Very curious..

Very curious.. (Full Version)

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

Message

Cykotica -> Very curious.. (8/24/2005 9:27:41 AM)
(If this is in the wrong forum, I apologize, I'm sort of a newish poster)I've read a lot of posts from people speaking with distaste about cyber bdsm. However, I am curious as to how many of you out there have either been cyberly owned, or have been a cyber owner? Secondly I'm wondering how many of those cyber relationships ended up in a real-time relationship? For the second question, I don't mean those who met for coffee after exchanging a few emails on collarme, I mean for people who have cybercollared, or been a cybercollar-ee.

ElektraUkM -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 9:39:20 AM)
Hello Cykotica. My current relationship was online for a while before we met (for various reasons), but the goal was always real time. There have been a few threads on this topic here in the past few months, try out: Online Slaves (which has links to more threads in one of the posts). Also: Online to real time ~ was it successful (Which might not be exactly what you're looking for, but makes a good read) Good luck, ~ Elektra

sub4hire -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 9:44:34 AM)
quote: However, I am curious as to how many of you out there have either been cyberly owned, or have been a cyber owner? Secondly I'm wondering how many of those cyber relationships ended up in a real-time relationship? For the second question, I don't mean those who met for coffee after exchanging a few emails on collarme, I mean for people who have cybercollared, or been a cybercollar-ee. I think most of us meet our partners online. I've seen very few success stories from meets at munches unless of course the people had been chatting online prior and arranged to meet there. I met my dom in a So Cal chat room. I was in there looking for part friends I knew who had gotten together once a week. Well he was there, we started talking and realized just how much we had in common. That is how we went real time. Of course the computer was also paramount for us after that. People tend to bare their souls a bit better when chatting via the computer. Of course when not together we were also chatting on the phone at great lengths. I've never had any sort of cyber collar. However, I can see how people would enter that relationship if they felt they were compatible. Of course the plan would be to ultimately be together within a short period of time. How many actually end up together I've no clue.

Cykotica -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 9:59:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sub4hire quote: However, I am curious as to how many of you out there have either been cyberly owned, or have been a cyber owner? Secondly I'm wondering how many of those cyber relationships ended up in a real-time relationship? For the second question, I don't mean those who met for coffee after exchanging a few emails on collarme, I mean for people who have cybercollared, or been a cybercollar-ee. I think most of us meet our partners online. I've seen very few success stories from meets at munches unless of course the people had been chatting online prior and arranged to meet there. I met my dom in a So Cal chat room. I was in there looking for part friends I knew who had gotten together once a week. Well he was there, we started talking and realized just how much we had in common. That is how we went real time. Of course the computer was also paramount for us after that. People tend to bare their souls a bit better when chatting via the computer. Of course when not together we were also chatting on the phone at great lengths. I've never had any sort of cyber collar. However, I can see how people would enter that relationship if they felt they were compatible. Of course the plan would be to ultimately be together within a short period of time. How many actually end up together I've no clue. sub4hire, I met my sub online about 6 years ago. We met in an online gaming community, that had nothing at all to do with bdsm. Everything else fell into place in real time. I never collared him online. I guess I am trying to understand why there is so much distaste for people who play at bdsm online, whereas it's generally well recieved that people can have a (vanilla?) relationship online, and move it to real-time. Yes, you can't feel the whip online, but you can't feel the smooch either. Oops, I guess I'm deviating from my original post. Sometimes I'm too curious for my own good.

Veav -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 10:08:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cykotica I guess I am trying to understand why there is so much distaste for people who play at bdsm online, whereas it's generally well recieved that people can have a (vanilla?) relationship online, and move it to real-time. Just as an aside, there's plenty of distaste for people who play at vanilla relationships online too. Making friends, fine, maintaining a relationship, goodie, but the people who say "yeah, I have an online significant other" and make it clear they've never actualized anything - it tends to incur snarky commentary in their general direction.

Cykotica -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 10:14:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Veav quote: ORIGINAL: Cykotica I guess I am trying to understand why there is so much distaste for people who play at bdsm online, whereas it's generally well recieved that people can have a (vanilla?) relationship online, and move it to real-time. Just as an aside, there's plenty of distaste for people who play at vanilla relationships online too. Making friends, fine, maintaining a relationship, goodie, but the people who say "yeah, I have an online significant other" and make it clear they've never actualized anything - it tends to incur snarky commentary in their general direction. Hmm. Good point. However, one could also use the example of an online friendship and an online romance. Why is one less valid - or more grounds for snarky commentary than the other? Friendship and romance both imply some sort of relationship.

ElektraUkM -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 10:19:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cykotica Hmm. Good point. However, one could also use the example of an online friendship and an online romance. Why is one less valid - or more grounds for snarky commentary than the other? Friendship and romance both imply some sort of relationship. Perhaps because a lot of people complaining that online isn't 'real' in the bdsm sense are those for whom sensation (rather than ownership) is the primary factor in their relationship. Even so, I would counter that on cam, using pegs on soft areas at the whim of Master is pretty painful. Of course that doesn't apply to those online 'sessions' which consist of people pretending to do things. There is so much variety in the online experience it's really not easy to round up in a simple, dismissive, soundbite (not that some don't try). ~ Elektra

Veav -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 10:23:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cykotica Hmm. Good point. However, one could also use the example of an online friendship and an online romance. Why is one less valid - or more grounds for snarky commentary than the other? Friendship and romance both imply some sort of relationship. True, but that's a relative term. A cat and a mouse have a relationship, up to and including the point of digestion! A romantic bond, or a master/slave collar bond, is generally considered to be significant to both parties and a commitment of no small order. The general idea is that an online-only commitment of this sort is uninformed and... considers words Less fulfilling than it deserves to be, as there are aspects which can only be satisfied from that face-to-face, skin-to-skin contact. It comes down to whether or not you feel that you can accomplish the same intimacy with Arial or Times New Roman that you can with fingertips on skin. Most people feel you can't, and feel that those who claim to form the same bonds without that actualization are either ignorant or deluding themselves. On the other hand, many friendships require no tactile contact and require less trust and closeness than such bonds. So they're cool with that.

Cykotica -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 10:39:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Veav quote: ORIGINAL: Cykotica Hmm. Good point. However, one could also use the example of an online friendship and an online romance. Why is one less valid - or more grounds for snarky commentary than the other? Friendship and romance both imply some sort of relationship. True, but that's a relative term. A cat and a mouse have a relationship, up to and including the point of digestion! A romantic bond, or a master/slave collar bond, is generally considered to be significant to both parties and a commitment of no small order. The general idea is that an online-only commitment of this sort is uninformed and... considers words Less fulfilling than it deserves to be, as there are aspects which can only be satisfied from that face-to-face, skin-to-skin contact. It comes down to whether or not you feel that you can accomplish the same intimacy with Arial or Times New Roman that you can with fingertips on skin. Most people feel you can't, and feel that those who claim to form the same bonds without that actualization are either ignorant or deluding themselves. On the other hand, many friendships require no tactile contact and require less trust and closeness than such bonds. So they're cool with that. How does anyone who isn't in the relationship know how significant or nonsignificant a relationship is to the parties involved? I understand what you're saying, and I see this attitude all over the message boards, it's just not something I can wrap my mind around. You certainly must be talking about someone elses cat though, as I can see my cat chased and captured by a mouse. [:D]

Cykotica -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 10:43:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ElektraUkM quote: ORIGINAL: Cykotica Hmm. Good point. However, one could also use the example of an online friendship and an online romance. Why is one less valid - or more grounds for snarky commentary than the other? Friendship and romance both imply some sort of relationship. Perhaps because a lot of people complaining that online isn't 'real' in the bdsm sense are those for whom sensation (rather than ownership) is the primary factor in their relationship. Even so, I would counter that on cam, using pegs on soft areas at the whim of Master is pretty painful. Of course that doesn't apply to those online 'sessions' which consist of people pretending to do things. There is so much variety in the online experience it's really not easy to round up in a simple, dismissive, soundbite (not that some don't try). ~ Elektra Elektra, Nothing applies to every situation, because every relationship is wildly personal and completely unique, which is part of the reason I don't understand the widespread mockery.

Veav -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 11:04:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Cykotica How does anyone who isn't in the relationship know how significant or nonsignificant a relationship is to the parties involved? I understand what you're saying, and I see this attitude all over the message boards, it's just not something I can wrap my mind around. Usually through past personal experience. Also, through application of general principles - to many, it's the same idea as trying to claim you were present for the fall of the Berlin Wall because you saw it on CNN. quote: You certainly must be talking about someone elses cat though, as I can see my cat chased and captured by a mouse. I never said who was doing the digesting... }:D

Cykotica -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 11:10:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Veav Usually through past personal experience. Also, through application of general principles - to many, it's the same idea as trying to claim you were present for the fall of the Berlin Wall because you saw it on CNN. I never said who was doing the digesting... }:D Yes, but you can't deny the people who felt something while watching it, the validity of their emotions. I can understand the comparison, I can't understand the superiority behind it. Damn, now what was my original question again?

Veav -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 11:19:53 AM)
I think it had to do with cybercafes, coffee, and being owned. My theory is that you were asking if coffee tastes better when you imbibe while playing Counterstrike and pwning n00bs. edit: Today's vocabulary lesson... Cybercafe - a coffeehouse, wired for internet access. While most Starbucks provide wireless access points for laptops with wireless cards, a "cybercafe" usually refers to a location designed and intended for internet access and multiplayer video games, sometimes with house computers available. Counterstrike - a modification for Half-Life, strictly for multiplayer use, which pits a team of terrorists against a team of counterterrorists. Also referred to as CS, this modification is extremely popular and enjoys a massive community of players. pwned - in gaming terms, to be "owned" is to be defeated by another, usu. in a humiliating or thorough fashion. The term "pwned" is a deliberate misspelling and an example of "l33tspeak", a foreign language spoken by many gamers and loosely based on english vernacular. Should you be pwned, the proper response is either "sux", "fscking shotgun whore", or "OMG wallhax"/"OMG aimbot". n00b - another example of l33tspeak, from the root term "newbie". Generally used as an insult.

Cykotica -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 11:24:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Veav I think it had to do with cybercafes, coffee, and being owned. My theory is that you were asking if coffee tastes better when you imbibe while playing Counterstrike and pwning n00bs. You could have really convinced me with that one, except for the fact I've never played counterstrike. [:D]

CitizenCane -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 11:36:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sub4hire I think most of us meet our partners online. I've seen very few success stories from meets at munches unless of course the people had been chatting online prior and arranged to meet there. I met my girl in a coffeehouse. Not even a kinky coffeehouse. Cane

sub4hire -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 12:23:57 PM)
quote: However, one could also use the example of an online friendship and an online romance. Why is one less valid - or more grounds for snarky commentary than the other? Well my perception is there are those out there who want to feel superior to you and me. Since they cannot do that on their own merit they opt for putting you down. Fact is online relationships do work. They just are not for everyone. Even those holier than thou types know they work. They are just too proud to admit it.

LadyJulieAnn -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 1:58:57 PM)
When I was unable to pursue real life relationships, I developed online relationships with subs. I had three serious relationships online over the course of three years, and was exclusive with each one. They were very intense relationships involving almost daily contact via chat, voice chat, email, or phone calls, and I learned a lot about myself and about D/s through them. When I was able to pursue real life relationships, I made the transition easily. For what I was able to experience at the time, my online relationships were fulfilling and great learning experiences, and no one can tell me otherwise. Be well, Julie

IronBear -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 7:58:18 PM)
I collared two triks in a Gorean Chat Role-play room 8 years ago. I still have one who lives in Washington and we still are in contact often the other was collared real life when she visited me here a couple of years age and was realeased late last year (bless her in finding her man and new Master.)

OsideGirl -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 8:38:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sub4hire I met my dom in a So Cal chat room. If it's the SoCalSubFem room from AOL, we used to hang out there too. I think one of the great things about that room was that most of us knew each other in real time. I sorta met my current Master from that room. I became friends with a room regular who talked me into attending the Orange County social. I became friends with him and his wife. When I went to the LA social to meet up with them, they introduced me to a friend of theirs. He and I became platonic friends and chatted a lot on AOL. When I broke up with the my ex-Dom, he and I ended up dating and getting married.

FangsNfeet -> RE: Very curious.. (8/24/2005 9:04:54 PM)
Cyber is for good chat and seeing each others interest and creativity. Web cams are an especialy good tool when engaging in such activities. Any how, I don't consider anything a relationship untill you have real physical contact. Untill then it's all just chat and you never know what the other person is really doing. After you have the physical meeting / meetings you both decide from there. The Cyber world will help you stay together in those times of seperation and such.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.076172E-02