15 Jan 12, 1:10 PM
Tanos
UK(M), 14 yrs
  |
ClassAct2005 wrote:
(I don't personally like to use the words consensual non consent as it's an assault on the English language like saying black is white but I understand the concept so that's a side issue)
|
(Slaves aren't free, right? So is the term "a freed slave" an assault on the English language? No, because they're free at a different time to being a slave. Just as the initial consent happens at a different time to the period(s) of non-consent.)
:T: www.tanos.org.uk
www.bridgewood.org.uk
The Warehouse: pony play etc, Sat 7 Apr 2012, Exodus, Birmingham
|
15 Jan 12, 1:17 PM
ToakReon
UK(RH), 12 yrs
|
Tanos wrote:
ToakReon wrote:
Dom says to sub, "take this felling axe and hack that child to death".
|
I think these 'tit-slicer' examples that always come up are best avoided btw. 
The essential quality of TPE, or IE, or ownership isn't the obedience of the submissive. It's the authority of the dominant over the submissive, not over other people. It's like owning a pet animal: you can tell it to jump out of a window and it probably won't. You can throw it out of a window and since you are in charge of the pet's daily schedule you can probably arrange a good quiet time to do that to avoid getting caught. But you just wouldn't do that to your beloved pet and other pet owners will be disgusted if they ever find out.
|
In that sense the "total" of "total power exchange" is a myth.
|
As I said in the link I gave on the first page, each word of the name "total power exchange" is misleading. It doesn't help that the character who coined it was an opponent of these type of relationship in the heated debates in alt.sex.bondage
:T:
|
Isn't this, more or less, what I was saying? *UPDATE* Model(s) for "how to" bondage photographs (and other bondage photographs) have now been found. Thank you to all who showed interest.
|
15 Jan 12, 1:20 PM
Tanos
UK(M), 14 yrs
|
ToakReon wrote:
Tanos wrote:
ToakReon wrote:
Dom says to sub, "take this felling axe and hack that child to death".
|
I think these 'tit-slicer' examples that always come up are best avoided btw.
The essential quality of TPE, or IE, or ownership isn't the obedience of the submissive. It's the authority of the dominant over the submissive, not over other people. It's like owning a pet animal: you can tell it to jump out of a window and it probably won't. You can throw it out of a window and since you are in charge of the pet's daily schedule you can probably arrange a good quiet time to do that to avoid getting caught. But you just wouldn't do that to your beloved pet and other pet owners will be disgusted if they ever find out.
|
In that sense the "total" of "total power exchange" is a myth.
|
As I said in the link I gave on the first page, each word of the name "total power exchange" is misleading. It doesn't help that the character who coined it was an opponent of these type of relationship in the heated debates in alt.sex.bondage
|
Isn't this, more or less, what I was saying?
|
No, you were focusing on obedience rather than authority:
ToakReon wrote:
A TPE relationship is one where power is exchanged to the point where any REASONABLE AND PROPER command will be followed and, assuming the dom is himself reasonable and proper, this will equate to EVERY COMMAND THAT IS ACTUALLY LIKELY TO BE GIVEN.
|
:T:
www.tanos.org.uk
www.bridgewood.org.uk
The Warehouse: pony play etc, Sat 7 Apr 2012, Exodus, Birmingham
Edited 15 Jan 12, 1:47 PM by Tanos
|
15 Jan 12, 1:45 PM
misunderstoodslave
UK(OL), 2 yrs |
Actually focusing on the authority of the dom (and that's the sp. Tanos, at the risk of being banned) is the key to all this apparent division.
I can safely say that my consent and obedience is limitless, because the limits will of course be his limits. Which, inter alia, means that I probably don't have to worry about being ordered to do morally repugnant or life-threatening stuff. Probably.
And we haven't even talked about the headfuck. I have at times been convinced I'm being asked to do something that does not take into account my safety or wishes, when the reality was something quite other. I quite like that my naive trust can be exploited like that. But then I am a bit weird, I suspect. |
15 Jan 12, 1:47 PM
ToakReon
UK(RH), 12 yrs
|
Tanos wrote:
ToakReon wrote:
Tanos wrote:
ToakReon wrote:
Dom says to sub, "take this felling axe and hack that child to death".
|
I think these 'tit-slicer' examples that always come up are best avoided btw.
The essential quality of TPE, or IE, or ownership isn't the obedience of the submissive. It's the authority of the dominant over the submissive, not over other people. It's like owning a pet animal: you can tell it to jump out of a window and it probably won't. You can throw it out of a window and since you are in charge of the pet's daily schedule you can probably arrange a good quiet time to do that to avoid getting caught. But you just wouldn't do that to your beloved pet and other pet owners will be disgusted if they ever find out.
|
In that sense the "total" of "total power exchange" is a myth.
|
As I said in the link I gave on the first page, each word of the name "total power exchange" is misleading. It doesn't help that the character who coined it was an opponent of these type of relationship in the heated debates in alt.sex.bondage
|
Isn't this, more or less, what I was saying?
|
No, you were focussing on obedience rather than authority:
ToakReon wrote:
A TPE relationship is one where power is exchanged to the point where any REASONABLE AND PROPER command will be followed and, assuming the dom is himself reasonable and proper, this will equate to EVERY COMMAND THAT IS ACTUALLY LIKELY TO BE GIVEN.
|
:T:
|
Toak <- Does the "frowning and wrinkling nose" thing normally associated with arguments involving definitions and detailed use of words.
Well ... maybee ... possibly ... perhaps. *UPDATE* Model(s) for "how to" bondage photographs (and other bondage photographs) have now been found. Thank you to all who showed interest.
|
15 Jan 12, 2:16 PM
Sobri_Quet
UK(N), 6 mths
|
Tanos wrote:
Sobri_Quet wrote:
Tanos wrote:
You've managed to dodge the term 'consensual non-consent' for 20 years and despite all that reading???
|
I have heard it many times but it's just a way of getting a deeper thrill by stretching limits. The reality of the situation is always that the sub can cease to consent.
|
Then you've learnt* something new today, as that is not the case for everyone as you can see from other people's posts.
(*Unless you're going to stick your fingers in your ears and say "Wah! Wah! I don't do it so it's not true!"  )
:T:
|
Having given the matter further consideration I really want to correct what I said. Consensual non-consent is the sub saying I trust you completely. I will trust you with my body, my life, my physical and mental well being. An act of total submission. The sub agrees to act without a safety net because they trust the dominant to catch them.
That said my fingers are firmly in my ears when it comes to anyone telling me that the sub cannot then, at a later point, withdraw their consent and submission when they find, in fact that they no longer trust the dominant. Any dominant who really believes this is the case is, I would suggest, one in whom you should clearly never place absolute trust.
|
15 Jan 12, 2:27 PM
Ianneil
UK(N), 5 yrs
|
ClassAct2005 wrote:
(I don't personally like to use the words consensual non consent as it's an assault on the English language....
|
Slightly off OP but tangential to it I think that is the beauty of English that we can come up with a phrase that appears to be an oxymoron that with a little mental flexibility sums up crisply a complex concept.
But then in this debate we use terms in shorthand who's OED definition is not the context in which we use them.
IE slave, if we live in the literary binary exactitude of the mechanical engineer or lawyer we should follow slave with a paragraph of what slave means in a BDSM context or make up cumbersome and aurally jerky terms like para slavery or indeterminant non binding total power exchange.
This wordy pedantry has the effect on conversation that going back to the Roman numeral system would have on maths.
|
15 Jan 12, 2:31 PM
mia
UK(M), 4 yrs
 
  |
Sobri_Quet wrote:
Any dominant who really believes this is the case is, I would suggest, one in whom you should clearly never place absolute trust.
|
Or one who you can be assured will work hard to keep you safe, trapped and in the sort of relationship you need. Horses for courses n all that.
x Now where were we? Ah, yes - abject humiliation!
@Modified_Bodies
@O_and_P
@LGB_Forum
|
15 Jan 12, 3:15 PM
ClassAct2005
UK(N), 7 yrs
|
Freed slave should be "freed former slave" really, shouldn't it, to be accurate. Hoever the term freed slave has become so common that we know it means ex slave.
I don't see any point in arguing over it as I don't disagree with the concept. You can certainly consent to things in advance - an operation before you go unconscious etc and say what might happen when you're under. You can also withdraw your consent at any time in law though - so if I said you can spank me tonight and for the rest of our lives I am allowed to change my mind that night or in 5 years' time and if that person still does it to me although we had an agreement I could never withdraw that consent, I can still withdraw it. Tricky business but I think it tends to work as long as people are still into each other.
Tanos wrote:
ClassAct2005 wrote:
(I don't personally like to use the words consensual non consent as it's an assault on the English language like saying black is white but I understand the concept so that's a side issue)
|
(Slaves aren't free, right? So is the term "a freed slave" an assault on the English language? No, because they're free at a different time to being a slave. Just as the initial consent happens at a different time to the period(s) of non-consent.)
:T:
|
|
15 Jan 12, 3:17 PM
ClassAct2005
UK(N), 7 yrs
|
I would hope if most subs were put inthe position of Abraham - mind fuck by God to kill his own son etc - then they would say "not on your nelly mate, you know what you can do with my so called submission". As most dominants don't come up with stuff ilke that it isn't a huge issue although every night of the week there will be man thumping a woman who is so attached she cannot leave. So I think it's vital subs know to distinguish when they are submitting and it's good and working and when it moves to something they must be mad to accept. |
