Someone elses rules (Full Version)

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



Message

VampiresLair -> Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 1:41:19 PM)

This is prompted by a comment Fox has gotten several times over the year we have been together.
He has been contacted by others, male and female, dom and sub alike. He is as social as I am, so I never worry too much about who he speaks with. He has only one rule, in order to move to instant messenger whomever wants him to chat with them has to ask me for permission to do so. Since it is just for conversation, I dont see why that should be a problem. He has been contacted a few times by girls who do not seem to believe he is taken, which is why I have made the rule that THEY have to contact me, not ask permission through him.
I am shocked by the number of people who do not want to continue conversations with him, even after asking me if they can do so, because he is not free to discuss all aspects of his training and our sex life. He has rules about what he can and cant talk about, and some things he has to ask permission to discuss. He outright declines conversation about what he would do if thye played with him, and other hypothetical situations like that. They get tired of it and tell him they dont like dealing with "someone elses rules". This boggles my mind. If you are contacting an owned slave, asking his or her owner permission to speak with them... why would you then decide you dont like someone elses rules that far into it? 
If you contact someone who is open about being owned, do you expect not to have to worry about their owners rules? Would you take offense if the topic you wanted to discuss was against those rules and the slave refused, even though you were dominant?
I think thats what I find confusing. Are these people (usually women, but not solely) insulted becasue Fox says no to them even though they are dominant, or do they seriously not want to deal with rules and want him to sidestep them to make them happy?

DV



IvyMorgan -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 1:52:06 PM)

I find, when replying "I'm in a relationship" about 60% of people don't reply back.

Of those who do... there will be about 80% who start a conversation with a view to either usurping that relationship, or getting me to play away from it.

The remaining 10% choose to selectivly forget that I'm in a relationship at all, and, about 12 memos later say "why aren't you owned?"

Very few people are actually nice about it.

(all figures are guesses)



TreasureKY -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 1:58:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: VampiresLair

... Are these people (usually women, but not solely) insulted becasue Fox says no to them even though they are dominant, or do they seriously not want to deal with rules and want him to sidestep them to make them happy?


To be honest, it could be any of those things... but it could just as easily be that the only reason they want to chat is to satisfy their own desires... whatever they may be... and your rules get in the way.

Perhaps I'm just an anti-social kinda person, but I don't understand why a dominant would want to talk to someone else's slave to begin with.



lobodomslavery -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 2:00:14 PM)

i think people should respect each other 's choices. if a slave is owned , i think it ends the matter and the inquirer should respect that fact and not pester him or castigate him for obeying someone else's rules. is that not the true essence of slavery anyway that the sub, the male in this case must obey the Female Dominant and show complete respect for Her Right to have authority over him and control his life. After all that is Her entitlement as a Female Dominant, otherwise it would be just pretend slavery and a joke anyway could break rules and there would be no consequences it does not work like that, when owned, the Owner's word is law to the slave
kevin



hopelesslyInvo -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 2:07:50 PM)

i can understand their frustration in not being able to so much as speak freely, but i can't understand their point of view, reason for contacting, or interest in the first place when they know he has you.



DiurnalVampire -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 2:15:32 PM)

I have no problem with them talking to him about his photography and modeling. He can talk al he wants about his interests in the lifestyle and activities he has commented on in the forums, and even about his masochism. However, I draw the line at specifics about what I do with him and our sex life. We both agree that hypothetical situatons about his service to others is innapropriate.
He has had conversations that were completely within his OK areas cut off becasue they dont like his having to ask me before he can do things. He needs my OK to go chat on messenger if I am hope, and even that rankles someone.
Thank you all for your responses. I find it hard to figure out some people sometimes. I talk to owned and unowned subs all the time and this has never been an issue with me before.



CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 2:28:37 PM)

We've encountered this a number of times, and I'm afraid I've become a little cynical. We don't tend to restrict our servants on a social level. They're allowed to attend local events, submissive special interest groups, and to chat for those who are interested, as long as the individual in question 'says howdy', so to speak, to us. They have certain things that they're encouraged to let us know if they've been subjected to (like pressure to cyber, etc.), and if something goes wrong, everyone involved knows, up front, that -we- will deal with it, typically by terminating the outsider's privileges.

Unfortunately, we've run into a -large- percentage of individuals who -insist- on bringing up topics that our servants are not allowed to discuss, trying to force our servants to disobey, or trying to convince our servants that our rules are actually 'abuse'...and when we call them on it, and ask how they would feel if we behaved in that manner with -their- servants, all of a sudden they either cut off conversation, or they cut off conversation -and- start badmouthing us in the community. I've never understood the mentality, though in several cases, I have my own paranoid suspicions. In any case, it won't stop us from encouraging our servants to interact... we just keep our eyes and ears open and school our servants well in their instructions (and trust them to abide by them... 'cause if we can't do that, they aren't really ours anyway.)



IronBear -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 3:07:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: VampiresLair


I am shocked by the number of people who do not want to continue conversations with him, even after asking me if they can do so, because he is not free to discuss all aspects of his training and our sex life. He has rules about what he can and cant talk about, and some things he has to ask permission to discuss. He outright declines conversation about what he would do if thye played with him, and other hypothetical situations like that. They get tired of it and tell him they dont like dealing with "someone elses rules". This boggles my mind. If you are contacting an owned slave, asking his or her owner permission to speak with them... why would you then decide you dont like someone elses rules that far into it? 
If you contact someone who is open about being owned, do you expect not to have to worry about their owners rules? Would you take offense if the topic you wanted to discuss was against those rules and the slave refused, even though you were dominant?
I think thats what I find confusing. Are these people (usually women, but not solely) insulted becasue Fox says no to them even though they are dominant, or do they seriously not want to deal with rules and want him to sidestep them to make them happy?

DV



What an interesting, amusing and informative post DV and before I start my reply, many thanks for sharing so much about your relationship and it's dynamic. Essentially, I have a rule that what happens in Bruin Cottage stays in Bruin Cottage and only those who need to know are informed. This notwithstanding, I am happy to share most of what transpires with people provided that none of my people are placed at risk (ridicule or any other form of social stigma). Most people would never be given the legal names of any Bruin Cottage collars for there is no reason for them to know. Many decades ago I developed an excelent format for group security when I was running a 60+ coven (The Coven of Lothlorien) in Perth Western Australia and have adapted that system for my home. Initially, all primary enquiries come to me for a decision on the best way of dealing with it. Everyone seems to have their own circle of contacts and internet outlets so I generally have no issues with the contacts there. I do require that all new contacts request permission countersigned by Lady Neets (mostly to keep things upfront and us both in the loop). The few people who have baulked at obtaining permission have in the main been males and upon investigation have a demonstraitable record of maliciousness and trolling. To the best of my knowledge, none here has suffered any form of deprivation by having these people loosing interest in them. In fact I'd say we have savced some grief by filtering out the idiot element.

On the other side of the coin, and those here (sub/slaves) who I have been in contact with, know that if their profile shows they are collared, I will always send my regards and respect to their owner/s even if some form of permission is noit required. It is jusrt a matter foir good manners.



apiercedkitty -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 3:20:30 PM)

~FR~
 
i just think it speaks volumes about the person making the contact. It sounds like they're just looking for wanking material wherever they can get it - why else would they need to ask hypothetical questions about what Fox would do with them? Or ask questions about sex between the two of you?
If i think about it too much, the society we live in makes me sad. So many people only looking out for him/herself - not bothering to give 2 shits about anyone. They want what they want when they want it. Period. It's just a very selfish society, as a whole, imho.



YourhandMyAss -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 3:31:42 PM)

There's a lot of reasons why one would wish to talk to someone elses property. if all people stopped speaking to every one owned there'd be a lot of silence.

Slaves are humans first and have interests and thoughts that might interest others. being owned doesn't make you stop being interesting or desrieable to carry on a conversation with.


quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

Perhaps I'm just an anti-social kinda person, but I don't understand why a dominant would want to talk to someone else's slave to begin with.




hereyesruponyou -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 3:36:22 PM)

I have not placed many rules on my pet's communication with others, except where i feel a friend may be taking advantage of him and his good nature. I really don't want another child to babysit thanks. Without any requirement from me, he chooses to share some communication with me when he is unsure how to respond or feels it crosses the lines. I am always pleased when he requests my council because i know it makes him more comfortable to let me guide him. I can't say i have ever felt any type of compulsion to talk to someone else's property, except for a few sub/slaves i was friendly with prior to the relationship and then i am only comfortable with surface conversation, such as congratuations and well wishes. Nothing personal against anyone else, but i get what i need from my own relationships, i don't really want to know all the dirty details of yours, lol.

DV, i know fox is so devoted to you that your rules are more for protocol and protection than any other reason. I think perhaps he is also of the "too nice" variety. Some people we will never understand, as common sense is anything but common it seems



candystripper -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 3:38:38 PM)

Well, I'd guess some are wankers, some are 'twisted sisters' who cannot want a submissive unless someone else has already collared them, and a few are just socially inept.
 
Just cuz they're women or self-identify as Dommes dun ensure they're great people.  I have strong feelings about what anyone in a committed relationship should be offering to tell me, never mind worrying about having an inquiry I sail off discomfort my friend, for Gawd's sake. 
 
A lack of respect is always a deal-breaker with me...that's what this sort of nuisance conduct is really driven by, at its base, IMO.

 candystripper  [sm=pole.gif]



LadyPact -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 3:41:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY
Perhaps I'm just an anti-social kinda person, but I don't understand why a dominant would want to talk to someone else's slave to begin with.


Off of the top of My head, I can give you some examples.  One would be a comment on a forum post, to say that what was written was appreciated or well done.  Another would be concern for physical health, if it was mentioned that person was ill.  Also might be included a note of congratulations at a collaring or an engagement. 

All of the above, I've done in regard to DV's Fox.  I'm well aware of her rules about what contact he may have.  I always acknowledge her place as his Dominant any time I write to him and wish her My regards.

That's not such a difficult concept, is it?



DiurnalVampire -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 3:47:30 PM)

Becasue Fox is so new to all of this, he has often talked with other submissives about things he has been involved in or interested in to help them find their places. New doms have contacted him as well, with similiar questions. I have mentored so I can understand the interest. However, when he tells someone "I am sorry but my Owner wouldnt want me commenting on that." its as if he told them something offensive.
LP and Fox have talked often, and I have never had a problem. He has plenty of other regular contacts I dont worry about. It makes me suspicious of the motives of people contacting him when they have these issues. I am somewhat relieved to know it isnt JUST with us though.



ProlificNeeds -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 3:50:25 PM)

I don't tell people I have rules, I just refuse to partake in things that are out of the question for whatever reason. Whether my partner doesn't like it, or I don't like it, doesn't matter. I ain't doing them, period and any a$$hole who can't accept that I have clear lines that I draw, is of no interest to me.

It happens a lot, which is why I never bother to answer c-mail anymore, even if it's a nice polite message of some vague interest. Unless it's directly related to a forum discussion which I am part of, from a poster I recognize, it goes in the trash.



candystripper -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 3:52:18 PM)

WTF?  Why would a person be any more or less appealing as a friend due to being unavailable as a lover/partner/etc.?
 
Gawd forbid I limited my openness to new people in such a way.
 
candystripper  [sm=pole.gif]



CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 3:57:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

Perhaps I'm just an anti-social kinda person, but I don't understand why a dominant would want to talk to someone else's slave to begin with.



I'm not a particularly social person (INTJ), but I have social contacts extending through the range of human expressions. I'm a d-type, and have friends who are s-types, some of whom are happily owned. I talk with them because we've known each other for a long time, and genuinely like one another as -people-... the same reason a person picks -any- friend. Frankly, I don't always ask people that I contact socially if they're collared, and some friends that I've had for a number of years, or who were between keepers when I met them, entered relationships in the interim.

I always respect another's rules for hir servants, but just because a friend enters a new relationship, I don't cut that person out of my life, and just because someone is in a relationship doesn't mean that I won't converse with hir or even develop a friendship.



hereyesruponyou -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 4:29:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: candystripper

WTF?  Why would a person be any more or less appealing as a friend due to being unavailable as a lover/partner/etc.?
 
Gawd forbid I limited my openness to new people in such a way.
 
candystripper  [sm=pole.gif]


Why would you feel the desire or even need to ask a friend about explicit details of their play and/or sex life with their partner? Or to ask them to imagine what it would be like if they were with you instead? I think the problem is when people go beyond a typical level of friendship and push toward a familiarity with someone that is not deserved.



DiurnalVampire -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 4:38:12 PM)

I dont even ask Silk about details, and I know Angel better than anyone out there (except maybe her herself). There are limitations on what you ask for details on, even between friends. And when this is a new contact, there is no way you can know him well enough to ask something like that.  I mean, I asked my friend DAni how the sex was on her honeymoon becasue she had expressed to me she was worried about it since she was a virgin. Thats a little different from me asking details about positions and length and the like.
It is one thing for someone curious to ask if you have ever been whipped or hit with a crop. It is a whole nother story to ask how long it lasted, where it lead, how erect it got you, whether you came from it and other details when this is someone you barely know. One is asking out of curiousity, the other is trying to live vicariously through the story.
Maybe its just me, but I  think if this isnt a conversation you would have with someone in real life, why would you think it is OK online?




antipode -> RE: Someone elses rules (11/3/2008 5:15:43 PM)

It is kind of hard to answer questions about the motivations of people one does not know. All I could do is conjecture, which I think is kind of useless.

I can tell you about me, though, FWIW. I stopped using IM altogether, because it is such a HUGE waste of time. 90% of everybody out there seems to be fake, moronic, or both. I use Skype, so do all my good friends, and my family. It is actually much more fun to voice talk to people, with cam, now that that has become easy. And because I bought this international flat rate deal, I can even talk to my peeps when I am in the car, because I can call Skype from my cellphone. Best thing since sliced bread, and even good connections with friends in China, Australia, and South Africa. Luv it. Way to go. IM is so 2000.

The other thing is that I personally only deal with the person I want to speak to. If the two of you, for instance, have whatever arrangement between you about who asks what of whom, that's between the two of you, does not involve me in any way, shape or form. I want to talk to A. so I have to explain to B. why I want to talk to A? Pfff. That is at best torturous, at worst a ritual. And in my view, a ritual that doesn't do anything,. My sub wants to talk to someone? Talk. My sub wants to tell me about it? Talk. Not? I got plenty of stuff to do. I don't want to read her email, either.



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




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