NuevaVida -> RE: Children (10/29/2010 6:23:24 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: January OK. I explained my reasoning. It's the word "presence". Yes and you apparently decided that "presence" meant he did not want her to even exist - and that it left nothing to the imagination. You want substance? How about that she just meant "physical presence in the house when he is home?" Or that he actually really likes the kid but "has some difficulties" in dealing with her presence, as the OP said. SOME difficulties. Maybe he tripped over a shoe and stubbed his toe. Maybe he's struggling with keeping up with a toddler. Maybe he's working through sharing his slave's attention with her (my own owner had to work that out, himself). It could be anything. That - what is it you said? "It's inconvenient for him that the girl is alive." That's such a stretch I honestly couldn't even think of a response other than "Wow." quote:
And you? Your reasoning is what? That the OP didn't mention the Master disliking the child? So clearly he loves and values the girl? Clearly nothing. As most of the responders have stated, there is nothing clear about her post, and she hasn't returned to clarify. quote:
Do you think her question is merely how do we steal a few moments away, alone? Like that's not a problem for every parent? It's only a BDSM issue? I don't think her question is merely anything. Where are you getting that I think her issue is only about stealing a few moments away, alone? Or that it's only a BDSM issue? I certainly didn't state that. I stated that we don't know what the issues are. quote:
We don't know if these people have even met in real life. Exactly. We don't know anything about her situation. That's why I stated I was curious as to why he chose to own a slave without working these details out. quote:
If the Master has doubts about a new, or potential, difficult relationship, because of a child, he should be the one asking us for advice. Why? Mother's and/or slaves can't ask questions and opinions, too? Maybe he's asking other people. We don't know. quote:
He's the one in control, yes? He's the rock in the relationship, yes? Otherwise it's the poor slave who struggles to make things right--very likely at the expense of the child. Tragedy is absolutely a possible outcome. It seems the poor slave agreed to being owned by a man without first working out something as important as living together with a child. I have no clue if he's the one in control. I have no clue if he's the rock of the relationship. She hasn't said. Maybe he's a blithering idiot who doesn't know what he's doing. Maybe he's an incredible human being who is in perfect control and doing everything right, and she's not liking his way of controlling. I repeat: We don't know. quote:
Until the OP returns to explain--your conclusions about her post are no more legitimate than mine. What are my conclusions? I have said repeatedly that we don't know enough to make a conclusion. The only thing I said re: the OP is that yes, it is possible to have a 24/7 relationship with a little one, and that we don't know enough to make any conclusions about their situation. quote:
I like a good discussion and enjoy civil disagreements, but I prefer to voice my point of view with something more substantial than "wow". Cool for you. It's Friday and has been a tough week. Wow was all I could muster when I read your post. Edited to clarify: You may be absolutely right - maybe he hates the kid and doesn't even want her around, ever. I would hope that is not the case. I am not saying this is NOT a possibility, just that we don't know, either way. We so often see people jump to the harshest conclusions here, and I simply wanted to point out that without knowing any details, there are other possible conclusions, too.
|
|
|
|