RE: Training vs being owned

RE: Training vs being owned (Full Version)

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

Message

RqrCompanionS -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 1:13:34 PM)
Well, there you have it: he does not need you, and, he does not want you as the person you are. It's time to move on to someone who does. Thank him for his time, and, find someone who wants you, not just to bide his time with you.

Rochsub2009 -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 2:30:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: justasubslut where does that leave experienced people who's relationships have ended? Be it they had one master or several, little experience or tons? It leaves them with more experience. And that's the nature of life. But that experience doesn't constitute "training" for the next relationship. That's where I think you got confused. Nobody can train you for your next D/s relationship except for the Dom that you ultimately choose to serve. If you do it with anyone else, it's not "training". Instead, it's the equivalent of "playing" with someone at the local dungeon. People do that all the time. They play with a play partner who is not their actual Dom/Domme. But most people who play casually recognize that it is not training for their eventual "Master". Rather, it's just play. It's a short-term good time. Nothing more.

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 2:40:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rochsub2009 quote: ORIGINAL: justasubslut where does that leave experienced people who's relationships have ended? Be it they had one master or several, little experience or tons? It leaves them with more experience. And that's the nature of life. But that experience doesn't constitute "training" for the next relationship. That's where I think you got confused. Nobody can train you for your next D/s relationship except for the Dom that you ultimately choose to serve. If you do it with anyone else, it's not "training". Instead, it's the equivalent of "playing" with someone at the local dungeon. People do that all the time. They play with a play partner who is not their actual Dom/Domme. But most people who play casually recognize that it is not training for their eventual "Master". Rather, it's just play. It's a short-term good time. Nothing more. As much as I respect your extremely well stated views, Roch, I have to disagree. I think the majority of male subs benefit from the type of training that emphasizes obedience with grace, the ins and outs of service based submission, becoming an expert at helping your domme with her personal grooming, how to determine your own limits, the proper execution of protocol, understanding how to negotiate a time limited session with a dom/me in a dungeon or play party situation, how to rise to the top and get noticed by femdommes and similar topics. I agree, you can't teach a sub how his next domme is going to want her tea brewed, but you can give him a good foundation for finding the domme of his dreams.

Rochsub2009 -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 2:48:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt I agree, you can't teach a sub how his next domme is going to want her tea brewed, but you can give him a good foundation for finding the domme of his dreams. I see what you mean, but I guess I don't agree with it completely. The concern that I have is that the things that you THINK are preparing him for the Domme of his dreams may be the exact behaviors that piss her off once he finds her. To me, training in specific behaviors in not necessary to be a good sub/slave. Instead, a submissive attititude, and a willingness to learn your Dom/Domme's wishes and desires is all that is needed. The rest of it is best learned through on-the-job training. Otherwise, the Domme of my dreams will have to spend too much time making me "unlearn" stuff. [;)]

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 3:24:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rochsub2009 I see what you mean, but I guess I don't agree with it completely. The concern that I have is that the things that you THINK are preparing him for the Domme of his dreams may be the exact behaviors that piss her off once he finds her. To me, training in specific behaviors in not necessary to be a good sub/slave. Instead, a submissive attititude, and a willingness to learn your Dom/Domme's wishes and desires is all that is needed. The rest of it is best learned through on-the-job training. Otherwise, the Domme of my dreams will have to spend too much time making me "unlearn" stuff. [;)] But teaching him some basics of how to cook, clean, do a pedicure never goes amiss. His new domme may never even want a pedicure, true, but she might have a friend who does. Certain skills, once acquired, serve you well through life. Cooking is another one. Being a cordon bleu is not necessary for most dommes, but being able to get a meal on the table is. Please try to remember, most male subs are not like you. They are so focused on sex, they have given zero thought to being able to serve in any other way.

LadyConstanze -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 3:32:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt Please try to remember, most male subs are not like you. They are so focused on sex, they have given zero thought to being able to serve in any other way. I couldn't agree more, most of them think that offering a woman to be a "sex slave" should send us into rapture... I don't care what exactly their skills are, the fact that they actually bothered to learn skills that are not for their own pleasure but to do something for somebody else, that counts so much! It's the mindset, plus I hate people that are too lazy to get off their butts...

leadership527 -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 4:34:53 PM)
quote: But teaching him some basics of how to cook, clean, do a pedicure never goes amiss. His new domme may never even want a pedicure, true, but she might have a friend who does. I was thinking the same thing as I read your list. I was thinking, "Well sheez, those would be reasonably good skills to have under any circumstance." I got a little leary when you got to "The proper execution of protocol" but I decided that so long as you made sure that the real lesson was "ONE PARTICULAR GROUP sees xxxx as how protocol is properly executed, but be aware that other groups have very different protocols and a non-trivial segment of the BDSM worl dis protocol averse..." In other words, I'm a huge believer that when I'm "training" someone, I have to train them on as much of the BDSM universe as you can, not whatever little part happens to appeal to me. I like to expose them to as much as I can so that they can find their own place. But nitpicking aside (since I'm sure you don't disagree with my point anyway), I agree with you and I think Roch is wrong (a rarity for sure). I totally agree that done properly you can absolutely give someone a solid foundation for finding first themselves and then the partner of their dreams. I also think certain skills have value in all of life and so are not "wasted training" no matter what. Roch's statement: The concern that I have is that the things that you THINK are preparing him for the Domme of his dreams may be the exact behaviors that piss her off once he finds her. what exactly what I was referring to when I pointed out that "training someone to accept punishment would be training them to fail for me." But that can be avoided simply by religiously instilling the idea that whatever is being trained my not be how a specific partner sees it in the future.

ChasteDream -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 4:49:22 PM)
Oh yes; all this chat and no profile! Fascinating. I'll keep my advice for someone real.

ChasteDream -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 4:56:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt quote: ORIGINAL: Rochsub2009 quote: ORIGINAL: justasubslut where does that leave experienced people who's relationships have ended? Be it they had one master or several, little experience or tons? It leaves them with more experience. And that's the nature of life. But that experience doesn't constitute "training" for the next relationship. That's where I think you got confused. Nobody can train you for your next D/s relationship except for the Dom that you ultimately choose to serve. If you do it with anyone else, it's not "training". Instead, it's the equivalent of "playing" with someone at the local dungeon. People do that all the time. They play with a play partner who is not their actual Dom/Domme. But most people who play casually recognize that it is not training for their eventual "Master". Rather, it's just play. It's a short-term good time. Nothing more. As much as I respect your extremely well stated views, Roch, I have to disagree. I think the majority of male subs benefit from the type of training that emphasizes obedience with grace, the ins and outs of service based submission, becoming an expert at helping your domme with her personal grooming, how to determine your own limits, the proper execution of protocol, understanding how to negotiate a time limited session with a dom/me in a dungeon or play party situation, how to rise to the top and get noticed by femdommes and similar topics. I agree, you can't teach a sub how his next domme is going to want her tea brewed, but you can give him a good foundation for finding the domme of his dreams. However, if the sub/slave in question is this gross, why would you want to bother giving him/her of your time? The sub might benefit, true; but are you actually here to teach them to serve someone else? Wouldn't your time be better spent finding the sub/slave with whom you want to spend your time, and train them to please you?

LadyConstanze -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 5:01:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ChasteDream Oh yes; all this chat and no profile! Fascinating. I'll keep my advice for someone real. Because she doesn't want every wanker to see her profile doesn't make her less real, as for your "advice" sounds you best keep it to yourself, people tend to prefer real life experience and not Sheffield dreams how things should be...

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 6:07:28 PM)
quote: However, if the sub/slave in question is this gross, why would you want to bother giving him/her of your time? The sub might benefit, true; but are you actually here to teach them to serve someone else? Wouldn't your time be better spent finding the sub/slave with whom you want to spend your time, and train them to please you? That gross? Spoken like someone with very limited experience of male subs. I'm a switch with a male dominant to take care of. I'm not interested in a full time sub, and I have severe limitations on how involved I'm going to get (i.e. no sex) with one. A part time sub who is interested in being trained and mentored is perfect for me. To each his own, remember?

LadyPact -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 6:17:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ChasteDream However, if the sub/slave in question is this gross, why would you want to bother giving him/her of your time? The sub might benefit, true; but are you actually here to teach them to serve someone else? Wouldn't your time be better spent finding the sub/slave with whom you want to spend your time, and train them to please you? This question comes up quite often when folks are talking about training situations. Not all folks are saying that they are specifically training a person for their next dynamic. They are allowing that person to get a taste of a certain kind of lifestyle. Also, it's worth mentioning that not all folks who do make good Dominants to train with are especially wanting to take on another sub of their own. For example, I'm poly and I'm straight. That means that I am not a good permanent Dominant for somebody who is monogamous and certainly not for a straight female. Does this mean that I'm not a good resource to introduce a person to living a leather lifestyle? When someone wants to experience what it's like to be member of a high protocol household, does this mean that I'm not a good teacher about things like leather care, formal dinners, wine service, high teas, or learning about community? Sometimes, the best person to do these things isn't wanting to add that person permanently to their household. That doesn't mean that the people shouldn't gain something out of the situation.

frazzle -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/22/2011 6:53:15 PM)
In general i wouldnt go for a training situation, but as LadyP states sometimes for certain things they would be useful. I have very little clue about the Leather community, if invited to that sort of event, damn right i'd be finding someone to teach me the ropes, so to speak. Mind you i'd do that for a vanilla event i didnt know about as well.

justasubslut -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/23/2011 12:08:46 AM)
Thanks to everyone for contributing. :) This helped me clear my mind and focus more, validated points i felt were valid and showed me what i learned and what i was doing wrong. Even knowing the ending of this little journey, i know i can take what i need and leave the rest. Ruined? Naw...just another roll of the dice in this adventure we call life. It's all good :) Cheers...and many thanks!

LoveSlider -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/23/2011 4:12:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Palliata but at the same time casual play sessions are fun for both parties so I see no reason 'training' relationships can't be mutually beneficial. The newbie improves their comfort level and learns some basics while both parties enjoy a bit of play. Sounds like a good enough deal to me. Nothing wrong with that but better to be honest about it from the start and avoid such confusion.

NotBragging -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/23/2011 10:12:22 AM)
...interesting thread...

leadership527 -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/23/2011 10:29:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: justasubslut Ruined? Naw...just another roll of the dice in this adventure we call life. It's all good :) Yay! My ex-wife (and mentor in a great many things) once said to me, "Experience is what you get when you didn't get what you wanted." In that sense, experience is the consolation prize of life :)

kalikshama -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/23/2011 6:44:49 PM)
quote: As much as I respect your extremely well stated views, Roch, I have to disagree. I think the majority of male subs benefit from the type of training that emphasizes obedience with grace, the ins and outs of service based submission, becoming an expert at helping your domme with her personal grooming, how to determine your own limits, the proper execution of protocol, understanding how to negotiate a time limited session with a dom/me in a dungeon or play party situation, how to rise to the top and get noticed by femdommes and similar topics. I agree, you can't teach a sub how his next domme is going to want her tea brewed, but you can give him a good foundation for finding the domme of his dreams. Good points, however, for Desktop Doms, "training" means NSA fucking.

Acer49 -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/24/2011 6:33:00 AM)
I am very leery of dominants who call themselves mentors or trainers as well as the individuals who seek them out. Any trainer who thinks that sexual activities of any kind are part of training to be done by anyone other that the chosen Master needs to have their privates ripped off and shoved down their pathetic, slimy throats. Masters do not shirk their responsibilities. Any molding of a sub/slave is to be done by them and them alone, not by some wannabee. A sub / slave needs only to present themselves with a willingness to learn. The Master / dominant, if he is worth his salt, will gladly take care of the rest.

Rochsub2009 -> RE: Training vs being owned (7/24/2011 4:04:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Acer49 Any trainer who thinks that sexual activities of any kind are part of training to be done by anyone other that the chosen Master needs to have their privates ripped off and shoved down their pathetic, slimy throats. This is stated in a way that is much harsher than I would have put it, but I agree with the sentiment. I do agree that there are benefits to some types of training. For example, LadyPact's example of training in leather protocols. Another example is if someone wanted to be trained in "Old Guard" protocols. Personally, I think it would be valuable to be trained in Swedish and Shiatsu massage techniques (even if a future Domme didn't desire massages). What I have a problem with is when someone wants to "train" someone in things that are totally subjective. How do you train someone in the "right" way to do something that is completely a matter of personal preference? And I've noticed that in the internet age, those offering to do the training almost always tend to focus 90% on sexual training. [8\|] As someone said earlier, NSA fucking is NOT the same thing as "training". Selling it as training is completely unscrupulous.

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875