Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Ruining the illusion?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Ruining the illusion? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 7:44:34 AM   
theRose4U


Posts: 3403
Joined: 8/22/2005
Status: offline
Thanks for the responses:
Roche- I am attractive, have no problem finding dates & long absences from the boards are usually due to being in a vanilla relationship. Sadly vanilla is boring & vanillas or worse Doms in sheeps clothing tend to find me too bossy (go figure)

TMIK- following your definition of social dominant...I would fit that label. While I do have a strong soft side to my personality its still at my whim & discretion. This isn't an act or clothes I put on...thus my thought process that I should still be viewed as a dominant even in cargo shorts, clothes fit for the junior league or naked.

This is an extremely young prospect. About as old as years I have been kinky. Checklist was to reveal exactly how new as he was told to rank "the usual list" as experienced, know I enjoy, think I would enjoy, want to try, soft limit (with definition given) & hard limit.
Not found on CM though he claims accounts here & fet so at least not a virgin on paper. All initial communication respectful, textbook "how to attract a dominant" so fine I'll have a look. First meeting went well lots of talking, no play & he even managed 2 hours before the subtle conversation shift to kink/his dick was attempted. Hell for prospects I've met it was a record.

Points in favor:
Youth, sweetness, genuine desire to please, attractive with small upgrades (hair need cut, stop biting nails type)
Points against:
Currently living 500 miles away & university decision in my city for fall not confirmed...so I went with light get to know you conversation & again light non-marking play was considered after viewing checklist.
Mental stability...ADD, Aspergers would be new territory for me but desire to please so far had outweighed the challenges
Stress- here for seminar, looking at moving entire life on short timeline & leaving direct family behind for aunt/cousin support system here.
Ettiquette needed polishing...BADLY. Door he walked through first slamming in my face was upsetting but filed under To Do if I took him on.

In general a sweet guy that was getting ready to make the biggest transition of his life being given the latitude to do so with me earning trust as a support system. Foolish me, looking at the long term goal & coarse correcting until I had fully investigated his operating guidelines. Silly me!!

The point of this post & i hope roche will address that:
Are we allowed to be humans first with a kinky side?
Is dressing to blend at a coffee shop really this mentally damaging to the sub psyche?
While I'm at it since men "taking" a sub on the first meeting was brought up, is this actually what male subs are hoping for?
Is this breaking of illusion by being human first just a male sub thing?




_____________________________

Finding a good sub is like sifting through trail mix. You find a few fruits, a lotta nuts and have to sift to get to the sweet and special ones
drama llama

(in reply to theRose4U)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 7:46:37 AM   
LadyPact


Posts: 32566
Status: offline
I know I'm fairly predictable with this response but it is situations like this that reinforce why I just meet people through the local munch group. People are already on the ground enough to know that it's going to be vanilla attire, realize they aren't getting their kinky fantasies met from the time they say hello, and the conversation isn't going to have anything to do with sex. I get that munches aren't for everybody but it seems to save a heck of a lot of time.


_____________________________

The crowned Diva of Destruction. ~ ExT

Beach Ball Sized Lady Nuts. ~ TWD

Happily dating a new submissive. It's official. I've named him engie.

Please do not send me email here. Unless I know you, I will delete the email unread

(in reply to theRose4U)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 7:49:21 AM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: theRose4U

I would agree to a point about "escape from porn land". I actually did have a sub once upon a long time ago... rant AT LENGTH about "I can't believe you wore that to meet me". Apparently linen slacks, suede boots (he was a footie) & silk blouse are now unacceptable?!? I was glad had chosen boots after about 30 minutes of his loud protests because I used them to SPRINT to my car!

In this case, out of state potential sub maybe moving here so I kept things light. Clear there would be no sex until he was here, any play again would be light & checklist homework had been given. Apparently it caused all confidence to flee the building


When I met my mistress online and we agreed to meet for dinner she wore jeans and a red Pooh t-shirt. I thought she was adorable and we ended up not only having dinner but going to a bar to shoot pool afterward. Personally I was more interested in getting to know her that the clothes she had picked out that night.

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to theRose4U)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 7:57:53 AM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

Words can be dangerous if you do not understand the right meaning, and it is my experience here from collarme that people invent their own description of words they do not understand, then they fit into their world view.


You mean like you just did in this post?

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to hrxxx)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 8:25:17 AM   
njlauren


Posts: 1577
Joined: 10/1/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: theRose4U


quote:

ORIGINAL: hrxxx

quote:

ORIGINAL: theRose4U

Well it has happened again...potential sub comes across my path. We talk by email, we talk by phone, we meet in person then poof "this lifestyle isn't for them" (usually during or soon after discussion of checklist). To explain, I make note of but do not respond to particular kinks or fetishes they list in the first 10 emails, do not participate in phone sex & show up at the coffee house in clothes designed to blend.
First question is, are male subs the only ones flakier than a buttermilk biscuit? Is it a volume thing, so many of them so few of us that men obsessing over the idea of kink makes them insane when they may achieve their goal of having a dominant?

Or is it that meeting a potential sub as a human being instead of the porn fictionalized version of a dominant: leather dress, stiletto heels & a whip for the local starbucks the problem? Is it ok for us to be humans first & kinky second?
--color me confused--


If he was a slave and not submissive, then would all kink come first, and he would not want to see a Mistress as a human being, but only as a Mistress.

There is a huge difference between being a slave and submissive.
A slave is living his fantasy out into real life, about being a real slave!
A submissive is living in a fantasy in real life, about being a slave!

So if you find a slave and you are Domina, then you will not fit together.

Unfortunately there are not many who can tell the difference between slave and submissive, and then occurs all these misunderstandings, and it happens because they do not understand BDSM, and never tried to study a little bit about BDSM, but if I should try to make it easy for you then you can read about how I have described sadism / masochism here sadomasochisme

And when you read about sadism and masochism, then you should try to understand that slave is a form of masochism, they both have fantasies that replace normal sexual fantasies, the difference is wher the masochist fantasize about pain and torture, the slave fantasizing about being real slave.
But they suffer both from a psychological sexual disorder
and the diagnosis is the same for slaves and for master´s as it is for sadists and masochists

A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving acts (real, not simulated) in which the psychological or physical suffering (including humiliation) of the victim is sexually exciting to the person. 
B. The person has acted on these urges with a nonconsenting person, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty. 
The official DSM-IV criteria for sexual masochism are: 
A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving the act (real, not simulated) of being humiliated, beaten, bound, or otherwise made to suffer. 
B. The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning. 

In common has sadists / masochists / slave / master / mistress that they all want to live their fantasies out in real life, and that they want to get as close to their imagination as possible.
So when they enter an M / S. relationship, then the limits are set before, they enter the relationship, and within the limits is the relationship limitless, so there is no chance to say no or stop the relationship, everything that happens after the relationship is entered into, will be considered as part of the fantasy as they live out in real life

It is not far from a master with a BDSM profile to a Master with a house in Cleveland

And as it seems to me, the you and him has agreed limits! and you have destroyed his fantasy by showing your vanilla side.

And I think it was very lucky, that it was not a submissive, who was meeting with a master, and did not know about the difference between D / S and M / S, it might have ended up very wrong.

My experience is that the slave knows what they want! They want to live out the fantasy in real life, and if they see a Domina and not a Mistress they will just leave you.

Master / slave relationship is the most extreme relationship that are in BDSM! Like sadomasochism is the most extreme in BDSM, it's only people who have a psychological sexual disorder which is in those categories and who want to live their fantasies completely out into real life.

But as I said there are not many who understand it, and there are many who believe they are sadists / masochists / master / slave but they are not.

Words can be dangerous if you do not understand the right meaning, and it is my experience here from collarme that people invent their own description of words they do not understand, then they fit into their world view.

A Domina can never have a slave in a D / S. relationship
But a Mistress can get a submissive into an M / S relationship. and punish the submissive to become a slave.

So the next time pay more attention to whether it is a slave or submissive you talk to, because there is a very big difference

Thanks for the pinch, this kind of advice is still mis-informed, heavy handed crap!!! Been in kink longer than he's been alive. No limits or anything else negotiated & no slave I'm acquainted with fell for "me dom you slave" from the very beginning they proceeded there over a long period of time. But hey thank for confirming internal compass is in working order on this topic.


Bingo, ya hit the nail on the head with that post, here is an example of another thread (about how you know someone is an expert), when what they right comes off as a piece written by some third rate psych professor at a mediocre college, they aren't:). This post reminds me of the old saying, if you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bs.

(in reply to theRose4U)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 8:38:24 AM   
njlauren


Posts: 1577
Joined: 10/1/2011
Status: offline
It sounds to me like the OP ran into an emotionally immature person, obviously not experienced in BD/SM, who got their idea of dominant/sub relationships from the net, and was disappointed when the possible domme of his dreams didn't show up in fantasy mode. Plus to be honest (not defending men), he is really young, and at that age it is so, so easy to freak out meeting any woman, let alone someone potentially they might have a kink relationship with, and it trips the circuit breakers. At least for me, that was an age when I was exploring play in pro space, and I think if one of the dommes had wanted me to be in more of a real life relationship with them, as friendly as I was with them, I might have freaked. At that in with possible ADD/Aspergers that can make social things difficult IME, and it adds up.

I agree with Lady P about something,that you also are dealing men who may be operating off of images from porn and the net and think that a mistress is someone who wears leather 24/7 and so forth, men tend to be visual creatures and they might see you dressed nicely and looking pretty, and their reptilian brain says "that no domme, that pretty woman you fuck" *lol*..seriously, the problem is their image of a domme in not the reality, they see porn and read stories about the dominant woman who is a bitch with a whip 24/7, and are shocked that the domme is a woman who also wants someone to be a companion, lover and friend, someone to cuddle with, a partner even if the power dynamic is in her court. They don't quite understand that the leather and thigh high boots are to the domme a fun part of play,or as one friend of mine put it "adult dress up, like the little kid putting on their mom's clothes and makeup, only a lot sexier", a facet of their life, they think that is being the domme.

(in reply to njlauren)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 8:57:29 AM   
kalikshama


Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline
I'm a female submissive and imagine some of the many Doms with whom I had only one date thought I was a flake for not wanting to pursue the relationship further after we met. The chemistry was there online, but not in person.

_____________________________

Curious about the "Sluts Vote" avatars? See http://www.collarchat.com/m_4133036/mpage_1/key_/tm.htm#4133036

(in reply to theRose4U)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 9:03:59 AM   
orgasmdenial12


Posts: 613
Joined: 9/18/2012
Status: offline
I think there's a bit of a double standard here. As a female submissive, if there was no sexual chemistry in the first 10 messages, or at the meeting then I would feel bored and probably decide not to take it any further.

BDSM, for me, is a sexual preference - masochism is my sexuality. If they're not connecting with my sexuality then I have no purpose for connecting with them as a Dom. I like good conversation as much as the next person but there's a name for it when you enjoy talking but don't connect sexually and that's friendship. To be honest, if there's no phone sex on the first conversation, then it's probably not going to happen at all.

If you're so defensive and blocking their sexuality then, really, why would they continue trying to date you? I don't think it's a gender thing, I think that it's a sex positive / negative thing. I would ask what you're trying to get out of dating submissive men if it isn't to enjoy yours and their sexuality.

(in reply to theRose4U)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 9:09:09 AM   
theRose4U


Posts: 3403
Joined: 8/22/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: njlauren

It sounds to me like the OP ran into an emotionally immature person, obviously not experienced in BD/SM, who got their idea of dominant/sub relationships from the net, and was disappointed when the possible domme of his dreams didn't show up in fantasy mode. Plus to be honest (not defending men), he is really young, and at that age it is so, so easy to freak out meeting any woman, let alone someone potentially they might have a kink relationship with, and it trips the circuit breakers. At least for me, that was an age when I was exploring play in pro space, and I think if one of the dommes had wanted me to be in more of a real life relationship with them, as friendly as I was with them, I might have freaked. At that in with possible ADD/Aspergers that can make social things difficult IME, and it adds up.

I agree with Lady P about something,that you also are dealing men who may be operating off of images from porn and the net and think that a mistress is someone who wears leather 24/7 and so forth, men tend to be visual creatures and they might see you dressed nicely and looking pretty, and their reptilian brain says "that no domme, that pretty woman you fuck" *lol*..seriously, the problem is their image of a domme in not the reality, they see porn and read stories about the dominant woman who is a bitch with a whip 24/7, and are shocked that the domme is a woman who also wants someone to be a companion, lover and friend, someone to cuddle with, a partner even if the power dynamic is in her court. They don't quite understand that the leather and thigh high boots are to the domme a fun part of play,or as one friend of mine put it "adult dress up, like the little kid putting on their mom's clothes and makeup, only a lot sexier", a facet of their life, they think that is being the domme.

The reptilian comment made me laugh...A LOT. Considering LP is the 24/7 "bitch with a whip" I generally defer to. Times I met her were munches, she was in INCREDIBLE leather outfits...but I hold by the opinion she doesn't dress like that for the market & an oil change. Any truth to that accusation LP?

_____________________________

Finding a good sub is like sifting through trail mix. You find a few fruits, a lotta nuts and have to sift to get to the sweet and special ones
drama llama

(in reply to njlauren)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 9:29:40 AM   
LadyPact


Posts: 32566
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: theRose4U
The reptilian comment made me laugh...A LOT. Considering LP is the 24/7 "bitch with a whip" I generally defer to. Times I met her were munches, she was in INCREDIBLE leather outfits...but I hold by the opinion she doesn't dress like that for the market & an oil change. Any truth to that accusation LP?

I've done the occasional leather skirt at a munch *if* going to a play party immediately afterwards. It's just easier than changing at the venue. Any other time, it's jeans and whatever top is appropriate. In the fall, I might wear the boots that are in the pic. I don't think I've gone to a munch in full leather since the last time I've been to ARM (Atlanta Regional Munch) four or five years ago. (It's held at 1763, so it's not one of those deals where it's a vanilla venue.) There is always the famous purse. (For those that don't know, the 'famous' purse is the foot portion of a stiletto boot with chains for strings. It really is a kick ass purse.)

More often than not though, for a munch, it's casual wear. I think I wore jeans, a tank top, with a button down shirt to the last one. I'm going to be wearing a sun dress when we go today with a comfortable pair of white flats.



_____________________________

The crowned Diva of Destruction. ~ ExT

Beach Ball Sized Lady Nuts. ~ TWD

Happily dating a new submissive. It's official. I've named him engie.

Please do not send me email here. Unless I know you, I will delete the email unread

(in reply to theRose4U)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 9:35:23 AM   
MAINEiacMISTRESS


Posts: 1180
Joined: 9/12/2012
Status: offline
HOLY CRAP! I was just reading your description of the business-like vanilla outfit you wore and realizing that's EXACTLY how I normally dress when out in public. Though actually last week when I met a new potential sub it was very hot so I was wearing an office type DRESS. (shhhh, I wore a dress, don't tell anyone)

At home, where subs come to Serve on The Projects List, I wear grubby old Carhartt pants, shorts, tank tops, t-shirts. I might be barefoot or wearing work boots (WHOA, SHOCKER! That ought to shrivel up a few of your Pornland boys). I run a farm and accept Service-minded subs who devote their bodies to getting Projects completed. Yes, D/s is VERY much involved, as in, COME TO SERVE OR GET LOST...and we've found fun ways to include some fetishes in the activities too.

As for your guy who ranted about your outfit, WTF? He's obviously looking for a submissive woman to serve HIM, to do as HE wants, and has no fucking clue that a Dominant woman doesn't exist for a man's pleasure.
I wouldn't have run to the car, I'd probably have made a "public example" of him.

(in reply to theRose4U)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 9:39:35 AM   
theRose4U


Posts: 3403
Joined: 8/22/2005
Status: offline
Not intentionally making judgements about him being a flake or dissecting the how/why of his choice as much as puzzled by the question of does being human & wanting a well rounded opinion of a sub before taking them on ruin the illusion of dominance.

As for od...thanks for making my point for me. "If they aren't connecting with me sexually I have no purpose for a Dom" & "if there is no phone sex on the first call it won't happen at all"...this is EXACTLY what I'm trying to avoid. I'm not a 1-900 number or someone that only wants submission when the dick is at full mast. "Defensive/blocking sexuality" & why kinky if not for sex is you reading your personal struggle into my life, kind of odd to me from someone claiming to be into orgasm denial but I digress...I want to know what a sub is about, discover their real motivations by not allowing my initial interactions with them to be all about "what will you do to me" while they stroke on the other end of a phone line.
Also in this case before play I want to be sure of what limits are, be dealing with a stable mental state & not have 6'2 200lbs of psycho inside my home alone.
Sexual compatibility with my owned subs (not prospects still in early discussion) are as full partners sharing household chores, how day went, challenges in daily life & sexually sharing a bed on a regular basis.

Based on this response must ask are women in BDSM regardless of which side of the kneel really just supposed to be sex toys? Is this an illusion I need to break that my sub is my partner even in the mundain of "honey get my oil changed & take out the trash" that I am just as in charge there as I am in stilettos with a whip?

_____________________________

Finding a good sub is like sifting through trail mix. You find a few fruits, a lotta nuts and have to sift to get to the sweet and special ones
drama llama

(in reply to theRose4U)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 9:45:57 AM   
theRose4U


Posts: 3403
Joined: 8/22/2005
Status: offline
LP remember I'm in Denver. I pre-date atlanta & think the blue leather outfit was for seminar you were hosting after the munch.
But always good to know when discussing illusion that even you can be found in public wearing jeans hear that boys?!?

_____________________________

Finding a good sub is like sifting through trail mix. You find a few fruits, a lotta nuts and have to sift to get to the sweet and special ones
drama llama

(in reply to theRose4U)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 10:00:23 AM   
Punetop


Posts: 8
Joined: 6/9/2013
Status: offline
How come I never meet such nice & dedicated slaves:(

(in reply to theRose4U)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 10:06:53 AM   
kalikshama


Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline
quote:

I think there's a bit of a double standard here. As a female submissive, if there was no sexual chemistry in the first 10 messages, or at the meeting then I would feel bored and probably decide not to take it any further.


My experience with men that lead with messages that are predominantly sexual is that they do not go on to form emotionally intimate relationships. That being said, there was so little sexual content in my initial exchanges with B, who I met on OKCupid, that I had reservations about meeting him, fearing he would turn out to be too vanilla. We laugh about that now

_____________________________

Curious about the "Sluts Vote" avatars? See http://www.collarchat.com/m_4133036/mpage_1/key_/tm.htm#4133036

(in reply to orgasmdenial12)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 10:17:35 AM   
littleclip


Posts: 869
Joined: 5/31/2012
Status: offline
meting in a vanilla forum like a munch first and then see if they can act appropriately there before trying a kink function like a dungeon ect. hopefully they can show they are competent and emotionally mature enough to continue with

_____________________________

currently owned by LadyAthena15805
i will always come to the call of those i love


(in reply to kalikshama)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 11:02:56 AM   
orgasmdenial12


Posts: 613
Joined: 9/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

As for od...thanks for making my point for me. "If they aren't connecting with me sexually I have no purpose for a Dom" & "if there is no phone sex on the first call it won't happen at all"


Well I think you made your own point - you appear to have no interest in them sexually. I would query why you are attempting to engage in relationships with people who you don't seem to be attracted to? If you are attracted to them, are you showing this at all? Do you compliment their appearance or state that you find their kinks interesting or useful? You asked why they were acting in this way and I would suggest that you already have your answer - they are looking for a relationship where they feel sexually compatible and valued and you make them feel like you are not interested in their sexuality and that any attempt to discuss that aspect will be treated as bad ettiquette. My response, and seemingly theirs too, is that your behaviour is not appropriate for them and is not what they are looking for. Now you can get up on your high horse about that, or you can accept that you have a niche way of approaching relationships that is going to have a high rejection rate, and adjust your response accordingly.

Please also be aware that paraphrasing whilst presenting it as a direct quote is generally considered to be bad form.

quote:

I'm not a 1-900 number or someone that only wants submission when the dick is at full mast.


These are your preconceptions speaking here. By the time I have made a decision to swap numbers with someone we will already have swapped in excess of 100 messages and we will already have established general and sexual compatibility. The purpose of a phone call is check whether that feeling of attraction can carry over into real time. If we have a perfectly nice conversation that doesn't include any sexual frisson / behaviour then the answer is probably no - it doesn't carry over into real time, and it's probably not going to happen on the next phone call or the one after that or any of them. Did it ever occur to you that, as the top, the purpose of sexual behaviour is for your pleasure rather than his? As you rightly note, my kink is orgasm denial, I have no interest in touching myself or orgasming but I *do* have an interest in experiencing small acts of submission, checking their behaviour and my response and seeing whether my submission arouses *them*. Otherwise, there's simply no point in pursuing it, for either party.

quote:

"Defensive/blocking sexuality" & why kinky if not for sex is you reading your personal struggle into my life...


If this isn't your personal struggle then why post a question about it? I don't have a problem with getting or keeping partners, I am merely trying to give you honest feedback about why your approach is failing. If you actually just wanted a pat on the back and people to reinforce your own preconceptions then carry on regardless. But if it is leading to you getting hurt and confused then you might like to try opening your mind to different opinions in order to learn something that will benefit you. Just sayin.

quote:

I want to know what a sub is about, discover their real motivations by not allowing my initial interactions with them to be all about "what will you do to me" while they stroke on the other end of a phone line.


Once again you are allowing your own preconceptions and insecurities to interfere with your control of the process. Any phone call you make should be about a) you setting the rules and b) you enjoying it. If you don't want them to touch themselves, say so. If you don't want to talk about what you will do to them, say so. In the meantime, you could try telling them what you do want them to do and what will please you. By refusing to address that aspect at all you leave a void which naturally they will attempt to fill to see if there is any sexual and D/s chemistry. I do not personally believe that any potential partner can have an understanding of me without understanding my sexual, masochistic and submissive aspects. Nor can I judge any sort of compatibility without engaging with those aspects. Once again - good conversation is lovely, but that's friendship, not dating.

quote:

Also in this case before play I want to be sure of what limits are, be dealing with a stable mental state & not have 6'2 200lbs of psycho inside my home alone.


And you don't think that phone play, being literally one of the safest kinds of play there can be, would help you judge what a person is likely to behave like before they are in your home, completely unprepared and unrehearsed for what might happen to them or you? Curious.

quote:

Based on this response must ask are women in BDSM regardless of which side of the kneel really just supposed to be sex toys?


Once again your sex negativity comes to the surface. My desire to discuss, explore and engage in my own sexuality is a tribute to the immense pleasure I get from being a masochist and a hot-bloodied sexual creature. Finding partners who are willing and able to go on this sexual adventure with me, and to assist and encourage me is a joyful prospect and not the odious chore that you seem to truly believe it to be. Please note that you are also attempting to argue completely opposite points here. On the one hand you are saying that your refusal to allow male submissives to be sexual with you is a sign of your power over them, on the other hand you are saying that a male Dom's willingness to allow my sexuality is a sign of their power over me. But which one is it? It seems to be the case that you simply resent male sexuality regardless of who is in control and that female Dominance, for you, is a kind of revenge on the male libido by repressing it.

quote:

Is this an illusion I need to break that my sub is my partner even in the mundain of "honey get my oil changed & take out the trash" that I am just as in charge there as I am in stilettos with a whip?


As far as I am aware, my partner has never engaged in stiletto wearing or whips. I believe that on our first date he wore jeans and a rugby shirt, I wore flat shoes and leggings. It seems you believe in your 'sex toy' myth more than those you are accusing of propagating it. Has it occured to you that sexuality is a feeling and not an outfit? That it is control and not masturbation? That it is chemistry and connection, not prostitution? I don't need somebody to change my oil or take out my trash, I'm perfectly capable of doing my own chores. I need somebody to love me, to be attracted to me and to explore this fabulous thing we call BDSM. If you're doing it to get free housework and car maintenance then it's really no wonder that submissives are bailing out after a few dates - I would too.

Once again - there's nothing wrong with having a more unique idea of what you are looking for, but then you are going to have to accept that you have niche desires and adjust your expectations accordingly.

(in reply to theRose4U)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 11:43:13 AM   
graceadieu


Posts: 1518
Joined: 3/20/2008
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12

I think there's a bit of a double standard here. As a female submissive, if there was no sexual chemistry in the first 10 messages, or at the meeting then I would feel bored and probably decide not to take it any further.

BDSM, for me, is a sexual preference - masochism is my sexuality. If they're not connecting with my sexuality then I have no purpose for connecting with them as a Dom. I like good conversation as much as the next person but there's a name for it when you enjoy talking but don't connect sexually and that's friendship. To be honest, if there's no phone sex on the first conversation, then it's probably not going to happen at all.

If you're so defensive and blocking their sexuality then, really, why would they continue trying to date you? I don't think it's a gender thing, I think that it's a sex positive / negative thing. I would ask what you're trying to get out of dating submissive men if it isn't to enjoy yours and their sexuality.


That's interesting. I don't think I've ever heard a woman take that position. I've personally never talked to a dominant - male or female - who wasn't a sleazebag who looked for anything sexual right away, other than a basic discussion of interests.

(in reply to orgasmdenial12)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 12:22:56 PM   
StrictlyADomina


Posts: 103
Joined: 7/11/2011
Status: offline
The simple answer is that flakes abound be they male, female, dom or sub. A big group of them love the fantasy on BDSM and reality will never satisfy the favorite movie they play in their head. So how do you handle one of life's speed bumps? Indulge in your "therapy" of choice whether it's primal scream, beating a pillow, ice cream or a spa trip. Dust yourself off, block his/her profile and begin again. Remember: Never treat someone as a priority if they treat you as an option.
********************************************************
Your mileage may vary,
Strictly A Domina

(in reply to theRose4U)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: Ruining the illusion? - 7/7/2013 12:27:24 PM   
sexyred1


Posts: 8998
Joined: 8/9/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: theRose4U

Issues I would like input on:

Is this just a MALE sub thing?
Is this all illusion?
Is being human first & kinky as one part of ourselves just me?



No. I think it is a delusional people thing, not just male subs. I have heard similar complaints from men about sub women who think the Dom is being too nice by not being abusive to them on the first email or meet.

It is only illusion if someone makes it so.

Continue to be a human first and kinky second; maintain your standards until someone comes along who respects them.

(in reply to theRose4U)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: Ruining the illusion? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




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

0.109