RE: A semi philosophical question.

RE: A semi philosophical question. (Full Version)

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

Message

persephonee -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/19/2008 10:10:13 PM)
poen.... i love you. i need you to know that i know that i am not disposable...to anyone and not to myself. i would never feel good in any way about being disposable to anyone, in scene or in life. That would break my heart. (besides, is something like that even possible, given how phukkn cute i am?) If i play with someone for the first time, he is still someone i have watched play...i was just too busy up til now to play with him til this time...scheduling is a bitch for princesses donchaknow. If i havent chatted with him over those teeny tiny hotdogs and sauce at the potluck, or watched him play, or found a couple bottoms in attendance who vouch for him without his knowledge or presence at the time of questioning...something. So i know, or have an inkling of how hes going to play me or what hes aiming to get from me... As for driving my ass?...theres a manual...right there in the ....wait for it....glovebox...[:D] i have just as much responsibility as he to make the scene click...but i cant do it all from where i am...he is never the lifesupport for the whip....its not the implement...its the man behind it that makes it good. wanders off to bed and hopes any of that made any sense at all... perse

KnightofMists -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/20/2008 2:04:08 AM)
god.. are you really that slow to catch on???? LMAO

KnightofMists -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/20/2008 2:47:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: persephonee i have just as much responsibility as he to make the scene click... I couldn't agree more! It takes two to tango as they say. It really just a question of do the individuals want to dance to the type of music that is between the two of them. Somtimes the answer is yes... sometimes it's no... but when the dancing begins... both are responsible for it.

LaTigresse -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/20/2008 3:35:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists god.. are you really that slow to catch on???? LMAO KoM, some just "get it" and some, really never do. Always stuck with the butter knife. Ddited to add............DJ, here's a hint. Please read my first sig line.

persephonee -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/20/2008 4:30:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross Oh barf...take it to IMs where it belongs! That's where the REAL cyber magic happens. Hey LA, a girls gotta take it where she can get it...and i tried cyber, but got criticised for my punctuation...and ruined like 2 keyboards.[:D]

wandersalone -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/20/2008 4:34:34 AM)
OP ... this was a topic that could have been extremely interesting to read as I am sure there are so many people with differing viewpoints and experiences. From reading threads here and on other forums for a long time I have noticed that the most enjoyable ones are threads where the OP returns to reflect on comments others have made and to continue deepening the discussion. Reading your responses however it has seemed more like you wanted to actually block further discussion by re-iterating time and time again that your view is somehow more valid that those of people that disagree. Of course tone and intent can be hard to read on line however I am fairly certain I am not alone in having felt this from reading your responses. Even the wording of your OP was quite leading and biased ... chewed up and spit out vs a more serious bond?? I have watched many casual scenes where (from my perspective) the sub was not always treated as something entirely disposable and less valuable (which is what I inferred from your opening comments). I have no doubt of your higher education however I confess to also feeling that your pointing out minor errors on the part of others when their posts were still able to be understood was both patronising and immature. (after all, it is not like they committed the deadly sin of saying they were a dominate for goodness sake). For the record I personally have wanted/needed different types of play at different times and each was equally valid/enjoyable at the time. For me the intent with which I and the dominant enter the scene makes the difference.... do we both know that it is a one off experience or is this part of an on-going relationship. ps. Welcome to the dark side. edited to add....and this dear friends is why I tend to stay in P & RS.... it suits my off topic responses [:D]

persephonee -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/20/2008 4:35:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists god.. are you really that slow to catch on???? LMAO Sir, You knew that at the first post....and his pouting and whining really makes me hot....Now theres an example of twue domliness. At least i know im hot for him now.[8\|]

DoctorJeep -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/20/2008 6:01:05 AM)
The truth is, as you have pointed out, that I freely admitted my bias in this case - in the very first post. I was hoping to have a serious discussion. Also, I have said a bunch of times, that I do not view any other's legitimate view as "lesser" or wrong and I have twice tried to clarify that. By the same token, why should I not have the right to debate the merits of my side any less than the other side has the right to argue theirs? For the record, I do respect those who argued the other side reasonably. I believe that I commented positively on people who represented the other side well. As to responding to the insults of the silly - I mean those who specifically set out to be rude, I tried at first, to prevent drama, but you are correct. I should have simply ignored it. As to what I find fatuous, well... To each his own. Seriously, all the strutting and name calling is not age appropriate and sometimes people need to be called on just simply being rude. If you have found me rude, to you, it was unintentional.

kyraofMists -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/20/2008 6:24:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DoctorJeep As to responding to the insults of the silly - I mean those who specifically set out to be rude, I tried at first, to prevent drama, but you are correct. I should have simply ignored it. As to what I find fatuous, well... To each his own. Seriously, all the strutting and name calling is not age appropriate and sometimes people need to be called on just simply being rude. If you have found me rude, to you, it was unintentional. Well this is amusing... if others perceive you as being rude then it is 'unintentional', so basically their misperception. But when you perceive others as being rude then it is 'intentional'. You started this thread preaching your one way is best and better than others and that if it isn't done your way then it is shallow and disposable. Now when people call you on that you find every reason to ignore the posts rather than saying, 'oh shit, I fucked up. I didn't mean to say that, my bad'. Name-calling and bashing the ones who call you out on it, says to me you said exactly what you meant, that you think people who do things differently than you are more shallow and not as good. Knight's Kyra

BlackPhx -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/20/2008 7:27:52 AM)
~~Fast Reply~~ I was talking to persephonee this morning and while this may not be exactly what the OP was talking about it is something that people also need to consider. There are subs out there who are completely disposable and in fact are seeking those who will do exactly that. While many of the people here are focused on some sort of relationship, even if only for an hour or so with a partner and a whip, there are others out there who are self loathing, do not desire a relationship of any duration both Top and Bottom. These people are the extremes, the Sexual Sadist who seeks out the Sexual Masochist and vice versa and rarely are they healthy for each other. One such from the past is Sharon Lopatka http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharon_Lopatka, and there are others. Many of these for what ever reason, past, present or even percieved future (short term) seek out those they know will "punish" them to the degree they desire. I have played with some hard sadists but when my little animal hindbrain says this one is dangerous I listen. I am just not that disposable. I think fewer people would have had their back up in the first place if it had been defined more as Relationship verses Casual Play. Casual play implies something else...that it is a coming together temporarily for mutual pleasure, including aftercare without having to form any more of a relationship than negotiations/agreements and aftercare require. Even casual play however is rarely without someone observing the other at play to know they are going to be safe in their hands or at least talking first. poenkitten

DoctorJeep -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/20/2008 8:09:45 AM)
quote: ncluding aftercare without having to form any more of a relationship than negotiations/agreements and aftercare require. Even casual play however is rarely without someone observing the other at play to know they are going to be safe in their hands or at least talking first. poenkitten quote: ORIGINAL: BlackPhx ~~Fast Reply~~ I was talking to persephonee this morning and while this may not be exactly what the OP was talking about it is something that people also need to consider. There are subs out there who are completely disposable and in fact are seeking those who will do exactly that. While many of the people here are focused on some sort of relationship, even if only for an hour or so with a partner and a whip, there are others out there who are self loathing, do not desire a relationship of any duration both Top and Bottom. These people are the extremes, the Sexual Sadist who seeks out the Sexual Masochist and vice versa and rarely are they healthy for each other. One such from the past is Sharon Lopatka http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharon_Lopatka, and there are others. Many of these for what ever reason, past, present or even percieved future (short term) seek out those they know will "punish" them to the degree they desire. I have played with some hard sadists but when my little animal hindbrain says this one is dangerous I listen. I am just not that disposable. I think fewer people would have had their back up in the first place if it had been defined more as Relationship verses Casual Play. Casual play implies something else...that it is a coming together temporarily for mutual pleasure, including aftercare without having to form any more of a relationship than negotiations/agreements and aftercare require. Even casual play however is rarely without someone observing the other at play to know they are going to be safe in their hands or at least talking first. poenkitten Thank you very much for writing this. The first part is something I completely agree with - though from the other side. The second contained a very good suggestion that I will keep in mind for the future.

leadership527 -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/20/2008 1:14:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW With a little thought, it is possible to express one's preferences and emphasize how important those preferences are to oneself without belittling someone else's preferences. Agreed.. not just with this but your entire post. Granted that wasn't one of my more sensitive postings. That just goes to show you that even when writing about your own relationship with no reference to anyone else, passion can still be offensive.

BlackPhx -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/20/2008 1:40:26 PM)
Remember that I said "safe in their hands". The person with the whip is in JUST as much danger as the person being whipped..more, as if something goes wrong, and things do from time to time no matter how good you are, if that person is NOT stable, or develops regret etc...even if everything was done in a dungeon/club in front of witnesses..the person with the whip can be charged with assault, rape, battery or any number of things. Even if it is dismissed and your new address does not include rooming with Bubba or Bette, it can be very costly to defend yourself and can cost job, family, friends and other things like reputation as well. One of the largest dangers of casual play IMHO is that the person on the cross may have a problem you DON"T know about, and they may not think to tell you. Flashbacks and Fugues do happen and if you are not familiar with the person how the hell will you know they are not just sub spacing but are instead lost in an internal hell. Not to say casual play isn't good from time to time, but it isn't all that casual to be honest. You aren't looking for a relationship, but you also don't just grab a whip and flail away at anybody hanging around a cross unless they are standing there with a sign saying 10 strokes for $1.00. There is some conversation, negotiation and an agreement that both walk away afterward with no strings attached. sort of a temporary verbal contract to play and hold the other free of blame. poenkitten

windchymes -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/20/2008 3:01:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DoctorJeep To the Subs: Would you rather be chewed up and spit out or, would you rather have a Dom who sees you and into you where you have developed a more serious bond? The latter one....the first one isn't even a speck of an option. At least for me.

youscreamncream -> without a connection,I don't see the point (11/21/2008 12:40:25 AM)
I need to get inside her head to some extent to get anything out of the scene. Edit: Having read the whole thread...there may be something to the idea that having less connection frees the bottom to be more responsive..no care for what the top thinks...thank you mrharsh,something to think on.

Wildfleurs -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/21/2008 4:33:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DoctorJeep I had written on another thread about the need to see your sub as not just a toy. Fellow Doms, don't get me wrong, she is there to serve and to please, but, to truly get the most out of her I believe that there must be a mental connection when vertical before play begins. As such, she trusts you more and you explore her more fully. I find that I simply get bored with subs who have nothing to themselves. So my question to the Doms and the subs out there is: To the Doms: Which play is better and more satisfying to you? Do you prefer to have the totally disposable little toy? Or, do you find that breaking in one that you actually care for as a person is more of a challenge and produces more of a gain? I suppose that the way that I phrased that indicates my preference... To the Subs: Would you rather be chewed up and spit out or, would you rather have a Dom who sees you and into you where you have developed a more serious bond? To both: Obviously both have thier place depending on the scene and the appetite, but which really makes it for you? I haven't read the thread yet but.... The way you put those options its pretty obvious which one I should want. But regardless of the way they are worded I actually prefer the more serious bond. I've had casual and while its certainly easy, fun, and no messy entanglements or feelings to worry about, its precisely that lack of emotions or depth (yes I said it!) that make casual meaningless and boring for me at this point. I never really thought of myself as a playtoy, but rather it was two adults getting their need for kink/BDSM out in a mutually and pretty much agreed upon way. I've been with my owner for quite a while and done things with him that I can't imagine doing with anyone else and have such a great bond (both through mutual attraction and also a lot of work to establish and keep trust) that I can't even see the value of doing anything other than enjoy that bond - the choice between that and the wading pool is a no brainer for me. C~

NorthernGent -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/21/2008 4:50:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DoctorJeep Which play is better and more satisfying to you? Do you prefer to have the totally disposable little toy? Or, do you find that breaking in one that you actually care for as a person is more of a challenge and produces more of a gain? I suppose that the way that I phrased that indicates my preference... For me, it depends where I'm at in my life, and as such my activities are pragmatic solutions to that which I need at a point in time. At times, I enjoy taking what I need with little consideration for the one on the receiving end. Yet at this stage of my life, I prefer the solid relationship that you imply. In my experience, I have been able to care for someone and treat her as a 'totally disposable little toy'. When needs must.

NessunDorma -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/21/2008 8:45:13 AM)
I think certainly both have their place. The interesting question is "If she wants to be treated like a toy, are you treating her as 'just a toy' by giving her what she needs?' I suppose in the long run I want a sub who needs that, sometimes, and then, sometimes doesn't. So perhaps it's more complicated than just one or the other.

DoctorJeep -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/21/2008 11:15:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NessunDorma I think certainly both have their place. The interesting question is "If she wants to be treated like a toy, are you treating her as 'just a toy' by giving her what she needs?' I suppose in the long run I want a sub who needs that, sometimes, and then, sometimes doesn't. So perhaps it's more complicated than just one or the other. In the course of reading these, I realize that I need careful in my phrases. So, let me distinguish between literal, "all you mean to me girl is as a toy, I care nothing for you" viewpoint and the view where yes you care about her, but right now your mutual beast needs to treat her contemptuously as a plaything. I abhor the first and most love the second (when the time calls for it).

DoctorJeep -> RE: A semi philosophical question. (11/21/2008 11:18:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: DoctorJeep Which play is better and more satisfying to you? Do you prefer to have the totally disposable little toy? Or, do you find that breaking in one that you actually care for as a person is more of a challenge and produces more of a gain? I suppose that the way that I phrased that indicates my preference... For me, it depends where I'm at in my life, and as such my activities are pragmatic solutions to that which I need at a point in time. At times, I enjoy taking what I need with little consideration for the one on the receiving end. Yet at this stage of my life, I prefer the solid relationship that you imply. In my experience, I have been able to care for someone and treat her as a 'totally disposable little toy'. When needs must. I completely concur. Though, I find that the "YOU ARE MY TOY" sessions are improved with trust.

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 [5] 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875