A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation

A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (Full Version)

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

Message

fungasm -> A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/3/2007 11:16:20 PM)
I just searched for Males Switches looking for Female switches. Now I have a little rant... A rant-let if you will. * If you are seeking a 24/7 slave... you aren't looking for a switch. * If you want a Mistress who will bend you to her will, you aren't looking for a switch. * If you want to control someone completely, a switch is a bad bet. * If you can't give up any control yourself, you don't want a switch. * If your nom de plume contains the words sissy, slut, subbie, or submissive and you are looking for a Master, you probably aren't a switch. If you are a bottom- and think perhaps since you haven't found a top yet; that maybe you can find a switch to top you: you are asking for someone to give you what you need- but you aren't giving back. If you are a top- and think you can make a switch into what you crave or you won't give up any control- you will be asking them to give up a part of themselves they don't want to or making them fit your idea. Neither of these is fair. Sorry to whine... but it's rough enough trying to negotiate amongst the variety of switches themselves- between people who want equality in power exchange and those who just want extremely open kinky sex- and then trying to weave through the casual vs. committed, private vs. public, leather vs. silk... To add another layer of difficulty in humans who think they increase their odds by broadening their self-definition to include those subsets that they might fit (but don't) is just extra frustration. Alison

LadySeraphina -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/3/2007 11:21:54 PM)
I can see how that would be difficult for you, but just to add a perspective... Perhaps some of the people you refer to who say they are looking for a switch are willing to play one role for them, and allow the switch to find another to meet the rest of their needs? So if I'm a Domme (just hypothetically [;)]) and I say I'm looking for a switch, perhaps I'll let them have a subby play partner. It could also be perceived like someone seeking a monogamous relationship with a bisexual. I'm bisexual, and I am in a monogamous relationship with my houseboy. It doesn't make me less bisexual, but from here on the distinction is moot, as I will no longer be with women. Just some thoughts. I know they won't apply to all situations.

Damocles809 -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/3/2007 11:31:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fungasm * If you are seeking a 24/7 slave... you aren't looking for a switch. * If you want a Mistress who will bend you to her will, you aren't looking for a switch. * If you want to control someone completely, a switch is a bad bet. * If you can't give up any control yourself, you don't want a switch. Oh? Plenty of switches submit, and only submit, to a certain dom/me. That same switch can dominate, and only dominate, another sub. Sounds like a switch to me.

iammachine -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/3/2007 11:47:28 PM)
Devil's advocate, here! At your service! [:D] * If you are seeking a 24/7 slave... you aren't looking for a switch. Some people switch with different people. They may be sub/slave/bottom to one person, Dom/me or Top to another. * If you want a Mistress who will bend you to her will, you aren't looking for a switch. Again, some may settle into one role once they are involved with someone, or may be interested in having more than one partner, or they may be more inclined to one side of the spectrum over the other but do switch at times. Take me, for example, I'm listed as a switch, because I do switch. I enjoy both roles - but I do not engage in these roles equally. I'm best described as a versatile top, or a top that bottoms, but that just doesn't fit into the neat little categories that we are confined to when putting up a listing. * If you want to control someone completely, a switch is a bad bet. * If you can't give up any control yourself, you don't want a switch. * If your nom de plume contains the words sissy, slut, subbie, or submissive and you are looking for a Master, you probably aren't a switch. I could repeat the above a few more times, but I'll save my keystrokes. [;)] In any case, I understand and empathize with your frustration. Instead of worrying so much about how others define themselves, maybe you would have better luck in defining for yourself more clearly what would meet your needs, regardless of titles or definitions.

e01n -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/3/2007 11:55:28 PM)
I keep coming back to OP and looking at everything but the bullet points and saying "so?" All of this is normal in trying to negotiate anything between anyone. Me, I'm all about personalities and not principles. I might submit to Lady Seraphina or not (example only) because of HER, not because she's a Debian Domme... [;)] Even then, it's likely I won't... unless I care for HER, personally. Similar with being in a dominant position - I can't do it if I don't feel something for you. Yes, I'm picky. Get over it.

Lashra -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/4/2007 4:48:51 AM)
A switch is just that, a person who can go either way depending upon the partner(s) they are involved with. Even though in their profile they say they are looking for a Domme, that doesn't mean they aren't being a Master to someone else. ~Lashra

Alumbrado -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/4/2007 5:57:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fungasm I just searched for Males Switches looking for Female switches... ...To add another layer of difficulty in humans who think they increase their odds by broadening their self-definition to include those subsets that they might fit (but don't) is just extra frustration. Alison Think outside the checklist.[:D] These are self defined roles, and ill fitting labels. Everyone has their own rationalization for checking one over the other, since options don't exist allowing someone to paint a more subtle picture of their possible preferences with people they haven't met. Increasing the odds seems like a natural self interest.

RRafe -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/4/2007 6:22:17 AM)
I prefer to look at folks on an individual basis-rather than just labels.

fungasm -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/4/2007 6:34:34 AM)
All of these are indeed correct... It was late was typing... Perhaps I should have altered it to read "If all you are seeking..." My frustration isn't with switches seeking something specific. It's with subs and doms who aren't getting the results with one label so they expand it. I'd rather there be a "Try-sexual" or "Any" category that is much broader, rather than "switch" be the catchall. Furthermore, I think the nail has been hit very firmly on the head by Lashra- to most a switch is person who can go either way, depending on who their are with... I would love the self-identifiers to be as such: Dominant, Submissive, Either, or Switch. That way you would know if you are with someone who needs one role, depending on whom they are playing with- or whether you are with someone who seeks a more contraverted form of sexual expression. Yes, I know, I hate the labels in themselves as well... But there has to be a sorting mechanism. The whole point to having a label/identifier is so that those of use who know what we want can find it. And when we want something different, we change our identifiers. What is the point of doing a search when all you find are people who want something different than what you want? Alison

Alumbrado -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/4/2007 6:43:16 AM)
quote: My frustration isn't with switches seeking something specific. It's with subs and doms who aren't getting the results with one label** so they expand it. Understandable. I self identify as dominant, but with the right partner (say Ilsa, She-Wolf of the SS with a trust fund [:D]) I could switch. If I check that box however, I rule out a much larger number of prospective submissive partners...so the impetus is to, as you say, go for better results. Thank goodness I found that picture of Orson Welles to stick up with my profile, else I'd get no hits....[8D]

fungasm -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/4/2007 6:46:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: iammachine Instead of worrying so much about how others define themselves, maybe you would have better luck in defining for yourself more clearly what would meet your needs, regardless of titles or definitions. I did that darling. I started just under a month ago. My first profile had all the activities that I enjoyed, and most was very clear on what I wanted. And my inbox was horrible. If you are a female online, and you mention a dynamic that is incredible sexual- the context seems to evaporate. Words about an equal sharing of power- of explorations and finding new experiences were never read because yahoos salivated over the sexual bits that were on the periphery (there are those who search for things like spanking and fisting... and it doesn't matter what else is in the profile- they are going to reply). Despite my specific notice that I deal with Subs (who are delicious) only on a professional basis- I still had many who hadn't found someone who would use a strap on them- so they asked me. And I'm not even going to go into what some of the "Doms" sent me. (shudders) I've altered my profile- now I there is very little personal on it- and it's deliberate that my photograph shows nothing from the neck down. So it goes. I return to my original request. Please identify yourself as you are- not in a way that you hope will get you more responses. Alison

e01n -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/4/2007 7:35:50 AM)
What I've found that works is saying that I'm emotionally unavailable, only here for friends and then giving huge batches of movie monologue for perve fodder... Then again, I say switch and eliminate half the room. I say male and it kills another quarter to half. YMMV. Maybe instead of having it so much as seeking actively, perhaps redirecting towards what gives people an idea of who you are and what you're into beyond a checklist. Wouldn't know that OP does anything like that ... [;)] BTW - I dig the idea of SubChallenge - not for me, but pretty damn cool... respect. Back to OPs request of how I label myself - Eoin Keith is perfectly serviceable and is how I think of myself when I think of myself...

Aine -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/4/2007 11:16:46 AM)
Mine says Friends only.... How clearer can you get? Doesn't matter what a person puts on their profile, it will be disregarded and ignored.

ocilla -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/4/2007 11:21:12 AM)
[image]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/73/Coyote_portrait.jpg/200px-Coyote_portrait.jpg[/image]trickster coyote in Eoin's clothing quote: ORIGINAL: e01n What I've found that works is saying that I'm emotionally unavailable, only here for friends and then giving huge batches of movie monologue for perve fodder... how I label myself - Eoin Keith is perfectly serviceable and is how I think of myself when I think of myself...

iammachine -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/4/2007 11:35:12 AM)
quote: I did that darling. I started just under a month ago. ... I've altered my profile- now I there is very little personal on it- and it's deliberate that my photograph shows nothing from the neck down. I've altered my profile I don't know how many times over the course of the 18ish (I think?) months that I've been on here, until finally settling into something that I feel works for me maybe a month or two ago. Again, I totally empathize with your frustration. But to quote you... quote: So it goes. ... and that is a rather unfortunate operative. So it goes. It's the interweb. shrug quote: I return to my original request. Please identify yourself as you are- not in a way that you hope will get you more responses. I appreciate your vent. Personally, however, whereas I think it would be really fucking dandy if people could just define themselves for me in some way that I could appreciate - I know it ain't happenin'. I personally deal with it by refining my own internal filters, and make liberal use of "thanks but no thanks" and delete. Ahh, the interweb.

MadRabbit -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/4/2007 1:52:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fungasm I just searched for Males Switches looking for Female switches. Now I have a little rant... A rant-let if you will. * If you are seeking a 24/7 slave... you aren't looking for a switch. * If you want a Mistress who will bend you to her will, you aren't looking for a switch. * If you want to control someone completely, a switch is a bad bet. * If you can't give up any control yourself, you don't want a switch. * If your nom de plume contains the words sissy, slut, subbie, or submissive and you are looking for a Master, you probably aren't a switch. If you are a bottom- and think perhaps since you haven't found a top yet; that maybe you can find a switch to top you: you are asking for someone to give you what you need- but you aren't giving back. If you are a top- and think you can make a switch into what you crave or you won't give up any control- you will be asking them to give up a part of themselves they don't want to or making them fit your idea. Neither of these is fair. Sorry to whine... but it's rough enough trying to negotiate amongst the variety of switches themselves- between people who want equality in power exchange and those who just want extremely open kinky sex- and then trying to weave through the casual vs. committed, private vs. public, leather vs. silk... To add another layer of difficulty in humans who think they increase their odds by broadening their self-definition to include those subsets that they might fit (but don't) is just extra frustration. Alison Have you ever considered that switch doesnt necessarily mean the person flips orientations constantly in a single relationship, but rather has relationships where the orientation they take is based on the interaction and connection of the other person? Hence, Bob meets Sue. Sue makes Bob feal submissive because of who she is as person. Bob is a slave to Sue. Bob leaves Sue. Bob meets Jane. Jane makes Bob feal dominant because of how they both connect. Bob is dominant to Jane. The orientations in the relationship are static, but his own orientation in ALL his relationships together is dynamic based on the other person.

ownedgirlie -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/4/2007 2:03:46 PM)
You are missing a lot of options. I am fully submissive to my Master, 100%, in all things. He, however, has been training me to top and to dominate another, under his direction and guidance. He would like to see me develop this skill, and to ultimately have a male submissive to become a companion to me and to help me with the many things I have going on in my life. My profile will be changing in the upcoming weeks to reflect this. But what I am doing, even if I am managing another, is under his direction and leadership, and as a requirement he will have of me. There was recently a very nice man in my life who submitted to me as I submitted to Master, and he knew that my Master ultimately ran the show. He enjoyed it, and loved interacting with both of us. His life circumstances removed him from the situation but we are still in touch. There are no neat little boxes in which to put people you do not know. Sure, you can form these opinions that you have about them, but such opinions won't always reflect what the situation actually is.

e01n -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/4/2007 2:05:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ocilla: trickster coyote in Eoin's clothing quote: ORIGINAL: e01n: What I've found that works is saying that I'm emotionally unavailable, only here for friends and then giving huge batches of movie monologue for perve fodder...<snip>how I label myself - Eoin Keith is perfectly serviceable and is how I think of myself when I think of myself... Actually, that's not bad - except for the implication of intentional duplicity... ahem Seriously, I'm not looking for anything other than friends to maybe have a pint with. I have much of the rest of it well in line, and growing daily...

SusanofO -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/4/2007 2:42:06 PM)
I am a Switch, and actually, I recently began a relationship with a submissive man who indeed seems to be a very decent, good-looking, intelligent person. There is nothing wrong with him at all. But a couple of weeks in to the "get to know you" phase, I realized that - if anything, at this point in my life, I probably need a male Dominant, not a male submissive, and also that I should probably wait longer to seek anyone at all. I told him I never should have answered his letter, and apologized, and we did not pursue the relationship further. I truly hope he finds someone who will be able to partner with him now, and give him what he seeks. So, I then changed my profile to indicate I am (for now) just here for the forums. But I still consider myself able to have Dominanted him (I've been an active Domme, just not for very long) - my decision had not much to do with him personally, as it did with this just being a bad time in my life to seek a submissive man. But I still consider myself a Switch, in the "Either" sense. Some people would attribute this to me being a (supposedly) "confused Switch. But it's really because I feel super vulnerable right now, and don't want to base my decision re: Who to be with, while letting my emotional state interfere with that decision to an unhealthy degree. That is just my current situation, however, and I do see the OP's point. I don't have much experience as a Domme (but do have some) - and I really do feel I am able to "separate the roles" - one doesn't bleed into the other (for me). But there does exist the problem of how to get both "sides" of my needs met in any LTR with someone who isn't themselves a Switch. So a few I've talked with have suggested having a full-time partner in one role, and a part-time partner in another role (which makes some sense to me). - Susan

teamnoir -> RE: A switch Rant: When Action doesn't meet Orientation (9/6/2007 2:39:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fungasm * If you are seeking a 24/7 slave... you aren't looking for a switch. You're making some invalid assumptions. First, you're assuming that if I am a switch, I'm seeking a switch. I may or may not be. Second, you're assuming monogamy. I can have relationships with multiple people where one of them might be a 24/7 slave. quote: * If you want a Mistress who will bend you to her will, you aren't looking for a switch. Ok, you've got me here. Why not? quote: * If you want to control someone completely, a switch is a bad bet. Now you're just off in left field. Why would you say this? quote: * If you can't give up any control yourself, you don't want a switch. Huh? Is this like saying that a het guy can't look for a bi girlfriend? quote: * If your nom de plume contains the words sissy, slut, subbie, or submissive and you are looking for a Master, you probably aren't a switch. Lol. Some of the harshest, nastiest tops I know use those names. I think perhaps you're thinking inside a very small box. quote: If you are a bottom- and think perhaps since you haven't found a top yet; that maybe you can find a switch to top you: you are asking for someone to give you what you need- but you aren't giving back. If you are a top- and think you can make a switch into what you crave or you won't give up any control- you will be asking them to give up a part of themselves they don't want to or making them fit your idea. Neither of these is fair. Nonesense. Just because someone is a switch doesn't mean that they want to play both sides with each of their partners. Some people play top with one partner and bottom with others. quote: Sorry to whine... but it's rough enough trying to negotiate amongst the variety of switches themselves- between people who want equality in power exchange and those who just want extremely open kinky sex- and then trying to weave through the casual vs. committed, private vs. public, leather vs. silk... To add another layer of difficulty in humans who think they increase their odds by broadening their self-definition to include those subsets that they might fit (but don't) is just extra frustration. Oh, believe me. I get it. However, I don't think that forcing your assumptions onto the rest of us helps anyone.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125