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

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



Message

heartfeltsub -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 9:22:05 AM)

Yes, i apologize, i realized who you were responding to after i posted the previous comment.



Reasonable -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 9:30:49 AM)

That's fine,don't feel bad.  I screw up on here all the time.[8|]

I'm going to exit this thread before the "snarling pussy pack" arrives in full force to do battle.

I DO hope that you speak with this man, and try to ferret out his styles-and why he behaves in ways that he does. After all, if this is the only point of contention-maybe understanding him will help you get past it?



heartfeltsub -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 9:30:54 AM)

No, you are correct you never did specify me by name, however that being said, when someone says "I wish that alleged "submissives" could wrap thier minds around the fact that some dominants aren't going to behave like alan alda.

If a guy has a different style and enjoys it-and you don't.

Just give it a miss and move on. Rather than try and project how you feel he SHOULD behave. I'm constantly amazed at the contradictory fantasy constructs of women who say they want to be controlled by a strong man-then expect instant compromise at thier every whim.

They don't want a dominant-they want a Harlequin romance novel.

Gimme a break.[:D] ,"
in response to a particular submissive's question, it is "reasonable" to assume that that submissive's behavior is being addressed by the comment. i merely read your statement as most reasonable people would.



heartfeltsub -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 9:32:44 AM)

Thank you again for your advice, i will try to get to the bottom of this with the Dom in question, because there may be true compatiblity there, which is what we are all looking for, well what most of use are looking for (grinning).

Thank you again.

heartfelt



Reasonable -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 9:34:24 AM)

(In refference to post BEFORE Last)You are making assumptions.

Remeber the old catch phrase about that "assuming makes an

*ass*
of
*u*
and
*me*"

and that is NEVER reasonable. (something I have to remind myself of constantly-jeez) Be well.



TNstepsout -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 9:38:56 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Reasonable

I was merely giving you an alternate viewpoint as to how this fellow may tick.


Yes, I suppose there are many ways he could 'tick'. I for one wouldn't care what his rationale was if he wouldn't or couldn't honor a polite reasonable request.

It's really not that complicated. Rude is rude. The rest is just mental gymnastics.



Reasonable -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 9:42:12 AM)

I admit that I would wonder as well TN.

But I enjoy the mental gymnastics-to an extent. I guess that I simply prefer kaliedoscopic vision to tunnel vision,it's more fun-have a great day!



ElektraUkM -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 10:10:17 AM)

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.


Well, as others have said, he's entitled to behave exactly as he wishes, and to have the opinions and pov that he has.

The fact is that, what he's doing is counter-productive to what his aim supposedly is. You've told him you're having trouble relating to him because of this, and he's come back with this response: he wants to know if you are what you say you are before you get too personal. Hm. What's wrong with getting to know you as a person at the same time as getting to know whether you're going to make a good sub? How, indeed, can he find out anything much about you as a person if he insists on depersonalising you in this way? I don't know whether you're considering him as a future mate (rather than occasional play-partner?) but if you are it's even more important to get to know the person first..? Or am I reading something wrong?

My suspicion is that he's probably getting off on calling you whatever it is he's calling you... and that is possibly all he wants. As someone else said... online player. Could be. Whatever, he's rubbing you the wrong way. And you know, if that's happening I usually think... there's more to this than just what seems to be on the surface. I would bet that it's a gut reaction of yours to something, otherwise well, as someone else said... you would be viewing it as just a quirk of his.

You have come back a few times and said that you're reticent to 'let him go' because you match up on a few things that you feel are important. And I think this is significant. You seem to be willing almost to accept behaviour you're not happy with for the sake of him fitting a few other categories. Personally, when I've done that in the past I've ended up with egg on my face. What I think... the fact he likes the same kink you do, and has the same spiritual belief, is basically more or less 'personal preference' (if you see what I mean), while the fact he acts like a jackass IS somewhat more significant. That's his personality there.

JMHO.



TNstepsout -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 10:24:34 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Reasonable

I admit that I would wonder as well TN.

But I enjoy the mental gymnastics-to an extent. I guess that I simply prefer kaliedoscopic vision to tunnel vision,it's more fun-have a great day!


Kaliedoscopic vision huh? Sounds more like "rose colored glasses" to me.



heartfeltsub -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 10:29:40 AM)

Thank you for your words of advice,  i see what you are saying and i believe that you are correct. Thank you.



heartfeltsub -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 10:31:24 AM)

i thought kaliedoscopes were those tube like apparatuses that you rotated at the end to make different colors appear. A tube-like apparatus sounds remarkably like a tunnel to me? (grinning)



valeca -> RE: Not using names during initial conversations (4/26/2006 11:04:15 AM)

A third option for his behavior:

You've mentioned the 'connection' thing more than once, and how this behavior is inhibiting you in making one with him, and, how you're feeling he's not trying to bridge the gap to get to know you as a person rather than just as a slave.  Perhaps, he's doing this deliberately because he doesn't want either of those things.  It's common enough for a Dominant to merely want a warm body to use and service drone to do menial tasks with no mental connection to speak of.  He may be seeking nothing more than the essence of 'property' in a slave and is purposely keeping you at a distance to achieve this.

Whatever it is, there definitely appears to be a need for much more discussion between the two of you to discover the roots--at least enough for a more indepth answer than was provided to you.  From the answer he gave, he appears inconsistant...the words don't match his actions...and that in itself is enough to raise questions (obviously) in your mind, as it would in mine.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125