RE: First Munch Bad Dom

RE: First Munch Bad Dom (Full Version)

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

Message

MasterWilliam55 -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (3/31/2008 9:52:17 AM)
I disagree with you. The Op stated that they didn't get along. She did not say he telegraphed a behaviour pattern that was abusive to any real extent over those years. He was bossy to be sure, and he was also very nice and accomodating when he offered to give her a ride to the munch. It's very disarming. It's very similar to passive/aggressive behaviour. This was her first munch. she's not going to be screaming No to him for everyone to hear.

HerLord -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (3/31/2008 11:28:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stephann Again, wearing a short skirt because she might want to get laid, doesn't mean he's entitled to rape her. Her ride wasn't forced to do anything; he chose to go out of his way to court her. It did almost work; but that doesn't mean he's entitled to act as if it did. If I have a gay friend of seven years (and I did in fact have such a friend) who invites me to a bar, knowing I'm straight, knowing that I've made it clear I'm not interested in him, I probably wouldn't have let him pay for my membership sure. But if he's my ride, and I'm ready to leave, I tell him. I don't owe him anything - he's supposed to be my friend. It's not my fault if he wants more. The real issue here, is that she wasn't sure until after the fact that she didn't want to play with him. She thought about it, and had he not have been quite so pushy, she very well might have. It's not her fault he's not suave, it's not her fault he got pissed off that he's not suave, and it's not her fault the friendship is ruined. It will be her fault, if she doesn't cut him out of her life. Summer, go to the next with a friend if you want. You don't owe him the time of day. It sucks when a friendship is ruined, it sucks when people are ruled by the wrong head. Chalk it up to a learning experience. Stephan Stephan... You are absolutely CORRECT! I do not condone nor excuse his behaviour in any way... BUT, First... She had stated in op more than once that she had made it clear to him for SEVEN FUCKING YEARS that she had no interest in this with him. So... She WAS sure she did not want any of this. So is professed any way. Yes I came down hard here... More than once. I'll do it again. What Summer is doing is absurd. Allow me to indulge myself. She is claiming that a guy she wasn't really freinds with, for SEVEN FUCKING YEARS, did this to her against her will. And where does she take acountability, In the portion of the post that states (this is where I go wrong trying to please people). This is the ONLY accountability she takes for SEVEN FUCKING YEARS of this guy "harrasing" her. Now admittedly she does not make the pretense that it was harrasment for the entirety of the relationship... but she does profess that "We never got along in the past but managed to keep friendly by talking on yahoo messenger. One of the reasons we never got along was because the only times he wanted to come to see me is if I would give him something in return such as my submission to him. So it didin't work out but as I said we managed to keep mildly friendly over the years via messenger." She does however refer to it as harrasment later. Stephan... I get it... my tone sets people aback and goads their civilities but the truth cannot be in this OP. It is full of inconsitences and just don't set right. Your right, her wearing a short skirt don't mean he can rape her... But Methinks there's a little... nah hell, WAY too much bullshit here. ALL... Plz read the op and my retort within the context of the op... I took the time to make it easy on everyone to put the two together... before slamming me for what I said. fuck the flame retardant suit Summer. I have very little actual advice for you. My first would be to find some honesty. If not with us, here, at least in your own self. You appear to be one of the greatest bullshitters I have read, except that, I aint buying, not for a second. I am sure that all of us wish no one harm. You need to find a place in your soul that you can let the tiniest modicum of real truth in your life. The way you write on this leads me to think that you truly believe you have no responsibility in this at all, which to itself is unfathomably INSANE. I may actually advise seeking psychiatric help. You are seriously delusional. Good luck in your life... And stay the fuck away from me and mine. edited to add Stephan... / All I would also add... I would fire him up as roasty for his action could I find him to do so. I would also beat him to with in an inch of his life IF I believed there was any truth to perported abuse. I would also take the time to ask him "What the hell is it about your retardation that makes this woman appealing in any light or dark?"

TysGalilah -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (3/31/2008 4:47:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TNstepsout quote: ORIGINAL: colouredin Also as galliah said, since when do munchs have play? Munches don't have play, but sometimes munches at dungeons are followed by play. There's not really a term for the period AFTER the munch since it's just open dungeon time. Maybe it's not an acceptable use of the word, but when referring to my experience, I have used the term "munch" to describe then entire evening, not just the munch part. Thank you TNstepsout : ) good to know..

justasubmissive2 -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (3/31/2008 5:02:38 PM)
Ok now I know I will probably have many that disagree with me. That being said, I have to say we are only hearing one version of events. I did not read every post on here, but I did read the OP's and some of the ones following. Doms are not mind readers. Much to our suprise...he could have felt like her accepting his invitiation and his paying for her admittance fee was a step toward them having some sort of relationship. I had a dominant who offered to pay for a membership to a club here. We had only known each other a few weeks. He told me flat out from the beginning there was no obligation to him. That he was just wanting to treat me nice. Now I knew this dominant was interested in me, and I also knew by accepting that invitation that I was showing in some ways my interest in him. If the OP was not interested in him in any way, she had a responsiblity to make that perfectly clear. That way there would be no assuming. The OP also states that she has talked to this person for the better of 6 years. Why would you have a relationship with someone for 6 years if you didn't care for them? I would think that after 6 years of talking to someone you would be easily able to say, I just want to be friends. If you want to go to the munch then continue going. Don't let anyone keep you from what you wish to do. While I do believe there is a good chance that this dominant took a few too many things for granted, I also believe that the OP did not properly state what her intentions were and what she wanted. Lesson learned...be clear in any friendship/relationship what it is you expect. missi

SNoB -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (3/31/2008 5:12:54 PM)
This topic raised a number of questions. Was it a munch or a play party? Every munch I have been to has been free(or nearly) with no play, in a no-pressure situation. Usually a public place like a bar or restaurant, so semi-vanilla behavior is mandatory(though a few I have been to use a private room in a public place). How many people at this event(what im going to call it until I know what it is) actually knew him? In our local comunity if anyone was found out to be acting like this, especially to newcomers, they would be shunned.

Poetryinpain -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (3/31/2008 5:34:53 PM)
My question to the OP: In all those years of chatting, did you *really* make it clear that you were (1) mostly lesbian and (2) mostly dominant? Did you check frequently to be sure he understood what you were saying as what you meant? This is not a frivolous question. Sometimes we say things to others thinking we have made things crystal clear, but they have understood (just as clearly in their mind) something distinctly different. And once you made sure he understood you, did you muddy the waters with flirtatious behavior? I have chat-friends that I tease and flirt with, but we both know and clarify frequently that our friendship is non-sexual. I chatted with one today who made a salacious suggestion to me for dealing with a disappointment - and then made it clear that he would not expect to collect on that suggestion. The point is that if we bend our boundaries a bit, we step back inside and reiterate our commitment to platonic friendship. Although I don't believe that there is any excuse for abusive behavior or language, we might make some allowance for frustration and feeling as though one is being yanked around. pip, just sayin'

Kirren -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (3/31/2008 5:44:57 PM)
I dont think it matters how often she checked to see if he understood her point. Its simple. VERY simple...she said NO. She said she was not comfortable with him on that level. She was trying to maintain the friendship, he used the membership fee as something to hold over her head and to get into her pants. This guy doesnt care about any ones needs other than his own. So while we argue and debate whos right and whos wrong...it really doesnt matter. He should have stopped when she stated that she wasn NOT intrested in him on that level. PERIOD. My advice to the OP would be to cut ties with him. If he calls, comes by or messages asking why...explain to him what you have done to make him aware of his breeches of your trust and why you feel like he over stepped a boundary with you and you are in fact done speaking with him, and while you will be civil on a social level, you see no need to continue a private friendship with him based on his actions. There ya go.

katie978 -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (3/31/2008 6:23:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Stephann *Again, wearing a short skirt because she might* want to get laid, doesn't mean he's entitled to rape her.** However, you're missing the part where she agreed to play with this guy. If I'm wearing a short skirt, agree to get laid, and then, after an in-depth discussion of having sex ANOTHER time say, "You know what? I'm not really into you at all," that's where I see the problem. She knew the guy was an ass, she played with him, she talked about more playing with him, she went out with him, and agreed to go out with him again... The gay friend example doesn't hold true, because it's not like she really thought this guy wasn't interested in her. She knew he wanted her, she knew he was pushing about getting what he wanted. This guy didn't rape her or abuse her or any of that BS.... If I ask someone to play with me and they accept, no matter the circumstances (assuming she wasn't drunk or anything), that's perfectly consensual stuff going on! Should he have spent the time to ilk out her innermost feelings about playing? Take some responsiblity here, woman. If someone asks to punch you in the face, and you say yes....it's mostly your own fault you've got a black eye.

TNstepsout -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (3/31/2008 6:53:24 PM)
I've actually been kicking this one around quite a bit. I have ended up in similar situations with men I've met online several times, although it's never ended with being verbally attacked, I've definately felt uncomfortable and unsure of how to proceed. How can I maintain a friendship but make sure he knows I have no interest in having sex with him? Sometimes it can't be done. I do not agree with those who believe that she led him on or communicated poorly. Perhaps she didn't communicate the way HE understood, but when we test the law, we have to ask what is reasonable. Wouldn't a reasonable person have understood what she was saying? Do we really have to take our level of communication down to the lowest common denominator in order to avoid being responsible for "leading someone on"? I don't think she led anyone on. I think she was being polite. Something else to consider is that while at the munch when he was teasing her with the flogger, had she shut him down then, instead of letting it go, would he have blown up as he did online a week later? Would he possibly have refused to give her a ride home? Would he have been verbally abusive (or possibly worse) all the way home? Perhaps she was attempting to difuse a situation that could potentially get ugly and leave her stranded. Also, where is his responsibility for communication? It seems to me that all those years he had an agenda that only came out when he got angry. He NEVER told her what he really wanted from her all those years, but it seems he had this meticulous plan he was working on all along. Then when he finally thought he was going to get what he wanted out of her and she shut him down he blew up. That's a scary guy. I think if men like this were more honest in their communication they would avoid situations in which they feel taken advantage of. If he'd told her years ago "I'm only talking to you and feigning interest in you because I really hope one day to have sex with you", then she knows exactly where he's coming from and can made a decision as to whether she wants to maintain a friendship under those terms. But if he is purposefully hides his real intent, how can that be her fault? Sure maybe she has some personal responsibility for failing to see the signs and maybe she should have known that this guy was the type to blow up if he didn't get his way, but it doens't make his behavior right or reasonable. I don't think she should become so paranoid about "communication" that she can't make a move.

TNstepsout -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (3/31/2008 6:55:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: katie978 However, you're missing the part where she agreed to play with this guy. You know, I'm missing that part too. Can you please quote it because I can't find it.

HerLord -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (3/31/2008 7:02:22 PM)
I pretty much tear down the op to one sentance at a time in post 55 here... I never saw such an agreement.

Poetryinpain -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (3/31/2008 7:46:45 PM)
Why when he suggested playing with her did she ask him question after question. She doesn't quote herself, but I imagine IMs somewhat like this: "I'm not sure I'm comfortable with that. What else would you do?" This to me would indicate that she is trying to find something in his plan that she is comfortable with. After asking all these questions, which he patiently answered, she said the equivalent of "Tchah, ya know what? Uh-uh." I'm not surprised he blew it. That does not in any way excuse verbal abuse, but the OP must take some responsibility for her own actions in this matter. It won't wash to sit there all open-eyed, saying, "I just don't understand it." If she doesn't acknowledge some ownership of this, she will not learn from it. pip, never assigning blame without looking at myself as well

HerLord -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (3/31/2008 7:50:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Poetryinpain Why when he suggested playing with her did she ask him question after question. She doesn't quote herself, but I imagine IMs somewhat like this: "I'm not sure I'm comfortable with that. What else would you do?" This to me would indicate that she is trying to find something in his plan that she is comfortable with. After asking all these questions, which he patiently answered, she said the equivalent of "Tchah, ya know what? Uh-uh." I'm not surprised he blew it. That does not in any way excuse verbal abuse, but the OP must take some responsibility for her own actions in this matter. It won't wash to sit there all open-eyed, saying, "I just don't understand it." If she doesn't acknowledge some ownership of this, she will not learn from it. pip, never assigning blame without looking at myself as well This conversation reportedly took place after the initial visit to the munch where yet more "unwanted" advances took place. before the second munch was even discussed to the details of what he wanted to do with/to her. As posted in OP.

RumpusParable -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (3/31/2008 8:14:20 PM)
FR: OP, you were dishonest to him and led him on and he threw a fit like a child. Both of you showed terrible behavior for adults.

katie978 -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (3/31/2008 8:44:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: summerblossom Nearing the end of our stay he took out his flogger and started to tease me with it, which made me uncomfortable because we didin't discuss anything about that but I let him do it because it seemed so innocent at the time. Maybe he was just teasing, but he considered that to be play and so do I. If she didn't want to play, she should've spoken up. I don't think I've ever been too lazy or just "meh" to fend off unwanted sexual activity, but that's just me.

TNstepsout -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (4/1/2008 5:28:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: katie978 quote: ORIGINAL: summerblossom Nearing the end of our stay he took out his flogger and started to tease me with it, which made me uncomfortable because we didin't discuss anything about that but I let him do it because it seemed so innocent at the time. Maybe he was just teasing, but he considered that to be play and so do I. If she didn't want to play, she should've spoken up. I don't think I've ever been too lazy or just "meh" to fend off unwanted sexual activity, but that's just me. Interesting how two people can read the same thing and have a completely different interpretation. Which to me is the crux of this whole exchange between the two of them. I did not consider that to be play at all or even very sexual. It sounded to me like he was flirting with her and trying to get her to play, but that they didn't actually play.

MasterWilliam55 -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (4/1/2008 8:03:18 AM)
I don't see teasing and flirting as play as well, not in the way we use the word "play" in a BDSM context.

Missokyst -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (4/1/2008 11:00:57 AM)
Hmm... I don't know, if someone playfully started smacking me with a flogger they would know soon enough whether it was ok with me. If I enjoy it, I will engage it. If I don't, I am going to grab those pieces of leather and yank that guy to the floor. I see this more as a problem with knowing how to enforce boundries. I don't even let people call the shots online. <g> I still have one guy periodically asking if I am still mad because he used a cuss word. There is no way I would have allowed some guy to playfully flog me without my consent. And even if he was her ride.. I would have walked, taken a bus, got a cab, if he was being pissy about my denying him some fun. People need to be able to enforce their boundries, and be able to back it up with action. Kyst quote: ORIGINAL: TNstepsout Interesting how two people can read the same thing and have a completely different interpretation. Which to me is the crux of this whole exchange between the two of them. I did not consider that to be play at all or even very sexual. It sounded to me like he was flirting with her and trying to get her to play, but that they didn't actually play.

roughleather -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (4/1/2008 5:26:11 PM)
quote: I have known this guy on and off for about 6 to 7 years. So you've been stringing this guy along for seven years and now you're whining about him. That's classic passive-aggressive behavior. Get a life.

MasterWilliam55 -> RE: First Munch Bad Dom (4/1/2008 9:51:11 PM)
She isn't exhibiting passive aggressive behaviour, you might want to read up on it, But he did. She didn't say anything that would lead to the conclusion that she was stringing him along. Did you stop to consider that maybe he was stringing her along?

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125