RE: Can't vs Won't

RE: Can't vs Won't (Full Version)

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

Message

LaTigresse -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 11:46:27 AM)
I disagree. If I bring a slave into my home and her "will"s and "can"s align with my "do"s, so that I do not have to force her to do anything she would imagine saying "can't" or "won't" to.......I will not see her as being any less a slave or any less submissive. Not everyone sees M/s or D/s as requiring the s-type to struggle or change who they are.

porcelaine -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 11:48:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist For some of us, it's not about becoming pleasing so that he never wants to get rid of us. It's about becoming ourselves and being allowed to embrace that. would a willingness to do such that reflected her real self imply something negative? porcelaine

NihilusZero -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 11:50:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse So are you saying that unless there is struggle, there is not "true" submission??? quote: ORIGINAL: Aileen1968 So you think submission has to be a struggle? I am not advocating intentional struggle, but... "Pain nourishes courage. You can't be brave if you've only had wonderful things happen to you." - Mary Tyler Moore

LaTigresse -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 11:51:38 AM)
And where is it written that all of those un-wonderful thing have to come from within the relationship dynamic? Or that whatever pain might exist within, is wanted by those in the relationship, making can't or won't, a moot point?

IrishMist -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 11:52:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: porcelaine quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist For some of us, it's not about becoming pleasing so that he never wants to get rid of us. It's about becoming ourselves and being allowed to embrace that. would a willingness to do such that reflected her real self imply something negative? porcelaine For some people, yes it would. Being asked to 'change', no matter what it is, for some people is a sign of negativity. It says " I am no longer wanting you so become this instead"

NihilusZero -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 11:54:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist For some of us, it's not about becoming pleasing so that he never wants to get rid of us. It's about becoming ourselves and being allowed to embrace that. It's certainly your prerogative, but that sounds like s slave whose underlying core focus is "me" rather than "him/her"...at which point I'd be wondering why the word "slave" would apply at all (granted, as I said in my original response in this thread, I am looking at things from an M/s point of view where I expect a slave to be offering up the full extent of surrender possible). But even with submissives, needing to "be me" to where that is the trump card for every instance of disagreement is just an argument for the 'do me' sub mentality....which is perfectly within anyon'es right to choose. I'm only arguing the irony of wanting to describe one's self in a manner that implies wanting to serve another when, in reality, the serving of another is only really done to the extent that it serve's one's self.

IrishMist -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 11:56:44 AM)
No offense, but most slaves are inherently selfish. They surrender for one reason and one reason only. BECAUSE THEY WANT TO. It is about them and their own desire to surrender. What comes after is up to how those in the relationship wish for it to develop.

NihilusZero -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 11:56:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse And where is it written that all of those un-wonderful thing have to come from within the relationship dynamic? Where is it written that none must come from within the relationship, lest the relationship (or worse, the dominant partner) be accused of the heinous crime of actually trying to mold and build his slave to his wishes (you know...what is supposed to be happening in an M/s relationship)?

Wolf2Bear -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 11:57:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse I disagree. If I bring a slave into my home and her "will"s and "can"s align with my "do"s, so that I do not have to force her to do anything she would imagine saying "can't" or "won't" to.......I will not see her as being any less a slave or any less submissive. Not everyone sees M/s or D/s as requiring the s-type to struggle or change who they are. Yet isn't one of the goals in a d/s relationship is for both to undergo changes in order to further strengthen that relationship? I am thinking, in keeping with the 'can't and 'won't' theme, that when a sub states they can't do this or this that it is also due to their own fear of X or Y. Often that fear is born out of the sub having misconceived notions of the activity or they do not have a knowledge of what it entails thus they are fearing the unknown. It is when the person/sub gains a better understanding of such activity which they originally feared and gained the understanding that the fear is basesles then they change their internal feelings and therefore they change and be more accepting of the desires of the dom to engage in said activity.

NihilusZero -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 11:59:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist No offense, but slaves are inherently selfish. They surrender for one reason and one reason only. BECAUSE THEY WANT TO. It is about them and their own desire to surrender. What comes after is up to how those in the relationship wish for it to develop. But they are "selfish" in the sense that they seek to actually defer themselves entirely to the molding hands of another. No quips, no won'ts, no "it's too core a part of my personality to surrender". At least that selfishness is consistent with the title they are using and what it is generally presumed to imply.

NihilusZero -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 12:01:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist It says " I am no longer wanting you so become this instead" If a slave thinks xhe is a better determiner of hir life direction than hir M-type would be, why bother surrendering in the first place?

porcelaine -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 12:02:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist For some people, yes it would. Being asked to 'change', no matter what it is, for some people is a sign of negativity. It says " I am no longer wanting you so become this instead" how is surrender possible if he is unable to initiate change unless it occurs on her terms? i'm sure there are ways to combat that feeling. but who determines what needs to be altered, the dominant or submissive in this case? porcelaine

LaTigresse -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 12:05:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse And where is it written that all of those un-wonderful thing have to come from within the relationship dynamic? Where is it written that none must come from within the relationship, lest the relationship (or worse, the dominant partner) be accused of the heinous crime of actually trying to mold and build his slave to his wishes (you know...what is supposed to be happening in an M/s relationship)? I don't think anyone is saying that none must come from within ANY relationship. I won't even say that it wouldn't come from some future relationship I might have. What I am saying is that it should not be a measure of "better than" which I am am picking up from you. Perhaps I am wrong but that is the feeling I am getting in reading your posts. That somehow if this molding and struggle does not exist, it is not a "true" M/s relationship. You can certainly have an ideal for YOUR M/s relationship that makes it a real M/s relationship for YOU, but to say that your ideal is what makes mine, Aileen's, Irish's, or anyone else's relationship a real M/s relationship is asinine. Molding and/or suffering, does not make a relationship a M/s relationship for all. Neither the existence nor lack thereof.

NihilusZero -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 12:06:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: porcelaine quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist For some people, yes it would. Being asked to 'change', no matter what it is, for some people is a sign of negativity. It says " I am no longer wanting you so become this instead" how is surrender possible if he is unable to initiate change unless it occurs on her terms? i'm sure there are ways to combat that feeling. but who determines what needs to be altered, the dominant or submissive in this case? porcelaine And, frankly (patience in working out kinks aside) I would end a relationship where such a mentality was presented. And not because I'm not getting what I wanted, but because there would appear to be an inherent suspicion about my directions for her, as a slave, and the relationship. If that questioning is even arising in the first place, things either need to go back to a vanilla square-one or things need to end because I can't devote my complete focus and thoughts on making the best decisions if my thought-processes are getting undermined by someone afraid of losing themselves when they have chosen a relationship role where they handed themselves over in the first place.

LaTigresse -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 12:07:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Wolf2Bear quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse I disagree. If I bring a slave into my home and her "will"s and "can"s align with my "do"s, so that I do not have to force her to do anything she would imagine saying "can't" or "won't" to.......I will not see her as being any less a slave or any less submissive. Not everyone sees M/s or D/s as requiring the s-type to struggle or change who they are. Yet isn't one of the goals in a d/s relationship is for both to undergo changes in order to further strengthen that relationship? I am thinking, in keeping with the 'can't and 'won't' theme, that when a sub states they can't do this or this that it is also due to their own fear of X or Y. Often that fear is born out of the sub having misconceived notions of the activity or they do not have a knowledge of what it entails thus they are fearing the unknown. It is when the person/sub gains a better understanding of such activity which they originally feared and gained the understanding that the fear is basesles then they change their internal feelings and therefore they change and be more accepting of the desires of the dom to engage in said activity. For many it may be a goal. But what about the rare instance where two meet and find one another perfect as they are? Are they less M/s because they cannot see anything that needs to change?

leadership527 -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 12:07:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist I am with Aileen on this one. If a certain style of speaking attracted him the first place, why should I change? Because I asked it of her. I do not expect Carol to always understand or agree with the decisions I make. Nor do I expect to be static as I steer this relationship towards goals which are constantly unfolding in front of me. I expect her to follow my lead, plain and simple.

leadership527 -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 12:10:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist No offense, but most slaves are inherently selfish. They surrender for one reason and one reason only. BECAUSE THEY WANT TO. It is about them and their own desire to surrender. What comes after is up to how those in the relationship wish for it to develop. blinks

Wolf2Bear -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 12:12:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse quote: ORIGINAL: Wolf2Bear quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse I disagree. If I bring a slave into my home and her "will"s and "can"s align with my "do"s, so that I do not have to force her to do anything she would imagine saying "can't" or "won't" to.......I will not see her as being any less a slave or any less submissive. Not everyone sees M/s or D/s as requiring the s-type to struggle or change who they are. Yet isn't one of the goals in a d/s relationship is for both to undergo changes in order to further strengthen that relationship? I am thinking, in keeping with the 'can't and 'won't' theme, that when a sub states they can't do this or this that it is also due to their own fear of X or Y. Often that fear is born out of the sub having misconceived notions of the activity or they do not have a knowledge of what it entails thus they are fearing the unknown. It is when the person/sub gains a better understanding of such activity which they originally feared and gained the understanding that the fear is baseless then they change their internal feelings and therefore they change and be more accepting of the desires of the dom to engage in said activity. For many it may be a goal. But what about the rare instance where two meet and find one another perfect as they are? Are they less M/s because they cannot see anything that needs to change? I do agree that there will be the rare instance that both consider each other to be perfect in their eyes. I'd be the last person to determine if their M/s relationship is more or less than the D/s relationship I am forging for myself.

porcelaine -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 12:12:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IrishMist No offense, but most slaves are inherently selfish. They surrender for one reason and one reason only. BECAUSE THEY WANT TO. It is about them and their own desire to surrender. What comes after is up to how those in the relationship wish for it to develop. i share a different view. my desire to serve is intrinsic and would be exercised in some capacity regardless of my ownership status. however, when i accept his offer i am ceding control to Him. if He chooses to involve me in the decision making process, that is His to determine. we are not equal nor am i his co-pilot either. i'm a slave and have a defined position in our dynamic. selfishness doesn't enter into my servitude at all. the surrender of self and willingness to embrace His will above my own provides the necessary ingredients for enslavement. it is impossible for me to conceive how this could occur if my motives are individually oriented and neglect to include the One guiding the process. porcelaine

pyroaquatic -> RE: Can't vs Won't (10/19/2009 12:15:13 PM)
You cannot mold this!!! :P You would want me as I am first, not what you can make me. If that was the case any Dominant could go to Sub's R Us and pick up their own block of sub to shape.... but alas.... preferences preferences and more preferences must align so the pieces fit with little resistance. A slave/submissive can just as easily mold a dominant. It works both ways. As to the Can Not versus the Will Not.... I cannot sustain flight under my own power. I cannot breath underwater without gills. I can dance, but I will look like a doof so I will not. I can draw, but it comes out looking like a preschooler scribbled (but I still draw anyways...) There are things that a submissive should NOT do.... especially if medical conditions exist. Otherwise.... in the future.... they can not perform the very thing they should not have done. I believe this is a question of semantics, but I may be wrong. Defining a submissive/slave.... the will is not their own. Will of the sub is in the hands of the Dominant. A Dominant who will not respect a submissives limitations will find they cannot command a sub in the future.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

2.929688E-02