RE: the Loved Dominant (Full Version)

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



Message

AquaticSub -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 7:55:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KnightofMists

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

but i dont have to point out the obvious differences between mainstream and D/sers or Msers and how much what we do requires greater trust and acceptance.



THIS IS DEAD WRONG! I suggest that you don't seek to undermine the strength of other relationship types to increase your ego!

The amount of trust and acceptance required in a relationship is dependent on the people involved in the relationship and NOT the type of dynamic such intimate relationship has.




I'm completely with KoM and completely against the idea that BDSM takes more trust.

Ok. So I trust the guy to do what? Not to hurt me right?

Which what I trust every single frikkin' person in this city not to do when I step outside my front door. People go nuts, lock themselves up in towers and start sniping. But 99.9 percent of people don't so I trust that I'm not going to going to encounter the rare one who does.

Most people don't want to hurt people or at least they don't want to suffer the consquences of hurting someone, ex. jail, paying for medical bills. fewer people willing to play with them.

I play casually with people who I don't even know their names and have no trust of beyond the basic "I trust not to want to hurt me because it would cause too much hassle for you". As for in a relationship, I vehemently disagree that we have more trust, love, or acceptance as opposed to any other healthy dynamic.

We aren't better or more trusting. If you look at half the posts on this board, there are tons of people who come here not trusting their partners, being afraid of what their master might do because they don't trust them to make the right decision - but they are still involved in a m/s dnyamic.

There isn't an exam to pass, there isn't a rubber stamp to mark any relationship approved. It's either healthy and has people who trust each other or it not. Everything else is a detail.



lally2 -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 7:59:34 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

hear hear

a married woman with half a dozen kids has a lot riding on her mate

i think the word trust is over used and misused quite a lot


i agree that every relationship under the sun relies on the other half of it to provide support - financial, emotional etcetera.... with or without half a dozen kids.

trust is one of the pivotal requirements for any relationship. knightofmists is perfectly right in saying that we are no different to mainstream than any other relationship with regard to a partner sticking around after spawning half a dozen children with you.

i really didnt think it was necessary to spell out the difference but ok. when you give up control, hand decision making over to someone else, allow them to direct you in the fashion they most require along with wanting to tie you up and beat you - trust is huge. a submissive or slave has to trust that the Dominant theyre handing themselves over to has the required common sense, intelligence and responsibility to make the right decisions for them.

the moment that trust is gone there is nothing to work from. the submissive invests a huge amount of emotion and energy and thought into submitting themselves body and mind. putting that level of trust into someone cannot be overstated or over emphasised and its all too often that some Dominants fail miserably in recognising the massive investment a slave or sub puts into them.



AquaticSub -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 8:04:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

i really didnt think it was necessary to spell out the difference but ok. when you give up control, hand decision making over to someone else, allow them to direct you in the fashion they most require along with wanting to tie you up and beat you - trust is huge. a submissive or slave has to trust that the Dominant theyre handing themselves over to has the required common sense, intelligence and responsibility to make the right decisions for them.

As I addressed in my previous post, I trust complete strangers not to kill me every time I get in the car when I trust them not to serve into my lane.

As for the handing over decisions, a vanilla wife has to trust her husband not to run with all the money, she has to trust him not to buy things they can't afford. Basically - she has to trust his judgement just as much as a submissive has to trust her dominant's. In either case, if the judgement becomes impaired to a point, they have to make a decision to leave or stay.

Sorry lally, I still think it's BS.
quote:


the moment that trust is gone there is nothing to work from. the submissive invests a huge amount of emotion and energy and thought into submitting themselves body and mind. putting that level of trust into someone cannot be overstated or over emphasised and its all too often that some Dominants fail miserably in recognising the massive investment a slave or sub puts into them.


Yeah... still BS to me that glorifies what we do pointlessly.

We aren't special. We aren't better. We don't require more. We just talk about it a lot more. All that energy isn't unique to our relationships. My vanilla friends put the same energy into their relationships as I do into mine. The energy is simply directed and focused in different ways.



osf -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 8:06:06 AM)

hear hear



wisdomtogive -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 8:47:02 AM)

Lally
I can only speak from my observations. As you know the majority of my life was lived in vanilla marriages. Things you speak of regarding them knowing they were loved is appliable to my marriage. In my mind it might be that Sir carries a whip, and i need to trust he will be wise in using it, but that same depth of trust was  also felt, when i was very ill.  The trust I felt in my late husband that he would have the wisdom to know how to deal with my illness. I can't for the life of me seperate D/s , M/s and vanilla as one needing more trust then the other. How do they know i love them? By my sharing gratitude, trust and appreciation of who they are/were in all aspects. This was at least told to me by both the vanilla and D/s relationships. They knew  I carried their heart in mine within a sacred way.

[sm=threadhijack.gif]  Living a vanilla marriage and now Ds one thing I must say the difference is only when you believe there one.  Either type can provide a strong bond threaded in trust and faith to tighten the love shared. It doesn't matter if they carry the sadist within them or not, when you love you take a risk of being hurt. I have had success in vanilla, and in BDSM i have learned a lot. Neither do i conclude are not for me, it is the personality and how the individuals connect.



NihilusZero -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 8:55:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub

Ok. So I trust the guy to do what?

To make competent decisions in every facet of your life which has been surrendered unto him.

And, on average, the surrender of such decisions in a D/s or M/s relationship is going to be more than a relationship that is based more on each partner retaining specific autonomy of those decision-making facets.



breatheasone -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 9:01:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2



this has been fired up by a friend on the other side. A Dominant i have a great deal of respect for in terms of his insight and understanding.

a great deal is talked about how much the submissive needs to feel loved, cared for, cherished.

but what makes a Dominant feel loved.

in the context of D/s and Ms, which is where the relationship springs from what are the aspects of enslavement and submission that make you feel cherished.

is it all about trust. does her level of trust in you = her love for you.

when so much is discussed about how much a sub or slave 'needs' to express herself and does so through submission what part of that 'need' makes you feel loved for you.

as a sub/slave type the love i have felt for a Master went far deeper than for any other man i have known. because he was strict and controlled me? partly. because he took the trouble to know me and understand me? - very much.

and yet i have been told by a slave on here i respect hugely and others i respect that it isnt for a sub or slave to understand her master or even to know him. simply to accept and not question, not seek to know his private, personal mind.

its a very personal question i know, i hope you dont mind me asking.

This is a good question Lally, i hope some more male D-types chime in.



NihilusZero -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 9:08:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub

As I addressed in my previous post, I trust complete strangers not to kill me every time I get in the car when I trust them not to serve into my lane.

That's more a gamble than a matter of trust.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub

As for the handing over decisions, a vanilla wife has to trust her husband not to run with all the money, she has to trust him not to buy things they can't afford. Basically - she has to trust his judgement just as much as a submissive has to trust her dominant's.

If there is not a greater degree of facets unto which trust is placed in a D/s relationship, then there is no substantial authority transfer in that D/s relationship.

For every facet surrendered by an s-type unto a D-type, there is a degree of trust exchanged in that situation that is not present in a non-exchange relationship.

Unless we are arguing that D/s partners do not surrender anything more unto a partner than those in vanilla relationships.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub

Yeah... still BS to me that glorifies what we do pointlessly.

Actually, it's reverse glorification. It's the glorification of "trust" as an ambiguous entity that is supposed to have "ethical value" and, as etiquette would dictate to us, we shouldn't say anything that would suggest that another person's relationship is of any less "ethical value". The intent is noble (and somewhat logical), but is itself a mischaracterization of what exactly is being discussed.

And if some people have their ego fluffed by being part of a relationship where more trust is exchanged...so what? It's like me griping about someone being pompous about being able to hit a baseball a hundred times better than I if he's a pro baseball player. My dislike of his arrogance doesn't necessarily discount the veracity of his point.

I'm not necessarily supporting that sort of attitude by some or any, but it isn't something that can logically be countered.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub

We aren't special. We aren't better.

This is exactly my point. Because of how so many people see trust in the "ethical value" department. it's assumed that that is what people mean when I can't find anyone who has implied that "we are special" or "we are better". It's just the fixation on needing to make "trust" an emotional affirmative action issue that makes those parallels.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub

We don't require more. We just talk about it a lot more. All that energy isn't unique to our relationships. My vanilla friends put the same energy into their relationships as I do into mine. The energy is simply directed and focused in different ways.

And, now the parallel to "energy". I'm sure some people put more energy into relationships than others (regardless of relationship type). And I'm sure those vanilla friends don't put "the same energy" into their relationships. Same potency? Perhaps. Same frequency? Unlikely, but for the sake of argument...sure.

There is a big, big difference between understanding that all relationships should be treated equally (in terms of tolerance and respect) and the supposition that all relationships are equal.



lally2 -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 9:11:49 AM)

its all about degrees i think.

being a slave type (no ego here, just that i prefer to hand all control over, its how i tick) i have no autonomy regarding decisions for myself, i hand that over.

ive been in a mainstream relationship and i reserved the right to say 'no' when something didnt feel right. in Ms i dont have that right - i may try to exercise it but if my opinion doesnt fit his opinion, im fucked. ok, fine, thats what i signed up for.

in order to sign up for that i have to believe that the person im signing up to can carry the responsibility of making decisions for my health, wealth and happyness.

i trusted my mainstream partner to help me pay the bills, come home to me every night after work, care about my feelings over things, include me in his life as and when, take care of me when i felt ill, etcetera - i did not leave him to make all of the decisions regarding my health, wealth and happyness, partly because he would have been crap at it, mostly because he didnt want to be that responsible for me.

when a Dominant wants infacts insists that his decision gets the final vote more trust is required.



NihilusZero -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 9:17:30 AM)

For illustrative purposes, my point lies on the fact that this:

[img]http://www.kostagara.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/on-off-switch.jpg[/img]

...is not "trust". But this is:

[img]http://www.kristinsweetland.com/Studio-Board.jpg[/img]



AquaticSub -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 9:22:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero

quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub

Ok. So I trust the guy to do what?

To make competent decisions in every facet of your life which has been surrendered unto him.

And, on average, the surrender of such decisions in a D/s or M/s relationship is going to be more than a relationship that is based more on each partner retaining specific autonomy of those decision-making facets.



No, I trust him to make competent decisions. The fact that he is making them over my life doesn't have much to do with it to me. Either I trust him to make good decisions or don't, regardless of the power dynamic. And if you don't trust them to make good decisions, why are you in a relationship with them?



AquaticSub -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 9:31:01 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero

quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub

As I addressed in my previous post, I trust complete strangers not to kill me every time I get in the car when I trust them not to serve into my lane.

That's more a gamble than a matter of trust.


By that defination of gamble vs. trust, I consider nearly everything a gamble. I'm gambling that Val will never get an addiction to painkillers and sell everything off.
quote:


quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub

As for the handing over decisions, a vanilla wife has to trust her husband not to run with all the money, she has to trust him not to buy things they can't afford. Basically - she has to trust his judgement just as much as a submissive has to trust her dominant's.

If there is not a greater degree of facets unto which trust is placed in a D/s relationship, then there is no substantial authority transfer in that D/s relationship.

For every facet surrendered by an s-type unto a D-type, there is a degree of trust exchanged in that situation that is not present in a non-exchange relationship.

Unless we are arguing that D/s partners do not surrender anything more unto a partner than those in vanilla relationships.

It seems you and I have a fundemental difference in how we view trust in regards to d/s. Which is logical since trust is such a personal thing.

I don't think I have to trust him anymore than I trusted any of vanilla exes because other than that our relationship has gone further... I pretty much don't. I trust him more because our relationship has gotten deeper, not because it's a power dynamic.
quote:



quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub

Yeah... still BS to me that glorifies what we do pointlessly.

Actually, it's reverse glorification. It's the glorification of "trust" as an ambiguous entity that is supposed to have "ethical value" and, as etiquette would dictate to us, we shouldn't say anything that would suggest that another person's relationship is of any less "ethical value". The intent is noble (and somewhat logical), but is itself a mischaracterization of what exactly is being discussed.

And if some people have their ego fluffed by being part of a relationship where more trust is exchanged...so what? It's like me griping about someone being pompous about being able to hit a baseball a hundred times better than I if he's a pro baseball player. My dislike of his arrogance doesn't necessarily discount the veracity of his point.

I'm not necessarily supporting that sort of attitude by some or any, but it isn't something that can logically be countered.

My problem with the attitude isn't so much the belief itself as that when it's espoused it demeans the other style of relationship by implying there is less trust and, to go further, inferior. That is a pet peeve of mine that drives me up the wall.
quote:


quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub

We aren't special. We aren't better.

This is exactly my point. Because of how so many people see trust in the "ethical value" department. it's assumed that that is what people mean when I can't find anyone who has implied that "we are special" or "we are better". It's just the fixation on needing to make "trust" an emotional affirmative action issue that makes those parallels.

I feel that to say more trust is required implies our relationships are better. You and lally and others are feel to disagree and probably will. [:)]
quote:


quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub

We don't require more. We just talk about it a lot more. All that energy isn't unique to our relationships. My vanilla friends put the same energy into their relationships as I do into mine. The energy is simply directed and focused in different ways.

And, now the parallel to "energy". I'm sure some people put more energy into relationships than others (regardless of relationship type). And I'm sure those vanilla friends don't put "the same energy" into their relationships. Same potency? Perhaps. Same frequency? Unlikely, but for the sake of argument...sure.

There is a big, big difference between understanding that all relationships should be treated equally (in terms of tolerance and respect) and the supposition that all relationships are equal.

The same energy as in they do everything the same? No - that is why I said it's channeled and focused differently. Some put in more and some put in less but I was speaking of those in happy and healthy relationships, the same way I thought we are talking about those in happy, healthy m/s relationships and not the ones where the sub/slave has to run to the boards cause her owner refuses to talk to her for a week or where the pet took the master's computer and ran off. [;)]



DesFIP -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 10:57:11 AM)

Being restrained and hurt?That's a risk of a few hours lally. A greater risk is marrying him and having his child, that risk lasts the next 20odd years. And risking spending the next 50 years in bed with the same man every night? Knowing that there will be times when he's snoring that you will want to smother him with a pillow, yet you commit to it anyway? Much bigger risk.

And the largest risk of all, that after those 50 years together when you can no longer imagine yourself as anything but part of that couple, and he dies first and you have ten or fifteen years of loneliness.



NuevaVida -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 12:57:48 PM)

~ Fast Reply ~

As to the trust issue, I think there are different kinds of trust, and different relationships (and the unique people in them) are the only ones who can decide what kinds and what levels of trust that relationship requires - D/s, M/s, or not.  I personally give more of myself in an M/s relationship, and my trust in him is going to reflect that.  But Des makes a good point about trusting a man to raise children with, etc.  Different types of trust.  Different scenarios.

As for the original question - The Man has been burned and betrayed before, in a way which affected not only him but his daughter.  You bet he has to trust in me.  Time, being together, and conversations have brought us both to feel secure with each other.  We moved slowly forward, together, with baby steps.  We still move slowly forward. 

As someone pointed out, it's the little things.  The way we look at each other and the way we talk to each other communicates so much, beyond words.  Yesterday I was cooking this delicious seafood pasta and I burned the garlic bread.  I immediately scrapped all the burned part off, re garlic-buttered it, and put it back in the oven to warm.  He smiled and said that's what separates me from others he has been in relationships with - something as small as seeing something gone wrong and doing what I can to make it right.  Who would have thought that the way I buttered his bread communicated that I love him. [;)]

For he and I, it's really about walking the talk, in both directions.  There are a gazillion examples, in both directions.  But it really boils down to how we treat each other.



lally2 -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 1:32:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub
.

I feel that to say more trust is required implies our relationships are better. You and lally and others are feel to disagree and probably will. [:)]

i dont think anyone is suggesting that our relationships are better than mainstream just because the focus on trust is shifted across to one person more than another when it comes down to decision making.

its just that in mainstream its usually both people making a joint decision about stuff (great) and in Ds or Ms the prefferance is for the Dominant to cast the final vote on what goes and what doesnt (also great)




osf -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 1:36:11 PM)

a lot of times we trust because we want to not because there's a basis for it



AquaticSub -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 1:38:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

its just that in mainstream its usually both people making a joint decision about stuff (great) and in Ds or Ms the prefferance is for the Dominant to cast the final vote on what goes and what doesnt (also great)




There are also plenty of relationships where one partner makes final decisions regarding X and the other regarding Y.

Again to me, the fact that they are making decisions over me just doesn't factor into how much I need to trust them. I trust them to make good decisions wherever they are making decisions otherwise I wouldn't be with them at all.



lally2 -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 2:34:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

its just that in mainstream its usually both people making a joint decision about stuff (great) and in Ds or Ms the prefferance is for the Dominant to cast the final vote on what goes and what doesnt (also great)




There are also plenty of relationships where one partner makes final decisions regarding X and the other regarding Y.

Again to me, the fact that they are making decisions over me just doesn't factor into how much I need to trust them. I trust them to make good decisions wherever they are making decisions otherwise I wouldn't be with them at all.


yes, but there was a process in getting to that point where you trusted his decision making and that it was someone you knew you could relax with, inbetween penguin impersonations of course [:D]

i meet alot of people in their homes through the course of the week. even the guys who are into their very late years and arguably more Ds than vanilla in many cases all discuss things with each other first, they can never make a decision until theyve consulted their spouse first. people in egalitarian relationships tend to feel that it is disrespectful and undermining for their partner to make decisions for them and on their behalf without consulting them first. and in the end that isnt about trust anyway. its about shared responsibility.




KnightofMists -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 2:47:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2


if i have a bloke about to tie me up and beat me im gonna need to trust him 100%



And because you need to have 100 % trust... all such type relationship must have more trust and acceptance as result?...... The logic is highly flawed... expecially since you are not representative of every single individual that engages in such relationships.... Your you! and as such... what you believe to be needed is HIGHLY appreciated by me and I suspect must people. But... what you need is not what everyone needs in this style of relationship or what other need to have other styles of relationships.




KnightofMists -> RE: the Loved Dominant (12/21/2009 2:57:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

i really didnt think it was necessary to spell out the difference but ok. when you give up control, hand decision making over to someone else, allow them to direct you in the fashion they most require along with wanting to tie you up and beat you - trust is huge. a submissive or slave has to trust that the Dominant theyre handing themselves over to has the required common sense, intelligence and responsibility to make the right decisions for them.

the moment that trust is gone there is nothing to work from. the submissive invests a huge amount of emotion and energy and thought into submitting themselves body and mind. putting that level of trust into someone cannot be overstated or over emphasised and its all too often that some Dominants fail miserably in recognising the massive investment a slave or sub puts into them.


You really need to stop speaking in some universal sense that convey you are some authority on this topic.

First.... some individuals recklessly give authority with no consideration of trust that all. In some cases... it's more they have such low self esteem or confidence in themselves that ANYONE is better than them at making this decision.

Secondly... for some it's not that big of a deal of trust... so you hand over the decisions... but there confidence is high in themselves that well.... if they see things going astray.. they trust themselves in there ability to make a fast exit out the door.

The possibilities are many and varied... put some universal attachments to it is nothing short of foolishness. But... it does make some ego's feel good about themselves to believe this crap!

I think what is most amusing is the idea that "Submissives" put all this "HUGE" trust into Dominants... but aaaaaalas... some of those silly Dominants don't appreicate it! some don't appreciate it... but then some submissivex really don't put that much trust into it either.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
4.492188E-02