quote:

Some submissives, however (imagine this), are naturally submissive. In that case, I would be their partner because they want me to be. The submission, however, would be a natural byproduct of that decision. And, I would think that such a decision would come with the assessment that they are receiving something they want (in the form of a dominant partner).

And perhaps people like to adhere to this "gift" notion because of some perceived concept of altruism when, in actuality, we all act as hedonists to our own ends. Call it my own overly analytical quirk, but I'd consider anyone referring to their decision to enter into what is supposed to be a mutually beneficial relationship as a "gift" as someone trying to begin said relationship with a plus balance in their quid-pro-quo relationship bank account.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fadingthought

I naturally like women, do I naturally like every woman?  Does every natural submissive like you?
A D/S is mutually beneficial relationship, make no mistake.  In return for their submission I treat them as a fair and stern dom.
When a submissive puts her well being, her whole self in my hands, as Fitznicely said it is a huge responsibility and needs to be taken seriously.
It is different for every couple, but if you don't care for your submissive, they won't be your submissive for long.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth
Of course, "care for" means different things for different relationships. For some people, "caring for" the submissive simply means keeping them in a perpetual state of confusion, doubt and helplessness. For others, it means keeping them happy and content. (and yes, both are possible to base a long-term relationship off of.)

And D/S isn't necessarily a mutually beneficial relationship; there's plenty of predators on both sides of the slash.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero
Submission is a "gift" for those who play the role selectively. It's quite their prerogative, true.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero
Some submissives, however (imagine this), are naturally submissive. In that case, I would be their partner because they want me to be. The submission, however, would be a natural byproduct of that decision. And, I would think that such a decision would come with the assessment that they are receiving something they want (in the form of a dominant partner).

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero
And perhaps people like to adhere to this "gift" notion because of some perceived concept of altruism when, in actuality, we all act as hedonists to our own ends. Call it my own overly analytical quirk, but I'd consider anyone referring to their decision to enter into what is supposed to be a mutually beneficial relationship as a "gift" as someone trying to begin said relationship with a plus balance in their quid-pro-quo relationship bank account.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tslaveboy

I'm starting to understand certain aspects. I had a question about the responsibility of dominating. Let me see if I understand this clearly. The submissive has responsibilities to perform their duties if they intend to be kept on as a submissive. But for the Dominant, I suspect they don't just sit there waiting to be served. Isn't there more responsibility laid upon the Dominant? Do they have the responsibilities of both their own and the submissive's in thieir hands?

I suspect I turned down the position of Dominant because I didn't want to take on that extra responsibility. I'm just guessing, but I have wondered about that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tslaveboy

I'm starting to understand certain aspects. I had a question about the responsibility of dominating. Let me see if I understand this clearly. The submissive has responsibilities to perform their duties if they intend to be kept on as a submissive. But for the Dominant, I suspect they don't just sit there waiting to be served. Isn't there more responsibility laid upon the Dominant? Do they have the responsibilities of both their own and the submissive's in thieir hands?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tslaveboy

I've recently been watching some male domination videos. I'm starting to notice that some male Dommes seem to care about the experience that their female subs are having. I always thought that the male Doms just took what they wanted. That the female submissives just had to accept his dominant role.

I'm still learning. Maybe someone could set me straight on this. Could someone explain the dynamics of Dom/sub relations.

quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

Heh, even then, I dislike the word. A 'gift' implies something freely given. I've bought and paid for the submission I get from Carol in the only coin that matters. Calling it a 'gift' is akin to saying Nordstrom's gave me a 'gift' the other day. I, being so pleased with them, gifted them with a stack of money in return.

This is where I being to differ with you. Although we had none of the words, in hindsight, it is easy to see that Carol is what I call 'globally submissive'. It is the way she interacts with the world as a whole, not just me. And yes, because that is true, she has been 'submitting' to me since we married. But she is not a helpless fool dritfing down the stream of life. She absolutely can decide that submitting to me is not good for her. If she did, while I doubt she could entirely stop being submissive, she could certainly tone it way way down. For short periods, she might even be able to stop it entirely. In the end, she would leave me. The fact that a submissive demeanor pervades her entire world-view does not stop her from executing smart and valid choices. And yes, when we married and again when I collared her, she made decisions at that time that she was receiving something of value. But times change neh? Decisions get revisited.

I also have to point out that while I do see Carol as generally submissive in her life, that trait has been refined greatly in our current relationship pattern. If we stopped being M/s, she would revert to something akin to what she was in the first 10 years of our marriage. Submissive yes, but not anywhere near the degree to which she is now. Again, she is not an unthinking animal operating on instinct driven by the mythical submission gene... just as I am not solely motivated by my non-existent dominant gene.

Heh, even worse in my eyes. I parse the 'submission is a gift' statement as solid evidence that someone doesn't have a clue what it means to be in a committed relationship and does not understand the word partner. I have no interest in getting into an adversarial relationship with someone that shares my home and bed. As you said, what next? Do we start a little ledger keeping track of who gifted who what?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tslaveboy

I'm starting to understand certain aspects. I had a question about the responsibility of dominating. Let me see if I understand this clearly. The submissive has responsibilities to perform their duties if they intend to be kept on as a submissive. But for the Dominant, I suspect they don't just sit there waiting to be served. Isn't there more responsibility laid upon the Dominant? Do they have the responsibilities of both their own and the submissive's in thieir hands?

I suspect I turned down the position of Dominant because I didn't want to take on that extra responsibility. I'm just guessing, but I have wondered about that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero
Some submissives, however (imagine this), are naturally submissive. In that case, I would be their partner because they want me to be. The submission, however, would be a natural byproduct of that decision. And, I would think that such a decision would come with the assessment that they are receiving something they want (in the form of a dominant partner).

This is where I being to differ with you. Although we had none of the words, in hindsight, it is easy to see that Carol is what I call 'globally submissive'. It is the way she interacts with the world as a whole, not just me. And yes, because that is true, she has been 'submitting' to me since we married. But she is not a helpless fool dritfing down the stream of life. She absolutely can decide that submitting to me is not good for her. If she did, while I doubt she could entirely stop being submissive, she could certainly tone it way way down. For short periods, she might even be able to stop it entirely. In the end, she would leave me. The fact that a submissive demeanor pervades her entire world-view does not stop her from executing smart and valid choices. And yes, when we married and again when I collared her, she made decisions at that time that she was receiving something of value. But times change neh? Decisions get revisited.

quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

I also have to point out that while I do see Carol as generally submissive in her life, that trait has been refined greatly in our current relationship pattern. If we stopped being M/s, she would revert to something akin to what she was in the first 10 years of our marriage. Submissive yes, but not anywhere near the degree to which she is now. Again, she is not an unthinking animal operating on instinct driven by the mythical submission gene... just as I am not solely motivated by my non-existent dominant gene.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero
I'm not sure where exactly there would be a point to differ unless my words made implications I did not espouse.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero
So, I would never had made the presumption that your significant other is a "helpless fool drifting down the stream of life". My entire point is actually to cast a critical spotlight on the fact that many folks seem to treat those who are comfortable with their submission having a more pervasive part of their lives as such "fools".

quote:

ORIGINAL: FadingThought
There is a very wide range of people and experiences here, telling others they don't understand committed relationships or the word partner simply because they don't fall into the parameters of you and your wife's relationship is both rude and arrogant.

quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527
it is my general perception that both in and out of the BDSM community, somewhere well above 50% of couples are actually engaged in some sort of adversarial relationship as opposed to a partnership. How's that for rude and arrogant?

quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527
it is my general perception that both in and out of the BDSM community, somewhere well above 50% of couples are actually engaged in some sort of adversarial relationship as opposed to a partnership. How's that for rude and arrogant?

quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

Heh, even worse in my eyes. I parse the 'submission is a gift' statement as solid evidence that someone doesn't have a clue what it means to be in a committed relationship and does not understand the word partner. I have no interest in getting into an adversarial relationship with someone that shares my home and bed. As you said, what next? Do we start a little ledger keeping track of who gifted who what?