RE: The Dominant Submissive (Full Version)

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



Message

knottygrl -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/14/2008 11:48:56 PM)

[quote:
ORIGINAL: cloudboy
I didn't think LA was so much "negative" as she was critical. When someone is being critical, it means that they are paying attention and giving thought to the subject. Frankly, it shows you did a good job.
After reading LA's post, I was wondering what I would have thought had I seen your presentation and talk.
From what I've seen, switches often feel marginalized by BDSM "reliance" on immutable traits and roles. So I think LA went into your presentation with high expectations. No wonder she was dissective.
I know one thing for sure, if I gave some kind of talk or presentation about BDSM --- others would walk away with issues about what I had to say. It just goes with the territory. ]
 
 


i disagree.  when someone is being "critical," they are being "critical" (according to "my" definition).  one can have a difference of opinion and even a good strong "constructive"  debate on opposite ends of the spectrum without being "critical."  Critical denotes that one side or the other is wrong and is a judgment, not a difference of opinion.
 
or maybe it just depends on what your definition of "IS" is!!!



knottygrl -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/14/2008 11:57:16 PM)

deleted



knottygrl -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 12:09:40 AM)

deleted and condensed



DMFParadox -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 12:18:53 AM)

My critique is that I'm critical of this opinion.  It's critical you understand.



DMFParadox -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 12:20:10 AM)

I call that a critter call.



Owner4SexSlave -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 12:33:28 AM)

I've been giving this topic some deep thought since my last posting.  One of the biggest challenges in presenting idea or concepts is the use of words.  Especially the use of established Buzz words or labels.  These things can and do have different meanings to people.  At times they carry a negative connotation or even have a set in stone stereotype meaning that is universal for most people.

At times we get hung up or trip over the meaning of a specific word, and had a hard time getting the concept that is trying to be expressed or conveyed.  The comprehension skills of people vary as well.  Plus there is the factor of personal perferences or set bias to deal with as well.

At times when people take a topic and it spins off into directions that were not the intended scope of things, it's due to some glitch.

I do know that I have a sincere interest in this topic, I am in the process of giving this matter some deeper rationalized thoughts.

I have been following this thread, it's taken on some interesting directions.  I think some of these directions or turns do need to be addressed or covered in the presenting of the "Dominant submissive" concept.

Everybody does not have a 100% open mind, at times human thought needs to be challenged for it to become open to an idea or concept.

There are acceptable limits or parameters in any relationship.  These will vary from relationship to relationship.  Also the dynamics between people can be rather different.  Fun stuff, such as should a slave be allowed or not be allowed to own personal effects.  Mind you in reality some slaves are, others are not.  I'm using this as an extreme example of the concept I'm trying to express.

A simple word such as "Challenge" what does it really mean?  Does this mean a submissive is challenging authority, or is willing to challenge what they believe may be a bad decision upon their Dom partner?  Does this mean the sub is acting up/out in a manner to gain attention with the end result being a Reinforcement of the D/s dynamic.   At times, the lack of D/s reInforcement can do some interesting bad things to a relationship.  Should a submissive sit and wait for their DOM partner to magically start Reinforcing this missing element or not?  So with one simple word "Challenge" what does this really mean?  In what Context or perhaps Multiple Contexts was it used.

I can honestly see where the word "Challenge" could come into play in a D/s relationship where it's not a threat per se to the D/s dynamic itself, and cases where it might lead down the path to keeping the D/s going or otherwise reinforced by the initiative of the submissive.

It's ironic that some people come to the message boards, asking for advice regarding how to recapture the D/s dynamics in their relationship.  Time and time again, advice is handed out for the submissive to communiate these things to their Dom partner.  In a sense, the submissive needs to challenge their Dom partner for letting things become relaxed.  A submisisve is seeking out whatever means it takes on her end to Light a spark back in a D/s relationship.

I can not pretend to know one way or another the full nature of the Original Presentation of the "Dominant submissive".  All I have to work off from is LA's posting on this subject.  

At best I can only take my own thoughts, that I have been tossing around inside my head and share with other people.  I see many different contexts to how some words are applied.   I see the meaning varies from person to person.

At best I can express, perhaps alternative paths to the concept and nature of a "Dominant submissive" concept.  I am neither the OP nor the presenter of this idea.



MissMagnolia -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 12:38:37 AM)

I'd suggest that every person who posted negative comments about the presentation write and  give the talk in front of a large group of people.

I just bet you'd be torn down in exactly the same way as this woman has been. She gave a talk on what all of us know, her OWN interpretation. She wasn't claiming it should be written in stone and used as a ten commandments type way, she talked about what she knew. That's all anhyone can do. Including all of you who have bitched at her.

Edited to add: Of course she posted as she did. None of us would reply to all the flack she was getting, mostly by people who weren't even there, with a loving "who wants a hug" post. Gimme a break. And her.



ownedgirlie -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 1:44:17 AM)

Hi Miss Magnolia,

I have spoken in front of groups quite often.  You want critical, get in front of an executive group and make a presentation on something you know they will object to, but feel strongly enough about it to present it anyway!  (talk about a harsh audience!)   If you stand convicted to what you are presenting, then you take the flak and keep going.  And frankly, I don't think the OP said one bad word about the presenter.  In fact the first half of LA's post was complimenting the presenter and stating agreement with her concepts.  And yet, LA did not state who the presenter was, she simply talked about the presentation - what she agreed with and what she didn't.  What good is a presentation if nobody talks about it afterward?   

I believe people are taking things very personally in this thread, including the presenter.  It is unfortunate that a discussion of an idea turned into personal rebuttal.



Owner4SexSlave -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 4:43:46 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie

Hi Miss Magnolia,

I have spoken in front of groups quite often.  You want critical, get in front of an executive group and make a presentation on something you know they will object to, but feel strongly enough about it to present it anyway!  (talk about a harsh audience!)   If you stand convicted to what you are presenting, then you take the flak and keep going.  And frankly, I don't think the OP said one bad word about the presenter.  In fact the first half of LA's post was complimenting the presenter and stating agreement with her concepts.  And yet, LA did not state who the presenter was, she simply talked about the presentation - what she agreed with and what she didn't.  What good is a presentation if nobody talks about it afterward?   

I believe people are taking things very personally in this thread, including the presenter.  It is unfortunate that a discussion of an idea turned into personal rebuttal.


In all honestly, I felt the OP was pretty neutral for the most part.  That it was a great topic to post on the message board to get the ball rolling.  I find threads like this more interesting compared to what I call postings on "BDSM 101 Basics".  Sure some topics might appear to be more abstract in nature, but it does not mean they are not worth consideration for mental stimulation.



Missokyst -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 6:05:42 AM)

So, I guess you have never seen a good movie or book review?  Those are critics who write them.  Critical thought is a reasoning judgement.  It can be a good review or a bad one.





3.
involving skillful judgment as to truth, merit, etc.; judicial: a critical analysis.



4.
of or pertaining to critics or criticism: critical essays.
Kyst

quote:

ORIGINAL: knottygrl

i disagree.  when someone is being "critical," they are being "critical" (according to "my" definition).  one can have a difference of opinion and even a good strong "constructive"  debate on opposite ends of the spectrum without being "critical."  Critical denotes that one side or the other is wrong and is a judgment, not a difference of opinion.
 
or maybe it just depends on what your definition of "IS" is!!!



TNstepsout -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 6:06:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner4SexSlave

A simple word such as "Challenge" what does it really mean?  Does this mean a submissive is challenging authority, or is willing to challenge what they believe may be a bad decision upon their Dom partner?  Does this mean the sub is acting up/out in a manner to gain attention with the end result being a Reinforcement of the D/s dynamic.   At times, the lack of D/s reInforcement can do some interesting bad things to a relationship.  Should a submissive sit and wait for their DOM partner to magically start Reinforcing this missing element or not?  So with one simple word "Challenge" what does this really mean?  In what Context or perhaps Multiple Contexts was it used.

I can honestly see where the word "Challenge" could come into play in a D/s relationship where it's not a threat per se to the D/s dynamic itself, and cases where it might lead down the path to keeping the D/s going or otherwise reinforced by the initiative of the submissive.


In the contex in which it was used, which admittedly is another person's interpretation of how it was used in the discussion, I believed it to mean that the sub "challenged" the Dom's authority. I don't see how that can ever be a good thing.  There are productive ways to discuss your needs/wants/issues, clarify communication, correct an error on the D's part, offer alternatives etc.... without undermining the core structure of the relationship. Of course there are times when this might happen as people are human after all, and emotions might flare up, but if it happens often there is a much bigger problem.

To me, a Dom/me should not have to prove his/her authority. It should be respected because the D has shown him/herself to be a strong worthy leader. The time to test is in the trust building/getting to know you phase. (that's why it needs to take time) Once you have evaluated another person's worthiness, it's time to stick to your agreement.  Any relationship is already a challenge as people attempt to communicate with words that may have different meanings, deal with life stresses and view life from different perspectives. I don't think it's helpful to add another layer of difficulty by constantly challenging the single core basis on which the relationship is built. That to me is damaging.

I also think one of the issues that many people had with the talk (as it was related by the OP) is the idea that some D's "can't handle" this kind of sub. This implies that there is a weakness or fault with the D, and I don't think that went over well with a lot of people. Perhaps this is not exactly what was said, or exactly what you meant to say, but this is what was said in the original post. I would not want to "handle" someone like that. IMO, that's what kids are for. I have already had many, many years of constantly having to reassert my authority and I weary of it.  However, there may be people who DO enjoy that sort of thing and find it fulfilling. One type is not better or stronger than the other, they are just different in what they are trying to accomplish.



thetammyjo -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 6:42:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KnightofMists

quote:

ORIGINAL: thetammyjo


quote:

ORIGINAL: KnightofMists

so if she/he is not "Powerful"... what is she ..... "Powerless"!

somehow it doesn't work for me.


Is that I said above? I don't think so.

Everyone has power but to be powerful you need to know how to use it and be willing and able to do so while accepting full responsibility.

I do not believe that any human being is powerless perhaps not even after death.

Power is not the same as dominant and submissive which were the terms the reported discussion wanted to use.


well then if every Human being has power... which equates to being powerful it is rather pointless to say Powerful submissive... kind of like saying she is a female woman.

but.. I do appreciate that what a person sees as powerful... will be different from person to person. or competent for that matter.

I don't think it's a bad thing to say Powerful or Competent X... since when we appreciate that person's idea of what is Powerful or Competent means we have an increased understanding. between us. The there is nothing wrong with saying a person is a powerless or incompetent submissive... or Dominant for that matter Again it really say more about my values, principles and standards that does about person I may be labeling as such. Some may agree... and some may not.

lastly just because you didn't say.. doesn't mean you don't imply it... If one person is seen as a Powerful submissive... it stands logically to reason that someone can also be seen as a powerless submissive... and I know some of both.


I think you didn't look at my words very closely.

Powerful is not just about having power -- it's the ability and willingness to use that power and take responsibility for it.

I'm not sure how I can express my thoughts much clearer than this.... perhaps saying it for the third time will work.

Also the logic only applies you see the world as dualist system -- one must either have power or not. I don't think dualism works well in the describing how the world actually functions especially as things get more complex as I would argue any human dynamic is.

But then as LA said -- I see Ds as an authority model not a power model so I immediately have a very different way of looking at things.



CruelDesires -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 6:51:19 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross

quote:

ORIGINAL: DominaTX
I'm sorry that I only just heard about this discussion.  As someone who knows me "pseudo well" the original poster seemed to totally miss the mark of my presentation.  Also, for someone who I embraced as a friend - her response seems very acerbic.

From my perspective, the presentation missed the mark.  My response is acerbic- but should be clear that it's the TOPIC and CONCEPTS which I find distressing.  You as a person are totally not on the table- I think you are very sweet, very organized, you know EVERYONE and everyone says great things about you (including me).  The fact that you happened to be the presenter last night isn't relevant for me or why I posted.  Like I told you last night, it's when I'm silent on an issue that you know I don't consider it worth my time or made any impact on me.

quote:

 just wish the original poster (who came in late to the discussion last night) had actually gotten the point.

Uhh 2 minutes, you were on the second slide of the presentation.


Sometimes the first minute or two of a seminar can make all the difference in the world as to how the topic of discussion is to be translated by the person who is doing the presentation.

CD



SimplyMichael -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 7:49:54 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MissMagnolia

I'd suggest that every person who posted negative comments about the presentation write and  give the talk in front of a large group of people.

I just bet you'd be torn down in exactly the same way as this woman has been. She gave a talk on what all of us know, her OWN interpretation. She wasn't claiming it should be written in stone and used as a ten commandments type way, she talked about what she knew. That's all anhyone can do. Including all of you who have bitched at her.

Edited to add: Of course she posted as she did. None of us would reply to all the flack she was getting, mostly by people who weren't even there, with a loving "who wants a hug" post. Gimme a break. And her.


If LA's post was "tearing down" then the presenter response was an attempt to savage and perhaps kill LA in comparison.

SHOW me where anyone was "tearing down the PRESENTER....you can't but why let facts get in the way of a rant.  We were discussing the CONCEPTS and IDEAS.

If your ego is so delicate you can't handle people doing that, you have no business presenting classes.  As for us, most of us HAVE presented to large groups, many of us have given BDSM presentations and more so that dog don't hunt.

As for hugs, that presenter doesn't deserve one but a time out in the corner for throwing a tantrum seems in order.



LuckyAlbatross -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 8:59:43 AM)

I, too, am sorry that this has become a personal issue discussing the possible wrongdoing against the presenter.  This was never my intention.  In fact I had hoped to use this discussion and others to polish my ideas, work out some of my questions to get some clarity and then discuss things directly with the presenter to get a better understanding.

I have given presentations for many years as well.  I don't think there's much worse at age 13 than spending an entire Saturday at a county science fair with your project that won 1st prize at your school having to stand immediately next to the entire division winner with all the people coming to ooh and ahh over his project.   It should be fair, balanced, and open to change, but for me it's part of the entire critical thinking process. 

No one can ever control where their thread ends up, but I think it would be unfair to the presenter if we allowed the thread to become focused on her rather than her presentation, especially as she decided not to further engage here herself.



KnightofMists -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 9:06:50 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thetammyjo
Powerful is not just about having power -- it's the ability and willingness to use that power and take responsibility for it.



and Powerless would be the Inability and Unwillingness to use that power that is within or take responsibility for it.

It irrelevent if one is considering  D/s as a Power or Authority dynamic.

I agree... that everyone has a Power..... but just becaue they have Power doesn't make them Powerful.  It only makes them powerful if as you say.. they have the Ability and Willingness to use that power.... otherwise they are powerless.



robertolapiedra -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 9:29:53 AM)


[/quote]

If LA's post was "tearing down" then the presenter response was an attempt to savage and perhaps kill LA in comparison.

SHOW me where anyone was "tearing down the PRESENTER....you can't but why let facts get in the way of a rant.  We were discussing the CONCEPTS and IDEAS. .
[/quote]
_______________________________________________________________________________________

Hello SimplyMichael. I agree with Michael that LA was not tearing down anything but rather was responding to what she deemed important to her on an intellectual level.

I find that in this type of discussion a lot of people are responding to different ''understandings'' of the same words. For instance in my ''understanding'' of a dominant submissive, it makes as much sense to me as a submissive dominant. When I re-read a few times ''some'' posts, I just put in the words ''assertiveness'' and ''abnegation'' in the discourse and suddenly a big part of the whole intellectual exercise came into focus.

An assertive submissive makes sense to me and so does a devoted self abnegating dominant (many daddy doms are like this) but a submissive dominant? Never heard of this as a descriptive. If someone makes a presentation about a peculiar aspect of a power relation (some substitute ''authority'' but to me it is the same thing, power of authority? What ever...) with the dominant submissive descriptive  that's ok, but they should understand guys like me who just see the face value contradiction of the terms used to make one's point. Nice catchy label, but to me it just does not stick, but that's ok, I guess. Everybody have a bad-nice day. RL.





KnightofMists -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 9:45:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross

I, too, am sorry that this has become a personal issue discussing the possible wrongdoing against the presenter.  This was never my intention.  In fact I had hoped to use this discussion and others to polish my ideas, work out some of my questions to get some clarity and then discuss things directly with the presenter to get a better understanding.


Nor was it your intention to cause the presenter to feel and respond in the manner she did.  Personally, I think you did an excellent job to bring forth an aspect of the presentation that cause you concern.  I share your concern.

Unfortuately, the manner that the presenter expressed themselves on the forums here, it seems unlikely that you will beable to have a constructive discussion on the concepts she is presenting on.  I am afraid that my instincts that she has attached her ego and indentity to this concept might be correct based on her response to your OP.  With such much of her ego and indentity attached to the concept, it will be very difficult maybe impossible for her to consider the flaws.


quote:



No one can ever control where their thread ends up, but I think it would be unfair to the presenter if we allowed the thread to become focused on her rather than her presentation, especially as she decided not to further engage here herself.


I agree completely.

My compliments of bringing another interesting discussion to the boards.



thetammyjo -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 1:44:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: KnightofMists

quote:

ORIGINAL: thetammyjo
Powerful is not just about having power -- it's the ability and willingness to use that power and take responsibility for it.



and Powerless would be the Inability and Unwillingness to use that power that is within or take responsibility for it.

It irrelevent if one is considering D/s as a Power or Authority dynamic.

I agree... that everyone has a Power..... but just becaue they have Power doesn't make them Powerful. It only makes them powerful if as you say.. they have the Ability and Willingness to use that power.... otherwise they are powerless.


That is not how I use those words or understand them. You still have your power even if you are unable or unwilling to use it or to take responsibility for.

Think about two batteries -- each having the same amount of power. One is designed to be efficient and it can be used for a long amount of time because of this -- on the non-human level we would say this is a more powerful battery than the other which is less well designed and uses too much energy to do the same thing or leaks energy, that battery still has power, it is not powerless it is merely less powerful.

I was thinking also of an extreme human example of how I'd use the term powerful.

Two people with the same amount of charisma use that power to get a bunch of people together, steal their money and live off of them. The more powerful person will say "Yes, I did that and I'm proud of it" the less powerful person attempts to claim God as their leader or blame those who follower them -- both still have power but one refuses to accept responsibility or perhaps honestly believes they aren't in control.

Believing you aren't in control though doesn't strip you of your power, you do not become powerful, you merely lose authority and cease to be powerful.

I'm sure that made no sense to anyone and I don't frankly care. Why? Because my original post wasn't about convincing anyone of you about anything only commenting who what the OP's described discussion made me think and feel. Now thinking about I've invested far too much of my own power into attempting to even have this discussion at all when I frankly shouldn't care!



KnightofMists -> RE: The Dominant Submissive (6/15/2008 3:26:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thetammyjo

You still have your power even if you are unable or unwilling to use it or to take responsibility for.


I agree... but if you are unable or unwilling to use said Power... you are "powerless" to affect anything...  the power sits there unutilized.

quote:


Think about two batteries -- each having the same amount of power. One is designed to be efficient and it can be used for a long amount of time because of this -- on the non-human level we would say this is a more powerful battery than the other which is less well designed and uses too much energy to do the same thing or leaks energy, that battery still has power, it is not powerless it is merely less powerful.


each battery has the same power capacity... But one is more "efficient in it's use of it's power...... therefore it will get better results... Power is the same.. the results are different.   Put Battery A into Toy A and Toy A works fine... but battery B in Toy A and it doesn't move.  Battery B is Powerless for Toy A to work.

Putting this in people terms... Things are not linear like this battery example.  Things are multi-dimensional.  Person A in situation A may use their power effectively enought to get desired results... making this person Powerful in situation A... and maybe C,E,G,L,M,N,Q and Z but is completely powerless in situations B,D,F,H,I,J etc.  But people have the ability to grow and enhance themselves and where they once where powerless to get desire results they can learn to use their Power (talents,skills etc) and become powerful in situations they where once powerless to deal with.  Often times... Abused Victims stay in a given situation not because they lack Power.. but because they feel Powerless to change their situation.  However, in time many learn and become to change their situation and go beyond feeling powerless to feeling powerful in that given situation.  This of course is not a flick of the switch change.  A person doesn't simple go to powerless from powerful or in reverse at a flick of switch.  But people do feel and are powerless at times... just as they can be feel and are powerful at times.  None of this speaks to the power that is within them.. it only speaks to there ability and willingness to use it.

quote:


I was thinking also of an extreme human example of how I'd use the term powerful.

Two people with the same amount of charisma use that power to get a bunch of people together, steal their money and live off of them. The more powerful person will say "Yes, I did that and I'm proud of it" the less powerful person attempts to claim God as their leader or blame those who follower them -- both still have power but one refuses to accept responsibility or perhaps honestly believes they aren't in control.


perhaps he believes they are powerless to stop him.... a person's ego and affect how one views others.

quote:


Believing you aren't in control though doesn't strip you of your power, you do not become powerful, you merely lose authority and cease to be powerful.


that is correct... but ceasing to be powerful makes you powerless.


quote:


I'm sure that made no sense to anyone and I don't frankly care. Why? Because my original post wasn't about convincing anyone of you about anything only commenting who what the OP's described discussion made me think and feel. Now thinking about I've invested far too much of my own power into attempting to even have this discussion at all when I frankly shouldn't care!


Just because one has power doesn't equate that they use their power wisely or effectively.. afterall.. in your words you invested too much on to a discussion that you don't care about.... definitely wouldn't call that powerful.. and not powerless either.... maybe .......



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

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125