|
tazzygirl -> RE: If You Love Your Doormat... (2/25/2010 10:42:29 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: NihilusZero
quote:
ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
And this is where you are trying to redefine the term to suit your own purposes.
Not at all. That's why I began the post with a question and posited thoughts based on a different contention dealing with that question.
Do you define "doormat" as someone devoid of the ability to make priority value assessments?
I'm not trying to redefine any term, but trying to engage in discussions that make each of us think about how we have defined the term for ourselves and whether we think it merits adjustments or not. There is no right or wrong answer here.
quote:
ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
A doormat has no boundaries. none. zip. nada. they do as told, when told, by whomever told them, regardless. And, yes, i have seen doormats who, regardless of their partners wishes, have gone against what their partner wanted to obey someone else. Its that moment of pleasure they find so thrilling.
This too is interesting. The suggestion you are making is that doormats are actually, in the end, the ultimate hedonists, catering only to their desire to obey the commands of others.
Also, this would substantiate your suggestion that doormats also do not have the ability to attribute hierarchical value to their obedience.
Again, this is all fine. We're just trying to asses different views on the term.
quote:
ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
Its the... oh Master, was going to come straight home, but the Boss needed me to do this and that. and you know how he gets if i say no, so of course i couldnt say no, i had to do what he said.... their belief is that no one can be disappointed in them, they can say no to no one.
If this was my slave, then she's not being a doormat to me, then.
How does this definition of a doormat deal with the conundrum of two immediately contradictory requests? (Example: doormat's old friend A saying "Come with me to the house party" vs. doormat's partner saying "Stay home with me tonight.")
A doormat has no boundaries, so, of course they have no hierachy.
quote:
Its the... oh Master, was going to come straight home, but the Boss needed me to do this and that. and you know how he gets if i say no, so of course i couldnt say no, i had to do what he said.... their belief is that no one can be disappointed in them, they can say no to no one.
The above was not speaking to a doormat being one just for you. the following is....
quote:
When they utter the word.. no... even as a boundary set by their owner... they are no longer a doormat to the world. Perhaps to him, then its a personal doormat... but not to the world.
Im not sure why you decided to take the meaning of the later and place it to the former. I was quite clear in what i posted. When you, as the owner, give a doormat the ability to say the word "no", then they are no longer a doormat, unless its just to you.
again, we are speaking here, from what i gather by your posts and others, on a lifestyle basis. i am speaking on a life basis. there is no illegal slavery, at least in the US. so all slavery is consensual, requiring the agreement of the slave.
|
|
|
|
