quote:

ORIGINAL: Chulain

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sundowner
I run my company effectively by asking others for their ideas and views and by recognising and accepting the frequent occasions when their input is better than mine. But there's never been the slightest doubt about who's in charge.

Of course you don't run an interpersonal relationship, D/s or vanilla, the way you run a company.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chulain
Whether you believe in it or not, the law does, and as far as the law is concerned, you can withdraw your consent at any time. Whether you choose to do that is up to you, obviously. But you can't disbelieve consent away. You could try to implement changes in the law, if you're so inclined.

quote:

The point is, as far as the law is concerned, the only thing holding you to him is your desire to remain so. Without the force of law to back up any claims or remedies he may seek, it will always be nothing more than your desire which holds you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCdc
Like I said, consent and non consent is pointless within the context of BDSM and relationships in general quite frankly. Thank you for exampling.

quote:

Just out of interest, in your opinion, where would that place a married Ds couple?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact


This does lead Me to wonder if, due to the circumstances of numbers, that some are more lenient in their expectations of obedience for different periods.  Something for Me to mull over.

I've missed several pages of the thread so I don't know if I'm repeating what's already been said. But it seems that the above is the problem in your understanding. You are assuming that all d/s relationships are based entirely on obedience.

And that's not true, at least not for all M/f relationships. I know those who are based on obedience, those based on service, and those based on emotional transparency. Mine is the last. I'm not supposed to obey him regardless if it causes me to distance myself from him. I follow because he's a superior leader. But he doesn't want me to follow if it's going to negatively impact me loving him.

quote:

He was this way when he managed over a hundred people, he wanted people to first come talk to them. He counted it a failure if they did what they were told and quietly looked for another job. Training someone is costly in time and money and he wanted employees who were happy to work for him. The same is true in our personal relationship, love is paramount, he wants me to want to be with him, to be happy to be there.

But as I know I've said elsewhere, he's not a sadist so he doesn't get off seeing me suffer. In any way. And I know that it's different if you are a sadist, that then you give orders designed to make the sub suffer. And this is a point that I think gets overlooked, that making a sub unhappy is often what the dom wants in order to feed his/her inner sadist. That doesn't exist here.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP
I've missed several pages of the thread so I don't know if I'm repeating what's already been said. But it seems that the above is the problem in your understanding. You are assuming that all d/s relationships are based entirely on obedience.

And that's not true, at least not for all M/f relationships. I know those who are based on obedience, those based on service, and those based on emotional transparency. Mine is the last. I'm not supposed to obey him regardless if it causes me to distance myself from him. I follow because he's a superior leader. But he doesn't want me to follow if it's going to negatively impact me loving him.

He was this way when he managed over a hundred people, he wanted people to first come talk to them. He counted it a failure if they did what they were told and quietly looked for another job. Training someone is costly in time and money and he wanted employees who were happy to work for him. The same is true in our personal relationship, love is paramount, he wants me to want to be with him, to be happy to be there.

But as I know I've said elsewhere, he's not a sadist so he doesn't get off seeing me suffer. In any way. And I know that it's different if you are a sadist, that then you give orders designed to make the sub suffer. And this is a point that I think gets overlooked, that making a sub unhappy is often what the dom wants in order to feed his/her inner sadist. That doesn't exist here.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chulain
The law says you have the power to consent and withdraw consent. There is nothing you can do, short of changing the law, to change that. And because you have the power, under the law, to consent and withdraw consent, the only thing hold you is ... your consent. You can deny it all you want, you play in the bedroom that you do not have the power to withdraw consent, but you have it.

quote:

That depends on what the law says about married couples. Years ago, for example, it was legally impossible under Anglo-American common law for a man to rape his wife. It was also not legally possible to rape a male. That's changed now, but I can't answer your question without knowing the specifics of the law in any particular jurisdiction.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

Don't feel bad about not hitting all of the thread.  It's gotten rather long now.  Have to say that I'm happy about that because folks have wanted to contribute their thoughts to it.

There really is a difference between understanding different dynamics and saying different dynamics wouldn't work for Me.  I think you use an excellent example.  I would not be a good Dominant for you and you would not be a good submissive for Me.  That's over and above the gender thing, the poly thing, and other issues that even if they were looked at as non issues, there would absolutely be the incompatibility in type of dynamic thing.

This is not to say that I don't respect the way that other people have structured their dynamics (even though they wouldn't work for Me).  Heck, I can even say that about equality based relationships and all other types.  Different priorities for different people. 

Someone else just started a really good thread which used the words power, authority, and control.  Frankly, those three elements in a dynamic are more important to Me than My sub always being happy with My decisions.  That isn't about feeding My inner sadist.  (I have better ways to do that.)  It has much more to do with the way our dynamic is structured.  If My primary concern was that My sub was never unhappy, I don't think I could consider authority to have the highest importance.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCdc
Consent/nonconsent in any personal relationship is pointless and misleading. Like I said.

quote:

Was just 'in general'... most people stick to their own areas.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact
  It has much more to do with the way our dynamic is structured.  If My primary concern was that My sub was never unhappy, I don't think I could consider authority to have the highest importance.

quote:

The other thing is that I don't pay blackmail. If someone said "my way or the highway" I would automatically choose the highway. I'm interested in a win/win solution. I don't see too many male dominants that are, they so often seem to set things up as an adversarial relationship where for them to win, the sub has to lose. I don't know if that's sadism or lack of self esteem, either way I don't fit with anyone like that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

The other thing is that I don't pay blackmail. If someone said "my way or the highway" I would automatically choose the highway. I'm interested in a win/win solution. I don't see too many male dominants that are, they so often seem to set things up as an adversarial relationship where for them to win, the sub has to lose. I don't know if that's sadism or lack of self esteem, either way I don't fit with anyone like that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP
The other thing is that I don't pay blackmail. If someone said "my way or the highway" I would automatically choose the highway. I'm interested in a win/win solution. I don't see too many male dominants that are, they so often seem to set things up as an adversarial relationship where for them to win, the sub has to lose. I don't know if that's sadism or lack of self esteem, either way I don't fit with anyone like that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero

Actually, I thought about this and my picture was admittedly not perfect. This more appropriately emblemizes the mentality in question:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chulain

Hey, look, another message from NihilusZero, Mr. Anti-Spock. What deviltry will he dream up next? Maybe a nice you tube link.

You're moving even so much closer to twue domdom yourself, sparkilicious.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NihilusZero
Your sock-puppet is losing kinks in its armor. The Spock reference was too soon a stretch for someone who's known me (online, no less) for less than a week.

quote:

Try back-stepping to commentary about my writing style. That's more indicative of someone who's only recently met me.