RE: Control ?

RE: Control ? (Full Version)

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

Message

Aileen1968 -> RE: Control ? (6/26/2010 7:38:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subtlebottomgirl Can you share your opinion of yes or no, and why ? Gotta go ask him for permission to answer....

Jeffff -> RE: Control ? (6/26/2010 7:40:34 PM)
Yeah...as if you really can be controlled. Long distance...anyway...:)

laurell3 -> RE: Control ? (6/26/2010 7:41:13 PM)
The lipstick isn't your shade. [;)] The question isn't very specific. Control is real. However, it isn't really him controlling me. The alternative would be something I wouldn't want to be part of.

Jeffff -> RE: Control ? (6/26/2010 7:42:17 PM)
Yeah as if you can be controlled too.

Zevar -> RE: Control ? (6/26/2010 8:18:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subtlebottomgirl Is it an illusion ? Can you share your opinion of yes or no, and why ? Another term for control is domination. I disagree with the notion that control or rather domination is an illusion. Perhaps the wrong use of ones abilities in asserting control might full well be deemed as that which is indicative of an illusion. Simply because that which fails to sustain the longevity of control or domination does not possess the capacity to control or dominate at all. Therefore in essence the only way control or domination is genuinely asserted over another is when the dynamics of consent have been engaged. Prior to that I would identify anything less than to be merely an imposter of sorts or rather that which is incapable of possessing the characteristics of consent that are required to sustain the potency that is indicative of control or domination over another. Consensual control or domination can be equally pleasurable if sustained by the ideology of a mutually agreed definition of consent one to another. IMO

BitaTruble -> RE: Control ? (6/27/2010 3:40:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subtlebottomgirl Is it an illusion ? Can you share your opinion of yes or no, and why ? His will overpowers mine whether I desire such a thing or not. That's not an illusion, just a simple fact. He controls what he wants to control because he can where I am concerned.

Plasticine -> RE: Control ? (6/27/2010 4:18:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zevar quote: ORIGINAL: subtlebottomgirl Is it an illusion ? Can you share your opinion of yes or no, and why ? Another term for control is domination. I disagree with the notion that control or rather domination is an illusion. Perhaps the wrong use of ones abilities in asserting control might full well be deemed as that which is indicative of an illusion. Simply because that which fails to sustain the longevity of control or domination does not possess the capacity to control or dominate at all. Therefore in essence the only way control or domination is genuinely asserted over another is when the dynamics of consent have been engaged. Prior to that I would identify anything less than to be merely an imposter of sorts or rather that which is incapable of possessing the characteristics of consent that are required to sustain the potency that is indicative of control or domination over another. Consensual control or domination can be equally pleasurable if sustained by the ideology of a mutually agreed definition of consent one to another. IMO I find your posts thoughtful. I agree with you that dominance is not an illusion. We humans are just as subject to animal social dominance as any other creature and there is nothing illusory about that. I wonder though whether or not you mean knowing consent or implied consent? It is my observation that it is relatively easy to control many strangers with the right tone of voice, gestures and attitude. These posturings force a kind of implied consent onto anyone suggestible enough to go there. It is still true that they are controlling themselves for you, but they may not exactly "want to be". I am not claiming that this is advisable activity I'm simply saying that because dominance is real, consent (in the case of dominance) is a relative term. None of that is to say that actual adult mutual consent is not necessary for WIITWD.

cassandria -> RE: Control ? (6/27/2010 3:20:19 PM)
When I allow a man to step through my ears, wander up the ladders (think like the game, snakes and ladders, yanno?), slide down here and there, until they open the door to my inner home...and then they begin to rearrange the furniture within, opening doors and fixing that water damage in one room....and the fire that happened a while back in that other room...dominant men tend to take a seat and just make themselves right at home. Sometimes it shocks me, how easily they enter those ears of mine. I don't know if it begins with control or dominance. I do know that it begins with me, desiring him. Because he has strength, and I can feel it, I can sense it, I can smell it. It's devious, it's brilliant, it's the ability to take over, once he is allowed to take hold. Is overtaking a slave considered to be 'controlling'? I dunno. I only know I'm powerless to avoid it once it happens.

Zevar -> RE: Control ? (6/27/2010 4:00:48 PM)
quote: I find your posts thoughtful. I agree with you that dominance is not an illusion. We humans are just as subject to animal social dominance as any other creature and there is nothing illusory about that. I wonder though whether or not you mean knowing consent or implied consent? It is my observation that it is relatively easy to control many strangers with the right tone of voice, gestures and attitude. These posturings force a kind of implied consent onto anyone suggestible enough to go there. It is still true that they are controlling themselves for you, but they may not exactly "want to be". I am not claiming that this is advisable activity I'm simply saying that because dominance is real, consent (in the case of dominance) is a relative term. None of that is to say that actual adult mutual consent is not necessary for WIITWD. A mutually agreed definition of consent equates that those involved in the agreement of consent have a like minded understanding of the meaning of consent and agree to the terms required to solidify the agreement of consent. I know that might sound rather technical to some. However I have discovered over the years that without the required communication to arrive at a mutually agreed definition of consent there is room for a breeding ground of sorts to foster unnecessary conflict which can lead to a disruption of the continuity that is needed for the longevity of any mutual agreement to become formed or rather bonded, one to another. I agree that there is a necessity for consent else one can become vulnerable to an onslaught of unjustified outcomes that could have been prevented if the element of consent had been mutually agreed upon. Although do not hear me incorrectly. I understand the human element is never 100% failsafe. Nonetheless I aim for prevention in all of my personal interactions while knowing that there will be times when my aim is in need of further self examination thus sharpening. To live is to learn, I say. Thanks for your words they too are thoughtful in the sense that they give room for a pause that for myself is needed for further introspection. Now that I can appreciate, introspection that is. A close second to the potency that is evident in mutual consent, IMO.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125