tallslenderguy(other male)
|
4 years ago •
Apr 25, 2020
4 years ago •
Apr 25, 2020
Did "ghosting" even exist before 'online relationships?'
i think there's some salient points made, things that i thought too, but will try not to repeat.
To my original thought/question, i think "ghosting" is largely an internet phenomena. One can disappear in face life, but its a lot harder. i think what often happens with ghosting is the relationship no longer meets the ghosts criteria or ideal, so they just disappear rather than try and fix or end the relationship. Either way, ghosts are immature and inconsiderate, so while it hurts to realize you didn't have a relationship with a person of substance, the notion you did have a relationship with a person of substance was, apparently, an illusion.
i agree with MasterRon: "it's applicable on both sides. There are people who will use the label "Dom" or "sub" as an assistive device for a broken part rather than changing. For instance, since we are talking communication, i've seen both 'Dom' and 'sub' people assume that it's the others responsibility to "ask questions" in place of self disclosure. i think mature people can have a mature relationship where there is a balance of self disclosure and answering questions, but some people want you to do all the work and don't self disclose, relying on the other to figure them out. Some 'Dom's' call that "serving them" and some 'subs' call that being 'taken care of.' Each could be just finding a way to accommodate their handicap?
i've seen it a lot in D/s communities; there are all sorts of traits that people will try to excuse as being "Dom" or "sub." For instance, i don't believe that Dom=selfish or sub=needy. The truth is, no one is selfless, and everyone has needs, but part of maturity is finding balance, not accommodating immaturity by assuming a label we think will let us get away with it.
Part II. ""is it allowed that a master can have multiple slaves?"
Allowed by who? There isn't a D/s police force and judicial system, interpreting and enforcing a D/s code, eh? Those things are individually and relationally determined. If i read you right, it seems in your case the question is rhetorical and the answer is "no?" If we are being honest and real, we all know that slavery is not supported by the laws in most countries, laws which supersede most slavery contracts made between D/s people. And most do not get to that place, it's more of a spoken agreement. Which is not to minimize the desire and intent of the many who take D/s seriously, just to say the tenets are, largely, individually determined?
As an aside, "multiple slaves" (and multiple masters for that matter), sounds like polyamory to me, and i see that as a viable option for some. i see an underlying idea in polyamory that it takes more than one person to meet ones needs/desires. i also see reasons to support monogamy, but i don't think there is such a thing as perfect. And, i think that is where most relationships fall apart, with failed expectations. An ideal i see in polyamory is the acceptance that one person may meet some of those needs/desires, an additional person may meet other needs/desires the first one does not naturally meet. And to me "naturally" is key. A simple example would be two subs, or two Dom's, would not likely have a successful "ltr," for lack of compatibility, chemistry.
We're complex, it makes a sort of sense to me that it may be illogical to expect one person to be the end all. i think a lot of the emotional disposition behind monogamy is culturally conditioned into us (which is not to dismiss or minimize the benefits one might find in monogamy). i think forced monogamy (vs natural?) devolves into a quid pro quo relationship that often ends in one or both parties feeling used (and used up) because they are doing stuff to satisfy their partner that doesn't come naturally.
|