RE: Not using names during initial conversations

RE: Not using names during initial conversations (Full Version)

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

Message

TallDarkAndWitty -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/25/2006 7:08:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jezzabelle I don't think it's that she doesn't like the person she's getting to know. I made that statement based on what she had written in her original post, that she found his calling her things other than her name was making it difficult for a connection to be made. If you had said that, or said that it was making it difficult for him to get to know her, I would not have said what I did. quote: While I don't think he should bend over backwards and change all that he is for her in order for a connection to be made, I don't think calling someone by their given name is all that outrageous of a request. And I don't thinking denying such a request is very outrageous. Vive la difference! "Ok, I will send you naked pictures and I will tell you of my dark fantasies of punishment and humiliation and I long to be collared and treated like a slave...but you won't call me by my name?!?! What kind of freak are you!??!?!" quote: She just wishes to feel a connection with him, that he is getting to know her as a person and not just another slave. But that is perhaps what he does not want. Someone will have to give in...I think having the Dominant give in might set a bad precedent...but perhaps that is just me. quote: Is his refusal to call her by her name just an indication of things to come? I have met many a slave who would consider themselves lucky for it to be so... smile There are some who really want to be owned....and not just wrap some top arond their submissive finger. quote: Is he going to completely disregard requests for certain limits just because he doesn't like her limits? That is the way it works for some folk. Some slaves pick the Master, and that is it. After that, all limits are off. I know some folk who are very very happy with this arrangement. Taggard

ladychatterley -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/25/2006 7:10:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TallDarkAndWitty This is something that kills me at times. I can only assume, not being one myself, that the submissives on this site are here because they wish to meet dominants...right? Do they expect those who are dominant to not want to get their own way, even when introductions are being made? It is like the dominant is supposed to go from "mild mannered" to "master of the domain" only when the time is right for the submissive... Guess what? The whole dominance thing doesn't really "turn off". If the guy doesn't want to use names, why would he give in to the request of some submissive he doesn't even know? So he can get to know her and then somehow magically earn the right to not use her name? Hogwash... This surprised me for several reasons. I'm sure you didn't mean it this way, but to me it read like mean/rude/self-centered=dominant. I would think the dominance thing would 'turn off,' just like the submission thing does. Unless you are independently wealthy you have different behaviors at work, at school, when a cop pulls you over for speeding. And many of us submissives are quite accomplished during the day; when I talk with a governor or a CEO, or the guy repairing my car, or an agent I am in a very, very different space than when I'm with someone that I'm learning to whom I'm learning to surrender that power. Maybe some subs are here to meet dominants, but I think a lot of us subs would like to meet just one. Meeting multiple dominants is quite easy, but meeting the one is hard. (And if I were poly, I'd be wanting to meet the right ones, not every single guy who didn't know how to play well with others so just called himself a dominant.) My goal is to meet someone I would actually want to be intimate, and who I would respect enough to want to have that person shaping me. When I go out with someone, I look at how they treat the waiter/ess because if they are a jerk there, this isn't really someone I want shaping me. So why on earth wouldn't I want them to treat me with that respect until they earn my trust enough to mold me? And why wouldn't I want to be with someone that respects my limits? Certainly, some of those will be stretched, and maybe even left by the wayside, but that is a journey and a process; it isn't unilateral or immediate.

TallDarkAndWitty -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/25/2006 7:21:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ladychatterley I would think the dominance thing would 'turn off,' just like the submission thing does. Unless you are independently wealthy you have different behaviors at work, at school, when a cop pulls you over for speeding. Agreed...but this situation is the "courting" of his slave. I would think it would be best if his actions in this area would be consistent from first introduction to their parting kiss (be it on their deathbeads or two weeks later). If he expects her to be submissive, he must be dominant. Not using her name might be a silly thing to hang one's dominance on, but I have seen sillier. If he what he says, and he can negotiate this conflict successfully, he will have discovered much more than if he were to do as she asked. They guy is either a blowhard, or he knows what he is doing. laughing I can't decide which. He certainly has her attention... quote: Certainly, some of those will be stretched, and maybe even left by the wayside, but that is a journey and a process; it isn't unilateral or immediate. And I don't see the denial of a small request as a sign that this dom is going to ignore discussed limits. I see it as a clear indication that he is running things, and that she can walk if she doesn't like it. If she stays, he has "hand"...and that is what a lot of this is about. Taggard

feastie -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/25/2006 7:41:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: heartfeltsub His response was this: "i have found that before I get too personal i want to see if the person (in this case you) are serious about the lifestyle... now what may seem cold, is really a way to keep everything anonymous until it seems like you are really what you say you are" and he then said that i do seem serious about this lifestyle, which i am, but he will not use my name. You haven't mentioned it, but did you ask him to please use your screen name or did you offer your given name? I always ask to be referred to by my screen name. If the man refuses to use that, and claims that "sub" or "slave" is less personal, then he's simply being a jerk. A screen name is just as impersonal as sub or slave. It's just less generic. Although, upon reflection, he probably doesn't possess the ability to recognize the subtle difference.

MstrFury -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/25/2006 8:08:01 PM)
I'm not going to straddle the fence here...but I have to just interject this....I consider myself a Dominant person....I feel as if I control most aspects of what I do in life....( most not all)....there's a lot of... but are you this way at work..when in certain settings..etc....well for some of us...(like me)...yes......I live this lifestyle as they say 24/7... it carries over into everything I do...I don't turn it on and off like a lightswitch....it's the basics of my makeup...it's me....I do show respect to others...I try to always get into someones head so to speak....but in the plain of a Ds activity...knowing if I'm looking ...and... have a prospect....I would never be able to step outside the thought of what we're coming together for...I stare into a soul...and if you blink before I do....you know who's in control of the situation......it isn't an equal propersition...it's a Dominant/submissive action......to even play the word games like it's just two people meeting is just BS...it's not.....I may not agree with how someone else treats or reacts to another...I just know what works for me.....I'm going to always be me...and in as much...I seek that control....there is never a perfect match...two people never see everything exactly the same....we come together through time...communication...trust...oh yes..did I mention communication............I think sometime we need to get over ourselves and be who and what we (I hate labels) call ourselves.....Dominants and Submissives..... now before the bullets fly...I'll pull my cloak around me...and slip back into the shadows to lurk....

Evanesce -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/25/2006 8:20:21 PM)
quote: Just to be different, I am going to ask what is so wrong with what the guy is doing? What's wrong with it is that the OP has repeatedly asked him to use her name and he refuses. Otherwise, it would be a non-issue.

TemptingNviceSub -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/25/2006 8:22:28 PM)
To the Op..basically it comes down to what you want.You are not his sub/slave yet, so what do you want? what do you seek in a relationship?It appears to me he is going to do what he is going to do, is this issue important to you?do you run the risk that you will possibly never be more than sub/slave to him?that his very nature is cold and impersonal?that maybe any jane sub will do as long as her orientation is submissive?..This is the point in where... your choice only ...comes into play.....be well..Tempting

TallDarkAndWitty -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/25/2006 8:25:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Evanesce What's wrong with it is that the OP has repeatedly asked him to use her name and he refuses. And just why is that wrong? He isn't forcing her to continue conversations, is he? He is simply not doing something she asks. Why is that, in and of itself, wrong? If she had wanted to be called "Queen and Godess", would it have been "wrong" of him to deny that request? Not by the rules that most of us play by. Yet he plays by rules that have him refer to her only as "slave" or "sub"...why is it wrong for him to refuse to play by anyone's rules but his own? Taggard

Evanesce -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/25/2006 8:40:35 PM)
You left out the part of my post that kept the quoted part in context - the part that said if it weren't for the fact that he refused to use her name as she requested, it would be a non-issue. quote: And just why is that wrong? He isn't forcing her to continue conversations, is he? He is simply not doing something she asks. Why is that, in and of itself, wrong? Because at this stage of the "courtship," it makes the OP uncomfortable and she's asked him to stop. Until she agrees to submit to him, she does have that right. I wonder what he'd think of her if she started addressing him as "guy." quote: If she had wanted to be called "Queen and Godess", would it have been "wrong" of him to deny that request? Not by the rules that most of us play by. Yet he plays by rules that have him refer to her only as "slave" or "sub"...why is it wrong for him to refuse to play by anyone's rules but his own? Because the two of them are not on the same playing field. Not to mention that she's having difficulty remaining interested in the guy because of it, and he can't really play anything by his rules if he's got no one to play with.

BitaTruble -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/25/2006 8:46:41 PM)
Did you ever think to tell him something like. "Very well, I give you permission to call me slave," just to see his reaction to it? I love doing that.. but I can be a bitatruble sometimes. ::chuckles:: OK, enough of the tic. You just need to decide if it's a deal breaker. He wants to do things on his terms and you want to do them on yours. If you're not feeling a connection with him whether he uses your name or not, that, to me, is much more telling than anything else. Small market or not, settling is rarely a good option. Celeste

TallDarkAndWitty -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/25/2006 8:54:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Evanesce Because at this stage of the "courtship," it makes the OP uncomfortable and she's asked him to stop. Why is this wrong? Why is it wrong to make her uncomfortable? Why is it wrong to deny her a request? It may not feel good...but what makes that wrong? quote: Until she agrees to submit to him, she does have that right. She will always have the right to ask him to stop calling her something...she will never have the right to make him stop. If she doesn't like it, she needn't talk to him. Why is it wrong? quote: I wonder what he'd think of her if she started addressing him as "guy." I think he would stop talking to her. Why doesn't she do the same? Perhaps it is because there is more to this than just who is being called what? quote: Because the two of them are not on the same playing field. Right! They are on his playing field...and that makes her quite uncomfortable...why is that wrong? quote: Not to mention that she's having difficulty remaining interested in the guy because of it, and he can't really play anything by his rules if he's got no one to play with. Not having her to play with does not mean not having anyone to play with. And it is often better to be alone than to be with someone with whom we are not compatible. Taggard

Clothespingirl -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/25/2006 9:00:09 PM)
I was just thinking of this thread and laughing... The guy I'm talking to has started calling me "Spanky". So you see, it could always be worse! [:D]

johnxinxscruz -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/25/2006 9:35:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: heartfeltsub Also not only does he also call me slave, he always calls himself Master in sort of a third person context. Oh, good lord, that right there would be enough for me get rid of someone. (no, really, often I'm a smart ass and make absurd statements in reply to others, just to show how absurd THEIR statement was, but right here I'm being 100% serious) People who _always_ refer to themselves in the third person, _ESPECIALLY_ in a superior tone, just annoy the crap out of me. I can sort of see submissives doing it as a form of self deprecation, but otherwise ... ugh. John thinks you should dump his ass. :-) As they say in the military, rank is something you wear, respect is something you earn. If he wants you to respect him as your Dominant or Master, he had better inspire that in you some how. Once he has it, that's a completely different ball game ... but he's not there yet. I'm curious what you think of as your niche market. Is it that you're in VA, or that you're looking for a Christian Dom?

heartfeltsub -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 2:41:05 AM)
lol Celeste, i can see that one going over well (chuckling)

heartfeltsub -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 2:42:40 AM)
lol Clothespingirl, very true. it could be spanky.

heartfeltsub -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 2:56:28 AM)
It seems like you are more into this discussion than i am (grinning). Please understand i was NOT saying that he had no right to call me this. i was NOT saying that he was wrong to do this, that was not my question at all. And you are correct, it may be a power thing with him, to establish his dominance, i can honestly say i was not looking at it in that way. What i would like to say here and what i have and will say again to him is that this behavior is counter productive to what he said that he wishes to do which is pursue discussions and it is not because of a power play on my part. It is because i am not feeling any sort of connection that makes continued discussions and the natural growth of a D/s relationship possible. The initial question was on it being common, because i have been to many a munch, dungeon etc, and the Dominants that i meet there, none of them have done this. They have all been polite, called me by my scene name in conversation and something more affectionate like girl is we play together. Again please understand i am not saying he is wrong to be doing this, i know that is the direction that most of the posts have been going. (grinning, with some notable exceptions). i was merely looking for some advice and it may be that this person's personality is cold, distant and humorless like he is coming across, and i will need to look elsewhere. Thank you again for all your comments. heartfelt

Areflectionofyou -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 3:32:29 AM)
I was called, girl, and slave right off the bat, and during initial conversations as well...guess what , he is the dominant and its his choice. He knew my name and chose the other. I personally am glad he chose to call me what he felt he wanted. He must have felt comfortable with my submission to call me slave. just my two cents.

heartfeltsub -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 4:40:47 AM)
Thank you for your reply.

Reasonable -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 5:03:38 AM)
He may have an objectification fetish. Refusing to awknowledge any status, by refusing the use of names is a big part of that. (And let's get one thing straight people. If you have known the vast numbers of truly useless people I have come across in this realm,or seen the flocks of wounded birds who will gang up and turn predatrory in a heartbeat,you will understand WHY so many doms have no respect for them. It's a huge waste of time to get involved with the mentally ill. So it's not so much about respect. It's about proving you are even SANE enough to bother with.)

heartfeltsub -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 5:13:28 AM)
He might, though that was not the answer that i got when i asked him why he wasn't using my name, but it is also true that initially most people try to hide those things about themselves that are the "most extreme" to try not to run off everyone from the get go.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125