RE: I Have a Dilemma

RE: I Have a Dilemma (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

whisperedsighs -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/21/2007 9:44:08 AM)
The OP has said this is a group effort. That they do put on several different varieties of events, but this one is specific in it's nature.

MistressDiane -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/21/2007 10:23:00 AM)
There's not much I can add here that hasn't already been said but most likely they eventually just drift away from the group all together. Which is ok too if they decide that this group is not for them. As many have already stated, you can't please everyone and I wouldn't let it disturb me too much. You and the group are much better off without all that drama and negativity.

mbes -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/21/2007 11:00:10 AM)
Thanks, I thought it was a group event, but some of the responses read differently to me and I wasn't sure. Of course, if you have a diverse group, everything isn't going to appeal to everyone. All you can do is make it quite clear that while it's "Victorian" night one month, it will be "whatver" night another time. Whatever the focus of the group is, the membership will adapt accordingly. I still love the "savage at the table" idea though, I can see that working in a whole lot of different contexts. Thanks to whoever tossed it in the pot!

SweetAndInnocent -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/21/2007 11:31:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mbes I'm confused on one question--- Is this a "my house, my party" event, or a group-sponsored event? If it's the first, then of course the host has not just a right but an obligation to decide the theme, the menu, and everything else (although it's never a bad thing to be accomodating to those one likes well enough to invite into one's home). If it's the latter, then a lot more compromise is in order. The compromising doesn't have to take place within one evening, of course, although there have been suggestions of ways to do that (I loved the "savage at the table" suggestion particularly!). A rotating schedule of different types of events is fine, if it's clear that this is the way the group works. If the group is open to many different types of dynamics, then all should be accomodated, especially once the dues have been paid. I agree completely with this statement. I try to keep my opinions to myself as often as possible, but this one has struck a chord. As a council member for our local group, I often have to compromise on issues that I don't want to. When you are doing things for a group, you really don't have the right to change "protocol" on your own whim. I think Type A's suggestions have been well thought and provide ways for ALL members of the group to be able to attend the function without having to live by someoneelse's protocols.

SimplyMichael -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/21/2007 1:21:30 PM)
If you wanted to have a women's only play party but I just want to watch, you going to let me in the name of "peace" and comprimise?

Evanesce -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/21/2007 3:02:00 PM)
quote: I agree completely with this statement. I try to keep my opinions to myself as often as possible, but this one has struck a chord. As a council member for our local group, I often have to compromise on issues that I don't want to. When you are doing things for a group, you really don't have the right to change "protocol" on your own whim. I think Type A's suggestions have been well thought and provide ways for ALL members of the group to be able to attend the function without having to live by someoneelse's protocols. So what you're saying here is that, despite the fact that the event has been planned with the specific purpose of it being an opportunity for the group to experience and learn something of Victorian protocol, we should just throw the Victorian part out and let people do whatever it is they wish to do, yes? Please explain to me how this does not completely invalidate the entire event, because obviously I'm missing something here. Would you conduct a class in glass blowing, only to have people come and demand you let them do ceramics, or knitting, or any number of things OTHER than what it is you're supposed to be teaching, instead? After all... they're all crafts, right? Why shouldn't the pottery wheels be spinning in your glass blowing class? It's not like they'd be any kind of disruption at all. What about sex at your play parties? If your dungeon rules specifically stated sex would not be allowed, are you then supposed to "compromise" because one couple wants to fornicate across the spanking bench, and simply let them do it? After all, heaven forbid that they would have to live by someone else's protocols (aka standards of behavior). And as for this statement: quote: When you are doing things for a group, you really don't have the right to change "protocol" on your own whim. Where, exactly, did you get the idea that I, personally, was "changing protocol" for any purpose whatsoever? Maybe you should go back and read the post again.

LaTigresse -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/21/2007 3:31:08 PM)
I just wanna know if TypeA was getting married and planning a very formal wedding that required the wedding party to dress in formal wear......follow me here.........BUT her (fictitious) snotty little sister said "I am NOT wearing that god damned awful bridesmaids dress you picked out, I am wearing my holey jeans I haven't washed in months and my "fuck you!!" old black tank top with my hair dyed orange" all while drinking a Budlite, Is she still going to be the brides maid?

Evanesce -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/21/2007 3:39:19 PM)
quote: Why wouldn't it? It seems to be your kink? And you would know this, how, exactly? To my knowledge, we have never met, nor have I had any conversation of any type with you wherein I disclosed what my kinks are or are not. Although I must say the personal affronts you're attempting here are very revealing. quote: You're full of contradictions for me. You claim you have a dilemma that you want to solve - but when presented with any number of alternatives, you eschew them all. Including simply inviting them to attend the information session - which isn't part of the dinner at all. What... you don't read? I specifically stated the "information session" is a full TWO MONTHS PRIOR to the event. No one has "invited" or "uninvited" anyone for any reason, and the alternatives you offered, for many, many reasons, are not acceptable or reasonable given the nature of the event being planned. quote: You are also treating service like it's nothing - not important.. but it is a D/s activity. Insisting that people engage in your preferred d/s activities can be a shocking thing for people who aren't accustomed to it. It's not a "yellow Tshirt".. it's an intimate, private, act for some. I've repeatedly stated that I don't think you're "obligated" to change your party - what I have stated is that it would be gracious to do so. And it would be. And I have repeatedly explained exactly why "changing" this event is neither practical nor preferable. It is a Victorian-themed event, with Victorian-era protocol and Victorian-era service. What part of this are you failing to comprehend? Or are you merely looking for something you can use in your continued attempts to insult me? It seems to me that you equate "service" with something sexual. For myself, and the rest of those attending this event thus far, it is far from it. If I were treating service as something not important, why on god's green earth would I be busting my ass to coordinate an event focused ENTIRELY on domestic service? You asked me why I would take offense to serving this submissive. Here's your answer: Because this event IS about service, every slave and submissive who attends will be, for all practical purposes, a servant. Servants serve. They don't sit in the parlor or living room and socialize. And they certainly don't dine in the formal dining room with the Masters. Even if I were to tell them both to attend, in the era we're recreating for this event, even a visiting servant would not have the right to be in the public areas of the house. It has nothing to do with whether or not we are friends, and everything to do with upholding the structure THE GROUP has already determined for the event. Not to mention the fact that I'd then have a half dozen slaves asking why this one slave is getting "preferential treatment," when the rest of us are sitting down to soup and salad in the kitchen - long after the Masters have finished dessert. In closing, I'm finding your judgments of me fascinating. You've maybe understood half of what's been said here, put your own extremely self-centered "I'm not serving anyone but my Master" spin on it, and declared ME self-centered and inflexible! But that's ok. We'll just go with that, because with THIS event, on THIS weekend, I AM inflexible. I have to be. Otherwise it won't be the weekend the group intended it to be, and I'll have a whole lot more unhappy members than just this one couple to deal with.

Evanesce -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/21/2007 3:42:02 PM)
quote: *hugs Denise cause i missed you* ::: pounces on amy and hugs her back ::: I didn't have anything else to say with this post. I just had to pounce on the tigress for a second. [:)] Back to the discussion...

MasterNdorei -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/21/2007 11:53:27 PM)
How great you are to open your home and host such an event. It takes alot more effort than some people think... and that is not counting having to handle all the hurt feelings... i used to volunteer as chef for a lifestyle formal dinner's group. Everytime a new dinner would be announced there would be a few people joining the group who were really offended by the idea of there being no play at the dinner. It was stressed repeatedly, and still one couple showed up the night of the event "shocked" to learn there was no play. Others were offended by the idea of all the servers dressing the same... until i announced the menu, i would be bombarded by people wanting to influence my decision... the conflicts went on and on, but there was a core group that developed, who inheirently understood what it was really all about, and turned every event into a remarkable, memorable evening. i have no doubt you will do the same with yours. You sound like you have things under control, but if i can help you in any way, feel free to drop me a line on the other side. Master's dorei

mons -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/22/2007 12:15:36 AM)
greetings this does sound like a wonderful experince and i hope all goes well you may have just ran into a rude gorean i would not want anyone to group me with other before their was a rude domme. so there may be another couple who may be more open have a great time mons

mbes -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/22/2007 6:59:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael If you wanted to have a women's only play party but I just want to watch, you going to let me in the name of "peace" and comprimise? Oooo... I can answer this one! If I were a planner for a group, I wouldn't hold a function which was dependent on locking out some segment of the group. If it's a group for men and women, I wouldn't prevent either sex from attending any function. If it's a dom/sub group, I wouldn't hold a function and not allow both "halves". If I wanted to hold sub-only functions, I would form a sub-only group, not exclude doms and switches from an already established group. I may plan events that not everyone is interested in, but I wouldn't plan events that anyone was refused entry to. I also wouldn't attend functions which excluded some members. The exceptions to this are meetings based on heirarchy within the group, ie leadership meetings. I'm fully aware that's a personal preference, though, and it does seem to be a popular option. And if the group is clear that this is how things work, that's great. Then everyone can join or not with that understood up front.

SimplyMichael -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/22/2007 7:18:04 AM)
You didn't answer the question, you skirted the issue.

SimplyMichael -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/22/2007 7:21:10 AM)
As someone who has actually dealt with these issues as well as spent time and money hosting events, I wonder perhaps if this is perhaps such a contentious issue because of perceptions. We are NOT talking about creating a group or even event to exclude someone. We are speaking of creating an event to accentuate a certain perspective. Two VERY different concepts, I am against the former but support the latter.

BOUNTYHUNTER -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/22/2007 7:51:09 AM)
Diane and her friends both subs.and doms have an all girls night out about once a year...we men sit home taking care of the kids and wonder what our otther halfs are up too.They meet a a private home with a dungeon with room for all..THEY coming dragging in around 10 the bext day wore out ..HUMMMMMMMMM now I am womdering what they do there smiles...BH

mbes -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/22/2007 10:30:04 AM)
Ok, I'll be more clear. If you were part of the group in question, you would be invited. If you weren't part of the group, you wouldn't be invited. Participation versus "watching" isn't an issue, both are ok with me. In the case of a women's-only group, you wouldn't be invited to a member-only event, because you wouldn't be in the group. If the group were mixed-sex, you would be invited to any event. Groups are free to include/exclude anyone they choose, as far as I'm concerned. I agree that they are very different concepts. I'm only answering that question because it was tossed into the mix. Some of the posts in this thread (a very few) read as though the "full force" of the group is being brought to bear in connection with one type of event which isn't a common interest, with the notion that individuals may of course provide alternatives, but without "full force" of the group. IF (a big if) this is the case, I would only remain in the group if I shared that particular interest. It would appear that this is not the case from most of the other posts, but it is a good point to be clear on within the group.

mbes -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/22/2007 10:33:59 AM)
BOUNTYHUNTER, at one time I and a group of other women had "poker night" every couple of weeks. No men and no children allowed. They were GREAT, but you probably don't want to know what they're doing. :D

domiguy -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/22/2007 11:09:49 AM)
As a Suessean we find it repugnant to break bread with goreans or christians.

sublizzie -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/22/2007 11:37:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Evanesce Not to mention the fact that I'd then have a half dozen slaves asking why this one slave is getting "preferential treatment," when the rest of us are sitting down to soup and salad in the kitchen - long after the Masters have finished dessert. I wouldn't be one of those asking about someone getting "preferential treatment". I'd be feeling sorry for the poor kajira who wasn't enjoying the service opportunity that was handed to her nor experiencing the learning she could be doing.

jadein -> RE: I Have a Dilemma (2/22/2007 11:54:24 AM)
I'll be honest typeA ... you say you won't "serve" anyone other than your Master, However by catering to people at an event who are putting up a fuss as this couple/slave you are serving them. shrugs Service comes in all shapes, sizes and forms ... just as submissiveness does ... and by catering to these people, who are in all honesty being rude as fuck you are being subserviant to them. I say that because you are giving up your wants and possible need (for learning and experiencing something to it's fullest extent) and possibly the need and want of your Master for someone else. I've planned many many events in my short lifetime and anytime someone didn't like what I was doing they (hopefully) have been smart enough to just not come. I don't see what the BIG fucking deal is here ... I've been invited to things that just weren't for me, so didn't go. This is not directed at the original poster ... I understand these people are your friends and you want them to feel welcome to come to future events. You know my Husband and I even uninvited our first set of groomsmen because they were such assholes about OUR wedding. We had to find 4 new groomsmen a month before the wedding, get them fitted for the tuxes and added to programs ... it was a mess I'll tell you that. But uninviting them was the best decision I ever made because my wedding was just perfect ... and I don't feel it would of been had I kept them there. This is the GROUPS party and from everything I've heard ... Everyone else in the party is very happy and excited about this event ... So why change it for two people? My response would be different if the whole group was against this idea and Evanesence was still pushing to do it ... THAT would be selfish on her part ... but she's not doing that ... she's doing what EVERYONE (except two very rude people regardless of what they lifestyle choice is) else has agreed to. Are the people on here who are telling her to cater to this couple really in need of validation from other people ... because that's how it seems.

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 [5] 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125