Collarchat.com

Join Our Community		 Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: On addiction and D/s


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: On addiction and D/s Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/23/2009 5:43:47 PM   
QuixoticErrant


Posts: 260
Joined: 2/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Firebirdseeking

Very well stated, Quixotic.  For some, there is an addiction in this Life; a bigger and bigger kink for a bigger and bigger high.  Just like the needle in the arm.


Thank you!

(in reply to Firebirdseeking)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/23/2009 6:44:14 PM   
NihilusZero


Posts: 4036
Joined: 9/10/2008
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline 		Meh. You're digging a circular path. The presumption to pre-qualify anything (even addictions) as "unhealthy" or "healthy" is based entirely on geocultural mores and norms. Strangely...if we want to psycholanalyze ourselves, it's the fear of need that often propagates the arguments you bring forth. It's often painted as a direct nemesis to "freedom"...one of the sacred cows of human individuality (you'll find slews of threads that subtly reference that aspect in the D/s relationships discussed on these boards).

It all inevitably comes down to the results of the "need". Need itself is not a detractor. We have no qualms rolling our eyes at the obviousness of "needing" physical thing (air, food, hydration) but despite the fact that we are thoroughly psychological creatures, we tread apprehensively on the thought that there may be emotional and mental "needs" as well.

To that extent, a self-ascribed "need" is just that which brings an individual to where they wish to be. The term "addiction" only applies when chemical or biological habits force the body to continue to seek said thing when the conscious desire for it (and its byproducts) is no longer there. If someone decides to use the word "need" when speaking of, say, spanking as a prerequisite to their relationship, it's only a description of how fulfilling the act is for them.

Trying to reduce the entirety of the concept to box in "need" into the "addiction" box misses the forest for the trees.

< Message edited by NihilusZero -- 6/23/2009 6:54:02 PM >

_____________________________

"I know it's all a game
I know they're all insane
I know it's all in vain
I know that I'm to blame."
~Siouxsie & the Banshees

NihilusZero.com

CM Sex God du Jour
CM Hall Monitor

(in reply to QuixoticErrant)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/23/2009 6:51:36 PM   
NihilusZero


Posts: 4036
Joined: 9/10/2008
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: variation30

what I am saying is that there are no 'actual needs'...hell, there are no needs. only desires or wants.

This is either contradictory or a semantic fixation.

If all value is subjective, then needs do indeed exist the moment individuals create them.


_____________________________

"I know it's all a game
I know they're all insane
I know it's all in vain
I know that I'm to blame."
~Siouxsie & the Banshees

NihilusZero.com

CM Sex God du Jour
CM Hall Monitor

(in reply to variation30)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/23/2009 7:01:09 PM   
variation30


Posts: 1190
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: Alabama
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: QuixoticErrant

I was going to address your other points until I saw this. Get a grip. The potential scorn that the vanilla world may or may not have for BDSM does not parallel, come close to, or even begin to be remotely honorable to even mention in the context of those who suffered at the hands of Nazi Germany. This is shallow narcissism at it's worst. It dishonors the dead and it discredits your arguments. Grow up. You are not a persecuted minority. You are an adult with certain sexual preferences. It is nothing more or less than that. You are not being taken away to be murdered for it.


get a grip. it was a joke. it does not dishonor the dead nor does it discredit my argument.

and thank you for telling me I'm not being taken away and shot by the einsatzgruppen for posting on a website, I needed to know that.

what I will say is that the belief that the individual's will should be subordinate to experts or a larger community is always a dangerous idea. it was at the root of the persecution of homosexuals by the apa (when homosexuality was considered a mental illness according to the dsm). it was at the root of the nazi's theory of 'rational antisemitism' . it was at the root of prohibition (and countless other post-millienialist projects). as such, whenever I see the argument of a petty tyrannt who feels they know what is best for other people and, what is more, believe that they or another organization should disallow others from actions they find disagreeable, I critisize.

quote:

The way that people get so pissy about their kinks is actually a form of the addiction I am talking about. They identify so much of themselves with their kinks, that they can not take anything that even looks like a questioning of kink as anything other than an attack on themselves. This relates directly to what I am saying about self generated worth.


ah yes, so me critisizing you is actually a manifestation of an addiction.

oh where to start with you.

how about this, first off, making such a claim nothing more than an ad hominem. it's not that I have a rational objection to your statement, it is that I am controlled by an addiction (which subverts my will) which forces me to disagree with you. such disagreement must be a manifestation of delusion right? as if this isn't centuries old (I would suggest you look up the minutes of Freud's little circle-jerk when they used similar pseudo-medical babble to assassinate the character of Karl Kraus).

you can also impotently attempt to tie my arguments to esteem issues, but the argument falls flat. what we are discussing is vampirism, an activity I am in no way interested in. seconldy, how have I taken this as an attack upon myself? I have stated that no individual, no matter how well-intentioned, self-righteous, or pompous, can justify forcing individual's to stop acts they engage in willingly. that is the issue I am discussing. you can try and sidestep it by claiming I am being irrational because I am so blinded by my 'kink' (whatever that means) or you can try to convince me that you, or some other agency, should be the final arbiter of how humans can and cannot act.

quote:

Real self generated worth is an honest affair. If you have a strong sense of self worth then you say, "Hey fine, this is what I like, so what?" There is no need to be defensive - provided you are not hurting anyone else. If you are permanently damaging others, that is another matter. Honestly, liking BDSM is like liking to put caramel on your french fires. Others may not get it, but then again it is hardly evil either. It is also not something that makes you a special persecuted little snowflake.


I believe the essence of what I am saying is similar to 'this is what I (they) like, so what?' why do I need to be defensive? well, because it is suggested that arbitrary distinctions be made about when things that people like should be disallowed. for instance, 'permanent damage'. what if two individuals consent to branding or some type of ritualistic removal of a digit to show devotion? what if one individual assists another in suicide?

and where exactly have I claimed persecution? the only thing I've commented on is the dangers of individuals believing they, through some invisible web of communal responsibility, should be allowed to disallow dangerous behaviors.

< Message edited by variation30 -- 6/23/2009 7:02:53 PM >

_____________________________

all the good ones are collared or lesbians.

or old.

(in reply to QuixoticErrant)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/23/2009 7:04:50 PM   
dreamerdreaming


Posts: 2839
Status: offline 		10 points.

_____________________________

Download SLAVE LOVER. Explicit BDSM porn, with a plot! A love story, on a FemDom planet! http://www.amazon.com/Slave-Lover-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B0031ERBLI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1261973416&sr=1

(in reply to NihilusZero)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/23/2009 7:09:37 PM   
variation30


Posts: 1190
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: Alabama
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero

quote:

ORIGINAL: variation30

what I am saying is that there are no 'actual needs'...hell, there are no needs. only desires or wants.

This is either contradictory or a semantic fixation.

If all value is subjective, then needs do indeed exist the moment individuals create them.



it's semantic.

I always avoid using the term 'needs' to describe the ends individuals seek. this mainly stems from conversations about other topics like whether or not humans deserve certain 'needs' to be met because humans have a right to have such things (because they are objectively valued by humanity - like healthcare, housing, unemployment insurance, food, etc.).


_____________________________

all the good ones are collared or lesbians.

or old.

(in reply to NihilusZero)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/23/2009 7:32:22 PM   
DemonKia


Posts: 5521
Joined: 10/13/2007
From: Chico, Nor-Cali
Status: offline 		FR, after read thru

Firstly, this seems very similar to the discussion going on in the 'N/need' thread . . . . .

Didn't see this elsewhere in this thread: there are millions of persons with mental health issues who 'need' to take their psychoactive meds every day to be 'normal', but that isn't taken as 'addiction' . . . . .

&, yeah, I read both this & that 'N/need' thread as having a lot more to do with the OP's issues about 'need' than having some basis in 'everyone's reality' . . . . .

Oh, & meh-meh-meh on all this 'addiction is obviously so evil' shit, just annoys the heck out of me . . . . . Frankly, that kinda talk just reminds me of how people talked about the devil hundreds of years ago, 'addiction' will reach out & grab you if you're not careful, take over your soul & you will be helpless in its thrall . . . . .

People 'need' to be employed & dependent on employers in our culture, & most everyone celebrates that particular 'addiction' as wonderful even when the 'users' freakin' hate their jobs & their employment destroys their bodies, their minds, & their souls . . . . . . Or consumption of material goods as addictive, that's widespread, what my 'buddhist nature' frames as 'out of control acquisitive nature' . . . . . But the rest of the culture tends to see 'out of control acquisitive nature' as something fabulous, to be emulated & desired . . . . .

'Addiction' & 'neediness as awful' are both cultural / social constructs rather than some kinda 'hard indisputable fact' .. . . . In my opinion, of course; I expect that mileage will vary quite a bit on this, & as usual I suspect I'm airing a 1% opinion . . . . . *shrugs*

_____________________________

Snarko ergo sum.



The Verbossinator

(in reply to variation30)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/23/2009 8:31:12 PM   
abuddingdom


Posts: 158
Joined: 3/8/2007
Status: offline 		What a great topic for discussion......

If you cant stop doing something & it adversely is affecting you & others- especially  but not limited  to those close to you  then you're addicted, whether substance or behavior. People get addicted to all kinds of things besides the big ones - tobacco, alcohol, the myriad drugs(legal&not)&gambling. People- getting addicted to a person isa big one, & unhealthy just by definition. Patterns -usually those of a relationship but again there's patterns to all aspects of the human condition & patterns can be addictive. Work & / or responsibility or dodging it. Exercise. Lying & stealing are addictive.  We all know attention whores - does anyone agree with me that they're addicted to it?  How about sun worshippers ? Food, or more accurately abusing it , using it for medication. Some may be rolling their eyes & dismissing me but if someone cant stop doing ANYthing then its an addiction.

I know about addiction, but I'm far from an expert on D/s & M/s. I'm learning as I go along & doing basically all right, IMO. I'm expending a lot of thought on how to make some more definite progress - that is, make things within me move along faster or become better defined for me, but thats another topic( I say that a lot in these threads, lolol!). But even having a way yet to go , knowing what I do re addiction has made me think a lot on weather WIITWD can be addicting to both D & s types. I'll leave the heavy lifting on that one to those who've been around longer&more intensely than me(& have read some good words in the last quarter hour or so. Could be an endless debate, though). I  do think  that BDSM activities are more likely to become an addiction if you're more vanilla then kinky , or just top / bottom but not D/s. Inevetibly one will want it more than the other does, then  they'll crave it&resent not having enough of it(& when addicted ther'e never enough), crave it, then start bargaining or worse for more of it. That one will find relief from the addictive parts of it all only by finding a partner on their wavelength or by  moving on - by  their choice or not - & if they're fortunate(& lucky) they'll find the lifestyle&discover that it isnt all about the BDSM stuff.

I will opine, though, that  out of control active addictions can only be detrimental to D/s or M/s. You're head has to be clear to lead or serve, & if you're a slave to someTHING it will take away from your  providing structure & taking care of (which is my style of Dominance)  or serving  someONE. Out of control addiction clouds the mind & the senses. If I'm drunk or stoned or face down in the food all or most of the time  or concentrating on getting that way what good can I be to her? & if she's preoccupied with the same, she's serving her needs&another Master(or demon)  but she cant do that and serve me.

My pretty one is addicted to that old tobacco leaf though, but has gone from upwards of 3 packs  a day  when we met to the 10 a day that I allow since we went 24/7. We tried less & eventually reached half a pack a day - any less is too stressful for her& anymore than that & she would be more focused on it than her duties & on me. Either way, she couldn't serve. So,  its a controlled addiction.

(in reply to variation30)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/23/2009 8:48:34 PM   
abuddingdom


Posts: 158
Joined: 3/8/2007
Status: offline 		Oh yeah, DemonKia, thanks for reminding me- spending. Buying  your way to happiness but usually ending up in misery....

I just know that I'm prone to addiction & have struggled with several. There's endless debate(& study) on why some people are prone to it & some aren't & I sure as hell dont know the answer to it. But that ones a good example thats affected not only people but has become pervasive into our fabric. My pretty one has made the point several times since the economy went crazy(it became evident right about the time we got together) that its almost comical how shocked, -Shocked! - Greenspan was afew years back after spearheading&allowing deregulation in the banking industry that they didnt regulate themselves(he must have been addicted to his blinders).  Power can be an intoxicating thing , & get intoxicated enough & some will become addicted......

(in reply to abuddingdom)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/23/2009 9:37:25 PM   
QuixoticErrant


Posts: 260
Joined: 2/1/2009
Status: offline 		Good on you!

(in reply to abuddingdom)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/23/2009 9:50:43 PM   
QuixoticErrant


Posts: 260
Joined: 2/1/2009
Status: offline 		Oh do stop the psycho babble. When I point out that people are identifying themselves so much with their kinks that any question of a kink gets touchy, this is a direct observation, not an ad-hominem attack on you - unless of course you feel that you fall into that category.

So you have a thing against Freud ok... I'm not here to try to debate the nuances of psychiatry. I really don't care at all what the fine lines are. They don't matter at all when the discussion revolves around convincing people that such lines exist even in principle. If you do not believe that certain self destructive addictive behaviors exist, you are simply refusing to see plain reality. You are not making a deep philosophical point any more than Cartesian Doubt is deep. Don't get me wrong, it is fun to imagine the evil genius and all, but really, if you doubt reality, stub your toe.

If you want this in very basic terms, people do lots of stupid stuff that is self destructive and that they would likely regret in more lucid moments. BDSM, like any other thing can easily be abused in this manner. These are such basic statements of reality that when people argue against them, one has to wonder why they are being so willfully blind. One has to ask, if they are interested in such things at least, what could possibly drive them to make such absurd statements which are so obviously contradictory to the simple observed truth.

No, a more direct critique of your writing comes from simply being silly.

On a more serious point there is a word in the English language for those who do not believe that they have any responsibility to others "in an invisible web" as you put it. The word is evil. Please do spare me the hackneyed nihilism. It is an unimpressive philosophy only espoused by the spoiled. In the real world, there are such things as social contracts. This is a good thing even for you, since you are not the biggest guy or the best survivalist. Do you know how to grow/gather food, hunt, fight? Think about the need for social responsibility very carefully before you disavow it.

Perhaps you feel that protecting your fellows and having responsibility is a drag... Again, consider the alternative. The argument that people have intrinsic merit just for being people and therefore harming them, or allowing harm to be done to them, through inaction, is inherently wrong, might be very well be unappealing to you. Too bad. Instead, I will simply use the cave man argument.

In a real world application, the law of the jungle would see you get done in quite quickly by a much larger and more angry fellow, who frankly would not only be unimpressed by shallow attempts to be byronic, but would also just smash your head because he could. Those of us who live in lawful societies, which are founded on the moral principle of protecting our fellows, have to worry less about that.

Yes, duty to others might be a drag. I weep for the crimp that may put in your style... I will not convince you that it is inherently right and something to be embraced, however, you should at least consider the utilitarian aspect of the social contract as it applies to your own survival.

Ohhh and one other thing, we are not discussing vampirism. Do read the OP where I made it quite clear that I was not going into that.



< Message edited by QuixoticErrant -- 6/23/2009 10:42:46 PM >

(in reply to variation30)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/23/2009 10:23:06 PM   
ThatDamnedPanda


Posts: 6060
Joined: 1/26/2009
Status: offline 		Well, whatever else may come of this thread, I learned a fantastic new word. Byronic! Brilliant! I love it. Thank you, QE! Nicely crafted!

_____________________________

Panda, panda, burning bright
In the forest of the night
What immortal hand or eye
Made you all black and white and roly-poly like that?


(in reply to QuixoticErrant)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/23/2009 10:28:06 PM   
QuixoticErrant


Posts: 260
Joined: 2/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda

Well, whatever else may come of this thread, I learned a fantastic new word. Byronic! Brilliant! I love it. Thank you, QE! Nicely crafted!


You are welcome!

(in reply to ThatDamnedPanda)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/23/2009 10:55:49 PM   
NihilusZero


Posts: 4036
Joined: 9/10/2008
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: QuixoticErrant

Yes, duty to others might be a drag. I weep for the crimp that may put in your style... I will not convince you that it is inherently right and something to be embraced, however, you should at least consider the utilitarian aspect of the social contract as it applies to your own survival.

I'm looking back over the interactions and am failing at finding where this strawman is an accurate portrayal of anyone's views.

What was brought up is that mutual consent trumps projected morality. What I'm seeing here (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) is your suggestion that an outer arbiter should be making the rulings on other people's behalf as to what they can or cannot do...which is a dangerously contradictory notion to its very intent.


_____________________________

"I know it's all a game
I know they're all insane
I know it's all in vain
I know that I'm to blame."
~Siouxsie & the Banshees

NihilusZero.com

CM Sex God du Jour
CM Hall Monitor

(in reply to QuixoticErrant)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/23/2009 11:02:37 PM   
QuixoticErrant


Posts: 260
Joined: 2/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero

quote:

ORIGINAL: QuixoticErrant

Yes, duty to others might be a drag. I weep for the crimp that may put in your style... I will not convince you that it is inherently right and something to be embraced, however, you should at least consider the utilitarian aspect of the social contract as it applies to your own survival.

I'm looking back over the interactions and am failing at finding where this strawman is an accurate portrayal of anyone's views.

What was brought up is that mutual consent trumps projected morality. What I'm seeing here (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) is your suggestion that an outer arbiter should be making the rulings on other people's behalf as to what they can or cannot do...which is a dangerously contradictory notion to its very intent.

quote:

the only thing I've commented on is the dangers of individuals believing they, through some invisible web of communal responsibility, should be allowed to disallow dangerous behaviors.


Then you didn't read his entire rant.

He said (amongst other things): "the only thing I've commented on is the dangers of individuals believing they, through some invisible web of communal responsibility, should be allowed to disallow dangerous behaviors."

(in reply to NihilusZero)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/23/2009 11:08:25 PM   
NihilusZero


Posts: 4036
Joined: 9/10/2008
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: QuixoticErrant

Then you didn't read his entire rant.

He said (amongst other things): "the only thing I've commented on is the dangers of individuals believing they, through some invisible web of communal responsibility, should be allowed to disallow dangerous behaviors."

I'll read more...but I don't see a problem with his statement here. It's worded properly so as to make a distinction between "dangerous" and "illegal", and hits the point about the inherent problem of ethical projection that seeks to constrain the freedom of another.

What, exactly, is wrong with the sentence?

_____________________________

"I know it's all a game
I know they're all insane
I know it's all in vain
I know that I'm to blame."
~Siouxsie & the Banshees

NihilusZero.com

CM Sex God du Jour
CM Hall Monitor

(in reply to QuixoticErrant)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/23/2009 11:16:14 PM   
NihilusZero


Posts: 4036
Joined: 9/10/2008
From: Nashville, TN
Status: offline 		And the comments about personal persecution came from you misconstruing his altered rendition of Niemölle's poem. It wasn't a instance of Godwin's law or an attempt to parallel BDSM with the byproducts of nazi Germany. The context is clear when we read his preceding paragraph:

quote:

ORIGINAL: variation30

perhaps you should reread what I wrote. it was more along the lines of "I have no right to dictate to others which actions they willingly commit with their bodies/property are acceptable and which actions should be disallowed." it's an argument of courtesy and respect for individual's sovereignty over their own bodies and lives. I have no desire to be a petty tyrant, trying to force my views of proper behavior onto others. and for those that do , I wish them a painful reminder that it is none of their business. I would expect a community such as collarme (or any bdsm community) to be hesitant to start cordoning off behavior as 'too dangerous' or 'not healthy' as it's done to our lifestyle already.


_____________________________

"I know it's all a game
I know they're all insane
I know it's all in vain
I know that I'm to blame."
~Siouxsie & the Banshees

NihilusZero.com

CM Sex God du Jour
CM Hall Monitor

(in reply to NihilusZero)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/24/2009 1:54:38 AM   
QuixoticErrant


Posts: 260
Joined: 2/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero

quote:

ORIGINAL: QuixoticErrant

Then you didn't read his entire rant.

He said (amongst other things): "the only thing I've commented on is the dangers of individuals believing they, through some invisible web of communal responsibility, should be allowed to disallow dangerous behaviors."

I'll read more...but I don't see a problem with his statement here. It's worded properly so as to make a distinction between "dangerous" and "illegal", and hits the point about the inherent problem of ethical projection that seeks to constrain the freedom of another.

What, exactly, is wrong with the sentence?


I have a hard time believing that you can not process the basic issue with such a statement. I really think you are likely just trying to be a troll. However, if you honestly don't understand what is wrong with the sentence, I will try to put it into the sorts of terms I would use to explain this concept to an unempathetic child... An empathetic child would have the notion that you have a duty to help others because it is the right thing to do... Since that is lacking here, I will phrase it in terms of self interest.

You see... There are people who believe in things like morality, decency and ethical behavior. They are not bigots or extremists or anything other than people who believe in the bare minimum needed to make a society function. Yes, the police really do have the right to keep you from being awful to other people. In fact, so do average people. this helps you too. It may seem to you like those oppressive pigs are telling you that you can't just do whatever you feel like... oh man... THEY ARE, but your ass is alive because of such ideas.

For those who are too self obsessed, shallow or simply evil to understand the value of a coherent ethical society, there is the simple utilitarian argument that without an ethical society, they would be dead at the hands of others who think like they do, but are stronger, more ruthless, more lucky or just more cunning.

The cornerstone of an ethical society is the notion of social responsibility. In otherwords, the belief that you actually do have a duty to others.

This applies even to you. Since you have grown to adulthood, and an infant is helpless, we can assume that someone, with the notion of an ethical responsibility to you, kept you alive long enough so that you are now able to say such silly and ungrateful things. You see, the system worked even for you!

Sorry if that bums you out.

You actually do have a duty to other people. That means, amongst other things, that you can not just watch someone do something very dangerous at a play party and do nothing. For someone with empathy, it is because they do not want to see another human being get seriously hurt or dead. For the nihilistic types who can't be bothered with petty notions like morality and right and wrong, they should consider that accessory to murder is a real bum rap and that most juries are made up of people who believe in social duties.

Whine about that fact to someone else. I really have no patience for nihilist manifestos. There is nothing cool at all about people who can't be bothered to do their duty. There is nothing cool about a let others suffer attitude. It is simply selfish, egotistical, narcissistic and lazy. Yes that is judgmental. Ethical societies have the duty to judge the unethical as such. Go figure... it has something to do with maintaining order.

Your other comments about this paraphrase of the German minister's quote being fine, show the most astonishing rudeness and insensitivity. Wow, man you are soooo cool... I mean paraphrasing a quote that refers to the deaths of millions of innocent people at the hands of monsters - to use in a debate about not judging your own little sex kinks is really manly! IT SHOWS SUCH CLASS AND SENSE OF PROPORTION! Right, your kinks and your right to think that there are no limitations on them is just as important as their lives... Really classy... And don't go saying that is a straw man or trying to weasel out of that point. The implication of equivalence is clear. Cynical nihilists making light of serious matters to suit their own petty ends in making pompous pronouncements are only showing their utter lack of basic human interaction skills by presuming that their personally petty grievances are just as important as the greatest tragedies. Cry me a river.

The nicest thing I can assume is that you really aren't that socially clueless and are simply trying to "joke" to be a troll. OK great, so you are a troll. I will now ignore any more ridiculous comments from you.

< Message edited by QuixoticErrant -- 6/24/2009 2:25:36 AM >

(in reply to NihilusZero)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/24/2009 2:01:51 AM   
RCdc


Posts: 8674
Status: offline
quote:

You see... There are people who believe in things like morality, decency and ethical behavior. They are not bigots or extremists or anything other than people who believe in the bare minimum needed to make a society function.


Are you one of these people?
 
the.dark.

_____________________________
RC&dc


love isnt gazing into each others eyes - it's looking forward in the same direction

(in reply to QuixoticErrant)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: On addiction and D/s - 6/24/2009 2:30:21 AM   
QuixoticErrant


Posts: 260
Joined: 2/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark

quote:

You see... There are people who believe in things like morality, decency and ethical behavior. They are not bigots or extremists or anything other than people who believe in the bare minimum needed to make a society function.


Are you one of these people?
 
the.dark.


If you mean do I believe in morality decency and ethical behavior, of course. Do you not believe in ethics? Do you not believe in personal and social responsibilities? Are you asking this like it is a bad thing, or do you want to hijack the thread into a debate about defining morality?

In order to forestal that, I will put out the simplest and most basic moral concepts a sufficient to this discussion. Don't cause unnecessary harm. Don't do nothing when you see another harmed.

Harm will be defined as something which is ultimately detrimental.



(in reply to RCdc)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: On addiction and D/s Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





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
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.523