Sir wants to know...the sequal

Sir wants to know...the sequal (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master

Message

pqwinny -> Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 4:10:41 AM)
okay, i think it's time to add the rest of the facts. i intentionally left them out of the first post so as not to sway the jury but from the direction that the response has headed, i'm curious to know if this additional info ellicits the same or different responses. We were driving to my house to pick up a few things and then head to His, a 30 minute drive from mine. He was behind the wheel. On His best day He's not a great driver however, yesterday His driving was markedly bad. He stopped for 2 red lights well into the intersection and in one case had to back up so people would not have to go around us and then He missed both turns to go to my house (which He has been to dozens of times). i was concerned and asked Him if anything was wrong and He informed me that He had taken a valium about an hour earlier (on an empty stomach). i became instantly angry, not because He took the pill but because He did so and got behind the wheel and endangered me as well as Himself. Although i was angry i was composed in expressing it. i gradually lost my composure as the conversation continued and He not only denied that He had endangered both of us but refused to let me drive the rest of the way. The internal conflict for me ensued as the struggle to honor my own personal values knocked up against my need and desire to honor my Sir. i ultimately chose self preservation albeit by instinct more than choice. With that additional info now i am the one who is curious as to the input from Doms and Masters. (i'm happy to hear from all but particularly interested in the D&M responses) thanks

Elorin -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 4:21:19 AM)
From a Domme who is also a submissive - I would have gotten out of the car, to be honest. My personal integrity cannot be compromised for my dominant. I might have said - I feel uncomfortable with you driving after taking a valium, may I drive the rest of the way home? But if the answer was no, I would have gotten out of the car, no question. As for my view as a Domme, I expect my submissives to stick to their values and speak up if my behavior violates one of their values. I expect my submissives to have their own opinions and the only requirement is that they express them respectfully when they differ from mine. I hope you got home safe and sorry to hear of the situation; these choices can be very hard. ~Ms. Elorin

pqwinny -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 4:33:35 AM)
i asked to get out of the car at a substantial distance from my home, he did not stop. i asked to be taken home and he obliged and we parted.

Lashra -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 4:50:55 AM)
As a Domme I would never, ever endanger my sub or Myself this way. It sounds to me like the person who's had too much to drink as they stagger to their car swearing they are alright, they only had a few drinks and then they pass out behind the wheel. Its simply something that you Do Not Do! Pride is never an excuse for being dumb. There is a problem here and yes you need to bring it up to him and if he won't listen then perhaps its time to part for awhile and see if he gets himself together. If he refuses then its time to look for a new Dom. Don't compromise your life and beliefs for someone who obviously just doesn't care that much. ~Lashra

Pimpernell -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 5:47:35 AM)
That's a very different scenario than the other post. This you have every right to go batshit over. Tell him, he was in no condition to drive and driving under the influence of any medications is a non-negotiable, hard limit. The valium affected his judgement. Personally I fall asleep when I take non-drowsy flu tablets. I don't even want to know what valium would do to me.

MsKatHouston -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 5:55:19 AM)
This additional information does not change my opinion on the first post one whit. The first post had to do with your own emotions and your own control. My opinions stand. This, however, is a different situation and I will address this as separate. As a dominant, I have a responsibility to care for my submissive. This means I do not play when impaired, I do not put my submissive in dangerous situations and I realize and ackowledge my limits and skill level and do not lie about them. I also know to ask for assistance from my submissive or another in times when it is needed. Driving impaired is not only unsafe, putting your life and those of others on the road in danger, but it is also a crime. I do not think you were wrong to be upset by being put into such a situation. I think the dominant was wrong to have put you in that situation. If there was nothing wrong with your ability to drive, the responsible thing to do would have been to say, "I took a valium and feel a little woozy, would you mind driving?" This shows a great amount of responsibility and IMO would only solidify the trust a submissive would have in their dominance. Addressing this issue now that you are safe should be done in a calm, respectful manner, outlining your concerns and giving options for what can be done in the future so as not to repeat. Dominants can make mistakes, it is how he deals with the mistakes that will show his character.

juliaoceania -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 6:27:20 AM)
There are things in this world that you not only have the right to get pissed off about, but you have the duty to get upset about, one of them is protecting your own life. You were given survival instincts for a reason. I hope everything works out for you

MrDiscipline44 -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 6:45:23 AM)
My answers to your original thread stand. Regardless of the situation, if you can not remain in control of your own emotions then you do nothing but perpetuate the situation. As for the the new details of the situation.......... First off I had to laugh at the hypocritical irony of it. Secondly, I feel that the two of you are perfect for each other and that it shouldn't be anyother way.

juliaoceania -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 7:26:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrDiscipline44 My answers to your original thread stand. Regardless of the situation, if you can not remain in control of your own emotions then you do nothing but perpetuate the situation. As for the the new details of the situation.......... First off I had to laugh at the hypocritical irony of it. Secondly, I feel that the two of you are perfect for each other and that it shouldn't be anyother way. I just have to say, it takes zero time to be nasty for no apparent reason, it takes much more time to come up with uplifting, measured and productive words.. I think most people that read your post can tell for themselves which category this falls into.

MrDiscipline44 -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 7:41:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I just have to say, it takes zero time to be nasty for no apparent reason, it takes much more time to come up with uplifting, measured and productive words.. I think most people that read your post can tell for themselves which category this falls into. Well, for one julia, your premise of how much time it takes to respond to a post made really depends on the person giving the response. An inherently nice person may find that it would take more time to write out something "nasty" (as you called it) as oppossed to something nice. And vice versa. How long did it take you to write out your response? And do you see the irony in giving a response in which you are being "nasty", about a response that you think is "nasty"? I also question what you see as being "nasty" in my response? It appears to me that you jumped to a conclusion without getting further input. Most would call this a bit short sighted. Would you agree?

juliaoceania -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 7:47:49 AM)
Not long, but it is not like someone risked your life yesterday by taking valium and driving your ass around and risking your life. I do not understand your response, because I bet is someone did that to you that might just cause you to become adrenalized enough to get pissy about it... I would be more than a little upset. I fail to see where your judgments of hypocrisy come from, and wonder if you understand the meaning of the word or if it was the first insult you thought of to hurl at someone who was asking you a question.

Iskander -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 8:16:19 AM)
A lie by ommission is still a lie in my books... (something gl would be reprimanded for) I don't know if the intent of your initial thread did or didn't have anything to do with the case you present now, to me they seem 2 seperate issues... But if so... First you make us agree with your Dom and then (almost) make us look like fools for it because it was infact a life threatening situation at the heart of the matter... Having said that, you were totally right in being upset about his reckless behaviour, not only did he put you both at risk, but also other road users.. A few seconds slower in reaction times and potentially we have a dead child lying under his car... No amount of "I'm right coz I'm the Dom" will cut it before a judge... I'm glad everyone lived and hopefully learnt... Iskander...

juliaoceania -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 8:47:10 AM)
Sometimes when one is asking for an opinion they leave out information as not to embarass or denigrate another. Perhaps she did not want to make her dominant look bad? It is not lying to leave out something, how much was she supposed to include or exclude? She made a judgment that she did not need to include certain information, that does not make her a liar..

Kinkypupper -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 9:30:32 AM)
Being a slave does NOT mean you have to put your life or your Masters in Jeoperdy. I beleave that one can be a slave but also take care and protect their Master when they feel its required.

MasterFireMaam -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 9:34:31 AM)
These are the options that I see: You can either accept that he will behave in this way, both endangering you while DUI and denying it, or you can not. No matter what you accept, there are consequences. If you accept it, you are accepting that he has the final say over your physical life and accepting that he might fuck it up to the point of killing you. If you don't accept it, you, in essance, are ending the relationship. It's up to you to decide how important being in a relationship with this particular man is worth to you. Can you accept that he might kill you, himself and others due to his behavior in order to maintain the relationship? A thought: You can offer unconditional love to someone, but still see that their behavior is negative or dangerous for you and back away. As LA has said, there is such a thing as unconditional love, there is no such a thing as unconditional relationships. Master Fire

marieToo -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 9:45:53 AM)
General Reply: Well.......color me vanilla, but none of this has to do with being a master or a domme. No sensible caring person would expect another person to risk their life needlessly for something like driving while under the influence of a drug that someone cant handle or driving drunk or whatever the risk may be. I dont understand all the comments on "as a dom, I am responsible for". As human beings WE are responsible for not putting some other human being (sub, stranger, whoever) in harms way. At some point common sense has to transcend all the master slave obedience stuff. Save your life then worry about your tone of voice later. Being sub to someone doesnt mean we check our common sense in at the door. Let me guess....someone told you that if you arent willing to die for him, you're not a real slave.

Iskander -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 9:47:05 AM)
Leaving out name or such to protect the (not so) innocent sure.. Asking an opinion about a scenario, and not mentioning vital details of that scenario makes any advice requested pretty pointless IMO... Some people think that a 'white lie' isn't a real lie either.. "I told my slave to drive to the shops and get me some chocolate, she refused, I think she was out of line, what do you think?" Knowing she'd consumed a large amount of scotch and coke change that opinion? Was I lying? Not in the strictest sense, but I did engage in a bit of disinformation... Now take your point of view and apply it to politicians... They never tell us the whole story, generally to make themselves look better, they often judge that we need not know the full story, mostly so they don't embarass themselves... Are they a pack of lying bastards? Yes.. Can we trust them? No.. Now before you get your hackles up again, I am not comparing her to a poli, just saying that your logic has loopholes the size of china... Iskander..

marieToo -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 10:15:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Iskander Leaving out name or such to protect the (not so) innocent sure.. Asking an opinion about a scenario, and not mentioning vital details of that scenario makes any advice requested pretty pointless IMO... Some people think that a 'white lie' isn't a real lie either.. "I told my slave to drive to the shops and get me some chocolate, she refused, I think she was out of line, what do you think?" Knowing she'd consumed a large amount of scotch and coke change that opinion? Was I lying? Not in the strictest sense, but I did engage in a bit of disinformation... Now take your point of view and apply it to politicians... They never tell us the whole story, generally to make themselves look better, they often judge that we need not know the full story, mostly so they don't embarass themselves... Are they a pack of lying bastards? Yes.. Can we trust them? No.. Now before you get your hackles up again, I am not comparing her to a poli, just saying that your logic has loopholes the size of china... Iskander.. Its also very possible and quite common to ask for general advice without applying the question to a specific situation.

sophia37 -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 10:52:08 AM)
I missed the first thread so I dont know whats going on with that. For this post I say Woe! Thats a dicey stiuation. Geez. To be held hostage in a car with an unfit driver. Thats actually terrifying if u give it too much thought. Not only were u 2 in danger, everyone else on the road was too. And what pray tell does one do if one could get out of the car and escape? Call the cops and rat? I just hope Im never put in that situation.

pqwinny -> RE: Sir wants to know...the sequal (9/29/2006 10:53:26 AM)
There were no lies of comission or omission on my part. The first post was for a specifice purpose. Sir felt i was out of line in my reaction and His suggestion was to 'go on Collar Me and see if you find one person who would disagree' so i did. He has never posted here and has only in the past few weeks even begun to visit here. i intentionally left out the details to match the blindness that He has relevant to the event. He is still adament that i was not in danger and He did nothing wrong and is fact asking me for 'submissive contrition'. i felt it would have been predjudicial to include the details intially in seeking a response to His querry. If anyone felt tricked or mislead because of that, it was not my intent. And for the record, i don't believe white lies are okay but also recongize that just like everything else in life, truth is fluid and always changing. Things that were true for me now may not have been last year or 10 years ago and vice versa. Even my politics have changed as i've aged!

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.492188E-02