Unlocked collar? What that means?

[Robberinthemuseum]

WHAT? Why am I not surprised this is a thing in SL? (I'm only really a month old so excuse my ignorance, made and avi and quit for a year)

Where was this person wearing the collar? If it was a regular sim then have at it. But if you're in a kinky rp sim then leave the person alone and mind your own business haha

Edited February 24, 2022 by Robberinthemuseum

[Ajay McDowwll]

20 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Well first off, it is faster clicking the sub a couple times to strip her in the way and timing desired rather then type out the command and then wait for her to open Inventory, find the appropriate clothing part and remove. Why leave it up to her if the Dom/me can accomplish the same with 2 mouseclicks?

All the person undressing needs to do is go to Avatar > Now Wearing and scroll down to remove the appropriate items.  Or, you know, have a "Naked" outfit saved which accomplishes the same thing.  It's not that hard to undress your own avatar.

Edited February 24, 2022 by Ajay McDowwll

[Luna Bliss]

12 hours ago, Lindal Kidd said:

Why all the argument? There are lots of ways to approach it, and whatever way works for you and your partner(s) is the right one for you.

In any interaction where power is involved, be it in D's relationships, religion, or government (as 3 examples of many) there are always rules or guidelines in place to protect participants because serious harm can occur. And so, I can't agree with your notion that "freedom to" (to do whatever an individual wants) should be the default, as we must consider "freedom from" as well (the latter being freedom from abuse).

While individuals are certainly free to do as they choose this does not remove the fact that there are standards in place, standards developed over decades, to address optimal ways of relating. Not that these standards are always right, and not to rule out the fact that many standards are solidified simply because they exist and have nothing to do with protection from abuse, we must at least consider the recommendations from our chosen participation in a tradition and not automatically assume the "freedom to" position you have chosen as sacrosanct.

Edited February 24, 2022 by Luna Bliss

[Madelaine McMasters]

16 hours ago, Drake1 Nightfire said:

17 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Ps- personally I love it when a Domme uses collar huds or commands to undress or pose me and in my experience, Dommes who know what they are doing, seem to like it too. It is the ones who just order by texts for me to strip that seem the lazy ones and are not really into the RP other then getting a quickie....usually males.

Why would any Dom want to use collar huds/commands rather than order their sub to do it? I could just as easily get a bot and do the same. The whole reason to have an actual breathing person as a sub is the dynamic between the two. 

How is conversing that they want you to strip and the back and forth between the Dom and Sub be more lazy than clicking a button? Roleplay IS part of it. Good lord, do you have zero emoting skills? Do you want us to go back to talking bits and just clicks?

I can argue for virtually any way of approaching a BDSM interaction in SL.  Before RL consumed all of my partner's time, we were working on getting her wardrobe completely under my control. It hardly helps immersion to tell her to change clothing while wearing restraints intended to make that impossible. Our interim solution was to just have her locked in the same outfit, day after day (what's the sense in spending five minutes to prepare for a 20 minute visit?), and turn SL into a celebration of emoting. Text is fast, accessible, and unshackled by SL's protections. We eventually found SL being outrun by Discord. We missed the visuals, but managed to maintain a fairly immersive experience outside SL.

I must be mindful of computer mouse usage, due to nerve damage from 35 years ago. Navigating RLV collar dialogs can become a literal pain for me. As a result, I began crafting custom scripted objects to do the heavy lifting. My partner wears a ring that allows me to teleport her to me, or back home, with a single touch of a HUD button. I can unlock/lock it just as easily, and she can enjoy imagining the ring as "welded". There is no OpenCollar support group that can help her reset the script I wrote. As our relationship grew, I was able to shift additional cumbersome and useful operations into the ring.

We loved exploring together, with her trapped in the little bubble of our imaginations. I'd search out empty sims, bring her along when the coast was clear, then populate the scene with imaginary threats. Monsters, paparazzi with telephoto cameras clicking away, effigies of annoying people from her RL, you get the idea. We were, as @Scylla Rhiadra opined, like two little girls in a backyard tent (she bought us one!), telling ghost stories.

Crashes are part of my SL on Mac experience. Though my partner didn't mind teleporting back home when that happened, she often mentioned how much she enjoyed having me near to protect her from our imagined threats. So, I made the ring teleport her home within 10 seconds if I was not nearby, automatically keeping her safe if I crashed (and preventing her from leaving home without me) . Some might think that an abusive level of control. It took months to build confidence in the idea. She'll tell you she loves it.

Slow and incremental, just as @Quistess Alpha described. I might have taken control from my partner inch-by-inch, a pace that would surely bore some of you, but she'll tell you that no one has ever taken more. She'll also tell you she's never felt so powerful.

Click-click-clickety-click? I do it
Emote-emote-emotey-mote-mote? I do it.
Bark-an-order-barkety-bark-bark?. I do that too (and adore the laughter I get in return).

It's all good and has never been a part of my argument. My concern has always been about consent, the simple application of care, consideration, and respect for those we engage and those who witness.

[Quistess Alpha]

10 hours ago, Robberinthemuseum said:

Why am I not surprised this is a thing in SL? (I'm only really a month old so excuse my ignorance, made and avi and quit for a year)

Just wait until you learn about Gor, Vore and other things galore. Or don't. There's no wrong way to enjoy SL as long as you do. Welcome aboard!

[Coffee Pancake]

You've literally not lived till you've been party to a reverse unbirthing ...  wow, ok, where's the gin.

[Madelaine McMasters]

2 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

You've literally not lived till you've been party to a reverse unbirthing ...  wow, ok, where's the gin.

...sets a saucer of gin just inside the entrance to her lair.

[Coffee Pancake]

[Arielle Popstar]

15 hours ago, Lindal Kidd said:

Why all the argument? There are lots of ways to approach it, and whatever way works for you and your partner(s) is the right one for you.

My take when overlooking the thread is that the argument is less about the Principles then the personalities. In practice we probably all do it roughly the same but the difference is whether one is an outlier or inlier to the general clique debating it. So an outlier can relate their view on a certain aspect and get negative reactions but then when an inlier relates a similar view, the ones who were negative to the outlier are suddenly tripping over themselves to upvote the inlier even when it parallels the view of the outlier. And then follow it up with stories of how they too have done similar in past.

It's quite entertaining to be honest.

[Arielle Popstar]

6 hours ago, Ajay McDowwll said:

All the person undressing needs to do is go to Avatar > Now Wearing and scroll down to remove the appropriate items.  Or, you know, have a "Naked" outfit saved which accomplishes the same thing.  It's not that hard to undress your own avatar.

Yes thank you, Ajay. I realize there are some workarounds and I should take better advantage of them but it's a pain still from the perspective of needing a naked outfit with every head and body that I have. Otherwise I would likely be loading with a different head/makeup combination then I had originally.

Also when taking individual items off, I find sometimes that after double-clicking to remove one item and then quickly moving to take off another item, that as I double-click the second item, the line shifts up or down as the Inventory window resorts itself and I inadvertently remove the wrong item like a mesh body or head. Now add the searching for the head or body I just wore to hide the system ugliness and meanwhile seeing a certain something going flaccid from the shock and horror of seeing me without my makeup! Maybe that has never happened to you but I have experienced that multiple times and it was not fun.

A 2 mouseclick strip is just easier and safer.

[Madelaine McMasters]

10 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

My take when overlooking the thread is that the argument is less about the Principles then the personalities. In practice we probably all do it roughly the same but the difference is whether one is an outlier or inlier to the general clique debating it. So an outlier can relate their view on a certain aspect and get negative reactions but then when an inlier relates a similar view, the ones who were negative to the outlier are suddenly tripping over themselves to upvote the inlier even when it parallels the view of the outlier. And then follow it up with stories of how they too have done similar in past.

It's quite entertaining to be honest.

Would you give me an example from this thread of someone arguing for the use of explicit consent, being supported for that view, then revealing they don't offer or obtain it practice, and being supported for that as well?

Edited February 25, 2022 by Madelaine McMasters
Added "give".

[Arielle Popstar]

11 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Would you me an example from this thread of someone arguing for the use of explicit consent, being supported for that view, then revealing they don't offer or obtain it practice, and being supported for that as well?

Note that I did not specify what principle or persons, just that it has happened.

But since you ask, your own admittance of not going to the level of explicit consent you talked about early in the thread with this line just a few posts above:

So, I made the ring teleport her home within 10 seconds if I was not nearby, automatically keeping her safe if I crashed (and preventing her from leaving home without me) . Some might think that an abusive level of control.

Not that I have an issue with it but from your own back and forth on it, I'd venture it goes beyond the level of consent that was being insisted on by some.

Edited February 24, 2022 by Arielle Popstar
added.

[StarlanderGoods]

24 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Note that I did not specify what principle or persons, just that it has happened.

But since you ask, your own admittance of not going to the level of explicit consent you talked about early in the thread with this line just a few posts above:

So, I made the ring teleport her home within 10 seconds if I was not nearby, automatically keeping her safe if I crashed (and preventing her from leaving home without me) . Some might think that an abusive level of control.

Not that I have an issue with it but from your own back and forth on it, I'd venture it goes beyond the level of consent that was being insisted on by some.

You might be confusing consent and control, those are two very different things.

[Quistess Alpha]

This is an argument I can't believe is being had in good faith, so I should probably just drop it. . . Actually @StarlanderGoods said it more succinctly and to the point than I could while I was still typing. Cary on.

[Rowan Amore]

32 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Note that I did not specify what principle or persons, just that it has happened.

But since you ask, your own admittance of not going to the level of explicit consent you talked about early in the thread with this line just a few posts above:

So, I made the ring teleport her home within 10 seconds if I was not nearby, automatically keeping her safe if I crashed (and preventing her from leaving home without me) . Some might think that an abusive level of control.

Not that I have an issue with it but from your own back and forth on it, I'd venture it goes beyond the level of consent that was being insisted on by some.

They were already in a relationship so it's quite different than letting a stranger/new Dom have that type of control if your collar is open.  If they agreed on something, then it's consent.

[Madelaine McMasters]

1 hour ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Note that I did not specify what principle or persons, just that it has happened.

But since you ask, your own admittance of not going to the level of explicit consent you talked about early in the thread with this line just a few posts above:

So, I made the ring teleport her home within 10 seconds if I was not nearby, automatically keeping her safe if I crashed (and preventing her from leaving home without me) . Some might think that an abusive level of control.

Not that I have an issue with it but from your own back and forth on it, I'd venture it goes beyond the level of consent that was being insisted on by some.

I wasn't sure just what example you had in mine, as you didn't specify the principle or persons. I was, however, fairly confident  there'd be a comprehension error.

I was once mistaken for a young man in the hardware store. I turned around to correct the mistaken impression. That does not mean that, for the duration of that miscomprehension, I was actually a young man. This is the error you made.

I have had explicit permission to take as much control as I want from fairly early in our relationship. That may have been her signal to me to speed it along. I warned her, "give me an inch and I'll take a mile". She's been patient enough to allow me to deliver on that promise. She has little time for SL and no interest in wandering it without me. The restrictions I place on her don't stop her from doing things she wishes to do, they afford her that opportunity and make her feel cared for. That's the point.

I am careful about exposing our relationship where people might not expect to see such things. Were we to encounter someone who thought it was abusive, we'd take the time to explain how it works. Consent isn't just for the two of us.

Edited February 24, 2022 by Madelaine McMasters

[Madelaine McMasters]

48 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

They were already in a relationship so it's quite different than letting a stranger/new Dom have that type of control if your collar is open.  If they agreed on something, then it's consent.

My partner handed over more control than I was willing to take. The difference between what she offered and what I accepted was the limit of my consent. Over time I've taken more control than either of us expected, but not a bit more than either of us wants.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

35 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

I am careful about exposing our relationship where people might not expect to see such things. Were we to encounter someone who thought it was abusive, we'd take the time to explain how it works. Consent isn't just for the two of us.

Thank you for this, as well.

[Madelaine McMasters]

1 minute ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

38 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

I am careful about exposing our relationship where people might not expect to see such things. Were we to encounter someone who thought it was abusive, we'd take the time to explain how it works. Consent isn't just for the two of us.

Thank you for this, as well.

I thought for sure you'd chastise me for not obtaining consent to put things on your windowsill.

[Sukubia Scarmon]

A long, long time ago I fiddled around with the settings of a collar I had - that I was actually pressured into by some weirdo who didn't understand the concept of NO, at a time where I didn't understand the concept of putting up and enforcing boundaries. Well, I did successfully weasel myself out of that mess, but I enjoyed the look of that collar as an accessory, still do, and I love to play around with stuff like that. Also thought I was a submissive for a long time, I am not. Holy ***** I am absolutely not. I do have a kink, tho. Aaaand you do not need to know more, lol. 
So, I fiddled with that, and absend minded as I can be, I accidentaly set it to open access, and promtly forgot about that.
My question now is.

What part of that is explizit giving consent? The accidental part? Or the forgetting part? Or is it both? 

[Setsuki Takeda]

4 hours ago, Quistess Alpha said:

Just wait until you learn about Gor, Vore and other things galore. Or don't. There's no wrong way to enjoy SL as long as you do. Welcome aboard!

The *first* day I had a collar I got grabbed by a vore fetishist...

 

Not the best introduction to RLV, but it gets you to read the manuals

[Arielle Popstar]

4 hours ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

I wasn't sure just what example you had in mine, as you didn't specify the principle or persons. I was, however, fairly confident  there'd be a comprehension error.

I was once mistaken for a young man in the hardware store. I turned around to correct the mistaken impression. That does not mean that, for the duration of that miscomprehension, I was actually a young man. This is the error you made.

I have had explicit permission to take as much control as I want from fairly early in our relationship. That may have been her signal to me to speed it along. I warned her, "give me an inch and I'll take a mile". She's been patient enough to allow me to deliver on that promise. She has little time for SL and no interest in wandering it without me. The restrictions I place on her don't stop her from doing things she wishes to do, they afford her that opportunity and make her feel cared for. That's the point.

I am careful about exposing our relationship where people might not expect to see such things. Were we to encounter someone who thought it was abusive, we'd take the time to explain how it works. Consent isn't just for the two of us.

The comprehension error started when you assumed that the example I was thinking of in my initial post, had to do with you. It didn't. However since you asked, I did pick another example from your posts. Thank you for sharing your story of the journey with your Partner. No doubt it could be instructive for those looking to do a similar sort of relationship. I could pick out a couple potential red flags if I was the sort looking at what is wrong with how someone is doing D/s, but I choose not too because if your Partner was ok with them, who am I to judge? In the same way, who are you or any of the others to judge how I choose to do my D/s?

Therein lies the error you are making.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

1 hour ago, Arielle Popstar said:

The comprehension error started when you assumed that the example I was thinking of in my initial post, had to do with you. It didn't. However since you asked, I did pick another example from your posts. Thank you for sharing your story of the journey with your Partner. No doubt it could be instructive for those looking to do a similar sort of relationship. I could pick out a couple potential red flags if I was the sort looking at what is wrong with how someone is doing D/s, but I choose not too because if your Partner was ok with them, who am I to judge? In the same way, who are you or any of the others to judge how I choose to do my D/s?

Therein lies the error you are making.

On both this and on Covid safeguards, Arielle, you're a little like someone who, arriving at the swimming pool and seeing a sign prohibiting peeing while in the water, opines that, really, that's a choice that should be left to everyone to determine for themselves.

[Arielle Popstar]

4 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

On both this and on Covid safeguards, Arielle, you're a little like someone who, arriving at the swimming pool and seeing a sign prohibiting peeing while in the water, opines that, really, that's a choice that should be left to everyone to determine for themselves.

That is some serious grasping for equivalency. Can AR'ing the thread be far away?

[Madelaine McMasters]

12 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

The comprehension error started when you assumed that the example I was thinking of in my initial post, had to do with you. It didn't.

The main subject of the thread has been consent, so I asked for an example of hypocrisy from someone here regarding that. You  offered me as an example and I found fault in that. If you actually had another example in mind, and provided me a dead red herring instead, then you're being disingenuous. Why not give the example you actually had in mind? I'm happy to hear it.

12 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

I could pick out a couple potential red flags if I was the sort looking at what is wrong with how someone is doing D/s, but I choose not too because if your Partner was ok with them, who am I to judge?

I'm also happy to hear about these red flags you see. Pick away.