Because we have made a choice to .....

[Kajira Callista]

live this lifestyle, does that mean that we leave all our own personal morals at the door. Are we supposed to not have any? Which do we keep, which do we toss. Do we throw away our beliefs for a Dom/Master/Mistress or a sub/slave? Would you...have you....I would love to hear all sides on this one.

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

If it were me posting this thread, it would turn into a flame war...let's see how you do.

 

[Kajira Callista]

If it were me posting this thread, it would turn into a flame war...let's see how you do.

I like to hear all sides...even if there is diagreement....lets see where it goes.

 

[esclave_PP]

I guess I am wondering what you mean or asking exactly about tossing morals at the door? I have a very loving and ethical relationship with Master, what are you looking for or asking specifically? Are you implying that the lifestyle is immoral and wrong? I don't think so because I know you love it So what exactly are you curious about here?

 

[Kajira Callista]

I guess I am wondering what you mean or asking exactly about tossing morals at the door? I have a very loving and ethical relationship with Master, what are you looking for or asking specifically? Are you implying that the lifestyle is immoral and wrong? I don't think so because I know you love it So what exactly are you curious about here?

Not implying anything...just interested in ppls takes on this. Does living this life mean no morals or more morals. Do you toss away your beliefs etc.

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

I guess I am wondering what you mean or asking exactly about tossing morals at the door? I have a very loving and ethical relationship with Master, what are you looking for or asking specifically? Are you implying that the lifestyle is immoral and wrong? I don't think so because I know you love it So what exactly are you curious about here?

I think what she is getting at is the attitude that some people appear to express, that the D/s or M/s relationship supercedes moral concerns. For instance, if you consider yourself a slave, it is ok, or even required, to commit a crime if your Master/Mistress tells you to. Or, from the other side, that once a submissive gives consent, the Dominant can do ANYTHING to the submissive, including things that can cause grave and permanent harm.

 

[esclave_PP]

Ah, yes that makes more sense. I can only speak for Master and myself but yes, I would do anything for Master because I have explicit trust for Him. But, and I will qualify this, Master would never harm me, have been with Him for years now. So I guess to answer your question I suppose I do throw away my personal wants and needs because of the specific relationship we have. But that brings me pleasure to do so.

 

[Kajira Callista]

Ah, yes that makes more sense. I can only speak for Master and myself but yes, I would do anything for Master because I have explicit trust for Him. But, and I will qualify this, Master would never harm me, have been with Him for years now. So I guess to answer your question I suppose I do throw away my personal wants and needs because of the specific relationship we have. But that brings me pleasure to do so.

do you both have the same basic beliefs in life...and if you didnt would you go against something you know or feel is wrong for him? would he do the same for you?

 

[esclave_PP]

I guess I'm not the best example -- yes we mesh very well with our philosophies. Even as part of my contract Master put in that He would never do anything to cause me harm or create a situation that would endanger me. So I guess I can't really answer that for you -- BUT, let's say Master lost His mind (sorry Master I know you wouldn't lol) and said, "Slave I want you to go kill so and so..." I would for sure be in a quandry -- I could no sooner do that than hurt anyone and it would be a huge dilemma. But again that is an extreme example.

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

I think that most rational(by my personal definition) subs/slaves consider their Dominant/Master's personality before entering into service, and vice-versa. If they both agree to certain standards and views, and then one of the people begins to act, or expect action for the other, in ways that seem to violate the initial personality that was presented, a case can be made that the "contract" has been violated, or at least that the parameters of the relationship have changed.

 

[esclave_PP]

Exactly Johnny. This actually ties into the personal responsibility thread that is going on as well -- we are all 100% responsible for our own actions, and that being said, look before thy leap as the old adage says.

 

[Kajira Callista]

Exactly Johnny. This actually ties into the personal responsibility thread that is going on as well -- we are all 100% responsible for our own actions, and that being said, look before thy leap as the old adage says.

So then becoming someones property doesnt absolve you of your own personal moral responsibilities. (if im off target on that let me know)
Here is a little addition to this, if slave has no apparent morals and Dominant knows this going in...would it then become Dominants responsibility to help develop them with slave?

 

[noodleslut]

So then becoming someone's property doesnt absolve you of your own personal moral responsibilities....

Since we are living in two worlds at the same time, we need to look at these two separate levels.

First, on the M/s level -- yes, as a slave, we are absolved of personal moral responsibilities. With TPE, the decision and the consequences of that decision now belong to the Master/Mistress.

However, we also live under the laws of our respective governments, so if something we are allowed or commanded to do is illegal, then we personally will bear the consequences of that action. (Separate question here: Is it rebellious to refuse an action while willing submitting to discipline for that refusal?)

It's an issue that shouldn't happen though -- a responsible Master/Mistress will not put their slave into a position of harm. A wise submissive will carefully chose a Master/Mistress they can trust.

Noodle

 

[TNRkitect2b]

So then becoming someones property doesnt absolve you of your own personal moral responsibilities. (if im off target on that let me know)
Here is a little addition to this, if slave has no apparent morals and Dominant knows this going in...would it then become Dominants responsibility to help develop them with slave?

I will give my two cents (and overcharge as usual)

I am in agreement with becoming someone's property doesn't absolve you of your personal moral responsibility. However, it is sometimes in the pushing of those morals that a Master exerts his control. For instance, the Master could order her to do something such as shoplift, just to exert that force by bringing her into a moral dilemma. Which should she do? Obey her Master? or should she Obey her moral conviction that stealing is wrong? I am not saying that this should happen, as the only way I could see it happening was under controlled circumstances where the targeted business was aware of and an accomplice in the scenario.

The Dominant should mold his slave to his preferences. If the slave has no morals and he wishes her to, then he should work to help her develop them. If he likes that she has no morals, then why should he change that aspect? This seems to be more a matter of what the Master's prefences are than should or shouldn't. By society's standard yes he should help her develop her morals. But by society's standard, there should not be a Master/slave relationship in the first place.

edited for stupid grammar mistakes... not enough coffee yet

 

[Etoile]

I think the sub's most important responsibility is to choose a dom whose morals are solid and whose ethics match the sub's own. If that's the case, the rest of it is a moot point.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Call me lazy, but I just copied and pasted my words from Master's TPE Ethics thread:

From my understanding of what you say, this is mostly true, perhaps more so depending on exact meanings. For us it is TPE of the extreme, and we are aware that anything we do, though at his choice and design, if it steps outside the law or safety it is the risk he decides to take...and yes, I will voice my concerns if they are high, and he will listen, and sometimes he will revise his decision, but it still remains his decision one way or the other, and his responsibility between us and others who understand the terms of the relationship.

By extreme I mean there are no limits outside those he decides upon for us, there is no contract on paper, and I have surrendered all rights to him to direct or take as he wishes. It does permeate every aspect of our lives, though he is not into micromanagement......he has rules and expectations I understand and try my best to abide by, and use to guide my actions when he is not physically with me one on one. It is why it is important to understand and know the essence of the person you commit to, their ethics and values, before crossing that line which can never be recrossed. So many fall back on the excuse 'but you can't discuss every possible topic and decision that might arise before commiting'. This is true, but if you know, and understand their ethics and values, IMO there is no need to discuss "all' possibilites before knowing what it is you are committing to.

I exercised my will to make the commitment, and though it now belongs to him, as you say, in a way I am always exercising my will, though by proxy as I have surrendered that right to him. It is a blanket type surrender which from that moment no longer is my right to choose whether or not I agree. I can scream and beg and debate all I want, but if it is his wish to continue, I do so to the best of my ability. I don't have to fear if this means he is going to ask me to murder someone or cut off contact with family and friends, as this is just not who he is, or what he needs to do to exercise his dominance over me. I think this is the fear of some when talking of TPE, the being asked to do the unexpected and unacceptable.....a possible reality if you don't use your head before the fact. Or perhaps a carefully planned argument when needed for one who knowingly commits to someone who shares their ethics and values, which do not necesssarily respect the rights of others, or see murder and/or abuse of others as off limits. Just a thought from another angle.

Catalina

 

[Johnny Mayberry]

I think the sub's most important responsibility is to choose a dom whose morals are solid and whose ethics match the sub's own. If that's the case, the rest of it is a moot point.

Alot of people addressed this point, but yours was the most concise answer, so let me put the question to you specifically:

If the Dom's morals and ethics turn out to NOT be what they were originally presented as, or change over time to become far removed from their original status, what should a submissive do?

 

[esclave_PP]

Either roll with it or beg for release and move on -- seems simplest.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Either roll with it or beg for release and move on -- seems simplest.

I'm not sure it is simple....depends how you look at it, what the commitment is you made, on what grounds, and how that commitment is put in jeopardy.

Catalina http://www.logtenberg.info/ridders/anfrogprince.gif

 

[Netzach]

I believe in ownership, and I also believe that you can't make a grilled cheese in a two slot toaster to borrow one of the smartest phrases I know from a local sub, it's not my own nugget of brilliance.

So whatever moral ingrained personal deeply held sacred stuff a person has, I'm not liable to go monkeying with it, trying to veto it and override it, especially if I'm alligned with those things, which, if it's a close relationship, I probably will be.

That's outside of my own personal morality and comfort zone. While I'm the Queen, it's only because I decided to be, not because I'm better than anyone else.

God or no, I don't think I created the slave to remake in my own image, and I do think they require their own morality and ethics that I am personally able to respect.

 

[esclave_PP]

Good point catalina -- there really isn't a simple catch all solution, was more directed at Johnny's point

 

[Kajira Callista]

I will give my two cents (and overcharge as usual)

I am in agreement with becoming someone's property doesn't absolve you of your personal moral responsibility. However, it is sometimes in the pushing of those morals that a Master exerts his control. For instance, the Master could order her to do something such as shoplift, just to exert that force by bringing her into a moral dilemma. Which should she do? Obey her Master? or should she Obey her moral conviction that stealing is wrong? I am not saying that this should happen, as the only way I could see it happening was under controlled circumstances where the targeted business was aware of and an accomplice in the scenario.

The Dominant should mold his slave to his preferences. If the slave has no morals and he wishes her to, then he should work to help her develop them. If he likes that she has no morals, then why should he change that aspect? This seems to be more a matter of what the Master's prefences are than should or shouldn't. By society's standard yes he should help her develop her morals. But by society's standard, there should not be a Master/slave relationship in the first place.

edited for stupid grammar mistakes... not enough coffee yet [/QUOTE

I agree with most of what you said,but would like to clarify one thing. I was pretty much not speaking of society in general, it was more meant to be "our" society...peers whatver name you want to give it. (i am working on being much more clear in what im posting getting better but not quite there yet)

 

[Kajira Callista]

I'm not sure it is simple....depends how you look at it, what the commitment is you made, on what grounds, and how that commitment is put in jeopardy.

Catalina http://www.logtenberg.info/ridders/anfrogprince.gif

Catalina...suppose it was something that you personally truely felt was out n out wrong?

 

[Kajira Callista]

I believe in ownership, and I also believe that you can't make a grilled cheese in a two slot toaster to borrow one of the smartest phrases I know from a local sub, it's not my own nugget of brilliance.

So whatever moral ingrained personal deeply held sacred stuff a person has, I'm not liable to go monkeying with it, trying to veto it and override it, especially if I'm alligned with those things, which, if it's a close relationship, I probably will be.

That's outside of my own personal morality and comfort zone. While I'm the Queen, it's only because I decided to be, not because I'm better than anyone else.

God or no, I don't think I created the slave to remake in my own image, and I do think they require their own morality and ethics that I am personally able to respect.

I really liked what this said...thank you for the input Netzach

 

[Kajira Callista]

I think the sub's most important responsibility is to choose a dom whose morals are solid and whose ethics match the sub's own. If that's the case, the rest of it is a moot point.

I agree but is that always the case? What if it wasnt, i'd like to hear/read your opinion on that.