RE: dangerous men

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

RE: dangerous men

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

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master >> RE: dangerous men

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 5:20:29 PM

osf

Posts: 3288
Joined: 10/19/2009
Status: offline

im not sure about which posts your referring to, but suppose i did as you say, then there is nothing im hiding its there for all to read in my own words so whats the warning for?

i joke around a lot and your not going to get a sense of what im like from just a post or few

take the time to get to know me and i may appear different, then again maybe not

but the fact remains is im not in the habit of hiding what im after, its up to the individual woman to make up her mind i dont need my many fans helping

(in reply to hopelessfool)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 5:23:36 PM

Posts: 988
Joined: 7/29/2005
Status: offline

Well your jokes are obviously not that terribly endearing to many of the people who have posted in well less then friendly terms, but earlier in this thread you mentioned wanting to barbecue your submissive after you abused her. That to me ring of cannibalism, i mean why else barbecue her?

Your jokes are obviously not well received in such a manner why not alter them to express the same amount or same effect but in a different form of verbiage?

_____________________________

" I have nothing left to give, I have found the perfect end, You remain to make it hurt, disappear in to the dirt, carry me to heavens arms.....Dear Agony Just let go of me, suffer slowly, is this the way its gotta be, Dear Agony...."

(in reply to osf)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 5:25:58 PM

osf

Posts: 3288
Joined: 10/19/2009
Status: offline

its memerable line from an old spencer tracy movie about the scopes monkey trial

Henry Drummond- Spencer Tracy
Matthew Harrison Brady- Fredric March

Matthew Harrison Brady: But your client is wrong. He is deluded. He has lost his way.

Henry Drummond: It's a shame we don't all possess your positive knowledge of what is right and what is wrong, Mr. Brady.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Harrison Brady: I do not think about things I do not think about.

Henry Drummond: Do you ever think about things that you do think about?

(in reply to Politesub53)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 6:03:57 PM

Posts: 6041
Joined: 9/9/2006
Status: offline

Unless your name is Phillip Garido... at age 65, is there anything that might still be dangerous?

(in reply to osf)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 6:06:41 PM

osf

Posts: 3288
Joined: 10/19/2009
Status: offline

what is old?

is it 50?

is it 55?

what?

(in reply to Missokyst)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 6:42:26 PM

Posts: 11292
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

ROFL... okay dude.

_____________________________

No matter how old a woman gets, some men will think she was born yesterday! ROFL... I love this place!

(in reply to Psychonaut23)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 6:53:41 PM

Posts: 3939
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Psychonaut23

Yet you have no authority over osf. He is not yours to command, and you do not write the rules that he must follow. Therefore you have no right to punish him. You are dominating, in a passive-aggressive manner, without his consent.

Oh the irony.

You're assuming you have the authority to tell someone to stop doing something by saying that they don't have the authority to command someone else?

Also by participating in a forum a person gives tacit consent to many things including other people replying to their words. And those other people won't always agree and won't always be nice. However there are two steps one can take to rectify this problem:

1. Use the ignore button.

2. Type a different address in your web browser.

If you stay on the website and then say "But I'm not consenting to read your replies to my post" you're a damn jackass.

(in reply to Psychonaut23)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 6:56:11 PM

Posts: 11292
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

You really are funny.

_____________________________

No matter how old a woman gets, some men will think she was born yesterday! ROFL... I love this place!

(in reply to Psychonaut23)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 7:01:12 PM

Posts: 3939
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Psychonaut23

You're annoying me. I don't think people should annoy me. Now I'm going to punish you. I'm going to grab you by the hair, smack you around till you're crying, and throw you into a wall. There's nothing sexual here, I just think you need a quick lesson in how to talk to me. ::poof:: There. It's done. It's happened. You're crying and banged up, I feel justice has been done.

Tell me how what I've done is any different than what you've done to ocf.

If you're at all intelligent, you have to recognize that any differences are only in matters of extremes. Both our actions are on the same continuum. Both involve one person with no authority over another person exercising their ability to punish others without that other persons consent for violating arbitrary and meaningless rules.

Either you're wrong to present your actions as justified by osf's actions, or it's perfectly acceptable for me to smack the shit out of you for annoying me. Choose one.

Physical violence is illegal, laughing at someone isn't. The only reason you have to change it to physical violence instead of laughing at someone is because you can't make your point adequately using only the facts involved.

(in reply to Psychonaut23)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 7:01:21 PM

VideoAdminAlpha

Posts: 3876
Joined: 7/25/2008
Status: offline

**steps in, puts on her best Rodney King voice and says" PULEASE can't we all just get along?"

< Message edited by VideoAdminAlpha -- 12/19/2009 7:02:03 PM >

(in reply to Lockit)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 7:14:41 PM

Posts: 3939
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Psychonaut23

quote:

Oh the irony.

Why does no one ever use that word correctly?

Because it's evolved from its original form as an intentional quip to encompass unintentional self contradiction. It's colloquial now.

quote:

quote:

You're assuming you have the authority to tell someone to stop doing something by saying that they don't have the authority to command someone else?

I didn't tell her to stop. I only described what she is doing and told her I found such behavior obnoxious.

You told her she had no right to do what she was doing. If you're arguing that you didn't use the specific word "stop" please tell me now cuz I'll be so done with this.

quote:

quote:

Also by participating in a forum a person gives tacit consent to many things including other people replying to their words.

That's a dodge. There is no such thing as tacit consent, and I wouldn't run around trying to convince admitted sadists that such a thing exists. Claims of tacit consent are made by people who have done wrong to another without their express consent and are now trying to backpedal.

There is such thing as tacit consent. Anyone assuming tacit consent might be wrong, but it's a fair assumption to make and what we should be discussing is if he *gave* tacit consent rather than if there is such thing as it.

Express consent is saying "I will" whereas tacit consent is *not* saying "I won't" even as the situation presses forward.

quote:

quote:

And those other people won't always agree and won't always be nice. However there are two steps one can take to rectify this problem:

Neither of which actually address the point. You're right, people won't always agree and won't always be nice. Some people are assholes. What's going on here is that first Lockit and now you are trying to defend behavior that makes one an asshole while denying that you are, in fact, assholes. Which is what makes you both passive-aggressive bitches. See how that works?

No, actually I don't. I follow the asshole bit, I follow the bitch bit, and I follow the aggressive bit, but the "passive" tacked on to aggressive is throwing me. Will you please explain it?

quote:

quote:

If you stay on the website and then say "But I'm not consenting to read your replies to my post" you're a damn jackass.

Why hello there Straw Man! I haven't seen you all day.

Well what you argued was that ocf didn't consent to punishment, but in this case the only "punishment" is having to read negative replies to his post.

If you're saying that the punishment wasn't related to reading insulting posts toward him then I apologize and I'd ask that you better explain it.

(in reply to Psychonaut23)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 7:15:10 PM

Posts: 11292
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

I guess we shall meet in hell then bro... lol Lockit 7:77

_____________________________

No matter how old a woman gets, some men will think she was born yesterday! ROFL... I love this place!

(in reply to Psychonaut23)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 7:20:56 PM

Posts: 3939
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Psychonaut23

quote:

Physical violence is illegal, laughing at someone isn't.

We are discussing ethics. We are not talking about what the law is. Neither you or Lockit is a law enforcement professional, and neither of you has any legal authority, so the question of what the law says is irrelevant.

Laughing at others has long been recognized as unethical and immoral. Even Christ noted it:
Matthew 5: 21Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: 22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

quote:

The only reason you have to change it to physical violence instead of laughing at someone is because you can't make your point adequately using only the facts involved.

That is a purely nonsensical statement, and leads me to speculate that what you know about logical argumentation could probably be written on a notecard. It is empty speculation and meaningless. I changed it to physical violence because physical violence is more obviously wrong in most people's perspective.

Well if you can only make your point using the obvious, then my statement stands. But I'll ignore that bit so we can get back to the point.

Re: the law, it doesn't matter if I'm a lawyer or not, I can have you arrested for hitting me. I can't have you arrested for laughing at me when I do something you consider stupid.

Re: ethics and morals of laughing at someone, I'm not a Christian so I'll skip that bit, but it seems as though our society has progressed beyond the rule based forms of ethics (IE what's good is what the Bible says) and that most codes of morals and ethics now are inherently personal. One person can find something to be abhorrent and another person can see no problem with it. The fact that I have to point this out on a BDSM board kind of makes me wonder.

Anyway I have no issue with saying that you think people here should stop posting what they do. My main issue was that you framed it in the sense of "you have no right to command others but here I am commanding you by telling you what you do and don't have the right to do" and that's obnoxious.

That being said, I still disagree with you. But I disagree with you on the content of your post, not on the concept.

(in reply to Psychonaut23)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 7:39:55 PM

Posts: 9792
Joined: 9/8/2007
Status: offline

nm

< Message edited by lusciouslips19 -- 12/19/2009 7:41:58 PM >

_____________________________

Original Pimpette,
Keeper of Original Home Flag and Fire of Mr. Lance Hughes
Charter member of Lance's Fag Hags,
Member of the Subbie Mafia
Princess of typos and it's my prerogative

(in reply to Psychonaut23)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 7:45:11 PM

Posts: 6412
Joined: 6/5/2008
Status: offline

*wonders if she has room for 'Snippy Bitch' in her sig line*

_____________________________

"MotherFUCKER!" is NOT a safeword!!"- Steel
"We've had complaints about 'orgy noises'. This is not the neighborhood for that kind of thing"- PVE Cop

Resident "Hypnotic Eyes", "Cleavage" and "Toy Whore"
Subby Mafia, VAA Posse & Team Troll!

(in reply to lusciouslips19)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 7:56:24 PM

Posts: 3939
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Psychonaut23

quote:

You told her she had no right to do what she was doing. If you're arguing that you didn't use the specific word "stop" please tell me now cuz I'll be so done with this.

Take it up with Immanuel Kant. He's the authority, not I. I'm simply applying rational, humanist ethics to the situation, exactly as I was trained to do by my ethics professors in college (criminal justice major).

Really I don't care if you feel she has the right to do something or not. My point was that by saying she has no right to do something you're telling her *not* to do it. Thus contradicting yourself.

quote:

quote:

There is such thing as tacit consent. Anyone assuming tacit consent might be wrong, but it's a fair assumption to make and what we should be discussing is if he *gave* tacit consent rather than if there is such thing as it.

Express consent is saying "I will" whereas tacit consent is *not* saying "I won't" even as the situation presses forward.

And thus were a million date-rapes born.

I'd prefer not to discuss this on here because I don't want to offend anyone who believes they were date raped in a situation where they could have said "no" with no risk of harm to themselves but for whatever reason didn't.

Suffice it to say I agree with you in that believing that there's no such thing as tacit consent is directly correlated to the rise in date rape convictions.

quote:

No, actually I don't. I follow the asshole bit, I follow the bitch bit, and I follow the aggressive bit, but the "passive" tacked on to aggressive is throwing me. Will you please explain it?

Certainly. When someone is being an aggressive asshole, and denying that they are being an aggressive asshole, and furthermore blaming the target of their assholish behavior for the behavior they are engaging in, then they are being passive aggressive. They are being aggressive while maintaining a facade of innocence.

I suppose that could apply to me, but I'm not denying that others might perceive me as an asshole and I'm not saying that their perceptions would be wrong. I fully believe that you can consider me an asshole for something that I consider myself aggressive for, and neither of us would be wrong because those value judgements are based in (guess what) the values each of us hold.

quote:

It doesn't matter what the crime is, and it doesn't matter what the punishment is. Lockit has no authority, thus if she punishes osf in any way at any time she is being an asshole. Which is fine. I'm an asshole. Nothing wrong with being an asshole.

I'd change that to "if she responds to his posts the way she wants to, some may perceive her as an asshole" with the corollary of "and in their paradigm they'd be right" but in general I'd say this is reasonable.

quote:

I personally find people who are assholes and then deny it or try to justify it with any claims beyond "I enjoy being an asshole" fairly pathetic. But that's just my opinion.

I tend to see things in the context of "you can do whatever you want, but you can't control how people respond to it" and that would fit both people here. Osf can say what he wants, he can't control people laughing at him over it. Lockit (and I apparently) can say what we want but we can't control people calling us an asshole for it.

So I guess in general we agree, but I do stand by my statement that by participating in a forum and freely expressing your opinion, you're consenting to the fact that others will be doing the same. You can withdraw that consent (leave the forum) or deny that consent to certain individuals (ignore button) but it's laughable to think that someone participating in a forum is being punished without consent simply because people are responding negatively to his posts.

(in reply to Psychonaut23)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 8:02:04 PM

osf

Posts: 3288
Joined: 10/19/2009
Status: offline

which gets back to my contention , we're all assholes, ask everybody else

my personal attacks on others have been nil

my threads were meant to elicit responses not elucidate others on my positions, i have made posts that did convey my positions but they were ignored

as for my typing , im not a typist and to make it look professional would occupy all my time

as far as im concerned there has been little but strident criticism of anything ive posted and damned little discussion or coherent debate

i have news for you this whole thing that we say we're into defies logic and it is up to each and every one of us to develop their own coherent philosophy or find someone whose philosophy they can live with

i sometimes say outrages things to see the response , so what

ive seldom seen a pack attack ive been subjected to here

if people are more concerned with the package and not the contents im not going to loose sleep over it

im only responsible for my words and not those of others

say im every thing my critics say i am, what do their mean spirited attacks make them?

is a puzzlement

< Message edited by osf -- 12/19/2009 8:04:20 PM >

(in reply to Psychonaut23)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 8:03:09 PM

Posts: 25191
Joined: 11/25/2007
From: Apple County NY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

im not sure about which posts your referring to, but suppose i did as you say, then there is nothing im hiding its there for all to read in my own words so whats the warning for?

i joke around a lot and your not going to get a sense of what im like from just a post or few

take the time to get to know me and i may appear different, then again maybe not

but the fact remains is im not in the habit of hiding what im after, its up to the individual woman to make up her mind i dont need my many fans helping

Nobody is going to want to take the time to get to know someone who says the things you do.

You may claim you are joking but your posts do not come across as that.

We are not sufficiently interested in a stranger to beg him to explain. The onus for presenting yourself in a way that would make someone want to know you better is on you.

_____________________________

Slave to laundry

Cynical and proud of it!

(in reply to osf)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 8:06:57 PM

osf

Posts: 3288
Joined: 10/19/2009
Status: offline

then what concern is it of yours and why your seeming fascination with attacking everything i say

(in reply to DesFIP)

RE: dangerous men - 12/19/2009 8:07:46 PM

Posts: 3939
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Psychonaut23

quote:

Well if you can only make your point using the obvious, then my statement stands. But I'll ignore that bit so we can get back to the point.

And my statement about what you know about logical argumentation fitting on a note card stands.

Then I'll keep going at it illogically because I prefer to discuss the topic at hand rather than attempt to introduce a flawed analogy. An analogy only works when two things are equal, you can't say "this response which is illegal" is equal to "this other response which is not illegal."

quote:

quote:

Re: the law, it doesn't matter if I'm a lawyer or not, I can have you arrested for hitting me. I can't have you arrested for laughing at me when I do something you consider stupid.

Correct, but you can't punish me. You have to go find an actual authority figure to do that. Were you to try to punish me, you would (most likely) be guilty of assault.

Only if I punished you in a manner that was against the law. If my punishment was laughing at you and calling you an idiot for hitting me, I'd be fine. Which is what I was saying to begin with - the "punishment" osf is facing here does not require an authority to determine whether or not it is legal.

quote:

quote:

Re: ethics and morals of laughing at someone, I'm not a Christian so I'll skip that bit, but it seems as though our society has progressed beyond the rule based forms of ethics (IE what's good is what the Bible says) and that most codes of morals and ethics now are inherently personal.

There is no such thing as personal ethics and morals. Morals are universal and absolute, or they are meaningless. Our entire legal system is founded on this understanding.

Not wanting to get into the whole subjective vs. objective morality thing, suffice it to say that even institutionalized morals aren't universal, they're just institutionalized in one place. Or several places.

Institutionalizing morality doesn't mean "this is the moral code everyone has" it just means "this is the moral code you must abide to if you wish to live free in this nation."

quote:

quote:

One person can find something to be abhorrent and another person can see no problem with it. The fact that I have to point this out on a BDSM board kind of makes me wonder.

That a serial killer doesn't find it abhorrent to stab people to death does not make it moral, nor does it mean that in that serial killer's "personal morality" killing people is okay. The serial killer is simply immoral.

By your morality, yes. There are serial killers who do believe they are morally in the right.

The fact that I agree with your morality, the fact that most western nations' legal codes agree with your morality, does not mean that he's doing anything immoral *by his own morality.*

Or, for that matter, by the moralities of other nations. In other words, good luck finding Osama.

quote:

Sometimes, when it comes to ethical and moral issues, people are just wrong.

I'm not saying you have to agree with their morality or think they're right. Just accept that many people who are, in our eyes, "doing wrong," might feel that they're doing right. By their own code.

quote:

quote:

Anyway I have no issue with saying that you think people here should stop posting what they do. My main issue was that you framed it in the sense of "you have no right to command others but here I am commanding you by telling you what you do and don't have the right to do" and that's obnoxious.

I'm an asshole. Sue me.

LOL are you trolling me?

< Message edited by Elisabella -- 12/19/2009 8:30:21 PM >

(in reply to Psychonaut23)

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master >> RE: dangerous men

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

0.617