|
aSlavesLife -> RE: Can o/l stuff work? (5/31/2007 8:17:34 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: sambamanslilgirl
i would love to have Daddy 24/7 in a r/t relationship however certain circumstances keeps us apart and therefore we have an online D/s dynamic. just because we don't touch and feel each other like many of you do on a daily basis in your own relationship doesn't mean our relationship isn't real and/or is based on cybersex and mastrubation. you are so sorely wrong and incorrect ...and you'll never completely understand the connection Daddy and i feel.
yes, online relationships can work only if you and yours work at to make it work for you. those in real time relationships should stop thumbing your noses down on us who opted for online because you really don't know the circumstances and reasons why those of us cannot have r/t like you.
Lets look at an analogy here for a bit. Say you are sitting in some bar that caters to military types. You have a table full of patrons in different uniforms. Marines, Army, Navy, Air Force, National Guard, Coast Guard, and even representatives of an African Mercenary company and the Minnesota Minuteman Militia.
Certainly some of the major military branches are going to think that their force is superior. There will be the career military types that refer to the National Guardsmen as weekend warriors. The Coast Guard will catch some flak from the Navy ( Despite their seeing far more action in recent years than the Navy has ). Some of the troops will not think the mercs to be very respectable sorts, and just about everyone is going to get a chuckle at the redneck from the militia thinking that he is military grade. But here is the kicker, with the possible exception of the militiaman, every last one of these hypothetical military types are real. Their various branches serve real, practical, useful purposes. The career soldiers are in for the long haul. The Guardsmen pull the weight in current engagements abroad. The Wet Guard helps to curb drug trafficking. Even the mercenary soldier has a spot to fill in countries in need of professional military.
Now in walks some gangly long haired kid dressed in tee shirt and jeans, barely drinking age. He plops down at the table, orders a brew, eyes the others, and asks
" How much combat experience do you folks have? "
A few of the drinkers supply numbers, at which the kid snorts and laughs.
" I have over 50,000 hours of combat time! " He proudly exclaims.
Not believing him, someone asks about his tour of duty, to which he replies
" Let me see... I have 3,800 hours of Rainbow Six 14,200 hours of Ghost Recon, 300 hours of Splinter Cell... "
At which point the table erupts in laughter because not a single one of them is going to consider this twerp to be in any shape, form, or fashion " Real ". Even the militia member actually walks outside and fires a weapon in some semblance of a formation. This kid sits in the comfort of his home, playing and X-Box or Playstation simulation of warfare. How can he possibly think that his experience is real?
Take this into the BDSM arena. We have masters, slaves, dominants, submissives, the ever present mercenary switches ( kidding, kidding! ), tops, and bottoms. There will definitely be some from each group that thinks that their way is superior. This is human nature. But each one is filling a very real, needed role. They are interacting in a tangible, physical, real manner with their partner. What they are not doing is interacting in a virtual simulation.
In summation: Marine...real. X-Box game inspired by Tom Clancy...not real. Submissive...real. Online virtual top...not real. This is not an opinion of superiority. It is reality versus simulation. It is not possible to engage in intercourse online. It is not possible to clean a house online. You might to be able to serve in some extremely limited way by doing someones taxes, balancing their budget, or shopping for someone online, but that is as close to real as you can get. I am not nose thumbing. I know that there are times and circumstances in which a person cannot be involved in a real relationship. But to claim that online is in any effect the same as real time is like saying that you can't afford a meal, look at a photograph of a plate of food, then insisting that since you saw the picture you have had a meal.
My pet quoted Michael because his analogy was dead on the money. Sorry if it offended you, but sometimes the truth hurts.
Owner of slave L
|
|
|
|
