|
Aswad -> RE: Are dominants "allowed" to cry? (9/8/2012 11:16:43 PM)
|
I vote we're superheroes. [:D]
But don't let that stop you from bashing him with a hammer, though perhaps one might want to aim for something other than the face. The police always get miffed about that. They much prefer when the hammer has been applied everywhere else. Makes identifying a former moron a lot easier.
LaTigresse put it perfectly in post #26. There are times when it's inappropriate to cry, and the impetus to do so may not persist till the appropriate time arrives, but there's no inherent problem in crying. To occasionally cry from anger is also familiar, and one can use either to defuse the other (crying to bleed off adrenaline, for instance, is an undervalued technique among men, it seems, while using anger to shield against- or buffer off- grief appears overvalued).
That someone doesn't get it, indicates they have an unrealistic stereotype in mind. Education and remediation can be effected by keeping them in a drawer, neatly folded, when one isn't enjoying the perks of the stereotype of an unmovable, inhuman monster. Almost invariably, they will discover a preference for a real human with emotions and inhibitions in no time at all.
Instructive Domme: "Is this really what you were looking for?"
Enlightened Sub: "(sob) No-ow, bifftweff. (sob)"
Or the equivalent in written form, using a pen taped to whichever limb has some remaining mobility. [:D]
IWYW,
— Aswad.
|
|
|
|
