PeonForHer
Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama
quote:
ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
Have you checked for a criminal record on me? In what way would I be 'unsafe' to you?
No need to grasp at weird melodrama, Peon. I don't think you're physically unsafe; I would feel emotionally unsafe with a person like you. I don't think you're a criminal, just a player.
As for what's on view--well since you ask, you seem very manipulative, constantly flirtatious and seeking attention from every possible female in your environment, and involved with far too many potential partners. The way you frequently allude to behind-the-scenes intimacy with multiple dommes doesn't impress me in a good way; it creeps me out and makes me think you're probably incapable of monogamy.
As I've probably said before--I'm a mono-domme, myself. Need fidelity and exclusivity from my partners. Could not possibly be intimate with a person like you. Hence "unsafe".
Ah. I'm glad you defined 'unsafe' for me. I remember your snipe about 'flirting with everyone' from a while back. Actually, to me, most of the time, it's just something to make people laugh. Your charge was one of the reasons that I took a friendly dominant's advice to add to my profile the lines that she provided for me:
I like to make myself and others laugh. Where I make humorous comments, these should not necessarily be taken to imply dislike, disdain, aggressive feelings of any kind(including "passive aggression", howsoever defined), latent psychopathy, sexual attraction, a willingness to submit and be a slave for life, or an offer of marriage. Any one of those could be involved, but probably isn't.
What you refer to as 'behind the scenes intimacy with multiple dommes' is, in fact, just friendliness with women (as well as men). Despite that 'just', it's a friendliness that I value a great deal. I think you once remarked something along the lines of 'if it's this hot and flirty on the boards, it must be much more so behind them'. Actually it's the opposite for me. I feel fond of certain people - and I talk to them that way.
But your view - this box you've been so desperate to put me in and presuade others to recognise - explains your belief about my supposed promiscuity.
I have to admit to being a bit of a failure at that promiscuity thing, I'm afraid. I've only had one sexual partner at a time, ever, in my life. If you don't believe me, I'll supply you with all the numbers of all the women I've had sex with, or even kissed, in the last two and a half years. All zero of them.
quote:
ORIGINAL
It always does make me chuckle when you use belittling endearments like 'hon' when you're being aggressive and want to put someone in his or her place. Nice touch, my petal. 
quote:
*shakes her head* I don't use "hon" to belittle you or anyone. It's a feature of my natural speech pattern, and where I was raised it is used to soften or alleviate statements which might otherwise be taken too harshly. I am not British, but I'm well aware that many class and regional accents use words like "love" in the same way.
Perhaps it's worth a chuckle that insecure men can read hostility or belittling intent into someone else's innocent word choices, just as insecure women do, however.
 OK, I stand corrected. I got the wrong end of the stick - thinking that the word 'hon', given the context of your aggressive post, and given that you've never used it with me on those rare occasions when you've not been attacking me, was an attempt to belittle. Just as your use of such terms when attacking others isn't, either.
quote:
ORIGINAL As I think you're aware, my comment 'No-one makes the rules' was not aimed at dominants, generally.
quote:
This is how your previous comment in this thread and many other comments in other threads read to me..
Then you read them wrongly. You projected something onto me that wasn't there. It makes no sense to me that a given dominant doesn't make his/her rules in relation to his/her submissive, after negotiation about the parameters of those rules. I don't really see how there could be a D/s relationship otherwise.
quote:
ORIGINAL It was aimed at you and any other dominant (or indeed sub) who apparently aspires to make the rules that they think should apply everywhere.
quote:
*shrug* As in the rest of your post, you are projecting and assuming a great deal. When I say "the dominant sets the rules", in my eyes it's very much like saying "the sky is up". I have no interest in setting the rules for other players, nor in adopting their rules for myself. For example, I could give a flying fig about controlling my own submissive's weight--he doesn't need it--and I have very little interest in micro-managing what he eats or dictating his exercise regimen..
Again, I stand corrected. I misread your line "I think a dominant is entitled to ask for and receive what she desires from her submissive. Control over the body means control over the body: within the limits of sanity and safety, a dominant should be able to exert just about any sort of control she desires." (my emphasis)
quote:
One thing I have noticed about your posts on the subject of female authority is that you always seem to take a comment on female authority as the opportunity to project some sort of excessively horrid worst-case scenario. It's always used to harm you or ruin your life. This thread is no different from any other in which you immediately conjure up the Bad Domme controlling you to your detriment somehow. "Oh, I could never allow a woman to have any control over how I speak. She'd make me talk slash-speak to my boss and my Mum!"
This is one of your 'you seem to' comments again. No evidence, just your feeling. What are you talking about? Why would I be seeking a dominant if I believe that she might harm or ruin my life?
When I first came to CM, last summer, I had lots of questions - some, no doubt, very basic. My first big question was 'Are these women really dominants, or is this just my hopes deluding me again?' The answer to that question was a very clear, 'Yes, they're really dominants'. Then, my big question turned the other way. It became, "OK, they're dominants. But can they also be human, loving, decent, balanced?" The answer to that was 'yes', too - for the most part.
But I'm afraid that last is not true with you, Shakti. You have smarts and you often show a very keen sense of observation. However, when you called me a "promiscuous little attention-whore" a while back, I felt it as more insulting than anything anyone's said to me on this board because I have an ethical sense regarding that matter that seems wholly beyond your ability to grasp. It was an entirely baseless slur. You've never apologised for it, just as I cannot recall you apologising for any other insult I've seen you give to anyone else. Your rudeness, your frequent sharpness to people, are by the way. On the sole
basis of the fact that you can't bring yourself to apologise I couldn't trust you as a dominant. It smacks too strongly to me of lack of balance, and lack of self-control, in your sense of dominance.
_____________________________
http://www.domme-chronicles.com
|
RE: Weight Control - 
Profile
You and I do not agree on any subject, generally speaking, but especially on the control and authority a woman can and should exercise in a serious D/S relationship. 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread