Why Does it Have to Be?

Rhonda asked/commented:

"Why does it have to be that silence equates to "superior judgements"?
Why can't it be that if there is a loss for words, or that if you don't have anything good to say, then don't say anything? 
I just don't get the judgementalism that's going on here. Honestly. Kaya wasn't talking about you .you made it personal. Then a shit storm happened. Personally I think you invited her angry response because you made something that wasn't remotely about you...about you.

Really, there are two parts to that bit, so let me address the two parts independently of one another.

The answer to the first question is really simple in my mind.  The notion that someone who has been supported in her own struggles over the years; who has on numerous occasions reached out in pain and anguish and confusion, to ask others around the blog universe for words of encouragement -- and received that encouragement from me and from others, finds NO WORDS to offer in return is pitiable.  One does not have to be eloquent or even wise to offer a kind word to someone who is hurting.  "Hugs," does not take much effort, and it conveys a simple standing with one who hurts.  In my opinion, it isn't difficult.  If others have held you up in your times of need, then there is a simple, decent, human move that passes on that act of kindness to others in their turn.  

The second question / comment is more complex, and since you asked, Rhonda, I will attempt to explain it so that it is clear enough for you to understand.

While it is Kaya's contention, and one that you obviously accept at face value, that nothing that she wrote was "about me," the fact is that she made a very definitive and specific declaration about the nature of slavery in general:  

"Did you hear ... the one about the slave who dominated herself with any success?

Oh. Me, neither. Because it doesn’t fucking happen."

Now, I will grant that that pronouncement does not single me, or anyone else, out by name.  It does, however, quite specifically declare that no slave EVER successfully "dominates herself."  I disagree, and I will keep on confronting that sort of dismissive attitude toward those who do not DO their power exchange relationships according to Kaya's ideas of what is and is not the right way.  The truth is that she cannot have it both ways; she can't declare that it is only about her while simultaneously putting out declarative statements that categorically dismiss the choices made by those who differ -- who do it in ways that she cannot comprehend.  To claim that she's only writing about her while she makes broad, sweeping generalizations is just silly.  She is far too bright to believe that nonsense.

And...  Yes.  I am willing to own my own judgement about this particular us / them sort of uber-slave showboating.  Here's my take on the "no one is really a slave when there is not active, visible, discernible, describable, recognizable Dominance happening" notion within the D/s lifestyle.  In my experience (see how I did that?), the requirements and expectations of my power exchange relationship were made clear in the very early days, a very long time ago now.  I know what those expectations and requirements are, and I do my very best to live up to that.  It is what I promised.  It does not require any sort of external reinforcement -- no rules, punishments, protocols, tasks, mantras, etc.  Those things could be part of the dynamic, but they are not necessary.  Given that, I know from personal experience, that living in that kind of slave dynamic can be a real challenge.  There is not a lot of "hot" coming from that sort of slavery -- nothing that rings my bells or curls my toes or lights my fire.  When I read about those who require MORE, I understand the desire behind that, but I can't help but wonder who is dominating who in those relationships.  When the nominal dominant is working hard to supply the inputs that keep the slave feeling "slavey," then that dominant is being driven by the slave's demand.  That is not a model of dominance that I understand or recognize.  I think it is a very widely practiced model, but it simply doesn't make sense to me.

So, Rhonda, I do take exception to Kaya's sense of entitlement in this instance.  Her belief that she knows what is, or is not, true D/s or true M/s is myopic at best and arrogant at worst.  I do realize that I am probably the only one in the multitude of readers at her blog to hold that view; the lone voice to point out that the Empress has no clothes, but there it is.  Too, I know I have stirred up what you characterize as a "shit storm."  So be it.  Clearly there is no relationship between the two of us.  That is fine.  She is nothing more than a blog site to me -- one out of probably hundreds or thousands out there.  I have no need or desire to continue marching in the army of Kaya's minions.  I have, for some dozen years, done this my own way.  That is likely to continue.  Feel free to not look.

Sue