes, people could say to give her the benefit of the doubt, but a few years ago she witnessed her father beating the shit out of me in a drunken rage. How do I explain to her the difference in a way she would understand? What daddy did was wrong, but what Sir does is OK. Ignorance is bliss, I prefer to keep it that way for her. My [sm=2cents.gif] ETA - Sir does NOT beat me up, but in the mind of a young, teenage girl...what's the difference? Honestly, in the mind of a teenage girl whose daddy is no longer in the house, the difference is that you didn't "like" daddy doing it, but you like "Sir" doing it. If she still is "daddy's little girl" it will make her contemptuous and hateful towards your Sir. If she is still angry at her father for his actions, it will make her contemptuous and hateful of your Sir. It is unlikely there would be a "winning" scenario for you to tell her. Keeping it that way for her is the right decision. Not that you needed my or anyone else's confirmation of that fact. Teaching lifestyle dynamics to a child is tricky at best. It needs to be age appropriate. In gay/lesbian households, the subject comes up and will be explained as appropriate. In poly households, the same thing. Even in a household where one partner is more "in charge," if the question comes up a good parent handles it appropriately. There are many aspects of a BDSM household that are non sexual, and there is nothing wrong with seeing one partner "take care" of the other partner. Taking off shoes, massaging feet, preparing favorite meals, etc. it doesn't matter who is in which role. Eating out of a "slave dish" or hearing one partner "discipline" the other is NOT appropriate on any level. Our children at some point realize that mommy and daddy have sex, but they don't really want to know, nor should they. I don't think anyone would argue that parents (or partners if one parent is no longer in the picture) showing affections is fine and dandy only to a point. Sure it is ok for mommy and daddy to kiss and hug in front of the children, but certainly not ok for mommy to give daddy a blow job or daddy to fondle mommy's breasts in front of the kids. Likewise, if the grown ups want to have hot monkey sex swinging from the chandeliers, paddling the hell out of one and making all kinds of noise, it isn't something the kids should overhear. Moreover, your kids really don't want to hear it. I'm a firm believer that parents should have a life other than just being parents, but we don't need to share that with our kids. Young children hearing one caregiver being "disciplined" could very well lead them to believe that they should "discipline" people who don't obey them. Not appropriate. I feel sorry for the young girls in that household. Not only is their mother ignorant of being able to properly raise her kids, but the guy has proven to them by allowing it to happen that men are inferior just like momma said.

leadership527 -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/25/2009 2:23:06 PM)
The only thing "wrong" about it is that she said "men" generically. I'm here to tell you that THIS man does not need that. Other men do. Humans do not reduce easily to broad sweeping generalizations.

YesMistressIrish -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/25/2009 2:45:26 PM)
The most scary thing I saw in your post: quote: All chores are non existant to them. IMO Good parenting means bringing them up to be independent and to survive and thrive in the REAL world. To teach them to be open-minded, tolerant and also to have great common sense. Men as lowly dogs, bowls on the floor for man-meals- Female laziness = Bad parenting imo. Fun in kink- not in parenting. [:'(]

Aswad -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/25/2009 9:39:21 PM)
~fr~ Kids actually pick up a lot more on context, emotions and body language than people give them credit for. As I've said before, I do see a problem with overtly sexual displays due to the reactions that will entail from the host culture, and the ease with which it can be kept private, but the dynamic will be evident no matter what one does. And being honest and open about it as a natural thing is a key element in making sure the kids don't get the idea from home that their family is messed up. All kids pick on each other for whatever, and the dynamic is going to be one of the targets there, just like it is with LGBT. But you know what? That's generally due to the reactions of the parents of the other kids. Among themselves, until adults get involved with their prejudices, kids don't have all that many prejudices against such things. "Kat has two mommies." Not a problem. "Mom says Kat lacks a daddy." Uh-oh. "Dad says Kat's moms are freaks." Bingo, we have a fuckup. Now, that's obviously going to happen until people get used to the existence of kink and alternate lifestyles. But the problem isn't any bigger than what any minority group already has to deal with. There's no reason to hide any non-sexual aspect of the dynamic, as kids are apt to ask and take answers at face value until they get old enough to consider them on their own (at which point a parent that has been diligent in answering questions over the years will find the kid remarkably accurate in this regard). And, as noted, a kid can tell a lot of things about our mental state that we don't realize. If they're picking up on something being wrong, chances are there actually is something wrong. And if there's baggage from past abuse, that's where therapy comes in, regardless of the nature of the current relationship. The bit about not having chores and responsibilities, and the bit about teaching a skewed view of the world, those are the real problems here. Health, al-Aswad.

servantforuse -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/26/2009 10:00:19 AM)
I can see the 15 year old telling her friends, and her friends telling their parents, and those parents getting social services or the police involved. I'm actually suprised like that didn't happen.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/26/2009 11:13:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse I can see the 15 year old telling her friends, and her friends telling their parents, and those parents getting social services or the police involved. I'm actually suprised like that didn't happen. Quite honestly in the situation described by the OP, it wouldn't be a bad thing if it DID happen. I'm all for people being permitted to live their lives in whatever manner they choose. I have no doubt that GypsyMambo and LadyPact's households would shows kids no more than a loving household where there are more adults than people normally see. When you actively tell your kids that a certain group of people, whether it be a gender or a race, are on this earth only for the purpose of advancing others, when you allow children to hear beatings being given or watch a person eat off of the floor, you need someone to come in and teach you proper parenting skills. Even if it were a vanilla relationship where the man was beating the woman behind closed doors but the children could hear it, I would say that removing the children would be a wise decision. I know there are excessive difficulties to overcome for someone to leave their abuser, but that doesn't mean that the children should suffer as well.

LadyAngelika -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/26/2009 11:27:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse I can see the 15 year old telling her friends, and her friends telling their parents, and those parents getting social services or the police involved. I'm actually suprised like that didn't happen. Quite honestly in the situation described by the OP, it wouldn't be a bad thing if it DID happen. I'm all for people being permitted to live their lives in whatever manner they choose. I have no doubt that GypsyMambo and LadyPact's households would shows kids no more than a loving household where there are more adults than people normally see. When you actively tell your kids that a certain group of people, whether it be a gender or a race, are on this earth only for the purpose of advancing others, when you allow children to hear beatings being given or watch a person eat off of the floor, you need someone to come in and teach you proper parenting skills. Even if it were a vanilla relationship where the man was beating the woman behind closed doors but the children could hear it, I would say that removing the children would be a wise decision. I know there are excessive difficulties to overcome for someone to leave their abuser, but that doesn't mean that the children should suffer as well. Agreed. I've always said people really need to keep this part of their lives in perspective. Some people need external help to show them that. - LA

Lockit -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/26/2009 12:59:38 PM)
I will repeat... teaching either gender that the other is lower somehow and that they are not required to learn to clean and cook and do for themselves, is life abuse in my opinion. It changes them and makes them weak (vulnerable maybe) and creates a situation where they depend on other's for some very basic life requirements. It also makes them feel better than other's and that doesn't go so well in most relationships. Poly households... lifestyle households done with what is best for all persons that include a safe place for children to learn to be adults is one thing... teaching them they are better to enable those 'goddess's of mankind' is simply wrong in life practice and reality and creates lazy, unrealistic expectations in an adult life. Spoiled children that become spoiled and often times, nasty, willful and unproductive adults. There are ways to live freely and do as we please that are not harmful to children... then there are ways where is is harmful to them. You can't really compare the two and it isn't all black and white.

DommeMae -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/26/2009 4:10:57 PM)
" .....teaching either gender that the other is lower somehow...." How do you know what she's explaining to her kids? How do you know she's telling her kids men are worthless and low? Are you making these assumptions because he has his own eating bowl? Could that only mean one thing? Maybe she tells them it's his special bowl because he's a special helper. Maybe they each have their own towels, bathrooms, body washes, that they don't share with anyone else in the house. Are you making these assumptions because he's kissing her feet? What's wrong with kissing a foot? He may not be slobbering, sucking and licking her feet in a sexual way. It could just be a quick kiss. Nothing harmful or hateful about that. Are you making these assumptions because she has him doing all the cooking and cleaning? Is that harmful? Is that kink? Is that sexual? Perhaps it's just a harmless role reversal. Are you making these assumptions because she's raising them in a female-led household? There's nothing harmful in raising children in a home under doctrines of Goddess worship such as Shaktism/Dianic Wicca religions for instance, or any other matriarchal systems which focus on the female as being the more valuable sex, the source of all living things. Teaching children that women are the more valuable sex does not have to translate to teachings that spew hateful metamessages that men are worthless and low. We really don't know if the mother in the op home is telling her children men are worthless and low. She could perhaps live under a matriarchal philosophy or Wicca religion which, though finds value in both sexes, sees the female as the more valuable sex. Does that have to mean she's saying men aren't valuable or needed? Certainly not. Just because the kids don't cook or clean that doesn't automatically mean she teaches her kids those sorts of duties are ones they'll never have to do themselves. It may be so that her kids don't cook or clean but that doesn't have to mean she isn't preparing them to know how to do those things themselves, nor does it mean she's teaching her kids to expect and depend on someone else to do them. Plenty of rich kids grow up having a butler clean and cook for them, that doesn't mean they are taught to NOT learn themselves. ".....depend on other's for some very basic life requirements. " We don't know if she's telling her kids to depend on someone for their life requirements simply because some servant is attending to their life requirements for their convenience. " ...teaching them they are better to enable those 'goddess's of mankind' is simply wrong in life practice and reality and creates lazy, unrealistic expectations in an adult life." I think it's fair to say that it's wrong for you. Can you present proof that raising children in a Goddess-focused household, such as Shaktism/Dianic Wicca religions for instance, makes for lazy children? That's a broad generalization of which the only proof you have is your feelings. You have no idea how these children will be when they grow up. They very well could grow up to be healthy, balanced individuals coming from a Goddess-focused household.

Lockit -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/26/2009 4:19:20 PM)
I assumed nothing. The op stated that they do no chores and they are left for him to do. The rest we will just have to disagree on because one way teaching in my opinion isn't fair to those who may be in a one way family and who are different. When I speak of goddess... like goddess in the making... I am talking spoiled lil beings who think they should be served with little giving of anything except carbon dioxide. Not a belief system.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/26/2009 5:09:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae How do you know what she's explaining to her kids? How do you know she's telling her kids men are worthless and low? How do we know? quote: ORIGINAL: beowulf1234 My former Mistress of whom I served on a 24\7 basis was also going to be my wife. She has 2 daughters one 20 years of age and the other 15 years old. She tries instill in them about Female led relationships. She tells them men need to be harnessed and used for their advancement and happiness in life. This was reinforced by my service and submission. They were never exposed to kink. But they did see me kneel, remove her shoes and kiss her feet when she came home.They viewed me eating out of my slave dish. I did all the cleaning, cooking, the wash and any and all domestics for the entire family. They hear her discipline me but also see how it is for the male to make life easier for a Woman. All chores are non existant to them. When we're all together watching tv, I always sit at her feet. She explained that I would be taking her lastname instead of the opposite. I never posed an opinion of this but I always wondered if it were wrong. I would appreciate some feedback What part of those two statements are unclear? Using anyone for your own "advancement" in life is never positive teaching. I will not pretend that I am very knowledgeable about the two life philosophies you mention, but I do know that Wicca in particularly doesn't teach that any person, male or female should be used for the benefit of another. As for Shaktism, while it does preach about the Goddess, that Goddess is not an individual woman and in fact, Shaktism preaches not only that Shakti is nothing without Shiva, but that Shiva is nothing without Shakta. It is a faction of Hinduism that focuses on the family unit, which actually has nothing to do with this thread. As for kissing the feet, it isn't a role reversal. It would be improper regardless of whose feet were being kissed upon walking in the door. It would not be improper if one partner were rubbing the other partner's feet and then kissed them lovingly. There is a difference. The bottom line is that if you are unwilling or unable to put your kink aside in order to properly parent your children, then either don't have children or let someone else raise them. If a person was a prostitute, if she was having tricks come to her home while her children were present, I would say the same thing. A person can be as kinky as they want, they can believe whatever they want, but they don't have the right, legally or morally to expose their children to it, regardless of the kids' ages. If your teenager is now 18 and a legal adult, and you choose to expose them to it, it is the same as exposing it to a nonconsensual stranger on the street. ETA: Had to get rid of the super sized font...

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625