Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized...


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 8:23:49 AM   
WarMachine904


Posts: 123
Joined: 8/2/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL area
Status: offline 		Maybe this will put it into perspective...

"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

-Voltaire




_____________________________

WarMachine904
"I am not a Dominant by choice, I am Dominant by nature's design!"

(in reply to WarMachine904)
Profile   Post #: 141
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 8:38:10 AM   
DesFIP


Posts: 25191
Joined: 11/25/2007
From: Apple County NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

Darn, I may even sit with some good scene friends who are eating fish whilst Philip talks about his objections towards female dominants. Just because he can't comprehend a female being dominant doesn't mean it doesn't exist and well he knows that. His opinion doesn't threaten our friendship. Why when we can have earnest and intelligent discourse should I allow this one objection to distract me? Its not as though he's racially prejudiced or homophobic which for me would be a friendship deal breaker.




You don't believe that sexism is offensive?
That believing women, by virtue of their anatomy, are lesser people is not offensive?

If he believed people of one race or religion were lesser, that would be bigotry but believing half the human race to be lesser is not?

Weird.

_____________________________

Slave to laundry

Cynical and proud of it!


(in reply to MariaB)
Profile   Post #: 142
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 8:46:36 AM   
evesgrden


Posts: 597
Joined: 6/9/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WarMachine904

ob·ject - /ˈäbjəkt/ - Verb - Say something to express one's disapproval of or disagreement with something: "residents object to the volume of traffic".


quote:

ORIGINAL: evesgrden

I object to the idea of communism. I object to things I think are wrong, not things that are not my taste, but that are wrong.

You object to the idea of male submissives and female dominants. That's a direct quote from you.


And therein, lies the disconnect in your logic. You object to things that YOU DISAPPROVE OF. Just as I object to things that I DISAPPROVE OF.

You bring up the idea of communism being wrong. Who says it is wrong? Wrong for who? It is your opinion that communism is wrong, and you object to it. Great. That and $0.75 may get you a cup of coffee. Because in the grand scheme of the things, nobody gives a flying fuck what anyone else objects to, including you...or me, for that matter. We are not the world authority on anything. (Edited by me)

And it is interesting that you bring up the notion of communism, because until we abandon democracy, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights (which we are in the process of doing), everyone of us, myself included, is entitled to have and express an opinion, belief, view, or objection.

For instance, you object to my objection. Ok, great. We covered that.

BUT THE PURPOSE OF EXPRESSING MY OPINION IN THE FIRST PLACE WAS THE DEMONSTRATE THAT DESPITE MY OWN VIEWS, BELIEFS, AND OPINIONS, I CAN ACCEPT THAT OTHER'S MAY NOT SHARE THE SAME VIEWS, BELIEFS, or OPINIONS....AND NOT FEEL COMPELLED TO CHASTISE THEM, DEMONIZE THEM, OR "SCHOOL" THEM INTO CHANGING THEIR BELIEF.






Now we can actually get into a discussion, and one that I think could be very interesting. I didn't think you realized what you had said, but clearly you do so I'd like to know the rationale behind it.

See, I can tell you why I don't think communism is a good idea. It has to do with human behavior, reinforcement, the problems that arise if you see your peers doing no work while you haul ass, and yet they reap the same benefits as you and so forth. I object to it because I don't think it is possible for it to work with humans as they exist today, and it lends itself to abuse at the top. Lovely philosophy, right up there with "can't we all get along", but hardly realistic. If you (generic) could show me a communist society that really works, then I'd have to reconsider saying that I disapprove/object, and change it to "It's not for me".

So... you object/disapprove of female dominants and male submissives. Why? Is it a moral issue? What about it is wrong to you?

You have EVERY right to your opinion here, and truly I'm really really curious.

_____________________________

What you permit, you promote.

(in reply to WarMachine904)
Profile   Post #: 143
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 9:02:09 AM   
WarMachine904


Posts: 123
Joined: 8/2/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL area
Status: offline 		Actually, you did just change from "I object to communism" and "I object to things that are wrong" to "I don't think communism is a good idea".

Just making a point. It doesn't bother me in the least.

But since you asked, I would have to say that it stems from several different factors. Upbringing, religious beliefs, personal experiences, and my own cognitive thoughts all contribute to MY view of myself, the world around me, and my interpretation of the natural order of things. As descrite said previously, in order to really have this discussion we must have some agreed upon taxonomy.

Are we going to talk about dominance and submission in a BDSM context, a personality context, a physical context, or everything combined?



_____________________________

WarMachine904
"I am not a Dominant by choice, I am Dominant by nature's design!"

(in reply to evesgrden)
Profile   Post #: 144
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 9:10:27 AM   
njlauren


Posts: 1577
Joined: 10/1/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WarMachine904

ob·ject - /ˈäbjəkt/ - Verb - Say something to express one's disapproval of or disagreement with something: "residents object to the volume of traffic".


quote:

ORIGINAL: evesgrden

I object to the idea of communism. I object to things I think are wrong, not things that are not my taste, but that are wrong.

You object to the idea of male submissives and female dominants. That's a direct quote from you.


And therein, lies the disconnect in your logic. You object to things that YOU DISAPPROVE OF. Just as I object to things that I DISAPPROVE OF.

You bring up the idea of communism being wrong. Who says it is wrong? Wrong for who? It is your opinion that communism is wrong, and you object to it. Great. That and $0.75 may get you a cup of coffee. Because in the grand scheme of the things, nobody gives a flying fuck what anyone else objects to, including you...or me, for that matter. We are not the world authority on anything. (Edited by me)

And it is interesting that you bring up the notion of communism, because until we abandon democracy, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights (which we are in the process of doing), everyone of us, myself included, is entitled to have and express an opinion, belief, view, or objection.

For instance, you object to my objection. Ok, great. We covered that.

BUT THE PURPOSE OF EXPRESSING MY OPINION IN THE FIRST PLACE WAS THE DEMONSTRATE THAT DESPITE MY OWN VIEWS, BELIEFS, AND OPINIONS, I CAN ACCEPT THAT OTHER'S MAY NOT SHARE THE SAME VIEWS, BELIEFS, or OPINIONS....AND NOT FEEL COMPELLED TO CHASTISE THEM, DEMONIZE THEM, OR "SCHOOL" THEM INTO CHANGING THEIR BELIEF.





When you say you "object" to something you are chastising them, because you are telling them it is wrong. One of the things you are running into here is that people at least try with BD/SM to keep the judgement at home, and saying something is wrong is a judgement, pure and simple. When you tell someone else you object to femme dommes and male subs, you are judging them, pure and simple. You say you don't interfere in their lives, but the reality is you have no leverage in their lives to start with, you have no power over them whatsoever, so saying "I don't interfere" is basically like Huck Fin agreeing not to steal crab apples, and then noting that crab apples aren't good to eat. No, you can't affect others, it isn't quite like those who 'object' to gays based on cultural and religious reasons who can cause real harm, you don't have the power to start with.More importantly, you do what many do in the political arena, where someone says something and people get in their face, and then they cry the 1st amendment right to freedom of speech. What they are doing, and what you are doing, is confusing two different things. The right to freedom of speech or your beliefs is one thing, that is absolute, but what that leaves out is you have absolutely no right to expect that your beliefs won't be challenged. If someone IRL said something like blacks are inferior, or said something like hispanics are only good for cutting lawns or being maids,crying because people challenged you on it, told you your words and beliefs are hurtful, isn't covered by the right to have those beliefs (this is part of the whole "PC" bullshit, that somehow someone with unpopular ideas getting called on it takes away those rights, it doesn't). Justice Brandeis hit the nail on the head, speaking about a case about suppressing speech (this was a true 1st amendment challenge), he said the answer to 'bad' speech was more speech, 'good speech' to counter the bad one. What people are saying here to you is you have the right to your beliefs, but saying you object, saying it is 'wrong', is the problem, you can believe that, but you can't expect others to sit back and say "oh, how nice, he objects, I can understand that", they are going to respond, the same way people would to other things they find objectionable.

(in reply to WarMachine904)
Profile   Post #: 145
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 9:22:33 AM   
njlauren


Posts: 1577
Joined: 10/1/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

What we are about to do here is often called a lesson in learning. We shall discuss furthering your education so that ignorance can be left aside.



Apparently this post is supposed to impress you that there is a "we" and this poster is representing them or leading them and "they" are going to "discuss furthering your education so that (your) ignorance can be left aside".

"We" don't believe it is our place to educate anyone and "we" respect your opinion just as "we" respect others and their separate and very different kinks when "we" observe them and even participate in them while at the club. "We" also do not appreciate the poster implying that she represents "us" as fairly knowledgeable and experienced BDSM practitioners.

I did enjoy the post from "LP". I am amused by the pure poison dripping from each word but hope you understand that while "we" don't necessarily agree with you just as LP does not, "we" are not harmed by your opinion nor are "we" here to educate you and instead know that since your opinion is wrong it will just have to be that way. 'We" do not take your post personally and will not bring you down simply because you have an opinion that "we" don't agree with.

Well wishes,
"We"


What of course you leave out is what the OP is doing is exactly what you claim to be fighting against.

We" don't believe it is our place to educate anyone and "we" respect your opinion just as "we" respect others and their separate and very different kinks when "we" observe them and even participate in them while at the club"

The problem is when he said he objected to femme dommes and male subs, he wasn't showing respect to others kinks or whatever, when you say 'object' you are telling someone else what they are doing is wrong. Since beliefs in right or wrong are not objective, they are always subjective, beliefs, I could easily say that the jerk who comes up to a couple who has just done an edge play scene and tells them "you know, I really object to you guys doing that kind of play, I feel it is wrong" is a matter of belief on the part of the guy..and few on here would agree with that. When you tell someone you believe something they are doing is wrong (as the OP did by saying he objected), it is exactly what you say in that statement above, respect means you don't use words like "object" in discussing other people's lifestyles. His talk about not interfering is ludicrous, it is a cop out, because he doesn't have that kind of power over anyone else, never did, and what people are giving him hell for is claiming the right to object to what others do...and worse, not to get called on it. It isn't a matter of semantics, the word "object' doesn't mean I don't understand, I can't fathom, it is saying "hey, if you are a femme domme or a male sub, I think you are wrong doing so".there is no wiggle with that, object means you believe someone else is doing something wrong, and think you have the right to write that/say that, which is showing them disrespect. People have the right to their beliefs, but if they want to claim the right to be respected, they have to respect others as well.

And yes, I am sensitive to the word object, because I know the power of that concept, I have lived with it, and lived my life around others, who face the consequences of it. This guy doesn't have any power over others, but unfortunately, if enough people 'object' to something, you end up with real harm, where they do have power. In a country built on individual rights, that concept of 'I object" has been used far too many times to force beliefs on others, and simply because the OP doesn't have the power to affect anyone else, the concept is the same.

(in reply to Arturas)
Profile   Post #: 146
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 9:22:40 AM   
WarMachine904


Posts: 123
Joined: 8/2/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL area
Status: offline 		point=missed

The definition clearly states that to object is to express one's disapproval of or disagreement with something.

I never said "IT IS WRONG", in fact I'm pretty sure if anything, I said it is wrong FOR ME.

And how do those who "object" to gays based on cultural and religious beliefs have any more power to cause harm?

Furthermore, you can challenge whatever you like. Just don't cry TOS, when in challenging someone's right to free speech, they tell you (in a general sense) to cram it up your (in a general sense) ass!

So rather than resort to unproductive discourse, I choose to accept that you are not going to change my beliefs anymore than I am going to change yours. I think that demonstrates a high degree of maturity and tolerance. Wouldn't you agree?



_____________________________

WarMachine904
"I am not a Dominant by choice, I am Dominant by nature's design!"

(in reply to njlauren)
Profile   Post #: 147
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 9:26:42 AM   
njlauren


Posts: 1577
Joined: 10/1/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

One of the things I find hugely frustrating on any forums is, the lack of ability to actually understand what's being said. If you are a popular poster then some will hang off your every word. If you are an unpopular or unknown poster, people either won't hear you or cleverly pick out and quote just one sentence, which on its own changes everything else you said!

Us humans have proven that we have the ability to escalate conflict with whatever tools we are given. These forums are a place where we can vent our anger whilst retaining virtual anonymity. We can start a 'Jerry Springer' type verbal war with complete lack of accountability because the crossfire will always remain distant from its target!! Its not new (we used to write angry notes) its just much more accessible.

I find armchair activism fascinating and sometimes very addictive. Most ongoing threads rely on flame wars to survive. You can almost guarantee who's going to join in, who's going to take offence, who is going to quote that one snippet of your post that they can get their teeth into with the venom of a cobra.

If the op hadn't written that one sentence about female dominants and male submissives, this thread wouldn't be on the front page any more because nobody wanted to talk about the topic he offered up. Perhaps that was WarMachines genius to keep this thread going?!?!

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19



If he hadn't written that one line about female dominants and male subs you are correct, but with that one line, really one word, he was throwing a lit torch into a powder magazine, because it went from being about personal belief to being a put down. The word object doesn't mean I don't understand (though it is often driven by ignorance), it is a word that says someone has the right to judge someone else. It would be like writing on a forum "I think gays are sinners and should be put in jail" and expect people to sit their nodding and saying "I respect that belief", ain't gonna happen.

(in reply to MariaB)
Profile   Post #: 148
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 9:30:33 AM   
MariaB


Posts: 2969
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP


quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

Darn, I may even sit with some good scene friends who are eating fish whilst Philip talks about his objections towards female dominants. Just because he can't comprehend a female being dominant doesn't mean it doesn't exist and well he knows that. His opinion doesn't threaten our friendship. Why when we can have earnest and intelligent discourse should I allow this one objection to distract me? Its not as though he's racially prejudiced or homophobic which for me would be a friendship deal breaker.




You don't believe that sexism is offensive?
That believing women, by virtue of their anatomy, are lesser people is not offensive?

If he believed people of one race or religion were lesser, that would be bigotry but believing half the human race to be lesser is not?

Weird.


I do see sexism as a bit silly but I don't see what that has to do with any of this. I know more women that think all men are submissive and theres no such thing as a male dominant than I do the other way round. I don't take offence at them either, I just think they are a little over hyped about being dominant.

_____________________________

My store is http://e-stimstore.com

(in reply to DesFIP)
Profile   Post #: 149
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 9:32:31 AM   
WarMachine904


Posts: 123
Joined: 8/2/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL area
Status: offline 		I think the disconnect, is in the fact that YOU define the word "object" to mean an absolute judgement of right and wrong.

I object to people playing their car stereos too loud.

I object to people objecting to my objections.

I object to anchovies on my pizza.

I object to watching "chick flicks".

So if I got enough people to object to having anchovies on their pizza, then somehow that is dangerous? I really think you should re-evaluate your argument.

_____________________________

WarMachine904
"I am not a Dominant by choice, I am Dominant by nature's design!"

(in reply to WarMachine904)
Profile   Post #: 150
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 9:34:59 AM   
ChatteParfaitt


Posts: 6562
Joined: 3/22/2011
From: The t'aint of the Midwest -- Indiana
Status: offline 		That the conceptual idea of fem dommes (and male subs) doesn't conform to your world view doesn't mean they don't exist. It means your mind refuses to accept them into your reality.

I've been reading a great book called 'The Four Agreements' which is based on the Toltec philosophy which states we are all dreaming our own dream of reality. In your dream of reality, the dominant female does not exist. In my dream of reality, male superiority does not exist.

Arguing about who's dream is more 'real' is an exercise in futility, especially when those participating have closed their minds to the other's reality.

quote:

Are we going to talk about dominance and submission in a BDSM context, a personality context, a physical context, or everything combined?


You began the discussion, now it's up to the people who respond to shape the conversation as they see fit. That you have a strong need for control doesn't mean you get to control the responders.

I'ts my strong opinion that you can't really discussion dominance and submission in a BDSM context until you understand how those personality traits a/o positions (example: boss and underling) play out in everyday life. Why? Because there are so many corollaries.

You may not know that I am married to a dom male. I am submissive to him, and he has final authority on anything he chooses. Now, you may think me not very sub, it's certainly not my default. Which is why I liken our relationship to a high powered executive and his expert administrative assistant. There's no question about who's in charge or who has final authority, BUT a really good AA has a huge amount of autonomy and responsibility. She or he executes tasks with speed and efficiency w/o needing any prompting. She or he anticipates the boss' needs and does everything possible to make him or her look good. They work together as a well oiled machine, with both roles being mutually important.

This is not an uncommon model in the BDSM world.




< Message edited by ChatteParfaitt -- 8/19/2013 9:38:53 AM >

_____________________________



(in reply to WarMachine904)
Profile   Post #: 151
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 9:34:59 AM   
njlauren


Posts: 1577
Joined: 10/1/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

Fish, for me has an objectionable smell but that doesn't mean I won't sit next to my friend or husband in a restaurant when they eat fish. Just because I don't understand how people can eat and enjoy fish doesn't mean I don't accept it can smell and taste nice to some people. Darn, I may even sit with some good scene friends who are eating fish whilst Philip talks about his objections towards female dominants. Just because he can't comprehend a female being dominant doesn't mean it doesn't exist and well he knows that. His opinion doesn't threaten our friendship. Why when we can have earnest and intelligent discourse should I allow this one objection to distract me? Its not as though he's racially prejudiced or homophobic which for me would be a friendship deal breaker.

I'm not saying people shouldn't be offended. Its all subjective and I fully understand that some people have become so focused on the ops objections that they can't move on without trying to convince him otherwise. Its a bit like the Fin Domme thread which has become somewhat of a mission to convert anyone who objects. An absolutely pointless exercise imo.


What you are doing here is deciding what is worth discussion or chastisement and what isn't. There are plenty of people whose firm beliefs are they don't like people of other races or are homophobic, clearly you find that to be above the line, but then you say giving the guy grief by people getting offended he said 'he objected', when the root is exactly the same. Being in the LGBT community, there are plenty of people out there, who otherwise are sympathetic, who will tell LGBT people the same thing, that why do they insist on calling out people who say things like they object to gays or gay marriage or transgender people, it is common to be told' they have the right to their beliefs, we have to respect their beliefs', why is this any different? No, this isn't the same thing, if only because WM is a poster on an anonymous forum who has no power over anyone else, but on the other hand he raised the post in the first place, he said he wondered about a civil discussion being possible, yet he chucked the first bomb, by saying he objected to female dominants and male subs, he was the one being uncivil......sure, he believes male subs and female dominants are wrong, that is his belief, but so do people who believe blacks are inferior or LGBT people should be put in jail, and he is facing the same thing people do when they express their beliefs and they are unpopular. You don't think it is worth it, that is fine, others feel it is important. And when someone expresses ideas out of the 17th century, that domination is masculine and submission is female, isn't going to go over well given the battles to stop that kind of stereotyping.

(in reply to MariaB)
Profile   Post #: 152
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 9:43:30 AM   
njlauren


Posts: 1577
Joined: 10/1/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WarMachine904

Maybe this will put it into perspective...

"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

-Voltaire




If you knew anything about Voltaire, you would know that is fundamentally missing the point.Voltaire would fight to the death your right to say or write something (he himself faced death, literally, especially when he went after the Catholic Church and its arrogance and stupidity), but he also would be the first person to take up the pen and tell you in no uncertain terms what he felt about what you said. Voltaire was saying you have the right to say something, but he also didn't mean that to believe you had the right to expect him or anyone else not to challenge it. We see this in the US all the time, the right wing wackjobs make statements that show how stupid they are (like the clown in Missouri saying that women can't get pregnant if they are 'truly' raped) and then go around claiming the first amendment when consequences hit them for their statements. Besides the fact that the first amendment only governs law, it also guarantees that if you say something people feel is stupid or wrong, that they will show you the consequences of it. The first amendment for example doesn't say you are insulated from any consequences, only legal action, and in effect, the first amendment exists so if a politician says something stupid, they will face consequences, you can't have silly laws like they had in some countries where publishing something attacking a politician and implying they were not a gentleman could lead to you be arrested, or libel laws that even if what you wrote was true, protected certain classes of people from having that exposed.

Obviously, the 1st doesn't apply here, but the principle is the same, you can believe what you want, but if it offends other people they can call you on it and will. You can believe female dommes arent' women or male subs aren't men all you want, but you aren't going to get a free pass simply because those are your beliefs.

(in reply to WarMachine904)
Profile   Post #: 153
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 9:47:39 AM   
WarMachine904


Posts: 123
Joined: 8/2/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL area
Status: offline 		Chatte,

I think we are talking apples and apples. That has been my point from the beginning. I am not saying that female dominants and male submissives don't exist. I don't think that I ever made that statement. In fact, I have repeatedly said that they can be whatever they choose to be, or however they see themselves.

The book you are reading seems to share my philosophy, that I articulated several times. People exist in whatever reality they perceive.

And I was not attempting to control the responders, only to agree upon the context of the discussion so we are not arguing apples to oranges to watermelons to grapes, etc.


_____________________________

WarMachine904
"I am not a Dominant by choice, I am Dominant by nature's design!"

(in reply to njlauren)
Profile   Post #: 154
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 9:48:38 AM   
MariaB


Posts: 2969
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: njlauren

If he hadn't written that one line about female dominants and male subs you are correct, but with that one line, really one word, he was throwing a lit torch into a powder magazine, because it went from being about personal belief to being a put down. The word object doesn't mean I don't understand (though it is often driven by ignorance), it is a word that says someone has the right to judge someone else. It would be like writing on a forum "I think gays are sinners and should be put in jail" and expect people to sit their nodding and saying "I respect that belief", ain't gonna happen.


I think that was a very deliberate move by the op. This thread is called, 'Lets see if we can keep this one civilized' and it received a very lukewarm reception up until the op used the word 'objectionable' and referred it to fem Dommes and male subs. Of course his view is ignorant because it defies factual evidence, which he knows, yet continue to hold the view. Thats the very reason I believe its necessary to take it with a pinch of salt. You can't argue with ignorance. You can speak your peace, you can come back and insult his belief, you can even decide that every word he utters from here on in will be ridiculed by you but you can't change his mind. Up until a few minutes ago, nobody has asked him to start a compelling debate about why he thinks the way he does. We are 8 pages in before someone questions him. Emotion and opinions are merely emotions and opinions

_____________________________

My store is http://e-stimstore.com

(in reply to njlauren)
Profile   Post #: 155
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 9:50:50 AM   
JeffBC


Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt
That the conceptual idea of fem dommes (and male subs) doesn't conform to your world view doesn't mean they don't exist. It means your mind refuses to accept them into your reality.

This... the statement is akin to saying, "I object to gravity." Hey, that's certainly everyone's right but gravity just doesn't care and it does make one sound foolish to say it.

_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to ChatteParfaitt)
Profile   Post #: 156
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 9:54:37 AM   
WarMachine904


Posts: 123
Joined: 8/2/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL area
Status: offline 		Ok, I'll play your silly little game...

I personally objected to female dominants and male submissives.

You obviously objected to my objection, and "called me out".

Now, at this point I have a choice, to either accept our difference of opinion, and agree to disagree, which I have done repeatedly...or,

Call you out, and say I don't effin' care what you think, or what you object to, go piss up a rope! But how would that be productive? It wouldn't.



_____________________________

WarMachine904
"I am not a Dominant by choice, I am Dominant by nature's design!"

(in reply to WarMachine904)
Profile   Post #: 157
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 10:06:43 AM   
njlauren


Posts: 1577
Joined: 10/1/2011
Status: offline
quote:

nd how do those who "object" to gays based on cultural and religious beliefs have any more power to cause harm?


You must be joking if you can't see that. The problem is object, despite what you say, isn't a trivial word, any more than the word 'hate' is. People say things like "I hate anchovies" on pizza, but they don't really mean that, it means they strongly dislike it, whereas when you say you hate a person or a group "i.e I hate gays cause the good book says they are sinners", it is a whole different level, because it implies they feel strongly enough to do things against gay people, including physical violence, hate is a very strong word.

likewise, objecting to chick flicks or anchovie pizza i akin to saying you hate tuna sandwiches...

But when it comes to human beings, saying you object means you are saying de facto that you believe they have no right to exist or shouldn't exist or whatever.....

In regards to your original quote, either you are really naive, or you have lived in a cave some place, or in denial. In most parts of the world, someone can be killed, horribly, simply for being gay. Our old pals the Russians have laws on the books not just about promoting 'the gay lifestyle', but you can be put in jail if somehow you are found to be having homosexual sex; more importantly, in Russia, people suspected of being gay are routinely attacked and killed, all by people who have cultural and religious (especially religious, since 95% or Homophobia can be traced back to religious proscription, specifically the Abrahamic religions) beliefs against it.

In the US, in a large majority of states and cities, you can be fired for being gay, in many places you can be beaten up or killed for being gay and local law enforcement will look the other way (FBI stats show that for victims who are perceived to be LGBT, the arrest and prosecution rates are significantly lower than for non LGBT people), you can be denied basic rights.

More importantly gays face politicians like Rick Santorum (supposedly a devout Catholic, I don't know what that says about the church ) comparing gays to pedophiles and people having sex with animals, or a preacher at a GOP rally calling for gays to be put in concentration camps, and no one saying a bloody thing about it in the GOP, including the presidential candidates (said rally was for one of the candidates).


In many states a gay parent can have their children taken away or given in custody to the other parent simply because they are gay, and even where the law is on their side, they can lose custody of kids, or not have the right to make decisions for their partners. In the 2008 election a big factor in getting the GOP voters out to the polls was anti gay sentiment, trying to get a same sex marriage ban put into the constitution, which is still in the GOP official platform of their agenda.

And all of this is based on people's beliefs, mostly religious, that somehow being gay is a sin or wrong, they 'object' to it, too. When you use the word object, someone isn't saying they don't understand it, can't figure it out, it isn't for them, when you say you object, you mean you believe it shouldn't even exist. If you had said "you know, if someone tried to make me submit, I would object" I could understand it, but when you say you object to the concept of male subs and female dominants, say in effect it 'violates the natural order' it has gone from the personal ('this is not for me'),which is fine, to being "I don't like this, and I think it should exist, refuse to believe it exists") which is not only judging others, but saying it shouldn't be allowed to exist in effect. You didn't say "I would object to being a male sub to a female domme", it would be ok IMO, saying what you did are directly saying they don't have the right to exist, the way that people who object to gays are saying they don't have the right to exist. No, you aren't acting on it (though as I pointed out earlier, you don't even really have the power), but the way you said it made clear you don't believe it should exist at all. You have that right to write that, but you are going to get called on it, too.

Put it this way, if I wrote that I believe I object to the military, that the people in it are nothing more than a bunch of deranged, warped people who get delight in killing women and children and aren't to be trusted at all, I suspect I would catch a shitstorm (and rightfully so, and for the record, I don't believe that at all). My objection would be my beliefs, but others would have the right, especially those who served or are with military people, to tell me my thoughts are offensive. I have said in the past that I don't think I would do well in the military, that I would probably end up in the brig or peeling potatoes because I have trouble with assuming authority and I object to the concept of that kind of group for me personally, that would be differeent.

(in reply to njlauren)
Profile   Post #: 158
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 10:06:59 AM   
JeffBC


Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WarMachine904
Ok, I'll play your silly little game...

Not a silly game for me. I was actually trying to understand. From my standpoint you spoke of "dominance" in ways which made it sound familiar to me (which actually doesn't happen all that much on these boards). But then you "objected" to it in women which is nonsensical. When I queried you on that it's not that you don't believe females dominants exist it's simply that you "object" to them. I still don't fully understand either what you mean by "dominance" or "object". Or... maybe... you have a penchant for objecting to reality which I do not? I dunno. All I can tell you is that I'm baffled by the whole tangent.

_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to WarMachine904)
Profile   Post #: 159
RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... - 8/19/2013 10:13:59 AM   
WarMachine904


Posts: 123
Joined: 8/2/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL area
Status: offline 		Jeff: That reply wasn't aimed at you, it was in response to #153.

NjLauren: You are making a monumental leap in assuming that because a person objects to something that they automatically feel compelled to use violence to eradicate what they object to. I can assure you that I have never, ever, had any violent thoughts regarding anchovies!!

And although everyone is wrapped up in this word "object", here are the two paragraphs that followed the one sentence:
quote:

ORIGINAL: WarMachine904

HOWEVER, I was also raised with enough class, and have enough life experience to accept that not everyone share's my view, and I am perfectly fine with that. I will not tell a female Domme that she is not a "true" dominant, or tell a male sub that he should not allow a woman to control him. Why? Because everyone is entitled to live as they wish, call themselves whatever they choose, and exercise their right to free speech regardless of what I think. The exception being that by exercising those freedoms you infringe upon another's ability to exercise their freedoms.

If asked my opinion, I will give it. If I believe that I have a relevant thought to share in a discussion, I will share it. When you reply, and tell me that although you can appreciate my view, but that you don't agree, I will accept it. Not try to convert you to my way of thinking. It's really about respect and tolerance for others at the end of the day.


Doesn't sound like hate speech to me. Kind of sounds like a philosophy of tolerance. Hmmmmmm....

_____________________________

WarMachine904
"I am not a Dominant by choice, I am Dominant by nature's design!"

(in reply to JeffBC)
Profile   Post #: 160
Page:   <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Let's see if we can keep this one civilized... Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094