RE: Jealous Owners?

RE: Jealous Owners? (Full Version)

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

Message

YourhandMyAss -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/9/2009 10:36:16 AM)
Daddy wouldn't have to forbid me. The moment I knew they were detrimental I would of cut off all contact by myself on my own violition. quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact As for My own submissive, I have no problem with him speaking to anyone, regardless of gender or role, if they know how to respect the dynamic that he is in and conversing with them is not to his detriment. We have run into people who can't. Yes, I will forbid him further contact with someone when these situations come up. I can count on one hand the times I've had to invoke this.

Rainfire -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/9/2009 1:13:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AquaticSub Never said he was being a hypocrite and I'm not saying you should argue about it. I'm just saying that I think the logic behind the rule itself is flawed since it doesn't do anything to stop the incoming mail (as the undesirable mails come from people who don't read/respect profiles) and either way it just gets deleted. I get that it works for you and that's good. I'm not trying to debate in the terms of you but in the general sense since you definately aren't the only couple who has this rule. But I do have to disagree with you about not chatting with people when you're taken. I feel that sets up the "forbidden fruit" thing and just leads to trouble and temptation. I also feel that if a relationship is so fragile that it can't shoulder people having friends of both genders then it's probably going to be fail for other reasons or someone is going to end up cheating anyway and the no-chatting rule only delayed things. AS, I'm not sure I agree with the generalization that relationships are fragile if we as a couple decide not to chat with Dominants of the opposite sex. Lumus and I have a similar rule in place like Aynne and her Master. It has not a single thing to do fragility of our relationship, it's not about my inability to protect myself, but about love, caring, respect and above all, for my own protection. My very own friendliness and politeness work against me. Some people think that being friendly and polite means that I want more or am looking for more than what I say I am. And there are some that have a hard time believing that anyone would have a profile on CM just supposedly for the boards. "Forbidden fruit" can be any number of things. For us, I don't chat with male dominants. There's no need to, unless there is something in common, it's in direct response to a thread or a mutual friend. It doesn't set me up for wanting something I can't have, far from it. There is no other Man on this planet except Lumus for me. And I'm comfortable with His love for me and our bond together. I know I'm His only girl. That's what works for us. This is a rule that was made out of love and protection, not jealousy. If I couldn't accept it, then I shouldn't have accepted His collar or name in marriage. I accept His rules because that is part of my submission to Him. I know He makes them out of love. Because of that love, it makes my submission deeper and more meaningful to me, if that makes sense. Yes, we have friends of both genders. Shoot, for that matter, Bear was my attendant at our wedding. Bear and Lumus joke and flirt but we all know it's good fun and not taken seriously. (You can't take it seriously when you see the picture of Lumus sitting on Bear's lap at the reception!) [:D] There's only one or two female friends that Lumus has that I'm not comfortable with and He knows who they are and why I'm not comfortable with them. But neither of us are online that much, I'm on the boards regularly and that's about it. We're too busy with life and each other! [;)]

Aynne88 -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/9/2009 5:01:04 PM)
Lovely Rain, I just had to say that I am glad you too saw some of the "implications" that I did. Upon reflection I am certain I did get hot under the collar, but without naming anyone or assuming anyone intended anything overtly, there was that overall theme throughout. Regardless, thanks for saying that better than I was able to, and for stating the obvious. Decisions made in relationships have a million reasons behind them, but here most came to apparently only one conclusion. I find that incredibly simplistic thinking at best. Hugs Rain and regards to your so not insecure Master.[:)] I'm out, before I get wrapped up again.~

AquaticSub -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/9/2009 6:22:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rainfire quote: ORIGINAL: AquaticSub Never said he was being a hypocrite and I'm not saying you should argue about it. I'm just saying that I think the logic behind the rule itself is flawed since it doesn't do anything to stop the incoming mail (as the undesirable mails come from people who don't read/respect profiles) and either way it just gets deleted. I get that it works for you and that's good. I'm not trying to debate in the terms of you but in the general sense since you definately aren't the only couple who has this rule. But I do have to disagree with you about not chatting with people when you're taken. I feel that sets up the "forbidden fruit" thing and just leads to trouble and temptation. I also feel that if a relationship is so fragile that it can't shoulder people having friends of both genders then it's probably going to be fail for other reasons or someone is going to end up cheating anyway and the no-chatting rule only delayed things. AS, I'm not sure I agree with the generalization that relationships are fragile if we as a couple decide not to chat with Dominants of the opposite sex. Lumus and I have a similar rule in place like Aynne and her Master. It has not a single thing to do fragility of our relationship, it's not about my inability to protect myself, but about love, caring, respect and above all, for my own protection. My very own friendliness and politeness work against me. Some people think that being friendly and polite means that I want more or am looking for more than what I say I am. And there are some that have a hard time believing that anyone would have a profile on CM just supposedly for the boards. "Forbidden fruit" can be any number of things. For us, I don't chat with male dominants. There's no need to, unless there is something in common, it's in direct response to a thread or a mutual friend. It doesn't set me up for wanting something I can't have, far from it. There is no other Man on this planet except Lumus for me. And I'm comfortable with His love for me and our bond together. I know I'm His only girl. That's what works for us. This is a rule that was made out of love and protection, not jealousy. If I couldn't accept it, then I shouldn't have accepted His collar or name in marriage. I accept His rules because that is part of my submission to Him. I know He makes them out of love. Because of that love, it makes my submission deeper and more meaningful to me, if that makes sense. Yes, we have friends of both genders. Shoot, for that matter, Bear was my attendant at our wedding. Bear and Lumus joke and flirt but we all know it's good fun and not taken seriously. (You can't take it seriously when you see the picture of Lumus sitting on Bear's lap at the reception!) [:D] There's only one or two female friends that Lumus has that I'm not comfortable with and He knows who they are and why I'm not comfortable with them. But neither of us are online that much, I'm on the boards regularly and that's about it. We're too busy with life and each other! [;)] Please read further where I already clarified for Aynne but you clearly don't apply to what I was saying as I said: quote: I also feel that if a relationship is so fragile that it can't shoulder people having friends of both genders then it's probably going to be fail for other reasons or someone is going to end up cheating anyway and the no-chatting rule only delayed things. My response to a blanket statement that partners shouldn't speak to others of the other gender that had not been narrowed down to the internet. I responded to it at face value and applied to both online and off-line as there are people who attempt to restrict their partner from talking to anyone else who might be a partner, online or off, and I do feel that shows insecurity. Please do not take things personally and read things into what I write that aren't there.

DavanKael -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/9/2009 7:30:44 PM)
I would look seriously askance at someone who felt it a good idea to instruct me not to speak with males. I'm a 'guy's chick', always have been. Someone who isn't cool with my interacting with males and who does not have the security in themselves, me, and/or our relationship not to attempt to tell me with whom I may or may not speak isn't gonna work. Davan

GreedyTop -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/9/2009 11:30:47 PM)
Yep, that goes for me too, Davan. I spent the majority of my adult life in male-dominated work (truck driver, stagehand, etc). The bulk of my friends, until very recently, have been men..many of which I am still in contact with. There are a good number of identified male doms I am friends with.. I value their friendship, and would be quite adverse to having to cut contact with them. Fortunately, Pirate is quite ok with me having contact with whoever I wish to be. We frequently laugh together at the emails I get from guys who obviously havent read my profile (both - allegedly - dom and sub). He knows that I will handle it in whatever way I choose. Aynne...Rain... and anyone else whose email/contact is restricted... kudos... I personally couldnt deal with that, but it works for you (for whatever reason it's implemented).. so it's all good :)

Aynne88 -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/9/2009 11:48:43 PM)
Hey Greedy, Insomnia is keeping me company tonight and I'm overtired so I'll torture myself one more time on this.[;)] Okay, I've said it before but I work with men all day, VP of a contracting business, I have lunch with men, drinks with men, meetings with men, well..you get it. Prior to that I bartended as well, in a 90% male patronized bar. That wasn't the OP's question and it wasn't what I was referencing. It was in regards to strangers on the internet and CM mail. He determined that I was wasting too much time either getting pissed at the men writing to me, and insulting our relationship, or being lewd, or just in general that he diverted them to bulk mail and said ignore them. He does not not allow me to spend time with men that I know and/or work with in "real life" whatsoever unless they present a problem and then we discuss it like adults. As far as chat goes, I absolutely agree. I see no reason for He or I to be chatting with strangers of the opposite sex but that could just be that we are 40, busy, and just not into it. Funny how the men in my real life present none of the irritation or drama the some of the nonsense emails I was getting here. So, Sir said no more, it's stupid, and you are a hothead. He's right, it was and I am.[8D] I just don't want people to think he does not allow me to function in the world with men, I have always been the kind of chick that hangs out, has drinks with the guys, goes to strip clubs in Vegas with them, hell Greedy I have been the "best man" at wedding.[;)]. Am I just not explaining something properly, I don't see the disconnect between spending time with men that I know and he is fine with versus Him deciding that moronic CMails from doms was a waste of time? I mean that sincerely. I just don't get why I say clearly how it is and it seems to be all twisted.

GreedyTop -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/9/2009 11:52:53 PM)
Aynne smooch I got what you were saying.. seriously, I did.... (sexy wench!!)

NormalOutside -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/9/2009 11:53:31 PM)
My submissive has a terrible track record at being able to determine when another person is being inappropriate with her. She has gotten into nearly sexual situations with guys in the past, not knowing they were taking advantage of her trusting demeanor and her submissive willingness to "help". I am possessive and want nobody else handling her, or controlling her, except against a backdrop of my control and guidance. I no longer give her free reign to socialize with the dominant males of this website, not because I can't handle them, but because I don't want to.

Aynne88 -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/9/2009 11:55:50 PM)
Thank god! I was thinking I was losing my mind, well what is left of it! Jesus Greedy you are as much of an insomniac as I am. Get your ass to bed~ (sexy piratess[;)]) quote: ORIGINAL: GreedyTop Aynne smooch I got what you were saying.. seriously, I did.... (sexy wench!!)

GreedyTop -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/9/2009 11:58:07 PM)
HAH!! I only got home from work a couple of hours ago..I have an excuse to be up... now.. WHO needs to get their ass into bed? swat

Aynne88 -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/10/2009 12:01:47 AM)
See? There I go again, trying to top ya from the bottom. ****see how I got that swat I was trying to get though? heh...clever girl.[;)] Nighty night Greedy, 6 am is gonna suck, thank god for redbull and nodoz~

WyldHrt -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/10/2009 12:02:02 AM)
raises hand I do, Greedy! Do I get a swat, too? [:D]

Aynne88 -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/10/2009 12:03:43 AM)
Lol...careful Wyld, she's rough on ya[;)]

GreedyTop -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/10/2009 12:05:46 AM)
swats Wyld Aynne... I only did it cause I wanted to ;)

WyldHrt -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/10/2009 12:07:15 AM)
ouchies! I sent you some pain via cmail in return, girly [:D]

Aynne88 -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/10/2009 12:08:34 AM)
Sweet :-) I'll take that~ Is it really 3? lol...this time change is killing me, or something. This is night number 3, I'll be hallucinating tomorrow. Not the good kind either ;)

GreedyTop -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/10/2009 12:18:05 AM)
hugs Aynne Wyld.. you BRAT!! I couldnt read the posts.. I hate bad formatting.....

WyldHrt -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/10/2009 12:23:05 AM)
Yeah, but you lubs me anyway [:D] Trust me, you should be glad the formatting got you, lmao.

GreedyTop -> RE: Jealous Owners? (3/10/2009 12:26:15 AM)
snort

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875