RE: Assumed Monogamy

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Assumed Monogamy

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Assumed Monogamy

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Assumed Monogamy - 10/17/2008 8:29:54 PM

curvyslavegirl

Posts: 134
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

I more often deal with the assumption of polyamory, which I find equally insulting.

(in reply to OneMoreWaste)

Profile

Post #: 21

RE: Assumed Monogamy - 10/18/2008 7:09:34 AM

tsatske

Posts: 2037
Joined: 3/9/2007
From: Louisville, KY
Status: offline

quote:

Honestly, as a submissive, the concept of being submissive to more than one person is what would give me pause. What if they give you conflicting instructions?

The Military, a centuries old Dominance and submissive model in which one is generally officially submissive to thousands of Dominant persons, has developed an answer to this delemia.

'Last Legal Order'. Who ever spoke to you most recently gets obeyed first.

Many people think the military solves this problem with a hierarchy of Dominants, but, although they clearly do have a hierarchy, this problem is handled with the above rule.

If the General says rake this yard, and the Sergeant comes along and says, 'Stop what you are doing and take this envelope to the office', you obey the Sergeant. He was the last order you were given. If you get done with his command and have time on your hands, you go back to raking the yard.

I can see how this would work perfectly well in a multi-Dom house. It worked perfectly well raising my children - this was the instruction and explanation they were given throughout their childhood. ( by their ex-military father)

_____________________________

“If you never did you should. These things are fun and fun is good”
~Dr. Seuss quote

(in reply to OneMoreWaste)

Profile

Post #: 22

RE: Assumed Monogamy - 10/18/2008 8:50:14 AM

DavanKael

Posts: 3072
Joined: 10/6/2007
Status: offline

Hi, Ivy----
Excellent questions and that has made for an interesting thread.
I think even those of us who, as a general practice, think 'outside of the box' trip over conventionality or our own way of/scripts for doing things sometimes and make an assumption. From the assumer's point of view, it's a great moment to step back and say, "Ah, got it; broaden the horizons." If we were talking and you told me that you had multiple Dominants, I would be interested to know more about that because I find it difficult to conceptualize myself serving 2 Masters.
It seems as if you're honest and aware of what you want; go with what you're doing and broaden folks' horizons in the process if that be the path.
Best to you,
Davan

(in reply to OneMoreWaste)

Profile

Post #: 23

RE: Assumed Monogamy - 10/18/2008 2:14:44 PM

celticlord2112

Posts: 5732
Status: offline

quote:

I guess I'm wondering, why, in an "alternative lifestyle" site (and this is one of those also) there is an assumption of hetersexual monogamy? Granted my sample size is "self selecting males who identify as dominants" and therefore restricted, but still... why?

Because, statistically, you will find more monogamous heterosexuals than any other sexual orientation.

Additionally, the notion of "sharing" is seen by many segments of society (not just alternative lifestyle communities) as being a "non-dominant" behavior--a dominant may enjoy the pleasures of multiple submissives, but a submissive will have/should have but one dominant. Some of this is societal, and is as old as Jesus' commentary about serving two masters.

Yes, it is a guess on the dominant's part when he strikes up a conversation with you, but it is not entirely an unreasoned/unreasonable one.

_____________________________

(in reply to IvyMorgan)

Profile

Post #: 24

RE: Assumed Monogamy - 10/18/2008 8:55:47 PM

moonvine