RE: Curious dichotomy

RE: Curious dichotomy (Full Version)

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

Message

shellzbythesea -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 9:10:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: buddyboy22222 and gain power in excluding those they arbitrarilly choose to ignor justify in their own minds the power to play "the ole' game" of sex as a form of currency? The law of averages suggests some will conform to your assumptions; for many though, I'll guess the basis of their selection will be reasonable, i.e. not simply looking for any man, but, rather, a man who meets certain needs. Ding, ding, ding...we have a winner!

amayos -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 9:20:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: topcat Your question is backwards, actually. Why on earth would a dominant pursue a submissive? Bingo.

dawntreader -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 9:30:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: batshalom Sex is a form of currency? Welllllllllllll shit fire! I'm going down to the Lexus dealership TODAY! From Out of Phase by Sugarcult: We walk alone like broken motorists. Behind the bars and discotechs. Love is product and sex is a currency. We're all cheaters and can't win. Imagine the girl holding by will paint a picture of a kinder, gentler war. And our good scenes that have no ending. One that leaves us standing at the gates with broken wings while a heart scan reports "access denied, access denied." We have arrived.)

Missokyst -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 9:40:11 AM)
Yep.. sour grapes. And I just have to wonder if this is the same guy in another guise who asked the question "Is it wrong for a submissive to make judgements on whether to serve due to sexual and intellectual attraction to their Dominant, or the lack there of?" Seems to be of a similar mindset. If that post wasn't you, Get a clue OP. Just because we may choose submission, it is a choice. We have the responsibility to ourselves and our partner to be selective. Kyst quote: ORIGINAL: Padriag I'd add something, except the rest of you have pretty well already covered it. Instead I'll just add two words regarding the OP... sour grapes

Bella1965 -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 9:43:23 AM)
G'afternoon all: To the OP - Oy vey. Another whine from a male too eager to get down to business and not invest some time in the search for a match that fits his parameters. Here's a clue; not all the submissives you contact will throng to you in droves simply because you list yourself as dominant. They have just as much right to be selective as you do. By the way? That's part of what power play is about. The surrendering of your own personal power to someone you feel is qualified and worthy of such. eye roll What? You want someone that'll just roll over and play dead?? You reek of desperate aspirations. On the other hand, my search ended and the choice was under my nose for years. We simply never discussed long term and monogamy until April. Since then, he wears my training collar. Stay safe, play nice, & share your toys w/ others... [:D] Bella

Padriag -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 9:44:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Missokyst Yep.. sour grapes. And I just have to wonder if this is the same guy in another guise who asked the question "Is it wrong for a submissive to make judgements on whether to serve due to sexual and intellectual attraction to their Dominant, or the lack there of?" Perhaps, or perhaps just an all too common theme among a certain type seeking easy conquests... and discovering that submissives, in fact, do not = mindless sex toys free for use by anyone. For which I will simply offer just three words of advice... block delete ignore

CalifChick -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 9:49:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: buddyboy22222 On the other, they are here selective and gain power in excluding those they arbitrarilly choose to ignor. I'm not arbitrarily ignoring you. I'm ignoring you because I have zero interest in the two or three interests you listed in your profile, including birdwatching. Does that give me power? I sure wish someone had told me that before. I could provide heat for a small 3rd world country on all the power from ignoring people I have no interest in. Cali

shellzbythesea -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 10:08:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: julietsierra Oh, I don't know... when I first started this journey, while I never had any man turn me down, generally I found that what they were really after was the sex, not the D/s part of things. During those times, when I'd be fooled, I'd find that once they got that, they had no more use for me. So really, who used sex in that situation? I was hoping for D/s, and believe me, they spoke some very pretty words to get me to that point. It wasn't until I started realizing that if sex was really the draw, then the clue to finding what I wanted was to NOT engage in that little process. I started being more discerning, more decisive and certainly more picky. It wasn't me withholding sex, it was me getting a clue as to what I wanted in a relationship, and for my money, if more women did that, there'd be a whole lot less problems in relationships that develop out there. Yes, people come with grocery lists - both dominants and submissives have their own. It's when neither of them have one that makes me nervous. How they handle their respective lists is what makes or breaks a relationship. ... Sex, I can get...it's the D/s that is what mattered. It was the same for him. juliet Very well said, juliet. Your response echoes my own experiences (hence the highlights) and is another great reason for subs to be very discerning (and Doms should be, as well). It's very disheartening to invest so much time in someone who suggests they want the same thing only to find it was just their little road to sex. i'm a bit confused by the OPs post, though, given what he has stated in his profile. His profile suggests he wants a sub who is intelligent yet his post suggests he believes subs are just mindless twits who should bow to any Dom who happens along their path. And believe me, if i choose to ignore someone, that choice wasn't arbitrary.

DesFIP -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 11:10:29 AM)
I'm submissive to one and one only. And had I not found him with his amazing combination of traits and high level of compatibility, I wouldn't be submissive to anyone. What I am not is an abandoned coat at the local thrift shop available to anyone with $1, I'm haute couteur and worth it. You decide what you need, used and stained or one of a kind and a perfect fit, and then you decide whether or not you can pay the price.

secretagentgirl -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 11:28:28 AM)
I think what bothers me about your question is that you're implying that in the "ideal" scenario, the Dominants would be the highly selective ones since that matches up more with the D/s dynamic. Which to me implies that it's acceptable (or even desirable) to let the Doms choose the subs and the subs be more or less at the mercy of who selects them. I agree... the unbalanced ratio of genders here does make the power a bit uneven. But if all worked as it should, it would be equal and no gender would have an edge in that regard. Which to me would be ideal and as it should be. D/s or not, it's still people meeting each other, trying to connect, and find someone compatible. And to me, a level playing field is the best place for that to happen, no matter who you are.

topcat -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 12:54:23 PM)
Midear Julia, quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania You make it sound as though quality submissives grow on trees, you know, there are female HNG too... and desirable mates, whether male or female, are hard to come by.... Oh, absolutlely- still I suspect that when we grind off the Daytrippers, freakseekers, confused, desperate and clueless, there's still a surplus of submissives, but that may just be the fact that they, of course, hound me<g>. quote: Not to sound sexist either, but men tend to be the aggressors whether there is an over abundance of women or not in my experience. can't put my finger on it, but there's a line between (I think) aggressor and pursuer... Fuzzy words, damnit. I mean, I may intitiate- follow up, but I am not going to 'chase' anyone. If she's not smart enough to jump at the chance, she's too dumb for me to mate with<g>. Stay warm, Lawrence

Prinsexx -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 4:32:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: batshalom Sex is a form of currency? Welllllllllllll shit fire! I'm going down to the Lexus dealership TODAY! damn I nearly went to sleep and missed this one......pmsl

Prinsexx -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 4:38:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: buddyboy22222 how do supposedly submissive women justify in their own minds the power to play "the ole' game" of sex as a form of currency? oh please I beg you, you simply have to believe me, (grovelling, crawling) I can justify anything in MY mind but sex as a form of currency??? now that's a game I have truly never ever played....is it like Monopoly you know you play banker and pay me for standing in Euston Square?

MadRabbit -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 4:47:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: amayos quote: ORIGINAL: topcat Your question is backwards, actually. Why on earth would a dominant pursue a submissive? Bingo. My personal experiences have been in line with this line of wisdom personally. I have a LDR with a girl who pursued me after getting to know me through reading my posts on an online forum. She has known me for close to a year now and the relationship has gone much smoother and better from the fact that she wants to serve me as opposed to the girls in the past I pursued because I wanted them to serve me.

MadRabbit -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 4:48:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist Well,women in a lot of western cultures seem to have been trained to see sex as a bargaining tool. Not surprising we see it here too-very nilla. As far as submitting? Most only submit to what they want to begin with-and just go after a Top to facillitate it anyhow. So of course they have these big shopping lists. Great way to conveniently objectify a relationship. Sometimes (in a half serious kind of way) I think the trick is to become content with self gratification and pornography. If you achieve that Zen like state with your sex drive, the world is yours.

catize -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 5:13:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: batshalom Sex is a form of currency? Welllllllllllll shit fire! I'm going down to the Lexus dealership TODAY! [sm=biggrin.gif]

NaiveTempest -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 5:24:38 PM)
Exactly what power are we gaining by choosing to ignore all the HNG, assholes, and people looking for a piece of ass? The power of the right of selection/choice? The power to finding the Dom/me who suits you cause you did waste time on the others? The power to reply to your post to tell you that you need to learn to handle rejection better?

thisgirl72 -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 5:45:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist Well,women in a lot of western cultures seem to have been trained to see sex as a bargaining tool. Not surprising we see it here too-very nilla. As far as submitting? Most only submit to what they want to begin with-and just go after a Top to facillitate it anyhow. So of course they have these big shopping lists. Great way to conveniently objectify a relationship. Even though a person may identify as a submissive or slave, do they enter a relationship in that role? Should they? I don't think so. More likely than not, their first experiences with each other will be more along the lines of a top/bottom dynamic than anything else. Once the trust grows, the submissive will relinquish more power if that's the direction the relationship will take. It's not a matter of objectifying a relationship, it's just the progression of things. I don't think most Dominants or Masters would really want someone giving them everything right off the bat. There has to be some boundaries in place until everyone knows what they're getting into. Now some relationships (many even) never make it out of the top/bottom dynamic but as long as the parties involved are satisfied with that, it's all good.

catize -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 6:00:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: amayos quote: ORIGINAL: topcat Your question is backwards, actually. Why on earth would a dominant pursue a submissive? Bingo. And yet, if, as the OP suggests, we should be submissive to all dominants, to the world at large, how can we be the pursuers? What a conundrum; languish alone and simply wait for any ol’ dominant to sweep us off our passive feet, or seek what we <gasp> want only to find that others would deem that to be the dreaded ‘topping from the bottom.’ To be unwilling to make initial contact because ‘it isn’t the done thing’ from whichever side of the slash you reside seems rather silly to me. There is a nice middle ground called mutual interest. I’m thinkin’ that is where most successful relationships begin.

catize -> RE: Curious dichotomy (12/30/2007 6:06:44 PM)
quote: Oh, I don't know... when I first started this journey, while I never had any man turn me down, generally I found that what they were really after was the sex, not the D/s part of things. During those times, when I'd be fooled, I'd find that once they got that, they had no more use for me. So really, who used sex in that situation? I was hoping for D/s, and believe me, they spoke some very pretty words to get me to that point. It wasn't until I started realizing that if sex was really the draw, then the clue to finding what I wanted was to NOT engage in that little process. I started being more discerning, more decisive and certainly more picky. It wasn't me withholding sex, it was me getting a clue as to what I wanted in a relationship, and for my money, if more women did that, there'd be a whole lot less problems in relationships that develop out there. Yes, people come with grocery lists - both dominants and submissives have their own. It's when neither of them have one that makes me nervous. How they handle their respective lists is what makes or breaks a relationship. All I can add to this is my applause......well done! [sm=applause.gif]

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.09375