|
HarryVanWinkle -> RE: defining sub as renunciate and master as behavior (5/16/2006 10:42:26 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: circleoflove
Your definitions are not true of everyone
In particular you state two assertions which are not universally true:
1 the idea that if a dom likes a particular service, then he is not a dom. You have it backwards. Whatever the dom wants is what the dom gets. If the dom wants to wear a girdle while you fuck him, that is his business. You are there to serve. The behaviors the dom choose are up to him. Same for a domme. She chooses. Not you.
2. the notion that if the sub gets any pleasure then the sub is not a sub.
What you are suggesting is that in your case, your submission includes the renunciation of all pleasure.
So be it, but that does not mean that some other person who receives the gift of pleasure from their master, are not a sub then. The master may choose to grant pleasure. The sub is not in charge of even whether to be pleasurized.
Sir,
Seeing that you're new on the boards, it's obvious that you haven't read many posts by me. Otherwise, you would have realized, as mixielicous did, that this post of mine, which is the one I presume you're referring to, was made entirely in jest.
quote:
Obviously, if your master likes this then, according to "BDSM for Dummies" he can't be a TRUE dominant. And since, as you say, you do derive some sexual pleasure from it, then you can't be a TRUE sub.
Which means, you must both be (holding crossed fingers in front of screen to ward off the evil eye) SWITCHES.
You both have my deepest sympathy and may God have mercy on your souls.
I would have thought that the reference to a non existant book like "BDSM for Dummies" would have made it obvious that I wasn't being serious. Also, as those who have read other posts by me know, when speaking seriously, I absolutely abhor the word "TRUE" when applied to people who live this lifestyle.
That said, I must take umbrage with some of your assertions. You state that my "definitions are not true of everyone." I couldn't agree with this more. But I would point out that neither are your definitions, nor anybody else's definitions.
You then go on to say, "You are there to serve. The behaviors the dom choose are up to him. Same for a domme. She chooses. Not you." That may be true for you in submissive role. That may be true for a lot of people. But, it most certainly is NOT true for everybody. When a sub has a right to set limits, those limits may include certain behaviors of the dom or domina. In some relationships the behavior of both the dominant and the submissive are subject to negotiation between them.
You also stated "The sub is not in charge of even whether to be pleasurized." Again, this may be true in some D/s relationships, but it most certainly is not true in all of them.
Respectfully,
|
|
|
|
