|
FirmhandKY -> RE: Truth!?! Truth!?! (4/10/2006 4:16:18 PM)
|
Truth is a slippery thing, sometimes, isn't it?
For the philosophical out there, yes, "truth" is subjective in the final analysis, but objective operationally in the everyday world. So I'll dispense with any philosophical debate about "truth".
Operationally, and especially as related to this environment, truth is more correctly compared to "honesty" (another slippery word at times). I think that is why the conversation has turned to "truth" in relationships, and especially at the begining of a relationship, because that is often the time that people are the most cautious (rightly so), and have their antennas out a quivering at their most sensitive settings (or that is when they should be the most sensitive).
And I think Evanesce's comment is the key to the entire "mystery" ... that the inablity to be honest with yourself - for whatever reason - automatically means that you are less than honest with anyone and everyone else you come into contact with.
Now, that doesn't mean that you have to go around and be brutually "honest" to everyone about exactly what you think. Or more accurately, you don't have to run your mouth giving your opinions with no sense of couth or manners to every person you meet. Tact plays a big part of being a social being. But ... sometimes, you may be or look dishonest to others. Or you may slide over into dishonesty when you think you are just "being tactful".
Which is why occasional introspection and self-analysis is useful, and good for the soul of even the most confident dominant. It's a mid-course correction, and why I'm always suspicious of "dom's" who can't, or won't admit to mistakes in judgements, on occasion. Being confident doesn't mean that you never doubt yourself, to me it means you have a clear idea about why and how you act and treat others, but you also know that sometimes you can be wrong and make mistakes - but that crying over split milk is useless. Changing your behavior and outlook based on any mistakes is healthy - and honest.
And to SusanofO's point about wanting to still be an individual, to have and enjoy individuality even if she might self-identify as a slave in a relationship - I see this as one of the areas of understanding in the lifestyle that is poorly defined, or at least rarely talked about in a coherent way.
You see it all the time with submissives. Some just want to be used as a piece of meat, with every decision made for them from how and when to use the restroom, to how to hold their tongue when they chew their food.
Others, it's hard to tell any difference between how they define being a submissive to how a Christian covenant marriage union is seen, with the husband as HoH (head of household).
And there are dominants and "Doms" who want the mirror image of the same things.
I think there is a lot of room for some new concepts in the lifestyle to define the different levels more accurately.
Personally, I see a sub or slave as more than a "piece of meat". Sure, she has a body - but she has a mind, and a soul, and a heart. Why, if she were your slave, would you not wish to take advantage (in a positive sense) of all of her? Such a waste! If as a dominant, you don't think you could learn from anyone else, even a sub or a slave - then I would be curious as to the basis of both your honesty with yourself, and your dominance.
FHky
|
|
|
|
