My Epiphany

[Etoile]

Whew! You all have had a lot to say while I was at work today. First off, while I appreciate the suggestion that I will show up and bless the thread with my wisdom, I'm definitely not the only person who can answer these questions. I only have my own perspective and my own opinions. I definitely want to hear from others too, and I'm glad that's been happening!

"Game [in mathematics]: A model of a competitive situation that identifies interested parties and stipulates rules governing all aspects of the competition, used in game theory to determine the optimal course of action for an interested party." That is closer to the definition I am using, but it is not exact. I don't think this activity is "competitive" in the usual sense.

Thanks for explaining that. It seems to me that following that definition, many things in life are a game - driving, career advancement, etc.

"(In renegotiation) they do step onto equal territory . . . what the 'master' does with the information, though, is up to him."

I detect a contradiction here. Either they are on equal territory, or not – it can't be both. So within the construct of the "game," it can't be "up to him," or that particular rule is meaningless. Are you sure about your reading or description of this, Etoile? I understand that you are probably trying to sketch in rudimentary terms what appears to be a more fully fleshed out construct. (Hopefully you find delving into these issues with a vanilla bean as interesting as I do, because I have been asking a lot of you here.)

Ah, but that snip was very important. The rest of the sentence was: "while [she] expresses herself." That means that for the duration of her expressing her views, they are on equal ground and she will not be punished for what she says. If this were not a negotiation, she would be mouthing off and that would be breaking the rules, but the rules are suspended so she can say what she has to say. And this is a perfect example of why it's not role-playing...because in a Master/slave situation, they are still not equal partners, and after she has given her opinion, the decision-making still falls to him. During negotiations, she is given the right to express herself, nothing further. (I do want to point out that I am not talking about Sev and amasterfound here...Sev has already pointed out that there was compromise, not capitulation. I am talking about a "healthy" Master/slave relationship, as Couture originally alluded to.)

Moving outside the game back into the legal and social world we all inhabit, including the game players, it is not really "up to him," and also, "What happens if they say no?" is quite clear: She can always walk. The 13th amendment is alive and well. The game is over. So is the relationship, if it is completely based on the game.

Here again is why it is important that both partners believe in the relationship. Yes, legally she can leave, he has no legal basis for keeping her enslaved, she can call 911 and have the police come pick her up if need be. But her self-perception is that she is a slave and does not have the right to call 911, therefore she doesn't call 911. Many slaves believe that in order for the relationship to end, they must be released by their Masters. I don't agree with this - I think they do have the right to leave without being released - but many do feel that way and so that has come to be a "typical" element of Master/slave relationships. Again, if she is truly unhappy but still feels she is a slave, she will stay put because "that's what slaves do." The resolution to her distress is that the Master ought to be looking out for her well-being, and if he doesn't detect that she is unhappy and take actions to correct that...then he is not a good Master, the relationship is abusive, and she should run like hell. (She probably won't, but she should.)

The two parties must set aside their assumed roles for the moment and relate genuinely as two sovereign individuals. The answer was again expressed in the terminology of the lifestyle ("renegotiation"), but again I read it as, "Yes."

I have asked a lot of you here, Etoile, but I will push my luck and ask if this is the above is a fair statement? (As a gentle and wise woman you may want restate the last point in general terms if you are reluctant to make a statement about these individuals.)

In a Dom/sub relationship, you are correct. They do renegotiate as sovereign individuals. But a Master/slave relationship is slightly different, as I have explained above: permission is given only for expressing oneself. The decisions are still left to the Master. I realize that to most people "Dominant/submissive" and "Master/slave" sound like the same thing, but within the BDSM community they really are different, in that a slave has fewer rights than a submissive (some would say no rights at all).

As for the case study, perhaps Sev and amasterfound want to have a Master/slave relationship, but may not in actuality be practicing that way. It does indeed sound more like Dom/sub to me. But don't forget: everybody does this their own way, and the "rules" I am outlining may not be how each couple works. Sev and amasterfound may have their own definition of Master/slave...and that's fine. But I am not really intending to determine whether they are "typical" or not - I'm just explaining how most people would probably define Master/slave.

 

[Etoile]

Grrr....just when I thought that this whole issue was closed, it reopens.

For the record, no, there was no "capitulation" on my slave's part. One could more easily say that if I had agreed to monogamy in spite of my strong dislike of it, I would be capitulating. We wrote down a contract, agreed to a very clear and precise set of rules, and everything, including allowing for amendments and changes by mutual consent. While I am the Master, that does not give me the right to unilaterally alter the arrangement. The whole question of any possible change from an open relationship (which WAS a compromise, NOT a capitulation) to a polyamorous one was one that was discussed between myself and her recently and vetoed.

If I was forcing things on her that required "capitulation" on her part, she would have no such veto power. We BOTH have such power. That is understood. The only change that can be done unilaterally is to dissolve the relationship itself (since relationships of this sort are consensual just like all others) and neither of us want that.

I won't go into mystical issues right now. That's not the point. The point is that my relationship has weathered a crisis that many have not made it through, a crisis caused by my own contemplation and proposal of something that isn't mutually acceptable. Because it is not acceptable to her, and monogamy was never acceptable to me, we have decided that the status quo is the only arrangement that will work and it will continue.

Have there been recent relationship issues? Yes. They have been resolved, however, and idle speculation about how healthy or unhealthy my relationship with her is notwishstanding, I take our resilience as a sign of great overall health. So, that's that.

I will also back up those who repudiate this narrow-minded view that Couture has of BDSM. Comparing it to NAMBLA is an insult to consenting adults who freely opt for this lifestyle and are often happier and healthier than some in the vanilla world (though there are many happy, healthy vanilla relationships too).

For the record, I have been trying - hard - to keep things general and keep you out of the discussion. I personally don't care if you two see yourself as Master/slave, Dom/sub, Fish/rabbit. I'm just speaking in general terms - what M/s is generally considered to be in a "textbook" situation - and not about your relationship. I hope I have been clear about that!

 

[Honey123]

Crap...I hate threads like this...

Ok..I didn't read every page..

Is everyone OK?

{{hugs}} and es

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Whew! You all have had a lot to say while I was at work today. First off, while I appreciate the suggestion that I will show up and bless the thread with my wisdom . . .

Not LOL, but smiling warmly - you are indeed wise, and very wonderful.

I have only one minor quibble with all that you have explained, and it is this:

"But a Master/slave relationship is slightly different, as I have explained above: permission is given only for expressing oneself. The decisions are still left to the Master."

Not completely. As I said, she can always walk.

"But her self-perception is that she is a slave and does not have the right to call 911, therefore she doesn't call 911. (I)f she is truly unhappy but still feels she is a slave, she will stay put because 'that's what slaves do.'"

Well, here I go treading back into the subject that was seemingly, a tangent, but may not be really. Perception is not reality. She may choose to behave as if it is reality, but if she does so to the point of wasting her life in an unhappy relationship, this is dysfunctional and a bad character flaw. The "existential" reality is - she can always walk.


(BTW, implicit in this discussion has been that the "s" is the female. Are there ever any exceptions to that? If so, are they very rare?)


Thank you again, Etoile. You have not only been extremely generous and informative, you have delighted all who read your posts with your grace and gentleness. You are an ornament to this community.

 

[Etoile]

(BTW, implicit in this discussion has been that the "s" is the female. Are there ever any exceptions to that? If so, are they very rare?)

Actually, I thought about mentioning that in my previous post, in a tiny end note. In everything I have said, the gender of both parties is totally irrelevant. There are male slaves, female slaves, and slaves of indeterminate gender. Likewise, there are dominants of all genders.

Thank you again, Etoile. You have not only been extremely generous and informative, you have delighted all who read your posts with your grace and gentleness. You are an ornament to this community.

Simply put: thank you. http://www.amanita.net/images/smilies/cloud9.gif

 

[Selena_Kitt]

Credit where credit is due: I did not concoct the Spaghetti Monster, and the complete schtick is even more hilarious than the little bits I have included here.

That's it!! Roxanne Appleby, YOU are paying for my keyboard repair! SPEW! Iced tea EVERYWHERE, thankyouverymuch!

That was the funniest damned thing I have ever seen, and I will love you forever for pointing me toward my new path of Enlightenment...

LONG LIVE PASTAFARIANS!

(I'm going to start following the Eight I'd Really Rather You Didn't's TODAY!)

teehee!

 

[Etoile]

Get the book. I have the book, it's a good book. I FSM!

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

More of us are being touched by His noodly presence every day - it's a beautiful thing.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

BTW, a much more more thougtful book about the problems of "revealed" religions, with their cosmological/metaphyical assertions based on mysticism and superstion is this: The End of Faith by Sam Harris. He set out to undertake that project, but along the way does an extremely fine job of exploring the real spiritual side of human existance. He shows how western religions are 'impoverished" in this regard (which probably explains in part why they are subject to so much scorn in places like this.)

 

[Couture]

I will also back up those who repudiate this narrow-minded view that Couture has of BDSM. Comparing it to NAMBLA is an insult to consenting adults who freely opt for this lifestyle and are often happier and healthier than some in the vanilla world (though there are many happy, healthy vanilla relationships too).

What if I went to a site with a preponderence of nambla members and said that what they were doing was wrong. Don't you think they would come back with the whole consent and what they were doing was perfectly natural in their so-called lifestyle? Now as far as my moral objections go, of course we are in total agreement that one is much worse than the other.

However, when someone says I have to participate in a lifestyle before I can have an objection, then I think it's pretty clear from the preceding example that I don't have to participate to know what is right and what is wrong. But, it's not wrong according to everyone because it is two consenting adults - one willing to live as a slave and one willing to have mastery over the other.

It wasn't THAT long ago whent there were actual slaves in this country. When they were freed, some were still quite willing to live as slaves. There may have been consent, but it was still morally objectionable.

In reading the master/slave contract, I couldn't help but think that was some pretty serious stuff. And that is the supposed lifestyle. A lifestyle if it is such, should be able to be practiced in front of children. After all, that is their parents lifestyle - and their is nothing wrong with it. However, I can't see how children seeing mommy or daddy being treated in such a fashion as being condusive. So, if it can't even be shown to your children, then it isn't a lifestyle, it's a sex game. And pretending it's more than that isn't right.

But then again, according to another post, either mommy or daddy is already God and being worshipped and all that. So why doesn't God use his/her absolute power and make all those later psycological problems disappear.

 

[Sex and Death]

BTW, a much more more thougtful book about the problems of "revealed" religions, with their cosmological/metaphyical assertions based on mysticism and superstion is this: The End of Faith by Sam Harris. He set out to undertake that project, but along the way does an extremely fine job of exploring the real spiritual side of human existance. He shows how western religions are 'impoverished" in this regard (which probably explains in part why they are subject to so much scorn in places like this.)

I only have time for a quickie right now, but there is a world of difference between spirituality and religion.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

I only have time for a quickie right now, but there is a world of difference between spirituality and religion.

Amen

I think Roxanne knows that... she's all for things spiritual, just not for all things religious... but I won't speak for her, it's just my feeling.

I don't discount religion... there is spirit there, too... you can find "god" anywhere, even in the places you'd least expect to... like... churches...

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Amen

I think Roxanne knows that... she's all for things spiritual, just not for all things religious... but I won't speak for her, it's just my feeling.

I don't discount religion... there is spirit there, too... you can find "god" anywhere, even in the places you'd least expect to... like... churches...

That is pretty close to my view, Selena. I would replace "God" in your "you can even find it in churches" with "spriituality," which is why I am not one of those who joins in the religion-bashing games. And it's mysticism that I have no patience for, which in our society means applying a different standard for how do you know what you know to the spiritual side of life than to other parts of life (a form of dividing the self, among other things.)

 

[Selena_Kitt]

That is pretty close to my view, Selena. I would replace "God" in your "you can even find it in churches" with "spriituality," which is why I am not one of those who joins in the religion-bashing games. And it's mysticism that I have no patience for, which in our society means applying a different standard for how do you know what you know to the spiritual side of life than to other parts of life (a form of dividing the self, among other things.)

that's why I put "god" in quotes... you can call it what you like!

explain what you mean about mysticism? Do you mean you can't "rationally prove" spirituality (like you can, say, that the world is round, not flat) ?

 

[Salvor-Hardon]

I don't discount religion... there is spirit there, too... you can find "god" anywhere, even in the places you'd least expect to... like... churches...

Its amazing where those divine entities pop up and really make you sit back and go "Oh yeah...... hmmmmmmmm I never thought of it like that before".

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Mysticism is the acceptance of allegations without evidence of one’s senses and one’s reason. It is the claim to some nonsensory, non-rational, non-definable, non-identifiable means of knowledge.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

Mysticism is the acceptance of allegations without evidence of one’s senses and one’s reason. It is the claim to some nonsensory, non-rational, non-definable, non-identifiable means of knowledge.

hm. Then what is spiritualism?

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

hm. Then what is spiritualism?

They can be synonyms, but that is not how I use the word when I refer to a "spiritual side" to human existance. It has to do with the nature of consciousness, maybe. I will think on it, do a little research, and post later (gotta run, now.)

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

For the record, I have been trying - hard - to keep things general and keep you out of the discussion. I personally don't care if you two see yourself as Master/slave, Dom/sub, Fish/rabbit. I'm just speaking in general terms - what M/s is generally considered to be in a "textbook" situation - and not about your relationship. I hope I have been clear about that!

Generally, yes, you have, and I appreciate that you haven't tried to judge or make too many assumptions about that. Others, however, have not been so general.

I harbor no ill will toward any here but a certain person, who has deliberately engaged in a personal attack on my slave and myself. This was not meant to become an attack thread or an angry thread, and I regret that such have been caused.

It has gotten to the point where I agree with Honey, who hates this thread. I started this thread, and now I hate it too. I just don't hate anyone who posted here except Couture, who has made it quite clear that he/she hates me and everything I stand for.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

I understand the feeling expressed in the previous post, and will honor it by carrying over the discussions here to a new thread which I will start soon.

 

[Sex and Death]

Mysticism is the acceptance of allegations without evidence of one’s senses and one’s reason. It is the claim to some nonsensory, non-rational, non-definable, non-identifiable means of knowledge.

Roxanne, now, that's an objectivist description, not a definition. Where's your disclaimer?

Any "ism" is a belief. Mystics don't call their practices mysticism becuase mystics don't deal in beliefs, they deal in direct experiences and knowings.

The practices of the mysitc are aimed at direct experience and knowing (gnosis) of non-separation, of oneness with what we commonly refer to as "god." mysitcs, among others, understand that non-separation is our true state of being and that material and empirical world that defines the objectivist relaity is simply a distraction and barrier to bringing our consciousness to god and god to our consciosuness. Spirituality involves unlearning more than learning. We have been falsley "told" that ther eis separation, that dualism is the truth, and that the material world and consciousness are made up of separate and measureable entitie sof all bumping into eachother. Both contemporary physics and the earliest spiritual, mystic and theological perpsectives disagree with the idea that reality and existence is more separate than whole.

God is neither provable or disprovable from an objectivist perspective because objectivists will not accept non-sensory evidence as proof. It works out ok, though, because mystics don't care whether their experiences and knowings are provable or not, or whether or not they can provide sensory evidence of them.

Another point is that if god were provable by man, then god wouldn't be god. God is beyond reason, including objectivist reason.

To objectivists this brings up questions of bothersome fundamental and existential bugaboos such as faith, free will, fate, pre-determinism, trust and surrender. These things are not an issue for mystics because of the importance of phenomenological experience and knowing. Like objectivists, mysitics are evidence based. I don't think mysitcs find that as distasteful as objectivists do.

S&D

 

[amasterfound]

Just to clearify that I am NOT a yes sir or have capitulated on any thing. I don't normally show personal info, but this has upset me that people don't seem to know me very well. I know this is mainly because I don't come in here very often. It has nothing to due with anyone who comes here. Mainly because I have several other boards that I am a member of and help run. Three of which I am a Admin of and greeter of a 4 forth one. LOL that, work, and home life keeps me very busy.

Here is a copy of the contract that I wrote up MYSELF as a surprise to SEVERUSMAX! He in no way asked, hinted or forced me to write up this contract. That was of my own free will.

Upon seeing it he agreed with it and amended it where it was needed.

We also amended it just a little less than 2 months ago. So as you can see we do talk and amend it when it is needed. THAT is why this upset me so much at the time. I just wished he had done as he has in the past and brought it to me so we can work it out TOGETHER as we have always done. WE have resolved it since then and have agreed that a Poly relationship will not work out between us do to jealousy on both parts. That is why we wrote in the original agreement on the snuggling and such.





Contact Of Submission



I Dora with a free mind and open heart do
request of Daniel that he accept my submission
and take me into his care and guidance so that we may
grow together in love, trust and mutual respect.
The satisfaction of his wants and desires are
consistent with my wants and desires as a submissive
to be found pleasing to him. To that end I offer him
my heart and my soul. He may have unlimited use of my
body anytime, anyplace to do as he will determine.
I ask that he guide me in any sexual or scene related
way both together or separate from him/her) in such a
way to further my growth as a person.
I request of Daniel as my Master, that he uses
the power in his role as a dominant to protect me and
assist me to grow and help with my confidence and
character and that he continues to help me in my
developmental and intellectual abilities.
In Return I Agree.....

1. To obey his wishes to the best of my ability.
2. To serve him without hesitation and to surrender
only to him.
3. To maintain open and honest communication.
4. To reveal my thoughts and desires without
hesitation or embarrassment.
5. To inform him of all my wants and needs knowing he
is the sole judge of whether or how these shall be
satisfied.
6. To work with him to become a happy self fulfilled
individual.
7. To work against all negative aspect’s of my ego and
insecurities that would interfere with advancements
of these needs.
8.My submission is surrendered with my knowledge and
own free will and in no way diminish my own
responsibilities toward making the utmost use of my
potentials.
9. Both parties shall agree to use a safe word and respect said safe word, in the event that the dominant party gives an order that the submissive party does not believe that she can safely or prudently obey.

The dominant party agrees hereby to consider and respect the wishes of the submissive party, while retaining the right to make decisions of which the submissive party has registered disapproval. The dominant and submissive parties both retain their personal liberties and rights as people, including freedom to speak their minds, while showing proper respect to each other.

Should either of us find this agreement to much, or
for any reason either of us want to cancel this
agreement, either may do so verbally to the other in
keeping with the consensual nature of this agreement.
we both know cancellation of this agreement means part
of the control stated and implied with this agreement,
not termination of our relationship as friend’s or
lover’s
Upon termination of this agreement both agrees to give
his or her reason why and discuss our new need’s
openly and lovingly.
This agreement shall serve as a basis for a extension
of our relationship and commitment to our consensual
dominance and submission and furthering our happiness
and improving both our lives.

I, Daniel, in addition to the agreements stated, do hereby agree to inform my slave of any involvements outside of our own sexual relationship, whether for myself or planned for her, with the understanding that she inform me of any outside sexual acts she partakes in, whether I am present or not, and whether with men or with women, or both.
I also agree not to snuggle, cuddle, or spend the night in bed with any of my outside partners, whatever their sexes, with the understanding that she also refrain from the activities mentioned above. I further vow that any punishments, whether spanking or anything else, will not be done in such a way as to publicly humiliate or embarrass her.

As my slave has offered not to kiss other partners during sex with them, and to insist on condoms with them, I will return the favor. The only exception to this will be any sexual acts by either or both of us with people of either sex who have been tested and trusted not to be infected with HIV or STDs.

If the dominant partner, i.e. Dan, breaks a rule, then the submissive gets one free pass, to break the same exact rule one time only, before returning to the contractual limits.

I offer my consent to submission to Daniel under
term’s of this agreement above on this 23 day of
September in the year 2004


Dora
signature of submissive

I offer my acceptance of submission by Dora
under term’s of this agreement above on this ________
day of _________________ in the year _____________
___________________________
Signature Of Dominant

Amendment Pertaining To Sundays

Due to the realization that the dominant party in this relationship and the submissive party are both switches, it is agreed that on Sunday of each week, the dominant party shall reverse roles for exactly 24 hours (and no longer, unless agreed upon mutually for a brief time) and submit to the submissive party, who shall for that 24 hour period assume the dominant role. The preceding rules shall not be affected, save that the dominant party shall temporarily assume the submissive role and follow said rules in the same manner as the submissive party. When the 24 hour period has expired, the dominant party shall resume his normal position of dominance and the submissive party shall return to her submissive role. The safe word for Sunday will be a different one from the regular one used by the submissive party.

Daniel
signature of the dominant_____________________

I offer my consent to submission to Daniel under
term’s of this agreement. 5/30/06

Dora
signature of submissive_______________________

I offer my acceptance of submission by Dora
under term’s of this agreement. 5/30/06

 

[Guest]

you just posted both of your offline names fully for all of the internet to see

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

you just posted both of your offline names fully for all of the internet to see

It has been edited to leave out last names.

 

[Couture]

It has gotten to the point where I agree with Honey, who hates this thread. I started this thread, and now I hate it too. I just don't hate anyone who posted here except Couture, who has made it quite clear that he/she hates me and everything I stand for.

I may disagree with you, but I don't hate you.