RE: "boys' Bill of Rights"

RE: "boys' Bill of Rights" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

NihilusZero -> RE: "boys' Bill of Rights" (1/15/2010 11:52:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucienne But do you see the difference between presenting the list as "I am a person worthy of this sort of treatment" and "this is the baseline for respectful treatment of fellow human beings"? Yes, and in each case the list seems either superfluous or inapplicable (except, as I'd mentioned, in cases where the person is single). "I am a person worthy of this sort of treatment" is a declaration of what the person wants in hir relationship (if xhe is single). On that level, it's great. It's informative and it makes a clear what the individual seeks for potential suitors. It's a bit...preachy for my tastes, but the very point stands that it provides the user with information that someone like me may not be compatible with them as far as how they see things. To adhere to this, though, once the user is in a relationship is either a repetition of what is matter of fact (that they are receiving these things in their relationship already and, presumably, felt compelled to echo how they are glad to have their personal wants/needs fulfilled) or it is a cry for something not present in the relationship (to where they are passive-aggressively complaining that this is what they should be receiving in the relationship but are not). If the partner they are with or are choosing does not have characteristics that embody someone who would agree with this list, then we've simply got a case of the old 'trying to change someone once you're already in a relationship with them'. As far as how it applies in the case of "this is the baseline for respectful treatment of fellow human beings", then we approach it one of two ways. Either: a) that list is a universal declaration of what should be afforded to everyone. In this case you will reach an audience that either: a) agrees, in which case you're preaching to the choir, or b) disagrees, in which case your list is going to be flatly ignored. or b) the list is not a universal declaration of what should be afforded to everyone, since some people may not want any/all those things in their own relationships, in which case the list is just a personal list of wants painted with a wider brush than necessary. The list, as I alluded, has good intentions and plays its role well since it lists things which will almost universally be held as desirable. Yet, even some of them would (with the tone they are written in) fly right into the face of the authority dynamic of some M/s relationships (4, 5, 7, 9, 10...). quote: ORIGINAL: Lucienne I mean, isn't that normally the point of presenting something as a Bill of Rights? We're all pretty quick to chuckle at the folks who start threads asking about how they can create a legally binding M/s contract because (duh) it's not legally enforceable. This Bill of Rights falls under the same category. Therefore, the only way to actually enforce it is to: 1) make decisions in your own life that will lead to them being addressed as importantly as you think they are, or 2) create a militia that intends to actually 'enforce' these stipulations. On the bright side, it is a clever way to attract potential like-minded partners (the ones that smile approvingly of the list...unfortunately, however, none of those 'Rights' say a single thing about boys having the "right to not be lied to"...so you may have to watch our for the dishonest).

BKSir -> RE: "boys' Bill of Rights" (1/15/2010 11:55:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pixidustpet quote: ORIGINAL: GreedyTop what Aqua and Kiwi said.... which goes back to the common sense thing..... but sugar, common sense is NOWHERE as common as it should be, anyone who's read these boards for more than an hour knows that. [;)] kitten A terrible and unfortunate misnomer, isn't it, 'common sense'. Were that it truly so common... But I rather like this list personally. Aside from item 5, but that's just my own household dynamic. His privacy is at my discretion. However, that is somewhat covered elsewhere in the list, as that was agreed upon mutually. I also, if I may, like how you approached this subject, boyTamer. Bringing it up for discussion, and although making it clear that you agree with this list, you didn't say "And this is how it HAS to be for everyone's household!", like so many others tend to do with things such as this, who end up wondering why they're getting attacked. You asked for opinions, ideas and thoughts on it instead. Which it seems you're getting in a fair way (and I hope it stays that way). Good on you. :) Alsoooo... Welcome to the CM forums. :) HUG

Lucienne -> RE: "boys' Bill of Rights" (1/16/2010 10:22:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero As far as how it applies in the case of "this is the baseline for respectful treatment of fellow human beings", then we approach it one of two ways. Either: a) that list is a universal declaration of what should be afforded to everyone. In this case you will reach an audience that either: a) agrees, in which case you're preaching to the choir, or b) disagrees, in which case your list is going to be flatly ignored. or b) the list is not a universal declaration of what should be afforded to everyone, since some people may not want any/all those things in their own relationships, in which case the list is just a personal list of wants painted with a wider brush than necessary. I don't think it's necessary to break it down to that particular either/or. Rights can be waived. I think it's possible to consider the list a fair starting point from which to negotiate explicit waiver of rights. Just because you don't want your relationship to be governed by that list doesn't mean you can't respect it as universal baseline. quote: We're all pretty quick to chuckle at the folks who start threads asking about how they can create a legally binding M/s contract because (duh) it's not legally enforceable. This Bill of Rights falls under the same category. Therefore, the only way to actually enforce it is to: 1) make decisions in your own life that will lead to them being addressed as importantly as you think they are, or 2) create a militia that intends to actually 'enforce' these stipulations. Well, actually, quite a few of the rights on that list are legally enforceable under existing criminal and civil law. Which is why some people are pointing out/laughing at how much of it is "common sense." So I disagree that it falls in the same laughable category as posts that inquire into loopholes around the 13th Amendment. I agree that some of the rights listed rely on social, rather than legal, enforcement. But again, I think it is possible for a person to socially enforce the baseline, while individually negotiating waiver of rights in their individual relationships. Social enforcement, in my book, isn't limited to "selecting a partner who agrees to these basic terms for the relationship."

Lucylastic -> RE: "boys' Bill of Rights" (1/16/2010 2:36:59 PM)
I like it to the point of being a good starting point for any submissive who is looking at a new relationship, adapt as needed to the dominant, the relationship, and time, addressable but a decent self awareness technique along with not so"common sense":). Discussion of course shouldnt be replaced, but handy when you are mad trying to please a prospective dominant. Not everyone will like it, but there ya go.. Welcome to the boards also Lucy

PeonForHer -> RE: "boys' Bill of Rights" (1/16/2010 5:31:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic I like it to the point of being a good starting point for any submissive who is looking at a new relationship, adapt as needed to the dominant, the relationship, and time, addressable but a decent self awareness technique along with not so"common sense":). Yep. I do have the feeling that there are more than a few loons out there in the world of D/s. And at a much more fundamental level, of course, the very idea of D/s flies in the face of 'common sense'. Almost every economic, social or political theory ever put together was built on the 'common sense assumption' that people will strive for more power and will never want to give up the power that they already hold. That sort of 'common sense' has it that submissives don't, and can't, exist. D/s is still pretty much uncharted territory. A 'bill of subs' rights' might be a helpful 'chart'. BTW - Hello Lucy - nice to see you! [;)]

Lucylastic -> RE: "boys' Bill of Rights" (1/16/2010 6:35:26 PM)
Always lovely to see you hon, smewchies

goober -> RE: "boys' Bill of Rights" (1/17/2010 12:15:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GreedyTop (Too bad something like that needs to be written for some people to GET what SHOULD be common sense....) Yep, I was just about to write the same thing.

yummee -> RE: "boys' Bill of Rights" (1/18/2010 12:36:00 AM)
Well, I'll be the odd one out. I don't like it. quote: 1. Every boy has the right to have his body, intellect, and emotions protected by his Dom. I disagree that it is anyone's right to be protected by another. If this boy is ever physically harmed by someone or something, has his dom failed? voilated his rights? How can a dom protect his boy's emotions? quote: 3. Every boy has the right to be cared for, disciplined appropriately, and allowed to feel pride in his submission. If the dom feels type-A discipline is appropriate, but the boy feels it should be type-B discipline, what then? That phrase (disciplined appropriately) is just too vague. Also, I disagree with the term "allowed to feel X." quote: 5. Every boy has the right to privacy if he so wishes. No boy can be blackmailed, publicly humiliated, or physically coerced into service without his expressed desire to be so. I don't have the right to privacy. quote: 8. Every boy has the right to seek refuge, counsel, and advice from other subs and Doms without the expectation of sex, money, or any other service in return. I suppose he could seek it, but many are not willing to give refuge, counsel or advice. At least it says "the right to seek" not "the right to" quote: 9. Every boy has the right to a physically and emotionally available circle of friends. These aren't rights. Friends are made, earned, grown, nurtured, whatever. They aren't handed to you because its your right to them. The whole "Bill of Rights" just sounds puffed up to me. I dislike the tone and the notion that half of these things are somehow rights rather than: preferences, expectations, wish-list items, things he works for or earns, etc. Also, his "rights" seem to venture into others' territories too much for my tastes. I get the idea of what he's trying to get across. Its just a swing and a miss with me.

cloudboy -> RE: "boys' Bill of Rights" (1/18/2010 8:38:01 PM)
The bill or rights makes it clear that a Dom/Domme's authority is not absolute. Although this may seem obvious, the lines can be blurred when partners shoot for a TPE relationship. To me these enumerated rights help militate against the tautology argument that the top is always right and within his rights or that the sub/slave "out-of-line" or "disrespectful" whenever challenging or disagreeing with their partner.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.515625E-02