Quote:
Originally Posted by Tojo
So you're saying you would prefer to not meet either of them if given the opportunity? (With the underlying assumption it would not hurt your marriage.)
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tojo
So you're saying you would prefer to not meet either of them if given the opportunity? (With the underlying assumption it would not hurt your marriage.)
I'll pose the same basic question to you Brosco. Given all else equal, you would prefer not to be with fantassy in real life?
==> Yes, it is the issue if you feel it will eventually provide more than you have now. That was exactly the point I was making.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brosco
==> Well, there you go... because I wasn't thinking about, or answering, the question in terms of a fantasy relationship.
I guess I must feel pretty strongly about this topic. LOL
Looks like you do Oz lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heather_21
Oh you sound pretty darn nice yourself young lady. :)
Oz (sorry I said Brosco instead of Oz) I didn't say I wouldn't rather meet that special someone- I will be meeting an online friend later this year. I just don't agree that it's impossible to have a 'truly fulfilling relationship' via phone & internet.
As I say, it's different for everyone, that's just how it is for me- I have great satisfaction over the airwaves.
It's also possible to live with someone & NOT have a fulfilling relationship! :shithappe
Tojo
oh gee Tojo, you're making me blush again lol
I don't think Brosco was really talking about a fantasy relationship, but about a mental relationship. I have a basic idea what he looks like and vice versa. I think we have been honest in what we say to each other. But the true attraction, at least for me, is to Brosco's brain. I really like the way he thinks - not just in d/s stuff but in general. In a way, online can, if you are both being honest, allow you to get to know one another better without all the physical crap getting in the way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozme52
Anyway, that's my two cents.
Neither of us are in a position to be r/l at the moment (and wont be for some considerable time). The truth is we are getting more time together than if we were r/l - plus, as fantassy has already stated we enjoy getting into each others head and that would be harder to do with the physical distraction. So when all is assessed - we are happier and better off where we are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozme52
No... you misunderstood me. Maybe fantassy or I may want more in the future.. and not necessarily from each other. I cannot predict the future. All I can say is the here and now.Quote:
==> Yes, it is the issue if you feel it will eventually provide more than you have now. That was exactly the point I was making.
Again, i am afraid you misunderstood me. Hopefully fantasssy explained this better. Because we do get into each others heads we can use some fantasy as an aid to what we are really doing. For example, it only takes a piece of rope around her wrist and she can feel hopelessy bound. Its a mindset we can create. But we aren't creating a fantasy about bondage, we are just creating a mindset that is an aid to what we are doing. We are able to use the mind with some fantasy aspects to dramically add to our reality. In an online environment this is easier to do because of the 'loss' of the physical presence, other senses increase.Quote:
==> Well, there you go... because I wasn't thinking about, or answering, the question in terms of a fantasy relationship.
Brosco
Great point, Oz, about Nat and I switching to LDR.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozme52
However, before we met, our online/phone relationship was extremely satisfying. It still is.
Would I want Nat and I living out our fantasies on a daily basis - with him by my side? Tempting, but my productivity would drop to an all time low. That is at work, not in the domming.
* wicked grin *
So... when does a relationship become "real life"?
When you finally meet?
Talk on the phone?
When?
Ever curious.
Ruby
We are human animals. Evolved to be social. The need to see, hear, and foremost, to touch, is bred into our bones. All of the inventions throughout the ages, which have facillitated communications, have not, can not, imo, replace human contact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruby
That's all I'm saying.
And I'm not belittling the other. I'm here afterall. A committed online participant. But I recognize I need more.
I envy you Ruby... you've found it. And while you joke about lost productivity... if you could... I believe you would. And would do it successfully, just as we all manage the different parts of living. :rose:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brosco
Nope, I didn't misunderstand. I chose to use the sentences within your response that, imo, clarified my perspective. I understood, and understand, the points you were making...
I think it's a rationalization, but I understand it. I think this may have to be one of those... "agree to disagree" situations.
fantassy,Quote:
Originally Posted by fantassy
You'll see above, that I've admitted to using Brosco's response in a manner that suited my perspective... (not apologizing for doing so mind you. It's one manner of pursuing a debate point.)
I agree 100% with what you've said here (highlighted red) but, again, I have to say, non-personal communications have, over our whole history, allowed us to get to know each other without meeting... but meeting is better.
Even if you don't believe you would connect on a long term basis... wouldn't you like to, just once, shake his hand, maybe give him a hug...
...and feel his breath on your earlobe as he whispered "cum for me."
First off, LOL, I think you're arguing with me... Not Brosco.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tojo
Secondly, adjectives are not quantitative. They're qualitative. I also have great satisfaction over the airwaves... Do those words mean exactly the same thing to the two of us? Maybe. We just seem to disagree on the words "truely fulfilling." I'm just bemused that you can have a truely fulfilling relationship online and still "rather meet that certain someone special."
So are we in agreement as to the concept but not as to the words to describe it?
Oh I haven't even started yet Heather. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Heather_21
Yeah sorry guys, I swapped Brosco for Oz there-
First up, it's not nice to use such profanity on a forum Oz. Keep using big words & I'll pick you up on your spelling! :)Quote:
Secondly, adjectives are not quantitative. They're qualitative
Yeah I guess so- with reservations.... See the tricky bit is that the young lady I'm meeting in person, I'm not having a D/s relationship with.Quote:
So are we in agreement as to the concept but not as to the words to describe it?
However we plan on seeing how it goes in person for a week. Sort of a trial.
Also my long-term girl, I've never even seen a face shot of, much less on a webcam. We have an online relationship with strict boundaries, we really have no desire to meet in person.
So it's not as simple as all that.
Tojo
Without going through all posts to find all the quotes I need, I would like to summarize a little here. Oz, I can understand and accept that you believe that you need more. I would never try to convince you (or anyone else) that another can get all they need from an online relationship. My disagreement with you is that in several places you have taken your beliefs about yourself and stated them as fact for others. I have clearly stated that online is not for everyone, but attempted to explain how online is giving fantasssy and I all we need.
I disagree with you on this. If I take your argument to its logical conclusion you are suggesting that a blind or deaf person is unable to have as satisfying a relationship as yourself. If you have ever had any dealings with a person who has lost one of their primary senses you quickly realise that their other senses have increased in capacity, the loss in one area is fully compensated by the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozme52
I remember when fantassy and I just started talking she stated to me that in just a few days she shared more with me about her most personal thoughts than she did with her ex in 8 years! I also stated in an earlier post that being online has helped me understand much more of my own and a subbie's mindset than I did in years of r/l. I am loving the things that I am learning about the power of the mind, and I know that if I moved to a r/l relationship I would slip into old habits and be distracted by the physical presence. I am not prepared to stop my learning at this stage, it is way too exciting and stimulating.
And while I am not attempting to answer for fantassy,
I would suggest that being online is a major factor in contributing to our successes with O-control. We are both very relaxed and enjoy where we are and have opened our mind to fully taking advantage of our newfound skills. If either of us spent our time bemoaning what we can't have, we would be diminishing our capability to enjoy an exciting experience.Quote:
Even if you don't believe you would connect on a long term basis... wouldn't you like to, just once, shake his hand, maybe give him a hug...
...and feel his breath on your earlobe as he whispered "cum for me."
Brosco
Ok, I have sat back and looked at this long enough and decided to put my two cents in.
I do feel that online can be very fulfiling, but can become unfulfilling to some. I have had mostly internet. To me internet is very mental and that is the kind of person I am. (YES! I'm mental lol) The mental domination is more fulfilling, to me, than the physical....NOT saying I don't like it. The physical scenes I have been in have been very much fun and exciting.
I have not had an actual "real life" experience yet (other than playing with my Sir a couple of times); which I desire more than anything. I do feel that once you start desiring more of the physical then the internet becomes unfulfilling. Some reach that point others don't and are perfectly content with interent....nothing wrong with that.
To answer Ruby's question....to me, real life is the actual physical interaction between the two.
subwife
As they say, why ruin a good thing? Right now, when he commands "cum for me" it just washes over and through me. If he were really whispering in my ear, I'd probably get distracted by his scraggly beard or would be self-conscious.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozme52
fantassy
hey.... i trimmed it recently... it really aint that scraggly :)
brosco
I have been participating in the general goings-on in this site for a very short time and have not come across chatrooms or role play areas before, but I have come to see I cannot truly believe that a fully-formed human being can be satisfied by an on-line relationship.
I can grasp that on one level role-playing will provide a certain pleasure and form of escape. I say role playing because this is what an on-line relationship must be. It is not real. It does not involve body language and contact. It is devoid of most things that define us as human.
I read that people are satisfied by mental contact and by adopting a particular mind-set and frankly it makes me want to weep.
There are so many nuances in a glance. So many pleasure in a touch. Such an eroticism in a perfume. A joy in a lover's sigh. The taste of anothers body.
We have five senses and they are all used in a relationship of true depth. I will not subscribe to the way of thinking that says electronic transmissions of our intentions can be a substitute. Merely an imitation.
I will agree that such contact can be auto-erotic. The ideas sent out providing the sender with a thrill more than the recipiant. If you cannot actually see, hear, touch, smell or taste the other you can rely solely upon their statements-which you interpret from the written word alone and your own statements of feelings.
For what are two typists doing other than describing the way they wish their senses to react? Is it not better to actually have the senses stimulated?
Please lets have clear division between reality and fantasy.
What we read here is far removed from everyday life.
I do not say that an on-line relationship is bad. I do point out that it is a pale substitute for a human one. If we begin a new step in evolution by becoming satisfied with contact-by-wire then we risk losing the very things that make us what we are.
By all means start with the exchange of view points and investigate beliefs, likes, dislikes aspirations and so on. But do not be satisfied until it involves real contact.
William Shakespeare wrote:
"How weary,flat, stale and unprofitable seem to me all the uses of this world"
Don't settle for that.
Not written by EDMUNDO SLOTH.
Written by a real person behind the facade-for what is this other than that against which I rant?
Now, there's a paradox.
I think you raised a very important point here, and one that I have been pondering myself over the last couple of months. I've enjoyed playing online, doing tasks for people that I have never met in person, even building some sorts of relationships over the internet or phone. But I have to admit, as much fun as it was (and still is) I know I won't be happy until I find someone to explore in real life for most of the reasons that you stated yourself. There's always something missing...
Then again, some of the previous posters have fulfilling relationships outside of this medium and are merely looking to add to that by finding an online partner to live out certain fantasies or explore new territory. And that makes perfect sense to me, they have both...someone to touch, smell, taste and fulfill their needs, and someone to stimulate their mind and add another dimension, whatever that may be. You see, most of the posters here probably wouldn't settle for an ALL online relationship if there was no one there to come back to in r/l.
Others might just be looking for the substitute you're talking about, or they might have withdrawn into a fantasy world...
How about me? Well, I'm a single in r/l and I wish I had someone here with me, but I haven't found that special person as of yet and refuse to settle for less than I want and deserve. (yeah, guess I'm picky ;) ) So, I definitely fall into the "substitute category". And it's fine. It's a hell of a lot better than nothing...a very good substitute for the time being. I have a very creative fantasy and fill the gaps that mere virtual contact leaves. :)
The next question that comes up to me is what happens with my online life when I finally find a r/l partner and take my playing out of this environment and into reality? Will I give up on the fun and friends I've met here? Hell, NO! But I think my motivation and focus would change.
I really love your passionate plea for using all senses to paint the whole picture, EDMUNDOSLOTH...or whoever might be smiling through a small window in the facade. :)
Silke
Edumdosloth,
I am sorry to say that your post judges anothers tastes with a clear lack of knowledge on the topic. First understand that very few internet relationships rely on the written word for communication - most use at least voice communication and some also add visual (webcam).
So if a person if deaf or blind in a r/l situation you suggest that they cannot have a fullfilling relationship??? They also only have an imitation? OMG .. who is sad?Quote:
We have five senses and they are all used in a relationship of true depth. I will not subscribe to the way of thinking that says electronic transmissions of our intentions can be a substitute. Merely an imitation.
Division between fantasy and reality? Come on now... do you suggest there is no place for fantasy? Are you so limited in your 'reallife' that fantasy isn't used?
You may point out all you like that doesn't work for you - but don't dare suggest that you can speak for all others.Quote:
I do not say that an on-line relationship is bad. I do point out that it is a pale substitute for a human one.
Brosco
I must disagree. Although it CAN be, online does not HAVE to be role playing. Furthermore, I have had, and observed even more, real-life relationships which involved far more role playing. People often pretend to be what they believe the other will desire, even in real life. One must make a conscious effort. in either environment "to be real."Quote:
Originally Posted by EDMUNDOSLOTH
I further disagree with what you allege defines us as human. My brain is what defines me and makes me unique. Kindness, compassion, wit, reason, humor, empathy, insight, helpfulness - those are the traits I see as defining and desireable in humanity, and they all have to do with the brain, not the physical senses. My cats can see, hear, smell, touch and taste, but that doesn't make them human. (ok, they're almost human ....lol).
Perhaps the best response is your own Shakespeare. What is it that made Shakespeare great? - his words and insight into humanity - and that insight was about people's characters, not their physicality.
I'm not saying the 5 senses are unimportant - I certainly believe being able to hear Brosco enriches our experience, I'm just saying the 5 senses are not ALL-important. You cannot arouse me by using my 5 senses (no matter how hard you try) if you do not arouse my brain; however, Brosco can arouse me merely through words without using any of the 5 senses. But I will admit, I am an extreme case, heavily geared toward the mental aspect of things in all areas of life. As noted many times before in this forum, we are all individuals here - what works for one isn't going to work for everyone. So although it may not work for you, please don't dismiss it as lesser.
fantassy
This is the important part, not just for this thread, but for any topic that anyone cares to comment on. Express your own feelings and opinions about any topic, BUT, never assume that your own feelings are global or apply to all!Quote:
So although it may not work for you, please don't dismiss it as lesser.
I am proud of what fantasssy and I achieve online. At times I even suspect we achieve more than many reallifers do. For anyone to suggest we just roleplay is an insult. LOL ... the hours of torture I sometimes put fantasssy thru is far from roleplay or fantasy and is far more than many could take in reallife. It is very real, and if you can't comprehend it, by all means say so - but please don't dismiss something just because it is beyond your own imagination.
Brosco
I've kept my nose mostly out of this topic until now because for me it's a done deal. I have both and enjoy both and if they come up with something new I'll probably have that too. ;)
I have to say now that I am having a hard time understanding the....sensitivity? I suppose you could call it of some of the posters in the thread. It's almost as if you're debating religion or politics. I understand that blanket statements have set some people off, but those blanket statements are opinions being expressed, not laws being laid down.
To Brosco: You asked the question, my friend. To then state that someone not dare suggest something is rather close-minded of you I think. Edmund is entitled to his opinion that online is a pale comparison to r/l. Just as you are entitled to your opinion that you achieve more than many real-lifers do. Both inflamatory statements if heard through defensive ears.
Relax everybody. This has been a great topic, but let's remember we don'thave a wolf pack mentality here. ;)
One last thing Brosco. While I generally agree with that statement, people are free to believe that something "just doesn't work". One cannot express feelings that something just doesn't work in a singular fashion. By definition it is global.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brosco
Quote:
To Brosco: You asked the question, my friend. To then state that someone not dare suggest something is rather close-minded of you I think. Edmund is entitled to his opinion that online is a pale comparison to r/l. Just as you are entitled to your opinion that you achieve more than many real-lifers do. Both inflamatory statements if heard through defensive ears.
Aesop, I am truly sorry if you saw my post as imflamatory. It was definitely not my intention. I have tried very hard to express my opinions as exactly that - my opinion and what works for me. I never get 'defensive' about another expressing an opinion (no matter how negative to mine) providing that opinion is about themselves. I DO get defensive when people take opinions and tastes of their own and attempt to judge all others by it. I DO get defensive when someone belittles my tastes based on their own tastes.
I apologise for any disruption you feel I may have caused, but please check my posts again and you will see that I always expressed my views in the context of myself, not about others. You may also note that my 'defensive' reply was to a post that judged others.
Brosco
I disagree. It is very easy for someone to state that something doesn't work for themselves without suggesting it couldn't possibly work for anyone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aesop
No need to apologize Brosco. While it's true that you express your views in the context of yourself, saying you have achieved something more than many real lifers is going to trigger the same kind of defensive response in some others that Edmund's post triggered in you and I have to say that while Edmund did indeed post his opinions globally he did not post them personally. You did in your responses. You are of course allowed to find his opinion offensive if you do, but I question the need to insult him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brosco
You're right. I didn't say that though. I said they have a right to think something just doesn't work. Not just for themselves, but for anybody and that by definition is global.Quote:
I disagree. It is very easy for someone to state that something doesn't work for themselves without suggesting it couldn't possibly work for anyone.
This is the last I'll say on the matter as I don't think things have gotten that bad and want to keep the thread moving.
Have fun folks. :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tojo
: razzleberry: :nana:
I guess what got me started was how the responses to my comment about my feelings... was disagreement. I read that as... "You're wrong for feeling that way." LOL So I probably was first to over react... but overall, and for the most part, I thought it a lively debate. I was just defending how I felt... not attacking how others felt, but admit to pressing your own comments in my own defense. Perhaps too much debate background...Quote:
Originally Posted by Brosco
Hardly the "logical conclusion." But certainly a possible conclusion. I wouldn't say that a person who lacks or has lost one of the primary senses can't have a satisfying relationship. But I would say, without prejudice, it is different than what I experience. Who's to say it isn't in fact, better... save that, as I pointed out to Tojo, language is qualitative. Perhaps, an enhanced sense of touch provides a superior interaction.Quote:
I disagree with you on this. If I take your argument to its logical conclusion you are suggesting that a blind or deaf person is unable to have as satisfying a relationship as yourself. If you have ever had any dealings with a person who has lost one of their primary senses you quickly realise that their other senses have increased in capacity, the loss in one area is fully compensated by the other.
Recent health studies point out the benefits of sex with a partner provides a health benefit that mere solo sexual release doesn't duplicate. It just supports my belief that evolution has made us a social animal, one that requires contact.