RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else...

RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (Full Version)

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

Message

TreasureKY -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 11:30:56 AM)
Fast reply... It is abundantly evident that opinions on every aspect of this topic vary greatly. The diversity of thoughts have provided an interesting discussion. In the end, exposure to new and different ideas... even ones not agreed with... lead to greater understanding... of ourselves or others. Either way, it's knowledge and it's good. quote: ORIGINAL: lally3 ... when two people meet, connect, like/love each other, invest energy, time, committment - to say, 'keep pleasing me and we'll be grand' is stating the obvious and protecting what he has found with softness. its about saying i value you this much and this is what itll take to keep us together. my Master said to me 'keep making me laugh like this and youll have a master for a very long time' - i didnt see it as a caveat, i understood it as a man who just wants to be happy and stay that way. *in a way its the same thing, just different words.* Precisely. So why verbalize it framed in terms that can be taken in a negative fashion, when it is, as you say, "stating the obvious"? quote: ORIGINAL: Stephann ... Some people thrive with such statements, other folk detest them. Such is life. A simple and straightforward answer without judgement. [:D] quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark ... Personally, I don't see the statement as an ultimatum ... to me, it is a promise. My best wishes to you and Darcy. I can see the correlation as the concepts are so similar. Both declare what will or will not be done, and it is understandable how an ultimatum might be also viewed as a promise. However, with an ultimatum conditions are given... as the dictionary explains, "a final, uncompromising demand or set of terms issued ... the rejection of which may lead to a severance of relations..." While a promise can have conditions applied ... as in "if you complete your chores, I will take you out for dinner" ... conditions are not necessary. If someone simply assures you that they will take you out to dinner, it can still be a promise. The same cannot be said for an ultimatum. [:D] I realize that I'm arguing semantics, but after all, that's what we're discussing, isn't it? The meaning or interpretation of the meaning of words. Viewing the statement as a promise is optimistic and romantic... and perhaps a better fit for the subjective emotional intent. It's just that I see where "ultimatum" is a better fit concerning the actual use of the words. Which is kinda my objection with the whole concept being framed as an ultimatum. The words don't match the intent. Regarding your dissent with the use of the word "absolute", and beth's objection to my use of "perfection" as a synomym for "completion", I concede that my comments were evidently unclear. lol... In layman's terms, what I essentially said was that if a person gives the ultimatum of "be pleasing, or else", but they really mean that they will accept less than pleasing behavior without the promised consequences, then they've pretty much made a liar out of theirself. quote: ORIGINAL: daddysliloneds ... it shouldn't have to be (spoken). everyone knows it takes 'two' to make a relationship and that each person has a choice no matter who is deferred to within the relationship and who is not. Exactly. [;)]

phoenixrising43 -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 12:06:50 PM)
Thanks for posting that marieToo. That is exactly where my head is at with the breakup of this relationship. He changed and there was nothing I could do about it. There are no guarantees in life. So the only real guarantee is that you alone are responsible for yourself and your happiness and to never loose sight of that. In order to be pleasing to others, you have to be happy and content in yourself and what you are doing. Regardless of whether it is a D/s relationship or a vanilla one. Just life.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 12:20:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY A few days ago in the “Procuring” thread, softness made the following comment in her original post: quote: ORIGINAL: softness ... Sir has told me again and again that I am secure in my position as long as I am pleasing. ... He will not seek to replace me as long as I am pleasing ... At that time, I knew this comment niggled at me, but as it wasn’t really relevant to that particular thread. I also wanted to give it some time and consideration before I voiced my thoughts. Generally, the idea that a dominant would only keep a slave or submissive so long as he or she is pleasing seems to be a reasonable requirement… though not exclusively from a dominant perspective. I would posit that most people, regardless of orientation or lifestyle choice, would have a difficult time staying committed to someone who behaved in a manner they did not like. I suppose the underlying difference, though, is the impression that there would be less leeway with a dominant. Not that they require perfection, but, due to the nature of the D/s relationship, there is a higher expectation of compliance and behaving in a pleasing manner placed on the submissive. Another prominent difference is that this is more likely an upfront and spoken condition placed upon the relationship. I would imagine it is rare for a man to propose marriage to a woman with the caveat that he would only stay married to her for as long as she is pleasing to him. There is also the commonly accepted concept that, like marriage, collaring a slave is a lifelong commitment. Though, also like marriage, it is generally accepted that it may not work out. It’s just not typically voiced when people get married. Which brings me to the crux of why softness’ statement “bothered” me… because it is voiced, it is an ultimatum. Please me or you will be replaced. Ultimatums, in and of themselves, are not really a problem. Whether recognized or not, we live with ultimatums all the time. If you do not get a license, you cannot legally drive a car… if you do not meet entrance requirements, you cannot attend college… if you do not show up for work, you will not get paid… etcetera. What is different about this particular ultimatum is that it isn’t absolute. As I intimated above, it would be unusual for a dominant to require perfection from his slave or submissive. Unless DV was one who required absolute perfection from softness, then his statement to her isn’t true. Otherwise, one simple act by her that he found displeasing would have him looking for her replacement. I doubt that softness’ position is that unsecured. I suspect that DV allows for her to make mistakes and to occasionally displease him. However, that brings up the second difference with this particular ultimatum… it isn’t specifically defined. At what point do the little displeasures earn softness replacement? Where can softness ever find security in her relationship if she doesn’t know if the very next screw up will send her packing? I would imagine that most dominants would defend this ultimatum by claiming that the willingness and effort to please is what counts in the end… that as long as the submissive or slave was making a genuine attempt to be pleasing, that the error would not be counted against her. While I would question just how absolute that particular statement would be (if a slave or submissive consistently failed to please… no matter how much she wanted to and how much she tried… I suspect there would eventually be a point where the dominant would give up or lose interest), it still serves to emphasize that the original ultimatum wasn’t accurate. In D/s relationships where truthfulness and trust are so highly vaunted, I question the wisdom of a dominant making such an ultimatum… one that, for all intents and purposes, is not true. Since it seems to be a common ultimatum, is there some other purpose for this that I am missing? Hey there, treasure...say hi to Firm.[:)] Personally, I don't see it as an ultimatum but rather as a promise. Like some others on here, I too see the certainty in the statement but I also have a fairly big heart and it can sometimes be a bit soft (don't tell anyone); I'm also a guy who sees the glass as being more full than empty and so I also see the romance and the promise in such a statement, when taken within the context of the the overall view. As a dominant, I strive to always be responsible and to always make sure that not only a submissive who is mine but others in my life know that I will always be there...to lend a hand, to lend an ear, to lend a shoulder, to lend what part of me they need. But I occasionally fail. I try to always be in control and not get angry. But that is something I fail at also because, like most on here, I am human and sometimes my anger overtakes my common sense and rational behavior. I try to be understanding and caring when I need to be...with softness when called for but also with firmness, with the right measure of each. I sometimes fail. I try to be honest in my dealings with everyone but you guessed it...I sometimes fail. What does all that mean? Well, it means that I am human and I screw up. Less so than many of the vanilla men I know, less than fewer dominants I know, more so than some others I know. I keep trying and working to evolve to a higher state and yet not lose the emotionality involved as it can be a tricky balance. What I ask is that those who look at me when they are judging me...and as I said on another thread, judgment does occur whether people admit to it or not...and look at my mistake within the overall context of their time with me. Have I been honest more times than I have not? Have I been there for them more times than I have been selfish? Have I been more pleasing overall, more loving overall, more giving overall, more responsible overall than I was this time? Have I been consistently pleasing overall or have I been consistently displeasing over a great length of time rather than a short intense duration? I've stated before that I would rather spend the rest of my life alone than with a submissive that did not get what submission meant to me and our dynamic for if she did not, or began not to, she would be out the door. Does that mean that I would send her on her way for that first incident or even for a series of incidents? No...not any more than I would hope she would send me on my way for not measuring up in one incident or even a series of incidents. I would hope that communication would take place and that measures be instituted to try and correct the problem. I would be more concerned with, as softness noted, the deliberate attempt to not be pleasing or to not be understanding with my failures when such is expected of me.

NorthernGent -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 2:51:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: As I intimated above, it would be unusual for a dominant to require perfection from his slave or submissive. Unless DV was one who required absolute perfection from softness, then his statement to her isn’t true. Otherwise, one simple act by her that he found displeasing would have him looking for her replacement. but DV didn't say, "Be perfect"...He said, "Be pleasing", therefore your assumptions regarding perfection are merely a figment of your imagination. this slave strives to be pleasing to Master every day and would hope and fervently pray that Master would, indeed, look for her replacement if she wasn't pleasing to Him. His satisfaction and happiness IS paramount...pleasing Him is what this slave signed up for. I doubt anyone would argue that a slave or submissive is there to please..... The question is: what exactly is DV gaining by stating this simple notion "again and again"? Only he will know. You'd have to know the man and the context.

kyraofMists -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 5:12:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkVictory When she can't be bothered to be interested in pleasing me, the relationship is already dead. I love this line... replace the word "pleasing" with "obeying" and that is exactly how the three of us view our relationship. Willfully disobeying (and MadRabbit gave a good description of what that entails for us) would end our M/s relationship. I would no longer be his slave. Some may see this as an ultimatum and an untenable place to be, but it doesn't bring up any fear in me and it is not some cloud of doom hanging over the relationship. If I was ever mentally in a place where I seriously wanted to disobey him, then there would already be major issues in our relationship. If I actually did disobey him, then the relationship was long since dead before I took that action. I see this as being no different than the common oath taken in marriage to "forsake all others". We made certain vows to each other when starting our relationship. Breaking those vows would be a symptom that the relationship we started out with no longer existed. I think some look at this from the wrong perspective, 'someone does X so the relationship ends'. More often the perspective is, 'the relationship is already over, so someone does X'. Knight's Kyra

Leatherist -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 6:25:49 PM)
I would tend to think that the sorts who would have the biggest issues over that statement were those who wanted an "out" for improper behavior. A girl who knew she was always going to do her best should feel absolutely secure in the knowledge that she never need fear consequences of being "displeasing"-because it is not in her nature to be otherwise. If one feels insecure in hearing it-it says more about them than anything else-does it not?

kyraofMists -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 6:43:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist If one feels insecure in hearing it-it says more about them than anything else-does it not? Maybe... but then again maybe not. Maybe their insecurity is highly justified in that the dominant uses this as a means to jump from relationship to relationship. Maybe the dominant uses this as a means to keep them walking on eggshells. Maybe it is a new relationship and the security has not been built yet. Insecurity can come from many different things. Sometimes it is internally motivated and other times it is motivated externally. If he started behaving in a manner that was completely opposite of who he has presented himself to be, then I expect I would start to feel insecure. I was insecure when our relationship first started and we had to work on it from two different directions... Internally, I had my own issues to work through and then as a relationship we had to work on external issues that was driving the insecurity. Knight's Kyra

slaveluci -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 6:45:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kyraofMists Willfully disobeying (and MadRabbit gave a good description of what that entails for us) would end our M/s relationship. I would no longer be his slave As has been mentioned several times on these forums, I respect that your relationship is that way but it is so totally opposite of mine. I'm not going into the whole thing again here (so as not to derail) but, in OUR relationship, an instance of disobedience doesn't end anything. That's just not OUR understanding. quote: Some may see this as an ultimatum and an untenable place to be, but it doesn't bring up any fear in me and it is not some cloud of doom hanging over the relationship. If I was ever mentally in a place where I seriously wanted to disobey him, then there would already be major issues in our relationship. If I actually did disobey him, then the relationship was long since dead before I took that action To me, actually disobeying Him doesn't mean the relationship is in anyway "dead." I'm not perfect and I've never professed to be. I do not go about disobeying Him (willfully or accidentally) but I can't promise that I never will. I just don't know that. I hope I don't and I'll always do my best not to. However, we both know that, if I do, that doesn't negate everything we have had together. One act of disobedience doesn't erase the love and history we've shared or automatically put an end to everything we could share in the future. Does it indicate a problem? Damn straight. Does it automatically mean the entire relationship is "dead" and not worth salvaging or working on the problem. No way. quote: I see this as being no different than the common oath taken in marriage to "forsake all others". We made certain vows to each other when starting our relationship. Breaking those vows would be a symptom that the relationship we started out with no longer existed Exactly. I think as time goes by, no one still has the relationship that used to exist. People change and grow and life happens. In marriages, breaking a vow doesn't automatically mean couples throw each other down, divorce and move on and forget about each other forever. Some of the strongest marriages I know of consist of partners who overcame obstacles and stayed together working through troubles, not splitting at the first sign of one. To me, disobedience is just that - a sign of trouble that should be faced and dealt with. It's not the end of the whole thing automatically. quote: I think some look at this from the wrong perspective, 'someone does X so the relationship ends'. More often the perspective is, 'the relationship is already over, so someone does X'. Again, from our perspective, just because "someone does X," that doesn't necessarily mean at all that anything is "over." It means something needs to be dealt with, worked through and overcome. Just a different perspective................luci

Leatherist -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 6:51:34 PM)
But would just READING this sort of thing in regards to another person's relationship get you upset? I take it that you learned that you had enough value that this was never going to be an issue-but that it did not happen overnight. Would you be more likely to feel insecure in reading about someone else-if you felt insecure in your own relationship? I guess I am just trying to figure out where knee jerk reactions like this come from.

kyraofMists -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 7:42:55 PM)
No, reading about other people's relationships rarely upsets me; it might spark my curiosity and I may try to learn their perspective. I didn't read this entire thread, so I don't know what reactions there have been regarding this. When threads get this long, I tend to start at the end rather than the beginning. One of my own little quirks g I think sometimes that people view other people's relationships from the perspective of their own relationship and sometimes cannot view it from another perspective. It can be difficult to shed our own perspective to try and appreciate someone else's. I know there are some people/relationships on here that I just don't get and my life experience prevents me from ever appreciating them. To me, that is okay and it is okay that others don't get me and my life. I am not sure that answers your questions though. Knight's Kyra

lronitulstahp -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 7:58:04 PM)
quote: To me, that is okay and it is okay that others don't get me and my life. i think your posts tend to always point out clearly that you are speaking of your own relationship, and i can't think of a time where you got all "one true way" about anything. i enjoy your posts, and your perspective kyra. [sm=cheerleader.gif]

TreasureKY -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 8:02:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist But would just READING this sort of thing in regards to another person's relationship get you upset? I take it that you learned that you had enough value that this was never going to be an issue-but that it did not happen overnight. Would you be more likely to feel insecure in reading about someone else-if you felt insecure in your own relationship? I guess I am just trying to figure out where knee jerk reactions like this come from. lol... You're just bound and determined to try to get someone to agree with you that I'm just horrible, even if it's in a roundabout way. I can't imagine why you'd feel so threatened by me that you'd resort to such tactics. You should have not deleted your post where you implored Firm to drop me so he wouldn't be though bad of for associating with me... someone might have made you feel justified by agreeing with you. [;)] And sorry... I'm not the least bit insecure in my relationship, I'm not upset in the slightest, and this was not any kind of knee-jerk reaction. lol... I wonder what NorthernGent thinks about your arm-chair psychological analysis of people who don't care for this ultimatum?

chickpea -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 8:04:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist But would just READING this sort of thing in regards to another person's relationship get you upset? I take it that you learned that you had enough value that this was never going to be an issue-but that it did not happen overnight. Would you be more likely to feel insecure in reading about someone else-if you felt insecure in your own relationship? I guess I am just trying to figure out where knee jerk reactions like this come from. lol... I wonder what NorthernGent thinks about your arm-chair psychological analysis of people who don't care for this ultimatum? "Arm-chair psychological analysis" hehe I like that term! Someone needs to think of being a Judge for a career....eye roll

KnightofMists -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 8:19:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY Generally, the idea that a dominant would only keep a slave or submissive so long as he or she is pleasing seems to be a reasonable requirement… though not exclusively from a dominant perspective. I would posit that most people, regardless of orientation or lifestyle choice, would have a difficult time staying committed to someone who behaved in a manner they did not like. I agree.. quote: I suppose the underlying difference, though, is the impression that there would be less leeway with a dominant. Not that they require perfection, but, due to the nature of the D/s relationship, there is a higher expectation of compliance and behaving in a pleasing manner placed on the submissive. You may get that impression... but... I don't at all. As such.. your impression affects signicantly the logic of your arguement. So... if your impression is inaccurate... what does that say for the logic of your arguement. I do not share your idea that in a D/s relationship there is a higher expectation of compliance and behaving in a pleasing manner. I think the expectation is people specific and not relationship type specific. Some people are strict in their expectations... some are flexible and this has nothing to do with the relationship structure. quote: Another prominent difference is that this is more likely an upfront and spoken condition placed upon the relationship. I would imagine it is rare for a man to propose marriage to a woman with the caveat that he would only stay married to her for as long as she is pleasing to him. I agree that many that are aware of the Power Dynamic Relationship structures that their is an increased chance that the expectations and conditions are communicated better. However, and increased chance of 1% is hardly significant. One doesn't have to surf very long on the forums here and find relationship after relationship that hit rocky roads because of a lack of clear expectations and conditions. It is my opinion that regardless of relationship structure.. those that communicate effectively their expectations etc will have a significantly increased chance to succeed.... It is my opinion that a great majority of long-term relationships and/or very happy relationships (regardles of relationship type) will have effective communication that share their desires and expectations. quote: There is also the commonly accepted concept that, like marriage, collaring a slave is a lifelong commitment. Though, also like marriage, it is generally accepted that it may not work out. It’s just not typically voiced when people get married. I agree that it is a commonly accepted concept... but it is not an absolute for every relationship. quote: Which brings me to the crux of why softness’ statement “bothered” me… because it is voiced, it is an ultimatum. Please me or you will be replaced. yup... but the question that needs to be asked is.. what does "Pleasing" mean to the people involved. Is it be pleasing to me every moment of every day or is it... On the balance... I will see you as pleasing? quote: Ultimatums, in and of themselves, are not really a problem. Whether recognized or not, we live with ultimatums all the time. If you do not get a license, you cannot legally drive a car… if you do not meet entrance requirements, you cannot attend college… if you do not show up for work, you will not get paid… etcetera. What is different about this particular ultimatum is that it isn’t absolute. Actually.. I see it as absolute... but maybe that is because.. How I am defining "Pleasing" appears to be much different than you. quote: As I intimated above, it would be unusual for a dominant to require perfection from his slave or submissive. Unless DV was one who required absolute perfection from softness, then his statement to her isn’t true. Otherwise, one simple act by her that he found displeasing would have him looking for her replacement. and this is where your Definition of Pleasing affects the logically path. You are seeing "pleasing" as an absolute at all moments... I see pleasing as a more holistic view that weighs all aspects of the person. quote: I doubt that softness’ position is that unsecured. I suspect that DV allows for her to make mistakes and to occasionally displease him. I suspect that her Dominant is taking a more holistic or Macro approach to the concept of "Pleasing" and not the Micro approach that your logic seems to be dependent on. quote: However, that brings up the second difference with this particular ultimatum… it isn’t specifically defined. At what point do the little displeasures earn softness replacement? Where can softness ever find security in her relationship if she doesn’t know if the very next screw up will send her packing? You assume it is not specifically defined.. but it just might be defined... defined by conversation and discussion where Softness has learned the preferences, desires, pet peeves and dislikes of her Dominant of the months if not years they have been together. This knowledge arms her to make choices of action that will be seen has pleasing to her Dominant. Also... lets just assume that they have strong and effective communication between them that allows her to learn more every day of what was specifically pleasing and what wasn't. This will allow her to build and maintain a sense of security... not to forget her own self-esteem will and can have a positive or negative affect on her sense of security.. If she is a confident in her skills and abilities.. she can be secure in that this knowledge allows her to be pleasing for her Dominant. So... it is not just the communication between the two but also her own confidence in self that her security in the relationship will come from. quote: I would imagine that most dominants would defend this ultimatum by claiming that the willingness and effort to please is what counts in the end… that as long as the submissive or slave was making a genuine attempt to be pleasing, that the error would not be counted against her. While I would question just how absolute that particular statement would be (if a slave or submissive consistently failed to please… no matter how much she wanted to and how much she tried… I suspect there would eventually be a point where the dominant would give up or lose interest), it still serves to emphasize that the original ultimatum wasn’t accurate. If you view the concept of "Pleasing" in a Micro sense.. I would agree with you.. but... unfortunately.. if one needs to be pleasing in micro sense.. this implies one must be prefect. However, if one is pleasing in the Macro sense.. then imprefections are and will be tolerated... but it is a question of a balance that can tip the scales. This doesn't make the orginal ultimatum inaccurate.. in fact it proves that it is accurate... "It proves that by my holistic concept of pleasing... you will be with me or not." You will be held accountable. If I choose well.. this will never be an issue. If you authentically presented yourself to me for which I based my decision on collaring you.. then you will not have to worry... if you lied or misrepresented yourself... If I failed to properly assess all that was before me.. we will have troubled waters. quote: In D/s relationships where truthfulness and trust are so highly vaunted, I question the wisdom of a dominant making such an ultimatum… one that, for all intents and purposes, is not true. Since it seems to be a common ultimatum, is there some other purpose for this that I am missing? aaaww but it is true... it is only untrue for you because of your Micro concept of "Pleasing"...

kyraofMists -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 8:28:54 PM)
Despite how often we have had this discussion, I still don't think that you quite grasp the nuances of this particular aspect in my relationship. Using phrases like "one act of disobedience", "I am not perfect", "first sign of trouble" or "end of the whole thing" is what leads me to this opinion. It has nothing to do with one particular act. It has to do with the motivation that would lead me to do that one particular act. What would motivate me to make a conscious decision to take back the authority that I handed over to him? What would motivate me to break the vow I made him? It has absolutely nothing to do with being perfect. I fuck up often and end up disobeying, but we are still together, still loving each other and he still has the authority in our relationship. Willful disobedience, not fucking up, not making a mistake, but consciously deciding that I will not do what he wants when I have the knowledge, means and opportunity to do so is not a first sign of trouble. The first sign would have happened well before then and should be addressed before I decide to betray his trust. I can't imagine viewing breaking a vow as the first sign of issues. Maybe that is just me, because to lie to the people who are important to me is to break something inside of me and I know this from experience. To betray him would be the ultimate lie for me and it would break me, so there is no way that I could view it as a first sign of trouble. Even forming the thoughts to write these lines has caused a pit in my stomach and made my eyes tear. It would violate the core of who I am. It also has to do with how we define an M/s relationship. I cannot do my will without his permission and still call myself his slave. It would be a lie to retain authority within our relationship and still expect him to view me as his slave. Much like an employer/employee relationship, the relationship ends when the employee no longer works for the employer. It is very strictly defined; the M/s relationship ends when I decide to do my own will over his. It doesn't mean we stop loving each other or that some other type of relationship may or may not be able to be created from what is left. It means we are no longer Master and slave. Most people do not define M/s relationships the way that we do and as one of my favorite presenters often says, "rock on with your bad self if that makes you happy". I am not sure that this post has made any difference, I just think it does a disservice to see this aspect as a first sign of trouble, one act or being perfect. Knight's Kyra

TreasureKY -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 11:15:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant Hey there, treasure...say hi to Firm.[:)] Personally, I don't see it as an ultimatum but rather as a promise. Like some others on here, I too see the certainty in the statement but I also have a fairly big heart and it can sometimes be a bit soft (don't tell anyone); I'm also a guy who sees the glass as being more full than empty and so I also see the romance and the promise in such a statement, when taken within the context of the the overall view. Hello, CD... Firm says hello to you, too. [;)] As I explained to thedark, I can understand seeing this as a promise and that's probably more accurate considering the emotional intent, but I still think how it's presented more closely resembles an ultimatum. I do agree with your viewpoints concerning context, though, and feel they represent a normal and healthy relationship. lol... I would, of course, because Firm and I operate in the same fashion. We just don't couch it in the "be pleasing, or else" terms. quote: ORIGINAL: kyraofMists quote: ORIGINAL: DarkVictory When she can't be bothered to be interested in pleasing me, the relationship is already dead. I love this line... replace the word "pleasing" with "obeying" and that is exactly how the three of us view our relationship. Willfully disobeying (and MadRabbit gave a good description of what that entails for us) would end our M/s relationship. I would no longer be his slave. Some may see this as an ultimatum and an untenable place to be, but it doesn't bring up any fear in me and it is not some cloud of doom hanging over the relationship. I agree with the underlying sentiment of DV's statement, but I would say the relationship is changed, not necessarily dead. As long as two people relate, there is still a relationship... it just might not be a good one, or the one you want. Or want, at all. [;)] I don't see it as any kind of ultimatum, though. It's just not phrased in "do X or Y will happen" manner. It's simply a truism. All relationships are built on some kind of base. Only if a person feared the base their relationship is built upon, they might experience trepidation with regard to it. quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY I suppose the underlying difference, though, is the impression that there would be less leeway with a dominant. Not that they require perfection, but, due to the nature of the D/s relationship, there is a higher expectation of compliance and behaving in a pleasing manner placed on the submissive. You may get that impression... but... I don't at all. As such.. your impression affects signicantly the logic of your arguement. So... if your impression is inaccurate... what does that say for the logic of your arguement. I do not share your idea that in a D/s relationship there is a higher expectation of compliance and behaving in a pleasing manner. I think the expectation is people specific and not relationship type specific. Some people are strict in their expectations... some are flexible and this has nothing to do with the relationship structure. Perhaps, but perhaps not. While I agree that any individual, without regard to relationship structure, can have more or less expectations, or be more or less demanding than anyone else, I do believe that dominants are generally going to fall into the higher end of the spectrum. I mean, why else would a dominant be interested in a D/s relationship? If there isn't a generally higher expectation of compliance, obedience, or being in control, what's the point of having a submissive or slave? Do you really believe that your next door neighbor, the post man, or Joe Blow off the street demands the same level of obedience from their partners as you do of yours? To be honest, while pretty much every relationship has the unspoken understanding that the relationship will last only so long as the partners are pleased with one another, I do believe that we'd see a much higher divorce rate if the average married man was more demanding and allowed less leeway. How often do we hear husbands complain of not enough sex and not enough blow jobs? Do you think that is a common complaint from dominants actively involved in a D/s relationship? I may be wrong statistically, but I don't think my impression is off. quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY Another prominent difference is that this is more likely an upfront and spoken condition placed upon the relationship. I would imagine it is rare for a man to propose marriage to a woman with the caveat that he would only stay married to her for as long as she is pleasing to him. I agree that many that are aware of the Power Dynamic Relationship structures that their is an increased chance that the expectations and conditions are communicated better. However, and increased chance of 1% is hardly significant. One doesn't have to surf very long on the forums here and find relationship after relationship that hit rocky roads because of a lack of clear expectations and conditions. I agree with your assessment that effective communications increase the chance for relationship success, regardless of relationship structure. However, I wouldn't use the posts here in the forums as a gauge with regard to the general level of communication in D/s relationships. I would think that the aphorism of "no news is good news" might explain the disproportionate number of problems posted. People who have good communications and a healthy relationship aren't going to have problems to post about. quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY There is also the commonly accepted concept that, like marriage, collaring a slave is a lifelong commitment. Though, also like marriage, it is generally accepted that it may not work out. It’s just not typically voiced when people get married. I agree that it is a commonly accepted concept... but it is not an absolute for every relationship. True. There are no absolutes. quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists yup... but the question that needs to be asked is.. what does "Pleasing" mean to the people involved. Is it be pleasing to me every moment of every day or is it... On the balance... I will see you as pleasing? I agree. That's pretty much why I dislike the concept being couched as an ultimatum. It leaves little room for the details. quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY What is different about this particular ultimatum is that it isn’t absolute. Actually.. I see it as absolute... but maybe that is because.. How I am defining "Pleasing" appears to be much different than you. Here I'm just going to have to beg indulgence. I've apparently been ineffective in communicating my meaning. I've used the word absolute in the sense of complete or perfect. I don't see the ultimatum as being complete or perfect because it lacks the breadth for an abstract concept. An ultimatum is black and white... do this, or that happens. To be pleasing is an abstract concept... completely subjective and open to interpretation. That may be just how I see it, though, and no one else. That's okay. [;)] quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY As I intimated above, it would be unusual for a dominant to require perfection from his slave or submissive. Unless DV was one who required absolute perfection from softness, then his statement to her isn’t true. Otherwise, one simple act by her that he found displeasing would have him looking for her replacement. and this is where your Definition of Pleasing affects the logically path. You are seeing "pleasing" as an absolute at all moments... I see pleasing as a more holistic view that weighs all aspects of the person. Actually, I have not defined pleasing at all. The example in my quote was a bit of hyperbole. An illustration that the strict confines of the ultimatum leaves no room for anything other than pleasing or not pleasing/ black or white/ yes or no. I actually see "pleasing" in the same holistic manner as you. Again, this is why I dislike the format of the ultimatum. I can't specifically address the remainder of your comments as they erroneously attribute me with a limited definition of pleasing. Despite that, though, I'm in general agreement with your assessment. As I've said several times throughout this thread, my intention wasn't to speculate on DV and softness' relationship. Rather it was to discuss the somewhat common use of an ultimatum to convey a complex concept that is otherwise generally understood without ever being voiced. I didn't really expect agreement... it's a complicated issue and I've drawn a very fine line. It has been a very interesting discussion, though. [:D]

ownedgirlie -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 11:40:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY I agree. That's pretty much why I dislike the concept being couched as an ultimatum. It leaves little room for the details. Hi Treasure, Your post was confusing to me, but this part in particular is what I want to address. First, there are a myriad of people in this thread who have said they have this particular condition in their relationship (be it to be pleasing, to be obedient, to be ____ (whatever it is). You apparently do not have this condition in your relationship, which obviously works for you and all is well. Of those who do have this condition in their relationship, we are all saying it is not an ultimatum, it was communicated with their Dom/Master/Owner with clarity and understanding, it is accepted by all parties within the relationship, and it works for them. So why then do you dislike it for others? It is not something you yourself are personally contending with, and those who have spoken about it are saying there is no fear included with it and it does work for them. What exactly is the confusion here? Is it that you believe others are being given ultimatums? What if we call it a condition of the relationship, instead? How do you know there is no room for details in the context of other relationships? What exactly is your confusion about the way other relationships are structured? Would you think, "If you cheat on me I'll leave" is an ultimatum? A fair one or an unfair one? To remain faithful is a condition of a relationship for many partners. So, what's the issue if remaining pleasing, according to how the dominant and submissive define pleasing, would also be a condition of someone else's relationship? I could keep asking questions about your premise, but that's probably enough, heh. I just don't understand why the structure of relationships other than your own is causing you confusion. I'll just end this by saying being pleasing is a condition of my slavery to my Master. It's what I signed up for. If I stopped being pleasing (according to my understanding of pleasing in my relationship) then I would be unfaithful to my word in the relationship. At that point, the issue would be addressed, and if it were not resolved, I would no longer be his slave. This is not a threat or an ultimatum; it is an understanding of how our relationship is structured, what I promised him, and what his expectations of me are. I think where you got tripped up is you read a sentence and did not have an understanding of the complexities behind it, and somehow how ended up with the impression that it must therefore be a threat or ultimatum. I think someone said it in another post, but your impression is incorrect. Can you accept, from those who are in such a relationship, that you are incorrect in thinking so?

MadRabbit -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/25/2008 11:51:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kyraofMists Willfully disobeying (and MadRabbit gave a good description of what that entails for us) would end our M/s relationship. I would no longer be his slave. I should hope so! It's based off Knight's description which helped me logically think through what exactly willful disobedience entails when I decided long ago I wanted to model my relationships in such a way! Thanks!

MadRabbit -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/26/2008 12:09:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveluci To me, actually disobeying Him doesn't mean the relationship is in anyway "dead." I'm not perfect and I've never professed to be. I do not go about disobeying Him (willfully or accidentally) but I can't promise that I never will. I just don't know that. I hope I don't and I'll always do my best not to. However, we both know that, if I do, that doesn't negate everything we have had together. One act of disobedience doesn't erase the love and history we've shared or automatically put an end to everything we could share in the future. Does it indicate a problem? Damn straight. Does it automatically mean the entire relationship is "dead" and not worth salvaging or working on the problem. No way. I hear this a lot and I think people tend to get hung up on an emotional fear of being abandoned for forgetting to do one thing and it's just simply not based in reality when you think it through based on the definition. Should I take from reading this that you are allowed to obey him when you want to and disobey him when you don't want to?

TreasureKY -> RE: Be Pleasing, Or Else... (6/26/2008 12:46:47 AM)
Good morning, owned. quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie ... there are a myriad of people in this thread who have said they have this particular condition in their relationship (be it to be pleasing, to be obedient, to be ____ (whatever it is). You apparently do not have this condition in your relationship, which obviously works for you and all is well. Well... actually, in addition to saying numerous times that this type of condition is common to most relationships, I did say that Firm and I operate this way, as well... quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY Considering my own relationship with FirmhandKY, we have a similar understanding. In fact, if asked what my role in our relationship is, my response would be to please and pleasure Firm. With us, though, it is presented not so much as an ultimatum... ... Nevertheless, it's a part of our relationship and I can assure you that Firm would end things in a heartbeat if I no longer pleased him, and I would do likewise. But like you, I'm not so certain that I would feel as secure if it were couched in the "be pleasing, or else" fashion. quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie Of those who do have this condition in their relationship, we are all saying it is not an ultimatum, it was communicated with their Dom/Master/Owner with clarity and understanding, it is accepted by all parties within the relationship, and it works for them. So why then do you dislike it for others? It is not something you yourself are personally contending with, and those who have spoken about it are saying there is no fear included with it and it does work for them. What exactly is the confusion here? There is no confusion. lol... Well, I'm not confused, anyway. owned... I brought up a subject and expressed an opinion, other people have expressed theirs... it's just been a discussion. Though I do admit that it's been a bit difficult keeping the point of the discussion clear. [;)] quote: ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie ... I think where you got tripped up is you read a sentence and did not have an understanding of the complexities behind it, and somehow how ended up with the impression that it must therefore be a threat or ultimatum. Well, no. But that's okay. Like I said, it's been an interesting discussion... a bit tedious at times, but interesting nonetheless. [:D]

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625