RE: Doormats

RE: Doormats (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

LaTigresse -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 2:32:10 PM)
Right now, I am trying to not associate the word with any sort of M/s or D/s dynamic. It is just too variable to have a valid definition for me. What one person sees as one, another is quite happy being. If that person is a happy and satisfied consenting adult......more power to them. Outside of this, yes perhaps.

Smutmonger -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 2:35:44 PM)
When you have a bunch of people who are "refusing any sort of label-because I am too speshul to be defined"......These disagreements are myriad and chaotic. The conversations soon become a bit like watching a room full of drugged cats doing backflips. Lots of sound and fury-amusing in the extreme-but no sense whatsoever.

ResidentSadist -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 2:55:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero What is the difference between a doormat and a sub/slave in a relationship so trustworthy that demands made by hir D-type aren't even internally critiqued/questioned? -=Define Doormat=- What is a doormat? Is a doormat defined by action or intent? If by action, in general, a doormat usually means someone that unquestioningly obeys. When people impose intent to use the term as an insult, they propose that obedience is out of stupidity, insecurity or some other “flaw”. Rarely do they propose obedience is a result of trust and confidence in one’s self and partner. People do choose the role of a slave out of acute self-awareness, prowess and confidence. Those good qualities are something the mind reading fortune tellers in the BDSM community seem to have missed when they crossed the line to preach at us with their insightful M/s understanding about the woes of “blind obedience”. Jesus . . . if I was in a relationship with someone like that, I would be paranoid about their decision making abilities and want the power to negotiate too! -=No Difference=- As above, I imagine it depends how you define a doormat. For me, I love my doormat, so I don’t see a difference. I respect and appreciate a good doormat and all that it does. -=Ode to My Doormat=- (Forgive the reprint) You know, I am freaking tired of the prejudice against doormats. I love my doormat and it performs a vital function in my house. It is decorative and pretty to look at. It says “welcome” to my guests and makes them feel I care about them by having one. It shows respect for my house by letting you wipe your feet on it if they are dirty. It even dries your feet when they are wet. My house and my porch just wouldn’t be the same without a good doormat! [image]http://residentsadist.com/pics/doormat.jpg[/image]

VaguelyCurious -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 3:03:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist When people impose intent to use the term as an insult, they propose that obedience is out of stupidity, insecurity or some other “flaw”. Rarely do they propose obedience is a result of trust and confidence in one’s self and partner. People do choose the role of a slave out of acute self-awareness, prowess and confidence. Those good qualities are something the mind reading fortune tellers in the BDSM community seem to have missed when they crossed the line to preach at us with their insightful M/s understanding about the woes of “blind obedience”. Jesus . . . if I was in a relationship with someone like that, I would be paranoid about their decision making abilities and want the power to negotiate too! But what if you were to make a distinction between a) someone who unquestioningly obeys a partner (M, D, whoever) about whom they have thought long and hard and decided that this is a person they can trust to do right for and by them, and b) someone who unquestioningly obeys whoever comes along first, and then later realises that this was a stupid decision? That does not display self-awareness, prowess or confidence. a)-types aren't doormats, afaic-they are people who have made a well-considered decision. b)-types are people I would call doormats. Of course from the outside it's nigh-on impossible to tell which is which....

lally2 -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 3:05:35 PM)
the flip side to this term is the derrogatory inferrance that makes submissives like lovingpet and myself have to defend ourselves because we are wired for obedience, honesty and absolute trust to another. to do things without question, happily and with no other objective than to please. i do not associate doormat with myself. i am submissive and i have no need for further description. its an oxymoron, a contradiction and, in my view totally un-pc. i believe it probably goes a long way in confusing submissives who on one hand want to give their all but on the other are fearful that theyll be deemed (worthless)as the term suggests) doormats. and yet obedience, honesty, trust and full submission is what is valued and sought. you cant have it both ways. we are submissives not doormats. a doormat is something you put infront of youre door to wipe youre feet on, a submissive is a creature who will, if youre lucky, fulfill youre fantasies and desires. i see absolutely no comparison.

heartfeltsub -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 3:16:05 PM)
i would agree with a couple of other posters on the difference and will reference some of those posters in this post, i hope that is okay. beth, who is her post calls herself a doormat, is not someone i would define as a doormat based on the connotation that word has come to have. quote: To me, doormat has negative connotations because its indicative of being walked on. A doormat is someone who stands by weakly while some one uses, abuses, and generally disrespects them in ways that they are NOT ok with. It's the in ability to stand up for ones self in bad situations. So when our dear most favorite troll says that he wants a doormat, to me that's saying he wants some one who he can trample, stomp on, and treat poorly in all manner, and will still lay at his front door despite feeling completely abused and unhappy in the relationship. I fail to see the positive side of this. Being obedient and compliant is not one with being forced to do things that are sincerely harmful to your being. That to me is my definition of doormat and beth does not seem to fall into that category. It is apparent from almost every one of her posts, how much she loves and trusts Merc and what respect and love he has for her. The term, as i am sure the OP and the rest of us know has come to mean something far different than its dictionary definition. Those meaning ranges from a slur to mean "you would do that????" to "you're just trying to prove you are slavier than i am". To me, unquestioning obedience to a Dominant/Master who has proven that he or she is trustworthy is an entirely different matter thing all together and is, in my opinion, a beautiful thing to behold and not something to put down, regardless of where he or she wipes his or her feet. heartfelt

littlewonder -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 3:18:09 PM)
Personally I don't see any difference. Then again I'm more than willing to admit I'm a doormat and happily so.

ResidentSadist -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 3:42:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VaguelyCurious quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist When people impose intent to use the term as an insult, they propose that obedience is out of stupidity, insecurity or some other “flaw”. Rarely do they propose obedience is a result of trust and confidence in one’s self and partner. People do choose the role of a slave out of acute self-awareness, prowess and confidence. Those good qualities are something the mind reading fortune tellers in the BDSM community seem to have missed when they crossed the line to preach at us with their insightful M/s understanding about the woes of “blind obedience”. Jesus . . . if I was in a relationship with someone like that, I would be paranoid about their decision making abilities and want the power to negotiate too! But what if you were to make a distinction between a) someone who unquestioningly obeys a partner (M, D, whoever) about whom they have thought long and hard and decided that this is a person they can trust to do right for and by them, and b) someone who unquestioningly obeys whoever comes along first, and then later realises that this was a stupid decision? That does not display self-awareness, prowess or confidence. a)-types aren't doormats, afaic-they are people who have made a well-considered decision. b)-types are people I would call doormats. Of course from the outside it's nigh-on impossible to tell which is which.... *"Of course from the outside it's nigh-on impossible to tell which is which...."* Our understanding of definitions is a little different. To me you talk of doormats vs idiots. :) I try to live a simple and well defined life. I have found you can often avoid trying to predict their intent or internal decision making aptitude because idiots take the rope you hand them and hang themselves with it. Easily judged by the results, no intent required. Is the soldier that “unquestioningly obeys” risking their own life while fighting other people’s wars, whether for politics or profit, is their intent and decision making perceivable? Do you feel different amounts of respect for the delinquent that joined the service to get discipline or the farm boy that had no better way to get to college? Do you go one by one to decide whether or not to respect them for obeying? Is one better than the other? Later when we learn we did not find weapons of mass destruction and they all “realized that this was a stupid decision” . . . . do they become doormats? The soldiers that turned the tide in WW2, winning freedom for our allies, were the result of a “well-considered decision”? Are they more or less respectable than those that looked for weapons of mass destruction? Measuring intent gets sticky.

Lorenzo19 -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 3:55:15 PM)
doormats are that thing you put in front of your door. Other than that is is a made up word to insult Men who are percieved as control-freaks and humiliate women who are controlled by them.

domiguy -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 3:57:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero an ironic musing struck me: I cannot allow myself to participate in a thread that is based solely upon an ironic musing. Too many bad memories. It all stems from this nasty little episode. Jeffff and I were at this dingy little bar, wearing our ascots and partaking in some hoppy beveri when he started to speak. "Oh, Domiguy, just the other day I must confess that I had the most ironic musing..." His sentence was cut short by me slamming my pint glass directly into his throat. I then proceeded to grab him by the back of his shirt and slam his forehead into the top of the bar a half dozen times. I then kicked out the barstool from under him and began to jump up and down on his chest. Totally exhausted, I sat back down on my bar stool and slowly savored my hoppy beer. Several minutes later, Jeffff regained consciousness and said, "Dude, what the fuck!!!" I looked down at him and said, "Listen up, fuck stick...No one talks like that. Thank God that most people can go the entirety of their lives without suffering through a single ironic musing. No one wants to hear about your ironic musings, your contradictory contemplations or any of your puzzling paradoxes. Fuck you Jeffff. I hate you. You fucking cunt!!! After a lengthy recovery, we managed to mend our fences and inevitably we became the hop bonded pair that you see here today! It was really all for the best.

VaguelyCurious -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 3:59:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist *"Of course from the outside it's nigh-on impossible to tell which is which...."* Our understanding of definitions is a little different. To me you talk of doormats vs idiots. :) One of the perils of discussing BDSM... :-P quote: Is the soldier that “unquestioningly obeys” risking their own life while fighting other people’s wars, whether for politics or profit, is their intent and decision making perceivable? Do you feel different amounts of respect for the delinquent that joined the service to get discipline or the farm boy that had no better way to get to college? Do you go one by one to decide whether or not to respect them for obeying? Is one better than the other? The key thing for me is that both boys made a decision-they saw a result they wanted (an education, stability), they knew what they would have to do to get it (follow orders, risk their lives), and they decided that the consequences were worth the risk. There was a thought process involved. quote: Later when we learn we did not find weapons of mass destruction and they all “realized that this was a stupid decision” . . . . do they become doormats? Well, neither of the two examples you gave joined the army to find weapons of mass destruction-their goals remain intact whether or not the wars they fight in are justified... quote: The soldiers that turned the tide in WW2, winning freedom for our allies, were the result of a “well-considered decision”? Are they more or less respectable than those that looked for weapons of mass destruction? Measuring intent gets sticky. Conscripted soldiers like those in the latter part of WWII had a choice between prison or war. They were choosing between two evils. They fought because fighting was a necessity. Subs and slaves are not facing two evils, they are choosing to submit to a particular person-they have the possibility of finding someone responsible and trustworthy, who they wish to obey without question. They also have the possibility of rushing in and doing something stoopid... (I hate talking to Americans about military stuff-I'm always afraid of offending people-I just want to say that if I have it was inadvertent.)

Mercnbeth -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 4:08:15 PM)
quote: i would agree with a couple of other posters on the difference and will reference some of those posters in this post, i hope that is okay. beth, who is her post calls herself a doormat, is not someone i would define as a doormat based on the connotation that word has come to have. quote: To me, doormat has negative connotations because its indicative of being walked on. A doormat is someone who stands by weakly while some one uses, abuses, and generally disrespects them in ways that they are NOT ok with. It's the in ability to stand up for ones self in bad situations. So when our dear most favorite troll says that he wants a doormat, to me that's saying he wants some one who he can trample, stomp on, and treat poorly in all manner, and will still lay at his front door despite feeling completely abused and unhappy in the relationship. I fail to see the positive side of this. Being obedient and compliant is not one with being forced to do things that are sincerely harmful to your being That to me is my definition of doormat and beth does not seem to fall into that category. It is apparent from almost every one of her posts, how much she loves and trusts Merc and what respect and love he has for her. heartfeltsub, the happy and respected doormat that enjoys the relationship she does with Master, as it exists, was the doormat that previously submitted to folks who, on occasion, used, abused and disrespected this slave long before He ever came along. the only time this slave "stood up for herself" was when her life---the breathing in and out part---was in jeopardy. she handed out the same amount of trust, submission and love to those previous intimate partners as she did with Master~MOST, not all, did not respect it or appreciate it. they chose to call her submission/doormatiness sick, weak and undesirable. the difference you see is not because this slave submits any differently than she has with others...it is becaue HE is a dominant man of integrity that appreciates this slave's submission...unlike the many others.

LadyOddsworth -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 4:12:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: afkarr A doormat had no self esteem or automany to begine with; while those in a deeple commited relationship retain theri self esteem and voluntarily choose to give up automany. I agree with the above. Plus, they have no backbone, self worth or pride. IMO

Icarys -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 4:14:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyOddsworth quote: ORIGINAL: afkarr A doormat had no self esteem or automany to begine with; while those in a deeple commited relationship retain theri self esteem and voluntarily choose to give up automany. I agree with the above. Plus, they have no backbone, self worth or pride. IMO Okay afkarr

Icarys -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 4:28:53 PM)
I have to wonder why people even need a word like that to define themselves against...as if that somehow makes them better if they can separate from it. When in truth it may be what some need to embrace inside to get to where they want to be. Definitely not in all cases but maybe in some. Surely we all can see a few that might fit into a "doormat category" and seem completely ecstatic over it. I don't see the need for the negativity about any of it.

domiguy -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 4:34:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys I have to wonder why people even need a word like that to define themselves against...as if that somehow makes them better if they can separate from it. When in truth it may be what some need to embrace inside to get to where they want to be. Definitely not in all cases but maybe in some. Surely we all can see a few that might fit into a "doormat category" and seem completely ecstatic over it. I don't see the need for the negativity about any of it. It's the same as all doms being referred to as over controlling, manipulative and abusive assholes. It's a broad stroke that touches on what we do in a rather stereotypical fashion. Some would have a problem with it. Some might actually fit the description.

juliaoceania -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 4:39:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys I have to wonder why people even need a word like that to define themselves against...as if that somehow makes them better if they can separate from it. When in truth it may be what some need to embrace inside to get to where they want to be. Definitely not in all cases but maybe in some. Surely we all can see a few that might fit into a "doormat category" and seem completely ecstatic over it. I don't see the need for the negativity about any of it. It's the same as all doms being referred to as over controlling, manipulative and abusive assholes. It's a broad stroke that touches on what we do in a rather stereotypical fashion. Some would have a problem with it. Some might actually fit the description. That was what I was trying to say on another thread about doormats... I know some people want to identify like that, and that is fine by me, but to me a doormat is something I wipe my feet on because I do not want to get where I live dirty... its a shit wiper basically. I wouldn't want to be called toilet paper either.

domiguy -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 4:53:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys I have to wonder why people even need a word like that to define themselves against...as if that somehow makes them better if they can separate from it. When in truth it may be what some need to embrace inside to get to where they want to be. Definitely not in all cases but maybe in some. Surely we all can see a few that might fit into a "doormat category" and seem completely ecstatic over it. I don't see the need for the negativity about any of it. It's the same as all doms being referred to as over controlling, manipulative and abusive assholes. It's a broad stroke that touches on what we do in a rather stereotypical fashion. Some would have a problem with it. Some might actually fit the description. That was what I was trying to say on another thread about doormats... I know some people want to identify like that, and that is fine by me, but to me a doormat is something I wipe my feet on because I do not want to get where I live dirty... its a shit wiper basically. I wouldn't want to be called toilet paper either. I saw that...Then the guy with the "ironic musings" compared subs to a rodent....Once again missing the point entirely.

Icarys -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 5:01:51 PM)
I like the guy with the ironic musing.....They say you can tell alot about a person by the company they keep..He keeps good company. Thanks NZ for the topic.

Jeffff -> RE: Doormats (2/23/2010 5:05:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys I like the guy with the ironic musing.....They say you can tell alot about a person by the company they keep..He keeps good company. Thanks NZ for topic. I like to think so. Jeff

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

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.28125