RE: Qns about 24/7 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message

LadyPact -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 10:33:24 AM)

Ah good.  From one pissing contest to another.

The concept of 24/7 to Me is much more emotional or mental, rather than physical.  My boy might not be at My feet.  In truth, he's half way across the globe.  That doesn't mean that his submission isn't Mine.  If I give a command, he will still, to the best of his ability, obey it.

Being 24/7 isn't always about where you rest your head.  It's where you rest your heart.



SimplyMichael -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 10:34:53 AM)

Leonidas,

Name calling and insults may work in chatrooms but this is the adult section of Collarme and if you want to engage in debate, you are going to have to step up to the plate.

In case you are not simply trying to be insulting and can't grasp why those events matter, let me be more clear.  Through participating in those events, I have come to known hundreds of long term couples, people who have been together for years, THAT is why those experiences matter because I am basing my experience on people I know in person, not just through some screen name.  I have gone out to dinner, taken vacations with them, spent the night at their houses, watched them interact when we are intimate enough they are truly themselves in my presence.

Since you don't know how the International Master/slave couple is chosen  then you don't know enough to dismiss it or this was again, simply a poor attempt at an insult, either way it doesn't paint you in a good light, I prefer to understand things before I pontificate about them.

As for the book, god isn't going to help me but I hope Bossyshoebitch will help me edit it because we all know I can't spill for shit!







NihilusZero -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 10:40:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Actually, you haven't understood what I have said.  I have said my SUBMISSIVE partners have often been dominant women.  I TREASURE the submission I inspire in them.

Consequently, you couldn't feel the honor from an individual who was naturally submissive? Some subs do not force themselves to seem tough so as to have a general consensus consider their decision to submit sound.

Inspiring "submission" from someone is just mutual flattery. Now, inspiring their devotion, that's quite another thing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Perhaps you need to step back and reread what I write because I think that a healthy submissive who submits from a place of strength and power rather than from neediness and weakness is a glorious thing.

I think we're getting the idea of what you consider glorious. What I'm not getting is how this is of so much universal importance that you've gone out of your way to parade it here in rather uncharacteristic fashion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Which is why I have the utmost respect for male submissives because I think of all our roles, that is the one that requires the most bravery to openly embrace.

You have the utmost respect for submissive males because of stereotypical, antiquated gender roles?

This strikes me as akin to saying one has "respect" for white guys who make it to the NBA or black guys who make it to pro PGA tours.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

So no, it isn't me that is seeing submissives as not having value or being special.  It isn't me as seeing them as some two dimensional fictional stereotypes!

Except when they do not exhibit this aura of independent womanliness from which, presumably, is where the only healthy form of submission is born from?



SimplyMichael -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 10:44:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero

Applying passive situations to the argument to try to discount the dynamic seems an awfully naive view of BDSM. It should be relatively obvious that choosing not to decide what's for dinner does no abrogate the dynamic for anyone seriously in that dynamic. For as fantastical as you say the concept of 24/7 is, it is so proportionally to how much of a strawman you are painting. And that's not even taking into consideration the genuine question behind some of the insinuations: such as, are you saying that no one has a relationship dynamic where the sub sleeps as the foot of the bed and dresses as demanded by hir D-type?



Where do you see me discounting the dynamic?  I am discounting the FANTASY that some people have of it, one I think is highly destructive but no more. 

How many long term relationships (defined as longer than 4, Leadership527 would say 7) years do you know where the submissive almost always sleeps at the foot of the bed?

quote:

It should be relatively obvious that choosing not to decide what's for dinner does no abrogate the dynamic for anyone seriously in that dynamic.


You and I agree it is should be "relatively obvious" but I think the reality is that that concept is NOT obvious to people.  Otherwise we would have threads about whether or not is is "submissive" for a dom to go down on a slave!  Not only that, the APPEARANCE of that concept to someone outside is of "vanilla" despite there being the underlying power dynamic as so clearly put by Steele, he COULD order her to do something that would cost her her job but chooses not to!



daddysprop247 -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 10:45:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Actually, you haven't understood what I have said.  I have said my SUBMISSIVE partners have often been dominant women.  I TREASURE the submission I inspire in them.    Perhaps you need to step back and reread what I write because I think that a healthy submissive who submits from a place of strength and power rather than from neediness and weakness is a glorious thing.  Which is why I have the utmost respect for male submissives because I think of all our roles, that is the one that requires the most bravery to openly embrace.  So no, it isn't me that is seeing submissives as not having value or being special.  It isn't me as seeing them as some two dimensional fictional stereotypes!



first, why are you so angry?
secondly, i have not misunderstood a thing you have posted, and simply repeating yourself here was rather unnecessary. you, SimplyMichael, do not personally value submissive women. you value dominant women who consciously choose to submit to you when you desire it. you find this particular type of submission to be borne of "strength," and "inspiration," whereas you view those who submit simply because it is their nature to do so...in other words, plain old submissives...as being weak and worthless, and as conforming to some "fictional stereotype." that is your opinion and you are fully entitled to it, but it is certainly not gospel.





SimplyMichael -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 10:51:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero


quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Perhaps you need to step back and reread what I write because I think that a healthy submissive who submits from a place of strength and power rather than from neediness and weakness is a glorious thing.

I think we're getting the idea of what you consider glorious. What I'm not getting is how this is of so much universal importance that you've gone out of your way to parade it here in rather uncharacteristic fashion.



You really can't grasp why I felt the need to "parade" that?  If you can't see it, then I don't think I can explain it to you.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Which is why I have the utmost respect for male submissives because I think of all our roles, that is the one that requires the most bravery to openly embrace.

You have the utmost respect for submissive males because of stereotypical, antiquated gender roles?


Are you REALLY saying those NOBODY thinks that way anymore?  REALLY? 

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael


So no, it isn't me that is seeing submissives as not having value or being special.  It isn't me as seeing them as some two dimensional fictional stereotypes!

Except when they do not exhibit this aura of independent womanliness from which, presumably, the only healthy form of submission is born from?


Are you saying ANYONE who submits for ANY reason is AUTOMATICALLY healthy?  Any answer other than yes to that question means you agree with me and we are only arguing over what degree of agreement we share.




Leonidas -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 10:52:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

In case you are not simply trying to be insulting and can't grasp why those events matter, let me be more clear.  Through participating in those events, I have come to known hundreds of long term couples, people who have been together for years, THAT is why those experiences matter because I am basing my experience on people I know in person, not just through some screen name.  I have gone out to dinner, taken vacations with them, spent the night at their houses, watched them interact when we are intimate enough they are truly themselves in my presence. 


Nope.  I was being serious, pretty much.  I'm seeing what you're saying here, and I'm seeing you say "you can't be 24/7 cause you sleep 8 hours a day" which is what I would expect from someone who understands about jack.  The two don't go together, bud.  You can take that as an insult or name calling if you like, but it's just an honest observation.  You jumped up and started blustering about all the people who don't know shit and talk out of their asses even though they've been unsuccessful at ever having a long term 24/7 relationship.  Think maybe you should hold that yardstick up to yourself, and maybe STFU until you've had one, at least on this subject.

quote:

Since you don't know how the International Master/slave couple is chosen  then you don't know enough to dismiss it or this was again, simply a poor attempt at an insult, either way it doesn't paint you in a good light, I prefer to understand things before I pontificate about them.


I'm laughing my ass off here, literally.  No, I don't know how they are chosen.  I am, however, not prone to being star-struck, or vulnerable to the cult of celebrity.  I take it that isn't something we have in common.  How in the world you think that it adds to your credibility that you happen to know someone who won some popularity contest, I have no idea.  Adult section of collarme indeed.



NihilusZero -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 10:56:36 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Where do you see me discounting the dynamic?  I am discounting the FANTASY that some people have of it, one I think is highly destructive but no more.

A fantasy no one was talking about.

It's no different from me popping into a thread about rough sex and start a rant about how people who condone rape are "highly destructive".

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

How many long term relationships (defined as longer than 4, Leadership527 would say 7) years do you know where the submissive almost always sleeps at the foot of the bed?

I'm not sure what your point is here...that it doesn't happen or that if it does happen, it implies something else. The statistical probability of a D-type choosing the sub to sleep every night at the foot of the bed is unlikely. How about we ask how many long term relationships have the sub sleeping exactly where the D-type orders?

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

quote:

It should be relatively obvious that choosing not to decide what's for dinner does no abrogate the dynamic for anyone seriously in that dynamic.


You and I agree it is should be "relatively obvious" but I think the reality is that that concept is NOT obvious to people.  Otherwise we would have threads about whether or not is is "submissive" for a dom to go down on a slave!  Not only that, the APPEARANCE of that concept to someone outside is of "vanilla" despite there being the underlying power dynamic as so clearly put by Steele, he COULD order her to do something that would cost her her job but chooses not to!

So what are we really arguing here? The degree to which we should curtail exposure of certain possible elements of BDSM from the naive of the newbies for their own safety?

I'm still not sure what elements of the purported "fantasy" are universally unhealthy simply by their presence in the relationship.



CatdeMedici -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 10:59:47 AM)

Do I smell aloof derision?[8|]



Drakontos -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 11:00:59 AM)



quote:

To be "24/7 D/s" means that one is always dominant, and the other is always submissive. That can be just as "straightforward" and "normal" a way to interact with one another as any other way if it is how you naturally relate to and interact with one another.

zaphira would have to agree with this


quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Most people who talk about 24/7 are full of shit.  I mean lets look at this, you sleep right?  So there goes 8 hours, most of us work ,so there goes another 8 so we are down to 8/7 right off the bat.

The mere fact she is thinking about me at work doesn't change that, even if I take her earnings or she is chained to a desk.

Combine all that with the fact that most who talk about 24/7 relationships can't make one last longer than six months anyway.

The reality that most D/s couples who LIVE together long term end up with an authority dynamic that is present in some low key way, more for some, less for others but what most would see is a loving nurturing relationship that has as much to do with vanilla as D/s.  In short, it is a relationship with all the ups and downs, ins and outs, highs and lows of any real relationship.

If more people worked on their relationship skills than their topping skills there would be a lot more slaves in the world.


zaphira is always property. She is always owned. She is always the possession of another.

Just because Master is working, sleeping, or off with his friends or family; does not mean that zaphira suddenly 'gets a break' from being property, owned, and another's possession.

zaphira is who she is, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. Sleep, work, family, friends, incidents that occur that bring in others; none of these mean that zaphira will stop for a time, being who and what she is.

quote:

but what most would see is a loving nurturing relationship

this may be true for many relationships; however, not all relationships are based on emotion or romance.
zaphira does not love or care for Master in the 'loving' way that you imply here. If another was to see our relationship in 'motion' they would most probably compare it to that of an employer and employee who were content with each other's company. Contentment does not equal, or even come close, to 'loving'.

quote:

Sorry but I think the concept of someone "always" being anything is an unhealthy myth and one that lacks nuance of what "dominance" is and that it perpetuates a two dimensional view of humanity that is more suited to some silly fictional book than the reality of how humans operate in the real world.

Master does not require a slave, or a submissive, to be dominant. It is just who and what he is. All zaphira does is acknowledge his dominance openly. There is nothing unhealthy about it at all; unless you believe that a slave or submissive openly acknowledging the dominance of another to be unhealthy?

quote:

The whole "slave sleeping at the foot of the bed, kneeling when hubby comes home, walking around in some slave costume" is all hot wank fodder that I love doing for a weekend but would bore the fuck out of me as a lifestyle

zaphira sleeps naked on the floor at Master's feet.
zaphira does not wear clothing, ever, unless Master has company over or he requires her services outside the home. zaphira prefers these things; sleeping on the floor and beng free from restrictions such as clothing.

It has been this way for more than 3 years now. Not once in 3 years has Master 'attained wank fodder' from this slave following his orders.



LaTigresse -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 11:02:50 AM)

Using fast reply.......

Apparently this is going to turn into a "one true way" male pissing contest.

My personal take on 24/7 is, it is whatever the people INVOLVED in the actual relationship desires it to be. No more, no less.



Jeptha -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 11:03:02 AM)

Once, I began a relationship with a woman who said she did not want a "boss" or to be "micromanaged" in her personal life, she just wanted to be dominated in the bedroom.

So, D/s was to be just the form of erotic expression in the relationship.

What we discovered, tho, is that erotic expression (if you will) is not confined to the bedroom. You are an erotic being (sounds corny, I know, but bear with me) 24/7... or - let's say you have the potential of being one at any given time.

I use the word "erotic" to distinguish it from the sexual. We weren't sexual all the time.

But, I guess our sense of romance was best expressed in the idea that "I want to take possession of you", and that meant not just sexually, but in just basic kinds of interactions as well. Otherwise, the message would sort of feel like: I just want to fuck you and be done with it...

I'm not explaining this very clearly, perhaps, but what I'm trying to say is that it's hard to seperate D/s from other basic interactions if D/s is something that seems really meaningful to you. So, in a certain sense, D/s seems to me to always be 24/7. Or you could think of it as "only D/s in the bedroom", but in the courting phase, the whole world is the bedroom, and many more activities (foreplay of a sort?) than the sexual take place there.

However, when most people use the term 24/7, I take them to mean that it extends not just to all times of day, but to all phases of life and all activities ~ like mundane tasks such as doing the dishes, to refer back to that recent thread.

I can't speak to living together, as that is not an ideal or goal of mine personally, no matter what the relationship.



SimplyMichael -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 11:04:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Leonidas

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

In case you are not simply trying to be insulting and can't grasp why those events matter, let me be more clear.  Through participating in those events, I have come to known hundreds of long term couples, people who have been together for years, THAT is why those experiences matter because I am basing my experience on people I know in person, not just through some screen name.  I have gone out to dinner, taken vacations with them, spent the night at their houses, watched them interact when we are intimate enough they are truly themselves in my presence. 


Nope.  I was being serious, pretty much.  I'm seeing what you're saying here, and I'm seeing you say "you can't be 24/7 cause you sleep 8 hours a day" which is what I would expect from someone who understands about jack.  The two don't go together, bud.  You can take that as an insult or name calling if you like, but it's just an honest observation.  You jumped up and started blustering about all the people who don't know shit and talk out of their asses even though they've been unsuccessful at ever having a long term 24/7 relationship.  Think maybe you should hold that yardstick up to yourself, and maybe STFU until you've had one, at least on this subject.



First off, if you are going to quote me, please do so correctly.  I did not say "you can't be 24/7 cause you sleep 8 hours a day".  I was simply pointing out that the NAME of the concept is a bit of a misnomer, I was in no way denying the concept of of 24/7.  

quote:

quote:

Since you don't know how the International Master/slave couple is chosen  then you don't know enough to dismiss it or this was again, simply a poor attempt at an insult, either way it doesn't paint you in a good light, I prefer to understand things before I pontificate about them.


quote:

I'm laughing my ass off here, literally.  No, I don't know how they are chosen.  I am, however, not prone to being star-struck, or vulnerable to the cult of celebrity.  I take it that isn't something we have in common.  How in the world you think that it adds to your credibility that you happen to know someone who won some popularity contest, I have no idea.  Adult section of collarme indeed.




Is this common for you to attack concepts you admittedly know nothing about?  Doesn't say much for the rest of your argument if that is the case.  As for the two of them, I have known for as long as they have been in the scene, long before they met, it has nothing to do with being star struck.  And speaking of star struck, I am modest enough to use my own name, isn't Leonidas the name of a famous Greek?  Again, try and stick with attacking the actual concepts under discussion rather than vainly attempting to undermine my character.

I think this is a much needed discussion and I look forward to an intelligent discussion about the actual topic. 






NihilusZero -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 11:06:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero

I think we're getting the idea of what you consider glorious. What I'm not getting is how this is of so much universal importance that you've gone out of your way to parade it here in rather uncharacteristic fashion.



You really can't grasp why I felt the need to "parade" that?  If you can't see it, then I don't think I can explain it to you.

No, I get that you're trying to protect the poor fledglings from being taken advantage of.

What makes no sense is you racing into here and fighting the imaginary dragon in the room when all that was being discussed was geckos.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Which is why I have the utmost respect for male submissives because I think of all our roles, that is the one that requires the most bravery to openly embrace.

You have the utmost respect for submissive males because of stereotypical, antiquated gender roles?


Are you REALLY saying those NOBODY thinks that way anymore?  REALLY?

That people do is clear. Some people still think the earth is 6000 years old too.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Are you saying ANYONE who submits for ANY reason is AUTOMATICALLY healthy?  Any answer other than yes to that question means you agree with me and we are only arguing over what degree of agreement we share.

No. I don't ascribe any degree of healthiness or unhealthiness to the decision to submit or the decision of whom to submit to. That status is present in the individual irrelevant of that decision. A heroin addict, back from hir second suicide attempt can make a decision to be submissive to someone who might just be the perfect person for hir, getting hir life back on track and instilling a new sense of self-worth. Was xhe in a healthy mindset? No.

What is "healthy" is measured by the degree to which the results properly complement the individuals uncompromised desires and wishes for happiness. Even if that means sleeping forever at the foot of the bed or getting candlelit sushi dinners every Wednesday.



daintydimples -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 11:09:45 AM)

I view 24/7 as a mindset. I liken this relationship as similar to that between a good boss and his assistant. Will a good boss delegate responsibility to his assistant? Of course! Will a good boss ask his assistant for input? Yes to that one, too. But at the end of the day, the boss is responsible for the decision making, and the assistant is responsible for backing the boss up, whether they agree with the decision or not.

That is the closest thing I can think of to express how I see a 24/7 mindset.

I think simplymichael made some excellent points about having a well-rounded 24/7 dynamic.  I personally think these types of relationships must be well-rounded to survive the test of time.

BTW...hello to everyone!! I'm new here...so please be kind.

dd



DesFIP -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 11:11:10 AM)

There a ought to be straight forward interaction and communication at all times if the relationship will last, satisfying both parties needs.

For example: if he says "bedtime" there is nothing wrong if I say I only have ten pages to find out whodunit in the new mystery I'm reading. Since for me, those ten pages will go by in 3 minutes, I always get it.

If your relationship is set up so protocol strangles any ability to talk and get your needs met, then the problem is not in the protocol but the person who set it up like this.



BitaTruble -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 11:11:43 AM)

Jeptha, I thought you explained it very well.

OP - To me, 24/7 is like being on call. Yes, Sir sleeps 8 hours a day (I sleep about 5), he works way more hours than most other people (I'm not allowed to work outside of the home), but at any time of the day or night, he can call on me to provide any sort of service he desires. Depending on logistics, it may take more or less time for that service to manifest - for example, if he calls me from Lisbon to come to his work and give him a blow job, I have to travel there from Cascais and that's just about 90 mins of travel time, but most of the time, he Skypes me, gives me whatever directive he has for me and I accomplish it in a a timely manner and to his satisfaction. If he's at home and wakes up in the middle of the night, he might bellow for me to get him something (waking me up) and I'll get it. So, yeah, on call. That works for us.



Jeptha -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 11:13:17 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse

Using fast reply.......

Apparently this is going to turn into a "one true way" male pissing contest.
Well, mebbe. But I think those guys are arguing their positions pretty well, and with a reasonable amount of grace. There is a lot of mythologizing that goes on with this. That balloon should be popped once in a while.

On the other hand, there could be some truth behind it, and that should be stood up for.

I'm glad that they're both standing up for their points of view.
quote:

My personal take on 24/7 is, it is whatever the people INVOLVED in the actual relationship desires it to be. No more, no less.
I agree with you there.



SimplyMichael -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 11:13:54 AM)

  NihilusZero

You are aptly named.  When you actually want to have the intelligent discussion you are clearly capable of let me know but you aren't doing it now.



Mercnbeth -> RE: Qns about 24/7 (7/9/2009 11:15:55 AM)

The merits of defining the representation of the term 24/7. Battle-lines drawn from perspective based upon life to date results. Its merit or worthless being determined by them. Well first...

"Hello, I'm Merc and I represent to be in a 24/7 relationship with beth, my slave." Stipulating to being, as Michael says, "full of shit". However, not worried or even willing to get into a heated debate about it. A debate yes - but heated? - No way!

First of all, I wouldn't recommend it to anyone. It's a huge responsibility and big pain in the ass. Imagine coming home from work, pissed off from business calls, family calls, and the fact that some asshole in the left lane driving a Honda blocked me from doing 60 during my 6.8 mile commute home. You come through the door and this 24/7 'slave' raises her shirt and asks whether I want a beer, scotch, or martini? Maybe you can keep up the mood, but when she brings it to you, with some appetizers she's prepared, a Cuban cigar, and sits taking off my shoes by the pool - well that bitch just spoiled my evening!

I know all those people that Michael speaks, meeting some. None represent any similarity to beth and I except in the label. I'd say that was one of two things all those relationships have in common with ours. The second is more important - all the participants have the exact definition of 24/7 as their partner. Yes there is such a thing as 24/7. In our case, beyond the 'Rules', beyond the ritual and protocol, it is 24/7 responsibility, 24/7 foreplay, 24/7 FUN!

Argue all the semantics you want it comes down do both partners surrendering, submitting, and serving the relationship 24/7. Nobody from the outside can make a valid counter argument to the people participating in it. The most you'll generate in doing so, is a laugh.

Someone hit upon the only argument I would have with anyone representing they are in a 24/7 relationship. If you need a 'break', 'vacation', 'time-out' or whatever; you're acting. You can't act forever. You are doing something that take too much effort to expect long term success. Were that the case it indicates it is time to renegotiate the terms. One of the most unbelievable aspects of our relationship is that I've been it it 6 1/2 years - 6 1/2 YEARS! It seems like 6 1/2 minutes, and its as fresh and exciting as it was in the first 6 1/2 seconds. We hate any 'time-outs' we're forced to experience when one of us has to go out of town without the other. Hell, it's just as bad when I have to leave in the morning for work; and people who witnessed it say our nightly greeting when I come home is just "disgusting" to see such gratuitous affection (and nudity) being exchanged.

Regarding the pragmatic aspect that Michael points out; sleep represents the most difficult aspect of 24/7. No matter how many times I order her not to, beth still dreams of things other than serving me. However she does tries not to. I guess I have to work harder on her training.

Come on, the quality of the people having a argument of semantics and definitions overwhelms the subject of the argument. I say you all come over to our place where the only thing that's heated is the pool. The debate is something to do between sessions in the dungeon - open 24/7.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625