The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent

The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Submissive

Message

Jasmyn -> The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (1/19/2006 5:31:29 AM)
The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent. I have some ideas on this but would love to hear the thoughts of others. In whip weilding circles the question is often asked "who is in control?" Some argue the sub, some argue the dom. Arguments for the sub are quite compelling and the nature of consensuality kinda dictates it. But what are they in control of? Limits and what a sub can or will not do can be taken as a given. And doms, is it your philosophy the having of limits is the defining difference between a sub and slave? And so, why? Thanks in advance for your comments :)

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (1/19/2006 6:11:07 AM)
Again this is why I do not use the terms power or control when discussing the Ms or Ds relationship dynamic. Everyone in the relationship has their own personal power, and everyone needs to consent to it for the relationship to occur. No one has power OVER the other in this crucial sense- which is what people usually are actually trying to say when they get into the whole "who really has power?" debate. Relationships take cooperation from those involved in it. If a person does not cooperate, there simply is no relationship, and nothing to have power over. It doesn't matter which PERSON it happens to be. And for me, limits have nothing to do with sub/slave except that subs may be allowed to set and retain their own limits and that slaves accept the limits of their owner. This might work out to be meaningless in certain situations (subs and slaves can have identical limits in life, or some slaves can have more limits than some subs), but the way the authority flows is the important part for me.

Jasmyn -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (1/19/2006 6:56:19 AM)
Trust you to give a clear and succinct answer ...case closed...lol.. but I jest. The elements of power and control do intrigue me and I can't as readily remove them from the equation as you do although I totally get what you are saying in the rest of your post. I to don't see limits as been the defining difference between a sub and slave...but it amuses me that the having of limits are often held up as being the ulimate decider on what constitues 'control' in the 'sub is ulitmately in control' sense along with a sub can always choose not to submit. The former I've never consider it as having any impact on the manner in which I dominate someone, and within a consensual framework I simply see the latter as stubborness.

Heinz -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (1/19/2006 7:24:26 AM)
Limits are not "standard" Every human is diffrent so every Dom(me) and sub , slave are discussing together theire limits. Heinz

veronicaofML -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (1/19/2006 9:39:53 AM)
i am at a guess...You are talking to D only but i for one..am fed up with this "who has the power" thing. if a D says i want no part of you..they have THEIR power then if an s says NO i want nothing to do with you...they have THEIR power. and "I" have seen both sides of this in real life./ i know i didnt help You Ma'am...but i wanted to clear it off my chest... good luck back to Your thread

typesgirl -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (1/19/2006 9:44:36 AM)
Puts on her horns to be Devil's Advocate So if i let Master know that i'm really in the mood for a specific scene, that i want a specific limit pushed, and He does so...who is in charge? Is it Him because He chose to fulfill my request or is it me becuase He's doing what i want? I don't know that i fall on one side or the other but i'm curious how others would interpret that dynamic. typsegirl

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (1/19/2006 9:55:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: typesgirl So if i let Master know that i'm really in the mood for a specific scene, that i want a specific limit pushed, and He does so...who is in charge? Is it Him because He chose to fulfill my request or is it me becuase He's doing what i want? I don't know that i fall on one side or the other but i'm curious how others would interpret that dynamic. typsegirl To me it's easy- the dom is the one who has the authority to say yes or no. Just because he says yes when you want him to do so doesn't mean you suddenly have the authority. Too many doms equate "no" with authority and it tends to give them a lot more grief than necessary. We talk all the time about communication. You communicated your desires, he communicated his agreement to them. Think of a silly situation like this: Dom A gets a sudden craving for Chinese one afternoon. Sub B calls up Dom A on her way home and says "I have been dying for Chinese all day, does that sounds good for dinner to you?" Should Dom A go "Well no way can I get it now, she'll think she can get whatever she wants and walk all over me, so we'll go get Italian"? Thus no one gets what they REALLY want, because the dom isn't secure in his dominance and feels the sub isn't secure in his dominance either. Or Should Dom A go "Yes I've been wanting that all day as well, sounds like a great idea." This everyone gets what they REALLY want. Or a situation like this: Dom A has been wanting Chinese. Sub B calls and says "I've really been wanting Italian, does that sound good to you?" Dom A could do several things here. He could say sure, I know you like it and it would be good. He could say, no I'm not up for that, let's get Chinese. He could say no let's get something else completely. The commonality? The dominant is the one who has the final say. That's really the only relevant part here. Granted you have a complication here- many subs DO want the doms to say no and feel weird if the dom says yes to a request. They want the dom to mind read or just don't get that submissive squirm if they know the dom doesn't want the thing itself, but rather wants to make the sub feel happy. Giving up control and authority over being treated well/given pleasures independent of the doms pleasure is one of the hardest parts of submission for a lot of people.

mossy -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (1/19/2006 12:35:06 PM)
[8\|] quote: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent. I have some ideas on this but would love to hear the thoughts of others.[ 8\|] Since all people are different, and so is each relationship....This question is perhaps is impossible to answer. For there would be as many answers as there are D/s joinings. In theory? Who has the power? The One in control or the one being controlled? Being called Power Exchange,,,,i did give up my personal power. i was not in control. i did give up all control of my life. i balked, i complained, i asked why many times, but i did it. In the end...i always did obey. This went on for years. Until i discovered that the blanket that had been laid down underneath the relationship, was full of holes. Honesty itself was not the foundation upon which it had been laid. Dissent entered my heart, respect slowly left, control's hold loosened. After ugliness i had to leave, granting me the control to end the relationship. Who has the control? Or Who chooses to use it and how? i believe there are many slaves/submissives out there that hold relationships together,,, peacemakers,,,,with their kind and loving attitudes,,,their overlooking things,,,perhaps,, sometimes that should not be overlooked. That is why it is a wise Master in my opinion that treats a good slave as a wonderful treasure.[;)] just my own idea and opinion though.[8D]

phoenixslave -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (1/19/2006 5:08:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jasmyn Limits and what a sub can or will not do can be taken as a given. And doms, is it your philosophy the having of limits is the defining difference between a sub and slave? And so, why? i am in the minority here probably but here goes. as a sub, i had the power to say no. when that didn't work i had the power to never come back. i found far more abuse as a sub then ever as a slave. The reason being that i found a Master who uses me well without abuse. The ultimate veto fades away with the trust i put in him and the care he takes . He takes me farther than any dom ever did willingly. His power lies in the very nature of his respect for both sides of the whip, a thing one can't be sure of with any or every dom. i work to gain his care and he works to keep my trust. Ownership comes with a responsibility to those who truly deserve it. Those who don't recognize this seem to spend alot of time searching for a new slave...imho

IrishMist -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (1/19/2006 7:44:18 PM)
quote: In whip weilding circles the question is often asked "who is in control?" Some argue the sub, some argue the dom. Arguments for the sub are quite compelling and the nature of consensuality kinda dictates it. But what are they in control of? Limits and what a sub can or will not do can be taken as a given. I see it more as a transfer of control. A submissive, and slave ( yes, slave ) start off with the control...and it is through their consent that this power is transfered over to their Master/Dom. A submissive can, if that is what is agreed upon between the two, retain a small measure of control ( hence the use of safewords ), while a slave, eventually transfers ALL control over. What are they in control of or what do they eventually transfer control of over? For a submissive, they are in control of themselves, and the right to say ' I have had enough, it's too much, I can not go any further"; for a slave, they are in control of the right to transfer that power over to another. Until they have done so completly, they still maintain control of themselves and their wellbeing. Just my opinion though

Tapestry -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (1/20/2006 5:33:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jasmyn The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent. I have some ideas on this but would love to hear the thoughts of others. In whip weilding circles the question is often asked "who is in control?" Some argue the sub, some argue the dom. Arguments for the sub are quite compelling and the nature of consensuality kinda dictates it. But what are they in control of? Limits and what a sub can or will not do can be taken as a given. And doms, is it your philosophy the having of limits is the defining difference between a sub and slave? And so, why? Thanks in advance for your comments :) ok, Master and i discussed this at length, and concluded that we do both maintain control, in that we both always have the option of deciding the relationship is over, or staying together. As far as power, that is very much like authority, in that i do choose to give Him all power and authority over me. He's a very benevolent Master, and often asks for my input, although He always makes the final decisions, and i am more than happy about that. i know that if He chooses something other than what i've requested that He has His reasons, whether i'm aware of them or not, and i also know that His decision is always going to be in my best interest. He is without a doubt, better to me than i am to myself, and knows what's best for me. In turn, i long for nothing more than to please Him and serve Him. It's so easy to obey because of the deep trust and love between us. And this seems to be the heart of a M/s relationship. The deeper committment and love which allows for total trust and obedience on the slave's part, and as Master described it to me, "making me happy makes Him happy." And yet, He's always able to keep the big picture in view, so that He's not blinded by His love and devotion to me. This in turn helps me to relax and trust, knowing that i don't have to worry about decisions and choices, i need only obey, serve, and love Him, and He'll take care of the rest. W/we don't really think the having of limits enters into the situation. Yes, we both have limits, mine are definitely less hard than His, simply because i would rather die a hideous death than to ever displease him in any way. But i also know that He wants always to please me, so that often if He's pushing me beyond what i thought was a limit, it's for my own good, and never simply to please Himself, as He's not pleased when i'm not happy. Respect for one another, and for the relationship, is the heart of it all. The closeness and trust, love and intimacy which W/we've achieved as M/s has far surpassed anything either of us has ever known before.

imtempting -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (1/20/2006 6:12:17 AM)
The submissive has control as they can always say no...

mossy -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (1/20/2006 9:08:24 AM)
Tapestry that was so well said, it was beautiful really. For when all is said and done, i need to know when i lay my head down at night, i loved well that day, and i have been well loved. Of course, that is through the good days and the not so good ones.[:)]

strob -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (2/3/2006 10:11:07 AM)
Surely there would be more then one answer to this question and each could be interpreted differently by a different person... I would consider myself in control if I could bring a non-dominant person to dominate me and actually enjoy it. But what do You prefer better: to have control over someone that wants to be controled and enjoys it or to control and dominate someone that actually is not submissive but is just indulging You? Who is in control? quote: ORIGINAL: Jasmyn The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent. I have some ideas on this but would love to hear the thoughts of others. In whip weilding circles the question is often asked "who is in control?" Some argue the sub, some argue the dom. Arguments for the sub are quite compelling and the nature of consensuality kinda dictates it. But what are they in control of? Limits and what a sub can or will not do can be taken as a given. And doms, is it your philosophy the having of limits is the defining difference between a sub and slave? And so, why? Thanks in advance for your comments :)

collaredheart -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (2/3/2006 10:19:50 AM)
I just wanted to say how much i liked your response to this thread phoenixslave. It shows a great understanding and the wonderful and true relationship you have found with your Master. I felt compelled to give you credit for your post. best wishes to you B/both

mitsu -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (2/3/2006 12:00:35 PM)
quote: as a sub, i had the power to say no. I think that we are missing the point here when we think of a sub's limits and refusal as his/her control or power. I believe that the gratification of submission lies in the ability to accept and surrender - not just to say "no," (or to use a safeword or end a relationship) but to say "yes." I can only speak for myself, but I think the act of submission can be a most empowering feat.

perverseangelic -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (2/3/2006 7:03:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: imtempting The submissive has control as they can always say no... But so can the dominant. I dont' believe the ability to refuse means "control." I certainly don't control my relationship simply because I have the option to refuse my owner if he wants to do something I don't. I -do- have that basic human right. However, excercising that right loses me the things that I need and crave. If saying no means I no longer have a realtionship, am I still in control? I don't believe so.

Arpig -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (2/3/2006 8:11:10 PM)
Veronica had it right.

Sensualips -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (2/4/2006 6:50:05 PM)
I will go on record as an "Authority Convert." To me, it just more accurately explains how I view the dynamic. The dominant has the authority to make the decisions, within the limits agreed upon. He or she chooses how to exercise that authority. I have created a few converts of my own as well. ;) Personally I see authority relating to an ongoing s/D relation ship and see control as temporary and situational -- more of a top/bottom thing.

Crazytwice -> RE: The paradox of ownership, control, power, and dissent (2/4/2006 11:58:21 PM)
I think the paradox lies in the fact that it's the top that's really doing the giving. He/she may be enjoying themselves, but they are doing the work.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125