Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: The non-lifestyler perspective


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: The non-lifestyler perspective Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/15/2005 5:49:20 PM   
Rover


Posts: 2634
Joined: 6/28/2004
Status: offline 		What defines a power exchange relationship is consensual control, not the level of kink.

Jane and John Doe, in the example you provided (and limited information) may not identify as lifestylers (they may not even be aware that the lifestyle exists), but they are most assuredly in a consensual power exchange relationship.

A rose by any other name would smell just as sweetly.

John

(in reply to AAkasha)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/15/2005 5:59:27 PM   
AAkasha


Posts: 4429
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rover

What defines a power exchange relationship is consensual control, not the level of kink.

Jane and John Doe, in the example you provided (and limited information) may not identify as lifestylers (they may not even be aware that the lifestyle exists), but they are most assuredly in a consensual power exchange relationship.

A rose by any other name would smell just as sweetly.

John


I don't know...this can get really muddy. Say you take Jane Doe and flashback to her in college when she was single. Take another guy, a self identified submissive (complete with kinky fetishes built in). He falls hard for her because of her commanding presence and take charge atittude. He loves the way she calls the shots. They end up getting married, and when he finally has the courage to share with her his submissive ideas, she calls him a freak (If you watch Desperate Housewives, think of Bree and Rex's S&M disaster). This kind of scenario isn't that uncommon -- Many of the married/unfulfilled submissives I have met say their wife is dominant in her personality and so many ways, but when it comes to kink, she says no way. And since she is in control - that's how it stays. These subs thought for sure they could turn her onto BDSM because she *already* was, in fact, a dominant! No dice.

So is her submissive husband a 24/7 lifestyler married to a vanilla woman, yet she is the same woman you defined as in a 24/7 dynamic just now?

Akasha

< Message edited by AAkasha -- 8/15/2005 6:00:31 PM >

_____________________________

Akasha's Web - All original Femdom content since 1995
Don't email me here, email me at [email protected]

(in reply to Rover)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/15/2005 6:20:02 PM   
MsIncognito


Posts: 742
Joined: 5/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AAkasha

I'm not sure how they could be power exchange 24/7ers as defined by the BDSM community when they are not only unaware of it, but both would find it offensive. It's just a controlling woman and a passive man - nothing more, nothing less. Why throw them into our mix?



Because that IS what 24/7 power exchange is. Since so many seem to get off on the idea of "natural" Dominants and "natural" submissives I see no reason to eschew what is in fact natural for these two people (and many, many more like them!). Whether or not they would identify with/condone the lifestyle as BDSM types define it doesn't change the fact that they naturally co-exist in a power exchange relationship. I know that this will reduce the "speacialness" factor of BDSM for some but ultimately I think that's a good thing. The sooner we stop thinking of ourselves as oh-so-special and realize that we're just people, the better.

(in reply to AAkasha)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/15/2005 6:22:19 PM   
Rover


Posts: 2634
Joined: 6/28/2004
Status: offline 		Don't fall into the trap set by those that may choose to reject the lifestyle (often because of what society associates it with, rightly or wrongly, beyond the power exchange) but not the reality of the power exchange within their own relationship.

They often choose to use more "acceptable" terms (ie: I'm not Dominant, I just wear the pants in the family) that don't have a societal prejudice attached to them. Our own lifestyle did much the same, when in the early 1980's the Society of Janus voted to incorporate "BDSM" as the umbrella term for our organizations that had become inclusive and pansexual, because the existing umbrella term (the "leather lifestyle") was too closely associated with the exclusive gay leathermen that gave rise to the lifestyle in an organized fashion.

So, clearly this is an issue of semantics, and obviously not one that even avowed lifestylers (you define the term any way you want) are immune from.

John

(in reply to AAkasha)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/15/2005 6:23:02 PM   
MsIncognito


Posts: 742
Joined: 5/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AAkasha
These subs thought for sure they could turn her onto BDSM because she *already* was, in fact, a dominant! No dice.


And therein lies the crux of the problem. People equate power exchange and dominance with kink and they are so not the same thing. We all know that D/s can exist without kink and that kink can exist without D/s. I think the waters only get muddy if we insist on making them so.

Edited due to fat fingers


< Message edited by MsIncognito -- 8/15/2005 6:24:23 PM >

(in reply to AAkasha)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/15/2005 6:30:31 PM   
MstrHellsFury


Posts: 388
Joined: 1/5/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rover


A 24/7 power exchange relationship dynamic is comprised of two (or more) people just being themselves. It's not only possible to live a 24/7 power exchange relationship, for those who are Dominants and submissives (or slaves if you prefer) it is the natural dynamic they seek out and settle into, and it has absolutely nothing to do with whips and chains (or any other prop), nor anything whatsoever to do with a location or venue (such as a dungeon).

John



I've just been sitting back following this very active and insightful dialog...mind provoking..definitly.. this is the cord that struck me as being closest to the way I live within the "Lifestyle"...


Fury

(in reply to Rover)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/15/2005 6:41:20 PM   
Rover


Posts: 2634
Joined: 6/28/2004
Status: offline 		For all the good that an umbrella term (such as "BDSM") does to unify us, I personally believe that it often times does a disservice in that it can (most often online) equate the power exchange with kink (in much the way that you noted). I don't believe that recognizing and understanding the difference does anything to detract from our unity.

And truth be known, for sensation players engaged in role play for scening purposes, the power exchange IS a kink (and limited in duration to the length of the scene). But that is not a 24/7 power exchange relationship dynamic (it is, as noted, role play). Another truth be told, is that even those engaged in a 24/7 power exchange relationship dynamic may sometimes find the power exchange itself to be erotic (I know that I find consensual submission highly erotic in and of itself), and certainly during our own scenes, rituals, customs, etc.

But it need not be so, and when I am exerting my Dominance in the making of a decision regarding home finances, a vacation destination, my expectations for behavioral modifications (and any number of a myriad of other ways), I do so without the slightest bit of eroticism. It is simply an expression of who I am (a Dominant) engaged in the relationship dynamic that suits us both (a power exchange).

John

(in reply to MsIncognito)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/15/2005 6:55:12 PM   
Rover


Posts: 2634
Joined: 6/28/2004
Status: offline 		Often times when I present on relationship issues, I ask each of the attendees to name a single characteristic that they feel is inherent to their power exchange relationship. And despite the fact that we tend to overly focus upon the (very real) differences amongst power exchange relationships, invariably everyone agrees that they can identify with and share about 90 % of what others mention.

That's a significant indication that despite our differences, we have more in common than not (and I would propose that we have more in common with vanilla relationships as well).

Too often we fall prey to our feelings and emotions. We enjoy "feeling" special and different. It enhances the pleasure we derive from our scenes, and from our relationships. But it's nothing more than an enjoyable delusion. We're just average folk who are a bit more open and accepting of our (and other's) kinks and predilictions, and as such a bit more willing to go the extra yard to live out our fantasies.

And lest anyone forget, vanillas are kinky too. When you get right down to it, in terms of sheer numbers, more vanillas are engaged in some form of B/D S/M than "lifestylers" every day of the week. They just don't have the kewl dungeons, equipment and perhaps a wee bit of the imagination that can turn (almost) anything into a pervertable.

John

(in reply to MstrHellsFury)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/15/2005 7:00:00 PM   
Rover


Posts: 2634
Joined: 6/28/2004
Status: offline 		Ok, I'm cheating and replying to myself. I should have noted that we lifestylers, by virtue of being open and accepting of our kinks and predilictions, find an inordinate amount of "freedom" to fully be ourselves. We are not (as) constrained by societal prejudice, pressure and norms to "be" what others expect of us (or not to be what they disapprove of).

That is not insignificant.

John

(in reply to Rover)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/15/2005 7:23:51 PM   
LadyAngelika


Posts: 8070
Joined: 7/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mistoferin

quote:

So what am I and what am I doing here, right? I’ve been asking myself that question lately to be honest.


Oh Lady A....
I'm sorry that you have been feeling this way because I know... that you know ...that I know that feeling well.


Yes I do Erin. And I'm glad you are here too. Thank you for your post. It is just what I needed today.

- LA


_____________________________

Une main de fer dans un gant de velours ~ An iron hand in a velvet glove

(in reply to mistoferin)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/15/2005 7:35:02 PM   
LadyAngelika


Posts: 8070
Joined: 7/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

These subs thought for sure they could turn her onto BDSM because she *already* was, in fact, a dominant! No dice.


And by that same token, you and I both know first hand Akasha what it's like to convert a vanilla man. I'm sure that like me, you've tried more then once, and have been called a freak at least once.

The fact is that I actually am not attracted to 99.9% of the self identified lifestyle submissives because all they can chat me up about is about them serving me. They never ask me what my favorite film or book is, they never ask me my hopes and dreams, they don't really care about who I am, they see me as a Domme to fulfill their wishes.

When I meet a strong vanilla man who is enamoured with my strong dominant side, it seems a much better fit. But it has happened on occasion that when I start revealing my kinks, they back away slowly. Some will respect it and set limits, some I've taken quite far but a great deal will be turned off.

So there is my catch-22. If I look for partners here or in other BDSM venues, I'll be lucky if I find a man local to me who cares about me, the person. If I try vanilla avenues, I'll invest much time into luring the man I want only to scare him away.

As much as kink is an important part of my life and sexuality, I'd give up whips and chains before I would give up an honest and deep emotional and intellectual connection.

- LA

_____________________________

Une main de fer dans un gant de velours ~ An iron hand in a velvet glove

(in reply to AAkasha)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/15/2005 8:10:19 PM   
Rover


Posts: 2634
Joined: 6/28/2004
Status: offline 		Finding a compatible partner isn't easy, regardless of lifestyle. And really, how much different is your experience than that of the vanilla women who come across men who simply want sex?

Consider yourself lucky... those vanilla women aren't likely to be getting their toilets, floors and windows scrubbed by the submissive men you run across.

John

(in reply to LadyAngelika)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/15/2005 8:16:53 PM   
LadyAngelika


Posts: 8070
Joined: 7/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rover

Finding a compatible partner isn't easy, regardless of lifestyle. And really, how much different is your experience than that of the vanilla women who come across men who simply want sex?

Consider yourself lucky... those vanilla women aren't likely to be getting their toilets, floors and windows scrubbed by the submissive men you run across.

John


Not so different, really. My (not so) vanilla girlfriends have a similar hard time. The thing is, that I do find a lot of vanilla men that I'm very compatible with. It's getting the kink in there that sucks.

And for the record, I do my own housework. If I don't want to do it, I'll hire a real maid. Not every dominant woman is looking for a maid boy to do her chores.

- LA


_____________________________

Une main de fer dans un gant de velours ~ An iron hand in a velvet glove

(in reply to Rover)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/15/2005 9:40:57 PM   
AAkasha


Posts: 4429
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rover

For all the good that an umbrella term (such as "BDSM") does to unify us, I personally believe that it often times does a disservice in that it can (most often online) equate the power exchange with kink (in much the way that you noted). I don't believe that recognizing and understanding the difference does anything to detract from our unity.

And truth be known, for sensation players engaged in role play for scening purposes, the power exchange IS a kink (and limited in duration to the length of the scene). But that is not a 24/7 power exchange relationship dynamic (it is, as noted, role play). Another truth be told, is that even those engaged in a 24/7 power exchange relationship dynamic may sometimes find the power exchange itself to be erotic (I know that I find consensual submission highly erotic in and of itself), and certainly during our own scenes, rituals, customs, etc.

But it need not be so, and when I am exerting my Dominance in the making of a decision regarding home finances, a vacation destination, my expectations for behavioral modifications (and any number of a myriad of other ways), I do so without the slightest bit of eroticism. It is simply an expression of who I am (a Dominant) engaged in the relationship dynamic that suits us both (a power exchange).

John


I think this has been one of the most intriguing threads in a long time, and I think it's great -- because I'm really interested in defining some of this language -- (and it really doesn't have to do with me feeling slighted for whatever label people want to give me, it's really not important to me.) But to my point --

I believe you are saying that both those who live a 24/7 power dynamic WITH or WITHOUT kink/fetish are basically doing the same thing or in the same category. And, they are also living a 24/7 power dynamic whether that dynamic is erotic to them or not, right? One couple (or just one person in that couple) may be turned on in a way by how the dynamic is expressed, another couple might not consider it erotic at all.

But if you go back to the second couple example I gave, with the submissive (kink/fetish) husband and the dominant (but not kinky/no fetish) wife, then isn't it true they are also living a 24/7 power dynamic? She is dominating him even by not honoring his desires that he be dominated (in a fetish sense). She is in control, and in REAL control in a way she is really expressing it, because if there is no compromise, then there is no question she is in control. Right?

So the subs that are in a depression about not being in a power exchange relationship are actually GETTING what they wanted. The problem is that they really don't want a power exchange relationship as it is defined -- they want a kinky scenario, a fetishy submission, or a fantasy ideal met in their mind. Does that make sense?

Now, (assuming I am right), I think this definition is actually dead-on, the way you make it cut and dry and simply state 24/7 power exchange is what it is; you can add the kink or remove the kink, but the way the relationship operates -- the relationship foundation -- is the same.

But if we accept that, it seems like a huge percentage of male submissives are mislabeling themselves in a way far greater than we even thought before. Taking this further, doesn't it also assume that what so many men are seeking is not *submission* but is mislabeled "satisfaction of their erotic fantasies"? (As I write this, I'll note that we can all easily observe this is where a large breakdown happens in new relationships and courting -- the subs desires are actually somewhat formulated, fetishy, kinky, and if the woman is dominant -- and that's what she is in plain terms -- he can't expect that means she will do what he wants just because they both fall under the umbrella "BDSMers".) If the dominant woman has equal fetishes, fantasies, desires then they may connect and these activities between both people may happen -- AND, this can also happen if a "non dominant" but fetish-oriented woman engages in these activities, right?)

By now, I'm sure some people are reading this and have an urge to say "ok so what. who cares anyway, it's all labels, no one can agree, there will never be a perfect term" -- but what seems frustrating to me is that there isn't even a term close to describing what it is I think I am as a femdom. Because taking in all this information, I'm neither a 24/7 power exchange woman (I wonder if that's debatable under the new assumption that the exchange does not need to be erotic; an outsider would look at my relationship with my husband as an almost 100% reverse of the traditional June and Ward Cleaver -- so perhaps it is? I don't think so) and I am also not a straight fetishist. I have a terrible time connecting with a submissive because I can't cater to fantasies; when I am actually dominating, at that time it is 100% power exchange).

I think a lot of other femdoms might find themselves in some odd category that kind of does or does not fit any of this.

I'd like more clarification though, based on what has been said, because I do think it's helping me redefine myself. Whether or not that is relevant or not, I'm not sure, since I don't need a label; but I can tell you, if I were single and looking, I'd hope I could find some way to describe what I seek in a relationship without huge miscommunication.

Akasha

_____________________________

Akasha's Web - All original Femdom content since 1995
Don't email me here, email me at [email protected]

(in reply to Rover)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/15/2005 9:44:42 PM   
AAkasha


Posts: 4429
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rover

Finding a compatible partner isn't easy, regardless of lifestyle. And really, how much different is your experience than that of the vanilla women who come across men who simply want sex?

Consider yourself lucky... those vanilla women aren't likely to be getting their toilets, floors and windows scrubbed by the submissive men you run across.

John


Not so different, really. My (not so) vanilla girlfriends have a similar hard time. The thing is, that I do find a lot of vanilla men that I'm very compatible with. It's getting the kink in there that sucks.

And for the record, I do my own housework. If I don't want to do it, I'll hire a real maid. Not every dominant woman is looking for a maid boy to do her chores.

- LA



I second that. I'm someone who DID hire a maid instead of dealing with houseboys/subs because it's more work to micromanage and deal with the head games of a sub who has needs but pretends he doesn't than to just pay someone to do the job right.

Now, I have a husband that does all the laundry (and doesn't masturbate in my panties, well, unless I tell him to) and cleaning and doesn't need an erection to keep him motivated or a spanking if he didn't do it right. I tell him to do it, it gets done. But he's not submissive and is not getting one ounce of erotic pleasure out of mundane chores. He is, however, getting a deep satisfaction from knowing he's helping me out and making my life easier. So, wait, is *that* submissive thinking?

Akasha
Akasha

_____________________________

Akasha's Web - All original Femdom content since 1995
Don't email me here, email me at [email protected]

(in reply to LadyAngelika)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/15/2005 9:52:37 PM   
testlimit


Posts: 47
Joined: 6/11/2005
Status: offline 		Hmm...maybe it's just my being new here, but I kind of just think of "the lifestyle" as a blanket term for BDSM. I also kind of see Ds in pretty much every interaction I'm a part of or witness around me. It's just kind of there. I us the "lifestyle" term just to refer to those who view these interactions in terms of Ds as well, and enjoy them for what they are. I don't really ascribe to anyone else's rules of what does or doesn't constitute "the lifestyle" and who is or isn't a "lifestyler."

(in reply to MstrssPassion)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/15/2005 10:11:56 PM   
AAkasha


Posts: 4429
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika

quote:

These subs thought for sure they could turn her onto BDSM because she *already* was, in fact, a dominant! No dice.


And by that same token, you and I both know first hand Akasha what it's like to convert a vanilla man. I'm sure that like me, you've tried more then once, and have been called a freak at least once.

The fact is that I actually am not attracted to 99.9% of the self identified lifestyle submissives because all they can chat me up about is about them serving me. They never ask me what my favorite film or book is, they never ask me my hopes and dreams, they don't really care about who I am, they see me as a Domme to fulfill their wishes.

When I meet a strong vanilla man who is enamoured with my strong dominant side, it seems a much better fit. But it has happened on occasion that when I start revealing my kinks, they back away slowly. Some will respect it and set limits, some I've taken quite far but a great deal will be turned off.

So there is my catch-22. If I look for partners here or in other BDSM venues, I'll be lucky if I find a man local to me who cares about me, the person. If I try vanilla avenues, I'll invest much time into luring the man I want only to scare him away.

As much as kink is an important part of my life and sexuality, I'd give up whips and chains before I would give up an honest and deep emotional and intellectual connection.

- LA


Yeah, I have had my share of vanilla men give me an odd look and ask a lot of questions, but I never had a relationship fail because of it (or, in hindsight, I'd just not pick the guys who expressed any ability to be closed minded). I would choose to curb my fetishes if need be, lighten it up, and use writing as an outlet if I wasn't getting all I needed. It always became a matter of compromise, but I also have never really been committed to a set of fetishes that were non negotiable, I'm more drawn to "categories" of activities as long as they illicit the response I want -- which is surrender, a little fear, humility, vulnerability. I must have the bondage of some sort, and a few other things, but if the partner was worth it I'd pull back on a few things he wasn't ready for.

Like you, I revealed my kinks slowly, didn't break out the entire fetish closet..and most guys are a little shocked and at least initially think "hey wow, kinky sex, right on, sure I can do that" but then find that submission/surrender is difficult, scary, etc....then they get a little more timid about it. It took a lot of relationship maintenance.

With "submissives" there was less relationship maintenance like that, but just a lot more melodrama and headgames and often a total lack of chemistry because his personality was too passive or other major things -- basically the glue that holds it all together -- were lacking. If he's not a guy I can take over to a family gathering or who can engage me in areas not related to kink, I just don't develop the lust to want to dominate him. You know the relationship is failing if you are with a submissive guy and have no "urge" to dominate him but have a real lustful fantasy about dominating a totally vanilla friend who has no idea you are kinky....

I am in the same catch-22 as you are. The one thing I made clear to all my vanilla partners once all the chips were on the table was that if he did not think he could submit to my fetishes on a regular basis (how often was negotiable) for the long haul (read: for as long as we are together, I ain't growing out of this) he has to be willing to allow me to dominate other men. It's just something I have to do. I did have a vanilla boyfriend for 2+ years with this arrangement; I dominated other men, and we had our own set of boundaries and limits and it actually worked out quite well. My husband knows this non-negotiable also, and I prepared him pretty clearly that there could be a time in my life where I want and need to dominate other men, and if he does not want to submit to me, he has to allow me to explore it with others. So far, I haven't had the urge to go that way.

I can also get a femdom "high" off of pretty obscure things, and those also serve to feed the hunger. Having a frank discussion with a professional hockey player about my idea of a penalty box, and watching the reactions he gives, is an example. I'm also a fantatical hair puller -- it's a huge turn on -- and yeah, I've pulled the hair of a lot of guys (and hockey players). So I'm still getting my mini-fixes along the way.

Akasha

Akasha

_____________________________

Akasha's Web - All original Femdom content since 1995
Don't email me here, email me at [email protected]

(in reply to LadyAngelika)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/16/2005 12:34:44 AM   
BlkTallFullfig


Posts: 5585
Joined: 6/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika
So what am I and what am I doing here, right? I’ve been asking myself that question lately to be honest. I look at the relationships dynamics described on the boards and I have to say, though I totally respect everyone’s right to live out their relationship the way they want, I cannot relate to 90% of you. I read the posts lately and I really feel like “what on earth do I have to contribute to this”. I have to say, it hasn’t always been this way, otherwise I have no idea how I would have tallied up this many posts! It seems these boards haven’t always been so “lifestyle” oriented. Or maybe I was just clueless.

I’m actually wondering if there is a way for lifestylers and non-lifestylers to co-exist and/or if they should. I often get the feeling that many lifestylers view us non-lifestylers as players and wannabees. Now this isn’t going to affect in any way, shape or form how I view myself or my relationship dynamics, but it does affect how I interact on here.
LA
Well, when I first began posting here, I felt different and clueless about many things... Okay I still am, but what I know for sure now is that I feel more honest about my needs and desires; I can clearly state what I need/want, and how I feel about most things within a relationship. For me these boards and this lifestyle have been catalysts to my increasing self awareness and my living more authentically/honestly (redundant, I don't care).
I certainly don't agree with a lot of what other people do, and definitely don't live my life they way many others within wiitwd live, but that is life, and diversity really is a wonderful thing. I understand that no one person fits everyone, and many people don't see or do things the way I see/do them, but as long as we are honest in communicating, than these forums have and will continue to serve a purpose.

I've learned and continue to learn about general life issues, lifestyle issues, and I get many insightful thoughts on ways to better oneself and be more aware.
There are days when there isn't anything here I care about sufficiently to contribute my $.02, and that's why having something solid not necessarily relating directly to the lifestyle is important for me. M


_____________________________

a.k.a. SexyBossyBBW
""Touching was, and still is, and will always be, the true revolution" Nikki Giovanni

(in reply to LadyAngelika)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/16/2005 1:03:21 AM   
GentleLady


Posts: 356
Joined: 2/1/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika

Thank you for the kind words GL. Though I have to say, I'm confused when you say:
quote:

I have a mirror to use to see what My life might be like as a Dominant without the kinky or BDSM aspects. By thinking about some of the points you have made as a non-kinky Dominant I have been able to finally identify exactly what My kink is.


I'm not sure I would identify as a non-kinky Dominant. What I have said is that my dominance did not come from my desire to be kinky. I am naturally dominant. Not all naturally dominant people indulge in kink. I happen to. Not all naturally dominant people who engage in kink take the role of the Top. More often then not, I do. But I do not define my dominance based on the fact that I like to be a Top in a kinky dynamic.

- LA

I was sitting here trying to figure out how to word it better when I read mistoferin's post to you (number 52).
What she said...*laughter*

As much as I dislike the convoluted threads about word definitions, I often get stuck not having the word I need to describe something. I used the term non-kinky in My post out of a lack of a better word. You identify first as a Dominant and state that you are naturally dominant. I would identify Myself also as being naturally dominant but....based on other posts you have made....

quote:

Yes, this is how I see a lifestyler. That isn't me....snip....Now and then it can be interesting. But I can only take it in small doses.

This is What it is that I do, not What it is that I am.

For Me the lifestyle is what I am...it is a way of identifying who I am just like I am causcasian, bi-curious, pagan, sadistic, masochistic, middle-aged, celtic, open to polygmy but monogamous at the moment, etc. I am kinky-minded in that I will usually put a kinky twist on even the most vanilla (I am really starting to dislike this term) thing. I have been called perverted (not the same thing as a pervert) with a very twisted sense of humour.

But a lot of the way I look at things in My life is because I am in a 24/7 power exchange relationship. I know that I use the term lifestyle as a short form of explaining that personal and indivudal dynamic that is core to My life. If I can come up with a more accurate or descriptive term then I will change the terminology I use. The relationship dynamics are something I need and I will no longer settle for less. My personal kink preferences are separate from that and I have been fortunate enough to find someone who fits into both the relationship dynamics I require and the kink level I desire. I suspect that the kink hunger would be there even if I was (magically somehow) submissive. By reading your (or anyone else's) posts which come from a different perspective then Mine, I have an easier time sorting out what is going on inside of Myself. The kink is what I do....being Dominant is who I am....but the two are entwined.

Thanks mistoferin.

Gentle Lady


_____________________________

All things are possible to those who have patience, try, and are willing to learn.

(in reply to LadyAngelika)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: The non-lifestyler perspective - 8/16/2005 1:25:25 AM   
GentleLady


Posts: 356
Joined: 2/1/2005
Status: offline
quote:

So the subs that are in a depression about not being in a power exchange relationship are actually GETTING what they wanted. The problem is that they really don't want a power exchange relationship as it is defined -- they want a kinky scenario, a fetishy submission, or a fantasy ideal met in their mind. Does that make sense?

Now, (assuming I am right), I think this definition is actually dead-on, the way you make it cut and dry and simply state 24/7 power exchange is what it is; you can add the kink or remove the kink, but the way the relationship operates -- the relationship foundation -- is the same.

My submissive will tell you that what he was searching for was a power exchange relationship. He has learned from his personal experiences that the kink is less important then the relationship. He is willing to live without the kink but not without the power exchange in the relationship.

quote:

but what seems frustrating to me is that there isn't even a term close to describing what it is I think I am as a femdom.

That lack of accurate terminology was what tripped Me up in My first post to LadyAngelika.
One of the things that has always driven Me batty was the question: what is My kink? Up until recently I have not been able to identify it because the need/hunger was met no matter which kink I was sceneing in/using.

quote:

Now, I have a husband that does all the laundry (and doesn't masturbate in my panties, well, unless I tell him to) and cleaning and doesn't need an erection to keep him motivated or a spanking if he didn't do it right. I tell him to do it, it gets done. But he's not submissive and is not getting one ounce of erotic pleasure out of mundane chores. He is, however, getting a deep satisfaction from knowing he's helping me out and making my life easier. So, wait, is *that* submissive thinking?
Boy I sure hope so because he has identified as being submissive. He was however new to wiitwd so perhaps all I really did was convert a vanilla male? The flip side though is that he definately DOES have a couple of kink needs....which are separate from his role in the power exchange relationship.

Gentle Lady

_____________________________

All things are possible to those who have patience, try, and are willing to learn.

(in reply to AAkasha)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: The non-lifestyler perspective Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




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

0.156