|
BenevolentM -> RE: Is Love Inconvenient? (2/5/2011 12:27:50 PM)
|
I think someone should respond to what IronBear wrote.
quote:
ORIGINAL: IronBear
I'm having trouble working out what BenevolentM is carrying on about in relationship with the OP of "Is Love Inconvenient)? It does appear that for a number of folk, they equate the collar as representing more than ownership (depending if you are sub or slave). One of the problems for those dominants who are already married or in a significant relationship that so many sub/slaves appear to be searching for a BF or life partner. I prefer to see such things as being different to the search for a collared relationship dynamic which a Dominant who can meet the needs of the sub/slave BDSM wise. Similarly, there is also a difference between the sub/slave seeking a love based relationship compared to one which allows the service/domestic seeking lass or lad. I may love a slave girl in my collar, but that pales beside the love I have for my wife with whom I am in love with. So I say that love is decidedly inconvenient, and when it interferes with a collar I than say: "Bahhh! Humbug!!!!!!"
In my experience and I do have some experience though perhaps not as nearly as much as some of you, a relationship involving more than one female can be challenging. What IronBear has to say strikes me as pragmatic. Why? Inevitably there will be real or perceived inequalities. One female will become jealous of another, for example. I can see how starting out the relationship with a profound inequality, then enforcing it keeps a lid on these sorts of problems. Everyone understands their role. It's like building a bridge I suppose where the engineers worked out in advance that if the bridge should fail, how it will fail is at least predictable; the wife stays, the collar goes.
I, on the other hand, will regard my females as equal. This places a greater demand on my females to be moral. As I see it IronBear's approach places fewer such demands, less weight on the weight bearing columns. With IronBear's approach if a collar has a problem with whatever, she can be shown the door because its all clear. With my approach no one is going to be shown the door unless it is out of necessity. IronBear can say whereas I cannot to a female, your objection is inconvenient, here is the door. It is simple and IronBear is powerful in much the same way that stone is hard, but I am water. In time even the mountains will yield to me. My females must strive for an ideal which means I'm a slave driver who is more than willing to make them completely miserable for the sake of achieving those ideals.
Weak females need not apply. On this point I suspect IronBear and I both agree. I base this conclusion on IronBear's name which suggests that he values American Indian culture and it is my understanding, though this is a generalization of course, that American Indians have an appreciation for strong females.
|
|
|
|
