RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia

RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Alternative Lifestyles in the News

Message

kittinSol -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/24/2007 5:37:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveluci That's more than I can say for most folks. Thank you............luci (Why am I feeling aimed at [:D] ?) Oh, and it IS wrong to bring up children in any way that denies them the right to make an informed choice if and when they're able to do it. Therefore, it IS wrong to raise a little girl to think that she and the house maid have to be at the feet of the king of the household. Would any of Lowrat Boyle's supporters out there support somebody's decision to raise a little boy in a FemDom environment? Or is it acceptable to them to bring up a little girl to be subservient to the penis holder of the household because, well, that's the way they know, or like, or believe in, or that's what they chose to do in life, so it's only right that their daughters learn the same way? Sorry, but your way isn't necessarily the right way. And I say this with the utmost respect. Jump down my throat if you like, but please, form an orderly queue, and do it one by one. Ta.

slaveluci -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/24/2007 5:55:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol (Why am I feeling aimed at [:D] ?) Perhaps because like me you just like to be irate and make everything about you????[8D] I'm KIDDING, of course. I didn't mean to aim anything at you, KittenSol. We had our debate and I have no lingering upset feelings. I hope you don't either. quote: Oh, and it IS wrong to bring up children in any way that denies them the right to make an informed choice if and when they're able to do it. Therefore, it IS wrong to raise a little girl to think that she and the house maid have to be at the feet of the king of the household. Yes.....to raise her to think that she HAS to is wrong. But hopefully we can agree that she can be raised to understand that she does have that option as well as others? quote: Sorry, but your way isn't necessarily the right way. I will just say that parents have the right to choose how they raise their own children. No one else (me or you) can tell them what's "right" for their own family (outside of Social Services and that's a whole other creature......) quote: And I say this with the utmost respect. Jump down my throat if you like, but please, form an orderly queue, and do it one by one. Ta. LOL.....I for one am not going to jump down your throat. I say what I say with utmost respect too, KittenSol. I love a reasonable, civil debate with a sense of humor thrown in. Thank you........slave luci

amaidiamond -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/24/2007 6:17:39 PM)
This doesnt seem wrong to me at all

ownedgirlie -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/24/2007 6:43:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol Oh, and it IS wrong to bring up children in any way that denies them the right to make an informed choice if and when they're able to do it. Therefore, it IS wrong to raise a little girl to think that she and the house maid have to be at the feet of the king of the household. I am interested if those with this point of view feel it is wrong to bring up little one's with any sort of religious belief, too, be it Christian, Judaism, Hinduism, Confusianism (which also puts men first), Buddhism, etc...? The truth is, every family has its set of values, whatever they may be, and they will raise their little ones according to those values. The question is, who decides what is an acceptable family value and what is not? And how is such a decision determined? And how is it executed?

kittinSol -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/24/2007 7:32:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie The question is, who decides what is an acceptable family value and what is not? And how is such a decision determined? And how is it executed? Since you're unable to make a decision I suggest you surrender your power of decision over to ME. You suggest; I execute. There, better now? [:)]

ownedgirlie -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/24/2007 9:22:34 PM)
Sorry chicadee. I am already surrendered to someone. And you entirely missed my point.

onegoodgirl -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/24/2007 10:16:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol The wife called the child's father by the name 'Daddy': it's creepy. It can make the child feel that somehow, her father is also her mother's father. It's just plain wrong: I call that abuse. Plus, you can BET the man never speaks to their daughter about "pleasing" and "honouring" the mother. Ridiculous. Abuse? ROFL. Sounds like a personal problem.. I assure you that it's quite common and the idea of my referring to my son's father as "Daddy" as being damaging to him in some way is laughable, at best... Ignorance, at the very least. "It can make the child feel...." - I'm sorry.. are you a psychologist?.. How about a parent? You saw what they wanted you to see.. no original thought or objectivity - shame. Sheep. /sigh

Masque66 -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/24/2007 11:44:03 PM)
My only issue was the idea of having their daughters in 'training'. I think everyone has the right to be dominant or submissive as their choice, but applying that choice arbitrarily to their children based on their gender is, in my opinion, wrong. If their daughters want to be submissive, so be it. But make it known that they can be the dominant if they want. It's only right.

kittinSol -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/25/2007 5:41:42 AM)
Well, yes, and no: what irks me with other posters responses here (and they're all chicks, how weird is that???) is that they're completely mixing up the D/s 'lifestyle' and what these old-fashioned, reactionary, neo-cons marriage are all about. It's all about politics. The personal is political and if they miss that point, well, there really is not much hope for them. They may wallow in their pool of ignorance and stupidity. I don't care about them, but I do care about their offsprings. That's what being a social animal's all about. [:(]

ownedgirlie -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/25/2007 7:43:17 AM)
There's always the option that the "D/s lifestyle" isn't the only way to be submissive. Religions have been practicing this for years. Since when is one way the only way? What about the 50's household style of D/s?

nearnyccouple -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/25/2007 8:22:06 AM)
there is nothing wrong with being a social animal, as long as you respect a parents' right to raise their children as they see fit, and be tolerant of their choices. their way may not be your way, but that doesnt make their way wrong. i havent viewed the clip, so i cant discuss details..but i can say this......i always asked my um's if daddy had called. if i used his given name they would have looked at me as if i was from another planet. how in heavens name is that abusive, creepy or otherwise? now it may be simply a cultural thing, but my marriage wasnt even close to what has been discussed here, yet that was how i referred to him and to this day my sister who is 58 and i (49) still refer to our mother as mommy when discussing how she drives us crazy. secondly, i raised my ums in a certain religion. they went to religious school. when they graduated, they had the choice as to whether or not to continue. i cant force them to believe as i do, but i have an obligation as a parent to give them a foundation and basis...parents are suppose to impart values,and make their ums aware of all the choices out there....we raise them the best we can and then send them out into the world, to make their own way.. we hope they make good choices...we may not always agree with their choices, but stand behind them, support them and love them, regardless cassie

thetammyjo -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/25/2007 9:23:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveluci quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo It's great to choose what you want to do -- please remember that in large part that is what feminism won for you. It's like women such as Schaffly who actively worked against the ERA --guess who made it possible for her to even have a voice in the that discussion? All those feminists she hated. Or women who say no female could possible be president and they would never vote for one -- and how did you get the right to vote? People worked for that, both men and women, worked for that, they are often called first wave feminists. I really do agree with you, tammyjo. It was pretty tongue-in-cheek when I said "anti-feminist." I was just trying to emphasize the point that ownedgirlie made. It has always amazed me when rabid feminists attempt to dictate to women that, now that we don't have to be "surrendered" or "submissive," that we never should be. It always reminded me of the time I spent managing a domestic violence shelter. Women would come in who seemed to have no right to choose in matters at home and, in the course of trying to empower them, certain staff members thought the way to do that was to basically tell them the "right" choices to make. I always find that very ironic. She came to us with no real personal power and in the course of "helping" her, we decide what's "best" for her? Kind of reminds me of feminists who would "help" me be empowered. No thanks - I'll handle it myself[;)]. But, I'm very aware, as you noted, that I am able to handle it myself due to the work of "feminist" women before me. quote: I have a great problem though when others work to undermine feminism even if it is on the level of raising a child to believe there is only one way to be a particular sex or gender. I'd have the exact same problem if it was a matter of race or religion or ethnic group too. I see your point but if these women (and I) choose to live in this type of relationship, how are we "undermining feminism?" We are empowered to make our own choices and we do - even if they don't fit other peoples molds of what is acceptable. I would think any feminist worth her salt would encourage individual women to follow the path that's best for them even if it is against popular mores................slave luci How you live, not a problem for me and I would be the first feminist to defend your choice. How you raise the next generation is a concern for the entire community because you create the next generation of citizens and as citizens we impact each other for better or worse. The "you" here isn't directed at an individual on this site but toward the video clip and the idea that we pass on sexist (racist or anything else) ideas and expectations to our offspring.

thetammyjo -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/25/2007 9:31:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol Oh, and it IS wrong to bring up children in any way that denies them the right to make an informed choice if and when they're able to do it. Therefore, it IS wrong to raise a little girl to think that she and the house maid have to be at the feet of the king of the household. I am interested if those with this point of view feel it is wrong to bring up little one's with any sort of religious belief, too, be it Christian, Judaism, Hinduism, Confusianism (which also puts men first), Buddhism, etc...? The truth is, every family has its set of values, whatever they may be, and they will raise their little ones according to those values. The question is, who decides what is an acceptable family value and what is not? And how is such a decision determined? And how is it executed? Actually I think it is wrong to exclusively tell your child that there is only one way. It is better to share your traditions and then, if you are asked, give them permission and resources to investigate other traditions on their own. If one's way is the best way then won't such an investigation led the offspring back to that way? It may take awhile or it may be that there is no "best way". Why does that possibility frighten people? Why does encouraging offspring to develop into people who can investigate and make the best choice for them frighten people? I think someone who is only led throughout the young years becomes an adult who can only follow. That becomes a problem when that same adult exercises civic responsbiliites that impact the rest of society. Because of that it is importan to the rest of us.

daddysprop247 -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/25/2007 10:45:01 AM)
fast reply, to no one in particular: i just watched the video, tho i had heard of the "Surrendered Wife" book and read some things about it years ago, after seeing this newsclip however i think i'll have to go out and get this book myself. i think that this "movement" if you will can be a wonderful thing for many vanilla couples who have tried the modern way of feminism and equality and realized that it simply does not work. growing up in my own household and observing the relationships around me, i saw firsthand much tension and friction in relationships that mostly came down to each partner struggling for dominance and control, because there was no clear Head of household, no clear leader, everything was just chaos. or worse, i would see couples where the male had happily checked out emotionally and mentally from the relationship, while the female would be going merrily along running her one-person show. our current society which encourages independent, controlling, ball-busting women and pleading, ultra sensitive effeminate men results in damaged relationships with selfish, demanding women and emotionally depleted, emasculated men. it all saddens me a great deal. i think that the Surrendered Wife movement is simply another brand of D/s, as D/s for many of us is nothing new under the sun, and a traditional way of life that has been in existence in human relationships since prehistoric times. my Master and i were not led to D/s thru bdsm or kink, but rather thru old-fashioned values that we both held regarding the natural order. i realize that many do not agree with such beliefs, and that is fine, but i wonder why all the animosity and anger towards those of us who believe and live this way, especially on a place like collarme.com?? i would think that we of all people would understand the beauty and simplicity in the Surrendered Wife model. instead many are criticizing and bashing it even more than those in the outside vanilla world would. as far as the issue of raising children in such a household, i see no harm in it. parents tend to pass on their own values to their children, and as they grow up these children can embrace or discard those values. personally i found it very sweet and touching the way that mother emphasized to her young daughter how important it is to obey and honor her father, and how even the mundane duties of life hold special significance because it is for Daddy. even more significant, that child is being raised in an environment of love and harmony, where her mother and father are complements to one another, not opponents, which is a rare thing indeed in these sad times.

sluggy67 -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/25/2007 10:50:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo [quote How you live, not a problem for me and I would be the first feminist to defend your choice. How you raise the next generation is a concern for the entire community because you create the next generation of citizens and as citizens we impact each other for better or worse. The "you" here isn't directed at an individual on this site but toward the video clip and the idea that we pass on sexist (racist or anything else) ideas and expectations to our offspring. That is the scariest post I have read on here in a long time. So, if I am understanding your position correctly, the "community" has a stake in how I raise my child? And what happens if the "community" is unhappy with my choices in child-rearing? Do they then take my child and instill in him the correct attitudes? How would they do that, exactly, without destroying any kind of familial bond between parents and children? "Well, young citizen, your parents are not instilling the correct values. Your ever-powerful and infallible government will now teach you the correct way to think. Until you can admit that what your parents did (teaching you that men, or whites, or christinas are superior) was abusive and wrong, you will not see them again, OK?" And I imagine that the offending parents would have to pass some kind of tolerance and diversity training to prove that they were capable of having the children returned and raised correctly? The training center should have the latest in medical, pharmacological and coercive techniques to insure that the parents truly BELIEVE that the community is right, and are not just faking it to get to see their kids again. Keep your hands off my kids, lady. I will raise my children as I see fit. As long as I am not abusive to them, I have the freedom to instill whatever values I see fit. And I don't believe that teaching children to be intolerant, racist or sexist to be abuse. I personally do not teach them to be racist, but I do teach them that the husband and father is the leader of the family. And I DO teach them to be intolerant of idiotic ideas, whether they be religious or political. Once you start saying that the community (and does that mean the neighborhood, the city, the county, the state, the federal government?) has an obligation or duty to teach children the politically correct attitudes, you destroy the integrity of the family, you usurp the parents' authority, and it is a short trip from there to re-education centers and mandatory child-rearing laws.

PONYSEEKER -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/25/2007 11:19:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Boucanier Wow. You know, for a community that struggles so hard to at least be left alone to do our thing, if not truly accepted, people here can be incredibly judgemental of those who don't see things exactly as they do. If it works for them, good for them. I know of people who DO combine the concepts in that book with a kink lifestyle -- Does that validate the "Surrendered wife" part? Does it invalidate the kink? Who are you to judge? If you don't like it, don't live it, but let others live as they see fit. As for what they teach their daughters, that's between them and their daughters, unless you're ok with the idea of society telling us what beliefs we can bestow on our kids -- a scary proposition, considering what most of society thinks of what most of us believe (at one point or another). If this is what it is that we do, sitting in judgement of those whose lifestyles aren't to our approval, how different are we from our detractors? "No question now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which." HEAR HEAR!

thetammyjo -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/25/2007 12:24:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sluggy67 quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo [quote How you live, not a problem for me and I would be the first feminist to defend your choice. How you raise the next generation is a concern for the entire community because you create the next generation of citizens and as citizens we impact each other for better or worse. The "you" here isn't directed at an individual on this site but toward the video clip and the idea that we pass on sexist (racist or anything else) ideas and expectations to our offspring. That is the scariest post I have read on here in a long time. So, if I am understanding your position correctly, the "community" has a stake in how I raise my child? And what happens if the "community" is unhappy with my choices in child-rearing? Do they then take my child and instill in him the correct attitudes? How would they do that, exactly, without destroying any kind of familial bond between parents and children? "Well, young citizen, your parents are not instilling the correct values. Your ever-powerful and infallible government will now teach you the correct way to think. Until you can admit that what your parents did (teaching you that men, or whites, or christinas are superior) was abusive and wrong, you will not see them again, OK?" And I imagine that the offending parents would have to pass some kind of tolerance and diversity training to prove that they were capable of having the children returned and raised correctly? The training center should have the latest in medical, pharmacological and coercive techniques to insure that the parents truly BELIEVE that the community is right, and are not just faking it to get to see their kids again. Keep your hands off my kids, lady. I will raise my children as I see fit. As long as I am not abusive to them, I have the freedom to instill whatever values I see fit. And I don't believe that teaching children to be intolerant, racist or sexist to be abuse. I personally do not teach them to be racist, but I do teach them that the husband and father is the leader of the family. And I DO teach them to be intolerant of idiotic ideas, whether they be religious or political. Once you start saying that the community (and does that mean the neighborhood, the city, the county, the state, the federal government?) has an obligation or duty to teach children the politically correct attitudes, you destroy the integrity of the family, you usurp the parents' authority, and it is a short trip from there to re-education centers and mandatory child-rearing laws. Wow you sure are taking my comments personally. I think you are also reading a lot into them. Are you saying that community doesn't matter? That future citizens are unimportant to communities? That everything that happens in the "family home" is someone separate from what happens in the world around it? That's sadly and exceedingly naive. It also completely undermines your above idea that it would be ok for someone to step in if you are abusing your children. Who do you think determines that if not the community around you? The community you live in (whether or not you want to believe you are part of it) has a deep effect on your family and on you. You and your family in turn will have an effect on it. To believe otherwise is simply a fantasy.

kittinSol -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/25/2007 12:37:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sluggy67 Keep your hands off my kids, lady. I will raise my children as I see fit. As long as I am not abusive to them, I have the freedom to instill whatever values I see fit. And I don't believe that teaching children to be intolerant, racist or sexist to be abuse. I personally do not teach them to be racist, but I do teach them that the husband and father is the leader of the family. I don't think anybody here has any intention on stopping you from 'instilling' whatever you wish into YOUR kids. However, I shall quote Khalil Gibran, author of the most wonderful 'The Prophet': Your children are not your children. They are the sons and daughters of Life's longing for itself. They come through you but are not from you And though they are with you yet they belong not to you. You may give them your love but not your thoughts.

thetammyjo -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/25/2007 12:43:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol quote: ORIGINAL: sluggy67 Keep your hands off my kids, lady. I will raise my children as I see fit. As long as I am not abusive to them, I have the freedom to instill whatever values I see fit. And I don't believe that teaching children to be intolerant, racist or sexist to be abuse. I personally do not teach them to be racist, but I do teach them that the husband and father is the leader of the family. I don't think anybody here has any intention on stopping you from 'instilling' whatever you wish into YOUR kids. However, I shall quote Khalil Gibran, author of the most wonderful 'The Prophet': Your children are not your children. They are the sons and daughters of Life's longing for itself. They come through you but are not from you, And though they are with you yet they belong not to you. You may give them your love but not your thoughts. applauds We used the words of Khalil Gibran in our wedding ceremony. Unlike those who would blame feminism or Christianity or anything else for unhappy marriages, we took his words to heart and focus on our marriage as a place for each of us to get the support we need to become the best person we can become. I think that people wanting a quick fix or a model they can follow to make things better is only cheating themselves of the true wonder and love that can be marriage. Is it work? Of course. Isn't anything worth having in the end work?

kittinSol -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/25/2007 12:46:07 PM)
daddysprop, you're happy that the times are changing back. I'm not. I disagree with you: male dominance isn't the natural order of things. But that is my prerogative. Then again, if everybody thought along your lines, I wouldn't have the opportunity to disagree and would have relinquished all my rights to a life of either utter solitude, or as an addendum to a man's chattel. Not my idea of fun, yet, I'm pretty open-minded. Speaking of which, I think you will find that the most rabid, virulent, agressive posters here were the ones who defended Boyle's (atrocious) piece of literature (ahem). The few of us who DARED raise a voice of objection were ran into as if we were evil witches trying to take a toy away from a screaming toddler. Brings the whole idea of tolerance back on track, I think.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.1660156