Comments on: Episode 11: Spirituality in Dominance? (The Actualized Dominant)

By: Soulhuntre

Soulhuntre — Sat, 22 May 2010 02:09:52 +0000

While obviously a LOT has happened in the (ack!) 75 weeks since you posted this comment, if your still aroudn hit me up – I would love to have you on :)

If anyone else knows of a good way to get in touch with Master Skip, let me know please.

By: Soulhuntre

Soulhuntre — Sat, 22 May 2010 02:08:10 +0000

Hey Bruce!

Thanks for dropping by and for your comments. You may be well be correct about context… we discussed what we had, and I think a few times mentioned that this may well not be representative of what Master Skip is all about.

By: Bruce

Bruce — Fri, 21 May 2010 05:03:01 +0000

My opinion is that this blog post did a disservice to Master Skip’s ideas. From what I know, this was taken out of context from a presentation he did about spirituality and mastery, and is not a book. I attended this discussion at the Master and slave conference, and you cannot get the fullness of his ideas about mastery as a vocation from just those bullets in his handout. At no point in the discussion did I hear that he thinks all Masters should approach mastery as spiritual.

By: SuePrise

SuePrise — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 00:42:17 +0000

I found this podcast to be quote thought provoking, to the point where I went online in search of the document. Which was harder to find than I expected to be.

While I was listening to the podcast I found myself hearing a familiar rant of my own: “Men just don’t get some of this stuff”. As a dominant female I have spent lots of time trying to figure out how to be the dominant person in a relationship dispite how I was raised or my own initial thoughts on dominant women.

In my quest for my own answers I have found that sometimes, male dominants don’t see the emotional/psychological side of the dynamic.

In this list of criteria, I saw an underlying tone of that side. Take away the literal interpretation, which is where I saw this podcast get stuck to some extent, and you are left with a half decent guide to morals and values of being dominant.

I have found that more often than not, dominant men overlook these ideals in their relationships. The focus is much more on the task. This was just another example for me of how different female domination is from male.

Even though I disagreed with most of what was being said, I enjoyed the podcast.

Thank you for putting it out there.

Kind regards,

SuePrise

By: Skip Chasey

Skip Chasey — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 20:49:22 +0000

I’m sorry to say that I haven’t come across this blog or the precedent podcast until now.

Gentlemen, if your invitation is still open, I’ll be happy to have a conversation with you on another podcast. In any case, while you were uninformed or misinformed as to that particular document, I nevertheless appreciate your responses.

Respectfully,

Skip Chasey

By: Reina Darkness

Reina Darkness — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:13:20 +0000

By: Flagg

Flagg — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 16:11:52 +0000

After reading your post, I gave the entire podcast another listen, and I saw something in my own behavior I had not noticed before. I think Ken and I were reacting, not so much to the site in front of us, but to a knee jerk reaction caused by a hundred sites and speeches we had read and heard other places. Daddy david helped us focus on what was really there in front of us, which, we noted by the end, was not nearly the atrocious horseshit that we were used to- and that we saw out of habit and expectation. Not our best, to be certain- but a behaviour to be aware of.

Thank you.

Flagg

By: Symetrie

Symetrie — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 14:53:22 +0000

Interesting… though I will say, I heard that podcast as primarily a rant-n-bash as well.

“damaging misinformation” Hmmm… because there is a Truth other than the one espoused? I suspect their are many… my truth, your truth, his and hers with matching bath towels just to prove it.

At no time did I get the message from the “Priest in Black Leather: Mastery as a Spiritual Calling” excerpt (The Qualities of a Realized Master) that this truth, ideal, belief, *insert descriptive of choice* was attempting to promote anything other than Skip Chasey’s personal philosophy… which happens to be spiritual in nature.

Whose responsibility, with the respect to the dissemination of information, is it to investigate the layers of legitimacy of any given piece or its alternatives? The reader’s rather than the writer’s is how I would answer that question. The fact that few individuals do that… round hole, square peg. Lemmings are the responsibility of their own dysfunction and not the author’s.

By: Flagg

Flagg — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 16:52:47 +0000

really, our intent was not to bash anybody- what we arere all struck by was the continuation of what we consider to be damaging misinformation which proliferates on the web, and had recently come across a new example.

In the end, we felt we had nothing against the guy for holding spiritual views in his BDSM; we just have a problem with spiritualism being promoted as obvious and necessary fact – kinda like teaching creationism in school. Just rubs me the wrong way.

Flagg

By: Noname

Noname — Wed, 21 May 2008 17:10:27 +0000

I found that this really was a rant and I didnt get too much out of it. I didnt quite get the topic and all you were doing was really bashing the guy who put this book out there.