Ahem,,,, I object to this writers idea of what it means to be a master or dominant and what it means to be a slave or submissive.... to me it is my own relationships that dictate what is comfortable and what is not... this angers me to some extent because it indicates some masters attitudes that they are all knowing and we are all slaves to their beefed up idea of what BDsm is for EVERYONE. I am not his slave and my version of what is an appropriate definition is not and will not be defined by him.
It aggravates even more that he is male. I find quite often that men who identify as master or male dominants think that they can speak for mistresses and female dominants such as myself. It's bullshit and I object. I agree with some of what he says but his attitude of superiority, especially that this is documented on line, concerns me and is quite frankly rude and disrespectful to anyone who identifies as dominant. I do not wish to be classified with the likes of this man or anyone like him.
I would suggest that his way of doing things is a bit old school and there is definitely room for that. There are community members that believe that puritanism is important and that anyone who does not hold true to the rules are not practicing BDsm. To me that limits any chance of BDsm being understood and respected as a legitimate lifestyle choice.
When rules are laid down then rigidity sets there can only be damage to the people practicing them. The whole idea is to make ones life their own... a contract is a very good idea because it sets that up... this writer is not whiling to allow us that choice. Especially not someone who self identifies as dominant!
What, am I suppose to be getting Nerdist to do all the ironing if I want to be able to identify as a mistress?! okay, he does all the ironing... bad example.. but you get my point. I can identify as what ever I chose and don't have to have this writer tell me how to do it properly.
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM