quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist


A slave/sub needs to stand accountable for their choices.  Misplacing either the blame or credit for surrender is emotionally abusive.  It has long been my contention that in a collaring ritual, a Master should hand the slave the collar and make her put it on herself to keep the reality of her choice in place.

quote:

ORIGINAL: chickpea

quote:

ORIGINAL: Leatherist

Which raises the basic question. Why would the majority of tops bother with a woman so deep in denial that she could not see something that relatively simple?
 
 You cannot ask for control-and then keep snatching it back whenever you feel the slightest discomfort-or are required to make an effort. It's very tiresome for a top to put forth effort and planning-and have the sub continually throw monkey wrenches into the works-on a whim.

Why don't you get to the root of the control issue?  I really doubt any sub would be THAT stupid not to realize that subs should let the dominant lead.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BurntRose

First of all, I just want to say that this is a great topic to be discussing...speaking as a sub in my sexual life only, it is the feeling of being dominated that does it for me. The Dom has to enforce his control, and for me struggling against it is a natural way of making sure he's a strong enough person to make me submit.

It's not because i dont 'really' want to be controlled, its because I need the Dom to show me that no matter what I do HE'S the one in charge, if he's not a strong enough person (and I dont mean just in a physical sense) then is he worth submitting to?

If the Dom just expects submission because the sub says 'i will submit to you' then he's not really being Dominant is he? he's not enforcing his will and DEMANDING obedience, he's just expecting it without backing up the role of Dominant.

anyways, just my 2 cents.

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreedyTop


I can submit to anyone as well, that doesnt mean I'll submit to everyone... or even very many (in fact there are only 3 people I've ever played with that I felt truly submissive to..).. but I can submit to anyone I CHOOSE.

quote:


Dear misturbation,
I have noted many of your posts and believe what I am about to say may not make more sense to you than the OP.  But will proceed in good faith anyway. 

You hold yourself in place, not your Master. “A Master’s actions can only serve remind a slave of their place.”  It is illegal to kidnap, demand forced labor or own a human being.  Almost no one in this country or in the BDSM community submits involuntarily.  Therefore it is the slave/sub that chooses her position.  If she feels out of position, often she is equally or more responsible than Master. 

You surrendered, you submitted to authority.  When it feels like that authority is waning, often, but not always, it is due to your level of submission changing, not the level of authority.  If this could not be the case, then a submissive couldn’t feel “sub frenzy” towards someone who has absolutely no authority over them yet. 

I get ya

quote:

One is psychological and the other ritualistic and as such can be 'void' befaviour and therefore lacking in psychological accountability. (Sorry monosyllabic words available only after coffee).
In the former, the psychological process has an inherently 'weak' stage for the slave....which is at the begiining of the enslavement process. It is especially weak in terms of differentiating responsibility for actions because as often happens a slave feels a sense of diminishing and softening of boundary or self-edges when she or he surrenders authority.

quote:

Though i must admit it did take me several weeks to completely accept and embrace what my submission meant

quote:

ORIGINAL: accipitres

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreedyTop
I can submit to anyone as well, that doesnt mean I'll submit to everyone... or even very many (in fact there are only 3 people I've ever played with that I felt truly submissive to..).. but I can submit to anyone I CHOOSE.

She is referring to "can" (versus "will"), thus buttressing RS's comment about  submission as a choice.

RS was emphasizing the role played by the submissive's choice to submit; while I agree that choice is important, I was trying to suggest that we not ignore the dominant's ability to elicit submission as an influence in that choice process.

That comment will inevitably lead to the chicken and the egg dilemma; does the submission come first so that the dominance can spring forth? Or vs vs?

I guess if you think it is the master’s job to “lead,” then the dominance should elicit the submission (otherwise the dominance is being led by the submissive .. horror!)

Whatever the case, if I submit, and submit, and submit, but no dominance is exerted, I will choose to quit submitting.  (Thorndike, not Throndike’s Law)

quote:

ORIGINAL: missturbation
I get ya
Just out of curiosity and a serious id like to know, what did you mean by....

quote:

I have noted many of your posts and believe what I am about to say may not make more sense to you than the OP.  But will proceed in good faith anyway.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP
I disagree. I really think it is a two way street.

If I feel his dominance and give over control because he shows himself capable of handling it in the manner that meshes the best with my needs, then that has to be an ongoing thing. He can't just give off dominant vibes once and I need to submit without dominance from them on.

Basically, it's a ballroom dance. He leads and I follow. But if he doesn't lead, then I can't follow. This isn't fantasy, it's real.

I did say it was a “two way street” and the error I see often is when a submissive doesn’t "examine their own responsibility for the change as well as Masters."

It is not always the Dominants fault.  If a sub/slave doesn’t *feel * submission it doesn’t always mean the Dominant is not leading.  Sometimes, if not often, it is because the slave/sub is not following. 

quote:

(not directed at you specifically)
I think the OP was clear that I talk of something I see commonly in BDSM relationships that have trouble or fail.  The submissive doesn’t examine there part in it.  I swear this line "examine their own responsibility for the change as well as Masters" is in the OP… I just copied it from there. 
 
Next week I will post the “Be accountable for your Dominance”.  I just didn’t want to flood the boards with philosophy all at once.  

quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist

I did say it was a “two way street” and the error I see often is when a submissive doesn’t "examine their own responsibility for the change as well as Masters."

It is not always the Dominants fault.  If a sub/slave doesn’t *feel * submission it doesn’t always mean the Dominant is not leading.  Sometimes, if not often, it is because the slave/sub is not following. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

You make an interesting point.  Of course, the problem comes in when you have submissives saying that they want the dominant to show them that he is strong enough to lead and control, no matter what the submissive does to struggle against that...and then, life steps in and the dominant is wrong for "forcing" the submissive to yield as she promised.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BurntRose

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

You make an interesting point.  Of course, the problem comes in when you have submissives saying that they want the dominant to show them that he is strong enough to lead and control, no matter what the submissive does to struggle against that...and then, life steps in and the dominant is wrong for "forcing" the submissive to yield as she promised.

I see what you mean there, I think that in a committed relationship as you say in your previous post, discussion would go a long way to resolving the issue...I would also hope that in a committed relationship the Dominant would have learned and respect what limits (if any) are held by the sub.

It is a tricky one tho, where is the line that shouldnt be crossed? it has to be different for every relationship - but thats part of what a relationship is about - learning the needs and desires or your partner and fulfilling them whenever possible, and that goes for both sides of a relationship...shouldnt a Doms main prerogative be making sure their sub is happy by providing what they need just as much as it is the subs to make sure they are pleasing their Dom?

quote:

ORIGINAL: TemptingNviceSub

You state ...should'nt a Dominants main perogative be ensuring their sub is happy and providing what they need ...I say not necessarily so...not in all D/s dynamics ...and then again who decides what the needs and desires are?..the sub? or the Dominant?