RE: Loveless D/s.

RE: Loveless D/s. (Full Version)

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

Message

celticlord2112 -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 10:36:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist I was probably not being clear enough. Expects her to be more than a fuck toy. You were perfectly clear. If the master wants more than a toy and the toy wants nothing more than to be used, the desires are not in sync and the relationship will have problems. Even the most obedient slave cannot be compelled to receive love from Master's hand if that is not her desire.

sweetwenchie -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 10:38:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist Dunno,just made me curious. Especially in a place where people seem to think D/s is all romance and flowers. Not sure what place that is, but from what i have seen, the majority do not think it all romance and flowers. That might work for some, and good, great, whatever gets them through the day. i myself see it more as blood, sweat, exquisite pain and tears. To each their own as the overused saying goes. Those who want romance will be better off looking for a romantic Dominant, those who want the dynamic without any romantic trappings will look for that. i think the fact that they put it right there on their profile is perfect, lets anyone curious about them know right away if they are a possible match or not.

Leatherist -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 10:40:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist I was probably not being clear enough. Expects her to be more than a fuck toy. You were perfectly clear. If the master wants more than a toy and the toy wants nothing more than to be used, the desires are not in sync and the relationship will have problems. Even the most obedient slave cannot be compelled to receive love from Master's hand if that is not her desire. I didn't mean more=love. It might well mean she had more important things he desired of her-not including love. Let's try not to get fixated on romatic emotional content as the only reliable driver here please. Others do exist, and they are just as valid as motivations.

Dnomyar -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 10:42:00 AM)
wenchie your confusing me. Mmmm typical woman. Would I be better putting Im a Romantic Dom in my profile or a heartless Dom?

celticlord2112 -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 10:42:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist I was probably not being clear enough. Expects her to be more than a fuck toy. You were perfectly clear. If the master wants more than a toy and the toy wants nothing more than to be used, the desires are not in sync and the relationship will have problems. Even the most obedient slave cannot be compelled to receive love from Master's hand if that is not her desire. I didn't mean more=love. It might well mean she had more important things he desired of her-not including love. Let's try not to get fixated on romatic emotional content as the only reliable driver here please. Others do exist, and they are just as valid as motivations. Substitute any noun you wish. The issue arises from the differing desires/needs/objectives of master and slave. If those differences are not reconciled, they will tear the relationship apart. If the differences are reconciled....the question ceases to exist.

Leatherist -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 10:43:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sweetwenchie quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist Dunno,just made me curious. Especially in a place where people seem to think D/s is all romance and flowers. Not sure what place that is, but from what i have seen, the majority do not think it all romance and flowers. That might work for some, and good, great, whatever gets them through the day. i myself see it more as blood, sweat, exquisite pain and tears. To each their own as the overused saying goes. Those who want romance will be better off looking for a romantic Dominant, those who want the dynamic without any romantic trappings will look for that. i think the fact that they put it right there on their profile is perfect, lets anyone curious about them know right away if they are a possible match or not. I think that I just find myself fascinated by dynamics that are based on driving forces not akin to more vanilla ones-I loved your input-thank you!

Leatherist -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 10:44:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist I was probably not being clear enough. Expects her to be more than a fuck toy. You were perfectly clear. If the master wants more than a toy and the toy wants nothing more than to be used, the desires are not in sync and the relationship will have problems. Even the most obedient slave cannot be compelled to receive love from Master's hand if that is not her desire. I didn't mean more=love. It might well mean she had more important things he desired of her-not including love. Let's try not to get fixated on romatic emotional content as the only reliable driver here please. Others do exist, and they are just as valid as motivations. Substitute any noun you wish. The issue arises from the differing desires/needs/objectives of master and slave. If those differences are not reconciled, they will tear the relationship apart. I have no argument with you about dynamic mismatches. Only that you seemed to be a bit fixated on the love thing. When I was speaking of it only as something left OUT in this case,per se.

celticlord2112 -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 10:48:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist I have no argument with you about dynamic mismatches. Only that you seemed to be a bit fixated on the love thing. When I was speaking of it only as something left OUT in this case,per se. Merely a stylistic conceit on my part. Keeps a good rhythm to the words.

sweetwenchie -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 11:03:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dnomyar wenchie your confusing me. Mmmm typical woman. Would I be better putting Im a Romantic Dom in my profile or a heartless Dom? me, confusing? Hardly! [8D] i do not know your personal style, but you could always go with Heartless Romantic Dominant, really confuse the poor dears.[;)]

IrishMist -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 11:10:28 AM)
quote: I think that I just find myself fascinated by dynamics that are based on driving forces not akin to more vanilla ones-I loved your input-thank you! Sorry, but well, I HAVE to do this Please define or explain what you mean by driving forces not akin to more vanilla ones?

LadyHathor -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 11:15:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist I run across the occasional profile where the person says they don't want a boyfriend or girlfriend, just a harsh, strict owner. Do you think they really mean it? Why? Yes, as Jeffff stated there are people who need a connection, but who need not the depth of emotion---OR who cannot feel or express emotion. To them this is less risk than getting the heart involved.

yrstocollar -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 11:19:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist I run across the occasional profile where the person says they don't want a boyfriend or girlfriend, just a harsh, strict owner. Do you think they really mean it? Why? Maybe they already have a girlfriend or boyfriend and/or they literally just want someone to scene with... without emotional attachment... bit like good hard sex as opposed to a bit of lovin'.

Leatherist -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 11:20:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist quote: I think that I just find myself fascinated by dynamics that are based on driving forces not akin to more vanilla ones-I loved your input-thank you! Sorry, but well, I HAVE to do this Please define or explain what you mean by driving forces not akin to more vanilla ones? I doubtless mean a reordering of the more conventional priorities for being in a relationship. A la, the emotive being placed as most important.

Leatherist -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 11:21:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: yrstocollar quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist I run across the occasional profile where the person says they don't want a boyfriend or girlfriend, just a harsh, strict owner. Do you think they really mean it? Why? Maybe they already have a girlfriend or boyfriend and/or they literally just want someone to scene with... without emotional attachment... bit like good hard sex as opposed to a bit of lovin'. No primaries were ever mentioned that I could see. Only the desire to be property.

Leatherist -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 11:22:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyHathor quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist I run across the occasional profile where the person says they don't want a boyfriend or girlfriend, just a harsh, strict owner. Do you think they really mean it? Why? Yes, as Jeffff stated there are people who need a connection, but who need not the depth of emotion---OR who cannot feel or express emotion. To them this is less risk than getting the heart involved. I might venture that turning your entire life upside down to become property does entail a bit more risk than just having one's feeling hurt by a rejection.

BoiJen -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 11:26:02 AM)
Well I don't say that in my profile it's how I approach things. The power dynamic is more important to me that the romantic notions of "love." Do I have love in my relationship? Yes but it's not romantic. And I enjoy a freedom in knowing that I don't have to negotiate that part in our relationship. The power dynamic prevails entirely...meaning the D/s is first always.

toservez -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 11:26:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyHathor Yes, as Jeffff stated there are people who need a connection, but who need not the depth of emotion---OR who cannot feel or express emotion. To them this is less risk than getting the heart involved. I agree with this. I would not take a profile like the one referenced by the OP and think they are just wanting sex. There are many relationships throughout the world that love/emotion have nothing to do with them but are about fitting the needs of the two people. For most being in a relationship a need/strong desire is love but that is simply not for all. Who knows the reasons why someone does not want love in a relationship but I do know that you can probably think of all the couples you know and find one that appears to you is loveless and both of them could be quite content in it.

Leatherist -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 11:36:28 AM)
One thought did occur to me on reflection. Most kink and D/s based relationships seem to fizzle out and die, once that new relationship infatuation wears off. It's a huge problem. Perhaps people looking for something more performance and authority based........are seeking stability? Something more consistent and reliable as a foundation? It would seem that putting accountabilty as a higher priority than emotion might well point in this direction.

Nineveh -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 11:56:12 AM)
I disagree that they are just looking for sex, I have seen some people who are just looking for sex, and they are usually quite clear about that. I am sure there are a few who are new to the whole field, who honestly think they want a master who doesn't care about them, and then there are others for whom the power, control, and discipline matter far more than any sort of emotional connection that might exist.

Leatherist -> RE: Loveless D/s. (2/14/2008 12:00:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nineveh I disagree that they are just looking for sex, I have seen some people who are just looking for sex, and they are usually quite clear about that. I am sure there are a few who are new to the whole field, who honestly think they want a master who doesn't care about them, and then there are others for whom the power, control, and discipline matter far more than any sort of emotional connection that might exist. This comes back round to what I was trying to get at. Newbies and fantasies aside...... It's actually more like a military discipline. A dynamic based not on emotive value, but performance. Interesting.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875