|
undergroundsea -> RE: No Strings Housework? (4/11/2009 8:14:32 AM)
|
I think the two complaints we are seeing are apples and oranges. I also think there are some scenarios which one might not have experienced personally but with which one can empathize by considering a similar scenario.
One complaint is against some who present themselves as service submissives who will provide no-strings-housework. In practice, it turns out that sometimes this statement was made to get the foot in the door and there were many expectations. I imagine the frustration felt in such a bait-and-switch scenario would be similar to the frustration a given sub might feel upon courting towards what was initially presented as a personal relationship and then learning that the other is in fact seeking clients.
The other complaint is against those persons who wish to receive energy without giving any in return. I imagine frustration a given sub might feel in such a scenario is similar to that a domme might feel upon encountering a sub who wants his fetishes fulfilled without any regard to why she is doing what she does.
I have two other observations.
Some of these scenarios may be a matter of miscommunication versus deception. Specifically, different people might interpret no-strings-attached differently. A given sub might mean that no sex is expected but expects some form of D/s play, another might not expect specific D/s play but expects a D/s energy, and another might think it means that absolutely nothing is expected in return. While I think the last interpretation is most reasonable when the term is taken literally, I also think it is unrealistic. When the last situation does occur, I think by coincidence the sub is getting what is desired. As a solution, I think the two should calibrate their terminology and clarify what no-strings means to each person.
Domme: What do you mean by no-strings? What if I lock myself in my office and work on my project the entire time and we have no interaction?
Sub: Blah, blah, blah
Or
Sub: Have I explained well enough what draws me to such a scenario, and is that motivation acceptable to you?
Domme: Blah, blah, blah
I think there is also a case of a us-versus-faceless-them scenario occurring here. A given sub might have experienced resentment over time about someone who sought housework without any regard to the sub. This resentment, when expressed, might be seen to be or might erroneously be directed directed against all dommes versus those who sought such a scenario. Similarly, the protest against deceptive subs might come across or be expressed against all service subs who are willing to provide no-strings service, however they define it, versus against those who seek to deceive. A protestation by either category who does not fit the complaint may then be taken as denial, and the discussion may turn into a case of faceless us versus them where a gripe against some is directed against the whole, and response of some is seen as response of the whole.
In summary, the first complaint is effectively against those who use bait-and-switch tactics, and the second is effectively against those who think only of their own wants. I think each is a fair complaint. I think the behavior described is distributed across population and each dommes and subs are likely to encounter it. The us-versus-them is more towards those who deceive versus those who do not, and those who think only of their needs versus those who are also interested in the needs of the other. Putting the matter in proper perspective may help avoid the incorrect generalization trap.
Cheers,
Sea
|
|
|
|
