It doesn’t matter. You keep that shit away from the children. The children should never see their mother being treated by an SO as less than an equal. Both adults are showing an absolute lack of concern for how the kids might feel that’s very disturbing. What’s so hard about straightening the fuck up and acting like a parent when the kids are watching?
Yeah, I think you’re right–sorry. I’m not sure what kind of collar it was.
Anyway, I’m just not sure what’s inherently humiliating about a collar. People wear way more out there things to goth clubs and the like. I’m not sure kids would necessarily think it was all that weird, especially if they’ve grown up with it.
Nonsense. All participants in a football game consent to being bashed about to the degree permitted by the rules of the game. If they did not, then the bashers would be guilty of assault.
And that’s the primary point concerning D/s – it is consensual.
How would you have felt if you had a stepfather come into the household and literally treat your mother like a slave who had no right to say no (and I’m talking about how the children will perceive things, not how the couple enacting this drama conceptualizes it for themselves)?
If it makes the children unhappy or uncomfortable for even a day, it’s inappropriate. No one NEEDS to enact sexual dramas 24 hours a day. They’re doing it because they want to, not because they have to. If they don’t HAVE to bring the children into it, then it’s indefensible for them to do it. It’s not the same as a GLBT situation because those are not choices and they’re not even primarily sexual. Sex games are purely voluntary and should only be played out of sight of the children.
Not at all. She could walk away at any moment or sit him down and say “OK, really, I’m not digging this anymore” and it would stop. If she wanted to, she could easily walk out and get full custody of the kids (how many family court judges are going to give custody to a father who hits and publicly humiliates his wife?). She could even take full control of the situation by refusing to do his bidding and forcing him to “punish” her.
Anyway, she wants her husband to call the tune. She’s made a deliberate choice to all but force him to call the tune. Why can’t the Morality Busybody Crew go off and save someone who actually needs it, like the still-massive numbers of women who are subservient to their partners against their wishes?
As demonstrated by everybody (except for Mr. Magoo, who I’ve already covered above) giving exactly that response to Robin Goodfellow. When DtC was called on it, suddenly “mentally ill” only applied to M/f, not F/m. It’s as if he said “We can’t trust a woman to run our country!”, then noticed a woman in the room and added, “Oh, um, well, I only meant black women.”
You’re spot on here. We all know that women can’t make their own lifestyle choices, and need big, strong men to make those choices for them. Don’t let them get too into it, though–they can be right monsters about it.
And where has this been claimed? The most extreme claim so far has been that everything that happens between consenting adults is OK and not our problem–not “normal”, which is your word. There’s a pretty strong line there: everything that happens between fully informed and consenting adults is on this side, and everything that involves children, animals, uninformed participants and/or non-consenting participants is on the other side. Even that is a deliberate fudging intended to communicate the idea that we needn’t meddle in even the weird and destructive fetishes that occur between fully informed and consenting adults.
How so? Reading this thread first, I got the impression that freekalette’s husband actually subdued her and then ordered/asked the children to help tickle her, and that sounded very, very weird. Then I read through the original thead, and it sounded more like her husband started tickling her and then the kids jumped in and started tickling her too, of their own volition. How is that sexual, and how were the kids unwilling participants? They could have easily decided not to tickle Mom that day.
Neither side is consenting to be subservient to the authority of another. Both sides have equal rights on the field. This is an asinine analogy. I don’t know why I’ve even given it as much attention as I already have.
The problem is that the children don’t have that same right.
That’s where I have concern over how the 24/7 aspect of a D/s relationship is handled. I think that a lot of how one treats another person is learned. What will a child learn if throughout his or her formative years the primary exemplar treats his or her spouse like shit?
Not like shit, like a sex slave.
Damnit, woman, pay attention! And can you bend over and pick up that sock on the floor? No, no, a little more to the right…
Too, I know women whose “collars” are bought from Tiffany’s or some other fine jeweler. What one calls a collar can be anything from a regular necklace, to a choker, to thick leather with spikes and little tags.
A Prior Tea, take a look at my post count. I speak from experience: this kind of thinking is endemic on the Dope. There are a LOT more of them than there are of you, and I suspect the Mods share in their opinions to some extent.
There’s a difference?
Treating mom as less than an equal is a problem no matter what you call it,
Sex?
I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. What does sex have to do with treating a mother as an equal in front of her children?
Because it clearly points out that people can and do consent to being bashed about.
If you want to shift the slope away from consent to physical bashing, and instead look at consent in the context of subservience to the authority of another, simply look to the armed forces, where, unlike D/s, when one changes one’s mind, one cannot necessarily back out and remove one’s self from the authority by withdrawing consent.
You asked me the difference between being treated like a sex slave and being treated like a piece of shit. As far as I can tell, the only difference is putting a sexual spin on the behavior.
:: psst, I agree with you. ::
Straight male here. You?
Something was bugging me about her posts when I first read them but couldn’t put my finger on it until I read your post, fisha. The whole undercurrent of “teehee I’m such a bratty little girl” that comes across in her posts had me all :rolleyes: .
To each their own, I suppose. I have some tendencies towards submissiveness in the bedroom but there’s no way I could live that lifestyle 24/7, let alone think about exposing children to that (if I had any).
Straight female.
Let me go find my riding crop and dressage boots. Oh, and Pop Rocks, let’s not forget the Pop Rocks.
Sure they do. It’s called emancipation. Your children have no more (or less) right to escape their mother’s insistence on a Christian upbringing, IIRC. Should I be more concerned about that than I am?
This question has been answered several times in both threads. Really, if you’re still asking it, you just haven’t been paying attention.
freekalette has made it quite clear in the original thread that she’s treated as an equal.
Eh, she’s an ICP fan. What do you expect?