Love, fear, and D/s?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

Love, fear, and D/s?

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

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> Love, fear, and D/s?

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 1:50:59 PM

SimplyMichael

Posts: 7229
Joined: 1/7/2007
Status: offline

It is a common refrain that as a dominant you must be able to "walk away" or that you can't "love your submissive" without losing control in a relationship.

What exactly does that really mean? Every time I hear that my skin crawls and my mind screams "not no but hell no" but I couldn't quite come up with the words to explain why. I hear people advising people to ditch their relationships constantly and frankly, some relationships SHOULD be ditched but far more could be saved if people didn't have such an adversarial viewpoint of relationships.

When you say "I need you to submit to me by doing X" do you really want your submissive to hear "or I will leave you"? Making your partner feel safe and secure to me is the most fundamental task in trying to evoke submission from someone. Now before people start spouting "I don't want warm and fuzzy" D/s remember there is still something that makes you feel safe. It might be having someone who is strict with lots of rules and or who is terrifying but whatever it is, it satisfies what you need to feel safe.

Saying "do this or else" with the else being the ending of the very relationship you are trying to do is build and strengthen is destroying the very foundation you are trying so hard to create. Love shouldn't threaten a relationship, it should enhance it (baring part time or specific relationships where love is not part of the dynamic) and combined with real deeply felt security should allow all sorts risks by both sides.

In addition, what is more submissive, someone who has all options open to them choosing to submit or someone who fears losing someone doing it only to prevent that loss. One would happen even if nobody was watching, the other only if someone was watching.

Now I wrote this from a dominants perspective but both sides play a part in making the other feel safe. How many threads do we see where a dominant is afraid to show their soft underbelly or even cook breakfast for someone without the fear of being seen as soft and weak. Taking care of your partner is a two way street, the safer each side feel, the more genuine and vulnerable they can be which encourages them to be more caring which starts the cycle all over again, drawing them ever closer in an uplifting spiral of love.

(yes, I am feeling mushy today)

Post #: 1

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 1:59:06 PM

Mercnbeth

Posts: 11766
Status: offline

quote:

(yes, I am feeling mushy today)

Had a fun filled, good-time, enjoyable weekend then, huh Michael?

(in reply to SimplyMichael)

Post #: 2

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 2:00:43 PM

SimplyMichael

Posts: 7229
Joined: 1/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

(yes, I am feeling mushy today)

Had a fun filled, good-time, enjoyable weekend then, huh Michael?

Oh god it was fabulous, spoiled in every way imaginable, from beautiful scenery to beautiful scenes.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 3

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 2:20:39 PM

DavanKael

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

I agree with you, Michael and am glad that you had a good weekend! :>
Davan

_____________________________

May you live as long as you wish & love as long as you live
-Robert A Heinlein

It's about the person & the bond,not the bondage
-Me

Waiting is

170NZ (Aka:Sex God Du Jour) pts

Jesus,I've ALWAYS been a deviant
-Leadership527,Jeff

(in reply to SimplyMichael)

Post #: 4

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 2:26:55 PM

LydiaSciKitten

Posts: 43
Joined: 10/16/2008
From: Luxembourg, now in UK
Status: offline

Well, the whole 'If I fall for my submissive then I lose control' is a very tricky trail of thoughts to follow. True, if you the Dominant and you are extremely emotionally involved your submissive, you do empower them in a sense. You will, no matter what, have that little 1% of you that is actually vulnerable to them. If all one is seeking is play, then such a vulnerability is a no-no. Perhaps even for the submissive. And indeed, Doms that become overly emotional sometimes fail to dominate properly.

Yet, if one is actually seeking to be angaged in a romantic relationship, a minimal amount of vulnerability is a sacrifice one has to make. No matter how high your heels or how sharp the sting of your crop, no one can make themsleves perfectly invulnerable to the emotional dynamics of a relationship. The thing is, if the relationship is actually going that way, then probably the D/s dynamics have been very clearly established and have been working very well, and if such is the case, a Dominant can perhaps allow themselves to truly be loving. Of course, that should not take away the intimidation element of the D/s. I find that it's a crucially important psychological component.

Of course, the whole 'loving Dom' as a way of presenting yourself as a Dom is slightly ridiculous in my opinion. How can you be loving when you haven't had the time to even grow affection for your submissive? No one is by definition loving. Or at least they shouldn't be. They should be by definition dominatin, and the rest is up to the evolution of the relationship.

(in reply to SimplyMichael)

Post #: 5

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 2:52:06 PM

RCdc

Posts: 8674
Status: offline

Negativity is an easy trait. Giving up is by far the simpliest option.
And those that do not fear loss have the most power in the relationship. Therefore, to love is seen as a weakness.

I pretty much dig that I am weak.

the.dark.

_____________________________

RC&dc

love isnt gazing into each others eyes - it's looking forward in the same direction

(in reply to SimplyMichael)

Post #: 6

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 3:25:08 PM

leadership527

Posts: 5026
Joined: 6/2/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark
And those that do not fear loss have the most power in the relationship. Therefore, to love is seen as a weakness. I pretty much dig that I am weak.

Good god... To think that love might be considered "weak". That must go in the bin with the other weak concepts like "influence". It's hard to believe that people see concepts which have shaped our the globe as "weak". I'll take my place along side Kennedy, Ghandi, and Mother Theresa on the weak list and feel pretty happy with the company I keep.

Those that do not fear loss have no power in the relationship because, when you get down to it, they have no relationship.

@SimplyMichael
Leadership through fear has it's place and can accomplish something. I choose not to engage in such things for two reasons. For starters, such control is always very very limited and I'd prefer to have more extensive and reliable control over that which is mine. But way more importantly, the choice itself speaks volumes about a person. I do not want to be the kind of person who chooses intimidation over cooperation... fear over love.

_____________________________

~Jeff

I didn't so much "enslave" Carol as I did "enlove" her. - Me
I want a joyous, loving, respectful relationship where the male is in charge and deserves to be. - DavanKael

(in reply to RCdc)

Post #: 7

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 3:26:19 PM

LadyPact

Posts: 32566
Status: offline

Michael, for what it's worth, I've noticed, and I'm glad to see it. Doesn't anyone watch?.

You know, the greatest thing for a Dominant is to accept the fact that they are human and might have weakness. Personally, I am not the great and powerful Domme of Oz. If no one looks behind the curtain, they will not see Me. The illusion is more than enough to sustain most.

What happens when that is not enough? I can't say I know. I wish I did.

Edited to add...... Leadership, I've said it before, but I'll say it again. I like you more and more all of the time.

< Message edited by LadyPact -- 11/10/2008 3:28:40 PM >

_____________________________

The crowned Diva of Destruction. ~ ExT

Beach Ball Sized Lady Nuts. ~ TWD

Happily dating a new submissive. It's official. I've named him engie.

Please do not send me email here. Unless I know you, I will delete the email unread

(in reply to RCdc)

Post #: 8

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 3:28:07 PM

RCdc

Posts: 8674
Status: offline

This is Darcy

As the dominant in our relationship I feel no need whotsoever to issue or offer ultimatums or threats of any kind in order to assert my dominance, or to have the respect, love, service and obedience of the.dark.

Ours is indeed, as you say Michael, a two-way street. the.dark. looks after my needs, pampers me and makes me feel like the most special man on the planet, and I in return love, nurture, respect and care for this woman who chooses to submit to and serve me.

Though it works for some dynamics, I would have it no other way than the.dark. sharing my bed, my house, my food, my car, my thoughts, my fears, my hopes, my dreams and my mushy peas and mint sauce.

I see it as no threat to my dominance or masculinity or authority if I choose to make her a cup of coffee, or a mushroom omelette, or to rub her shoulders when they are tense.

Though in D/s terms she is my property, my slave, my servant, my submissive or whatever other descriptive term you (and I speak generally now) may wish to use, she is also my girl, my lover, my friend and my companion to the very end of this road we call life.

I have no need of threats, or any other control methods. the.dark. may well be mine, but it is because she chooses to be, and not because I demand it. We do have need of fear, however, and I think it was Dean Koontz, of all people, in one of his short stories who said that there can be no love without fear, because once you love somebody then you fear them not being there any longer. That is the fear that we entertain in our relationship, the fear of being parted through circumstances beyond our control (the greatest, of course, being death, who we as mankind will never tame or control), but all other psychological based fears that are used as control methods do not enter into our dynamic.

_____________________________

RC&dc

love isnt gazing into each others eyes - it's looking forward in the same direction

(in reply to SimplyMichael)

Post #: 9

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 3:32:44 PM

RCdc

Posts: 8674
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

quote:

ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark
And those that do not fear loss have the most power in the relationship. Therefore, to love is seen as a weakness. I pretty much dig that I am weak.

Good god... To think that love might be considered "weak". That must go in the bin with the other weak concepts like "influence". It's hard to believe that people see concepts which have shaped our the globe as "weak". I'll take my place along side Kennedy, Ghandi, and Mother Theresa on the weak list and feel pretty happy with the company I keep.

Yup, that is exactly how I feel too. (I really hope you understood my post).

the.dark.

_____________________________

RC&dc

love isnt gazing into each others eyes - it's looking forward in the same direction

(in reply to leadership527)

Post #: 10

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 3:36:05 PM

WhiplashSmile2

Posts: 526
Joined: 6/11/2008
Status: offline

If emotional involvement and loving somebody is a sign of weakness, I'm with "the.dark" on this one. I pretty much dig that I'm weak.

To open myself up to somebody on these levels is amazing and yes a little scarey at first. Honestly, yes, I'm one of the many people who have been burned, or have been in a bad relationship before. I have had to cross or deal with a few of my own internal issues along the way. I met somebody really amazing, my little girl means a lot to me on some many levels. The Amazing thing about Love is that it's like a small seed that sprouts and starts to grow.

My affection for her has been growing over time now, and it still is growing. I've been taking the time to get to know her for who she really is. Based on my experiences and perspective, the whole intimidation element of D/s tends to not make somebody feel comfortable, willing or able to open themselves up on certain levels. There's something to be said about owning somebodys heart, mind, body and soul. How many people truely know the souls of their partner? How many people truely share things from deep inside their minds with one another? I find this process rather bit of an equal "give and take" thing.

Both people need to feel safe and secure in a relationship for it to work, this is my opinion.

I know I want and need to be in a loving relationship. Don't know about other people though. lol...

(in reply to SimplyMichael)

Post #: 11

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 3:36:25 PM

RCdc

Posts: 8674
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LydiaSciKitten
No one is by definition loving.

You cannot make that statement with any truth to it, unless you can define love for everyone else.

quote:

Or at least they shouldn't be.

Who says so? It's cool for you granted, but I would challenge anyone who makes such a broad statement without some flesh.

the.dark.

_____________________________

RC&dc

love isnt gazing into each others eyes - it's looking forward in the same direction

(in reply to LydiaSciKitten)

Post #: 12

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 3:42:10 PM

natasha66

Posts: 321
Joined: 10/14/2006
From: NJ
Status: offline

Personally, i like "warm and fuzzy" - it shows humanity. There is a time and place for everything. Has absolutely nothing to do with His dominance.

_____________________________

"If you bother me again I shall visit you in the small hours of the night and put a bat up your nightdress".
~Basil Fawlty

Collared June 4th, 2008
Love is giving him the power to destroy you, but trusting him not to.

(in reply to RCdc)

Post #: 13

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 3:49:43 PM

MadRabbit

Posts: 3460
Joined: 8/9/2006
Status: offline

It's a thought central to leadership ideas, particularly business, where a degree of emotional detachment is necessary for the event that emotion will get in the way of properly disciplining or firing an employee.

Of course, D/S relationships aren't business relationships that are formed on impersonal grounds with a minimum of personal trust for the purpose of cooperation toward individual financial goals.

If we attempted to apply this idea to a parental dynamic where one was advised to not love their children to make discipline easier, the statement would probably be viewed as ludicrous. Since parents manage to effectively manage an authority dynamic without their emotional attachment becoming a burden, it shouldn't necessarily be an issue in a D/S relationship.

Add into the equation that a D/S relationship is one involving a (hopefully) responsible, mature, adult submissive, instead of an immature child, who is (hopefully) supporting the dominant and working toward the same goal as them, then the necessity of such detachment is even less needed.

This isn't a Slave Academy or a secret European House of Domination (at least not in my lifestyle). It's a relationship between two adults.

I find that the introduction of such logic as a necessary element mostly stems from insecurity. Dominants are insecure because emotional attachment makes them vulnerable to the possibility that this attachment might be manipulated into a shift in the power dynamic.

Is it possible? Yeah. Can emotional attachment get in the way? Hell yeah.

But I think it's more constructive to the relationship to work on moving beyond that insecurity instead of protecting one's self with limitations that serve only to fuel that insecurity.

At best, such a code is only constructive in the initial stages of getting to know a partner where time is needed to develop that trust. However, emotional detachment during that stage is good idea in any relationship.

_____________________________

Advice for New Dominants
The Unpolitically Correct Lifestyle Definitions

Obama is NOT the Messiah! He's just a VERY NAUGHTY BOY

(in reply to SimplyMichael)

Post #: 14

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 3:55:45 PM

SimplyMichael

Posts: 7229
Joined: 1/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark

quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

quote:

ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark
And those that do not fear loss have the most power in the relationship. Therefore, to love is seen as a weakness. I pretty much dig that I am weak.

Good god... To think that love might be considered "weak". That must go in the bin with the other weak concepts like "influence". It's hard to believe that people see concepts which have shaped our the globe as "weak". I'll take my place along side Kennedy, Ghandi, and Mother Theresa on the weak list and feel pretty happy with the company I keep.

Yup, that is exactly how I feel too. (I really hope you understood my post).

the.dark.

Leadership, I think they meant love is PERCIEVED by many as weakness, not that either of them see the other that way

(in reply to RCdc)

Post #: 15

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 3:57:14 PM

SimplyMichael

Posts: 7229
Joined: 1/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark

quote:

ORIGINAL: LydiaSciKitten
No one is by definition loving.

You cannot make that statement with any truth to it, unless you can define love for everyone else.

quote:

Or at least they shouldn't be.

Who says so? It's cool for you granted, but I would challenge anyone who makes such a broad statement without some flesh.

the.dark.

I think what she meant is people rarely walk around in love with everyone and that doing so can be problematic. There is one thing being loving/caring with others and a whole nother mess "being in love" with whomever you meet.

(in reply to RCdc)

Post #: 16

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 3:57:34 PM

Fizzgig168

Posts: 28
Joined: 4/29/2008
Status: offline

I think the fear is not of being weak, but of being *vulnerable.* The two look awful similar but they aren't. And it's damn scary for anyone, Top, bottom or vanilla to allow themselves to be vulnerable.

::shrug:: I've got this shirt, it says "Those that fear love fear life and those that fear life are already 3 parts dead." Those that don't play it safe get hurt a lot more. But there are so many more opportunites to find incredible happiness that come with that risk. I'll toss the dice any damn day of the week.

Great post, SimplyMichael.

_____________________________

"Fall if you must fall. But if you are going to fall, fall hard and fall completely. It is so much better than some suspended animation which can never tell you anything about your life."

(in reply to RCdc)

Post #: 17

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 4:38:52 PM

leadership527

Posts: 5026
Joined: 6/2/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MadRabbit
It's a thought central to leadership ideas, particularly business, where a degree of emotional detachment is necessary for the event that emotion will get in the way of properly disciplining or firing an employee.

Actually, it is an OLD-SCHOOL thought from business (and military) circles. The notion of the detached leader has kind of gone by the wayside as an anachronism. I actually think the last book I got in the business context for leadership was called something like, "Motivation through love" or somesuch. It definitely relied on LOVE as a primary motivator within the business context. Insofar as any managers I might've been mentoring, I'd look em in the eye and say, "So listen, if you don't have the spine to discipline someone you care about, then you're really not cut out to be a manager."

And this just in from my slave girl.. hot off the IM window...
Somehow, somewhere, something has gone really really wrong when love is considered a bad thing.

_____________________________

~Jeff

I didn't so much "enslave" Carol as I did "enlove" her. - Me
I want a joyous, loving, respectful relationship where the male is in charge and deserves to be. - DavanKael

(in reply to MadRabbit)

Post #: 18

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 4:50:44 PM

SimplyMichael

Posts: 7229
Joined: 1/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MadRabbit

If we attempted to apply this idea to a parental dynamic where one was advised to not love their children to make discipline easier, the statement would probably be viewed as ludicrous. Since parents manage to effectively manage an authority dynamic without their emotional attachment becoming a burden, it shouldn't necessarily be an issue in a D/S relationship.

That was some insightful stuff!

(in reply to MadRabbit)

Post #: 19

RE: Love, fear, and D/s? - 11/10/2008 4:51:44 PM

MadRabbit

Posts: 3460
Joined: 8/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

Somehow, somewhere, something has gone really really wrong when love is considered a bad thing.

I certainly agree with that, but it doesn't necessarily have to go that far. The only thing I can say in support of this cliche is that at the very least, it's good to understand and be fully aware of the liability that emotional attachment can cause.

_____________________________

Advice for New Dominants
The Unpolitically Correct Lifestyle Definitions

Obama is NOT the Messiah! He's just a VERY NAUGHTY BOY

(in reply to leadership527)

Post #: 20

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> Love, fear, and D/s?

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.142