RE: is it possible to...? (Full Version)

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



Message

sunshinemiss -> RE: is it possible to...? (5/31/2011 4:22:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

Is that all you're after?

If so, then you go ahead and have the papers drawn up, I'll sign 'em.


*hides a credit card slip under the pile for signature.



oldhippie1954 -> RE: is it possible to...? (5/31/2011 5:04:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

An enforceable contract requires an offer, acceptance and consideration.  Consideration means, for example.  X will pay you 5K a year to be shirtless at all times.  In the absence of consideration, it isn't a contract, it is prefactory.  So, what is the consideration for you being shirtless at all times?
Having said that, I have a hard time imagining a court enforcing such an agreement.  Could be interesting, though.
Yay, my vanilla ice cream cone went away!



hmmmm,I would not mind being paid to be shirtless
and yes I do realise that there are times that a shirt is a must
but I would like to be kept shirtless as much as possible.
btw who is sweetcheeks?



oldhippie1954 -> RE: is it possible to...? (5/31/2011 5:32:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1

If you look closely at the OP's photo (he attached a larger one), I doubt that he is all that concerned about his appearance, with the tats and piercings. Not that anything is wrong with any of it. You choose to put forth a particular persona in this world and you should do what makes you comfortable.

I really think it is a major fantasy about control and for him, it manifests itself in being shirtless.

As he admitted, first he has to find someone to work with him on this.



I am concerned about my appearance,
I want to be known as a tattooed,pierced
and shirtless man.
and yes I would like it knowing that I have to
be shirtless as much as possible,only
allowed to wear a shirt when absolutely
necessary
and yes a lot of it is about control



leadership527 -> RE: is it possible to...? (5/31/2011 10:06:24 PM)

I, oldhippie1954, do hereby solemnly swear to accept the command of leadership527 regards the matter of no longer wearing articles of clothing designed to cover the male torso (commonly referred to as shirts but also to include jackets, sport coats, and the upper portion of suits and tuxedos including the cummerbund). My signature affixed to this instrument indicates my agreement to the condition of not wearing the aforementioned items of clothing until such time as this agreement is terminated. Termination of this agreement may be done by either signatory party with or without cause.



________________________________________
oldhippie1954 date




_________________________________________
leadership527 date


------------ snip --------------

There ya go. Sign and date that and send it back to me.



oldhippie1954 -> RE: is it possible to...? (5/31/2011 10:25:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

I, oldhippie1954, do hereby solemnly swear to accept the command of leadership527 regards the matter of no longer wearing articles of clothing designed to cover the male torso (commonly referred to as shirts but also to include jackets, sport coats, and the upper portion of suits and tuxedos including the cummerbund). My signature affixed to this instrument indicates my agreement to the condition of not wearing the aforementioned items of clothing until such time as this agreement is terminated. Termination of this agreement may be done by either signatory party with or without cause.



________________________________________
oldhippie1954 date




_________________________________________
leadership527 date


------------ snip --------------

There ya go. Sign and date that and send it back to me.



I, oldhippie1954, do hereby solemnly swear to accept the command of leadership527 regards the matter of no longer wearing articles of clothing designed to cover the male torso (commonly referred to as shirts but also to include jackets, sport coats, and the upper portion of suits and tuxedos including the cummerbund). My signature affixed to this instrument indicates my agreement to the condition of not wearing the aforementioned items of clothing until such time as this agreement is terminated. Termination of this agreement may be done by either signatory party with or without cause.



___oldhippie1954______ date __June 1 2011_______
oldhippie1954



Iamsemisweet -> RE: is it possible to...? (5/31/2011 11:09:20 PM)

Well there you go then. Leadership, that was so funny



Ishtarr -> RE: is it possible to...? (6/1/2011 8:38:07 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldhippie1954


and yes a lot of it is about control


Yes, it's obviously all about control, all about your control that is.

You realize in the scenario you dream of there isn't any actual control for the dominant, right?
In fact, it's about the opposite of control, seeing that you're dictating how they are "contractually" bound to keep you.

It's all about you, your fetish, your kink, your desire... and finding a "dom" who will cater to those desires to perfection.

If it was about the dominant's control, it would be a matter of you being dressed at all times in a manner of their choosing, but seeing that you want to be dressed at all time in a manner of your choosing, what you really want is a submissive service top who will follow your instructions and pretend to dominate you the way you want.

Personally, if a sub comes to be with a fetish like that he wants to prescribe to me that I must cater to, I will go absolutely opposite and the prescribed fetish will most likely one of the things he least ever gets -unless I happen to actually be in that mood- simple because not catering to their fetish will ACTUALLY give them a taste of the control they claim to want.
Perhaps not surprisingly most find out rather rapidly that didn't want somebody else to have that control after all and they really wanted to be in control themselves all along.

If you where mine, you'd be in a suit and tie most all of the time. Because making you dress in a manner of my choosing instead of yours... that would actually be about... ya know... control.

- That's not to say there is anything wrong with what you're looking for... it's just that you seemed to need some perspective on what it ACTUALLY is that you are looking for -



oldhippie1954 -> RE: is it possible to...? (6/1/2011 9:03:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ishtarr

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldhippie1954


and yes a lot of it is about control


Yes, it's obviously all about control, all about your control that is.

You realize in the scenario you dream of there isn't any actual control for the dominant, right?
In fact, it's about the opposite of control, seeing that you're dictating how they are "contractually" bound to keep you.

It's all about you, your fetish, your kink, your desire... and finding a "dom" who will cater to those desires to perfection.

If it was about the dominant's control, it would be a matter of you being dressed at all times in a manner of their choosing, but seeing that you want to be dressed at all time in a manner of your choosing, what you really want is a submissive service top who will follow your instructions and pretend to dominate you the way you want.

Personally, if a sub comes to be with a fetish like that he wants to prescribe to me that I must cater to, I will go absolutely opposite and the prescribed fetish will most likely one of the things he least ever gets -unless I happen to actually be in that mood- simple because not catering to their fetish will ACTUALLY give them a taste of the control they claim to want.
Perhaps not surprisingly most find out rather rapidly that didn't want somebody else to have that control after all and they really wanted to be in control themselves all along.

If you where mine, you'd be in a suit and tie most all of the time. Because making you dress in a manner of my choosing instead of yours... that would actually be about... ya know... control.

- That's not to say there is anything wrong with what you're looking for... it's just that you seemed to need some perspective on what it ACTUALLY is that you are looking for -

yes you do have very good points,I was contacted a while back by a dom who had said that
he would want to keep me barechested and I was just wondering if there
were more who would be interested.
and yes I know that if I am sombodys slave it is up to them how I would be dressed
I'm also guessing that you like men in suits that you said that
you would keep me in suit and tie
also keep in mind that I had origanaly posted at one time
something like this:
for some reason I like the idea of being kept dressed as a skinhead. jeans or kilt, polo shirts,suspenders and boots with shaved head. also keep ring in nose and earrings,collar around neck and made to get even more tattoos than what I have
and then I was contacted by a dom who said that he would rather keep me barechested and harnessed



leadership527 -> RE: is it possible to...? (6/1/2011 12:01:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ishtarr
Yes, it's obviously all about control, all about your control that is.

Unless there's more to go on here than this thread I don't follow that line of reasoning.

My favorite two commands with Carol are "hug me" and "kiss me". In terms of activities I've spent more effort training her in those two commands than anything else by far. But it wouldn't exactly be accurate to suggest my relationship or my dynamic with her is "all about hugs & kisses".

If I were looking at a new slave I'd be really surprised if she didn't have a few things she was looking for out of the relationship and/or dynamic. Actually, the "I exist only to serve" people send me running for the hills. I generally need a bit more self-awareness than that in my partners. So how is it bad for oldhippie to say, effectively, "Hey, I'm looking for a relationship which features a lot of 'forced' shirtlessness on my part." How's that any different than someone saying "I'm looking for a daddy" or "I'm looking for a Gorean master" or whatever else they are looking for?

PS: Oldhippie
I hope you understand I wasn't mocking you... it was just too good of a setup line to let pass :)



oldhippie1954 -> RE: is it possible to...? (6/1/2011 12:21:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ishtarr
Yes, it's obviously all about control, all about your control that is.

Unless there's more to go on here than this thread I don't follow that line of reasoning.

My favorite two commands with Carol are "hug me" and "kiss me". In terms of activities I've spent more effort training her in those two commands than anything else by far. But it wouldn't exactly be accurate to suggest my relationship or my dynamic with her is "all about hugs & kisses".

If I were looking at a new slave I'd be really surprised if she didn't have a few things she was looking for out of the relationship and/or dynamic. Actually, the "I exist only to serve" people send me running for the hills. I generally need a bit more self-awareness than that in my partners. So how is it bad for oldhippie to say, effectively, "Hey, I'm looking for a relationship which features a lot of 'forced' shirtlessness on my part." How's that any different than someone saying "I'm looking for a daddy" or "I'm looking for a Gorean master" or whatever else they are looking for?

PS: Oldhippie
I hope you understand I wasn't mocking you... it was just too good of a setup line to let pass :)



hey no problem,
yes that is basicaly what I'm looking for a
relationship with forced shirtlessness on my part
and maybe some other play too



Ishtarr -> RE: is it possible to...? (6/1/2011 12:25:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: leadership527

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ishtarr
Yes, it's obviously all about control, all about your control that is.

Unless there's more to go on here than this thread I don't follow that line of reasoning.

...

it wouldn't exactly be accurate to suggest my relationship or my dynamic with her is "all about hugs & kisses".



I wasn't talking about a dynamic but about a specific kink-act Jeff.

Oldhippie mentioned that the reason he wants to kept bare chested is about control, which from what he describes I agree with, but it's about his control, not the doms.

That doesn't say anything about the type of dynamic he might want or end up in, it's not even something bad, but it's clearly something he wants to control in his future relationship, or rather, remain in control off.

Thus, it's advisable for him to realize that and present it honestly when he is looking for a partner in a way that other people will understand what he is ACTUALLY looking for.

If he where to go and say: "I'm looking for a partner who will control what I wear" he will most likely not find what he's looking for, and instead get people like me who, when they have a sub, actually like to dress them to their own tastes.
If he on the other hand goes out and states: "I have a fetish for being bare chested and I'm looking for a partner who will let me indulge in that fetish and enjoy it with me" he may actually find what he's looking for.

Like I mentioned in the last line of my previous post: there isn't anything at all wrong with the desire he's having, but it's important that he realizes what that desire exactly is in order to efficiently communicate it to others.
When he indicated that a lot of the act is about control, I thought it would be helpful for him to reflect for a moment on whose control he was actually talking about.

I'm with you in that I absolutely don't believe in the "I live to serve" crowed... never have... as such, I don't really see it as a bad thing to point out that sometimes when somebody has a fetish that relates to control issues, it's not necessarily the dominant partner who they wish to have the control. There is nothing wrong with looking for a dominant who will, on some level, cater to a submissive's fetishes because they've got the same ones, in fact, it's probably a necessity to have a good D/s relationship to have that sort of compatibility. However, one can only find that type of compatibility if one is clear on what ones personal desires actually are... and if they are clearly and efficiently communicated.



JstAnotherSub -> RE: is it possible to...? (6/1/2011 12:33:22 PM)

I do not understand why it is perceived to be the sub in control if the dominant caters to their fetish/wants/desires. Both parties in a relationship, d/s or otherwise, are going to get certain things that they want catered to, or the relationship just will not survive.

I want a dom who will cater to my love of sucking dick. I doubt one is going to say "oh hell no missy, you shall never suck my dick because I am the domly one!"

For me anyway, the D/s is in my mind.



leadership527 -> RE: is it possible to...? (6/1/2011 12:38:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ishtarr
I wasn't talking about a dynamic but about a specific kink-act Jeff.

~chuckles~ I stand corrected and I should have known better knowing you.

I absolutely agree that if someone was approaching me I'd prefer it if they had it sorted out in their head how they envisioned serving me and how they envision me serving them.



Ishtarr -> RE: is it possible to...? (6/1/2011 12:49:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub

I do not understand why it is perceived to be the sub in control if the dominant caters to their fetish/wants/desires. Both parties in a relationship, d/s or otherwise, are going to get certain things that they want catered to, or the relationship just will not survive.

I want a dom who will cater to my love of sucking dick. I doubt one is going to say "oh hell no missy, you shall never suck my dick because I am the domly one!"

For me anyway, the D/s is in my mind.


Because who controls things is determined by who gets to decide whether or not something is going to be included in the relationship at all and to what extend.

If a person says: "I want/need/demand/expect X as a necessity for me to consider being in this relationship" they are being in control off that aspect, regardless of whether they are on the dom or on the sub side of the kneel.

I had an ex-boyfriend who didn't like blowjobs at all. You may have been completely incompatible with him if you want/need/demand/expect to be able to give blowjobs as a requirement for you to consider being in a relationship with somebody.
If it's a requirement you have, that means that you do not accept a dom to have complete and sole control over which sexual acts happen in a relationship with you, instead, you expect to remain some control over the sexual acts yourself.

Of course D/s is in the mind, but the fact that it's in the mind doesn't mean that submissives are incapable of retaining control over certain things even when the dom is generally in control over most other things.
It's all about how you present your own desires.

Stating that a dominant is in FULL control over X when at the same time them ordering you to do part of X or forbidding you to do part of X would be a dealbreaker that would end the relationship is just not the type of communication that will lead to compatible relationship.
If a person wants to retain part or full control over X, then why not say that, instead of pretending/stating that they want the dominant to be fully in control over something that their control is restricted on?



slaveluci -> RE: is it possible to...? (6/1/2011 1:08:53 PM)

I'd recommend a verbal contract. Your dom/master/fill-in-the-blank tells you to never wear a shirt and....here's where it gets tricky....you agree and obey. Voila![;)]

luci



BurntKitty -> RE: is it possible to...? (6/1/2011 2:39:20 PM)

This bare chested kink is all well & good in June. But seeing as how the OP is in Wisconsin, let's see how bare he likes it while shoveling snow in Dec, Jan & Feb.
Oh, I take it, the "no shirts" thing includes not wearing Green Bay Packer jerseys? Cop out this year!!! There's a lock out!!!!

~shakes fist & stomps ground....~



JstAnotherSub -> RE: is it possible to...? (6/1/2011 2:47:25 PM)

quote:

Because who controls things is determined by who gets to decide whether or not something is going to be included in the relationship at all and to what extend.


I guess some see this as control. I see it as compatibility.

Luckily, we can all choose who we get involved with.



oldhippie1954 -> RE: is it possible to...? (6/1/2011 2:56:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BurntKitty

This bare chested kink is all well & good in June. But seeing as how the OP is in Wisconsin, let's see how bare he likes it while shoveling snow in Dec, Jan & Feb.
Oh, I take it, the "no shirts" thing includes not wearing Green Bay Packer jerseys? Cop out this year!!! There's a lock out!!!!

~shakes fist & stomps ground....~

well the shirtless requirement would be whenever weather permits
though it would be interesting to see how long I could stay shirtless when weather does start getting cold



wandersalone -> RE: is it possible to...? (6/2/2011 5:51:03 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldhippie1954
is it possible to have a contract or something
between dom and sub/master-slave
or anyone else
that would make sure that I stay shirtless
I like the idea of having no choice but
to remain shirtless


quote:

ORIGINAL: oldhippie1954
........and yes I do realise that there are times that a shirt is a must
but I would like to be kept shirtless as much as possible.


quote:

ORIGINAL: oldhippie1954
.....and yes I would like it knowing that I have to
be shirtless as much as possible,only
allowed to wear a shirt when absolutely
necessary


quote:

ORIGINAL: oldhippie1954
well the shirtless requirement would be whenever weather permits
though it would be interesting to see how long I could stay shirtless when weather does start getting cold


I am a little confused here .... it sounds like what you are wanting is a contract that requires you to be shirtless unless it is too cold or unless you have to go somewhere that requires you to wear a shirt. 

And what on earth would the consequence be of breaking your contract to be shirtless, which I assume could only be broken by you wearing a shirt?  You would already be wearing a shirt so they can't order you to put one on as punishment.

I don't quite get the idea of being forced to do something that you really enjoy doing, otherwise I would be searching for a dominant who would make me eat bon bons and watch daytime television!! .... errrr but if one happens to be reading this thread feel free to say hello [:)]


for the record I neither eat bon bons nor watch day time television, but loved being able to write that phrase ha ha





oldhippie1954 -> RE: is it possible to...? (6/2/2011 7:00:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: wandersalone

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldhippie1954
is it possible to have a contract or something
between dom and sub/master-slave
or anyone else
that would make sure that I stay shirtless
I like the idea of having no choice but
to remain shirtless


quote:

ORIGINAL: oldhippie1954
........and yes I do realise that there are times that a shirt is a must
but I would like to be kept shirtless as much as possible.


quote:

ORIGINAL: oldhippie1954
.....and yes I would like it knowing that I have to
be shirtless as much as possible,only
allowed to wear a shirt when absolutely
necessary


quote:

ORIGINAL: oldhippie1954
well the shirtless requirement would be whenever weather permits
though it would be interesting to see how long I could stay shirtless when weather does start getting cold


I am a little confused here .... it sounds like what you are wanting is a contract that requires you to be shirtless unless it is too cold or unless you have to go somewhere that requires you to wear a shirt. 

And what on earth would the consequence be of breaking your contract to be shirtless, which I assume could only be broken by you wearing a shirt?  You would already be wearing a shirt so they can't order you to put one on as punishment.

I don't quite get the idea of being forced to do something that you really enjoy doing, otherwise I would be searching for a dominant who would make me eat bon bons and watch daytime television!! .... errrr but if one happens to be reading this thread feel free to say hello [:)]


for the record I neither eat bon bons nor watch day time television, but loved being able to write that phrase ha ha





the only time a shirt would be allowed would
be while grocery shopping on Tuesdays all
other times a shirt would be forbidden.
also would have to work something out
for winter time after all -10 degree
weather would not be the best for being shirtless



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

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875