RE: Is it right for daughters

RE: Is it right for daughters (Full Version)

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

Message

LafayetteLady -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/27/2009 4:28:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady The FACT that you saw your father "scold" your mother is part of what led you to your beliefs on "Goddess" worship and female-led households. You so disliked your father's behavior that you went to the other end of the spectrum and decided that men would not only never scold you, but they should worship you. You're making assumptions again. Why don't you ask me for my opinion on female-led relationships or if I even practice it or not instead of speaking for me. You don't know anything about me or how I live my life. You're making assumptions without anything to back it up. Actually the mere fact that you are hear as a domme is indicative of you preferring female led relationships. That isn't an assumption. I think that most of the dominas here would say that they are in female-led relationships. Kind of goes with the whole "domme" scenario. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady I'm going to make another assumption gasp Based on your need to prove that she isn't damaging the kids, you are in one of two situations. You either don't have children and so are really not knowledgeable about the responsibilities of being a parent OR you actually do have children and see too much of yourself in the OP's description of his mistress and need to alleviate your own guilt with your own failings as a parent. Careful now, you're making more assumptions. My situation doesn't have to apply to any of your limited two situations above for me to know there's more than one way of viewing the OP's situation. Until we have more facts, we don't know if the children are being damaged by a housemaid, a foot kiss, a special bowl for the server, or his discipline. You nor I have enough facts yet, and that's just my point. Actually, it has everything to do with it. Being a parent should always come before your kink. The problem with your "oh we just don't know" foolishness is that you don't understand the reality that when it comes to the best interest of children, people need to err on the side of caution. The law certainly does. Why? Because why you are busy trying to exonerate this woman's poor parenting skills, more damage occurs. As a parent you should protect your child at all costs. Having spent a good portion of my professional life working towards protecting children, I can say with complete confidence and authority that your "viewpoint" is either already damaging to any children you have, or because you don't have any, you are simply clueless. Of course, there is one other possibility. That would be that you are just one of those people who wants to argue with everyone they meet. Doesn't make any difference though. They all add up to the same thing. You are clueless and have no idea what you are talking about. I've had a relatively successful career by being able to understand what people write and/or say. Everything that the OP posts is indicative of those times he is being "disciplined" as being either loud, violent or demeaning. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Again, do you really think he meant that she was "gently scolding him?" Are you so focused on giving the benefit of the doubt or so naive that you would actually believe this was the case? Especially after LadyPact so clearly pointed out issues from the OP's previous posts that give a better understanding of the whole picture? Again, do you really have to assume it's physical assaults for sure? Are you so focused on thinking the worst in people or are you so judgmental and narrow-minded that you think you know precisely what is going on in someone else's home? Ladypact's post didn't show where he said he was disciplined in front of kids. If he did, I find that irresponsible and destructive, as I've stated a number of times already. Well if you could sift through your memory, the OP doesn't state that the children are "seeing" it either. They hear it. For the record, people who live in homes with doors (as most of us do) aren't going to hear a "gentle scolding" through a closed door. They will hear someone being physically disciplined, or being yelled at. Again, you trying to give this woman the benefit of the doubt brings many questions to many people's minds. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady You see for many people here, when someone posts, we don't just zip off a response. We look at the person's profile, perhaps read one or two of their other posts to get a clearer idea the "whole picture." Frankly, you seem full of accusations with no evidence, except for your own assumptions. These are not "accusations." The OP asked people for an opinion of the situation he presented. Some of us did a little research and make the likely conclusion that this woman is putting her kinky desires ahead of her role as a parent with little thought to the effect it would cause those children. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady YOU are very hung up on the issue of "female-led household," even though it is has been made clear throughout this thread that regardless of the gender of each, the activities in themselves would be wrong in front of the children. Careful now, you're making more assumptions again. YOU have no idea if I'm hung up on something or not. I'm not hung up on anything, you just don't like what I'm saying because I'm talking about the possibility of there being more than one way to look at this situation. When you keep bringing the same horribly flawed argument up over and over again, it isn't an assumption. I really don't care how you look at the situation. Of course there are many ways to look at a situation. We are looking at a situation with the facts that we are given. You are trying to make assumptions that there are lots of little "special" things going on in front of the children. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Actually, you are inserting your own terms to support your argument. No where does the OP say they see him eating out of his "special bowl," he is specific, they see him eating out of his "slave bowl." You're inserting your own terms here to support your argument, no where does the op say the mother puts it on the floor or that she calls it a "slave" bowl. She very well could call it a special bowl for a special man, whether you like it or not. "Slave dish" is the OP's term not mine. Your thought that she is calling it a "special bowl for a special man" is so far reaching that it doesn't even make any sense. But I'm sure you will continue to defend this woman's honor and her stellar parenting skills. Again, your reasoning behind it makes little difference, however, I'm sure I'm not the only one that prays to God, Goddess or whoever else may be in charge of these things that you do not have children and refrain from having them until you fully understand the responsibility. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady You are hell bent on defending this woman's actions for reasons unknown. Careful now, you're making more assumptions again. You don't know if I'm hell bent or not. I could easily turn that statement around on you and call you hell bent for condemning a woman and her way of life as destructive to kids, without having very much information to go by. But I can't tell if you're hell bent or not. You know what? I AM hell bent. I will condemn any parent male or female who conducts their private life in front of their children. Not only will I condemn it, I will be that son of bitch who picks up the phone and calls children's services to stop you from doing it. Why? Because if a parent isn't properly protecting their child, then I will be make damn sure someone else does. As for whether you are hell bent or not....you keep presenting the same flawed argument over and over again. If that isn't hell bent, then what is it? quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Do you really think that he would have mentioned anything about it if he was sitting at the table and just had a particular dish that he always ate out of? Who knows. He could have a special bowl, that is called a special bowl, that sits right on the table. We don't know. Personally I think the op is making this entire story up. Well if he is making the story up, what do you continue to post your point of view? I'm still waiting for you to explain why, if it is called a "special bowl" the OP refers to it as a slave dish? Don't worry, I don't expect you to answer, because I know that you aren't able to. I also know that if you did, you would cloak your foolishness in the notion that you just don't have enough facts. The OP called it a slave dish. Is that not a fact to you? Oh wait, you think he made it all up. I'm sure that in your week on this site, you are an expert at seeing when someone is making things up. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady While you chastise everyone here for making the not so tremendous leap that based on the OP's statements, the children in that household are witnessing things they shouldn't,.. Are you being too sensitive or defensive? Too emotional? I haven't chastised anyone specifically. You see it like that because you don't like my argument, or what seems like any other alternative perspectives that differs from yours. You make the assumption (you are really good at that) that I feel the way I do because I don't like your argument. Newsflash kiddo. I wouldn't even call your statements an argument. I think of them more as the musings of someone who hasn't a clue. I am very open to alternate perspectives. But I am not open to perspectives that are potentially damaging to young people because of someone else's selfishness. I also will vehemently argue against those who have the perspective of finding a "slave" so they can "breed" and raise the child in slavery. I'm sure you agree with me on that one, but there are those who disagree. You see the reality is that it is YOU who doesn't like people not accepting your perspective. We don't disagree with your perspective because it doesn't agree with ours, we disagree because you insist on skewing the information that WAS given to fit in with that perspective. For some reason, you feel the need to negate what the poster says and suggest that what is happening could be very different than what he says. Well it could be. For the purpose of this discussion though, that doesn't matter. We are discussing the situation that the OP wrote. I don't know what you are discussing. You present this lovely little fantasy where mistress is doing no more than patting her boy on the rump and saying, "don't do that again you special little man." Yea, no where based in reality. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady YOU make the very giant leap that she might be practicing a religion that worships Goddesses. She could be. You don't know if she is or isn't. Do you? "As mentioned before", there's nothing wrong with raising kids in a Goddess or matricarchical house. Even if she does use a slave bowl, or disciplines him, that doesn't exclude her from doing so, either, just because you say it does. No I don't know whether or not she worships a Goddess or lives by matriarchal rule. I did, however, not only point out that neither of those particular philosophies ever mention use of giving men slave dishes or discipline, but specifically asked you to find me something that pointed out it was part of some unknown practice in those philosophies. I'm still waiting. As for whether or not it excludes her from giving him a slave dish or discipline, just because "I say so." No it doesn't. Quite frankly, I don't care what her and the man decide to do with their PRIVATE time. However, it does give others the right to tell her what to do when she takes part in those activities within sight or hearing of her children. Because those things have nothing to do with Goddess worship or matriarchal rule. Don't confuse religion and BDSM. While it is possible to practice both, it is unlikely you will find any religious doctrine to back up the concept of belittling one sex or the other, and even where it instructs that one "rules" over the other, it isn't done in a BDSM type of manner.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/27/2009 4:31:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lockit http://www.collarchat.com/m_2870675/mpage_1/key_/tm.htm#2870675 I wonder where the kids are when the bat is being taken to him? I wonder about them hearing it... means they must be close. Case closed. Dammit Girl! That's what I was talking about! Short and to the point. Got my fingers all tired and you summed it up in a sentence and a link.

Lockit -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/27/2009 4:37:38 PM)
LOL... Yes but I liked your version far better!!!!!!!!!! Thank you!

LafayetteLady -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/27/2009 4:39:06 PM)
Well, ok then. At least I don't feel like my fingers are all crampy for nothing, lol

Lockit -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/27/2009 4:40:27 PM)
LOL... I'm sure we could find someone to treat your tired fingers very well! Hell, after that read... I would! lol

LafayetteLady -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/27/2009 4:45:30 PM)
Know what is really funny? I just rechecked the OP's profile. He is here in NJ! Maybe I should ask him to come and help me? I couldn't ever treat him like a dog as he wants, but I'm sure I could make very good use of him!

Lockit -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/27/2009 5:43:06 PM)
LOL...

DommeMae -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/28/2009 10:48:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Being a parent should always come before your kink. No one is disagreeing with that. Of course, what if it's not "kink" you're living? quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady As a parent you should protect your child at all costs. No one I see is disagreeing with that. Of course, what methods we use to protect our children and why will vary. Let me run a parallel here with polyamorous homes and children. How do you feel about kids growing up in poly households? Is it possible polyamory could lead them to be promiscuous? Is it possible it will mislead them and discourage them from pair bonding? Is this style of living in the best interests of the children? Yes. No. It depends. The answer isn't black or white. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady The problem with your "oh we just don't know" foolishness is that you don't understand the reality that when it comes to the best interest of children, people need to err on the side of caution. Careful with those assumptions again, you have no idea what my stance is regarding "best interest of the children" aside from my saying I see harm in their witnessing/hearing physical abuse and seeing a man eat off the floor in a referenced "slave" bowl. For the record, I do not see their interests being threatened if they see non-kink foot kissing, as long as they're not taught to expect that from all men. I do not see their interests being threatened living in a non-kink matricarchial home where the women are seen as more valuable, as long as their exercising care, compassion and consideration for both sexes, as long as the kids are taught that men are valuable too, and they aren't taught that men are worthless and low or that their home life is the only way to live. I do not see their interests being threatened living in a home where the man does the housework, as long as their taught to do it themselves, to be appreciatiative of the convenience, and as long as their not told to expect that from all men they meet, etc. You're making a judgmental assumption of which you have no proof. I've commented on several possible scenarios which, *if* were happening, in my opinion would be harmful to the children. Therefore, you can't say I haven't taken their best interest into consideration. For example: beatings. We still don't have any evidence they heard actual beatings. If they did, again I don't condone that. Repeat: If they did, again I don't condone that. But that doesn't make everything else she does in her house harmful or detrimental to the kids. Second: having him eat off the floor in a bowl designated as a slave bowl. I wouldn't condone that. Repeat: I wouldn't condone that. But we don't know if she did this. Aside from that, I see no harm in him kissing her feet, as long as it's not sexual in nature. I also see no harm in having him perform all the house work either, as long as she teaches her children how to do it themselves, and makes certain to integrate them into society and be open to how everyone else lives. I see no harm in them growing up in a female-led household as long as she doesn't teach them men are worthless. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady you are simply clueless. Are you trying to get a personal to get a rise out of me? I'm touched. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady I can say with complete confidence and authority that your "viewpoint" is either already damaging to any children you have, or because you don't have any, you are simply clueless. Of course you would think so. You seem full of assumptions and speculations. You not only seem to lack the ability to see any other perspective other than your own, but would use it as a 10 pound cudgel to dictate right and wrong in these matters if you could. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Actually the mere fact that you are hear as a domme is indicative of you preferring female led relationships. You're deductive logic isn't correct. Dominant Tops don't have to lead anyone. But keep on stabbing in the dark. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady That would be that you are just one of those people who wants to argue with everyone they meet. Wants to argue? And with everyone? You're so full of personal attacks. Don't let your emotions get the best of you. Seriously. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Well if you could sift through your memory, the OP doesn't state that the children are "seeing" it either. They hear it. To reiterate: What sort of discipline do they hear? Was he specific? Is it verbal discipline? Physical? Again, I don't condone them hearing/seeing beatings and I've said this many times throughout. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Some of us did a little research and make the likely conclusion that this woman is putting her kinky desires ahead of her role as a parent with little thought to the effect it would cause those children. You still don't have any proof of that, based on the limited information he provided. Goddess worship, matricarchical philosophies, special bowls, foot kissing, discipline, housework don't have involve sex or "kink". quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady I really don't care how you look at the situation. I think you do care. You care very much how I look at the situation. You seem quite upset over this subject. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Of course there are many ways to look at a situation. Great, now you see my point. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady We are looking at a situation with the facts that we are given. Really? Do you have answers to the following, aside from your speculations? Discipline. What sort of discipline do the kids see or hear, if anything? Do they hear it? Do they see it? Is it mild scolding? Is it physical brutality? (Again, I don't condone physical beatings or kids hearing/seeing them.) Separate eatery. What do the kids hear her refer the bowl by? Is it just called something mild, and not a "slave" bowl? What does she explain to the children about the bowl? Where is the bowl placed? Is it placed on the table for him to eat from? (Again, I don't condone telling children it's a slave bowl, or placing it on the floor.) Feet Kissing. How does he kiss her feet? Is it in a sexual, "kinky" way? Is it a quick peck done in a respectful, admiring way? Male housework. What does the mother teach her children about chores, and other life skills? Does she tell them to depend on and expect men to cook and clean? Does she teach them to do these things themselves and not depend on someone else? Female Led Home. Does she teach and exercise care, compassion and consideration for men too? Does she teach them that males are worthless and low as someone suggested? Does she teach them they are valuable and helpful? Do she teach them her way is the only way? Does she teach them her way is one way out of many lifestyles? None of these things are in evidence. As much as you like to think there's abuse and damage happening to the children, you don't have any proof of that whatsoever. Don't speculate until you have evidence. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Your thought that she is calling it a "special bowl for a special man" is so far reaching that it doesn't even make any sense. Of course you would say that. Im not defending, Im just imploring people to keep an open mind and avoid getting on the soap box to moralize among a group of people who come together under the precepts of "alternative lifestyles". Alternative lifestyle, as I know it, means different way of living. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady You know what? I AM hell bent. I will condemn any parent male or female who conducts their private life in front of their children. Not only will I condemn it, I will be that son of bitch who picks up the phone and calls children's services to stop you from doing it. Why? Because if a parent isn't properly protecting their child, then I will be make damn sure someone else does. As for whether you are hell bent or not....you keep presenting the same flawed argument over and over again. If that isn't hell bent, then what is it? Well thanks for admitting you're guided by your emotions and personal bias. This is obviously a very hot button issue for you, but you would be probably shocked and appalled over how mild in comparison this scenario is to what others live or idealize. And I'm damned well happy that you are not arbiter of how I may raise my children, Chairman Mao. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Well if he is making the story up, what do you continue to post your point of view? I'm still waiting for you to explain why, if it is called a "special bowl" the OP refers to it as a slave dish? Don't worry, I don't expect you to answer, because I know that you aren't able to. I also know that if you did, you would cloak your foolishness in the notion that you just don't have enough facts. The OP called it a slave dish. Is that not a fact to you? Oh wait, you think he made it all up. I'm sure that in your week on this site, you are an expert at seeing when someone is making things up. Relax. He could be referring to his own knowledge of what it is, or speaking in a language we all here would understand. The question is do the children see that as a "slave" dish? Is it on the floor? We don't know. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Newsflash kiddo Take a deep breath. (You really need to work on not being such a harsh moral judge. Try lowering your disgust sensitivity, it might help you.) quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady wouldn't even call your statements an argument. Then I'd say you're wasting a lot of time making counter arguments. LOL quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady You see the reality is that it is YOU who doesn't like people not accepting your perspective. All I'm doing is inviting people to keep things in perspective. And while we're at it, allow me to be the expert on my own thought processes, thank you. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady No I don't know whether or not she worships a Goddess or lives by matriarchal rule. I did, however, not only point out that neither of those particular philosophies ever mention use of giving men slave dishes or discipline, but specifically asked you to find me something that pointed out it was part of some unknown practice in those philosophies. I'm still waiting. Inaccurate. It's not black or white. There are cases where it does exist, in whatever numbers or portions I wouldn't presume. We have to be open-minded and consider the possibilities. It's quite conceivable that Goddess worship / matriarchal philosophies are being used to reify the practice of D/s in the household. This is not hard to imagine incorporating into an **alternative lifestyle**.

Lockit -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/28/2009 10:57:32 AM)
I am not reading all that... but what you fail to see even with links is the bitch beat him with a bat and they heard it! (according to the op) Nice home life wouldn't you say?

SimplyIsaac -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/28/2009 12:00:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lockit I am not reading all that... but what you fail to see even with links is the bitch beat him with a bat and they heard it! (according to the op) Nice home life wouldn't you say? The guy/troll/threadjerker who started this thread has five posts total (so far). No where does he specifically say his bitch goddess beat him with a bat and made an appetizer of his shoulder within earshot of those precious divas to be. The prosecution needs more evidence. Judge Isaac

Lockit -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/28/2009 12:24:53 PM)
You are wrong. The link was provided for his other posts where he tells us he was beaten with a bat. If you will judge... read the whole thread or at least the link or what Lady Pact posted he said. Then you will make a much finer judge. lol

SimplyIsaac -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/28/2009 12:42:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lockit The link was provided for his other posts where he tells us he was beaten with a bat. If you will judge... read the whole thread or at least the link or what Lady Pact posted he said. Then you will make a much finer judge. lol Motion denied! I've read everything. The bat (described as a "small" bat) and "they hear me being disciplined" were never conclusively linked. In THIS thread, what does "discipline" mean? Does it encompass that incident spoken of in this link or something else? Is it verbal? Does it involve a bat and a chomp on the shoulder all the time? I can't say for sure. The OP is being purposefully vague. We need more input. Judge Isaac

Lockit -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/28/2009 12:54:39 PM)
LOL... okay... they were not connected per his words and connecting them but he did say they heard him being disiplined. But it isn't too hard to imagine someone who would beat someone even with a small bat... might be a bit extreme and just might be teaching/showing/allowing too much to go on in the household that houses the kids. I would surely lean toward her going overboard than giving her credit for just simply living her lifestyle with accountablity and some belief system. It sounds more like the belief system of hate men if anything. lol

lally2 -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/28/2009 1:08:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse Using fast reply...... I have been thinking about this thread and while the described situation is definitely not something I can support, I find it interesting to consider that for hundreds of years, there was very similar lifestyles with reverse gender and we often hear/read it referred to, as "the good old days" and most people don't really think much about it. Yet with the female as the dominant and the male as the submissive/service role, it is considered 'exposing minors to kink'. Odd. actually not totally, id feel the same if it was male Dominant, female sub and the daughters were brought up to be submissive to all men. equally wrong because its allowing the stronger force in the dynamic to dictate to people who are not there out of choice and have not consented to the exposure. the thing is that two gay guys can bring up a boy and that boy is not going to become gay unless he already is. the chances with this scenario though is that those two girls are going to grow up thinking all men are weak. i dont see how thats healthy at all. teaching any sort of supremacy thing to kids is wrong in my view. mostly those people are going to have to live in a largely egalitarian society. for myself, i would not cripple my son with the idea that women are subservient to men - i want him to grow up equipped to have well-rounded relationships with whoever and whatever their sex. i wonder if her maternal instinct would have served her differently had she had two boys rather than two girls. would she have brought them up believing they were subservient to all women or would she have given them a broader perspective. pesumably this Domme has been living this lifestyle long before beowulf arrived so presumably these two girls were exposed to plenty from a young age. the term 'brainwashed' comes to mind. there is no healthy choice option being given, no opportunity for them to develop their own minds. its wrong and depressing.

SimplyIsaac -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/28/2009 1:34:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lockit LOL... okay... they were not connected per his words and connecting them but he did say they heard him being disiplined. But it isn't too hard to imagine someone who would beat someone even with a small bat... might be a bit extreme and just might be teaching/showing/allowing too much to go on in the household that houses the kids. We could say that about a number of fetish folks who enjoy in their own homes (that have children) what the gentle public thinks is over the top and sick. Knife "play", bull whipping and branding are in a similar category. In any case, the key word here is "might" when talking about extremity, and regarding this thread, if the word "extreme" can even be used in the discipline context spoken here. He also writes, "They were never exposed to kink." What does that exactly mean when in the same paragraph he says they can hear him being punished? Odd. It might be a good idea to establish if this thread and the link we are discussing are speaking of the same woman and household. Adding to that, I'd like to know the details about the "slave dish" and what "discipline" involves. Also, what exactly is the philosophy taught in the house regarding men? Is it all negative? "She tells them men need to be harnessed and used for their advancement and happiness in life," doesn't totally sound like hate speech to me. Perhaps the OP can shed some light here? (I doubt it).

LafayetteLady -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/29/2009 10:33:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae No one I see is disagreeing with that. Of course, what methods we use to protect our children and why will vary. No one is saying the methods different people use to protect their children is the same. There are, however, "standard" methods that most people ascribe to. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae Let me run a parallel here with polyamorous homes and children. How do you feel about kids growing up in poly households? Is it possible polyamory could lead them to be promiscuous? Is it possible it will mislead them and discourage them from pair bonding? Is this style of living in the best interests of the children? Yes. No. It depends. The answer isn't black or white. It isn't a parallel at all. I have already stated that when the children are exposed to that situation in an appropriate manner (such as described by GypsyMambo), it is just as healthy as a male/female household, a single parent household, or a same sex household. As for the concept that a poly household would potentially lead them to be promiscuous, it is just as ridiculous as saying that children raised by gay parents will grow up to be gay. There is a huge difference between a child growing up seeing the adults in their household in loving relationships and seeing their parents as being overly sexually active. Having said that, if a child sees a parent who has a revolving door of relationships, yes it would likely teach them to be promiscuous and inhibit them from being able to enter into committed relationships. No child raised in a loving home is being taught to be promiscuous. The "typical" successful polyamorous homes that I have seen discussed here are of the type where the members are not continuously changing, but steady and stable. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae Careful with those assumptions again, you have no idea what my stance is regarding "best interest of the children" aside from my saying I see harm in their witnessing/hearing physical abuse and seeing a man eat off the floor in a referenced "slave" bowl. For the record, I do not see their interests being threatened if they see non-kink foot kissing, as long as they're not taught to expect that from all men. I do not see their interests being threatened living in a non-kink matricarchial home where the women are seen as more valuable, as long as their exercising care, compassion and consideration for both sexes, as long as the kids are taught that men are valuable too, and they aren't taught that men are worthless and low or that their home life is the only way to live. I do not see their interests being threatened living in a home where the man does the housework, as long as their taught to do it themselves, to be appreciatiative of the convenience, and as long as their not told to expect that from all men they meet, etc. No I don't know what your stance is regarding the best interests of children. However, your need to continually look for "another side" to this story is disturbing at best. As I have repeatedly said, both society and the law err on the side of caution when it comes to the best interest of the children. Since you seem to want to present a defense for this woman, let me assure you, your comments would not allow her to keep custody of her children. THAT I can say with complete confidence especially since the OP lives in my state and I can pretty much quote chapter and verse on Family Law in my state. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae You're making a judgmental assumption of which you have no proof. I've commented on several possible scenarios which, *if* were happening, in my opinion would be harmful to the children. The point is that the only reason to create "possible" scenarios would be to defend this woman's actions. Many people like to try to see all sides of a situation. Often to try to reason how anyone could behave in a way that for all accounts appears foolish and irresponsible. As I mentioned, there isn't a reason to try to defend this poor woman from villification here. People will and have taken the situation given and stated opinions. There isn't a need to try to present "her side" of things. You say the OP could be making the whole thing up which of course is possible. Even in that case, the opinions asked for were "what do you think of this situation. That negates the need to try to present other possibilities. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae Therefore, you can't say I haven't taken their best interest into consideration.... But we don't know if she did this. Again, given the situation posed by the OP coupled with the other post, why should anyone doubt the OP's statements or try to read more into it? That is akin to taking a post by someone who is claiming their SO is beating them, and saying that maybe it isn't exactly as the OP says. Interestingly enough, if it were a woman who made that statement, not many would have trouble telling her to leave and few would question whether or not her statement was true. Attempting to criminalize the victim is never a good way to go. Even if the attemt is no more than to say that their statements might be a bit over the top and not really what is happening. It doesn't matter whether the person being abused is male or female, by trying to negate what they say is happening to them in any way, you are abusing them that much further. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae Aside from that, I see no harm in him kissing her feet, as long as it's not sexual in nature. I also see no harm in having him perform all the house work either, as long as she teaches her children how to do it themselves, and makes certain to integrate them into society and be open to how everyone else lives. I see no harm in them growing up in a female-led household as long as she doesn't teach them men are worthless. Yea, what part of "chores are non existent to them is unclear? Since he is doing all the work around the house, how would she be teaching them to do anything? Do you think she is secretly teaching them to cook while he is at work or asleep? Do you think that she is showing them how to clean when he isn't around? If he is doing all the cleaning, which by the way, I don't have a problem with at all, and chores are non existent to them, there is no logical way for them to be being taught how to do it. I'm sure for that though, you will say how we don't know what she is telling the kids. You're right we don't, other than men should be "harnessed for a woman's advancement." Children don't simply learn by being told things. They learn by example. She isn't setting a good example, and the OP, by being an obedient little slave isn't setting one either. Both these people have selfishly let their "lifestyle" come before the kids. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae Of course you would think so. You seem full of assumptions and speculations. You not only seem to lack the ability to see any other perspective other than your own, but would use it as a 10 pound cudgel to dictate right and wrong in these matters if you could. Actually, I'm not making assumptions or speculating on anything. I responded to the OP's post at face value. You, on the other hand have speculated that all kinds of other things might be taking place in that house, regardless of what anyone else tells you. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae You're deductive logic isn't correct. Dominant Tops don't have to lead anyone. But keep on stabbing in the dark. Not a stab in the dark at all. Female dominant is in charge of a relationship, ergo, female is leading the relationship, i.e. female led. If the female dominant household is not a female led household, please explain to me what it is? quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae To reiterate: What sort of discipline do they hear? Was he specific? Is it verbal discipline? Physical? Again, I don't condone them hearing/seeing beatings and I've said this many times throughout. But you see nothing wrong with them "hearing" verbal discipline that isn't "gentle scolding" which based on the history that was given in this situation is unlikely to ever happen. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae You still don't have any proof of that, based on the limited information he provided. Goddess worship, matricarchical philosophies, special bowls, foot kissing, discipline, housework don't have involve sex or "kink". Again speculating that the situation is different than the OP's statements and assuming she is into Goddess worship, matriarchal philosophies, doesn't call it a slave dish in front of the children is just reaching for ways to defend her. It is making the assumption that the OP came up with the term "slave dish" while the nice, gentle, motherly dominant tells her children he just as a "special dish." quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae Do you have answers to the following, aside from your speculations? Discipline. What sort of discipline do the kids see or hear, if anything? Do they hear it? Do they see it? Is it mild scolding? Is it physical brutality? Well, the OP states they hear it, so I'm not sure why you seem to feel the need to negate that it is heard. Further, you seem to want to make a point that just because he says they "hear" something, it might just be her saying "OP, you shouldn't have done that." Logically, they are hearing things that would be inappropriate. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae Separate eatery. What do the kids hear her refer the bowl by? Is it just called something mild, and not a "slave" bowl? What does she explain to the children about the bowl? Where is the bowl placed? Is it placed on the table for him to eat from? (Again, I don't condone telling children it's a slave bowl, or placing it on the floor.) Why would he make reference to him just having a particular dish he eats from on the table? Does this make ANY sense? quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae Feet Kissing. How does he kiss her feet? Is it in a sexual, "kinky" way? Is it a quick peck done in a respectful, admiring way? Most of us have completely ignored the issue of kissing her feet for several pages. Why do you need to keep bringing it up? Kissing her feet is not the issue of what is inappropriate for the children to be made aware of. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae Male housework. What does the mother teach her children about chores, and other life skills? Does she tell them to depend on and expect men to cook and clean? Does she teach them to do these things themselves and not depend on someone else? Hmmm, let's see, chores are NON-EXISTENT to them, so exactly how would she be teaching them about chores? "Men should be harnessed and used for their ADVANCEMENT in life", and someone (a male) is in the house doing all the cooking and cleaning, all for happiness and advancement. Again, when would she be teaching them to do these things for themselves? quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae Female Led Home. Does she teach and exercise care, compassion and consideration for men too? Does she teach them that males are worthless and low as someone suggested? Does she teach them they are valuable and helpful? Do she teach them her way is the only way? Does she teach them her way is one way out of many lifestyles? She beats the guy with a bat, and bites him so hard the bleeding doesn't stop for an hour. What part of that is exercising care, compassion or consideration? I'm not going to comment on "low and worthless" but I am going to reiterate the fact that saying "men should be harnessed for her advancement" isn't teaching them men are valuable or helpful and it also isn't indicative of saying there are many ways to live. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae None of these things are in evidence. As much as you like to think there's abuse and damage happening to the children, you don't have any proof of that whatsoever. Don't speculate until you have evidence. Chores: non existent, slave dish, "hearing" discipline and saying that men need to be harnessed for the advancement of a woman. Not speculation, those are the OP's statements. Yes, they are damaging to the children. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae Im not defending, Im just imploring people to keep an open mind and avoid getting on the soap box to moralize among a group of people who come together under the precepts of "alternative lifestyles". Alternative lifestyle, as I know it, means different way of living. Well, I would assume you meant to DEmoralize the woman. What you are doing is asking people to consider that the OP's own words are not necessarily what are used in the home. Would you approach a woman who asked whether or not her partner was abusing her the same way? quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae Well thanks for admitting you're guided by your emotions and personal bias. This is obviously a very hot button issue for you, but you would be probably shocked and appalled over how mild in comparison this scenario is to what others live or idealize. Actually, we can agree that this is "mild" compared with what many others feel is ok to do in front of or to their children. I wish that there was something regarding the abuse to children that would shock me and be something I had never heard of. As for appalled? I think anyone who isn't appalled at the atrocities that happen to children has something wrong with them. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Well if he is making the story up, what do you continue to post your point of view? I'm still waiting for you to explain why, if it is called a "special bowl" the OP refers to it as a slave dish? Don't worry, I don't expect you to answer, because I know that you aren't able to. I also know that if you did, you would cloak your foolishness in the notion that you just don't have enough facts. The OP called it a slave dish. Is that not a fact to you? Oh wait, you think he made it all up. I'm sure that in your week on this site, you are an expert at seeing when someone is making things up. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae He could be referring to his own knowledge of what it is, or speaking in a language we all here would understand. The question is do the children see that as a "slave" dish? Is it on the floor? We don't know. In a language we all would understand? Or maybe he wants us to be inflammed by his situation? Realistically, he wouldn't bring it up if it were a "special dish" for a "special man" that was placed on the table. While you might be correct in that we don't definitively know, your speculation makes no sense at all. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae You really need to work on not being such a harsh moral judge. Try lowering your disgust sensitivity, it might help you. Help me what? Be more accepting of situations that I believe put a child's well being in jeopardy? Hmmm....I'm 45 and have spent the majority of my adult life protecting children with my "harsh moral" judgements. You seem to be suggesting that I lower my "disgust sensitivity" so that a bunch of selfish, ignorant people can live their lives with disregard for the affect it has on their children. I would rather not let those people continue to damage their kids and take your attitude. If the parents are not going to protect those children, and we all take the attitude of what someone is doing isn't our place to judge, the kids will suffer. That would be just as appalling as what does happen to them. quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae All I'm doing is inviting people to keep things in perspective. Actually, you are inviting people to disregard the OP's own statements and think that in all liklihood, it just isn't as bad as he states. Again, would you tell a woman who asked questions about whether or not she was being abused that there is "another side" and that her SO probably views it differently? quote: ORIGINAL: DommeMae Inaccurate. It's not black or white. There are cases where it does exist, in whatever numbers or portions I wouldn't presume. We have to be open-minded and consider the possibilities. It's quite conceivable that Goddess worship / matriarchal philosophies are being used to reify the practice of D/s in the household. This is not hard to imagine incorporating into an **alternative lifestyle*. There are cases where people use the bible as a reason for not seeking medical treatment as well. Not because the bible says so, but because that is their interpretation. I'm sure that there are many who use Goddess worship/matriarchal philosophies as a part of their D/s practice. It doesn't mean that either of those philosophies support the connection. quote:* ORIGINAL: SimplyIsaac In THIS thread, what does "discipline" mean? Does it encompass that incident spoken of in this link or something else? Is it verbal? Does it involve a bat and a chomp on the shoulder all the time? I can't say for sure. The OP is being purposefully vague. We need more input. Judge Isaac Actually, it serves a prima facie evidence that the (what did you call her?) "bitch goddess" is not terribly concerned who might be in earshot when she loses her temper. Judgement reversed on appeal. quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyIsaac We could say that about a number of fetish folks who enjoy in their own homes (that have children) what the gentle public thinks is over the top and sick. Knife "play", bull whipping and branding are in a similar category. In any case, the key word here is "might" when talking about extremity, and regarding this thread, if the word "extreme" can even be used in the discipline context spoken here. He also writes, "They were never exposed to kink." What does that exactly mean when in the same paragraph he says they can hear him being punished? Odd. I would say that the majority of those "fetish folks" who are into "extreme" play are responsible enough to not do it in front of or in earshot of the children. Many people, regardless of whether they are kinky or not tend to be of the belief that children are much less aware of what is going on around them than the children actually are. Kind of like the parents who are fighting for years but not getting divorced saying "but we never argue in front of the children" or "the children have no idea what is going on." Only in very rare cases do the children not know what is going on and typically many of them tell their parents how glad they are when the two finally divorce. That's the big problem is people not giving kids credit for being able to figure things out. Just because they don't tell you doesn't mean they don't know.

DommeMae -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/31/2009 4:38:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady No one is saying the methods different people use to protect their children is the same. There are, however, "standard" methods that most people ascribe to. Define "standard" method. A home with one mother and two boyfriends? Is that raising a kid in a "standard" way? For one who is a part of a very "unstandard" lifestyle comparatively with the rest of the population, it's ironic that you would speak as an oracle for all things "normal". quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady I have already stated that when the children are exposed to that situation in an appropriate manner (such as described by GypsyMambo), it is just as healthy as a male/female household, a single parent household, or a same sex household. You forgot female-led household which, by all accounts, can be a healthy household too. Also, you use the word "appropriate" as if it's a universal term for each household and each situation. Mind you, it may not be "appropriate" for children to be raised in a household where they know their mom is sharing the bed with two men. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady As for the concept that a poly household would potentially lead them to be promiscuous, it is just as ridiculous as saying that children raised by gay parents will grow up to be gay. As for the concept that a female-led household would potentially lead them to be lazy, dependent man haters, it is just as ridiculous as saying that children raised by a mother with two boyfriends will grow up promiscuous or prejudiced against pair bonding. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady There is a huge difference between a child growing up seeing the adults in their household in loving relationships and seeing their parents as being overly sexually active. No one is disagreeing. But what's overly sexual activities in your perspective? A quick peck to a woman's foot? One bed shared between one woman and two men? quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady The "typical" successful polyamorous homes that I have seen discussed here are of the type where the members are not continuously changing, but steady and stable. Good, but that can't be said for all poly homes. Can they expect a visit from your secret police? quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady No I don't know what your stance is regarding the best interests of children. Well, how very generous of you. You've gone from these: quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady The problem with your "oh we just don't know" foolishness is that you don't understand the reality that when it comes to the best interest of children, people need to err on the side of caution. I can say with complete confidence and authority that your "viewpoint" is either already damaging to any children you have, or because you don't have any, you are simply clueless. to: quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady No I don't know what your stance is regarding the best interests of children. I'm glad you finally stopped telling me what I thought after I've stated this already: I see harm in their witnessing/hearing physical abuse and seeing a man eat off the floor in a referenced "slave" bowl. We still don't have any evidence they heard actual beatings. If they did, again I don't condone that. having him eat off the floor in a bowl designated as a slave bowl. I wouldn't condone that, which is altogether different from saying authoritatively that it is not right for all, period. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady However, your need to continually look for "another side" to this story is disturbing at best. You're saying it's disturbing because you don't like hearing about another likely explanation, which is evidence of how close-minded you are and how little you care about reality. I don't defend anyone, I'm trying to get you to stop dismissing the possibilities which are out there. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady As I have repeatedly said, both society and the law err on the side of caution when it comes to the best interest of the children. As it should be. And they should do this by looking at all the facts, rather than existing preconceptions, bias, speculations and assumptions. God forbid someone goes into a poly home and takes the kids away because they think the Mother is teaching her kids to be sluts and whores, or is exposing them to sex since so much sex MUST be happening in a kinky home with two men on one woman. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Since you seem to want to present a defense for this woman, let me assure you, your comments would not allow her to keep custody of her children. Aside from broaching the possibility of additional explanations, exactly how am I defending her? Did I not say beating a person within their ear shot, making a human being eat off the floor in front of kids is harmful? You're wrong to say I'm defending her. I merely broached the possibility that it's possible there's more to the story and that the OP's very vague on several key statements. Discipline. What sort of discipline did they hear? Beatings or scolding? Was the scolding loud and abusive or was it mild and controlled? Is it possible she reserved his severe beatings to when they weren't home? It's possible. When you mention custody of children, you are speaking of a legal environment which would parse these facts carefully and weigh all available evidence WITHOUT speculation. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady The point is that the only reason to create "possible" scenarios would be to defend this woman's actions. That's a cheap way of writing off my comment. So how does one tell you that your interpretations of the facts are lacking in evidence? Does that have to amount to defending her? Are you kidding? I could just as easily say you're here to hang her, and I have more evidence here based on what you said to support that notion. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady There isn't a need to try to present "her side" of things. May God have mercy on the defendant whose trial has you on the jury seat. Regardless, it's not about "her side" of things. It's about what's really happening in the home. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady As I mentioned, there isn't a reason to try to defend this poor woman from vilification here. No, I wouldn't defend anyone until I had enough facts. But you would convict someone without having all the facts. That's just the difference between you and me. You call me defending her is your way of saying you can't stand hearing about any other possible explanation for a presentation of sketchy, limited facts. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Even in that case, the opinions asked for were "what do you think of this situation. That negates the need to try to present other possibilities. He didn't give enough facts to make an assessment. That's the whole problem. Do you know what sort of discipline they kids heard? No you don't. Neither do I. How can I judge that issue without first knowing what sort of discipline they heard. Maybe he considers a pointed finger and a mild: "Tsk Tsk" as "discipline". If I know they heard her hitting him than I would say immediately and without reservation that that was wrong. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Again, given the situation posed by the OP coupled with the other post, why should anyone doubt the OP's statements or try to read more into it? That is akin to taking a post by someone who is claiming their SO is beating them, and saying that maybe it isn't exactly as the OP says. He said discipline. Discipline has many forms, from mild scolding to bodily harm. He needs to be more specific. And you need to stop thinking you can judge the depth and nature of an entire relationship based on five paltry posts on a message board. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Yea, what part of "chores are non existent to them is unclear? You have such a lovely way with words. Simply because they do not perform chores does not mean they are not being raised to take care of themselves and be responsible adults. Again, you assume much. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Since he is doing all the work around the house, how would she be teaching them to do anything? Well you can first start by asking privileged kids what their experience was like growing up in a home with a butler. Can they wash a plate and vacuum? Most likely. It's very immature of you to think kids that don't grow up doing housework are going to grow up dependent, incapable and damaged. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady If he is doing all the cleaning, which by the way, I don't have a problem with at all, and chores are non existent to them, there is no logical way for them to be being taught how to do it. Did you really just write that? You actually believe that if a child grows up with a butler doing all their chores, there's no way for them to be taught to do them themselves? That statement isn't even worth the words. Uh, so 1950 boys who grew up with mommy doing all the house work, logically were not able to learn how to do it themselves?? quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady I'm sure for that though, you will say how we don't know what she is telling the kids. You're right we don't, other than men should be "harnessed for a woman's advancement." And I've been saying 'we don't have the full story as to what she's doing, telling or teaching the kids. Though your crystal ball seems to know. By the way, that men should be harnessed for a woman's advancement is nothing new. Men have been protectors and providers since we can remember. That most women openly look for men who are good protectors and providers is tacitly understood, but somehow when you put it in words it changes? quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady They learn by example. She isn't setting a good example You need more facts before you can say that. Further, you need more clarification on what facts were already given too, before you can say that. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Both these people have selfishly let their "lifestyle" come before the kids. He said they saw no kink. What lifestyle activities are they engaging in? Foot kissing doesn't have to be kink. Neither does having a special plate, unless it's expressed as a "slave" plate. Housework doesn't have to be kink either. The philosophy that men should be harnessed for her advancement doesn't have to be "evil kink". quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Actually, I'm not making assumptions or speculating on anything. Yes you are: quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Some of us did a little research and make the likely conclusion that this woman is putting her kinky desires ahead of her role as a parent with little thought to the effect it would cause those children. Your thought that she is calling it a "special bowl for a special man" is so far reaching that it doesn't even make any sense. I will condemn any parent male or female who conducts their private life in front of their children. She isn't setting a good example.. I can say with complete confidence and authority that your "viewpoint" is either already damaging to any children you have, or because you don't have any, you are simply clueless. These girls will not be in a position to "choose" what they want to believe in, they have only seen one way. 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. For the record, you don't know if he ate off the floor because the OP was vague. It's possible he didn't. You also don't know what else she told them about men making women happy. It is possible, I know, this is hard for you, that she did tell them it's that way for her but not every woman or man ascribes to that. You also don't know if this woman actually beat him within their ear shot. Until the OP gets more specific, your assumptions are just that - assumptions. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Not a stab in the dark at all. Female dominant is in charge of a relationship, ergo, female is leading the relationship, i.e. female led. If the female dominant household is not a female led household, please explain to me what it is? It is a stab in the dark when your original comment stated: quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Actually the mere fact that you are hear as a domme is indicative of you preferring female led relationships. Again, your deductive logic isn't correct when you insinuate I'm in a female led relationship. Dominant Tops don't have to lead anyone. But keep on stabbing in the dark. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady But you see nothing wrong with them "hearing" verbal discipline that isn't "gentle scolding" which based on the history that was given in this situation is unlikely to ever happen. It's possible she gently scolds him in front of the kids and reserves harsher discipline for when they're not home. It's possible. We need to find out from the OP. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Again speculating that the situation is different than the OP's statements and assuming she is into Goddess worship, matriarchal philosophies, doesn't call it a slave dish in front of the children is just reaching for ways to defend her. Until we hear from the OP, all we can do is speculate the POSSIBILITIES. Speculation is just that—speculation. As opposed to what you do, which is assume, and rather judgmentally, if I say so myself. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady It is making the assumption that the OP came up with the term "slave dish" while the nice, gentle, motherly dominant tells her children he just as a "special dish." We don't have all the facts yet. He could be using a term we here all know, though while at home that plate is described as something else. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Well, the OP states they hear it, so I'm not sure why you seem to feel the need to negate that it is heard. I'm not negating they didn't hear anything. I said we need facts about what exactly they heard. All the OP said was they heard discipline. Until he defines what sort of discipline they heard, because discipline takes many forms, from mild scolding to physical brutality, we won't know. What do they hear exactly? Is it damaging them? What if it's mild scolding discipline. It's possible they don't hear severe beatings. We need more facts. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Why would he make reference to him just having a particular dish he eats from on the table? Does this make ANY sense? So what. It's possible for him to eat out of his special plate on the table. We don't know until he specifies. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Hmmm, let's see, chores are NON-EXISTENT to them, so exactly how would she be teaching them about chores? Hmmm, let's see many children grow up in wealthy homes where they don't do any chores EITHER. Are you also applying this restricted view to the parents of said children, and say they couldn't possibly be teaching them? quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Men should be harnessed and used for their ADVANCEMENT in life", Don't pretend this motto hasn't been around, just called something else or described in different terms. lol. Seriously. Have you ever heard of "women and children first"? Ladies first? Even though the idea is antiquated in our age, "finding a man to support you" wasn't all that uncommon of a mission statement for most women seeking marriage. You may not like that idea, but it is an example of how women have benefitted from the status and work of men in society. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady someone (a male) is in the house doing all the cooking and cleaning, So? It's possible she teaches them to not depend on others for this, but rather, see it as a privilege and convenience. It is possible. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady She beats the guy with a bat, and bites him so hard the bleeding doesn't stop for an hour. What part of that is exercising care, compassion or consideration? Why don't you ask the sadists out there (or on this very forum who have healthy relationships in households with children) to answer this question. For the record, he may have asked for this. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady But I am going to reiterate the fact that saying "men should be harnessed for her advancement" isn't teaching them men are valuable or helpful and it also isn't indicative of saying there are many ways to live. In your very limited narrow one track mind, this message can't, but in my eyes, having a man work for my happiness would be very valuable and I would do everything I can to keep him inspired to continue this for me. No doubt. Hell, I would be honored. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Chores: non existent, slave dish, "hearing" discipline and saying that men need to be harnessed for the advancement of a woman. Not speculation, those are the OP's statements. Yes, they are damaging to the children. So what, doesn't mean they aren't taught how to do them themselves. You need to ask him for the rest of the story if there is one. It's possible there is more to it. Slave dish. What do the kids know it by? It is on the floor or table? You need to ask because if they answer if different from your negative assumptions, there is no damage to the kids, i.e. they know it by another name, and it's placed on the table. Men should work for the happiness of women. Nothing hateful about that. But what else did she say? We don't know if she elaborated on the positives of this and told them that that's her own personal take and others may differ. We need more info from the op. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady In a language we all would understand? Or maybe he wants us to be inflamed by his situation? Realistically, he wouldn't bring it up if it were a "special dish" for a "special man" that was placed on the table. You don't know that for sure. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady While you might be correct in that we don't definitively know, your speculation makes no sense at all. They make no sense to you because you can't bear to face the reality of other alternative explanations, or the need for more facts before one judges. In short, I remain a skeptic. A skeptic demands to be convinced with sound evidence, and will only make speculations, not absolute judgments, as you seem to be making. Speculation is the only intellectually honest route here at this point; we don't have enough data. quote:* ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Actually, you are inviting people to disregard the OP's own statements and think that in all likelihood, it just isn't as bad as he states. We don't have enough facts from him to draw a conclusion. What was the plate called and where was it placed? What discipline did they hear? You don't-have these answers yet you already say she's damaging the kids. You need more facts. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady There are cases where people use the bible as a reason for not seeking medical treatment as well. Not because the bible says so, but because that is their interpretation. I'm sure that there are many who use Goddess worship/matriarchal philosophies as a part of their D/s practice. It doesn't mean that either of those philosophies support the connection. So what?

LadyPact -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/31/2009 4:58:20 PM)
I'm going to interject on this, even though I feel like I'm wasting the keystrokes. For the love of the stars, can we please get off of the 'it could have been, it could have been, it could have been' broken record? I'm not trying to attack anyone here but in all seriousness, it's a message board. Not a court of law where proof beyond a reasonable doubt has to be established. It's also not a requirement for anybody coming here to pose a question write an entire book about the premise of what they want to know so that every possible detail can be scrutinized. I'm all for giving anyone a fair shake. At the same time, folks were asked to give an opinion based on the information and implications that we received. Sure, there are a lot of possibilities out there. It's also possible to take things at face value.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Is it right for daughters (12/31/2009 7:40:59 PM)
As LadyPact said, continuing this further is a waste of keystrokes. You will continue to take my comments out of context or repeat points that are irrelevant. LadyPact is correct in that this is not a court of law. However, as someone who has worked a significant amount of time within the courts, especially in the state the OP is from, I can assure you that the Division of Youth and Family Services is all about "speculation." Far too many people in the "lifestyle" will take the "your kink isn't my kink, but it's all good" far beyond the threshold of reasonable thought. Happily most here don't do that, but too often people seem to think that harmful and dangerous behavior by consenting adults is ok because it was consenting adults. I'm always pleased when someone asks a question about something that is totally foolish (such as the guy wanting to be castrated by a Mistress) and everyone strongly suggests that it is a bad idea. Likewise for those who will always try to develop a scenario where people are not doing anything to endanger the welfare of a child. In those circumstances, erring on the side of caution is taking things at face value. Instead of trying to consistently put words in my mouth about poly households raising promiscuous children or harping on the female led household, perhaps at the ripe old age of 28, it is time to realize that you aren't the brightest kid in the room and consistently attempting to insult the intelligence of others you should try to figure out why you are so combative and need to constantly write these long repetitive diatribes. Several times I have pointed out to you that the examples you gave (Shaktism/Dianic Wiccans) don't support your statements. Instead of attempting to address the errors in your statements you revert back to the other things that you keep repeating over and over. For me the discussion is over. I will go on in the comfort knowing that "judgemental" ways will continue to protect the children around me and the prayer that before you take on children you grow up a bit more.

DommeMae -> RE: Is it right for daughters (1/1/2010 10:02:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady As LadyPact said, continuing this further is a waste of keystrokes. You will continue to take my comments out of context or repeat points that are irrelevant. Funny, I feel the same way about you. The majority of your posts to me are full of assumptions. quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Instead of trying to consistently put words in my mouth about poly households raising promiscuous children or harping on the female led household, perhaps at the ripe old age of 28, it is time to realize that you aren't the brightest kid in the room and consistently attempting to insult the intelligence of others you should try to figure out why you are so combative and need to constantly write these long repetitive diatribes. Oh yeah. That's it. Negate my argument by saying I'm a youngin' and don't know any better. That's a real intellectually mature way of signing off in this thread. And P.s., assumption and putting words in the mouth of others seems more your province than mine, if you care to review the thread, oh old and wise elder.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625