An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (Full Version)

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



Message

SocratesNot -> An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 8:20:01 AM)

Here it goes:

"If your partner is NOT interested in you unless you offer some financial tribute OR some other kind of useful practical work, you should never be in a relationship with her / him, no matter what kind of relationship it is, D/s or vanilla, online or real life."

It could also be said in this way:

"You should only be in a relationship with a partner who is interested in you as a person regardless of any economical or other utilitarian benefits they may get from you."

Let me give some examples.
First, vanilla examples:

1. You should only be with a woman if she is attracted to you sexually or if she fell in love with your personality. If she is with you only because you are rich, or have a beautiful apartment and an expensive car, you shouldn't be with her.

Now some BDSM examples:

2. You should be with the Master / Mistress only if he or she is genuinely interested in dominating you - for example she gets off when she sees your buttocks red from her whip and she loves it; or in other relationship - he adores the mere fact that you obey him and behave like his little girl. Or generally your Dom(me) is in love with your personality, your looks, your intelligence, and of course your obedience.
However, if your Mistress or Master is only interested in having you give them money or do them dishes or make them websites, you shouldn't be with them.

Do you agree with this?

I'll try to rephrase it once more:
" You should be in a relationship only if your partner is interested in you even if he / she doesn't get any practical, economic or utilitarian benefits from you."

P.S.
I'm not going to say that serving your partner in practical things is bad. Of course that you will do all the best for their wellbeing, including practical, utilitarian and economical support. I am only saying that you shouldn't be in a relationship in which you would be unneeded and undesired without this component.

I mean, anyone can give you money, wash your car, clean your house or cook your food. But you want to be in a relationship with someone because of their personal qualities, because of their uniqueness, in which no one can replace them. If your partner doesn't recognize your uniqueness and irreplaceability you shouldn't be with them.



Jeffff -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 8:22:16 AM)

You should absolutely never say anything absolutely.



Andalusite -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 8:23:56 AM)

Personally, I wouldn't want to be in a service-only D/s relationship, but some people seem to be happy with them. I'm not interested in dictating what other people's relationships should be like.



subsfaith -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 8:24:04 AM)

There is no should, or shouldn't in relationships.

A relationship is something that suits you personally, it doesn't have to suit anyone else.





SailingBum -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 8:33:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeffff

You should absolutely never say anything absolutely.


AbsoFuckinglutely never say never

BadOne



Rochsub2009 -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 8:41:48 AM)

SocratesNot,
i don't mean to criticize, but i've read a few of the threads that you've started recently, and several of them seem to be a bit naive.

Each person has to determine what works for them.  If it doesn't work for you, then don't do it.  But there is no need to judge others for participating in those behaviors.

i have a very good friend who his short, fat, has male pattern baldness, and is generally not viewed as a particularly handsome fellow.  However, he owns a multi-million dollar company and has tons of money.  His wife is HOT.  i mean supermodel hot.  She is one of the most beautiful women i've ever seen.  She is also almost 20 years younger than him.

They live in a mansion, and she drives both a Mercedes and a Lexus.  She doesn't work, and she spends a good deal of her time shopping.  He tells me that their sex life is the stuff of fantasies.  So where's the problem?

He knows that he couldn't have gotten her if he weren't rich.  She's using him for his money, and he's using her for her beauty and sex.  They're both happy.  They've been married for almost a decade now.  i can't remember ever seeing them argue or fight.  Sounds like a good relationship to me.

Their relationship violates your premise, but they'd both say #&$% you and your premise, and they'd keep the marriage.



RCdc -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 8:44:00 AM)

quote:

"You should only be in a relationship with a partner who is interested in you as a person regardless of any economical or other utilitarian benefits they may get from you."


Disagree.

the.dark.



SocratesNot -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 8:50:22 AM)

Now I will tell you what inspired me to start this topic.
I saw this theread: http://www.collarchat.com/m_3190126/mpage_1/tm.htm

in which a guy said he was in a search for an online domme, but only if she doesn't require a tribute.
Most of other posters told him that he is very unlikely to find such a domme, because she is not getting anything in return.

Which implies the following - she is only interested in his money or some other practical service, which also implies that she doesn't enjoy dominating him at all, and finds no pleasure in it, quite the contrary it is boring to her, so she wants a compensation.

If this is really the case with online dommes, then no genuine submissive should be in relationship with them, because they (the dommes) aren't really enjoying it or getting off of it, and if this is the case, by submitting you are not pleasing them at all. And what is the purpose of being submissive -  to please a domme, to satisfy her.
If you can't satisfy her, she charges you for spending (actually wasting) her time on you.

Some may argue that the financial tribute is also a way to please, which may be the case, but in most cases it is not pleasing per se, but compensation for wasting some of her time, she could spend more productively.

So I would recommend submissives to only be with dommes who genuinely get wet when they see them on they knees, and not those who are just providing a fantasy (which is not at all exciting for themselves) and charging for it.



SocratesNot -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 8:58:43 AM)

quote:

i have a very good friend who his short, fat, has male pattern baldness, and is generally not viewed as a particularly handsome fellow.  However, he owns a multi-million dollar company and has tons of money.  His wife is HOT.  i mean supermodel hot.  She is one of the most beautiful women i've ever seen.  She is also almost 20 years younger than him.

They live in a mansion, and she drives both a Mercedes and a Lexus.  She doesn't work, and she spends a good deal of her time shopping.  He tells me that their sex life is the stuff of fantasies.  So where's the problem?

He knows that he couldn't have gotten her if he weren't rich.  She's using him for his money, and he's using her for her beauty and sex.  They're both happy.  They've been married for almost a decade now.  i can't remember ever seeing them argue or fight.  Sounds like a good relationship to me.


I know that I am naive. I also have a big problem which is that I am an idealist. I don't know about them, they might be happy. But if I was in his place I would ALWAYS be aware of the fact that she is with me only because of my money, and this would be enough to spoil my happiness and satisfaction.
Such relationship for me seems more like some sort of trade than relationship based on love.



RCdc -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 9:04:28 AM)

Submission isn't a selfless act so your advice pretty much sucks.[;)]

Besides, mutual pleasure doesn't have to extend to anything else than some woman getting happy because shes earning and some s-type happy to oblige!

quote:

Which implies the following - she is only interested in his money or some other practical service, which also implies that she doesn't enjoy dominating him at all, and finds no pleasure in it, quite the contrary it is boring to her, so she wants a compensation.


It doesn't imply anything other than what you reacted to.  It could imply that the female doesn't want to waste her time with someone who isn't prepared to have something to offer.  Female domination is far more time wasting/consuming than male.

Are you related to Kevin?[;)]

the.dark.



LadyHibiscus -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 9:07:48 AM)

You are really, really naive. Which I guess is okay, be an idealist, stick to your goals whatever they may be. However, the rest of the world has a large variety of motivations for being here (by "here" I mean the BDSM zone). Many are looking to get their rocks off. Many are trying to fulfill a fantasy that has no bearing on anyone's reality.

Speaking personally, I have no desire to be an "online dominant" unless it was for money. The very idea that some total stranger could serve me remotely is ludicrous, what could they do other than help me pay my bills? Some find that kind of arrangemet fun and satisfying. Good on em.

I suggest you read more, meet more real people, and start fewer threads for awhile.



ReginaMirus -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 9:18:31 AM)

Yes, but...

Being used for one's proclivities can make for a pretty hollow relationship, as well.

While I certainly do enjoy male-centric play, if the entire relationship revolves around ONLY what I do to him, that's going to leave me stone cold, no matter how much I enjoy said activity. If my entire relationship only centers around my "getting my rocks off" by doing an awful lot of work for his benefit, then I'm going to feel pretty used after awhile if I'm not getting the things I WANT, first and foremost.

I'M THE DOMME, ffs. MY NEEDS COME FIRST. Once my needs and wants are met, and I'm a very happy camper, I might treat him with a bit of play focused on him. But only when I feel like it, and only when I'm certain that he understands that his submission is based upon his service to me, on what he thinks can potentially get out of me.



SocratesNot -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 9:18:38 AM)

quote:

Speaking personally, I have no desire to be an "online dominant" unless it was for money.


That's why I would never like you to dominate me online, this doesn't please you, doesn't turn you on, and when it comes to sex I would like only to engage in activities that are enjoyable both for me and my partner.



Jeffff -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 9:24:43 AM)

See, here's the dealio. It is not about your enjoyment. Don't get me wrong, it is ok if, in my case, the woman enjoys it. It is even preferable. But it is not the point.

The point is, am I enjoying it.

Idealy, we meet people who click together.

It seems to me that you don't want to submit, you want to be pleased. There is nothing wrong with that, it just isn't submission.



LuckyAlbatross -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 9:24:46 AM)

Part of being interested in someone for me is that they do have useful parts about them.

I enjoy being used and made useful.  I'd never want someone who didn't use me or want me without using me.

There's no separation between the two for me.



CarrieO -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 9:26:29 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SocratesNot

Now I will tell you what inspired me to start this topic.
I saw this theread: http://www.collarchat.com/m_3190126/mpage_1/tm.htm

in which a guy said he was in a search for an online domme, but only if she doesn't require a tribute.
Most of other posters told him that he is very unlikely to find such a domme, because she is not getting anything in return.

Which implies the following - she is only interested in his money or some other practical service, which also implies that she doesn't enjoy dominating him at all, and finds no pleasure in it, quite the contrary it is boring to her, so she wants a compensation.

As someone who responded on the thread that inspired this question, I would suggest you go back and read some of the replies.  The man who posted that thread, who by the way no longer has an active profile or has it hidden for whatever reason (which is unfortunate because his profile had much to do with the way I replied to him), admitted he had no idea what would be expected of him from an online domme.
 
He stated he wanted to "serve a dominant female via webcam and online" but when asked what he could offer in return, he had nothing really to say other than he had 'something'...kind of vague. 
 
The OP of that thread was given some very good suggestions on what he could offer via online and some suggestions on how to make his approach more reality based.
It was suggested to this person that he may have to supply a tribute (money) if he had nothing else to offer if he only wanted online interaction. 


If this is really the case with online dommes, then no genuine submissive should be in relationship with them, because they (the dommes) aren't really enjoying it or getting off of it, and if this is the case, by submitting you are not pleasing them at all. And what is the purpose of being submissive -  to please a domme, to satisfy her.
If you can't satisfy her, she charges you for spending (actually wasting) her time on you.

Something for nothing usually doesn't work.  What people were trying to impress on the OP of the thread was that there are few women who enjoy simply having a man perform...in what ever way...online without something in return. 
That something could be money, or it could be time spent performing a task for the domme like doing research on a topic of interest to her or helping her in some way with a project (depending on the level of trust) like proof-reading and such.  Submission online doesn't have to be based on money or sexual acts.

Some may argue that the financial tribute is also a way to please, which may be the case, but in most cases it is not pleasing per se, but compensation for wasting some of her time, she could spend more productively.

Money is pleasing for some.  It all depends on what both parties agree on for a dynamic.

So I would recommend submissives to only be with dommes who genuinely get wet when they see them on they knees, and not those who are just providing a fantasy (which is not at all exciting for themselves) and charging for it.

That may be true for you...but not others.  To be honest, you sound bitter and, as others have said, a bit naive.  Maybe some time spent reading some threads of interest here using the search feature by topic and some of the books from the list I posted on the thread you referenced would be helpful. 
It might also benefit you to attend some groups related to D/s or M/s and some munches. 



LadyPact -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 9:30:16 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyHibiscus
I suggest you read more, meet more real people, and start fewer threads for awhile.

Funny.  I just said something fairly similar on another thread.

Let Me see if I can put this in a context that the OP will understand.

I have a slave.  One of the reasons that I have a slave is because I enjoy beating his ass.  The good part about this is, he happens to like having his ass beaten.  That is how we started out.  Something that was mutually beneficial to both of us.  If there was nothing in it for Me (i.e. the satisfaction of My sadistic desires) none of the stuff that has followed in the past three years would have transpired.

Now, you can translate that into any other thing that will fit.  It isn't always someone's personality that brings people together in the world of BDSM.  It can be structure, service, money, or any other thing that people feel happy with.  There is always going to be some benefit happening between the parties or they wouldn't bother.



SocratesNot -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 9:44:03 AM)

quote:

There is always going to be some benefit happening between the parties or they wouldn't bother.


Yes, but not all the "benefits" are the same. For example the situation you described with your slave feels good to me "I like to beat his ass, and he likes his ass beaten". This is some sort of compatibility on personal level which is somehow very beautiful and good to me.

But when he gets sex and she gets money, this is somehow wrong in my opinion I don't know why. I said I would always feel bad about a woman being with me only because of my money. But if she was with me only because she likes to spank my ass and I can grant her this pleasure, this would feel very right and good to me.
I really don't know why, but that's how I feel about it.



LuckyAlbatross -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 9:47:32 AM)

quote:

I really don't know why, but that's how I feel about it.


It's just personal values.

Most hetero fem subs adore making dinner.  They'd be offended at the idea of going out and paying for dinner.

They adore giving blow jobs.  They'd be offended at the idea of being told to go and buy an escort for him.

To me it's all service.  It's all my providing for him and his pleasure, the fact that it's money involved is just the method.



LillyoftheVally -> RE: An interesting piece of advice - do you agree with it? (5/21/2010 9:52:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RCdc

quote:

"You should only be in a relationship with a partner who is interested in you as a person regardless of any economical or other utilitarian benefits they may get from you."


Disagree.

the.dark.


Ditto the.darkness, as is so often the case.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125