RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress



Message

Reform -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/5/2009 5:51:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wickad
For myself, I seek to define my own relationship. I am not interested in a morphed copy of a vanilla, romantic style relationship. This is my choice, just as it is for many folks (men and women alike) to seek out a romantic, sexual, sm, D/s relationship. It all comes down to knowing what you want and need and having the courage to stand by those needs.

Good luck in your search,
Wickad


It's good that you know what you want and stick to it. I'm the same way, even if we differ in outlooks. My boy is my partner first and my boy second. I crave that vanilla-stability and intimacy, and turn it up a notch in the bedroom (or living room, or kitchen...). But, when I play with others I desire little to no intimacy. Sure there is some degrees of physical intimacy going on because of nudity and the like, but the emotional side of it doesn't exist. That's saved solely for my partner.

blackpearl, I don't think it's that Dommes want or don't want any given thing as a trend, I think it's more a matter of them knowing what they want and not being afraid to put it out in the open.



lovingpet -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/5/2009 6:05:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: blackpearl81

So, with that said, is this because of a common belief that intimacy taints a relationship? Or is this more of a filtering tool used to weed out the "do me" type submissives?



I don't think such a stance would filter out the do me's. I tend to think it would attract them all the more (rings of no strings). There are some who really do not want intimacy as a part of a D/s relationship. There is nothing wrong with this. It is a preference like any others. I can't explain to you why as it is not my may. There are some that want a very emotionally intimate relationship with a submissive, but will also keep that in strict check in order to be able to make objective decisions when they are needed. Others are pretty open emotionally and do want that closeness as well. They don't find that being emotional affects their judgement. They still are able to maintain clear minded in the heat of a passionate moment. None of these are wrong, just different styles based on the needs, wants, desires, strengths, and weak spots each dominant person has. Compatabilty is key. Look for those who seek what you do.

lovingpet



shadowowl -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/5/2009 6:32:09 PM)

from my point of view if the Domme doesn't want intimacy they are either involved with someone else and just want something a little less serious maybe more a servent type then a relationship type, a pro that doens't want to get emotionally or sexually involved with clients, or just looking for someone to explore desires with on a part time or casual basis weather they are involved or not with someone else they just are not looking for anything serious right now.    Same goes with vanilla women and men as well there are plenty that just want either sex or friendship but no real emotional intimicy.
They are not types I get along with but there are LOTS of sub males that do not want intimacy either so there is someone for everyone :)
Actually I would almost say there are more males that think that way then women in vanilla and bdsm.   But that's just a guess from casual experiance and reading various profiles.



blackpearl81 -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/5/2009 6:39:56 PM)

Thank you everyone for your replies.

:)



MsStarlett -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/6/2009 7:08:00 AM)

I'm out of town and just checking in for right now.  Don't have time to read all of this and respond properly.

Just wanna say WELCOME BACK PEARL!!!!

And - on topic - BDSM is a rather intimate relationship by it's nature.  I have "No Sex" on my profile to keep away the Do Me subs who seem to think that Dommes are nothing but free whores in hot outfits.  The vast majority of those who approach want some sort of sexual contact on the first meeting!  I don't believe in that in a vanilla relationship and I sure as hell am not going to do it in a BDSM relationship.  I have to admit that I was having sexual relations with my Best Boy... but I don't have one of those now.  As I told my new guy, "I only have sex with my best boy.  Just because you are my ONLY boy, doesn't automatically make you Best Boy."



Lockit -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/6/2009 8:00:28 AM)

Okay, I was woken up far too early after being kept awake far too late... so... you get my early morning crass talk... but what's new? (hehe)

A randy boy with a hard on doesn't make for automatic intimacy, especially when they think that one email constitutes a relationship, no matter how pretty they talk and how they promise the world.

I think I just need coffee served in bed... lol It is Sunday after all...



PeonForHer -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/6/2009 9:05:52 AM)

I went with a prostitute just once, in Amsterdam, back in my early twenties.  I remember lying there and suddenly realising that I couldn't kiss her.  My mood dropped and so did the Oberleutnant.  Grim, bleak feeling afterwards.  A quick way of learning that I was put together one way and not another, and that was that.



DavanKael -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/6/2009 10:24:04 PM)

If intimacy is viewed as tainting a relationship (From either side of the kneel), it's the wrong relationship for me.  That having been said, intimacy isn't something that's generally instantaneous.  A lot of people mistake lust for intimacy.  Some people are more holistic in their relationships while others desire certain facets from one source, others from another.  I'm just guessing that what you're running into when you're seeing anti-intimacy profiles is 1)Ladies who are trying to discourage do-me subs and wankers and 2)Folks who aren't looking for lifepartners in the person they're seeking on CM. 
Best wishes, 
Davan
(Who is an even bigger fan of Peon after reading his post above mine)



blackpearl81 -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/6/2009 11:33:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsStarlett

I'm out of town and just checking in for right now.  Don't have time to read all of this and respond properly.

Just wanna say WELCOME BACK PEARL!!!!

And - on topic - BDSM is a rather intimate relationship by it's nature.  I have "No Sex" on my profile to keep away the Do Me subs who seem to think that Dommes are nothing but free whores in hot outfits.  The vast majority of those who approach want some sort of sexual contact on the first meeting!  I don't believe in that in a vanilla relationship and I sure as hell am not going to do it in a BDSM relationship.  I have to admit that I was having sexual relations with my Best Boy... but I don't have one of those now.  As I told my new guy, "I only have sex with my best boy.  Just because you are my ONLY boy, doesn't automatically make you Best Boy."



Thank you for the welcome back! It's good to see some familar, and some new faces.

I understand about how some want sexual encounters on the first meeting. I also understand how it's sometimes used to weed out undesirable candidates.

I guess it ultimately depends on the person. Take myself - I consider myself to be a very intense person when it comes to sex. One of the desirable traits that I'm looking for in a partner, is the *want* to harness that intensity, and take it for Herself.

Granted, it's not the only area I can be intense in, but it's also part of who I am.

Coming across someone who is looking for a platonic relationship, (but also includes kink) makes me sort of feel singled out (in a wierd sort of way).

Almost along the lines of: "Oh, so You're emotionally involved with me enough to have my ass tanned by Your flogger/cane/whip, but not emotionally involved enough to be with intimately"

@ DavanKael:

Yeah, that may be what I'm seeing. I mean, ultimately I wish to find a life partner. Physical intimacy. while not exactly a top priority, would definitely make the relationship more wholesome. It'd be like ordering a pizza, but only getting 4 slices instead of the usual 8.

Thank you everyone for their input.



MsRose -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/7/2009 12:10:52 AM)

I personally prefer to have a physical, emotional and spiritual relationship with my partner. That sounds greedy, but it's my preference. If I don't have these elements (or at least two out of the three), then I feel I am not being honest with myself or I'm missing something that should connects me to my partner to make the relationship meaningful. Then I have to ask myself why I'm with this person. The only time I would see intimacy 'tainting' a relationship is perhaps if a Dominant and a sub agreed prior to playing with each other that they did not want emotional or physical intimacyl for whatever reason. Intimacy would then interfere with the dynamic between them and the boundaries that they had established from the beginning.



undergroundsea -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/7/2009 1:11:30 PM)

I think part of it might be related to discouraging those who seek to hook up for sex.

I think part of it might be to achieve a dynamic that is not softened by intimacy. From the perspective of each the dominant and submissive, emotional intimacy has potential to soften the dynamic. I have heard some people say that, at times at least, they seek a dynamic where this emotional intimacy is not there so as to have a more raw go at it with SM, which is fair enough as long as both seek it in that manner.

Another reason to seek a dynamic that is without intimacy is because there is a primary relationship that provides greater intimacy, which could set a limit on the magnitude or types of intimacy.

I have had dynamics where I did not expect emotional intimacy and it developed. I often say that our wants and behavior are a collective sum of our different components, and one of these components seeks intimacy. The more the dynamic or interactions touch upon this component, and the more this component is wanting intimacy (it is not being provided by another existing relationship), the more the odds that intimacy will develop even if it is not initially envisioned.

Cheers,

Sea



undergroundsea -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/7/2009 1:23:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: blackpearl81
Well, TBH, both. However, in my limited time on these boards (Been a member for 4 years, but have been posting in the forums for ~2), it seems that out of the two - physical intimacy & emotional intimacy - the latter seems to be achieved easier.

Well... not easier, but... I don't know. Usually I can articulate my thoughts fairly well, but I'm stumped on how to explain what I mean.


I understand what you mean. There is not a dichotomy and one can wish for general intimacy, which includes both physical and emotional, as is the case in romantic relationships.

If I am interpreting your words correctly, what you mean is that a desire for physical intimacy could be coming or seen to come from ulterior motives to sexually use, for which reason it is more guarded in comparison to emotional intimacy, and the latter is seen to be more genuine.

Cheers,

Sea



Andalusite -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/7/2009 2:52:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: blackpearl81
Coming across someone who is looking for a platonic relationship, (but also includes kink) makes me sort of feel singled out (in a wierd sort of way). Almost along the lines of: "Oh, so You're emotionally involved with me enough to have my ass tanned by Your flogger/cane/whip, but not emotionally involved enough to be with intimately"

Why does it make you feel singled out, especially if they aren't approaching you? Personally, I *can* indeed enjoy S/M and bondage without any sexual or romantic intimacy, athough I do want some emotional/friendly connection. I was able to find a playpartner who has a similar attitude. She and I started building a friendship before we decided to pursue a playpartnership. How does our interaction affect you at all? I can trust someone enough to let him slap me in the face or punch me in the stomach more quickly than I can trust him or want him to have sex with me. YMMV.



pyroaquatic -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/7/2009 3:10:17 PM)

Intimacy-I would die without it while in a relationship.

Shrivel up.... and *poof*

You don't want me to disappear do you?



blackpearl81 -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/7/2009 4:43:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andalusite

Why does it make you feel singled out, especially if they aren't approaching you? Personally, I *can* indeed enjoy S/M and bondage without any sexual or romantic intimacy, athough I do want some emotional/friendly connection. I was able to find a playpartner who has a similar attitude. She and I started building a friendship before we decided to pursue a playpartnership. How does our interaction affect you at all? I can trust someone enough to let him slap me in the face or punch me in the stomach more quickly than I can trust him or want him to have sex with me. YMMV.


Well... I never claimed to have a logical line of thought. XD

But, Sea hit the nail on the head - assuming that someone has ulterior motives, and thus, guarding it more closely.

The best way to describe why it feels like being singled out, is like the old adage: "One bad apple ruins the bunch"
Granted, I would NEVER pursue sexual relations right off the bat. But to assume someone has ulterior motives, (based on bad previous experiences) when they don't even know the person, is tweaked.



Andalusite -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/7/2009 6:06:19 PM)

Hmm, I'm not sure if you mean that someone who doesn't want intimacy is assuming that you have ulterior motives, or if you assume that they do? I'm a bit confused! In my case, I didn't want romantic or sexual intimacy with a playpartner at this point, and the lady I'm playing with is fine with that, and doesn't want sex or romance from me, either. I don't think there are any ulterior motives involved.

In the past, I've sometimes played causually when I was still thinking things through after a breakup, and didn't feel ready to get into a relationship yet. I didn't want sex or romance, but did want some gentle affection and violent play. I didn't necessarily assume that men just wanted casual sex from me, if that's what you meant by "ulterior motives," although I did run into quite a few who did. I refused to play with them, once they made it clear. I actually said flat out (if I was bottoming or switching, since I had the control if I was topping to back off whenever I needed or wanted to) that I would safe out if I got too turned on. I didn't have to red over it, but did have to yellow occasionally, and some guys seemed to find it completely incomprehensible that someone would want to play without having an orgasm. None of the women I played with had any trouble understanding it at all. *shrugs* I also had to turn down a few people who didn't see any distinction between submitting and bottoming. Nothing wrong with them automatically going hand-in-hand, as long as the people they play with feel the same way. Most people just don't push my buttons in a D/s way in either direction, and it feels like a lie to claim to be dominating someone or to be someone's submissive if there isn't an ongoing, intense power exchange involved. Just being compliant and obedient isn't submission, either - it's being yielded to the other person's will. From the outside, it might look identical, but it's a completely different headspace.

A lot of men here are looking for a more casual service-oriented interaction (ie. housekeeping), but when I was searching, I couldn't in good conscious claim them as my submissive unless I was involved with them romantically, sexually, and with physical BDSM play, and actually felt that dynamic. Again, a lot of them seemed confused by that, and assumed that following orders ought to be enough to make them submissive, and that calling me their Mistress could just be a pet name, meaningless once they went home.




NoreenSwan -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/7/2009 6:41:50 PM)

Actually I don't find it to be a GIVEN at all, most dommes (and sub women) here really would love to find a man looking for an intimacy. I think most of us women really want that. And I also think more people are looking for this than you could think. And it's not just a feminine pursuit; it's universal, even if people admit it or not. But it's hard to find. Intimacy has to have romance with it, that special feeling from a look across the room. Many confuse sex with intimacy, it's more then sex...it's knowing someone so well that you can predict thier needs, desires and wants...you can't get to that level of understanding in one night. I think dommes are always open to finding this but don't require it in their subbys in order to dominate them and be served.



blackpearl81 -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/7/2009 6:45:24 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andalusite

Hmm, I'm not sure if you mean that someone who doesn't want intimacy is assuming that you have ulterior motives, or if you assume that they do? I'm a bit confused! In my case, I didn't want romantic or sexual intimacy with a playpartner at this point, and the lady I'm playing with is fine with that, and doesn't want sex or romance from me, either. I don't think there are any ulterior motives involved.

In the past, I've sometimes played causually when I was still thinking things through after a breakup, and didn't feel ready to get into a relationship yet. I didn't want sex or romance, but did want some gentle affection and violent play. I didn't necessarily assume that men just wanted casual sex from me, if that's what you meant by "ulterior motives," although I did run into quite a few who did. I refused to play with them, once they made it clear. I actually said flat out (if I was bottoming or switching, since I had the control if I was topping to back off whenever I needed or wanted to) that I would safe out if I got too turned on. I didn't have to red over it, but did have to yellow occasionally, and some guys seemed to find it completely incomprehensible that someone would want to play without having an orgasm. None of the women I played with had any trouble understanding it at all. *shrugs* I also had to turn down a few people who didn't see any distinction between submitting and bottoming. Nothing wrong with them automatically going hand-in-hand, as long as the people they play with feel the same way. Most people just don't push my buttons in a D/s way in either direction, and it feels like a lie to claim to be dominating someone or to be someone's submissive if there isn't an ongoing, intense power exchange involved. Just being compliant and obedient isn't submission, either - it's being yielded to the other person's will. From the outside, it might look identical, but it's a completely different headspace.

A lot of men here are looking for a more casual service-oriented interaction (ie. housekeeping), but when I was searching, I couldn't in good conscious claim them as my submissive unless I was involved with them romantically, sexually, and with physical BDSM play, and actually felt that dynamic. Again, a lot of them seemed confused by that, and assumed that following orders ought to be enough to make them submissive, and that calling me their Mistress could just be a pet name, meaningless once they went home.




See, I fully understand that each person is different, and YMMV. But what I've bolded above, is exactly what I'm wondering.

It seems that there are a fair amount of people that CAN, in fact, claim someone as their submissive, yet only be involved with them in 2 of the 3 ways mentioned above. Or, more accurately, only partially claiming them.

Thats like what I was saying earlier: Thats like ordering a pizza, but only getting 4 slices instead of the usual 8.



Misstoyou -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/7/2009 7:49:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: blackpearl81

... is this because of a common belief that intimacy taints a relationship? Or is this more of a filtering tool used to weed out the "do me" type submissives?


quote:

ORIGINAL: undergroundsea

I think part of it might be related to discouraging those who seek to hook up for sex ...


Bingo!

Because (though it shouldn't have to be explained...)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

... people need to realize that intimacy is not instantaneous...


And yet,

quote:

ORIGINAL: undergroundsea

... I have had dynamics where I did not expect emotional intimacy and it developed...


[:)]




Andalusite -> RE: Intimacy tainting a relationship? (9/9/2009 8:51:56 AM)

blackpearl, sure, some people can and do! I even know a couple of gay men who have female submissives or slaves, and there are a few people who post in the forums who have non-sexual, service oriented D/s relationships, a couple of which have lasted for years. It isn't what I personally would need or want in a D/s relationship. When I was looking, I wanted a kinky boyfriend who I was compatible with in several different aspects, and D/s orientation was one of the less important aspects. I just happened to luck into finding someone here who I have a very intense desire to serve, whose will I can yield to trustingly. I hope you find what you're looking for, and there's nothing wrong with wanting all of those things, but the people who are searching for something more casual or service-oriented aren't "wrong" or "fake." Like I mentioned, my playpartnership isn't romantic or sexual, more topping and a bit of service. I'm not taking advantage of her, and I *do* care about her as a person and as a friend. We just devote those other aspects of ourselves to our respective partners.



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

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875