RE: If you told your slave

RE: If you told your slave (Full Version)

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

Message

RedMagic1 -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 12:04:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero And, most of us are forum veterans here. Accusing osf of dropping flame-bait is like accusing domi of being rude. It should be understood that the existence of those things is expected and that you need to dig through the modus operandi to get to whatever interesting point(s) underneath you may wish to discuss. I agree. When I made a post with material content, others responded to it in kind (though people didn't "agree" with me), and I ended up learning something about nude-friendly restaurants. I never would have learned that if I'd spent my time wrangling with, or mocking, the OP.

lusciouslips19 -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 12:07:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf if you're a submissive then by definition you're willing to be a doormat for someone osf's "twue submissive" [image]local://upfiles/485766/7CB0A6B2D45E4D6CB87BABB5085EBC12.gif[/image]

NihilusZero -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 12:08:18 PM)
Seriously...people are getting all butthurt because osf said subsmissives, by default, choose to be a doormat for someone? Technically, being submissive does imply selective doormatishness. Perhaps it can be argued that it's selective to things the submissive wants anyhow, but even D/s discussions I've seen still imply at least a partial range of uncomfortable tasks that would still be expected to be performed if the s-type's D-type requested it (which effectively counts as an instance of doormatting). Obviously, the flat parallel of a submissive to a doormat is silly...but all it takes is to point out that the point is silly, where it's silly and why it's silly. Where there is grounds to be offended, I'm not sure.

Smutmonger -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 12:10:27 PM)
Precisely. You can't really expect "mundane pc behaviors" from people who are already non conforming to a certain degree. Button pushing is a thing often done for amusement purposes-toying with those who lack emotional control-the knee jerk crowd. But just because someone pushes your buttons-does not mean you have to play along-it shows a certain weakness of mind to be unable to filter beyond the intial tweak to one's ego. And thusly,they end up throwing out the baby with the bath-water. quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero And, most of us are forum veterans here. Accusing osf of dropping flame-bait is like accusing domi of being rude. It should be understood that the existence of those things is expected and that you need to dig through the modus operandi to get to whatever interesting point(s) underneath you may wish to discuss. I agree. When I made a post with material content, others responded to it in kind (though people didn't "agree" with me), and I ended up learning something about nude-friendly restaurants. I never would have learned that if I'd spent my time wrangling with, or mocking, the OP.

juliaoceania -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 12:16:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I see it as offensive, yes, I do. It would be like saying all submissives want to be slaves, or all submissives need to be told when to go to the bathroom.. He meant it to be incendiary, and it was How? It's either factual or it isn't. I'm still suspecting that the degree to which one finds his comments offensive is due to the degree that a) one is not familiar with his style of posting, or b) one has a disproportionally negative view of 'doormats' (as a contextual title in WIITWD). Okay, if I say all men with long hair are homosexual... that is factually incorrect... there is nothing wrong with having long hair, there is nothing wrong with being homosexual, but saying someone is a homosexual because they have long hair just to get a rise out of all men with long hair is flame baiting trollish behavior

NihilusZero -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 12:22:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania Okay, if I say all men with long hair are homosexual... that is factually incorrect... there is nothing wrong with having long hair, there is nothing wrong with being homosexual, but saying someone is a homosexual because they have long hair just to get a rise out of all men with long hair is flame baiting trollish behavior I would only be offended by that if my ethical system was structured in a way that I found the state of being homosexual to be ugly. For many men, that would be insulting, yes. It's a typical hot-button for men caught up in the machismo of their testosterone to have their heterosexuality questioned, even in silly allegory. I'm not homosexual (heteroflexible, though...based on picky my taste in men in). Being called homosexual doesn't change my sexuality nor does it really change my prospects (unless people start believing it, I suppose). If I say "All subs are capybaras!", did I just insult all submissives by calling them members of the rodentia family or did I just make a false statement?

juliaoceania -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 12:24:18 PM)
quote: Technically, being submissive does imply selective doormatishness. I could not state emphatically enough how fucked up I think that is... it doesn't imply anything of the sort.. My Daddy never treats me like a doormat. I have the sort of respect one has for a professor, or a parental figure, or a religious one.. not of someone that believes I am less than, or that I can be treated in anyway as though I am an object to be used... there is nothing wrong with wanting to be that person, but I am not that by my very submissiveness

juliaoceania -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 12:26:37 PM)
quote: If I say "All subs are capybaras!", did I just insult all submissives by calling them members of the rodentia family or did I just make a false statement? What if you said that all submissives were feces... there is nothing inherently wrong with being shit, just because you are doesn't make you less... Shit fertilizes the ground, won't have food without a little manure after all

Mercnbeth -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 12:51:23 PM)
~ Fast (Emily) Post ~ In the days when being a 'gentleman' was considered a desired trait for men; Sir Walter Raleigh was often given as an example of the ideal. For all his other accomplishments, Sir Walter may be best know for something he didn't do - laying down his cloak so 'Queen Elizabeth I' would not need to step in the mud. Hark ye, Master Raleigh, see thou fail not to wear thy muddy cloak," the queen exhorts Sir Walter, "in token of penitence, till our pleasure be further known." Sir Walter vows never to clean the cloak, and later the queen, delighted with his gallantry, invites him to visit the royal wardrobe keeper that he may be fitted for "a suit, and that of the newest cut." Although the story wasn't true, it places a position of honor on lowering oneself to be the proud doormat of another. What better token of commitment, respect, and humility can there be in service of another; whether a Queen or a Master? Truth be told, there is, or at least should be, a little 'doormat' in all of us. In tossing a 'cloak' of aid over a problem for a friend, a relative, or even a stranger; we all risk the possibility of getting a bit of 'mud' on us. So what? It washes off, and sometimes you feel good about involving yourself in the process. A slave or submissive may choose to be a 'doormat', or a 'cloak' over a muddy pothole, 24/7 to their partner but feels no humiliation in doing so; indeed many feel Sir Walter Raleigh type pride. A confident proud 'doormat' is beautiful and a treasure to own even if others perceive it 'muddy'.

NihilusZero -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 1:26:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania What if you said that all submissives were feces... there is nothing inherently wrong with being shit, just because you are doesn't make you less... So you admit the issue you have with being equated to a doormat is based on your own negative perception of the term. quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania My Daddy never treats me like a doormat. What does that have to do with anything? Can doormats not exist unless their partners are treating them as such?

zephyroftheNorth -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 1:50:33 PM)
quote: Sigh... If I were in a restaurant with my two young children, I would not watch. I (and I suspect other parents too) would detain you - using as much force as the law would reasonably allow me to get away with and call the police. You and your sub would be arrested, prosecuted and your names put on the child protection register. So lets hope your obedient sub never ever wants a job in teaching, childcare, medicine or countless other jobs for which registration on the CPR rules you out. And who is saying this would be anywhere near children? Assumptions much?

BossyShoeBitch -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 1:58:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf my doormat comment means it's so totally unimportant to me if you're a submissive then by definition you're willing to be a doormat for someone Perhaps if you could explain what you regard as doormat behavior, I could try and wrap my head around what you are saying. Are you saying that "being a doormat" is a good thing or a bad thing?

Jeffff -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 2:07:18 PM)
This thread has now dissolved into nit picking. I imagine osf is smiling. Lets ratchet it up a bit. If you told your slave to have sex with an animal, would you expect her too, regardless of the consequences? This may indeed violate TOS. I am just trying to demonstrate a point here. I am not endorsing this. No animals were hurt in the construction of this post Jeff

crazyml -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 2:11:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: zephyroftheNorth quote: Sigh... If I were in a restaurant with my two young children, I would not watch. I (and I suspect other parents too) would detain you - using as much force as the law would reasonably allow me to get away with and call the police. You and your sub would be arrested, prosecuted and your names put on the child protection register. So lets hope your obedient sub never ever wants a job in teaching, childcare, medicine or countless other jobs for which registration on the CPR rules you out. And who is saying this would be anywhere near children? Assumptions much? Actually - I say it, really very clearly - if you read the beginning of my reply I say "if I were in a restaurant" - can you see thst cheeky little "IF" at the beginning of the sentence? By saying "if" I was making the point (which I elaborated on in a later post) that it would rather depend on the context... IF it was a kink friendly place the issue is one thing, IF it is a public restaurant then the issue is really quite different. Honestly, I don't think that it's particularly outlandish to assume that there may be children in a regular restaurant...

UniqueRaven -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 2:16:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jeffff I am not endorsing this. No animals were hurt in the construction of this post Jeff Um........coughanteatercough [:D]

Jeffff -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 2:17:22 PM)
LOL!.... I can't believe I missed that

zephyroftheNorth -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 2:18:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jeffff I agree. Much like his stripping sub, I look at these too!....[8D] Jeff AHA! I thought I saw you peeking in my window. You dirty, dirty man!

UniqueRaven -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 2:19:22 PM)
Um, Jeffff, in the context of your last post, your whole avatar is a violation of the TOS...............hee hee! [;)] edited because i can't type....

heartcream -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 2:19:58 PM)
The difference here being intent. If one said all subs are doormats to get a rise, that is the motivation. If they said it because they believed it, well, there ya go. To say all subs are feces and think there is nothing wrong with that statement is a drag. What is your intent in these things being said?

antinomy -> RE: If you told your slave (2/23/2010 2:20:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: zephyroftheNorth quote: Sigh... If I were in a restaurant with my two young children, I would not watch. I (and I suspect other parents too) would detain you - using as much force as the law would reasonably allow me to get away with and call the police. You and your sub would be arrested, prosecuted and your names put on the child protection register. So lets hope your obedient sub never ever wants a job in teaching, childcare, medicine or countless other jobs for which registration on the CPR rules you out. And who is saying this would be anywhere near children? Assumptions much? Personally, I read the OP as if it were a regular restaurant. I mean, I have dined out many times in my 43 years, the majority were not kink friendly places (okay, NONE of them were). And unless they were bars, or attended late at night, there more often than not were children present. Lacking details, and being from the same country and state as the OP, my mind filled in the blanks with what would be the most oft found scenario. And, since the OP seems to go for the shock factor in his posts, I felt comfortable with that assumption. However, I agree that the circumstances of the dining experience COULD alter one's answer to the question. However, I'm wondering if this was not meant as a lesson in absolutes? The moral of the question being would a Dominant expect obedience regardless of the command, the circumstances, or the location it was given?

Page: << < prev 18 19 [20] 21 22 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875