MarcEsadrian
Posts: 852
Joined: 8/24/2008 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: RLMK I'm quite definitely dominant, but I'm not that experienced. (I don't have a dungeon, cattle prod, etc... OK, so I do have a cattle prod, but it's in the barn) However, if I date women closer to the age that I'm usually more comfortably with (mid twenties to early thirties), and they're subs, they seem to already be considerably experienced. Just wondering if that's really something I should concern myself about. Compatibility is far more key. "Experience" can be a dubious thing to rely upon if you both gleaned it from different worlds. A man with a more serious aptitude for dominance may not get along so well with a woman who has spent twelve years as a "submissive" within the surface trappings of an alt lifestyle—not because she has learned more, but learned wrongly. Alternatively, she may find his natural character, unfettered by the clichés and truisms often found within these social circles refreshing; for all her touted years of "experience", he may indeed have things to teach her. Experience can be helpful, but it can be something that has to be "unlearned" as well. It's really the quality of experience that's important, and how relevant that experience is within a particular relationship set; it can help as much as hurt. Sometimes it can just be plain irrelevant. Philosophical congruence and natural propensity is by far more important.
|