RE: Under consideration

RE: Under consideration (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

DesFIP -> RE: Under consideration (1/18/2014 12:52:30 PM)
When I used it, it was shorthand to say I was talking seriously to someone and therefore wasn't going to talk to or meet someone else yet. Because I'm not good at juggling multiple relationships. Even multiple potential relationships. He didn't use it for the same reason he didn't link me on his profile. Because as a guy nobody ever wrote him out of the blue anyway. Since guys don't get the deluge of email that females do, they don't need to look for any possible thing to slow it up.

windchymes -> RE: Under consideration (1/18/2014 1:43:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven What's the issue? Vanillas use the term "engaged" for the exact same thing. It means that both parties are exploring a commitment. You're thinking of being "pre-engaged" where you get a "promise ring", where you get to be giddy with excitement with a blingy on your finger, but aren't SURE you're going to get married. It usually happens after you've "gone steady" and wear a class ring wrapped in fuzzy yarn to fit your finger. Or, if you were in a fraternity or sorority, somewhere after in the middle of "lavalliere'd" and "pinned". [:)]

FieryOpal -> RE: Under consideration (1/18/2014 5:43:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: windchymes You're thinking of being "pre-engaged" where you get a "promise ring", where you get to be giddy with excitement with a blingy on your finger, but aren't SURE you're going to get married. It usually happens after you've "gone steady" and wear a class ring wrapped in fuzzy yarn to fit your finger. Or, if you were in a fraternity or sorority, somewhere after in the middle of "lavalliere'd" and "pinned". [:)] Going steady or still determining whether you want to go steady probably describes it best. I don't do a collar of consideration because when I do decide to collar, there's nothing tentative about it from my point of view. I can see where a Dom wouldn't want other Doms hitting on (no pun intended) his prospective girl and wanting her to wear such a collar while they're at a BDSM venue as a way of signaling "hands off." I don't find this to be an issue with a male sub. I wouldn't take a prospective sub out for public play in the first place. Now, this doesn't mean my collared sub doesn't have to pass a probationary period of say three months. (Yes, that should work both ways, theoretically.) This would more accurately be the "going steady" phase from my F/m perspective. Since I tend to be rather old-fashioned in many respects when it comes to dating, and believe that women in general should play harder to get in order to best protect their interests (which I had to learn the hard way, not being sensible enough when I was younger to take my mother's sage advice), I would advocate that a female submissive not allow the Dom (who is not as of yet officially her Master) she has under her consideration take liberties with her until she has been officially collared. If she permits it, then she should make sure she gets hers in the process and that their encounters don't become one-sided. (This means no gratuitous bjs in the backseat of a car unless that's what she customarily did while out on her vanilla dates. [&o] Not recommended if she wants to be taken seriously as steady girlfriend material instead of a mere booty call.)

youthinkso121 -> RE: Under consideration (1/18/2014 6:20:35 PM)
under consideration and engagement have no similarities. under consideration, normally means im interested, will keep chatting to others and we might meet at some point. Or do you get engaged to someone you haven't met???

kalikshama -> RE: Under consideration (1/19/2014 8:01:44 AM)
quote: This means no gratuitous bjs in the backseat of a car unless that's what she customarily did while out on her vanilla dates. Not recommended if she wants to be taken seriously as steady girlfriend material instead of a mere booty call. [sm=goodpost.gif][sm=agree.gif] (My agreement should not be taken as an indication that I am sex-negative, but rather that I am acknowledging the reality that most men won't treat a women as steady girlfriend material if she acts like a fuck buddy. So, whether she wants a LTR with a vanilla or kinky man, she should act like a girlfriend, not a booty call.)

DesFIP -> RE: Under consideration (1/19/2014 8:51:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal Now, this doesn't mean my collared sub doesn't have to pass a probationary period of say three months. (Yes, that should work both ways, theoretically.) This would more accurately be the "going steady" phase from my F/m perspective. (This means no gratuitous bjs in the backseat of a car unless that's what she customarily did while out on her vanilla dates. [&o] Not recommended if she wants to be taken seriously as steady girlfriend material instead of a mere booty call.) I'm now envisioning you sitting down at your desk at the end of three months giving him a written performance review. And as I recall we were all over each other in the car on that first date. We've been together now for over ten years. Being on the same page sexually was important for us to know.

windchymes -> RE: Under consideration (1/19/2014 9:01:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kalikshama quote: This means no gratuitous bjs in the backseat of a car unless that's what she customarily did while out on her vanilla dates. Not recommended if she wants to be taken seriously as steady girlfriend material instead of a mere booty call. [sm=goodpost.gif][sm=agree.gif] (My agreement should not be taken as an indication that I am sex-negative, but rather that I am acknowledging the reality that most men won't treat a women as steady girlfriend material if she acts like a fuck buddy. So, whether she wants a LTR with a vanilla or kinky man, she should act like a girlfriend, not a booty call.) Amen! Sex may get him in the trap for awhile, but he ain't gonna take you home to Momma.

kalikshama -> RE: Under consideration (1/19/2014 10:30:12 AM)
quote: we were all over each other in the car on that first date. We've been together now for over ten years. Being on the same page sexually was important for us to know. And I was married for 18 years to a man I fucked eight times the night he walked by my dorm room door and I invited him in to help me change a light bulb. That doesn't change the reality that for most men, me putting out in the absence of courtship would have excluded me as marriage material.

littlewonder -> RE: Under consideration (1/19/2014 11:07:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: windchymes quote: ORIGINAL: kalikshama quote: This means no gratuitous bjs in the backseat of a car unless that's what she customarily did while out on her vanilla dates. Not recommended if she wants to be taken seriously as steady girlfriend material instead of a mere booty call. [sm=goodpost.gif][sm=agree.gif] (My agreement should not be taken as an indication that I am sex-negative, but rather that I am acknowledging the reality that most men won't treat a women as steady girlfriend material if she acts like a fuck buddy. So, whether she wants a LTR with a vanilla or kinky man, she should act like a girlfriend, not a booty call.) Amen! Sex may get him in the trap for awhile, but he ain't gonna take you home to Momma. Yup. Gotta agree with this. Any man I ever fucked on the first date only saw me as one thing....a one night fling, a whore or a fuck buddy. They were definitely not going to take me home to meet momma. When I met Master, no matter how much I wanted him to fuck me the night we met, he held off. I was actually very glad he did and I saw him as someone entirely different after that night. He wasn't just the hot guy who I wanted to fuck that night. He became a man I could respect and who understood courtship.

popeye1250 -> RE: Under consideration (1/19/2014 2:33:58 PM)
I hate those things! What is it,...like an engagement announcement in the newspaper or something?

DesFIP -> RE: Under consideration (1/19/2014 2:38:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kalikshama That doesn't change the reality that for most men, me putting out in the absence of courtship would have excluded me as marriage material. The difference here is that I am not now, and haven't been since my sophomore year in college interested in 'most men'. Just the ones that are right for me. And that I've always had damned good people picking skills. So I could move at whatever speed mattered to me, because of that.

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: Under consideration (1/19/2014 3:09:01 PM)
FR: What many appear to be missing out on is that under consideration is something the d-type does to the s-type. It's not mutual. It's a way to get her to stop talking to other men while he plays the field and doesn't have to commit. I've seen this time and time again online, which is why I don't like the usage. Of course both should be mutually under consideration -- and this is yet another way for doms to convince the clueless newbie it's okay for him to have his cake and eat it too.

FieryOpal -> RE: Under consideration (1/19/2014 3:54:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesFIP quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal Now, this doesn't mean my collared sub doesn't have to pass a probationary period of say three months. (Yes, that should work both ways, theoretically.) This would more accurately be the "going steady" phase from my F/m perspective. (This means no gratuitous bjs in the backseat of a car unless that's what she customarily did while out on her vanilla dates. [&o] Not recommended if she wants to be taken seriously as steady girlfriend material instead of a mere booty call.) I'm now envisioning you sitting down at your desk at the end of three months giving him a written performance review. And as I recall we were all over each other in the car on that first date. We've been together now for over ten years. Being on the same page sexually was important for us to know. How did you know this? [:o] No, I don't mentally ABC grade him either -- it's more like Pass [:)] or Fail [:(] , Mediocre/needs improvement [&:] , et al. Every once in a while you get lucky and he's an Outstanding! [:D] But, that's rare indeed. You did give me an idea, DesFIP, about putting up a chart to paste shiny little metallic-colored stars (or smileys).... Nice visual progress reference guide.... Listen all, I'm not against getting swept away in the throes of passion, but there has to be an unequivocal level of trust and respect that has been established somehow already in place. This does have to do in large part with being astute in one's people[partner]-picking skills. I'm sure your man (and kalikshama's man) wasn't one-sided with you either, and if he had been the sort of guy who wasn't about pleasuring you as much as you were with him, he would and should have been dead in the water-- like a dead, bloated stinking white-bellied fish, putrid and rotten to the core. Any man who exhibits slutty behavior or calls himself an ass slut or whatever is a big turn-off for me. I'm the only one who gets to say that to him in private on rare occasion. I don't even want him to consider himself my slut, but that's just me. Kind of sounds like fingernails scraping across the chalkboard (messing up my progress chart [>:] ). In fact, if a male submissive I've just met in person wants me to collar him on the spot and start an orgasm control regimen before I could care less about the state of his dick, as one did a couple months ago, this can put me off. Not so much his over-eagerness to be Insta-Dommed (most of them are like that anyway), but mainly due to how pushy he was. I don't like pushy people, especially pushy males. (Edited for clarity)

LookieNoNookie -> RE: Under consideration (1/19/2014 8:14:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ExiledTyrant The whole "under consideration" thing has always baked my noodle. Is "under consideration" used to give a D time to think of more hoops for the /s to jump through, or is it a way to sequester an /s until the D figures out they can't do any better? Why isn't the D "under consideration"? The /s has much more options than the D. Maybe the D should be "under contemplation" instead. Any thoughts? Exiled Why would you bake your noodle?

Greta75 -> RE: Under consideration (1/19/2014 9:02:50 PM)
I'm a sub, and I do use "under consideration" for D's I mean, there are many words for it. Everybody has to go through a trial period to ascertain compatibility and chemistry right?

IvoryPearls -> RE: Under consideration (1/20/2014 2:17:35 AM)
Thanks for asking this question - and thanks to everyone for the answers. I had been pursued - and I mean *pursued* - by a Dom: A. whose wife/sub left him this past August B. whose divorce hasn't even really been initiated yet C. who was convinced I was the one D. who lives 1200 miles from me I liked him very much; he's handsome, educated and we share a number of common interests. But he leaned so heavily on me. I can't even begin to describe it. I kept telling him he was pushing too hard and I was not comfortable with it at all. One night, I happened to leave chat just as he came in and he sent me an excoriating email and stopped speaking to me. This was approximately January 9th of this year. I saw yesterday on FetLife that he's taken someone *"under consideration"*. I honestly didn't know what that meant, but learning this makes everything very, very clear. Not only was he not being honest with me about how he felt about me, he was probably giving her the same rush he was giving me. She, apparently, was more comfortable with it than I. IP~

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875