quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

my point here is that the dye in the wool Dominant who retains autonomy through perceived impunity is going to likely come unstuck unless he has the good sense to moderate his freedom to 'behave any way he likes'.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

the sad thing is that in the end the slave or sub may very well be faced with the decision to leave - that isnt an outcome thats a damn shame - all for some 'point' being made that the Dominant should be free at all times to act with impunity - damn the consequences and the loss of something that might have been really good for both of them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

at what point does it stop being two adults in a mutually enjoyable relationship - i can tell you - when one of them starts to treat the other one badly. Ms, Ds or vanilla, its all the same.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

the point im trying to make here, is why should that abuse happen in the first place.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

 the fine line here is that i have often submitted to things i dont want but the Dominant did want and i got through it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

 it happens a fair bit actually, but as a sub or slave that is part of the deal quite often and because it is managed in such a way that care is taken throughout, the outcome, ultimately is a good one. but it can also happen that one can submit to something you hate, it is damaging, the sub mentions their genuine horror of it and yet it is pursued in the same aggressive manner. pursuing that line is therefore counter to the health of the relationship. by pursuing it you are pressing into territory that is 'wrong' for the sub or slave.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

 right there you have an act of impunity that is basically saying, 'accept it or leave' and in that moment you have a situation where the slave or sub no longer feels their presence is valued.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

in truth it is then abusing the good will of the sub or slave who is otherwise completely submissive to you. a Dominant is taking beyond the point of care and consideration. everything else might be great, it might just be this one activity that no matter what, she cannot cope with.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

 in the end she is an adult in an adult relationship and up to a point, for a slave anyway, her choice to stay or leave is in fact abusing her also. she should not be put in either position.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

the moment you start saying 'the slave has no rights whatsoever' you are discounting many who are more slave than sub, but have issues that need to be addressed not trampled on or you are creating a situation where the slave will not leave because she is so wired to submit and accept and shut up. both situations are wrong.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

if you have a slave who is completely smitten, totally submissive, willingly and openly trusting, why on earth would anyone be so cavalier.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

im sorry, i dont understand these comments.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

yes ok, the decision making skills are suspect. but the intent behind that decision is where im at. the intent is to do whatever they want because it works for them on an entirely selfish level.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

they know the sub or slave is struggling beyond the realms of reasonable acceptability but it continues because they are the D and what they want is more important.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

never at any time in any of my vanilla relationships did i agree to be hurt emotionally or physically.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

 in my Ms and Ds relationships i did agree to physical hurt - and that is where it gets a bit fuzzy for a slave or sub when the activity pushes them into a situation they are wired to submit to, committed to submit to, but find impossible or unbearable to the point where walking is the possible outcome.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

in my case not atall. i made the call in both relationships to walk and it seriously fucked me off. in making that decision i had to renaig on something that is fundamental to my personality and i had to walk away from someone i liked a great deal and was hopeful about.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

 the far reaching affect of both of these situations was that i ended up having to review myself and yet, actually all that i was doing was protecting my own emotional health.

in the end it was bloody annoying.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

 if the slave cannot live with it then she cant. but in there you infer youre own integrity and i would agree, from the little i know of you, i would certainly say that you come across as someone who would weigh all things up and proceed in the best interests of everyone involved.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

when im not the thought of being enslaved or in submission to someone is a bit like going to the dentist [:D]
- i need to on one level but on another im perfectly happy thank you! [:)] my point being - i dont need this to fulfill my life and when i do find myself in submission to someone its because i believed their integrity and decision making skills were trustworthy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

 baling out isnt the easy option, its got nothing to do with martydom and everything to do with submitting to the man you believe in. when that suddenly gets wacked off the map because the guy believes his position as D or M means he can act with impunity over something i find impossible to live with makes it a shitty shame. i walk, some dont.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

lagely, as ive said, its ok. there needs to be an air of impunity. the statement, 'i am youre Master and i expect you to do as youre asked' is where we s'types swing happily from all day long.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

this act of impunity isnt always about compatibility. sometimes its just down to the pressure being exerted where the D or M feels its their right to do so and the sub or slave, wired to please, tries hard to comply, cant, feels crap about it and ultimately is put in the invidious position of rebelling against her own wiring.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

 in there are two counts of unreasonable behaviour by the D type. first the impunity and second placing the slave in the position of having to reject herself (basically).

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

the first was something that was not discussed, but possibly implied in the sense that he was a sadist, i was his slave and most anything sadistic was on the table. i accepted that. one action however was brutal, not in a bludgeoning way, i was not damaged or harmed, but it was beyond reasonable endurance (for me - someone else might well have been pleased to bits) - this activity was not only going to continue but it was going to be made even more unbearable. i stepped away, i had no choice.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

the second was something very small and stupid, but it got inside my brain and i lost complete respect for the guy. he had mentioned it in a small voice, in a small way but made no mention beyond until it happened. i voiced my discomfort but the activity was very much part of his psyche and i couldnt continue with a guy whose actions on this particular thing were screwing up my respect for him, but there was slightly more to that one, kinda invidious emotional sadism and that wasnt discussed before hand and its a hard limit because my brain just doesnt handle emotional abuse at all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

so i guess in a way, both situatons were involved in both situations. i knew before hand, tacitly and implied. i submitted, found both impossible to live with, realised they were not going to go away and so i had to leave.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

in both situations these two things were not integral, not vital, not in any way worth losing a relationship for.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

the impunity that set in was the attitude that they could do these things because my position was to shut up and put up, they wrongly assumed that as slave i didnt have the option to walk, but in the end, we are all adults living our life as well and as happily as we can.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

from compatibility impunity can develop

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

my point here is that the dye in the wool Dominant who retains autonomy through perceived impunity is going to likely come unstuck unless he has the good sense to moderate his freedom to 'behave any way he likes'.

Is that a threat or a statement of fact?

neither.
I mean, surely that's exactly what will happen, yes. The job of an honest partner in these situations, though, is not specifically to change his wants/desires to cater to the s-type (unless he so wishes), but to be honest enough to explain to the s-type that a crossroads has likely been reached where a fruitful outcome no longer seems likely (based on acts the s-type cannot handle that the M-type wants).

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

the sad thing is that in the end the slave or sub may very well be faced with the decision to leave - that isnt an outcome thats a damn shame - all for some 'point' being made that the Dominant should be free at all times to act with impunity - damn the consequences and the loss of something that might have been really good for both of them.

Staying in a place where one or both partner have to begrudgingly change something they don't want to change for the mere sake of keeping the habit of the relationship intact isn't "good" for anyone.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

id agree completely. but what if it wasnt begruding, what if the relationship wasnt a 'habit' but something otherwise good - what then. for the sake of some modification or approaching the situation slower or anything other than turning it into a brick wall. when dogged determination to have this thing whatever it is, come hell or high water and at a pace. the thing is submissives and slaves do hit problems, its a fact of life, doesnt mean the relationship is shit, it just means theyre having problems with something

at what point does it stop being two adults in a mutually enjoyable relationship - i can tell you - when one of them starts to treat the other one badly. Ms, Ds or vanilla, its all the same.

I think that's too easy to verbally abuse. There is no "badly" that isn't specifically constructed by the people of each relationship. this is why I say that expectation and discussion are the more important issue.

expectaion of what, the outcome. if the outcome is doomed why pursue it to that point. if discussion has failed because the Dominant is used to having his way with this submissive and doesnt see any need to change his view, irrespective of the doomed outcome then the given impunity he possess is at that point fundamentally flawed, unless he is prepared to go around the problem, approach it in a different way or whatever. basically anyway discussion is pointless at that juncture[/color].

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

the point im trying to make here, is why should that abuse happen in the first place.

Unless you're working on a paper for your psychology course, it's honestly irrelevant (at least, unless you think something is actually neurologically wrong with your partner).

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

 the fine line here is that i have often submitted to things i dont want but the Dominant did want and i got through it.

Then that's a decision you made and for which you have the responsibility to own up to. It seems as though there is the passive sentiment in your words that there should be a expected 'reward' for doing these things. Now, certainly any balanced relationship has elements of positive reinforcement...but adopting the mindset of being entitled to it seems a bit non-indicative of someone who is comfortable in their role as a slave.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

i am more than happy being who i am and at times that has been as a slave and i was happy. i stated that i had submitted to things i didnt like to underline the occasional times when submission to something has proved impossible. in both of the situations i mentioned i was completely submissive and happy, to one i was completely enslaved. the point i was attempting to make was that it isnt always the case that a submissive can always submit to everything even when the slave is wired to please and not baulk.

.no, i really didnt. no one goes into a relationship expecting to be hurt, if that were the case noone would enter .

Telling a partner, mid-relationship, that you have a new, previously undisclosed hard limit is a bit of a no-no in an M/s relationship. One instance of such in a relationship for me and I'd have to seriously consider the direction moving forward. By the second, it would be done. Granted, I do try to cover as much ground as possible.

how can you know what is a hard limit if you have never experienced the activity before.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

Um...the option to walk is always there. But, if you did agree to shut up and put up and then didn't, that isn't necessarily their fault for trying to hold you to it.

it wasnt really a matter of not shutting up, i did and i took what happened. it was afterwards when i mentioned how hard i found it, to the point where i needed to be reassured and was frankly told that it wasnt changing and infact it was going to get much worse that i made my decision to request release. i genuinely couldnt have lived with the dread of never knowing when or how bad- it was genuinely beyond me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

from compatibility impunity can develop

Compatibility makes impunity a non-factor. If you had enjoyed all those things they told you to do, the issue of whether they were pushing 'abuse' boundaries wouldn't be here.

of course but compatibility was there in all other ways. from that compatibility the freedom afforded to act with impunity took off. had those hard limits not evolved, had they not pushed those hard limits with that afforded impunity it would not have become abuse.

[:D][:D]

as a disclaimer i have to put here that i totally believe in Ms. i believe that it is a wonderful and fabulous way to live. i have loved it and i hope that i will reach that point of happyness again. im simply saying here that hard and fast disregard for the outcome is not healthy. it doesnt matter if its with a sub, a slave or a vanilla - to use impunity as the Dominants friend in these circumstances is just failing to be a human being. if a dominant cannot, hand on heart, admit that there are things that he would find impossible and not in that moment show some compassion then he is a hypocrite.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

quote:

ORIGINAL: agirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

but this isnt just about Ds or Ms or bdsm, impunity in my book is crass arrogance wherever it happens. when it happens there will always be consequences, well usually. only then, maybe does a person reflect and realise that their actions were wrong or damaging. but in almost every case that i can think of, its only when the consequence occurs that they realise their 'bad'.

in Ms or Ds the fine lne is drawn on because a slave or submissive is there to submit. then abuse of impunity can occur.

Well....... I'm not actually here to submit..... I'm here because I asked for his authority. A lot of the time that doesn't involve any submission whatsoever.


[color=#333333]im not atall sure i understand the difference.

The difference is my motivation for being here.

Within the relationship we have , he can pretty much act with impunity....... I asked to be here, with him.....I picked him and all that goes along with that. 

He should be able to act with impunity....my being with him gives him that. That's what we both knew would be the case.

[color=#333333]but since it isnt submission and youre not there to please you must therefore have some sort of say in what happens and when, how etcetera. if you dont have a say then you are in submission surely.

I'm not here to please, no. Yes, I get a say and a choice here and there but overall things are run how he likes them. As I tend to be fairly enthusiastic about the things he wants, whether I have a say or not.......I can't say that it feels terribly *submissive*  that I happen to like doing what he what he chooses.

never at any time in any of my vanilla relationships did i agree to be hurt emotionally or physically. in my Ms and Ds relationships i did agree to physical hurt - and that is where it gets a bit fuzzy for a slave or sub when the activity pushes them into a situation they are wired to submit to, committed to submit to, but find impossible or unbearable to the point where walking is the possible outcome.

So, with that in mind, we run equal risk (equal variables considered) in any relationship. What you seem to be suggesting is that being in an s-type's position nullifies the ability to make the intellectual assessment of when the hurt has progressed past the point of being able to contribute to the relationship as expected.

in my case not atall. i made the call in both relationships to walk and it seriously fucked me off. in making that decision i had to renaig on something that is fundamental to my personality and i had to walk away from someone i liked a great deal and was hopeful about. the far reaching affect of both of these situations was that i ended up having to review myself and yet, actually all that i was doing was protecting my own emotional health.

in the end it was bloody annoying.

 But.....you liked them a great deal *apart from..XXXXX......* Wasn't XXXXX part of them?  It seems as if you're pissed off because they didn't turn out to be what you wanted/expected/hoped for.

If you couldn't *be* what they wanted.........and they weren't being what you wanted.......for WHATEVER reason....you weren't compatable, surely?


his act of impunity isnt always about compatibility. sometimes its just down to the pressure being exerted where the D or M feels its their right to do so and the sub or slave, wired to please, tries hard to comply, cant, feels crap about it and ultimately is put in the invidious position of rebelling against her own wiring. in there are two counts of unreasonable behaviour by the D type. first the impunity and second placing the slave in the position of having to reject herself (basically).

 Well, yes........ my owner DOES have the right to, not because I'm *wired to please* but because I said..... * Ok*. If I try to comply, am rubbish at it and feel crap ....... I can't really beat him up about it. I DID ask to be there.

I'm rather with NZ here. Your dom may just as well felt and thought you were renaging too. It depends what you agreed to, and how well you know each other. It wouldn't work at ALL here if I said .... * Do as you wish .....* when I really meant * Do as you wish ....but don't do that*.

great. so within youre relationship there is nothing that you find impossible. you guys have a relationship where there is no need to say 'dont do that'. why - possibly because he understands you very well, knows youre limitations and acts with empathetic impunity. (read mercs first post to qualify)

Most likely, yes.

It's not easy to explain why it's completely alright for him to do as he wishes, with no resentment , no bad feelings, no angst...without it really ending up being two people that know each other and knew that BOTH of them understood what they'd got into.

exactly. you both knew where you were within whatever dynamic it is that you have that works within that understanding, based on the fact that he does not view you as a submissive, there to please or submit.

Well yes. He's known me for an extremely long time and though I'm not  particularly *submissive* it doesn't mean I don't have to when my will meets his.

up until the point where submission feels 'completely alright' a Dominant is in the position of doing anything he pleases - yes, absolutely and noone wants that to change, least of all the submissive or slave. but when they reach a road block, and it does happen, the boards have a full history of road blocks occuring in all dynamics the authority in that relationship has two directions to go. carry on and stuff the consequences or find a way around. not at any time have i ever said to a D 'dont do that', but i have told them how it feels for me in the hope that they modify the activity to at the very least break me into it more gently.[/color]agirl

Ok, I think I may get your point now.  Our relationship didn't just arrive where it is now. It's been easy, in a way, for me to just let him get on with it and do whatever he wants to, because there hasn't ever been one moment or nanno-second where I TRULY found anything he wanted was *impossible*. He WAS in the position right from the start of owning me, of being ABLE to do what he wanted........ but it was tempered by not having the slightest wish to ruin the high regard I hold him in. He CAN do what he wants ....but WOULD he want to if I'd view my relationship with him as less viable and the esteem I hold him in , built over many, many years, be trashed in the process? It's akin to Merc's *look* that he spoke of.

I see it as being compatable, which is also another *easy* thing to say when you've known someone for a decade and you haven't come across any road-blocks on the activity front.  Both of us treasure our relationship, and there's really no *activity* that's worth the risk of losing it.

The things you've described seem to be in relation to guys that are on the selfish side, or at least that's how I seem to be seeing it. What they want  to *do* mattering more than the relationship they're trying to *do* it in.  It depends what their objective is ....... I don't see it as *behaving with impunity* in those situations.

agirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

are we discussing irresponsible domination?

and not exercising ethical ownership?

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

are we discussing irresponsible domination?

and not exercising ethical ownership?

actually, my goosey friend, that is what we are discussing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

well done [:)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: agirl
..He WAS in the position right from the start of owning me, of being ABLE to do what he wanted........ but it was tempered by not having the slightest wish to ruin the high regard I hold him in. He CAN do what he wants ....but WOULD he want to if I'd view my relationship with him as less viable and the esteem I hold him in , built over many, many years, be trashed in the process? It's akin to Merc's *look* that he spoke of.

i guess it is down to whether that process of thought actually connects - i believe in the two situations ive mentioned the mental process didnt get that far. i was their slave - end of and yet i know they valued me. very odd. in the end i have come to the conclusion that it was impunity gone wrong, they couldnt shift on position because they wanted complete impunity. that in of itself isnt a problem, its only a problem when a road block occurs. blasting through it is one approach of course. but then things start to feel less viable and the esteem issue gets a serious kicking - i beleive the reason that happened is because they genuinely did not think that their position as my Master could become tenuous because i was fully submissive otherwise

I see it as being compatable, which is also another *easy* thing to say when you've known someone for a decade and you haven't come across any road-blocks on the activity front.  Both of us treasure our relationship, and there's really no *activity* that's worth the risk of losing it.

The things you've described seem to be in relation to guys that are on the selfish side, or at least that's how I seem to be seeing it. What they want  to *do* mattering more than the relationship they're trying to *do* it in.  It depends what their objective is ....... I don't see it as *behaving with impunity* in those situations.

i call it impunity because thats how it felt. [&:]
agirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2
you can argue that she shouldnt have gone into a relationship with him. you could argue that he was excercising his right to meet out the punishment he always meeted out. i would argue that he knew the sub had claustrophobia, that it would be unwise to traumatise her in that way and there are plenty of other things he could have come up with.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomImus

That pretty much sums it up. At the very least if I was assigning blame it would split it right down the middle. She knew his preferred punishment up front and made assumptions she perhaps should not have made and he knew she had issues with his preferred punishment up front and chose to enact that punishment anyway. I won't dump all the blame on one party. To do so indicates obvious bias.

quote:

in both situations these two things were not integral, not vital, not in any way worth losing a relationship for.

quote:

in the end she is an adult in an adult relationship and up to a point, for a slave anyway, her choice to stay or leave is in fact abusing her also. she should not be put in either position.

quote:

if the slave cannot live with it then she cant. but in there you infer youre own integrity and i would agree, from the little i know of you, i would certainly say that you come across as someone who would weigh all things up and proceed in the best interests of everyone involved.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomImus

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2
you can argue that she shouldnt have gone into a relationship with him. you could argue that he was excercising his right to meet out the punishment he always meeted out. i would argue that he knew the sub had claustrophobia, that it would be unwise to traumatise her in that way and there are plenty of other things he could have come up with.

That pretty much sums it up. At the very least if I was assigning blame it would split it right down the middle. She knew his preferred punishment up front and made assumptions she perhaps should not have made and he knew she had issues with his preferred punishment up front and chose to enact that punishment anyway. I won't dump all the blame on one party. To do so indicates obvious bias.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomImus

That pretty much sums it up. At the very least if I was assigning blame it would split it right down the middle. She knew his preferred punishment up front and made assumptions she perhaps should not have made and he knew she had issues with his preferred punishment up front and chose to enact that punishment anyway. I won't dump all the blame on one party. To do so indicates obvious bias.

I think you're missing a key point here - the woman was a slave. If anyone is going to compromise a preference in a M/s relationship, it is the slave.

Now I don't 'blame' either person or think either were wrong, I think that they were two incompatible people. But essentially what the M did in this relationship is say "being able to act out my sadistic desires is more important to me than being with this specific person."

And really what's wrong with that? Would you fault a vanilla for leaving a relationship where the partner was unable or unwilling to fully sexually please them? I'm reading the OP's posts as saying "I was really into this guy, he had desires that I was unhappy submitting to, and now I am upset that he did not abandon his desires in order to stay with me." How utterly selfish. Obviously if it's a recent breakup it'll still sting, but really. Selfish.

it was one thing i found impossible and i did not ask him to abandon his desires i simply knew i could not submit to this one thing that was going to get worse, that when it occurred, for the first time, became a hard limit for me, one he would not respect. therefore i chose to ask for release. im not sure where selfish comes into that.

To address a few specific points:

quote:

in both situations these two things were not integral, not vital, not in any way worth losing a relationship for.

Perhaps it wasn't the act itself so much as the fact that he knew you would never be able to fully obey him in a TPE M/s relationship?

Or maybe these things were more important to him than they were to you.

i could fully obey him in all things and i did, i would have continued submitting to this one thing, had it not been for the fact that it was impossible for me. he would continue to have me as his slave right now, but i cannot submit to that level of pain on that part of my body and i would not expect him to live without it, therefore i asked for release.

quote:

in the end she is an adult in an adult relationship and up to a point, for a slave anyway, her choice to stay or leave is in fact abusing her also. she should not be put in either position.

Are you serious here? Abusing her? I think that the "obey or leave" is generous, if it's something the M is unwilling to compromise about, he could just say "I'm sorry, the fact that you won't obey this means we are incompatible. Goodbye."

yes i am serious. when a slave submits wholly to her Master and meets with one issue that she finds impossible she is then placed in the position of a) denying her Master something and b) having to ask for release because he refuses to accept her denial. both of these things go against her nature and for me, on a personal aside, took a time to level out in my head.

Giving the slave a choice between sucking it up or ending the relationship is a lot nicer than breaking up with her without giving her a chance to make it work.

quote:

if the slave cannot live with it then she cant. but in there you infer youre own integrity and i would agree, from the little i know of you, i would certainly say that you come across as someone who would weigh all things up and proceed in the best interests of everyone involved.

In this situation I would say the best situation for EVERYONE involved is to break up so that both people can find a person who meets their needs.

You saying "he should compromise so that I can stay with him" is no different than him saying "she should compromise so I can stay with her." Except that you chose the role of slave, and generally speaking, the slave is to obey the desire of the master, not vice versa.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella
I think you're missing a key point here - the woman was a slave. If anyone is going to compromise a preference in a M/s relationship, it is the slave.

Now I don't 'blame' either person or think either were wrong, I think that they were two incompatible people. But essentially what the M did in this relationship is say "being able to act out my sadistic desires is more important to me than being with this specific person."

And really what's wrong with that? Would you fault a vanilla for leaving a relationship where the partner was unable or unwilling to fully sexually please them? I'm reading the OP's posts as saying "I was really into this guy, he had desires that I was unhappy submitting to, and now I am upset that he did not abandon his desires in order to stay with me." How utterly selfish. Obviously if it's a recent breakup it'll still sting, but really. Selfish.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovingpet

Impunity.  My partner wants what he wants.  The thing is, with him, it is like a brand new player sitting down to play chess with a grandmaster.  He has already thought every single move and counter ahead of even starting the game.  He's usually thought of everything.  I can't see it.  It's all locked up inside his head, but he has his plan and is aware of the potential pitfalls, areas of resistence, attempts to avoid the trap, etc.  There is nothing I am going to throw at him or that the situation is going to throw at him that he hasn't already calculated.  There may be some small thing on the outlying fringe (like how one grandmaster would beat another), but it isn't something that is at all within the scope of likely or even remotely potential events.

My questions to OP would probably be, do you win and HOW do you win?  Do you win by having the dominant back down and step away from something?  Do you win by being heard, comforted, and expected to comply anyway?  Do you win by having your little frets mean not a fig to him and your delayed obedience mounting in punishment?  For me it is win/win to simply comply.  What he has planned for me is for my enjoyment (even if part of that enjoyment is frolicking in fear, humiliation, etc) as well as his.  I guess it is really a case by case basis as far as which of these and many more options are the way I want and/or need to win.  For me, a win is mutual benefit and that doesn't necessarily equate to enjoyment or fun.  Sometimes I need him to reconsider, although not often at all.  Sometimes I need to know that, as much as he may enjoy it, my fears matter and he has his bases covered.  Other times, I want....impunity.  I want him to just take what he wants and to hell with fiddling around with me.  We win when we come away fulfilled and somehow better for the experience.

In my partner's case, he has the ability to act with impunity all on his own.  He also knows when to use it to its greatest benefit.  He knows me very well and is aware when I need a harder or a softer hand.  He knows my buttons and just how hard to push each one.  For him, impunity is a tool.  Additionally, it is rarely true impunity.  He just knows the entire story while I only have the title.  Forethought is different than not caring what the consequences will be.

lovingpet

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomImus

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella
I think you're missing a key point here - the woman was a slave. If anyone is going to compromise a preference in a M/s relationship, it is the slave.

Now I don't 'blame' either person or think either were wrong, I think that they were two incompatible people. But essentially what the M did in this relationship is say "being able to act out my sadistic desires is more important to me than being with this specific person."

And really what's wrong with that? Would you fault a vanilla for leaving a relationship where the partner was unable or unwilling to fully sexually please them? I'm reading the OP's posts as saying "I was really into this guy, he had desires that I was unhappy submitting to, and now I am upset that he did not abandon his desires in order to stay with me." How utterly selfish. Obviously if it's a recent breakup it'll still sting, but really. Selfish.

No, I didn't miss it. The OP is intent on this being all the dominant's fault. That's the initial conclusion and then the ensuing discussion is designed to prove it - instead of it working the other way. That's why I offered my 'at the very least" statement. To point out that there is reasonable doubt here.

I agree with your last paragraph entirely. To me it's just another example of a submissive who is chagrined because she wasn't dominated the way she wanted to be dominated. I've always called it The Goldilocks Syndrome (i.e. "This porridge is too hot"  "this porridge" is too cold"). You are absolutely right - it's nothing more than two people who don't fit but for some people that's hard to admit and just walk away and carry on.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovingpet

Impunity.  My partner wants what he wants.  The thing is, with him, it is like a brand new player sitting down to play chess with a grandmaster.  He has already thought every single move and counter ahead of even starting the game.  He's usually thought of everything.  I can't see it.  It's all locked up inside his head, but he has his plan and is aware of the potential pitfalls, areas of resistence, attempts to avoid the trap, etc.  There is nothing I am going to throw at him or that the situation is going to throw at him that he hasn't already calculated.  There may be some small thing on the outlying fringe (like how one grandmaster would beat another), but it isn't something that is at all within the scope of likely or even remotely potential events.

My questions to OP would probably be, do you win and HOW do you win?  Do you win by having the dominant back down and step away from something?  Do you win by being heard, comforted, and expected to comply anyway?  Do you win by having your little frets mean not a fig to him and your delayed obedience mounting in punishment?  For me it is win/win to simply comply.  What he has planned for me is for my enjoyment (even if part of that enjoyment is frolicking in fear, humiliation, etc) as well as his.  I guess it is really a case by case basis as far as which of these and many more options are the way I want and/or need to win.  For me, a win is mutual benefit and that doesn't necessarily equate to enjoyment or fun.  Sometimes I need him to reconsider, although not often at all.  Sometimes I need to know that, as much as he may enjoy it, my fears matter and he has his bases covered.  Other times, I want....impunity.  I want him to just take what he wants and to hell with fiddling around with me.  We win when we come away fulfilled and somehow better for the experience.

In my partner's case, he has the ability to act with impunity all on his own.  He also knows when to use it to its greatest benefit.  He knows me very well and is aware when I need a harder or a softer hand.  He knows my buttons and just how hard to push each one.  For him, impunity is a tool.  Additionally, it is rarely true impunity.  He just knows the entire story while I only have the title.  Forethought is different than not caring what the consequences will be.

lovingpet

no one won. it wasnt about wining either to be honest. it was about struggling through something that lasted a very long time and was unbearable. im not sure any thought went into it, infact im pretty sure no thought went into it. my tits were in his face and he went off on one big sadistic spree. i got through it, just. at the time i said nothing, i was just relieved it was over. it was later, in a quiet moment that i talked to him about it and there was going to be no let up and infact he knew how to make it worse and said that would be happening.

in other things sadistic he was measured and careful. but with that he wasnt and i couldnt imagine spending the rest of my life dreading it and going through the procedure that would make it even worse.

impunity is, i realise something that can work very well for us as submissives. we are wired to respond to that element in our men where what they want is ultimately what we want because they want it soooooo much. thats so cool. but when you hit upon something that is impossible for you, as that was for me, impunity becomes destructive.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovingpet

quote:

ORIGINAL: lally2

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovingpet

Impunity.  My partner wants what he wants.  The thing is, with him, it is like a brand new player sitting down to play chess with a grandmaster.  He has already thought every single move and counter ahead of even starting the game.  He's usually thought of everything.  I can't see it.  It's all locked up inside his head, but he has his plan and is aware of the potential pitfalls, areas of resistence, attempts to avoid the trap, etc.  There is nothing I am going to throw at him or that the situation is going to throw at him that he hasn't already calculated.  There may be some small thing on the outlying fringe (like how one grandmaster would beat another), but it isn't something that is at all within the scope of likely or even remotely potential events.

My questions to OP would probably be, do you win and HOW do you win?  Do you win by having the dominant back down and step away from something?  Do you win by being heard, comforted, and expected to comply anyway?  Do you win by having your little frets mean not a fig to him and your delayed obedience mounting in punishment?  For me it is win/win to simply comply.  What he has planned for me is for my enjoyment (even if part of that enjoyment is frolicking in fear, humiliation, etc) as well as his.  I guess it is really a case by case basis as far as which of these and many more options are the way I want and/or need to win.  For me, a win is mutual benefit and that doesn't necessarily equate to enjoyment or fun.  Sometimes I need him to reconsider, although not often at all.  Sometimes I need to know that, as much as he may enjoy it, my fears matter and he has his bases covered.  Other times, I want....impunity.  I want him to just take what he wants and to hell with fiddling around with me.  We win when we come away fulfilled and somehow better for the experience.

In my partner's case, he has the ability to act with impunity all on his own.  He also knows when to use it to its greatest benefit.  He knows me very well and is aware when I need a harder or a softer hand.  He knows my buttons and just how hard to push each one.  For him, impunity is a tool.  Additionally, it is rarely true impunity.  He just knows the entire story while I only have the title.  Forethought is different than not caring what the consequences will be.

lovingpet

no one won. it wasnt about wining either to be honest. it was about struggling through something that lasted a very long time and was unbearable. im not sure any thought went into it, infact im pretty sure no thought went into it. my tits were in his face and he went off on one big sadistic spree. i got through it, just. at the time i said nothing, i was just relieved it was over. it was later, in a quiet moment that i talked to him about it and there was going to be no let up and infact he knew how to make it worse and said that would be happening.

in other things sadistic he was measured and careful. but with that he wasnt and i couldnt imagine spending the rest of my life dreading it and going through the procedure that would make it even worse.

impunity is, i realise something that can work very well for us as submissives. we are wired to respond to that element in our men where what they want is ultimately what we want because they want it soooooo much. thats so cool. but when you hit upon something that is impossible for you, as that was for me, impunity becomes destructive.

I have to admit I hadn't (and still haven't) read the entire thread, so I missed the part initially where there was a specific incident you had in mind.  There is no excuse for breaking one's toys.  I have been taken apart and put back together again very careful and with some painful alterations along the way, but doing something that he knows is going to harm me is absolutely off limits.  That is per him, not me.  I just happen to agree.

Did you enter the dynamic knowing that such a thing was likely to occur?  I just can't see how it makes any sense on either side to enter into a relationship knowing that some of the primary expectations not only will not, but cannot, be met.  I just see a lot wrong with the whole senario no matter how it came to be.  My guess is that this is not a person who matches you well and it is such a poor fit that you are being harmed in the process.  If this has been a one time thing and it can be worked through, I guess it is up to you to determine if your trust can be repaired.  If there have been or it is clear from discussion that there WILL be other things, then I suppose you have a great deal to consider.

No one can make this decision for you and I know that isn't what you are asking.  What your personal tolerences are in this matter is really something only you know.  It sounds like you are beyond your breaking point, however.  Please be careful and make the best decision that honors you. 

lovingpet