RE: Good submissives

RE: Good submissives (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity

Message

ResidentSadist -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 6:12:45 PM)
"Good submissive like getting fucked in the ass in their sleep without lube." At least you got this one right! Just sayin'

metamorfosis -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 7:02:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NuevaVida quote: ORIGINAL: metamorfosis Very few people on the other thread defended the OP's right to consent to what most labeled as "abuse". Ought they to have? If they believe in that right, then sure they should talk about the OP's right to consent to abuse. If they don't believe in that right, why would they defend it? We all presumably believe in the right to consent to things other people would call "abuse". That's why we're here. What makes one person's preferred "abuse" okay, and another's not?

tommonymous -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 7:03:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: metamorfosis quote: ORIGINAL: thezeppo It's not really any of my business, but isn't this thread the opposite of the advice you just gave? Aren't you feeding the troll (if the op of the other thread is one) further through this thread? Yes, unless we can deliberately steer it in another direction, such as this: We all laugh at this idea of what a "good submissive" is. But where do these ideas come from? The media? 50 shades of grey? People's own imaginations? Why do many newbies equate "submission" with lack of self respect, and "dominance" with unprincipaled bullying? If we disagree, do we have the right to try to convince them otherwise, or is this a YKINMK issue? Very few people on the other thread defended the OP's right to consent to what most labeled as "abuse". Ought they to have? I have a really hard time believing that you started this thread as a way to steer the conversation towards a philosophical discussion about consensual non-consent, edgeplay, and/ or BDSM in the media. Also, the other thread was started by an OP who explicitly did not consent to the abuse, so there really would be no reason to defend her right to consent to such. It's a moot point. EDIT: Spelling mistake.

metamorfosis -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 7:10:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tommonymous I have a really hard time believing that you started this thread as a way to steer the conversation towards a philosophical discussion about consensual non-consent, edgeplay, and/ or BDSM in the media. That, and to make fun of the other. It was a little of both. quote: Also, the other thread was started by an OP who explicitly did not consent to the abuse, so there really would be no reason to defend her right to consent to such. It's a moot point. No, by staying, she consented. By defending him, she consented. A person can't have it both ways. As long as she is fit to consent, she consented.

tommonymous -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 7:18:16 PM)
So where's the line then? If one person is beating the another brutally, and that person isn't physically strong enough to stop the beating or get away, are they consenting? It didn't sound like other OP had put up with the situation for weeks or months, and I'm willing to give a pretty liberal grace period for someone who has something like that sprung on them. People need time to analyze a situation, process emotions, and then make and act on a plan. Some people need more help with some or all of those steps than you or I. And, regardless, none of that's going to happen in the course of a 24-hour thread. To me, the argument you're making sounds very close to "She was wearing slutty-looking clothes and walking in a dark alley. Of course she wanted to get fucked! It's not rape..."

NuevaVida -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 7:19:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: metamorfosis We all presumably believe in the right to consent to things other people would call "abuse". That's why we're here. No, actually I'm here to talk about relationships. quote: What makes one person's preferred "abuse" okay, and another's not? Abuse in the real sense fucks up one's head to the point they believe they deserve the treatment that emotionally damages them. They don't see that they have other options. This is why battered women either don't leave or keep returning. By remaining, they're consenting to it. But it doesn't make it right. Would you ridicule them for their poor choices? Defend her right to stay? I think most people don't defend what they find reprehensible, even if it's someone's right.

DesFIP -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 8:18:54 PM)
And some of us, frustrated by the other thread where the abuser is being protected, where all our concern is pushed aside, come here to work off our frustration. Pam didn't link the other thread here. Had someone not linked it, I truly believe the op of the other thread would not have recognized that this was based off of what she said. Denial is not just a river in Egypt, ya know? As far as what she could do? If she has access to a computer, she could email friends and family and ask for help. She could look up who to call to get her to a shelter. She could, but I don't suggest it, emulate Lorena Bobbitt. Unfortunately people stay in unhealthy situations because they are getting something out of it. Until they are willing to do the hard work to figure out what that something is, they will cling to the bad situation. Which is why so many abused women do refuse to press charges and sometimes attack the officers who go there trying to help.

metamorfosis -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 8:23:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tommonymous So where's the line then? If one person is beating the another brutally, and that person isn't physically strong enough to stop the beating or get away, are they consenting? It didn't sound like other OP had put up with the situation for weeks or months, and I'm willing to give a pretty liberal grace period for someone who has something like that sprung on them. To stay, and even defend the person afterwards, is where I draw the line. I'm afraid I am not willing to give someone as liberal a grace period on this type of situation. A person being raped truly is helpless at the time. Afterwards, unless they are locked in a basement, no. As long as she was mentally fit to make the choice, then she chose to consent. If she was not mentally fit to make that choice, then she had no business entering the relationship in the first place. quote: People need time to analyze a situation, process emotions, and then make and act on a plan. Some people need more help with some or all of those steps than you or I. And, regardless, none of that's going to happen in the course of a 24-hour thread. If her difficulty had been confined to "making a plan to get out", I would totally agree. But she hasn't even decided if she wants to get out, if she really thinks he even did anything wrong. And I'm afraid I have to argue that unless she clearly expressed that she wasn't okay with what happened at the time, unless she tried to leave or at least made plans to, and unless she condemned his actions afterwards rather than defending him, then she forfeits any claim to call it "rape" later on. Unless she was so mentally incapacitated that she was unfit to consent in the first place, and he knew it. quote: To me, the argument you're making sounds very close to "She was wearing slutty-looking clothes and walking in a dark alley. Of course she wanted to get fucked! It's not rape..." To me, the argument you're making is dangerously close to, "She's a woman and therefore a victim. Women are poor delicate creatures that aren't competent to answer for their own bad choices. Her boyfriend's an asshole and therefore even though she didn't tell him 'no' he must have raped her. She gets to wait as long as she wants to before deciding whether it was rape."

metamorfosis -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 8:41:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NuevaVida Abuse in the real sense fucks up one's head to the point they believe they deserve the treatment that emotionally damages them. They don't see that they have other options. This is why battered women either don't leave or keep returning. By remaining, they're consenting to it. But it doesn't make it right. Granted. quote: Would you ridicule them for their poor choices? I wish I had not ridiculed her. I thought she was a fake. Not I'm not so sure. It would have been wiser to reserve judgement, and for what it's worth, Sheela, I'm sorry. quote: Defend her right to stay? I think most people don't defend what they find reprehensible, even if it's someone's right. I'm afraid I have to disagree with you there. However naive she is, I still believe she is mentally competent to make that decision. And being competent to make that decision, I must defend her right to make it, even if I don't agree.

tommonymous -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 8:45:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: metamorfosis To stay, and even defend the person afterwards, is where I draw the line. I'm afraid I am not willing to give someone as liberal a grace period on this type of situation. A person being raped truly is helpless at the time. Afterwards, unless they are locked in a basement, no. As long as she was mentally fit to make the choice, then she chose to consent. If she was not mentally fit to make that choice, then she had no business entering the relationship in the first place. Emotions (whether focused on someone deserving or not) have a nasty way of clouding our judgement. And analyzing a situation from a removed vantage point is a great way of taking the emotion out of it. We have a pretty major advantage that the other OP doesn't. And I won't hold that against her. Also, if someone is unfit to decide to enter into a relationship, do they know they can't make that choice? I doubt it. (It's a different application, but the same principle: Do the insane recognize their insanity?) quote: If her difficulty had been confined to "making a plan to get out", I would totally agree. But she hasn't even decided if she wants to get out, if she really thinks he even did anything wrong. And I'm afraid I have to argue that unless she clearly expressed that she wasn't okay with what happened at the time, unless she tried to leave or at least made plans to, and unless she condemned his actions afterwards rather than defending him, then she forfeits any claim to call it "rape" later on. Unless she was so mentally incapacitated that she was unfit to consent in the first place, and he knew it. Again, some people take longer to sort things out than others. Other OP is at the very beginning of the process, and may end up not needing an exit plan. Why plan to end something that doesn't need to be ended? You're condemning both parties after having each made a mistake. (His to use his sub without proper regard, hers to allow it.) Do they get an opportunity to make amends, or possibly salvage the situation? Or are they forever banished to BDSM Failures' Island for having done something very stupid? (For the record, I don't think either is very fit for this particular relationship at the moment.) quote: To me, the argument you're making is dangerously close to, "She's a woman and therefore a victim. Women are poor delicate creatures that aren't competent to answer for their own bad choices. Her boyfriend's an asshole and therefore even though she didn't tell him 'no' he must have raped her. She gets to wait as long as she wants to before deciding whether it was rape." It's inarguable that Other OP told us she's a woman. I do think she's a bit of a victim of a bait-and-switch here. (Which requires some culpability on the part of the victim.) I don't think that susceptibility to bait-and-switch has anything to do with gender, but rather naivete. (Since I apparently have to be explicit about it: Men can also be naive. I think it's more a function of life experience than biology.) If she had been a man in this position, and I saw that you had started a similar thread, I'd be having a similar conversation with you.

NuevaVida -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 8:52:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesFIP And some of us, frustrated by the other thread where the abuser is being protected, where all our concern is pushed aside, come here to work off our frustration. Pam didn't link the other thread here. Had someone not linked it, I truly believe the op of the other thread would not have recognized that this was based off of what she said. She may or may not recognize it. I don't understand the frustration you speak of, though, only because I don't feel frustrated by most things here. Not to discount what you feel by any means, only that I don't relate to it. As for working off that frustration, that's cool, too. I tend to not work off my frustrations with mockery, but I understand that others do, which is their option. I wouldn't choose that option for myself, but everyone is not me. quote: As far as what she could do? If she has access to a computer, she could email friends and family and ask for help. She could look up who to call to get her to a shelter. Yes, she absolutely could do that. And hopefully when she's in the right mindset to do so, she will. quote: She could, but I don't suggest it, emulate Lorena Bobbitt. Hopefully she doesn't choose that option, as it would cause more problems than she already has. quote: Unfortunately people stay in unhealthy situations because they are getting something out of it. Until they are willing to do the hard work to figure out what that something is, they will cling to the bad situation. Which is why so many abused women do refuse to press charges and sometimes attack the officers who go there trying to help. I absolutely agree with this. I lost friends in the past because of very similar choices. I couldn't understand why nobody seemed to realize that I was the problem, not him, so I pushed them away. Stupid, yes, but it's what I truly believed because my self esteem was that trashed. She'll either figure it out or she won't. Some people will help her, some won't. Some will show support, some will criticize her. Whatever wrong or right there is in any of that is up to the individual to decide. I'm only offering what would feel wrong or right to me.

NuevaVida -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 9:01:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: metamorfosis quote: Defend her right to stay? I think most people don't defend what they find reprehensible, even if it's someone's right. I'm afraid I have to disagree with you there. However naive she is, I still believe she is mentally competent to make that decision. And being competent to make that decision, I must defend her right to make it, even if I don't agree. I can't argue that - you are speaking for yourself here and I believe you. I said I think most people don't defend what they find reprehensible. I could be wrong there, but it was my opinion in response to your question of whether people ought to have defended her right to be abused. The mental competence thing is interesting to me, though. When I was being abused, I was mentally competent to hold a job, to manage my bills (well sort of, I always screwed them up), to get by in life, etc. But I did not have the mental or emotional clarity to see what was really going on. A lot of abused people feel shame and embarrassment because they think they deserve it. They think others can't see the truth (even though that "truth" is really a lie). They lie to themselves by thinking it will get better, if they just "behave better." Shit like that. Some people become enlightened to reality over time. Some do not. I'm not finding fault with you defending that right, by the way. If she didn't have that right then that would mean she could be forcibly removed from the situation, which would open up a whole can of scary worms.

littlewonder -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 9:04:16 PM)
woohoo! I'm a good submissive!

DesFIP -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 9:07:19 PM)
Proving mental incompetence is damn near impossible. A long legal nightmare. She is competent. If she had a heart attack and refused to take the prescribed medication that would be equally unhealthy. And although she probably wouldn't live very long, she would be competent and therefore no intervention could be done to force her to take her medication. Competency is a bare minimum. Healthy is a lot higher level of the bar. Do I feel a need to defend her right to stay with a classic abuser? Nope. I'm selfish. I find reading about these cases in the local newspaper to be very upsetting.

metamorfosis -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 9:11:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tommonymous ...analyzing a situation from a removed vantage point is a great way of taking the emotion out of it. We have a pretty major advantage that the other OP doesn't. That is certainly true. quote: Also, if someone is unfit to decide to enter into a relationship, do they know they can't make that choice? I doubt it. (It's a different application, but the same principle: Do the insane recognize their insanity?) Now you're arguing that a person who's mentally ill is not responsible for their own choices? They would have to be very, very mentally ill, and if that were true he should have noticed it and he could be held responsible for taking advantage. However, I don't think this one qualifies. I think she's fucked up, but not so much so that she forfeits the right to make her own choices, and I must hold her responsible for those choices. quote: It's inarguable that Other OP told us she's a woman. I do think she's a bit of a victim of a bait-and-switch here. (Which requires some culpability on the part of the victim.) I don't think that susceptibility to bait-and-switch has anything to do with gender, but rather naivete. (Since I apparently have to be explicit about it: Men can also be naive. I think it's more a function of life experience than biology.) If she had been a man in this position, and I saw that you had started a similar thread, I'd be having a similar conversation with you. I'll take your word that gender has nothing to do with your position. That said, if she had been a man, and I started the same thread, and you took that same position, I would give the same answer. Staying and defending the person implies consent to what happened.

metamorfosis -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 9:19:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NuevaVida The mental competence thing is interesting to me, though. When I was being abused, I was mentally competent to hold a job, to manage my bills (well sort of, I always screwed them up), to get by in life, etc. But I did not have the mental or emotional clarity to see what was really going on. A lot of abused people feel shame and embarrassment because they think they deserve it. They think others can't see the truth (even though that "truth" is really a lie). They lie to themselves by thinking it will get better, if they just "behave better." Shit like that. Some people become enlightened to reality over time. Some do not. I was never abused, but I can relate to a lot of that. Being a fucked up basketcase absolutely clouded my judgement. I'm only now getting to the point of taking responsibility for my own bad choices. quote: I'm not finding fault with you defending that right, by the way. If she didn't have that right then that would mean she could be forcibly removed from the situation, which would open up a whole can of scary worms. Yes, I know. There's a fine line between being compassionate and not infringing on a person's freedoms.

NuevaVida -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 9:43:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesFIP Proving mental incompetence is damn near impossible. A long legal nightmare. She is competent. If she had a heart attack and refused to take the prescribed medication that would be equally unhealthy. And although she probably wouldn't live very long, she would be competent and therefore no intervention could be done to force her to take her medication. Competency is a bare minimum. Healthy is a lot higher level of the bar. Do I feel a need to defend her right to stay with a classic abuser? Nope. I'm selfish. I find reading about these cases in the local newspaper to be very upsetting. I agree with you about competence. I did not say there was no competence, only that I found that concept interesting. I spoke of emotional clarity, which is much different, of course.

NuevaVida -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 9:46:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: metamorfosis I was never abused, but I can relate to a lot of that. Being a fucked up basketcase absolutely clouded my judgement. I'm only now getting to the point of taking responsibility for my own bad choices. It took me a long time, too. This is why I think the gal who "inspired" this thread has very clouded judgment and can not yet take responsibility for her choices. quote: There's a fine line between being compassionate and not infringing on a person's freedoms. Exactly. I'm thinking one can be compassionate without infringing on freedoms.

metamorfosis -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 10:15:11 PM)
We chastise newbies with fantasy based notions of BDSM for letting their interest in kink edge out their common sense. Is it slightly unfair to expect a new person to know that beating, branding, cutting, and ordering someone around are all okay but the things listed in the OP are not?

NuevaVida -> RE: Good submissives (8/7/2013 10:21:13 PM)
As I read it, the OP didn't sign up for that. He just started doing it. There's a difference in choosing that kind of relationship and finding your way through it versus one being foisted upon you without discussion.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625