Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message

punkdom -> Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 8:13:32 PM)

I'm going to take the brunt of a lot of criticism for this, but I'll say right now, I think Collarme and the D/s community as a whole should stop condoning the practice of "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions and ban it from the site.

First, while speech restrictions were always a part of D/s, never was this idea of letting your prospective Dom monitor all your communications from the get go condoned in the BDSM community. All of a sudden, I'm seeing all these newbie Doms thinking the current conception of "Under Consideration" somehow has become the norm of D/s protocol and are copying it and codifying it. Meanwhile, its become pervasive and prevalent enough, that novice submissives are accepting this as a norm.

NO! Restricting access to others communicating with you is dangerous! This is not the practice at all in real world D/s socializing where submissives frequently interact with many other Dom and Dommes in their community and hear rumors, stories, and opinions about anyone they play with and are considering submitting to.

But now "UNDER CONSIDERATION" has become a practice being used by stalkers, abusers, etc. to monitor a girl's mail and sometimes to keep others from relaying caution stories about the person a sub is about to submit too. There is inherent danger to this practice and if a Dom demands this - RUN!

But even to a lesser degree, accepting restrictions from talking to others right off the bat, particularly if you are an inexperienced sub, is very bad news as it limits your ability to hear warnings about unsafe play from other Doms or Dommes and use other people as sounding boards.

That said, its fine to tell Doms to "respect that you're considering someone and don't contact you," or once you've reached a place of trust, have your Dom place certain speech restrictions upon you - but UNDER CONSIDERATION as it has now come to be understood on this site should not be condoned and I urge all subs to set a hard limit against restrictions on communicating with others - particularly in the first three months until you can be more sure someone is a safe and sane D/s player.



MasterGremlin -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 8:18:22 PM)

I don't give a flying f#$% what anyone else condones.  What happens between U/us is determined by U/us not you or any other individual or group or "community". 

Sincerely,
minxy [:)]




RumpusParable -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 8:19:01 PM)

*eyerolls*



DiurnalVampire -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 8:21:58 PM)

Good luck with that.  If I have a sub under consideration, they damn well better stop communicating with other prospective Doms without my permission. If you have progressed in your relationship to the point where you are being considered, then you are agreeing to alow the Dominant you are being considered by to make restrictions.  If they do not sit well with you, then you say so.  AS said in many other places, the Dominant is being conisdered at the same time. However, it is rude and imporper to still be communication with other Dominants without the permision of someone considering you. Aside from the potential for hearing rumors and lies, which inexperienced submissives are equally vulnerable to, they should not yet me out learning about different activities until they learn what wll be expected in their relationship. Only an insecure Dominant would restrict ALL communication with their submissive. However, when I was considering Angel, I was glad I had the ability to monitor what he was seeing.  As soos as a desireable submissive puts "UNDER CONSIDERATION" on their profle, they are inundated with messages badmouthing their potential owners (founded and unfounded), offers to give them a better life, and other interest hthat has more to do with their new status than it did with interest in them.
In that case, it is the Dominants right and responsability to make sure the information their pet is getting is true, useful and real. They should be able to edit the contacts the sub can keep, to make sure they are not getting as many bad influences as they can aquire good ones.

DV



stef -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 8:25:09 PM)

Yet another glaring reason why my suggestion for the "Not-So-Random Stupidity" forum should be followed with undue haste.

~stef



becca333 -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 8:25:09 PM)

It sounds like a good idea - most of us have learned a lot through discussion and support from friends, and any Dom who's secure won't worry about a prospective sub getting ideas and friendship from others, especially fellow subs.

On a serious note, social isolation is a common technique used by abusers.  Not suggesting all Doms who restrict communication are abusers (ducks the flaming arrows coming my way) but it makes it far easier for those who are. 



earthycouple -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 8:34:42 PM)

did anyone notice his 27 years of life which definitely goes to show he's the end all be all and is the authority on what the original intentions of BDSM through the ages has been.  I bow to your omniscience.



DiurnalVampire -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 8:41:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: becca333
On a serious note, social isolation is a common technique used by abusers.  Not suggesting all Doms who restrict communication are abusers (ducks the flaming arrows coming my way) but it makes it far easier for those who are. 

We are not talking about real life situations here.  We are talking about restricting email from others when under consideration.  Thats a far cry from social isolation. How is a Dom supposed to consider someone and teach them his or her way if there is a constant influx of other information, some of which might be false, some incorrect, some irrelavent, and some just unnecessary? There is nothing wrong with saying "OK, now, for the next month, I want to OK whom you speak to while you are learning what I want" to keep distraction to a minimum...
Lets not blow this argument out of proportion.  The OP wasnt refering to a Dom locking his new sub in his basement for a period of time.  He was talking about her email being edited. This is online, and if a sub is going to make the choice to allow her prospective owner to edit her mails from otehr CM people, so be it. If he cuts her off from EVERYONE  she knows... she will see the flag. But from other prosepcts, its like dating someone.  You dont want them hanging out with anotehr perosn you know is interested in them if you just started seeing one anotehr.  Its about a comfort zone.

DV




becca333 -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 8:53:51 PM)

Why can't the sub just ask the Dom if XYZ is true or not, or is possible or not?

I'm sorry, but I can't see why emailing, at least with other subs, is so dangerous.  Showing the emails, and asking what the person is on about, might help them decide if the Dom/me is someone who's genuine.

I can understand that a Dom/me wouldn't be ecstatic about a prospective sub chatting with other Dom/mes, but swapping notes with fellow subs? 

It seems that for the Dom/me it's about control, and stopping bad influences, so that the sub can be developed in the direction the Dom/me wants.  For the sub it's about safety, and important information, and emotional support.  I think we're coming from totally different directions on this one.



DiurnalVampire -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 8:59:18 PM)

There is no gaurantee that other subs are going to be giving useful information anymore than other Doms. When Angel was under consideration, a former sub of mine contacted him, ad told him ALL sorts of lies about me. She was very upset that I had him under consideration, which meant that she no longer had a shot to get back with me. You are asking the sub to place themselves in a bad situaiton.
Allow the sub to speak to anyone theyd like, then ask the Dom if things are true or not true.  Would someone attempting to manipulate the sub be any more inclined to tell the truth and confirm that something THEY did was unsafe or wrong?

I have my opinion becasue of what I went through with Angel. It is just that, though, an opiniion.  Take or leave it as you would like. I know what I saw monirtoring his emails, and a lot of the garbage that came in, from subs and doms alike, telling him what he was doing wrong and how he could be better for me. None of which held any merit but to muddy the waters. I would never have him give up friends he had before me, but I did restrict new contacts until I was sure they were not going to impede his progress.  Once his consideration was over, and we knew where we stood, it as opened up and he could contact anyone he wished again.

DV




angelic -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 9:00:45 PM)

~FR~
i agree with some of what the OP says... i do not necessarily agree with his delivery.  He does make some good point about "Under Consideration" however... And since i am monogomous, if a Dom wants to restrict my speech with others, he damn well better be willing to do the same.



LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 9:02:58 PM)

I'm confused.  The person who accepts or rejects any speech restrictions is the one under consideration.  So if they are engaging in it, they must want it.



slaverosebeauty -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 9:07:00 PM)

{prepares for getting blasted.. not that I will look at this thread again.. so here goes}
 
"Under Consideration" to begin with is bs. If you even make contact with someone techincally they are 'under' your 'consideration.'  So this 'under consideration' if basically for newbies and for people who don't know better or who are o/l only.
 
As for NOT talking to other people, I talk to whoever I desire. MJ knows who I talk too {we don't keep secrets,He knows who emails me, who texts me, who calls me, etc, I dont' have a reason to hide those tihngs from Him, He doesn't ask though}, He knew before we took this step, if He has an objection to me talking to someone in particular, He tells me so.
 
When I have been in that 'flux' stage with past partners and they said they didn't want me talking with other Male Tops, that's all fine and dandy, they had NO claim or right to me, so I can do whatever I want, an I did. If they wanted to meet, that was one thing, it was MY decision to keep looking or not. I have a decent number of friends that I have met while talking ot another, I won't stroke someone's fragile ego or coddle them, JUST to satifsy this enate desire that they have to control someone who is NOT their's to control.
 
Its time to be adults. Enough 'I want this, I want that' bs attitude. You cannot control what is NOT your's to control nor lay 'claim' to what is not your's to begin with. Relationships are two-way streets, not a one-way thats under construdtion by one person who isn't secure enough.



sambamanslilgirl -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 9:27:04 PM)

fast reply and my pov

"under consideration" is such an oxymoron around here - it's like taking an exam to see whether you can jump through hoops like a trained mutt before a dom actually says "yes you're the one". what a bunch of bullocks!

i prefer chatting and meeting other potential doms even if i'm chatting with one i'm might consider moving further along into a relationship.  Daddy doesn't feel the need to restrict contact with others or read my mail because He trusts (hint: keyword here) me.



xoxi -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 9:33:59 PM)

Speaking as someone who has never and will never commit to someone who isn't committed to me (and really, isn't that what 'under consideration' is?) I agree completely.

Then again I don't do online relationships either.  I guess if you live 1000 miles away from someone you can't really date casually before deciding to commit, so the 'under consideration' is sort of a replacement for that process.  I can only hope that the person doing the 'considering' is as faithful as the one 'under consideration' otherwise the 'relationship' is just a joke to begin with.



junecleaver -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 9:50:17 PM)

I didn't know that I, as a member of the BDSM community, had the right to ban the consentual and legal practices of others?  How am I suppose to enforce this ban over the internet?  I think...and tell me if I misunderstood...but it's really hard to seduce a submissive out of her current relationship and into a relationship with you when she won't answer your mail or you keep getting the replies of pissed of Doms?



shyinini -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 9:50:20 PM)

Someone speaks up about a very stupid practice and he is jumped.
jeeeeez
For the most part I totally agree. His piece of advice to newbies, both D and s types, is a welcome refreshing change in my POV from "under consideration" ~~ thinking its the norm in how a relationship should develope. 
 
WtFdoes it mean anyway...something different to everyone just like the word slave..... 
if a newbie s type is only out there for 2 months and a dom restricts her and puts her under consideration....  it cancels out completely LA's advice...WAIT 6 MONTHS BEFORE YOU MAKE A CHOICE !
 
Who the hell are you supposed to believe...LA, a dom saying you are now under consideration ~ the girl or guy not even knowing that this is a stupid practice and restrictions ONLY should come with some type of submission to control.
 
Why are NEW thoughts and ideas so easily shot down as if the new poster or new idea is to be tossed out with the bath water.
 
Who are you?  A drone of the typical CM message board banter or someone who is willing to risk new thoughts.... challenge the stupidity of absurd practice.... be your own thinker...
be willing to risk the flaming that ensues, the sarcasm, the cynism....the complete put down that the idea is at least valid.........
 
grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr    CM regulars can be such  &&^%^%#%(*)*)(  about free thinking !!
 
Sir's girl

edited to add....pompass a$$$$ comes to mind



Grlwithboy -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 9:59:06 PM)

Personally, I don't want a submissive who's so overwhelmed as to be unable to decide for him/herself what smells like BDSMBS when learning their way, and needs me to filter the noise down for them. I had to do it myself, I expect big boys and girls to do the same. Crazy, I know.



realtuffdom -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 10:08:20 PM)

You see, I go one step further than most doms. Not only do I demand that my prospective subs not talk to anyone else, but I don't allow them to speak to me either. I'm that strict and tough of a dom.

Hmm, for some reason I don't seem to have any subs. Can't figure out why.



Rover -> RE: Stop "Under Consideration" Speech Restrictions (8/17/2007 10:14:16 PM)

There seems to be no end to the reasons for me to scoff at those who are "under consideration", engaged in said "consideration", or even those who take it seriously (such as the OP).
 
Yeah, that's judgmental.  Yeah, it's just my opinion which doesn't make me right.  Yeah, you're welcome to have a different opinion and to express it. 
 
John



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625