quote:

ORIGINAL: NuevaVida

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

What I have read over and over again on THIS thread is that there are women who see Daddy Doms as emotionally supportive, approachable, there for them when they need someone to lean on, interested in their lives. To me this just sounds like women who want healthy intimate caring relationships.

This would be me, and I'm well over 40. 

He does not fix anything for me. He has my back when I need someone to have my back, and he helps me sort my thoughts out and encourages me to be happy.  But that's just him being a loving, supportive leader. 

He is also my Master and Owner.  He most certainly can put his foot down and say "This is what will happen" when he feels he needs to.  We had a very loving conversation last night in which he told me he'd probably be that way more often, but my heart is still rather delicate (history stuff) and he wants to be careful.

I really don't see what Aynne does, about girls talking about "My Daddy fixing everything."  To be honest, I see that about more Masters than I do about Daddy's.  "I was lost until Master found me."  "My Master changed my life" and so on. Just look at some of my posts in my previous CM name and you'll see I have said the same thing. I think the notion of having one's life "fixed" runs across the board - to masters, daddy's, dominants, even egalitarian partnerships.  Maybe the "white knight syndrome" is being confused with a particular kind of dominant.  But I'm just speculating.


So, no harm no foul, but I do think many of the assessments made in this thread against the Daddy-Owner dynamic are incorrect and based on something else.

quote:

ORIGINAL: angelikaJ

Porcelaine and juliaoceania:
I have really appreciated your developing/continuing dialogue within this thread.

quote:

porcelaine and juliaoceania:
I have really appreciated your developing/continuing dialogue within this thread.

quote:

ORIGINAL: angelikaJ

Responding to both porcelaine and juliaoceania:

Thanks!

btw: I feel gratitude especially for the example of your willingness to listen to and hear each other.

Perhaps it seems silly to remark upon something that seems so basic, but it is what makes being an observer and participant on these forums meaningful and pleasurable for me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

quote:

ORIGINAL: angelikaJ

Responding to both porcelaine and juliaoceania:

Thanks!

btw: I feel gratitude especially for the example of your willingness to listen to and hear each other.

Perhaps it seems silly to remark upon something that seems so basic, but it is what makes being an observer and participant on these forums meaningful and pleasurable for me.

I love procelaine's posts, and she knows it

This sort of thing used to happen much more often, back when I first started posting here I learned a great deal from some of my fellow subs who have a wonderful presence on this board. People such as NuevaVida, bitatrouble, katylied, sexyred, and many others... we have had these sorts of conversations here many times...

Both NuevaVida and bitatrouble especially broadened my understanding of how they lived in their dynamics.... and Knight of Mists's Kyra also expanded my knowledge about poly homes, etc.... I have learned a great deal and love knowing how other people experience power exchange (or whatever you wanna call it) relationships

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

I love procelaine's posts, and she knows it

quote:

We needn't like nor validate another person's choices. But a little tolerance goes a very long way.

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

quote:

We needn't like nor validate another person's choices. But a little tolerance goes a very long way.

Amen!

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

I know you stated these categories overlap, but in my mind engaging in a dynamic that seeks to put someone at an age that they are well past is age play. This includes coloring, etc. Now if the submissive behaves in a "childish" way without doll props, coloring books, etc, like adopting a childish demeanor, well that is not so much age play in my mind... vanilla people even do this.

I see no difference between having someone play like they are five years old and having them wear a diaper and baby clothing...

quote:

And to me, and this is just my idea, one could in theory have an "incestuous" fantasy play with a dominant and not be age playing at all. Age play is not synonymous with "incest" play. Some people enjoy being regressed and it has nothing to do with a fantasy of being with their father/mother. I think what you speak of, the fantasy of being with a parental figure, is rare from everything I have read from littles/daddy's girls/age players

quote:

If both are emulating childish behavior are you suggesting that the props or designated age make it age play? I ask because the other party could be mimicking behavior that would be indicative of that range but that isn't age play? I'd posit that many adults have moment of folly but that isn't a constant in their relationship.

quote:

If you're fantasizing about having sexual relations with "Daddy" and that is not in an adult capacity (response and behavior) it is age play. If no regression takes place (in the play) it is incest play instead. I still consider regressors that are acting that out with another individual age play. Sexualization of the role is not a necessity. But I'm well aware that many shy away from the label due to the incestuous undertones.

quote:

There used to be an excellent website on this subject matter years ago but she took it offline. I read through her materials and the negotiation form she provided for those interested in engaging. Strangely enough I saw a lot of the things I did with my first partner mentioned that were never intentionally designed. We merely grew into the role organically and allowed it to develop on its own. Irregardless of the lack of sex involved (in that capacity) I still consider it age play. And there were no props involved. I realize other opinions exist on the subject.

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

My motivation for having a daddy dom is having a less strict and formal, unritualized dynamic. It isn't to age play. I enjoy the paternal authority dynamic... because daddy is in charge, but daddy wants what is best for his girl because he loves her. This is what a daddy does in my world.

quote:

I mentioned the props because daddydeviant stated that these were "littles" as opposed to "age play" , which he reserved as being about incest play. I think age play is not just props, but regression to an earlier age, and this being an important aspect of the age play dynamic.

quote:

I DO see a difference between occasionally taking on a childish demeanor and being an age player.

quote:

Whereas for me if there's a parent involved that would require its complement. I don't see age play in terms of number, but the interaction of someone that is operating from two ends of the spectrum. Yes, it involves authority but a specific sort that is familial in nature most times. The word Daddy conjures specific ideas and emotions that are not akin to others like sister, brother, what have you. It is unique unto itself. I just don't think you can have the paternal without recognizing its root.

quote:

I look at reciprocity. If one adult is illustrating behavior that is father-like in nature and the other takes on a more child-like role in actions or mannerisms it fits.

quote:

If it's an occasional occurrence why would one need the permanence of the Daddy dominant? Why not a dominant that simply nurtures instead that didn't identify as "Daddy?"

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

I do not think of MY father when I call a dominant "daddy". I do not see him as a "father figure". It is hard to define for me, but I know what I am thinking and feeling when I say it. I am saying I give that person the type of authority a father would have. They could send me to bed at a certain time. It might be reminding me to stay on task to finish a project I am working on. I do see it as different from the other sort of relationship I had where i called him "sir", because that relationship was all about the dom. It was about his wants, his needs, serving him. I got lost in that relationship.

quote:

Wow, then I have at times been a mommy sub to a dom. I have taken care of a dom that when he was in a certain mindset he slightly regressed, filling a nurturing role while he needed that. It was not often, but it happened.

quote:

Most people will regress at points in their intimate relationships. I have regressed in all my relationships in my demeanor, as have my partners, whether vanilla or not. It is just something human beings do in my experience on planet earth. I suppose everyone is "age playing"

quote:

Because I want to confer authority with a label without calling a man "master" "lord" or "sir". It is a term of affection, devotion, and an acknowledgement of the power they have over me.... your mileage may vary

quote:

In my personal experiences some people bring (or touch) that part of me. It isn't a constant.