quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

quote:

I agree with that.  It makes perfect sense.  Even vanillas should think things through before they jump in blind.

but for you as a sub the price is even greater, after all you want a person to whom you give authority

and he is going to have a mind of his own and his desires may not always be attuned to yours

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

but explain get to know

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

quote:

I rather like a romantic D/s relationship.  Sir and I were very much in love and romantic, but at the same time very much D/s and very secure in our "roles," and knew who and what we were.  We both brought a lot to the relationship and to each other. 

im talking about over romanticizing the relationship, not love within the relationship

two different things

quote:

ORIGINAL: aninquisition

"i want to dispel the myth of saint dom and strong independent submissive"

That should be, "I want to make clear that 'saint dom' and 'strong independent submissive' are extremely rare."
Because I can think of personal examples of both.

For one, why does a saintly nature have to be separate from a dominating nature?  The desire to control is not innately evil.  There are plenty who desire to keep things within their realm of control in order to protect them.  The dominant who seeks to control his submissive, not to bring himself far more pleasure, but to ensure her betterment.  There are plenty of dominants assured of themselves to the point of feeling they know what is better for a submissive than the submissive does.  And yes, there are plenty of submissives who are far from knowing what is best for themselves.

Are some dominants self-serving?  Do some use their control to solely meet their own needs?  I might even relent that most are like that.  But the 'saintly' dominant is far from a myth.

Now, let's evaluate 'strong, independent submissive.'  When we look at the word, 'independent', I assume you don't mean too independent to pursue relationships to begin with.  Because that would just be redundant and ridiculous.  It would no longer have anything to do with romanticizing D/s relationships and everything to do with the simple fact that some people just don't need other people to be happy.

So, the said submissive can take care of themselves (that level of independence, I'm assuming) and is strong.  Why would they need a dominant?

So simple.  For many submissives, performing tasks for themselves is far from satisfying.  To the point of near self-negligence in some cases.  Whereas some submissives, if left to their own devices, would not bother with cooking dinners, even if they were master chefs.  Despite any amount of intelligence, they would not learn other languages, pursue secondary education, or obtain any new talents.  Despite any natural inclination towards health, they would not exercise or pursue sports.  Simply because...there's no one to do it for.

I speak from personal experience.  For myself, I hardly have the effort to pour cereal in a bowl.  For someone I admire and respect, I will make a three course meal, complete with elaborate presentation, and love every moment.  To me, the greatest joy is to use my strength, my intelligence, my questioning nature, and apply that to better someone else's life.  I wish to be nothing more than the most deadly weapon, in the hands of someone I view as the greatest general of all time, should you follow me in that rather 'romantic' metaphor.

That said...  Can everyone have their romantic ideal?  No.  They can't.  And, all political correctness and PG-13 crap aside, it's because not all of us are good enough to have what we want.  I'm not even certain I'm good enough for my 'romantic ideal.'

But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subtee

Why am I always on a plane or a fast train?
Oh what a world my parents gave me
Always traveling but not in love
still I think I'm doing fine
Wouldn't it be a lovely headline?
Life is beautiful
on the New York Times

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMillgrove

Scroll back and read aninquisition's post again. It's her First post! Wow. Look forward to reading more of them!

quote:

For one, why does a saintly nature have to be separate from a dominating nature?

quote:

Are some dominants self-serving?

quote:

Do some use their control to solely meet their own needs?

quote:

ORIGINAL: sweetsub1957

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

but explain get to know

I want/need to know about:
1. The Man as a Person.
2. His relationship status. (I don't want to find out later, after
   we're involved, that He's got a vanilla wife somewhere.
   I won't be Someone's "dirty little secret.")
3. His vanilla and kink likes/dislikes and needs/wants.  (There's
   more to the kind of relationship I want than just kink and sex.) 
4. What He wants/needs out of the relationship.
5. What He is expecting from me.
and at the same time I will let Him know all of the above about myself.  Also:
6. I need to spend some time with Him in person to see if there
   is any chemistry in real time, since that's what I'm looking for.

I'm pretty thorough, after learning the hard way early on. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aileen1968

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

quote:

I rather like a romantic D/s relationship.  Sir and I were very much in love and romantic, but at the same time very much D/s and very secure in our "roles," and knew who and what we were.  We both brought a lot to the relationship and to each other. 

im talking about over romanticizing the relationship, not love within the relationship

two different things

I over romanticize the relationship right up to the point where the paddle comes out. And then I'm right back to it when I fall asleep with his arms wrapped around me. I over romanticize all the time, and I'm not a romantic person. I focus, on down time, about the warm loving things we do rather than the sadistic things since I'm not a masochist at a level equal to his sadism. I swear there's a fucking bluebird of happiness flitting around my bedroom as I type.

OP...you really need to realize that just because things in bdsm are not how you do it or think it, doesn't mean that it's not how others do or think. Seriously.

quote:

i am an independent woman with my own business, single mum, animals, home and so on - i manage but only freekin just!! i try really hard to get a grip of all the bits and bobs flying around me, but its chaos most of the time. sometimes its a huge effort to just keep going.

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

quote:

ORIGINAL: sweetsub1957

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

but explain get to know

I want/need to know about:
1. The Man as a Person.
2. His relationship status. (I don't want to find out later, after
   we're involved, that He's got a vanilla wife somewhere.
   I won't be Someone's "dirty little secret.")
3. His vanilla and kink likes/dislikes and needs/wants.  (There's
   more to the kind of relationship I want than just kink and sex.) 
4. What He wants/needs out of the relationship.
5. What He is expecting from me.
and at the same time I will let Him know all of the above about myself.  Also:
6. I need to spend some time with Him in person to see if there
   is any chemistry in real time, since that's what I'm looking for.

I'm pretty thorough, after learning the hard way early on. 

my advice to newly emerging submissives is don't worry about most of that, she's not going to be forming lasting relationships at firs anyway at this time she is discovering her self and that requires intimate contact with someone

after she gets to know her submissive self better, then it's time to worry about that

quote:

ORIGINAL: aninquisition

"i want to dispel the myth of saint dom and strong independent submissive"

That should be, "I want to make clear that 'saint dom' and 'strong independent submissive' are extremely rare."
Because I can think of personal examples of both.

For one, why does a saintly nature have to be separate from a dominating nature? The desire to control is not innately evil. There are plenty who desire to keep things within their realm of control in order to protect them. The dominant who seeks to control his submissive, not to bring himself far more pleasure, but to ensure her betterment. There are plenty of dominants assured of themselves to the point of feeling they know what is better for a submissive than the submissive does. And yes, there are plenty of submissives who are far from knowing what is best for themselves.

Are some dominants self-serving? Do some use their control to solely meet their own needs? I might even relent that most are like that. But the 'saintly' dominant is far from a myth.

Now, let's evaluate 'strong, independent submissive.' When we look at the word, 'independent', I assume you don't mean too independent to pursue relationships to begin with. Because that would just be redundant and ridiculous. It would no longer have anything to do with romanticizing D/s relationships and everything to do with the simple fact that some people just don't need other people to be happy.

So, the said submissive can take care of themselves (that level of independence, I'm assuming) and is strong. Why would they need a dominant?

So simple. For many submissives, performing tasks for themselves is far from satisfying. To the point of near self-negligence in some cases. Whereas some submissives, if left to their own devices, would not bother with cooking dinners, even if they were master chefs. Despite any amount of intelligence, they would not learn other languages, pursue secondary education, or obtain any new talents. Despite any natural inclination towards health, they would not exercise or pursue sports. Simply because...there's no one to do it for.

I speak from personal experience. For myself, I hardly have the effort to pour cereal in a bowl. For someone I admire and respect, I will make a three course meal, complete with elaborate presentation, and love every moment. To me, the greatest joy is to use my strength, my intelligence, my questioning nature, and apply that to better someone else's life. I wish to be nothing more than the most deadly weapon, in the hands of someone I view as the greatest general of all time, should you follow me in that rather 'romantic' metaphor.

That said... Can everyone have their romantic ideal? No. They can't. And, all political correctness and PG-13 crap aside, it's because not all of us are good enough to have what we want. I'm not even certain I'm good enough for my 'romantic ideal.'

But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.