Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/14/2005 8:34:12 PM   
pygmalionsub


Posts: 30
Joined: 5/21/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: EmeraldSlave2


quote:

ORIGINAL: pygmalionsub

that was great Oumae.

Its better to be safe then sorry. Its better to have a safeword/signal and never use it , then not and have a Dom miss the signs that something is wrong.

It's not an all or nothing deal here. I don't have a safe word with the Owner, but I still let him know signs that he can't be aware of or might miss.

Sigh, trusting a "safe word" is just such a flimsy thing.

quote:

Sigh, trusting a "safe word" is just such a flimsy thing.



Its not trusting a safeword, its trusting the Dom to know that when that safeword is used, that play will stop and i will recieve whatever help i need at that moment. Safeword is a useful tool just like many others in the lifestyle that you may or may not choose to use. If one chooses to use them, that doesn't make them "less" submissive. I would never play with a Dom if he said no safewords. Even if we had been playing together for years. Simply because Doms are humans, they make mistakes, they may misread something. In 5 years i've used a safeword once, which is pretty good, but that one time was worth it. I think its dangerous to put out the romantic notion that a Dom will always 100% of the time beable to read your needs perfectly.

(in reply to EmeraldSlave2)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/14/2005 9:41:43 PM   
proudsub


Posts: 6142
Joined: 1/31/2004
From: Washington
Status: offline
quote:

In another thread Proud sub I believe mentioned the need for increasing pain in her sessions. I think this is consistent with a deeper trust and is more a function of her releasing more of herself to her Master/husband versus a need for more sensation. If she was considering her safe-word I doubt the relationship would progress so well.


That's true now. But when i first introduced pain play to Hubby i explained about safewords and He told me to use one if i needed it. I used it once early on when He was testing me to see how much nip pain i could tolerate. That was 2 years ago, haven't needed it since then.

_____________________________

proudsub

"Without goals you become what you were. With goals you become what you wish." .

"You are entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts"--Alan Greenspan


(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/15/2005 5:32:27 AM   
EmeraldSlave2


Posts: 3645
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pygmalionsub
Its not trusting a safeword, its trusting the Dom to know that when that safeword is used, that play will stop and i will recieve whatever help i need at that moment. Safeword is a useful tool just like many others in the lifestyle that you may or may not choose to use.


But you don't need a safeword to do that. There are many many forms of communication, including a huge vocabulary from which to draw from. Why on earth limit that all down into one single word (which most subs are too insecure to use, most doms too defensive to have it used on them, too out of it to know to use, and lucky if the dom can even hear it)?

quote:


If one chooses to use them, that doesn't make them "less" submissive.

I agree, and my discussion points have had nothing to do with "how deeply" submissive someone is.

quote:

I would never play with a Dom if he said no safewords. Even if we had been playing together for years. Simply because Doms are humans, they make mistakes, they may misread something.


Again my point is that limiting communication in this to an all safewords or no play scenario is silly. There's a LOT of communicating that can be done without safewords being involved at all. If a dom came up to you and said "Hey, if somethings wrong, let me know" would that be any different than saying "Hey, if somethings wrong, safeword"? I don't think so.

quote:


In 5 years i've used a safeword once, which is pretty good, but that one time was worth it. I think its dangerous to put out the romantic notion that a Dom will always 100% of the time beable to read your needs perfectly.

Agree, in fact in every single one of my responses here I have pointed that out.

But you don't NEED a safeword to do that, in fact relying on JUST a safeword to do that is pretty silly. People put so much value into a safeword, into how great it must be to NEVER use it or "I've ONLY used it once"

If you are using a safeword as it's properly meant to be used, then there's no fault if you use it a dozen times or never at all. But personally, I will stick with the entire broad vocabulary I have at my disposal, PLUS vocal tempo and pitch, PLUS body language, PLUS choosing good partners to start with.

Safe words are WAYYYY down on the importance of safety list when it comes to what really helps and what doesn't.

Love
Liz

(in reply to pygmalionsub)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/15/2005 10:53:52 AM   
pygmalionsub


Posts: 30
Joined: 5/21/2005
Status: offline
quote:

If you are using a safeword as it's properly meant to be used, then there's no fault if you use it a dozen times or never at all. But personally, I will stick with the entire broad vocabulary I have at my disposal, PLUS vocal tempo and pitch, PLUS body language, PLUS choosing good partners to start with.



I absolutely agree, as long as there is some form of communication going on. If its a signal for when your gagged, or just out and out say " stop my leg hurts" But waiting for the Dom to "read" you especially when gagged isn't something i would be comfortable with, so i would have a signal.

Safewords are also good for example in a rape scene, where there would be alot of " No's" "stops" and " your hurting me" but screaming out something silly or preplanned that is meant to REALLY stop.

(in reply to EmeraldSlave2)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/15/2005 12:12:19 PM   
shay


Posts: 63
Joined: 11/15/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: EmeraldSlave2
Safe words are WAYYYY down on the importance of safety list when it comes to what really helps and what doesn't.


This post scares the hell out of me. EmeraldSlave2 its obvious YOU Have been in the lifestyle for quite some time. You have Your own way of doing things, but MANY new submissives read this forum. THEY are the ones wanting to learn, needing the set guidelines, needing the safe words. To say they are FAR or WAYYYY down on the importance of safety list is just crazy. They do not know how to express themselves properly within the lifestyle. Often the excitement of the moment will fog their minds, while a safe word remains high on their recall list.

Do i personally use safewords alot? No, i dont anymore. Did i in the beginning? Hell yes i did. Safe words are words of comfort for those new to experiences that we have been trained through life to NOT want: the spanking, the humiliation, the pain.

i personally encourage the use of safewords, am proud when i can actually USE them. it means my limits have been stretched, pushed and exceeded at least for the moment. If a new Top doesnt encourage having safe words i will NOT play with Him or Her.

just my side, the way i see it, and no i aint blind~
shay

(in reply to EmeraldSlave2)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/15/2005 12:26:29 PM   
EmeraldSlave2


Posts: 3645
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline 		Shay & Pygmalion-

Refer to my first post on this topic when I said

I advise using a safeword when just topping/bottoming, or when doing force/role play when normal screams of terror aren't enough (even in pain scenes, it's usually easy to tell the difference between "god that fucking hurts" and "god somethings really wrong" screams).

Otherwise, just use real communication.

Subs don't like using safe words, they feel it's a failure on their part, they feel guilty, they feel they took control, they are afraid the dom will be angry with them or upset. Subs aren't always CAPABLE of using them, in a scene their headspace is irrational, they might not notice a mistake, they might not be able to signal anything from headspace or even care if they do notice it.

Relying on "a safeword" and making it a big deal is not the wisest thing to do. Communication is a SET of skills, all of which need to be employed and at your disposal. Safewords in an of themselves is a very, very small, very misused part of that process.

(in reply to shay)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/15/2005 4:56:08 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

To say they are FAR or WAYYYY down on the importance of safety list is just crazy.


The importance of whether they are "FAR or WAYYY down" the list is a matter of debate. But relying on a safe word as a key to your safety at best provides you with a false sense of security and at worse can kill you. This is especially true when you are meeting someone or even scening in public with someone for the first time.

I know someone who is a long time experienced player, and related to me a terrible experience playing with someone for the first time. The scene went instantly wrong. The Domme didn't build up as the sub expected, but the sub has a bit of a stubborn streak, so he tried his best to NOT safe-word. When trying to find out "what went wrong", you have a perspective problem. The Domme's perspective; "Wow - this is a hard core pain slut I have to take it up a notch". The sub; "i'm not going to let this bitch think I'm a wussy!" Neither got anything from the experience. Put this in the context of many of the first time players that come to this site for advise, and counseling that a "safe-word" is the key to safety is just wrong.

But then there's the worst case. A Jeffrey Dahmer wannabe is out surfing the net and finds this site. After 6 months of playing nice, you meet. He is the "perfect" safety oriented dom. INSISTING on you knowing a safe-word. Having you practice it. Then in his basement tied to a rafter you shout it and he just laughs. Is the last thought in your mind before death; "gee-he's not a good dom, he didn't recognize my safe word!"?

Without knowing and developing trust a safe-word should come with the same disclaimer as the plastic inner tube you float on in the pool. "Not intended as a life saving devise!" It's also not intended to be a substitute for trust or experience with your partner.

So I agree with Emerald - it should be WAY down the list.

< Message edited by ModeratorEight -- 6/17/2005 8:23:22 PM >

(in reply to shay)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/15/2005 7:17:40 PM   
shay


Posts: 63
Joined: 11/15/2004
Status: offline 		Mercnbeth,

if safe words are wayyyyyyyyyy down the list, whats at the top?

respectfully,
shay

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/15/2005 7:48:38 PM   
sanita


Posts: 338
Joined: 1/30/2005
Status: offline 		well, the top of this thread, the original post, was not about the wisdom of relying on a safeword above any other methods of being safe and secure, and healthy.

it was suggesting that subs aren't truly submitting if there is a safeword in the mix. or if limits are known and set. that they are instead "allowing," which puts them in the position of controller.

i disagreed. i don't like anyone suggesting i am not up to par as a sub, because i am not cut to their mold.

others disagreed as well.

how is that debate going?


along the lines of the OP, was this sub even in any sort of headspace? and was there any chance that they'd get there, considering it was going bad from the start? the safeword, the limits did not hinder the bottom's submission... the wrong scene did. the failure to use the safeword just made it go way too far.

that was a communication problem, and a judgement problem, but if the safeword had not been on the table, would the scene have worked better? maybe the Domme would have read the signals... but not if the sub was determined to take what the "bitch" dished out, and not to look like a "wussy." there is not really any individual at fault in this case, but maybe B/both for poor communication.

as a reason to not JUST rely on a safeword, that is a very important story to read. however, i don't think the safeword had anything to do with how submissive the person was being. that is in the person's attitude, which is probably what affects the ability to let go.

< Message edited by ModeratorEight -- 6/17/2005 8:24:42 PM >

_____________________________

Sometimes, He calls me "subbie." Sometimes, i call me "subbie." And if someone wants to call me a BBW, its flattering. Just don't call me false.

"Please do not show me your ass and expect me to read your mind." -Opencollar

(in reply to shay)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/15/2005 10:26:14 PM   
junecleaver


Posts: 1145
Joined: 4/6/2005
Status: offline 		When I enter a relationship, I talk with the person and we set up limits in the relationship. Like...no children, animals, scat, blood, etc etc. I think that as a submissive in a relationship, I have the right to set basic limits that are hurtful to me.

And you know in the course of a relationship my limits may be pushed and even change, but I still reserve the right to pick basic limits. Everything outside of those limits would be in his control.

IMO, a slave does not have the right to limits or safewords. I am not a slave and I have no desire to be one. Of course I don't place much importance on being "real" to other people, if I am happy and my partner is happy, others opinions aren't really relevant.

I can sort of see your point though. It seems like you're implying(and I might be wrong, happens all the time ;-) ) that in a scene a submissive is constantly thinking about her safeword. I can't speak for all submissives, but I've never actually thought about my safeword. It was always just kind of there collecting dust.

gotta love midnight ramblings,
june

(in reply to pygmalionsub)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/15/2005 10:29:16 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

if safe words are wayyyyyyyyyy down the list, whats at the top?


Communication. Leading to Familiarity. Which leads to Trust. From which ALL things are possible.

(in reply to shay)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/15/2005 10:41:30 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

how is that debate going?


Well I think - How do you think it's going?

If bringing out the tangent of safe-words, both sides of the issue should be addressed there too don't your think? There is no listed or implied "absolute", only question and challenge to educate me. I KNOW I don't know and CAN'T know the safe-word process. When I made the original post it was for the purpose of advancing my own understanding. That comes more from the disagreements than the agreements.

What I'm hearing confirms my theory. The more experienced you are with a particular partner, the less needed or used even if you have a safe word. The more casual the play the more used and needed. Being very interested and motivated by the mental aspects of play I wondered how a submissive kept track.

As beth points out, when our scene injury occurred even if she had a safe-word, unless it was; "OH SHIT THAT Fn HURTS!" she wouldn't have remembered it.

(in reply to sanita)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/15/2005 10:43:12 PM   
AAkasha


Posts: 4429
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

how is that debate going?


Well I think - How do you think it's going?

If bringing out the tangent of safe-words, both sides of the issue should be addressed there too don't your think? There is no listed or implied "absolute", only question and challenge to educate me. I KNOW I don't know and CAN'T know the safe-word process. When I made the original post it was for the purpose of advancing my own understanding. That comes more from the disagreements than the agreements.

What I'm hearing confirms my theory. The more experienced you are with a particular partner, the less needed or used even if you have a safe word. The more casual the play the more used and needed. Being very interested and motivated by the mental aspects of play I wondered how a submissive kept track.

As beth points out, when our scene injury occurred even if she had a safe-word, unless it was; "OH SHIT THAT Fn HURTS!" she wouldn't have remembered it.


You haven't given your input on what you thought of my theories regarding the submission of a non-sub, and how that relates to it all.

Akasha

_____________________________

Akasha's Web - All original Femdom content since 1995
Don't email me here, email me at [email protected]

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/16/2005 4:43:05 AM   
sanita


Posts: 338
Joined: 1/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

how is that debate going?


Well I think - How do you think it's going?



i thought it got off track a little. *grin*


quote:


What I'm hearing confirms my theory. The more experienced you are with a particular partner, the less needed or used even if you have a safe word. The more casual the play the more used and needed. Being very interested and motivated by the mental aspects of play I wondered how a submissive kept track.


but in my case, and probably in others, the safeword is there. i do "have" a safeword. is it on my mind during a session with my Master? no.

would it come to mind if i were in serioous need to stop the scene? yes.

is it in a little place in my head that my Master does not get to control? no. He put it there.


quote:

As beth points out, when our scene injury occurred even if she had a safe-word, unless it was; "OH SHIT THAT Fn HURTS!" she wouldn't have remembered it.


during a scene or session, i have trouble forming coherent phrases. if that kind of wrong pain snapped me out of it, if i could wrap my head around the english language, i would probably have that one assigned word at the front of it. though i understand this is not the case, i would venture that if beth had had a safeword, it might have been either directly before that exclamation, or directly after it. please do not think i am trying to dictate someone else's behaviour, or label it, though.

once the safeword is on the table, it is there. a sub can submit fully when limits are known and a safeword is in the mix. the depth of a submissive's surrender in a given situation is not based on the part of the mind that is monitoring. it is based on the situation itself, and the comfort and trust in the Dom/me.

in my experience, unless i feel that i am in danger, and cannot get into that space because of it, the "do i use it now?" thought is nowhere near my conscious. if i feel that i am in danger, i am not looking for my safeword, or espousing limits, i am running.

_____________________________

Sometimes, He calls me "subbie." Sometimes, i call me "subbie." And if someone wants to call me a BBW, its flattering. Just don't call me false.

"Please do not show me your ass and expect me to read your mind." -Opencollar

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/16/2005 10:52:07 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

Hypothetically I could also say -- "To me, any submissive that chooses to submit to someone instead of someone else is making a choice, and therefore is not submissive. A person who does not make the choice to submit, but submits to someone who requests/desires their submission is offering an act of conscious surrender. In addition, that person would not actively seek another person to give his/her submission to, therefore, this dominant is more empowered than the dominant that provides a service to submissives who seek it."


quote:

You haven't given your input on what you thought of my theories regarding the submission of a non-sub, and how that relates to it all.


Akasha,

Well, as I said, I thought your point was very interesting. In reading my original response I can see how it really didn't address the point you made concerning "submission of a non-sub inclined person. I think a comparable analogy with many parallels would be a "straight" person having a homosexual relationship.

There can be the "casual" experience brought on by a wild night of partying or a one-time curiosity. Then there are the cases where it is the only relationship possible such as prisons, convents, or; as is often the case in 'erotic' literature, at exclusive girls and/or military schools. And finally there's the case where a "straight" just falls in love with a person of their own gender. I see all of these comparable to how someone becomes involved in the lifestyle.

Any relationship including another person must have a common goal. Self flagellation is no more fulfilling then the Dom side of the equation, flogging a pillowcase with a picture attached. Taking your point, is it a semantic argument to say that there is a "surrender" versus "submission"? A straight person in prison may surrender to homosexuality for sexual relief or just to survive. The person may not and never consider that they are homosexual. A straight person, falling in love with someone of their same sex may surrender to his/her emotions. The person may never consider such a relationship with anyone else of the same sex.

However it happens, the relationship that ensues is a product of that mutual surrender, not to a person but to the relationship. Applying the concept to the lifestyle the Dom does surrender to the role of Master/Mistress whether the submissive comes as a willing submissive or a person who never before considered such a relationship. I feel both parties are serving toward the goals jointly set and defined by agreement.

The only distinction about the surrender of the sub versus the surrender of the Dom is that once the agreement is reached, it's the Dom in charge. I never implied that it meant that the relationship didn't have limits - but I do say that those limits are the Dom's. The sub surrenders those limits to the Dom whether the sub choose their submission or it chose them. I know of many situations where the Dom's limits were actually more conservative than the sub's. For instance, a sub loving anal sex, but the Dom/Domme does not. In this case the sub "surrenders" access to that desire.

I don't think being a Dom over a "coerced" sub represents more power then Doming over someone coming to the relationship with submissive desires. If the relationship is going to work, the bottom line is that everyone in the relationship is achieving something desirable and surrenders to working to that goal. This is why I feel such a relationship is only possible with communication over time, resulting in trust. Then, surrender isn't so scary, and the need or question of safe-words is moot.

(in reply to AAkasha)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/16/2005 12:29:51 PM   
AAkasha


Posts: 4429
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

Hypothetically I could also say -- "To me, any submissive that chooses to submit to someone instead of someone else is making a choice, and therefore is not submissive. A person who does not make the choice to submit, but submits to someone who requests/desires their submission is offering an act of conscious surrender. In addition, that person would not actively seek another person to give his/her submission to, therefore, this dominant is more empowered than the dominant that provides a service to submissives who seek it."


quote:

You haven't given your input on what you thought of my theories regarding the submission of a non-sub, and how that relates to it all.


Akasha,

Well, as I said, I thought your point was very interesting. In reading my original response I can see how it really didn't address the point you made concerning "submission of a non-sub inclined person. I think a comparable analogy with many parallels would be a "straight" person having a homosexual relationship.

There can be the "casual" experience brought on by a wild night of partying or a one-time curiosity. Then there are the cases where it is the only relationship possible such as prisons, convents, or; as is often the case in 'erotic' literature, at exclusive girls and/or military schools. And finally there's the case where a "straight" just falls in love with a person of their own gender. I see all of these comparable to how someone becomes involved in the lifestyle.

Any relationship including another person must have a common goal. Self flagellation is no more fulfilling then the Dom side of the equation, flogging a pillowcase with a picture attached. Taking your point, is it a semantic argument to say that there is a "surrender" versus "submission"? A straight person in prison may surrender to homosexuality for sexual relief or just to survive. The person may not and never consider that they are homosexual. A straight person, falling in love with someone of their same sex may surrender to his/her emotions. The person may never consider such a relationship with anyone else of the same sex.

However it happens, the relationship that ensues is a product of that mutual surrender, not to a person but to the relationship. Applying the concept to the lifestyle the Dom does surrender to the role of Master/Mistress whether the submissive comes as a willing submissive or a person who never before considered such a relationship. I feel both parties are serving toward the goals jointly set and defined by agreement.

The only distinction about the surrender of the sub versus the surrender of the Dom is that once the agreement is reached, it's the Dom in charge. I never implied that it meant that the relationship didn't have limits - but I do say that those limits are the Dom's. The sub surrenders those limits to the Dom whether the sub choose their submission or it chose them. I know of many situations where the Dom's limits were actually more conservative than the sub's. For instance, a sub loving anal sex, but the Dom/Domme does not. In this case the sub "surrenders" access to that desire.

I don't think being a Dom over a "coerced" sub represents more power then Doming over someone coming to the relationship with submissive desires. If the relationship is going to work, the bottom line is that everyone in the relationship is achieving something desirable and surrenders to working to that goal. This is why I feel such a relationship is only possible with communication over time, resulting in trust. Then, surrender isn't so scary, and the need or question of safe-words is moot.


I don't see the homosexual analogy at all here. When a vanilla man submits to me, he isn't doing it because there are no other options (ie the prison example) or just a fling (ie the one time curiosity). He also is not compromising the entire side of his own sexual identify or giving up one entire side of it.

But not looking at the dominant side of it (coerced or not, which is more "powerful") -- but the other way around. That is, could a person say that "submission" is more "real" (to use the term you used) when it comes from someone with zero agenda, vs. submission (with an agenda) -- even though the dominant can change the agenda.

You talked about dominants being a "service provider" for subs who control with limits and safewords. I contend with that thinking, any dominant is a "service provider" when a submissive is seeking submission. The submissive will seek submission elsewhere and continue to seek it. A vanilla who submits isn't looking for a service provider. The vanilla is simply willing to submit, purely to please the dominant.

Akasha

_____________________________

Akasha's Web - All original Femdom content since 1995
Don't email me here, email me at [email protected]

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/16/2005 1:12:35 PM   
perverseangelic


Posts: 2625
Joined: 2/2/2004
From: Davis, Ca
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: shay

Mercnbeth,

if safe words are wayyyyyyyyyy down the list, whats at the top?

respectfully,
shay



Communicating with your partner.

Even when I was brand spankin' new I only had to use a safeword =once=. As I see it, safewords are a great saftey valve in situations where 'oh god that hurts' isn't as effective as it usually is. In situations when "no" means "fuck me harder" it's useful to have a way of communicating that damage is being done.

HOWEVER, in "normal" situations, that is, in situations that aren't speisifically force play or are with your primary partner, as I see it, communication is more important than key words. My partner trusts that I'm going to tell him that my feet are falling alseep or that something untoward is happening. I trust that he's going to do something about it when I tell him there is a serious problem.

I find that a reliance on safewords has actually made me more -unsafe- with new play partners. I believe that communication should supplant them, and that a bottomw should tell her top what's going on with her. I find that when we've played with tops that are more interested in s&m the the d/s bit, their reliance on safewords has made things difficult.

That is, I tell my top what's going on, and what i'm feeling. I keep him/her abrest of what's going on with me and how much things hurt. In turn, I assume that the top has a given sensation he/she is attempting to produce in me, and that he/she will stop when that sensation is produced to his/her satisfaction. With some tops I've been with, they gauge their scenes by safewords. That is, they assume that unless the bottom uses her safeword she isn't feeling anything, or she isn't being "truthful". In other words, they seem to think that whatever a bottom tells them is exageration -unless- a safeword is used. I, on the other hand, tell my partenrs "I am in a lot of pain" but if they choose to continue, I assume that's because they -want- me in a lot of pain, not because they don't believe it's pain untill I safeword.

I find that to be a dangerous way of thinking. I think that reliance on safewords can often make an individual less able to read personal signs.

Don't get me wrong, I advocate using them in scenes with people you don't know or with new partners, for the saftey of both the top and the bottom. Howeve, like Emerald, I think an over-reliance on safewords can lead to =more= trouble.

I don't believe that having a safeword limits submission. I see it as another tool of communication. If my spoken-word vocabulary isn't working, or if I cannot think well enough to use normal words, a safeword is a quick way of telling my top there is trouble. I don't operate with safewords that mean "we're done now" Rather, my safeword means "there is some serious trouble you need to deal with before we keep going." I still have only used it twice. Once in my first three months, and once with one of the afore mentioned sensation-tops.

Similarly, I don't see "limits' as reducing submission, but perhaps that's because I define limits differently than most. To me, limits are things which will damage me physically or mentally or which violate my morality or religion. In essence, they are things which will make me incapable of service. I think that -everyone- has limits and should have them, however I think that individuals should find partners that have the -same- limits. So, if you won't chop somoene up with an axe, find someone who will never ask you to do it. As I see it, limits should match so 'testing limits' is never a problem.

_____________________________

~in the begining it is always dark~

(in reply to shay)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/16/2005 1:24:04 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

That is, could a person say that "submission" is more "real" (to use the term you used) when it comes from someone with zero agenda, vs. submission (with an agenda) -- even though the dominant can change the agenda.


No I wouldn't agree that it is more or less "real". The journey or how they got there doesn't matter other than from perspective. If you put two statements that you made together there was an agenda, as you say, "pleasing the dominant". The comparison to falling in love with a person of your same gender seems analogous. You weren't looking for it, didn't expect it, it occurred and the feelings are "real". But debating whether homosexuality is a good comparison isn't the subject and not important.

quote:

A vanilla who submits isn't looking for a service provider. The vanilla is simply willing to submit, purely to please the dominant.


Would you argue that pleasing the dominant as you state isn't an agenda, albeit an adopted one? Adopted so that the person, taking on the submissive role, can be with a certain person.

As you've said previously; "it can get tricky".

(in reply to AAkasha)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/16/2005 1:38:34 PM   
AAkasha


Posts: 4429
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

That is, could a person say that "submission" is more "real" (to use the term you used) when it comes from someone with zero agenda, vs. submission (with an agenda) -- even though the dominant can change the agenda.


No I wouldn't agree that it is more or less "real". The journey or how they got there doesn't matter other than from perspective. If you put two statements that you made together there was an agenda, as you say, "pleasing the dominant". The comparison to falling in love with a person of your same gender seems analogous. You weren't looking for it, didn't expect it, it occurred and the feelings are "real". But debating whether homosexuality is a good comparison isn't the subject and not important.

quote:

A vanilla who submits isn't looking for a service provider. The vanilla is simply willing to submit, purely to please the dominant.


Would you argue that pleasing the dominant as you state isn't an agenda, albeit an adopted one? Adopted so that the person, taking on the submissive role, can be with a certain person.

As you've said previously; "it can get tricky".


For a non-submissive, pleasing the dominant is an adopted agenda -- sure. But that's all there is to that agenda.
For a submissive, there's more on that agenda -- in fact, it's an entire agenda, its a wishlist per se. Whether or not the dominant decides to follow it is up to them. But, if that submissive isn't ultimately getting what they want out of it, they can seek another dominant. The submissive seeks a "service provider" as you stated when you talked about limits and safewords.
Ultimately, all submissives seek a service provider.

For a non-submissive, there's no agenda but pleasing. Therefore, no need to seek another partner to fulfill the needs, to be the service provider.

Do you believe there are cases where a submissive -- who only desires to please -- drives away their dominant partner with their agenda? Or, the submissives feels that the service provider is not providing the service? The submissive is unfulfilled and must leave?

What if the dominant told the submissive, "Ok, my desire is for you to be the dominant -- now and forever." Will the submissisve do that unconditionally? In how many cases? For how long? Will the submissive feel fulfilled in their new role as dominant, now and forever?

A non-submissive partner..a vanilla...will submit to either request arbitrarily -- one may feel more comfortable than the other, but if their desire is to please, they'll give it a shot to the best of their ability, and often beyond their own capabilities or comfort zone. No agenda.

(btw, I'm not stating that vanilla partners are better or submissive partners are better, they each come with their own long list of pros and cons, and I've had lots of experience with both. My point is just to clarify that the idea of a dominant merely being a service provider -- because of limits, safewords, parameters -- can be argued about submission as whole.)

Akasha




_____________________________

Akasha's Web - All original Femdom content since 1995
Don't email me here, email me at [email protected]

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? - 6/16/2005 2:38:16 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

My point is just to clarify that the idea of a dominant merely being a service provider


Akasha,
Please keep my comment regarding a dominant being a service provider in context. It was addressing submissives with very specific, almost scripted, scenes in mind when they meet or are with dominants. It doesn't apply to a global M/s relationship. Hell, in that context I'm a service provider for beth. Outside the context of punishment the fact is I am since she derives pleasure and fulfillment in being submissive both physically, and emotionally. Mentally, I'm sure she has conflicts with my decisions or requirements and I consider that a significant difference that excludes considering myself a service provider. Rationalization? Maybe, but I know that I'm not concerned about following any script that she presented me.

quote:

What if the dominant told the submissive, "Ok, my desire is for you to be the dominant -- now and forever." Will the submissive do that unconditionally? In how many cases? For how long? Will the submissive feel fulfilled in their new role as dominant, now and forever?


Now that's a paradox comparable with time traveling and killing your father. I seem to remember someplace were something similar was mentioned here, perhaps in the "switch" area. In theory I imagine it is possible, but it would be in contradiction to the relationship being based upon honest initial communication and agreement of expectations. It's so fundamental I'd compare it to marrying a woman and finding out she was born a man. In theory, if all other things were equal, you could choose to stay married, but I think you would agree that a complete re-evaluation of the relationship would be in order.

quote:

A non-submissive partner..a vanilla...will submit to either request arbitrarily -- one may feel more comfortable than the other, but if their desire is to please, they'll give it a shot to the best of their ability, and often beyond their own capabilities or comfort zone. No agenda.


Like my issue of being defined as a service provider for beth, this example is consistent with my interpretation of "agenda". You say it yourself; "their desire to please". Whether serving as a Dom or sub that desire is an agenda. In relationships where one or both parties is a switch that criteria may even be essential. Is the acquiescence truly "arbitrary"? I'd say not-it still is consistent with a desire to please.

Curious - Would you exclude considering a person from this discussion if, after experiencing the lifestyle from either perspective, independent of a request on your part they came home one day and "surprised" you with a planned lifestyle session either as a sub or Dom? Or would that just mean you've turned them to the "Dark Side"? Are you still "vanilla" if you start to like it, look forward to it, or even encourage it?

(in reply to AAkasha)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: What Part of you is "Monitoring"? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125