RE: breakable bits

RE: breakable bits (Full Version)

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

Message

lally2 -> RE: breakable bits (2/12/2011 11:29:59 AM)
and then i said....., 'and thats as much of the personal side i want to go into here - but it needed clearing up so thanks for the question.' before that i asked..... 'how much of what dominance is has to do with the submission they want and expect and how much of that factors in the submissives heart.' 'do you see submissives as being strong or weak people that submission is all they have and all they give.' some people saw the questions without question marks, but ill be sure to be on top of my punctuation from now on.

agirl -> RE: breakable bits (2/12/2011 1:57:14 PM)
I'm not sure what you mean by breaking point, to be honest. But moving on to your questions above..... M's dominance doesn't mean in any way that he's going to ride rough-shod over my feelings. There'd be no sense in it. By the same token, he's never pandered to them either. If he wants me to do something challenging, no matter how difficult it might be, he still wants us both to come away from it in a good place. He wants a happy, secure, jolly, adventurous little sunbeam to be with. He's not doing it TO me he's doing it WITH me. It's not soley for him, at my expense.......even when it looks like it. Sometimes people just find they are with someone who simply isn't good for THEM. agirl

osf -> RE: breakable bits (2/12/2011 3:53:59 PM)
what is it about you that makes you seek a dominant, what is it he can fulfill in you that you cant yourself?

porcelaine -> RE: breakable bits (2/12/2011 5:49:39 PM)
Greetings lally, Thank you for expounding. I realize this is a personal and challenging subject for you to discuss and I appreciate your honesty. I'll preface by stating it's very easy to provide advice when you're not in a situation. I believe your intentions are honorable and you're attempting to provide a happy medium for your son in spite of the discomfort you're enduring. Whether the affects are as hidden as you believe is another question. I find children are much more astute than parents realize and generally aware when something is amiss even if it's never articulated. I won't address the choices you've made regarding your ex but ask you to give serious consideration to what you seek and how it can be manifested in the current situation. A slave has but one master and you have unwittingly aligned yourself in a fashion that makes it complicated for another to assume the position. If your previous connection reigns supreme how can you develop another upon a foundation that points to something that is no more? And what of your happiness my friend? The pill you've swallowed leaves a bitter aftertaste. I trust that you're given this a great deal of thought and know you'll come to the right conclusion. Whatever that involves you know my stance. Somethings never change. xx Namaste, ~porcelaine

darkenchantment -> RE: breakable bits (2/12/2011 6:33:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 how much of what dominance is has to do with the submission they want and expect and how much of that factors in the submissives heart. which is quite a heavy question i know and sorry about that but it seems to me that a sub is either seen as someone strong and therefore resiliant or someone weak and leadable. im a mix of both. Which is fine. Few people are wholly one or the other. At one time, in certain circumstances, I'm sure you are capable of being strong; at another time, in a different set of circumstances, you feel weak. Welcome to being human, lally. the codicil is that we submit to whatever our Masters or Dominants want and if we dont like it we suck it up or we leave. such an easy thing to say. Yep; that's relationships for you! And not only in bdsm, as you appear to know. Its just the same in vanilla too. But I wouldn't say that you automatically submit to exactly whatever your master or dominant wants (I refuse to capitalise!) In my world, you always have the choice to raise issues and discuss; its just that I may be holding a whip at the time... ive just realised ive been in a situation ive had to suck in for nearly twenty years. submitting to a situation that wont go away until my son is grown. i cant release myself until then. I'm sorry to hear that. It sounds incredibly hard, and difficult for anyone who hasn't been in a similar situation to offer advice. I think there's some good advice offered by others later in this thread, and from your response it sounds like its useful to you. all of my relationships have been Ms or Ds even when i was vanilla. and each one went tits up because my submission to them resulted in them thinking it was ok to take that submision as unremitting consent. almost as if i dont have a heart all i have is submission. I so totally agree with Focus50. But when you say submissive even in your vanilla relationships, then you create a situation where the other is ignorant of your submissive energy and most likely disrespects that you automatically defer to their will in what's supposed to be an egalitarian relationship. That would easily be construed by a vanilla as you being weak and co-dependent etc. Submission is one half of a complementing relationship. It doesn't work if the other "half" is ignorant of their role and place. do you see submissives as being strong or weak people that submission is all they have and all they give. Neither submissives, slaves, nor dom/mes nor m's are strong or weak per se. It all depends on the person and the situation. Obviously I wouldn't admit to it on here, but I can sometimes feel like running around in circles screaming my frustrations! And sometimes its my sub that makes the tea and brings my head around again. A submissive can be as strong or as weak as s/he wants to be, and perhaps as they are allowed to be by the situation in which they are placed. For me, as I think for most dom/mes, a sub is someone to be respected and valued as an equal partner in our game of life. please resist in writing about youre loved up relationships and how much youre submissives heart means to you. Not gonna mention that then! Gotta put the kettle on anyway. and thank you for sharing this thread, and I hope what has been said will be of some help and comfort to you.i know that there are many that have that and will enjoy telling us all about them. i need to understand that other level, that part of you that says - submit or go. the part that doesnt factor in the heart. Hmm; pauses at door to throw in a last remark. Can't talk about not factoring in the heart, I'm afraid; too important a thing IMO not to factor in. Damn thing stops beating, you've got real problems! thank you.

KnightofMists -> RE: breakable bits (2/12/2011 6:39:24 PM)
quote: how much of what dominance is has to do with the submission they want and expect and how much of that factors in the submissives heart. Dominance in of itself has nothing to do with the submissives heart. However, "Ethical" Dominance will take great consideration to the heart of the submissive! It is the Manner or Character of the person that decides what will be involve in their own individuals expression of dominance... and not Dominance itself quote: do you see submissives as being strong or weak people that submission is all they have and all they give. neither... I see strong and weak people... some happen to be Dominant in nature and some submissive. Their orientation of this type is irrelevant. Just as irrelevant as the sex of the person determining if the person is seen as weak or strong.

lally2 -> RE: breakable bits (2/13/2011 2:20:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: osf what is it about you that makes you seek a dominant, what is it he can fulfill in you that you cant yourself? as with anyone wishing for a relationship - having someone there to share youre life with. its no different here than anywhere else its just that here people assume so many things about submissives. that they need leadership to function, that they need to be tied up and beaten to feel normal. i think thats youre inferrance isnt it? - and yes those things factor in, theyre just not the engine that drives me anymore. as ive said somewhere else, ive come right around to when i started in some ways. the BDSM became a distraction for a while as was the dominance. i was titilated by these things and set forth to find those things without really working on factoring in compatibility. ive learnt the error of my ways. but it was fun... [:D] (mostly) what does that poem say, in precis - the journey is the most important part if we are ever to reach our desired destination.

lally2 -> RE: breakable bits (2/13/2011 2:49:54 AM)
I so totally agree with Focus50. But when you say submissive even in your vanilla relationships, then you create a situation where the other is ignorant of your submissive energy and most likely disrespects that you automatically defer to their will in what's supposed to be an egalitarian relationship. That would easily be construed by a vanilla as you being weak and co-dependent etc. Submission is one half of a complementing relationship. It doesn't work if the other "half" is ignorant of their role and place. yes - i totally agree with this too. its why i will never go out with a vanilla again, no matter how dominant in personality they are. my ex is proof positive to me, in my case, anyway, that vanilla dominant personalities do not understand whats going on! [:D] im going to be really contentious here - all for the sake of discussion you understand. its something i wrote to a friend on the other side. but it has been my observation, now that i can compare both. that 'here' we have a number of vanilla dominants lurking and now that i can draw the comparison, having lived it for so long it makes me realise how very few Ds or Ms Dominants there really are. thats ok, i mean im not casting a judgement on anyone at all. im sure that many start out with vanilla sprinklings and then grow and learn. in fact as i did, i expect as most of us did. its just that in the not knowing phase - and the more i read from Dominants who have been at this for a while and have responded as they have - im begining to think that maybe for some its all just part of that process, possibly. growing and learning and realising that in some ways the egalitarian approach of vanilla when it comes to loving, caring and sharing is still relevant here, albeit a little different. oddly my experience of vanilla dominance still had the sprinklings, the BDSM element so the kink was there too - just the comprehension was missing, which in the end led to the missuse of what i gave and why - i realise that none of us sing from the same prayer book, none of us are the same in how we interract and choose to conduct ourselves. what proves to be my waterloo might be someone elses paradise. not everyone wants to factor in caring and sharing and we all respond differently to the same things. but this has helped me to unravel the resentment i was begining to feel and put it all back into perspective. so thank you everyone.

lally2 -> RE: breakable bits (2/13/2011 3:13:49 AM)
(Porcelain) A slave has but one master and you have unwittingly aligned yourself in a fashion that makes it complicated for another to assume the position. If your previous connection reigns supreme how can you develop another upon a foundation that points to something that is no more? And what of your happiness my friend? The pill you've swallowed leaves a bitter aftertaste. :) i see where youre coming from. but believe me he isnt my master and there is no confusion on that one at all. maybe in the earlier years he had far too much control still because his methods of control had kept me subdued for so long i was conditioned to accept things because i couldnt change them. leaving was physical but not immediately mental, that process has taken time, but im very definitely there now [:)] I trust that you're given this a great deal of thought and know you'll come to the right conclusion. Whatever that involves you know my stance. Somethings never change. xx i certainly have and thanks to everyone for clearing the path for me to see things more clearly. happy's post really made me think things through, as have youres. in the process of writing my responses it might seem i had the answers right there, i didnt, theyve evolved with this thread as ive taken a look at what everyone has said and thought them through. i have come to the right conclusion thank you xx

lally2 -> RE: breakable bits (2/13/2011 3:22:01 AM)
KoM) Dominance in of itself has nothing to do with the submissives heart. However, "Ethical" Dominance will take great consideration to the heart of the submissive! It is the Manner or Character of the person that decides what will be involve in their own individuals expression of dominance... and not Dominance itself ah! [:D] - please explain to me why Dominance in of itself has nothing to do with the submissives heart. im not even going to try and guess, but i find that sentance very refreshing actually, not sure why:) i do want to understand this...,

agirl -> RE: breakable bits (2/13/2011 4:36:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 oddly my experience of vanilla dominance still had the sprinklings, the BDSM element so the kink was there too - just the comprehension was missing, which in the end led to the missuse of what i gave and why - Well yes, It's going to be quite difficult to comprehend or appreciate what someone is giving if they're not informed, or are unable to understand, what it is they're being given. In a way, they're having something foisted on them that they didn't actually ask for. There are lots of dominant men in egalitarian relationships that are caring, sharing, loving and considerate. It doesn't actually take an M/s or D/s aware man to be appreciative of a complimenting partner and to be ethical in his approach to her, just as there are dominant men in M/s relationships that aren't as considerate andethical in their approach. Sometimes we don't know what we can or can't, will or won't, put up with until we've experienced a range of situations and there are just as many assumptions about doms as there are about submissives and just as many expectations. I lost count, years ago, of the amount of submissive women who expected their new fantastic dom to understand them fully, and to behave according to their idea of how a dom should. Then when they were a little further down the line, the fantastic dom was a total wanker and a fake because he dared ask them to do something they didn't want to; they didn't care, they didn't understand, they were abusive, they were arse-holes, they were selfish....and believe me , people are just as quick to assume the dom is a grunty-pig, based on a whiny post or two from a wounded submissive. Doms have just as many assumptions to counter as submissives, and in some ways they have a worse time, as it's far more tolerated for a sub to pull the old poor me thing based on a one-sided version of a situation. Getting the dominance/control/leadership you wish for is as much your responsibility as the doms. agirl

lally2 -> RE: breakable bits (2/13/2011 5:01:30 AM)
well, i dont believe i foisted anything - at the time i had no idea how things could work for me. in fact if anything i was kinda used to being pushed around by vanilla dominants. im really fully aware of the problems out there for both sides - im not sure why we're discussing that so much. the point of the thread was to explore the heart of the issue - for those people interested in that element, some arent. horses for courses and im a fully signed up member of that creed. i dont know, maybe its me, but sometimes i find youre tone quite aggressive - not sure if you are being and not at all sure why you would need to be here, if you are. im niether whining or accusing, if you read through carefully. im merely trying to understand something.

agirl -> RE: breakable bits (2/13/2011 6:00:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 well, i dont believe i foisted anything - at the time i had no idea how things could work for me. in fact if anything i was kinda used to being pushed around by vanilla dominants. im really fully aware of the problems out there for both sides - im not sure why we're discussing that so much. the point of the thread was to explore the heart of the issue - for those people interested in that element, some arent. horses for courses and im a fully signed up member of that creed. i dont know, maybe its me, but sometimes i find youre tone quite aggressive - not sure if you are being and not at all sure why you would need to be here, if you are. im niether whining or accusing, if you read through carefully. im merely trying to understand something. I was speaking generally and the reason I mentioned it is because you made more than a few references to how submissives are viewed which caused me to think about how doms are viewed....and so on and so forth. I'm not in the least bit aggressive, in fact I've found it quite an interesting thread which sparked up quite a few thoughts. I often don't quite understand what you are actually saying and I try to make that clear.( ie, I did say that I didn't understand what you meant by the breaking point thing). I also don't know what you mean by your submissive's heart, but I try to limit asking you to explain lest it appear nit-picky, even though it leaves me none the wiser. I have to say that I'm not sure what the heart of the issue is, as there are so many different points in every post you've made. I know I'm not particularly warm in the way I write and respond, I try to be clear about what I'm saying/asking and that is occasionally interpreted as coldness (especially with females). So, just to be clear...... I wasn't speaking about YOU in particular, when I spoke about foisting..........I thought it was quite clear that it was the generic you and they....because otherwise I would have said YOU and HE/HIM. I did read through each and every post actually, and although you only ASKED a couple of things, there were plenty of other things that weren't at all clear. The problem is that you half-hint at situations, mention bits of it, relate them slightly to D/s, then change tack. You do tend to make a special case out of being submissive....or that's how it tends to come across. You do pose interesting situations but it can be tricky to actually deduce exactly what you are saying/asking at times. agirl

lally2 -> RE: breakable bits (2/13/2011 6:20:52 AM)
ok, this medium isnt always easy to guage. lol, maybe its my prose and my random thoughts going off at tangents and because usually when im asking about something its because im coming from a place that i dont understand, hence the confused rambling style. i dont intend to come through as making a special case for submission, but ill keep an eye on that. its not the case at all. far from it lately and for the past few months ive been seriously struggling with it. part of trying to fix that struggle is to fix the misconceptions ive arrived at regarding what Dominance is and where it comes from. the only place i know to go to for clear answers is here. 'heart of the matter' was just punning on the premis of this thread and the breakability of hearts and where love enters into it, if it does, when it does and stuff like that, for a Dominant. spurred on a little by the comment 'you can love what youre sub does for you, but dont love youre sub' - i find that, whilst an isolated and to some extent specific attitude that fits for some and not for others a dodgy legend to put out there as an overall for people to read and absorb. and people do, well i did. but only in the sense that it doesnt apply to me, but how much doesnt it or does it apply to dominance, since im not dominant i felt the urge to ask. in the end Knight of Mists has come up with an interesting comment and im looking forward to him extending that a little, should he swing by again.

KnightofMists -> RE: breakable bits (2/13/2011 6:42:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 KoM) Dominance in of itself has nothing to do with the submissives heart. However, "Ethical" Dominance will take great consideration to the heart of the submissive! It is the Manner or Character of the person that decides what will be involve in their own individuals expression of dominance... and not Dominance itself ah! [:D] - please explain to me why Dominance in of itself has nothing to do with the submissives heart. im not even going to try and guess, but i find that sentance very refreshing actually, not sure why:) i do want to understand this..., I suppose this boils down to how I define the word. I bring it down to a very basic concept. For me Dominance is nothing but the act of Dominanting and Influencing the will of others to your own. However, this doesn't state the "HOW" or the "WHY" it's done. The how it's done is often a reflection of a person's character. I believe the character of the person is often the KEY that enables one to unlock the submission of another. The values and ethics of the person is also going to affect the "WHY" or to what ends one is attempting to Dominant and influence another. Are they doing it for their own selfish ends that has little consideration for the feelings and thoughts of the other person... or to do they have more altrustic motivations. I would add that submission to me is nothing by the act of submitting to the will of another. This in of itself doesn't make them weak or strong. It's my subjective valuation on their character, values and ethics that does. For some.. their submission has little value because who they are as a person is of little value to me... but for others... their value as a person is priceless and therefore their submission is equally priceless to me. This is who I feel about Alandra and Kyra. I would also state that I have seen others that submit to others... that I also put in this some group. The fact that they don't submit to me is not a determining factor of their value. It' is who they are as a person that matters to me... regardless if they are submissive in nature or Dominant. hopefully this answer your question... if not... well.... I will try again.

DesFIP -> RE: breakable bits (2/13/2011 7:06:11 AM)
I've never been interested in being viewed as disposable, and anyone who says do this or hit the road does see me in that light. We view the relationship as being important, as a result he does consider my reactions to be important and that it is necessary to take into account my weak areas. Since a broken toy isn't any fun to play with, he is careful not to break me. I agree with agirl, submitting to a man who doesn't want a submissive means the man doesn't have the opportunity to give consent. I know we've all done it, because we didn't understand what we wanted or what it meant. I was 48 before I stumbled across the word submissive and had an ah ha moment. But it was unfair to my ex, because that isn't what he needed in his relationship to be happy. It guaranteed that he would take me for granted and look down on me for being who I am, in the same way that I thought less of him for not being the strong man of my dreams.

agirl -> RE: breakable bits (2/13/2011 7:17:59 AM)
I suppose I see that as quite an understandable thing for some people ...; to love what a sub does/provides , but not love THEM, specifically. Not everyone is after the same thing. Also, not loving a sub doesn't mean they're not respected and appreciated for what they provide. I think it's a realistic situation and not at all dodgy....just as plenty of guys can provide control and various other things, for a girl ,without loving her. In fact, it's a far more prevalent situation than the LT M/s relationships. When it comes to breaking hearts, I have to be honest, if the right* thing means breaking my heart then it should be broken. Feelings, and love, aren't the most rational of things and I'm sure that I'm not the only person that, despite being almost pathetically devoted, knows that the right thing might possibly mean I'll be desperately hurting. It doesn't matter HOW devoted I am, or how much I love.......it doesn't matter how much he controls......unless it's suitable, accepted, wanted and wished for by both of us. I understand fully what KOM said, but having given an example already, I'll leave it for him to explain. agirl

osf -> RE: breakable bits (2/13/2011 7:33:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lally2 quote: ORIGINAL: osf what is it about you that makes you seek a dominant, what is it he can fulfill in you that you cant yourself? as with anyone wishing for a relationship - having someone there to share youre life with. its no different here than anywhere else its just that here people assume so many things about submissives. that they need leadership to function, that they need to be tied up and beaten to feel normal. i think thats youre inferrance isnt it? - and yes those things factor in, theyre just not the engine that drives me anymore. as ive said somewhere else, ive come right around to when i started in some ways. the BDSM became a distraction for a while as was the dominance. i was titilated by these things and set forth to find those things without really working on factoring in compatibility. ive learnt the error of my ways. but it was fun... [:D] (mostly) what does that poem say, in precis - the journey is the most important part if we are ever to reach our desired destination. I don't think so much in the what, the why interests me more If I can understand the why she wants, I can better judge weather I can get the what I want and it is different here imo, just sharing can be done with most anyone with some similar interests for interest say collecting old beer cans i keep hearing about the many faceted motivations but i still think there is deep down that one thing that starts it all in motion, that primal need and it's not even a fully formed thought and it may not be immediately apparent in the other person

KnightofMists -> RE: breakable bits (2/13/2011 7:36:30 AM)
quote: Also, not loving a sub doesn't mean they're not respected and appreciated for what they provide. I think it's a realistic situation and not at all dodgy....just as plenty of guys can provide control and various other things, for a girl ,without loving her. In fact, it's a far more prevalent situation than the LT M/s relationships. I think people get caught up in the word "Love". It seems to mean so many different things... Lets just say that I find it completely impossible to imagine a relationship enduring and thriving if the one is Indifferent or hated the other. I believe there must be affection to some degree... and what specifically motivates that affection maybe what the person does for you and/or for who the person is.

agirl -> RE: breakable bits (2/13/2011 8:29:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists quote: Also, not loving a sub doesn't mean they're not respected and appreciated for what they provide. I think it's a realistic situation and not at all dodgy....just as plenty of guys can provide control and various other things, for a girl ,without loving her. In fact, it's a far more prevalent situation than the LT M/s relationships. I think people get caught up in the word "Love". It seems to mean so many different things... Lets just say that I find it completely impossible to imagine a relationship enduring and thriving if the one is Indifferent or hated the other. I believe there must be affection to some degree... and what specifically motivates that affection maybe what the person does for you and/or for who the person is. I'm in agreement. People get together for all sorts of reasons, but they rarely stay together, or grow as a relationship if they're ambivilent, indifferent or dislike each other. As I've never discovered what love means, specifically, to anyone else, it's lost any potency it may have had in my youth. agirl

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875