|
AAkasha -> RE: 24/7/365-slavery: possible (7/19/2005 10:30:44 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MemphisDsCouple
quote:
ORIGINAL: slavemike1968
I am a slave looking for real slavery with TPE, willing to relocate anywhere in the world.
quote:
ORIGINAL: AAkasha
Is it only me, or do others think that just the same level of chemistry (granted, depending on the type of service required, perhaps different but nonetheless critical) must exist between partners?
hmmmmm
I see what you're talking about. I see the concept you're trying to convey. And, in the context in which you view the question you pose - there is only one answer, namely, the answer you propose. But there is another level. The level of TPE.
quote:
ORIGINAL: AAkasha
since, it's TPE 24/7 and rules are rules....it's sort of like a fantasy of a relationship that must work -- after all, the slave has no choice and is ready to go, right?
Yes. That's the other context in which your first question could be viewed. It can be a fantasy and remain a fantasy only, as you suggest and seem to believe. Or, it can become reality. And, it can be both fantasy and reality at the same time. (The best of all worlds is, indeed, possible.)
But I do agree that to theorize that, definitionally, a TPE relationship "must work" is a surely in the realm of fantasy. To ignore the skills and level of commitment that are prerequisites on the part of both the dominant and submissive is to ignore reality.
quote:
ORIGINAL: AAkasha
Because someone seeking a TPE dominant for a live in situation, to me, is seeking all the same characteristics and need a connection on a lot of levels: As friends, as roommates, as lovers (possibly), as financial partners (assuming income is split or negotiated)
If you are saying that is what you need, individually, as a dominant, then that is your prerogative. If you are saying that is what another dominant needs to succeed, then you seem to be generalizing a bit much. If you are saying that is what any submissive would need as a submissive, then (again) you seem to be generalizing a bit much.
In your mind you seem to separate relationship and service and then base the service on the relationship. While it is true, that the relationship/service dichotomy exists, if we stop to think about it for a moment it becomes obvious to us that it is not *necessary* to base the service on the relationship. Indeed, the relationship can be based on the service (see below). We need to remember that we are (by definition from the OP) talking about TPE here.
Friends:
a. Certainly, in a TPE relationship a dominant and a submissive can develop a friendship. However, it is not necessary to do so for the relationship to exist and/or succeed. Normally, we humans develop that type of bond (friendship) with anyone with whom we are in close contact for a period of time unless something like a lack of morality or a similar character deficiency prevents that relationship from developing. In the case of the discovery of a serious character flaw in the submissive such as dishonesty, irremediable addiction to substances, psychosis or some other systemic type personal trait that is so far beyond the realm of normally acceptable behavior (or beyond the realm of TPE submissive behavior) so as to render that submissive virtually useless or even harmful to the dominant - the submissive can always be sent away. Similarly, the discovery by the submissive of that level of a serious character flaw within the dominant may require the submissive to simply leave. Barring that sort of problem, a "friendship" (of whatever sort) will likely develop.
b. And, it is certainly not necessary that this friendship be developed prior to establishing the TPE relationship. The order can easily be that the relationship is founded first and the friendship comes in its own time.
Roommates: See below.
Lovers:
a. Certainly, like every other part of the submissive, sex and the sexuality of the submissive is part-and-parcel of what becomes the dominant's in a TPE relationship. The only "possibly" involved is whether (and possibly how) the dominant makes use of the submissive's sexuality.
b. Just as friendship, love can (and probably will) arise of its own volition within the relationship.
Financial Partners:
The very term "partner" negates the applicability of this concept in the present discussion. We are talking about a TPE relationship, not about a partnership. What is there to "negotiate"?
quote:
ORIGINAL: AAkasha
ON TOP of whatever service agreements might exist.
Presumably, a TPE "service agreement" (to fit the definition of TPE) would be a very, very short document!
quote:
ORIGINAL: AAkasha
You can rule out a tremendous amount of people based on simple incompatibility -- look at how many roommate relationships crash and burn -- and those are just *roommies*.
Roommates:
a. Certainly, a TPE submissive can (and probably often is) housed with the dominant. However, that is not a prerequisite of/for the TPE relationship. The submissive could be housed virtually anywhere.
b. The reasons 'nilla "roommate relationship crash and burn" should not be applicable to the TPE relationship. TPE relationships are an entirely different dynamic and structure with entirely different expectations on the part(s) of the participants.
c. If the dominant requires the submissive to conduct him/herself differently, the dominant (theoretically at least) need only teach and require the appropriate adjustment to the submissive's deportment that will satisfy the dominant. As I said above, we should not underestimate the levels of skill and commitment required to succeed in a TPE relationship.
quote:
ORIGINAL: anthrosub
In the beginning I thought a TPE would be the most ideal arrangement but I had not been in any relationship for about 4 years at the time. Then after going through a vanilla relationship last fall and winter, I realized for something to be TPE it would definitely require the same chemistry as AAKasha points out. People, no matter what the relationship, will go through phases as they acclimate to each other. I think life is life first and the lifestyle is not the "core" of the relationship and never can be no matter what the arrangement.
If that is what a submissive thinks, and it often is, then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy for that submissive. So, it becomes true that TPE will not work. For that submissive. Without the dedication to the lifestyle of TPE, without the commitment to constantly and continually doing as one is bidden, without fulfilling the definitional goal of molding one's life and being around what the dominant is and wants, clearly TPE will not work for a submissive.
However! To paint with a brush so broad as to say "people", or to say "no matter what" is spreading one's own experience and willingness (or unwillingness) to serve a bit too thinly, especially when one bases those statements on "going through a vanilla relationship last fall and winter".
Many, many relationships survive and flourish for the very reason of the structure of the relationship being the backbone, soul and source of the relationship, and not because of some emotional bond of friendship, love or complete compatibility as a predicate to the relationship. The emotional bonds can, and usually do, naturally flourish. I think it would be indescribably more difficult to *not* love a submissive who lived to please me and who made herself putty in my hands than it would be to love her. Indeed, how could I not love her?
-----------
Founding relationships on structure first is a time-tested and experience-proven practice. While there is little of that in personal relationships in our modern western society, relationships founded on structure is a practice well documented in history by family arranged unions, mail-order brides, the capture of women in wars and so on. In other parts of the world these relationship structures continue today. I am not advocating these things, I am simply pointing out that we can see examples of the success of these relationship structures. Where we can see an example of something, we can not deny its existence. Therefore, we can not say relationships *must be* founded on love, friendship, compatibility and so on as a prerequisite to success. These things can develop after the relationship is founded on structure. Founded on structure, the relationship can succeed as perfectly as is humanly possible.
------------
quote:
ORIGINAL: AAkasha
This seems like an extremely "high maintenance" type
Yes. It seems that TPE is usually like that.
quote:
ORIGINAL: AAkasha
yet the subs seeking it always seem to think just saying you are available means you'll get offers.
I note that most, if not all, of the submissives seeking unconditional TPE submission like the OP are men. If you see any women writing similar posts - send them my way. I know what to do with a good woman who wants to serve unconditionally.
Postscript:
You are welcome to print or save this post for your own use. Please do not copy it to any public or semi-public forum (including email groups/lists) without my express permission. Thanks. All rights reserved. (I write this postscript because after-the-fact someone wrote to me to inform me that they had copied a prior post I wrote to another list. So, I thought I'd better clarify what my preference/policy is regarding use of what I write.)
B. (the male half of MemphisDsCouple)
You've carefully described how having a 24/7 TPE slave around might not be as difficult -- "chemistry" wise -- as I've suggested. I understand your logic about why a TPE situation eliminates the needs, somewhat, by saying the TPE dominant can just change the things about the submissive that are not appropriate or desirable, and by the nature of the agreement, the submissive has to obey. Whereas, I suppose, a friend or roommate can just walk away and shut the door.
Still, perhaps I am just somewhat anal about people I allow in my house, in close proximity, or sharing the details of my personal life. I hear TPE and 24/7 and I think of this as mostly a live-in situation. In a fantasy situation where a dominant could really mold the person, you have to assume first of all that the person can and will change. Sure, it's a great fantasy to believe you are going to be a real TPE slave, but when push comes to shove, how many would really go through with it? Would they break habits? Would a messy person become clean at once? Would a smoker just quit cold turkey? Would someone with an annoying habit of interrupting just force themselves to change years of conditioning? How much micromanaging would be required? Is it worth that time on the part of the dominant?
If the dominant or couple has a lot of friends in and out, or work associates, or relatives, is this 24/7 TPE slave going to be immediately appropriate, presentable, polite? There are very important, large issues that cannot be immediately put to rest just with the premise, "Well, the slave will be a TPE slave, and what I don't like, I can change." It's a nice fantasy. I'd be interested to hear how many times it worked out that way -- specifically, in a Femdom/malesub situation -- where none of the criteria I listed mattered but it still worked out fine. Ie, they are not romantic, not sexual, not intimate.
Akasha
|
|
|
|
