Subs = Chattel?

Haku_Z said:
though, said actions, aren't against the will of said sub/(s) - so responsibility of the tort goes to the sub/(s). If against the will, then responsibility of the tort goes to the dominant.

But it's just a lot more fun if everyone gets blamed.


Ah, but said subs have no will of their own!
 
vamplawyer said:
Yeah... my ass.

All said is for the purpose of the discussion of the thread, which is tongue in cheek view. It should be obvious that REALITY is a completely different matter.
 
Marquis said:
Precisely; humiliate yourself.

How, you ask?

Shall I count the ways?

lol

by pointing out i think you're an arrogant prick?

your definition of "humiliate" and mine, i think sir, do not coincide, for from my perspective you would humiliate yourself each and every time you speak a word.

it is difficult, i believe, to label with subjective terms.
 
VampLawyer said:
Is that not the definition of both a Domm and a lawyer? Subjectives and Pejoratives tend to be conveinantly laid at the feet of both.

not by necessity
i've met both who were perfect gentleman.

i don't like the fact that marquis plays up his arrogance or prickishness - it only furthers the sort of dom stereotype that is negative. doms are not all assholes - only the ones who were assholes to begin with are. it is not a precondition of being either dom or lawyer that one must be an asshole, nor an inevitable result of which.
 
vamplawyer said:
If I thought you were serious, the reply would have been far less terse.


Is that not the definition of both a Domm and a lawyer? Subjectives and Pejoratives tend to be conveinantly laid at the feet of both.

Well, it is one of the things we like about them. Dom's that is. I can't think of much I like about lawyers.
 
graceanne said:
Well, it is one of the things we like about them. Dom's that is. I can't think of much I like about lawyers.

Lawyers have social status occasionally so if you date one you get to be one of the cool kids? :)
 
canadiancutie said:
Lawyers have social status occasionally so if you date one you get to be one of the cool kids? :)

It would take a lot more than dating a lawyer to make me one of the cool kids - even temporarily. :p
 
bg23 said:
not by necessity
i've met both who were perfect gentleman.

i don't like the fact that marquis plays up his arrogance or prickishness - it only furthers the sort of dom stereotype that is negative. doms are not all assholes - only the ones who were assholes to begin with are. it is not a precondition of being either dom or lawyer that one must be an asshole, nor an inevitable result of which.

Oh trust me, I play it DOWN.


By the way, you act like I'm the only Dom on the site. But I bet it kinda seems like that to you doesn't it, baby. :kiss:
 
graceanne said:
It would take a lot more than dating a lawyer to make me one of the cool kids - even temporarily. :p

You should date me, I'll even stamp your hand so you could sit at the cool kids table after we broke up.
 
Marquis said:
Oh trust me, I play it DOWN.


By the way, you act like I'm the only Dom on the site. But I bet it kinda seems like that to you doesn't it, baby.

you're about the only asshole dom on the site.

i've never met another dom who felt the need to exert his own superiority in such a way as you do.

if i didn't know better, i'd think you had one hell of a serious inferiority complex.
 
bg23 said:
you're about the only asshole dom on the site.

i've never met another dom who felt the need to exert his own superiority in such a way as you do.

if i didn't know better, i'd think you had one hell of a serious inferiority complex.
Wow, somebody must not pay attention to the boards much. I've seen several asshole Doms on this site! :D
 
bg23 said:
you're about the only asshole dom on the site.

That was my point.

bg23 said:
i've never met another dom who felt the need to exert his own superiority in such a way as you do.

Your obsession with this topic truly puzzles me. I'll take the present example. You read my satirical thread about how chattel laws might might apply to D/s and took it as me trying to brag about being in law school. Well, I am in law school. In fact, I spend 80 hours a week on law school related activities. Is it so unreasonable to start a thread somewhat based on what is now consuming my life?

bg23 said:
if i didn't know better, i'd think you had one hell of a serious inferiority complex.

I have never sought your attention, ever, with the exception of a pm once to tell you that you looked nice when you put your face up on an av. You continually invade a board you never post to, with the sole purpose of making complaints against me that never hold water.

You really think I'm the one who looks insecure here?

I think you could safely put an objective standard to that question.
 
Marquis said:
That was my point.

can't say it made much sense.

Marquis said:
Your obsession with this topic truly puzzles me. I'll take the present example. You read my satirical thread about how chattel laws might might apply to D/s and took it as me trying to brag about being in law school. Well, I am in law school. In fact, I spend 80 hours a week on law school related activities. Is it so unreasonable to start a thread somewhat based on what is now consuming my life?

not in the least.

but there's a difference, i believe, in starting a thread that says, "i happen to be in law school, here's a question"

and starting one that says, "oh look at me! i'm in law school!"


Marquis said:
I have never sought your attention, ever, with the exception of a pm once to tell you that you looked nice when you put your face up on an av. You continually invade a board you never post to, with the sole purpose of making complaints against me that never hold water.

You really think I'm the one who looks insecure here?

I think you could safely put an objective standard to that question.

i've never said that you've sought my attention. as with "invading" a board, i had no idea there were member issues. what makes you think i don't post here? i had no idea you were following my posts. i rarely venture over here except to read a few topics, and where there is a topic that catches my eye, i post. please don't flatter yourself by thinking -you're- my purpose in coming over here. it so happens that quite often, you start interesting topics. an unfortunate side effect of that is at the same time, you come across as a complete jerk, and i have an unfortunate inability to hold my tongue when someone, or something, grinds against my nerves.

as to the insecurity - there is no insecurity in my occasionally making a bitchy comment towards you.

but there is a wealth of insecurity behind -your- constantly having to assert your own superiority.

in any case, i see no point towards continuing this discussion. i don't like you, and you don't like me. from now on, i'll just stay the heck away from your threads, lest i not be able to help myself again.
 
vamplawyer said:
Yeah, which is real funny... because we were all the geeky kids at the lunch table once. :p

Interestingly enough, the cool kids became cool lawyers and the geeky kids at that lunch table turned into arrogant lawyers who think they are God's gift to the ABA. And most of them STILL don't get to sit with the "cool kids" at lunch.

Marquis, I for one happened to enjoy your satirical post. I also think that using those types of satirical thoughts could make a great study aid. Since 99% of the viewers had fun with your post, who cares about the 1%?
 
FLButtSlut said:
Interestingly enough, the cool kids became cool lawyers and the geeky kids at that lunch table turned into arrogant lawyers who think they are God's gift to the ABA. And most of them STILL don't get to sit with the "cool kids" at lunch.
No, not from my school. The cool kids (who were pretty arrogant about it in school) are becoming arrogant lawyers, doctors or managers, while the geeky ones seem to care more about their clients/patients.
 
Back
Top