RE: Etiquette...

RE: Etiquette... (Full Version)

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

Message

OsideGirl -> RE: Etiquette... (7/8/2010 7:52:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Honestly? This guy who is deployed, in my opinion, is really insecure. So much so that he needed someone to "watch" his property while he is gone. And training? What exactly did he tell you that "training" would consist of? As others have already indicated, you and he may (and apparently do) have different views on what is or is not appropriate. LL put it really well. And what is this training? I find the idea of someone training someone else's slave to be ridiculous. Unless you're doing something like culinary training or the like.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Etiquette... (7/8/2010 8:09:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KatyLied I remain curious about the "training". I understand how you can train someone in general terms, with general topics. But how can one person specifically train another person's submissive? Does the owner leave detailed instructions regarding the training? Likes/dislikes/methods are going to be different, there are no universal codes of training. The "training" that I do is specific skill training -- formal service (tea service, table service, butler/chatelaine, kitchen service and meal preparation--aka servant's cooking school, etc.) in the Victorian and/or Steampunk styles; needle/temporary piercing training for tops and bottoms (including safety issues), and "experiential training".... opportunities to serve with an experienced head of a Victoriandustrial/Steampunk household. I don't train to replace the primary dominant's specific instruction about what xhe is looking for, but there are skill-sets that are part of the kind of lifestyle that I participate in (specifically the Victoriandustrial and Steampunk lifestyle, nothing to do with bdsm specifically) that require training. I also train in certain other areas that transcend service lifestyles, but which I occasionaly get individuals who were sent by their dominant partner to learn such, including French patiessierie and charcuterie (sausages, terrines, and pates). When a servant is in training, many times they -live- in our household... as such, there are certain expectations that -we- have about the necessity for their participation in said household. I would not take in a servant for training who would not be allowed to, for example, serve at table with our other servants. When they're not in service, they're still servants, and treating them as guests, where our servants would have to attend to them when they weren't actively in training is not acceptable to us. That's why, for me, before I take someone on to train, I insist on setting the parameters that will define my authority over that servant while xhe is in my household -- and if the primary dominant partner is unwilling to yield sufficient authority for me to integrate their servant into our household, I refuse the commission. Hope this helps explain things a bit better. Calla

MasterGreg43 -> RE: Etiquette... (7/8/2010 8:55:29 AM)
I would have to agree also, since is appears that the ground rules of what u are to do was not fully cleared

porcelaine -> RE: Etiquette... (7/8/2010 9:06:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cj97 I am in a slightly confusing situation. I am going to be training a submissive for a friend of mine while he is deployed. He has put out that prior to anyone contacting her they contact him and/or me. The other day I received a request from someone wanting to contact her and I gave him permission to speak with her and i let her know that I had spoken with this individual. When her Dom found out he basically ripped me up one side and down the other for making that decision. I guess what i am wondering is if I was incorrect in assuming that I was able to act on the authority that was delegated to me? I know if the roles were reversed I would not have been offended. Maybe I am the one that is off base in their thinking. cj97, The issue of being contacted by other men could readily be resolved by hiding her profile. What I find most interesting is why the individual isn't able to conduct herself in this realm and needs a virtual intermediary. I'm uncertain if your "training" will extend beyond this and entails in person contact. The whole setup sounds a little sketchy in my opinion. She's an adult. I'm fairly certain she's capable of telling a gentleman to get lost that offers unwanted attention. But for the life of me I have never understood how those faculties wither when one arrives on the Internet. You're feeding the situation by being involved and validating the supposed helplessness. Vetting the messages allows you to keep tabs on her in his absence. And unless you're okay with being his eyes and ears, I'd respectfully remove myself from the debacle immediately. ~porcelaine

sexyred1 -> RE: Etiquette... (7/8/2010 9:11:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KatyLied I remain curious about the "training". I understand how you can train someone in general terms, with general topics. But how can one person specifically train another person's submissive? Does the owner leave detailed instructions regarding the training? Likes/dislikes/methods are going to be different, there are no universal codes of training. Same here. I also don't get why someone would want another to train someone? Isn't this between two people? I never understand that concept; do it your damn self!

LadyHibiscus -> RE: Etiquette... (7/8/2010 9:14:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sexyred1 quote: ORIGINAL: KatyLied I remain curious about the "training". I understand how you can train someone in general terms, with general topics. But how can one person specifically train another person's submissive? Does the owner leave detailed instructions regarding the training? Likes/dislikes/methods are going to be different, there are no universal codes of training. Same here. I also don't get why someone would want another to train someone? Isn't this between two people? I never understand that concept; do it your damn self! And if you can't do it your own damn self, don't whine about the job other folks do!

DarlingSavage -> RE: Etiquette... (7/8/2010 9:33:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jeffff This is why I am such a good protector! Really? I need protection! "They" are out to get me! I know it! I've seen the signs! And I've "tested" people and they "failed". If you believe this, I have some interesting real estate for sale that I'd like to show you.

NorthernGent -> RE: Etiquette... (7/10/2010 1:04:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cj97 He has put out that prior to anyone contacting her they contact him and/or me. When her Dom found out he basically ripped me up one side and down the other for making that decision. The missing gap is exactly what scope you were granted. There is a difference between 'contact' and granting you the permission to decide who speaks to her. Were specific instructions in place? If not.....then I'd say both of you are at fault....he should have been clear...and where you were unclear...you should have asked.

juliaoceania -> RE: Etiquette... (7/10/2010 1:10:11 PM)
I would wonder why the submissive needs training from someone other than her dom. I would wonder why her dom needed to entrust her to someone else. I would again wonder why people have to go through anyone in order to establish contact... these are all things I wonder about this situation.... In my opinion, it is proper etiquette for people to work out their own relationships and leave third parties out of it... just me. etc

NorthernGent -> RE: Etiquette... (7/10/2010 1:15:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I would wonder why the submissive needs training from someone other than her dom. I would wonder why her dom needed to entrust her to someone else. I would again wonder why people have to go through anyone in order to establish contact... these are all things I wonder about this situation.... In my opinion, it is proper etiquette for people to work out their own relationships and leave third parties out of it... just me. etc He's 'deployed'.....presumably that means out of the country. So he's left with a choice......no training or training at the other hand of another man.......and has chosen training....nothing strange about that. Don't see a problem apart from the instructions seem to leave a lot to be desired. Anyway....surely it's only a teething problem that can be sorted out with a simple phone call.

juliaoceania -> RE: Etiquette... (7/10/2010 1:24:59 PM)
quote: He's 'deployed'.....presumably that means out of the country. So he's left with a choice......no training or training at the other hand of another man.......and has chosen training....nothing strange about that. When one takes the entirety of the opening post into consideration, and breaks it down, yes it is VERY strange. If it were not so strange the guy would not be asking what etiquette he should be following, he could go to Emily Post or Martha Stewart for the answer.... I would venture to guess most dominants in the service do not enlist someone to babysit their submissive, train them, and then get bent out of shape when the babysitter lets her have contact with other kids on the playground... just my opinion

NorthernGent -> RE: Etiquette... (7/10/2010 1:48:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: He's 'deployed'.....presumably that means out of the country. So he's left with a choice......no training or training at the other hand of another man.......and has chosen training....nothing strange about that. When one takes the entirety of the opening post into consideration, and breaks it down, yes it is VERY strange. If it were not so strange the guy would not be asking what etiquette he should be following, he could go to Emily Post or Martha Stewart for the answer.... I would venture to guess most dominants in the service do not enlist someone to babysit their submissive, train them, and then get bent out of shape when the babysitter lets her have contact with other kids on the playground... just my opinion Aye.....well maybe so Julia.....but in terms of what the OP has given us...it ain't the end of the world....and no need to go into a decline over it....just ring the bloke: "all right mate.....yeah it's a bit fucked at the moment....so now what?".....problem solved. Most dominants probably don't employ a 'babysitter'....but then most dominants aren't out of the country. Perhaps he wants someone to keep an eye on her....a bit like when you go abroad on holiday you give your keys to the next door neighbour so he/she can go in and make sure everything's fine. I don't see a problem with it.....although I can't imagine myself in that situation. Fair enough as far as I can see. But do have the instructions right and it saves a spot of consternation further down the line.

LadyPact -> RE: Etiquette... (7/10/2010 1:51:43 PM)
I think it's already been mentioned in the thread, it may also have something to do with what kind of training is involved and what the job was supposed to entail. For example, if the Dominant who is deployed is a leather person, this really isn't that unusual. What may have happened here was two different mindsets. The OP thinking it was cool to let the sub have contact with anybody who messaged him first, and the deployed Dom having restrictions, thinking it was cool as long as it was contact with other subs. It also gives the sub who is still at home an automatic escort to go to things like demos and such while the owner is away. The OP should be the one scouting out other classes and such, helping with protocols, and things of that nature. There's probably been not enough communication between any of these folks because it doesn't sound like the expectations were laid out very well. If there was an issue over an email, imagine the potential problems over a play party.

juliaoceania -> RE: Etiquette... (7/10/2010 2:13:28 PM)
I do not think it is "wrong" for someone to enlist the aid of someone else when they are out of the country to look in on their mate... I can imagine a lot of soldiers would ask a friend to keep an eye out for their wife, etc, that is not unusual to me.... I also wonder how many affairs start that way in the vanilla world, but that is another subject... I guess I think it is strange to enlist someone's aid and then get mad at them for doing it wrong. If anything why not just quietly say to yourself "This person isn't doing things the way I envisioned, my bad" and then tell them you don't need their help anymore. It is just my opinion that you leave your ass hanging out there when you entrust other people like that, and involving third parties in your relationship is often a recipe for a big fucking drama....

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125