RE: Training vs being owned

RE: Training vs being owned (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

peppermint -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/21/2011 11:37:09 PM)
You've been sold the Brooklyn Bridge, not training. If "training" means fucking others, I can train you in just a few words here. Lie down, spread legs, stay until he's done. See? That's all you need to know. If "training" is learning to serve, please ask your trainer how your future Master will want his coffee fixed in the morning. That is probably the most important training you will need to have. Another important aspect in "training" is whether your Master is a mayonnaise man or whether his poison is Miracle Whip. I have never heard of one who doesn't have a preference. I do hope your trainer has the right answers or your training will be going right down the drain with that jar of mayonnaise your Master can't stand. So, before agreeing to more of this training stuff, make sure your trainer has some clue to the important things in the life of a slave.

Anomandaris -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 12:57:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: justasubslut quote: ORIGINAL: xXsoumisXx quote: ORIGINAL: justasubslut True that. It's my fault for not drawing the lines in the training situation. It can be hard sometimes because He can get in my head so well, that the lines blur between "this is training" vs when He asks "who owns you slut?" That should have sent off warning bells right there. Is there a reason he is only your "Trainer" and not your Dom? Is this rl or online? It is real life and because he already has two girls he owns and others he plays with. Yes, he was just using me for some kind of personal pleasure. Was being the key word now. Good to hear.

RqrCompanionS -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 1:10:45 AM)
First of all, WHY are you in training with someone who does not own you? Second of all, what does being shared have to do with learning service or obedience? No one needs to be trained to be a slave or a submissive. They need to be trained to please their owner, because, not all owners are alike. Anyone who does not own you but is "training" you is USING you. Which is alright, if you want to be used in the way in which they are using you. It sounds like it is not what you want, and, that he does not respect that. Maybe he's a scumbag, maybe he's just not that experienced, maybe he only thinks he is dominant. Whatever the reason, he's doing a very bad job of mentoring you, which is what dominants do, when they take an interest in you but are not your owners. If he was doing a good job, he'd be learning about you, your situation, your limits, and, he'd respect them, rather than trying to push you to things which are only for his benefit. What has he "taught" you that actually makes you a stronger person, more capable, happier? And, how does that compare to what else he has made you feel? Think about it. If he doesn't mostly make you feel good, cherished, desired, and respected, then it's best to walk away. quote: ORIGINAL: peppermint So, before agreeing to more of this training stuff, make sure your trainer has some clue to the important things in the life of a slave. That, the whole post actually, is a beautiful reply!

justasubslut -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 1:52:44 AM)
hi peppermint and RqrCompanionS...there was some kind of that thrown in, again based on his preferences, such as keeping drinks filled, not acknowledging waitstaff, sitting at his feet, etc. i got 10 cane strokes for not asking permission to pee. With that being said, i can almost say there was a learning lesson there....i experienced physical punishment. With my own Dom, it could just be a different infraction. And it was strictly a protocal thing. But i have less than two years in this interest in submission.....i could be singing out of my behind for all i know. i also learned to allow myself to show more vulneralbility than i have in my entire life. i can say without a doubt it has been one of the most freeing experiences of my life. He was not completely insensitive to most of my needs, fortunately. i can also honestly say most of the time he did make me feel cherised, respected, enjoyed personally. And he praised me often. This is totally my fault. i didn't set the limits. I feel he may have respected them for a while but would have ended it fairly quickly from boredom

Darktra151 -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 2:02:14 AM)
Well there is a lesson here.. DO NOT GET SWAYED BY ANOTHER PERSONS BULLSHIT!

justasubslut -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 2:12:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darktra151 Well there is a lesson here.. DO NOT GET SWAYED BY ANOTHER PERSONS BULLSHIT! yes he did take advantage of the situation lol

leadership527 -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 10:04:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: justasubslut yes he did take advantage of the situation lol Really? I think you took advantage of yourself more than anything.

coookie -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 10:32:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: justasubslut , such as keeping drinks filled, not acknowledging waitstaff, sitting at his feet, etc. i got 10 cane strokes for not asking permission to pee. Many dominants would be irritated if you did not acknowledge a server as it is rude nor would they want the task of being gate keeper to the toilet. I am not saying that there are not those who micromanage but as you have already indicated knowing, he was "training" you based on what he likes not on what any other dominant would like. i also learned to allow myself to show more vulneralbility than i have in my entire life. i can say without a doubt it has been one of the most freeing experiences of my life. He was not completely insensitive to most of my needs, fortunately. i can also honestly say most of the time he did make me feel cherised, respected, enjoyed personally. And he praised me often. Then you can chalk this up to a positive first experience and move on. Congratulations. This is totally my fault. i didn't set the limits. I feel he may have respected them for a while but would have ended it fairly quickly from boredom Well i cannot believe that any blame lies completely in your court. The demise of any relationship is the responsibility of both parties. Don't worry too much about blame though. As long as no one was hurt there really is nothing to claim blame about. You knew this was not a permanent situation. This relationship has ended and it is now time to move on. Good luck OP. I hope you find what you are looking for.

Darktra151 -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 10:39:14 AM)
So another lesson learned.. Don't LET yourself be taken advantage of again. Keep your eyes peeled for the people out there that see you as nothing more then a kinky rube. As for that man I personally wouldn't talk to him again BUT if you do you better set some boundaries and have a conversation about what this really is.

LaTigresse -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 11:19:36 AM)
I seriously do not understand the concept of 'training' generically. Except for a few exceptions......high protocol, etc., as others have mentioned, it is really going to be worthless. I've even communicated with s-types that I feel their previous 'training' basically, ruined them for any other relationship. All I ask for is a strong desire to serve ME and to learn how best to do that.

peppermint -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 11:34:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: justasubslut With that being said, i can almost say there was a learning lesson there....i experienced physical punishment. With my own Dom, it could just be a different infraction. And it was strictly a protocal thing. But i have less than two years in this interest in submission.....i could be singing out of my behind for all i know. What if the Dom you eventually are collared to does not do a reward/punishment relationship? What if he doesn't care if someone caned you for whatever it was? What if he is not thrilled to be told about how much pain you can take? What if he never canes you for a rule infraction? What if he prefers to discuss why the rule was broken and how this can be avoided in the future? What if your greatest punishment is in knowing that you have disappointed him? Of course, maybe you prefer rewards and punishments. However, perhaps you haven't realized that not all D/s or M/s relationship are reward/punishment based.

LaTigresse -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 11:45:13 AM)
Exactly.

justasubslut -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 12:04:45 PM)
yes Jeff, i did. i played the hand i was dealt stupidly, caught up in the game, taking risks. Lesson learned. coookie, ty for your kind words. peppermint and LaTigresse, i hope i'm not ruined....that's a very strong word. You guys are without a doubt right that each Dom/Master is different. And i suppose, i'm not a dom so don't know for sure, that a nice blank slate is wonderful to have. But, to give the devil his due, where does that leave experienced people who's relationships have ended? Be it they had one master or several, little experience or tons?

RqrCompanionS -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 12:21:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: justasubslut i got 10 cane strokes for not asking permission to pee. With that being said, i can almost say there was a learning lesson there....i experienced physical punishment. Experiencing physical pain is not a lesson.The lesson is to ask for permission to do things. If he was training you in the basics of politeness, he would have made the difference clear. As to whether he is training you correctly, or, if he should be training you at all, the question you should ask yourself is does he make the rules clear before the punishment occurs and does the punishment seem reasonable, does it seem like he is trying to teach you to avoid punishment - or, are the rules less clear to begin with, does he punish you and then explain why but fail to give adequate warning beforehand, and, does he seem like he is seeking out your failure so that he has an excuse to punish you? Also, if you like him so well, and, he is training you, and, the problem with some activities is that you do not want to do them with someone who does not own you, why is it that he is not owning you?

leadership527 -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 12:37:23 PM)
yes Jeff, i did. i played the hand i was dealt stupidly, caught up in the game, taking risks. Lesson learned. grins I"m glad you took that in the spirit in which it was intended. Sure, the guy was a dick. No question about it. But focusing on his fault really leaves you with nothing. Focusing on YOUR fault, however, leaves you the ability to change that in the future. But, to give the devil his due, where does that leave experienced people who's relationships have ended? Be it they had one master or several, little experience or tons? Experience is experience. Everyone over the age of zero has experience. The real question is "what did you learn from it". I don't actually care about someone's experience level because I'm not into all sorts of arcane sexual practices where "experience" might actually matter. I care about someone's personality -- things like "strength", "integrity", "compassion", etc. Give me stuff like that and I can work around pretty much anything else. In short, when someone says to me that they have "no experience" or "a lot of experience" I make nothing of it other than such things are important to them (which I suppose is a minor strike against in my book). And, just to support a point that peppermint made: Your "trainer" has trained you that you will be punished if you disobey. This would, in fact, be very bad training for me as a dominant. For me, the lesson is "Don't disobey". There is no "or else". I make a habit of not setting up the expectation of failure in those I lead. He, on the other hand, has trained you that failure IS an option. So I'd need to "untrain" that if you became mine. Note, I am NOT suggesting any right way or wrong way. I'm only pointing out how it is that the training you have gotten would be absolutely poisonous in my marriage... exactly as peppermint said might happen. Edited to add: Such previous training is only ruinous in my book if the person carried away the idea that this is "the one true way". Otherwise, it's just another of life's experiences added into the mix. Sadly, a lot of subs seem to take away exactly that lesson... largely because the "trainer" trained them that way. I recommend reading my point above about how his training of you would be a real problem in my marriage until it's cemented in your head that there are lots of other viewpoints out there. That way, when you encounter a new viewpoint -- as a training exercise or just "in life", you can add it into your inventory of diverse viewpoints rather than try to measure it against some standard of correctness.

justasubslut -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 12:42:58 PM)
hi RqrCompanionS...yes i had been told more than once to ask permission to pee. He has a 1,2,3 method....that was 3. Big oops. Afterwards, i got a "this is now forgotten but you must ask permission". He is not owning me because he feels i do not fit a poly household. i can be with another woman, i have been before, and would probably enjoy it. But he needs someone that actually desires a woman on the same level as his other two girls. i would do it because he wanted me to. More straight than real bi.

LaTigresse -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 12:44:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: justasubslut yes Jeff, i did. i played the hand i was dealt stupidly, caught up in the game, taking risks. Lesson learned. coookie, ty for your kind words. peppermint and LaTigresse, i hope i'm not ruined....that's a very strong word. You guys are without a doubt right that each Dom/Master is different. And i suppose, i'm not a dom so don't know for sure, that a nice blank slate is wonderful to have. But, to give the devil his due, where does that leave experienced people who's relationships have ended? Be it they had one master or several, little experience or tons? That, in and of itself, means nothing..........pro or con.........to ME. It is what they do with it that matters. To best explain I will use an acquaintance of mine that identifies as a slave. For HER, it is not serving if she does not experience certain physical punishments, is not required to behave a certain way, get treated a certain way........because that is how her first mistress trained her and subsequent mistresses also used her. She is a stunningly beautiful woman but because of her years of mental conditioning, I would never consider her.

LadyPact -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 12:46:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse I seriously do not understand the concept of 'training' generically. Except for a few exceptions......high protocol, etc., as others have mentioned, it is really going to be worthless. I've even communicated with s-types that I feel their previous 'training' basically, ruined them for any other relationship. All I ask for is a strong desire to serve ME and to learn how best to do that. LaT, I don't believe that it "ruins" anybody at all. It's like anything else that people get to experience and then do something else different later in life. Sure, a person might want to enter into a training dynamic so they can participate in a high protocol household, but that doesn't mean that a laid back type of Dominant is going to have to bang their heads trying to un-teach somebody and then teach them over again to do things differently. I know a lot of people don't get the appeal of the high protocol and/or leather thing. People that it does work for, however, especially s-types can be very fulfilled by it. They like the formality. They like the structure. They like being in service to someone who is introducing them to D/s or M/s in such a way that they get a vast range of experiences. They want to be taught how to serve at that high protocol dinner or learn how to participate at functions where certain behaviors are expected. They want to experience and live that mindset. For most folks interested in wiitwd, the answers are pretty simple. In most cases, I'm the first person to tell them to go to a munch or an event. The difference is, most people aren't going to find the high protocol events nearly as often and most wouldn't know where to look. A lot of those things are private parties and it's more about who you know. I get that there are some folks out there who use the training moniker for less than scrupulous reasons. It's not the whole story.

LaTigresse -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 12:55:43 PM)
Perhaps I was not clear enough in my response. I understand that there are SOME situations where it MIGHT be valid. However, I have communicated with SOME s-types that were so set in how they felt it SHOULD be based upon their previous experiences/training..........that they felt any dominant/master/mistress that did not have the same expectations, do the same things, was not a REAL d/m/m. So yes, it ruined them for any situation that was not very much like their previous situation. The s-type I wrote of above is the perfect example of what I mean. She feels she absolutely needs specific duties or actions or she is not submitting.

LadyPact -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 1:08:17 PM)
Yes, I saw that after I typed My response. I'd see that more as a sign of incompatibility. Either that, or a person not wanting to let go of how things were before. Just like Dominants, I think submissives need to seek the type of dynamic that they want in their lives. For some folks, that's the more laid back style and for others, it's a more formal one. I think it's a good thing when people try out both to see where they are more content. The not real thing? I think some people use that too quickly, rather than just saying a certain situation isn't right for them. There are some submissives out there who wouldn't suit Me at all because they don't want the structure or service that I require to be a part of a dynamic. That doesn't make them not "real" submissives. It means that they just aren't a good fit for Me.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875