quote:

ORIGINAL: orgasmdenial12

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.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Your profile has no pics of you and the verbiage is really generic.

And yes, male subs are flakey and few are looking for reality.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Do you always act like this? I cant imagine with your attitide that any decent guy would stay in contact for very long.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TieMeInKnottss

quote:

ORIGINAL: ARIES83

What do you mean when you say social doms?

It is a term that JeffBC uses...My preference is men who act dominant in everyday life...nothing to do with sex...all about discipline, confidence in what they believe, desire & willingness to take charge & responsibility.

I have only a small amount of experience in submitting in sexual relationships but lengthy experience in submitting in everyday life..
As I say...I make a great 2nd in command but a lousy commander. Career, education..I thrive &succeed where the choices, consequences, rewards are very clearly spelled out for me... Tell me to do "what I think best" and I waffle, try to figure out how to make everybody happy...tell me to do "a or b" I can not only carry it out but, dammit, I will do it better than anyone else ever has...

quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama

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

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).

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?

quote:

ORIGINAL: TieMeInKnottss

OMG!!!! I think that might be it! I do like to be "supervised" or "managed". Odd you say that because I saw "The Secretary" for the first time and, it was almost eerie how much like Lee Holloway I am...

quote:

ORIGINAL: crwlon4

My personal opinion is that is men in general. How do I know? I am one, lol. It took me a bit through life experience to figure it out, and understand that D/s was not just about whips and restraints. I don't have any knowledge, but I think 10 e-mails without any kink related chat is a good test. A quality sub should be able to handle that.

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?