RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s

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

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

Message

BitaTruble -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/16/2006 12:43:55 PM)
quote: that issue was addressed in the essay when i said to find a dominant whos limits she could live with Will you be so kind as to address the other question I had about a slave who knows herself better than a dominant could possibly know her? I appreciate your kind indulgence in answering my questions. Celeste

cillydom -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/16/2006 1:38:30 PM)
Your seeking a level of percussion that I’m afraid mere mortals don’t have he may have some limits that would exceed what she would prefer but that may be the price she has to pay. when I say she has to find a dom she can live with I meant overall. There is never going to be a perfect fit between any two people, so the question is, who gives in to the other. Because eventually one will have too. what I get from your questions is that she should have the last word on what happens to her in every respect , sounds like a nilla relationship with a little spice thrown in. Not a d/s relationship, or any I would recognize.

JohnWarren -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/16/2006 1:49:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cillydom Your seeking a level of percussion that I’m afraid mere mortals don’t have Because you don't quote it can be difficult to follow your thought processes and whom you are answering. Please specifiy who was talking about intense impact play and what the context was.

BitaTruble -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/16/2006 2:05:17 PM)
quote: what I get from your questions is that she should have the last word on what happens to her in every respect , sounds like a nilla relationship with a little spice thrown in. Not a d/s relationship, or any I would recognize. How do you draw that conclusion? Celeste

cillydom -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/16/2006 2:22:06 PM)
you seem cought up on the exactness of limits, limits are not a line drawn in the sand, more like the water lapping at the shore, never quite in one place

cillydom -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/16/2006 2:24:09 PM)
Why lie when the truth will serve you better. One of the things that will shatter a submissives faith in her dominant the fastest is to be lied to. The one she looks up to lie to her would shake the very foundation of her world. Better to tell her she’s not ready to hear something and in time when she’s ready she will know. Truth in a d/s relationship is strictly a two way street. Which does not mean the truth has to be blunt, it can be told her in a way she will accept, but any way it’s told it must be the truth. The submissive woman is after all on his side, even if the thinking woman isn’t. Between the two of them she can be persuaded. The dominant that lies to his submissive really hasn’t thought it out or the consequences, she’s submissive not stupid, and in time will figure the truth out. How to talk to a submissive. The dominant has to develop a way of talking to his submissive that she’ll listen to in rapt attention. I have found that short simple declarative sentences of just a few words each and strung together in a soft soothing even cadence fascinates them. They will listen for hours if he can keep it up. With just words he can take her into sub space. I’ve actually had one of my submissives orgasm just from my words. It may take trial and error, trying different methods of speaking to her but there is one that will excite her. Find that and he wont be able beat her of with a stick, a paddle maybe but not a stick. Authors disclaimer this is a personal philosophy presented to provoke comment and discourse. It is not a how to manual or a “This is the only way it should be” essay. But I dare say many will see things that pertain to them and their partners. This is a work in progress and changes are made from time to time for clarity and continuance but the basic ideas remain constant. So if it interests you come back to find out what has been added. Rereading from the beginning is recommended as changes are made to the body of the text also. It is also in my profile in its entirety. Or I will gladly email you a copy.

BitaTruble -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/16/2006 3:01:03 PM)
quote: you seem cought up on the exactness of limits, limits are not a line drawn in the sand, more like the water lapping at the shore, never quite in one place And you seem caught up in calling something a limit when it's truly not. Let me ask you a very simple question. Are your postings intended for newbies? Celeste

cillydom -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/16/2006 3:36:29 PM)
Not particularly , in part it is for some submissives that enjoy what I write and encouraged me to write more and in part it’s to explain me and in part I think that for others like me it provokes thought. It is not for all and I tried to make that clear within the essay, one thing, it is a consistent philosophy thought out over many years, I think most good dominants have gone through a similar process of self realization, of what they are and what they want. But what ever their philosophy on d/s it should be consistent and fit together as a consistent whole even though you may disagree with some or all of it, it should make sense. That would be a good basis for a prospective submissive to examine a dominant to find out over time if what he says agrees with what he may have said at some earlier time at least she will understand if he’s thought it through or is only telling her what he thinks she wants to hear. This cant be done in just a couple meetings.

catize -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/16/2006 6:22:17 PM)
quote: The submissive woman is after all on his side, even if the thinking woman isn’t. quote: Ahhh, we finally come to the crux.....'I think, therefore I cannot be submissive'.......Excuse me, I'll go schedule my lobotomy now......

Wolfspet -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/16/2006 7:01:29 PM)
Damn To think, Wolf and I have been doing this M/s thing all wrong for the last 17 1/2 years. If we only had the net back then to tell us how we should structure our relationship, what the rules were, and the proper behavior and way to deal with each other.

cillydom -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/16/2006 7:12:56 PM)
Would be nice if people read the essay before commenting instead of just commenting on other comments nowhere did I say this was a rule book, but that it applied to some more than others. So I guess your one of the others which is just fine, no problem

JohnWarren -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/16/2006 7:25:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: catize quote: The submissive woman is after all on his side, even if the thinking woman isn’t. quote: Ahhh, we finally come to the crux.....'I think, therefore I cannot be submissive'.......Excuse me, I'll go schedule my lobotomy now...... [Laughing] I guess I should really be reading this notestream. I must be missing a lot. Hold off on the lobotomy, Catize. I don't think you want him as a dom and as he's said, he's just speaking for himself. Some riders want old nags; other's prefer spirited steeds. I know what I want under me.

TNstepsout -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/16/2006 8:00:29 PM)
I'm so glad I revisited this thread. The first two pages of back patting and high fiving was very discouraging.

BitaTruble -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/16/2006 9:14:13 PM)
quote: ut what ever their philosophy on d/s it should be consistent and fit together as a consistent whole even though you may disagree with some or all of it, it should make sense. I don't believe the words you have written have been consistent, and they certainly haven't fit together as a whole because you leave out so much and can't really address the very valid issues which have been brought up except to say.. it's not for everyone. Your posts are so vastly general that specifics seem to throw you for a loop and those specifics have yet to be addressed in any substantive manner. I think you hit the nail on the head sometimes, more so in your earlier posts than the more recent ones, but I think that may be more a matter of luck than a consistent philosophy. Bottom line, I'm not quite sure you know where you stand in spite of your preaching. I'm not one to throw the baby out with the bath water, but I doubt there is much you will have to say from which I can actually learn something new.. although, on occasion I see some of myself in what you post.. they are things of which I am well aware. Earlier, you spoke of losing the romantics, but your speeches are almost pure romantic notion, feelings and emotions with not only thought being disparaged, but outright outlawed and pushed down as if intellect were poison to be avoided. Even the very human flaw of insecurity is to be shunned.. out of sight, out of mind. You are a Dominant, so you can't possibly be human much less show a smidgen of frailty for fear of damaging your slave. This philosophy you believe is so controversial is nothing but a spin on the God-complex. Hindsight being what it is, I'm not surprised you defended so staunchly the 'doormat' mentality, because that is the sort of woman who would appeal to such a thing as 'thoughtless' automaton, created.. or cloned is how I believe you phrased it. By uplifting the doormat in the same breath as you belittle those who are not, ::I think you termed them jealous their submission was not so deep, but I'm not rereading the entire thread to quote you exactly:: you seek to elevate the thoughtless clone as the 'ideal'. To this 'thinking' woman, your ideals are the stuff of which dreams are made.. or, more plainly.. fantasies with little substance to be found in the real world. Every once in a while, you unearth a pebble of insight, but having to wade though entire beaches to find them has grown into a tiresome and tedious task. Perhaps you have played with the cloned and brainless doormats for so long, that the thinking woman actually frightens you. It would explain much you cillydom. Celeste

cillydom -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/17/2006 3:56:08 AM)
Can you point to any particular inconsistency of a major kind in the totality of what I wrote, or are you referring to minor things that may be nothing more than typos or phrasing that could have been more clearly stated on the whole I think what I wrote is fairly consistent. And your right I did leave out much that would have better tied it all together, but that would really have sent the pc police into a frothing fit.

cillydom -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/17/2006 6:07:26 AM)
Rivalry among sisters. Submissive woman and thinking woman may be like sisters forced to share the same bed room. Submissive woman may want to leave the crayons out and thinking woman is always putting them back in the box, submissive woman likes to sleep nude and thinking woman wants to wear pj’s. Submissive woman wants to stay up late and party, thinking woman wants to go to bed early. One can see how these differences can lead to arguments and it will take the parent to step in an make them behave, get along. One woman I chatted with online flat came out and told me “ I hate thinking woman”. Submissive woman wants her dominant to take the place of the parent and help her calm these inner conflicts. The thoughtful dominant will realize what is taking place in his submissive and act to figuratively take the place of the parent. Part of his control is dealing with this inner conflict if it is present. I’m not saying all submissives have this inner conflict but some do. Authors disclaimer this is a personal philosophy presented to provoke comment and discourse. It is not a how to manual or a “This is the only way it should be” essay. But I dare say many will see things that pertain to them and their partners. This is a work in progress and changes are made from time to time for clarity and continuance but the basic ideas remain constant. So if it interests you come back to find out what has been added. Rereading from the beginning is recommended as changes are made to the body of the text also. It is also in my profile in its entirety. Or I will gladly email you a copy.

ownedgirlie -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/17/2006 6:40:53 AM)
If i am understanding correctly, "submissive woman" and "thinking woman" are actually the same woman, and your statements are examples of her own inner conflict, right? i think some of your readers understand them to be two entirely seperate people. Would you clarify please? Thank you.

cillydom -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/17/2006 6:42:14 AM)
they are the same

TNstepsout -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/17/2006 7:36:30 AM)
I haven't weighed in on this thread because as someone new to all of this it's taken me quite some time to figure out exactly what seemed so wrong about it. I'm glad you posted it, and that so many have responded because considering your argument has finally alleviated a lot of confusion I've had ever since I began reading forums and profiles and chatting with "Doms". I think what you propose is what many "Doms" seek, but I think it's an ideal you seek for the wrong reasons. I believe it represents a "risk-free" relationship. The concept of a sub who finds complete fulfillment in meeting your needs with no intrinsic needs or limits of her own would be ideal because it means you could never screw anything up. It wouldn't matter if you misunderstood or failed to communicate or didn't listen or overstepped a boundary or spoke too harshly or pushed too hard, were callous, cold or a complete jerk. You would have her absolute devotion no matter what you did, and in fact the MORE you pushed her to meet your needs (and give up her own), the more devoted she would become because she would be filfilling her greatest desire and proving to you and herself just how truly "selfless" she is. While I can see the appeal in this, it doesn't really offer much room for growth or mature fulfillment for either party. If all it took to be a good Dom was finding a perfectly selfless sub, then anyone could do it. Ultimately, where is the challenge/growth/joy in that? If you find someone this needy to submit, she would submit just as completely to any other Dom, so what have you really contributed that made her devote herself to you? You might as well not even be in the equation. It's sort of like finding a really easy video game to play. You can beat it over and over and over again, but was it really an accomplishment?

cillydom -> RE: One Dominants controversial thought on d/s (3/17/2006 7:59:13 AM)
Then you have totally misunderstood what I’m talking about. The relationship I speak of is a lot of work for the dominant and not many can stay the course. And for the submissives that seek such a relationship they require a lot from their dominants. Almost constant attention, it is quite intensive. Its not a relationship most want but for us that do it is quite fulfilling. And for those that do not seek this level of intensity to disparage it when they decry disparagement of their own level of need seems to me quite hypocritical. I actually read the profiles of those that comment here and sometimes wonder at the disparity at what they say in their profiles about acceptance and their comments here.

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125