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

Aswad -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 11:16:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol Actually, none of the criticisms were directed at luci, but at the women in the 'surrendered wife' movement. That's how the whole little fracas happened: a misunderstanding which I attempted to clear up from the very beginning, in my own awkward way. Needless to say, it failed. The communication did fail then, yes, as a lot of what you said seemed to be directed at her. And not all of it appeared very constructive, at that. Not my business, though, just letting you know how it appeared to a third party. quote: I dared say I found Boyle's work ugly; some people took it as a personal insult - it's called conflict arousal. If you read carefully you will find the whole thing got out of hand when the submissive troops decided to erect a barrage against those that disagreed with them! Boyle's work seems to be one approach, not "the only approach(tm)"... And I didn't get the idea that was what most people said, either. What people rallied behind, was the idea that a 20-minute segment on TV is not enough to give a picture of how people live, that just about anyone would seem tense when being interviewed about a lifestyle like this (hence not appearing happy), and that these women have chosen how to live their lives, and should be allowed to do so. More importantly, they rallied behind the right to choose. If womens' rights aren't about the right to choose, what good are they to anyone, least of all women? I've sometimes described myself as antifeministic, even thought I'm not, mostly when I'm in the company of feminazis. The reason for this is that I'm not about the rights, duties, freedoms and so forth of any one gender. I'm about equal rights and so forth, for all genders. In short, equal potential and equal options. Handing over the right to choose to the "new wave" feminists, as if one were a helpless little thing that needed to have others take care of affairs for oneself, sounds a lot more 50'ish to me, except it's not the husband, but some feministic strangers taking on that role. Trading one gender stereotype for another isn't a step forward, but a step sideways. The problem is the same as the reason I'm against the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: People try to sell depriving others of the right to choose as "empowering" and "freeing" them. As for the issue about the UMs... I don't have the energy to deal with that debate right now, but I don't see a problem.

Aswad -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 11:21:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveluci quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo But programming offspring, yes, I find that very offensive. Then I would suggest to you that should you ever produce any offspring, that you do not "program" them. Quite apart from probably being physically impossible to do, it would also be abuse. To not program your offspring is to raise wild monkeys with no language. It is to peak their mental development at about 5 years of age. To teach them no values, no habits and no skills. It is to make them be nothing. And it's damn hard to do.

thetammyjo -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 11:39:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad quote: ORIGINAL: slaveluci quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo But programming offspring, yes, I find that very offensive. Then I would suggest to you that should you ever produce any offspring, that you do not "program" them. Quite apart from probably being physically impossible to do, it would also be abuse. To not program your offspring is to raise wild monkeys with no language. It is to peak their mental development at about 5 years of age. To teach them no values, no habits and no skills. It is to make them be nothing. And it's damn hard to do. Whoa you can certainly teach without programming. As a teacher I'm deeply offended by the idea that they are the same. Programming means putting information in -- not offering variations, not allowing for questions or other models, just putting information in. I am deeply offended by that when it comes to any human being -- young, old, male, female, any category you may wish to choose.

QuietlySeeking -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 11:47:41 AM)
2+2 = 4. Programming. 2+2 = 5 given sufficiently large values of 2...giving options. For a child...2+2=4 is enough. For someone who possesses discretion and more mature thought processes, 2+2=5 is an interesting supposition. And by the way, I believe that point Aswad is trying to make is that "programming" isn't about NOT allowing options, it's about limiting the number of options under consideration to a manageable number and to a parentally-acceptable subset. In some circles, it's even called "setting boundaries"! [image]http://www.collarchat.com/micons/m28.gif[/image]

slaveluci -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 1:35:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo slaveluci, I just don't think that you and I are capable at this point of having a reasonable discussion about any of this. I'm sorry you feel this way. I think that though we very obviously disagree, we have had a reasonable debate thus far. You are passionate about your view and I am passionate about mine. Just because we have very different philosophies doesn't mean we can't have a reasonable debate. As a matter of fact, to me, that makes the best debates. quote: We clearly have very different philosophies about what makes Ds Ds as opposed to any other model of relationship as well as the role of parents in relationship to offspring and community and the value of arguments based on "nature" or "religion". Yes, we clearly do. I admit I did take a bit of offense to your comment about God "BS." That indicated to me that you are so obviously biased against parents who would teach about God that you must consider it BS. Excepting that comment, I believe we have been very reasonable thus far, though passionate. quote: We keep offering examples that the other either ignores or counters. Heyyyyy...I didn't ignore yours! Are you saying you ignored mine?[&o] quote: Hopefully we each are in healthy and happy families built on different philosophies so even our lives only bolster our own opinions. Yes, ma'am, and I believe we are[:)].........luci

slaveluci -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 1:40:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo Programming means putting information in -- not offering variations, not allowing for questions or other models, just putting information in. That was what I was also thinking of when I used the word "programming." To me, it didn't mean not teaching them anything. "Programming" to me raised the image of almost brain-washing or indoctrinating.........luci

hildalove123 -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 1:50:37 PM)
whos on line i love to no love to see me on line

slaveluci -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 1:54:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hildalove123 whos on line i love to no love to see me on line [sm=confused.gif] [sm=confused.gif] [sm=confused.gif]

thetammyjo -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 1:57:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking 2+2 = 4. Programming. 2+2 = 5 given sufficiently large values of 2...giving options. For a child...2+2=4 is enough. For someone who possesses discretion and more mature thought processes, 2+2=5 is an interesting supposition. And by the way, I believe that point Aswad is trying to make is that "programming" isn't about NOT allowing options, it's about limiting the number of options under consideration to a manageable number and to a parentally-acceptable subset. In some circles, it's even called "setting boundaries"! [image]http://www.collarchat.com/micons/m28.gif[/image] I disagree with your use of the term program then. I think my programmer husband would strongly disagree too.

nearnyccouple -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 5:43:27 PM)
First, there is "programming"that is accomplished by the mere fact of bringing up children. We "drive" home those "values" commonly referred to within the old testament. IE the 10 commandments. Teachers also program our young ones by giving them rote to memorize and practice and are tested upon their sole ability to memorize. The statement of : 2+2=4 is very apt. I have used a similar demonstration when making a point to my girl. 2+?=? This invites independant thought and the necessity for asking questions. If I just gave her 2+23=25 then what has she learned? what can she take pride in accomplishing? The ability to simply listen and remember? If we do not instruct, guide, teach or program (pick the term for they all fit) our children and ourselves how do we learn or impart knowledge to others? As for making judgements upon anothers lifestyle choice, unless you have walked in their shoes, experienced everything they have experienced in the order and fashion they have done who are we, or how can we be so arrogant to judge. Where is the tolerance this lifestyle is so proud to espouse? Where is the ability to see others and accept their ways as right for them and enjoy the dichotomy it provides? James

Lashra -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 7:12:58 PM)
This lifestyle may work for some people but it absolutely will not work for others. I am one of those "others". As a naturally Dominant female I am not going to give over control or the decision making to a man just because he has a cock swinging between his legs. I learned a long time ago it is not your sex that makes you dominant or submissive but your own personality traits. No one anywhere has shown me any solid, absolute evidence that ALL women were designed to be (pick your own word to insert here) inferior, slaves, submissive, livestock to men. I respect other people and their lifestyles as long as they respect my own life choice. If you want to live that way go for it, but not everyone desires that type of relationship. I think all these women celebrating the fact that they have no control/no rights and wish it for all women, were born after womens liberation. They have no idea what is it really like to have no control or rights in this world. If they did they may not be so keen to have their and all other womens rights taken away. These marriages do not last any longer or are any more happier than an equal partnership, if they did then why did womens liberation even happen? Here's a clue it wasn't because all the men were pushing us to be independent and capable of making our own decisions...Could it be that the women were actually unhappy and wanted something more for themselves? Perhaps they wanted choices..? ~Lashra

kittinSol -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 7:23:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lashra This lifestyle may work for some people but it absolutely will not work for others. I am one of those "others". As a naturally Dominant female I am not going to give over control or the decision making to a man just because he has a cock swinging between his legs. I learned a long time ago it is not your sex that makes you dominant or submissive but your own personality traits. No one anywhere has shown me any solid, absolute evidence that ALL women were designed to be (pick your own word to insert here) inferior, slaves, submissive, livestock to men. I respect other people and their lifestyles as long as they respect my own life choice. If you want to live that way go for it, but not everyone desires that type of relationship. I think all these women celebrating the fact that they have no control/no rights and wish it for all women, were born after womens liberation. They have no idea what is it really like to have no control or rights in this world. If they did they may not be so keen to have their and all other womens rights taken away. These marriages do not last any longer or are any more happier than an equal partnership, if they did then why did womens liberation even happen? Here's a clue it wasn't because all the men were pushing us to be independent and capable of making our own decisions...Could it be that the women were actually unhappy and wanted something more for themselves? Perhaps they wanted choices..? ~Lashra Lashra, thank you. You are the first Dominant to post something relevant on this topic. Once again I shall abstain from doing the silly banana dance.

domitablespirit -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 7:43:44 PM)
Let's not forget The Chalice and the Blade: Archaeological evidence suggests that before the male-dominant cultures which swept the world there existed co-operative, "partnership"-oriented societies. While we can thank the male-dominant cultures of the past 5,000(ish) years for BDSM--for without them, we wouldn't have such strong gender roles--the only really reasonable model is the partnership model. Which is exactly why men will try to re-assert their "god-given" or historical dominance over women occasionally. (Note: I'm not trying to discredit relationships which use a dominance-based dynamic. I enjoy them also!)

slaveluci -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 7:47:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lashra This lifestyle may work for some people but it absolutely will not work for others. I am one of those "others". As a naturally Dominant female I am not going to give over control or the decision making to a man just because he has a cock swinging between his legs. I learned a long time ago it is not your sex that makes you dominant or submissive but your own personality traits. No one anywhere has shown me any solid, absolute evidence that ALL women were designed to be (pick your own word to insert here) inferior, slaves, submissive, livestock to men. Hello Lashra, I certainly respect your choice as I hope you respect mine. I would like to say that I for one have certainly never wanted to show any such evidence about ALL women. I don't think women are inherently designed to be any of those things. I just think that I am one woman who has decided that is the path for me. quote: I respect other people and their lifestyles as long as they respect my own life choice. I agree and would even go one step further to say that I respect others' lifestyles even when they refuse to even acknowledge that I have the right to my own way, as different as it may be. quote: I think all these women celebrating the fact that they have no control/no rights and wish it for all women, were born after womens liberation. I personally have never wished it for all women and, reading back over all these pages, I don't see anyone wishing it for all woman - no one posting here did nor the women in the original clip. quote: They have no idea what is it really like to have no control or rights in this world. If they did they may not be so keen to have their and all other womens rights taken away. No, I certainly do not know what it's like "to have no control or rights in this world." I don't want to ever know what that's like because that would mean I would not have the right to choose to live the way I do. I know I personally am not keen on anyone's rights being "taken away." I gave mine up to one Man. They were not taken and I don't think anyone's should ever be taken in any situation. Again, I don't recall anyone posting on this thread or any of the women in the clip ever saying they wanted no rights in this world or that all women's rights should be taken from them. quote: These marriages do not last any longer or are any more happier than an equal partnership, I've never seen any studies done on this so I can't say if they do/are or not. quote: Could it be that the women were actually unhappy and wanted something more for themselves? Perhaps they wanted choices..? Could be. I know I'm thankful for the fact that I have choices. Especially that I was free to exercise the choice to live this wonderful "surrendered" D/s life. I am glad to see a dominant woman post here as well, Lashra. Thank you for refusing to totally dismiss a style of living simply because you would hate living it. I have been surprised that nearly all the anger and refusal to accept has come from those identifying as submissives and not dominant women. It's been a bit surprising. You dommes seem to be a very tolerant, accepting group of ladies even when it's not your cup of tea[:)].......slave luci Edited to add: Oops, Tammyjo....I should have said "I am glad to see ANOTHER dominant woman post here." I went braindead there for a minute or two. My apologies.

thetammyjo -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 7:51:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: nearnyccouple First, there is "programming"that is accomplished by the mere fact of bringing up children. We "drive" home those "values" commonly referred to within the old testament. IE the 10 commandments. Teachers also program our young ones by giving them rote to memorize and practice and are tested upon their sole ability to memorize. The statement of : 2+2=4 is very apt. I have used a similar demonstration when making a point to my girl. 2+?=? This invites independant thought and the necessity for asking questions. If I just gave her 2+23=25 then what has she learned? what can she take pride in accomplishing? The ability to simply listen and remember? If we do not instruct, guide, teach or program (pick the term for they all fit) our children and ourselves how do we learn or impart knowledge to others? As for making judgements upon anothers lifestyle choice, unless you have walked in their shoes, experienced everything they have experienced in the order and fashion they have done who are we, or how can we be so arrogant to judge. Where is the tolerance this lifestyle is so proud to espouse? Where is the ability to see others and accept their ways as right for them and enjoy the dichotomy it provides? James What adults choose to do is their own decision as long as they do not attempt to force others to behave or believe as they do. You think that's me being arrogant? So be it. I think it's me valuing everyone's right to choose for themselves. I believe also that part of "themselves" involves all living human beings regardless of their age or biological connection.

thetammyjo -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 7:53:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveluci I am glad to see a dominant woman post here as well, Lashra. Thank you for refusing to totally dismiss a style of living simply because you would hate living it. I have been surprised that nearly all the anger and refusal to accept has come from those identifying as submissives and not dominant women. It's been a bit surprising. You dommes seem to be a very tolerant, accepting group of ladies even when it's not your cup of tea[:)].......slave luci raises an eyebrow

DsKnight -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 7:56:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lashra This lifestyle may work for some people but it absolutely will not work for others. I am one of those "others". As a naturally Dominant female I am not going to give over control or the decision making to a man just because he has a cock swinging between his legs. I think all these women celebrating the fact that they have no control/no rights and wish it for all women, were born after womens liberation. They have no idea what is it really like to have no control or rights in this world. If they did they may not be so keen to have their and all other womens rights taken away. These marriages do not last any longer or are any more happier than an equal partnership, if they did then why did womens liberation even happen? Lashra: You are saying this because you are totally clueless about what other women want. If they love giving up control to their man, then who are you to tell them that they shouldn't love or want it? We currently have the exact opposite of the problem you are referrring to - the media and the goivernment is full of bitch feminazis like you who want to tell everyone else how they can and cannot live. You and the rest of your ilk are revolting. Frankly, I don't give a damn that you are dominant - go do your thing and stop condemning other women because they want to be a feminine woman.

slaveluci -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 7:58:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo quote: ORIGINAL: slaveluci I am glad to see a dominant woman post here as well, Lashra. Thank you for refusing to totally dismiss a style of living simply because you would hate living it. I have been surprised that nearly all the anger and refusal to accept has come from those identifying as submissives and not dominant women. It's been a bit surprising. You dommes seem to be a very tolerant, accepting group of ladies even when it's not your cup of tea[:)].......slave luci raises an eyebrow Tammyjo...I'm sorry......I said I had short-term memory on a thread the other day[:)].....though we definitely seemed to be at odds here, I usually find you very accepting and very informative as well....so that applies to you as well (tolerant and accepting) - at least most of the time[;)].......Sincerely, luci

slaveluci -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 8:09:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DsKnight We currently have the exact opposite of the problem you are referrring to - the media and the goivernment is full of bitch feminazis like you who want to tell everyone else how they can and cannot live. You and the rest of your ilk are revolting. This is an unprovoked personal attack on someone who simply expressed her opinion. Since I'm assuming you do not know Lashra personally, why in the world would you call her a "feminazi" and say she is "revolting?" That is mean and uncalled for, DsKnight. Come on.....I see that you may be frustrated and I agree that no one should tell others how to live but to attack Lashra for expressing her opinion about what works for her is just not fair..........slave luci Edited to add: As strong as her opinions were, at no point did she ever say that people should not live the "surrendered wife" dynamic. She never said they were wrong or should be prevented from choosing their own way, as distasteful as she may personally find it. That's all I've been asking people to do all along - agree it's fine for others even though you would personally hate it. She did that. How is that worthy of an attack?

ErusUxor -> RE: Surrendered Wives on "60 minutes" Austrailia (6/26/2007 11:43:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveluci quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol On top of that: I shudder to think that some of us will take their 'surrender' as an other example of BDSM submission. To me, it's nothing to do with BDSM. Well, not to send you into a fit of shuddering or anything[;)] but I watched the clip and I see nothing wrong with what these women are doing. Let me make a short list of some of the things that occurred: a husband ordered for his wife in a restaurant and later picked out the clothes she would wear out a woman had to make her husband a smoothie for breakfast a mother spoke to her young daughter of "pleasing" and "honoring" her father and how he is the "king" of their home one lady ran her husband's bath and actually washed his back and shaves him It was suggested that women should not nag, should not criticize, should respect their husband's choices, and that husbands should have the final say in everything from financial decisions to sexual relations (in which case she said always say "yes" and not deny him) It was further suggested that "happy marriages happen" when wives give lots more control to their husbands and that, even if marriage is considered a partnership, the husband is the senior partner and the wife is junior partner. Now, I don't want to shock anyone but there is nothing here that Master and I do not adhere to (except explaining to the young child how things work as we don't have children. However, if we did, I would certainly explain it just as she did). I don't see anything oppressive or abusive in any of this. Saying it is creepy, sick, and wrong is certainly an opinion you've the right to have but to say these folks are freaks and should be dismissed is what is wrong in my eyes. We live like this and He and I love every minute of it. Just because we throw in some bondage and pain doesn't make it any more valid than if we didn't. I hate to burst anyone's bubble but not everyone's submission involves strutting out to public parties, wearing fetish clothes and hanging out in dungeons. If that's what does it for you, great. But please don't insult or dismiss those whose kink simply appears a bit more vanilla to you..........slave luci Edited to add: I would also state here that BDSM is made up of the terms bondage/discipline, dominance/submission, and sadism/masochism. In our relationship, we are always engaged in the d/s part and the other two happen occasionally. I see these women as engaged in perfect examples of what d/s means to Master and I. Just because couples aren't constantly involved in the other two aspects doesn't make their relationship any less valid or acceptable as a BDSM one. Master says that if I were to only be totally submissive to Him when I'm tied up or being beaten, that that would be a poor example of BDSM. This is a very nicely expressed discription of a D/s relationship. I whole heartedly agree with the concepts expressed by slaveluci...and see myself and my Masters relationship in a very similar light.

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.140625