RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think??

RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (Full Version)

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

Message

AcademyForSlaves -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/18/2009 8:06:35 PM)
Hi. We've trained and owned so many subs long distance and we've learned it DOES work. It's all in the effort. If both the Dom and the sub really want it to work then it'll work. Why would anyone must be be trained or owned long distance? There's plenty of reasons. Some are married, can't relocate, maybe handicapped, famous, in the army, in college, always on the road, require training online before meeting in person, or maybe the sub found the right Owner who just happens to live far away in another country and the sub can't relocate for awhile. There IS a need for long distance slavery, and like I said if both parties want it to work then it DOES work. Hope this helps.

KaityK -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/19/2009 3:02:56 AM)
How do you train someone online? I know many offer it in return for money which isn't what M/s D/s etc is all about FOR ME. If people want to pay then fair enough. I know people who do but even they would say it's not the same as being in a proper relationship with someone and they pay for rl play not online nonsense. I had someone respond to my adverts once that said he would train me 'online and on the phone' before we met. Apparently this was to make me at ease but my mind just goes into overdrive at these kinds of suggestions and I think there must be reasons why he can't meet me yet; he is insecure, he doesn't have any equipment, he stinks... On asking how on earth he could 'train' me online the answer was 'tasks'. I absolutely loathe this concept. Tasks usually involve going shopping without knickers on (yawn), going out with things inserted (double yawn) in fact, practically anything that will piss me right off and I still don't know how anyone can be 'trained' from a distance. Not how to serve sexually anyway. Maybe they can be brainwashed into thinking they have a relationship but they are not 'trained' to be that persons submissive if they've never touched them.

DemonKia -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/19/2009 10:57:05 PM)
[sm=popcorn.gif] & [sm=chug.gif] quote: ORIGINAL: KaityK Had enough of this thread now. Have fun people!

SailingBum -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/19/2009 11:25:31 PM)
until your in front of me on your knees begging me to stop whipping your ass, It aint real. If you wanna call someone you have never met a relationship go right ahead. Personally I think it's nutz. But that's another topic. Some ppl get attached to pet rocks. You wanna call it a relationship??? Rock on. BadOne

JonnieBoy -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/20/2009 4:16:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SailingBum Personally I think it's nutz. But that's another topic. Sounds like the same topic to me ... (unless you are qualified to diagnose "nutz"?) ... you just expressed your prejudice quite openly. Pirate

JonnieBoy -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/20/2009 4:27:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DemonKia [sm=popcorn.gif] & [sm=chug.gif] quote: ORIGINAL: KaityK Had enough of this thread now. Have fun people! (Jonis Kia for a pint) [sm=chug.gif] If computers get viruses and programs have bugs, maybe forum discussions get "Predictable Tread Syndrome" ? Pirate

Firebirdseeking -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/20/2009 6:04:45 AM)
KaityK: I have read your posts with interests and admire your tenaciousness in keeping up this discussion/argument, but at the same time I wonder why, and I wonder why you need to be "right". There are those - including me, to be honest - who would judge your vanilla marriage and the fact that you have masters, or have had three. Many would say this is not a marriage. So, who are you to say that someone else does not have a "real" relationship because it does not meet your standards? I think you should be quiet now and go to bed.

couldbemage -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/20/2009 8:05:36 AM)
Yeah. A relationship with no sexual contact has a name; "friendship". Nothing wrong with friends. I have lots of them. ...but until you actually do something that doesn't belong in the friend zone, you don't have more than a potential relationship. I have met someone online, and we count our second irl meeting as the start of the relationship. A real ldr would be post irl with "as possible" meetups. I've done that. It sucks, but.... Likewise, I wouldn't consider online "sex" to be cheating. (though my thoughts on cheating can't be worth much) quote: ORIGINAL: SailingBum until your in front of me on your knees begging me to stop whipping your ass, It aint real. If you wanna call someone you have never met a relationship go right ahead. Personally I think it's nutz. But that's another topic. Some ppl get attached to pet rocks. You wanna call it a relationship??? Rock on. BadOne

TurboJugend -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/20/2009 10:14:51 AM)
quote: A relationship with no sexual contact has a name; "friendship". platonic love ? that goes beyond friendship

couldbemage -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/20/2009 10:48:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TurboJugend quote: A relationship with no sexual contact has a name; "friendship". platonic love ? that goes beyond friendship That is a good word. I love many of my friends, even though I'm intimate with them. Those people are very important to me. As are my children. Love and sex go well together, but are not the same thing.

bearly2001 -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/20/2009 2:44:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella quote: ORIGINAL: bearly2001 i have experienced a bit of prejudice as an online-only dom.. the ultimate LDR. i smile when i see profiles, journals and postings ranting about the illegitimacy of online-only or LDR relationships. to me, it just bespeaks a close-mindedness that indicate a person who undoubtedly doesn't have the imagination, creativity, sensuality and depth to appreciate these relationships anyway. it conveys to them a false sense of validity and sanction to their perceptions and opinions. arrogance and inflexibility will extract its toll on their possibilities unless they learn tolerance. Experienced a bit of prejudice or given a bit of prejudice? Seriously. I have plenty of imagination, creativity, sensuality and depth, but I'd never do an online relationship only because I can get every single thing I'd get out of an online relationship in an offline relationship - except I get sex, and snuggles, and dinner dates, and oh yeah a lifetime commitment known as marriage - and why would I want to settle for only mental stimulation when I could have the whole package? If that's what you're looking for, it's great, go for it, I'm sure there are plenty of people who want the same. But don't you dare say anyone who wants to meet someone, have sex, move in together, get a pet, have a family, and get married is too "closed minded" to appreciate a mental connection. For ANY good relationship you need a mental connection. I have a brilliant mental connection with my fiance, we've managed to last 7 months apart after living together for over a year. So I obviously have the capability to do a LDR. But that's not what I want out of life - I want to spend the rest of my life waking up to my husband and cooking him breakfast. How would you feel if I said you were online only because you couldn't handle the commitment of waking up to someone every day? Not good, eh? Then don't say negative things about people who choose to be in face to face relationships. elisabella, i can't help but think you totally missed the thrust of my post. i urge you to re-read my post more closely... i merely indicated that those that criticize online-only relationships may be showing their limitations. i am not suggesting that online is superior to any other type of relationship, nor am i saying that those who would never consider one or engage in one too ''closed-minded". i am saying that those that deny that these relationships are "real" or that they are actually "fantasy" may be revealing these limiting traits. i have been in a rare and successful r/t relationship for 36+ years... it's called a marriage! so i guess you could say i understand the benefits of physical contact and connection. but because she is totally vanilla, i have chosen the online-only venue to seek d/s relationships, as i am sure that some in similar circumstances also do. i am sure if you re-read my post, you may realize that i was not showing prejudice, just asking for tolerance and civility of those who look down or presume to denigrate the online-only participants of d/s.

Andalusite -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/20/2009 7:30:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ownedslavesweet There is literally no swordfighting in WoW, so I will agree that is pretty unlikely. And it translated very nicely, thanks for the thought. I don't play WOW, but I have several friends who do, and rogues, paladins, hunters, and warriors frequently use swords. Heck, they have fishing in the game, but building your skill up in the game at that won't translate if you visit a trout stream. I didn't claim that people who are in an online-only relationship can't possibly be a match in terms of S/M and bondage once they do meet. I just wanted to caution people that they can't learn HOW to use tools correctly online, so classes or careful experimentation are a good idea, once they do actually meet. Also, things you fantasise about or roleplay online might not be so hot in person, if you've never physically tried them before. Online, anal sex doesn't involve any contact with even trace amounts of poop, bondage can't cut off circulation, knifeplay can't make you bleed, and so forth.

LPslittleclip -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/20/2009 9:56:05 PM)
i have a long distance relationship with my M'Lady due to my being deployed right now. i have lived with Her and proudly wear her collar. that being said it is not a matter of it being truly anything. as i am now apart from all that is near to me i take great comfort in having a ability to be in a submissive relationship in any form. for many there is little opportunity to be with someone full time due to the economy and such. being physical with my M'Lady only intensifies Our bond but the distance only means that there is no physical contact not that it is of little meaning or significance. in the military there is great prejudice on bdsm but there are many who practice it. all of those who follow kink should help not hinder others who practice what they can as they can. LPs_littleclip

Gauge -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/23/2009 5:48:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KaityK How do you train someone online? I know many offer it in return for money which isn't what M/s D/s etc is all about FOR ME. If people want to pay then fair enough. I know people who do but even they would say it's not the same as being in a proper relationship with someone and they pay for rl play not online nonsense. I had someone respond to my adverts once that said he would train me 'online and on the phone' before we met. Apparently this was to make me at ease but my mind just goes into overdrive at these kinds of suggestions and I think there must be reasons why he can't meet me yet; he is insecure, he doesn't have any equipment, he stinks... On asking how on earth he could 'train' me online the answer was 'tasks'. I absolutely loathe this concept. Tasks usually involve going shopping without knickers on (yawn), going out with things inserted (double yawn) in fact, practically anything that will piss me right off and I still don't know how anyone can be 'trained' from a distance. Not how to serve sexually anyway. Maybe they can be brainwashed into thinking they have a relationship but they are not 'trained' to be that persons submissive if they've never touched them. OK, so it doesn't work for YOU. Is that really so hard to admit? Is it also so hard to admit that while it might not work for YOU that it might work for others (others being NOT YOU)? No one has actually debated that the physical portion of an LDR is something that is lacking within that context. This does not, however negate the fact that there ARE some sexual things that can be "trained" online or even over the phone. Cumming on command is definitely one of those things that can be trained without physical contact. Regardless of how you perceive the validity of such training, it does not invalidate them.

NihilusZero -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/23/2009 7:07:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DemonKia [sm=popcorn.gif] & [sm=chug.gif] Is that Guinness in that emoticon? [:D]

ownedslavesweet -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/23/2009 8:32:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Andalusite quote: ORIGINAL: ownedslavesweet There is literally no swordfighting in WoW, so I will agree that is pretty unlikely. And it translated very nicely, thanks for the thought. I don't play WOW, but I have several friends who do, and rogues, paladins, hunters, and warriors frequently use swords. Yep, you are right there, in fact so can warlocks, mages and death knights. Didn't want to be pedantic, and wanted to acknowledge your point. Despite these classes using swords, they do not 'swordfight' as we would generally understand the word. In fact nearly half those classes would never actually use the swords, would only carry them. Your main point that virtual communication in a place such as WoW does not prepare you for the reality of physical interaction is definitely well made. In my own personal experience, the game only served as a meeting and text communication medium as like any other, such as here. Other than the occasional /kneel in game, our lifestyle never carried into gameplay. There are some people however who do almost think of themselves as their ingame characters, which could certainly be dangerous if it carries itself into naiveity in r/l encounters. Interestingly, during my time on WoW, a surprisingly large number of couples in the lifestyle popped up... and those were only the ones that I firmly identified. All of them were either living together or travelled back and forth to one another, and were pretty well informed. Of course there would be the weirdos out there who truly live in a fantasy world, but I saw it as a very positive platform for communication and the odd virtual kneel. lyss

LadyPact -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/23/2009 9:32:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bearly2001 quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella quote: ORIGINAL: bearly2001 i have experienced a bit of prejudice as an online-only dom.. the ultimate LDR. i smile when i see profiles, journals and postings ranting about the illegitimacy of online-only or LDR relationships. to me, it just bespeaks a close-mindedness that indicate a person who undoubtedly doesn't have the imagination, creativity, sensuality and depth to appreciate these relationships anyway. it conveys to them a false sense of validity and sanction to their perceptions and opinions. arrogance and inflexibility will extract its toll on their possibilities unless they learn tolerance. Experienced a bit of prejudice or given a bit of prejudice? Seriously. I have plenty of imagination, creativity, sensuality and depth, but I'd never do an online relationship only because I can get every single thing I'd get out of an online relationship in an offline relationship - except I get sex, and snuggles, and dinner dates, and oh yeah a lifetime commitment known as marriage - and why would I want to settle for only mental stimulation when I could have the whole package? If that's what you're looking for, it's great, go for it, I'm sure there are plenty of people who want the same. But don't you dare say anyone who wants to meet someone, have sex, move in together, get a pet, have a family, and get married is too "closed minded" to appreciate a mental connection. For ANY good relationship you need a mental connection. I have a brilliant mental connection with my fiance, we've managed to last 7 months apart after living together for over a year. So I obviously have the capability to do a LDR. But that's not what I want out of life - I want to spend the rest of my life waking up to my husband and cooking him breakfast. How would you feel if I said you were online only because you couldn't handle the commitment of waking up to someone every day? Not good, eh? Then don't say negative things about people who choose to be in face to face relationships. elisabella, i can't help but think you totally missed the thrust of my post. i urge you to re-read my post more closely... i merely indicated that those that criticize online-only relationships may be showing their limitations. i am not suggesting that online is superior to any other type of relationship, nor am i saying that those who would never consider one or engage in one too ''closed-minded". i am saying that those that deny that these relationships are "real" or that they are actually "fantasy" may be revealing these limiting traits. i have been in a rare and successful r/t relationship for 36+ years... it's called a marriage! so i guess you could say i understand the benefits of physical contact and connection. but because she is totally vanilla, i have chosen the online-only venue to seek d/s relationships, as i am sure that some in similar circumstances also do. i am sure if you re-read my post, you may realize that i was not showing prejudice, just asking for tolerance and civility of those who look down or presume to denigrate the online-only participants of d/s. Actually, you just blew the whole argument with this statement. You asked for tolerance and civility, which I am more than happy to grant, but it would be My opinion that you are comparing apples and oranges between a situation such as yours and the OP's. This is exactly why I get involved in threads like this. People need to remember that not all situations of circumstance are the same when discussing long distance. There are absolutely those out there who have given the rest of us a bad rap.

CaringandReal -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/23/2009 4:10:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy I must say it seems odd to me that you are taking so much grief for this position. Oddly though, denial of the real (meeting, touching, knowing) intensifies online relationships where folks forgo the "real" for a Dostoevskian-like intense bearing of the souls. I don't think this is particularly well adjusted, but few of Dostoevski's characters were. We all must adapt to our own limitations while trying to pioneer new experiences and relationships, and sometimes desire and imagination are at farthest reach a person may go. Touching, knowing, and feeling might all be off limits or even forbidden. Which of Dostoevsky's characters did you find to be well-adjusted? If you say the underground man I will jump up and down on your head!

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/23/2009 4:16:14 PM)
It's not "prejudice", but "experience"... that most LDR either (i) never last, (ii) are fraught with fantasy about the other, or (iii) have some level of deception taking place. Not stating it's impossible, just highly unlikely it'll work out.

dreamerdreaming -> RE: Prejudice about long-distance D/s - what do you think?? (7/23/2009 7:01:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 24/7 slaves are not chained to a post 24/7. They have lives and jobs. The ones I know in real life do, anyway. Perhaps the ones you know in real life are chained to a post. Things might be different in your small country. [sm=ballchain.gif] hurries away to unchain slave from his post

Page: << < prev 8 9 10 [11] 12 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.882813E-02