Added: Ranita Mccranie - Date: 28.12.2021 23:44 - Views: 21270 - Clicks: 9904
Just wanted to let people here know that the newest version of the Basic slave Rules have finally been finished. They will be published in the Feb. Yes, I wrote the rules set. And I would like to open a discussion on any issues any of you find with the rules set. You have a typo. I couldn't get a connection to " clarityconnet. Where to begin, eh? I think I'll just summarize in general by saying that your style and mine are considerably different.
I do have a minor quibble with Rule No. I would suggest rewriting the rule to read as follows: " Another minor quibble. There is a reference somewhere to a Master selecting a slave's sexual orientation. I seriously doubt whether a slave's sexual orientation is subject to selection by any human, although a slave might choose to let a master dictate the type of sexual behavior required of the slave. My only hope in such transferences is that Master will be able to take me there again and again as my relationship to Him progresses through time, that He 128 slave rules will need it as much as i will, and that He will not be afraid to increase the intensity while we are there.
Second, I'm confused by the phrasing "that He too will need it as much as I will," which in context appears to suggest some sort of increasing dependency on the sub by the Dom, hm? Maybe this is not what you meant to say. Perhaps an explanation would help clarify. It'll be interesting to see what other folks think. Regards, Serion ps: I think there's also a typo in Rule The first instance of the word "accept" probably should be "except. Please note the correct URL is " connect. And I think a good of them are excellent. I also happen to think a good of them 128 slave rules bad and some are down right dangerous.
Some are just, IMO, unnecessary. I'm of the opinion that using lower case letters to refer to a submissive and capitals to refer to a Dominant is condescending. In my view, both the Dom and the sub are equal partners in building the relationship.
It was very hard for me to read through the rules because you consistently use this format. Since you don't know me, a word or two of explanation is probably a good idea. I am the property of my Dom, but I am also his Executive Assistant and involved in the day to day running of not only his household but his business. Many of the rules you suggest just would not be practicable in such a relationship - although they might be very workable in a more scene oriented style. Now - for some good rules: The opportunity to please my Master is very important to me and i will take every chance to seek out such opportunities to do so to the best of my abilities and in accordance to how i have been taught or allowed to do so.
After all, if it's pleasing - it's pleasing. In a nutshell, plain open communication is, IMO, the best course. Bluntly, rule 64 which begins, " my limits do not have to be respected Limits must be respected. Rule On the surface, this is wonderful, but in fact, it is asking for trouble.
I'll accept punishment gladly, if I misunderstand, but I think a sub must have the right to question a Dom's order if in their opinion there is something the Dom is not aware of. Should Master wish for my breasts to be suckled I'm not sure of the health issues here, but, although I've heard of Doms wanting to do it, I've never known one who did. This is getting to be a very long post, so let me just end by saying that there is another group of rules here, which seem to me 128 slave rules be pretty much "fantasy fodder", that is, fun to think about but not something that will work in the context of a real life relationship.
I would advise any submissive presented with these rules to consider them very carefully. If you are uncomfortable with any of them, don't hesitate to discuss them. Doms are wonderful people but they aren't infallible and open and honest communication is the best foundation for any relationship.
Regards, LadyGold --There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won't feel insecure around you. Nelson Mandela I agree. Rule 64 sounds like what a "TPEer" would say. There is no such thing as a sub without limits, and it's wrong to try to not have any. Does anybody except for me feel this statement is objectionable?
Melville, And just what's wrong with being a 'TPEer'? If the master chooses to go to the 'edge' of these limits in an attempt to renegotiate However, as for Tom's point The master will be given the authority to do whatever, whenever And I know of a few who are searching 128 slave rules it. Skeeve bob If the word 128 slave rules is used literally, a "TPE" can't exist, and it's wrong to go to the extreme of trying to have one. If the adjective "reasonably" is put before it, it can be valid, though. Short of a dom being God, it is never right for a sub to completely abandon his or her own judgment regarding what his or her dom requests.
Pledging oneself to be willing to take a machine gun and go to the nearest grade school and start mowing down children if one's dom told one to is not a valid lifestyle choice. That is just one example of what I include within "no limits," since, if "no limits" excludes anything, the word "limits" isn't being used literally, and since it is so easy just to use the term "reasonable limits" to describe such a relationship, I see no reason not to use the term "no limits" literally. The term "reasonable limits" at least clarifies that it is meant that the sub always retains the responsibility for deciding whether or not what he or she is requested to do is reasonable, which is required for submission to be a valid lifestyle choice.
Just because you choose not to persue that route, why is it wrong for others? Yes, that is another valid lifestyle choice.
But again, who defines reasonably? Do we have to use your definition or do the individuals involved get to define it? This sounds a lot like you are trying to define reasonably for everyone. Then this would mean that those who have dedicated their lives in service of any leader would have made invalid choices. I'm sure that the families of all the 128 slave rules martyrs would be happy to hear this.
Also using an extreme example Power exchange is power exchange, regardless of why. And when someone uses the term 'no limits', I always assume that they mean it literally. What if the sub choses not to keep this responsibility? Or arranges things so that they cannot refuse a request? I agree that the 'just following orders' defense does justify a wrong act or excuse the person who committed it, but there are many who follow orders blindly and without question. It's imo human nature--there are many more followers than leaders. And where is the master rule book which tells us the requirements for submission?
I'll note thatthe text above is taken from another post, I have not been to the actual website and will not comment on any of the other rules. I have very clear limits, and most of them exist for good reasons. I cannot imagine being around a Dom who could safely push many of those limits outside of a fully equipped hospital.
I am not comfortable either with the idea of having a relationship where I, as a sub, have stated limits that the Dom can violate because the Dom thinks it's OK and I'm "ready" for it. Further, I don't think it matters psycholgically where the limits are, if it's at dismemberment, blood sports, piercing, or even the missionary position.
One's limits are just as real to one no matter where they are. In many cases, such a scenario would lead to a loss of trust from the sub, because of abused trust. And, potentially, such violation of stated limits because the Dom feels the sub is "ready" could include actual abuse, "excused" by the Dom telling the sub "if you really loved me and trusted me, you wouldn't question my having done that Ani l'dodi.
There is no. It would be an abdication of one's responsibility as a human being to completely throw away one's own judgment. I don't see the point of the 128 slave rules.
Whether something is reasonable or not does not depend on anyone's perception of whether or not it is reasonable. I am saying that no individual should try to be completely loyal to anyone who is fallible. Anyone who completely blindly follows the dictates of any other human being has made a wrong choice. I do, too, and the thought that some people would actually pledge themselves to jump off a bridge or kill their own mothers if another human being told them to scares me.
Such misplaced attempts at the bliss of complete devotion frequently make the headlines Waco, Heaven's Gate, Jonestown, etc. Devotion is only as valuable as its object. Then he or she has made probably the most dangerous mistake possible. And for what? 128 slave rules pleasure? I'm not so sure. As a sub who doesn't care for pain but who does crave punishment as part of a regime I am acutely aware of limits, my own most of all.
It would be my hope though only a rare experience that a Dom would have the judgement and skill to push those limits, especially in directions that mattered to him. If my limits are attacked without regard to my condition and preparedness then I'm going to hurt and it isn't going to work.
To date I have screamed and wept, but not regretted the decision. I think there are times and places where limits have to be pushed but the sub must have confidence in the Dom's judgement when doing so. Matthew -- "Homo sum: humani nihil a me alienum puto" mailto: matthew On 12 Dec GMT, spyr Thank you The sense that i personally got out of the original post was that the slave would trust her 128 slave rules not to push any of her limits in such a way as to harm her, and that the slave was therefore giving him the decision of where to push and how hard.
Oh, i interpreted it a little differently where it said in Rule 64 above, that he could push "when he expects i am ready" meant she trusts him to judge when she is ready, and to not harm her Well, but your lifestyle is different from TPE and that's ok too, you know. Masters have their own limits, too It can take a very long time to find the right person for a TPE type relationship.128 slave rules
email: [email protected] - phone:(819) 866-1757 x 4923
The new Basic slave Rules are finally released !