RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant

RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (Full Version)

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

Message

LadyPact -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 8:57:20 AM)
I would happen to agree with beth's observation. I'm not sure of exactly which threads she is reading, but I can think of at least one here and two in the Ask A Master section that I would say are a direct reflection of this mindset. I believe in one of them, I even turned such as phrase that a situation would break a hard limit of My own. In doing so, if I came to these boards as a submissive female and asked advice on what to do if a hard limit had been broken, the answers that I would receive would be to leave. Instead, I was told that I should have more love and forgiveness. Sorry, but that's a double standard and I refuse to be a part of that. I think where this mindset comes up more often than not is when folks come to these boards, involved in a pre-existing relationship, and the two partners have incompatibilities in a number of areas. At the top of that list always seems to be just how kinky should their sex life be. Other areas that are easily identified as the amount of control/authority one person should have over the other, protocol, ritual, willingness to serve/acceptance of service, and probably more. The answer always seem to be 'act more Dominant'. That's great for those of us who actually ARE Dominant. For someone who comes along and might just be vanilla, or might be more laid back in their approach with their partner, it's not the same thing. Truthfully, we didn't give that person advice on how to become more Dominant. We just taught him how to be a service top. If the partners find happinens and contentment in that, great. However, that's not always the case, is it? In My opinion, I think folks around here do their best to offer what they feel are the best solutions when people come here with questions of discontent in their lives. It's not that we're not trying. We really do want to help. The problem is that we only really have our perspective to offer. Hey! Throw Me a situation where the submissive partner at home craves more authority, power, and control within the relationship! As a high protocol, sadistic type, I can give that person exactly what they need because that's who I am. The solution that I would use just wouldn't be the same as some non kinky guy who comes along. How I would handle it just isn't going to work for him because that's not who he is. Sometimes, we need to look for alternative solutions that don't ask anybody to be what they are not.

xssve -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 8:59:26 AM)
I have children, and I'm not going to do anything that will compromise them in a negative way - most women with children, I expect feel the same way, and I'd expect to get slapped down if I asked them to do it, submissive or otherwise - and if they're that far gone, Id feel obligated to do it for them.

osf -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:00:03 AM)
quote: The answer always seem to be 'act more Dominant'. you have to be a more understanding dominant just my opinion

Icarys -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:11:20 AM)
quote: beth noted that the same consideration is rarely, if ever, been given when a person comes in with the same problems from the dominant side of the relationship. A person who says their submissive partner wants them to exceed their abilities or desires (limits?) for lifestyle activities is told anything from "act like you like it", to "you are lazy!". The dominant is told they must change themselves, their physical desires, and maybe most importantly - their philosophy of what a relationship entails. They must break from their beliefs of how they define 'love' and how it's personified. They must break from their attitudes, break from how they define sex, break from their comfortable non D/s persona. To fulfill their partner's expectations for their relationship they must break. I recently had a short term relationship with a female just like that. It was more or less a standoff..I wanted a few things that I've always wanted (certain controlling issues) and she wasn't willing to give them. She actually said she was okay with them in the beginning along with a few other things that she later wanted to take back and threw up in my face that she could get that from other Dominants. What I got from that is she wanted me to adapt to her because others would. I refused to do it and the relationship ended. We were good together for the most part but it's a slippery slope when you begin to cater to someone just to make the relationship work when you know your not compatible enough. One I refuse to step on. I've been referred to as too rigid and told I'll never get what I'm looking for. Funny thing is I see relationships on a regular basis that are what I'm looking for and the people are seemingly blissful in it. I know it takes two people to make a relationship work and both have needs but in my world the Dominant should be given the lead even if their desire is to make the submissive happy in that moment..Not told by a submissive with a do it or else attitude.

KnightofMists -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:13:51 AM)
Well... I am not a fan of 'breaking' of either side of the coin.... if there needs to be some 'breaking' it's like needs to be the relationship and not one side of the coin or another. I have never had a desire to 'break' Alandra or Kyra..... now have I felt I was being 'broken either' We all just do what is best for the relationship... and sometimes that means we need to stretch ourself out of our comfort zone or hold back abit. Maybe if these individuals that want to do the breaking thought more about "WE" instead of "I"... there would be alot less breaking going around.

osf -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:14:35 AM)
I like to think of it as a fenced off area in which you have all you want and you’re willing to nudge the fence here and there but not willing to pick up and relocate the fence oh and both serve the relationship

Mercnbeth -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:15:25 AM)
quote: What do you mean "submissive orientated lifestyle"? With consensually being one of the few cornerstones of majority universal agreement (Note: 'majority' not universally accepted.); the most draconian represented Masted/slave dynamic had at its inception the submissive partner agreeing to enter the relationship. Not saying that my relationship represents draconian principles, going into it my requirement to beth was that she understood what I meant when I said entering it would be; the last independent decision she would make. Pragmatically we could not exist and therefore my 'dominance' or being beth's 'Master' wouldn't exist, without beth's submission. It is within that meaning that I make the statement; "submissive orientated lifestyle". Differentiated by knowledgeable consent from the classic Master/slave dynamic whose labels were rooted in the days when buying/selling or non-consensual slavery was common practice. I was not referring to the condition of 'limits' and 'safe-words' debated to ages; which I feel speaks more to the pragmatic power dynamic aspect. Projecting the expectations of consequence to actions make the source of dominance pragmatically obvious. However it serves to illustrate the condition I hope to discuss. A person making the suggestion that a submissive break their limits for the sake of dominant partner is commonly condemned. A dominant, or better yet someone we identify as 'vanilla' not having a leaning either way and surely not having and understanding the generally acceptable 'safe-zone' lifestyle mantra 'A subs limits MUST be respected!"; isn't treated nearly as well. Its assumed he/she can be trained to overcome their current 'limits', and encouraged to do so. They are told to "seek counseling", find a mentor, or to break their current,and vowed, definition of their relationship and accept the idea of bringing another individual into the relationship to act as a surrogate 'dominant'. For whatever reason some people don't want to dominate within their relationship. It would break them to do so. To them, ordering their partner to wear something specific, or limiting any aspect of their partner's lives 'breaks' them. Can I relate to that? No, and I'd bet most people on CM can't no matter which end of the flogger they prefer. However after having it pointed out by beth, I'm surprised and agree with her that a seeming majority of people who defend a submissive's right to set limits in a dynamic and see exceeding them as an attempt to 'break', have no problem telling a 'vanilla' to break from their vanilla limits for the sake of serving the submissive sensation or emotional fantasies of their partner.

lusciouslips19 -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:15:35 AM)
I think anything that doesnt bend will break.[8\|]

osf -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:17:12 AM)
quote: With consensually being one of the few cornerstones of majority universal agreement (Note: 'majority' not universally accepted.); the most draconian represented Masted/slave dynamic had at its inception the submissive partner agreeing to enter the relationship. Not saying that my relationship represents draconian principles, going into it my requirement to beth was that she understood what I meant when I said entering it would be; the last independent decision she would make. Pragmatically we could not exist and therefore my 'dominance' or being beth's 'Master' wouldn't exist, without beth's submission. It is within that meaning that I make the statement; "submissive orientated lifestyle". Differentiated by knowledgeable consent from the classic Master/slave dynamic whose labels were rooted in the days when buying/selling or non-consensual slavery was common practice. pretty well agree

Drifa -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:18:12 AM)
I am with the several other people that said they need a pointer to an exemplar thread so we can understand better what is being described. For me, I think the limits for EVERYONE should be respected. I don't think it's good to push past a sub's limits, and I definitely think the dominant's limits should likewise be respected. That being said, both vanilla and kinky people get into relationships where they know (or should have known before committing too soon) that the other person isn't really what they need. This is sort of the "bait and switch" relationship -- you enter into the relationship telling the other person that they are exactly what you want, then start trying to change them into someone else. I am not talking about minor changes,such as subs stretching their limits a bit -- many of us who like impact play have found over time that our "hard limit line" moves over time and that we will in fact experiment with kink we might have been afraid of earlier. But, for example, when a sub latches onto a vanilla person and tries to mold them into a domme, or a dominant tries to take a vanilla partner and introduce kink into the relationship, this has to be a delicate negotiation. Basically, all the decision IS in the vanilla person's court, because the two of you got into the relationship with certain boundaries and expectations, and one person can't unilaterally change those boundaries. The vanilla person has to be allowed to learn about what it is you want them to try, and then they must decide whether they will consent. In this situation where a vanilla person in a relationship is being asked to change, if they say, "Hey, sounds like fun!" you're golden. But if they say "Hell no, no way, I didn't sign up for that" then the person trying to convince them otherwise has some tough choices to make: (1) Agree to continue the relationship without the proposed kink. (2) Decide that they can't live without the kink and... (2A) ... get out of the relationship and go find someone who is kinky. (2B) ... ask for and RECEIVE permission from the vanilla partner to seek out the kink elsewhere (if permission not granted, you are at 2A again). If your partner, on either side of the kneel, isn't giving you what you need in the relationship, and you have discussed it and they are not willing to change, then you need to decide to get out of the relationship and find someone who meets your needs. This point is one that Dear Abby and Dear Prudence and Dan Savage all agree upon!

Phoenixpower -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:18:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jeffff quote: ORIGINAL: Phoenixpower quote: ORIGINAL: Jeffff men by there nature are problem solvers men are what??? So far in my experience they are more problem creaters [image]http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/10/10_3_6.gif[/image] I didn't say we were good at it. I said it's what we do...:) Jeff Well, you should have clarified that before, yanno [8\|] But thanks for confirming it now [:D] Sorry MercnBeth that I am unable to contribute to your question at the moment...need more time to think about [&o]

osf -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:18:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lusciouslips19 I think anything that doesnt bend will break.[8\|] you can also bend it till it breaks

xssve -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:20:53 AM)
Well, I think we've all, those of us still searching anyway, have run into the situation, where somebody is complaining about a situation that's right up our alley - i.e., seems like the perfect fit in terms of what we're looking for. It's hard sometime to resist telling them the solution is to dump them and call me. The more respectful protocol here is to contact their dominant/s, although of course I have a good idea of what they'll say. i.e., I suspect there are very few dom's willing to part with a sub just because the sub is unhappy.

Icarys -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:22:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: What do you mean "submissive orientated lifestyle"? With consensually being one of the few cornerstones of majority universal agreement (Note: 'majority' not universally accepted.); the most draconian represented Masted/slave dynamic had at its inception the submissive partner agreeing to enter the relationship. Not saying that my relationship represents draconian principles, going into it my requirement to beth was that she understood what I meant when I said entering it would be; the last independent decision she would make. Pragmatically we could not exist and therefore my 'dominance' or being beth's 'Master' wouldn't exist, without beth's submission. It is within that meaning that I make the statement; "submissive orientated lifestyle". Differentiated by knowledgeable consent from the classic Master/slave dynamic whose labels were rooted in the days when buying/selling or non-consensual slavery was common practice. I was not referring to the condition of 'limits' and 'safe-words' debated to ages; which I feel speaks more to the pragmatic power dynamic aspect. Projecting the expectations of consequence to actions make the source of dominance pragmatically obvious. However it serves to illustrate the condition I hope to discuss. A person making the suggestion that a submissive break their limits for the sake of dominant partner is commonly condemned. A dominant, or better yet someone we identify as 'vanilla' not having a leaning either way and surely not having and understanding the generally acceptable 'safe-zone' lifestyle mantra 'A subs limits MUST be respected!"; isn't treated nearly as well. Its assumed he/she can be trained to overcome their current 'limits', and encouraged to do so. They are told to "seek counseling", find a mentor, or to break their current,and vowed, definition of their relationship and accept the idea of bringing another individual into the relationship to act as a surrogate 'dominant'. For whatever reason some people don't want to dominate within their relationship. It would break them to do so. To them, ordering their partner to wear something specific, or limiting any aspect of their partner's lives 'breaks' them. Can I relate to that? No, and I'd bet most people on CM can't no matter which end of the flogger they prefer. However after having it pointed out by beth, I'm surprised and agree with her that a seeming majority of people who defend a submissive's right to set limits in a dynamic and see exceeding them as an attempt to 'break', have no problem telling a 'vanilla' to break from their vanilla limits for the sake of serving the submissive sensation or emotional fantasies of their partner. I gotya. Thanks for the clarification.

DarkSteven -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:23:27 AM)
I had that. A submissive didn't know when she was being too needy and taking too much of my time. It took me a while to train her. As the Dom, it's my responsibility to let her know that she's asking more of me than I can give. If she still pushes, there will be consequences. If she pushes after that... farewell.

osf -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:25:17 AM)
i don't think i could have a subbie that didn't need a lot my time, it goes with the teritory the type i want is needy, i understand them i

Icarys -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:27:06 AM)
quote: i don't think i could have a subbie that was too needy or needed too much of my time, it goes with the teritory I'm exactly the opposite. I enjoy spending a lot of time with my females.

Mercnbeth -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:27:35 AM)
quote: I am with the several other people that said they need a pointer to an exemplar thread so we can understand better what is being described. Third call for this - obviously I'm avoiding it because I do not want the discussion to focus on specific relationship where all the facts are never disclosed. Some generalities have already been brought up. "Act like a 'dominant'!" a big one. Many people just aren't dominant let alone are not actors. To them, not even knowing the reference, that exceeds their personal 'limit' and is just as 'hard' as any limit that would 'break' a submissive. However, once beth has completed her morning tasks for me I'll assign her the task of pointing to some specific examples. I'm sure she'll do it with much more sensitivity.

Icarys -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:29:34 AM)
[:D]

lusciouslips19 -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/2/2010 9:44:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf quote: ORIGINAL: lusciouslips19 I think anything that doesnt bend will break.[8\|] you can also bend it till it breaks Well yes, substances that arent made to bend will break if you bend them.

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875