RE: no limits period

RE: no limits period (Full Version)

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

Message

Midnightsnow -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 7:37:28 PM)
I'll throw in my $.02. If my lady tells me to eat a bucket of pig guts, I'll let her know how much I detest like the idea, but I WILL eat that bucket-full. I'll screw a donkey in the town hall, even if it means I'll go to jail. However, I agreed to give up my limits because I TRUST that she won't make me do those kinds of things. I gave her the power over me to do what-ever she wants, knowing that she loves me and wants me to be healthy, happy, and successful. As for actually enforcing it: I am a white, american male. I need nobody to tell me how little power I would have in court if she were to accuse me of raping her, molesting, etc. Would she actually stoop that low? I don't like to think so, but in reality I don't know. If she were to threaten it I would probably to take her seriously. But it would probably never come to that because I'll do things I really don't want to do when she asks. I have a strong desire to please, a strong sense of honor to keep my word, and I trust her that it will be ok.

girlygurl -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 7:38:36 PM)
Just a random thought... Is a no-limits relationship more of a desire to submit/serve completely or dominate completely? I know for myself, I want to please Him and submit to His every desire and need. I also know, that our limits are the same so I never have to say "no" heaven forbid an s-type ever say that word!

gordon2011 -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 7:38:43 PM)
I wouldn't expect a sub/slave to do something 'no limits' that then has limits. Ultimately, it is all about trusting how you are with. Something about it seems off but you know the people you'll be sceening with.

MaxsGirl -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 7:49:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hausboy If that same sub/slave played with someone else, there may be plenty of limits, but I would argue that what makes the two a match...and work as a relationship.....is that there is an underlying understanding that the Dom/Domme could do anything and the sub/slave would accept it, and the mere concept of that is enough for them. And because (I'm assuming) there is love present in such a relationship, the Dom/Domme would not do something to the sub that he or she would normally define as a hard limit. So in that sense, if we were to argue semantics, which is the favorite CollarMe pasttime, I would have to agree with many that "no-limits" is a misnomer. But the dynamic between the no-limit slave/sub and his/her Domme/Dom is obviously very real to those who live it. You have it completely right. I have no limits with Alpha, but would have plenty with others and would enforce them however necessary. With Alpha, the idea of him being allowed to do anything with me is enough, even though I know very well that there are many things he would never do. That's what it means to have no limits - not that every possible limit will be tested, but that Alpha knows he does not always need to test me, because I would allow him anything he asked of me.

NihilusZero -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 7:50:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: girlygurl Just a random thought... Is a no-limits relationship more of a desire to submit/serve completely or dominate completely? I know for myself, I want to please Him and submit to His every desire and need. I also know, that our limits are the same so I never have to say "no" heaven forbid an s-type ever say that word! Contextually, a "no-limits" relationship exists within the the demand queue of the dominant. But also, at a certain point in certain such relationships, the connection to the person transcends any potential suspicion that would arise from any possible request.

Ishtarr -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 7:50:41 PM)
I absolutely agree with that, hausboy. Anybody who claims that they blankly have no limits, with nobody, under no circumstances, is either lying or actively trying to get themselves killed. However, it's perfectly possible for somebody to be so under the spell of somebody -or under the spell of specific people- that they have no limits with that person(s). This may be because the dominant simple has limits so compatible with the submissive that there is nothing the dominant would possible do that would cause doubt or hesitation in the submissive to follow the order. Or it may be that submissive is brainwashed by the dominant in a cult-like manner to the point that they are mentally incapable of revoking consent. Or it may be that the submissive is dumb and has enough misplaced trust in the dominant to agree to a situation where the dominant is able to take away their ability to revoke consent and the submissive ends up regretting it for the rest of their lives. Or it may be that the submissive agrees to a situation in which the dominant is able to take away their ability to revoke consent and the submissive ends up happy and fulfilled for the rest of their lives. There are a myriad of situation where it's possible for a person to actually willingly, knowingly, consent to having no limits, often towards a certain person. This doesn't even mean that this situation is irreversible. It's not because a person at this moment in time doesn't have limits towards a certain person that that necessarily always remains the case. If a submissive has no limits towards a dominant, and he dumps her, she gets a new owner and now the first guy orders her to come back and she refuses, that doesn't mean that she did have limits towards him to begin with. No limits doesn't mean that limits may not come into existence either. Situations can change, and a person who has no limits today, can get limits after becoming a mother, for example. No limits simple means that they would submit to anything their dominant could possible chose to do to them, at this moment in time, including things like having body parts amputated, being killed, consenting to a situation where the ability to revoke consent can be taking away, or whatever other horrible thing you can come up with. Ishtar

Chulain -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 7:56:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: girlygurl I know for myself, I want to please Him and submit to His every desire and need. I also know, that our limits are the same so I never have to say "no" heaven forbid an s-type ever say that word! The point is not whether you think you ever would, but that in reality you can. quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero Contextually, a "no-limits" relationship exists within the the demand queue of the dominant. But also, at a certain point in certain such relationships, the connection to the person transcends any potential suspicion that would arise from any possible request. The "demand queue?" What does that even mean?

Ishtarr -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 7:59:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chulain quote: ORIGINAL: Ishtarr This is where you are wrong. Non-consensual relationships are perfectly plausible in the U.S. That explains why you have provided so many examples of non-consensual relationships in the U.S. I already mentioned incarceration by the state. What you got, girl? quote: Further than that, they are a daily reality in other parts of the world. And the point of mentioning this would be ...? quote: If MaxsGirl would agree to voluntarily and knowingly enter a non-consensual relationship with her Owner, in which he removes her ability to revoke her consent, then she has no-limits. It is not possible to enter into a non-consensual relationship in the U.S., etc. Deal with it. All relationship in the U.S. where a person has ever been held against their will would qualify as a non-consensual relationship. Any time an abusive husband has locked his wife in the house, often to the point of killing her eventually, is an example of a non-consensual relationship. Any time a kidnapper has taken somebody against their will and held them for undefined periods of time is an example of a non-consensula relationship. And I mention other countries because if MaxsGirls' Owner would decide to move to Saudi-Arabia with her tomorrow, the fact whether or not she consented to the relationship would become quite irrelevant after they got there. If she agreed to get on the plane with him, she basically agreed to no longer having a possibility to end the relationship. And it's very possible to enter in a non-consensual relationship in the U.S. If a person agreed to be locked in somebodies basement indefinitely, with the guaranty from the dominant that they would never be released, not even when they changed their minds, and begged for it, consent would become a mute issue. And if they then, after being locked up there, changed their mind and wanted to leave, you'd have a perfectly viable non-consensual relationship... Really... this isn't as complicated as you're trying to make it. Ishtar

porcelaine -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 7:59:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ishtarr However, I knew that something like what he has posted is what he was setting you up for as a rebuttal. Greetings Ishtarr, I have only encountered two people in this realm that honestly adhere to this philosophy and both are pretty tight lipped about their lifestyle. One has admitted her experiences aloud and been brutally raked over the coals because of it. She's become far more reticent over the years. The other maintains an air of modest transparency and readily admits there are elements of her relationship that are never divulged in public. I concur with that sentiment and have seen threads move in the direction that this one has taken whenever controversial subjects are raised. The one factor I've noticed that is fairly consistent with both is their intentional silence and unwillingness to debate or defend their beliefs without due cause. Many of the supposed claims that highlight differences that appear fringe or extreme if you will are usually quite embellished and a far cry from the reality its author experiences. I will candidly admit that there are relatively few well adjusted individuals that could honestly agree to the terms mentioned and its consequences. However, when one never encounters that reality or worries about the negative side of the omission of consent (as you've pinpointed) it is fairly simple to say yes if the Boogeyman never comes calling. Namaste, ~porcelaine

Chulain -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 8:05:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ishtarr All relationship in the U.S. where a person has ever been held against their will would qualify as a non-consensual relationship. No, that would qualify as a crime. You cannot consent to be the victim of a crime.

Chulain -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 8:08:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chulain quote: ORIGINAL: Ishtarr All relationship in the U.S. where a person has ever been held against their will would qualify as a non-consensual relationship. No, that would qualify as a crime.

hausboy -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 8:08:27 PM)
Hi Isthar.... Understand your point-- I think I'm finally getting now what the no-limit folks are saying-- the fact is that a healthy, sane person would not (knowingly) get into a no-limits relationship with someone who would intentionally do something that was truly horrible and harmful--and no Dom/Domme would ever do something truly horrible/harmful to the one they loved, just to prove that they could. That....would be really sick and unhealthy. Does it happen? I'm sure it must...I know plenty of vanilla couples who have unhealthy and abusive relationships...that's not what I believe is really being discussed here. what I have taken from this dialogue is this: a person who is looking for a no-limits relationship is going to have to be extra discriminating (in the good sense) and have to really find that "perfect" other half, because unlike those of us who wish to have say in our limits on a regular basis, the no-limit relationship truly has to be 100% compatibility or one of those two will be really, really unhappy somewhere along the way.

Ishtarr -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 8:09:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chulain quote: ORIGINAL: Ishtarr All relationship in the U.S. where a person has ever been held against their will would qualify as a non-consensual relationship. No, that would qualify as a crime. As pointed out before: sodomy would qualify as a crime in many states. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Looking up the definition for the word "relationship" may help you here... there is nothing in the definition that suggests that there needs to be consent for a relationship to exist, nor that illegal acts within the relationship make that it's no longer a relationship... Ishtar

Chulain -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 8:10:12 PM)
We're not talking about sodomy, we're talking about consent and limits. Care to stay on topic?

Ishtarr -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 8:15:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hausboy Hi Isthar.... Understand your point-- I think I'm finally getting now what the no-limit folks are saying-- the fact is that a healthy, sane person would not (knowingly) get into a no-limits relationship with someone who would intentionally do something that was truly horrible and harmful--and no Dom/Domme would ever do something truly horrible/harmful to the one they loved, just to prove that they could. That....would be really sick and unhealthy. Does it happen? I'm sure it must...I know plenty of vanilla couples who have unhealthy and abusive relationships...that's not what I believe is really being discussed here. what I have taken from this dialogue is this: a person who is looking for a no-limits relationship is going to have to be extra discriminating (in the good sense) and have to really find that "perfect" other half, because unlike those of us who wish to have say in our limits on a regular basis, the no-limit relationship truly has to be 100% compatibility or one of those two will be really, really unhappy somewhere along the way. For the most part, you're right, most people claiming to have no-limits claim this because they know their dominant's limits well enough to trust them completely to make all decisions. From my personal perspective, I've been with a man that, if he would have ordered me to jump off a bridge, or a building, I would have done so without any hesitation, simple because I trusted him enough to know that he would never order me to do such a thing without having a really good reason to do so. That doesn't mean that I claim I have no limits, now or then... but I do understand having such a level of unquestioned faith in somebody that you can say: "I know that, at this moment in time, I would do ANYTHING this person tells me to do". Sometimes people make mistakes and end up in a no limit relationship with somebody who does go to far. I imagine that people have died in regret because of this. Other times, people -who would by most people be considered to be insane- consent to a relationship in which they know the dominant will do extreme things to them... like cut of their penis and eat them... or kill them... or destroy their ability to revoke consent. Yet these people still embark in these relationship, for whatever reason seems fit to them.

NihilusZero -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 8:17:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chulain The "demand queue?" What does that even mean? Sorry. The words sometimes spill out in weird ways. I meant the parameters of "no-limits" are set by what the dominant wants, since those are the only relevant limits in the context of the relationship.

Ishtarr -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 8:17:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chulain quote: ORIGINAL: Ishtarr All relationship in the U.S. where a person has ever been held against their will would qualify as a non-consensual relationship. No, that would qualify as a crime. quote: ORIGINAL: Chulain We're not talking about sodomy, we're talking about consent and limits. Care to stay on topic? Fine, answer me this then: Where in any definition of the word relationship does it say that a relationship ceases to be a relationship when a crime is committed?

NihilusZero -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 8:20:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chulain You cannot consent to be the victim of a crime. Sure you can. Unless you're conflating ethics and legality. BDSM is actually criminal in some US states. Consequently, every flogee consents (in those states) to be the victim of a crime. Now, if you're conflating ethics and legality, then you have a semantic point since, the moment someone consents to a criminal act, it ceases to be "criminal" (from that interpretation).

Chulain -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 8:21:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ishtarr From my personal perspective, I've been with a man that, if he would have ordered me to jump off a bridge, or a building, I would have done so without any hesitation, simple because I trusted him enough to know that he would never order me to do such a thing without having a really good reason to do so. That doesn't mean that I claim I have no limits, now or then... but I do understand having such a level of unquestioned faith in somebody that you can say: "I know that, at this moment in time, I would do ANYTHING this person tells me to do". Trusting someone so much that you tell yourself you would be willing to do anything they asked because you're certain they will never ask for something ultimate is not the same as having no limits.

Ishtarr -> RE: no limits period (1/27/2011 8:27:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chulain quote: ORIGINAL: Ishtarr From my personal perspective, I've been with a man that, if he would have ordered me to jump off a bridge, or a building, I would have done so without any hesitation, simple because I trusted him enough to know that he would never order me to do such a thing without having a really good reason to do so. That doesn't mean that I claim I have no limits, now or then... but I do understand having such a level of unquestioned faith in somebody that you can say: "I know that, at this moment in time, I would do ANYTHING this person tells me to do". Trusting someone so much that you tell yourself you would be willing to do anything they asked because you're certain they will never ask for something ultimate is not the same as having no limits. Care to read what I actually wrote? I didn't claim to have no limits. And people have submitted to another person who DID ask for something ultimate. Further, can you stop the shady debate techniques of going back and editing your posts to add in significant portions AFTER those posts have already been replied to. Can you also stop replying to only those things that you think work in your favor, and actually reply the questions asked? Can you also stop using logical fallacy, after logical fallacy in your posts? Can you also stop making absolutely unsupported claims, and then ignoring follow-up questions you get about those claims? It all makes it seem like you're unwilling to actually logically debate this, and are instead set on staying hung up on your own dogma... Ishtar

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625