LadyLou
Posts: 110
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: hardbodysub
quote:
ORIGINAL: LadyLou
quote:
ORIGINAL: hardbodysub
When you look at the comments and attitudes of many of the D/s dominants here, it looks like they expect the sub's relinquishment of power to be pretty unconditional.
Far from it! Don't you consider it foolhardy to make such emphatic statements concerning strangers and the way they run their entire relationships by just reading tiny little snippets of it on a forum?
I think you are seriously missing the underlying current of a lot of the replies here. Whilst I can't speak for everyone, if you actually read into the underlying current, it is quite the opposite to what you suggest.
No, I don't think I am missing anything. I think you are. My statement was not "foolhardy", nor "emphatic"; it was very conditional. I didn't say "all dominants", or even "a majority" of dominants, I said "many". Nor was it about how strangers "run their entire relationships", nor was it based on "just reading tiny little snippets of it". It referred to the typical comments and what the attitude "looks like", based on several years of posts here. Perhaps "unconditional" wasn't the appropriate word to use, but I was running out of synonyms for "willing", "subservient", and "unresistant".
Lol! I suggested you were “foolhardy” as you made a generalisation (which you admit you have formed by reading these forums), and which may well of encompassed my relationship (I assumed you were referring to the posters in this particular thread with your statement of “when you look at the comments and attitudes of the dominants here”). You don't know me, thus I consider it 'foolhardy' to make defining statements which concern things you have no understanding of. As you say, you are basing your opinion on what it “looks like” without showing any empathetic understanding of what you are saying. You may well do, but your remark suggested otherwise to me.
quote:
Countless posts have stated how a sub should not have any resistance in him, how he should offer his submission willingly, how his only desire should be to serve, how it should be completely about his domina, and not about him, how the domina is not interested in a struggle. So what does that make it "look like" they want? How is it "the opposite" of what I said?
I too have been reading these forums for a few years. Despite the occasional 'one twue way' types, I have not seen many people state how a sub is suppose to be, rather I see people stating their preferences for a partner. In fact, I see 'many' dominant woman here state that they seek a sub who submits selectively and conditionally. Who submits to them because of a fondness/love/respect/affection for them, and only when it has been established. I see many dominants stating that they don't expect immediate submission and would be turned off by someone who submitted from the “get-go”. I see many dominants here state and demonstrate an understanding that submission will take time, trust, chemistry etc. So let me state one of the underlying currents I refer too; 'they' seek a sub who sets standards for his submission, i.e it's conditional. Indeed, It's this 'quality' submission that makes it appealing.
|
RE: Any Mistress's like subs with a little will power l... - 
Profile
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