juliaoceania
Posts: 21383
Joined: 4/19/2006 From: Somewhere Over the Rainbow Status: offline
|
quote:
I do, but am confused we are not talking about a gay person, we are talking about a submissive person, your argument that a gay person would not ask what reward am I getting from being gay with this person is flawed in that we do not know if the gay person is also submissive and if they are the kind of submissive who does think they need to see the reward in being submissive and gay with that person. I think of submissive as a relationship orientation... just as being gay or being het.... it is the way I relate in my intimate relationships....it is not something that I decide to be based on a reward. I decide what relationships are rewarding, but submissive is not something I decide to be because of "gain"... does that make sense?> quote:
I think there are certain types of PEOPLE who only do things for the reward of being with a certain person.... How often do you hear about women who want to marry a doctor, or a lawyer, or men who want women with nice large breasts, or someone who simply wants a person who performs oral sex, and although that may not be the ONLY reason someone gets involved with someone else it could be a reason why someone does not STAY with someone or at least consider someone worth being with. The Point being that to some people being submissive is a conditional thing. I know you know the type I am talking about, they are just about everywhere you look. "I will only surender to a Master who is ____, and ____ and they must be okay with me doing _____ and have to be knowledgeable in ____." you are not familiar with statements like this? Some people that do this are dominant, some are vanilla, and some are submissive... this is not something tied to orientation..... quote:
You do qualify, but your view is not the only one here and sometimes what a person says is how they feel, it needn't go any further because it is as simple as it has been presented. I think what Leadership said was clear enough and did not need to be forced into an explanation that may not express his views. So if someone asked you to explain your definition, that would bother you? I asked a question... that was all I did.....I can't force him to comply with answering it, this seems a bit dramatic to me.... He has every right to quantify submissive anyway he likes..He isn't "wrong".... I just was curious, and I am not trying to start a fight.... quote:
I think some people are Twits because of the way they talk. If I were asked to expand on that, perhaps give an example of something someone says that makes them a Twit, it would be construed that all people who say _____ are a Twit, when in realty NOT ALL people who say _____ are Twits, just the ones that are twits are Twits. Do you see what I am getting at? No, I don't see at all, but that is okay.... I think that if I made blanket statements about what motivates dominants, you might see why I asked these questions...perhaps try viewing it from that perspective.... and I am not saying that doms have no idea of what motivates us, but I am saying that it is variable... that is all....
_____________________________
Once you label me, you negate me ~ Soren Kierkegaard Reality has a well known Liberal Bias ~ Stephen Colbert Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt
|