MemphisDsCouple
Posts: 146
Joined: 11/1/2004 From: Memphis, TN, USA Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: sfgrrl quote:
ORIGINAL: MemphisDsCouple But it sounds to me like what you're really fishing for is more like a prenuptial agreement. Personally, I refuse to agree to agree to fail. I am not interested either in that type of relationship, or in that type of person/submissive/slave/lover/whatever. Planning for the possibility that a relationship might not last "till death do us part" is worlds away from agreeing to fail. At the cynical end of the scale, it's playing the odds. On a less cynical note, it's simply responsible behavior. ~stef hmmmmmm, stef Behaving responsibly by putting in place a plan that minimizes the consequences of future irresponsible behavior? Now wait a minute. Something rings hollowly here. A plan that turns a d/s, and moreover a m/s relationship into a normal, modern (and in my personal philosophy of life and relationships - a disgusting) vanilla relationship when someone changes their mind? Let's wait another minute and think about this a bit more deeply. We covered incapacitation and death. But you write that those are not the issues we are addressing in this continuing discussion. quote:
ORIGINAL: sfgrrl but it doesn't really cover the eventuality I was addressing. All of the above can be accomplished by a will/living will. Unfortunately, those instruments offer no remedy whatsoever in the event of a premature ending of the relationship. "Premature ending"...... As I think and write, those words keep coming back to me. Is "premature ending" another way of saying someone, probably the slave, changed her mind? If she serves well and true, why should the owner change his mind? If you had said not everyone enters a relationship promising "till death do us part", I would have said: You're right. A prenupe sounds wise for those people. But that's not what you wrote. You simply wrote that the promise is often made, and less often kept. And you're right. Color me primitive. In many cases primitive people have/had no word in their language for "lie" or "falsehood". Guess I'm kinda a throwback. If a person doesn't mean "till death do us part"...... don't say, "till death do us part". This is not a complicated, multifaceted concept, this "till death do us part". It only becomes complicated when I see people try to justify a way out of it. *Then* it gets complicated. It defies the meanings of the words used in the sentences to simultaneously enter a commitment "till death do us part" and also "plan for the possibility that a relationship might not last 'till death do us part'". To embrace those contradictions is not responsible behavior. It is deceptive behavior. Beyond being deceptive behavior, it is usurous behavior. It intentionally, and with forethought commits to one never-changing and unqualified course of action while simultaneously keeping options open to follow another course of action. Where does that behavior leave the other person in the relationship who has relied on the promise? hmmmm? And I'll tell you what else I think it is. I think it is destructive behavior. I've never read a study of prenupes. But I'll lay odds that the incidence of divorce is way higher in marriages/relationships with prenupes than in those without prenupes. To contemplate and plan for breaking off the relationship is merely laying out and following a path to a breakup. A prenupe is, by the definition of the thing itself, an acknowledgement and agreement that you may fail, that it will be ok to fail and that the failure will be handled as specified in the prenupe. It is an agreement in which the two people agree on how to fail. quote:
ORIGINAL: sfgrrl There are means for financial separation after the dissolution of a marriage, but what happens when a slave has given up their livelihood to enter service and find themselves, several/many years later, starting over again? Where does the obligation lie on the part of the master to make sure their ex-slave isn't destitute after their term of service? The question, as posed, addresses a master/slave relationship. I read that very literally. It is not, and is not to be confused with a vanilla marriage. One can never have one's cake and eat it too. Just as I embraced my responsibilities in my first response to the question at hand, to which you replied: quote:
ORIGINAL: sfgrrl That's fantastic So too, I claim the corresponding and complimentary prerogatives. In this case specifically, I decline to relinquish my prerogative to own, enjoy and keep my property once a girl commits to be mine "till death do us part". Will I restrain her physically if she chooses to leave? No. Almost all slavery embraces a measure of consensuality (see "The Choice of Slavery" here: http://www.collarme.com/forum/m_53926/mpage_1/key_/tm.htm#54201 ) and I will not employ physical force if a slave chooses to leave my service. However, to ask me to facilitate that choice in any way would be pretty ridiculous from my point of view. (And that includes a prenupe.) I want to remind that the responses to your writings that I have offered apply to me and my life only. I'm sure there are men who fool prospective slaves for a while. However, that should not last long. Indeed, any perceptive, discerning prospective slave should have spent enough time with a prospective owner and know enough about that prospective owner to know whether or not he is deceiving her about pivotal issues *before* the slave commits to "till death do us part". To do otherwise is vastly foolish and when people do foolish things, there are usually unpleasant consequences. But at any rate, to learn this about a master should not take the quote:
ORIGINAL: sfgrrl several/many years you mention. So, the problem you describe should not exist in the case in which the master has lured the slave into a commitment with falsehoods. It should be uncovered before the "several/many years" have elapsed. (Just kind of brainstorming the question you pose here.) I think the question you're really trying to address may be: What if the slave changes her mind after "several/many years" and decides she wants to leave? Decides she no longer wants to be her master's slave? Should she have a trust fund set up for her? Should she have a separation fund in her name? To facilitate her decision to break her promise of "till death do us part"? lol.... I don't think so. quote]ORIGINAL: sfgrrl Where does the obligation lie on the part of the master to make sure their ex-slave isn't destitute after their term of service? Whoa!! We covered that, but you said it wasn't what you were talking about. The "term of service" was "till death do us part". And you said that can be handled fine with wills and living wills (and trusts and so on even though you didn't mention those estate planning tools). The more I read and think about this, the more I'm convinced that we're just talking about a slave changing her mind and reneging on her commitment. I say again: Personally, I refuse to agree to agree to fail. I am not interested either in that type of relationship, or in that type of person/submissive/slave/lover/whatever. Postscript: The reader is welcome to print or save this post for your own use. Please do not copy it to any public or semi-public forum (including email groups/lists) without my express permission. Thanks. All rights reserved. (I write this postscript because after-the-fact someone wrote to me to inform me that they had copied a prior post I wrote to another list. So, I thought I'd better clarify what my preference/policy is regarding use of what I write.) B. (the male half of MemphisDsCouple)
|