Where Worlds Collide

Where Worlds Collide (Full Version)

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

Message

anthrosub -> Where Worlds Collide (6/25/2004 3:13:02 PM)
Often i come across a thread discussing the definition of Domination and submission (and sometimes going further to discuss submission vs. slavery). Further, there have been many good discussions about how a sub can not be in control if the control is being surrendered purposely. There are other variants to this theme but i wanted to list a couple to set the context. i've always been fascinated by the space where both sides meet and feel this is where the real fulfillment is to be found between partners. To me, submission is the "willful surrender" of control...it is a deliberate act. i think this is what some subs have a problem rationalizing and end up flipping back and forth over whether they are controlling the situation or not. Domination on the other hand, is the "willful taking" of control. The Dominant takes the subs offering (and here's where i think the meeting space opens up) and then takes more, thus pushing the limits a bit. i get the feeling that less experienced Dominants (or those who are only assuming the role) are not aware or completely aware of this. i may be wrong... Does anyone have any perspectives to share? anthrosub

topcat -> RE: Where Worlds Collide (6/25/2004 7:34:10 PM)
Midear Anthro- While I do, personally, have a bit of a 'consent fetish' ('please' is the loveliest word in english, especially when pronounced as a seven syllable word<g>), but at times I have some doubts about the validity of the consent in the truest sense. If I have done a good job, I have created a space where what started as consent will become license- that is, where the ability to actually make a rational, consicous choice has blurred to something other. I think there does come a place, if one is lucky, where the willful, conditional surrender of control becomes something more global, something less than willed. Stay warm, Lawrence

LadyBeckett -> RE: Where Worlds Collide (6/25/2004 8:04:20 PM)
It's kind of like acheiving the ultimate high. Those who believe it can be done, never stop attempting to do just that. In the world of D/s I personally believe that dominance and submission compliment one another. With that in mind, and with attention to limits, I would suggest that we all have them, inside limits and outside limits. It would be those inside (or soft limits) that would ultimately be pushed, or stretched as trust were established in the relationship. Those who believe it can be done, never stop attempting to do just that.

Sundew02 -> RE: Where Worlds Collide (6/25/2004 9:16:06 PM)
Many on the s side of the slash when first meeting a dominant want immediacy, they do not want to talk and learn, but be touched and directed, NOW. I find when a male comes to me and is patient the end result is a wonderful blending. Learning their body language, and opening their mind to more intense involvement gives us both the rush, and the pleasure that we seek. Maybe not a long term match, but an interlude that leaves both feeling the high. This is not a frequent event, but oh the intense sensations when it happens.Sundew

TallDarkAndWitty -> RE: Where Worlds Collide (6/26/2004 5:56:15 AM)
Kind of an echo to what Lady Becket and Lawrence have written, but when this lifestyle works, it is so much less about consent, and so much more about two equal opposites attracting and coming together. In the beginning, of course, there is a need to go slow and get consent (I always get my consent in the form of a contract, but that is more about my paperwork fetish than anything else). When two people meet to get to know one another for a possible LTR, or even just to play, they have to establish their likes, wants, and limits. This has to be done through constant communication. Yet, once that initial lineof communication has been established, each side, in a good match, will begin to unconsciously understand the power exchange and how it can be pushed and expanded. I still find it quite incredible when it happens, but at the right point, in the right pairing, the question of consent vanishes. Yours, Taggard

anthrosub -> RE: Where Worlds Collide (6/26/2004 10:45:02 AM)
i just read my original post after sleeping and doing some morning chores...funny how that can give a fresh take on what's trying to be communicated. The point about a sub feeling he's actually in control by willingly giving it up was not stated so well and i apologize but the rest looks Ok. i can't remember where i read this but some of what's been written so far reminds me of it: "Lose your mind, and come to your senses." i've had experiences where this has happened spontaneously and it's amazing when it does. i wouldn't call it sub space because it's bigger than that and i'm sure it's shared by both partners. The point that culivating the relationship takes time leads to this potential. It is not something one can expect immediately...not that it's impossible but certainly unlikely so soon. It's incredible when the communication becomes almost wordless. anthrosub

danae -> RE: Where Worlds Collide (6/26/2004 10:54:37 AM)
Lawrence: “If I have done a good job, I have created a space where what started as consent will become license” Taggard: “…when this lifestyle works, it is so much less about consent, and so much more about two equal opposites attracting and coming together…at the right point, in the right pairing, the question of consent vanishes.” Thus, paradoxically, when consent is gone, turned into license, that’s where I find my freedom. What I really love about this site is reading words from others that completely capture the essence of my relationship! lol danae [:)]

Voltare -> RE: Where Worlds Collide (6/27/2004 8:04:23 AM)
Lawrence summed up my thoughts pretty well, though I will add something that I don't believe he would necessarily agree with. There is a HUGE necessity for 'consent' in this lifestyle. This consent is derived in much the same way consent to any other high risk activity is involved - negotiation and agreement. If I go bungee jumping, I sign a consent/waiver form. The form has a list of things that might happen, and I am saying "yes, I know what the risks are" even if in reality, I do not know the risks (or even wish to relinquish the right to sue the bastard if the crane drops me.) This, I think, has a lot to do the basis for relationships not being successful: because one or the other party either doesn't understand, or doesn't truely agree with the terms, in spite of their assertions to the otherwise. Now, I will throw a wrench, and say 'that's ok.' Complete knowlege and understanding, in my opinion, is not necessary. Hell, the kind of communication I'm talking about doesn't come naturally to most people - I highly doubt that most of our parents had a meeting the night of our conception and said "well, tonight if we have sex we're probably going to have children. We'd better make arrangements with the doctor in a few weeks, check our financial records to ensure we can afford it, make a time to visit larger apartments/houses tomorrow...etc etc." It's said ideally relationships exist with a great deal of communication. While I agree, I believe there really -is- such a thing as 'too much' communication. If I try to have a conversation like the one above with a woman before we have sex, odds are we'd never get to the bedroom (or end up fully clothed and exhausted if we do.) Like it or not, emotions aren't a collection of stimuli and responses. Feelings are rarely quantifiable: and that's what makes them so powerful! By permitting (and to a degree acknowledging the fact) emotion to be the real glue to (most) relationships, we permit the incredible sensations of agony and exctasy that most of us are seeking here in the first place. I'm not advocating to throw caution and common sense to the wind - I am just offering that you don't need to have everything charted, mapped, and planned to enjoy the route you take. I believe myself to be naturally dominant, and instead of 'trying' to Dominate, and letting my sub/slave 'try' to submit to me consciously - I find the overall enjoyment to be far greater if I just let her submit naturally. If it is not in her nature to do so, then we probably aren't compatible anymore then two vanilla people who just don't have anything in common. Stephan

topcat -> RE: Where Worlds Collide (6/27/2004 10:25:32 AM)
M. Stephan- Actually, I agree wholeheartedly. The best scenes I have worked were what I think of as 'lightning strikes'- no disscussion of the nature of the work, no establishment of limts, sometimes, not even a proper introduction. Not exactly SSC, but it works wonderfully. The after care for some of my best work has begun with "I'm Lawrence, By the way. Are you here alone?". Some of the worst scenes have been the result of a clearly argreed upon, in some cases written out, negotiation, with someone I'd known well for a while. My worst scenes were with someone that I was in a relationship with almost a year- I'd hit a landmine _every_ time we did a scene, public or private, heavy or light. At this point, I have declined prospects when the negotiation included too long a set of limits- in one venue the SIQ went around warning everyone I was a 'Dangerous Dom' becuase I wasn't respecting her limits, which got a good luagh as most of the room had seen me work. I rather thought I was respecting her limits- I just wasn't interested in working within them (it boiled down to I could tie her loosely in a comfortable position, and give her a vigorous massage with a middlin' sized flogger). The best negoitation I have had lately consisted of "do you trust me? Good. Lets find a spot." and a bit later, after she was bound and hooded, "oh yeah- 'Red', OK? don't be afraid to use it." Stay Warm, Lawrence

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

1.513672E-02