RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ?

RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress

Message

ShaktiSama -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 6:19:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer In short: I can accept control over me by my domina - but I can't accept any desire by her to control others through me. That'd be irresponsible of me. A pity that the men and women who submit to male dominants don't seem to feel this way. If they did, we'd have less trouble with this whole "patriarchy" thing. [;)] I'm not really sure why you would want to submit to a woman who was unworthy to lead or control any human being but you, PofH. Dominance is not a trait that exists only in a bedroom, or in very private moments with your partner; most good people who have the trait exercise it in more than sexual/romantic ways, precisely because it is useful and beneficial for people with the ability to lead...to lead. In the family, in business, in religion, politics and war--submitting to female leadership is not by definition "irresponsible". Unless that female is Margaret Thatcher, of course, in which case you are being so irresponsible you should shoot yourself.

PeonForHer -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 7:04:03 AM)
I'm not really sure why you would want to submit to a woman who was unworthy to lead or control any human being but you, PofH. Dominance is not a trait that exists only in a bedroom, or in very private moments with your partner; most good people who have the trait exercise it in more than sexual/romantic ways, precisely because it is useful and beneficial for people with the ability to lead...to lead. I think submitting to a woman in more than a sexual and romantic way refers to that 'grey area' for me, Shakti. All I can say for now is that some will be good, some might not be. I'll find out when the time comes. I've seen only glimmers of it so far from dominant female friends and you may be pleased to learn that I've liked those glimmers. I'll report back when I've got more than mostly dry theory to work on. In the family, in business, in religion, politics and war--submitting to female leadership is not by definition "irresponsible". Unless that female is Margaret Thatcher, of course, in which case you are being so irresponsible you should shoot yourself. No, submitting to female leadership is not by definition "irresponsible" - of course not. What I think would be irresponsible is for me to submit to a woman then, as it were, force others to submit to her as well - by, for instance, letting her direct the way I do my work or deal with my friends. They haven't made the choice to submit to her, I alone have done that. It wouldn't be fair on those others. Please refrain from mentioning Margaret Thatcher's name to me again, or I shall be left with no option but to kill you.

YourhandMyAss -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 7:27:21 AM)
You better specify from an actuall rosebush, cause there's a condition called a rose bud, where the asshole is outside the body and it looks like a "rose" You might end up with THAT type pf rosebud coming out of the butt pictures, and nto the rose bush tree buds. quote: ORIGINAL: MsStarlett I don't know... I was hoping for a copy of that photo of a rose bud coming out of your bum... but my mail box seems to be empty.

GigglingGoddess -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 9:15:09 AM)
I view my sub as my equal. He is submissive to me, yes, but he is a human being and I treat him as one. I have no desire to make him demonstrate a lack of self-respect by not capitalizing his name or by referring to himself in third person. In addition, we both hold the mastery and correct use of English grammar in high regard. To butcher it in the name of dominance would be hypocritical of us. I suppose the matter is up to individual dominants to decide, but it should not be a rule for everyone, as some of us place more importance on intelligent conversation than superficial protocol. After all, I would not want my sub obeying your dominant's rules, only mine. If you and your dominant wish to modify your typing to display your dynamic, feel free to do so, but in my opinion, it is extraneous, confusing, and takes much more away from the content of posts than it adds.

ShaktiSama -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 10:30:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Please refrain from mentioning Margaret Thatcher's name to me again, or I shall be left with no option but to kill you. clears her throat Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher ThatcherThatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher . Margaret. Thatcher. Everyone's favorite Prime Minister. Currently shacking up with Pinochet, isn't she? What a lovely couple they must make. [:D]

LadyPact -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 1:34:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer No, submitting to female leadership is not by definition "irresponsible" - of course not. What I think would be irresponsible is for me to submit to a woman then, as it were, force others to submit to her as well - by, for instance, letting her direct the way I do my work or deal with my friends. They haven't made the choice to submit to her, I alone have done that. It wouldn't be fair on those others. There's a huge difference between other people submitting to your Dominant through you and other people recognizing the dynamic you have with her. I think you are still looking at it in such a way where the writing style is used everywhere with everyone. It isn't. If I were to impose such a thing for clip's business dealings or with non lifestyle people, I would tend to agree with you. Since it isn't the case, I don't. Perhaps an example of a similar concept would have you see it in a different way. At any kind of lifestyle gathering, event, or get together of like minded people, My submissive introduces himself as clip, or Lady Pact's little clip if we're going to be really formal about it. Of course, that's not the name he has on his birth certificate, driver's license or anything else. It's the name he uses because I gave it to him for our dynamic. For regular life, he uses the name he was born with. For those things BDSM related, he uses clip. Now, if you were to meet him at an event, would your calling him clip be a version of your submitting to Me through him?

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 1:54:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer No, submitting to female leadership is not by definition "irresponsible" - of course not. What I think would be irresponsible is for me to submit to a woman then, as it were, force others to submit to her as well - by, for instance, letting her direct the way I do my work or deal with my friends. They haven't made the choice to submit to her, I alone have done that. It wouldn't be fair on those others. There's a huge difference between other people submitting to your Dominant through you and other people recognizing the dynamic you have with her. I think you are still looking at it in such a way where the writing style is used everywhere with everyone. It isn't. If I were to impose such a thing for clip's business dealings or with non lifestyle people, I would tend to agree with you. Since it isn't the case, I don't. Perhaps an example of a similar concept would have you see it in a different way. At any kind of lifestyle gathering, event, or get together of like minded people, My submissive introduces himself as clip, or Lady Pact's little clip if we're going to be really formal about it. Of course, that's not the name he has on his birth certificate, driver's license or anything else. It's the name he uses because I gave it to him for our dynamic. For regular life, he uses the name he was born with. For those things BDSM related, he uses clip. Now, if you were to meet him at an event, would your calling him clip be a version of your submitting to Me through him? LP, I think it's more that he's saying that he wouldn't want to submit in any way that anyone outside of his Mistress would be exposed to. My question about this is... how would he feel about things like opening doors, 'handing' her out of the car, carrying packages for her, etc.... would those, if she commanded them, because they are no longer 'common courtesies', also be considered a form of 'submission' that he wouldn't want to expose strangers to? If not, what's the difference between courteously formal speech and courteous formality in opening doors or carrying packages? As an aside, I've actually had people say that they didn't want to communicate with me unless I told them my real name, because if they spoke to me using my chosen moniker, they would be 'submitting' to me by calling me by my chosen designation (not title... the name I choose to use when I'm not trapped by my legal name). They honestly felt that it was a form of submission to be asked to call someone something other than one's legal name. shrugs Clearly not folks destined to be -my- servants, eh?

Usako -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 2:46:45 PM)
Since I still believe in common courtesies and know if I ever had a son I'd be teaching him to do such as well, I know I would not think it odd if a saw a male acting like a gentleman for a lady. Honestly, I don't think a male should be commanded to do such things, they should be something automatic...but times change it seems.

PeonForHer -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 4:26:30 PM)
I think you are still looking at it in such a way where the writing style is used everywhere with everyone. It isn't. No, LP - don't worry, I got that. As I said: silly mistake that I didn't get it before. I'm quite clear that you don't demand that clip use protocol in his business dealings. I wouldn't have any trouble calling clip "clip" at any BDSM event. It doesn't impact on my life in any way that's important. As for CFSBW's comment/question: My question about this is... how would he feel about things like opening doors, 'handing' her out of the car, carrying packages for her, etc.... would those, if she commanded them, because they are no longer 'common courtesies', also be considered a form of 'submission' that he wouldn't want to expose strangers to? If not, what's the difference between courteously formal speech and courteous formality in opening doors or carrying packages? Chuckle - No. I think the sense of proportion here has now gone a little skew-whiff. That level of courtesy - and quite a lot more, actually - isn't going to impact on anyone else's life either. Re Usako's comment: I'd be a little ashamed if a domina felt the need to command it as well. However, if she were to 'command' heaploads more than that fairly ordinary (to me) level of courtesy, it'd give me a buzz, I'd do it and still not believe that it makes any impact on anyone else in a way that's worth my caring about. However, if, in a public vanilla venue and in full view of others, she were to throw a vigorous right hook at my jaw because my manners had been remiss in some way, I'd consider that to have an impact on those onlookers in a way that I couldn't allow on future occasions. (Even if she were a woman who couldn't hit properly, which is most of them, of course.)

MsStarlett -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 4:33:40 PM)
Yourhand.... Icky! You need to back up a few posts. We were discussing Peon with a long stem rose anally inserted to the bud... When that happens, we all want photos.

PeonForHer -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 4:35:06 PM)
Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher ThatcherThatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher Thatcher . Margaret. Thatcher. Little do you realise how good an impression of Vincent Price I can do, Shakti. I've got a BBC sound-effects dvd with thunderclap noises too: You, your children and your children's children, until the end of time itself, will have just cause to regret your words of this day.

Lockit -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 4:36:33 PM)
Yes I think there is a waiting list on that thorny rose butt trick pic... I'm first damn it! hehe

PeonForHer -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 4:38:20 PM)
bud No, please don't call it that. Somehow calling an anus a "bud" is just disgusting. Not a man's anus, anyway. No. Yak. Foul. [:'(][:'(][:'(]

PeonForHer -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 4:42:46 PM)
I'm going to make a chainmail sock to whack up my khyber first. Hah! Sorted.

Usako -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 4:44:16 PM)
Pucker? Tailhole? Dirty no-no place?

PeonForHer -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 5:00:15 PM)
Yes, yes, any of those. I just don't want to look at rosebuds and think of anuses, that's all. I sure in hell don't want the next woman to whom I give a rose to think of an anus, either. FGS!!

eri -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 5:02:23 PM)
I always thought calling an anus a rosebud was right up there with calling sperm "baby batter" ...

PeonForHer -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 5:09:07 PM)
"baby batter" I'd not heard that one, eri. Yes, that's deeply repulsive in a rich variety of ways, too.

Usako -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 5:18:06 PM)
Bend over and show us your rosebud, Peon! [:D] I think there are a million more lewd, crude and down right wtf terms for cum than an asshole though. Spooge, jizz, baby juice, goop, ocean of sperm, magic cream, ooze, etc.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: To CAPITALIZE or not ? (12/2/2008 5:34:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Usako Pucker? Tailhole? Dirty no-no place? Barking spider???

Page: << < prev 4 5 6 [7] 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

5.078125E-02