|
CaringandReal -> RE: Having Multiple Subs/Slaves (9/26/2009 7:36:56 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Acer49
quote:
ORIGINAL: SubOnlyForHim
Are there alot of Masters or Doms who have multiples?
I think there many that try, but ulitmately someone ends up getting the short end of the stick. I can't see a submissive wanting to share her Master with another. With life, work, children and other time demands, there seems to be so little time even for those who have only one. To split what little time is left between one or twomore, I do not think a submissive deserves half or a third of a dominant.
Responding to a variety of things in this thread, not just your message, but I will start with yours, Acer.
I see what seem to be successful versions of these relationships spoken about on this message board by the people in them and given the consistentcy of their statements over time, I assume that some of them are not dissembling. ;) While I agree with antipode that SubonlyforHim is the only one who can define what "a lot" means to her personally (as it's her value, not anyone else's) I see enough of these relationships being spoken of to say that, while I don't personally think there are "a lot," there are far more of them than I expected!
This is one of those situations where circumstances alter cases. Under certain circumstances, perhaps the ones you envisioned when you answered this question, what you say makes sense. But there's such huge variance in people, in their needs and desires, and in the situations they find themselves in. I know of (and even if I didn't know, I could imagine) many circumstances involving devoted masters and slaves where another submissive would be a very positive thing, and none of them involve "yippie more sex!" or a need for the dominant to aggrandize his ego even more.
A situation that I'd like to hear about from someone experienced with it is one in which two dominants of the same sex (and not gay) in a household share a single submissive. I do not recall every hearing such a situation talked about, although these scenarios pop up frequently in erotic fiction. So I'm curious about whether they exist/work in real life.
PS: I love the term "servant." I find it a very warm and affectionate word when used by a dominant to describe someone they're in a relationship with. To me, servant carries the connotation of "trusted,' which is something of a badge of honor. Servants, whether paid or not, traditionally knew their master's business and if a servant wasn't loyal they could cause a lot of trouble for (and perhaps ruin) that master or mistress.
A lot of talk goes on in the messages about submissives learning to trust (or not trust) their dominants. I see less talk about a dominant's need to trust a submissive and how that can also be a slow, careful process of analysis and judgement that doesn't always succeed with a given submissive. I don't see submissives discussing among themselves what they can do to earn that trust. (shrug, maybe it'd make for a good thread some day.) But it's almost as if earning the dominant's trust is taken for granted by many of us? And maybe that has to do with an "angel complex" (just making up a name for something I've observed) that many of us seem to have, particularly the female subs. Angels, after all, should not need to earn trust. ;) But, although it is not talked about as much, I know this analysis of a sub's trustworthiness goes on, particularly with dominants who are strongly in control of themselves (don't cave in much to impulse or emotion) or who have been badly burned in the past.
|
|
|
|
