RE: One strike and out

RE: One strike and out (Full Version)

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

Message

HisSweetElysium -> RE: One strike and out (3/23/2010 9:28:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RavenMuse However if either have stepped away from the Dynamic there is no D/s or M/s... there is no 'relationship' at that point (Assuming it is based on having that Dynamic)... To Me neither side gets to call a time out. That maybe fine for a D/s couple with parts of their lives inside the Dynamic and parts outside, I can't speak for them, that's not how I am wired and I'm not compatible with a girl who thinks that way. For Me, the relationship Dynamic is the way We relate, who We are... if she has stepped away from that, then We are not relating, the relationship has already gone. she didn't trust Me to be able to steer Us through this. If I have not given her reason to doubt Me, reason to lack trust then there is simply not enough there to sustain the relationship. For Me it is a one shot deal once that trust is broken, it can't be rebuilt.... something a girl is made aware of before she submits. If she keeps hold of My hand I'll go above and beyond to find solutions to any problem that We face... but her part is to work WITH Me. that's what I trust her to do. If she isn't then there is a fundamental flaw, a relationship ending flaw. that's perfectly fine if that works for you and yours, but this is not a universal standard. I'm a flawed human being. I bring a life time of baggage and trust issues to the table, as we all do. I have no delusions; my Master is likewise a flawed human being. At the heart of all of this, we are, simply two human beings committed to a relationship. 95% of the time, I have no problem letting go and letting Him. That 5% of the time, I WISH I could, I desire to, but all that from my past gets in the way. I am grateful because He understands and loves me through it with patience and guidance. Yes, I have withdrawn from the dynamic, I will admit, like a petulant child "no not playing!" and it is through His love and support, He guides me back to what we both want, and what we have is stronger for it. Afterward I regret my behavior very much, but through it I trust Him more for not seeing it as a dealbreaker, for loving me enough to hold me through my tears, and talk with me later about how to avoid this in the future. It is a process; our relationship deepens and grows through these experiences. By your premise, I was supposed to have 100% trust in ALL things before our relationship even began. Maybe some people without my past are capable of that, but I'm not. I desire to trust, and for my Master and I, that is enough. We find each other and what we have worth working through the hard times. Had He not had this patience, He would not be my Master. Reading your post makes me all the more grateful for what I have, so thank you for sharing your thoughts.

littlewonder -> RE: One strike and out (3/23/2010 3:31:29 PM)
I've got no problem with it. It's how our relationship functions as well and I knew that with eyes wide open the first night we met.

DomImus -> RE: One strike and out (3/23/2010 3:57:26 PM)
Willful disobedience is reasonable grounds for dismissal. While some dominants enjoy the tug of war dynamic it shouldn't have to routinely be a contest. You either want to submit or you do not. It's really that simple.

domiguy -> RE: One strike and out (3/23/2010 4:02:29 PM)
Do you know that the moon is following you? It appears to be gaining ground. I think is is too late for you. It looks pissed.

catize -> RE: One strike and out (3/23/2010 4:34:01 PM)
I would compare this issue with the overall societal expectations about marriage. In general, most married couples expect monogamy from their spouse. I have had several friends whose husband or wife was unfaithful; one couple is still together. In the other instance, the wronged spouse could not forgive and they are now divorced. I do not make any negative judgments about either decision. We all have our line or lines that, if crossed, forces us to make a choice that we can live with.

Andalusite -> RE: One strike and out (3/23/2010 7:34:22 PM)
Elysium, it sounds like the two of you have a wonderful relationship! So far, I haven't withdrawn from the dynamic, and I hope that it never comes up. If it does, though, I would hope that my Master would respond similarly to yours, turning it into building trust rather than shattering it. RavenMuse, I guess the bottom line is that the "one strike and you're out" mindset/philosophy would make me distrust the person, so we couldn't develop a dynamic in the first place. I want to clarify that I don't think that you specifically or anyone else who engages in it is insecure in their dominance, but that I would feel that way toward anyone who tried to apply it to me, if that makes sense. I'm not trying to criticise other people, it's more that back when I was looking, I pretty much went, "Wow, there's no way I could be a slave with just about any of these people, that mindset toward a relationship just wouldn't work for me!" I admit, I have tried a little too hard, and hung on a little too long in a couple of my past relationships, but not to the point where it was abusive or anything like that. We still were mostly able to respect and like each other, even if things didn't work out. Trust generally wasn't the issue, but logistics, or chemistry fading, or love not developing to the point that I needed it to for a serious relationship on either my part or the other person's.

DWCskitten -> RE: One strike and out (3/23/2010 7:45:35 PM)
i agree that both Masters & slaves can have deal-breakers that they won't budge on and i see nothing wrong with that. my Master and i both have them and W/we discussed & were aware of them from the beginning. Willful disobedience is very much a biggie with U/us too. That and (1)stealing or misappropriating anything belonging to Master, (2)requesting/attempting release from slavery without Master's approval beforehand, (3)harming Master in any way, and (4) participating in any service or sexual activity with ANYONE without Master's specific approval beforehand. They are spelled out in my "Slave Rules" which i agreed to in the beginning. Those are the big ones that could cause release the first time. There are others that, repeated over time, could also result in release. i think just about E/everyone has "deal-breakers." People need to communicate and find a compatible relationship where they mesh well together. i don't agree with the idea that the Dominant is always the bad Guy. People are people and we all need to use our common sense and communication abilities to avoid ugly confrontations later on. ~kitten~

LafayetteLady -> RE: One strike and out (3/23/2010 9:19:09 PM)
I think the context of the situation makes all the difference in the world. Of course it would be nice to come up with speicific examples, but I don't think I can, because everyone is different. In the most simplest sense, if you say "I'll be home at 5 and would like dinner on the table at 5:15." A response of "Fuck you" is a big problem. However, if you make that call at 4:45 and the meal won't be ready....As you said, it is when something is "willful." Your comparision of the cheater in a monogamous relationship is probably the best. We all have things that are "deal breakers" in our relationships. What is best is for both partners to discuss what those deal breakers are early on in the "getting to know you" phase. I do think there are times when something happens that was not discussed and people are ready to run or end it without discussion and that isn't good either. I think we all have deal breakers whether you are dom or sub. It is the job of both partners to make sure they let the other know what they are as well as to recognize the "acclimation" period in the beginning of a relationship. As for "willful" acts against the other (yes, I mean that for both sides)? That is a no no all around.

Aylee -> RE: One strike and out (3/24/2010 11:07:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RavenMuse What's the malfunction folks are having with this issue? Why the difficulty in understanding a simple concept? My guess is that they view the one strike and you're out as ANY mistake. The breakfast eggs are cooked over-medium instead of over-easy. . . kicked to the curb. A drinking glass is put away right-side up instead of upside down. . . kicked to the curb. Medium black olives instead of large black olives are purchased. . . kicked to the curb. When viewed through that type of lens it is easier to see why so many people dislike the idea of one-strike and you're out.

RavenMuse -> RE: One strike and out (3/24/2010 11:15:38 AM)
So the 'problem' is that there are so many thick people out there? Personally I think its more that the notion that someone just maybe strong enough to end something that doesn't work rather than flog a dead horse scares some, they want to hold onto the notion that they can get away with any shitty behaviour without the risk of loosing it all. Therefore they WILFULLY choose to misinterpret (Much in the same way as they do with the not limits thing... talking about death and dismemberment rather than compatibility and trust).... After all, where the hell in what I stated did it say one MISTAKE and out? A mistake isn't choosing to be wilfully disobedient.

Aylee -> RE: One strike and out (3/24/2010 11:40:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RavenMuse So the 'problem' is that there are so many thick people out there? Well, there are a good many 'thick' people out there. However I do not think that is the entire problem. quote: Therefore they WILFULLY choose to misinterpret (Much in the same way as they do with the not limits thing... talking about death and dismemberment rather than compatibility and trust).... After all, where the hell in what I stated did it say one MISTAKE and out? A mistake isn't choosing to be wilfully disobedient. I think that the problem lies more in people not really listening. Sure they hear what someone is saying, however many treat a conversation as competition for 'air time.' Instead of concentrating on what is being said, they spend the time thinking of their response. So when the words, "One strike and you're out," are heard they pretty much stop listening to anything afterwards and start thinking, "OMG OMG OMG!!!! He is going to drop kick me to the curb for cooking the eggs wrong. OMG OMG OMG!!!!" They do not make the effort to finish listening to the statement regarding wilful disobedience nor make sure that they are fully understanding what is meant by what has been said. A lot of this could be cleared up by the person listening taking the time and having the backbone to say, "So what you are saying is. . ." or "Let me see if I have this correct . . ." But, of course, that would be taking responsibility for your own side of the conversation and communication. A break down in communication occurs because the two people are using different meanings or interpretations for the same words without making sure the other person is on the same page. quote: Personally I think its more that the notion that someone just maybe strong enough to end something that doesn't work rather than flog a dead horse scares some, they want to hold onto the notion that they can get away with any shitty behaviour without the risk of loosing it all. I think that many people are terrified of being alone. Popular culture teaches that if you do not have a significant other, there is something 'wrong' with you. As far as the shitty behaviour goes, the way I put it is: If a person has the wherewithall to manipulate a situation so that things evolve to their liking, then they also have the wherewithall to act RIGHT, and they get no patience from ME when they continuously fail to DO so. I mean, if you're legitimately uninformed, then I'll inform you; if you only fake ignorance when knowledge is inconvenient, then you'd better get ready for a pointy-booted kick to the curb.

RavenMuse -> RE: One strike and out (3/24/2010 11:50:12 AM)
Oh I agree that the one thing they are not doing is something most in these types of situations do... the "OK What are you actually saying here".... For sure My girl has said the word "No" a number of times, usually met with "That better not be what it sounded like girl!".... AKA "What are you saying here", the relationship still exists because not once has it been 'wilful disobedience'... its been "I'm scared", it's been "I'm not sure I can", Its been "I don't understand".... as the relationship goes on I'm getting her better at using the right words to communicate such things directly rather than Me have to dig it out... but the difference has always been obvious because at no point has she stopped trying to work with Me, ergo obvious she wasn't trying to be wilfully disobedient.

lally2 -> RE: One strike and out (3/24/2010 12:29:53 PM)
i used to think that the 'one strike' thing was harsh, but ive witnessed a situation where the cut off line just wasnt there at all - the entire dynamic unravelled and the Dominants authority was lost. so the polarity to 'one strike' is complete meltdown. so then youre left with a gradation situation between the two stark polarities - at what point do you apply the 'one strike and out' and for what reasons. surely that depends completely on the premis of the dynamic from the start, when two people start out together and work it all through. if that is the case then the sub/slave is in no doubt where her parameters are and the Dominant/Master can do nothing else but apply those parameters or his authority is lost and you get meltdown. it is, if you look at it that way, a fait a complis. i see nothing harsh or unreasonable - if anything it is providing a stabilising limit - the Dominant/Masters limit. in the end it is a pragmatic illusion of control that is rarely if ever overtly exercised and might even be waivered for the sake of giving a sub/slave a second or even third chance - but ultimately, if the situation doesnt resolve the Dominant/Master has to make that call, He has to abide by his own ruling for His sake as well as the sub or slaves. you cannot carry on in a situation where both parties are failing to be what they are - ie., loss of submission = loss of authority = meltdown

DickSteel -> RE: One strike and out (3/24/2010 12:32:21 PM)
One chance? I am good with a preemptive strike and you're out!

DesFIP -> RE: One strike and out (3/24/2010 12:55:00 PM)
I think the problem is that so many of the wanne be doms are saying this without the recognition that you discuss the problem. Indeed I've read enough profiles where it is clear that there is to be no discussion, it is done or else. The realism bit just isn't there for so many. "You will cater a party for 100, cook and serve it while also being sexually available". The fact that this is not possible to be on your back and also bringing out another tray of canapes at the same time doesn't occur to a lot of people. Obviously we all have our points of 'enough', you've broken my trust and I don't want to try again. But there are a lot of relationship challenged doms who come to this because they can't handle honest communication.

lally2 -> RE: One strike and out (3/24/2010 1:43:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesFIP I think the problem is that so many of the wanne be doms are saying this without the recognition that you discuss the problem. Indeed I've read enough profiles where it is clear that there is to be no discussion, it is done or else. The realism bit just isn't there for so many. "You will cater a party for 100, cook and serve it while also being sexually available". The fact that this is not possible to be on your back and also bringing out another tray of canapes at the same time doesn't occur to a lot of people. Obviously we all have our points of 'enough', you've broken my trust and I don't want to try again. But there are a lot of relationship challenged doms who come to this because they can't handle honest communication. the realism bit isnt there because theyve never actually had a Ds or Ms relationship - least ways, thats what i think - in fact statements like that are so obviously clueless that they might just as well put 'i have no phucking idea what im doing so bear with me' i dont believe you can make such a bald statement out into the ether at noone in particular and remain credable. each and every dynamic is 'controlled' by the forces at work - life, family, personalities etceterra. if they dont know that enough to moderate their statements then they havent grasped the fact that subs and slaves are prone to human failings and if they dont know that yet, then they havent yet had a sub or slave. the 'one strike and out' rule should surely be kept for things that would seriously undermine the Dominant or Masters reach of control. once that is gone there is nothing left anyway. it doesnt just show a lack of basic communication it suggests a basic lack of faith in themselves to actually Dominate. if they have to rely on threats of dismissal to keep their sub or slave in line then not only are they starting off with negative reinforcement they are in point of fact demanding that the sub dominate themselves.

LaTigresse -> RE: One strike and out (3/24/2010 2:01:12 PM)
Perhaps it isn't a threat.

lally2 -> RE: One strike and out (3/24/2010 2:14:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse Perhaps it isn't a threat. if its not a threat then its a promise - if you promise something then you have to abide by that promise or lose face. if the promise is that the first failed task you undertake will remove you from service, without preamble, without finding out if there was a perfectly good reason, if the sub had really tried hard but still failed then surely youre stuck with youre promise and the loss of a sub who had tried but for some reason wasnt able to complete the task.

Aylee -> RE: One strike and out (3/24/2010 3:26:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 if the promise is that the first failed task you undertake will remove you from service, without preamble, without finding out if there was a perfectly good reason, if the sub had really tried hard but still failed then surely youre stuck with youre promise and the loss of a sub who had tried but for some reason wasnt able to complete the task. And I think that you missed the whole idea being [resented of "one strike and you're out." You are seeing the situation as: Ravenmuse: Cook me two over-easy eggs. Metelmiss: Whoops, they came out over-medium. Ravenmuse: Get the hell out! When what he is presenting is: Ravenmuse: Cook me two over-easy eggs. Metelmiss: I won't. I only cook scrambled eggs. I am not even going to try. Ravenmuse: What? Metelmiss: Not gonna. Ravenmuse: Okay, this dynamic is over. I will grant that I doubt that this is the way the conversation would actually work. I think that Ravenmuse would most likely be more verbose. But hopefully you can see the difference in the situations.

DWCskitten -> RE: One strike and out (3/24/2010 3:31:33 PM)
~Fast Reply~ To add to my earlier post, although Master Sir & i do have a certain number of "deal-breakers," they are purposesful, willful things, not accidents. He does not release slaves for accidents or mistakes. For Him to release a slave, she has to work at it on purpose. lol ~kitten~

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.882813E-02