Can't vs Won't

Can't vs Won't (Full Version)

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

Message

Elisabella -> Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 7:32:49 PM)
Is there really a difference? Submissive A says "I can't do electroplay, I have a pacemaker." Submissive B says "I won't do electroplay, it's a complete turnoff." The end result is no electroplay so why are there so many posts in the vein of "It's okay if s/he can't do it, but if s/he just won't then it's a problem"?

beltainefaerie -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 7:43:57 PM)
I think that in some relationships can't and won't are equivalent. In other relationships can't is definite and won't is about right now, but might shift as you grow with one another. Some see "won't" restrictions as being more indicative that the sub only wants to do the things they enjoy, which seems more hedonistic and less submissive, not that I find there to be anything wrong with that.

Cuffkinks -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 7:48:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella Is there really a difference? Submissive A says "I can't do electroplay, I have a pacemaker." Submissive B says "I won't do electroplay, it's a complete turnoff." The end result is no electroplay so why are there so many posts in the vein of "It's okay if s/he can't do it, but if s/he just won't then it's a problem"? In your example, submissive B says "I won't do electroplay, it's a complete turnoff." My response would be to look her in the eyes, smile and say..."To who?" Then I'd bind and gag her and have my electroplay fun with her. So...In my world, the result is not "no electroplay." It's a submissive pleasing the one who owns her. After all, that's what she's there for. Unless of course, electroplay was a hard limit of hers. That's a different story.

porcelaine -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 7:55:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella Is there really a difference? Submissive A says "I can't do electroplay, I have a pacemaker." Submissive B says "I won't do electroplay, it's a complete turnoff." The end result is no electroplay so why are there so many posts in the vein of "It's okay if s/he can't do it, but if s/he just won't then it's a problem"? submissive a has provided a documented medical issue that could prove problematic to the play. she has not overtly expressed an unwillingness to engage without providing a reasonable reason why play should be discouraged. submissive b has elected to defer to her own interests above the dominant in question without reasonable consideration, save it has no appeal. in this case she has decided that a valiant attempt to adhere to the dominant's preferences will not be undertaken. in my opinion both statements are inappropriate. the first example should be restated and presented in a manner that is less matter of fact. i would advise submissive a to respond in this fashion: Sir, i realize you are interested in electroplay. however, i should make you aware that i have a pacemaker. additional details about the condition should be provided at this point. after this occurs she should follow up by stating: i understand this is disappointing and know you enjoy this kind of play. what else can i do to please you? this demeanor is surrendered and takes into account her condition and the fact that style of play will probably be off limits. however, she makes herself available to him in another fashion by offering and demonstrating her desire to please. the second statement is simply wrong. her tone is inappropriate and matter of fact. it could be viewed as challenging and disrespectful as well. i would probably suggest that submissive b phrase it in this manner: Sir, i'm aware of your interests in electroplay. may i please share something with you that i believe might be of importance? she waits for his response then continues on and states: admittedly i'm a little (scared, nervous, or whatever her problem is) about engaging in this way. i have/have not done this before. if she's had a bad experience it should be admitted. if her fears are based on other factors such as things she's heard or read she should share those as well and wait for his response. then end the dialogue by saying: i know this is something that you enjoy. i'm aware that my feelings probably haven't changed at this moment, but i'm willing to make an effort. then shut the hell up. don't add one more iota. as you can see it isn't always in what you say, but how the feelings are presented that can make the difference between compassionate discussion and a punishment. porcelaine

Lucienne -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 7:57:33 PM)
As someone who can honestly say, after decades of sexual experience and effort, that there are certain things I simply CAN NOT do, regardless of my willingness or interest.... I get the point you are making but I still think there is a big difference between "can't" and "won't." Proving "won't" leads to resentment. Proving "can't" leads to guilt.

DesFIP -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 8:05:05 PM)
If I say I won't do it, I don't feel I have to justify that unless I'm in a relationship with you. However if it came up in the beginning before we entered into the relationship, and he accepts it, then he doesn't have the right afterwards to decide to force me to do it after saying he wouldn't. Plus to me, mental and emotional harm are equally valid reasons not to do something. Yet lots of people here seem to think that unless it causes physical harm, it isn't really bad. If you believe that, then you're likely to get into bad relationships where you get called unsafe. Hitting an emotional trigger is as bad as hitting a physical trigger for someone with fibro would be. It's still deliberate harm and it still teaches the sub you aren't a good person to play with. So yeah, he could tie me up and do it anyway. Once. But he wouldn't have the opportunity to do it again. Because if he says he understands that I won't do it and does it anyway, he's untrustworthy. I shouldn't have to use the magic words Hard Limits to have it understood that I'm not willing to go there. If you want it that badly, then be honest enough to admit it and tell me we aren't compatible. Don't harm me just to prove you're the big bad dom.

LadyPact -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 8:11:37 PM)
To Me, there is a difference. One is the willingness to submit. The other is a condition based on willfulness.

Level -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 8:17:40 PM)
Jane can't climb the tree, as she has no arms nor legs. Judy won't climb the tree, she's a lazy git. It's true, the end result is the same, but the way you got there is totaly different.

aldompdx -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 8:27:54 PM)
Both options are choices. Unfortunately, too many here seem to think that death is the only valid limit which one can choose to assert. Surrender is a free choice made with self will from strength. A master who disrespects the exercise of free choice only disrespects themself -- as so unworthy of receiving the gift of surrender that they must forcefully impose their will upon another.

littlewonder -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 8:39:15 PM)
Depends. Are you saying this to someone you are just communicatingn with or someone you are in a relationship with? What is the type of relationship you are seeking? For me personally I can tell Master my reasons for why I won't do something but they better be extremely good and reasonable reasons. It's up to him to decide what my options are. Saying can't doesn't even come into play in our relationship. Can't? I think I'd be hurting for a long time if I ever said that to him. It's not even an understood concept. That would be like me saying "no" to him..it holds no water. It's all going to depend on your dynamic with the other person if any at all.

NihilusZero -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 8:39:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella Is there really a difference? Submissive A says "I can't do electroplay, I have a pacemaker." Submissive B says "I won't do electroplay, it's a complete turnoff." The end result is no electroplay so why are there so many posts in the vein of "It's okay if s/he can't do it, but if s/he just won't then it's a problem"? This topic will garner vastly different viewpoints depending on if you are asking the question about a situation where two partners are already in a dynamic or whether it is about a situation where two people are debating getting into a dynamic. Concerning the latter: I'd technically have a problem with both (take into consideration, however, that I view things for myself in an M/s dynamic, not D/s). Both submissives A and B are making declarative statements about what they will or won't do, and that isn't a role I would expect them to be in (since the focus should be on sharing with the dominant partner in order to ensure that all pertinent information is available for the D-type to make the decision). However, sub A is making a much more valid point as the statement in question is one that discloses information about whether a certain act/idea/whatever could be potentially fatal or at least damaging beyond the scope of what is reasonably acceptable within the dynamic. Submissive B, however, only has the refuge of preference and whimsy. How valid those excuses are will certainly vary depending on how strict the authority dynamic is, but I would find any sub whose primary reaction to something is a measuring of whether they would like it rather than whether their dominant partner would like it to be not very exemplary of someone whose purpose is to serve and obey (at which point we're getting into the infamous 'do me' sub realm).

NihilusZero -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 8:41:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: aldompdx Both options are choices. Unfortunately, too many here seem to think that death is the only valid limit which one can choose to assert. Surrender is a free choice made with self will from strength. A master who disrespects the exercise of free choice only disrespects themself -- as so unworthy of receiving the gift of surrender that they must forcefully impose their will upon another. This makes no sense. It is fundamentally an argument for topping from the bottom. I'd go so far as to surmise that plenty of s-types would actually be appalled at the notion that they should be thinking that their "gift" of submission to their d-type should be considered so magical a surrender that it affords them the freedom to demand any post hoc preferences they like.

leadership527 -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 8:41:59 PM)
For me, the end result is not the same because it was never about the activity.

NihilusZero -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 8:44:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: porcelaine quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella Is there really a difference? Submissive A says "I can't do electroplay, I have a pacemaker." Submissive B says "I won't do electroplay, it's a complete turnoff." The end result is no electroplay so why are there so many posts in the vein of "It's okay if s/he can't do it, but if s/he just won't then it's a problem"? submissive a has provided a documented medical issue that could prove problematic to the play. she has not overtly expressed an unwillingness to engage without providing a reasonable reason why play should be discouraged. submissive b has elected to defer to her own interests above the dominant in question without reasonable consideration, save it has no appeal. in this case she has decided that a valiant attempt to adhere to the dominant's preferences will not be undertaken. in my opinion both statements are inappropriate. the first example should be restated and presented in a manner that is less matter of fact. i would advise submissive a to respond in this fashion: Sir, i realize you are interested in electroplay. however, i should make you aware that i have a pacemaker. additional details about the condition should be provided at this point. after this occurs she should follow up by stating: i understand this is disappointing and know you enjoy this kind of play. what else can i do to please you? this demeanor is surrendered and takes into account her condition and the fact that style of play will probably be off limits. however, she makes herself available to him in another fashion by offering and demonstrating her desire to please. the second statement is simply wrong. her tone is inappropriate and matter of fact. it could be viewed as challenging and disrespectful as well. i would probably suggest that submissive b phrase it in this manner: Sir, i'm aware of your interests in electroplay. may i please share something with you that i believe might be of importance? she waits for his response then continues on and states: admittedly i'm a little (scared, nervous, or whatever her problem is) about engaging in this way. i have/have not done this before. if she's had a bad experience it should be admitted. if her fears are based on other factors such as things she's heard or read she should share those as well and wait for his response. then end the dialogue by saying: i know this is something that you enjoy. i'm aware that my feelings probably haven't changed at this moment, but i'm willing to make an effort. then shut the hell up. don't add one more iota. as you can see it isn't always in what you say, but how the feelings are presented that can make the difference between compassionate discussion and a punishment. porcelaine It's been a while since I've been moved to shell out triple digits. 100 points.

NihilusZero -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 8:45:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 For me, the end result is not the same because it was never about the activity. 30 points.

NihilusZero -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 8:49:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level Jane can't climb the tree, as she has no arms nor legs. Judy won't climb the tree, she's a lazy git. It's true, the end result is the same, but the way you got there is totaly different. While I'm just handing them out... 10 points. And another 10 for having Gaiman in your sig line. [:)]

porcelaine -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 8:51:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero It's been a while since I've been moved to shell out triple digits. 100 points. aww you're too kind! [;)] porcelaine

Level -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 8:53:11 PM)
I thank you, and Neil thanks you, NZ [:D]

leadership527 -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 9:09:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: porcelaine Sir, i realize you are interested in electroplay. however, i should make you aware that i have a pacemaker. I understand this is disappointing and know you enjoy this kind of play. what else can i do to please you? OK, this is where NZ is going to accuse me of forgetting that I'm in a 15 year marriage, but here goes anyway. Within my marriage and for Carol & I, we don't mess around with word choice in this way. In fact I specifically commanded her to stop trying to "talk like a slave" and just talk. ESPECIALLY in a life and death situation (which any "no" response would automatically be), I'd have SO little patience for beating around the bush. I wasn't planning on turning into a homicidal maniac any time soon so yeah, the electroplay is right out. No need to mess around. The fact that I may please myself in any other way is already understood. There's no need to point that out either. Nor would I be disappointed that I failed to murder the woman I love. The whole thing is just contrived. If both Carol and I cannot tell whether she is mine without such fooling around, then we are doing something radically wrong. NOT INTENDED TO TELL OTHER PEOPLE HOW TO DO IT. IT'S JUST HOW WE DO IT But damn girl! 100 freakin points. I'm not sure, but I don't think I've ever given a hundred point answer. applause

NihilusZero -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/18/2009 9:16:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leadership527 quote: ORIGINAL: porcelaine Sir, i realize you are interested in electroplay. however, i should make you aware that i have a pacemaker. I understand this is disappointing and know you enjoy this kind of play. what else can i do to please you? OK, this is where NZ is going to accuse me of forgetting that I'm in a 15 year marriage, but here goes anyway. Within my marriage and for Carol & I, we don't mess around with word choice in this way. In fact I specifically commanded her to stop trying to "talk like a slave" and just talk. ESPECIALLY in a life and death situation (which any "no" response would automatically be), I'd have SO little patience for beating around the bush. I wasn't planning on turning into a homicidal maniac any time soon so yeah, the electroplay is right out. No need to mess around. The fact that I may please myself in any other way is already understood. There's no need to point that out either. Nor would I be disappointed that I failed to murder the woman I love. The whole thing is just contrived. lol But, that's the point, right? I mean...what relationship scenario that actually involves partners who have been together long enough would hypothetically involve disclosure of a pacemaker? Although, I am willing to admit that the pedant and picky bastard in me may just be preferential to the overt focusing on tone and intent. [:D]

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875