RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements

RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Submissive

Message

ResidentSadist -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/5/2008 10:39:37 PM)
From 14 years older to 25 years younger. From professional models to rather heavy set. No prefs except one… they all were attractive and charming in their own way.

Ialdabaoth -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/5/2008 10:43:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesFIP It's your sexual insecurities that worry me a lot more than your preferences per se. So what happens if she has an accident, is stuck in a wheel chair for six months and gains 50 pounds? Going to dump her because you aren't capable of dominating her, even though she's still just as submissive and caring? If she breaks her leg skiing and can't touch her butt to her head for six weeks? Is it dump time? Well... part of the problem is, I did find someone who was as close to my 'soul match' as I could conceive, and she wasn't my perfect physical match - but after 7 years together, she became my perfect physical match. Then she realized she could "do better", and left. So... at this point, I just don't see "submissive and caring", or "loves me and supports me", or "understands me and is loyal to me", as being things that I can trust. Now, "turns me on and can't threaten me", that I feel like I can wrap my head around right now. Huh. Maybe the problem is, I think my current mindset is shallow - but I can't bring myself to break out of it, because of various bullshit trust-issues. Or I'm trying to give myself 'permission' to have meaningless flings for awhile, which goes completely against my normal character. Or something. I will meditate on this.

Emperor1956 -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/5/2008 10:51:17 PM)
FR: The question is a troll. Using the word "shallow" incorporated a judgemental view -- it can't be answered without either saying "yes, you are shallow and you are justifying your shallowness by claiming your submissive needs to be a certain height/weight/fitness" OR "no, you aren't shallow, and those that think you are, are wrong so here's your pie, and you can smugly go on being shallow." So the OP gets his strokes no matter what you reply. Its sort of like "have you stopped beating your wife." Which oddly enough, in some circles, is a negative question. Another way to look at it: If my fantasy scenario requires a person no more than 4'7" and 60 lbs, can I molest a child to get myself off? Of course not. Another way to look at it: If I desire a submissive with a cock, am I shallow for eschewing women? Of course not. Once upon a time, people actually had partners they cared about who they then "did things with" that they and that cared-for partner enjoyed together. Apparently now a "Dom" is a set designer who comes up with a fantasy, and then goes out and finds the rigging and furniture (and submissive) to fit the set design. I think maybe something was lost in translation. But hey, I'm notoriously shallow. E.

Ialdabaoth -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/5/2008 10:57:33 PM)
Sorry; I didn't consider that my question might be trolling.

Emperor1956 -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/5/2008 11:36:22 PM)
FR: Hey, you don't owe ME an apology! And I admire you for having the integrity to post the subsequent note about your experience with a "soulmate" who (one assumes) worked hard to also become a "body-mate" and then left you when she (in your words) decided she could do better with her new body. But the last paragraph of my post was serious: Consider finding the woman you desire, and tailoring your Dom fantasies to her, not the other way around. Unless you are a professional rigger/suspension artist (and then I wouldn't worry about a "soulmate" as much as a good reliable magician's assistant) you'll do better. E.

Ialdabaoth -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/5/2008 11:48:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Emperor1956 FR: Hey, you don't owe ME an apology! And I admire you for having the integrity to post the subsequent note about your experience with a "soulmate" who (one assumes) worked hard to also become a "body-mate" and then left you when she (in your words) decided she could do better with her new body. But the last paragraph of my post was serious: Consider finding the woman you desire, and tailoring your Dom fantasies to her, not the other way around. Unless you are a professional rigger/suspension artist (and then I wouldn't worry about a "soulmate" as much as a good reliable magician's assistant) you'll do better. E. Well, I'm actually training to be a professional rigger; my ex was going to be my assistant. Now I'm kind-of hosed for practice.

chickpea -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/6/2008 12:25:42 AM)
The phrasing of this topic as "Legitimate" vs "Shallow", implies that shallow isn't legitimate. It's a form of control put upon by persons with the "Holier than Thou" complex as some form of attack on either someone's character and/or someone's action. Shallow is shallow, and deep is deep. If I want a big boned dude, as opposed to a skinny boned dude, that is definitely shallow and definitely okay. If I want someone who can be intellectual, well that's deep and that's definitely okay as well. No one needs to justify a decision. We all live in a free society and live with the consequences of our free choices. If some dude says he just wants skinny because he has a suspension fettish and only has weak equipment available, first if I were the sub he were interested in I'd say adios...(Safety first!) Second, if he's lying, than kudos to him for keeping the wolves at bay. [image]http://www.collarchat.com/micons/m11.gif[/image] So if you're going to make a life choice based on someone else's preference of what is good and right, then you got major problems. I got major problems with this thread. If you want to have a judgement time of what is shallow and what is deep, fine. Think to start passing judgement on other people's choices is a waste of time. Like who gives a shit.

Dnomyar -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/6/2008 5:30:05 AM)
A shallow person is one who critizies other peoples choices. I think that shallow and asshole are interchangeable in that respect.

SubJordanTyler -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/6/2008 7:57:20 AM)
I think a preference is just what it is - a preference. We all have a "type" that we like, and if a guy prefers a young, slim blonde, or a woman prefers a muscled hunk, then so be it. There are plenty of others out there who prefer the opposite. So there is someone who would prefer the voluptuous over the slender. Mistress wanted someone young and slender because she wanted to have me naked at parties and wanted my body to be a certain way for that purpose. So that is one reason why she chose me. But we like who we like and that's fine - as long as we don't belittle others who may not fit into our preferences. Now that would be wrong.

wandersalone -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/6/2008 8:17:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth Well... part of the problem is, I did find someone who was as close to my 'soul match' as I could conceive, and she wasn't my perfect physical match - but after 7 years together, she became my perfect physical match. Then she realized she could "do better", and left. So... at this point, I just don't see "submissive and caring", or "loves me and supports me", or "understands me and is loyal to me", as being things that I can trust. Now, "turns me on and can't threaten me", that I feel like I can wrap my head around right now. Huh. Maybe the problem is, I think my current mindset is shallow - but I can't bring myself to break out of it, because of various bullshit trust-issues. Or I'm trying to give myself 'permission' to have meaningless flings for awhile, which goes completely against my normal character. Or something. I will meditate on this. I see no problem with people having preferences...I have some of my own. Being open about these preferences is a great start. Having rigid guidelines and not considering anyone who doesn't meet these even if you find them attractive may mean that you end up being the loser in the long-term. My main concern is that you have only recently experienced the break up of your long-term relationships and instead of focussing on healing you seem very focussed on jumping straight into another one.. meaningless fling or not...is this maybe a way for you to avoid the pain that you are currently feeling?

Maya2001 -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/6/2008 10:02:26 AM)
quote: 1. "I have this neat idea for a suspension bondage scene. You'll need to be able to arch your back so your butt touches your shoulders, and you'll need to be suspended by this rope without breaking it." Would love to see the one that could touch butt to shoulders, I mean I was fairly flexible in my youth and was still able to do backward walkovers upto about age 30 as I have loose ligaments and am double jointed but no way was my spine going to flex backwards to nearly 180 degrees radius to achieve that feat without damage

subtee -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/6/2008 10:13:20 AM)
Exactly. I was a gymnast for 13 years and really flexible, but no way could I do the ass-to-shoulders thing. There are going to be very few who will be able to do this.

littleone35 -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/6/2008 10:51:21 AM)
Nothing wrong with having a preference. Mine is older men with broad shoulders. However not being shallow i would give younger guys (not younger than me howerer) a shot. I just happend to find the perfect man who has everything i wanted. Physically, emotionally and mentally in my wonderful Master. Matt's littleone

Ialdabaoth -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/6/2008 11:07:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Maya2001 Would love to see the one that could touch butt to shoulders, I mean I was fairly flexible in my youth and was still able to do backward walkovers upto about age 30 as I have loose ligaments and am double jointed but no way was my spine going to flex backwards to nearly 180 degrees radius to achieve that feat without damage nod a lot of what I want to do requires talents that less than 0.001% of the population posesses.

eyesopened -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/6/2008 11:14:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth quote: ORIGINAL: Maya2001 Would love to see the one that could touch butt to shoulders, I mean I was fairly flexible in my youth and was still able to do backward walkovers upto about age 30 as I have loose ligaments and am double jointed but no way was my spine going to flex backwards to nearly 180 degrees radius to achieve that feat without damage nod a lot of what I want to do requires talents that less than 0.001% of the population posesses. Nope, sorry, if this guy can get his head into his ass he still doesn't seem to get butt to touch shoulders. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMHO8OtBzvM

Lynnxz -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/6/2008 11:32:09 AM)
Damn you all.. I got curious, tried the ass to shoulders thing, and fell off the bed.

Dnomyar -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/6/2008 11:39:57 AM)
funny Lynnxz

MistressSabine -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/6/2008 11:44:19 AM)
Shallow? By whose standards? I find very few men attractive, and very many women are beautiful (I am not Bi) It is a luxury to find that one's shape and character form the ideal in one's partner's eyes....bliss indeed! Thank God that we all have our standard Ideal - and that we are all different. I do find that the accusation of "Shallow" is a very handy little tool for unattractive people to bandy when they have been rejected. Unattractiveness begins and ends with a person's character and nature. Some physically handsome men of my acquaintance are the least interesting, but one has to feel attraction to have a relationship. That is not being shallow, surely?

Kana -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/6/2008 12:07:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lynnxz Damn you all.. I got curious, tried the ass to shoulders thing, and fell off the bed. You know we all want to see video evidence of this feat! somehwere somehow there have to be enougt peoples to put out a terrific BDSM bloopers DVD.

eyesopened -> RE: Legitimate vs. shallow physical requirements (5/6/2008 12:19:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lynnxz Damn you all.. I got curious, tried the ass to shoulders thing, and fell off the bed. You know, i'm usually not in the least bit snarky but the OPs other threads has me wondering just what is going on. He gets his girl to finally meet his physical requirement and she leave him and now he has trust issues. Perhaps had he been more involved in being what she needed emotionally instead of her being what he desired physically, she would not have ever left. Oh well. Now, about the butt to shoulders thing. i have racked my brain and searched the internet but have not found anything with a spinal cord that can do this. Maybe a snake but it doesn't have shoulders. No primates, not even contorionists, not a bird or a reptile, not even a scorpion cuz the tail meets the head, but not the butt. In fact, if you think about it, the only way to get a butt to meet the shoulders is to have ones head up ones ass...all the way! No shortage there! Certainly more than 0.001% of the population.

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125