RE: Dominant? (Full Version)

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



Message

MzBerlin -> RE: Dominant? (7/25/2004 11:34:08 PM)

quote:



You are probably right. For me to assume anything about anyone 'round here is probably not appropriate.

Take care of yourself

Leonidas


Leo-
I would like to take this opportunity to point out that your above statement was pretty much the point in my posts to you regarding your reference to me. I'm pretty sure I might have put it in bold letters.

Also- I would like to view these boards as a neutral communication tool. I think (tell me if I'm off base in this) that that is the intent of the forums. To exchange ideas and thoughts and words and emotions. To Learn and Grow and Teach and Build. From gaining different perspectives and finding things you can identify with and expressing your own personal opinion. Call me crazy (or a hippie in too much makeup [:D]), but instead of worrying if I'm Taggards' "property" "slave" "accountable to him" wouldn't it be easier if you simply took this as the neutral playing ground it is meant to be? I treat everyone the same, regardless of their personal preference or gender or whatever. I'm not saying that I don't try to get some basics on a person if they're asking for specific advice, because that would limit my ability to perhaps give them some new information somewhat. I'm not saying that you should be me, act like me, or agree with me. Just (hopefully) food for thought.
Feel free to mail me if you have questions or I have been unclear. (I have known to have communication issues from time to time. [;)])
As Always
Berlin



Leonidas -> RE: Dominant? (7/26/2004 12:09:22 AM)

quote:

Do I think that it's very easy to negotiate away control? You bet.


Thank you. I seem to have opened up a whole can of "negotiating isn't topping from the bottom" worms here, when all I was saying is just that. Though I don't negotiate with slaves, I don't see anything inherantly evil in it. In fact, I think that if you are into some exotic forms of fetish or sadistic play, and that is what you are really about, negotiations are a damn good thing if you have any hope of finding someone who likes to have done what you want to do. However, it is, just as you said, easy to negotiate control away.

Take care of yourself

Leonidas



Leonidas -> RE: Dominant? (7/26/2004 12:22:08 AM)

Hi Berlin,

I have edited that post since you quoted it. I am saying so here so that it doesn't appear to anyone that you misquoted me. You said what you had to say, and you are certainly entitled to do so. There was no reason for me to respond to you at all.

It is clearer in that new picture that you are not from Gelgemech.

Take care of yourself

Leonidas



MzBerlin -> RE: Dominant? (7/26/2004 12:51:27 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Leonidas

Hi Berlin,

I have edited that post since you quoted it. I am saying so here so that it doesn't appear to anyone that you misquoted me. You said what you had to say, and you are certainly entitled to do so. There was no reason for me to respond to you at all.


Leo-
Perhaps it is social conditioning. (I am from the South.) It is just considered rude to not to speak back when spoken to in a reasonable manner. When you did not respond, I took that as an affront. My problem, but I'm responding, nonetheless, with honesty. It is a social "do" down here in the swamp and I try to use all of my social niceties in the forum. I'm not saying that you didn't, just what my particular situation is and how I approach these forums. At any rate we've learned something about each other. Learning=Good (at least to me).



quote:

It is clearer in that new picture that you are not from Gelgemech.


Thankyou. I try not to give that impression.
As Always-
Berlin



January -> RE: Dominant? (7/26/2004 7:37:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: January

Hi Leonidas,

When you have some time, please let us know YOUR definition of a dominant.

January


Um... Pretty please?



TallDarkAndWitty -> RE: Dominant? (7/26/2004 7:46:59 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MizSuz

But if you use Red because you don't think you can endure anymore (especially if I've not heard a yellow yet) then all play stops, you put your clothes on and you go home. No re-starts or do overs. We'll discuss it within the next 24 hours, but not here and not now.


If you read any of my contracts, this is exactly how I work with my stop safewords. If you Red, all play stops, not to be started again. Red means "no more play", not "you're not doing it the way I like." Yes, yes yes and yes.

Yours,
Taggard



Sinergy -> RE: Dominant? (7/26/2004 8:36:38 AM)

Hello,

Thank you for the clarification, Leonidas. I understand where you are coming
from and am not sure how best you could have expressed your query to Berlin.
This is a text based message board, and not everybody can see verbal cues or
has the same protocols about this lifestyle as you do, nor was I personally privy
to your conversations with Taggard. I personally would have remained silent and/or taken it offline (sent an email to Taggard querying him with your question) as opposed
to raising it as an issue on a message board. It is the sort of question which can
be misconstrued, as I did.

To respond directly to your question, Leonidas, I personally dont believe proficiency
in tools has much (if anything) to do with Dominance. It has a lot to do with BDSM,
but a person can be extremely dominant in nature without ever lifting a flogger.

To me it is a state of being, not a checklist of toys mastered.

Sinergy



Leonidas -> RE: Dominant? (7/26/2004 8:55:45 AM)

Hello January.

Somehow I missed that the first time you posted it. I'd be happy to.

Dominance at its core is the ability of an individual to create social order and common purpose, whether in an intimate relationship, or in a large group. Pick any highly successful human endeavor that you care to that required purpose and effort. If it was a group effort, somewhere in that group was a dominant individual or individuals. If it was an individual effort, the individual is dominant, especially to the extent that they can create order and purpose in themselves. Similarly, pick any example that you care to where some endeavor failed miserably. The root cause likely was that the group's leaders were not truly dominant, only politically manipulative, which isn't the same thing.

The reason that I asked, originally, whether the common BDSM definition of dominant was equivelent to egocentric and hedonistic is that those qualities are the polar opposites of dominance as I understand it. In the case of a truly dominant individual, it absolutely is not all about them. Without exception, every dominant individual worthy of the characterization that I have ever met was committed to a vision or purpose larger than themselves. Dominant individuals accumulate power because they are possessed of uncommon focus, assertiveness, persuasiveness, presence of mind and clarity of vision. The truly dominant people that I have known would consider pursuing personal power just for the sake of having it or wielding it to be a petty and small minded endeavor.

There is a very real sense in which I get paid to be a dominant man. I go into organizations where projects or processes are adrift and failing, and provide the vision that causes the group to form a social hierarchy with common purpose and get things done. Of course, the guy who brought me in can't say "well, we decided to bring a dominant man in here". "We hired a consultant" is more socially accepted in our culture.

So, to my mind, the man or women who is not posessed of the quality of dominance is no more dominant in their leather get-up on friday night than they are in their working duds on monday morning, hiding out in their cubie and hoping not to be noticed until quitting time. They might be kinky. They might be sadistic. They could well be on a power trip, and demand that it be "all about them" in interpersonal relationships. They may well have command of all the toys, and know the lingo of "dominance" as found in the BDSM literature. But dominant? Nah.

In the sub-culture that I associate with, you will see a lot of discussion about the qualities above, and other qualities that I haven't spoken of here but are akin to them. It is our opinion that a slave who submits themselves to someone not posessed of these qualities is making a mistake.

Take care of yourself.

Leonidas



Sinergy -> RE: Dominant? (7/26/2004 9:02:44 AM)

quote:

So, to my mind, the man or women who is not posessed of the quality of dominance is no more dominant in their leather get-up on friday night than they are in their working duds on monday morning, hiding out in their cubie and hoping not to be noticed until quitting time. They might be kinky. They might be sadistic. They could well be on a power trip, and demand that it be "all about them" in interpersonal relationships. They may well have command of all the toys, and know the lingo of "dominance" as found in the BDSM literature. Dominant? Nah.


"Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken."
Brad Pitt, Fight Club

I think I watch too many movies and read too much.

Sinergy



LadyBeckett -> RE: Dominant? (7/26/2004 9:10:52 AM)

quote:

I personally dont believe proficiency
in tools has much (if anything) to do with Dominance. It has a lot to do with BDSM,
but a person can be extremely dominant in nature without ever lifting a flogger.

To me it is a state of being, not a checklist of toys mastered.


Is my phone tapped??? [>:] I keep saying, post after post, "I just spoke with someone about that..." lol And here's another one! And I did just speak with someone about this very thing! I've always admired and respected her, but when she said that "A Dominant Woman is defined by her knowledge of, and skill with, her tools....", I had to disagree. While knowledge of, and skill with "tools" and "toys" is certainly very important, and something I strive to perfect, I don't believe that it is the definition of a Dominant Woman. Or Man either for that matter.

I saw "Fight Club". Strannnnnge movie! But I loved the scene where he answered the door (bedroom) with the spatula (?)!!! [;)]



January -> RE: Dominant? (7/26/2004 7:50:13 PM)

Leonidas,

Thank you!

Have you noticed the sudden creation (after some 148 posts) of social order and common purpose in this thread?

January



Thanatosian -> RE: Dominant? (7/27/2004 1:00:11 AM)

quote:

Having recently done some overly large catheter play, I don't think this is very high on my "to do" list. The irritation due to the size of the catheter (which was still significantly smaller than any dick I've ever seen) caused me discomfort for a few days afterwards, even though it was much fun at the time. My preference tends towards average/small penises, but damn, that would have to be a mighty small cock!


M. Sherri - Urethral intercourse is something that has to be planned for a long time in advance - I am talking at least a year or more - and you have to start out small. stretching the urethra with sounds and slowly and gradually working your way up to larger and larger sizes, until eventually it has been stretched wide enough to receive a penis - it is most definitely a long term project/goal, not something to plan on for a weekend get together of BDSM play

quote:

Have you read Pornucopia by Piers Anthony? It is all about this guy who...umm..well he ends up doing what you say for various bizzare reasons...


M. Taggard - No, I have not - am going to have to go out and get it and read it - thanks for the suggestion[:)]

quote:

Been there. Done that. Got it on video.


M. bailey, you have done urethral interourse? if so could you share your experience with the board? or were you referring to catheter play and/or sounds? (and can I get a copy of the video?[;)])

as previously stated, I find sounds mucho fun, and have noticed the same shocked expression on a womans face when you talk about inserting this metal rod into her urethra that Sherri described on the mens faces

catheters I also find mucho fun, not to mention giving me the ultimate control over her urination (and no, I am not going to let it go so long as to risk medical problems, as a former EMT I know all too well the risks associated) - and catheterization can be used as a 'humiliation' tool as well, something along the lines of "I am now going to drain your bladder, and there is nothing you can do to stop me from invading this most personal hole of yours"

btw Sherri, I think the vibrator may be somewhat like the tuning fork, only instead of vibrating in sympathy with the fork, the vibrator would cause stronger, more consistant vibrations in the sound - wheras with the tuing fork, I am presuming the vibes get weaker and fade out as the fork comes to rest? (note to self - get a tuning fork and try it next play session)

Apply usual caveats here



MzBerlin -> RE: Dominant? (7/27/2004 1:06:17 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Leonidas

Where I come from, for me to respond directly to a slave's uninvited intrusion into a conversation between myself and her master would be rude. The respectful thing would be to remain silent and let the man correct his slave. The statement was simply giving her the benefit of the doubt. Either she is his slave and needs his permission to intrude and has it, or she does not need his permission. I could have posted "Taggard, would you mind me responding to her?" first, which achieves the same thing, but It probably would have gotten a similar reaction from you.
quote:

Take care of yourself

Leonidas


I just re-read this and the gravity of it hit me. Perhaps I am slow, but I think that you're saying that you don't need to respond to me because I am a submissive female or because this was somehow a "private" conversation between you ane my "master." I did not know that "private" conversations were the point of forum boards. Just wanted to comment on that. Also, in the above quote state that it was "rude" of me to have an opinion and post it, which implys that I am not correct in posting my opinion on a semi-public forum.
Have fun, Leo. You are seriously deluded as to what the function of a forum is.
As Always-
Berlin

PS- It doesn't matter where you're from, it matters where you're at.



Leonidas -> RE: Dominant? (7/27/2004 6:08:47 AM)

quote:

"Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken."


Indeed.



Leonidas -> RE: Dominant? (7/27/2004 6:38:25 AM)

quote:

Have you noticed the sudden creation (after some 148 posts) of social order and common purpose in this thread?


That is probably not possible on a forum like this, because the people represented here are, in some ways, fundamentally at cross purposes. For some, dominance is equivalent to egocentric and hedonistic (or simply whatever the person claiming it thinks it is). To think about dominance in any other way might invalidate a dearly held piece of their self-image. If the thread got a few people to think that dominance might, as I said in the original post, carry with it some sense of character and nobility, that will have to do.

Take care of yourself

Leonidas



Leonidas -> RE: Dominant? (7/27/2004 6:47:18 AM)

quote:

I just re-read this and the gravity of it hit me. Perhaps I am slow, but I think that you're saying that you don't need to respond to me because I am a submissive female or because this was somehow a "private" conversation between you ane my "master."


Maybe you should read it one more time. I said explicitly why there was no need to respond to you. You made an assertion. You said what you had to say. You are entitled to do so. The fact that you made an assertion does not require a response from me. Your assertion stands on its own as just that; your assertion.

quote:

Also, in the above quote state that it was "rude" of me to have an opinion and post it, which implys that I am not correct in posting my opinion on a semi-public forum.


Actually, I said that in some circles (the circles that I run in) it would be rude of me to respond to you, not knowing whether you were jumping into the exchange between Taggard and I with his permission, or without it. Again, maybe another reading would be beneficial.

quote:

You are seriously deluded as to what the function of a forum is.


Here again is an assertion made by you that requires no response from me. It stands on its own. See how that works?

Take care of yourself

Leonidas



January -> RE: Dominant? (7/27/2004 10:49:03 AM)

quote:

Have you noticed the sudden creation (after some 148 posts) of social order and common purpose in this thread?


I spoke too soon. But I really enjoyed that 12 hours of peace on the thread after you posted your views on dominance. I was imagining readers chewing things over during that long calm period.

Anyway Leonidas, what are your views on submissives who are egocentric and hedonistic?

January



Leonidas -> RE: Dominant? (7/27/2004 1:45:29 PM)

quote:

Anyway Leonidas, what are your views on submissives who are egocentric and hedonistic?


My view is that for a submissive (or at least one who calls themselves one), it is fine, as long as he or she is self-aware enough to know these things about him-or-herself, and seeks out someone that will serve his or her pleasure. An egocentric, hedonistic man or woman who by definition is focused on themselves and pleasure seeking is going to be "high maintainence" Just because they are the ones on the receiving end of the spanking/flogging/whipping/fucking/figging/plugging/cutting/etc/etc/etc, does not in any way mean that the relationship isn't "all about them". If they find someone who is happy for it to be all about them, hey, that's fine.

A slave, on the other hand (at least the way that I would define consentual slavery) is going to have the proverbial tough row to hoe if they come into it for the goodies that they are going to get. That isn't to say that this isn't a common situation for new slaves. There is often a fairly ... um... eventful transition in store until they learn that it isn't all about them, and then ultimately either find a different kind of joy and fulfillment in being of service to and pleasing their master, or run back to the "submissive" situation. The third and really unfortunate situation is when a slave (and this happens often with pretty young slaves) is able to wrap her master around her finger and make it all about her. In the end, she just hates his weakness, and has probably ended up jaded in the process, when she might have been a fine and devoted slave.

That's about what I think

Take care of yourself

Leonidas.



Sinergy -> RE: Dominant? (7/27/2004 5:23:17 PM)

Hello,

I was asked recently about what would be involved in pursuing a relationship with me, and my answer got me thinking so I wanted to post it here on the Dominant board, although it may be a bit off the beaten path of where the thread has taken us.

I responded that I really would not know until I had danced with the person.

I said this because when I am leading a partner who is led well, we make poetry out on the dance floor. I can feel her energy as she moves out when spun away, pulled back, slid out, or whatever. I can feel her cling for dear life to my lead hand as it leads her into double spins, and I can feel a deep welling of control knowing that my hand has to be there for her to hold on to if we are going to make magic happen.

And I got to thinking this is what I want in a submissive, one who follows my lead, trusting that my lead hand will always be there for her to hold on to as she goes about her life. One who trusts I will not spin her off into a speaker or fling her (aerials) into the band. One who can sink into the dance we do together, as I sink (or rise) into my place leading us.

If we dance well together, magic happens, and I get a sense that if I dance with her I will learn if making magic as a D/s couple with her is possible.

Well, it is time to go to dance class. My opinion, for what it is worth.

Sinergy



baileythorne -> RE: Dominant? (7/28/2004 12:06:54 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thanatosian

quote:

Been there. Done that. Got it on video.


M. bailey, you have done urethral interourse? if so could you share your experience with the board? or were you referring to catheter play and/or sounds? (and can I get a copy of the video?[;)])



Sorry for the confusion. I did a catheter play demo with a fairly small catheter. I have no aspirations of being a size queen. Ever.

It was for a small group of 12-15 friends at a private party. I watched the video once and packed it away due to a move. It's still in a box somewhere and if I never find it, that will be just fine. It's not for publication. Just a reminder of someone who was very special to me and how hard he pushed. Good memories.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thanatosian
<snip> giving me the ultimate control over her urination (and no, I am not going to let it go so long as to risk medical problems, as a former EMT I know all too well the risks associated) - and catheterization can be used as a 'humiliation' tool as well, something along the lines of "I am now going to drain your bladder, and there is nothing you can do to stop me from invading this most personal hole of yours"


Actually, I thought the most humiliating moment would be when he strapped on a leg bag in a public dungeon and made me wear it for the rest of the evening. However, he'd irragated my bladder (added saline to fill it) and I was starting to cramp so the choice was (1) feel really crappy and have bad cramps or (2) wear that silly bag full of my own pee. It became a no brainer. I just looked at him and said "strap the damn thing on". I don't think anything has really ever humiliated me since.

--bailey



Page: <<   < prev  5 6 7 [8] 9   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875