RE: can you own a Dominant

RE: can you own a Dominant (Full Version)

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

Message

Rochsub2009 -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/7/2010 1:19:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 my sexuality was rampant back then - i just had to have it and flipped into submission at the drop of a hat, didnt matter if they were dominant or not. looking back i wasnt submitting to them i was submitting to my need to submit. these days im a little better clued in to how it all works and i dont waste my time on the guys that have no innate dominance. Well said. i would wager that there aren't many subs/slaves who haven't found themselves in a situation (particularly early in their D/s experience) very much like what you described. There are many "Dom/Dommes" out there who aren't really dominant at all. Yet in our desire to submit, we've found ourselves submitting to those who didn't deserve our submission. As you stated, we were really "submitting to our need to submit". Thanks for sharing that insight. i can relate completely.

lally2 -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/7/2010 1:23:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 quote: ORIGINAL: osf quote: ORIGINAL: sexyred1 quote: ORIGINAL: littlewonder quote: A submissive woman’s sexuality is unceasing in it’s appetite and need. That sexual need is there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever. I guess I'm not very submissive then because well..there are times when my sexuality does indeed come to a screeching halt..it dies on the concrete floor with a big loud bang! It's easily reasoned with and can find bargains at basement prices. And there are quite a few times when it feels pity and remorse and lots of times when it feels fear...more times than I wish. So yup..big load of bullshit. Yup, she is right. That truly is one of the most bullshitty things osf has ever said. Why? Not just because it is a sweeping generalization, but in my experience, the Doms I have been with feel the same way, their sexuality and need for us and our relationship matched mine and sometimes, surpassed it. So please, give me a break. Edited to add: what does that have to do with the OP's question? and here i thought we were getting along what does your post have with the ops question then again it's an allegory for some of my past experiences and maybe i knew some women that were in a submissive frame of mind all the time so far we have one in agreement and 3 against get over yourselves ladies, you don't represent all womanhood and some submissives are never out of role, they it seems instinctively react to their dom in a submissive way constantly and most men cant handle that for long and of course you are here looking , some for years for the man that can keep up to your oh so easy natures if submissives were so easily taken care of some of you wouldn't be here and every man could be a dominant but they can't wonder why that is again it is from my experience with a couple of women and i stand by it the blue bit - in the early years i would have said this was very true - i would have harped on about the men who just wanted kink but who had no innate Dominance and who mistakenly believed that i would happily submit all day long without an ounce of effort from them. my sexuality was rampant back then - i just had to have it and flipped into submission at the drop of a hat, didnt matter if they were dominant or not. looking back i wasnt submitting to them i was submitting to my need to submit. these days im a little better clued in to how it all works and i dont waste my time on the guys that have no innate dominance. Dominant men turn me on, for them its just who they are, no thought process required. so now the blue bit isnt true for me anymore. and in your early days you probably burned them out so i stand by the statement yes i did - or they couldnt handle the level of submission i went into and dwindled away - it was just mismatching really in the end. its odd that now ive sussed myself out i seem to draw in people who are more the real deal in terms of Ds and Ms rather than just accessing a sub for kink. in the relationships that i can think of, it was the kink they wanted, not the submission of me and certainly not ownership, but then i hadnt worked out that ownership didnt necessarily mean that i lost complete freedom of inner self. far from it, it actually enhances that, but thats possibly another topic. rochsub - i think icarys was saying that through the feeling of being owned the cord between Master and slave/sub feels unbreakable - but i think we would all agree that having to leave for safety, health, happyness does and should happen if its unresolvable. doesnt depreciate the feeling of being owned though. having been in that situation myself it took me many months to pull enough slack in that cord to feel i can move on. the cord still isnt broken, but i have moved on and im approaching a new DM/s relationship and im not looking back. i made an attempt at a new relationship a few months back and it failed, largely because i hadnt moved on enough, i still felt owned to my last Master. i would say that i am a reasonably well adjuted, intelligent, emotionally together woman, strong and strong willed, but it got me big time and although there were excellent reasons not to go back i seriously considered it for a longish while.

lally2 -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/7/2010 1:33:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rochsub2009 quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 my sexuality was rampant back then - i just had to have it and flipped into submission at the drop of a hat, didnt matter if they were dominant or not. looking back i wasnt submitting to them i was submitting to my need to submit. these days im a little better clued in to how it all works and i dont waste my time on the guys that have no innate dominance. Well said. i would wager that there aren't many subs/slaves who haven't found themselves in a situation (particularly early in their D/s experience) very much like what you described. There are many "Dom/Dommes" out there who aren't really dominant at all. Yet in our desire to submit, we've found ourselves submitting to those who didn't deserve our submission. As you stated, we were really "submitting to our need to submit". Thanks for sharing that insight. i can relate completely. [:)] what im curious about is where the hell were all the real deal Ds and Ms guys back then. why were they not approaching me in the way that they have been these past few months. why did i have to go through all of that shite! - [:D]

Rochsub2009 -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/7/2010 1:41:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 rochsub - i think icarys was saying that through the feeling of being owned the cord between Master and slave/sub feels unbreakable - but i think we would all agree that having to leave for safety, health, happyness does and should happen if its unresolvable. doesnt depreciate the feeling of being owned though. having been in that situation myself it took me many months to pull enough slack in that cord to feel i can move on. the cord still isnt broken, but i have moved on and im approaching a new DM/s relationship and im not looking back. i made an attempt at a new relationship a few months back and it failed, largely because i hadnt moved on enough, i still felt owned to my last Master. i would say that i am a reasonably well adjuted, intelligent, emotionally together woman, strong and strong willed, but it got me big time and although there were excellent reasons not to go back i seriously considered it for a longish while. i completely understood his premise, and i agree in part. i just feel that most subs/slaves have a point that they won't allow their dominant to cross. Thus, they are not truly owned. While i know that situations like what he described exist (where a person won't leave REGARDLESS of what is done to them), i think that often those situations are unhealthy, and a caring Dominant would see that it is not good to have a person in a situation like that. Is there anyone out there who believes that all Doms would be completely moral/ethical while exercising that level of control? IMO, many would place their own needs/desires ahead of the needs of the sub. While we are discussing it in the context of BDSM, psychologically it is very similar to a woman in a vanilla relationship who won't leave despite the fact that the relationship is physically abusive. i could use Icarys' definition to say that she is "owned". But in reality, she is simply not able to do what is actually best for her. She probably requires an intervention to free herself from an unhealthy situation. Does the abusive husband/boyfriend "own" her. Perhaps. But the more meaningful question is whether that type of ownership (control/influence) is healthy. Moreover, are there many (any?) people out there that you would trust to wield that level of control benevolently?

lally2 -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/7/2010 2:22:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rochsub2009 quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 rochsub - i think icarys was saying that through the feeling of being owned the cord between Master and slave/sub feels unbreakable - but i think we would all agree that having to leave for safety, health, happyness does and should happen if its unresolvable. doesnt depreciate the feeling of being owned though. having been in that situation myself it took me many months to pull enough slack in that cord to feel i can move on. the cord still isnt broken, but i have moved on and im approaching a new DM/s relationship and im not looking back. i made an attempt at a new relationship a few months back and it failed, largely because i hadnt moved on enough, i still felt owned to my last Master. i would say that i am a reasonably well adjuted, intelligent, emotionally together woman, strong and strong willed, but it got me big time and although there were excellent reasons not to go back i seriously considered it for a longish while. i completely understood his premise, and i agree in part. i just feel that most subs/slaves have a point that they won't allow their dominant to cross. Thus, they are not truly owned. emotionally they are, legally they cannot hold a person against their will but that doesnt depreciate the ownership that is felt, even if the sub or slave feels they have to leave. you are looking at the pragmatism of ownership or feeling owned, there is actually no pragmatism involved, its entirely emotional. While i know that situations like what he described exist (where a person won't leave REGARDLESS of what is done to them), i think that often those situations are unhealthy, and a caring Dominant would see that it is not good to have a person in a situation like that. Is there anyone out there who believes that all Doms would be completely moral/ethical while exercising that level of control? IMO, many would place their own needs/desires ahead of the needs of the sub. a Master who values his property, treats her well, cares for her, sees to all of her needs and supplies her with that safe place is fulfilling her on a level that no other relationship could. it actually has nothing at all to do with morals or ethics, its totally about two people fulfilling a level of committment that means the world to them. While we are discussing it in the context of BDSM, psychologically it is very similar to a woman in a vanilla relationship who won't leave despite the fact that the relationship is physically abusive. i could use Icarys' definition to say that she is "owned". But in reality, she is simply not able to do what is actually best for her. She probably requires an intervention to free herself from an unhealthy situation. if it is unhealthy. im getting from what youre saying that all Ms relationships are unhealthy and all people who feel owned or own are debased or debasing. it simply isnt true. spirralling abuse where the victim cannot leave is something else again. but not all relationships are unhealthy. comparing a vanilla abusive relationship with an Ms relationship is sidestepping the complication of consent. Does the abusive husband/boyfriend "own" her. Perhaps. But the more meaningful question is whether that type of ownership (control/influence) is healthy. Moreover, are there many (any?) people out there that you would trust to wield that level of control benevolently? power of any sort is heady and for some too potent and open for abuse. but there are many healthy Ms relationships where the power and control is used to the slaves benefit not her detriment. if what we're talking about is abusive relationships across the board then theres no argument. whether emotionally owned or not. that is down to that individual to call on. but to simply say that ownership is exerting too much power over another is also suggesting that the slave or sub in that relationship is incapable of choosing for herself what is good for her. when in submission i am deeply committed to my Master. the feeling of owned is natural to me. whether my Master feels he owns me or not is almost beside the point, i feel owned. in that situation would you say that he is exerting too much dangerous power over me. in many ways Ds relationships across the board are tentatively about ownership and owned. emotionally invested committment is all about that for some.

ranja -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/8/2010 2:17:53 AM)
FR~ Yes i own His ass... He married me, i own Him as much as He owns me ... difference is He won't do what i say... unless i politely ask, craftily manipulate or beg... while i do (almost) everything He says at the drop of a hat so i think the difference is mainly in the obeying ETA... if He would ever want to terminate my ownership He would have to kill me or buy Himself out... His freedom will not come easy or cheap. i don't think He'd ever want rid of me though as i kiss His feet and am generally very sweet to Him and He may fart whenever He wants and do whatever He pleases...... as long as He gives me ooooos

Rochsub2009 -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/8/2010 3:56:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 While we are discussing it in the context of BDSM, psychologically it is very similar to a woman in a vanilla relationship who won't leave despite the fact that the relationship is physically abusive. i could use Icarys' definition to say that she is "owned". But in reality, she is simply not able to do what is actually best for her. She probably requires an intervention to free herself from an unhealthy situation. if it is unhealthy. im getting from what youre saying that all Ms relationships are unhealthy and all people who feel owned or own are debased or debasing. it simply isnt true. i never said that, nor implied it. i'm not sure where that idea came from. i don't think we are understanding one another properly, so lets just agree to disagree (although i'm not sure that we disagree).

Andalusite -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/8/2010 7:06:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 what im curious about is where the hell were all the real deal Ds and Ms guys back then. why were they not approaching me in the way that they have been these past few months. why did i have to go through all of that shite! - [:D] "When the submissive is ready, the Master will appear?" [;)] I don't feel I own my Master, and I'm not dominant toward him. Recently in a moment of passion, I dug my claws a bit and said "Mine!" I was feeling rather primal and a little possessive, he thought it was cute.

Kana -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/8/2010 7:13:02 PM)
Mmmmmmmm Primal is a nice word. Say it once. say it twice. Roll it around the tongue. Roll it around the brain. Conjure images, set them free, let them soar. Sweat and stained sheets. Cool breeze on furnace skin. That smell lingering, the fear, lust, cum, pussy, alive scent Eyes that are wild, wind-fucked Hair tangled in knots. Vibrating hearts. Yeah. Nice.

lally2 -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/9/2010 1:44:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rochsub2009 quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 While we are discussing it in the context of BDSM, psychologically it is very similar to a woman in a vanilla relationship who won't leave despite the fact that the relationship is physically abusive. i could use Icarys' definition to say that she is "owned". But in reality, she is simply not able to do what is actually best for her. She probably requires an intervention to free herself from an unhealthy situation. if it is unhealthy. im getting from what youre saying that all Ms relationships are unhealthy and all people who feel owned or own are debased or debasing. it simply isnt true. i never said that, nor implied it. i'm not sure where that idea came from. i don't think we are understanding one another properly, so lets just agree to disagree (although i'm not sure that we disagree). i dont think we're disagreeing either [:)] - just you seemed to be saying that Ms was having more power than was maybe healthy and asking if it was morally or ethically right. you seemed to be paralleling Ms with abuse, but then i might have read that wrong.

Rochsub2009 -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/9/2010 3:55:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 you seemed to be saying that Ms was having more power than was maybe healthy and asking if it was morally or ethically right. you seemed to be paralleling Ms with abuse, but then i might have read that wrong. No, that wasn't my point at all. i wasn't making a blanket statement about Ms. Rather, what i was referring to was a previous poster's comment that he gets his slave to a point where they won't (and can't) leave regardless of what he does to them. He said that even if they want to, they can't leave. He stated that at that point, the slave is truly owned. My point was that while i acknowledged that it was possible to get someone to that point, is it healthy to do so? IMO, a sub should maintain the mental fortitude to leave if the situation were to dictate that it is best to do so. To allow someone to get you to the point where you can't leave, even if you want to (or need to) may be dangerous. i pointed out that that is essentially the same mental space that people in abusive relationships find themselves in. They want to leave, but can't. i believe that if you take a sub to that point, you had better be a very wise Dom/Domme, because that type of power would be very easy to abuse. And if your motives are self-serving, rather than benevolent, you can easily take advantage of the sub.

osf -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/9/2010 5:26:14 PM)
a good question is how far does an owners rights go

Icarys -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/9/2010 8:04:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rochsub2009 quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 rochsub - i think icarys was saying that through the feeling of being owned the cord between Master and slave/sub feels unbreakable - but i think we would all agree that having to leave for safety, health, happyness does and should happen if its unresolvable. doesnt depreciate the feeling of being owned though. having been in that situation myself it took me many months to pull enough slack in that cord to feel i can move on. the cord still isnt broken, but i have moved on and im approaching a new DM/s relationship and im not looking back. i made an attempt at a new relationship a few months back and it failed, largely because i hadnt moved on enough, i still felt owned to my last Master. i would say that i am a reasonably well adjuted, intelligent, emotionally together woman, strong and strong willed, but it got me big time and although there were excellent reasons not to go back i seriously considered it for a longish while. i completely understood his premise, and i agree in part. i just feel that most subs/slaves have a point that they won't allow their dominant to cross. Thus, they are not truly owned. While i know that situations like what he described exist (where a person won't leave REGARDLESS of what is done to them), i think that often those situations are unhealthy, and a caring Dominant would see that it is not good to have a person in a situation like that. Is there anyone out there who believes that all Doms would be completely moral/ethical while exercising that level of control? IMO, many would place their own needs/desires ahead of the needs of the sub. While we are discussing it in the context of BDSM, psychologically it is very similar to a woman in a vanilla relationship who won't leave despite the fact that the relationship is physically abusive. i could use Icarys' definition to say that she is "owned". But in reality, she is simply not able to do what is actually best for her. She probably requires an intervention to free herself from an unhealthy situation. Does the abusive husband/boyfriend "own" her. Perhaps. But the more meaningful question is whether that type of ownership (control/influence) is healthy. Moreover, are there many (any?) people out there that you would trust to wield that level of control benevolently? You've used the negative possibilities to what you think I implied but there were no negative tones to my comments at all. In the context of today's relationships subs/slaves are in fact owned..the only way they aren't is in legal terms and only then because of societies rules on that matter. It makes it no less possible to own a female in a positive way even in today's times. That was my base for the original comments to begin with. I wasn't and am not now talking about the abuse side of ownership. Lally had it correct.

girlygurl -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/9/2010 8:07:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 if a Dominant can feel that theyre sub or slave belongs to them, can a slave or sub feel that her Dominant belongs to her. For a fleeting moment yes, but then I woke up and realized he's a human being and I can't own a human being.

Icarys -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/9/2010 8:16:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: girlygurl quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 if a Dominant can feel that theyre sub or slave belongs to them, can a slave or sub feel that her Dominant belongs to her. For a fleeting moment yes, but then I woke up and realized he's a human being and I can't own a human being. I find it odd when the people who live outside the box have such trouble thinking outside of it. She wasn't speaking in literal terms.

Rochsub2009 -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/9/2010 8:27:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys You've used the negative possibilities to what you think I implied but there were no negative tones to my comments at all. i never attributed abuse or negative possibilities to you. Go back and re-read what i said. i don't know you, and i would never accuse you of such. My comments were generic. i did speak of the negative aspects of the mental "ownership" coin. If you accept that i was not talking about you specifically, and read my comments objectively, i don't think that you will disagree with anything that i've said. Just as i can agree that it is possible for someone to wield that type of control and NOT be abusive, i think you can probably see my point about how that type of control could be used in an abusive fashion and therefore might not be healthy for the sub.

Icarys -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/9/2010 8:33:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rochsub2009 quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys You've used the negative possibilities to what you think I implied but there were no negative tones to my comments at all. i never attributed abuse or negative possibilities to you. Go back and re-read what i said. i don't know you, and i would never accuse you of such. My comments were generic. i did speak of the negative aspects of the mental "ownership" coin. If you accept that i was not talking about you specifically, and read my comments objectively, i don't think that you will disagree with anything that i've said. Just as i can agree that it is possible for someone to wield that type of control and NOT be abusive, i think you can probably see my point about how that type of control could be used in an abusive fashion and therefore might not be healthy for the sub. Again you misunderstand. I was referring to the concepts of ownership and not to me. I do agree with what your saying now but the original comments I spoke against were this: quote: There is no ownership, on either side of the kneel. Period. End of story. So now that we've eliminated fantasy, let's talk about reality. This I absolutely disagree with and that was what started the discussion for me.. It's an incorrect statement from my experience.

girlygurl -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/9/2010 10:07:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys quote: ORIGINAL: girlygurl quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 if a Dominant can feel that theyre sub or slave belongs to them, can a slave or sub feel that her Dominant belongs to her. For a fleeting moment yes, but then I woke up and realized he's a human being and I can't own a human being. I find it odd when the people who live outside the box have such trouble thinking outside of it. She wasn't speaking in literal terms. No shit sherlock[8\|][8\|]

allthatjaz -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/10/2010 7:01:05 AM)
I have never owned a submissive any more than I have owned my children. My submissive is 'my' submissive as long as she wants me and I want her and I owe a duty of care to her. I need to work at our relationship because if I don't she could walk away and lets face it, she can do that can't she?!?!. So as long as she is free to walk away she can never be my property can she? She's not a gold necklace that belongs to me. She's a living breathing being that has a choice to say she's my property whilst she adores me and then tell me she's no longer my property when she's had enough! Its all good and beautiful and pure when everything is going hunky dory. We can think what we like and shout to the world 'Im his property' and thats great. Nobody wants to take that dream away if its clearly working but the reality is, its only true as long as you want it to be!

petmonkey -> RE: can you own a Dominant (2/10/2010 7:23:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Domin8tingUrDrmz Yes, you can own a dominant. Get a cat [:D]. slightly off-topic: my cat just jumped into my lap as i was reading the OP. i asked her if i owned her. She slapped me in the face and demanded food. As far as as the "dynamic" between myself and my cat is concerned, the answer is yes. As far as my human relationships go, i haven't experienced enough possessive feelings to reach the stage of owner, let alone with a Dominant. i'm not even sure i'd link the two words necessarily. Do the sentences "i possess you." and "i own you." really have the same meaning for me? Investigation time! runs off with a dictionary in one hand, and a cup of Iams in the other

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875