RE: Contracts

RE: Contracts (Full Version)

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

Message

tazzygirl -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 11:07:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kana What were Frosted Flakes Terms-something like we practice YDWTFITYTD (You do what the fuck I tell you to do). That's my contract. Right there. :-) Sounds like my "contract" "I say, you do!"

UllrsIshtar -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 12:27:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wckdmnd Of course it's not legally enforceable. The contract even states such in the very beginning of it. Whether it's legally enforceable or not isn't the point. What is the point is it lays out, in no uncertain terms, the duties and responsibilities, of the parties involved Euhm it doesn't say that it's not legally enforceable, what it says is that the slave hopes that the courts would uphold it as much as possible, and that if any part is deemed invalid, everything else still stands, as much as possible. It also doesn't lay out at all the duties and responsibilities of the parties involved. It lays out the duties and responsibilities of ONE party involved, while trying to invalidate the LEGAL duties and responsibilities of the other person. It basically gives the false illusion that the Master party doesn't have duties or responsibilities, not even the legal ones, while at the same time giving the false illusion that the slave party has duties and responsibilities they legally do not have. The entire thing can be summarized in one single line: We both agree that we're going to pretend that reality and legality doesn't exist, and doesn't affect us, until either one of us no longer feels like doing that. Which makes it beyond silly, because if that's the only thing you're wanting to agree to, needing a multiple page contract to do so is nothing but a giant waste of time.

UllrsIshtar -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 12:30:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wckdmnd Wouldn't the steps you take be throwing the contract in her face? Because what you say there I totally agree that that's how it's done No, because she already knows that the contract is in place, and choose to disobey anyways, which means that the idea of the contract already isn't enough to illicit her obedience. If you get to the point where, in an attempt to get somebody to obey you, you resort to throwing a tantrum and saying "but you promised you would!!!!!" by throwing a completely invalid and legally criminalizing you contract in their face, you can be happy if the only result you get is her continued disobedience, instead of her pressing charges against you and using the contract as evidence...

TNDommeK -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 12:34:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kana quote: ORIGINAL: TNDommeK But as the dominant, couldn't you and slave alter the contracts when needed? I look at it like this, if a king makes rules that his kingdom must follow, can't he change the rules at any time? He is the king, after all. Now of course this is on a much smaller comparison. But I find that whatever works best for you is what you go with. Lets say at the beginning of relationship, said slave signed a contract stating hard limits of anal (first thing that came to mind) and throughout your relationship, you've managed and she has been turned onto a little anal play and eventually she has tossed out the notion that anal is a limit, wouldn't it be ok to redo that part of the contract? Sure. And I do and have. I call these "State of the Union" moments-every few months we'll sit down (Well, I sit and she kneels naked) and hash out what's up and where we are going. But then you're writing a new contract, the new negotiation (Hehehe-its some negotiation-"From now on out, we're going to be doing this.") voids the old one. Legally, it's the same as offer/counteroffer. The counter voids the initial offer once made. And really I'm speaking only theoretically at this point-we work within a no limits structure-if I decide to nail her tongue to a coffeetable, it's my choice. We don't really discuss this sort of stuff anymore. But we have had to alter how and what we do due to health concerns, issues with getting older and other factors that have certainly impacted our play. And WTF signs a no anal contract? I mean shit, would you? I want a bitch to serve me, that gal, she giving up that ass. And the more she dislikes it, the more I'm gonna want it. I suspect you may understand.... 100% true, she's giving that ass up too! I think I might like it better if she dislikes it. But now I wanna see someone's tongue nailed to the table.

wckdmnd -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 12:40:38 PM)
Did anybody except me not take "throwing it in her face" as not literally throwing it in her face but more a figurative expression?

UllrsIshtar -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 12:42:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wckdmnd Did anybody except me not take "throwing it in her face" as not literally throwing it in her face but more a figurative expression? I was taking it figuratively as you telling her "you promised you'd obey when you signed this", which doesn't alter my point that, if you need to resort to doing that, you've already lost the battle.

SimplyMichael -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 1:01:31 PM)
Power of attorney Prenups Long term lease for living owner's home Master owns assets Slave holds debt Lots of ways to create legally binding contracts.

TNDommeK -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 1:11:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar quote: ORIGINAL: wckdmnd Did anybody except me not take "throwing it in her face" as not literally throwing it in her face but more a figurative expression? I was taking it figuratively as you telling her "you promised you'd obey when you signed this", which doesn't alter my point that, if you need to resort to doing that, you've already lost the battle. This

Spiritedsub2 -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 1:13:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael Contracts are a tool, like all tools, knowing when and why to apply them determines your success with them. They do not create obedience, nor do they substitute for dominance New people can use them as tools to enhance communication and create clarity, around limits, responsibilities, defining outside relationships and a host of other issues. Like all ritual, they can be used to enhance a submissive mindset, to provide structure and safety, to have a tangible presence of the relationship. To make clear secondary roles, to outline the scope and limits of a part time relationship. Putting thoughts to paper requires one to clarify those thoughts, to say yes or no and can force people to reckon with unspoken needs and expectations. One doesn't need a ring or a priest to be married nor do either of those ensure a better outcome than a pinky swear, but many find them important. I see contracts in the same light. These are all great reasons to use contracts, especially for new people like you mentioned. None of this is clear to most new people, I can attest. That such contracts lack enforceability doesn't limit their usefulness; enforcement is just one purpose, and an optional one at that. I can also see they wouldn't offer much in no-limit slave relationships, but those don't seem to be the norm.

UllrsIshtar -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 1:31:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael Power of attorney Prenups Long term lease for living owner's home Master owns assets Slave holds debt Lots of ways to create legally binding contracts. I'm not disputing that, nor am I saying that contracts don't have a place and function. What I'm saying is that having somebody sign an illegal contract that states that they'll obey you no matter what, and for whatever reason later they don't obey you, pointing out to them that they're in breach of contract and how they broke their promise isn't going to get your anywhere reasonable, nor is it the mature way of handling things. If there is a problem that's causing the disobedience, that needs to be addressed. Even if you can get her to obey again by pointing out her promise, you didn't win anything, because the underlaying problem didn't get solved. Relaying on a contract and a promisse to illicite obedience from somebody is the first step in the loosing battle of the Top completely loosing control, because all it does is reenforce the fact that the bottom really doesn't have any good reason to obey you, other than her wanting to, which you've somehow already momentarily make her loose the desire to do, and now instead of addressing that, you're plainly expecting obedience despite her no longer wanting to obey, instead of making her desire to obey again.

Focus50 -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 3:11:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wckdmnd Did anybody except me not take "throwing it in her face" as not literally throwing it in her face but more a figurative expression? Maybe you were being figurative but that is the lurking menace that personal contracts imply. A tool of entrapment, to coerce and even manipulate. All valid possibilities, especially if the sub in particular has little to no lifestyle experience when entering into one. Sure, they're not legally binding but how sure can one be that a novice sub knows that. Or that they do but feel pressured to endure anyway, because it's presented as written evidence that they gave their word. And all these things make the self-defeating point that contracts are a poor substitute for mutual trust and respect. They achieve the opposite! Isn't your word, your ethics and your reputation good enough? Because as soon as you need documentary evidence that they are, I'm trusting you a whole bunch less.... Focus.

wckdmnd -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 3:31:38 PM)
No no. If you go back in the thread to about page 2. you'll see that those were her words for what her Master (not me) was doing to her. I just said she deserved it thrown in her face if she wasn't upholding her end of the contract that she agreed to in the first place. Gotta be held accountable. Or none of this works

Focus50 -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 3:46:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael Contracts are a tool, and like all tools skill in both their use and an understanding of when and where to use them is important. A screwdriver is a tool - used for fixing screws. They're also used as levers, scrapers, wedges, probes, drifts and back-scratchers. Not their intended use, and indeed quite abusive when used as a drift (struck with a hammer). This contract "tool", no possibility that it can be used for anything other than its design purpose? Not open for abuse? If it's a tool, it can also be a weapon, no? Hmmm, I missed that one for screwdrivers.... quote: Most people who cant use a tool dismiss their usefulness. This is nonsense. If you're an advocate of contracts, stick your hand up and say so. I dismiss the usefulness of contracts or any "tool" when they have no use at all - it's THAT simple. Focus.

tazzygirl -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 3:56:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wckdmnd No no. If you go back in the thread to about page 2. you'll see that those were her words for what her Master (not me) was doing to her. I just said she deserved it thrown in her face if she wasn't upholding her end of the contract that she agreed to in the first place. Gotta be held accountable. Or none of this works If a submissive isnt holding up their end of the relationship, there is a reason. It could be her, it could be the owner, or it could be medical or situational. Until that is figured out, tossing a contract into someone's "face" doesnt mean squat, and can even be harmful.

Focus50 -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 4:00:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wckdmnd No no. If you go back in the thread to about page 2. you'll see that those were her words for what her Master (not me) was doing to her. I just said she deserved it thrown in her face if she wasn't upholding her end of the contract that she agreed to in the first place. Gotta be held accountable. Or none of this works I understood perfectly. Littlewonder said it was used to guilt and shame her, of which you approved - that she deserved to have it thrown in her face etc.... So it's now a weapon of accountability. Again I ask, isn't your word, your ethics and your reputation etc good enough for someone to trust you and want to follow your direction? I've got all of that (allowing for inevitable and occasional human failings) and no contract - yet we're both held accountable for our places in the relationship. Focus.

SimplyMichael -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 4:46:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Focus50 woof, woof, woof Feel better now?

wckdmnd -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 4:46:30 PM)
Are not your words, ethics and reputation figuratively weapons of accountability? All a contract is is words written. Why does the spoken word carry more weight than those that are written?

UllrsIshtar -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 5:18:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wckdmnd Are not your words, ethics and reputation figuratively weapons of accountability? All a contract is is words written. Why does the spoken word carry more weight than those that are written? To me, neither carries more or less weight than the other one. It's just a matter of it being idiotic to expect somebody to obey everything you say just because they promised to do so (either written or verbally). If you give a command, and it's not obeyed, by a person whom you know wants to be in a relationship in which they obey, something is wrong. Period. And if something is wrong, it cannot ever be fixed by pointing out to them that they are breaking their (written or verbal) promise to obey you. They may not be obeying because you're giving unreasonable commands, or because they're emotionally or physically off balance, or because they no longer want to obey (you), or because they no longer trust you, or because they're unable to... but none of those things are being addressed by you pointing out that they're breaking their promise to obey. In fact, with most of those issues, pointing out that they're breaking their promise in an attempt to illicit obedience will only make things worse... much worse. I cannot come up with a single situation where pointing out to somebody that they're failing to uphold their promise to obey, in an attempt to get them to obey again, will work out well, except for when both parties think it's somehow kinky for some reason. Barring there being a sexual undertone to having the contract (verbal or written) thrown in your face, it's just not a good move, from any perspective you look at it.

Focus50 -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 6:16:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael quote: ORIGINAL: Focus50 woof, woof, woof Feel better now? You're attributing this quote to me? [:-] So much for the written word clarifying everything.... Focus.

Focus50 -> RE: Contracts (7/9/2013 6:44:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wckdmnd Are not your words, ethics and reputation figuratively weapons of accountability? All a contract is is words written. "Weapons" is a bit strong, but yeah, of course they are. My D/s relationships include rules and standards of behaviour that the girl is expected to adhere to. And when she slips, there are consequences. As there are when I fuck up. I see contracts as something relative strangers enter into for a common purpose. ie, it's business! And when one or the other doesn't meet their contractual obligations, the contract's purpose is to enable legal redress. I don't regard the prospect of entering into a personal, intimate relationship as being business. You expect to give and get waaaaay more trust than that. Having documentary proof that one of us isn't measuring up defeats the ability to build that level of trust. But yeah, it is proof that your word or your handshake isn't good enough. quote: Why does the spoken word carry more weight than those that are written? You tell me - who's the person you'd be most comfortable entering into a relationship with - the one who can provide a signed release from a recognised mental institution or one with no such documentation at all? Focus.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.125