quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: NookieNotes

As a aside, you really have a thing for the way you view the world being the be-all-end-all for everyone, don't you?

There was no need for this. I have accorded you courtesy. You return ad hominem and slander.

We're done.

Michael

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

Since there's no sex involved, it isn't cheating.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

Since there's no sex involved, it isn't cheating. Is someone in a bad relationship where they cannot be honest with their partner? Sure but that's a horse of a different color. Does a grocery store cashier have to give someone an interrogation to make sure their partner isn't a vegan and going to be horrified by that steak they buy? Does a Vegas casino need to see a tax return to make sure monies being bet aren't taking food out of their kids' mouths?

If you don't need to take the moral high horse in every other area of life, then why just when it's sexual?

quote:

ORIGINAL: ExiledTyrant

Alrighty Kaliko, so where is your dog in the fight?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

My point was: Being a "business woman" doesn't absolve immoral behavior.

In my view, ANYONE that helps a married (or otherwise committed) person to cheat on their partner is a scumbag. I don't care if they're making money doing it. That doesn't clear the books. The ACT ITSELF is a moral abomination (It's called "dishonesty" or "Subterfuge", if you like).

NO ONE gets a pass, in my book. D

quote:

ORIGINAL: shiftyw

bear- I've been the other woman three times- once unknowingly though, and I've been cheated on, at least twice.

You're in good scumbag company. No one is perfect, people learn and grow. I don't think we need scarlet letters (would they be s for scumbag?) condemning us in everyone's eyes for the rest of eternity. it our weight to bare- and if people can't hang because of it- they can move along.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


I don't know that there's a question, in here, that requires an answer, per se but I will see what I can do.

quote:

ORIGINAL: UnholyBear

- "In my view, ANYONE that helps a married (or otherwise committed) person to cheat on their partner is a scumbag. I don't care if they're making money doing it. That doesn't clear the books. The ACT ITSELF is a moral abomination (It's called "dishonesty" or "Subterfuge", if you like)."

Michael: It is for this statement here which yes it does come across as judgmental and without having any elaboration on this stance, it is highly obvious to myself that anyone/everyone is being painted with the same brush? This is simply an observation on my part so please take it as such. From that above quote, does it also indicate that in your eyes and mind that there are no gray area and that it is strictly black and white? Reason why I ask is that is what it says to me. Especially when you label a cheater as being a scumbag which logically also would include the person they cheated with?

First (and I'm not being a grammar nazi); what seems to be a question is a little confusing: "It is for this statement here which yes it does come across as judgmental and without having any elaboration on this stance, it is highly obvious to myself that anyone/everyone is being painted with the same brush?".

It's "highly obvious" to you but there's a question mark. So, I am honestly not sure if you're asking a question or making a declarative statement. I will answer what I can decipher from it:

There's always "a grey area" with some people. It's because (in my view) they are searching for justification or mitigation as to why they've done something wrong. There are certain things that I believe are moral absolutes.

As I have said (Twice, on this thread, I think) already; if Person A (married) tries to take up a relationship with Person B and tells Person B that they are married, Person B is just as culpable as Person A, in my mind. They are actively engaging in dishonest behavior.

We can always find excuses for what we do wrong, it's how we justify bad behavior so that we can try to ease our conscience. It's a human thing. There's people that try to make excuses for murderers and all sorts of morally bankrupt people (they're usually called lawyers).

So, there's honesty and dishonesty and in that instance, there is no grey area, for me. I do see it as "black and white".

quote:

ORIGINAL: UnholyBear

An if that is the case then it would also mean that there is no consideration of the circumstances because people cheat for a variety of reasons and not always is it because their spouse/partner supposed fault.

There is no consideration of circumstances. Once again; there's "honest" and "dishonest". Some people don't value honesty as much as I do. That is correct and that is their choice but, it is not their choice as to how highly I value honesty. Stalemate.

quote:

ORIGINAL: UnholyBear

And essence, one is acting as judge, jury and executioner in a metaphorical sense.

I reserve the right to judge others for my own benefit as every human being does (although we all have different standards that we use as our "measuring stick"). As far as "executioner" (metaphorical or not) the only "execution" I do is to whether or not that person is one that I deem to be of value in my personal interactions. It's the only thing I can control.

I didn't say "there should be a law" or that they aren't free to fuck over as many people as they like. They won't be given the opportunity to fuck me over.

quote:

ORIGINAL: UnholyBear

Yes, I find that comment offensive in the fact that you apparently placed yourself in a position to judge and condemn.

I refer you to what Stephen Fry says about being offended.

That said; condemn them to what? Not being able to be my friend? Who gives a fuck? Not being able to have the opportunity to prey on me with their lies and obfuscation? Tough shit. That's my choice to make.

quote:

ORIGINAL: UnholyBear

You are not a perfect person and I certain not either and frankly I have never claimed to be a saint or an angel either. At least I know I am honest to myself and to others about my past, about all the stupid fuckups I got myself into and I do this on the idiot hoppe that people will gain a little more understanding on human nature. Understand also that I am quite able to lay enough self guilt without you or anyone else who decides to make a blanket judgement on the morals or lack of morals of another.

I defy you to show where I ever claimed to be perfect (Nice straw man attempt, there). We are all imperfect beings. I have never disputed that.

We are also all beings who are social or societal creatures and as such, we make judgments and choices, every day. If you don't like how others view you, you have two choices: You can examine your behavior and decide if people are being too scrupulous in their assessment of you. if that is the case, I have always found, when I find myself in such an instance, what others think about me doesn't really matter much.

You can examine your behavior and realize that maybe there's a reason why you're able to "lay enough guilt on yourself". On some level, you find your behavior to be wrong and what is bothering you is that thing called a conscience.

Now, I've answered what I think were the questions in there and I'll add this: In this post, you judged me. I don't begrudge you that. It's what we do as human beings. You find me lacking in the area of compassion. Fair dues. I don't care that that is your opinion. It's fine. I'm not going to try to change your mind about me.

Lastly, I wish to point out that I didn't call out anyone by name. I wasn't pointing my finger at you (not the generic "you"). I was pointing my finger at people that engage in dishonesty and your post makes it no less morally repugnant to me than it was before your post.

I'm sorry that you, as another human being were offended by what I said, but I refer you (again) to Stephen Fry and to the fact that what might be eating at you is your own conscience (as you kind of indicated).



Michael

quote:

ORIGINAL: UnholyBear

edited because you don't give a fuck

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


I don't know that there's a question, in here, that requires an answer, per se but I will see what I can do.

quote:

ORIGINAL: UnholyBear

- "In my view, ANYONE that helps a married (or otherwise committed) person to cheat on their partner is a scumbag. I don't care if they're making money doing it. That doesn't clear the books. The ACT ITSELF is a moral abomination (It's called "dishonesty" or "Subterfuge", if you like)."

Michael: It is for this statement here which yes it does come across as judgmental and without having any elaboration on this stance, it is highly obvious to myself that anyone/everyone is being painted with the same brush? This is simply an observation on my part so please take it as such. From that above quote, does it also indicate that in your eyes and mind that there are no gray area and that it is strictly black and white? Reason why I ask is that is what it says to me. Especially when you label a cheater as being a scumbag which logically also would include the person they cheated with?

First (and I'm not being a grammar nazi); what seems to be a question is a little confusing: "It is for this statement here which yes it does come across as judgmental and without having any elaboration on this stance, it is highly obvious to myself that anyone/everyone is being painted with the same brush?".

It's "highly obvious" to you but there's a question mark. So, I am honestly not sure if you're asking a question or making a declarative statement. I will answer what I can decipher from it:

There's always "a grey area" with some people. It's because (in my view) they are searching for justification or mitigation as to why they've done something wrong. There are certain things that I believe are moral absolutes.

As I have said (Twice, on this thread, I think) already; if Person A (married) tries to take up a relationship with Person B and tells Person B that they are married, Person B is just as culpable as Person A, in my mind. They are actively engaging in dishonest behavior.

We can always find excuses for what we do wrong, it's how we justify bad behavior so that we can try to ease our conscience. It's a human thing. There's people that try to make excuses for murderers and all sorts of morally bankrupt people (they're usually called lawyers).

So, there's honesty and dishonesty and in that instance, there is no grey area, for me. I do see it as "black and white".

quote:

ORIGINAL: UnholyBear

An if that is the case then it would also mean that there is no consideration of the circumstances because people cheat for a variety of reasons and not always is it because their spouse/partner supposed fault.

There is no consideration of circumstances. Once again; there's "honest" and "dishonest". Some people don't value honesty as much as I do. That is correct and that is their choice but, it is not their choice as to how highly I value honesty. Stalemate.

quote:

ORIGINAL: UnholyBear

And essence, one is acting as judge, jury and executioner in a metaphorical sense.

I reserve the right to judge others for my own benefit as every human being does (although we all have different standards that we use as our "measuring stick"). As far as "executioner" (metaphorical or not) the only "execution" I do is to whether or not that person is one that I deem to be of value in my personal interactions. It's the only thing I can control.

I didn't say "there should be a law" or that they aren't free to fuck over as many people as they like. They won't be given the opportunity to fuck me over.

quote:

ORIGINAL: UnholyBear

Yes, I find that comment offensive in the fact that you apparently placed yourself in a position to judge and condemn.

I refer you to what Stephen Fry says about being offended.

That said; condemn them to what? Not being able to be my friend? Who gives a fuck? Not being able to have the opportunity to prey on me with their lies and obfuscation? Tough shit. That's my choice to make.

quote:

ORIGINAL: UnholyBear

You are not a perfect person and I certain not either and frankly I have never claimed to be a saint or an angel either. At least I know I am honest to myself and to others about my past, about all the stupid fuckups I got myself into and I do this on the idiot hoppe that people will gain a little more understanding on human nature. Understand also that I am quite able to lay enough self guilt without you or anyone else who decides to make a blanket judgement on the morals or lack of morals of another.

I defy you to show where I ever claimed to be perfect (Nice straw man attempt, there). We are all imperfect beings. I have never disputed that.

We are also all beings who are social or societal creatures and as such, we make judgments and choices, every day. If you don't like how others view you, you have two choices: You can examine your behavior and decide if people are being too scrupulous in their assessment of you. if that is the case, I have always found, when I find myself in such an instance, what others think about me doesn't really matter much.

You can examine your behavior and realize that maybe there's a reason why you're able to "lay enough guilt on yourself". On some level, you find your behavior to be wrong and what is bothering you is that thing called a conscience.

Now, I've answered what I think were the questions in there and I'll add this: In this post, you judged me. I don't begrudge you that. It's what we do as human beings. You find me lacking in the area of compassion. Fair dues. I don't care that that is your opinion. It's fine. I'm not going to try to change your mind about me.

Lastly, I wish to point out that I didn't call out anyone by name. I wasn't pointing my finger at you (not the generic "you"). I was pointing my finger at people that engage in dishonesty and your post makes it no less morally repugnant to me than it was before your post.

I'm sorry that you, as another human being were offended by what I said, but I refer you (again) to Stephen Fry and to the fact that what might be eating at you is your own conscience (as you kind of indicated).



Michael

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

I think we are all getting a little too involved here.

If Michael finds pro Domming with married men so abhorrent then people like myself have to accept that. If Michael decides he doesn't want to interact with me on any other topic from now on, I have to understand and accept how he feels. Just because my views are different to Michaels doesn't mean I can talk him round to thinking like me...that goes back to my own expectations.

Nothing wrong with putting in our ten cents worth and laying open our view on things so long as we can and should accept that we likely won't change the other persons view and why should we?. Remember that thread on Fin Dommes that went on to about 50 pages? That was Fin Dommes trying to reason with people who didn't agree with Fin Dommes...it couldn't rest because people were desperate to change there opponents opinion and were prepared to spend considerable lengths of time on that thread trying to do that. That thread resulted in insults, put downs and numerous apologies (one from me) but I don't think anyone walked away from that thread with a different opinion than the one they started with.

Michael and myself get along because we both accept that we think very differently about certain things.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB

I don't think anyone walked away from that thread with a different opinion than the one they started with.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SinFix

DS.. I have the utmost respect for your stance on honesty/dishonesty, given the way you had written your post, there was what appeared to be a line/view that was not what was actually being said. I asked a question of how you viewed personal responsibility on the interaction between two people, just so I could get a better gauge of what you were saying. You informed me of your meaning behind the posts and I got a clear view of what you were saying, though you did take a pot shot at me, I went past that and could then empathize with your stance and see what you were saying.

I tend to think that a lot of posters tend to get vehement on their views and want to argue that view till the end of time. For myself, I tend to be fluid and try my best to see not just my view but how or why someone else sees their view of the same situation.

I myself hope you continue to interact on the forums as I think you bring a perfect foil to the boards that they need at times, as I have stated before.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: UnholyBear

edited because you don't give a fuck

While I was thinking about this entire topic, over night, I realized that you were judging me for judging others. Paradoxical, no?



Michael

quote:

ORIGINAL: UnholyBear

Save it for someone else who cares.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr
... and I don't think either one of us has ever said anything the with intent of hurting the other? I know I don't feel like you have.

quote:


I won't give details (that wouldn't be cool), but I vaguely remember an exchange where I think we were both tip-toeing and choosing words, carefully.

Michael

quote:

Nookie
That's why I do what I do: the love of discussion, and to provide more than a 2-dimensional view/opinion of various kinks.