Bobkgin
Posts: 1335
Joined: 7/28/2007
From: Kawarthas, Ontario, Canada
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: xoxi
LOL Mad Rabbit. Seriously. I called that "Daddy" abusive and Bob was one of the champion defenders of how its not abuse if its consented to.
Here are just a few gems. I would also like to point out that he put "abuse" in quotations every time he used it to refer to that situation, as though he didn't believe breaking a bitch's bones for punishment was abusive.
I'm lolling already.
quote:
And if they like the dynamic as it is, despite the fact Props would be declared sane if she chose to pursue that, why should they?
Form over substance? "It's not how you feel its how you look"?
The understanding they have between them is of less value than what others think of them?
Seems to me these questions go to the core of wiitwd and why.
Some seem to think that if the majority of bdsmers say something is "bad", it is bad, while ignoring the fact that a much larger majority of Vanillas say everything about BDSM is "bad".
Double-standards abound: it is not okay for Vanillas to stigmatize BDSM, but it is okay if a group of like-minded kinksters stigmatize a smaller group of kinksters.
If you are going to give credence to the belief that a larger group can correctly judge a smaller group, then you've given credence to all the Vanillas who say BDSM is wrong, that doms and master should be locked up and subs/slaves should be institutionalized for their own protection.
That's why I say this isn't about kink, it's about a group of people who don't like Props and are using this as an issue with which to beat her.
Why else 'believe' everything she says about her relationship with Daddy -except- the part about how right this is for her?
(You think it's right for someone to be abused?? And yet you make this thread criticizing it?)
No. I think it right that people have a right to accept the relationship and its parameters that seem right to them.
I've not challenged that position here.
quote:
quote:
Seems to me you want to speak for Prop's "best interests".
That you have to ignore Prop and the state who both agree Daddy is the best guardian for her doesn't seem to bother you a bit.
You telling me a complete stranger who doesn't know the details of the situation knows better than those who are involved intimately?
quote:
You know, Velvet. You might be right.
Maybe I am chasing unicorns.
I happen to believe in Diversity, Individuality. I think its a logical result of a species number 6 billion +.
If Daddy and Prop are standing out there on the fringe of consensual interaction that's their business.
If you hear of them talking about involving innocents in non-consensual ways, you let me know and I'll rally to the charge.
But what they do between them I view as done between husband and wife, and I will -not- mess with that. If either of them want help getting out of it, our society has made it extremely easy for them. That Prop is here tells me she has contact with the outside world. Her mental state is her business. I'm not involved, not going to be involved, let alone involved enough to be able to sort out what is what.
Would I do what you claim has been done to her? No. Diversity and Individuality specifically recognizes what I do others do not, and vice versa. That we are each a blend of many qualities and beliefs, unique.
Does Prop suffer from low self-esteem? I don't believe so. It takes courage to post her thoughts here, and fortitude to read the responses and defend her statements or try to clarify them. Neither courage nor fortitude are in much supply with one who lacks self-esteem, unless the individual has hyper-inflated her ego. And Prop does not show that quality.
So Prop has a healthy dose of self-esteem, she is reasonably intelligent and articulate, and has chosen a way of life that is at the extreme end of "obedience", a valid BDSM kink.
Soo....breaking a bitch's bones isn't abusive but spanking is?
And it's wrong to judge 'extreme' examples of abusive behavior but okay to judge punishment as a whole to be abusive?
Please. Explain. Now.
First off, I do not refer to women as "bitch".
Second, I've never condoned breaking bones, nor do I now.
Third, while I am quite willing to challenge an activity, or the rationale behind an activity, that in no way challenges the rights of the individuals to engage in said activity for whatever reason seems right to them.
This is where we differed in the "Hard Limits" thread: you wanted to judge the relationship, and I disagreed with anyone's right to judge a consensual relationship.
That people have a right to enter a relationship does not mean I condone what they do. It means I acknowledge and respect their right to choose it, whether I agree or not.
_____________________________
When all is said and done, what will you regret?
That you never really lived?
Or there was so much living left to do?
For those interested: pics and poetry have been added to my profile.
|
RE: Why is Punishment not seen as Abusive? - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread