RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (Full Version)

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



Message


Takethiswaltz -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/20/2006 1:42:27 PM)

Cilly dom,
Heck of a lot of verbage in an attempt to explain your particular take on dominance and submission.  It would seem a way to attract a submissive that espouses to your take on these things.  It would be more appropriate for you to try to explain your needs and wants on your profile and in your journal.  You could also set up your own web site.  Clearly, your motivation is your search.  I sincerely wish you luck on that, but this approach is somewhat underhanded.  Understandable if you are frustrated in a lack of finding what you need, but still inappropriate.  I appreciate these boards for discussion, but not to be lectured about what submission and dominance is and is not.




cillydom -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/20/2006 1:46:40 PM)

And others have said they enjoy what I write




MasterOwnskitty -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/20/2006 2:10:48 PM)

i was very pleased to have found the original post and agree with some of the others that it makes some very valid points.  Yes, it is very fundamental in its ideas, but that's what i like about it:  it addresses the psychological aspects  -- and those are what i find so intriguing about the M/s relationship.  

i'll be putting a shortcut to this article on the desktop.  [:D]

~dawna




kyraofMists -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/20/2006 4:13:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpaceForMore
"demolish" may have been too harsh a word to use, and led to the impression of wanting to hurt the sub. Maybe these would sound better: weakening the submissive's analytical side... overcoming the submissive's resistance to submit... helping the submissive throw caution to the wind... Once trust has been established with the dominant, then letting go?


Why would you want to weaken a character strength of a person?  My Lord has no need or desire to weaken my analytical ability.  He seeks to enhance this strength and he uses it to better me, himself and our relationship.  Just this past weekend we had a several hour conversation where he was quite pleased to be able to use my mind to help him better understand a concept.  It was quite an enjoyable exercise to play devil's advocate and help us both come to a deeper understanding.

Knight's kyra   




amayos -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/20/2006 4:40:56 PM)

You know, I don't even find this thread controversial as much as it is preternaturally stuck at the top of the 'Ask a Master' section. We all need to just stop replying in unison and let it go.

Then again, just making this statement shot it right back up there...



Reminds me of what happened to the Knights who say Ni.




catize -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/20/2006 6:08:04 PM)

LOL, I will keep myself busy digging up shrubbery, me thinks it will be a more productive endeavor!




cillydom -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/20/2006 6:22:58 PM)

Changed for clarification of meaning


Respect and how it can ruin the d/s relationship. I know those are fighting words. For the dominant to extract his desires from his submissive he cant be overly concerned with displaying respect for her. After all if he’s to humiliate and objectify her, to show too much respect would only be a hindrance. This doesn’t mean he doesn’t respect her, he certainly should for her own accomplishments and for what he has made of her, I meant that, that respect shouldn’t prevent him from using her to fulfill his desires. She should know his respect and relish it. And through her deeds and service increase his respect for her. After all he’s going to use her in ways he would never try with women to whom he had to socially show respect. The submissive woman doesn’t want an overly hesitant dominant always afraid he’s hurting her feelings.
Her desire is “ grab me, slap me, throw me down and use me”. Not normally considered respectful behavior, but it’s a hell of a lot more fun.  Respect she can get anywhere, raw use is what she craves from her man or why else is she there? Submission is the giving up of power and free will, and with that power goes the demand for respect. we Anything else is just playing at d/s. In a happy viable relationship the question of respect never comes up. Why should it after all both are getting out of the relationship what they need. The question of respect is a symptom of a troubled  relationship. When reality is accepted for what it is then it can be incorporated into the relationship making it stronger.





Angeni -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/20/2006 6:31:43 PM)

:edited to remove a very hateful and flaming response




IrishMist -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/20/2006 6:51:54 PM)

/scratches head in confusion

I'll ask the obvious question

What fucking planet do you live on?




KnightofMists -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/20/2006 7:01:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cillydom

And others have said they enjoy what I write


Yes... but really that isn't of much importance now is it.... You looking for someone to have in your life to share your fantasy.... As you say... your Reality Suck!  Lots of words... that suggest your own Fantasy.  But, if you can't bring the Fantasy into Reality... Well your reality will continue to Suck.   

If you not getting the results... one has to wonder where the problem is.... We are responsible for our own reality!  And yours Sucks!




Moloch -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/20/2006 8:40:45 PM)

*starts banging head on a desk*    *reads cillydoms profile*      

Oh never mind folks, hes from Joiysey




amayos -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/20/2006 9:29:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: catize

LOL, I will keep myself busy digging up shrubbery, me thinks it will be a more productive endeavor!


Ekki-Ekki-Ekki-Ekki-PTANG! Zoom-Boing! Z'nourrwringmm!




cillydom -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/21/2006 9:51:19 AM)

What we need is a definition of just what dominance means in relation to the needs of submissive women.

A man that just wants to give orders and have a woman at his beck and call is not it.

There doesn’t seem to be an appreciation of what a good dom puts into a d/s relationship, what he brings to the table so to speak.

Women should try to get an appreciation of why he wants a submissive not just what his kink is.

Lots of men have kinky fantasies, few have dominant needs and fantasies.

You have to learn to separate the two.




JohnWarren -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/21/2006 10:55:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cillydom

What we need is a definition of just what dominance means in relation to the needs of submissive women.



Just one definition?  I suppose that translates as "How sillydom does it"?  There are multiple ways to experience domination and submission; all are valid for those who accept and enjoy them.

There is no One True Way.




MHOO314 -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/21/2006 10:56:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cillydom

What we need is a definition of just what dominance means in relation to the needs of submissive women.

A man that just wants to give orders and have a woman at his beck and call is not it.

There doesn’t seem to be an appreciation of what a good dom puts into a d/s relationship, what he brings to the table so to speak.

Women should try to get an appreciation of why he wants a submissive not just what his kink is.

Lots of men have kinky fantasies, few have dominant needs and fantasies.

You have to learn to separate the two.


This is your opinion only---when you can define trash and treasure to everyone's agreement then I think one can tackle Dominant and submissive.




cillydom -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/21/2006 11:15:25 AM)

Again people didn’t read what I wrote

go back and reread what I said and tell me where I gave the one and only definition.

I didn’t give a definition, only an example of what it wasn’t

a definition can have mutabile examples and flavors, look up something in a dictionary to see what I mean.

Some are so quick to pile on what they see as a wreck that they become the wreck themselves

to some here if I said 2+2=4 they would differ in a reflex reaction

And I think the “why” can be as if not more important than the what




Moloch -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/21/2006 11:19:51 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cillydom

What we need is a definition of just what dominance means in relation to the needs of submissive women.

A man that just wants to give orders and have a woman at his beck and call is not it.

There doesn’t seem to be an appreciation of what a good dom puts into a d/s relationship, what he brings to the table so to speak.

Women should try to get an appreciation of why he wants a submissive not just what his kink is.

Lots of men have kinky fantasies, few have dominant needs and fantasies.

You have to learn to separate the two.


No, I disagree we are adults, we can figure out things out on our own, we can talk and communicate about needs and or a conflict or a prolem. You are trying to put guide lines on feelings and emotions, to be quite frank I think that is stupid. You cant weight and measure and control feelings and emotions.

We dont need defenitions each person is different, If I go to a bar in one country and knock on the counter  the bartender will smile and ask me what I want to drink, I hop on a plane fly to another country I knocke on the counter at a bar and I get slapped off the bar stool for rudness.




 









BitaTruble -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/21/2006 11:21:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cillydom

What we need is a definition of just what dominance means in relation to the needs of submissive women.


You can't possibly believe there is a single definition which will apply to everyone and if this applies to just you, don't you already have a definition? I know what it means to 'me'.. and I know what it means to Master.

quote:

A man that just wants to give orders and have a woman at his beck and call is not it.


It certainly is for some people.

quote:

There doesn’t seem to be an appreciation of what a good dom puts into a d/s relationship, what he brings to the table so to speak.


Good is subjective, and I'm sorry if you don't have anyone to appreciate you, but I certainly have a great deal of appreciation for Master.

quote:

Women should try to get an appreciation of why he wants a submissive not just what his kink is.


Why is that important? Make a foundation, give arguments as to why knowing is better than not knowing.

quote:

Lots of men have kinky fantasies, few have dominant needs and fantasies.


Again, lay a foundation. Quote your sources. From where do you get this factoid? Why is it true? On what do you base this assumption?

quote:

You have to learn to separate the two.


How? Why?

Celeste




cillydom -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/21/2006 11:33:34 AM)

I guess I was mistaken

every man that calls himself a dom really is a wonderful dom

and all the women complaining must be mistaken

but don’t you think that just maybe there some questions a newbe maybe could ask a prospective dom other than what’s his kink and he says “on your knees”? Just wondering

and couldn’t some of you give countering examples instead of just complaining, I for one am more than willing to listen







BitaTruble -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/21/2006 12:08:28 PM)

quote:



I guess I was mistaken

every man that calls himself a dom really is a wonderful dom

::shakes head::  Do you deal only in extremes? If it's not birth it must be death? What about all which lays between?

quote:

but don’t you think that just maybe there some questions a newbe maybe could ask a prospective dom other than what’s his kink and he says “on your knees”? Just wondering

So, when I asked you if these pieces were written for the newbie and you said they were written for everyone, you really did mean they were written for the newbie. Thank you for 'finally' clarifying something.

quote:

and couldn’t some of you give countering examples instead of just complaining, I for one am more than willing to listen

I tried that, you said I was nitpicking. It's a waste of time to try to reason with someone who refuses to acknowledge critical thinking and review as anything other than a slam on their person or work. You have a good foundation, but it needs lots of tweaking.. you yourself said it's a work in progress. ::sighs:: For someone who is 60 years old, sometimes you rather remind me of a child. You haven't given much evidence of being willing to listen. Your work has been gone over and over.. and yet anyone who fails to 'grasp' AND embrace your ideas has failed to read it from the proper perspective. Did it ever occur to you that one reads from the perspective which they have.. and not from where you desire it be? I'm afraid that you are the one who doesn't quite understand. If the reader fails to grasp the writers intent, it is the clarity of the writer which is lacking, not the fault of the reader for not understanding. Good writers know this.. poor ones make excuses.
People have asked this of you already, but will you PLEASE use quoting so that individuals know to whom you are referring?
Celeste




Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125