|
FLButtSlut -> RE: "Under Consideration" (10/7/2005 7:11:18 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Soulhuntre
Look, it is a simple fact of the universe in my experience that between ANY two human beings a power differential will always exist. As such, the idea fo a "level playing field" is a fine one in theory but one that doesn't actually happen.
Now, if you wish to express that in many relationships authority does not start until it is formally agreed upon then I will agree entirely. If your going to claim that this is >always< so or that to deviate from this idea is wrong or predatory, then I disagree.
If you would take the time to read my post correctly, I am talking about the time before a relationship commences. The part after "hello", but before any type of "dating" (or let's get together type stuff" begins. When someone writes to me or I write to them, we are on a completely equal playing field. It is completely within the choice of each individual whether to pursue it.
In all successful relationships, some type of power exchange is going to take place. In vanilla relationships that exchange is usually a fluid one with each party "controlling" the things they are better at, i.e. one is good with the bills the other with the cooking. In a D/s dynamic the power exchange is, or should be discussed going in.
Quite frankly, if someone feels that just because they are dominant that from the first "hello" they have the power, it IS predatory.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Soulhuntre
You (and anyone else) are welcome to try and gain any concession or advantage you wish. If you can get someoen to agree to this then go for it if thats what you want.
"try" to gain a concession? "If" I can get someone to agree to it? The world of bdsm is not a world where a sub has no right to determine if the relationship he/she becomes involved in will be what they want. Not only are we "welcome" to seek the traits we want in a partner, it is stupid not to.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Soulhuntre
What I object to is the tone of the OP that implied that any situation that did NOT operate in this manner was wrong or unethical.
Do you always take offense to those whose opinions differ than yours? You and the OP obviously seek different things in this lifestyle, which is fine. Are you saying that if a sub/slave were to approach you and you knew that they were seeking a one on one, monogamous relationship, you should feel no obligation to be honest with them, and tell them that you are not seeking the same thing? If that is the case, that makes you somewhat dishonest, don't you think? All the OP is saying is that people should be upfront with each other regarding their expectations of the relationship (or situation) that they are looking for. This would be an honorable thing to do, whether you seek monogamy, polyamorous or nothing more than service.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Soulhuntre
The concept of a "right" and the concept of what someoen has the ability to do are radically different.
So if during that "courting" phase, a sub/slave discovers that the dominant they are getting to know is not for them, they don't have the right or shouldn't have the ability to say, "I'm sorry, but I don't think a relationship would work between us"?
quote:
ORIGINAL: Soulhuntre
It is this idea, that a submissive has a natural "right" to demand a profile change that I disagree with... just like I would not claim that a dominant has such a "right". To imply it is to confuse the idea of what s "right" is. Now, a submissive and / or a dominant may well have the >ability< to make such a demand... thats a different animal :)
I never said the submissive had the right to demand a profile change. I said they have a right to ask the dominant what making that profile change means to all parties, i.e. if dominant is looking for sub to be exclusive, sub has the right to question whether dom is going to be exclusive as well, if that the situation the sub is seeking. Obviously for those into poly, this becomes a different situation.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Soulhuntre
I am completely aware that I am constantly under evaluation by those who may approach me. The difference lies in another aspect of the situation...
They are looking for a boon from me, not the other way around. The will adapt to fit my needs, I will not adapt to theirs.
Obviously if I do not "fit" for them they will have no interest in seeking a position with me. The issue at hand is who is the one doing the asking :)
That is based on the type of dynamic you seek. I am not seeking a "boon" from anyone, and in relationships, even in D/s, adapting is done on both sides. As an example....submissive enjoys cooking for her dominant, who also happens to enjoy cooking. By your standard, the sub should give up cooking to "adapt" to the dominant's enjoyment of the activity. Or perhaps the sub enjoys a particular position sexually...in a relationship (which is what I am talking of, not a training environment that lacks any type of romantic interest between the parties), I'm willing to bet that on occasion the dominant is going to let the sub cook at times or use that particular position at times...they are adapting to each other.
As for your "boon" theory...certainly a dominant is looking for the same "boon" from me as I am from him. He is seeking a partner just as I am. When the compatibility is there it is a "boon" to each of us.
The issue of "who is doing the asking" is that for those seeking a relationship, BOTH are doing the asking. I am asking a dominant what things he is looking for in a partner and he is asking me the same thing to ascertain whether or not we are compatible. What goes on in "training" situations is of little interest to me, and of little matter to what the OP was discussing as well.
While we are both free to be seeking what we seek, you situation is (from what I gather from your posts) never about relationships. As such, the manner in which the "seek and find" occurs is, and should be quite different than for those of us seeking a relationship. It seems that you are trying to apply the standards you use to those seeking relationships and the two just work too differently to do so. I have consistently stated that in YOUR particular situation, the whole "consideration" question has a much different meaning. Your implication that my belief that I have no right to question the almighty dominant in my search or that most dominants would have no part in it is absurd.
I don't pretend or presume to say how situations such as yours work, you should not presume that the manner in which people seek out life partners for relationships is inappropriate either.
|
|
|
|
