RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating

RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (Full Version)

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

Message

littlewonder -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 7:01:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SeverinVim quote: ORIGINAL: littlewonder so basically she told you nothing. It's just a feeling you got online. Gotchya Basically she told me nothing. Exactly. --rolls eyes-- I'm going exactly by your own words dude. You said you DETECTED. You didn't say "she told me". You didn't say "she talked to me". You said you felt some kind of vibe. She didn't tell you anything. For someone who wants others to be specific and honest about what they want, I'd say maybe you need to do the same.

SeverinVim -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 7:02:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rawni You know OP... there are times in everyone's life, that they may evolve, may face life challenges, may change in ways that might not fit your manner of evaluation on whom and what they are. Should a dom ever cry? Does a man cry? Do dominants need to be strong at all times? Can they get down time? Should a submissive be weaker? Dumber? You categorize people without a realistic view of a whole person, you will find yourself very lonely. So you got butt hurt because you didn't get butt hurt. She is one woman that most likely wouldn't have wanted you either... as you are too submissive and couldn't be a backbone when a domina down needed one. (Maybe) Move on... you don't have to go trying to change websites and other people. Geez... get over yourself. It's not just one woman. Check out some of the profiles on CM of dominant women. About a third of them have pictures of themselves in submissive poses. Yes, you can't always judge a book by its cover, but sometimes you truly have to question what you're seeing.

Rawni -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 7:07:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SeverinVim quote: ORIGINAL: Rawni You know OP... there are times in everyone's life, that they may evolve, may face life challenges, may change in ways that might not fit your manner of evaluation on whom and what they are. Should a dom ever cry? Does a man cry? Do dominants need to be strong at all times? Can they get down time? Should a submissive be weaker? Dumber? You categorize people without a realistic view of a whole person, you will find yourself very lonely. So you got butt hurt because you didn't get butt hurt. She is one woman that most likely wouldn't have wanted you either... as you are too submissive and couldn't be a backbone when a domina down needed one. (Maybe) Move on... you don't have to go trying to change websites and other people. Geez... get over yourself. It's not just one woman. Check out some of the profiles on CM of dominant women. About a third of them have pictures of themselves in submissive poses. Yes, you can't always judge a book by its cover, but sometimes you truly have to question what you're seeing. So like when I decide to take my guy... kneel down and suck his cock... I am being submissive? LOL I see that as power... depending on like teeth and um sucking energy and well, not letting him cum. Dude, you make no sense. A submissive position in your opinion dictates a lot in your little box. Give it up now... really. People lie, people can be multifaceted, they can be confused, lost.... and different than you think they should be. It isn't the end of their world and really shouldn't be the end of yours. Like I said... move on... There are far more important things to get anal about.

UllrsIshtar -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 7:07:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SeverinVim It's not just one woman. Check out some of the profiles on CM of dominant women. About a third of them have pictures of themselves in submissive poses. Yes, you can't always judge a book by its cover, but sometimes you truly have to question what you're seeing. About 50% of the profile are fake with a scammer just picking some random picture off a website. But do carry on.

littlewonder -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 7:20:21 PM)
<just continues to look down at her signature since her fingers are tired of pointing to it>

SeverinVim -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 7:22:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: littlewonder <just continues to look down at her signature since her fingers are tired of pointing to it> lol...yes, yes, i know. the "terrible" things I say. ;-)

JeffBC -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 7:51:26 PM)
It makes lots of sense? I'm afraid it didn't to me. Even if I just restricted my view to [sexually] dominant and submissive (eg: top and bottom) it still didn't make sense. I'm afraid I'm going to have to agree with EVERY OTHER PERSON ON THIS THREAD. Oh... and Carol does not "crave attention". In fact, as a general rule she absolutely does NOT want attention. And I do not get "control" out of this. I get "responsibility" and a sense of self-worth... it provides a bar for me to measure up to that is ridiculously high. In both of our cases the most important thing we get out of this is the ability to just behave naturally.

AAkasha -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 7:55:09 PM)
I don't know if the OP is getting at "active" dominance vs. "passive" dominance. As an active dominant, I like DOING things to a man. I like hurting him, tying him up, tormenting him for my amusement, controlling him, stimulating him (or not stimulating him). I have an assertive personality and am aggressive, an a predatory type, a pursuer (whether or not this ties into my sadistic style of affection, I have no idea, could be a coincidence). A "passive" type of dominant may crave adoration. To be pampered. To receive foot massages. To be served. To have a man tend to their needs, to be tended to, to provide for them. I have zero interest in any of this, and would prefer to hire a maid and pay a masseuse, and continue to torture my man in our "free" time (that's not to say I don't love it when he cooks me an awesome meal or does the housecleaning, but that's not a fetish for either of us - it's a separation of duties). And of course there are some relationships that are a mix of these. But as a femdom (and sure, people can just label me as a "top" but I want the man I "top" to surrender to my sadism, not just endure it, ie, I don't seek straight masochists - he has to actually give something up for my pleasure - he has to SUFFER willingly or have his ego or willpower bent to my desires - this requires, on some level "submission") --- I have no interest in "passive" dominant, I am 100% about active dominance - power, control and cruelty. And more specifically, not to someone who will give it up to anyone - he has to want to give it to me -- and it has to be hard for him. Akasha

SeverinVim -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 7:57:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC It makes lots of sense? I'm afraid it didn't to me. Even if I just restricted my view to [sexually] dominant and submissive (eg: top and bottom) it still didn't make sense. I'm afraid I'm going to have to agree with EVERY OTHER PERSON ON THIS THREAD. Oh... and Carol does not "crave attention". In fact, as a general rule she absolutely does NOT want attention. And I do not get "control" out of this. I get "responsibility" and a sense of self-worth... it provides a bar for me to measure up to that is ridiculously high. In both of our cases the most important thing we get out of this is the ability to just behave naturally. We can agree to disagree then. Although I prefaced what I said by noting that it is a broad generalization, I think that Dominant people are generally "control freaks" and submissive people are generally "attention whores." Not always. Not in every capacity. There are many facets to a person, so, yes, it is a broad generalization, but it is a generalization that holds true to some degree. Submissive people yearn for the attention and sense of belonging that a Dominant can provide to them. Dominant people yearn for the sense of control that comes with having a submissive. Forgive me, but this isn't exactly controversial or "offensive" to me.

DesFIP -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 7:58:35 PM)
Opie, you're confusing topping with dominance. There are sadistic subs and masochistic dom(me)s. There are no solely sub or dom positions. If his feet hurt and I rub them, is that me being in charge because I'm giving him a sensation or is that him being in charge because he told me to? If my feet hurt and he rubs them, that doesn't make him a sub because he's chosen to do something to make me feel better. If the sensation he wanted was not a light massage with my hands but a heavier one that required using a wooden dowel, it still wouldn't make him a sub.

littlewonder -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 8:02:33 PM)
quote: Submissive people yearn for the attention and sense of belonging that a Dominant can provide to them. Sorry but that is soooooo not the reason I am submissive to Master. I don't need to feel like I belong. I submit because he's a dominant personality and I'm a submissive personality and we love one another and he's a leader in his everyday life. Why would I NOT follow a man who makes brilliant decisions for all?? All of this really sounds like you have some jaded and bitter views about women. I'd suggest stepping away from the computer and people in general until you figure out how to fix yourself.

SeverinVim -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 8:03:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AAkasha I don't know if the OP is getting at "active" dominance vs. "passive" dominance. As an active dominant, I like DOING things to a man. I like hurting him, tying him up, tormenting him for my amusement, controlling him, stimulating him (or not stimulating him). I have an assertive personality and am aggressive, an a predatory type, a pursuer (whether or not this ties into my sadistic style of affection, I have no idea, could be a coincidence). A "passive" type of dominant may crave adoration. To be pampered. To receive foot massages. To be served. To have a man tend to their needs, to be tended to, to provide for them. I have zero interest in any of this, and would prefer to hire a maid and pay a masseuse, and continue to torture my man in our "free" time (that's not to say I don't love it when he cooks me an awesome meal or does the housecleaning, but that's not a fetish for either of us - it's a separation of duties). And of course there are some relationships that are a mix of these. But as a femdom (and sure, people can just label me as a "top" but I want the man I "top" to surrender to my sadism, not just endure it, ie, I don't seek straight masochists - he has to actually give something up for my pleasure - he has to SUFFER willingly or have his ego or willpower bent to my desires - this requires, on some level "submission") --- I have no interest in "passive" dominant, I am 100% about active dominance - power, control and cruelty. And more specifically, not to someone who will give it up to anyone - he has to want to give it to me -- and it has to be hard for him. Akasha Akasha, I love the distinction you made and will spend a while pondering it. The "active dominance" versus "passive dominance" distinction is the closest approximation to what I was getting at in my original post. To me, however, "passive dominance," in form at least, is closer to submissive assertiveness than to "active dominance," as you define it. But reasonable minds will disagree...

wikedmischief -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 8:06:41 PM)
It is impossible for me to label myself. (Well there was that one time. Unfortunatly the glue didn't stick to my forhead) Seriously. Your upset because she wasn't what she said she was? Was this after days, weeks and months of your time invested in the realtionship? There were meets? Or was it a first time meet and you weren't forced to submit to her? Most Dominants don't do that unless it's already been agreed upon. YES I SAID MOST.

LookieNoNookie -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 8:06:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SeverinVim 1. Dominant 2. Switch 3. Submissive This probably sounds obnoxious, but I think that women with major self-esteem issues should not be encouraged to hold themselves out as "Dommes." There should be another label for them, like "women interested in dominating men," or something to that effect. It would be like me saying that I'm a "Dominant Male" if I ever feel the need to dominate a woman. The title of "Dominant Male" just wouldn't be true to my personality. Sometimes I may fantasize about dominating a woman, but that doesn't make me a "Dominant." I will still have a submissive personality. Lots of submissive women are interested in dominating men, and a lot of men (and women) enjoy this. But there should be more truth in advertising. For example, if I know that it is a submissive woman looking to dominate me, I will approach the interaction much differently. The difference? Submissive people (myself included) crave attention; we need a LOT of care. What do Dominants get in return? The control. Dominants generally crave the CONTROL. Yes, I'm aware that these are broad generalizations, but there is a lot of truth to them. Incidentally the term "switch" doesn't exactly apply, either. Why? "Switch" implies that the person is capable of being "Dominant" and "Submissive." A lot of submissive people (myself included) are only capable of being one way, even when we "dominate" another person. In other words, we are dominating as a "submissive" would, not as a "Dominant" would (which is what a switch would be doing when he/she dominates another person). Anyway, it may all sound rather confusing, but when you really think about it, it makes perfect sense. People should take the time to figure out what they really are before advertising on these pages. If I ever attempted to dominate a woman....one of us better have access to good healthcare because after I tried....we'd both be falling on the floor laughing so hard that I'm confident she or I would break a rib from laughing.

angelikaJ -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 8:08:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SeverinVim We can agree to disagree then. Although I prefaced what I said by noting that it is a broad generalization, I think that Dominant people are generally "control freaks" and submissive people are generally "attention whores." Not always. Not in every capacity. There are many facets to a person, so, yes, it is a broad generalization, but it is a generalization that holds true to some degree. Submissive people yearn for the attention and sense of belonging that a Dominant can provide to them. Dominant people yearn for the sense of control that comes with having a submissive. Forgive me, but this isn't exactly controversial or "offensive" to me. I really do not _get_ your assertion about submissives being "attention whores". Belonging-ness is wholly different to me. I love to please my Master and make His life as pleasant and pleasurable as possible. I enjoy it when I amuse Him. I think you may be making a generalisation based upon how you are: having a high need for care and attention. My personal focus is on Him. And my submission to, and love for, Him. I think you and I have very different ideas about what it is to be a submissive partner. I am not saying your idea is wrong, just that it is not something I understand or relate to.

BlkTallFullfig -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 8:27:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SeverinVim This probably sounds obnoxious, but I think that women with major self-esteem issues should not be encouraged to hold themselves out as "Dommes." It definitely does sound obnoxious, so right on! Swiches are people who can/do top, or bottom for play. Being a swich does not necessarily define anyone as either dominant, submissive, or well balanced. quote: The difference? Submissive people (myself included) crave attention; we need a LOT of care. What do Dominants get in return? The control. Dominants generally crave the CONTROL. Yes, I'm aware that these are broad generalizations, but there is a lot of truth to them. Hello pot, have you seen kettle or been introduced recently?! Welcome to the boards though, M

SeverinVim -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 8:37:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BlkTallFullfig quote: ORIGINAL: SeverinVim This probably sounds obnoxious, but I think that women with major self-esteem issues should not be encouraged to hold themselves out as "Dommes." It definitely does sound obnoxious, so right on! Swiches are people who can/do top, or bottom for play. Being a swich does not necessarily define anyone as either dominant, submissive, or well balanced. quote: The difference? Submissive people (myself included) crave attention; we need a LOT of care. What do Dominants get in return? The control. Dominants generally crave the CONTROL. Yes, I'm aware that these are broad generalizations, but there is a lot of truth to them. Hello pot, have you seen kettle or been introduced recently?! Welcome to the boards though, M Thank you, BlkTallFullfig. I find myself being hit with four or five uppercuts to the jaw in this thread alone...lol

njlauren -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 8:50:18 PM)
The problem, OP, is you want nice, neat labels that kind of lay things out like ingredients in a can of soup, and it isn't going to happen, people are just too different. Dominance and submission are about control, it is about the power dynamics, whether it is in the playroom only or bedroom, or it is in 'real life' as well. As others have pointed out, someone can enjoy whipping the shit out of someone else, and not be a dominant or submissive, just a sadistic top, and the person getting whipped could be a bottom without a shred of submission, or a submissive who is simply getting a good whipping from a top because they enjoy the sensation play, but it is not submission. Submissives are attention whores? While I am sure there are some that are, I can't say I have seen that. Seriously, what make you think that? The kind of sub you are talking about, the needy sub, who always needs their D to have them at the center of their attention, who constantly needs to be 'dommed' or whatever, isn't going to be very attractive, if they create drama to be at the center of attention, they won't last long, because it is a bummer to the Domme. There are obviously a wide variety of subs, no two are alike, a dominant who wanted a sub that totally depended on them for everything wouldn't like me too much, I am kind of the self contained type like a cat who in submitting, turns over the attitude to my Domme, but she expects me to handle myself with her guidance, rather than telling me how to do everything, that is our style..is she less of a domme or me less of a sub? Nope. Someone who is a slave has a different dynamic than myself, and among slaves it is expected to be variations. There are people who switch, who enjoy topping and bottoming, and yes, there are switches who are both dominant and submissive. Friend of mine in her role as a domme has a female sub/slave, but she herself is sub to a M (is that switching? God only knows, or maybe Lady P:). ... I understand about having trouble figuring people out, but guess what, it is why personal ads suck, they are limited in scope, and are fill of all kinds of vagueries, and on a site like this there are a lot of crap ads, people who don't know jackshit but think it is fun to wank around on here, guys who think submissive means some women in a leather corset who will suck them off or something, lot of phonies, lot of people trolling for scams shrug. It is only in real life that things play out.......and labels after a while stop meaning anything except to the people involved with each other, and speaking only for myself, instead of being sub and Domme, it is simply us, in our natural roles.......and yeah, it is hard to figure out, these relationships have misunderstandings and meltdowns, because people aren't simple. I will be married 25 years soon, and all I can say is I am still learning about my wife/domme, new things (scary things, too:), so what makes you think it is any different for this crazy world? Instead of bitching, or trying to play semantic chess or redefine what other people are or aren't, figure out what you need, and go for it, and eventually you will find the person you need. Calling a dominant submissive won't find you the right person,and expecting personal ads to give you clear answers is kind of like the magic 8 ball cube, kind of cute, but not worth much else;)

BlkTallFullfig -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 8:54:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SeverinVim Thank you, BlkTallFullfig. I find myself being hit with four or five uppercuts to the jaw in this thread alone...lol Lol, Awh poor baby! Don't worry, it'll get better as soon as you slow down opening your mouth, and inserting your foot. [8D] quote: LookieNoNookie If I ever attempted to dominate a woman....one of us better have access to good healthcare because after I tried....we'd both be falling on the floor laughing so hard that I'm confident she or I would break a rib from laughing. That is exactly what my response was, when a man tried to once. I began laughing uncontrollably, and I don't think he understands to this day, many years later. M

FelineRanger -> RE: The D/s nomenclature is in need of serious updating (4/16/2013 9:06:15 PM)
OP My $0.02. the "pot, meet kettle" remarks seem to hit closest to the mark, but not for the obvious reasons. Whether or not you realize it, you claim frustration with people who you perceive to be confused about who they really are. But it's been my experience that, when a person says "I see everybody doing ____ behavior," they are actually projecting their own behaviors and subconscious frustration with said behaviors on to other people. Maybe you need to back up and do some serious soul searching about who you are instead of worrying about others.

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

6.347656E-02