RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress



Message

Cherylmazana -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (3/31/2010 8:31:16 PM)

It amazes me how normal day to day living can be determined by some to be part of negotiating a “kink”.

Many years ago to save our marriage we divided up the household chores into what each of us is best at, I am better at tidying and cleaning and he is better at cooking. That way neither one of us comes home from work and finds all of their spare time taken up by chores, also each of us can decide if its going to be hours of work or a quick get it done so I can collapse type of thing.

That is the nature of most working vanilla relationships that I know of, in a vanilla relationship women want a partnership with a man who helps instead of making things harder. Its only in BDSM that a man can say they want to be submissive and worship a woman while actually creating more work for her and expecting her to say thank you to him for creating that work.

Cheryl



tightropes -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (3/31/2010 8:45:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Venatrix


quote:

ORIGINAL: tightropes

It appears that a substantial number of dommes on CM who seek a male submissive want someone to make their lives "easier" and more "comfortable."


Even when I dated vanilla, I expected a man to make my life easier and more comfortable, otherwise, why would I spend time with him? If I'm going to do everything myself, I may as well do it just for myself and not have the added burden of doing things for a man, in addition.

I'm sorry to say this, but your post makes you sound like a user. You want your kink satisfied, yet you offer nothing in return. Why would a woman be interested in that? If that's not who you are, you might want to re-think your approach.



I thank you all for responding to my inquiry.  I have chosen to reply to this response in particular because, for me, it captures some of the concerns that underlay my initial posting.

Why, Venatrix asks, would she spend time with a man who doesn't make her life easier and/or more comfortable.  Well, let me tell you, during my rather long adult life, I haven't sought women for relationships, be they vanilla or otherwise, who will make my life easier or more comfortable.  I've sought women for mutual intellectual, physical and emotional stimulation and satisfaction, for sharing life's adventures whether through travel or in more sedentary ways, obviously to love and be loved, and I'm sure other reasons.  To make my life easier has never been on my list.  Talk of being a user, that defines one for me, which is why so many of the domme profiles that focus on the easier or more comfortable life disturb me.

Please note that in my concluding remarks in my post, I asked: "Do you believe a man isn’t really submissive if he isn’t interested in performing menial tasks as a central part of his role vis-a-vis a domme? Is there room on CM or elsewhere for a male submissive to find a domme who isn’t interested in him mainly as a means to make her life easier?"

I particularly underlined the word "central" to underscore it!  I didn't include it by chance.  That seems to have escaped a number of respondents, or at least that's the way it appears to me.  To be sure, if one's perspective is: "wait, you're a submissive.  You do what you're told to do, otherwise you're not a submissive" — then you've answered my question with a resounding NO!  Fine, but obviously that isn't my perspective.

Of course there's a place in every relationship for one party to perform menial work, whether to assist the other, or to help him or herself, or "for the relationship."  And, yes, having been in many vanilla relationships during my life, I am quite experienced at doing all kinds of work and other activities to assist, help or otherwise support my partner, and not with a chip on my shoulder. That is part of any relationship. There's been no quid pro quo, Akasha, and many males who consider themselves submissive (as well as those who aren't) aren't looking for trade offs or credit toward a beating or other rewards, whether in a vanilla relationship or in a d/s, bdsm or however the relationship is labeled.

In any case, I welcome and thank you again for the remarks and observations.  For me, there's plenty of room for a satisfying D/s or bdsm (or whatever you wish to call it) relationship between a dominant woman and a submissive man where the woman's interest in the man isn't to make her life easier or more comfortable. Certainly her interest isn't to make her life harder or less comfortable, but my point was there are hopefully other reasons that draw her, and him, to be together.




Lockit -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (3/31/2010 8:56:49 PM)

Okay, it looks like we have to split hairs here. None of the dominant's I know simply choose a man based on how he can make her life easier. It isn't the key factor and surely wouldn't be the one thing that makes or breaks the relationship. I do believe that most made comments that align with this.

What I am seeing is that there is such a focus on this by you, the op, that it would sure make me look much deeper before I would even consider much with you. You are too worried about it. That could stem from anger or pain or simply an attitude I don't wish to deal with.

While I wouldn't respect a woman who only picked a man because he made her life easier, I cannot at the same time respect a man who is so worried about it that he focuses on that rather than the many dominant's saying they don't focus on that. lol In other words it would be a red flag to me to find out why that is. Proving a point? Making a point? Past relationship issue? What?




Venatrix -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (3/31/2010 9:01:06 PM)

So, tightropes, would you put up with a woman who made your life harder? Who demanded things of you but offered nothing in return? No? Then why would you ask a woman to do the same? Because, make no mistake, that *is* what you are asking, tart it up however you like.

You've been on this planet rather a long time, according to your profile. One of the things one would think you'd have learnt is that relationships *are* about making each other's life easier, and that means, yes, you have to offer something of yourself to others if you expect to get something from them. If it makes women users because we say, "I'm not going to let some guy treat me as a convenience," so be it.

I wish you the best of luck in finding someone. You will need it.



hardbodysub -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (3/31/2010 9:03:45 PM)

quote:

Who is it that expends more energy for play?  The top.  Who is it that spends her time and energy in learning new areas of play?  The top.


I think that really depends on the relationship and the activities in which they indulge. It doesn't have to be a lot of work.



Lockit -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (3/31/2010 9:10:00 PM)

I'm sending hardbody all my email! lol Most don't simply want those things that can be done without some research and or training. lol There may not be a lot of work to some things... but to others, sorry... unless you were born with an extended arm that is a whip, you have to learn that. Unless you want someone like me practicing on your backside.



SweetDommes -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (3/31/2010 9:10:40 PM)

We describe what we want as pets - boys to be loved, cherished, and cared for as they enrich our lives, just like our four-footed and furry pets do in their own ways. If that means fetching me a drink when I'm thirsty, then that's what it means; if it means snuggling on the couch while we watch a movie, then that's what it means; and if it means having a deep, philosophical conversation with me, then that's what it means. It all depends on the boy, and on how I feel at the time, and what I want and need at the time. Same with Holly. Yes, we want someone to help us with the chores around the house - so that we have more time to spend together ... the same chores split 4 ways are faster than split 3 ways, right?



Andalusite -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (3/31/2010 9:41:38 PM)

If you're in a relationship where the two of you don't live together, I think it's something that can be negotiated. Ideally, both people pitch in to help the other out when needed. I tend to enjoy it when guys are kind of domestic no matter what their orientation - even if he's doing his *own* dishes rather than mine, I've been known to slide up behind him, turn off the water, and molest him a bit.[;)] I've been in a couple of relationships with bottoms or tops or other switches, who were still very much willing to do nice things for me, be helpful, and so forth. They weren't specifically turned on by being controlled, but they *loved* making me happy and fulfilled! If you feel it is to a degree where you are resentful or unhappy, then obviously the two of you aren't compatible. If you don't find service-oriented tasks rewarding on some level, if you don't *enjoy* being helpful and useful, then you just aren't a good match for someone who is looking for that.

My Master and I don't live together, but he doesn't just let dirty dishes stack up until I come over. Often, I'll take care of them and do other housework, but sometimes he wants me to focus our time together on other stuff and take care of those chores himself. It doesn't feel like drudgery - I want to do things for him, I want to be useful.



LadyNTrainer -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (3/31/2010 9:50:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tightropes
Why, Venatrix asks, would she spend time with a man who doesn't make her life easier and/or more comfortable.  Well, let me tell you, during my rather long adult life, I haven't sought women for relationships, be they vanilla or otherwise, who will make my life easier or more comfortable.  I've sought women for mutual intellectual, physical and emotional stimulation and satisfaction, for sharing life's adventures whether through travel or in more sedentary ways, obviously to love and be loved, and I'm sure other reasons.  To make my life easier has never been on my list.  Talk of being a user, that defines one for me, which is why so many of the domme profiles that focus on the easier or more comfortable life disturb me.


It's a two-way road.  I do expect my submissive partner to be willing to focus a reasonable portion of his available time and energy on pleasing me, making me happy, making me comfortable etc.  On my end, if I don't do exactly the same thing from a dominant perspective and take care of my partner's needs as well, I doubt the relationship will be very healthy or last very long.  You can't replace fundamental human needs in a personal relationship with nothing but "Real True Dominate Rules"; it doesn't tend to end well.  He shows his love and concern for me in service.  I show my love and concern for him by being considerate of his needs and taking care of him in turn.  I get his time and energy and he gets mine.  This is the heart's most basic equation.

Both men and women can be users.  Men who expect their kinky and sexual needs met without being willing to give of themselves in turn, and women who exploit men for material gain with no other concern or feeling for them.  You need good filters to avoid winding up with either type of user, and one of the perfectly reasonable filters is making it clear that you're not the drive-through McDomme's and you expect to be treated with kindness and consideration before giving of your own time and energy.



cloudboy -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (3/31/2010 9:58:38 PM)

You're not even coming close to answering his question -- which is demographic in nature. In my experience there are Domme's who want relationships (first) and want to be with men of standing. This means that they don't put menial tasks and petty authorities high up on their priority lists, and they also understand that quality men don't want to be errand boys.

Next, keep in mind that no Domme sets the parameters of your relationship, you do that. (Sounds counter-intuitive, but its true. A sub sets the limits, and then the relationship is built off of them.) Women are responsive to subs who know themselves and know what kind of relationships they want. Knowing your limits, being comfortable with them and emphasizing the energy you will bring into a relationship -- that's all excellent courtship material.

The Trojan horse method of declaring limits that you think a Domme wants to hear -- is a mistake.

Many femdom profiles do read like exploitation invitations -- and from what I've read here -- guys get off on that -- but men seeking relationships don't. You sound pretty grounded and self aware to me, and I think you will do fine. I agree with you that the important elements of M-F relationships exist on a higher plane, and I also think D/s can work there as well. Part of the reason malesubs often receive derision and lack of respect -- is the image of them actually serving a woman who exploits them for money and chores.

I agree with your thesis that money and chores do not constitute love or D/s -- they constitute stuff you do and earn. They are ancillary -- not central to a good relationship.

As a point of reference, I do the bulk of the housework in my household -- and none of it is a "loving act" or a "sub space high" or what I might call a "proof of love." The housework is just the shit I take care of because that's how we've got things divided.



LPslittleclip -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (3/31/2010 9:58:39 PM)

serving my Mistress in any way makes the relationship better. i happen to be service oriented and like to cook and clean.for me if im doing the dishes or sitting at Her feet i am just as happy and content as i have made Her day/life easier and can spend time with Her.



LadyPact -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (3/31/2010 11:26:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: hardbodysub

I think that really depends on the relationship and the activities in which they indulge. It doesn't have to be a lot of work.

It is obvious that you and your Mistress indulge in different activities than I pursue.  Even those activities that aren't as straining physically, certainly have an investment before it ever gets to the play part.  For example, the violet wand is one of the easiest forms of play in the world.  However, it also came with a huge time investment beforehand.  That's not just demos attended.  There's also independent reading and study.  Making connections with other folks who are experienced and learning from them.  Even with what I know now, that process doesn't stop.  I'm always in the pursuit of being a better top.

Take that time spent and multiply it by all of the skills that a top, such as Myself would like to acquire.  Add solo practice (meaning the pillow type) hours in there.  Don't forget things like doing the obtaining of specific supplies (wax, needles, whatever) of those items that do run out.  Keeping track of what local groups have demos on what and when.  There really is more to it than meets the eye.

Granted, both the top and bottom benefit from all of the above, but what is the bottom investing while I'm doing all of this?  I'm very literally putting in hours toward mutual enjoyment.  If he's not contributing any more than his tail in the air once play time comes, how is this really both persons working towards the goal?



VaguelyCurious -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (4/1/2010 3:29:59 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

You're not even coming close to answering his question -- which is demographic in nature. In my experience there are Domme's who want relationships (first) and want to be with men of standing. This means that they don't put menial tasks and petty authorities high up on their priority lists, and they also understand that quality men don't want to be errand boys.

Next, keep in mind that no Domme sets the parameters of your relationship, you do that. (Sounds counter-intuitive, but its true. A sub sets the limits, and then the relationship is built off of them.) Women are responsive to subs who know themselves and know what kind of relationships they want. Knowing your limits, being comfortable with them and emphasizing the energy you will bring into a relationship -- that's all excellent courtship material...

...I agree with your thesis that money and chores do not constitute love or D/s -- they constitute stuff you do and earn. They are ancillary -- not central to a good relationship.


What he said. You're a words-from-mouth thief, CB [:D][:D]

Although I can think of a couple of quality men who *do* want to be errand boys, so maybe I'd be a little less absolute in my phrasing if I was the one writing.



MstrPBK -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (4/1/2010 3:43:44 AM)

the answer lies in what the slave wants not what the master desires.

1) does the slave WANT to serve that way?
2) Is the Master/Dom being lazy, or do they honesty need that level of assistance?
3) at what level or style does the slave want to submit to?

MstrPBK
St. Paul, MN USA



LadyAngelika -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (4/1/2010 4:57:27 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AAkasha


One of the biggest setbacks of the whole "service" submissive thing is that now many subs (or bottoms, whatever) see "service" as a currency they can use for barter. In other words, submissives/slaves/bottoms/kinksters - whoever - sometimes view anything labeled as "service" as equity they can use to barter, trade or expect kink.  They don't "do nice things" because they are a gentleman.  They do it because they believe that by being a submissive and doing errands, cleaning, whatever, they have moved into a category called "service sub" and can therefore expect kink in return. Or, at least a domineering sneer and barked orders.

Newflash for subs:  Totally vanilla guys often are VERY generous of spirit and time, and actually enjoy washing a lady's car, running her errands, helping her clean up or cooking a meal - and they DON'T expect to have to do it naked, to wear panties at the same time or that by doing so they have "earned" kink time.

Akasha



Akasha, the kind of guy that uses service for barter is not a submissive in my eyes, he's a bottom. I have no problem with a self-identified bottom who is upfront about this. I do however stay away from those that, either out of deception or lack of self-awareness, use service as barter for kinky-sex.

- LA



LadyAngelika -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (4/1/2010 5:04:25 AM)

quote:

Next, keep in mind that no Domme sets the parameters of your relationship, you do that. (Sounds counter-intuitive, but its true. A sub sets the limits, and then the relationship is built off of them.)


Perhaps that is how it works in certain relationships but it is not how it works in mine. I will not let a submissive set the limits in a relationship. I do. I will talk with him, try to understand his needs and fears but ultimately I set them. If they do not suit him, he is free to walk away. I know it might sound like we are saying the same thing but fundamentally, we are not.

quote:

Women are responsive to subs who know themselves and know what kind of relationships they want. Knowing your limits, being comfortable with them and emphasizing the energy you will bring into a relationship -- that's all excellent courtship material.


On this, we agree.

- LA



perfectflaw00 -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (4/1/2010 7:07:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: AAkasha


One of the biggest setbacks of the whole "service" submissive thing is that now many subs (or bottoms, whatever) see "service" as a currency they can use for barter. In other words, submissives/slaves/bottoms/kinksters - whoever - sometimes view anything labeled as "service" as equity they can use to barter, trade or expect kink. They don't "do nice things" because they are a gentleman. They do it because they believe that by being a submissive and doing errands, cleaning, whatever, they have moved into a category called "service sub" and can therefore expect kink in return. Or, at least a domineering sneer and barked orders.

Newflash for subs: Totally vanilla guys often are VERY generous of spirit and time, and actually enjoy washing a lady's car, running her errands, helping her clean up or cooking a meal - and they DON'T expect to have to do it naked, to wear panties at the same time or that by doing so they have "earned" kink time.

Akasha


^^^^^^^^
This, in the past whenever I've helped out women (given rides, helped with school projects, Home improvement,) I've gotten more satisfaction from a heartfelt thank you than from any kink I may have. I'm still relatively new to all this but I would think that a submissive gets enjoyment from making their dominants life easier,content,relaxing at least that's my view and so doing errands/chores doesn't really seem like that big a deal.



JhonDean -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (4/1/2010 7:31:49 AM)

I think it important you clarified your reasoning as to exclusive right in setting limits and did it in a manner that implied intellect and experience.
However, in the final analysis each establishes limits they will not violate and are charged with the responsibility of conducting themselves in a manner that furthers them, not their lust, ego or selfishness.



Andalusite -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (4/1/2010 7:37:36 AM)

IMHO, it's important that both people be compatible in the area of hard limits - they are set by both people, and should be abided by once agreed to. If the submissive agrees that an area isn't a hard limit, either at the outset, or after they've been in a relationship for a while, that's fine (or, for that matter, if the Dominant decides that something the submissive enjoys isn't a limit after all). For the most part, though, getting involved with someone when you know that things are crucial to them hat you don't want to do or feel incapable of seems like it is asking for trouble. Most people don't make dishes or laundry or running errands "hard limits" in any case - that would be absurd for most live-in relationships. I can understand not wanting to feel taken-advantage-of, and it's important that both people get their needs met.



SomethingCatchy -> RE: Does a male submissive have to be an errand boy? (4/1/2010 2:39:18 PM)

quote:

Do you believe a man isn’t really submissive if he isn’t interested in performing menial tasks as a central part of his role vis-a-vis a domme?


Regardless if he's interested or not, if he doesn't do the 'menial' tasks I assign him, then he is not submissive. He is a bottom, a person who picks and chooses when they will obey when it suits them. I do not want a bottom, because my definition of what my sub is, is someone who will put aside his desires and focus on me.

Part of being my submissive is jumping when I say jump, regardless if he think it's stupid, boring, not manly enough, or pointless. The reward for being my submissive is being spoiled with love and affection, being treated with respect, fabulous home cooked dinners, and clean socks and underwear on those really long work weeks when he just doesn't have the time.




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

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875