RE: What's too far?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: What's too far?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: What's too far?

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 [5] 6 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: What's too far? - 1/10/2010 11:38:06 PM

Elisabella

Posts: 3939
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: jujubeeMB

And someone asked earlier (I'm sorry, I can't find it to quote it) if I was worried about what I thought about myself or what my previous Dom thought about me, in terms of respect. The answer is both, but what he thought about me was the problem. He actually believed - or at least told me he believed, even when it upset me on numerous occasions - that I was designed to be a fucktoy and that I should give up all the rest and just do that. He said that while I was most assuredly a very talented, smart young woman, my primary talent was being on my knees with my mouth open, and I owed it to myself to accept that. Of course I found this insanely hot while I was turned on, but when I wasn't, it just made me feel like I had to escape, and fast.

So there lies your answer. Sure he told you that you were smart and talented, but at the end of the day, he really didn't respect you for it and thought you should spend your life on your knees. When you are all turned on and playing, it's great to wrap your head around that thought, that "fantasy." Then comes real life and the fact that while you enjoy being a fucktoy, you KNOW in your head that you are much more than that and want to continue to be much more than that. There is a dom out there, as everyone has pointed out, that will want a smart, talented fucktoy. This guy wasn't him.

So before NZ comes in here tellling me how wrong I am for making any "judgement" on what you said....your worry seems to have been directly related to how THIS dom viewed things. Based on the posts that you made, in the long run, if you did give up all else so you could do nothing but fuck and suck all day and was told every day that was your "purpose," yes it likely would have caused you "harm." Because that isn't all of who you are, just a tiny part. Now certainly there are some women who actually don't WANT to be anything else, and that is ok for them. The fantasy of it, for you, even the reality of it in the moment is enjoyable. It enhances your arousal and your mood, but you still need to get up and go to work or school the next day. And I assume you you enjoy that too. But being that and a fucktoy seem to be diametrically opposed. There is no reason not to have both, but with the right partner. And if over time, you decide one is more important to you than the other, i.e. be a full time fucktoy, that will be the time when you are ready to give up the other stuff. In the meantime, if you are going to be with partners like the one you described, the relationships will be short lived because in the cold light of day, that fantasy isn't making you feel as good as it should or could.

Very well said!

(in reply to LafayetteLady)

Profile

Post #: 81

RE: What's too far? - 1/10/2010 11:48:33 PM

InvisibleBlack

Posts: 865
Joined: 7/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: jujubeeMB

And someone asked earlier (I'm sorry, I can't find it to quote it) if I was worried about what I thought about myself or what my previous Dom thought about me, in terms of respect. The answer is both, but what he thought about me was the problem. He actually believed - or at least told me he believed, even when it upset me on numerous occasions - that I was designed to be a fucktoy and that I should give up all the rest and just do that. He said that while I was most assuredly a very talented, smart young woman, my primary talent was being on my knees with my mouth open, and I owed it to myself to accept that. Of course I found this insanely hot while I was turned on, but when I wasn't, it just made me feel like I had to escape, and fast.

So there lies your answer. Sure he told you that you were smart and talented, but at the end of the day, he really didn't respect you for it and thought you should spend your life on your knees. When you are all turned on and playing, it's great to wrap your head around that thought, that "fantasy." Then comes real life and the fact that while you enjoy being a fucktoy, you KNOW in your head that you are much more than that and want to continue to be much more than that. There is a dom out there, as everyone has pointed out, that will want a smart, talented fucktoy. This guy wasn't him.

So before NZ comes in here tellling me how wrong I am for making any "judgement" on what you said....your worry seems to have been directly related to how THIS dom viewed things. Based on the posts that you made, in the long run, if you did give up all else so you could do nothing but fuck and suck all day and was told every day that was your "purpose," yes it likely would have caused you "harm." Because that isn't all of who you are, just a tiny part. Now certainly there are some women who actually don't WANT to be anything else, and that is ok for them. The fantasy of it, for you, even the reality of it in the moment is enjoyable. It enhances your arousal and your mood, but you still need to get up and go to work or school the next day. And I assume you you enjoy that too. But being that and a fucktoy seem to be diametrically opposed. There is no reason not to have both, but with the right partner. And if over time, you decide one is more important to you than the other, i.e. be a full time fucktoy, that will be the time when you are ready to give up the other stuff. In the meantime, if you are going to be with partners like the one you described, the relationships will be short lived because in the cold light of day, that fantasy isn't making you feel as good as it should or could.

Very well said!

That was very well said. Kudos!

_____________________________

Consider the daffodil. And while you're doing that, I'll be over here, looking through your stuff.

(in reply to Elisabella)

Profile

Post #: 82

RE: What's too far? - 1/11/2010 12:17:43 AM

LillyoftheVally

Posts: 1826
Joined: 7/22/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
There is a huge difference between being "judgemental" and attempting to keep someone from making mistakes.

Not in my opinion, judgemental is making a value judgement about something, we are all judgemental.

I just think that where we draw the line is difficult. Many people believe that BDSM is a sign of mental health issues that people should not be able to consent to physical pain because no one in their right mind would do it. Problem is right and wrong in this regard is not clear cut. My going out and having D/s relationships affect people around me, my sister thought me a freak for a long time, my mum worries constantly that doesn't stop me from doing it, I feel I am able to make my own choices. Like I said informing people of dangers is fine, which I think is what you mean really, I don't think we should have the right to legally stop people

_____________________________

'My doctor says that I have a malformed public-duty gland and a natural deficiency in moral fibre, and that I am therefore excused from saving Universes.'

Nah I am not happy to see you either

(in reply to LafayetteLady)

Profile

Post #: 83

RE: What's too far? - 1/11/2010 1:10:53 AM

NihilusZero

Posts: 4036
Joined: 9/10/2008
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

And others have the right to tell them they are stupid decisions. It doesn't equate to being "judgemental."

Considering the fact that you don't know if it's stupid or not until it's done unless you think your insight is magically better than theres, it is judgmental. It's precisely judgmental because you have to presume their thinking is flawed and that you know why.

Sometimes you might be right, sometimes you might be wrong. But none of that is based more on you knowing something about them that they don't than it has to do with their own degree of self-awareness.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

You see the bolded phrase? It affects the "willingly obliges" portion of the statement. Especially when you have the idiot on top telling some newbie "this is how it is done. You agreed to obey and please me at all times." Yes, she is still making a stupid decision, but also yes, that the top "convinced" (cajoled, pressured, pushed) her into doing, so yes, the top bears some responsibility. And yes, as with the example of the guy who is insisting that someone cut his dick off with a butcher knife...he can't adequately make responsible decisions for himself.

I keep seeing the argument that because someone is new to WIITWD that it means they must also be fundamentally stupid. Because one would have to be to be so easily persuaded to do something that they hate just because they are in a new element.

This has zero to do with protecting people from themselves and everything to do with helping people be smarter. There's a distinct difference.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

In your example, he is "managing to convince" her to do something, no magic involved. The managing to convince is indicative of his knowing that it isn't something she wants to consent to and so yes he should be curtailing his "demand." That's the whole "pushing limits" issue though and really not what this is about, but in any case, not everyone is able to stand up for themselves and say "hell no." Especially when they are new and exploring and someone is spouting all kinds of rules at them.

Again "They are new, therefore must be stupid and more easily prone to coercion."

And the "managing to convince" complaint is bunk. Turn on your TV. Every commercial in existence is trying to "manage to convince" you to buy their product. Every dude in a bar is trying to "manage to convince" the lone girl that she should hook up with him.

Are you as protective of new car buyers when they walk onto a used car lot?

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

While it is clear that you think I'm overly judgemental and have out of whack morals, there are some extremes that are simply beyond the boundaries of reasonable thought. It isn't a matter of civil liberties or "ethical imposition."

No, there aren't. Not so long as they are consented to by all parties. Your position, applied to any example in human history, is precisely an instance of the suppression of civil liberties.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

Yet many here would like to see their lifestyle choices become more acceptable in the "vanilla" world. To have the opportunity to not worry about the consequences with their family or employment.

So tell the gay guys to be less homosexual around their parents and around the public, why don't you?

I actually was surprised how easily I noticed, watching the ball drop this new year, multitudes of close-ups of heterosexual couples kissing being shown on the screen and then, when they panned to two men, the moment there seemed to be even the slightest hint of them leaning into each other, the cameras cut away.

The vanilla world would be much happier if they just didn't flaunt themselves...and that's the mentality we want to cater to, right?

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

And pretending that all things are "ok" and that morals don't exist because it is BDSM is ridiculous.

"Ridiculous" is just a word used by someone to describe their dissatisfaction with it. We already know you think that's the case. You just can't support it without anything that isn't a holier than thou presumption that you know what's better for someone than they do.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

Gee, last time I checked we had laws to try to deter people from doing such things. Kind of why people can be committed against their will to a psychiatric facility to prevent them from doing harm to themselves or others.

Did you intentionally ignore the entire psychological sidetrack we made? Instances of psychosis or actual clinical disorder are highlighted by the distinct occurence of someone being unable to stop themselves from doing something they actually don't want to do. In those cases, we should clearly be offering assistance and they would be right there requesting it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

But I guess you think those people should be able to do that harm to themselves as long as they really want to do it, even if there might be some psychological disorder that is causing that thought, which by the way means they ARE NOT able to adequately make responsible decisions for themselves.

Are you the sort who grabs cigarettes out of people's mouths? Or is that not enough 'self-harm' for you?

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero
If how realistic something is becomes the measuring stick by which to call something 'wrong', how do you suppose any technological advancement has ever happened? Any civilized advancements??

You do know what comparing apples and oranges means, right? There is a rather significant difference between someone wanting to create a computer that can process really fast and someone wanting to cut off an appendage.

We're talking about things being realistic...which means your only gripe, from this angle, was the unlikelihood or difficulty of achieving something being grounds for not doing it. It makes no sense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

And when that friend's family found out that you knew what the friend was going to do and the likely outcome of the act, they would think you were much more than an asshole because you didn't stop them.

I wasn't trying to vicariously honor them. I would have been honoring my friend. If their short-sightedness or lack of being able to accept his/her decision means they make me the scapegoat, that's not really my issue.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

Actually since I do understand how humans work from a psychological standpoint, I'm not simply "tossing" the word healthy about. You mention "cutters" and I know that there are many here who are involved in that type of play. I'm also aware that there are people (typically young women) who are "cutters" and it is due to psychological issues. It would seem according to you though, that they are making their own decisions and they should be left alone. Same thing with anorexics. They are making a conscious decision to starve themselves to death. Many are very aware of the risks, yet they do it anyway.

I used the word "cutters" in an insufficiently descriptive way. Without getting into the cutters you refer to, I was speaking of WIITWD participants that engage in the cutting of the flesh of their partner (or being the cuttee).

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

Should no one make a "judgement" that they need help?

No one should presume their judgment call should ever have the power to do anything more than to inform the person.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

Perhaps herein lies the problem with your thinking at its core. A great many people DO find a lifelong partner that fufills the MOST important things to them. When one views it as an impossibility, it won't ever happen because they have closed themselves off to the possibility that it can happen.

So, you've made my point. Something being "unrealistic" is no argument against trying it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

I have the cojones to be that "self-righteous" although I don't believe it is being self righteous.

Of course you don't! That would involve an active acceptance of hypocrisy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

I believe that all humans have a responsibility to do what they can to protect other human beings even it sometimes it is protecting them from themselves.

Even if, to do that, you have to potentially step all over the "beliefs" of someone else to whom you're doing it to. See the problem?

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

I have zero respect for those who think it is ok to sit on the sidelines and do nothing Even less for those who while calling others "judgemental" and "self-righteous" and "imposing our morals" on others are being judgemental and self righteous telling me how wrong I am.

Strawman fallacy. Appeal to emotion. Argumentum ad hominem. Bait and Switch (the onus on you of showing you're not judgmental to the person suggesting it to further substantiate the obvious).

Any other logical errors you want to toss in?

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

I don't expect you to ever understand that.

Holier than thou argument.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

It's much easier to sit back and philosophize and hand out points to people who agree with your way of thinking.

It's much easier to find ways to strike down a position instead of bolstering your own. Unless you've got none.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

But then again that is the problem with philosophers on the whole. They love to sit back and tell everyone else what is wrong with society and what should be done to make it better, but they don't want to personally take any action to make it happen. Too much responsibility I guess.

Way to insult the basis for pretty much every intellectual advancement in humanity's history!

Too much responsibility to shove my morals down someone else's throat and fabricate an ethical structure that lets me not only feel good about it, but feel justified as well?

I'll take it.Guilty.

< Message edited by NihilusZero -- 1/11/2010 1:21:55 AM >

_____________________________

"I know it's all a game
I know they're all insane
I know it's all in vain
I know that I'm to blame."
~Siouxsie & the Banshees

NihilusZero.com

CM Sex God du Jour
CM Hall Monitor

(in reply to LafayetteLady)

Profile

Post #: 84

RE: What's too far? - 1/11/2010 1:34:10 AM

Elisabella

Posts: 3939
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero

That may be a bit of a follow-through on my part, yes, but that's usually where I see the idea progressing to. Sure, it's not invasive to just think that someone should be kept from doing what they wish...but that mentality is where the motivation to actually intercede comes from.

It doesn't even need to go that far. I find it's possible to say "you shouldn't do that" without having to say "I will prevent you from doing that."

quote:

Which, again, can just as easily bring us back to smoking or drinking (nevermind harder drugs or some of the harsher pain-plays often discussed here). But, the point of being human (and have self-reflective rentience) is that we get to determine for ourselves that is "self-destructive".

Self destructive is objective. It is "something that is harmful to the self."

We get to decide for ourselves what self destructive acts we will participate in. Saying "I am making an informed choice to smoke cigarettes" doesn't mean you're not going to get lung cancer.

quote:

That's because I do not adhere to the concept of universal 'good judgment'. I mean, sure...perhaps it's easy to tell when someone is about to make a decision they will shortly come to regret (I do own two volumes of The Darwin Awards), but I don't consider that an issue of 'right' or 'wrong', just an issue of whether the person was smart or not. And, far as I know, it's still not a crime to not be smart.

Not a crime, but I think as a generalization (and by generalization I mean generalization, not hard and fast rule that can be proven with flawless logic) you can say that the smart thing to do is the right thing and the stupid thing to do is the wrong thing, when it comes to situations that only affect yourself.

quote:

I think every decision in the world, as ridiculous and extreme as it may be, can be arrived at from a position of honest assessment and desire. We aren't talking about whether certain things are good or poor decisions...we're talking about whether the means by which people arrive to that decision are competent and mature.

That does affect it, yes, but I think that when you get to an extreme end of the spectrum, like, say, wanting to be roasted alive and eaten, there is no way to rationalize it as a sane, competent or mature decision.

It is my purely unprofessional opinion that wanting to actually act out that fantasy is a sign of mental illness. The sane mind has a self-preservation instinct and it takes extreme circumstances to override it. Extreme as in "offer myself to a terrorist to protect my child," not extreme as in "thinking about this makes me wet so I think I should do it."

quote:

Not wrong. Just foolish. And still, we only know those things after the fact. Everyone's a pedestal speaker in hindsight.

Yes but how can the foolish decision be the right decision, and the non-foolish decision be the wrong one?

quote:

But there is no critical thinking litmus test that people take before taking such office and modern civilization sure as hell doesn't readily value it enough to teach it across the board. So, I think being able to address the illogic of it at any location makes for the chance that it is more widely dispelled overall (unless, to be fair, people willingly consent to still remain uneducated about it ).

You can't "educate" someone into sharing your opinion. You can educate them on facts, then attempt to sway their opinion.

Sorry but it really irks me when people assume the only reason people don't agree with them is because they're uneducated. Sociology and psychology aren't hard sciences. There's no way, at this point, to get consistent, exact, repeatable results, so it's not like you're teaching me (x)(x) = x2.

Things like "what is the best way for humanity to live" are questions that are answered by opinion and worldview, and the objective facts can often be used to support both positions.

< Message edited by Elisabella -- 1/11/2010 1:35:24 AM >

(in reply to NihilusZero)

Profile

Post #: 85

RE: What's too far? - 1/11/2010 1:57:51 AM

NihilusZero

Posts: 4036
Joined: 9/10/2008
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

It doesn't even need to go that far. I find it's possible to say "you shouldn't do that" without having to say "I will prevent you from doing that."

I see no problem with that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

Self destructive is objective. It is "something that is harmful to the self."

And only the "self" (individual) makes that determination.

Otherwise happiness is just as easily "objective". What you've posited above is that the definition of 'self destructive' is objective, not the concept itself.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

We get to decide for ourselves what self destructive acts we will participate in. Saying "I am making an informed choice to smoke cigarettes" doesn't mean you're not going to get lung cancer.

It means that the person has understood how that factors in and has chosen to not value the act as 'net unhealthy'.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

Not a crime, but I think as a generalization (and by generalization I mean generalization, not hard and fast rule that can be proven with flawless logic) you can say that the smart thing to do is the right thing and the stupid thing to do is the wrong thing, when it comes to situations that only affect yourself.

And with some we cannot know until it's done.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

That does affect it, yes, but I think that when you get to an extreme end of the spectrum, like, say, wanting to be roasted alive and eaten, there is no way to rationalize it as a sane, competent or mature decision.

That's what the next person would say about someone who likes to be whipped with a single-tail. Is there a way to "rationalize" that as "sane" by the same standard?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

It is my purely unprofessional opinion that wanting to actually act out that fantasy is a sign of mental illness. The sane mind has a self-preservation instinct and it takes extreme circumstances to override it. Extreme as in "offer myself to a terrorist to protect my child," not extreme as in "thinking about this makes me wet so I think I should do it."

The only thing differentiating those two are our inner ethical constructs. Martyrdom is traditionally more virtuous than death via chosen fatal pleasure.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

Yes but how can the foolish decision be the right decision, and the non-foolish decision be the wrong one?

Because "foolish" can be a word used to describe an act before or after it's done, while "right/wrong" only really applies in the aftermath as a measurement against other conceivable outcomes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

You can't "educate" someone into sharing your opinion.

Educated about critical thinking.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

Sorry but it really irks me when people assume the only reason people don't agree with them is because they're uneducated. Sociology and psychology aren't hard sciences. There's no way, at this point, to get consistent, exact, repeatable results, so it's not like you're teaching me (x)(x) = x2.

That's not at all what I said or implied, though. That I happen to think my view is born of critical thinking and that someone else's view might more closely match it by using the same logical principles is not the same thing as saying I want people to agree with me, lest I call them uneducated.

< Message edited by NihilusZero -- 1/11/2010 1:58:51 AM >

_____________________________

"I know it's all a game
I know they're all insane
I know it's all in vain
I know that I'm to blame."
~Siouxsie & the Banshees

NihilusZero.com

CM Sex God du Jour
CM Hall Monitor

(in reply to Elisabella)

Profile

Post #: 86

RE: What's too far? - 1/11/2010 2:03:26 AM

NihilusZero

Posts: 4036
Joined: 9/10/2008
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline

Side note:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

Sociology and psychology aren't hard sciences.

It is precisely because they are soft sciences that we should tread very, very lightly on any mindset that presumes to easily know if someone is unstable to where we should bar them from being able to make their own decisions, which is where it is possible that some people (I'm not suggesting anyone here, but certainly someone somewhere) would take their 'save the world from itself' mindset to places where they are imposing on the liberties of others.

_____________________________

"I know it's all a game
I know they're all insane
I know it's all in vain
I know that I'm to blame."
~Siouxsie & the Banshees

NihilusZero.com

CM Sex God du Jour
CM Hall Monitor

(in reply to Elisabella)

Profile

Post #: 87

RE: What's too far? - 1/11/2010 6:13:20 AM

WinsomeDefiance

Posts: 6719
Joined: 8/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero

quote:

ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance

I have the right to set limits on what I will indulge others in. Just because something turns me on, if I don't believe it is right, or correct or worthy of the risks - I freely exercise my right to abstain. I do not meander through existence believing that because someone gives me carte blanche, I am without responsibility for my actions.

WinD

That's the point I'm making but you're pointing it in a different direction. You're saying that somehow, the dominant in my hypothetical above should somehow magically know that this woman should not be consenting to what she actually is consenting to and that he should bear the burden of curtailing his demands/requests because she cannot consent competently.

That's a totally backwards way to treat relationships.

What I am saying, is that common sense, judgement and reason must partner with our desires.

What it boils down to, is no matter what someone wants or is willing to consent to, their counterpart doesn't have to be a magician or an empath to know when something is outside of their personal squick zone. That doesn't mean the partner will always be correct and choices to abstain can be wrong too. But, for myself, if I believe something is wrong - I try to err in the direction where least harm is implied.

Passion, kink, desires, lasciviousness etc. are all awesome things. I'd invest in them, since we know that they will almost always be profitable. But, to say it is wrong to evaluate a situation, to make judgements and decisions based off those evaluations - for fear that you may be trouncing upon another's right to unadulterated assinocity, just doesn't make sense to me.

I do understand and agree that zealous judgementalism and fear are scary things to drive what governs us. History reveals that such things typically ARE what legislates us, unfortunately, but that doesn't mean that I believe that reason, logic, judgement and a healthy sense of self-preservation is wrong or dangerous to our rights and liberties.

< Message edited by WinsomeDefiance -- 1/11/2010 6:34:16 AM >

(in reply to NihilusZero)

Profile

Post #: 88

RE: What's too far? - 1/11/2010 10:51:55 AM

NihilusZero

Posts: 4036
Joined: 9/10/2008
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance

What it boils down to, is no matter what someone wants or is willing to consent to, their counterpart doesn't have to be a magician or an empath to know when something is outside of their personal squick zone. That doesn't mean the partner will always be correct and choices to abstain can be wrong too. But, for myself, if I believe something is wrong - I try to err in the direction where least harm is implied.

As a dominant, I can understand where you're going here, since I have to make sure I'm making decisions that incorporate all thoughts and feelings in the relationship, but I wouldn't gamble on 'just knowing' if something is outside a partner's squick zone and you'd be surprised how often and how well some submissives subvert their distaste for something and pretend to want to do it because they think the act of pleasing their dominant partner is what should be done.

So, it does take a certain bit of magical telepathy if we're going to try and guess when someone in entering the squick zone. Why shouldn't I be able to rely, instead, on their honesty when I sincerely ask if they are entering it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance

Passion, kink, desires, lasciviousness etc. are all awesome things. I'd invest in them, since we know that they will almost always be profitable. But, to say it is wrong to evaluate a situation, to make judgements and decisions based off those evaluations - for fear that you may be trouncing upon another's right to unadulterated assinocity, just doesn't make sense to me.

I have no issue with someone thinks they'd like to offer up advice as to whether someone is doing something harmful to themselves if they don't try to actively stop that person against their wishes, but it's still rude.

It's the same thing as an evangelist trying to 'nicely' warn a homosexual couple that if they don't change their sinful ways, they'll 'harm themselves' and their 'souls' via their gayness.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance

I do understand and agree that zealous judgementalism and fear are scary things to drive what governs us. History reveals that such things typically ARE what legislates us, unfortunately, but that doesn't mean that I believe that reason, logic, judgement and a healthy sense of self-preservation is wrong or dangerous to our rights and liberties.

All of those things are fantastic...when we use them to better ourselves. And if we use them to be honest enough to know when we might be confused and then seek out the input of others (even those itching to make judgments), so much the better.

But to be confident that I am happy in the decision I'm making only to have someone else who doesn't know me tell me that there's something wrong with my brain because I want to do it is rather pompous...even if the pomposity is born of a supposed intent to 'help'.

< Message edited by NihilusZero -- 1/11/2010 10:53:26 AM >

_____________________________

"I know it's all a game
I know they're all insane
I know it's all in vain
I know that I'm to blame."
~Siouxsie & the Banshees

NihilusZero.com

CM Sex God du Jour
CM Hall Monitor

(in reply to WinsomeDefiance)

Profile

Post #: 89

RE: What's too far? - 1/11/2010 10:57:48 AM

domiguy

Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline

Lately I have been seeing her. She is really nice. Her photo seems a bit processed but she is in all actuality a very nice cow.

< Message edited by domiguy -- 1/11/2010 11:00:46 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to NihilusZero)

Profile

Post #: 90

RE: What's too far? - 1/11/2010 11:33:02 AM

LafayetteLady

Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero

Did you intentionally ignore the entire psychological sidetrack we made? Instances of psychosis or actual clinical disorder are highlighted by the distinct occurence of someone being unable to stop themselves from doing something they actually don't want to do. In those cases, we should clearly be offering assistance and they would be right there requesting it.

Actually, in many cases of psychosis or actual clinical disorder it isn't simply the person can't stop themselves from doing something that they actually don't want to do.

There are countless serial killers who think that what they are doing is the right thing. They WANT to do what they are doing. Granted, their victims did not consent, but that doesn't change the fact that they believe what they are doing is the right thing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero
I wasn't trying to vicariously honor them. I would have been honoring my friend. If their short-sightedness or lack of being able to accept his/her decision means they make me the scapegoat, that's not really my issue.

I'm sure I'm not alone in saying that you not only "honoring" your friend, but that you really are not being a friend at all.

All things are not equal, yet you argue that they are. The decision of a woman to cut her waist length hair to a spiky short do is not equal to her decision to (using Elisabella's example) have herself roasted on an open spit and then eaten.

Trying to equalize the constent and rationality behind decisions seems to be the only way you can justify your argument. Just like all lies are not equal. There are little lies and big lies. No, I'm not going to get into the discussion that they are still lies, because of course they are. But the reality is if a friend comes to you very excited about that new spiky haircut and you think it looks like shit, a friend isn't going to tell her it looks like shit and hurt her feelings. They will lie, even if they avoid giving a direct answer (lie of omission), they aren't going to hurt her feelings. That is not equal to cheating on your spouse and lying about it. Likewise, all things that a person does or wants to do is not simply justified by the fact that they are an adult and consented to it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero
Way to insult the basis for pretty much every intellectual advancement in humanity's history!

If you think that philosophers are responsible for every intellectual advancement in history, then yes, I guess it is an insult. Philosophers pose questions, much like you are trying to do. Then others do the actual work to advance humanity. It would seem you fancy yourself to be a philosopher. I have never had much respect for philosophers, and given my reasons why. I don't see you as being much different from them.

For me, this conversation is over. I can live with you thinking that I am a highly judgemental, overly moralistic hypocrite sitting on a pedastal preaching right and wrong. Maybe someday you will realize that you are doing the exact same thing. Because make no mistake, you have put yourself on a pedastal, you do preach that your beliefs are the "right" way to think. Lucky for society, everyone isn't buying your sermon.

(in reply to NihilusZero)

Profile

Post #: 91

RE: What's too far? - 1/11/2010 11:36:16 AM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

I'd seek professional help - only after having drilled them into my psyche by acting them out over and over of course.

(in reply to LafayetteLady)

Profile

Post #: 92

RE: What's too far? - 1/11/2010 11:50:25 AM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jujubeeMB

Does being in a constant state of submission and servitude make slaves incompetent of thinking of themselves assertively/positively out in the world? I don't know. Is the slave in question being treated with love and respect, or treated as less than a person?

Absolutely - or not. It happens in Vanilla relationships all the time, in fact it used to be the norm - i.e., women were routinely conditioned to be arm candy/domestic servants, many found themselves in straights after the old man kicked off and they discovered he wasn't the mogul everybody thought he was, up to his neck in debt, etc.

In which case, most women I've known in this situation adapted - the Blanche DuBois stereotype isn't that common anymore, most women, yourself presumably included, are already way ahead of the curve if you've ever had to take care of yourself already.

Tripping on a fucktoy fantasy might make you a little skittish in some situations in the short term, depending on how deep into it you get, but should you be required to change gears, I suspect you already have the tools to do that - they don't just disappear, although they can atrophy, over a length of time.

Again, this happens in any dyad, partners often compensate for each others shortcomings, it's one of the synergistic benefits of being in a dyad - and just as traditionally women were often rendered financially helpless, men were often rendered equally incapable of housekeeping and childrearing, and those are just basic, traditional divisions of labor.

Still, in the end, you do what you gotta do in that situation - knowing what that is is already a step ahead, at least you aren't completely at sea.

< Message edited by xssve -- 1/11/2010 11:51:29 AM >

(in reply to jujubeeMB)

Profile

Post #: 93

RE: What's too far? - 1/11/2010 12:04:06 PM

NihilusZero

Posts: 4036
Joined: 9/10/2008
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

There are countless serial killers who think that what they are doing is the right thing. They WANT to do what they are doing. Granted, their victims did not consent, but that doesn't change the fact that they believe what they are doing is the right thing.

Um, yes. Forcing what you think is right upon a non-consenting person is not right at all.

Like, for instance, trying to force ethical decisions upon someone to try and keep them from doing what they consensually want...

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

I'm sure I'm not alone in saying that you not only "honoring" your friend, but that you really are not being a friend at all.

I normally don't keep friends who I presume I need to daddy and tutor because they cannot make decisions for themselves. That may just be me, though.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

All things are not equal, yet you argue that they are. The decision of a woman to cut her waist length hair to a spiky short do is not equal to her decision to (using Elisabella's example) have herself roasted on an open spit and then eaten.

Of course they're not equal. One is far more extreme a decision than the other. The degree to which we should respect the genuine consent of someone doing those things, however, should be equal.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

But the reality is if a friend comes to you very excited about that new spiky haircut and you think it looks like shit, a friend isn't going to tell her it looks like shit and hurt her feelings. They will lie, even if they avoid giving a direct answer (lie of omission), they aren't going to hurt her feelings.

We clearly keep a very different type of friend. I'm always honest with mine.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

That is not equal to cheating on your spouse and lying about it. Likewise, all things that a person does or wants to do is not simply justified by the fact that they are an adult and consented to it.

Actually, yet again, you are imposing your own idea of how big a lie is upon someone else. Lying, however, is something done to someone else and if they consider a lie about the quality of their new haircut as more egregious than a lie about having sex with someone else, then that is what counts.

This is how relationships are torn asunder: with the presumption of one party that their assessment of what is and isn't important is automatically what the other's should be.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

If you think that philosophers are responsible for every intellectual advancement in history, then yes, I guess it is an insult. Philosophers pose questions, much like you are trying to do. Then others do the actual work to advance humanity. It would seem you fancy yourself to be a philosopher. I have never had much respect for philosophers, and given my reasons why. I don't see you as being much different from them.

I'll take that as a compliment and leave this nonsensical monologue of you presuming you know me and what I do in my life out here to be seen for what it is: a cheap prod without substance.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

For me, this conversation is over. I can live with you thinking that I am a highly judgemental, overly moralistic hypocrite sitting on a pedastal preaching right and wrong. Maybe someday you will realize that you are doing the exact same thing.

I'm saying your actions reflect it. I'm not 'calling you' anything, I'm pointing to words you choose to write and displaying, coherently, how they do not stack up to critical scrutiny except as examples of contradiction and hypocrisy. My being able to point that out doesn't make me 'judgmental' (I'm not even trying to force you to change your ways).

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

Because make no mistake, you have put yourself on a pedastal, you do preach that your beliefs are the "right" way to think. Lucky for society, everyone isn't buying your sermon.

"Belief" is the second cheapest word in the english language and I don't bother with it. I'm making points and presenting views which I support. No belief necessary.

Where have I put myself on a pedestal? Or are you only saying that because it's easy to accuse someone who's doing a better job in a debate as being fixated with winning it? I appreciate your concern that I'm more interested in winning this discussion so I can sit in the W column rather than interested in being clear and logical about the premises I'm presenting, but nothing I've written here echoes that.

As a matter of fact, it's diametrically opposed to what I've been saying all along: that every individual is free to decide what is "right" for them. How does that somehow equate to me trying to force them to think "my beliefs" are right?

< Message edited by NihilusZero -- 1/11/2010 12:10:28 PM >

_____________________________

"I know it's all a game
I know they're all insane
I know it's all in vain
I know that I'm to blame."
~Siouxsie & the Banshees

NihilusZero.com

CM Sex God du Jour
CM Hall Monitor

(in reply to LafayetteLady)

Profile

Post #: 94

RE: What's too far? - 1/13/2010 7:59:40 AM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

Like I said NZ, Nihilism should begin with the self, the rest of us often have some hierarchy of priorities that have meaning to us.

I'm with LL on this one, it's purely a question of balance, and it takes Two to Tango.

(in reply to NihilusZero)

Profile

Post #: 95

RE: What's too far? - 1/13/2010 10:32:39 AM

NihilusZero

Posts: 4036
Joined: 9/10/2008
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

Like I said NZ, Nihilism should begin with the self, the rest of us often have some hierarchy of priorities that have meaning to us.

This has nothing to do with nihilism and everything to do with "to us" being the operative words. It is possible for people to have ethical hierarchies without feeling the need to have them be applicable to someone else's life.

quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

I'm with LL on this one, it's purely a question of balance, and it takes Two to Tango.

It takes two consenting people to tango. You can't dance while you're dragging someone else along against their will.

_____________________________

"I know it's all a game
I know they're all insane
I know it's all in vain
I know that I'm to blame."
~Siouxsie & the Banshees

NihilusZero.com

CM Sex God du Jour
CM Hall Monitor

(in reply to xssve)

Profile

Post #: 96

RE: What's too far? - 1/13/2010 11:03:59 AM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

Well, the OP is essentially talking about learned helplessness, and that is an established psychological phenomena that can potentially affect people besides those directly involved, as in my example of what happens if the "competent" partner dies?

In Blanche DuBois' case, she is carted off to a mental institution, presumably at taxpayer expense - a fictional example of course, but we're dealing with hypothetical's from the start, I'm sure I could come up with real world examples, i.e., if children are involved and they all end up living on the street at the mercy of every guy with a hardon - I've seen it happen.

(in reply to NihilusZero)

Profile

Post #: 97

RE: What's too far? - 1/13/2010 11:20:31 AM

NihilusZero

Posts: 4036
Joined: 9/10/2008
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

Well, the OP is essentially talking about learned helplessness, and that is an established psychological phenomena that can potentially affect people besides those directly involved, as in my example of what happens if the "competent" partner dies?

I don't see where she was making that quite the point of discussion. The 'too far' in the OP is asking about a fantasy or set of fantasies that one would worry might psychologically affect someone if they were to entertain them.

We discovered, through the thread, that her worry stemmed a great deal from the experience she had had where the partner wanted her to completely adopt the role of being inferior so as to match how he felt he should be able to see her. Her ideal, however, was just a more selective debasement or at least one where she knew she was genuinely thought of in all the positive ways she wishes while still being exposed to being able to be his fucktoy (which goes back to the fantasy).

The question of what happens when a partner dies doesn't have to do with a fantasy but with any relationship where sufficient emotional and/or physical/financial dependency has become the case. Unless you're saying that people who more openly try out their edgy fantasies are less able to handle breakups or the loss of a partner, I don't quite get how it's relevant.

quote:

ORIGINAL: xssve

In Blanche DuBois' case, she is carted off to a mental institution, presumably at taxpayer expense - a fictional example of course, but we're dealing with hypothetical's from the start, I'm sure I could come up with real world examples, i.e., if children are involved and they all end up living on the street at the mercy of every guy with a hardon - I've seen it happen.

I think maybe what you're saying is that the danger inherent in fantasies is because it is already presumed, with the more extreme ones, that simply the desire to have them somehow indicates psychological instability that could lead to some gross imbalance with our ability to manage the rest of our existence; as if the engaging in one unusual fantasy becomes a gateway act for reckless debauchery to suddenly spill into the rest of our lives.

It's no wonder, then, that the OP begins this thread wondering if, just by having thoughts of her fantasy, she isn't somehow magically at risk to lose the other parts of herself. Not everyone who picks up and smokes a cigarette for the first time goes on to become a 2-pack-a-day addict and the reasons for why that may or may not happen are not entirely based on the act of having smoked a cigarette in the first place and, certainly not, for thinking one would want to try it.

< Message edited by NihilusZero -- 1/13/2010 11:27:29 AM >

_____________________________

"I know it's all a game
I know they're all insane
I know it's all in vain
I know that I'm to blame."
~Siouxsie & the Banshees

NihilusZero.com

CM Sex God du Jour
CM Hall Monitor

(in reply to xssve)

Profile

Post #: 98

RE: What's too far? - 1/13/2010 12:45:15 PM

Ialdabaoth

Posts: 1073
Joined: 5/4/2008
From: Tempe, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero
It's no wonder, then, that the OP begins this thread wondering if, just by having thoughts of her fantasy, she isn't somehow magically at risk to lose the other parts of herself. Not everyone who picks up and smokes a cigarette for the first time goes on to become a 2-pack-a-day addict and the reasons for why that may or may not happen are not entirely based on the act of having smoked a cigarette in the first place and, certainly not, for thinking one would want to try it.

Unfortunately, this last bit is entirely true, and very difficult to come to terms with. The problem is, it doesn't help normal people live their lives - it suggests a world full of forces they can never understand or comprehend, that can conspire to strip them of their illusion of "free will" before they ever get a chance to know what's happening, let alone do anything about it.

What are people supposed to do in such a world? People need to be able to break down the phenomena of their world into simple concepts that they can grasp and build heuristics off of; without that capacity, everything is just an incoherent swirl of chaotic impressions and experiences. Humans need to believe that their world makes sense and that they have some sense of control over that world, or they find themselves incapable of surviving day to day. If most of the processes we have for believing our world makes sense involve ignoring how the world actually works, what are we supposed to do?

(in reply to NihilusZero)

Profile

Post #: 99

RE: What's too far? - 1/13/2010 12:54:34 PM

sweetboundesire

Posts: 285
Joined: 10/29/2009
Status: offline

to the OP. I just really read all of your posts and not the debates between. First off, doing X for me was the most theraputic thing I could have done for myself. I've only done it 4 or 5 times in my life and not for years... yet for me, it helped me with anxiety i was dealing with at the time and after that had a continuing positive effect on my life. I'm not into that anymore, just want to note it can be beneficial if not overdone.

that said, about the rest. If you trust the Dom you are seeking to fulfill this desire...why not go there? As long as you have an established trust and know what your getting into. How do we learn without going to extremes? At least, for myself, i find it is how i learn. Go there and learn and take what you can from the experience...

(in reply to Ialdabaoth)

Profile

Post #: 100