RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant

RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (Full Version)

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

Message

sexyred1 -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/3/2010 5:51:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lusciouslips19 quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: ...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... for those looking for more specific examples of the theme, these two current threads and some of the responses contained within sparked this slave's curiosity: Not quite sure how to continue... need help, advice, opinions, thoughts the thrust of this thread is not being specific to either situation, but just the general gist of the reception of and the advice given to an otherwise non-D/s oriented person, sometimes either affectionately or disdainfully described as "vanilla", who is faced with the situation of their partner's desire for receiving dominance that isn't inherent to their nature and/or a satisfying role for them to "act". Ive always thought these threads where people are telling a specific type of man to "act" a certain way are wrong. I didnt see that as breaking a dominant though. I saw it as trying to take a vanilla person or more submissive leaning man and have him "act dominant". Im not one in the "change for another camp." I was married to a Laidback sort of guy. He didnt change, i was forced to be a certain type of way because he didnt act on anything. decisions had to be made by me along with financial ones. It stressed me to the core. It was a major player in who I am now and what I want. No amount of counseling changed him. Those threads, I found it odd that many dominants were telling him how to act dominant.I think a person should be themselves. Where a marriage to a person where one is kinky and another not, will go is difficult. It is possible for a man to try the kink and find he takes to it. After all, Men have to get passed their conditioning sometimes to get to their baser instincts. They have to trust the person they are with. Many men who may want to be dominant fear getting in trouble with the law and all of society and figuring out what exactly a dominant is with what is portrayed in books. Nice guys can be dominant and not assholes. But i dont see that as breaking or making a dominant. I see that as a person becoming themselves if it is truly within them. A person who is passive may be able to top and a domineering person may be able to bottom. Passive is not submissive and Domineering isnt dominant. But I dont see someone passive as being able to be broken into dominance. I totally agree with Lushy. In fact, I gave my opinion in those cited threads and I was told that I should not be advising the couple to go their separate ways. The other replies were, hey dude, BE a man, BE Dominant, when clearly the gentleman OP clearly stated he was NOT Dominant and he was vanilla. I do not believe that just because your partner has an interest in BDSM or anything else, you should force them to be into it; they either will try and find it to their liking, try it and hate it, or try it and do it just to please their partner, which would likely foster resentment. I don't agree with the term "breaking" on either side. If someone expresses a need or interest and you can try to assist them or participate, fine. If not, no amount of counseling or advise will change when the essential nature or proclivity, is not there.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/3/2010 6:10:03 AM)
quote: Is it representing gender bias? "Act like a man!"; has been said with some seriousness behind the poke. While acting like a 'man' has been deliberately repressed in society from childhood since the late 60's, is the 'lifestyle' a place to go in the hope of bucking that trend? Yet even then, generally accepted is that it is the submissive who sets the governing parameters, limits and safe-words, bound by the most sacred of lifestyle words - 'TRUST'? The needs of the submissive partner seem to supersede that trust to not ask a partner to do what potentially can 'break' them. Merc, I don't think that it is representing gender bias, as the same poor advice is often given to female dominant individuals. My reasoning for this trend gravitates towards the idea that far too many individuals get involved in their BDSM relationships for romanticized reasons, and are less than forthright about what they expect from the relationship from the get-go. Far too many individuals go into not -only- their BDSM relationships, but almost -any- relationship they're involved in with the idea that they'll "hold a few cards back and slip them in once they get 'established'". More often than not, the reason these issues crop up is because the match is poor, and nobody wants to admit that it's time to just call it a day and find a better fit. It is amazing when a relationship just comes together, but, quite frankly, it is a lot more rare than we, as a race, tend to give credit for, and if we enter into relationships where we are not -completely- forthright about our expectations, and then attempt to twist the relationship into what we -really- wanted, then we are, collectively dooming that relationship to misery, regardless of whether the twister is dominant, submissive, male, female, transgender, top, bottom, or whether two (or more) individuals in the relationship are all reaching in and yanking the strings into knots. Calla

cpK69 -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/3/2010 6:51:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Is it representing gender bias? From my observations of a recent “Dom, you can’t do dat” thread; I’d go with ego biased. Seems to me, if the person posting brings up something that does not fall in the scope of ‘doable’, for the one responding, then it’s a bash. Like in a recent thread, where many of the responders were saying things to the affect of “you should just leave that alone; mine hurts when it is touched”; and I was thinking “what, you planning to be there?” [8\|] I’ll stop there, the other comment that comes to mind from that thread, put forth by a male D, was just too close to tragic for me to mention.[:(] Kim

zephyroftheNorth -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/3/2010 7:12:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jeffff It is possible I am not all here today. In the "not quite sure how to continue" thread. The op was asking for advice on how to dominate his wife when HE wanted other than when SHE was in the mood. I thought he recieved some excellent advice. yes I thought some of it was mine...:) But Ron seemed to have nailed it. How is this breaking ? Jeff It's breaking if the man doesn't have it in him to dominate his woman. He may be willing, but if it's not in his nature it's playacting at best. Far better - and kinder - advice is to point that out to him and not try to change what cannot be changed, at least on the longterm.

Mercnbeth -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/3/2010 8:13:59 AM)
*~ NOT So Fast Reply ~ (Appropriate on your own thread?)* Didn't you ever have something you obtained a long time ago that you had on a shelf for years? It wasn't extremely valuable, worth a few bucks, but not going to fund your retirement. It wasn't that sentimental, you may not even look at it every day but every time you did you smiled. You pick it up one day, maybe to hear the tin plunking of the tiny music box within and the arm falls off. Wow - it broke! You didn't try to break it, didn't expect it to break, didn't want it to break; but it did. You get out that expired tube of 'crazy glue' you picked up at your last trip to the 'Dollar Store' and try to glue the arm back on; thinking it should be easy to fix and glue that arm back on. But some paint chip can't be found, the glue dripped; do you put it back on the shelf? Same thing happens between people. Relationship partners sometimes take on souvenir status from days gone past; it happens! Then a book is read, a commercial comes on TV, or a best friend asks them if they ever heard about....? All of a sudden whatever it was is the most important thing in their life that they never experienced. Now I have a use for that old souvenir on the shelf and, of course, they'll be just as excited about it as me! This thread wasn't meant to be about bad intent. It is about bad results; albeit commonly unintentional. Some people have vulnerable parts that break easily. Even just winding them up saying "suck it up!" does it. Breaking in a 'dom' or breaking in a 'sub' can break the person who maybe didn't always light your fire, but always made you smile. Which warmth you can live without should be a major consideration for anyone coming to these boards looking for quick fix tricks to get their significant other to fulfill their fantasies for something they never experienced but now can't live without.

zephyroftheNorth -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/3/2010 8:31:48 AM)
Hi Merc, Was this in reply to me? If it was, I agree with you, in my post I didn't mean to imply intent to break if I did I apologise. All I was trying to say is that it's futile to try to make someone into something they aren't and that trying to do that can, and most likely will break them. Happy New Year to you and beth. zeph

Mercnbeth -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/3/2010 8:57:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: zephyroftheNorth Hi Merc, Was this in reply to me? No - sorry about that! Luckily still in the edit time to make it clear! Happy 2010! May it be the BEST!

zephyroftheNorth -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/3/2010 8:59:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: ORIGINAL: zephyroftheNorth Hi Merc, Was this in reply to me? No - sorry about that! Luckily still in the edit time to make it clear! Happy 2010! May it be the BEST! Thanks for clarifying Merc....oh and great thread!

CalifChick -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/3/2010 12:52:34 PM)
I know/have met/have experience with broken people. There was the preteen who had a family member do something VERY BAD to her (I'm trying to stay within TOS here), and instead of family member being punished, the preteen was sent away to foster care, and the rest of the family stayed intact. Years later she found the family again, and she was truly broken. Drugs, prostitution, welfare (yes, it sounds like a bad novel). The worst part was when she said she would gladly do it all again, or would start doing it again, (the VERY BAD THING) if she could have that family member back in her life. That, to me, is a broken person. Asking someone you're in a relationship with to try something that you would like to do together... I'm just not grokking how that would break someone. Maybe it would break the relationship, in which case, maybe it was all being held together with frayed threads anyway. Cali

NorthernGent -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/3/2010 1:57:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth "Act like a man!"; has been said with some seriousness behind the poke. It's perfectly understandable. People have their views of what it means to be a man or a woman or a dominant etc - so will post in accordance with these views. There is the idea (presumably held by some) that 'submissives' are entitled to leniency by virtue of being a 'submissive' - the opposite applies to 'dominants'. And just like any group you have people waiting to go down the throat (metaphorically speaking of course) of a poster who doesn't adhere to the consensus view (a house constructed by the wizards I'd imagine). It's no more than group behaviour - unwritten rules are established and some people conform to them to feel part of the group. quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth While acting like a 'man' has been deliberately repressed in society from childhood since the late 60's Which leads neatly to this: what it means to 'act like a man' is a personal choice. No one group owns a patent on the notion; nor can they surpress personal choice. quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth However I hope you'll focus on the main subject - the encouragement of 'breaking' a person to be 'dominant' in a relationship when they don't want to, don't need to, don't like to, or have no interest in being the live version character of their spouses 'romance novel' inspired fantasy. I think there are degrees of bending. A bit of give and take doesn't make you less of 'a man'; nor does it mean you're a fantasist. 'Takes two to tango.

QuirkyAnne -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/3/2010 10:28:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth 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. This thread has hit REALLY close to home for me and this is why: I agree with both you and Beth that it is not fair that such things are said to these people, I would even go so far as to say that it is reprehensible. While I think that gender bias definitely has at least some part in this, I believe perhaps it is more a case of people assume that Dom/Dommes will automatically be open to anything at all when in reality they have and are as entitled to any hard limit they feel necessary as a submissive is. A former roommate I had was involved in a D/s relationship with a girlfriend that ended because she openly berated him for not "acting like a man.". He was fine with and actively enjoyed spanking, flogging, slapping, wax play, and very rough/violent intercourse with her. He was somewhat concerned about the fisting and even squeamish about the watersports but did it because she liked it though he personally wasn't aroused by it. But when he called hard limit on using the full force of his arm on a 5' 2," 98 pound woman with a police issue nightstick, he got called a pussy. It still makes me angry when I think of how that affected him and really screwed him up into thinking that he "just wasn't cut out for this sort of sex," that he really enjoyed, all because of some brat who didn't once stop to consider that he would have his own needs and limits as well. Anne

QuirkyAnne -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/3/2010 11:59:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Psychonaut23 You got her number? No, but when he was sitting there with a broken heart, bruised ego, and screwed up sense of his own sexuality which had been very healthy and confident 24 hours earlier, I was certainly ready to go to her place and beat the tar our of her. Unfortunately, she probably would have enjoyed it. Anne

Knighthunter862 -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/4/2010 8:18:14 AM)
wow.....15 years in forums.chats.meets and someone has said it.I applaude the words and the meaning behind them.Merc you have now become the Dom.s ambassodor.Great article

MsDDom -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/4/2010 9:04:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists 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 agree that I am not one for breaking, and I often think of someone saying "break me" is just another form of getting their "fet on". I view this from another perspective of asking for something that one already espouse to. They are keenly aware of the process to get to said level, they just want to see if a dominant (or sub) can actually take them there. And if they fail, then, they are not the dominant (or sub) they thought you were. It is a merry-go-round at best; nothing symbiotic about it (the D/s or M/s relationship) at all. It is just a catch phrase "break me" or "I've been broken"...with that said, YES, I know that people can be broken, but I am specifically speaking to those who are aware of the manipulative tactic of being asked to be... Some may not agree.

xssve -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/4/2010 11:43:38 AM)
When it comes to the tangential issue of "domliness" that has arisen - all women apparently seem to think that all women want the same thing and man is supposed to know - in reality, what's dominant to one woman my be "smothering"or even insecure to another - it's not always easy to assess how strong to come on, especially in the beginning, and this is a critical period in a relationship: i.e., once established, a sexual dynamic is hard to change. i.e., if I come on too accommodating in order to reassure her it might make it harder to sweep her off her feet later on - conversely, come on too strong, she might freak and start stressing out. I've seem women complain in forums about both - i.e., online contacts coming on too strong, and others complaining about them not coming on strong enough. Contrary to popular belief, there is no consensus on this issue, though I'd say it leans a little more towards courteous initial contacts. This is even confirmed by studies: men are almost universally baffled by women's signals, which are often, if not invariably mixed, which is probably why a lot just give up and look for somebody who responds to their signals. All in all, I'm much more comfortable with sexually aggressive women, or at least talkative ones, than with timid or quiet ones, there's less ambiguity. W/regard to QA's story, I agree that's not a good way to treat someone with limited experience, the liability for any injuries does largely lie with the top in these situations, which includes the "buyers remorse" phenomena. I happen to think there is no good substitute for explicit prior negotiation, preferably in writing - formal or informal, some history or something. Some women get off on shocking men every bit as much as men get off on shocking women, and with anything potentially injurious, I prefer to let the bottom take the initiative, i.e., how much she can take, at least until I get to know her and her responses better. And, yes, I've been accused of not being aggressive enough, probably more often that I've been accused of being too aggressive - generally speaking however, there is less personal risk attached to the former, and I generally prefer to err on the side of caution when dealing with an unknown quantity, I call that prudence. So, if you have some particularly wild scene in mind, I prefer some hint or warning - some women are better than others at communicating their needs en-scène.

ranja -> RE: 'Breaking' a Dominant (1/5/2010 5:18:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: QuirkyAnne when he was sitting there with a broken heart, bruised ego, and screwed up sense of his own sexuality which had been very healthy and confident 24 hours earlier, I was certainly ready to go to her place and beat the tar our of her. I was not there but it does strike me as a bit odd that he could go from brilliant to totally broken just like that... Merc said: "Which warmth you can live without should be a major consideration for anyone coming to these boards looking for quick fix tricks to get their significant other to fulfill their fantasies for something they never experienced but now can't live without" People change... relationship change... if one of the people in a relationship develops a taste or interest in something it is always nicest if the two people in the relationship can share this... say dancing... both might have a go at this and one might find out they are incapable (physically) or just not 'like' it (that always sounds just a bit whiny to me really) Usually it is not such a problem to let the other one go dancing on their own with another partner if such a problem is encountered, maybe just enjoy to watch and have a beer (although i have been in a relationship where i was really forbidden to dance with anybody) Sex on the otherhand is not so easily done or allowed with an outsider... usually... so inevitably partners who want to remain faithful will try harder to manipulate eachother to get their needs met. I see nothing wrong with putting in more effort i think many people at some point in their relationship become lazy i do not think it is gender based at all and i think many people need a shake up from time to time reassess where they are at and what they can do for eachother

Page: << < prev 4 5 6 7 [8]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875