I dont get it

I dont get it (Full Version)

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

Message

VampiresLair -> I dont get it (10/15/2009 7:22:26 AM)
I dont understand a recent trend I have noticed. I am hoping someone can enlighten me. Mind you I am not looking, but I do pop around on profiles quite a bit. One thing I am noticing more and more is that on submissive profiles, they are saying how it is "ok" for the Dominant they want to have other "Dominant lovers" but they want to be the only submissive. I am all for a submissive who has their own ideas about compatibility. However, telling a Dominant that in order to own you they have to become switches seems a little strange. After all, the switches on here will be quick to tell you how often they are being told that they are not "true" dominants or submissives. Personally, telling the dominant what they can and cant do if you are their property rubs me wrong anyway. If you have things they cant do to you, or things that you cant be in a relationship with, then yes I can see it. But being OK with an open relationship as long as it is one YOU approve of as the sub is sort of overstepping. Does anyone have an opinion or idea about this that might make it make more sense? Am I missing something? DV

LadyPact -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 7:28:20 AM)
I'm not sure if I'm understanding properly. Perhaps it is addressing those situations where submissives don't have any issue with those of us who are involved in a D/D relationship as the primary?

justagirlinzh -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 7:31:23 AM)
Insecurity. Jealousy issues, anxiety about their place in the pecking order. Sub 1 may feel their dom having another sub is a threat to the relationship with sub 1, while another dom, is not.

OsideGirl -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 7:37:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact Perhaps it is addressing those situations where submissives don't have any issue with those of us who are involved in a D/D relationship as the primary? That's the way I read it. There are plenty of D/D relationships where neither one switches.

DrkJourney -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 7:38:15 AM)
I'm not understanding what you are saying. Might be cause it's a bit early for me...lol

StoneFox -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 7:44:45 AM)
Maybe they just meant D/D sexual relationships? But I agree a bit...it's weird for the sub to say "Yeah, open is cool...but only if I'm the only one of my kind in it!". Almost like saying if they're a brunette that the other partner can only fuck others as long as they're non-brunettes. Justagirlinzh is probably right in her point.

Wolf2Bear -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 7:47:24 AM)
In the end, it boils down to two or more people negotiating/working out compatibility when entering the relationship. Looking at semantics, I agree it doesn't seem logical to tell the other person what they can or can't do, it smacks dab being over stepping one's bounds in that sense. Even taking into consideration the roles/labels we self impose, telling person A that they can't do this or this is ignoring the D/s dynamics, yes we need to state in a non confrontational manner that "I don't like" or "I rather if..." As with open relationships, that is an area which many create based upon what they and their partner(s) are comfortable with and have agreed upon. Some are completely open in the knowledge that their partner has other friends with benefits and some cases they agree to an open relationship by do not want to know the other person(s) their are sleeping with outside the primary relationship. It is quite similar to a poly dynamic yet the one big difference is in open relationships, there is no deep intimate bond created between the committed person and their fuck buddy. Some will dispute this yet this is my experience in the LGBT community concerning open relationships. We are quite notorious for wanting a primary partner plus extra on the side.

NuevaVida -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 8:07:48 AM)
I don't see it as ordering a dominant to be a switch, but I do see it as knowing what environment the submissive is comfortable in, and looking for that. I don't see anything wrong in looking for what you want.

LadyHibiscus -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 8:09:30 AM)
Lots of folks do NOT understand poly. So, it seems easy from the outside to say the D type can have all the relationships with other D's, but there shall be NO other S types vying for attention! Since that is kind of my dream life, I say bonus, but dictating that up front? Meh.

Andalusite -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 8:40:41 AM)
I certainly wouldn't expect my Master to get involved with a Domme, as he's not at all interested in switching. However, if he wanted a relationship with someone I disliked or distrusted, I'd be very uncomfortable. Right now, we're more in "monogamous with room for play" mode, and if he wanted to do BDSM play casually, I'd have no problem with that. We've discussed poly a bit, and I'm open to it with the right woman, whether or not I was attracted to her or also involved with her, but I would want at least a little bit of say/to get to know her first. I wouldn't try to control what BDSM orientation or role she took, or whether she was bi or straight. I don't want to be controlling toward him, but I'm just not comfortable with a completely open relationship, either.

LadyHibiscus -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 8:45:08 AM)
I swear to you all----it is totally possible for two dominants to get together with NO POWER EXCHANGE AT ALL. Except fighting over the remote, maybe.

LadyPact -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 8:49:30 AM)
Completely true, LadyH! Though, many would people would think it funny if they knew how many people didn't understand that possibility.

BitaTruble -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 8:56:05 AM)
quote: Does anyone have an opinion or idea about this that might make it make more sense? Am I missing something? Before ownership, everyone gets to determine their own path and if someone knows themselves well enough to know what they can handle and what they can't and are honest and up front about it, they deserve kudo's for it. It might not be your thing, but it's their thing and doesn't effect anyone else .. only themselves and their potentials. If their criteria is quite narrow, they'll probably have more trouble finding a compatible partner, but that's also their problem.

agirl -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 9:03:20 AM)
Overstepping what, exactly? It's a profile, that's all. It's not telling anyone to do anything. To me, it reads as .......I'd prefer to be the only submissive in your life even if you have other females in it I can't see much wrong with that. agirl

IronBear -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 9:03:41 AM)
Stone the bloody crows! No big deal Neets and I did it and it works out for us. Can't see what the kafuffel is all about.

Mercnbeth -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 9:16:24 AM)
quote: ...Does anyone have an opinion or idea about this that might make it make more sense?... the only way it makes sense to this slave is by remembering that everyone doesn't share the same perception of "submissive" or "submission". what appears to this slave to be dominant, controlling behavior will most definitely be viewed by another as the behavior of a submissive. just spend some time in the "Foot-Worshipping Dom" thread over in the "Ask a Master" section if you'd like some glaring examples.[:)] [sm=cheerleader.gif]Vive la difference!

allthatjaz -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 9:22:58 AM)
A Dom, Domme relationship is just that and has nothing to do with switching but like Lady Pact and said, some people find it hard to get their head round that. I haven't seen such profiles but would wonder if they are looking for a couple Dom, Domme? or just the male Dom with a seperate Domme lover on the side? if its the second then it would be interesting to know if they are just looking for play or looking for something long term that may materialize into a relationship? The reason I say this is because when I was in a long term Dom, Domme relationship he had a couple of fem subs that really did want to be the partner of my partner and saw me as little threat simply because I was also Dominant! I think they thought he had ended up with me by accident!!

xssve -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 9:27:08 AM)
It makes sense because you're not talking about a collared submissive here, you're talking about somebody looking for a D/s relationship - i.e., you can make all the demands and set all the limits you want, it's just telling prospective Doms what their particular expectations are.

hardbodysub -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 9:30:15 AM)
As others have commented, a dominant having another dominant for a lover does not make either of them a switch. One would be a switch only if they sub to the other. A sub's profile stating that they want to be a dominant's only sub is nothing more than a sub stating a hard limit up front. The sub's not telling any dominant to do anything. if a dominant reading the profile doesn't like that condition, then he/she shouldn't bother contacting that sub.

VampiresLair -> RE: I dont get it (10/15/2009 9:31:19 AM)
Perhaps I didnt state the problem I was having with it quite right. They dont say anything about having vanilla lovers, or equals, they specifically say that being with Dominant lovers is OK, but submissives are not. I have been in D/D relationships when there was no power exchange, and I know it can happen. However, what I dont get is why the sub would want to specify that they were ok with their Dominant being with other dominants specifically... not with having other lovers who are not their submissives. After all, if they are JUST lovers, what does the orientation matter?

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625