GirlWithInk -> RE: Annoying things BDSM'ers say (12/10/2006 2:21:44 AM)
|
As someone who is into roleplaying, SCA stuff, etc, 'm'Lord' and 'm'Lady' are actually titles I kinda like hearing... if the circumstances call for it. The same applies to Master/Mistress, Sir/Ma'am, wench, slut, boy/girl, anything: if you want me to use ANY sort of title for you, expect to be disappointed unless there is a reason for it, either I'm using it out of respect or it's the appropriate form of address for the setting we are both in. Similarly, if you call me by a title when it's inappropriate - calling me Mistress when we're having a casual vanilla conversation in public, refusing to call me m'Lady if we are doing a fairly heavy BDSM-laced roleplay scene when I have told you that is what I expect - I'm going to be pretty annoyed. The "One Twoo Way" concept - if you tell me that the way YOU do something is the only way, the best way, the right way, the correct way, anything other than 'well, here's what I do, it's worked for me and I think you might benefit from it, do you want to hear about it?', I'm going to assume you're an ass and then even if you DO have good advice, I likely won't notice 'cos I'm busy ignoring you. ^.^ "You're not a true submissive if you don't do 'x' for me/don't do what I say the moment I deign to talk to you/don't talk in a way I find appropriate for submissives/whatever". Just... grr. GRRRR. "I have no limits." Ooh. Either you're lying, talking out your ass, or just have no grasp on reality, in which case I don't want to play with you... you're telling the truth, in which case you have no regard for your own safety and health or for the mental stability of your partner, in which case you scare the crap out of me and I don't want to play with you... or you're saying what you think I want to hear, in which case you haven't been paying attention, and again, yep, don't want to play with you. The same applies to a Dom/me who says that their submissives should have no limits. "I am fully trained." ...ok. By who? Trained as what? For how long? And what makes you think that their idea of what a submissive's training should be is my idea of what a submissive's training should be? Why do you think that training is something that only needs to be done once, for a set period of time, and never again? Don't you intend to ever learn anything more? Don't you think maybe the person you were with previously might not have known EVERYTHING? Do you think you're perfect, that because Person A handed you a certificate that you can now instantly and perfectly please Person B without even getting to know them, what they want, what they like or dislike? Yeesh. "There is no such thing as a real slave." ...this really, REALLY bothers me, because it boils down to semantics, doesn't consider things such as modern day human slave traffic of the BAD sorts, says nothing about individual definitions of the words, what the person who says they are a slave honestly feels, etc. "Oh, so you're a slave? Ok, lick my boots." Yeah, right, mister. I may be a slave, but I'm not YOUR slave. Ditto "Oh, you're into kink, that means I can spank you." Um, no. It means I can spank YOU, but I won't, 'cos you're an idiot. Ditto "Oh, your Master hasn't shared you with someone/you don't want to be shared? You're not a slave." or "What, you've slept with people other than your Master? You're just a slut." Grrrrrrrr. >.<
|
|
|
|