Moral defects?

[ksst]

Excellent, excellent post, Dog's Lady

I'm an idealist with you.

When I think of violence in this context it is play-violence. Yeah, someone may get hurt, but no more than they wanted to, and they have a way to stop it when it's too much.

[Dog's Lady]

Thanks, ksst. I'm having a crappy day, so the compliment came right in time. Did the humor I was trying for come across at all? Please, I'd love to hear any input.

[ksst]

Yes I did. I was going to make my own joke, but it wasn't very funny so I deleted it. Hugs to you on your crappy day.

[Ozme52]

The mistake being made by those who misvalue their partner is the presumption that while the dominant is indeed the superior role, and the submissive is indeed the inferior role, those adjectives must be used with their positional definitions. Those adjectives have nothing to do with the value of the role nor our perceptions of worth.

The original post (OP) is filled with flaws imo, for the very reason that it is filled with words that have multiple meanings but uses them miscomparing the definitions.

Even more importantly, the OP presumes all dominants are men and all submissives are women and extrapolates those concepts into her discussion. Well, these orientations are, and should be, genderless. So how a dominant feels about one or the other gender outside of what we do in our community is kind of irrelevent imo.

[ksst]

I have watched some of those and wondered what the out of context moments at the end were for. That makes sense.