RE: Where's the love?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Where's the love?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Where's the love?

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 5 [6]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Where's the love? - 7/15/2010 8:49:10 PM

KatyLied

Posts: 13029
Joined: 2/24/2005
From: Pennsylvania
Status: offline

I shut down and reopened it, you may have tried it during that time. I am open for business. As it were. btw, don't knock the PA slag heap until you've tried it.

_____________________________

“If you want to live a happy life, tie it to a goal, not to people or things.”
- Albert Einstein

(in reply to marie2)

Profile

Post #: 101

RE: Where's the love? - 7/15/2010 10:24:59 PM

Plasticine

Posts: 260
Joined: 6/9/2010
Status: offline

GR

Thanks for all the discussion. Perhaps the most interesting thing to me has been whom amongst the vocal has chosen not to post.

(in reply to KatyLied)

Profile

Post #: 102

RE: Where's the love? - 7/16/2010 9:00:05 AM

CreativeDominant

Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: porcelaine

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

Aren't you making the same mistaken assumption that plasticene was, though? Why does the fact that someone wants to build the kink relationship first...make sure that the D/s and/or BDSM dynamic can exist without the love and then, if a romantic attachment develops, fine...equate to poor relationship skills?

CreativeDominant,

I chalk it up to differences in relating and how each individual's priorities in terms of partnerships line up. Kink has its place but it is meaningless if the individual is incapable of executing leadership and mastering me. That is my model. On the other hand I have specific tastes that I'm unwilling to compromise. I like what I like and make no apologies for this. I refer to my ideal as a sadistic miscreant with class. It encompasses the bulk of what I'm seeking aside from the obvious leadership experience. I indicate this to allow the other person to make an informed observation of his qualifications in that regard. Whether he makes an honest assessment or believes I'll bend on these fundamental truths is another subject altogether. But for what it's worth I don't.

I believe that what you've said above is all contained in MY posts. I like what I like also...and to get to that being put out, the conversations have to go in that direction. Which is what I've stated...and you SEEM to be stating above. As for kink being meaningless without the ability to master you...oftentimes, the ability to master one person vs. another or be mastered by one person or another is based on whether or not their kinks line up, despite what some dominants and some submissives state about how if everything else falls into line, the kinks will too. Call me a cynic but I just don't believe that anymore. And anyone that knows me will tell you that I am an optimist. But...everything, whether it has to do with D/s or daily life or sexuality or outside interests or sexuality or distance, has to line up on a more compatible level than not, for leadership and following to be easier. Does everything lining up mean it will? No...and I am not saying that, nor has anyone else. What I am saying is that if everything BUT the kink and the D/s and the sexuality line up OR if nothing lines up BUT the kink and the D/s and the sexuality, for many of us, the leadership and the following won't line up either because there are just too many differences.

quote:

quote:

I find that there are an awful lot of submissives that want to talk about everything BUT where D/s and BDSM and the sexuality that goes with them fit into their life...they want to find out if we are compatible outside that arena.

I think that holds true on the other end as well. I've met more than a few that thought they'd woo me through their charm or emotions rather than capability and our compatibility for the other. I won't ignore the latter two because he tickles my heartstrings. However, I choose men that lead not dominants that want to lead. Big difference. I've gotta like the whole package.

I had an interesting discussion about the very thing you stated in this part of your post with a submissive that I consider very intelligent. I think all dominants want to lead. I also think that most...though certainly not all... do lead. But you have to remember that in order to lead, someone has to want to follow. I can lead someone as long as they want to follow...but when D/s dynamics break up from the submissive side there can be all kinds of reasons. But the biggest reason, which may be a condensation and the expression of all the other reasons, may be that the submissive chooses to no longer follow. Does that mean that the dominant has suddenly lost his capability to lead? Not necessarily, though it might. It means that the submissive has no longer chosen to follow and in THOSE cases, wanting to continue leading...trying to continue leading...has little to no effect.

quote:

quote:

If a submissive and I can converse for 3 hours at a time each time we speak or 30 minutes every night and never get bored in our conversations BUT we never go near kink or D/s or sexuality...

I'd wonder why you didn't cut to the chase in all truth. I'm assessing our suitability for further exploration as opposed to getting acquainted with him. I didn't always operate in this fashion but it saves time and alleviates situations that have the possibility of dragging out unnecessarily.

Great! Then you are the type of submissive, in terms of conversation and exploration, that a dominant like myself would enjoy speaking with in those first conversations. Many are not that way and when the dominant tries to speak of these things, he often gets brought to the boards in this guise: "all that some guys want to talk about is how I like to get off, how I can be made to be brought to my knees...he's not interested in the "real me".

quote:

quote:

I am trying to address their primary interests AND maintain an interest in those areas because I am interested in the person in one way or another and they are not addressing mine except as fits their schedule, their convenience and their mood.

If I allowed every man that wanted to monopolize my time while he waffles over what he wants or refuses to state his case to do so I'd never get anywhere. There's a big difference between people that entertain ideas and those that bring them into fruition. Talk is cheap. Action isn't.

Again...GREAT! you sound like the type of submissive I describe as being amenable to the entire package of what should be discussed. Many are not: many feel that what you yourself describe as a "waste of time" is what is MOST necessary in their first conversations with someone and that is what this has been about...those who feel that love MUST come into the dynamic and/or those who feel that the D/s and sexuality and BDSM come way down on the list of everything else that matters in the relationship. Oddly enough, for many of these same people, communication seems to come down towards the bottom of the list also.

(in reply to porcelaine)

Profile

Post #: 103

RE: Where's the love? - 7/16/2010 9:44:09 AM

porcelaine

Posts: 5020
Joined: 7/24/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

As for kink being meaningless without the ability to master you...oftentimes, the ability to master one person vs. another or be mastered by one person or another is based on whether or not their kinks line up, despite what some dominants and some submissives state about how if everything else falls into line, the kinks will too.

CreativeDominant,

I'm sorry, but that's not how things work in Casa Porcelaine. You see, I'm not submitting to a kinky guy that just happens to lead. The whole premise of our relationship is dependent upon a foundation he constructs. If he lacks the ability to be the architect where does the mastery come in? I'm left with kinky roleplay and that's not enough for me. Being freaky doesn't mean you're capable of building a framework. It means you're sexually adventurous. I'm interested in the bones, not the bells. I seek common bonds in terms of what we enjoy physically, but I won't trade them for someone that's not adept leadership wise.

quote:

What I am saying is that if everything BUT the kink and the D/s and the sexuality line up OR if nothing lines up BUT the kink and the D/s and the sexuality, for many of us, the leadership and the following won't line up either because there are just too many differences.

I agree and that is why I look for my complement when making an assessment.

quote:

I had an interesting discussion about the very thing you stated in this part of your post with a submissive that I consider very intelligent. I think all dominants want to lead. I also think that most...though certainly not all... do lead. But you have to remember that in order to lead, someone has to want to follow. I can lead someone as long as they want to follow...

I mentioned yesterday that we have all our own individual interpretations as to what constitutes good leadership. A wise dominant that is entertaining a prospect would discern her perspective on the subject. I don't discount someone's ability to lead. I consider whether he's in possession of the capabilities and experiences that compel me to follow him.

quote:

Great! Then you are the type of submissive, in terms of conversation and exploration, that a dominant like myself would enjoy speaking with in those first conversations. Many are not that way and when the dominant tries to speak of these things, he often gets brought to the boards in this guise: "all that some guys want to talk about is how I like to get off, how I can be made to be brought to my knees...he's not interested in the "real me".

That's because she's trying to get to know him and that isn't my mission. I'm making a determination if he's worthy of becoming a prospect that I'll expend energy getting acquainted with. The perspective is vastly different. I have no investment during the assessment process. People that levy those complaints fail to recognize they're able to steer the discussion in a different direction or bring it to a close if they desire to do so. I wouldn't subject myself to something that irritated me without some practical gain on my end. He isn't a demi god. He's a man underneath all those little cliches and adornments. I don't view him as a dominant at all. That's probably why I don't have those discussions.

quote:

Again...GREAT! you sound like the type of submissive I describe as being amenable to the entire package of what should be discussed. Many are not: many feel that what you yourself describe as a "waste of time" is what is MOST necessary in their first conversations with someone and that is what this has been about...those who feel that love MUST come into the dynamic and/or those who feel that the D/s and sexuality and BDSM come way down on the list of everything else that matters in the relationship. Oddly enough, for many of these same people, communication seems to come down towards the bottom of the list also.

I believe that approach is grievous and invites a level of investment on the submissive end that's inappropriate, but that's my opinion. I assess and I do it with all my biases, preferences, and acuity regarding what I desire in a partner. If the individual presents them in a fashion I find appealing and there's a mutual desire for further discussion I'll do so. The outcome of that assessment is critical and it's imperative that it's performed with a clear mind. Not one wafting in the clouds. The conversations are theoretical in nature. We're communicating our respective positions and seeing how they line up with the other person. Nothing more or less.

Once again I return to my original question that I posed to you in my earlier correspondence. I don't care what he's generating in his cranium. I'm making an assessment and if he refuses to participate in that process the whole possibility is null and void. I can't fathom how you could examine her suitability without the pertinent details you require. I simply wouldn't entertain it. And I'm aware of the risk one takes in that stance and the individual could have valid reasons for hesitating. But pulling teeth or mental wrangling with someone I haven't made an investment in being with is a futile in my opinion. I'd never contort myself in that manner for someone that hadn't proven their worth in my eyes.

Thank you for the compliments.