RE: no limits period

RE: no limits period (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

Chulain -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 11:33:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TotalDiscipline I slap her face. and punish her other wise later By doing what, exactly? Making her watch pre-season NFL games with you? quote: If it repeats to often..it is propably the end of M/s relation. Gosh, you get it. Exactly. If she's not willing to take it, the relationship ends. Ta da! Which is why, say it with me, everyone ... The submissive has the final say-so in all D/s or M/s or O/s or whatever relationships/scenes. Do I still need to add the "Barring illegality, etc." disclaimer?

RCdc -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 11:56:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chulain It's unlikely to be a simultaneous decision. At various points during the relationship, the dominant says "Do this." Every single time, the submissive is free to say "no," even if knowing that saying no, the dominant will end the relationship. The final say so is always within the submissive's power. Again barring illegality, etc. It's not usual for any ending of a relationship to be simultaneous. But your issue seems to be with the thought that when a s-type says 'no' she isn't ending the Ms relationship. The fact is, that she is and any self aware s-type knows this. quote: Tenuous? I don't agree. If all s-types were needy, uneducated people with low self esteem who could not stand on their own two feet outside a relationship, then you might have been correct. But that isn't the case. quote: If a dominant is so petulant as to end the relationship because the submissive refuses to submit to something a bit out of the ordinary, that's childish. Like a vanilla couple breaking up because one of them squeezes the toothpaste from the middle. Do people have arguments about that very thing? Sure, they do. And it's childish, too. A relationship based on childishness is doomed. A vanilla relationship that would end over a toothpaste tube or a D/s one that would end based on the submissive's refusal to submit to something unusual is a tenuous one. I'm not just talking about something 'a bit out of the ordinary'. I am not going to use extreme examples as I am comfortable using everyday ones as well and the different. I don't think you get that this isn't just about a relationship... this is about a promise and commitment. It's the breaking of a contract - not some written piece of paper, but a contract between two or more people. It's not about being childish, but about being aware of ones responsibilities within the agreement and the relationship. BTW, an argument about toothpaste isn't automatically 'childish' in a so called vanilla relationship... it's usually/quite often the sign of a much deeper issue and purely an external manifestation of something quite serious. quote: Let me go out on a limb and say that your relationship is based on mutual respect. If he ordered you to do something and you kind of messed up, and not on purpose, I'm betting he would not end the relationship over that. It's a relationship based on many things - love, respect, authority transfer. Master would not instruct me to do something he did not believe that I could not complete. He does not set me up for failure, nor does he have unrealistic expectations of my abilities. Many Ms relationships are like this... and not the extremes that you seem to be portraying with misrepresentations.(it's just the way your posts have come across). Just so you also are aware... we are no limits... but not because we are 'no limits' but because we do believe in the concept of limitations as they pertain in this environment.

Chulain -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 12:05:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RCdc But your issue seems to be with the thought that when a s-type says 'no' she isn't ending the Ms relationship. The fact is, that she is and any self aware s-type knows this. Exactly. Which is why final authority rests with the submissive or slave, because as long as he or she is willing to see the relationship end, "No" is always an option. And everyone has something to which they will say no. And, as I said once before, it does not have to be "Sawing your legs off with a rusty butter knife." quote: I'm not just talking about something 'a bit out of the ordinary'. I am not going to use extreme examples as I am comfortable using everyday ones as well and the different. I don't think you get that this isn't just about a relationship... this is about a promise and commitment. It's the breaking of a contract - not some written piece of paper, but a contract between two or more people. It's not about being childish, but about being aware of ones responsibilities within the agreement and the relationship. It's a voluntary relationship. You have no responsibilities other than what you agree to accept. And you are, both of you, are free at any time to reject those responsibilities. There is nothing holding you in the relationship other than your desire to remain in it. quote: BTW, an argument about toothpaste isn't automatically 'childish' in a so called vanilla relationship... it's usually/quite often the sign of a much deeper issue and purely an external manifestation of something quite serious. Exactly. And the same would apply to a dominant who got his or her nose bent because the submissive messed up (again, not chronically). quote: Just so you also are aware... we are no limits... but not because we are 'no limits' but because we do believe in the concept of limitations as they pertain in this environment. Let's not even go there.

Chulain -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 12:07:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ladypact It's quite simple. I release them. It really is that simple. Exactly. And whose actions precipitated yours?

RCdc -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 12:12:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chulain Exactly. Which is why final authority rests with the submissive or slave, because as long as he or she is willing to see the relationship end, "No" is always an option. And everyone has something to which they will say no. And, as I said once before, it does not have to be "Sawing your legs off with a rusty butter knife." That doesn't mean the submissive has the final authority... it just means that when someone changes the goal posts, regardless of whether that is the d-type or the s-type, then the contract initially agreed upon becomes void. quote: It's a voluntary relationship. You have no responsibilities other than what you agree to accept. And you are, both of you, are free at any time to reject those responsibilities. There is nothing holding you in the relationship other than your desire to remain in it. I take it you aren't particularly spiritual? quote: Exactly. And the same would apply to a dominant who got his or her nose bent because the submissive messed up (again, not chronically). Or visa versa. Well duh.[;)] quote: Let's not even go there. Why not? You might learn something that means your perceptions of all people being the same and having limits might not be correct?

TotalDiscipline -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 12:21:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chulain quote: ORIGINAL: TotalDiscipline I slap her face. and punish her other wise later By doing what, exactly? Making her watch pre-season NFL games with you? quote: If it repeats to often..it is propably the end of M/s relation. Gosh, you get it. Exactly. If she's not willing to take it, the relationship ends. Ta da! Which is why, say it with me, everyone ... The submissive has the final say-so in all D/s or M/s or O/s or whatever relationships/scenes. Do I still need to add the "Barring illegality, etc." disclaimer? what is your point of the questions? By doing what exactly? Depends...o.k. this one is answered The second one I don't understand...as you say......it is a relation..that is between 2 people. So both can stop it. Don't see the problem with that. illegal where? here in the Netherlands? hmm don't think so ps: you gonna ask questions..till you hear the answer you want? ..answering questions with questions...not very productive.

Chulain -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 12:26:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RCdc That doesn't mean the submissive has the final authority... it just means that when someone changes the goal posts, regardless of whether that is the d-type or the s-type, then the contract initially agreed upon becomes void. Sure it does. Because if the s- know that saying "no" to a particular order or request will cause the D/M/O to end the relationship, it is always within the s-'s power to precipitate that response from the D/M/O. quote: I take it you aren't particularly spiritual? By that do you mean "religious?" No I am not religious. Spiritual? That's a matter of opinion. You would probably say no. I say maybe. You're not part of that M/s or O/s sub-group which uses the bible as a basis for women's submission to and ownership by men, are you? quote: Why not? You might learn something that means your perceptions of all people being the same and having limits might not be correct? Are you implying there's an equal chance you might learn that everyone does in fact have limits? See, let's not go there.

RCdc -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 12:34:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chulain Sure it does. Because if the s- know that saying "no" to a particular order or request will cause the D/M/O to end the relationship, it is always within the s-'s power to precipitate that response from the D/M/O. And a d-type could pre-empt their s-type by suggesting they do something they know they wouldn't. quote: By that do you mean "religious?" No I am not religious. Spiritual? That's a matter of opinion. You would probably say no. I say maybe. You're not part of that M/s or O/s sub-group which uses the bible as a basis for women's submission to and ownership by men, are you? No I was specific and said spiritual. What I say you are would be irrelevant. What you say about yourself, would be factual pertaining to your own life. And no, I am not. quote: Are you implying there's an equal chance you might learn that everyone does in fact have limits? See, let's not go there. I am always willing to learn and consider other viewpoints. Ideas are not set in rock, like words on a gravestone.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 1:36:20 PM)
~FR~ And when the slave is trained and conditioned is such a way that their self determination to leave is eroded? Now take into account that in the beginning of this technique being used the slave is fully aware of the goal, and what it may well bring about. While exceedingly rare, it does occur. As far as legalities go, it is funny since most of BDSM is illegal in many areas of western civilization, especially the US where you cannot consent to assault or battery, and the use of many marital aids may as well be illegal. So legalities aside, things do happen, irregardless of what some may wish to state. The point of debate has been a moving target, in my opinion, and once the target has been hit by one side, it is moved by the other. What this means is it has gone from no limits, to discussion on consent, to discussion on where the ultimate authority resides. All of which are separate issues, that can have an impact on the type of dynamic being discussed, but are not as black and white as the letters typed on the screen.

Chulain -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 2:23:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RCdc And a d-type could pre-empt their s-type by suggesting they do something they know they wouldn't. The s- is always free to surprise the D by saying yes. So unless the D is psychic, your scenario is not 100% guaranteed. So once again, final say-so is in the hands of the s-. quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf And when the slave is trained and conditioned is such a way that their self determination to leave is eroded? To that I say "Then where is the consent?" quote: As far as legalities go, it is funny since most of BDSM is illegal in many areas of western civilization, especially the US where you cannot consent to assault or battery Quote me a statute. I already quoted California law which states that sexual battery requires that the act be against the will of the victim. With the target's consent, there is no sexual battery. I think some people need to do some serious research regarding the legality of consensual BDSM activities.

lally2 -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 2:35:25 PM)
no. when an Ms relationship starts the rules are usually made clear. in a TPE relationship the rule of TPE is that it is not messed with or the dynamic falters and fails. the rule is set in place by the Dominant, therefore when and if a slave decides to say 'no' they are already aware or should be, that the TPE has been fundamentally breached and the relationship cannot continue. the precident has already been set, the understanding has already been set and all of what has been set was set by the Master or Mistress. their rules, their expectations. the slave accepts that or she moves on. in fact as a rule it sucks - from a slaves point of view - its pretty harsh, but it cant be any other way, without that rule the TPE might slip and the dynamic would stop being Ms - its a bit like having a loaded gun put to youre head. do this or the relationship dies. only most slaves who are in a happy place would never consider exercising their 'no' muscles, because of the price they would pay for doing so.

LadyPact -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 2:37:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chulain Exactly. And whose actions precipitated yours? My own. How it worked for us was that I made clip very well aware of the type of dynamics that I have with submissives. At that time, he had to decide if he could live with that or not. That actually does include My right to punish. I made it very clear to him that if I came to the conclusion that a punishment was in order, he will take the punishment if he does not want to be released. Which goes back to the beginning. The boy actually could not want the punishment, but also the wish to stay in the dynamic. Him not wanting either doesn't mean I won't release him.

BitaTruble -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 2:44:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chulain So once again, final say-so is in the hands of the s-. Dominant walks into the room, looks at his submissive of 20 years and says, "You're too old and can't serve me the way you used to, the way I require you to serve. You are released." Are you saying that the submissive actually has the final say on whether or not she is released?

Chulain -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 2:48:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact My own. Not in the scenario I spun out. you demand X, he refuses, you end the relationship. His refusal has precipitated your ending the relationship. Final authority is his. quote: How it worked for us was that i made clip very well aware of the type of dynamics that i have with submissives. At that time, he had to decide if he could live with that or not. That actually does include my right to punish. i made it very clear to him that if i came to the conclusion that a punishment was in order, he will take the punishment if he does not want to be released. Right, and if he's willing to be released, his is the ultimate call. you're threatened by that somehow.

LadyPact -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 2:59:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chulain Not in the scenario I spun out. you demand X, he refuses, you end the relationship. His refusal has precipitated your ending the relationship. Final authority is his. Right, and if he's willing to be released, his is the ultimate call. you're threatened by that somehow. No, but you can think that if you'd like. There are offenses that, if they happened, I'd just plain release. I think I said something earlier to that effect on this thread or one of the others about My marriage. My other half knows that if he cheats on Me outside of our agreements, I'd divorce him. Edited for quotes.

Ishtarr -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 3:05:56 PM)
Since when do criminals have the final authority simple because they can choose to obey the law or not? In any situation where there is a social contract because people, how does obey said contract given you the final authority?

lally2 -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 3:51:08 PM)
if a slave wants to leave a relationship all they have to do is pack and walk. like anyone else in a relationship. there is no need to create a mess and be made to leave if the door is right there and there is no law to stop them. the trite and tiresome argument that the sub or slave has the ultimate control invariably comes from people who dont have the first clue how a sub or slave works internally. by arguing that point youre missing the entire point of submission. a submissive is entirely wired to please and serve. to say 'no' in a situation that would probably invalidate her position is not only going against her basic nature its losing the relationship shes in. if a slave gets to a point where she has to say 'no' to her Master, knowing the outcome then it is a slave who has reached a point in her enslavement where she cannot go on. it has nothing to do with control. its about someone unable to continue in that position and exercising their right to leave. that is a sad thing, surely, not a power play game. the end of a relationship? that isnt something to play with or go about flippantly for the sake of proving who has the ultimate power in the relationship. and how is that powerful. i dont see the word 'no' as powerful at all, not for me as a sub/slave type. the word 'no' is actually a point of weakness and struggle and a word i wouldnt use unless my life depended on it.

Ishtarr -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 4:16:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 the trite and tiresome argument that the sub or slave has the ultimate control invariably comes from people who dont have the first clue how a sub or slave works internally. Especially seeing that the dominant has the equal right and ability to say "no". I'll never get how a situation where both people have exactly the same legal rights necessarily means that submissive has the authority. If both have the same right and ability, both have the same authority from a legal point of view. The dominant has as much the opportunity to say "no" and stop giving commands than the submissive has the opportunity to stop obeying commands... so neither one gets their authority over the other one from a legal side of things... So clearly, if there is a difference of authority in D/s relationships, it must come from a different place than the legal realm. My bet is that the person who actually has the authority in the relationship is the person who is most willing to break off the relationship if the terms of the relationship are violated. And the person who is more "needful" of the continued existence of the relationship, is the one without the authority.

NihilusZero -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 4:27:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 a submissive is entirely wired to please and serve. Just to be picky, that isn't always the case. Frankly, my own preferences are for submissives/slaves who do demonstrate such traits, but plenty of people choose a submissive role just for the fun of it or for the feel of restriction when battled against and don't necessarily have much inclination to see things from a "please and serve" mentality at all. However, for the context you are presenting (that there are such s-types and they do function in a way thats negate the 'argument from hypothetics'), you're quite correct. [:)]

Chulain -> RE: no limits period (1/31/2011 4:27:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ladypact No, but you can think that if you'd like. OK, if you say you're not threatened by it, fine. quote: There are offenses that, if they happened, i'd just plain release. And if he knows that and precipitates your response (releasing him), he has made the final call. Some dominants have trouble with the notion that their submissive has ultimate authority within the scene or the relationship. quote: i think i said something earlier to that effect on this thread or one of the others about my marriage. my other half knows that if he cheats on me outside of our agreements, i'd divorce him. And one way he can precipitate the divorce is by cheating on you. He can also just plain say "I want a divorce." But by cheating, with the full knowledge that it will lead to divorce, he is, barring you changing your mind, forcing you to make the decision. The final control is his (unless you change your mind about the divorce, in which case final control is back to you).

Page: << < prev 13 14 [15] 16 17 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875