Normal?

[Ebonyfire]

Aw Aeroil, if you really want us ladies to whap your butt you just need to ask in the right way and see if we consider it enticing.

Catalina

He can name call all he wants. It only makes himself look "crazier".

 

[shy slave]

In addition to this, men are more stronger and more dominant and women are more nurturing and detail oriented by nature. We are built this way. Therefore, women are more suited to do household errands and take care of her partner and men are better suited for protecting and leading. The D/s lifestyle seems natural. Kink or BDSM adds another level of submission and adds a little spice, keeping things fun and interesting.

When I read this I didn't know whether to laugh or slap you.

It is more than bullshit (thanks Eb for that phrase) it is wrong to bring girls up to believe this.

BDSM & D/s are about choice.
Submissives choose to submit. It is not a choice if they don't know any better or if they think the wrath of God will come down on them if they don't.

That brings a level of fear into BDSM which is not allowing people free will or choice. It also allows bullies to take advantage of a woman who is in this situation due to ignorance. Domestic abuse shelters are always full yet the men they are trying to escape could use this as reason for what they did.

Many female submissives have jobs that are more stressful, bring home more money and have a higher kudos rating than the man they submit to. There are more reasons than you have active brain cells as to why that happens

I am sure I read you were new to D/s, may I suggest you grow up and then think about what you are saying.

If you don't you could easily end up in an abusive situation believing that God will pat you on the head and say 'Well done'

 

[Aeroil]

He can name call all he wants. It only makes himself look "crazier".

I have dozens of times admitted to being crazy.

 

[Netzach]

Basically the point I was trying to get at was that it sounds like people in D/s relationships seem to have a greater bond. I DO believe that doing some of the things that people do in D/s relationships, such as having your limits stretched and whatnot, builds trust and therefore a better relationship.

No. Not really. You're not the first person I've disagreed with on this.

If you want a D/s relationship and not a vanilla one, of COURSE the D/s relationship is going to seem deeper, better, more trusting and intense than the vanilla one.

If you don't, you're not missing anything if you're happy.

 

[shy slave]

Found the post in which you say you are new and a virgin.

https://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=18901133&postcount=1

I have concerns that you will end up in a situation that could cause you harm because of the things you say.

FFS stay off any personal sites until you learn some sense. At least you will be a live virgin and not a dead newbie

 

[Aeroil]

No. Not really. You're not the first person I've disagreed with on this.

If you want a D/s relationship and not a vanilla one, of COURSE the D/s relationship is going to seem deeper, better, more trusting and intense than the vanilla one.

If you don't, you're not missing anything if you're happy.

Aha! now I get to agree with you.

Although I *could* agree more.

 

[Ebonyfire]

It is really hard to know what is going on within a relationship when you are on the outsides looking in.

When the two people involved are happy, does it really matter what kind of label it has? If you were to see me and slave together in public, you would not be able to ascertain if the relationship was D/s or vanilla. Why? because our relationship is for us, not for show or the world. We lead the life we have decided to lead, and it is not the business of the outside world.

If something works then do not try to fix it, that is my motto.

Eb

 

[shy slave]

It is really hard to know what is going on within a relationship when you are on the outsides looking in.

When the two people involved are happy, does it really matter what kind of label it has? If you were to see me and slave together in public, you would not be able to ascertain if the relationship was D/s or vanilla. Why? because our relationship is for us, not for show or the world. We lead the life we have decided to lead, and it is not the business of the outside world.

If something works then do not try to fix it, that is my motto.

Eb

I love this post.

It is how he and I live our world of D/s.

Its a relationship for us, therefore what suits us may not suit others.

I can only think of one person outside of my local munch who knows us and has an idea of the nature of our relationship, that's because it is both private and personal

 

[catalina_francisco]

Ok, hold on now. I didn't mean to offend anyone. I'm not saying that I completely believe everything I said is true. I was just pondering a few things and thought I would put them out there to see what other people thought. I definately don't think that you can define "normal" because it is just not possible. Basically the point I was trying to get at was that it sounds like people in D/s relationships seem to have a greater bond. I DO believe that doing some of the things that people do in D/s relationships, such as having your limits stretched and whatnot, builds trust and therefore a better relationship. That's why I thought that people in the vanilla world would benefit from that kind of relationship. As for the bible part, I was just....I dunno...talking. I can't say anything from experience so I don't really know. Just thinking out loud in a sense. I sincerely apologize for offending anyone or turning anyone off. I don't want any enemies. *pout* Maybe I've learned this lesson the hard way.

Don´t mind us, you will get to know the things which are likely to generate spirited debates here, and that is not all bad as it is a discussion board. You will find many who support what you have pondered on, though not so much here as they do not find we support the weak, less intelligent sub theory well and leave in disgust. I have been on another site and been chastised for not literally bowing to every male on the board, holding their word as gospel, and shock of all shocks, daring to disagree with things male dominants said. As you will probably get to know, I am not backward in coming forward if I have something to say (slave or not) and just because someone on a bulletin board says they are a Dominant doesn´t prove to me it is so, and they certainly are not my Dominant so I do not have an obligation to kneel at their virtual feet awaiting their pearls of wisdom (translated = BS). Fortunately I found someone who wanted a thinking slave who was not afraid to take on responsibility and use their brain.

Catalina

 

[Ebonyfire]

I love this post.

It is how he and I live our world of D/s.

Its a relationship for us, therefore what suits us may not suit others.

I can only think of one person outside of my local munch who knows us and has an idea of the nature of our relationship, that's because it is both private and personal

Piggybacking...

I love your phrase private and personal. In most workplaces they have procedures about harrassment, and morality. I believe is it very inappropriate to inflict your personal lifestyle on anyone. You would not talk about your religion at work, and you would not go around telling everyone you life story or all about your educational accomplishments. Too much information. So it goes without saying why would you announce to the world your involvement in D/s? Do you announce your sexual orientation? I think not. Most people do not give a rat's ass.

It is both private AND personal.

We look normal because we are normal.

Eb

 

[Aeroil]

haah, well, against my better judgement I will attempt to put what I was trying to say in a different way that hopefully can't be misunderstood.

Keep in mind, using the term "built" implies to our starting point, two houses may be made with the exact same plans but look completely different later. I am suggesting, that some of the trends one can see in males, is that they are more aggressive, and more physically built, something caused by testosterone. This may be a trend, in that you can see a higher occurence of these males than you'd expect if it were perfectly random, but by no means is it absolute, or even the majority, a trend does not imply that its the majority. A similar trend, as caused by estrogen, for females, puts them more towards a nuturing attitude. I personally can't say that I'm aggressive or super physically built, but I most certainly have had "testosterone-y" moments in my life. Now, Ebony, if you claim I'm BSing, what do you mean, are you saying that there is absolutely no trend of behavioral types between males and females? that it's completely random? Or are you saying that there is a trend, but aggressiveness for males and nurturing for females isn't what the trend is? Or, whatever, what are you saying, how is this statement BS? Or, did you just misunderstand me, which is what I suspect, in which case, what did you think I was implying?

 

[Ebonyfire]

haah, well, against my better judgement I will attempt to put what I was trying to say in a different way that hopefully can't be misunderstood.

Keep in mind, using the term "built" implies to our starting point, two houses may be made with the exact same plans but look completely different later. I am suggesting, that some of the trends one can see in males, is that they are more aggressive, and more physically built, something caused by testosterone. This may be a trend, in that you can see a higher occurence of these males than you'd expect if it were perfectly random, but by no means is it absolute, or even the majority, a trend does not imply that its the majority. A similar trend, as caused by estrogen, for females, puts them more towards a nuturing attitude. I personally can't say that I'm aggressive or super physically built, but I most certainly have had "testosterone-y" moments in my life. Now, Ebony, if you claim I'm BSing, what do you mean, are you saying that there is absolutely no trend of behavioral types between males and females? that it's completely random? Or are you saying that there is a trend, but aggressiveness for males and nurturing for females isn't what the trend is? Or, whatever, what are you saying, how is this statement BS? Or, did you just misunderstand me, which is what I suspect, in which case, what did you think I was implying?

First of all, I will not debate you because there are racial and ethic historical differences that belie what you are trying to say. Why go there? Life is too short. If you are talking about your ancestors, then go for it. But yours are not mine I bet.


Eb

 

[Ebonyfire]

Note to Kailey

No one is angry at you. I know I am not.

 

[Aeroil]

First of all, I will not debate you because there are racial and ethic historical differences that belie what you are trying to say. Why go there? Life is too short. If you are talking about your ancestors, then go for it. But yours are not mine I bet.


Eb

racial and ethnic histories behind testosterone and estrogen???

See, my better judgement has that name for a reason.

 

[Ebonyfire]

racial and ethnic histories behind testosterone and estrogen???

See, my better judgement has that name for a reason.

I am not talking about testoterone and estrogen. Sheesh. saying a person is built to behave a certain way because of hormones is trivializing the subject. There is more than hormones involved in men and women and how they behave or their roles in life.

Now I am done with you. I refuse to discuss this with you anymore.

 

[Aeroil]

And here I thought that influencing mental and physical development was a hormone's purpose.

'sides, you didn't even read my post, obviously, I said influence and trends,, not that they decide everything. And because we are Built a certain way does not limit how we end up

 

[Etoile]

Quint's post was excellent and took most of what I had to say on this subject.

GeekySub's post was extremely good and said a lot of the same things I would have said.

My remaining comment is this: even if religious documents and/or biology pre-ordained a structure of subservience and control, I think it's a mistake to say that BDSM is what it should be called. BDSM includes whips and chains, mindfucks and experimentation, that kind of thing. Even D/s has a specific meaning within kink culture, so I'm not sure I'd even call the that structure D/s, even if one partner submits and the other dominates...it's not necessarily what we call D/s. So even if you believe the Bible says women should be subservient to men, that doesn't mean it's talking about what we know as BDSM.

Oh, and I think this is a great discussion.

 

[shy slave]

Quint's post was excellent and took most of what I had to say on this subject.

GeekySub's post was extremely good and said a lot of the same things I would have said.

My remaining comment is this: even if religious documents and/or biology pre-ordained a structure of subservience and control, I think it's a mistake to say that BDSM is what it should be called. BDSM includes whips and chains, mindfucks and experimentation, that kind of thing. Even D/s has a specific meaning within kink culture, so I'm not sure I'd even call the that structure D/s, even if one partner submits and the other dominates...it's not necessarily what we call D/s. So even if you believe the Bible says women should be subservient to men, that doesn't mean it's talking about what we know as BDSM.

Oh, and I think this is a great discussion.

Amen to that!

 

[Marquis]

There has been something I've wanted to share with all of you for some time.

A few years ago, I was visited by the ghosts of Jesus Christ, Mohammed, Menachem Schneerson, Haile Selassie and L Ron Hubbard.

They revealed to me a great secret that I shall reveal to all of you now.

The key to eternal life is ultimate submission to the earthly emissary of supreme Dominance.

That emissary is none other than myself, and since that day I have worked tirelessly and selflessly to ensure that as many people as possible are able to enjoy everlasting life.

Have you accepted Marquis as your personal lord and savior?

 

[Aeroil]

I can't afford an Xbox360, can I still worship you?

 

[Hooper_X]

I hate to bring religion into this but the bible states "Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything" (Ephesians 4:6). Am I wrong to believe that the D/s lifestyle is what everyone should be living and that the vanilla life is not normal.

Yes. You are wrong and this biblical nonsense is complete and utter patriarchal bullshit. Carry on.

 

[O'Mac]

I believe that, to most, D/s is out of the norm. Mainstream sex and vanilla relationships are viewed as normal. Does anyone agree with me when I say that socieaty has a misconception about what's "normal"? I strongly believe that a relationship, whether it be friend or partner, should be built on comitment, honesty, communication and trust. This seems to be the core of D/s relationships.

I hate to bring religion into this but the bible states "Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything" (Ephesians 4:6). Am I wrong to believe that the D/s lifestyle is what everyone should be living and that the vanilla life is not normal. I think the world would be a better place if everyone communicated as well as we (those living the D/s lifestyle) seem to.

In addition to this, men are more stronger and more dominant and women are more nurturing and detail oriented by nature. We are built this way. Therefore, women are more suited to do household errands and take care of her partner and men are better suited for protecting and leading. The D/s lifestyle seems natural. Kink or BDSM adds another level of submission and adds a little spice, keeping things fun and interesting.

With regards to sexuality I don't believe there is normal or abnormal conventions. I think Alfred Kinsey said something along the lines of "The only unatural sex act is the one you can't perform" and it's something I totally agree with. Yes, there are practises, kinks, and fetishes that are more uncommon than others, but for every sex act or lifestyle a person may think is completely abnormal, there is likely another person who practises it regularly. Like Eb said, we look normal because we ARE normal. At the end of the day, lifestylers and none-lifestylers have only a few differences between us in the grand scheme of things.

As for sexuality and religious belief (*sigh*, not this topic again!), I'm a Christian and I know for a fact that my sexual nature has never been dictated to me by what I've read in the bible. Nor do I find any evidence in scripture to suggest that what I do is sinful (which is a moot point anyways because everyone sins and there is no one sin greater in severity than any another).

Yes, I've heard people quote the same verse time and time again, but I'm not a biblical literalist so my feelings on that would differ greatly from others. If people live their lives believing that men are spiritually superior to women and so forth, that's completely fine with m. People have a right to live their lives as they want and to believe in whatever they want as well. Because I don't share the same attitudes, that doesn't mean I think they should change. Conversely, I'm not going to change because others feel the same towards me, that I'm not living the life I'm supposed to and whatnot.

The whole issue is really about tolerance and respect. Not acceptance or even understanding, but about whether people should be left to do what they want, even if we completely agree or not with the choices they make. Hooper's post is a good example of implied intolerance and disrespect of a differing point of view. The difference between us, for example is that while I may disagree with his opinion, I'd like to think I'm respectful enough to rise above petty insults.

 

[Kailey_86]

Yes. You are wrong and this biblical nonsense is complete and utter patriarchal bullshit. Carry on.

I am not wrong I just have a different opinion. I agree with you completely O'Mac and I appreciate your respect. I wish more people were more tolerant. After all, this is a discussion board meant for talking about opinions and hearing other's opinions.

 

[JMohegan]

I hate to bring religion into this but the bible states "Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything" (Ephesians 4:6). Am I wrong to believe that the D/s lifestyle is what everyone should be living and that the vanilla life is not normal.

Yes. You are wrong and this biblical nonsense is complete and utter patriarchal bullshit.

I am not wrong I just have a different opinion. I agree with you completely O'Mac and I appreciate your respect. I wish more people were more tolerant. After all, this is a discussion board meant for talking about opinions and hearing other's opinions.

My opinion is that Hooper is correct. It is nonsensical to project societal expectations from biblical times to the present day.

As an additional point on the subject of respect, I'll note that I have no respect whatsoever for efforts to impose one's own religious beliefs on others. Perhaps that was not your intent in quoting Ephesians as evidence of the way "everyone should be living." But that's the way it read to me.

 

[Kailey_86]

As an additional point on the subject of respect, I'll note that I have no respect whatsoever for efforts to impose one's own religious beliefs on others. Perhaps that was not your intent in quoting Ephesians as evidence of the way "everyone should be living." But that's the way it read to me.

That's definately not what I was trying to do. I don't want people imposing their beliefs on others either. For those who are Christian though, this would be something to ponder. I'm not saying that I believe that women should bow down to men in all aspects of their life and I know that some expectations from biblical times don't make sense in the present day. It was just something that made me go hmmmm.