The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation)

The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress

Message

littlesarbonn -> The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 3:15:03 PM)
Please don't take this as a complaint. It's not meant as one. It's also not directed at any one person but just at an observance I've been having over the last few years. For some time, I was away from the scene, so I had little involvement with what was going on. As a result, a lot of my previous contacts pretty much dissipated or just became more difficult to keep in contact with. Since I came back, I started looking for someone again, and I found my search to be less than successful (although that's actually more complaint-wise, and not the purpose of this thread...just info to put this thread in perspective). Anyway, I did manage to run into a few people here and there, but I kept getting the feeling that aside from a lot of the chemistry just not being there, there really seemed to be something missing, but I couldn't figure out what it was. So, I backpedal a long time ago to where I was actually in a bdsm relationship, and I started thinking about what was working back then that hasn't really been around today. It took me a LONG time to really figure that out, and I think I've kind of come up with what it is. Strictness. Yeah, that sounds strange, but let me explain. In previous relationships, I always seemed to be involved with women that were set in their ways, and they would go out of their way to make sure you understood that. A lot of women I've talked to claim to be exactly that, but I've observed a variation to that rather than what I remember being more of a norm. There is a strictness to detail, a desire to have exactness in one's interactions, but there's another piece to the puzzle that was hard for me to realize was missing. And I think I finally put my finger on it. "Expectation." So, let me explain because that's probably confusing now. I'll give an example that a lot of people might recognize. If you read a dominant woman's profile on the boards, you may take away a sense of "strictness" from the profile, in that she wants things done her way. But when you deconstruct that, there seems to be more of a sense of "things are done my way, or you go away" rather than "things are done my way, and you'll be damn sorry if you don't comply." I find that nuance to be actually quite significant. First off, let me revisit my first words. This is not a complaint. I believe I understand what has brought so many women to this sense of interaction with potential submissives in that in reading so many profiles, reading so many threads on the boards and just interacting with the women who have to deal with the form-letter email-generating submissive population here. It's almost a survival instinct now that if someone doesn't comply immediately, then you get rid of the person because otherwise, you're dealing with a time-waster. And I totally understand that. There were a couple of threads recently where the women were talking about not wanting to deal with a confrontational submissive, using such criticisms as calling him a time waster, and they would have much better usage of their time seeking those who are interested in serving. And I understand that. That's when I realized that that is what really seems to be different to me these days. I guess it has more to do with the fact that the Internet WASN'T the place to find a dominant to serve ten or so years ago (when I was previously seriously involved). So, just actually showing up meant you were taken seriously. The flakes were the ones who called and never showed up. Now, practically everyone, his brother, his pet turtle and his kangaroo are all flakes and playing games, which makes that sense of realness that much harder to achieve and perceive. So, I wonder if this has changed the dynamic in actual relationships because that's what's happened to me. In every relationship I pursued, there seemed to be no sense of strictness or control other than "do this or leave", and I'm wondering if this just means that I've been part of a statistically insignificant subgroup of partners by sheer coincidence, or has this interaction with dominants and submissive men actually changed a lot of the constructs of actual relationships AFTER the courtship stage? I realize that a lot of women are going to immediately state that they perceive themselves to be of a strict nature (of the ones that do...this isn't a necessity for everyone, of course), but I sometimes wonder if that might be a biased sample in that people may have become so used to the dichotomy today that they don't even realize things have changed. I know this is what has changed for me in almost every person who has contacted me through this message board. I didn't recognize it until recently when I was thinking about a partner I had some years ago, and I found myself trying to figure out why what happened before worked so well yet so many others were just not the same. The quality of people I've seen wasn't sub par in any way, so I thought it might be me, and then I analyzed it further to come up with this major difference in how the control dynamic seems to work in relationships these days. Anyway, maybe I'm the only one who has noticed this. Or maybe I'm just seeing something that's not there, or is there, if that makes sense.

SaintAllie -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 3:24:55 PM)
Thankyou for posting this littlesarbonn, it's very thought provoking.. I need more time to digest it, however what did jump immediately to mind is our disposable society mentality.. If something doesn't work we replace it..upgrade it or complain a lot heheheh and no I didn't read your post as a complaint. regards Allie

thetammyjo -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 3:42:09 PM)
I think it is always problematic to look online instead of primarily offline. These are meatlife relationships people are hoping to find, correct? I have never found one online -- Faith, Anna, Fox, Treasure, all of them I found at the local BDSM munches. Sure they talked to me online too but primarily we met at events. I still have the same approach now and then but to be honest I do take folks a lot less seriously when they contact me proclaiming how much we are a great match when they live in another state or another country. The result is that anyone trying to make a match with me online first has extra hoops to jump through. I won't change those hoops no matter how far away they are. I think also the number of people who think they are interested in BDSM has expanded because of popular culture and faster forms of mass communication like the Internet. I do not think the number of people who really feel a drive to live Ds or to do more than play has increased a measurable amount so this just makes more people to sort through than you'd have at a munch where one must be first brave enough to come out and second have the drive and ability to do that. As to the question of strictness that you raise.... Why would I feel the drive to work with or punish someone I only know online? I feel driven to train those with potential, online will never equal potential that's something that I believe I can only see face-to-face and over time.

littlesarbonn -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 3:47:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo As to the question of strictness that you raise.... Why would I feel the drive to work with or punish someone I only know online? I feel driven to train those with potential, online will never equal potential that's something that I believe I can only see face-to-face and over time. Okay, but before this thread goes completely off the rails, I'm not suggesting or even thinking of anything to do with any relationships online. This is all about people I have met in real time. NONE of it involves anything about online relationships. Except, perhaps, people might first meet that way because I did engage the question on an online board of a bdsm personals site.

Elorin -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 4:17:45 PM)
My attitude when I am in a getting to know you stage is one of meet expectations or walk. Once a commitment of sorts has been made, then it is one of meet expectations or pay the consequences. Any stage of the relationship which is online only has a very high likelihood of being in the first category, but once meatlife comes in, I talk with a sub about expectations and consequences and establish if they are willing to undergo discpline and punishment before I spend time asking them to meet expectations. So we are on the same page when we reach a mismatch of expectations, and I'm not wasting my time with someone who will walk because I expected them to undergo a punishment.

Politesub53 -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 4:18:26 PM)
Hi Littlesarbonn. SaintAllie hit it right on the button. It`s more to do with society in general and modern day expectations. Years ago, if a starter motor on a car went wrong, you could take it out, strip it down, clean it, oil the spring, change the brushes, replace it and it would last for ages. Now its taken into the repair shop and exchanged for a new one, job done. People know what they want, and they want it now. We have become an "Instant" society, thats not to say that Dominants or submissives have become lazy, more that it`s just easier to move on from someone who doesn`t fit, to someone who does. The internet has given everyone the ability to obtain anything at anytime, and slowly that preception is creeping into general society. Vanilla dating is much the same, intead of meeting someone and seeing what you have in comment, just join a dating agency and voila, a list or near perfect matches appears. This doesn`t meant they are or aren`t perfect, thats still to be decided, it just means the legwork is taken out of finding someone who is close to what you seek. Also, regarding strictness, a Dominant now has far greater choices, simply due to the power of the internet. Therefore it`s easier to pick and choose, conversly this spreads into offline, as again due to the internet, the ability to meet someone in the lifestyle is far greater. IE, due to greater interest generated by the internet more offline clubs and munches spring up, hence a greater choice. Nostalgia....it`s not what it used to be eh [;)]

Najakcharmer -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 5:51:20 PM)
Realistically there's only so far you can go in a direction where you don't have full and willing consent. So if a "submissive" partner of mine decides that he does not want to be submissive to me any more, then our D/s relationship is basically over. Depending on how much I have invested in the relationship and the individual, I am willing to spend a certain amount of time and energy discussing and negotiating, but that time is a finite resource. Basically you consent or we don't have a D/s relationship, it's really that simple.

MzMia -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 6:05:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Najakcharmer Realistically there's only so far you can go in a direction where you don't have full and willing consent. So if a "submissive" partner of mine decides that he does not want to be submissive to me any more, then our D/s relationship is basically over. Depending on how much I have invested in the relationship and the individual, I am willing to spend a certain amount of time and energy discussing and negotiating, but that time is a finite resource. Basically you consent or we don't have a D/s relationship, it's really that simple. I totally agree with NajakCharmer. I used to "waste" a lot of time with time wasters, wankers, etc. My profile is a tad "strong" to weed out a lot of people on purpose. I have found that MOST of the men that approach me NOW, tend to be of a higher caliber normally and more serious. We all seek different types of relationships, we all live this lifestyle in a different way. I understand what you are saying Littlesarbonn, but if you talk to many Dominant women, you will find that many of us create profiles to weed people out initially, so that LESS of our time is wasted. Many of us do not have hours and hours to talk to whatever man feels like emailing us. We have a right to create whatever type of profile we like, as you have a right to create and respond to whatever profiles suit your fancy. Great post and goodluck littlesarbonn.

littlesarbonn -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 6:07:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Najakcharmer Realistically there's only so far you can go in a direction where you don't have full and willing consent. So if a "submissive" partner of mine decides that he does not want to be submissive to me any more, then our D/s relationship is basically over. Depending on how much I have invested in the relationship and the individual, I am willing to spend a certain amount of time and energy discussing and negotiating, but that time is a finite resource. Basically you consent or we don't have a D/s relationship, it's really that simple. And that speaks at exactly what the problem is that I've tried to discuss. I'm a natural, lifestyle submissive. So I give consent, meaning that a D/s relationship would exist in that theoretical construct. But here's where the problem comes in. Because there's been so much emphasis on whether or not the submissive will or will not consent, and thus, whether or not the relationship exists or does not exist, that's all there seems to be. There's no actual strictness to the relationship, and to most of the relationships I've pursued in the last few years. It's either "serve or don't serve". But I don't think people realize there's somewhat of a long term flaw in this thought process. It's like a political problem that needs resolution. Both sides agree to disagree, which seems to be the standard pc saying these days. YET, no one actually solves the problem. Using that analogy, let's say we have a bdsm relationship. Because I submit, therefore we have a bdsm relationship. But some of the elements that have historically actually worked well in fostering that relationship are dormant because the only variables active is "should I stay or should I go" and "should I keep him or should I let him go". It's not about consent. It's about what used to happen AFTER consent has been established. In my recent experience, nothing more happens except in name only. It's like being someone's slave. She tells a friend: "He's my slave." The friend says, "what does that mean?" And she responds, "well, it means that we agree he's my slave." The friend asks again: "So, what does him being a slave mean you do to him?" She responds: "Well, nothing. I don't have to do anything. He's my slave."

cloudboy -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 6:30:45 PM)
I always thought the Anthropology cut was most important to you..... I think littlesarbonn's grasping at straws, frankly, b/c in LTRs the intimates find a comfort zone and try to stay there. Instead of feeling "strict," an intimate couple feels natural. So, IMO, a good match doesn't need "enforcement." The "real life" fit-suitability element should never be underestimated, and strictness doesn't have a lot to do with that. In fact, it can really get in the way. Sensible women know this and act accordingly.

thetammyjo -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 7:10:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littlesarbonn quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo As to the question of strictness that you raise.... Why would I feel the drive to work with or punish someone I only know online? I feel driven to train those with potential, online will never equal potential that's something that I believe I can only see face-to-face and over time. Okay, but before this thread goes completely off the rails, I'm not suggesting or even thinking of anything to do with any relationships online. This is all about people I have met in real time. NONE of it involves anything about online relationships. Except, perhaps, people might first meet that way because I did engage the question on an online board of a bdsm personals site. If these are relationships in meatlife then I have to ask at what level they are when these situations arise -- where the dom says 'you didn't do that, you are gone'. I think that at the very first stage of the Ds relationship there is a lot of weight on the submissive partner to prove that he/she is serious and on the dominant to prove she/he is trustworthy and steadfast. I'd consider this the pre-contract stage. For the first contract this period of proving continues though, at least in my world, there is a formal process of training going on where the rules and expectations should be very clear between both parties. At this level I would expect mistakes and some minor disobedience to happen. However, this is minor only. If someone isn't mature enough to control himself and follow the contract then he is not mature enough to be with me or in my household (which is saying a lot considering how childish we all can be here). Beyond that first contract I'm just having a difficult time grasping that need for punishment would be anything but exceedingly rare. We all have issues that we need to work on and if I've signed that ownership contract then we have both committed ourselves to supporting each other work through anything that comes our way for as long as the positives of the dynamic outweigh the negatives. Aside from my expectations and experiences, which may be what you see around you now that I think about it, there is a sad reality of supply and demand to be blunt. Some women and men when they find themselves to be a wanted and rarer commodity allow that to affect how they act even to the point of allowing it to corrupt what might be good intentions (finding a good partner) into ones that seem harsh or even cruel (not in a good way). Are there any traits or similarities about these women you've notice, Sarbonn? Do they tend to be a certain body type or dress a certain way? Do they hang out at particular types of events? Do they use titles to refer to themselves? Are there things you can see in common that might help you notice and avoid them in the future?

thetammyjo -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 7:17:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littlesarbonn quote: ORIGINAL: Najakcharmer Realistically there's only so far you can go in a direction where you don't have full and willing consent. So if a "submissive" partner of mine decides that he does not want to be submissive to me any more, then our D/s relationship is basically over. Depending on how much I have invested in the relationship and the individual, I am willing to spend a certain amount of time and energy discussing and negotiating, but that time is a finite resource. Basically you consent or we don't have a D/s relationship, it's really that simple. And that speaks at exactly what the problem is that I've tried to discuss. I'm a natural, lifestyle submissive. So I give consent, meaning that a D/s relationship would exist in that theoretical construct. But here's where the problem comes in. Because there's been so much emphasis on whether or not the submissive will or will not consent, and thus, whether or not the relationship exists or does not exist, that's all there seems to be. There's no actual strictness to the relationship, and to most of the relationships I've pursued in the last few years. It's either "serve or don't serve". But I don't think people realize there's somewhat of a long term flaw in this thought process. It's like a political problem that needs resolution. Both sides agree to disagree, which seems to be the standard pc saying these days. YET, no one actually solves the problem. Using that analogy, let's say we have a bdsm relationship. Because I submit, therefore we have a bdsm relationship. But some of the elements that have historically actually worked well in fostering that relationship are dormant because the only variables active is "should I stay or should I go" and "should I keep him or should I let him go". It's not about consent. It's about what used to happen AFTER consent has been established. In my recent experience, nothing more happens except in name only. It's like being someone's slave. She tells a friend: "He's my slave." The friend says, "what does that mean?" And she responds, "well, it means that we agree he's my slave." The friend asks again: "So, what does him being a slave mean you do to him?" She responds: "Well, nothing. I don't have to do anything. He's my slave." This is where I think having rituals and rules that you can do regularly is a huge help. They don't have to be huge or require hours of your time every day but I think they need to be there and they need to be used regularly. If you do not exercise your authority dynamic every day in some fashion, soon you neither of you will know that you have it nor what to do with it should one of you feel the need to use that dynamic. As cloudboy says this can become something that feels natural. In my experience "natural" is not a good reason to give up the rituals and rules that help make the Ds different from a plain old vanilla relationship.

Najakcharmer -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 8:48:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littlesarbonn And that speaks at exactly what the problem is that I've tried to discuss. I'm a natural, lifestyle submissive. So I give consent, meaning that a D/s relationship would exist in that theoretical construct. But here's where the problem comes in. Because there's been so much emphasis on whether or not the submissive will or will not consent, and thus, whether or not the relationship exists or does not exist, that's all there seems to be. There's no actual strictness to the relationship, and to most of the relationships I've pursued in the last few years. It's either "serve or don't serve". Ahh, now I think I understand better. You may need to communicate clearly to your dominant that you have a genuine need for strictness, structure, ritual and rules in a D/s relationship in order for you to feel properly owned. Not all D/s couples have this need on either side, but when one of them does and the other doesn't, the consequences can be detrimental to the relationship. quote: In my recent experience, nothing more happens except in name only. It's like being someone's slave. She tells a friend: "He's my slave." The friend says, "what does that mean?" And she responds, "well, it means that we agree he's my slave." The friend asks again: "So, what does him being a slave mean you do to him?" She responds: "Well, nothing. I don't have to do anything. He's my slave." So the problem here is dominants who are too inexperienced to understand that a submissive who is feeling lost , insecure or unsure of his "owned" status must be properly guided with a firmer hand to make him feel secure and owned again?

SaintAllie -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 8:49:50 PM)
Thankyou politesub.. however I disagree to an extent... I think more people choose to opt out for easier solutions due to a relaxing of the hardlines society used to maintain, in a different way now, it's more relaxed rather than relying on "shaming' as used to be done if a person was "divorced/separated or had indulged in "adultery'..not really an issue these days.. and harsh at the time, (I am referring to the 50's as a timeframe btw)... BDSM is still "non mainstream" despite the internet, dating lists are just a replacement for smalltown matchmaking.. Strictness in my opinion..is not so much a point of contract with a sub that consents.. more an agreement as to the dynamic between people. If the dynamic is lacking or being eroded gradually, surely someone needs to put their hand up and say.. hey! this isn't what I agreed to/ wanted... and you fix it together... the more I re-read the OP..the more I see in this thread.. regards Allie

themischievous1 -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 9:18:07 PM)
Hi sarbonn, I think what you're missing is in fact an actual relationship, believe it or not. In order for strictness and expectation to exist in the capacity I'm perceiving that you desire, I feel that your dominant partner has to actually be invested in the relationship. Someone merely "playing at it" isn't going to have the same emotional investment, just as someone who is newly in charge of you would not. Emotional investment takes time to develop and requires a lot of both people in order to create a profound, meaningful relationship. The submissive must open up and communicate honestly at length on a consistent basis and the dominant party must care and be invested enough to really listen and get to know you so that she can control you. Furthermore, it's my opinion that the dominant you're involved with must be mature, confident enough, and leadership oriented enough to know what they want from you and cause this to happen. This individual must have determination greater than yours and be willing to enforce it to see that her desires are complied with. My feeling is you've likely recently been involved with those who aren't what you need in terms of leadership, who aren't emotionally invested enough to really care to lead you. I do believe you have to truly be emotionally invested too for this to work the way you want it to. I really feel that with a strong, emotionally invested, determined, mature, confident partner to take charge of and claim ownership of you, you'll not have this problem in the future.

SunNMoon -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 9:32:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy <snip> b/c in LTRs the intimates find a comfort zone and try to stay there. Instead of feeling "strict," an intimate couple feels natural. So, IMO, a good match doesn't need "enforcement." The "real life" fit-suitability element should never be underestimated, and strictness doesn't have a lot to do with that. In fact, it can really get in the way. Sensible women know this and act accordingly. Thank you Cloudboy nicely stated. I just want to add a little more to this. When I'm in a long term relationship I'm looking for a life partner, I shouldn't have to punish him. We're both choosing to be in this relationship, so if something I want doesn't get done when/how ect I want well the question is why. I need to know the reason that it's not getting done. It comes down to who I am, I'm not a strict person I just prefer to be the leader within the relationship. So if talking isn't solving the problem then we both need to reconsider the relationship and that might mean it was nice knowing you but good bye. I'm still working on the way kind of relationship I need to be happy but I do know I'm going to be pretty darn laid back within the relationship when it comes to rules it's just part of who I am. Thank you for posting this it is thought provoking and I'm sure my thoughts might change tomorrow even. [:)]

Grlwithboy -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 10:00:02 PM)
I think to some degree people's lives have become less structurable. My slave was active in the 80's with a wealthy woman in her middle years with a fully functioning hierarchical household of male maids, very upstairs-downstairs. I am a rather underpaid freelancer living in an apartment with two cats and one boy and eking out a living. I also have a flare-and-remission illness. I'd love to map out my life more, let alone my submissives' but I don't always have the luxury of stability. I don't think this makes me unfit as a Domme, but it definitely means that those subs have to cope with or thrive on lack of predictability. I need people around me who think I'm stellar and want to enrich my sphere, not people I have to hold accountable and punish when I have other competing interests.

AAkasha -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 10:16:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Najakcharmer quote: ORIGINAL: littlesarbonn And that speaks at exactly what the problem is that I've tried to discuss. I'm a natural, lifestyle submissive. So I give consent, meaning that a D/s relationship would exist in that theoretical construct. But here's where the problem comes in. Because there's been so much emphasis on whether or not the submissive will or will not consent, and thus, whether or not the relationship exists or does not exist, that's all there seems to be. There's no actual strictness to the relationship, and to most of the relationships I've pursued in the last few years. It's either "serve or don't serve". Ahh, now I think I understand better. You may need to communicate clearly to your dominant that you have a genuine need for strictness, structure, ritual and rules in a D/s relationship in order for you to feel properly owned. Not all D/s couples have this need on either side, but when one of them does and the other doesn't, the consequences can be detrimental to the relationship. quote: In my recent experience, nothing more happens except in name only. It's like being someone's slave. She tells a friend: "He's my slave." The friend says, "what does that mean?" And she responds, "well, it means that we agree he's my slave." The friend asks again: "So, what does him being a slave mean you do to him?" She responds: "Well, nothing. I don't have to do anything. He's my slave." So the problem here is dominants who are too inexperienced to understand that a submissive who is feeling lost , insecure or unsure of his "owned" status must be properly guided with a firmer hand to make him feel secure and owned again? I think this might be part of it. Like most relationships, the challenge is defining what you imagine it will look like and what you desire. The idea of strictness and rules are foreign to me; the "rules" and structure in my relationship are more organic, and I value harmony and my partner's ability to respond to my needs without me having to tell him. The more he can operate intuitively without rules or structure the better, because my life is busy and fast and I don't have time or energy to maintain that kind of atmosphere. But more importantly, isn't the concept of rules and structure really the "kink" that must be met? And that's not to say it's a bad thing or having those needs is wrong or less submissive. It's important for a submissive to be clear about his needs - in this case, it sounds like those needs are for this strict environment, and a woman that enjoys providing that. My kinky "needs" are more like an undercurrent of passion and sensuality that come out in "bursts" and my ideal partner responds to unpredictable, predatory lust with healthy doses of bondage, discipline (of the fun variety, not real punishments designed to improve behavior) and erotic "play." For some, that kind of atmosphere is too unstructured and unpredictable. The other thing for me is that my dominance is simply the flavor of my affection. It's how I show adoration and affection, from hair pulling to ass slapping, manhandling and rough sex. But the concept of rules, structure and strictness, coming from my camp, would be work for me. If anything, my man provides the structure around here in terms of maintaining the calendar, planning the meals, reminding me of my appointments and having my materials handy. I liken it to having a well trained executive assistant for my "life" that does not need much fine tuning or guidance who is always a step ahead of me when it comes to keeping things in order. And he's always looking for ways to make my life easier. Akasha

SaintAllie -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 10:17:05 PM)
In a long term relationship , compatibility is the need.. if you are looking that far ahead. Not everyone seems to look ahead .. or even need to think longterm.. I agree that strictness may not be a requirement for some.. it's a need for some, including the Op..( if i read that incorrectly, I apologise) it's not about "sensible women", it's about what each person has in their mind as a dynamic, as you mentioned. in your post. Enforcement in my mind was something I did more in the initial relationship, as we grew to know each other more, it became less of an issue.. regards Allie

LadyPact -> RE: The thing I keep missing (not a complaint, but an observation) (7/15/2007 10:28:31 PM)
littlesarbonn, as usual, a well written and thought provoking OP. As disappointing as it sounds, while not a complaint, I see many of your points. Being someone who has left the lifestyle and came back, the changes noticed are not seen only through your eyes. Some of it has become the fast food mentality. I don't even think I need to explain that analogy, which proves the point. When I read the OP, though not having any glimpse of your personal experiences to see their contribution, I certainly did think of another thread that was posted recently. Forgive My laziness, but it referred to the hypothetical sub who wouldn't heed his Dominant's command to get off the couch (or something like that). All in all, you would be correct in your assessment that many responses would be to have him dismissed. However, I would point out that those who responded in this manner, Myself included, said they could not fanthom this happening at any point beyond the courtship stage. Not something that would happen in an established dynamic. I agree with Tammyjo's point that a submissive of quality doesn't necessarily have these types of suggested disobedience beyond a certain stage, or he wouldn't get to that point. There are some of Us still out here that respect the value of calling a submissive Her own. Unfortunately, some of that can't be transferred to the world of the internet in a forum that is based to some degree on seeking.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.882813E-02